ABSTRACT
The article provides information on immunopathology in sepsis and the commonality between immunopathogenetic processes of sepsis and the new coronavirus infection (COVID-19). As a result of the inability of the immune system to cope with aggression of the pathogen, inadequate immune activity occurs manifested by the systemic inflammatory response syndrome, resulting in damage to tissues of the host organism. In response, compensatory anti-inflammatory response syndrome is activated, which is manifested by inhibition of the immune response. One of its main mechanisms is signals produced by membrane receptors and their ligands. Against the background of inability of the host organism to neutralise the pathogen, numerous pathological phenomena and complications occur leading to damage to human tissues.Copyright © 2021, Krasnoyarsk State Medical University. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Severe COVID-19 patients may develop pulmonary fibrosis, similar to SSc-ILD disease, suggesting a potential link between the two diseases. However, there are limited treatment options for SSc-ILD-type diseases. Therefore, investigating pathological markers of the two diseases can provide valuable insights for treating related conditions. RNA sequencing technology offers high throughput and precision. However, the bimodal nature of RNA-Seq data cannot be accurately captured by commonly used algorithms such as DESeq2. To address this issue, the Beta-Poisson model has been developed to identify differentially expressed genes. Unlike the classical DESeq2 algorithm, the Beta-Poisson model introduces a Beta distribution to construct a new hybrid distribution in place of the Gamma distribution of the Gamma-Poisson distribution, effectively characterizing the bimodal features of RNA-Seq data. The transcriptomes of SARS-CoV infection and SSc-ILD disease in the lung epithelial cell dataset were analyzed to identify common differentially expressed genes of SARS-CoV and SSc-ILD disease. Gene function and signaling pathway enrichment analysis and protein-protein interaction (PPI) network were used to identify common pathways and drug targets for SSc-ILD with COVID-19 infection. The results show that there are 50 differentially expressed genes in common between COVID-19 and SSC-ILD. The functions of these genes are mainly enriched in immune system response, interferon signaling pathway and other related signaling pathways, and enriched in biological processes such as cell defense response to virus and interferon regulation. Based on the detection of hub genes based on PPIs network, it is predicted that STAT1, ISG15, IRF7, MX1, EIF2AK2, DDX58, OAS1, OAS2, IFIT1 and IFIT3 are the key genes involved in the pathological phenotype of the two diseases. Based on the key genes, the interaction of transcription factor (TF) and miRNA with common differentially expressed genes is also identified. The possible pathological markers of the two diseases and related molecular regulatory mechanisms of disease treatment are revealed to provide theoretical basis for the treatment of the two diseases. © 2023 Editorial Office of Journal of Shenzhen University. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundThe second COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD-2) study [1] is an international, multicentre, self-reported e-survey designed to evaluate several facets covering COVID-19 infection and vaccination as well as validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in a variety of autoimmune diseases (AIDs), including systemic sclerosis (SSc). Detailed assessment of the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and its drivers in patients with SSc is lacking.ObjectivesTo assess physical and mental health in a global cohort of SSc patients in comparison with non-SSc autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), non-rheumatic AIDs (NRAIDs), and those without AIDs (controls) using Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) global health data from the COVAD-2 survey.MethodsThe COVAD-2 database was used to extract demographics, AID diagnosis, comorbidities, disease activity, current therapies, and PROMs. PROMIS global physical health (GPH), global mental health (GMH) scores, PROMIS physical function short form-10a (PROMIS PF-10a), pain visual analogue scale (VAS), and PROMIS Fatigue-4a scores were compared between SSc, non-SSc AIRDs, NRAIDs, and controls. Outcomes were also compared between diffuse cutaneous SSc (dcSSc) vs limited cutaneous SSc (lcSSc). Multivariable regression analysis was performed to identify factors influencing GPH and GMH scores in SSc.ResultsA total of 10,502 complete responses from 276 SSc, 6006 non-SSc AIRDs, 545 NRAIDs, and 3675 controls as of May 2022 were included in the analysis. Respondents with SSc were older [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 55 (14) vs. 51 (15) vs. 45 (14) vs. 40 (14) years old, mean (SD), p < 0.001]. Among patients with SSc, 129 (47%) had dcSSc and 147 (53%) had lcSSc. SSc patients reported a significantly higher prevalence of ILD [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 30.4% vs. 5.5% vs. 1.5% vs. 0.2%, p < 0.001], and treatment with MMF [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 26.4% vs. 9.5% vs. 1.1% vs. 0%, p < 0.001].Patients with SSc had lower GPH and PROMIS PF-10a scores [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 13 (11–15) vs. 13 (11–15) vs. 15 (13–17) vs. 17 (15–18), median (IQR), p < 0.001;39 (33–46) vs. 39 (32–45) vs. 47 (40–50) vs. 49 (45–50), p < 0.001, respectively] and higher Pain VAS and PROMIS Fatigue-4a scores compared to those with NRAIDs or controls [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 3 (2–5) vs. 3 (1–6) vs. 2 (0–4) vs. 0 (0–2), p < 0.001;11 (8–14) vs. 11 (8–14) vs. 9 (7–13) vs. 7 (4–10), p < 0.001, respectively]. Patients with AIDs including SSc had lower GMH scores compared to controls [SSc vs. non-SSc AIRDs vs. NRAIDs vs. controls: 12.5 (10–15) vs. 13 (10–15) vs. 13 (11–16) vs. 15 (13–17), p < 0.001].Among SSc patients, GPH, GMH, and PROMIS PF-10a scores were lower in dcSSc compared to lcSSc [dcSSc vs. lcSSc: 12 (10–14) vs. 14 (11–15), p < 0.001;12 (10-14) vs. 13 (10-15), p<0.001;38 (30–43) vs. 41 (34–47), p < 0.001, respectively]. Pain VAS and PROMIS Fatigue-4a scores were higher in dcSSc compared to lcSSc [4 (2–6) vs. 3 (1–5), p < 0.001;12 (8–15) vs. 9 (8–13), p < 0.001, respectively].The independent factors for lower GPH scores in SSc were older age, Asian ethnicity, glucocorticoid use, and higher pain and fatigue scales, while mental health disorders and higher pain and fatigue scales were independently associated with lower GMH scores.ConclusionIn a global cohort, patient-reported physical and mental health were significantly worse in patients with SSc in comparison to those with non-SSc AIDs and without AIDs. Our findings support the critical need for more attention to patient's subjective experiences including pain and fatigue to improve the HRQOL in patients with SSc.Reference[1]Fazal ZZ, Sen P, Joshi M, et al. COVAD survey 2 long-term outcomes: unmet need and protocol. Rheumatol Int. 2022;42: 2151–58.Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsKeina Yomono: None declared, Yuan Li: None dec ared, Vahed Maroufy: None declared, Naveen Ravichandran: None declared, Akira Yoshida: None declared, Kshitij Jagtap: None declared, Tsvetelina Velikova Speakers bureau: Pfizer and AstraZeneca, Parikshit Sen: None declared, Lorenzo Cavagna: None declared, Vishwesh Agarwal: None declared, Johannes Knitza: None declared, Ashima Makol: None declared, Dey Dzifa: None declared, Carlos Enrique Toro Gutierrez: None declared, Tulika Chatterjee: None declared, Aarat Patel: None declared, Rohit Aggarwal Consultant of: Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Genentech, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca, Corbus, Kezar, Abbvie, Janssen, Kyverna Alexion, Argenx, Q32, EMD-Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roivant, Merck, Galapagos, Actigraph, Scipher, Horizon Therepeutics, Teva, Beigene, ANI Pharmaceuticals, Biogen, Nuvig, Capella Bioscience, and CabalettaBio, Grant/research support from: Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Genentech, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca, Corbus, Kezar, Abbvie, Janssen, Kyverna Alexion, Argenx, Q32, EMD-Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roivant, Merck, Galapagos, Actigraph, Scipher, Horizon Therepeutics, Teva, Beigene, ANI Pharmaceuticals, Biogen, Nuvig, Capella Bioscience, and CabalettaBio, Latika Gupta: None declared, Masataka Kuwana Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Asahi-Kasei, Astellas, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chugai, Eisai, MBL, Mochida, Nippon Shinyaku, Ono Pharmaceuticals, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Consultant of: Astra Zeneka, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chugai, Corbus, GSK, Horizon, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Grant/research support from: Boehringer-Ingelheim, Vikas Agarwal: None declared.
