Multiorgan MRI findings after hospitalisation with COVID-19 in the UK (C-MORE): a prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The multiorgan impact of moderate to severe coronavirus infections in the post-acute phase is still poorly understood. We aimed to evaluate the excess burden of multiorgan abnormalities after hospitalisation with COVID-19, evaluate their determinants, and explore associations with patient-related outcome measures.

METHODS

In a prospective, UK-wide, multicentre MRI follow-up study (C-MORE), adults (aged ≥18 years) discharged from hospital following COVID-19 who were included in Tier 2 of the Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study (PHOSP-COVID) and contemporary controls with no evidence of previous COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibody negative) underwent multiorgan MRI (lungs, heart, brain, liver, and kidneys) with quantitative and qualitative assessment of images and clinical adjudication when relevant. Individuals with end-stage renal failure or contraindications to MRI were excluded. Participants also underwent detailed recording of symptoms, and physiological and biochemical tests. The primary outcome was the excess burden of multiorgan abnormalities (two or more organs) relative to controls, with further adjustments for potential confounders. The C-MORE study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04510025.

FINDINGS

Of 2710 participants in Tier 2 of PHOSP-COVID, 531 were recruited across 13 UK-wide C-MORE sites. After exclusions, 259 C-MORE patients (mean age 57 years [SD 12]; 158 [61%] male and 101 [39%] female) who were discharged from hospital with PCR-confirmed or clinically diagnosed COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and Nov 1, 2021, and 52 non-COVID-19 controls from the community (mean age 49 years [SD 14]; 30 [58%] male and 22 [42%] female) were included in the analysis. Patients were assessed at a median of 5·0 months (IQR 4·2-6·3) after hospital discharge. Compared with non-COVID-19 controls, patients were older, living with more obesity, and had more comorbidities. Multiorgan abnormalities on MRI were more frequent in patients than in controls (157 [61%] of 259 vs 14 [27%] of 52; p<0·0001) and independently associated with COVID-19 status (odds ratio [OR] 2·9 [95% CI 1·5-5·8]; padjusted=0·0023) after adjusting for relevant confounders. Compared with controls, patients were more likely to have MRI evidence of lung abnormalities (p=0·0001; parenchymal abnormalities), brain abnormalities (p<0·0001; more white matter hyperintensities and regional brain volume reduction), and kidney abnormalities (p=0·014; lower medullary T1 and loss of corticomedullary differentiation), whereas cardiac and liver MRI abnormalities were similar between patients and controls. Patients with multiorgan abnormalities were older (difference in mean age 7 years [95% CI 4-10]; mean age of 59·8 years [SD 11·7] with multiorgan abnormalities vs mean age of 52·8 years [11·9] without multiorgan abnormalities; p<0·0001), more likely to have three or more comorbidities (OR 2·47 [1·32-4·82]; padjusted=0·0059), and more likely to have a more severe acute infection (acute CRP >5mg/L, OR 3·55 [1·23-11·88]; padjusted=0·025) than those without multiorgan abnormalities. Presence of lung MRI abnormalities was associated with a two-fold higher risk of chest tightness, and multiorgan MRI abnormalities were associated with severe and very severe persistent physical and mental health impairment (PHOSP-COVID symptom clusters) after hospitalisation.

INTERPRETATION

After hospitalisation for COVID-19, people are at risk of multiorgan abnormalities in the medium term. Our findings emphasise the need for proactive multidisciplinary care pathways, with the potential for imaging to guide surveillance frequency and therapeutic stratification.

FUNDING

UK Research and Innovation and National Institute for Health Research.

Healthcare utilization and unmet needs of patients with antisynthetase syndrome: An international patient survey

Antisynthease syndrome (ASSD) is a rare, complex and understudied autoimmune disease. Internet-based studies can overcome barriers of traditional on-site research and are therefore very appealing for rare diseases. The aim of this study was to investigate patient-reported symptoms, diagnostic delay, symptoms, medical care, health status, working status, disease knowledge and willingness to participate in research of ASSD patients by conducting an international web-based survey. The multilingual questionnaire was created by an international group of rheumatologists and patients and distributed online. 236 participants from 22 countries completed the survey. 184/236 (78.0%) were female, mean age (SD) was 49.6 years (11.3) and most common antisynthetase antibody was Jo-1 (169/236, 71.6%). 79/236 (33.5%) reported to work full-time. Median diagnostic delay was one year. The most common symptom at disease onset was fatigue 159/236 (67.4%), followed by myalgia 130/236 (55.1%). The complete triad of myositis, arthritis and lung involvement verified by a clinician was present in 42/236 (17.8%) at disease onset and in 88/236 (37.3%) during the disease course. 36/236 (15.3%) reported to have been diagnosed with fibromyalgia and 40/236 (16.3%) with depression. The most reported immunosuppressive treatments were oral corticosteroids 179/236 (75.9%), followed by rituximab 85/236 (36.0%). 73/236 (30.9%) had received physiotherapy treatment. 71/236 (30.1%) reported to know useful online information sources related to ASSD. 223/236 (94.5%) were willing to share health data for research purposes once a year. Our results reiterate that internet-based research is invaluable for cooperating with patients to foster knowledge in rare diseases.

Clinical characteristics with inflammation profiling of long COVID and association with 1-year recovery following hospitalisation in the UK: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

No effective pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions exist for patients with long COVID. We aimed to describe recovery 1 year after hospital discharge for COVID-19, identify factors associated with patient-perceived recovery, and identify potential therapeutic targets by describing the underlying inflammatory profiles of the previously described recovery clusters at 5 months after hospital discharge.

METHODS

The Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study (PHOSP-COVID) is a prospective, longitudinal cohort study recruiting adults (aged ≥18 years) discharged from hospital with COVID-19 across the UK. Recovery was assessed using patient-reported outcome measures, physical performance, and organ function at 5 months and 1 year after hospital discharge, and stratified by both patient-perceived recovery and recovery cluster. Hierarchical logistic regression modelling was performed for patient-perceived recovery at 1 year. Cluster analysis was done using the clustering large applications k-medoids approach using clinical outcomes at 5 months. Inflammatory protein profiling was analysed from plasma at the 5-month visit. This study is registered on the ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN10980107, and recruitment is ongoing.

FINDINGS

2320 participants discharged from hospital between March 7, 2020, and April 18, 2021, were assessed at 5 months after discharge and 807 (32·7%) participants completed both the 5-month and 1-year visits. 279 (35·6%) of these 807 patients were women and 505 (64·4%) were men, with a mean age of 58·7 (SD 12·5) years, and 224 (27·8%) had received invasive mechanical ventilation (WHO class 7-9). The proportion of patients reporting full recovery was unchanged between 5 months (501 [25·5%] of 1965) and 1 year (232 [28·9%] of 804). Factors associated with being less likely to report full recovery at 1 year were female sex (odds ratio 0·68 [95% CI 0·46-0·99]), obesity (0·50 [0·34-0·74]) and invasive mechanical ventilation (0·42 [0·23-0·76]). Cluster analysis (n=1636) corroborated the previously reported four clusters: very severe, severe, moderate with cognitive impairment, and mild, relating to the severity of physical health, mental health, and cognitive impairment at 5 months. We found increased inflammatory mediators of tissue damage and repair in both the very severe and the moderate with cognitive impairment clusters compared with the mild cluster, including IL-6 concentration, which was increased in both comparisons (n=626 participants). We found a substantial deficit in median EQ-5D-5L utility index from before COVID-19 (retrospective assessment; 0·88 [IQR 0·74-1·00]), at 5 months (0·74 [0·64-0·88]) to 1 year (0·75 [0·62-0·88]), with minimal improvements across all outcome measures at 1 year after discharge in the whole cohort and within each of the four clusters.

