ABSTRACT
BackgroundPatients with rheumatic diseases may present more severe SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to the general population. However, in some studies, hospitalization and mortality due COVID-19 were lower in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) compared to other rheumatic diseases.ObjectivesTo assess the severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with axSpA from the SAR-COVID registry, comparing them with patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to determine the factors associated with poor outcomes and death.MethodsPatients ≥18 years old from the SAR-COVID national registry with diagnosis of AxSpA (ASAS criteria 2009) and RA (ACR/EULAR criteria 2010) who had confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (RT-PCR or positive serology), recruited from August 2020 to June 2022 were included. Sociodemographic and clinical data, comorbidities, treatments and outcomes of the infection were collected. Infection severity was assessed using the WHO-ordinal scale (WHO-OS)[1]: ambulatory [1], mild hospitalizations (2.3 y 4), severe hospitalizations (5.6 y 7) and death [8].Statistical analysisDescriptive statistics. Chi[2] or Fischer test and Student T or Mann-Whitney as appropriate. Poisson generalized linear model.ResultsA total of 1226 patients were included, 59 (4.8%) with axSpA and 1167 (95.2%) with RA. RA patients were significantly older, more frequently female, and had a longer disease duration. More than a third of the patients were in remission. 43.9 % presented comorbidities, arterial hypertension being the most frequent. At the time of SARS-Cov-2 diagnosis, patients with RA used glucocorticoids and conventional DMARDs more frequently than those with axSpA, while 74.6% of the latter were under treatment with biological DMARDs being anti-TNF the most used (61%).94.9 % of the patients in both groups reported symptoms related to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Although the differences were not significant, patients with RA presented more frequently cough, dyspnea, and gastrointestinal symptoms, while those with axSpA reported more frequently odynophagia, anosmia, and dysgeusia. During the SARS-CoV-2 infection, 6.8% and 23.5% of the patients with axSpA and RA were hospitalized, respectively. All of the patients with axSpA were admitted to the general ward, while 26.6% of those with RA to intensive care units. No patient with axSpA had complications or severe COVID-19 (WHO-OS>=5) or died as a result of the infection while mortality in the RA group was 3.3% (Figure 1).In the multivariate analysis adjusted to poor prognosis factors, no association was found between the diagnosis of axSpA and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection assessed with the WHO-OS (OR -0.18, IC 95%(-0.38, 0.01, p=0.074).ConclusionPatients with EspAax did not present complications from SARS-CoV-2 infections and none of them died due COVID-19.Reference[1]World Health Organization coronavirus disease (COVID-19) Therapeutic Trial Synopsis Draft 2020.Figure 1.Outcomes and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with axSpA and RA.[Figure omitted. See PDF]Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsAndrea Bravo Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Tatiana Barbich Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Carolina Isnardi Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretati n, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Gustavo Citera Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Emilce Edith Schneeberger Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Rosana Quintana Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Cecilia Pisoni Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Mariana Pera Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Edson Velozo Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Dora Aida Pereira Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Paula Alba Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Juan A Albiero Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Jaime Villafañe Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Hernan Maldonado Ficco Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Veronica Sa io Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Santiago Eduardo Aguero Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Romina Rojas Tessel Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Maria Isabel Quaglia Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., María Soledad Gálvez Elkin Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access tothe information collected in the database., Gisela Paola Pendon Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Carolina Aeschlimann Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Gustavo Fabian Rodriguez Gil Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Malena Viola Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Cecilia Romeo Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Carla Maldini Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Silvana Mariela Conti Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor re istry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Rosana Gallo Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Leticia