Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 19 de 19
Filter
1.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 82(6): 727-728, 2023 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2319425
2.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 2022 Aug 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2312355

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Targeting interleukin (IL)-6 has become a major therapeutic strategy in the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory disease. Interference with the IL-6 pathway can be directed at the specific receptor using anti-IL-6Rα antibodies or by directly inhibiting the IL-6 cytokine. This paper is an update of a previous consensus document, based on most recent evidence and expert opinion, that aims to inform on the medical use of interfering with the IL-6 pathway. METHODS: A systematic literature research was performed that focused on IL-6-pathway inhibitors in inflammatory diseases. Evidence was put in context by a large group of international experts and patients in a subsequent consensus process. All were involved in formulating the consensus statements, and in the preparation of this document. RESULTS: The consensus process covered relevant aspects of dosing and populations for different indications of IL-6 pathway inhibitors that are approved across the world, including rheumatoid arthritis, polyarticular-course and systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis, giant cell arteritis, Takayasu arteritis, adult-onset Still's disease, Castleman's disease, chimeric antigen receptor-T-cell-induced cytokine release syndrome, neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder and severe COVID-19. Also addressed were other clinical aspects of the use of IL-6 pathway inhibitors, including pretreatment screening, safety, contraindications and monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: The document provides a comprehensive consensus on the use of IL-6 inhibition to treat inflammatory disorders to inform healthcare professionals (including researchers), patients, administrators and payers.

4.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 2022 Dec 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2261069

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate real-world persistence and effectiveness of the IL-12/23 inhibitor, ustekinumab or a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) for psoriatic arthritis over 3 years. METHODS: PsABio (NCT02627768), a prospective, observational study, followed patients with PsA prescribed first-line to third-line ustekinumab or a TNFi. Persistence and effectiveness (achievement of clinical Disease Activity for PSA (cDAPSA) low disease activity (LDA)/remission and minimal disease activity/very LDA (MDA/VLDA)) were assessed every 6 months. Safety data were collected over 3 years. Analyses to compare the modes of action were adjusted on baseline differences by propensity scores (PS). RESULTS: In 895 patients (mean age 49.8 years, 44.7% males), at 3 years, the proportion of patients still on their initial treatments was similar with ustekinumab (49.9%) and TNFi (47.8%). No difference was seen in the risk of stopping/switching; PS-adjusted hazard ratio (95% CI) for stopping/switching ustekinumab versus TNFi was 0.87 (0.68 to 1.11). In the overall population, cDAPSA LDA/remission was achieved in 58.6%/31.4% ustekinumab-treated and 69.8%/45.0% TNFi-treated patients; PS-adjusted ORs (95% CI) were 0.89 (0.63 to 1.26) for cDAPSA LDA; 0.72 (0.50 to 1.05) for remission. MDA/VLDA was achieved in 41.4%/19.2% of ustekinumab-treated and 54.2%/26.9% of TNFi-treated patients with overlapping PS-adjusted ORs. A greater percentage of TNFi-treated patients achieved effectiveness outcomes. Both treatments exhibited good long-term safety profiles, although ustekinumab-treated patients had a lower rate of adverse events (AEs) versus TNFi. CONCLUSION: At 3 years, there was generally comparable persistence after ustekinumab or TNFi treatment, but AE rates were lower with ustekinumab.

5.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 2022 Sep 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2265654

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: A third COVID-19 vaccination is recommended for immunosuppressed patients. However, data on immunogenicity and safety of a third COVID-19 vaccination in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) are sparse and therefore addressed within this clinical trial. METHODS: 60 immunosuppressed patients and 48 healthy controls (HCs) received a third vaccination with an mRNA vaccine. The primary endpoint was defined as the presence of antibody levels against the receptor-binding domain (RBD)>1500 BAU/mL in patients with IMIDs versus HCs. Further endpoints included differences in neutralising antibodies and cellular immune responses after the third vaccination. Reactogenicity was recorded for 7 days, and safety was evaluated until week 4. RESULTS: Rate of individuals with anti-RBD antibodies>1500 BAU/mL was not significantly different after the third vaccination between patients with IMIDs and HCs (91% vs 100% p=0.101). Anti-RBD and neutralising antibody levels were significantly lower in patients with IMIDs after the third vaccination than in HCs (p=0.002 and p=0.016, respectively). In contrast, fold increase in antibody levels between week 0 and 4 was higher in patients with IMIDs. Treatment with biological (b) disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARD) or combination of bDMARDs and conventional synthetic DMARDs was associated with reduced antibody levels. Enhanced cellular immune response to wild type and Omicron peptide stimulation was observed after the third vaccination. No serious adverse event was attributed to the third vaccination. CONCLUSION: Our clinical trial data support the immunogenicity and safety of a third COVID-19 vaccination in patients with IMIDs. However, effects of DMARD therapy on immunogenicity should be considered. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCT No: 2021-002693-10.

