Comparison of antibody responses before and after booster doses with the Pfizer-BioNTech or Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines in healthcare workers in Thailand.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread rapidly worldwide, not only causing significant morbidity and mortality but also dramatically increasing health care spending. To manage this in Thailand, healthcare workers first received two doses of the CoronaVac vaccine followed by a booster vaccine with either BNT162b2 vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech; PZ) or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (Oxford-AstraZeneca; AZ). Given that the difference in anti-SARS-CoV-2 levels following vaccination may vary depending on the vaccine and on demographic characteristics, we measured the antibody response after the second CoronaVac dose and after the booster with either the PZ or AZ vaccine. Our results in 473 healthcare workers show that the variation in antibody response to the full CoronaVac dose depends on demographic characteristics such as age, gender, body mass index, and underlying disease. After receiving a booster dose, anti-SARS-CoV-2 levels were significantly higher in participants who received the PZ vaccine than in people who received the AZ vaccine. Overall, however, receiving a booster dose of either the PZ or AZ vaccine promoted strong antibody responses, even in the old and those with obesity or diabetes mellitus. In conclusion, our results support the use of a booster vaccination program after full vaccination with the CoronaVac vaccine. This approach effectively enhances immunity against SARS-CoV-2, especially in clinically vulnerable groups and healthcare workers.

Hematological parameters as a predictor of disease remission in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Alterations in the hematological profile have been linked to disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We aimed to evaluate the levels of hematological parameters in different phases of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and determine whether hematological parameters could be used to predict RA remission. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The medical records of 365 RA patients were reviewed. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to compare hematological parameters among RA patients who were categorized into 4 groups according to disease activity: disease remission or low, moderate or high disease activity. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to determine the predictive performances of significant parameters for RA remission. RESULTS: Complete data were obtained from 325 patients. The 4 groups of patients had different levels of hemoglobin (Hb), red blood cell, white blood cell, and platelet values. In multivariate analysis, Hb level, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and mean platelet volume (MPV) were independent factors associated with disease activity. The combination of these 3 parameters yielded a sensitivity of 95.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 88.7-98.2), specificity of 23.6% (95% CI 18.3-29.9), positive predictive value of 37.3% (95% CI 31.6-43.4), and negative predictive value of 91.2% (95% CI 80.0-96.7) in predicting disease remission. CONCLUSION: Hb level, NLR and MPV were independently associated with RA disease activity. The high sensitivity and negative predictive value of the model consisting of Hb level, NLR and MPV may serve as a simple and inexpensive tool to identify patients who are less likely to have disease remission.

2016 updated Thai Rheumatism Association Recommendations for the use of biologic and targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

AIM: In June 2015, the Thai Rheumatism Association (TRA) approved an update of its recommendation for the use of biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and targeted synthetic (tsDMARD) in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to cover those currently available in Thailand (etanercept, infliximab, golimumab, rituximab, tocilizumab, abatacept and tofacitinib). METHOD: A search of the literature was performed between January 2000 and June 2015. Existing RA recommendations, in relation to the use of bDMARDs and tsDMARD, were identified and evaluated by the AGREE II instrument prior to their use as a 'guide' for developing this TRA recommendation. An additional literature search was performed in order to answer specific clinical questions that could not be found in existing guidelines. RESULT: Thirteen recommendations were developed. They covered the use of RA classification criteria, the aim of RA treatment, when to initiate bDMARDs/tsDMARD or taper or switch them to other medications, as well as monitoring these drugs during their use. In addition, specific issues including their use and vaccination, malignancies, pregnancy and lactation, and perioperative period also were addressed. Public hearings were performed at the annual meeting of the TRA and of the Royal College of Physicians of Thailand. The recommendations were distributed to other professional associations related to RA management, as well as government sectors associated with the reimbursement policy, prior to development of the final version. CONCLUSION: These recommendations will help Thai rheumatologists prescribe bDMARDs and tsDMARD more appropriately when treating RA patients.

Evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of rheumatoid arthritis for non-rheumatologists: Integrating systematic literature research and expert opinion of the Thai Rheumatism Association.

AIM: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory joint disease leading to joint damage, functional disability, poor quality of life and shortened life expectancy. Early diagnosis and aggressive treatment are a principal strategy to improve outcomes. To provide best practices in the diagnosis and management of patients with RA, the Thai Rheumatism Association (TRA) developed scientifically sound and clinically relevant evidence-based recommendations for general practitioners, internists, orthopedists, and physiatrists. METHODS: Thirty-seven rheumatologists from across Thailand formulated 18 clinically relevant questions: three for diagnosis, 10 for treatments, four for monitoring, and one for referral. A bibliographic team systematically reviewed the relevant literature on these topics up to December 2013. A set of recommendations was proposed based on the results of systematic reviews combined with expert opinions. Group consensus was achieved for all statements and recommendations using the nominal group technique. RESULTS: A set of recommendations was proposed. For diagnosis, either American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1987 or ACR/European League Against Rheumatism 2010 classification criteria can be applied. For treatment, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, glucocorticoid, and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, including antimalarials, methotrexate and sulfasalazine are recommended. Physiotherapy should be suggested to all patients. Tight control strategy and monitoring for efficacy and side effects of treatments, as well as indications for referral to a rheumatologist are provided. CONCLUSIONS: These evidence-based recommendations provide practical guidance for diagnosis, fundamental management and referral of patients with RA for non-rheumatologists. However, it should be incorporated with clinical judgments and decisions about care for each individual patient.