POS0615 TOCILIZUMAB IS SAFE AND EFFECTIVE IN ELDERLY PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS

Background:

Average life spans of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are approaching those of the general population. This results in a large proportion of RA patients being elderly at some point and underlines effective RA treatments needed for this population. Pivotal clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of tocilizumab (TCZ) for the treatment of RA. However, real-world studies that explore the effectiveness of TCZ especially in the elderly are lacking. ICHIBAN was a large, observational study that followed patients with RA treated with TCZ under real-world conditions in Germany for up to 2 years.

Objectives:

In this analysis of ICHIBAN, we examined the safety and effectiveness of long-term TCZ treatment according to patient baseline (BL) age (<50, 50–65, >65 years).

Methods:

ICHIBAN (NCT01194401) was a prospective, non-interventional study that observed adult patients with active moderate to severe RA in German rheumatology clinics and practices. Patients were treated with TCZ according to the local label. The safety analyses set (SAF) included all patients who received at least one dose of TCZ. The effectiveness set (EFF) included all patients from the SAF who had no prior TCZ therapy. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were assessed using the visual analogue scale. Last observation carried forward was used to substitute for missing values.

Results:

At baseline (BL), 3,164 patients were included in the SAF: 29.2% <50 years, 47.3% 50–65 years, and 23.5% >65 years old (1.2% ≥80 years). Patients >65 years old were not only the most likely to have comorbidities such as hypertension, anaemia, renal insufficiency, osteoporosis, diabetes, and coronary heart disease, but also had the highest BL disease activity according to Disease Activity Score-28 erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) (Table 1).

Proportions of patients with adverse events (AEs) considered related to treatment were similar in patients <50 (22.3%), 50–65 (21.9%) and >65 years (22.2%). More patients >65 years (20.2%) and 50–65 years (14.4%) experienced serious AEs (SAEs) than patients <50 years (11.5%). Slightly more patients >65 years old experienced infectious SAEs (4.8%) than younger patients (<50 years, 3.2% and 50–65 years, 3.1%). Yet, similar proportions of patients across all age groups discontinued TCZ due to AE (7.0% <50 years; 9.6% 50–65 years; 7.8% >65 years).

2,902 patients were included in the EFF. Patients <50 years experienced DAS28-ESR remission at least once during the treatment period (65.4%) more often than patients aged 50–65 years (59.8%) or >65 years (59.5%). However, patients >65 years had numerically greater improvements in DAS28-ESR (Table 1). Patients <50 years had the best physical functioning at BL and the greatest reduction in Health Assessment Questionnaire Disease Index (HAQ-DI) score (Figure 1A). All age groups had similar improvements in PROs such as fatigue, strength of pain, and sleep disturbances (Figure 1B).

Table 1.

Model summary for prediction of DAS28CRP using time and etanercept originator (relative to biosimilar)

<50 years50–65 years>65 yearsDAS28-ESR, mean ± SDn*7771237617BL4.9 ± 1.45.3 ± 1.35.4 ± 1.3Last visit2.8 ± 1.73.1 ± 1.73.2 ± 1.7Change from BL-2.0 ± 1.7-2.2 ± 1.7-2.2 ± 1.8CDAI, mean ± SDn*7681217590BL25.7 ± 12.828.4 ± 13.328.8 ± 12.8Last visit13.3 ± 12.814.6 ± 13.214.5 ± 12.8Change from BL-12.5 ± 13.6-13.8 ± 14.0-14.3 ± 13.8

*271 patients with missing data at BL

**327 patients with missing data at BL

Conclusion:

Although elderly patients experienced a higher rate of infections, the proportion of patients withdrawing due to AE was not higher than in the other age groups. Starting with higher baseline disease activity, patients >65 years had similar benefits to disease activity and PROs when compared with younger patients. Overall, these results indicate that long-term TCZ treatment of elderly patients is effective and has an acceptable safety profile.