INTERPRETATION

The sequelae of a hospital admission with COVID-19 were substantial 1 year after discharge across a range of health domains, with the minority in our cohort feeling fully recovered. Patient-perceived health-related quality of life was reduced at 1 year compared with before hospital admission. Systematic inflammation and obesity are potential treatable traits that warrant further investigation in clinical trials.

FUNDING

UK Research and Innovation and National Institute for Health Research.

POS1229 THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON MEDICATION NON-ADHERENCE IN A RHEUMATOID AND PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS UK COHORT

Background

In March 2020, as part of the UK’s COVID-19 prevention strategy, those identified as ‘clinically extremely vulnerable’, were advised to shield. This included a number of patients prescribed anti-rheumatic drugs, who were asked to continue their current treatment unless they developed symptoms of infection. Suboptimal treatment adherence (16.0%-81.0%) has been reported in patients with arthritic diseases, and is associated with psychological factors, including anxiety (1). Previous literature in non-UK cohorts has highlighted suboptimal adherence levels in immunosuppressed patients during the pandemic, although many were single centre studies (2,3).

Objectives

The aim of this multi-centre study is to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on adherence to anti-rheumatic medications in patients with established rheumatoid (RA) and psoriatic (PsA) arthritis in the UK who had recently commenced a biologic or targeted synthetic DMARD.

Methods

Between September 2020 and May 2021, RA and PsA patients prescribed biologic or targeted synthetic anti-rheumatic drugs from two multi-centre observational studies (BRAGGSS and OUTPASS) were sent a questionnaire on medication usage, adherence, and perceptions to establish the impact of COVID-19 on these parameters. Patients were asked about compliance during the COVID-19 pandemic using a 5-point Likert scale (always, often, sometimes, rarely, and never) and the reason for non-adherence. Adherence was defined as never missing or delaying a dose, unless medically advised. Descriptive summary statistics were calculated, and logistic regression and Pearson’s chi-squared tests were employed to investigate variables associated with self-reported non-adherence.

Results

In total 159 questionnaires were returned (81.1% RA and 18.9% PsA). Methotrexate (53.5%) was the most frequently prescribed agent, followed by etanercept (25.2%), sulfasalazine (22.6%), hydroxychloroquine (21.4%) and adalimumab (19.5%). Furthermore, 68.6% of patients were prescribed ≥2 drugs. During the pandemic, 42.1% of patients reported missing or delaying a treatment dose for any reason. Adherence information was available for 97.5% of patients with 25.8% reporting non-adherence which was not medically advised. Methotrexate non-adherence was 27.1%, with similar levels reported for etanercept (20.0%), sulfasalazine (27.8%), hydroxychloroquine (35.3%) and adalimumab (29.0%). No drugs had significantly different adherence compared to methotrexate. Furthermore, there was no association between disease type or perception of disease control and adherence. Of non-adherent patients, 17.5% reported increased anxiety, fear, and increased risk due to the COVID-19 pandemic as an influencing factor. Meanwhile, 37.5% of non-adherent patients listed non-COVID-19 intentional reasons and 45.0% reported non-intentional reasons, with forgetting and running out of treatment listed most frequently.

Conclusion

In a UK cohort self-reported non-adherence was reported in 25.8% of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, despite medical advice, with reasons including increased anxiety due to COVID-19.

References

[1]Medication adherence and persistence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, and psoriatic arthritis: a systematic literature review. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2018;12:1483–503.

[2]Vakirlis E, Bakirtzi K, Papadimitriou I, Vrani F, Sideris N, Lallas A, et al. Treatment adherence in psoriatic patients during COVID-19 pandemic: Real-world data from a tertiary hospital in Greece. J Eur Acad Dermatology Venereol. 2020;34(11):e673–5.

[3]Polat Ekinci A, Pehlivan G, Gökalp MO. Surveillance of psoriatic patients on biologic treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic: A single-center experience. Dermatol Ther. 2020;(December 2020):19–22.

Acknowledgements

on behalf of the BRAGGSS consortium

Disclosure of Interests

Philippa Curry: None declared, Hector Chinoy Speakers bureau: UCB, Biogen, Consultant of: Novartis, Eli Lilly, Orphazyme, Astra Zeneca, Grant/research support from: Eli Lilly, UCB, Meghna Jani: None declared, Darren Plant: None declared, Kimme Hyrich Consultant of: consultancy/honoraria from AbbVie, Grant/research support from: Pfizer, BMS, Ann Morgan Speakers bureau: Roche, Chugai, Consultant of: GSK, Roche, Chugai, AstraZeneka, Regeneron, Sanofi, Vifor, Grant/research support from: Roche, Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Anthony G Wilson: None declared, John Isaacs Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Gilead, Roche, UCB, Grant/research support from: GSK, Janssen, Pfizer, Andrew Morris: None declared, Anne Barton Grant/research support from: I have received grant funding from Pfizer, Galapagos, Scipher Medicine and Bristol Myers Squibb., James Bluett Grant/research support from: Pfizer Limited. JB has received travel/conference fees from UCB, Pfizer and Eli Lilly

POS0855 IMPAIRED PROMIS PHYSICAL FUNCTION IN IDIOPATHIC INFLAMMATORY MYOPATHY PATIENTS: RESULTS FROM THE MULTICENTER COVAD PATIENT REPORTED E-SURVEY

Background

Evaluation of physical function is fundamental in the management of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs). Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is a National Institute of Health initiative established in 2004 to develop patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) with improved validity and efficacy. PROMIS Physical Function (PF) short forms have been validated for use in IIMs [1].

Objectives

To investigate the physical function status of IIM patients compared to those with non-IIM autoimmune diseases (AIDs) and healthy controls (HCs) utilizing PROMIS PF data obtained in the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study, a large-scale, international self-reported e-survey assessing the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in AID patients [2].

Methods

The survey data regarding demographics, IIM and AID diagnosis, disease activity, and PROMIS PF short form-10a scores were extracted from the COVAD study database. The disease activity (active vs inactive) of each patient was assessed in 3 different ways: (1) physician’s assessment (active if there was an increased immunosuppression), (2) patient’s assessment (active vs inactive as per patient), and (3) current steroid use. These 3 definitions of disease activity were applied independently to each patient. PROMIS PF-10a scores were compared between each disease category (IIMs vs non-IIM AIDs vs HCs), stratified by disease activity based on the 3 definitions stated above, employing negative binominal regression model. Multivariable regression analysis adjusted for age, gender, and ethnicity was performed clustering countries, and the predicted PROMIS PF-10a score was calculated based on the regression result. Factors affecting PROMIS PF-10a scores other than disease activity were identified by another multivariable regression analysis in the patients with inactive disease (IIMs or non-IIM AIDs).