6.
J Autoimmun ; 135: 102981, 2023 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2233518

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A 3rd COVID-19 vaccination is currently recommended for patients under immunosuppression. However, a fast decline of antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein has been observed. Currently it remains unclear whether immunosuppressive therapy affects kinetics of humoral and cellular immune responses. METHODS: 50 patients under immunosuppression and 42 healthy controls (HCs) received a 3rd dose of an mRNA-based vaccine and were monitored over a 12-weeks period. Humoral immune response was assessed 4 and 12 weeks after 3rd dose. Antibodies were quantified using the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Spike immunoassay against the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein. SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses were quantified by IFN-γ ELISpot assays. Adverse events, including SARS-CoV-2 infections, were monitored over a 12-week period. RESULTS: At week 12, reduced anti-RBD antibody levels were observed in IMID patients as compared to HCs (median antibody level 5345 BAU/ml [1781-10,208] versus 9650 BAU/ml [6633-16,050], p < 0.001). Reduction in relative antibody levels was significantly higher in IMID patients as compared to HCs at week 12 (p < 0.001). Lowest anti-RBD antibody levels were detected in IMID patients who received biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) or a combination therapy with conventional synthetic and biological DMARDs. Number of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells against wildtype and Omicron variants remained stable over 12 weeks in IMID patients. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Due to a fast decline in anti-RBD antibodies in IMID patients an early 4th vaccination should be considered in this vulnerable group of patients.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents , COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies , Immunity, Humoral , Antibodies, Viral , Vaccination
7.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 82(5): 594-598, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2213913

ABSTRACT

To detail the unmet clinical and scientific needs in the field of rheumatology. After a 2-year hiatus due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the 22nd annual international Advances in Targeted Therapies meeting brought together more than 100 leading basic scientists and clinical researchers in rheumatology, immunology, epidemiology, molecular biology and other specialties. Breakout sessions were convened with experts in five rheumatological disease-specific groups including: rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus and connective tissue diseases (CTDs). In each group, experts were asked to identify and prioritise current unmet needs in clinical and translational research, as well as highlight recent progress in meeting formerly identified unmet needs. Clinical trial design innovation was emphasised across all disease states. Within RA, developing therapies and trials for refractory disease patients remained among the most important identified unmet needs and within lupus and spondyloarthritis the need to account for disease endotypes was highlighted. The RA group also identified the need to better understand the natural history of RA, pre-RA states and the need ultimately for precision medicine. In CTD generally, experts focused on the need to better identify molecular, cellular and clinical signals of early and undifferentiated disease in order to identify novel drug targets. There remains a strong need to develop therapies and therapeutic strategies for those with treatment-refractory disease. Increasingly it is clear that we need to better understand the natural history of these diseases, including their 'predisease' states, and identify molecular signatures, including at a tissue level, which can facilitate disease diagnosis and treatment. As these unmet needs in the field of rheumatic diseases have been identified based on consensus of expert clinicians and scientists in the field, this document may serve individual researchers, institutions and industry to help prioritise their scientific activities.


Subject(s)
Arthritis, Psoriatic , Arthritis, Rheumatoid , COVID-19 , Rheumatic Diseases , Rheumatology , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Rheumatic Diseases/drug therapy , Rheumatic Diseases/diagnosis , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Arthritis, Psoriatic/drug therapy
8.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 82(1): 1-2, 2023 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2193647
10.
RMD Open ; 8(2)2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2020254