Disclosure of Interests:

Christof Specker Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene, Chugai, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Lilly, Novartis, Sobi, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Boehringer, Chugai, GSK, and Roche, Martin Aringer Speakers bureau: Roche and Chugai, Consultant of: Roche and Chugai, Grant/research support from: Roche, Gerd Rüdiger Burmester Consultant of: Lilly, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Roche, Grant/research support from: Roche, Marvin Peters Employee of: Roche Pharma AG, Michael W. Hofmann Employee of: Chugai Pharma Germany GmbH, Herbert Kellner Consultant of: Roche, Grant/research support from: Roche, Frank Moosig Grant/research support from: Roche, Hans-Peter Tony Speakers bureau: Roche, Abbvie, BMS, Chugai, Janssen, Novartis, Sanofi, and Lilly, Consultant of: Roche, Abbvie, BMS, Chugai, Janssen, Novartis, Sanofi, and Lilly, Grant/research support from: Roche, Gerhard Fliedner Grant/research support from: Roche, Chugai, Abbvie, and Lilly

OP0283 DOES TNF-INHIBITION DECREASE THE RISK OF SEVERE COVID-19 IN RMD-PATIENTS?

Background:

Patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMD) might have an increased risk for infection due to their immunomodulatory treatment, secondary to their disease and comorbidities. Recent studies suggest a decreased risk of severe COVID-19 in RMD-patients treated with biologics.

Objectives:

The aim of this study was to assess courses of RMD patients treated with TNF-inhibitors (TNF-I) included in the German COVID-19 registry.

Methods:

In the German physician-reported COVID-19-RMD registry, patients with an RMD and confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infection were documented (data entered between March 30, 2020 and January 30, 2021). We analysed TNF-I treated patients, their course and outcome of the infection. Data were compared to RMD-patients treated with other immunomodulatory drugs (OID) than TNF-I.

Results:

A total of 269 patients were treated with a TNF-I (57% female) compared to 874 patients who were treated with OID (68% female). Median age was 52 years (range: 19-87) in the TNF-I-group versus 58 years (range: 18-91) in the OID-group. Rheumatoid arthritis was the most common diagnosis (38% in TNF-I-group vs. 52% in the OID-group), followed by ankylosing spondylitis (32% vs. 6%), psoriatic arthritis (22% vs. 11%) and other RMD (9% vs. 31%). Adalimumab (35%) and etanercept (35%) were the most frequently used TNF-I (tab. 1). Glucocorticoids (GC) were used in 22% of TNF-I-treated patients and in 42% of the OID-group.

Under TNF-I, stable disease was reported prior to the SARS-CoV-2-infection in 53% of the patients (OID-group: 47%), followed by low disease activity in 35% (OID: 34%), moderate disease activity in 6% (OID: 12%) and high disease activity in 4% (OID: 3%). Most frequent comorbidities were arterial hypertension (29% under TNF-I vs. 35% under OID), diabetes (8% vs. 11%) and cardiovascular diseases (7% vs. 12%).

The most common reported COVID-19 symptoms were dry cough (57% vs. 55%), fever (53% vs. 61%) and fatigue (50% vs. 49%). Hospitalization due to SARS-CoV infection was required in only 12% of the TNF-I-treated cases vs. in 29% in the OID-group. Oxygen treatment was necessary in 5% of the patients under TNF-I compared to 22% under OID and invasive ventilation in 2% in the TNF-I-group compared to 6% under OID. Most notably, no fatal courses of COVID-19 were reported among the 269 RMD-patients treated with TNF-I versus 49 deaths in the 874 cases (5.6%) treated with OID. Focussing on the hospitalizated TNF-I patients, the rate of concomitant GC use (p<0.001) and higher disease activity (p=0.005) was significant higher (tab.1).

Conclusion:

High or moderate RMD-disease activity is an important factor associated with severity of COVID-19 including mortality. In this large cohort RMD patients treated with TNF-I show a low hospitalisation rate and no fatal course. This is reassuring for patients and treating rheumatologists to use TNF-I to control RMD disease activity. The use of glucocorticoids and high disease activity seem to counteract possible protective effects of TNF-I.