ABSTRACT
Certolizumab is a Fab fragment of a humanized monoclonal antibody against tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha). Differing from the other TNF-alpha inhibitors due to the absence of Fc fragment and pegylation, it binds to both the soluble and transmembrane forms of TNF-alpha, creating a strong TNF-alpha blockage. Previously approved for psoriatic arthritis, certolizumab received another approval from FDA in 2018 for the treatment of moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis that does not respond to conventional systemic treatments or for which these treatments are contraindicated. Administered via subcutaneous injections, certolizumab also has a low-dose option for patients weighing less than 90 kg. Certolizumab is considered a safe biological drug that can be preferred during pregnancy and lactation.Copyright © 2022 by Turkish Society of Dermatology and Venereology.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: Data about COVID-19 patients treated with veno-arterial-ECMO (VA-ECMO) is limited. Reported survival rates range from 27.9% to 77.8%, depending on VA-ECMO indication. A subgroup of patients suffers from circulatory failure due to a COVID-19 associated hyperinflammatory state (CovHI). In these patients, differentiation between inflammation and sepsis is difficult but important. In this retrospective case series, differential diagnoses of COVID-19 associated refractory circulatory failure and survival rates in different indications for VA-ECMO are investigated. Method(s): Retrospective analysis of 28 consecutive COVID-19 patients requiring VA-ECMO at the University Hospital Regensburg between March 2020 and May 2022. Specific treatment for COVID-19 was in accordance with respective guidelines. Mycotic infections were either invasive or met current definitions of COVID19-associated-pulmonary aspergillosis. Result(s): At VA-ECMO initiation, median age was 57.3 years (IQR: 51.4 - 61.8), SOFA score 16 (IQR: 13 - 17) and norepinephrine dosing 0.53mug/kg/min (IQR: 0.32 - 0.78). Virus-variants were: 61% wild-type, 14% Alpha, 18% Delta and 7% Omicron. Survival to hospital discharge was 39%. 17 patients were primarily supported with VA-ECMO only (survival 42%), 3 patients were switched from VV to VA-ECMO (survival 0%), and 8 patients were converted from VA to VAV or VV-ECMO (survival 50%). Indications for VA-ECMO support were pulmonary embolism (PE) (n=5, survival 80%), right heart failure due to secondary pulmonary hypertension (n=5, survival 20%), cardiac arrest (n=4, survival 25%), acute left heart failure (ALHF) (n=11, survival 36%) and refractory vasoplegia (n=3, survival 0%). Inflammatory markers at VA-ECMO initiation were higher in patients with ALHF or vasoplegia;in these patients a higher rate of invasive fungal infections (10/14, 71% vs. 4/14, 29%;p=0.023) compared to the other patients was found. Conclusion(s): Survival on VA-ECMO in COVID-19 depends on VA-ECMO indication, which should be considered in further studies and clinical decisions making. Circulatory failure due to vasoplegia should be considered very carefully as indication for VA-ECMO. A high rate of mycotic infections mandates an intense microbiological workup of these patients and must be considered as an important differential diagnosis to CovHI.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic triggered serious challenges in the treatment of chronic diseases due to the lack of access to medical attention. Patients with rheumatic diseases (RD) must have adequate treatment compliance in order to reach and maintain remission or low activity of their diseases. Treatment suspension because of non-medical reasons might lead to disease activation and organ damage.ObjectivesIdentify the frequency of biologic treatment (bDMARD) suspension in patients with RD during the COVID-19 pandemic and determine the associated factors for suspension.MethodsIn this study we included all patients registered in the Mexican Biologics Adverse Events Registry (BIOBADAMEX), that started bDMARD before March 2019 and suspended treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. We used descriptive statistic to analyze baseline characteristics and main treatment suspension causes. We used Chi[2] and Kruskal Wallis tests to analyze differences between groups.ResultsA total of 832 patients patients registered in BIOBADAMEX were included in this study, 143 (17%) suspended bDMARD during the COVID-19 pandemic. The main causes of suspension were inefficacy in 54 (38%) patients, followed by other motives in 49 (34%) patients from which 7 (5%) was loss of medical coverage. Adverse events and loss of patients to follow up were the motive in 16 (11%) and 15 (11%) patients respectively.When we compared the group that suspended bDMARD with the non-suspenders (Table 1), we found statistical differences in patient gender, with 125 (87%) female patients that suspended bDMARD, with a median age of 52 (42-60) years, and a treatment duration of 3.8 years.ConclusionIn our study we found that 17% of patients with RD suspended bDMARD treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic and that non-medical motives such as lack of patients follow up and loss of medical coverage due to unemployment were important motives. These results are related to the effect of the pandemic on other chronic diseases.Table 1.Patients baseline characteristicsPatients that did not suspended bDMARD during pandemic (n = 689)Patients that suspended bDMARD during pandemic (n = 143)pFemale gender, n(%)549 (79.7)125 (87.4)0.02Age, median (IQR)55 (45 – 63)52 (42 – 60)0.04Body mass index, median (IQR)26.4 (23 – 30.4)27.23 (24.2 – 30.46)0.13Social security, n(%)589 (85.5)128 (89.5)0.2Diagnosis0.7- Rheumatoid arthritis444 (64.4)97 (67.8)- Juvenil idiopathic athritis29 (4.2)2 (1.4)- Ankyosing sponylitis93 (13.5)19 (13.3)- Psoriasic arthritis43 (6.2)6 (4.2)- Systemic lupus erithematosus32 (4.6)9 (6.3)- Others48 (6.9)10 (6.9)Disease duration, median (IQR)11 (7 – 19.5)12 (6 - 18)0.95Comorbidities, n(%)305 (44.3)73 (51)0.08Previos biologic, n(%)249 (36.1)60 (42)0.1Treatment at pandemic iniciation, n(%)0.8 - Etanercept a34 (4.9)5 (3.5)- Infliximab a24 (3.5)5 (3.5)- Adalimumab130 (18.9)22 (15.4)- Rituximab a61 (8.9)25 (17.5)- Abatacept76 (11)20 (14)- Tocilizumab82 (11.9)18 (12.6)- Certolizumab92 (13.4)28 (19.6)- Rituximab b7 (1)0- Golimumab36 (5.2)5 (3.5)- Tofacitinib14 (2)1 (0.7)- Infliximab b4 (0.5)2 (1.4)- Etanercept b31 (4.5)6 (4.2)- Baricitinib12 (1.7)1 (0.7)- Belimumab5 (0.7)1 (0.7)- Secukinumb8 (1.2)3 (2.1)Steroids use, n(%):254 (36.9)57 (39.9)0.2Steroids dose (mg), median (IQR)6 (5 – 10)6 (5 – 10)0.47DMARD use, n(%):538 (78.1)118 (82.5)0.1Treatment duration, median (IQR)5.06 (4.04 – 5.78)3.82 (3.35 – 4.95)0.001Suspension motive, n(%)NA- Inefficacy-54 (37.8)- Adverse event-16 (11.2)- Pregnancy-2 (1.4)- Loss of patient-15 (10.5)- Remission-7 (4.9)- Others-49 (34.2)Adverse events, n(%):102 (14.8)24 (16.8)0.3- Severe, n(%)13 (1.9)5 (3.5)0.4a original, b biosimilarREFERENCES:NIL.Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsVijaya Rivera Teran: None declared, Daniel Xavier Xibille Friedmann: None declared, David Vega-Morales: None declared, Sandra Sicsik: None declared, Angel Castillo Ortiz: None declared, Fedra Irazoque-Palazuelos: None declared, Dafhne Miranda: None declared, Iris Jazmin Colunga-Pedraza: None declared, Julio Cesar Casasola: None declared, Omar Elo Muñoz-Monroy: None declared, Sandra Carrilo: None declared, Angélica Peña: None declared, Sergio Duran Barragan: None declared, Luis Francisco Valdés Corona: None declared, Estefanía Torres Valdéz: None declared, Azucena Ramos: None declared, Aleni Paz: None declared, ERICK ADRIAN ZAMORA-TEHOZOL: None declared, Deshire Alpizar-Rodriguez Employee of: Scientific Advisor in GSK México.
ABSTRACT
PurposeThis paper aims to identify key factors for a contextualised Systemic Risk Governance (SRG) framework and subsequently explore how systemic risks can be managed and how local institutional mechanisms can be tweaked to deal with the complex Indonesian risk landscape.Design/methodology/approachUsing a case study from Palu triple-disasters in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia, the authors demonstrate how inland earthquakes in 2018 created cascading secondary hazards, namely tsunamis, liquefactions and landslides, caused unprecedented disasters for the communities and the nation. A qualitative analysis was conducted using the data collected through a long-term observation since 2002.FindingsThe authors argue that Indonesia has yet to incorporate an SRG approach in its responses to the Palu triple-disasters. Political will is required to adopt more appropriate risk governance modes that promote the systemic risk paradigm. Change needs to occur incrementally through hybrid governance arrangements ranging from formal/informal methods to self- and horizontal and vertical modes of governance deemed more realistic and feasible. The authors recommend that this be done by focusing on productive transition and local transformation.Originality/valueThere is growing awareness and recognition of the importance of systemic and cascading risks in disaster risk studies. However, there are still gaps between research, policy and practice. The current progress of disaster risk governance is not sufficient to achieve the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015–2030) unless there is an effective governing system in place at the local level that allow actors and institutions to simultaneously manage the interplays of multi-hazards, multi-temporal, multi-dimensions of vulnerabilities and residual risks. This paper contributes to these knowledge gaps.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundDeucravacitinib is a first-in-class, oral, selective, allosteric tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2) inhibitor approved in multiple countries for the treatment of adults with plaque psoriasis. Deucravacitinib suppresses signaling of cytokines involved in the pathogenesis of immune-mediated diseases including psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, and systemic lupus erythematosus. Deucravacitinib was efficacious compared with placebo in phase 2 trials in psoriatic arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus.[1,2] In two phase 3 trials in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis (POETYK PSO-1 [NCT03624127], PSO-2 [NCT03611751]), deucravacitinib showed superior efficacy versus placebo and apremilast.[3,4] Upon completion of either psoriasis trial, patients could enroll in the POETYK long-term extension (LTE) trial (NCT04036435).ObjectivesTo evaluate the incidence rate and severity of adverse events (AEs) due to COVID-19 with deucravacitinib treatment in the POETYK PSO-1 and POETYK PSO-2 trials and open-label POETYK LTE trial.MethodsIn PSO-1 (N=666) and PSO-2 (N=1020), adult patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis were randomized 2:1:1 to deucravacitinib 6 mg once daily, placebo, or apremilast 30 mg twice daily. At Week 16, placebo patients in both trials switched to deucravacitinib. Based on their Week 24 PASI response, apremilast patients continued with apremilast or switched to placebo or deucravacitinib. In PSO-1, patients randomized to deucravacitinib continued treatment for 52 weeks;in PSO-2, some patients randomized to deucravacitinib had a randomized treatment withdrawal period. At Week 52, patients could enroll in the open-label LTE and receive deucravacitinib. Incidence rates and severity of COVID-19–related AEs in the POETYK trials (n=1364;2076.7 person-years [PY] of follow-up) were compared with the Janssen/Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine trial placebo group (n=19,544;3096.1 PY of follow-up). This reference population was selected due to the study design and timing of the trial, which occurred when variants were in circulation.ResultsAs of October 1, 2021, 1519 patients received ≥1 dose of deucravacitinib over a 2-year follow-up period;1364 patients met criteria for this analysis, with deucravacitinib exposure since the pandemic onset (estimated to be January 1, 2020). In total, 153 deucravacitinib patients reported a COVID-19–related AE, for an overall exposure-adjusted incidence rate (EAIR) of 7.4/100 PY (95% CI, 6.2–8.6). Serious COVID-19–related AEs occurred in 43 patients (EAIR, 2.1/100 PY;95% CI, 1.5–2.8), including 30 with COVID-19 and 13 with COVID-19 pneumonia;this rate was within the margins of those for moderate to severe COVID-19 reported in the reference population (EAIR, 16.5/100 PY;95% CI, 15.0–17.9). Deaths due to COVID-19 occurred in 6 patients (EAIR, 0.3/100 PY;95% CI, 0.1–0.6), with the COVID-19–related mortality rate being consistent with the reference population (EAIR, 0.23/100 PY;95% CI, 0.1–0.5). Treatment was discontinued due to COVID-19 or COVID-19 pneumonia in 7 patients, including the 6 patients who died due to COVID-19.ConclusionCOVID-19 was among the most frequently reported AEs during the 2-year period of the pooled PSO-1, PSO-2, and LTE trials due to the temporal overlap of the pandemic with the trials. However, COVID-19 infection and death rates did not differ from the reference population;most infections were not serious and did not lead to treatment discontinuation. Based on this analysis, deucravacitinib did not appear to increase the risk of COVID-19 nor its progression to severe outcomes.References[1]Mease PJ, et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2022;81:815-822.