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Informing an international task force updating the consensus statement on efficacy and safety of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) selectively targeting interleukin-6 (IL-6) pathway in the context of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. METHODS: A systematic literature research of all publications on IL-6 axis inhibition with bDMARDs published between January 2012 and December 2020 was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL databases. Efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed in clinical trials including their long-term extensions and observational studies. Meeting abstracts from ACR, EULAR conferences and results on clinicaltrials.gov were taken into consideration. RESULTS: 187 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Evidence for positive effect of IL-6 inhibition was available in various inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, giant cell arteritis, Takayasu arteritis, adult-onset Still's disease, cytokine release syndrome due to chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy and systemic sclerosis-associated interstitial lung disease. Newcomers like satralizumab and anti-IL-6 ligand antibody siltuximab have expanded therapeutic approaches for Castleman's disease and neuromyelitis optica, respectively. IL-6 inhibition did not provide therapeutic benefits in psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis and certain connective tissue diseases. In COVID-19, tocilizumab (TCZ) has proven to be therapeutic in advanced disease. Safety outcomes did not differ from other bDMARDs, except higher risks of diverticulitis and lower gastrointestinal perforations. Inconsistent results were observed in several studies investigating the risk for infections when comparing TCZ to TNF-inhibitors. CONCLUSION: IL-6 inhibition is effective for treatment of several inflammatory diseases with a safety profile that is widely comparable to other bDMARDs.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Receptors, Chimeric Antigen , Adult , Humans , Antirheumatic Agents/adverse effects , Interleukin-6 , Ligands
11.
Nat Commun ; 13(1): 5362, 2022 09 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2016704

ABSTRACT

Impaired response to COVID-19 vaccination is of particular concern in immunosuppressed patients. To determine the best vaccination strategy for this vulnerable group we performed a single center, 1:1 randomized blinded clinical trial. Patients who failed to seroconvert upon two mRNA vaccinations (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) are randomized to receive either a third dose of the same mRNA or the vector vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Primary endpoint is the difference in SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody seroconversion rate between vector and mRNA vaccinated patients four weeks after the third dose. Secondary outcomes include cellular immune responses. Seroconversion rates at week four are significantly higher in the mRNA (homologous vaccination, 15/24, 63%) as compared to the vector vaccine group (heterologous vaccination, 4/22, 18%). SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses are reduced but could be increased after a third dose of either vector or mRNA vaccine. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, patient age and vaccine type are associated with seroconversion. No serious adverse event is attributed to COVID-19 booster vaccination. Efficacy and safety data underline the importance of a booster vaccination and support the use of a homologous mRNA booster vaccination in immunosuppressed patients.Trial registration: EudraCT No.: 2021-002693-10.


Subject(s)
BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Humans , Immunization, Secondary , RNA, Messenger , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Vaccination , Vaccines, Synthetic , mRNA Vaccines
12.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 81(12): 1750-1756, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1992984

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Patients under rituximab therapy are at high risk for a severe COVID-19 disease course. Humoral immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination are vastly diminished in B-cell-depleted patients, even after a third vaccine dose. However, it remains unclear whether these patients benefit from a fourth vaccination and whether continued rituximab therapy affects antibody development. METHODS: In this open-label extension trial, 37 rituximab-treated patients who received a third dose with either a vector or mRNA-based vaccine were vaccinated a fourth time with an mRNA-based vaccine (mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2). Key endpoints included the humoral and cellular immune response as well as safety after a fourth vaccination. RESULTS: The number of patients who seroconverted increased from 12/36 (33%) to 21/36 (58%) following the fourth COVID-19 vaccination. In patients with detectable antibodies to the spike protein's receptor-binding domain (median: 8.0 binding antibody units (BAU)/mL (quartiles: 0.4; 13.8)), elevated levels were observed after the fourth vaccination (134.0 BAU/mL (quartiles: 25.5; 1026.0)). Seroconversion and antibody increase were strongly diminished in patients who received rituximab treatment between the third and the fourth vaccination. The cellular immune response declined 12 weeks after the third vaccination, but could only be slightly enhanced by a fourth vaccination. No unexpected safety signals were detected, one serious adverse event not related to vaccination occurred. CONCLUSIONS: A fourth vaccine dose is immunogenic in a fraction of rituximab-treated patients. Continuation of rituximab treatment reduced humoral immune response, suggesting that rituximab affects a second booster vaccination. It might therefore be considered to postpone rituximab treatment in clinically stable patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 2021-002348-57.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , COVID-19/prevention & control , Rituximab/adverse effects , Antibodies, Viral , SARS-CoV-2 , BNT162 Vaccine , Vaccination , RNA, Messenger , Immunogenicity, Vaccine
14.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 81(12): 1628-1639, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1704550

ABSTRACT

The first EULAR provisional recommendations on the management of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) in the context of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), largely based on expert opinion, were published in June 2020. Since then, an unprecedented number of clinical studies have accrued in the literature. Several SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been approved for population-wide vaccination programmes in EULAR-affiliated countries. Studies regarding vaccination of patients with (inflammatory) RMDs have released their first results or are underway.EULAR found it opportune to carefully review to what extent the initially consensus expert recommendations stood the test of time, by challenging them with the recently accumulated body of scientific evidence, and by incorporating evidence-based advice on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. EULAR started a formal (first) update in January 2021, performed a systematic literature review according to EULAR's standard operating procedures and completed a set of updated overarching principles and recommendations in July 2021. Two points to consider were added in November 2021, because of recent developments pertaining to additional vaccination doses.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Musculoskeletal Diseases , Rheumatic Diseases , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Rheumatic Diseases/drug therapy , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19/prevention & control , Vaccination
15.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) ; 74(4): 572-578, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1669343