Table 1.TNF inhibition (269)Other immunomodulation (874)Total patientsRate (%)Total patientsRate (%)Disease activitystable1415340847low933529934Moderate15610812High104293Comorbiditiescardiovascular diseases18710412arterial hypertension772930335bronchial asthma124657COPD/interstitial lung disease1148610chronic renal failure93779Osteoporosis135678Diabetes2289211COVID-19 related symptomsFever1425347855dry cough1525753061Expectoration3112839muscular pain973628032Fatigue1355042449Headache1013823727shortness of breath491824528no symptoms239566COVID-19 outcomeOutpatients2378861971Inpatients321225529need of oxygen treatment18718922invasive ventilation52496fatal course00496TNF inhibitorsAdalimumab9535Infliximab239Certolizumab3312Golimumab249Etanercept9435GC and disease activity in TNF-I treated patientsTNF-I inpatients treated with GC18/3256p< 0.001TNF-I outpatients treated with GC42/23718TNF-I inpatients with high disease activity4/3213TNF-I outpatients with high disease activity6/2376p= 0.005

Acknowledgements:

The authors would like to thank all physicians and personnel involved in the documentation of the cases in our registry.

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared

POS1261 DISEASE ACTIVITY AND PAIN LEVELS ARE NOT INFLUENCED BY THE CURRENT COVID19 PANDEMIC IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATIC DISEASES IN GERMANY – DATA FROM THE GERMAN COVID-19 PATIENT SURVEY

Background:

The current pandemic constitutes an entirely new situation for patients as well as physicians. The insecurity of the early phase, shutdowns, increasing infection rate and appearing SARS-CoV2 mutations have created a situation that makes live difficult especially for chronic diseases i.e. patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMD) and their treating physicians. The psychosocial burden that is created by this special situation is completely unknown and is estimated to be higher in patients than in the general population.

Objectives:

In order to measure the impact on our patients, the German COVID19-Rheuma patient survey was set up in April 2020, during Germany’s first shut down.

Methods:

The German COVID19-Rheuma patient survey is a patient reported longitudinal online survey where patients with RMD who registered between April and July 2020 are asked on a monthly base using an online survey on social, personal, medical factors, whether a COVID19 infection occurred, isolation measures were changed and scores regarding stress and anxiety are recorded. Between April and July 2020, 637 patients registered and completed a first survey. Up to January 2021, about 400 patients are still enrolled.

Here we present an interim analysis of the first 6 months regarding patients that were enrolled in April and May during the first shut-down. This first analysis compares the situation in the first lockdown to July, a phase with very low infection numbers in Germany, and to November, the beginning of the second lockdown.

Results:

150 patients (87% female) were enrolled in April/early May 2020. Mean age was 48 years (range 11-89). The majority of patients suffered from rheumatoid arthritis (51%), followed by psoriatic arthritis (17%), other spondyloarthropathies (10%) and connective tissue diseases (10%).

The majority of patients received antirheumatic therapies: 32% glucocorticoids (GC), 31% cDMARDs, 21% TNF inhibitors, 7% Jak inhibitors, and 9% other biologicals. Of the patients treated with GC, 25% were on GC monotherapy.

In the first lockdown, 26% of patients were working remotely and 24% were self-isolating (doubles included). Additionally, 48% were using masks that were not mandatory at that time and 41% were using disinfection in a regular manner. The rates for remote work and self-isolation did not change significantly over time while the mask use increased to 98% with the official obligation to do so. The use of disinfectants increased to 88% in November.

Regarding disease activity, no change in patient global assessment could be observed over time (4.3 ± 2.5 vs. 4.0 ±2.6 and 4.0 ± 2.5). Self-reported pain was also stable over time as were sleep disturbances. While 48.2% of patients who were receiving physiotherapy paused in April, only 10 and 14% did so in July and November, respectively. 11% of the patients paused their medication in the first lockdown, whereas only 2.75% did so in July and 3.4% in November. Contact with the treating rheumatologist was maintained over time in the majority of cases.

