Clinical course of COVID-19 infections in patients with Behçet's disease in The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to investigate the cumulative incidence and the severity of COVID-19 infections in patients with Behçet's disease. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients with Behçet's disease was conducted. We obtained the data systematically from electronic patient files and through telephone interviews between February 2020 and May 1, 2021. Main outcomes were COVID-19 infection, disease duration, hospitalisation, intensive care admission and mortality. Secondary outcome was adherence to quarantine measures as recommended by the government. RESULTS: 185 Behçet's disease patients were included (mean age 42.2 years, 54% female); 58% of the patients were receiving colchicine, 30% anti-TNFα, 16% azathioprine and 8% systemic steroids. 30 patients (16.2%) were positive for COVID-19. Within our cohort, the cumulative incidence of COVID-19 was therefore 16.2% (95% CI 11.2-22.3%), which is significantly increased when compared to the general Dutch population (8.7% (95% CI 8.72-8.73%)) (p < 0.001). Four out of 30 (13%) patients were admitted to the hospital. There was no COVID-19 related mortality observed. Patients adhered to government measures; except in the period between the 1st of June and the 28th of September, this cohort received more visitors than in period 1 and 3. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, Behçet's disease patients have a higher risk for COVID-19 infection, without an increase of virus-related mortality. The course of COVID-19 disease in this cohort is relatively mild, with a lower admission rate than expected of patients using immunosuppressive medication.

Impact of the First SARS-CoV-2 Lockdown on Adherence to Biological Treatment in Patients with Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases in the Netherlands.

Purpose: During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, national and international societies have recommended continuing biological agents in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID) in the absence of SARS-CoV-2 symptoms. However, adherence to biological treatment might decrease, because these recommendations contradict patients' beliefs. Especially an increased concern about side effects could have influenced the adherence to biological treatment during the first lockdown. The primary objective was to investigate the impact of the first SARS-CoV-2 lockdown on adherence to biological treatment in IMID patients. Patients and Methods: In this prospective cohort study, IMID patients who received a biological agent before and during the first SARS-CoV-2 lockdown (March 2020- June 2020) were included. Patients were excluded if they did not complete the medication adherence report scale-5 (MARS-5) questionnaire at ≥1 visit before the lockdown and ≥1 visit during the lockdown. Adherence to biological treatment was measured with the MARS-5 and Medication Possession Ratio (MPR). Results: We included 157 IMID patients. The percentage of adherent patients, defined as MARS-5 score >21, was significantly lower during the lockdown compared to the period before the lockdown (88.5% vs 84.1%, p<0.001). Additionally, the overall percentage of adherent patients during the lockdown based on the MPR ≥90% was significantly lower compared to adherence based upon the MARS-5 (65.1% vs 84.1%, p<0.001). Conclusion: This study showed that the first SARS-CoV-2 lockdown negatively impacts adherence to biological treatment in IMID patients. Therefore, treating physicians should be aware of this problem to minimize the potential harmful effects of non-adherence.

Characteristics of COVID-19 infection and antibody formation in patients known at a tertiary immunology department.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge about COVID-19 infections is expanding, although knowledge about the disease course and antibody formation in patients with an auto-immune disease or immunodeficiency is not fully unraveled yet. It could be hypothesized that immunodeficient patients, due to immunosuppressive drugs or their disease, have a more severe disease course due to their immunocompromised state. However, it could also be hypothesized that some of the immunosuppressive drugs protect against a hyperinflammatory state. METHODS: We collected data on the incidence of COVID-19, disease course and SARS-CoV-2 antibody formation in COVID-19 positive patients in a cohort of patients (n â€‹= â€‹4497) known at the Clinical Immunology outpatient clinic in a tertiary care hospital in the Netherlands. RESULTS: In the first six months of the pandemic, 16 patients were identified with COVID-19, 14 by nasal swab PCR, and 2 patients by SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Eight patients were admitted to the hospital. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were measured in 8 patients and were detectable in all, including one patient on B-cell ablative therapy and one patient with Common Variable Immunodeficiency Disorder. CONCLUSION: This study indicates that the disease course differs among immunocompromised patients, independently of (dis)continuation of immunosuppressive drugs. Antibody production for SARS-CoV-2 in immunocompromised patients was shown. More research needs to be conducted to confirm these observations and guidelines regarding (dis)continuation of immunosuppressive drugs in COVID-19 positive immunocompromised patients should be developed.