Ibañez Zurlo Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Maria Natalia Tamborenea Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Susana Isabel Pineda Vidal Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Debora Guaglianone Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Jonatan Marcos Mareco Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Cecilia Goizueta Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Elisa Novatti Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Fernanda Guzzanti Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Gimena Gómez Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Karen Roberts Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of t em participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Guillermo Pons-Estel Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: To evaluate the association between the ABO and Rh antigens and the clinical characteristics and evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with rheumatic diseases. Method(s): SAR-COVID is a national, longitudinal, and observational registry. Patients >=18 years of age with a diagnosis of inflammatory or degenerative rheumatic disease, and confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (RT-PCR or serology) were included. Data were collected from August 2020 to June 2022. Sociodemographic, clinical data, comorbidities, underlying rheumatic disease, disease activity, and its treatment at the time of infection were recorded, aswell as symptoms, complications and treatments received for COVID-19. The WHO ordinal scale (WHO-OS) was used, and severe COVID-19was defined as WHO-OS>=5. Patients were categorized as follows: blood group A or non-A, and Rh factor positive or negative. Result(s): A total of 1356 patients were included, 547 (40,3%) had blood group A and 809 non-A (59,7%). Regarding the Rh factor, 1230 (90,7%)were positive and 126 (9,3%) negative. Age, sex, ethnicity and comorbidities were comparable between both groups. In both cases, the most frequent rheumatic diseases were rheumatoid arthritis (38,9%;p = 0,052), systemic lupus erythematosus (17,4%;p = 0,530) and osteoarthritis (10,1%;p = 0,888). Patients with non-A blood type presented a higher frequency of psoriatic arthritis (group A 5,1% vs non-A 8,7%;p = 0,015). During SARS-CoV-2 infection, more than 90% of patients in both groups were symptomatic (group A 96.0% vs non-A 94,8%;p = 0,384). Non-A blood group patients had a significantly higher frequency of arthralgia and dysgeusia. In A blood group 18.5% of the patients required hospitalization, 41,0% of them were admitted in the intensive care unit and 5.9% presented complications, while in the non-A blood group, were 16,7%, 31,1% and 5,5%, respectively (p > 0,05 in all the cases). The most frequent complications in both groups were respiratory distress syndrome and sepsis (p > 0,05). The outcome of the COVID-19 infection is detailed in Figure 1. In the multivariate analysis, adjusted for poor prognostic factors, patients with A blood type and those with negative Rh factor presented more likely severe COVID-19. (OR 1,75, 95%CI 1,20-2,56, p = 0,003 and OR 2,63, 95%CI 1,45-4,55, p = 0,001, respectively). Conclusion(s): Blood type A and negative Rh factor were associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes in this national cohort of patients with rheumatic diseases.
ABSTRACT
Background: High disease activity, treatment with glucocorticoids (GC) and rituximab (RTX), have been related to worse outcomes of COVID-19. Objectives: To assess the clinical characteristics and severity of the SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) included in the SAR-COVID registry and to identify factors associated with poor outcomes. Methods: SAR-COVID is a national, longitudinal and observational registry. Patients of ≥18 years old, with diagnosis of RA (ACR-EULAR criteria 2010) who had confrmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (RT-PCR or positive serology) were included between 13-8-20 and 31-7-21. Sociodemographic and clinical data, comorbidities, disease activity and treatment at the moment of the SARS-CoV-2 infection were collected. Additionally, infection symptoms, complications, medical interventions and treatments for COVID-19 were registered. Infection severity was assessed using the WHO-ordinal scale (WHO-OS)1. A cut-off value of ≥5 identifed patients with severe COVID-19 and those who died. Statistical analysis: Descriptive statistics. Chi2 or Fischer test, Student T test or Mann-Whitney and Kruskal Wallis or ANOVA, as appropriate. Multiple logistic regression model. Results: A total of 801 patients were included, with a mean age of 53.1 ± 12.9 years, most of them were female (84.5%) and the median (m) disease duration was 8 years (IQR 4-14). One third were in remission and 46.4% had comor-bidities, being the most frequent, hypertension (26.9 %), dyslipidemia (13.5 %), obesity (13.4 %) and diabetes (8.9%). Moreover, 3.2% had interstitial lung disease (ILD) associated with RA. At SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, 42.5% were receiving glucocorticoids (GC), 73.9% conventional (c) disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD), 24% biologic (b) DMARD and 9.1% targeted synthetic (ts) DMARD. Among bDMARD, the