Conclusion:

While in the beginning of the pandemic the insecurity was considerable and the concern that the fear for infection would lead to inadequately treated patients with RMDs, we here show for the first time that on the one hand our patients were timely in taking adequate measures to keep themselves safe (e.g. self-isolating, mask use) and adapted to the clinical situation in not pausing their medication. Altogether, in this alert cohort, the pandemic did not lead to an increase of patient-reported disease activity in the first six months.

Acknowledgements:

Thanks goes to all patients who participated in the study.

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared

Associations of baseline use of biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs with COVID-19 severity in rheumatoid arthritis: Results from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance physician registry

Objective

To investigate baseline use of biologic or targeted synthetic (b/ts) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and COVID-19 outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

We analysed the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance physician registry (from 24 March 2020 to 12 April 2021). We investigated b/tsDMARD use for RA at the clinical onset of COVID-19 (baseline): abatacept (ABA), rituximab (RTX), Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi), interleukin 6 inhibitors (IL-6i) or tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi, reference group). The ordinal COVID-19 severity outcome was (1) no hospitalisation, (2) hospitalisation without oxygen, (3) hospitalisation with oxygen/ventilation or (4) death. We used ordinal logistic regression to estimate the OR (odds of being one level higher on the ordinal outcome) for each drug class compared with TNFi, adjusting for potential baseline confounders.

Results

Of 2869 people with RA (mean age 56.7 years, 80.8% female) on b/tsDMARD at the onset of COVID-19, there were 237 on ABA, 364 on RTX, 317 on IL-6i, 563 on JAKi and 1388 on TNFi. Overall, 613 (21%) were hospitalised and 157 (5.5%) died. RTX (OR 4.15, 95% CI 3.16 to 5.44) and JAKi (OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.60 to 2.65) were each associated with worse COVID-19 severity compared with TNFi. There were no associations between ABA or IL6i and COVID-19 severity.

Conclusions

People with RA treated with RTX or JAKi had worse COVID-19 severity than those on TNFi. The strong association of RTX and JAKi use with poor COVID-19 outcomes highlights prioritisation of risk mitigation strategies for these people.

Updated recommendations of the German Society for Rheumatology for the care of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases in times of SARS-CoV-2-methodology, key messages and justifying information

A few days after the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection was declared a pandemic, the German Society for Rheumatology (DGRh) compiled the first group of recommendations for the care of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases in light of SARS-CoV-2/coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). These first recommendations were based on an expert consensus and were largely non-evidence-based. Now that the first scientific data from registries, cross-sectional studies, case reports and case series are available, the DGRh has developed a timely update. This update is based on a literature search of publications available through 15 June 2020 and addresses preventive measures (such as hygiene measures or vaccinations) and the use of immunomodulatory/immunosuppressive drugs. Driven by the commitment to let patients benefit from these new evidence-based recommendations as quickly as possible, the DGRh published the update in German on its homepage and in the Zeitschrift für Rheumatologie immediately after completion. Here we report the key recommendations to make them available to the international community, provide the scientific methodology used to develop the recommendations, give additional thoughts and advice for the management of patients with rheumatic diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic and discuss our recommendations in the context of other international recommendations.

[Disease-related knowledge acquisition through structured patient information in rheumatoid arthritis (StruPI-RA) : First results of the StruPI-RA study in Germany]

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

The structured patient information for rheumatoid arthritis (StruPi-RA) program was the first standardized outpatient education program in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Germany. The main objective of the study was to determine the efficacy of the StruPi-RA program concerning disease-specific knowledge acquisition in patients with early stage RA or after changing the treatment regimen.

METHODS

A total of 61 patients were included in a control group design, 32 in the intervention group (IG) and 29 in the control group (CG). Patients of the IG attended 3 modules of 90 min in a structured patient information program (StruPI-RA) including the topics of diagnostics, treatment and living with RA. Patients in the CG only received information material from the German Rheumatism League. The primary target criterion was the disease-related acquisition of knowledge, measured with the patient knowledge questionnaire (PKQ). Data were collected before and after participation in StruPI-RA.

RESULTS

The improvement in knowledge in the IG attending the StruPI-RA compared to the CG was significant in time and group comparisons. No influence of disease duration or educational level was observed. The subscale treatment alone showed a significant difference in the group and time comparison.

