Boosting Vaccine Response in Autoimmune Rheumatic Disease Patients With Inadequate Seroconversion: An Analysis of the Immunogenicity of Vector-Based and Inactivated Vaccines.

BACKGROUND: An additional dose of COVID-19 vaccine is being offered to vaccinated people, especially those immunocompromised. The most widely available vaccines in India are the adenoviral vector-based AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) and the heat-inactivated (BBV152). This study investigated the efficacy of both vaccines in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRD). OBJECTIVES:  To compare final anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers, neutralization of pseudovirions by these antibodies, and T cell responses between patients of AIRD who had received the third dose of AZD1222 and BBV152 vaccines. METHODS: Patients with stable AIRD who had completed two doses of COVID-19 vaccination but had a suboptimal response (anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) antibody<212) were randomized (1:1) to receive either AZD1222 or BBV152 as a booster dose. Patients with previous hybrid immunity or those who developed COVID-19 during the trial were excluded. Antibody titers, neutralization of Wuhan and Omicron pseudovirions, and interferon release by T cells (enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot (ELISpot)) in response to the Spike antigen were measured four weeks after this booster dose. RESULTS: 146 were screened, 91 were randomized, and 67 were analyzed per protocol. The third dose improved antibody titers (p<0.001), neutralization of the Wuhan strain (p<0.001), and T cell interferon release (p<0.001) but not neutralization of the Omicron strain (p=0.24). Antibody titers were higher (p<0.005) after ADZ1222 boost (2,414 IU (interquartile range (IQR): 330-10,315)) than BBV1222 (347.7 IU (0.4-973)). Neutralization of the Wuhan stain was better (AZD1222: 76.6%(23.0-95.45) versus BBV152 (32.7% (0-78.9), p=0.03 by ANCOVA). Neutralization of Omicron (0 (0-28.4) vs 0 (0-4.8)) and T cell interferon release (57.0 IU (23.5-95) vs 50.5 IU (13.2-139)) were similar. CONCLUSION: The third dose improved all parameters of immunogenicity in AIRD patients with previous inadequate responses except Omicron neutralization. The vector-based vaccine exhibits notable efficacy, particularly in antibody titers and neutralizing the Wuhan strain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CTRI/2021/12/038928.

Exploratory clinical subgroup clustering in systemic sclerosis: Results from the Indian Progressive Systemic Sclerosis Registry.

Objective: To conduct an exploratory cluster analysis of systemic sclerosis patients from the baseline data of the Indian systemic sclerosis registry. Methods: Patients satisfying American College of Rheumatology-European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria for systemic sclerosis were included. The clusters formed using clinical and immunological parameters were compared. Results: Of the 564 systemic sclerosis registry participants, 404 patients were included. We derived four clusters of which three were anti-topoisomerase I predominant and one was anti-centromere antibody 2 dominant. Cluster 1 (n-82 (20.3%)) had diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis patients with the most severe skin disease, anti-topoisomerase I positivity, males, younger age of onset and high prevalence of musculoskeletal, vasculopathic and gastrointestinal features. Cluster 2 (n-141 (34.9%)) was also diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis and anti-topoisomerase I predominant but with less severe skin phenotype than cluster 1 and a lesser prevalence of musculoskeletal, vasculopathic and gastrointestinal features. Cluster 3 (n-119 (29.5%)) had limited cutaneous systemic sclerosis patients with anti-topoisomerase I positivity along with other antibodies. The proximal muscle weakness was higher and digital pitting scars were lower, while other organ involvement was similar between clusters 2 and 3. Cluster 4 (n-62 (15.30%)) was the least severe group with limited cutaneous systemic sclerosis and anti-centromere antibody predominance. Age of onset was higher with low musculoskeletal disease and a higher presence of upper gastrointestinal features. The prevalence of interstitial lung disease was similar in the three anti-topoisomerase I predominant clusters. Conclusion: With exploratory cluster analysis, we confirmed the possibility of subclassification of systemic sclerosis along a spectrum based on clinical and immunological characteristics. We also corroborated the presence of anti-topoisomerase I in limited cutaneous systemic sclerosis and the association of interstitial lung disease with anti-topoisomerase I.