[2]Morand E, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2022;Nov 11 (Epub ahead of print).[3]Armstrong A, et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2022;S0190-9622(22)02256-3.[4]Strober B, et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2022;S0190-9622(22)02643-3.AcknowledgementsThese clinical trials were sponsored by Bristol Myers Squibb.Disclosure of InterestsDiamant Thaçi Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, Biogen Idec, Boeh inger Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Galderma, Janssen-Cilag, Leo Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz-Hexal, Sanofi, Target Solution, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, Biogen Idec, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Galderma, Janssen-Cilag, Leo Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz-Hexal, Sanofi, Target Solution, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, Biogen Idec, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Galderma, Janssen-Cilag, Leo Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz-Hexal, Sanofi, Target Solution, and UCB, Kenneth B Gordon Consultant of: Amgen, Almirall, Dermira, Leo Pharma, Pfizer, and Sun Pharma, Grant/research support from: Amgen, Almirall, Dermira, Leo Pharma, Pfizer, and Sun Pharma, AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, and UCB, Melinda Gooderham Speakers bureau: Glenmark, Actelion, AbbVie, Galderma, Leo Pharma, Pfizer, and Regeneron, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Sanofi Genzyme, and Valeant, Consultant of: Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Sanofi Genzyme, and Valeant, Andrew Alexis Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Regeneron, and Sanofi Genzyme, Consultant of: AbbVie, Allergan, Almirall, Amgen, Arcutis, AstraZeneca, Bausch Health, Beiersdorf, Bristol Myers Squibb, Dermavant, Galderma, Janssen, Leo Pharma, L'Oreal, Pfizer, Sanofi-Regeneron, Sol-Gel, UCB, Valeant, VisualDx, and Vyne, Grant/research support from: Almirall, Amgen, Arcutis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cara, Galderma, Leo Pharma, Menlo, Novartis, and Valeant (Bausch Health), Varsha Lalchandani Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Julie Scotto Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Lauren Hippeli Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Matthew J Colombo Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Subhashis Banerjee Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Tamara Lezhava Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Mark Lebwohl Consultant of: Aditum Bio, Almirall, AltruBio, AnaptysBio, Arcutis, Arena, Aristea, Arrive Technologies, Avotres, BiomX, Boehringer Ingelheim, Brickell Biotech, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cara, Castle Biosciences, CorEvitas' (Corrona) Psoriasis Registry, Dermavant, Dr. Reddy's Laboratories, Evelo Biosciences, Evommune, Forte Biosciences, Helsinn Therapeutics, Hexima, Leo Pharma, Meiji Seika Pharma, Mindera, Pfizer, Seanergy, and Verrica, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Arcutis, Avotres, Boehringer Ingelheim, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Incyte, Janssen, Ortho Dermatologics, Regeneron, and UCB.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundSjögren's syndrome (SS) is a chronic, systemic autoimmune disease affecting exocrine glands, primarily the salivary and tear glands, with potentially severe manifestations in multiple organs. No approved disease-modifying therapies exist. Dazodalibep (DAZ) is a biologic antagonist of CD40L.ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DAZ therapy in adult SS subjects with moderate-to-high systemic disease activity (NCT04129164).MethodsWe conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study to evaluate DAZ therapy in adult SS subjects with moderate-to-high systemic disease activity, as defined by a EULAR Sjögren's Syndrome Disease Activity Index (ESSDAI) score ≥ 5. Eligible subjects were randomized 1:1 to receive intravenous DAZ 1500 mg or placebo (PBO) Q2W x 3 doses, then Q4W x 4 additional doses. Starting on Day 169, subjects initially randomized to DAZ received PBO Q4W x 5 doses and subjects randomized to PBO received DAZ Q4W x 5 doses and were then followed for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change from Baseline in ESSDAI at Day 169. Safety assessments included the incidence of adverse (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), and AEs of special interest (AESIs).ResultsThe 74 randomized subjects all received ≥1 dose of study medication (DAZ, N=36;PBO, N=38). The baseline demographics and disease characteristics were balanced between the two groups. The change from Baseline to Day 169 in ESSDAI score (LS mean ± SE), was -6.3 ± 0.6 in DAZ-treated subjects compared to -4.1 ± 0.6 in the PBO group, a difference of -2.2 (p = 0.0167). Compared to the PBO group, the DAZ group showed positive trends in the EULAR Sjögren's Syndrome Patient Reported Index score, and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue score at Day 169. A post-hoc responder analysis of subjects achieving high levels (5 and 6 points) of improvement on ESSDAI favored DAZ (61.1% and 60.0%) over PBO (35.1% and 34.3%).The reported AEs were generally mild through Day 169 and similar in frequency between treatment groups. The most frequently reported AEs occurring in ≥5% of DAZ-treated subjects and >PBO were COVID-19, diarrhea, dizziness, ligament sprain, upper respiratory tract infection, contusion, device allergy, fatigue, hypertension, and oropharyngeal pain. Two SAEs were reported in a single DAZ-treated subject: this subject was a 59-year-old female who experienced a grade 3 SAE of COVID-19 infection and later died of unknown cause 46 days after last administration of DAZ (12 days after COVID-19 