CONCLUSION

Participation in the StruPI-RA program in early RA was associated with a significant increase in disease-specific knowledge compared to the control group of patients. This leads to better decision-making in terms of treatment, a more beneficial doctor-patient communication and better self-management. In the long term an improvement in treatment adherence and quality of life is expected.

[Annual meeting of the German Society for Rheumatology going virtual-successfully defying the pandemic]

Hintergrund

Die COVID-19-Pandemie führte im Jahr 2020 dazu, dass der Jahreskongress der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Rheumatologie (DGRh) als „Deutscher Rheumatologiekongress virtuell“ durchgeführt wurde.

Fragestellung

Wie wird der „Deutsche Rheumatologiekongress virtuell“ angenommen und welche Optimierungsmöglichkeiten bieten sich für die Zukunft?

Material und Methode

Die registrierten Teilnehmer wurden gebeten, an einer Online-Kongressevaluation teilzunehmen.

Ergebnisse

Von 2566 Kongressteilnehmern nahmen 721 an der Evaluation teil. Die Mehrheit (80,2 %) war mit der Veranstaltung insgesamt zufrieden oder sehr zufrieden. Das Format wurde als für den kollegialen Austausch weniger geeignet angesehen. Die verwendete Technik wurde überwiegend als leicht bedienbar und problemlos zugänglich beschrieben. Die ausgewählten Themen des Kongresses entsprachen den Erwartungen von 89 % der Teilnehmer. Die präsentierten Inhalte wurden von 85,2 % der Teilnehmer als für ihre Tätigkeit relevant eingestuft. Eine deutliche Mehrheit der Teilnehmer (85,3 %) würde es begrüßen, die Kongressinhalte dauerhaft und flexibel „on demand“ abrufen zu können.

Diskussion

Insgesamt konnte ein gut akzeptiertes Format für die Durchführung des „Deutschen Rheumatologiekongresses virtuell“ gefunden werden. Optimierungsaspekte konnten aufgezeigt werden, diese können bei der Umsetzung weiterer (digitaler) Kongresse Berücksichtigung finden. Die Ergebnisse dieser Arbeit geben Aufschluss darüber, wie die DGRh virtuelle und/oder hybride Konferenzen in der Zukunft gestalten kann, um den Interessen und Wünschen der Teilnehmer zu entsprechen.

Vaccination of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases against SARS-CoV-2: considerations before widespread availability of the vaccines

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 has become available and will hopefully end the current pandemic. Understandably, patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (iRMDs) and their physicians are feverishly preoccupied with questions about vaccination and the vaccines against SARS-CoV-2. However, as it will take months before all patients with iRMDs will have access to the vaccines, measures that are taken now in order to increase potential safety and efficacy of the vaccines may impose a risk for the patients with regard to reactivation of their underlying iRMD. The ad hoc commission ‘Covid-19’ and the board of directors of the German Society for Rheumatology have addressed this topic and have developed considerations, which are intended to answer urgent questions, to take away concerns and fears and to make initial recommendations for patients with iRMDs.

Older age, comorbidity, glucocorticoid use and disease activity are risk factors for COVID-19 hospitalisation in patients with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases

Introduction

Whether patients with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMD) are at higher risk to develop severe courses of COVID-19 has not been fully elucidated. Aim of this analysis was to describe patients with RMD according to their COVID-19 severity and to identify risk factors for hospitalisation.

Methods

Patients with RMD with PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection reported to the German COVID-19 registry from 30 March to 1 November 2020 were evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate ORs for hospitalisation due to COVID-19.