most frequently used were TNF inhibitors (17%), followed by abatacept (2.8%), IL-6 inhibitors (2.4%) and rituximab (RTX) (2.1%). During the SARS-CoV-2 infection, 95.8% had symptoms, 27% required hospital-ization, 7.9% presented complications and 4.4% died due to COVID-19. Severe disease and death (WHO-OS≥5) was present in 7.5% of the patients. They were older (62.9±12.5 vs 52.2±12.7, p<0.001), and they had more frequently ILD (18.5% vs 2%, p<0.001), comorbidities (82.5% vs 43.7%, p<0.001), ≥2 comor-bidities (60.3% vs 25.8%, p<0.001), treatment with GC (61% vs 40.7%, p=0.04) and RTX (8.3% vs 1.6%, p=0.007). Conversely, the use of cDMARD and TNF inhibitors was more frequent in patients with WHO-OS<5, nevertheless this difference was not signifcant. Disease activity was comparable between groups. In multivariable analysis, older age, the presence of diabetes, ILD, the use of GC and RTX were signifcantly associated with WHO-OS≥5 (Figure 1). Furthermore, older age (65.7±10.8 vs 52.4±12.8, p<0.001), the presence of comor-bidities (87.9% vs 44.7%, p<0.001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (21.9% vs 5.2%, p=0.002), diabetes (30.3% vs 7.9%, p<0.001), hypertension (57.6% vs 25.6%, p<0.001), cardiovascular disease (15.6% vs 3.2%, p=0.005), cancer (9.1% vs 1.3%, p=0.001), ILD (23.3% vs 2.4%, p<0.001) and the use of GC (61.8% vs 41.4%, p=0.02) were associated with mortality. Older age [OR 1.1 IC95% 1.06-1.13] and the use of GC 5-10 mg/day [OR 4.6 IC95% 1.8-11.6] remained signifcantly associated with death due to COVID-19. Conclusion: Treatment with RTX and GC, as well as older age, the presence of diabetes and ILD were associated with poor COVID-19 outcomes in this national cohort of patients with RA. Older patients and those taking GC had a higher mortality rate.
ABSTRACT
Background: Vaccination for COVID-19 is an essential tool to fght the pandemic. Evidence suggests that patients with immune mediated infammatory diseases (IMIDs) have less response. The application of a booster shot is a strategy that has been implemented in this population, however there is scarce information about its efficacy. Objectives: To assess the humoral and cellular immune response after a third dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with undetectable antibodies titles after primary regimen of two doses. Methods: Observational study. Patients with RA (ACR/EULAR 2010 criteria) from two rheumatology centers, ≥18 years old, with no seroconversion after two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, who received a third dose of either mRNA or vector-based vaccines (BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) were included. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies, neutralising activity and T cell responses were assessed between 21 and 40 days after the third dose. Sociodemographic data, comorbid-ities, treatment, vaccine applied and the presence of adverse events (AE) were recorded. Statistical analysis: descriptive analysis. Chi2 or Fischer test and T test. Results: A total of 21 non-responder patients were included, all of them females with a mean age of 63.7 years (SD 11,6) and mean disease duration of 15.8 years (SD 8). Most of them (81%) reported comorbidities, being the most frequent arterial hypertension, obesity and dyslipidemia. At vaccination time, 6 (28.6%) were receiving glucocorticoids, 3 of them ≥10 mg/day, 17 c-DMARDs (methotrexate 57.1%) and 18 (85.1%) b-DMARDs, 6 abatacept (ABT) and 4 rituximab (RTX). Regarding the primary vaccination regimen, 13 (61.9%) received two doses of BBIBP-CorV, 3 (14.3%) Gam-COVID-Vac, 3 (14.3%) ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 2 (9.5%) a mix regimen of Gam-COVID-Vac/mRNA-1273. The majority (95.2%) received BNT162b2 vaccine and only one of them ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, with a mean time between the second and third dose of 151,4 days (SD 46,4). After the third dose, 90.5% of the patients presented detectable anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and 76.2% presented neutralizing activity. The median of neutralizing antibodies titers was 1/12 (IQR 1/7-1/48). Both patients who did not present detectable antibodies were obese, recieved BBIBP-CorV during the primary regimen and BNT162b2 as the third dose, one of them was taking methotrexate and ABT and the other one RTX. Compared to other treatments, ABT and RTX was associated with no neutralizing activity in 4 (80%) patients and lower titers of neutralizing antibodies [median 1/3 (IQR 0-1/20) vs median 1/8 (IQR 1/4-1/128), p=0.197]. A T-cell response was present in 41.2% of all patients after the second dose, increasing to 75% after the third dose. The use of ABT was associated with a lower frequency of T-cell response (80% vs 20%, p=0.014). Sixteen (76.1%) patients reported at least one AE, 66.7% injection site reaction and 25% fu-like syndrome. Conclusion: In this RA cohort who failed to seroconvert after two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, 90.5% presented detectable anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and 75% T-cell responce after a third dose. The use of ABT was associated with a lower frequency of T-cell response. This data highlights the importance of a third vaccine in this group of patients.