Results

1057 IIM patients, 3635 non-IIM AID patients, and 3981 HCs responded to the COVAD survey until August 2021. The median age of the respondents was 43 [IQR 30-56] years old, and 74.8% were female. Among IIM patients, dermatomyositis was the most prevalent diagnosis (34.8%), followed by inclusion body myositis (IBM) (23.6%), polymyositis (PM) (16.2%), anti-synthetase syndrome (11.8%), overlap myositis (7.9%), and immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy (IMNM) (4.6%). The predicted mean of PROMIS PF-10a scores was significantly lower in IIMs compared to non-IIM AIDs or HCs (36.3 [95% (CI) 35.5-37.1] vs 41.3 [95% CI 40.2-42.5] vs 46.2 [95% CI 45.8-46.6], P < 0.001), irrespective of disease activity or the definitions of disease activity used (physician’s assessment, patient’s assessment, or steroid use) (Figure 1). The largest difference between active IIMs and non-IIM AIDs was observed when the disease activity was defined by patient’s assessment (35.0 [95% CI 34.1-35.9] vs 40.1 [95% CI 38.7-41.5]). Considering the subgroups of IIMs, the scores were significantly lower in IBM in comparison with non-IBM IIMs (P < 0.001). The independent factors associated with low PROMIS PF-10a scores in the patients with inactive disease were older age, female gender, and the disease category being IBM, PM, or IMNM.

Conclusion

Physical function is significantly impaired in IIMs compared to non-IIM AIDs or HCs, even in patients with inactive disease. The elderly, women, and IBM groups are the worst affected, suggesting that developing targeted strategies to minimize functional disability in certain groups may improve patient reported physical function and disease outcomes.

References

[1]Saygin D, Oddis CV, Dzanko S, et al. Utility of patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) physical function form in inflammatory myopathy. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2021; 51: 539-46.

[2]Sen P, Gupta L, Lilleker JB, et al. COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD) survey protocol. Rheumatol Int. 2022; 42: 23-9.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank all respondents for filling the questionnaire. The authors thank The Myositis Association, Myositis India, Myositis UK, the Myositis Global Network, Cure JM, Cure IBM, Sjögren’s India Foundation, EULAR PARE, and various other patient support groups and organizations for their invaluable contribution in the dissemination of this survey among patients which made the data collection possible. The authors also thank all members of the COVAD study group.

Disclosure of Interests

None declared

POS0899 HIGH FATIGUE SCORES IN PATIENTS WITH IDIOPATHIC INFLAMMATORY MYOPATHIES: A MULTIGROUP COMPARATIVE STUDY FROM THE COVAD E-SURVEY

Background

Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) are a rare, multisystem, heterogeneous diseases, and contribute to high psychological burden. The patients’ perception of physical health, deteriorating independence and social and environmental relationships may not always be a direct function of disease activity. To face with these aspects, several worldwide specialized organization have recommended the use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) both in clinical trials and observational studies to highlight patient’s perception of the disease (1). Unfortunately, data on fatigue scores in IIM is limited.

Objectives

We compared fatigue VAS scores in patients with IIM, autoimmune diseases (AIDs) and healthy controls (HCs) and triangulated them with PROMIS physical function in a large international cohort made up of answers from the e-survey regarding the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study.

Methods

Data of 16327 respondents was extracted from the COVAD database on August 31th 2021. VAS fatigue scores were compared between AID, HC and IIM using univariate followed by multivariate analysis after adjusting for baseline differences. We further performed a propensity score matched analysis on 1827 subjects after adjusting for age, gender and ethnicity. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used for continuous variables and chi-square test for categorical variables, and Bonferroni’s correction was applied for the post hoc analyses considering IIMs as a reference group.

Results

We analyzed answers from 6988 patients, with a mean age of 43.8 years (SD 16.2). The overall percentage of female was 72% and the population ethnicity was mainly composed of White (55.1%), followed by Asian (24.6%), and Hispanic (13.8%). The overall fatigue VAS was 3.6 mm (SD 2.7). IIMs VAS was 4.8 mm (SD 2.6), AIDs 4.5 mm (SD 2.6), and HC 2.8 mm (SD 2.6) (P <0,001). VAS fatigue scores of IIMs were comparable with AIDs (P 0.084), albeit significantly higher than the HCs (P <0,001). Notably, fatigue VAS was lower in IIMs than AIDs in two distinct subsets: inactive disease as defined by the patient’s perception and the “excellent” general health condition group, where IIMs had worse scores (P <0,05). Interestingly, fatigue VAS was comparable in active disease defined by physician assessment, patient perception, based on general functional status, or when defined by steroid dose being prescribed. Notably, after propensity matched analysis of patients adjusting for gender, age and ethnicity (1.827 answers, i.e. 609 subjects per group, P =1) the differences disappeared and IIMs and AIDs had comparable fatigue levels across all levels of disease activity, although the fatigue discrepancies with HCs were substantially confirmed.

After application of a multivariate linear regression analysis we found that lower fatigue VAS scores were related to HC (P <0,001), male gender (P <0,001), Asian and Hispanic ethnicities (P <0,001 and 0,003).

Conclusion

Our study confirms that there is a higher prevalence of fatigue in all the AIDs patients, with comparable VAS scores between IIMs and other AIDs. We can also read our data commenting that females and/or Caucasians patients suffer a higher impact of this manifestation of chronic autoimmune diseases upon their lives. This is why these subjects, to our judgement, should be carefully evaluated during outpatients visits and to whom we should spend some extra time to discuss health related issues and how to improve them.

References

[1]Regardt, M. et al. OMERACT 2018 Modified Patient-reported Outcome Domain Core Set in the Life Impact Area for Adult Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies. J. Rheumatol.46, 1351–1354 (2019).

Figure 1.

distribution of Fatigue VAS scores in the three population evaluated. IIM idiopathic inflammatory myositis; AID autoimmune diseases; HC healthy controls; * P < 0,05.

Disclosure of Interests

None declared

POS1260 COVID-19 VACCINATION-RELATED ADVERSE EVENTS AMONG AUTOIMMUNE DISEASE PATIENTS: RESULTS FROM THE COVID-19 VACCINATION IN AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES (COVAD) STUDY

Background

COVID-19 vaccines have been proven to be safe and effective in the healthy population at large. However, significant gaps remain in the evidence of their safety in patients with systemic autoimmune and inflammatory disorders (SAIDs). Patients and rheumatologists have expressed concerns regarding vaccination triggered allergic reactions, thrombogenic events, and other adverse events (ADEs) contributing to vaccine hesitancy (1)

Objectives

This study aimed to assess and compare short term COVID-19 vaccination associated ADEs in patients with SAIDs and healthy controls (HC) seven days post-vaccination, as well as between patients with SAIDs receiving different vaccines.

Methods

We developed an comprehensive, patient self-reporting electronic-survey to collect respondent demographics, SAID details, COVID-19 infection history, COVID-19 vaccination details, 7-day post vaccination adverse events and patient reported outcome measures using the PROMIS tool. After pilot testing, validation, translation into 18 languages on the online platform surveymonkey.com, and vetting by international experts, the survey was circulated in early 2021 by a multicenter study group of >110 collaborators in 94 countries. ADEs were categorized as injection site pain, minor ADEs, major ADEs, and hospitalizations. We analyzed data from the baseline survey for descriptive and intergroup comparative statistics based on data distribution and variable type (data as median, IQR).