Results

Data from 468 patients with RMD with SARS-CoV-2 infection were reported. Most frequent diagnosis was rheumatoid arthritis, RA (48%). 29% of the patients were hospitalised, 5.5% needed ventilation. 19 patients died. Multivariable analysis showed that age >65 years (OR 2.24; 95% CI 1.12 to 4.47), but even more>75 years (OR 3.94; 95% CI 1.86 to 8.32), cardiovascular disease (CVD; OR 3.36; 95% CI 1.5 to 7.55), interstitial lung disease/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (ILD/COPD) (OR 2.79; 95% CI 1.2 to 6.49), chronic kidney disease (OR 2.96; 95% CI 1.16 to 7.5), moderate/high RMD disease activity (OR 1.96; 95% CI 1.02 to 3.76) and treatment with glucocorticoids (GCs) in dosages >5 mg/day (OR 3.67; 95% CI 1.49 to 9.05) were associated with higher odds of hospitalisation. Spondyloarthritis patients showed a smaller risk of hospitalisation compared with RA (OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.91).

Conclusion

Age was a major risk factor for hospitalisation as well as comorbidities such as CVD, ILD/COPD, chronic kidney disease and current or prior treatment with GCs. Moderate to high RMD disease activity was also an independent risk factor for hospitalisation, underlining the importance of continuing adequate RMD treatment during the pandemic.

[Future of acute inpatient rheumatology in Germany : Statement of the Boards of the German Society for Rheumatology and the Association of Rheumatological Acute Clinics on hospital planning North-Rhine/Westphalia 2019 for the discipline rheumatology]

Im September 2019 wurde vom Ministerium für Arbeit, Gesundheit und Soziales (MAGS) in NRW ein Gutachten zur Krankenhausplanung veröffentlicht. Hierin wurde eine grundlegende Reform der Krankenhausplanung empfohlen, indem zukünftig eine Bedarfsplanung auf der Grundlage einer detaillierten Ausweisung von Leistungsbereichen und Leistungsgruppen erfolgen soll. Nach Aufforderung durch das MAGS NRW hat auch die Deutsche Gesellschaft für Rheumatologie (DGRh) mit Unterstützung des Verbandes Rheumatologischer Akutkliniken (VRA) hierzu Stellung genommen.

[Mission statement from rheumatologists in the German Society of Rheumatology (DGRh e. V.) : We live rheumatology. German version]

Systemic disease demands systemic thinkers. In this mission statement we define rheumatology, describe the role of the German Society of Rheumatology and the rheumatologist's spirit to their discipline. Rheumatologists are dedicated to improving the quality of life of their acute, chronic, and rehabilitative patients on the basis of up to date evidence and strong physician-patient relations. We think, act and interact systemically, scientifically, consistently, transparently, reliably, inclusively, innovatively and enthusiastically.

[Statement of the German Society for Rheumatology (DGRh) on the use of video consultations in rheumatology]

Die Durchführung von Videosprechstunden wird seit mehreren Jahren als ergänzende Form der medizinischen Versorgung in Ergänzung zu einem persönlichen Arzt-Patienten-Kontakt angesehen und teilweise auch gefördert. Die COVID-19-Pandemie hat der Nutzung von Videosprechstunden ungeahnte Aktualität und Aufmerksamkeit verschafft. Die Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung beschloss Sonderregelungen im Rahmen der COVID-19-Pandemie, die bisherige Hindernisse für den Einsatz von Telemedizin und Videosprechstunden (und auch teilweise der herkömmlichen Telefonie) reduziert. Die vorliegende Stellungnahme der DGRh zum Einsatz von Videosprechstunden soll einen Überblick darüber geben, in welcher Form und mit welchen Limitierungen die Videosprechstunde in der Rheumatologie in Deutschland anwendbar ist. Die Stellungnahme skizziert einen Ausblick, wie die Videosprechstunde welche Funktionen zukünftig in der rheumatologischen Versorgung übernehmen kann.

National registry for patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) infected with SARS-CoV-2 in Germany (ReCoVery): a valuable mean to gain rapid and reliable knowledge of the clinical course of SARS-CoV-2 infections in patients with IRD

Objectives

Patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) may be at risk to develop a severe course of COVID-19. The influence of immunomodulating drugs on the course of COVID-19 is unknown. To gather knowledge about SARS-CoV-2 infections in patients with IRD, we established a registry shortly after the beginning of the pandemic in Germany.

