Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outcomes Among Recipients of Anti-CD20 Monoclonal Antibodies for Immune-Mediated Diseases: A Comparative Cohort Study

COVID-19 Vaccination Before Initiating Rituximab Treatment Induces Strong Serological Response in Autoimmune Rheumatic Disease, Reducing Post-Pandemic Concerns About the Impact of Rituximab

OBJECTIVE

Rituximab (RTX)-treated patients exhibit suboptimal responses to COVID-19 vaccines. However, existing research primarily involves patients already receiving RTX when vaccines were introduced, failing to account for the current landscape where patients are vaccinated before initiating RTX. Our objective was to compare the serological response to COVID-19 vaccines in patients vaccinated before or after RTX initiation.

METHODS

We included 254 RTX-treated patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRDs) and 113 blood donors (BDs) in a retrospective, observational cohort study. Patients were categorized based on the timing of RTX treatment relative to primary COVID-19 vaccination. Serological vaccine responses were assessed using three immunoassays, and logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of serological response.

RESULTS

Patients vaccinated before initiating RTX treatment had significantly higher seroconversion rates of SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (87%) and neutralizing antibodies (91%) compared with those receiving RTX before and after vaccination (n = 132) (61% and 65%, respectively). In the logistic regression analysis, a positive serological response was associated with the number of vaccines administered >9 months after the last RTX treatment. Patients receiving the highest number of vaccines with >9 months after RTX showed a response comparable to that of the BDs.

CONCLUSION

Vaccinating before RTX initiation yields a robust serological response in patients with AIIRDs. Furthermore, we highlight the reversibility of antibody impairment after RTX treatment cessation, provided that adequate vaccinations occur within a minimum of 9 months after RTX. Our findings offer essential insights for clinical decision-making regarding COVID-19 vaccination and RTX treatment, alleviating concerns about future RTX use.

Factors Associated With an Electronic Health Record-Based Definition of Postacute Sequelae of COVID-19 in Patients With Systemic Autoimmune Rheumatic Disease

OBJECTIVE

Many individuals with rheumatic disease are at higher risk for severe acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to evaluate risk factors for postacute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) using an electronic health record (EHR)-based definition.

METHODS

We identified patients with prevalent rheumatic diseases and COVID-19 within the Mass General Brigham healthcare system. PASC was defined by the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10) codes, relevant labs, vital signs, and medications at least 30 days following the first COVID-19 infection. Patients were followed until the earliest of incident PASC, repeat COVID-19 infection, 1 year of follow-up, death, or February 19, 2023. We used multivariable Cox regression to estimate the association of baseline characteristics with PASC risk.

RESULTS

Among 2459 patients (76.37% female, mean age 57.4 years), the most common incident PASC manifestations were cough (14.56%), dyspnea (12.36%), constipation (11.39%), and fatigue (10.70%). Serious manifestations including acute coronary disease (4.43%), thromboembolism (3.09%), hypoxemia (3.09%), stroke (1.75%), and myocarditis (0.12%) were rare. The Delta wave (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.63, 95% CI 0.49-0.82) and Omicron era (aHR 0.50, 95% CI 0.41-0.62) were associated with lower risk of PASC than the early pandemic period (March 2020-June 2021). Age, obesity, comorbidity burden, race, and hospitalization for acute COVID-19 infection were associated with greater risk of PASC. Glucocorticoid (GC) use (aHR 1.19, 95% CI 1.05-1.34 compared to no use) was associated with greater risk of PASC.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with rheumatic diseases, following their first COVID-19 infection, we found a decreased risk of PASC over calendar time using an EHR-based definition. Aside from GCs, no specific immunomodulatory medications were associated with increased risk, and risk factors were otherwise similar to those seen in the general population.

Breakthrough COVID-19 After Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab Among Patients With Systemic Autoimmune Rheumatic Diseases

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence and baseline factors associated with breakthrough coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) after preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with tixagevimab/cilgavimab among patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study among patients with SARDs who received tixagevimab/cilgavimab between January 2, 2022, and November 16, 2022. The primary outcome was breakthrough COVID-19 after tixagevimab/cilgavimab. We performed multivariable Cox regression models adjusted for baseline factors to identify risk factors for breakthrough COVID-19.