Co prescription of anti-acid therapy reduces the bioavailability of mycophenolate mofetil in systemic sclerosis patients: A crossover trial.

OBJECTIVE: Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is an effective treatment option for interstitial lung disease (ILD) in systemic sclerosis (SSc). Many patients require co-administration of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) or H2 receptor blockers (HRB) because of various gastrointestinal (GI) manifestations in SSc. Co-treatment with PPI or HRB have shown to reduce serum drug levels in post-transplant patients. We wanted to see if there is a similar phenomenon for Mycophenolate in SSc. METHODS: Twenty SSc patients, who were on a stable dose of MMF (1.5-3 g) underwent a sequential cross over study with MMF alone in the first month, followed by co-treatment with Ranitidine and then Esomeprazole in the second and third month respectively. Estimation of 12-hour area under curve (AUC) of Mycophenolic Acid (MPA) levels and total GI score were calculated at the end of each month and compared between the treatment arms. [Trial registration: CTRI/2020/06/025,939] RESULTS: Co-administration of esomeprazole was associated with 32.7% (mean difference = 22.28 µg h ml-1) reduction in mean AUC MPA, whereas ranitidine caused a reduction of 21.97% (mean difference = 14.93 µg h ml-1) in MPA AUC when compared to MMF without anti-acid therapies. The addition of ranitidine or esomeprazole resulted in significant reduction in the total GI score. CONCLUSION: Co-administration of PPI or HRB can significantly reduce the bioavailability of MMF in patients with SSc. To avoid therapeutic failure of MMF drug level monitoring is essential when these agents are co-prescribed with MMF.

Efficacy and safety of curcumin in maintaining remission during disease-modifying antirheumatic drug withdrawal in rheumatoid arthritis at 52 weeks: a phase III double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial.

Curcumin has anti-inflammatory properties but current evidence is limited to advocate its use in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We explored whether curcumin could maintain remission in patients with RA while tapering conventional synthetic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs (csDMARD). In this patient-and investigator-blinded trial, adults with RA in sustained remission for more than six months were randomized to oral curcumin (1 g) with piperine (5 mg) twice daily or matching placebo. Patients who had received biological DMARDs or curcumin supplements in the last 6 months were excluded. csDMARD were tapered and stopped sequentially as per a fixed protocol. The primary outcome was flare-free survival at 52 weeks. The secondary outcomes were flare rate, correlation of serum curcuminoid levels with flares and safety. 200 patients (100 per arm) entered the trial with comparable baseline characteristics. Per protocol analysis included 92 and 93 participants in the curcumin and the placebo group, respectively. Flare-free survival at week 52 was similar between both groups (60% versus 64%; p = 0.76). The median time to flare was similar [Curcumin: 219 days (IQR: 123) versus placebo: 214 days (95.8); p = 0.067]. Cox proportionate regression modelling showed that the flare-free survival was independent of serum curcuminoid levels [adjusted HR = 0.99 (95% CI: 0.97-1.0)]. The model showed that flare-free survival was not associated with age, gender, seropositivity, or csDMARD used at baseline. No serious adverse effects were noted. Curcumin did not impact the flare-free survival in patients with RA in remission during the tapering of csDMARDs despite achieving adequate serum levels.Trial registration: CTRI/2018/04/013279.

Correlates of breakthrough Omicron (B.1.1.529) infections in a prospective cohort of vaccinated patients with rheumatic diseases.