ABSTRACT
Background: Patients with rheumatic diseases (RD) have been excluded from SARS-CoV-2 vaccine trials. Though data appear to show safety and efficacy, mostly evidence remains in mRNA vaccines. However in our country, adenovirus and inactivated vaccines, as well as heterologous schemes are frequently used. Objectives: To describe clinical characteristics and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection after vaccination in patients with RD from de the SAR-CoVAC registry and to compare them with patients who got infected before vaccination. Additionally, factors associated with COVID-19 unfavorable outcome were assessed. Methods: Adult patients with RD who have been vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 were consecutively included between June 1st and December 21st, 2021. Con-frmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (RT-PCR o serology) was reported by the treated physician. Infection after an incomplete scheme was defned when the event was diagnosed at least 14 days after frst dose;and after a complete scheme when it occurred > 14 days after second dose. Homologous scheme is defned by two same doses of vaccine and heterologous by two different doses. Patients with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were excluded. To compare SARS-CoV-2 infection characteristics in not vaccinated patients, subjects from the SAR-COVID registry, which includes patients with RD and SARS-CoV-2 infection, were matched 2:1 by gender, age and RD. WHO-Ordinal Scale ≥5 was used to defne unfavorable infection outcome. Descriptive statics, Chi2 test, Fischer test, T test and ANOVA were used. Results: A total of 1350 patients from the SAR COVAC registry were included, 67 (5%) presented SARS-CoV-2 infection after vaccination. The later were mostly (72%) females with a mean age of 57 (SD 15) years old. The most frequent RD were rheumatoid arthritis (41%), psoriatic arthritis (12%) and systemic lupus erythematosus (10%). At vaccination, most of them (75%) had low disease activity or remission, 19% were taking steroids, 39% methotrex-ate, 27% bDMARDs and 6% JAK inhibitors. A total of 11 (16%) patients had SARS-CoV-2 infection <14 days after the frst vaccine dose, 39 (58%) after an incomplete scheme and 17 (25 %) following a complete one. In the incomplete scheme group, 59% received Gam-COVID-Vac, 31% ChAdOx1 nCov-19 and 10% BBIBP-CorV;and in patients with complete scheme 47%, 24% and 29%, respectively. No event was reported after a complete heterologous scheme. No signifcant differences regarding sociodemoghraphic characteristics, RD, disease treatment, type of vaccine and regimen was found between in those with infection and those without it. After vaccination only 8 (12%) of the patients who got infected had an unfavorable course, 88% of them following an incomplete scheme (5 received Gam-COVID-Vac, 1 ChAdOx1 nCov-19 and 1 BBIBP-CorV) and one subject after a complete homologous Gam-COVID-Vac scheme. Having an unfavorable outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated to: male gender [63% vs 24%, p=0.036], older age [mean 70 years (SD 7) vs 55 years (SD 15), p=0.005], being Caucasian [100% vs 54%, p=0.018], higher education [mean 17 years (SD 4) vs 12 years (SD 4), p=0.010], the presence of comorbid-ities [100% vs 39%, p=0.001, having pulmonary disease [37% vs 5%, p=0.019], dyslipidemia [63% vs 17%, p=0.011] and arterial hypertension [63% vs 24%, p=0.036], RD, treatments, disease activity and types of vaccines received were comparable between groups. When comparing patients with and without vaccination prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, those who received at least one dose of vaccine had less frequently severe COVID-19 (12% vs 24%, p=0.067) and presented lower mortality due to COVID-19 (3% vs 6%, p=0.498). However these differences did not reach statistical signifcance. Conclusion: In the SAR-CoVAC registry 5% of the patients had SARS-CoV-2 infection after vaccination, most of them mild and 25% after a complete scheme. Any vaccine was associated with severe COVID-19. When comparing with non-vaccinated patients, those with at least one dose, had less frequently severe disease and died due COVID-19.