RESULTS

We identified 444 patients with SARDs who received tixagevimab/cilgavimab (mean age 62.0 years, 78.2% female). There were 83 (18.7%) breakthrough COVID-19 cases (incidence rate 31.5/1000 person-months, 95% CI 24.70-38.24), 7 (1.6%) hospitalizations, and 1 (0.2%) death. Older age was inversely associated with breakthrough COVID-19 (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.86/10 years, 95% CI 0.75-0.99). Higher baseline spike antibody levels were associated with lower risk of breakthrough COVID-19 (aHR 0.42, 95% CI 0.18-0.99 for spike antibody levels > 200 vs < 0.4 units). CD20 inhibitor users had a similar risk of breakthrough COVID-19 (aHR 1.05, 95% CI 0.44-2.49) compared to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) users.

CONCLUSION

We found that patients with SARDs had frequent breakthrough COVID-19, but the proportion experiencing severe COVID-19 was low. DMARD type, including CD20 inhibitors, did not significantly affect risk of breakthrough COVID-19. Evidence of prior humoral immunity was protective against breakthrough infection, highlighting the continued need for a multimodal approach to prevent severe COVID-19 as novel PrEP therapies are being developed.

A Descriptive, Retrospective Analysis of COVID-19 Passive Antibody Therapy and Its Effects on Morbidity and Mortality in Patients Receiving B-Cell-Depleting Therapies

Patients receiving B-cell-depleting therapies (BCDT) are at an increased risk for severe COVID-19. Passive antibody therapy (PAT), including COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) and monoclonal antibodies (mAb), may be an effective treatment in this population. Real-world data on PAT effectiveness are limited. To evaluate response to PAT measured through 90-day all-cause morbidity and mortality, we performed a retrospective review of patients who contracted COVID-19 within a year from the last BCDT. From 64 included patients, the majority were Caucasians (95%), female (56%), vaccinated (67%), treated outpatients (64%), with multiple comorbidities. Examined BCDT were rituximab (55%), obinutuzumab (33%), ocrelizumab (11%) and ofatumumab (1%), used for underlying hematological malignancy (HEM) (40%), multiple sclerosis (34%), and rheumatoid arthritis (16%). Of seven deceased patients, three died from COVID-19. All three were elderly males with multiple comorbidities, treated inpatient for severe COVID-19. Four of 41 patients treated as outpatients were hospitalized for non-COVID-19-related reasons. All deceased and hospitalized patients had an underlying HEM. All but one were on rituximab. PAT may be an effective treatment for patients receiving BCDT, especially if given early for non-severe disease. Patients with underlying HEM may be at increased risk for severe disease compared with others receiving the same BCDT.

Risk factors and outcomes for repeat COVID-19 infection among patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases: A case-control study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate risk factors and outcomes of repeat COVID-19 infections among patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs).

METHODS

We performed a case-control study investigating repeat COVID-19 infection within the Mass General Brigham Health Care System. We systematically identified all SARD patients with confirmed COVID-19 (15/Mar/2020 to 17/Oct/2022). Cases had confirmed repeat COVID-19 infections >60 days apart (index date: repeat COVID-19 date). Controls were matched to cases (up to 3:1) by calendar date of first infection and duration between first COVID-19 infection and index dates. We collected demographics, lifestyle, comorbidities, SARD features, and COVID-19 characteristics at initial infection and index date by medical record review. We used conditional logistic regression to identify associations with repeat COVID-19 infection, adjusting for potential confounders. We described the severity of repeat COVID-19 infection among cases.

RESULTS

Among 2203 SARD patients with COVID-19, we identified 76 cases with repeat COVID-19 infection (80.3 % female) and matched to 207 matched controls (77.8 % female) with no repeat infection. At first infection, cases were younger (mean 49.5 vs. 60.3 years, p < 0.0001), less likely to have hypertension (32.9 % vs. 45.9 %, p = 0.050), and less likely to have been hospitalized for COVID-19 (13.2 % vs. 24.6 %, p = 0.037) than controls. At index date, cases were more likely than controls to be rituximab users (18.4 % vs. 6.3 %, p = 0.0021). In the multivariable model, younger age (OR 0.67 per 10 years, 95 %CI 0.54-0.82), rituximab use vs. non-use (OR 3.38, 95 %CI 1.26-9.08), and methotrexate use vs. non-use (OR 2.24, 95 %CI 1.08-4.61) were each associated with repeat COVID-19 infection. Among those with repeat COVID-19 infection, 5/76 (6.6 %) were hospitalized and there were no deaths.

CONCLUSION

Younger age, rituximab, and methotrexate were each associated with repeat COVID-19 infection risk among patients with SARDs. Reassuringly, there were no deaths, and the hospitalization rate was low among those with repeat COVID-19 infection.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of anti-CD20 treatments in patients with COVID-19: an assessment of severe illness and mortality outcomes

BACKGROUND

The use of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, such as rituximab and ocrelizumab, has emerged as a matter of concern, in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to summarize the overall evidence on the pre-admission/pre-diagnosis use of anti-CD20 among patients with COVID-19 with regards to mortality and severe illness outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic literature search with no language restriction was performed in electronic databases, including PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and preprint servers (medRxiv, Research Square, SSRN), to identify eligible studies published up to June 13, 2023. The outcomes of interest were the development of severe illness and all-cause mortality. A random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled odds ratio for outcomes of interest using anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies relative to non-use of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, at 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Our systematic review and meta-analysis revealed significantly increased odds for development of severe illness (pooled odds ratio 2.95; 95% confidence interval 2.30, 3.78; n = 534,349) and significantly increased odds for mortality (pooled odds ratio 2.14; 95% confidence interval 1.37, 3.35; n = 333,462) with the use of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, relative to non-use of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, in patients with COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

Healthcare practitioners should exercise caution when prescribing these anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies during the COVID-19 pandemic to patients who are indicated for these agents, particularly those with underlying conditions like multiple sclerosis or rheumatoid arthritis.

Strict self-isolation did not protect Swedish cancer patients on active treatment from the risk of becoming seropositive for SARS-CoV-2

BACKGROUND

Swedish recommendations to reduce the risk of COVID-19 relied on each citizen's own sense of responsibility rather than mandatory lockdowns. We studied how COVID-19-related self-isolation and anxiety correlated to SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity and PCR-positivity in patients with active cancer treatment.

METHODS

In a longitudinal cohort study at Uppsala University Hospital patients and cancer personnel were included between April 1st 2020 to August 1st 2020. Serological testing for SARS-CoV-2 was done every 8-12-weeks until 30 March 2021. Patients completed a survey at inclusion regarding self-reported COVID-19-related anxiety and self-isolation.

RESULTS

A total of 622 patients [n = 475 with solid malignancies (SM), n = 147 with haematological malignancies (HM)], and 358 healthcare personnel were included. The seropositivity rate was lower for patients than for personnel; 10.5% for SM patients, 6.8% for HM patients, and 16.2% for personnel (p = 0.005). Strict adherence to self-isolation guidelines was reported by 54% of patients but was not associated with a lower risk of becoming seropositive [OR = 1.4 (0.8-2.5), p = 0.2]. High anxiety was expressed by 32% of patients, more often by SM patients than HM patients (34% vs 25% [OR = 1.6 (1.1-2.5, p = 0.03)]). Female gender [OR = 3.5 (2.4-5.2), p < 0.001] and being born outside of Europe [OR = 2.9 (1.4-6.4), p = 0.007] were both associated with high anxiety. Patients reporting high anxiety became seropositive to a similar degree as those with low anxiety [OR = 0.7 (0.3-1.2), p = 0.2]. HM patients with PCR-positive COVID-19 were more likely than SM patients to require oxygen therapy, including non-invasive ventilation/intubation (69% vs. 26%, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

For Swedish patients on active cancer treatment, high self-assessed COVID-19-related anxiety or strict adherence to self-isolation guidelines were not associated with a lower risk of COVID-19. Patients with HM were less likely to develop serological antibody response after COVID-19 and were more likely to require advanced hospital care, but expressed less COVID-19-related anxiety than patients with SM.

Effect of Immunosuppressive or Immunomodulatory Agents on Severe COVID-19 Outcomes: A Population-Based Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

We estimated the association between immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory agent (IIA) exposure and severe COVID-19 outcomes in a population-based cohort study.

METHODS

Participants were 18 years or older, tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between February 6, 2020, and August 15, 2021, and were from administrative health data for the entire province of British Columbia, Canada. IIA use within 3 months prior to positive SARS-CoV-2 test included conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (antimalarials, methotrexate, leflunomide, sulfasalazine, individually), immunosuppressants (azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil/mycophenolate sodium [MMF], cyclophosphamide, cyclosporine, individually and collectively), tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) biologics (adalimumab, certolizumab, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, collectively), non-TNFi biologics or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (tsDMARDs) (rituximab separately from abatacept, anakinra, secukinumab, tocilizumab, tofacitinib and ustekinumab collectively), and glucocorticoids. Severe COVID-19 outcomes were hospitalizations for COVID-19, ICU admissions, and deaths within 60 days of a positive test. Exposure score-overlap weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics of participants with IIA use compared with nonuse of that IIA. Logistic regression measured the association between IIA use and severe COVID-19 outcomes.

RESULTS

From 147,301 participants, we identified 515 antimalarial, 573 methotrexate, 72 leflunomide, 180 sulfasalazine, 468 immunosuppressant, 378 TNFi biologic, 49 rituximab, 144 other non-TNFi biologic or tsDMARD, and 1348 glucocorticoid prescriptions. Risk of hospitalizations for COVID-19 was significantly greater for MMF (odds ratio [95% CI]): 2.82 [1.81-4.40], all immunosuppressants: 2.08 [1.51-2.87], and glucocorticoids: 1.63 [1.36-1.96], relative to nonuse. Similar outcomes were seen for ICU admission and MMF: 2.52 [1.34-4.74], immunosuppressants: 2.88 [1.73-4.78], and glucocorticoids: 1.86 [1.37-2.54]. Only glucocorticoids use was associated with a significant increase in 60-day mortality: 1.58 [1.21-2.06]. No other IIAs displayed statistically significant associations with severe COVID-19 outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Current use of MMF and glucocorticoids were associated with an increased risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes compared with nonuse. These results emphasize the variety of circumstances of patients taking IIAs.

COVID-19 Vaccination and Disease Course in People with Multiple Sclerosis in Greece

Over the past three years, humanity faced the abrupt spread of COVID-19, responsible for a worldwide health crisis. Initially, it was believed that individuals with chronic disorders, including multiple sclerosis, were more likely to be infected and suffer a worse degree of COVID-19 disease. Therefore, data with regard to COVID-19 disease outcomes in these populations may provide additional insight with regard to the management of chronic diseases during viral pandemics. The objective of this study is to evaluate COVID-19 disease course in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) during the COVID-19 pandemic in Greece and explore the impact of vaccination in the outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection in this population. Anonymized data, extracted from nationwide administrative records between February 2020 and December 2021, were retrospectively analyzed in order to identify PwMS with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Demographic data, as well as data regarding COVID-19 infection and vaccination, were additionally collected. The study sample included 2351 PwMS (65.1% females, 51.2% unvaccinated at the time of infection). A total of 260 PwMS were hospitalized, while 25 PwMS died from COVID-19 disease and its complications. Older age, male sex and the presence of comorbidities were independently associated with a higher probability of hospitalization. The risk of hospitalization was decreased in PwMS receiving some disease-modifying treatments. Anti-CD20s demonstrated high odds ratios without reaching statistical significance. Regarding fatal outcome, only age reached statistical significance. Vaccination provided a significant protective effect against hospitalization but did not exhibit a statistically significant effect on mortality.

Effect of Disease-Modifying Therapies on COVID-19 Vaccination Efficacy in Multiple Sclerosis Patients: A Comprehensive Review

According to current knowledge, the etiopathogenesis of multiple sclerosis (MS) is complex, involving genetic background as well as several environmental factors that result in dysimmunity in the central nervous system (CNS). MS is an immune-mediated, inflammatory neurological disease affecting the CNS. As part of its attack on the axons of the CNS, MS witnesses varying degrees of myelin and axonal loss. A total of about 20 disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) are available today that, both in clinical trials and in real-world studies, reduce disease activity, such as relapses, magnetic resonance imaging lesions, and disability accumulation. Currently, the world is facing an outbreak of the new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which originated in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, in December 2019 and spread rapidly around the globe. Viral infections play an important role in triggering and maintaining neuroinflammation through direct and indirect mechanisms. There is an old association between MS and viral infections. In the context of MS-related chronic inflammatory damage within the CNS, there has been concern regarding COVID-19 worsening neurological damage. A high rate of disability and increased susceptibility to infection have made MS patients particularly vulnerable. In addition, DMTs have been a concern during the pandemic since many DMTs have immunosuppressive properties. In this article, we discuss the impact of DMTs on COVID-19 risks and the effect of DMTs on COVID-19 vaccination efficacy and outcome in MS patients.

Acute and postacute COVID-19 outcomes for patients with rheumatoid arthritis: lessons learned and emerging directions 3 years into the pandemic

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the findings of studies investigating patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and risk of acute and postacute COVID-19 outcomes 3 years into the pandemic.

RECENT FINDINGS

Most studies early in the pandemic included all patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs), not only those with RA, due to limited sample size. Many of these studies found that patients with SARDs were at higher risk of COVID-19 infection and severe outcomes, including hospitalization, hyperinflammation, mechanical ventilation, and death. Studies performed later were able to focus on RA and found similar associations, while also identifying RA-specific factors such as immunosuppressive medications, disease activity/severity, and interstitial lung disease as risk factors for severe COVID-19. After COVID-19 vaccination, the risks for COVID-19 infection and severity were reduced for patients with RA, but a gap between the general population persisted, and some patients with RA are susceptible to breakthrough infection after vaccination. Preexposure prophylaxis, effective treatments, and changes in viral variants have also contributed to improved COVID-19 outcomes throughout the pandemic. Emerging data suggest that patients with RA may be at risk for postacute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC).

SUMMARY

Although COVID-19 outcomes have improved over the pandemic for patients with RA, some experience poor acute and postacute outcomes after COVID-19. Clinicians and patients should remain vigilant about risk mitigation for infection and consider early treatment for RA patients with COVID-19. Future studies are needed to investigate clinical outcomes and mechanisms of PASC among patients with RA.

Outcomes with and without outpatient SARS-CoV-2 treatment for patients with COVID-19 and systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Some patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease and immunosuppression might still be at risk of severe COVID-19. The effect of outpatient SARS-CoV-2 treatments on COVID-19 outcomes among patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease is unclear. We aimed to evaluate temporal trends, severe outcomes, and COVID-19 rebound among patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease and COVID-19 who received outpatient SARS-CoV-2 treatment compared with those who did not receive outpatient treatment.

Methods

We did a retrospective cohort study at Mass General Brigham Integrated Health Care System, Boston, MA, USA. We included patients aged 18 years or older with a pre-existing systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease, who had COVID-19 onset between Jan 23 and May 30, 2022. We identified COVID-19 by positive PCR or antigen test (index date defined as the date of first positive test) and systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases using diagnosis codes and immunomodulator prescription. Outpatient SARS-CoV-2 treatments were confirmed by medical record review. The primary outcome was severe COVID-19, defined as hospitalisation or death within 30 days after the index date. COVID-19 rebound was defined as documentation of a negative SARS-CoV-2 test after treatment followed by a newly positive test. The association of outpatient SARS-CoV-2 treatment versus no outpatient treatment with severe COVID-19 outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression.

Findings

Between Jan 23 and May 30, 2022, 704 patients were identified and included in our analysis (mean age 58·4 years [SD 15·9]; 536 [76%] were female and 168 [24%] were male, 590 [84%] were White and 39 [6%] were Black, and 347 [49%] had rheumatoid arthritis). Outpatient SARS-CoV-2 treatments increased in frequency over calendar time (p<0·0001). A total of 426 (61%) of 704 patients received outpatient treatment (307 [44%] with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir, 105 [15%] with monoclonal antibodies, five [1%] with molnupiravir, three [<1%] with remdesivir, and six [1%] with combination treatment). There were nine (2·1%) hospitalisations or deaths among 426 patients who received outpatient treatment compared with 49 (17·6%) among 278 who did not receive outpatient treatment (odds ratio [adjusted for age, sex, race, comorbidities, and kidney function] 0·12, 95% CI 0·05-0·25). 25 (7·9%) of 318 patients who received oral outpatient treatment had documented COVID-19 rebound.

Interpretation

Outpatient treatment was associated with lower odds of severe COVID-19 outcomes compared with no outpatient treatment. These findings highlight the importance of outpatient SARS-CoV-2 treatment for patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease and COVID-19 and the need for further research on COVID-19 rebound.

Funding

None.

Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections and prediction of moderate-to-severe outcomes during rituximab therapy in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases in the UK: a single-centre cohort study

Background

Concerns have been raised regarding the reduced immunogenicity of vaccines against COVID-19 in patients with autoimmune diseases treated with rituximab. However, the incidence and severity of breakthrough infections in unbiased samples of patients with specific rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases are largely unknown. We aimed to assess the incidence of breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection, compare rates of moderate-to-severe COVID-19 with any severe infection event, and evaluate predictors of moderate-to-severe COVID-19 outcomes in patients treated with rituximab.

Methods

We did a retrospective cohort study in all rituximab-treated patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases in a single centre in Leeds, UK between March 1, 2020 (the index date), and April 1, 2022. Adults aged 18 years and older, who fulfilled classification criteria for established rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases, and received therapy with at least one rituximab infusion between Sept 1, 2019 (6 months before the pandemic in the UK), and April 1, 2022, were eligible for inclusion in the study. SARS-CoV-2 infection was defined by antigen test or PCR. COVID-19 outcomes were categorised as mild (from ambulatory to hospitalised but not requiring oxygen support) or moderate-to-severe (hospitalised and requiring oxygen support or death). The primary outcome was breakthrough COVID-19 infection, which was defined as an infection occurring 14 days or more after the second vaccine dose. Predictors of moderate-to-severe COVID-19 outcomes were analysed using Cox regression proportional hazards.

Findings

Of the 1280 patients who were treated with at least one cycle of rituximab since Jan 1, 2002, 485 (38%) remained on rituximab therapy on April 1, 2022. Of these patients, 400 fulfilled all inclusion criteria and were included in our final analysis. The mean age at the index date was 58·9 years (SD 14·6), 288 (72%) of 400 patients were female and 112 (28%) were male, 333 (83%) were White, and 110 (28%) had two or more comorbidities. 272 (68%) of 400 patients had rheumatoid arthritis, 48 (12%) had systemic lupus erythematosus, 48 (12%) had anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis, and 46 (12%) had other rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. During the study, 798 rituximab cycles were administered. Of the 398 (>99%) of 400 patients with vaccine data, 372 (93%) were fully vaccinated. Over the 774·6 patient-years of follow-up, there was an incremental increase in all SARS-CoV-2 severity types over the three pandemic phases (wild-type or alpha, delta, and omicron), but most infections were mild. The rates of moderate-to-severe COVID-19 were broadly similar across these three variant phases. Of 370 patients who were fully vaccinated and with complete data, 110 (30%) had all severity type breakthrough COVID-19, 16 (4%) had moderate-to-severe breakthrough COVID-19, and one (<1%) died. In the post-vaccination phase (after Dec 18, 2020), the incidence rates of all severity type and moderate-to-severe COVID-19 were substantially lower in those who were fully vaccinated compared with unvaccinated or partially vaccinated individuals (22·83 per 100 person-years [95% CI 18·94-27·52] in those who were fully vaccinated vs 89·46 per 100 person-years [52·98-151·05] in those who were partially vaccinated or unvaccinated for infections of all severities, and 3·32 per 100 person-years [2·03-5·42] in those who were fully vaccinated vs 25·56 per 100 person-years [9·59-68·10] in those who were partially vaccinated or unvaccinated for moderate-to-severe infections). The rate of moderate-to-severe COVID-19 was broadly similar to other severe infection events in this cohort (5·68 per 100 person-years [95% CI 4·22-7·63]). In multivariable Cox regression analysis, factors associated with an increased risk of moderate-to-severe COVID-19 were the number of comorbidities (hazard ratio 1·46 [95% CI 1·13-1·89]; p=0·0037) and hypogammaglobulinaemia (defined by a pre-rituximab IgG concentration of <6 g/L; 3·22 [1·27-8·19]; p=0·014). This risk was reduced with each vaccine dose received (0·49 [0·37-0·65]; p<0·0001). Other factors, including concomitant prednisolone use, rituximab-associated factors (eg, rituximab dose and time to vaccination since last rituximab dose), and vaccine-associated factors (eg, vaccine type and peripheral B-cell depletion) were not predictive of moderate-to-severe COVID-19 outcomes.

Interpretation

This study presented detailed analyses of rituximab-treated patients during various phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. In later stages of the pandemic, the SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection rate was high but severe COVID-19 rates were similar to any severe infection event rate in patients who were vaccinated. The risk-benefit ratio might still favour rituximab in vaccinated patients with severe rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases who have few other treatment options. Increased vigilance is needed in the presence of comorbidities and hypogammaglobulinaemia for all infection types.

Funding

Wellcome Trust and Eli Lilly.

Targeted Treatment of Relapsed or Refractory Follicular Lymphoma: Focus on the Therapeutic Potential of Mosunetuzumab

Follicular lymphoma is the most common indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and because of the incurable nature of this disorder, new therapies are constantly needed. The recently approved T-cell-dependent bispecific antibody mosunetuzumab showed promising results and manageable toxicities for patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma. Namely, as opposed to cellular immunotherapy options, this agent has the potential of being effective in patients with unfavorable features with a tolerable rate and severity of cytokine release syndrome, immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity, and infectious complications. Given the recent withdrawal from the market of PI3K inhibitors and the practical challenges in utilizing with chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CAR-T) for some patients, mosunetuzumab represents a "breath of fresh air" for both patients and hemato-oncologists. More data are required to better define the real potential of this molecule, either alone or in combination with other agents, including antibody drug conjugates, immunomodulators, and checkpoint inhibitors. Future studies will also shed light on the efficacy of mosunetuzumab compared with CAR-T, in well-designed registries or ideally in randomized controlled trials.

Areas of Uncertainty in SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination for Cancer Patients

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, it was recognized that infection with SARS-CoV-2 is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer; therefore, preventive vaccination in cancer survivors is expected to be particularly impactful. Heterogeneity in how a neoplastic disease diagnosis and treatment interferes with humoral and cellular immunity, however, poses a number of challenges in vaccination strategies. Herein, the available literature on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines among patients with cancer is critically appraised under the lens of anti-neoplastic treatment optimization. The objective of this review is to highlight areas of uncertainty, where more research could inform future SARS-CoV-2 immunization programs and maximize benefits in the high-risk cancer survivor population, and also minimize cancer treatment deviations from standard practices.

Risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes associated with rheumatoid arthritis and phenotypic subgroups: a retrospective, comparative, multicentre cohort study

Background

Rheumatoid arthritis has been associated with severe COVID-19, but few studies have investigated how phenotypes of rheumatoid arthritis affect these associations. We aimed to investigate the associations between rheumatoid arthritis and phenotypes of interstitial lung disease, serostatus, and bone erosions with COVID-19 severity.

Methods

We did a retrospective, comparative, multicentre cohort study at two large health-care systems (Mayo Clinic [19 hospitals and affiliated outpatient centres] and Mass General Brigham [14 hospitals and affiliated outpatient centres]) in the USA. Consecutive patients with rheumatoid arthritis meeting the 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria and who had COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and June 6, 2021, were matched 1:5 on age, sex, and calendar date with patients without rheumatoid arthritis (comparators). Data were received from electronic health records from Mayo Clinic and Mass General Brigham. We examined subgroups of patients with rheumatoid arthritis by phenotypic features: rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease, seropositivity (for anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide, rheumatoid factor, or both), and bone erosions. Severe COVID-19 was a composite of hospitalisation or death. We used Cox regression to estimate hazard ratios (HR) for severe COVID-19, comparing rheumatoid arthritis and subgroups to the comparator group.

Findings

We identified 582 patients with rheumatoid arthritis and 2875 matched comparators, all of whom had COVID-19 within the study dates. The mean age of those with rheumatoid arthritis was 62 [SD 14] years, 421 (72%) of 582 were women and 161 (28%) were men, 457 (79%) were White, 65 (11%) were Hispanic or Latino, and 41 (7%) were Black. Among patients with rheumatoid arthritis, 50 (9%) of 582 had interstitial lung disease, 388 (68%) of 568 were seropositive, and 159 (27%) of 582 had bone erosions. Severe COVID-19 occurred in 126 (22%) of 582 patients with rheumatoid arthritis versus 363 (13%) 2875 in the comparator group. Patients with rheumatoid arthritis had an HR of 1·75 (95% CI 1·45-2·10) for severe COVID-19 versus the comparator group. Patients with rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease had an HR of 2·50 (1·66-3·77) versus the comparator group for severe COVID-19. The risk for severe COVID-19 was also higher in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who were seropositive (HR 1·97 [95% CI 1·58-2·46]) or had erosive disease (1·93 [1·41-2·63]) than for those in the comparator group.

Interpretation

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis have an increased risk of severe COVID-19 across phenotypic subgroups, especially among patients with interstitial lung disease. These findings suggest that rheumatoid arthritis with interstitial lung disease, or its treatment, might be a substantial contributor to severe COVID-19 outcomes for patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Funding

None.

Outcomes with and without outpatient SARS-CoV-2 treatment for patients with COVID-19 and systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases: A retrospective cohort study

Objective

To investigate temporal trends, severe outcomes, and rebound among systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease (SARD) patients according to outpatient SARS-CoV-2 treatment.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study investigating outpatient SARS-CoV-2 treatments among SARD patients at Mass General Brigham (23/Jan/2022-30/May/2022). We identified SARS-CoV-2 infection by positive PCR or antigen test (index date=first positive test) and SARDs using diagnosis codes and immunomodulator prescription. Outpatient treatments were confirmed by medical record review. The primary outcome was hospitalization or death within 30 days following the index date. COVID-19 rebound was defined as documentation of negative then newly-positive SARS-CoV-2 tests. The association of any vs. no outpatient treatment with hospitalization/death was assessed using multivariable logistic regression.

Results

We analyzed 704 SARD patients with COVID-19 (mean age 58.4 years, 76% female, 49% with rheumatoid arthritis). Treatment as outpatient increased over calendar time (p<0.001). A total of 426(61%) received outpatient treatment: 307(44%) with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, 105(15%) with monoclonal antibodies, 5(0.7%) with molnupiravir, 3(0.4%) with outpatient remdesivir, and 6(0.9%) with combinations. There were 9/426 (2.1%) hospitalizations/deaths among those treated as outpatient compared to 49/278 (17.6%) among those with no outpatient treatment (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.12, 0.05 to 0.25). 25/318 (8%) of patients who received oral outpatient treatment had documented COVID-19 rebound.

Conclusion

Outpatient treatment was strongly associated with lower odds of severe COVID-19 compared to no outpatient treatment. At least 8% of SARD patients experienced COVID-19 rebound. These findings highlight the importance of outpatient COVID-19 treatment for SARD patients and the need for further research on rebound.

KEY MESSAGES

What is already known on this topic?

Previous studies suggest that monoclonal antibodies are an effective outpatient treatment option for patients at high-risk of severe COVID-19, including those with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs).Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir are recently-authorized effective oral outpatient SARS-CoV-2 treatment options, but clinical trials were performed among the general population, mostly among unvaccinated and prior to Omicron viral variants.Oral outpatient SARS-CoV-2 treatments may result in COVID-19 rebound, characterized by newly-positive COVID-19 testing and recurrent symptoms, but no studies have investigated rebound prevalence among SARD patients.

What this study adds?

This is one of the first studies investigating outpatient SARS-CoV-2 treatments among SARD patients that includes oral options and quantifies the prevalence of COVID-19 rebound.Outpatient treatment was associated with 88% reduced odds of severe COVID-19 compared to no treatment.At least 8% of SARDs receiving oral outpatient treatment experienced COVID-19 rebound.

How this study might affect research practice or policy?

These results should encourage clinicians to prescribe and SARD patients to seek prompt outpatient COVID-19 treatment.This research provides an early estimate of the prevalence of COVID-19 rebound after oral outpatient treatment to quantify this risk to clinicians and SARD patients and encourage future research.

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in people with multiple sclerosis: Lessons learnt a year in

It has been over a year since people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) have been receiving vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). With a negligible number of cases in which vaccination led to a relapse or new onset MS, experts around the world agree that the potential consequences of COVID-19 in pwMS by far outweigh the risks of vaccination. This article reviews the currently available types of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and the immune responses they elicit in pwMS treated with different DMTs. Findings to date highlight the importance of vaccine timing in relation to DMT dosing to maximize protection, and of encouraging pwMS to get booster doses when offered.

Expert Perspective: Management of Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-Associated Vasculitis

The antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitides (AAV) comprise a major subset of diseases that cause destructive inflammation of small and medium-sized blood vessels. Although these conditions have a predilection for pulmonary and renal involvement, they are in fact protean diseases that can involve essentially any organ system. AAV is among the most difficult rheumatic diseases to diagnose and treat. Therapy for AAV has evolved over the past two decades. Rituximab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, is now the preferred agent for remission induction in conjunction with a reduced-dose glucocorticoid taper. Rituximab is also often a key therapy for remission maintenance. Glucocorticoid toxicity reduction has become a major priority for treatment regimens. Avacopan, an important new adjunct to remission induction therapy, may reduce glucocorticoid use and its resulting toxicity. The role of avacopan as a remission maintenance agent requires further study. The duration of immunosuppression following remission is guided by a number of factors, including the patient's overall clinical state, the degree of damage from previous disease activity, the tolerability of remission maintenance medications, and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and immunity status. Certain features, including history of previous relapse, the presence of ANCA directed against proteinase 3, and a diagnosis of granulomatosis with polyangiitis, favor prolonged remission maintenance therapy. The interval between rituximab doses can usually be lengthened over time during the maintenance phase.