BACKGROUND: Data on the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and the durability of protection against the prevalent Omicron variant are scarce, especially in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs). Hence, we prospectively studied Omicron breakthrough infections in patients with AIRDs and attempted to isolate associated risk factors. METHODS: Patients with AIRDs who had completed primary vaccination with either AZD1222 or BBV152 vaccines were included and prospectively followed up from January 2022 onwards for the development of breakthrough Omicron infections. The time interval from the last event [2nd dose of vaccination (V) or past COVID-19 infection (I) whichever was later] to Omicron infection was recorded. Patients were divided based on the events and their order of occurrence into V + V, V + I, I + V, V + I + V, and V + V + I groups. The incidence of breakthrough infections and their predictors were studied with a focus on the vaccine type and hybrid (H) immunity (vaccinated individuals with a history of COVID-19 infection). RESULTS: We included 907 patients with AIRDs (53.5 ± 11.7 years and a male-to-female ratio of 1:5.1), and the majority of patients had received AZD1222 (755, 83.2%). Breakthrough infections were observed in 158 of 907(17.4%) of which 97 (10.4%) were confirmed by RT-PCR. Breakthrough infections were significantly greater in the V versus the H group (15.7% and 3.5%, log-rank test, p = < 0.01). Among the hybrid group, the order of infection and vaccination had no bearing on the risk of breakthrough infections. On multivariate analysis, breakthrough infections were significantly lesser in the H versus the V group [HR: 0.2(0.1-0.4); p = 0.01]. CONCLUSION: The risk of breakthrough Omicron infections in fully vaccinated patients with AIRDs was 17.4% with a significantly lower risk in patients with hybrid immunity.

Risk factors associated with COVID-19 in systemic lupus erythematosus: Results from a longitudinal prospective cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with SLE (systemic lupus erythematosus) have a higher risk of infection due to dysregulated immune system as well as long-term use of immunosuppressants (IS). This could influence the risk of COVID-19 and its outcome. METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal prospective study across 15 rheumatology centres during the first wave of the pandemic to understand the risk factors contributing to COVID-19 in SLE patients. During the 6 months follow-up, those who tested positive for COVID-19, their clinical course and outcome information were recorded. RESULTS: Through the study period (April-December 2020), 36/1379 lupus patients (2.9%) developed COVID-19. On analysing the COVID-19 positive versus negative cohort during the study period, male gender (adjusted RR 3.72, 95% C.I. 1.85,7.51) and diabetes (adjusted RR 2.94, 95% C.I. 1.28, 6.79) emerged as the strongest risk factors for COVID-19, in the adjusted analysis. There was no significant influence of organ involvement, hydroxychloroquine, glucocorticoid dosage (prednisolone< 7.5 mg or ≥ 7.5 mg/day) or IS on the risk of COVID-19. There was only one death (1/36) among the lupus patients due to COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Traditional risk factors rather than lupus disease process or IS influenced the risk of COVID-19 in our cohort.

Effects of the second dose of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases with hybrid immunity.

Patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases with a previous infection by the SARS-CoV-2 virus have exaggerated responses to a single dose of COVID-19 vaccination as compared to fully vaccinated infection naive patients. The second dose is currently recommended at an extended gap after the infection, but the information available regarding response to the second dose in this subgroup is limited. Patients with AIRDs previously infected with COVID-19, who have received at least one dose of AZD1222/ChAdOx1 (n = 200) were included and stratified based on vaccine doses (V), and infection (I) into I + V, I + V + V, V + I, V + V + I. Anti-RBD (receptor binding domain) antibodies were compared across the four groups. In 49 patients of the I + V + V group (AZD12222), paired sera were compared for antibody levels and neutralization after each vaccine dose. Thirty patients with hybrid immunity after BBV152 and 25 with complete vaccination without infection were included as controls. The highest anti-RBD antibody levels were observed in the V + V + I group (18,219 ± 7702 IU/ml) with statistically similar titers in the I + V + V (10,392 ± 8514 IU/ml) and the I + V (8801 ± 8122 IU/ml). This was confirmed in the 49 paired samples that paradoxically showed a lowering of antibody titers after the second dose [9626 (IQR: 4575-18,785)-5781 (2484-11,906); p < 0.001]. Neutralization of the Delta variant was unaffected but Omicron neutralization was significantly reduced after the second dose [45.7 (5.3-86.53)-35% (7.3-70.9); p = 0.028]. Ancillary analyses showed that only the hybrid immune sera could neutralize the Omicron variant and AZD1222 hybrids performed better than BBV152 hybrids. The second dose of AZD1222 did not boost antibody titers in patients with RD who had COVID-19 previously. In the analysis of paired sera, the second dose led to a statistically significant reduction in antibody titers and also reduced neutralization of the Omicron variant.