Results

10900 respondents [42 (30-55) years, 74% females and 45% Caucasians] were analyzed. 5,867 patients (54%) with SAIDs were compared with 5033 HCs. All respondents included in the final analysis had received a single dose of the vaccine and 69% had received 2 primary doses. Pfizer (39.8%) was the most common vaccine received, followed by Oxford/AstraZeneca (13.4%), and Covishield (10.9%). Baseline demographics differed by an older SAID population (mean age 42 vs. 33 years) and a greater female predominance (M:F= 1:4.7 vs. 1:1.8) compared to HCs.

79% had minor and only 3% had major vaccine ADEs requiring urgent medical attention overall. In adjusted analysis, among minor ADEs, abdominal pain [multivariate OR 1.6 (1.14-2.3)], dizziness [multivariate OR 1.3 (1.2-1.5)], and headache [multivariate OR 1.67 (1.3-2.2)], were more frequent in SAIDs than HCs. Overall major ADEs [multivariate OR 1.9 (1.6-2.2)], and throat closure [multivariate OR 5.7 (2.9-11.3)] were more frequent in SAIDs though absolute risk was small (0-4%) and rates of hospitalization were similarly small in both groups, with a small absolute risk (0-4%). Specific minor ADEs frequencies were different among different vaccine types, however, major ADEs and hospitalizations overall were rare (0-4%) and comparable across vaccine types in patients with SAIDs (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

A. Post Vaccination ADEs in SAIDs compared to HCs. B. Proportions of post COVID-19 vaccination ADEs in SAIDs by vaccine type.

Conclusion

Vaccination against COVID-19 is relatively safe and tolerable in patients with SAIDs. Certain minor vaccine ADEs are more frequent in SAIDs than HCs in this study, though are not severe and do not require urgent medical attention. SAIDs were at a higher risk of major ADEs than HCs, though absolute risk was small, and did not lead to increased hospitalizations. There are small differences in minor ADEs between vaccine types in patients with SAIDs.

References

[1]Boekel L, Kummer LY, van Dam KPJ, Hooijberg F, van Kempen Z, Vogelzang EH, et al. Adverse events after first COVID-19 vaccination in patients with autoimmune diseases. Lancet Rheumatol. 2021 Aug;3(8):e542–5.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank all members of the COVAD study group for their invaluable role in the collection of data. The authors thank all respondents for filling the questionnaire. The authors thank The Myositis Association, Myositis India, Myositis UK, the Myositis Global Network, Cure JM, Cure IBM, Sjögren’s India Foundation, EULAR PARE, and various other patient support groups and organizations for their invaluable contribution in the dissemination of this survey among patients which made the data collection possible. The authors also thank all members of the COVAD study group.

Disclosure of Interests

Parikshit Sen: None declared, Naveen R: None declared, Arvind Nune: None declared, James B. Lilleker: None declared, Vishwesh Agarwal: None declared, Sinan Kardes: None declared, Minchul Kim: None declared, Jessica Day Grant/research support from: JD has received research funding from CSL Limited., Marcin Milchert: None declared, Tamer A Gheita: None declared, Babur Salim: None declared, Tsvetelina Velikova: None declared, Abraham Edgar Gracia-Ramos: None declared, Ioannis Parodis Speakers bureau: IP has received research funding and/or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Elli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis and F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG., Consultant of: IP has received research funding and/or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Elli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis and F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG., Grant/research support from: IP has received research funding and/or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Elli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis and F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG., Albert Selva-O’Callaghan: None declared, Elena Nikiphorou Speakers bureau: EN has received speaker honoraria/participated in advisory boards for Celltrion, Pfizer, Sanofi, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Lilly, Consultant of: EN has received speaker honoraria/participated in advisory boards for Celltrion, Pfizer, Sanofi, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Lilly, Grant/research support from: EN has received speaker honoraria/participated in advisory boards for Celltrion, Pfizer, Sanofi, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Lilly, and holds research grants from Pfizer and Lilly., Tulika Chatterjee: None declared, Ai Lyn Tan Speakers bureau: ALT has received honoraria for advisory boards and speaking for Abbvie, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB., Consultant of: ALT has received honoraria for advisory boards and speaking for Abbvie, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB., Grant/research support from: ALT has received honoraria for advisory boards and speaking for Abbvie, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB., Lorenzo Cavagna: None declared, Miguel A Saavedra: None declared, Samuel Katsuyuki Shinjo: None declared, Nelly Ziade Speakers bureau: NZ has received speaker fees, advisory board fees and research grants from Pfizer, Roche, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, NewBridge, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Pierre Fabre; none is related to this manuscript., Consultant of: NZ has received speaker fees, advisory board fees and research grants from Pfizer, Roche, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, NewBridge, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Pierre Fabre; none is related to this manuscript., Grant/research support from: NZ has received speaker fees, advisory board fees and research grants from Pfizer, Roche, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, NewBridge, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Pierre Fabre; none is related to this manuscript., Johannes Knitza: None declared, Masataka Kuwana: None declared, Oliver Distler Speakers bureau: OD has/had consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from or has served as a speaker for the following companies in the area of potential treatments for systemic sclerosis and its complications in the last three years: Abbvie, Acceleron, Alcimed, Amgen, AnaMar, Arxx, Baecon, Blade, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, ChemomAb, Corbus, CSL Behring, Galapagos, Glenmark, GSK, Horizon (Curzion), Inventiva, iQvia, Kymera, Lupin, Medac, Medscape, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Roche, Roivant, Sanofi, Serodapharm, Topadur and UCB. Patent issued “mir-29 for the treatment of systemic sclerosis” (US8247389, EP2331143)., Consultant of: OD has/had consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from or has served as a speaker for the following companies in the area of potential treatments for systemic sclerosis and its complications in the last three years: Abbvie, Acceleron, Alcimed, Amgen, AnaMar, Arxx, Baecon, Blade, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, ChemomAb, Corbus, CSL Behring, Galapagos, Glenmark, GSK, Horizon (Curzion), Inventiva, iQvia, Kymera, Lupin, Medac, Medscape, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Roche, Roivant, Sanofi, Serodapharm, Topadur and UCB. Patent issued “mir-29 for the treatment of systemic sclerosis” (US8247389, EP2331143)., Grant/research support from: OD has/had consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from or has served as a speaker for the following companies in the area of potential treatments for systemic sclerosis and its complications in the last three years: Abbvie, Acceleron, Alcimed, Amgen, AnaMar, Arxx, Baecon, Blade, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, ChemomAb, Corbus, CSL Behring, Galapagos, Glenmark, GSK, Horizon (Curzion), Inventiva, iQvia, Kymera, Lupin, Medac, Medscape, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Roche, Roivant, Sanofi, Serodapharm, Topadur and UCB. Patent issued “mir-29 for the treatment of systemic sclerosis” (US8247389, EP2331143)., Hector Chinoy Speakers bureau: HC has served as a speaker for UCB, Biogen., Consultant of: HC has received consulting fees from Novartis, Eli Lilly, Orphazyme, Astra Zeneca, Grant/research support from: HC has received grant support from Eli Lilly and UCB, Vikas Agarwal: None declared, Rohit Aggarwal Consultant of: RA has/had a consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from for the following companies-Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Genentech, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca, Corbus, Kezar, Kyverna, Janssen, Roivant, Boehringer Ingelheim, Argenx, Q32, Alexion, EMD Serono, Jubliant, Abbvie, Janssen, Alexion, Argenx, Q32, EMD-Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roivant., Grant/research support from: RA has/had a consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from for the following companies-Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Genentech, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca, Corbus, Kezar, Kyverna, Janssen, Roivant, Boehringer Ingelheim, Argenx, Q32, Alexion, EMD Serono, Jubliant, Abbvie, Janssen, Alexion, Argenx, Q32, EMD-Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roivant., Latika Gupta: None declared