ABSTRACT
Background: Currently there is little information on the efficacy and safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with immune-mediated diseases and/or under immunosuppressive treatment in our country, where different types of vaccines and mix regimens are used. For this reason, the Argentine Society of Rheumatology (SAR) with the Argentine Society of Psoriasis (SOARPSO) set out to develop a national register of patients with rheumatic and immune-mediated infammatory diseases (IMIDs) who have received a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in order to assess their efficacy and safety in this population. Objectives: To assess SARS-CoV-2 vaccine efficacy and safety in patients with rheumatic and IMIDs. Methods: SAR-CoVAC is a national, multicenter and observational registry. Adult patients with a diagnosis of rheumatic or IMIDs who have been vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 were consecutively included between June 1st and September 17th, 2021. Sociodemographic data, comorbidities, underlying rheumatic or IMIDs, treatments received and their modifcation prior to vaccination and history of SARS-CoV-2 infection were recorded. In addition, the date and place of vaccination, type of vaccine applied, scheme and indication will be registered. Finally, adverse events (AE), as well as SARS-CoV-2 infection after the application of the vaccine were documented Results: A total of 1234 patients were included, 79% were female, with a mean age of 57.8 (SD 14.1) years. The most frequent diseases were rheumatoid arthritis (41.2%), osteoarthritis (14.5%), psoriasis (12.7%) and spondy-loarthritis (12.3%). Most of them were in remission (28.5%) and low disease activity (41.4%). At the time of vaccination, 21% were receiving glucocorti-coid treatment, 35.7% methotrexate, 29.7% biological (b) Disease Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs (DMARDs) and 5.4% JAK inhibitors. Before vaccine application 16.9% had had a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Regarding the frst dose of the vaccine, the most of the patients (51.1%) received Gam-COV-ID-Vac, followed by ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (32.8%) and BBIBP-CorV (14.5%). In a lesser proportion, BNT162b2 (0.6%), Ad26.COV2.S (0.2%) and Coro-naVac (0.2%) vaccines were used. Almost half of them (48.8%) completed the scheme, 12.5% were mix regimenes, the most frequent being Gam-COVID-Vac/mRNA-1273. The median time between doses was 51days (IQR 53). More than a quarter (25.9%) of the patients reported at least one AE after the frst dose and 15.9% after the second. The fu-like syndrome and local hypersensitivity were the most frequent manifestations. There was one case of mild anaphylaxis. No patient was hospitalized. Altogether, the incidence of AE was 246.5 events/1000 doses. BBIBP-CorV presented signifcantly lower incidence of AE in comparison with the other types of vaccines. (118.5 events/1000 doses, p<0.002 in all cases) Regarding efficacy, 63 events of SARS-CoV-2 infection were reported after vaccination, 19% occurred before 14 days post-vaccination, 57.1% after the frst dose (>14 days) and 23.8% after the second. In most cases (85.9%) the infection was asymptomatic or had an outpatient course and 2 died due to COVID-19. Conclusion: In this national cohort of patients with rheumatic and IMIDs vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2, the most widely used vaccines were Gam-COVID-Vac and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, approximately half completed the schedule and in most cases homologously. A quarter of the patients presented some AE, while 5.1% presented SARS-CoV-2 infection after vaccination, in most cases mild.