Progressive pulmonary fibrosis: an expert group consensus statement.

This expert group consensus statement emphasises the need for standardising the definition of progressive fibrosing interstitial lung diseases (F-ILDs), with an accurate initial diagnosis being of paramount importance in ensuring appropriate initial management. Equally, case-by-case decisions on monitoring and management are essential, given the varying presentations of F-ILDs and the varying rates of progression. The value of diagnostic tests in risk stratification at presentation and, separately, the importance of a logical monitoring strategy, tailored to manage the risk of progression, are also stressed. The term "progressive pulmonary fibrosis" (PPF) exactly describes the entity that clinicians often face in practice. The importance of using antifibrotic therapy early in PPF (once initial management has failed to prevent progression) is increasingly supported by evidence. Artificial intelligence software for high-resolution computed tomography analysis, although an exciting tool for the future, awaits validation. Guidance is provided on pulmonary rehabilitation, oxygen and the use of non-invasive ventilation focused specifically on the needs of ILD patients with progressive disease. PPF should be differentiated from acute deterioration due to drug-induced lung toxicity or other forms of acute exacerbations. Referral criteria for a lung transplant are discussed and applied to patient needs in severe diseases where transplantation is not realistic, either due to access limitations or transplantation contraindications. In conclusion, expert group consensus guidance is provided on the diagnosis, treatment and monitoring of F-ILDs with specific focus on the recognition of PPF and the management of pulmonary fibrosis progressing despite initial management.

Systemic sclerosis associated interstitial lung disease: a conceptual framework for subclinical, clinical and progressive disease.

OBJECTIVES: To establish a framework by which experts define disease subsets in systemic sclerosis associated interstitial lung disease (SSc-ILD). METHODS: A conceptual framework for subclinical, clinical and progressive ILD was provided to 83 experts, asking them to use the framework and classify actual SSc-ILD patients. Each patient profile was designed to be classified by at least four experts in terms of severity and risk of progression at baseline; progression was based on 1-year follow-up data. A consensus was reached if ≥75% of experts agreed. Experts provided information on which items were important in determining classification. RESULTS: Forty-four experts (53%) completed the survey. Consensus was achieved on the dimensions of severity (75%, 60 of 80 profiles), risk of progression (71%, 57 of 80 profiles) and progressive ILD (60%, 24 of 40 profiles). For profiles achieving consensus, most were classified as clinical ILD (92%), low risk (54%) and stable (71%). Severity and disease progression overlapped in terms of framework items that were most influential in classifying patients (forced vital capacity, extent of lung involvement on high resolution chest CT [HRCT]); risk of progression was influenced primarily by disease duration. CONCLUSIONS: Using our proposed conceptual framework, international experts were able to achieve a consensus on classifying SSc-ILD patients along the dimensions of disease severity, risk of progression and progression over time. Experts rely on similar items when classifying disease severity and progression: a combination of spirometry and gas exchange and quantitative HRCT.

Delay in diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis: reasons and trends over a decade.

INTRODUCTION: Delay in diagnosis and treatment initiation often lead to poorer outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Most of the data on delay in diagnosis and management are from western population with no data from India. Additionally, with improved health care services, whether the delay has changed over years is not known. In this longitudinal observational study, we investigated delay to diagnosis and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) initiation over past 9 years. METHODS: Patients aged ≥ 18 years having RA fulfilling 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria were enrolled from January to June in years 2012, 2017 and 2021. Diagnoses received before presenting to clinic, socioeconomic status, educational level and other demographic variables were recorded. RESULTS: Each year, 323 patients (mean age 49.5-52.01 years) were enrolled. There was a significant reduction in delay in diagnosis from a median (IQR) of 36 (12-84, range 1-288) months in 2012 to 12 (4-36, range 1-180) months in 2017 and 10 (5-24, range 1-120) months) in 2021 (p < 0.0001). A significant improvement in time to initiating DMARDs from 2012 [48 (24-96) months] to 2017 [12 (6-36) months] (p < 0.0001) and from 2017 to 2021 [12 (5-24) months] (p = 0.03) was seen. Higher education, more patients opting for treatment from rheumatologists, and urbanisation contributed significantly to improvement in delay. There was no impact of age or gender on delay. CONCLUSION: Delay in diagnosis has improved significantly between 2012 and 2021. However, delay still remains long as most patients miss the 3-month therapeutic window. Future work focussing on reasons for delays in the patient pathway could help improve consultation pathways in India.