Methods

Using an online questionnaire (www.COVID19-rheuma.de), a nationwide database was launched on 30 March 2020, with appropriate ethical and data protection approval to collect data of patients with IRD infected with SARS-CoV-2. In this registry, key clinical and epidemiological parameters—for example, diagnosis of IRD, antirheumatic therapies, comorbidities and course of the infection—are documented.

Results

Until 25 April 2020, data from 104 patients with IRD infected with SARS-CoV-2 were reported (40 males; 63 females; 1 diverse). Most of them (45%) were diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis, 59% had one or more comorbidities and 42% were treated with biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Hospitalisation was reported in 32% of the patients. Two-thirds of the patients already recovered. Unfortunately, 6 patients had a fatal course.

Conclusions

In a short time, a national registry for SARS-CoV2-infected patients with IRD was established. Within 4 weeks, 104 cases were documented. The registry enables to generate data rapidly in this emerging situation and to gain a better understanding of the course of SARS-CoV2-infection in patients with IRD, with a distinct focus on their immunomodulatory therapies. This knowledge is valuable for timely information of physicians and patients with IRD, and shall also serve for the development of guidance for the management of patients with IRD during this pandemic.

[Lupus and thrombophilia : Antiphospholipid syndrome]

Even early on thromboembolic events were observed in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) until the antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) was described in the 1980s as an independent disorder. The APS is a systemic autoimmune disease often overlapping with SLE in which antiphospholipid autoantibodies, including lupus anticoagulant, can cause a hypercoagulation state, which clinically by definition is manifested as arterial and venous occlusions or pregnancy complications. The pathophysiology has not yet been entirely delineated and the clinical spectrum of associated concomitant manifestations is large. As the mortality is increased with SLE and simultaneous APS, focused diagnostics and risk assessment are indispensable. According to the recently published recommendations of the European League Against Rheumatism the therapeutic strategy comprises individualized secondary prevention of thromboembolic complications by means of anticoagulation (with unaltered importance of vitamin K antagonists) and thrombocyte aggregation inhibition, usually lifelong. Statins and antimalarial drugs are recommended for vascular protection while immunosuppressive treatment has not so far been sufficiently proven for APS but remains the subject of current research.

[Position paper of the commission on digital rheumatology of the German Society of Rheumatology: tasks, targets and perspectives for a modern rheumatology]

Digitalization in the healthcare system is a great challenge for rheumatology as for other medical disciplines. The German Society for Rheumatology (DGRh) wants to actively participate in this process and benefit from it. By founding the commission on digital rheumatology, the DGRh has created a committee that deals with the associated tasks, advises the DGRh on questions and positions associated with digital health. For the DGRh, this affects the most diverse areas of digitalization in medicine and rheumatology. This position paper presents the topics and developments currently handled by the commission and the tasks identified.

[Safety management of the treatment with antimalarial drugs in rheumatology. Interdisciplinary recommendations based on a systematic literature search]

BACKGROUND

Antimalarial medication (AM) plays an important role in the treatment of rheumatic diseases.

OBJECTIVE

Updated evidence-based recommendations on the safety management of rheumatological treatment with AM are presented.

METHODS

A systematic literature search in the databases Medline (PubMed) and Cochrane identified 1160 studies on the safety of treatment with AM in rheumatology. In addition, a manual search was carried out and 67 publications considered to be particularly relevant by the authors were analyzed in more detail. These publications served as a basis for consensus-based recommendations.

RESULTS

Treatment with AM in rheumatology should be carried out with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) with a dosage not exceeding 5 mg/kg body weight/day. Patients should undergo a basic ophthalmological examination within the first 6 months of AM treatment. Pre-existing maculopathy, renal insufficiency (glomerular filtration rate, GFR <60 ml/min), tamoxifen comedication, a daily dose of >5 mg/kg HCQ or treatment with chloroquine (CQ) show an increased risk for AM-induced retinopathy. These patients should undergo an annual ophthalmological check from the beginning of the treatment, whereas patients with no risk factors are recommended to start this only after 5 years of taking the medication. The ophthalmological examination should comprise at least both an appropriate subjective and an objective method and these are usually an automated visual field test and optical coherence tomography (OCT). A visual field test revealing a parafoveal sensitivity loss and an OCT showing a parafoveal circumscribed loss of the photoreceptor layer or focal interruptions of the structural line of the outer segment are signs of a possible AM retinopathy. Determination of creatine kinase (CK) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) in blood is appropriate to screen for cardiomyopathy and myopathy and should be checked before starting the treatment and then ca. every 3 months. The use of cardiac biomarkers, such as brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) or troponin in serum, electrocardiograph (ECG) or cardiac imaging should be considered depending on the situation. An intake of HCQ is safe during pregnancy and breastfeeding according to the current state of knowledge and is protective for mother and child in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.

