Approaches to optimising access to NICE-approved biologic anti-TNFs for patients with rheumatoid arthritis with moderately active disease.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disease that is associated with joint pain and stiffness. Biologics represent some of the most effective treatments for RA, but previous guidance from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has limited their use to patients with severely active disease. This has meant patients with moderately active RA have been treated as if they have an acceptable disease state, despite many cases where the inflammation has a major impact on joint damage, mobility, pain and quality of life. However, recent guideline changes (NICE TA715) have approved the use of three biologics - adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab - for the treatment of moderately active RA. MAIN BODY: In response to these changes, we have held discussions with medical teams from across the UK to consider the main implications for implementation of these new recommendations, as well as any differences in approach that may exist at a local level. Several key challenges were identified. These included establishing methods of educating both physicians and patients concerning the new availability of the biologic treatments, with suggestions of various organisations that could be approached to circulate informative material. Identifying which patients with moderately active RA stand to benefit was another discussion topic. Relying solely on scoring systems like Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints (DAS28) was acknowledged to have limitations, and alternative complementary approaches such as ultrasound, as well as assessing a patient's co-morbidities, could also be useful tools in determining those who could benefit from biologics. An additional challenge for the process of patient identification has been the increase in the use of telemedicine consultations in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. More use of patient-reported outcomes was raised as one possible solution, and the importance of maintaining up-to-date databases on patient disease scores and treatment history was also stressed. CONCLUSION: While challenges exist in education and identifying patients who may benefit from the use of biologics, the NICE TA715 recommendations hold great potential in addressing an unmet need for the treatment of moderate RA.

Drive-through phlebotomy - is this the future?

Background/Aims Centralised phlebotomy services have been an integral part of providing blood monitoring facility for people with chronic diseases prescribed vital therapies. However, the patient experience is not always optimal due to the issues of congestion, parking, long waiting times;this has been accentuated during COVID-19 pandemic with the need for minimising physical contact. In response to the growing pressure on phlebotomy service at our institution enhanced by the COVID-19 pandemic, our rheumatology service implemented a drive-through phlebotomy clinic to provide the option for patients and families to stay in their vehicles whilst having venepuncture. Methods At our large university teaching hospital, we set up a drive-through phlebotomy service provided by a senior HCA supervised by the lead nurse. Patients were identified from the departmental database and were offered the facility via telephone. Eligibility was assessed using a standardised proforma focusing on logistics such as ability to drive and access to a mobile phone. Appointments were scheduled in advance with patients choosing this care option. All the data was prospectively collated with patients’ consent and anonymised for analysis. In addition to demographics, diagnosis and drug record, duration of visit and patient feedback was collected. Results 112 patients were offered the service during a 12-week pilot. Mean age of the participants was 49.5 yrs (19-91) with 73 (65%) women. 74 (65%) were of Caucasian and 28 (25%) of Asian origin. 94 (84%) had inflammatory arthritides and all were prescribed DMARDs and/or bone active agents. 69 (61%) had blood samples taken using this service. Most common reason to decline was an already arranged appointment with standard phlebotomy (n = 14, 12.5%). Six (5%) could not be bled due to difficult venepuncture. Mean duration of appointment was 12.5 mins (5-60). 68 (60%) provided feedback with 61 (90%) rating 5/5 and 60 (89%) rating it better than standard phlebotomy. All would like to have the option for future and 67 (98%) were highly likely or likely to recommend the service to family and relatives. Conclusion To our knowledge, this is the first study to demonstrate the utility of drive-through phlebotomy for people with rheumatic diseases prescribed DMARDs. Excellent feedback of the participants confirms the need and desire for such innovation in health care. In post COVID-19 services reconfiguration, the availability of drive-through appointments and the close physical proximity to the clinic made it an appealing option for a vulnerable group of patients evidenced by their outstanding experience and feedback. Overall, an HCA-delivered, nurse-supervised drive-through pathway is highly effective, safe and provides an innovative solution to strained phlebotomy services. Disclosure J. Begum: None. M.K. Nisar: None.

Biomarkers Predict In-Hospital Major Adverse Cardiac Events in COVID-19 Patients: A Multicenter International Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic carries a high burden of morbidity and mortality worldwide. We aimed to identify possible predictors of in-hospital major cardiovascular (CV) events in COVID-19. METHODS: We retrospectively included patients hospitalized for COVID-19 from 10 centers. Clinical, biochemical, electrocardiographic, and imaging data at admission and medications were collected. Primary endpoint was a composite of in-hospital CV death, acute heart failure (AHF), acute myocarditis, arrhythmias, acute coronary syndromes (ACS), cardiocirculatory arrest, and pulmonary embolism (PE). RESULTS: Of the 748 patients included, 141(19%) reached the set endpoint: 49 (7%) CV death, 15 (2%) acute myocarditis, 32 (4%) sustained-supraventricular or ventricular arrhythmias, 14 (2%) cardiocirculatory arrest, 8 (1%) ACS, 41 (5%) AHF, and 39 (5%) PE. Patients with CV events had higher age, body temperature, creatinine, high-sensitivity troponin, white blood cells, and platelet counts at admission and were more likely to have systemic hypertension, renal failure (creatinine ≥ 1.25 mg/dL), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, atrial fibrillation, and cardiomyopathy. On univariate and multivariate analysis, troponin and renal failure were associated with the composite endpoint. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a clear divergence of in-hospital composite event-free survival stratified according to median troponin value and the presence of renal failure (Log rank p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings, derived from a multicenter data collection study, suggest the routine use of biomarkers, such as cardiac troponin and serum creatinine, for in-hospital prediction of CV events in patients with COVID-19.