Withholding methotrexate after vaccination with ChAdOx1 nCov19 in patients with rheumatoid or psoriatic arthritis in India (MIVAC I and II): results of two, parallel, assessor-masked, randomised controlled trials.

Background: There is a necessity for an optimal COVID-19 vaccination strategy for vulnerable population groups, including people with autoimmune inflammatory arthritis on immunosuppressants such as methotrexate, which inhibit vaccine-induced immunity against SARS-CoV-2. Thus, we aimed to assess the effects of withholding methotrexate for 2 weeks after each dose of ChAdOx1 nCov-19 (Oxford-AstraZeneca) vaccine (MIVAC I) or only after the second dose of vaccine (MIVAC II) compared with continuation of methotrexate, in terms of post-vaccination antibody titres and disease flare rates. Methods: MIVAC I and II were two parallel, independent, assessor-masked, randomised trials. The trials were done at a single centre (Dr Shenoy's Centre for Arthritis and Rheumatism Excellence; Kochi, India) in people with either rheumatoid arthritis or psoriatic arthritis with stable disease activity, who had been on a fixed dose of methotrexate for the preceding 6 weeks. Those with previous COVID-19 or who were positive for anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibodies were excluded from the trials. People on high-dose corticosteroids and rituximab were also excluded, whereas other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were allowed. In MIVAC I, participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to stop methotrexate treatment for 2 weeks after each vaccine dose or to continue methotrexate treatment. In MIVAC II, participants who had continued methotrexate during the first dose of vaccine were randomly assigned (1:1) to withhold methotrexate for 2 weeks after the second dose of vaccine or to continue to take methotrexate. The treating physician was masked to the group assignments. The primary outcome for both MIVAC I and MIVAC II was the titre (absolute value) of anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) antibody measured 4 weeks after the second dose of vaccine. All analyses were done per protocol. The trials were registered with the Clinical Trials Registry- India, number CTRI/2021/07/034639 (MIVAC I) and CTRI/2021/07/035307 (MIVAC II). Findings: Between July 6 and Dec 15, 2021, participants were recruited to the trials. In MIVAC I, 250 participants were randomly assigned and 158 completed the study as per the protocol (80 in the methotrexate hold group and 78 in the control group; 148 [94%] were women and 10 [6%] were men). The median post-vaccination antibody titres in the methotrexate hold group were significantly higher compared with the control group (2484·0 IU/mL, IQR 1050·0-4388·8 vs 1147·5 IU/mL, 433·5-2360·3; p=0·0014). In MIVAC II, 178 participants were randomly assigned and 157 completed the study per protocol (76 in the methotrexate hold group and 81 in the control group; 135 [86%] were women and 22 [14%] were men). The methotrexate hold group had higher post-vaccination antibody titres compared with the control group (2553·5 IU/ml, IQR 1792·5-4823·8 vs 990·5, 356·1-2252·5; p<0·0001). There were no reports of any serious adverse events during the trial period. Interpretation: Withholding methotrexate after both ChAdOx1 nCov-19 vaccine doses and after only the second dose led to higher anti-RBD antibody titres compared with continuation of methotrexate. However, withholding methotrexate only after the second vaccine dose resulted in a similar humoral response to holding methotrexate after both vaccine doses, without an increased risk of arthritis flares. Hence, interruption of methotrexate during the second dose of ChAdOx1 nCov-19 vaccine appears to be a safe and effective strategy to improve the antibody response in patients with rheumatoid or psoriatic arthritis. Funding: Indian Rheumatology Association.

A prospective longitudinal study evaluating the influence of immunosuppressives and other factors on COVID-19 in autoimmune rheumatic diseases.