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: A treat-to-target (TTT) approach improves outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In prior work, we found that a learning collaborative (LC) program improved implementation of TTT. We conducted a shorter virtual LC to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of this model for quality improvement and to assess TTT during virtual visits. METHODS: We tested a 6-month virtual LC in ambulatory care. The LC was conducted during the 2020-2021 COVID-19 pandemic when many patient visits were conducted virtually. All LC meetings used videoconferencing and a website to share data. The LC comprised a 6-hour kickoff session and 6 monthly webinars. The LC discussed TTT in RA, its rationale, and rapid cycle improvement as a method for implementing TTT. Practices provided de-identified patient visit data. Monthly webinars reinforced topics and demonstrated data on TTT adherence. This was measured as the percentage of TTT processes completed. We compared TTT adherence between in-person visits versus virtual visits. RESULTS: Eighteen sites participated in the LC, representing 45 rheumatology clinicians. Sites inputted data on 1,826 patient visits, 78% of which were conducted in-person and 22% of which were held in a virtual setting. Adherence with TTT improved from a mean of 51% at baseline to 84% at month 6 (P for trend < 0.001). Each aspect of TTT also improved. Adherence with TTT during virtual visits was lower (65%) than during in-person visits (79%) (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Implementation of TTT for RA can be improved through a relatively low-cost virtual LC. This improvement in TTT implementation was observed despite the COVID-19 pandemic, but we did observe differences in TTT adherence between in-person visits and virtual visits.


Subject(s)
Arthritis, Rheumatoid , COVID-19 , Education, Distance , Rheumatology , Telemedicine , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/diagnosis , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics
16.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 81(5): 687-694, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1625022

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: SARS-CoV-2-induced COVID-19 has led to exponentially rising mortality, particularly in immunosuppressed patients, who inadequately respond to conventional COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: In this blinded randomised clinical trial, we compare the efficacy and safety of an additional booster vaccination with a vector versus mRNA vaccine in non-seroconverted patients. We assigned 60 patients under rituximab treatment, who did not seroconvert after their primary mRNA vaccination with either BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna), to receive a third dose, either using the same mRNA or the vector vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Oxford-AstraZeneca). Patients were stratified according to the presence of peripheral B cells. The primary efficacy endpoint was the difference in the SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroconversion rate between vector (heterologous) and mRNA (homologous) vaccinated patients by week 4. Key secondary endpoints included the overall seroconversion and cellular immune response; safety was assessed at week 1 and week 4. RESULTS: Seroconversion rates at week 4 were comparable between vector (6/27 patients, 22%) and mRNA (9/28, 32%) vaccines (p=0.6). Overall, 27% of patients seroconverted; specific T cell responses were observed in 20/20 (100%) vector versus 13/16 (81%) mRNA vaccinated patients. Newly induced humoral and/or cellular responses occurred in 9/11 (82%) patients. 3/37 (8%) of patients without and 12/18 (67%) of the patients with detectable peripheral B cells seroconverted. No serious adverse events, related to immunisation, were observed. CONCLUSIONS: This enhanced humoral and/or cellular immune response supports an additional booster vaccination in non-seroconverted patients irrespective of a heterologous or homologous vaccination regimen.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Humans , RNA, Messenger , Seroconversion , Vaccination , Vaccines, Synthetic , mRNA Vaccines
17.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 80(10): 1345-1350, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1394067