ABSTRACT
Background: Patients with rheumatic diseases (RD) have been excluded from SARS-CoV-2 vaccine trials, though data appear to show safety and efficacy, mostly evidence remains in mRNA vaccines. In our country, adenovirus-vector, inactivated and heterologous scheme vaccines are frequently used. Objectives: To describe the safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with RD from the national registry SAR-CoVAC and to assess sociodemographic and clinical factors associated to AE and disease fares after vaccination. Methods: Adult patients with RD who have been vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 from de Argentine Society of Rheumatology Vaccine Registry (SAR-CoVAC) were consecutively included between June 1st and December 21st, 2021, This is a national multicentric observational registry that includes patients that have received at least one dose of any SARS-CoV-2 available vaccines in Argentina. Data is voluntarily collected by the treating physician. Naranjo scale was use to assess the association between the AE and vaccination. Homologous and heterologous schedules were defned according to whether both vaccines received were the same or different, respectively. Descriptive statics, Chi2 test, Fischer test, T test, ANOVA and multivariate regression logistic model were used. Results: A total of 1679 patients, with 2795 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses were included. Vaccines more frequently used were: Gam-COVID-Vac (1227 doses, 44%), ChAdOx1 nCov-19 (872 doses, 31%), BBIBP-CorV (482 doses, 17%) and mRAN-1273 (172 doses, 6%). Altogether, 510 EA were experienced by 449 (27%) patients. Pseudo-fu syndrome was the most frequent (11%), followed by injection site reaction (7%). They were signifcantly more frequent after the frst dose in comparison to the second one (13% vs 7% and 9% vs 5%, respectively, p<0.001 in both cases). All were mild or moderate and no patient was hospitalized due to an AE. One case of moderate anaphylaxis was reported by a patient who received Gam-COVID-Vac. No cases of vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia were observed. There were 25 disease fares reported, 17 (68%) cases of arthritis. Among patients with two doses, those with heterol-ogous schedule presented AE more frequent after the second dose (39% vs 17%).Total incidence of EA was 182.5 events/10 00 doses, it was signifcantly lower for BBIBP-CorV (105.9 events/1000 dosis, p<0.002 for all cases). The higher incidence of AE was observed for mRAN-1273 (261.6 events/1000 doses) and ChAdOx1 nCov-19 (232.8 events/1000 doses). Patients with AE were younger [mean 55 years (SD 14) vs 59 years (SD 14), p <0.010], not Caucasian ethnicity [48% vs 35%, p<0.001], had higher education level [mean 13.8 years (SD 4) vs 11.9 years (SD 5), p<0.001], were more frequently employed [54% vs 44%, p<0.001], lived mostly in urban area [99% vs 95% p <0.001, had more frequently dyslipidemia [38% vs 28% p 0.012], and less frequently arterial hypertension [49% vs 65%, p<0.001]. Systemic lupus erythematosus [11% vs 7%, p=0.039] and Sjögren syndrome [6% vs 1.8%, p<0.001] were more frequent among them, while non infammatory diseases were less prevalent [19% vs 31%, p<0.001]. They were taking steroids [24 vs 18%, p=0.007], antimalarials [17% vs 10%, p<0.001] and methotrexate [41% vs 31%, p <0.001] more frequently. In the multivariable analysis, mRAN-1273 and ChAdOx1 nCov-19 were associated with AE, while BBIBP-CorV with lower probability of having one. (Figure 1) Conclusion: The incidence of AE was 1825 events/1000 doses, were signif-cantly higher for mRAN-1273 and ChAdOx1 nCov-19 and lower for BBIBP-CorV. Most common AE was pseudo-fu syndrome. Female sex, being younger, higher education level, ChAdOx1 nCov-19 and mRAN-1273 vaccines, the use of meth-otrexate and antimalarials were related of EA in patients with RD.