BACKGROUND: We conducted this study to identify the influence of prolonged use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), glucocorticoids and other immunosuppressants (IS) on occurrence and outcome of COVID-19 in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs). METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, non-interventional longitudinal study across 15 specialist rheumatology centers. Consecutive AIRD patients on treatment with immunosuppressants were recruited and followed up longitudinally to assess parameters contributing to development of COVID-19 and its outcome. RESULTS: COVID-19 occurred in 314 (3.45%) of 9212 AIRD patients during a median follow up of 177 (IQR 129, 219) days. Long term HCQ use had no major impact on the occurrence or the outcome of COVID-19. Glucocorticoids in moderate dose (7.5-20 mg/day) conferred higher risk (RR = 1.72) of infection. Among the IS, Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), Cyclophosphamide (CYC) and Rituximab (RTX) use was higher in patients with COVID 19. However, the conventional risk factors such as male sex (RR = 1.51), coexistent diabetes mellitus (RR = 1.64), pre-existing lung disease (RR = 2.01) and smoking (RR = 3.32) were the major contributing risk factors for COVID-19. Thirteen patients (4.14%) died, the strongest risk factor being pre-existing lung disease (RR = 6.36, p = 0.01). Incidence (17.5 vs 5.3 per 1 lakh (Karnataka) and 25.3 vs 7.9 per 1 lakh (Kerala)) and case fatality (4.1% vs 1.3% (Karnataka) and 4.3% vs 0.4% (Kerala)) rate of COVID-19 was significantly higher (p < 0.001) compared to the general population of the corresponding geographic region. CONCLUSIONS: Immunosuppressants have a differential impact on the risk of COVID-19 occurrence in AIRD patients. Older age, males, smokers, hypertensive, diabetic and underlying lung disease contributed to higher risk. The incidence rate and the case fatality rate in AIRD patients is much higher than that in the general population.

Effectiveness of delayed second dose of AZD1222 vaccine in patients with autoimmune rheumatic disease.

There is paucity of data on extended dosing interval between two doses of AZD1222 (AstraZeneca) in patients with Autoimmune Rheumatic Diseases (AIRD). We aimed to study the humoral response and rate of breakthrough infections between the two groups who had received the second dose of vaccine at 4 weeks (Group 1) and 10-14 weeks (Group 2). From established cohort [COVID-19 vaccination cohort from CARE(CVCC)] of vaccinated patients with AIRD, those who had received AZD1222 were included and divided into two groups. Anti-Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) antibodies (IU/ml) were measured 1 month after the second dose. Its predictors and rate of breakthrough infections were studied. Four hundred ninety-five patients with AIRD were included in this study. Group 2 had higher anti-RBD antibody titres [1310.6 (±977.8) and [736 (±864.7), p = 0.0001. On univariate analysis, presence of Diabetes Mellitus; use of Methotrexate, Sulfasalazine, and Mycophenolate Mofetil; and vaccine interval were significantly associated with anti-RBD antibodies. Diabetes Mellitus and vaccine interval were independent predictors on multivariate analysis. Breakthrough infections were higher in Group 1 numerically on survival analysis but the difference was not significant (7.5% and 4.5%; log rank test: p = 0.25). In conclusion, increasing the gap between doses of the AZD1222 vaccine from 4 week to 10-14 weeks was found to be more beneficial in terms of antibody response in patients with AIRD. There was a trend towards higher breakthrough infections in the short interval group, supporting the antibody data. Key Points • There is paucity of data on effectiveness of increased dosing interval from 4-6 to 10-14 weeks for AZD1222 in patients with AIRDs • We observed a better humoral response with increased dosing interval with the interval and Diabetes Mellitus being independent predictors of the anti-RBD antibody levels • Breakthrough infections were numerically higher in the short interval group but the difference wasn't significant.

Postvaccination antibody titres predict protection against COVID-19 in patients with autoimmune diseases: survival analysis in a prospective cohort.