diagnosis). There was a single AESI of herpes zoster in a DAZ-treated subject.ConclusionDAZ is a potential new therapy for the treatment of systemic disease activity in patients with SS. SS subjects with moderate-to-high systemic disease receiving DAZ experienced a statistically significant reduction in disease activity relative to PBO as measured by the improvement in ESSDAI score. Except for a case of severe COVID-19 infection, DAZ therapy in SS subjects appeared to be well tolerated. Larger controlled trials of DAZ therapy for SS are warranted to further explore its safety profile and confirm its clinical efficacy.Table 1.Efficacy and Safety DataPBO N=38DAZ 1500 mg N=36EfficacyΔESSDAI, LS mean (SE) †-4.1 (0.6)-6.3 (0.6)*ΔESSPRI, LS mean (SE) †-1.12 (0.29)-1.80 (0.31)ΔFACIT-Fatigue, LS mean (SE) †5.8 (1.6)8.1 (1.6)AE Summary, n (%)≥1 AE23 (60.5)28 (77.8)≥1 related AE8 (21)10 (27.8)≥1 SAE01 (2.8)≥1 related SAE00≥1 AE leading to discontinuation00≥1 AESI01 (2.8)≥1 Death01 (2.8)Efficacy endpoints as of Day 169;† Analyzed using MMRM;Comparisons vs PBO;*p<0.05;AE summaries based on AEs that occurred through Day 169;AE, adverse event;AESI, adverse event of special interest;ESSDAI, EULAR Sjögren's Syndrome Disease Activity Index;ESSPRI, EULAR Sjögren's Syndrome Patient Reported Index;FACIT-Fatigue, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue;PBO, placebo;SAE, serious adverse eventFigure 1.AcknowledgementsFunded by Horizon herapeutics. Medical writing support provided by B Lujan, PhD, an employee of Horizon Therapeutics.Disclosure of InterestsE. William St. Clair Consultant of: Horizon Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Resolve Therapeutics, Sonoma Biotherapeutics. Royalties: UpToDate, Liangwei Wang Shareholder of: Horizon Therapeutics, Employee of: Horizon Therapeutics, Ilias Alevizos Shareholder of: Horizon Therapeutics, Employee of: Horizon Therapeutics, William Rees Shareholder of: Horizon Therapeutics, Employee of: Horizon Therapeutics, Alan Baer Consultant of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Wan Fai Ng Consultant of: Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Abbvie, BMS, Sanofi, MedImmune, Janssen and UCB, Ghaith Noaiseh Consultant of: Novartis, Chiara Baldini Consultant of: GSK, and Sanofi.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundSystemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an autoimmune disease, which presents an immune disorder that leads to the production of autoantibodies with potential involvement of multiple organs. Infections are one of the most frequent causes of hospitalization and death in lupus patients, and SARS-CoV-2 infection has been a global threat since March 2020. Immunization of these patients has been strongly recommended, although vaccine evaluation studies have not included this profile of patients.ObjectivesTo evaluate the immunogenicity and safety after 2 doses of the vaccine against SARS-CoV2 in patients with SLE.MethodsSubgroup of SLE patients from the prospective multicenter cohort of patients with immune-mediated diseases "SAFER” – Safety and Efficacy on COVID-19 Vaccine in Rheumatic Disease, a phase IV study. Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 took place with vaccines approved by Brazilian regulatory bodies CoronaVac (Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine), ChadOx-1 (AstraZeneca) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and this project followed in line with the guidelines of the National Immunization Plan in Brazil. Patients aged 18 years or older with a previous diagnosis of SLE (according to the 2019 ACR/EULAR criteria) were included. Patients were evaluated by telephone contact and in a face-to-face visit on the 28th day after each dose. Patients were followed up by means of blood collection for measurement of IgG antibody against SARS-COV-2 by chemiluminescence and disease activity assessed using SLEDAI-2K score.ResultsA total of 367 individuals with SLE were included, of whom 207 received 2 doses of CoronaVac, 128 received 2 doses of ChadOx-1 and 32 received 2 doses of BNT162b2. 90% of the subjects were female with a mean age of 37 years. About 42% (154) of the individuals included did not have any other associated comorbidity. 50% (182) of patients were using oral glucocorticoids and azathioprine was the most frequent immunosuppressive therapy. Regarding disease activity parameters, 38% (140) of patients had zero SLEDAI-2K at baseline and 41% (147) had zero SLEDAI-2K 28 days after the 2nd dose. Anti-DNA positivity was 30.7% (16/52) at inclusion and 32.6% (17/52) 28 days after the 2nd dose. Complement consumption was present in 18% (10/55) at inclusion and in 14.5% (8/55) 28 days after the 2nd vaccine dose. The geometric mean titers of IgG antibodies against SARS-COV-2 increased in the different vaccine groups, log 2.27 BAU/mL at inclusion and log 5.58 BAU/mL 28 days after the 2nd dose. Antibody titers after second dose varied between different vaccines, 4.96 BAU/mL CoronaVac, 6.00 BAU/mL ChadOx-1 and 7.31 BAU/mL BNT162b2 vaccine, p < 0.001. Only 3.54% (13/367) patients had covid-19 infection after the 15th day of the second dose of immunization, 9 of them having received 2 doses of CoronaVac, 4 of them of ChadOx-1 and none of them receiving BNT162b2, with p-value of 0.63.ConclusionThis study suggests that vaccines against SARS-COV-2 are safe in SLE patients. Induction of immunogenicity occurred in different vaccine regimens. Only 3.5% of individuals had COVID-19 infection with no difference between the types of vaccines evaluated. Future analyzes to explore the association of the effect of immunosuppressive medication, as well as the impact of booster doses and longer follow-up on clinical outcome will be performed.References[1]Mason A, et al. Lupus, vaccinations and COVID-19: What we know now. Lupus. 2021;30(10):1541-1552.[2]Furer V, Eviatar T, Zisman D, et al. Immunogenicity and safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in adult patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases and in the general population: A multicentre study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2021;80(10):1330-1338.[3]Izmirly PM, Kim MY, Samanovic M, et al. Evaluation of Immune Response and Disease Status in SLE Patients Following SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination. Arthritis Rheumatol. Published online 2021.Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsNone Declared.