CONCLUSION

The updated recommendations on AM treatment in rheumatology in particular include a more rigorous measuring of doses, risk stratification in monitoring and defined ophthalmological examination methods to detect a possible retinopathy.

[Recommendations of the German Society for Rheumatology for management of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases in the context of the SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic - Update July 2020]

A few days after the SARS-CoV-2 infection was declared a pandemic, the German Society for Rheumatology (DGRh) compiled first recommendations for the care of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD). These first recommendations were based on an expert consensus and were largely non-evidence-based. Now that the first scientific data from registers, cross-sectional studies, case reports and case series are available, the present update is intended to update the previous recommendations and to add new findings. The current recommendations are based on a literature search of publications available up to 15 June 2020 and address preventive measures (such as hygiene measures or vaccinations) and the use of immunomodulatory/immunosuppressive drugs. An important goal of the current recommendations is also to prevent harm to patients with IRD through unjustified restriction of care. The DGRh will continue to update its recommendations in the case of new aspects and will publish them as well as further information on the COVID-19 pandemic on its homepage ( www.dgrh.de ) in an ongoing process.

[SARS-CoV-2 & rheumatic disease : Consequences of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic for patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases. A comparison of the recommendations for action of rheumatological societies and risk assessment of different antirheumatic treatments]

The recommendations of the German Society of Rheumatology (DGRh) update, which update and expand the guidance on the management of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases in view of SARS-CoV‑2 created at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, correspond in many points with the recommendations for action of the American (ACR) and European (EULAR) societies, but also differ in some points. Therefore, this article discusses the core recommendations of the DGRh update on the prevention of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19, the risk assessment for inflammatory rheumatic diseases and the use of antirheumatic treatments in the context and in comparison to the ACR and EULAR recommendations, and provides an overview of the risk assessment of individual antirheumatic drugs.

Canakinumab for Treatment of Adult-Onset Still's Disease to Achieve Reduction of Arthritic Manifestation (CONSIDER): phase II, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, investigator-initiated trial

BACKGROUND

Inhibition of interleukin (IL)-1 represents a promising treatment option in adult-onset Still's disease (AOSD).

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of canakinumab in patients with AOSD and active joint involvement by means of a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

METHODS

Patients with AOSD and active joint involvement (tender and swollen joint counts of ≥4 each) were treated with canakinumab (4 mg/kg, maximum 300 mg subcutaneous every 4 weeks) or placebo. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a clinically relevant reduction in disease activity at week 12 as determined by the change in disease activity score (ΔDAS28>1.2).

RESULTS

At enrolment, patients had high active disease with a mean DAS28(ESR) of 5.4 in the canakinumab and 5.3 in the placebo group, respectively. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 12 patients (67%) in the canakinumab group and 7 patients (41%) in the placebo group fulfilled the primary outcome criterion (p=0.18). In the per-protocol analysis, significantly higher American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 30% (61% vs 20%, p=0.033), ACR 50% (50% vs 6.7%, p=0.009) and ACR 70% (28% vs 0%, p=0.049) response rates were observed in the canakinumab group compared with the placebo group. Two patients in the canakinumab group experienced a serious adverse event.

CONCLUSION

Although the study was terminated prematurely and the primary endpoint was not achieved, treatment with canakinumab led to an improvement of several outcome measures in AOSD. The overall safety findings were consistent with the known profile of canakinumab. Thus, our data support indication for IL-1 inhibition with canakinumab in AOSD.