INTRODUCTION: To assess the incidence and risk factors for breakthrough COVID-19 infection in a vaccinated cohort of patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) and determine whether antibodies to receptor binding domain of spike protein (anti-RBD) serve as a reliable predictor of susceptibility to such infections. METHODS: Patients with AIRDs who had completed two doses of SARS-CoV2 vaccines were included and anti-RBD antibodies were determined 4-6 weeks post the second vaccine dose and stratified into good responders (GR) (>212 IU), inadequate responders (IR) (0.8-212 IU) and non-responders (NR) (<0.8 IU). Patients who had completed a minimum of 8 weeks interval after the second dose of vaccine were followed up every 2 months to identify breakthrough infections. All sero converted patients who had contact with COVID-19 were also analysed for neutralising antibodies. RESULTS: We studied 630 patients of AIRDs (mean age 55.2 (±11.6) years, male to female ratio of 1:5.2). The majority of patients had received AZD1222 (495, 78.6%) while the remaining received the BBV152 vaccine. The mean antibody titre was 854.1 (±951.9), and 380 (60.3%) were GR, 143 (22.7%) IR and 107 (16.9%) NR.Breakthrough infections occurred in 47 patients (7.4%) at a mean follow-up of 147.3 (±53.7) days and were proportionately highest in the NR group (19; 17.75%), followed by the IR group (13; 9.09%) and least in the GR group (15; 3.95%). On log-rank analysis, antibody response (p<0.00001), vaccine(p=0.003) and mycophenolate mofetil (p=0.007) were significant predictors of breakthrough infections. On multivariate Cox regression, only NR were significantly associated with breakthrough infections (HR: 3.6, 95% CI 1.58 to 8.0, p=0.002). In sero converted patients with contact with COVID-19, neutralisation levels were different between those who developed and did not develop an infection. CONCLUSION: Breakthrough infections occurred in 7.4% of patients and were associated with seronegativity following vaccination. This provides a basis for exploring postvaccination antibody titres as a biomarker in patients with AIRD.

The emerging role of mycophenolate mofetil in interstitial lung diseases.

INTRODUCTION: Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), initially approved to prevent rejection in solid organ allograft, is now being increasingly used for other conditions. Over the last decade, MMF has emerged as a useful therapy for a variety of immune-mediated diseases. AREAS COVERED: There has been a growing interest in the clinical use of MMF in the treatment of ILDs due to its versatile anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, anti-fibrotic and anti-proliferative properties. In this focussed review, we summarize the available literature using the Pubmed, Science Direct and EMBASE databases published until June 2021 on the efficacy and tolerability of MMF in various ILDs. EXPERT OPINION: Other than idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and its broader category of progressive fibrosing ILD, there have been no drugs approved by relevant regulatory agencies for the treatment of the multiple other forms of ILD. Though results are limited, immunosuppressants such as MMF have shown promise as an effective and well-tolerated steroid-sparing agent, providing hope that the limited treatment armamentarium for ILDs can be expanded.

Safety of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and the BBV152 vaccines in 724 patients with rheumatic diseases: a post-vaccination cross-sectional survey.

Patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal (RMD) diseases may be at higher risks for COVID-19 infection. Data on the safety of the adenoviral vector-borne ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and the heat-inactivated BBV152 Vaccines in this group are limited. 724 patients with RMD who had received at least one dose of either the ChAdOx1 or the BBV152 were audited to find out post-vaccination adverse effect (AE) or disease flares. The AE rates in patients with autoimmune rheumatic disease (AIRD) were compared with those with non-AIRD RMDs. The mean age of the cohort was 59.9 (± 10.43) years with a female (n = 581; 80.24%) majority. 523 (70.8%) had AIRD. The ChAdOx1 and the BBV152 vaccines were received by 624 (86.18%) and 77 (10.63%), respectively. 23 (3.17%) were unaware of which vaccine they had received. 238 (32.87%) of patients had at least one comorbidity. 436 (60.22%) participants [306 (59.64%) of those with AIRD and 130 (61.61%) with other RMDs] had at least one adverse effect (AE). Four patients reported flare of arthritis that resolved within 5 days. No patient had any severe AE or required hospitalization. All AEs were self-limiting. Both the ChAdOx1 and the BBV152 vaccines appear safe in RMDs. AEs do not differ between patients with AIRD or non-AIRD. This information can help negate vaccine hesitancy amongst all stakeholders.