POS0201 COVID-19 SEVERITY AND VACCINE BREAKTHROUGH INFECTIONS IN IDIOPATHIC INFLAMMATORY MYOPATHIES, OTHER SYSTEMIC AUTOIMMUNE AND INFLAMMATORY DISEASES, AND HEALTHY INDIVIDUALS: RESULTS FROM THE COVID-19 VACCINATION IN AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES (COVAD) STUDY

Background

Significant gaps are present in the evidence of the spectrum and severity of COVID-19 infection in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM). IIM patients typically require immunosuppressive therapy, may have multiple disease sequelae, and frequent comorbidities, and thus may be more susceptible to severe COVID-19 infection and complications (1). The possibility of attenuated immunogenicity and reduced efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines due to concomitant immunosuppressive medication is a major concern in these patients, and there is little data available on COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infections (BI) in IIM (2).

Objectives

This study aimed to compare disease spectrum and severity and COVID-19 BI in patients with IIM, other systemic autoimmune and inflammatory diseases (SAIDs) and healthy controls (HCs).

Methods

We developed an extensive self-reporting electronic-survey (COVAD survey) featuring 36 questions to collect respondent demographics, SAID details, COVID-19 infection history, COVID-19 vaccination details, 7-day post vaccination adverse events and patient reported outcome measures using the PROMIS tool. After pilot testing, validation, translation into 18 languages on the online platform surveymonkey.com, and vetting by international experts, the COVAD survey was circulated in early 2021 by a multicenter study group of >110 collaborators in 94 countries. BI was defined as COVID-19 infection occurring more than 2 weeks after receiving 1st or 2nd dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. We analyzed data from the baseline survey for descriptive and intergroup comparative statistics based on data distribution and variable type.

Results

10900 respondents [mean age 42 (30-55) years, 74% females and 45% Caucasians] were analyzed. 1,227 (11.2%) had IIM, 4,640 (42.6%) had other SAIDs, and 5,033 (46.2%) were HC. All respondents included in the final analysis had received a single dose of the vaccine and 69% had received 2 primary doses. Pfizer (39.8%) was the most common vaccine received, followed by Oxford/AstraZeneca (13.4%), and Covishield (10.9%). IIM patients were older, had a higher Caucasian representation and higher Pfizer uptake than other SAIDs, and HC. A higher proportion of IIM patients received immunosuppressants than other SAIDs.

IIMs were at a lower risk of symptomatic pre-vaccination COVID-19 infection compared to SAIDs [multivariate OR 0.6 (0.4-0.8)] and HCs [multivariate OR 0.39 (0.28-0.54)], yet at a higher risk of hospitalization due to COVID-19 compared to SAIDs [univariate OR 2.3 (1.2-3.5)] and HCs [multivariate OR 2.5 (1.1-5.8)]. BIs were very uncommon in IIM patients, with only 17 (1.4%) reporting BI. IIM patients were at a higher risk of contracting COVID-19 prior to vaccination than ≤2 weeks of vaccination [univariate OR 8 (4.1-15)] or BI [univariate OR 4.6 (2.7-8.0)]. BIs were equally severe compared to when they occurred prior to vaccination in IIMs, and were comparable between IIM, SAIDs, and HC (Figure 1), though BI disease duration was shorter in IIMs than SAIDs (7 vs 11 days, p 0.027). 13/17 IIM patients with BI were on immunosuppressants.

Conclusion

IIM patients experienced COVID-19 infection less frequently prior to vaccination but were at a higher risk of hospitalization and requirement for oxygen therapy compared with patients with HC. Breakthrough COVID-19 infections were rare (1.4%) in vaccinated IIM patients, and were similar to HC and SAIDs, except for shorter disease duration in IIM.

References

[1]Brito-Zerón P, Sisó-Almirall A, Flores-Chavez A, Retamozo S, Ramos-Casals M. SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with systemic autoimmune diseases. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2021 Jun;39(3):676–87.

[2]Wack S, Patton T, Ferris LK. COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disease: Review of available evidence. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021 Nov;85(5):1274–84.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank all members of the COVAD study group for their invaluable role in the collection of data. The authors thank all respondents for filling the questionnaire. The authors thank The Myositis Association, Myositis India, Myositis UK, the Myositis Global Network, Cure JM, Cure IBM, Sjögren’s India Foundation, EULAR PARE, and various other patient support groups and organizations for their invaluable contribution in the dissemination of this survey among patients which made the data collection possible. The authors also thank all members of the COVAD study group.

Disclosure of Interests

Latika Gupta: None declared, Leonardo Santos Hoff: None declared, Naveen R: None declared, Parikshit Sen: None declared, Samuel Katsuyuki Shinjo: None declared, Jessica Day Grant/research support from: JD has received research funding from CSL Limited, James B. Lilleker: None declared, Vishwesh Agarwal: None declared, Sinan Kardes: None declared, Minchul Kim: None declared, Ashima Makol: None declared, Marcin Milchert: None declared, Tamer A Gheita: None declared, Babur Salim: None declared, Tsvetelina Velikova: None declared, Abraham Edgar Gracia-Ramos: None declared, Ioannis Parodis Speakers bureau: IP has received research funding and/or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Elli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis and F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG., Consultant of: IP has received research funding and/or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Elli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis and F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG., Grant/research support from: IP has received research funding and/or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Elli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis and F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG., Albert Selva-O’Callaghan: None declared, Elena Nikiphorou Speakers bureau: EN has received speaker honoraria/participated in advisory boards for Celltrion, Pfizer, Sanofi, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Lilly, Consultant of: EN has received speaker honoraria/participated in advisory boards for Celltrion, Pfizer, Sanofi, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Lilly, Grant/research support from: EN holds research grants from Pfizer and Lilly., Tulika Chatterjee: None declared, Ai Lyn Tan Speakers bureau: ALT has received honoraria for advisory boards and speaking for Abbvie, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB., Consultant of: ALT has received honoraria for advisory boards and speaking for Abbvie, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB., Arvind Nune: None declared, Lorenzo Cavagna: None declared, Miguel A Saavedra: None declared, Nelly Ziade Speakers bureau: NZ has received speaker fees, advisory board fees and research grants from Pfizer, Roche, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, NewBridge, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Pierre Fabre; none is related to this manuscript, Consultant of: NZ has received speaker fees, advisory board fees and research grants from Pfizer, Roche, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, NewBridge, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Pierre Fabre; none is related to this manuscript, Grant/research support from: NZ has received speaker fees, advisory board fees and research grants from Pfizer, Roche, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, NewBridge, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Pierre Fabre; none is related to this manuscript, Johannes Knitza: None declared, Masataka Kuwana: None declared, Oliver Distler Speakers bureau: OD has/had consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from or has served as a speaker for the following companies in the area of potential treatments for systemic sclerosis and its complications in the last three years: Abbvie, Acceleron, Alcimed, Amgen, AnaMar, Arxx, Baecon, Blade, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, ChemomAb, Corbus, CSL Behring, Galapagos, Glenmark, GSK, Horizon (Curzion), Inventiva, iQvia, Kymera, Lupin, Medac, Medscape, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Roche, Roivant, Sanofi, Serodapharm, Topadur and UCB. Patent issued “mir-29 for the treatment of systemic sclerosis” (US8247389, EP2331143)., Consultant of: OD has/had consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from or has served as a speaker for the following companies in the area of potential treatments for systemic sclerosis and its complications in the last three years: Abbvie, Acceleron, Alcimed, Amgen, AnaMar, Arxx, Baecon, Blade, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, ChemomAb, Corbus, CSL Behring, Galapagos, Glenmark, GSK, Horizon (Curzion), Inventiva, iQvia, Kymera, Lupin, Medac, Medscape, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Roche, Roivant, Sanofi, Serodapharm, Topadur and UCB. Patent issued “mir-29 for the treatment of systemic sclerosis” (US8247389, EP2331143)., Grant/research support from: OD has/had consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from or has served as a speaker for the following companies in the area of potential treatments for systemic sclerosis and its complications in the last three years: Abbvie, Acceleron, Alcimed, Amgen, AnaMar, Arxx, Baecon, Blade, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, ChemomAb, Corbus, CSL Behring, Galapagos, Glenmark, GSK, Horizon (Curzion), Inventiva, iQvia, Kymera, Lupin, Medac, Medscape, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Roche, Roivant, Sanofi, Serodapharm, Topadur and UCB. Patent issued “mir-29 for the treatment of systemic sclerosis” (US8247389, EP2331143)., Hector Chinoy Speakers bureau: HC has been a speaker for UCB, Biogen., Consultant of: HC has received consulting fees from Novartis, Eli Lilly, Orphazyme, Astra Zeneca, Grant/research support from: HC has received grant support from Eli Lilly and UCB, Vikas Agarwal: None declared, Rohit Aggarwal Consultant of: RA has/had a consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from the following companies-Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Genentech, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca, Corbus, Kezar, and Abbvie, Janssen, Alexion, Argenx, Q32, EMD-Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roivant., Grant/research support from: RA has/had a consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from the following companies-Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Genentech, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca, Corbus, Kezar, and Abbvie, Janssen, Alexion, Argenx, Q32, EMD-Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roivant.

OP0161 TREATMENT PATTERNS OF IDIOPATHIC INFLAMMATORY MYOPATHIES: RESULTS FROM AN INTERNATIONAL COHORT OF OVER 1,400 PATIENTS

Background

Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) are a group of heterogeneous autoimmune disorders with limited standardization of treatment protocols.

Objectives

To evaluate frequency and patterns of various treatments used for IIM based on disease subtype, world region, and organ involvement.

Methods

Cross-sectional data from the international CoVAD self-report e-survey1 was extracted on Sep 14th, 2021. Patient details included demographics, IIM subtypes (dermatomyositis (DM), polymyositis (PM), inclusion body myositis (IBM), antisynthetase syndrome (ASSD), necrotizing myositis (NM) and overlap myositis (OM)), clinical symptoms, disease duration and activity, and current treatments. Treatments were categorized in corticosteroids (CS), antimalarials, immunosuppressants (IS), intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG), biologics, and others. Typical clinical symptoms (dyspnea, dysphagia) were used as surrogate for organ involvement. Factors associated with IS were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for IIM subtype, demographics, world region, disease activity, and prevalent clinical symptoms (>10%).

Results

In 1418 patients with IIM, median age was 61 years [IQR 49-70], 62.5% were females, median disease duration was 6 years [IQR 3-11], most common subset was DM (32.4%).

The most used treatments were IS (49.4%, including Methotrexate 19.6%, Mycophenolate Mofetil 18.2%, Azathioprine 8.8%, Cyclosporine 2.7%, Tacrolimus 2%, Leflunomide 1.6%, Sulfasalazine 1%, and Cyclophosphamide 0.6%), followed by CS (40.8%), antimalarials (13.8%) and IVIG (9.4%). Biologics were used in 4.3% of patients.

Treatment patterns differed significantly by IIM subtypes with a higher frequency of IS (77.7%) and CS (63.4%) use in ASSD; antimalarials (28.6%) and biologics (9.8%) use in OM and IVIG use in NM (24.6%) (Table 1). Also, treatment patterns were different in regions of the world (Figure 1), with a higher frequency of CS use in Europe (60.5%) and IS use in South America (77.2%). Antimalarials were most used in Asia (19.4%), while IVIG use was most common in Oceania (16.9%). Dyspnea was associated with higher use of IS (69.9%) and CS (65.8%) (p<0.001), whereas dysphagia was negatively associated with IS (39.7%) and CS (32.7%) likely due to a higher proportion in IBM patients reporting dysphagia.

Table 1.

Current Treatments for IIM, Stratified by Disease Subtypes

DermatomyositisPolymyositisInclusion Body MyositisAnti-synthetase syndromeNecrotizing myositisOverlap syndromeAll IIMp-valueNumber of patients459182348148572241418Immunosuppressants*269 (58.6)107 (58.8)39 (11.2)115 (77.7)40 (70.2)130 (58.0)700 (49.4)<0.001Corticosteroids208 (48.0)81 (46.8)32 (9.7)90 (63.4)32 (59.3)103 (50.0)546 (40.8)<0.001Antimalarials99 (21.6)7 (3.8)0 (0.0)25 (16.9)1 (1.8)64 (28.6)196 (13.8)<0.001Intravenous Immunoglobulins54 (11.8)16 (8.8)19 (5.5)10 (6.8)14 (24.6)20 (8.9)133 (9.4)<0.001Biologics**17 (3.7)7 (3.8)0 (0.0)13 (8.8)2 (3.5)22 (9.8)61 (4.3)<0.001Others***6 (1.3)0 (0.0)0 (0.0)1 (0.7)0 (0.0)5 (2,2)12 (0.8)0.098

*Methotrexate (278), Mycophenolate Mofetil (258), Azathioprine (125), Cyclosporine (38), Tacrolimus (28), Leflunomide (23), Sulfasalazine (14), Cyclophosphamide (9)

. **Rituximab (44), Abatacept (5), TNF inhibitors (4), Tocilizumab (3), Belimumab (3), Secukinumab (1)

. ***JAK(10) and PDE4 inhibitors (2)

Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed an association of IS with the IIM subtype (least used in IBM (OR 0.07 [95%CI 0.04-0.13] compared to DM), world region (most used in South America (OR 2.35 [1.12-4.91] compared to North America), active and worsening disease activity (OR 3.49 [1.76-6.91] compared to remission), and some clinical features (dyspnea, fatigue, and muscle weakness).

Conclusion

IIM treatment patterns differ significantly by disease subtypes, world regions and organ involvement, highlighting the need for unified international consensus-driven guidelines.

References

[1]Parikshit S. et al. Rheumatol Int. 2022 Jan;42(1):23–9.

Disclosure of Interests

None declared

POS0756 DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE (HR-QoL) ACROSS THE SPECTRUM OF SYSTEMIC AUTOIMMUNE RHEUMATIC DISEASES: RESULTS FROM THE LEAP COHORT

Background

Poor health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) is recognised in patients with established connective tissue diseases (CTDs), however it is not clear how it affects patients with undifferentiated CTD (UCTD) which has traditionally been associated with a mild or more benign profile.

Objectives

To investigate HR-QoL in patients affected with a variety of CTDs (including UCTD) using the SF-36 questionnaire; and secondly, to review demographic and clinical factors predictive of a poor HR-QoL

Methods

The Lupus Extended Autoimmune Phenotype (LEAP) cohort is a multicentre prospective study of patients with a CTD. Rheumatologist diagnosis was used to classify patients into four groups: systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), primary Sjögren’s syndrome (pSS), UCTD, and (combined because of low numbers) those with an idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (IIM), systemic sclerosis (SSc) or overlap syndrome. The SF-36 quality of life questionnaire was completed at enrolment and includes eight domains: physical function (PF), role physical (RP), bodily pain (BP), general health (GH), vitality (VT), social functioning (SF), role emotional (RE) and mental health (MH) which range from 0 to 100, with higher scores reflecting better HR-QoL. Physical (PCS) and mental component score (MCS) were calculated for each group, with a score below 50 representing a worse HR-QoL compared to the general UK population. Predictors for poor HR-QoL was chosen a priori, then tested using linear regression adjusted for age, gender and ethnicity. All statistical analysis was performed using STATA v14, with results expressed as beta coefficients with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI).

Results

Data were collected from 309 patients (280 [90.6%] women, with a mean [SD] age of 48.9 [12.9] years) from three UK rheumatology centres. The majority of patients were Caucasian (n=235, 76.1%). By rheumatologist diagnosis, 115 (37.2%) had SLE, 56 (18.1%) pSS, 72 (23.3%) UCTD and 66 (21.4%) SSc, IIM or an overlap syndrome. Patients with UCTD, pSS and SSc/IIM spectrum disorders had a shorter median disease duration (3.8, 3.7 and 6.1 years respectively) compared with patients with those with SLE (11.0 years), p<0.001. Previous steroid and immunosuppressant use was highest in patients with SLE and SSc/IIM spectrum disorders (p<0.001). The most affected domains include VT, GH and BP (Figure 1), and the PCS is more impaired compared with the MCS, with similar scores across disease groups. Agnostic of disease group, factors associated with a lower PCS include increasing age (beta -0.15 [95%CI -0.26, -0.06], p=0.008), prednisolone use (-3.1 [-6.05, -0.19], p=0.037), c-reactive protein (-0.09 [-0.62, -0.10], p=0.007), fatigue (-2.00 [-3.79, -0.22], p=0.028), and sicca syndrome (-4.70 [-7.66, -1.74] p=0.002), and these remained significant in a multivariate model.

Figure 1.

radar diagrams of eight SF-36 domains, and MCS and PCS boxplots. SLE; systemic lupus erythematosus; UCTD, undifferentiated CTD; pSS, primary Sjögren’s syndrome; IIM, idiopathic inflammatory myopathy; SSc, systemic sclerosis; PF, physical function; RP, role physical; BP, bodily pain; GH, general health; VT, vitality; SF, social functioning; RE, role emotional; MH, mental health

Conclusion

Patients with UCTD exhibit similar impairment in physical components of HR-QoL compared with other established CTDs, despite perceived differences in disease severity. This study highlights sicca syndrome, fatigue, and steroid burden as key targets for improving HR-QoL in patients across the spectrum of CTDs.

Disclosure of Interests

Sarah Dyball Grant/research support from: UCB and Eli Lilly, John Reynolds: None declared, Ariane Herrick Speakers bureau: Janssen, Consultant of: Arena, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Camurus, CSL-Behring, and Gesynta, Grant/research support from: Gesynta, Hector Chinoy Speakers bureau: UCB, Biogen, Consultant of: Novartis, Eli Lilly, Orphazyme, Astra Zeneca, Grant/research support from: Eli Lilly and UCB, Sahena Haque: None declared, Sophia Naz: None declared, Ellen Bruce: None declared, Ian N. Bruce Speakers bureau: AstraZeneca, GSK and UCB, Consultant of: AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, GSK, Merck Serono, UCB and ILTOO, Grant/research support from: Genzyme/Sanofi, GSK, Roche and UCB, Ben Parker Speakers bureau: Eli Lilly and Roche, Consultant of: Fresenius-Kabi and AbbVie, Grant/research support from: Genzyme/Sanofi and GSK

OP0160 HLA-DRB1 ASSOCIATIONS WITH AUTOANTIBODY-DEFINED SUBGROUPS IN IDIOPATHIC INFLAMMATORY MYOPATHIES (IIM)

Background

There is a gap between how IIM patients are classified in practice and current validated classification criteria1. Also, different associations with genetic variations in HLA can inform about different T-cell mechanisms involved in disease pathogenesis.

Objectives

We aimed to systematically study associations between HLA-DRB1 alleles, clinical manifestations, and autoantibody-defined IIM subgroups.

Methods

We included 1348 IIM patients from five European countries. An unsupervised cluster analysis was performed using 14 autoantibodies: anti-Jo1, -PL7, -PL12, -EJ, -OJ, -SRP, -U1RNP, -Ro52, -Mi2, -TIF1γ, -MDA5, -PMScl, -SAE1, and -NXP2 to identify patients’ subgroups. Logistic regressions were used to estimate the associations between HLA-DRB1 alleles, clinical manifestations and the identified subgroups.

Results

Eight subgroups were defined by the autoantibody status (Table 1). Three of the subgroups (1, 2 and 6) have overlapping autoantibodies, while four are almost monospecific (3,4,5 and 7), and one (8) has patients negative for tested autoantibodies. Figure 1 represents the significant associations between HLA-DRB1 alleles and the eight subgroups. Heliotrope rash and Gottron’s sign were significantly more frequent in subgroups 3 (OR:2.2 95%CI:[1.1-4.8], OR:2.6 95%CI:[1.3-5.9], respectively), 4 (OR:12 95%CI:[3.6-75], OR:7.8 95%CI:[2.8-33], respectively) and 7 (OR:22 95%CI:[4.5-385], OR:10 95%CI:[3.1-65], respectively), and Raynaud’s phenomenon was significantly more frequent in subgroup 6 (OR:3.3 95%CI:[1.2-11]).

Table 1.

Autoantibody-defined subgroups using an unsupervised cluster analysis.