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Evidence suggests that B cell-depleting therapy with rituximab (RTX) affects humoral immune response after vaccination. It remains unclear whether RTX-treated patients can develop a humoral and T-cell-mediated immune response against SARS-CoV-2 after immunisation. METHODS: Patients under RTX treatment (n=74) were vaccinated twice with either mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2. Antibodies were quantified using the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S immunoassay against the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein and neutralisation tests. SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses were quantified by IFN-γ enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot assays. Prepandemic healthy individuals (n=5), as well as healthy individuals (n=10) vaccinated with BNT162b2, served as controls. RESULTS: All healthy controls developed antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 RBD of the spike protein, but only 39% of the patients under RTX treatment seroconverted. Antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 RBD significantly correlated with neutralising antibodies (τ=0.74, p<0.001). Patients without detectable CD19+ peripheral B cells (n=36) did not develop specific antibodies, except for one patient. Circulating B cells correlated with the levels of antibodies (τ=0.4, p<0.001). However, even patients with a low number of B cells (<1%) mounted detectable SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody responses. SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells were detected in 58% of the patients, independent of a humoral immune response. CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest that vaccination can induce SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies in RTX-treated patients, once peripheral B cells at least partially repopulate. Moreover, SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells that evolved in more than half of the vaccinated patients may exert protective effects independent of humoral immune responses.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Immunocompromised Host/immunology , Immunogenicity, Vaccine/immunology , Rituximab/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Autoimmune Diseases/drug therapy , Autoimmune Diseases/immunology , B-Lymphocytes/immunology , Female , Humans , Immunity, Cellular/immunology , Immunity, Humoral/immunology , Immunogenicity, Vaccine/drug effects , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , T-Lymphocytes/immunology
18.
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases ; 80(6):677-678, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1226741

ABSTRACT

[...]about 100 years ago, the influenza pandemic of 1918–1920 cost more lives than World War I. It took 15 years from the time of that pandemic to isolate the virus.3 Burnet, recipient of the Nobel prize for physiology and medicine in 1960 for his contribution to the elucidation of acquired immunological tolerance, and who is likely best known to rheumatologists for his clonal selection theory of antibody production,4 was the first to cultivate the influenza virus on developing hen eggs in 1935.5 With his continuing research,6 this achievement ultimately enabled developments that culminated in the production and successful application of influenza vaccines almost a decade later.7 8 Why is influenza mentioned here? [...]because it has been proposed to occasionally elicit autoantibodies like rheumatoid factor and anti-phospholipid antibodies,9 observations that also have been reported for patients with COVID-19 in ARD recently.10 11 Third, because we have learnt in previous studies that disease modifying antirheumatic drugs, including tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, interfere with the efficacy of influenza vaccination only to a small extent,12 while rituximab has significant effects in this respect.13 These and other pieces of information are contained in a timely update of EULAR recommendations regarding vaccinations last year14 but also most recently in EULAR points to consider for the current SARS-CoV-2 vaccination programmes published in this issue.15 And fourth and finally, because the example of a single personality, a pillar and hero across many areas of medicine, Sir Burnet reveals how closely related research into infectious disease and investigations of immunological mechanisms are. All these foundations within the field remain relevant in current therapeutic approaches: convalescent serum, monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and vaccination with spike protein are exploratory or approved and effective therapeutic or preventive options. [...]medicines that are part of the rheumatologists’ armamentarium appear to be efficacious against severe COVID-19.18 19 This excursion to Burnet, Ehrlich and Behring should remind us that epidemics and pandemics have been around since times past—obviously already much before the 20th century, such as the plague—and were ultimately successfully conquered. Several points-to-consider or recommendations are presented in this June issue: one on the pathophysiology of COVID-19 (accompanied by an elegant editorial)24 25;one on the important topic of adherence to treatment26;and one on the standardisation of scoring in arthritis models, an area where standardisation had not been undertaken hitherto.27 A review authored by one of the world’s premier groups provides an important summary of current knowledge and prospects on functional genomics.28 In the ‘Heroes and Pillars of Rheumatology’ section, eminent authors remind us of two major figures in rheumatology of the late 20th century into the most recent years, Charles L Christian and Joachim R Kalden, a US and a European hero, respectively, who have inspired the whole world with their research and personalities.29 30 These remarkable leaders were among the most important scientific and clinical pillars of modern rheumatology, mentoring numerous rheumatologists, including chairpersons of rheumatology departments who are active in our current day, and both having been Presidents of the respective major organisations across the Atlantic, namely, ACR and EULAR.

19.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 79(7): 851-858, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-534969

ABSTRACT

The provisional EULAR recommendations address several aspects of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus, and the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 and are meant for patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMD) and their caregivers. A task force of 20 members was convened by EULAR that met several times by videoconferencing in April 2020. The task force finally agreed on five overarching principles and 13 recommendations covering four generic themes: (1) General measures and prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection. (2) The management of RMD when local measures of social distancing are in effect. (3) The management of COVID-19 in the context of RMD. (4) The prevention of infections other than SARS-CoV-2. EULAR considers this set of recommendations as a 'living document' and a starting point, which will be updated as soon as promising new developments with potential impact on the care of patients with RMD become available.


Subject(s)
Musculoskeletal Diseases/therapy , Rheumatic Diseases/therapy , Rheumatology , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Europe , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Humans , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Societies, Medical
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL