Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with inflammatory joint diseases in Sweden: from infection severity to impact on care provision

A narrative review of the comparative safety of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

INTRODUCTION

Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) have improved the outcomes of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). DMARDs are classified into three categories: conventional synthetic DMARDs, biological DMARDs (including biosimilars), and targeted synthetic DMARDs. DMARDs, by way of their effect on the immune system, are associated with increased risk of adverse events, including infections, malignancies, cardiovascular disease, gastrointestinal perforations, and other less common events.

AREAS COVERED

In this narrative literature review performed with searches of the PubMed database from 1 January 2010 through 1 January 2023, we compare the risk of safety events between DMARDs using data from both randomized clinical trials and observational studies.

EXPERT OPINION

DMARD use in RA is associated with higher rates of serious infections, tuberculosis reactivation, opportunistic infections, and possibly malignancies. Specific biologic DMARDs and higher doses are associated with elevated risks of various adverse events (gastrointestinal perforations, thromboembolism, serious infection). Shared decision-making is paramount when choosing a treatment regimen for patients based on their own comorbidities. JAKi are the newest class of medications used for RA with robust safety data provided in clinical trials. However, more real-world evidence and phase-IV pharmacovigilance data are needed to better understand comparative safety profile of DMARDs in RA.

The serological immunogenicity of the third and fourth doses of COVID-19 vaccine in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases on different biologic or targeted DMARDs: a Swedish nationwide study (COVID-19-REUMA)

Studies investigating the immunogenicity of additional COVID-19 vaccine doses in immunosuppressed patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) are still limited. The objective was to explore the antibody response including response to omicron virus subvariants (sBA.1 and sBS.2) after third and fourth COVID-19 vaccine doses in Swedish IRD patients treated with immunomodulating drugs compared to controls. Antibody levels to spike wild-type antigens (full-length protein and S1) and the omicron variants sBA.1 and sBA.2 (full-length proteins) were measured. A positive response was defined as having antibody levels over cut-off or ≥fourfold increase in post-vaccination levels for both antigens. Patients with arthritis, vasculitis, and other autoimmune diseases (n = 414), and controls (n = 61) receiving biologic/targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) with or without conventional synthetic DMARDs participated. Of these, blood samples were available for 370 patients and 52 controls after three doses, and 65 patients and 15 controls after four doses. Treatment groups after three vaccine doses were rituximab (n = 133), abatacept (n = 22), IL6r inhibitors (n = 71), JAnus Kinase inhibitors (JAK-inhibitors) (n = 56), tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNF-inhibitors) (n = 61), IL12/23/17 inhibitors (n = 27), and controls (n = 52). The percentage of responders after three and four vaccine doses was lower in rituximab-treated patients (59% and 57%) compared to controls (100%) (P < 0.001). After three doses, the percentage of responders in all other groups was 100%, including response to omicron sBA.1 and sBA.2. In rituximab-treated patients, higher baseline immunoglobulin G (IgG) and longer time-period between rituximab and vaccination predicted better response. In this Swedish nationwide study including IRD patients three and four COVID-19 vaccine doses were immunogenic in patients treated with IL6r inhibitors, TNF-inhibitors, JAK-inhibitors, and IL12/23/17-inhibitors but not in rituximab. As >50% of rituximab patients responded to vaccines including omicron subvariants, these patients should be prioritized for additional vaccine doses.

IMPORTANCE

Results from this study provide further evidence that additional doses of COVID-19 vaccines are immunogenic and result in satisfactory antibody response in a majority of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) receiving potent immunomodulating treatments such as biological or targeted disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) given as monotherapy or combined with traditional DMARDs. We observed that rituximab treatment, both as monotherapy and combined with csDMARDs, impaired antibody response, and only roughly 50% of patients developed a satisfactory antibody response including response to omicron subvariants after the third vaccine. In addition, higher IgG levels at the last rituximab course before the third vaccine dose and a longer time after the last rituximab treatment increased the chance of a satisfactory antibody response. These results indicate that rituximab-treated patients should be prioritized for additional vaccine doses.

CLINICAL TRIALS

EudraCT (European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials Database) with number 2021-000880-63.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on People Living with Rheumatoid Arthritis: Experiences and Preferences in Accessing Healthcare Across Five Countries

INTRODUCTION

The global coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created many challenges in healthcare provision. This study aimed to evaluate the global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on people living with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

The RA Narrative COVID-19 survey was conducted online among people with RA who resided in Brazil, Canada, France, Japan, and the US from August to September 2021. The survey examined disease management, healthcare access and experiences, and participant preferences for interactions with their doctor.

RESULTS

Overall, 500 participants completed the survey: 100 each resided in Brazil, Canada, France, Japan, and the US. Emotional well-being was the aspect of disease management most reported to be negatively impacted by the pandemic (55% of participants); 'having more anxiety and/or stress' during the pandemic was the top factor that made controlling RA symptoms more difficult (49% of participants). In comparison, the top factor that made controlling RA symptoms easier was 'having a less busy schedule' (35% of participants). More participants had virtual appointments during versus pre-pandemic (53% vs. 13%, respectively) and participants were equally satisfied with the overall quality of care received via virtual and in-person appointments (76% of participants were 'satisfied' or 'very satisfied' with both). However, participants generally preferred in-person over virtual appointments, except for prescription refills, for which preferences were similar (39% vs. 36%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This survey suggests that the COVID-19 pandemic did negatively impact some aspects of disease management for people living with RA but had positive impacts on the utilization of virtual care. Although participants generally preferred in-person appointments, these results position virtual care as an appropriate means for routine follow-ups.

COVID-19 admissions and mortality in patients with early inflammatory arthritis: results from a UK national cohort

OBJECTIVE

To describe the risks and predictors of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalization and mortality among patients with early inflammatory arthritis (EIA), recruited to the National Early Inflammatory Arthritis Audit (NEIAA).

METHODS

NEIAA is an observational cohort. We included adults with EIA from Feb 2020 to May 2021. Outcomes of interest were hospitalization and death due to COVID-19, using NHS Digital linkage. Cox proportional hazards were used to calculate hazard ratios for outcomes according to initial treatment strategy, with adjustment for confounders.

RESULTS

From 14 127 patients with EIA, there were 143 hospitalizations and 47 deaths due to COVID-19, with incidence rates per 100 person-years of 0.93 (95% CI 0.79, 1.10) for hospitalization and 0.30 (95% CI 0.23, 0.40) for death. Increasing age, male gender, comorbidities and ex-smoking were associated with increased risk of worse COVID-19 outcomes. Higher baseline DAS28 was not associated with COVID-19 admissions [confounder adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.10; 95% CI 0.97, 1.24] or mortality (aHR 1.11; 95% CI 0.90, 1.37). Seropositivity was not associated with either outcome. Higher symptom burden on patient-reported measures predicted worse COVID-19 outcomes. In unadjusted models, CS associated with COVID-19 death (HR 2.29; 95% CI 1.02, 5.13), and SSZ monotherapy associated with COVID-19 admission (HR 1.92; 95% CI 1.04, 3.56). In adjusted models, associations for CS and SSZ were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Patient characteristics have stronger associations with COVID-19 than the initial treatment strategy in patients with EIA. An important limitation is that we have not looked at treatment changes over time.

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.

The impact of immunomodulating treatment on the immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory rheumatic diseases compared to healthy controls. A Swedish nationwide study (COVID19-REUMA)

Objectives

To elucidate antibody responses after the second and third dose of COVID-19 vaccine in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) treated with biologic/targeted disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (b/ts DMARDs).

Methods

Antibody levels to antigens representing spike full length protein and spike S1 were measured before vaccination, 2-12 weeks after the second dose, before and after the third dose using multiplex bead-based serology assay. Positive antibody response was defined as antibody levels over cut off (seropositivity) in seronegative individuals or ≥4-fold increase in antibodies in individuals seropositive for both spike proteins.

Results

Patients (n=414) receiving b/ts DMARDs (283 had arthritis, 75 systemic vasculitis and 56 other autoimmune diseases) and controls (n=61) from five Swedish regions participated. Treatments groups were: rituximab (n=145); abatacept (n=22); Interleukin 6 receptor inhibitors [IL6i (n=79)]; JAnus Kinase Inhibitors [JAKi (n=58)], Tumour Necrosis Factor inhibitor [TNFi (n=68)] and Interleukin12/23/17 inhibitors [IL12/23/17i (n=42)]. Percentage of patients with positive antibody response after two doses was significantly lower in rituximab (33,8%) and abatacept (40,9%) (p<0,001) but not in IL12/23/17i, TNFi or JAKi groups compared to controls (80,3%). Higher age, rituximab treatment and shorter time between last rituximab course and vaccination predicted impaired antibody response. Antibody levels collected 21-40 weeks after second dose decreased significantly (IL6i: p=0,02; other groups: p<0,001) compared to levels at 2-12 week but most participants remained seropositive. Proportion of patients with positive antibody response increased after third dose but was still significantly lower in rituximab (p<0,001).

Conclusions

Older individuals and patients on maintenance rituximab have an impaired response after two doses of COVID-19 vaccine which improves if the time between last rituximab course and vaccination extends and also after an additional vaccine dose. Rituximab patients should be prioritized for booster vaccine doses. TNFi, JAKi and IL12/23/17i does not diminished humoral response to primary and an additional vaccination.

Barriers to the Diagnosis of Early Inflammatory Arthritis: A Literature Review

The early identification of patients with inflammatory arthritis and their referral to rheumatologists in order to establish a diagnosis and to start treatment plays a crucial role in patient outcomes. However, it is recognized that a large proportion of patients with inflammatory arthritis are diagnosed very late, losing the opportunity to start treatment in the very early stages of disease, resulting in a worse prognosis. This delay depends on several factors related to the patient, the disease, socio-demographic and health system aspects. Over time, several strategies have been developed and implemented at different levels aiming to overcome such barriers and to reduce the time from the onset of the symptoms until the diagnosis and start of adequate treatment. In this non-systematic comprehensive review, we will describe the main barriers in the identification of patients with inflammatory arthritis at different levels. We will also discuss the different strategies that have been implemented with the objective to overcome the recognized barriers and their impact in the reduction of delays.

Safety of synthetic and biological DMARDs: a systematic literature review informing the 2022 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVES

To perform a systematic literature review (SLR) concerning the safety of synthetic(s) and biological (b) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) to inform the 2022 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

SLR of observational studies comparing safety outcomes of any DMARD with another intervention in RA. A comparator group was required for inclusion. For treatments yet without, or limited, registry data, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were used.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine observational studies addressed the safety of DMARDs. Two studies (unclear risk of bias (RoB)) showed an increased risk of serious infections with bDMARDs compared with conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs. Herpes zoster infections occurred more with JAKi than csDMARDs (adjusted HR (aHR): 3.66) and bDMARDs (aHR: 1.9-2.3) (four studies, two low RoB). The risk of malignancies was similar across bDMARDs (five studies) and with tofacitinib compared with bDMARDs (one study, low RoB). The risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was similar with bDMARDs and tofacitinib (two studies, one low RoB). Thirty studies reported safety from RCTs, with one, designed to evaluate safety, showing that malignancies (HR (95% CI): 1.48 (1.04 to 2.09)) and MACE (HR (95% CI): 1.33 (0.91 to 1.94)) occurred numerically more frequently with tofacitinib (5 mg and 10 mg doses combined) than with TNFi in patients with cardiovascular risk factors. In this study, the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) was higher with tofacitinib 10 mg than with TNFi.

CONCLUSION

The safety profile of bDMARDs was further demonstrated. Whether the difference in incidence of malignancies, MACE and VTE between tofacitinib and TNFi applies to other JAKi needs further evaluation.

Incidence and management of inflammatory arthritis in England before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a population-level cohort study using OpenSAFELY

Background

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the incidence and management of inflammatory arthritis is not understood. Routinely captured data in secure platforms, such as OpenSAFELY, offer unique opportunities to understand how care for patients with inflammatory arthritis was impacted upon by the pandemic. Our objective was to use OpenSAFELY to assess the effects of the pandemic on diagnostic incidence and care delivery for inflammatory arthritis in England and to replicate key metrics from the National Early Inflammatory Arthritis Audit.

Methods

In this population-level cohort study, we used primary care and hospital data for 17·7 million adults registered with general practices using TPP health record software, to explore the following outcomes between April 1, 2019, and March 31, 2022: (1) incidence of inflammatory arthritis diagnoses (rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, and undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis) recorded in primary care; (2) time to first rheumatology assessment; (3) time to first prescription of a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) in primary care; and (4) choice of first DMARD.

Findings

Among 17 683 500 adults, there were 31 280 incident inflammatory arthritis diagnoses recorded between April 1, 2019, and March 31, 2022. The mean age of diagnosed patients was 55·4 years (SD 16·6), 18 615 (59·5%) were female, 12 665 (40·5%) were male, and 22 925 (88·3%) of 25 960 with available ethnicity data were White. New inflammatory arthritis diagnoses decreased by 20·3% in the year commencing April, 2020, relative to the preceding year (5·1 vs 6·4 diagnoses per 10 000 adults). The median time to first rheumatology assessment was shorter during the pandemic (18 days; IQR 8-35) than before (21 days; 9-41). The proportion of patients prescribed DMARDs in primary care was similar before and during the pandemic; however, during the pandemic, fewer people were prescribed methotrexate or leflunomide, and more were prescribed sulfasalazine or hydroxychloroquine.

Interpretation

Inflammatory arthritis diagnoses decreased markedly during the early phase of the pandemic. The impact on rheumatology assessment times and DMARD prescribing in primary care was less marked than might have been anticipated. This study demonstrates the feasibility of using routinely captured, near real-time data in the secure OpenSAFELY platform to benchmark care quality on a national scale, without the need for manual data collection.

Funding

None.

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.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Initiation of Immunosuppressive Treatment in Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases in Austria: A Nationwide Retrospective Study

Objective: Conventional immunosuppressive and advanced targeted therapies, including biological medications and small molecules, are a mainstay in the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID). However, the COVID-19 pandemic caused concerns over these drugs’ safety regarding the risk and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Thus, we aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the initiation of these treatments in 2020. Study Design and Setting: We conducted a population-based retrospective analysis of real-world data of the Austrian health insurance funds on the initiation of conventional immunosuppressive and advanced targeted therapies. The primary objective was to compare the initiation of these medications in the year 2020 with the period 2017 to 2019. Initiation rates of medication were calculated by comparing a certain unit of time with an average of the previous ones. Results: 95,573 patients were included. During the first lockdown in Austria in April 2020, there was a significant decrease in the initiations of conventional immunosuppressives and advanced targeted therapies compared to previous years (p < 0.0001). From May 2020 onwards, numbers rapidly re-achieved pre-lockdown levels despite higher SARS-CoV-2 infection rates and subsequent lockdown periods at the end of 2020. Independent from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, a continuous increase of starts of advanced targeted therapies and a continuous decrease of conventional immunosuppressants during the observation period were observed. Conclusions: In IMID patients, the COVID-19 pandemic led to a significant decrease of newly started conventional immunosuppressive and advanced targeted therapies only during the first lockdown in Austria.

COVID-19 infection and hospitalization risk according to vaccination status and DMARD treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to investigate the incidence of COVID-19 hospitalization in unvaccinated and vaccinated patients with RA compared with matched controls, and in patients with RA according to DMARD treatment.

METHODS

This was a Danish nationwide matched-cohort study from January to October 2021. Patients with RA were identified in the DANBIO register and matched 1:20 with individuals from the general population on age, sex, and vaccination status. Primary and secondary outcomes were COVID-19 hospitalization (Danish National Patient Register) and first-time positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test (Danish COVID-19 Surveillance Register), respectively. Stratified by vaccination status, incidence rates (IRs) per 1000 person years (PYs) and comorbidity-adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) in cause-specific Cox models were calculated with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

In total, 28 447 unvaccinated patients and 568 940 comparators had IRs for COVID-19 hospitalization of 10.4 (8.0-13.4) and 4.7 (4.3-5.1) per 1000 PYs, respectively (aHR 1.88, 1.44-2.46). When fully vaccinated, corresponding IRs were 0.9 (0.5-1.6) and 0.5 (0.4-0.6) per 1000 PYs (aHR 1.94, 1.03-3.66). Unvaccinated RA patients had an aHR of 1.22 (1.09-1.57) for testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 and 1.09 (0.92-1.14) among vaccinated RA patients. Vaccinated rituximab-treated patients had increased crude IR of COVID-19 hospitalization compared with conventional DMARD-treated patients.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of COVID-19 hospitalization was increased for both unvaccinated and vaccinated patients with RA compared with controls. Importantly, the parallel decreasing risk for patients with RA suggests a comparable relative benefit of vaccination in most patients.