ABSTRACT
Background: Mucormycosis is a serious life-threatening fungal infection that recently made severe sudden and devastating surge during the second wave of the COVID-19 epidemic with a mortality rate of up to 50%. Although the causality link between COVID-19 and rhino-orbito-cerebral mucormycosis (ROCM) remains unclear, many factors including poor diabetes control, high doses of steroids, viral-induced lymphopenia, and cytokine storm have been attributed to ROCM in patients with COVID-19. Orienting to risk factors and early recognition of this potentially fatal opportunistic infection is the key to optimal management and improved outcomes. In these contexts, we conducted a prospective study for 33 patients admitted to our tertiary hospital to determine the risk factors for ROCM in patients with COVID-19 and the cumulative mortality rates. Result(s): This study found a statistically significant relation between the fate of death in COVID-MUCOR patients who had presented fever, ophthalmoplegia, facial skin necrosis, and visual loss with those who received dose of steroid to control their respiratory symptoms P < 0.001. Death from COVID-MUCOR was statistically significant related to the prolonged interval from the onset of the symptoms to start of treatment and intervention. Also, it was found that there was a significant decrease in duration between COVID-19 infection and the start of mucormycosis (days) with incidence of DKA on admission. Nineteen (57.6%) of the patients had uncontrolled diabetes mellitus (hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) of > 7.0%). Conclusion(s): Mucormycosis epidemic was precipitated by a unique confluence of risk factors: diabetes mellitus, widespread use of steroids, and perhaps SARS-CoV-2 infection itself. Restricting steroid use in patients with severe COVID-19 requiring oxygen therapy, and screening for and optimally controlling hyperglycemia, can prevent COVID-MUCOR in a large majority.Copyright © 2023, The Author(s).
ABSTRACT
BackgroundThe main systemic sclerosis (SSc) manifestations are skin thickening, microangiopathy and ischemic changes in tissues, fibrotic damage to the lungs, heart, kidneys, and digestive system, arthritis, and myopathy. Acute phase reactants (APR) like erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) reflect inflammation activity in various inflammatory conditions. Ferritin is a protein bound to iron;low serum ferritin indicates iron deficiency and/or anemia. Instead, high ferritin levels are associated with inflammatory and non-inflammatory conditions such as dermatomyositis, pulmonary fibrosis, lupus, systemic COVID-19, vasculitis, tissue damage, thromboembolic complications, and metastatic cancer. The possible role of ferritin in SSc as APR is unclear.ObjectivesWe aimed to assess whether ferritin levels can reflect the severity of SSc and predict the outcome.Methods241 files of SSc patients with information on serum ferritin level (ferritin over 300 mg/dL is considered elevated) who visited the Rambam Rheumatology Institute in the years 2004-2021were used for retrospective analysis. Patients' demographic, clinical, laboratory, imaging, and respiratory function data were collected from electronic hospital files. Statistics included Student's T-test, Pearson's chi-squared test, and Kaplan-Meier curve;statistical significance was determined as p<0.05.Results36 patients (FerEl-SSc) had elevated ferritin values;the rest (n=205) represented the second group (FerNor-SSc). Significant differences were seen in gender (male 44.4% - 15.6%), disease duration (4.56 - 7.7 years), modified Rodnan skin score (12.3 - 6.9), as well as in incidence of lung (65.7% - 38.7%), heart (51.4% - 21.1%), and renal (28.6% - 5.9%) involvement. Increased ferritin correlated with elevated ESR, CRP, creatinine, creatine kinase, troponin, and reduced hemoglobin, impaired pulmonary function tests and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction on echocardiography. Patients with elevated ferritin had a significant increase in mortality rates (52.8% and 35.1%) and non-significant reduction in survival.ConclusionOur study demonstrated that ferritin has a potential as a sensitive marker for SSc severity in term of skin thickening, vital organ complications, and mortality. The ferritin test is simple and inexpensive, it can add to the complex SSc assessment and contribute to treatment decision-making in complicated SSc.REFERENCES:NIL.Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsNone Declared.
ABSTRACT
Background and purpose: Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C) occurs after having COVID-19. The severity and outcomes of COVID-19 with gastrointestinal symptoms are higher. The aim of this study was to investigate gastrointestinal manifestations in MIS-C patients in selected referral hospitals in Iran to obtain comprehensive information about the treatment and prevention of MIS-C. Materials and methods: In this cross-sectional study, all MIS-C patients <21 years in Dec 2019 to Oct 2021 were included. The patients were identified by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) checklist and data were analyzed applying t-test and Chi-square in STATA11. Results: There were 225 patients with a median age of 55 months (26-96 months), including 59.56% boys and all had fever on admission. At least one gastrointestinal symptom was seen in 200 patients and the most common symptoms were vomiting (60.9%) and abdominal pain (45.77%). Almost 60% of the patients had positive RT-PCR results. Among the patients with and without gastrointestinal symptoms 85.5% and 48% were admitted to intensive care unit (ICU), respectively. There were significant differences between the two groups in respiratory symptoms, ALT, AST, NT-pro BNP, ESR, and PLT (P < 0.05). All patients without gastrointestinal symptoms were discharged but nine patients in the group with gastrointestinal symptoms deceased. Conclusion: According to the current study, gastrointestinal symptoms are common in MIS-C patients and are associated with higher rates of death and intensive care unit admission. Therefore, in providing services to COVID-19 patients, all typical and atypical signs and symptoms should be considered to prevent unnecessary interventions.
ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic has left millions of cases and deaths worldwide, in children the infection is less severe and has low mortality. A post-infectious entity called Systemic Multiinflammatory Syndrome (MIS-C) associated with COVID-19 infection is described, which has a mortality rate ten times higher than acute infection in children. MIS-C is characterized by sustained systemic inflammatory manifestations associated with fever and multiple system involvement. We present the case of a schoolgirl who presented a diagnosis of MIS-C with a good response to management and 11 months later, she presented a second episode that also responded to treatment. To date, we have not found in the literature the report of recurrence of MIS-C in children, such as the case presented by us, it marks an important precedent, inviting us to consider recurrence as a possibility in the case of a similar clinical presentation.Copyright © 2023 Asociacion Colombiana de Infectologia. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundThe 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) is a standardised method routinely used to screen for and monitor interstitiel lunge disease and/or pulmonary arterial hypertension in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). Studies shows that esaturations during the 6MWT are associated with severity of pulmonary manifestations in patients with SSc [1]. Digital sensors are commonly used to measure peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) during the 6MWT. However, digital-based sensors may have important limitations in patients with SSc due to disease-related microangiopathy, Raynaud's phenomenon, sclerodactyly and motion artifacts during the 6MWT [2]. Sensors located at more central body positions may therefore be more accurate as these as less prone to Raynaud attacks.ObjectivesTo determine the validity and re-test reliability of peripheral oxygen saturation measured at the finger, forehead, and ear during the 6MWT in patients with SSc.Methods82 patients with SSc had an arterial line placed while performing the 6MWT. Peripheral oxygen saturation was simultaneously measured by finger, forehead, and earlobe sensors and compared to the arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2) measured before and after the 6MWT. 40 patients repeated the 6MWT one week later. We used Bland-Altman plots to display the agreement between SpO2 and SaO2, and between the minimal SpO2 (minSpO2) one week apart. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC, 95% confidence interval 95% CI]) for repeated measurement of minSpO2 was calculated.ResultsThe mean difference (SpO2 - SaO2, ± standard deviation [SD]) after the 6MWT was –3.3% (±4.82), 0.15% (±1.55), and 1.36% (±1.93) for the finger, forehead, and earlobe, respectively (Table 1).The finger minSpO2 also demonstrated the poorest re-test reliability: The mean difference in minSpO2 (visit2-visit1, ±SD) was 1.28% (±5.3), 0.74% (±4.36) and –1.10% (±2.87),). The ICC (95% CI) showed good agreement using the ear and forehead probe (ICCear = 0.89 [0.80;0.94];ICCforehead = 0.88 [0.60;0.87]), while a modest reliability was found using the finger probe (ICCfinger = 0.65 [0.43;0.80]).ConclusionPeripheral oxygen saturation should be measured using either the earlobe or forehead during the 6MWT in patients with SSc.References[1]Villalba, W. O. et al. Six-minute walk test for the evaluation of pulmonary disease severity in scleroderma patients. Chest 131, 217–222 (2007).[2]Pathania, Y. S. Alternatives for erroneous finger probe pulse oximetry in systemic sclerosis patients during COVID-19 pandemic. Rheumatol. Int. 41, 2243–2244 (2021).Table 1.Validity and re-test reliability of peripheral oxygen during the 6MWT (n= 82)Finger probeForehead probeEar probeMean difference SpO2 - SaO2 Mean difference pre-test (+/-SD)–0.68% (±1.88)0.13% (±1.26)1.54% (±0.69) Mean difference post--test (+/-SD)–3.30% (±4.82)0.15% (±1.55)1.36% (±1.93)Mean difference of the minSpO2 (visit2-visit1) Mean difference (±SD)1.28% (±5.3)0.74% (±4.36)1.10% (±2.87)Abbreviations: SpO2, Peripheral oxygen saturation;SaO2, Arterial oxygen saturation;SD, Standard deviation.Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsAmanda Lynggaard Riis: None declared, Esben Naeser Paid instructor for: Boehringer Ingelheim Denmark, Katja Thorup Aaen: None declared, Henrik Hovgaard: None declared, Peter Juhl-Olsen: None declared, Elisabeth Bendstrup Speakers bureau: Hoffman-la-Roche.Boehringer Ingelheim.Glaxo Smith Kleine.Daichii Sankyo, Klaus Soendergaard Speakers bureau: Boehringer Ingelheim, Consultant of: Boehringer Ingelheim, Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundCOVID-19 is associated with higher morbidity and mortality burdens in immunocompromised individuals, including patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE;1). These patients might benefit from treatment with anti-SARS-CoV-2-specific antiviral agents and monoclonal antibodies, but clinical evidence is to date limited.Objectivesto comparatively assess the course of COVID-19 in patients with SLE treated or untreated with COVID-19-specific agents.MethodsPatients with SLE and COVID-19 treated with antivirals and/or monoclonal antibodies from February 2020 to December 2022 were identified within a three-centre cohort of tertiary referral centres and age-, sex- SLE extension- and SLE duration-matched 1:2 with patients with a history of untreated COVID-19. Data on COVID-19 presentation, course (including time to viral clearance) and sequelae, along with SLE treatment at COVID-19 onset and SLE course after COVID-19 were collected. COVID-19 severity at presentation was quantitated through a 0-4 analogue scale [2]. Data are expressed as median (interquartile range, IQR) unless otherwise specified.ResultsOver three years, 39% of patients with SLE had at least one COVID-19 event. Eighteen subjects (16 women) were treated with antivirals (n=12) or monoclonal antibodies (n=6) and were matched with 36 controls. There was no difference in the frequency of organ involvement between the two groups. Treated patients were receiving significantly higher prednisone daily doses at COVID-19 onset (6.25 (0-10) vs 0 (0-2.5) mg;p=0.005) and had a higher prevalence of previous high-dose steroid treatments (83% vs 47%;p=0.019) compared to controls. SLE disease activity index (3 (0-5) vs 1 (0-4)) and SLE International Collaborating Clinics Damage Index scores (1 (0-3) vs 0 (0-1)) were also numerically higher in treated patients at COVID-19 onset. Patients in the treated group had more severe COVID-19 at presentation but showed no significant differences with control subjects in terms of COVID-19 resolution, prevalence of sequelae and viral clearance (Table 1). There was also no difference in flare occurrence between the two groups (Log-rank=0.02, p=0.889). Two patients reported mild adverse events with monoclonal antibodies (muscle cramps and chest pain, both self-resolving).ConclusionThese data support the safe use of COVID-19 specific treatments in patients with SLE. Patients treated with antivirals and monoclonal antibodies had a favourable COVID-19 course, despite a more severe presentation and a higher risk of deterioration due to SLE and corticosteroid treatment burden, suggesting the potential efficacy of COVID-specific treatments in preventing severe COVID-19 in patients with SLE.References[1]Strangfeld A et al, Ann Rheum Dis, 2021[2]World Health Organization. Clinical management of COVID-19;Interim guidance 27 May 2020.Table 1.COVID-19 presentation and courseTreated (n=18)Untreated (n=36)Number of vaccine doses3 (2-3)3 (2-3)Time from last vaccine administration (days)118 (53-184)134 (30-210)COVID-19 featuresWHO class at presentation1 (1-1)**0 (0-1)Symptoms at presentation: n(%)Dyspnoea3 (17)3 (8)Fever10 (56)22 (61)Upper Respiratory Symptoms16 (89)29 (81)GI symptoms1 (6)2 (6)Pneumonia3 (17)3 (8)COVID-19 courseTime to symptom resolution (days)5 (4-8)7 (3-8)Time to viral clearance (days)10 (7-14)9 (7-14)Any complication: n(%)1 (6)6 (17)Hospitalisations: n(%)1 (6)0 (0)Long COVID: n(%)3 (17)6 (17)Deaths: n(%)0 (0)1 (3)AcknowledgementsWe thank Dr. Giordano Vitali and his staff for assisting and treating patients with SLE and COVID-19 from IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital in the local mild COVID-19 clinic.Disclosure of InterestsGiuseppe Alvise Ramirez Consultant of: Astrazeneca, Maria Gerosa: None declared, Daniel Arroyo-Sánchez: None declared, Chiara Asperti: None declared, Lorenza Maria Argolini: None declared, Gabriele Gallina: None declared, Chiara Bellocchi: None declared, Martina Cornalba: None declared, Isabella Scotti: None declared, Ilaria Suardi: None declared, Lorenzo Beretta: None declared, Luca Moroni Consultant of: strazeneca, Enrica Bozzolo: None declared, Roberto Caporali Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celltrion, Fresenius, Galapagos, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Fresenius, Galapagos, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Lorenzo Dagna Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Astra-Zeneca, Biogen, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli Lilly and Company, Galapagos, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, Swedish Orphan Biovitrium (SOBI), and Takeda, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Kiniksa, Merk Sharp & Dohme, Mundipharma Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, and SOBI.
ABSTRACT
PurposeThis paper applies the theory of cascading, interconnected and compound risk to the practice of preparing for, managing, and responding to threats and hazards. Our goal is to propose a consistent approach for managing major risk in urban systems by bringing together emergency management, organisational resilience, and climate change adaptation.Design/methodology/approachWe develop a theory-building process using an example from the work of the Greater London Authority in the United Kingdom. First, we explore how emergency management approaches systemic risk, including examples from of exercises, contingency plans and responses to complex incidents. Secondly, we analyse how systemic risk is integrated into strategies and practices of climate change adaptation. Thirdly, we consider organisational resilience as a cross cutting element between the approaches.FindingsLondon has long been a champion of resilience strategies for dealing with systemic risk. However, this paper highlights a potential for integrating better the understanding of common points of failure in society and organisations, especially where they relate to interconnected domains and where they are driven by climate change.Originality/valueThe paper suggests shifting toward the concept of operational continuity to address systemic risk and gaps between Emergency Management, Organizational Resilience and Climate Change Adaptation.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundThe workload at rheumatology clinics have been growing relentlessly and an audit on new.referrals helps to identify referral behaviour of primary care doctors and improvement can be done by providing further training.ObjectivesTo audit on new referral cases to rheumatology clinic from 2020-2022 and to identify new cases with misdiagnosis for future training purpose.MethodsThis was a retrospective study. The medical records of all new referral to rheumatology clinic Hospital Sultan Ismail and Hospital Pakar Sultanah Fatimah from 1st January 2020 to 31th November 2022 were reviewed. The referral diagnosis and final diagnosis were identified and analysed.ResultsThere were total of 927 new cases referral throughout the 35 months during Covid-19pandemic. Majority of them were diagnosed to have rheumatoid arthritis (217/927)followed by systemic lupus erythematosus (190/927), psoriatic arthritis (147/927),gout (62/927), osteoarthritis (58/927), systemic sclerosis (25/927), ankylosing spondylitis (25/927), soft tissue rheumatism (24/927), Sjogren syndrome (24/927),mixed connective tissue disease (14/927), vasculitis (11/927), fibromyalgia (10/927),polymyositis (7/927) and miscellaneous (39/927).45 out of the new cases were diagnosed as unlikely rheumatic diseases. There were 29pending cases awaiting final diagnosis.212 of the referrals were identified as misdiagnosis with the highest as nodal osteoarthritis.(55/212) followed by unlikely rheumatic disease (43/212), soft tissue rheumatism (24/212),psoriatic arthritis (20/212), Sjogren syndrome (14/212), gout (8/212), rheumatoid arthritis (7/212), fibromyalgia (6/212), systemic lupus erythematosus (5/212), ankylosing spondylitis (4/212), mixed connective tissue disease (3/212), systemic sclerosis (2/212), polymyositis (2/212) and others (19/212): diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis, hypermobility syndrome, RS3PE syndrome, idiopathic uveitis, graft versus host disease, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, antiphospholipid syndrome, hypothyroidism, post streptococcal arthritis, prolapsed intervertebral disc, cerebrovascular disease, traumatic sternoclavicular joint subluxation, ledderhose disease, paraspinal muscle spasm and viral myalgia).ConclusionNodal osteoarthritis and soft tissue rheumatism can be great mimicker for inflammatory.arthritis and if wrongly diagnosed will lead to unnecessary anxiety or wrong treatment. More training is needed to improve clinical skills amongst primary care doctors.ReferencesNA.Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsNone Declared.
ABSTRACT
Increasing waiting lists and a structural staff shortage are putting pressure on the health system. Because care production is lower than care demand, there is no longer competition. Competition is over and we are beginning to see the contours of the new health system. The new system takes health instead of care as its starting point by legally embedding health goals in addition to the duty of care. The new system is based on health regions, but does not require a regional health authority. It is based on health manifestos that include agreements about cooperation in good and bad times.
ABSTRACT
This paper employs the Tail Event NETwork (TENET) to identify financial markets with greater potential risk, and simultaneously investigate the interdependence between them. We find strong time-varying connectedness across 23 emerging markets during the main crisis episodes, including the most recent COVID-19 pandemic, using data from January 1995 to May 2021. The network analysis revealed that emerging European markets are top risk transmitters, whereas emerging Asian markets are top risk receivers. China showed disconnection from the network, reflecting its diversification potential for investors. Our findings offer several policy and regulatory implications. • We investigated the tail-event network dependence of 23 emerging markets;• Tail-Event NETwork (TENET) technique has been employed;• We show that European emerging markets are top risk transmitters, while Asian economies are top risk receivers;• Chinese market is decoupled from the rest of markets analysed. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Emerging Markets Review is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)