Subgroups/ MedoidsVariables1 Ro522 U1RNP3 PMScl4 Mi25 Jo16 Jo1/Ro527 TIF18 None*Alln (%)137 (10)183 (14)107 (8)65 (5)119 (9)140 (10)78 (6)519 (39)1348 (100)Female (%)93 (68)116 (63)79 (74)45 (69)76 (64)96 (69)64 (82)313 (60)882 (65)Age at diagnosis, median (IQR)56 (16)51.5 (23)51 (25)57 (22.5)47.5 (23.25)52 (19.5)53.5 (21.75)58 (22)55 (23)AutoantibodiesAnti-Jo106 (3)01 (2)119 (100)140 (100)00266 (20)Anti-PL77 (5)13 (7)00000020 (1.5)Anti-PL125 (4)3 (2)1 (1)01 (1)00010 (0.7)Anti-EJ2 (2)00000002 (0.1)Anti-OJ07 (4)0000007 (0.5)Anti-TIF110 (7)2 (1)2 (2)00078 (100)092 (7)Anti-Mi21 (1)1 (1)1 (1)65 (100)02 (1)0070 (5)Anti-SAE18 (6)23 (13)00000031 (2)Anti-NXP21 (1)23 (13)1 (1)0000025 (2)Anti-MDA59 (7)10 (6)1 (1)1 (2)01 (1)0022 (2)Anti-SRP8 (6)32 (18)00000040 (3)Anti-Ro52137 (100)16 (9)000140 (100)00293 (22)Anti-PMScl11 (8)1 (1)107 (100)00000119 (9)Anti-U1RNP079 (43)0003 (2)0082 (6)

*IIM patients negative for the tested autoantibodies.

Figure 1.

Forest plot of significant associations of HLA. *DRB1 alleles with autoantibody-defined subgroups. Scandinavia includes patients from Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.

Conclusion

Our study reveals that certain subgroups of IIM patients are characterized by overlap of myositis -specific and -associated autoantibodies, which in turn are associated with different HLA-DRB1 alleles including potential novel associations. These results point to different disease mechanisms in the subgroups, as well as suggest that IIM classification could be improved by integrating broader serological and genetic data.

References

[1]Parker MJS, Oldroyd A, Roberts ME, et al. The performance of the European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology idiopathic inflammatory myopathies classification criteria in an expert-defined 10 year incident cohort. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2019;58(3):468-475.

Acknowledgements

We thank all the patients who participated in the study.

Disclosure of Interests

Valerie Leclair: None declared, Angeles Shunashy Galindo-Feria: None declared, Simon Rothwell: None declared, Olga Kryštůfková: None declared, Heřman Mann: None declared, Louise Pyndt Diederichsen: None declared, helena andersson: None declared, Martin Klein: None declared, Sarah Tansley: None declared, Neil McHugh: None declared, Janine Lamb: None declared, Jiří Vencovský Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Biogen, Boehringer, Eli Lilly, Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Werfen, Consultant of: Abbvie, Argenx, Boehringer, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Octapharma, Pfizer, UCB, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Hector Chinoy: None declared, Marie Holmqvist: None declared, Leonid Padyukov: None declared, Ingrid E. Lundberg Shareholder of: Roche and Novartis, Consultant of: Corbus Pharmaceuticals Inc, Astra Zeneca, Bristol Myer´s Squibb, Corbus Pharmaceutical, EMD Serono Research & Development Institute, Argenx, Octapharma, Kezaar, Orphazyme, and Janssen, Grant/research support from: Astra Zeneca, Lina M. Diaz-Gallo: None declared

POS0288 A KEY TIF1γ EPITOPE MAY FACILITATE THE IDENTIFICATION OF PATIENTS AT HIGHEST RISK OF CANCER ASSOCIATED MYOSITIS

Background:

The myositis specific autoantibody anti-TIF1γ targets TRIM33, a TRIM family proetin with a PHDBromo domain at the C terminal end. Anti-TIF1γ is strongly associated with malignancy in adult patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM). Intriguingly, anti-TIF1γ is also the most common autoantibody in juvenile-onset IIM but younger patients with anti-TIF1γ do not have an increased risk of cancer (1-3). Genetic studies have consistently shown human leukocyte antigen (HLA) to be the strongest risk factor for IIM. Adult and juvenile-onset patients with anti-TIF1γ have recently been shown to have different associations at the HLA-DQB1 locus (4). This could be due to differences in the key TIF1γ epitopes and may relate to differences in aetiology, such as malignancy in adults versus other environmental factors in juvenile onset disease.

Objectives:

To identify key epitopes targeted by anti-TIF1γ antibody in patients with IIM and establish if different TIF1γ epitopes are targeted in patients with and without malignancy.

Methods:

Patient plasma/serum samples were obtained from UK Juvenile Dermatomyositis Cohort and Biomarker and UKMyoNet studies. Autoantibody status had previously been determined by immunoprecipitation. Cancer data was collated from the UK Health and Social Care Information Centre and cancer associated IIM (CAM) defined as that occurring within 3 years of IIM diagnosis.

An in house ELISA was developed using a purified TIF1γ fragment comprising residues 882-1090, produced in E.coli, corresponding to the PHDBromo protein domain. An ELISA cut-off of 5SD above the mean of 38 healthy control samples was used.

Results:

38 healthy controls, and 117 anti-TIF1γ IIM patient sera (60 juvenile onset) were analysed for reactivity to the TIF1γ PHDbromo domain.

No healthy controls were positive. Anti-TIF1γPHDbromo was more common in JDM: 18 (30%) juvenile patients and 6 (10.5%) adult patients were positive, p=0.01.

Additional data was available for 39 adult patients (82% female, median age 52 (IQR 38-64)). Anti-TIF1γPHDbromo was only found in CAM patients plus one young adult non-CAM patient aged 27 years at disease onset, p =0.07 (p=0.02 for patients >30 years at disease onset), see Table 1. No juvenile patients had a history of malignancy.

Table 1.

Anti-TIF1γPHDbromo in 39 adult patients with cancer data available

anti-TIF1γPHDbromo positiveanti-TIF1γPHDbromo negativeCancer associated myositis n(%)5a (83)12(36)Myositis not associated with cancer n(%)1b(17)21(64)Total633

a. Median age 64 yearsb. Age 27 years

Conclusion:

The TIF1γ PHDBromo domain is an important epitope and autoantibody reactivity is more common in patients with juvenile-onset disease and adults with CAM. The distinction between adult and juvenile-onset IIM is arbitrary and it is relevant that the only adult with anti-TIF1γPHDbromo not to have malignancy was just 27 years old. Our numbers are small and further work is needed to establish if anti-TIF1γPHDbromo, and indeed other TIF1γ epitopes, could help identify patients at highest risk of malignancy, and how this relates to our understanding of IIM aetiopathogenesis. Our findings may add weight to the theory that the development of IIM in younger patients occurs after immune-mediated resolution of a pre-cancer event.

References:

[1]Oldroyd A, Sergeant JC, New P et al. The temporal relationship between cancer and adult onset anti-transcriptional intermediary factor 1 antibody-positive dermatomyositis. Rheumatology. 2019;58(4):650-655

[2]Tansley SL, Simou S, Shaddick G et al. Autoantibodies in juvenile-onset myositis: Their diagnostic value and associated clinical phenotype in a large UK cohort. J Autoimmun. 2017;84:55-64

[3]Fujimoto M, Hamaguchi Y, Kaji K et al. Myositis-specific anti-155/140 autoantibodies target transcription intermediary factor 1 family proteins. Arthritis Rheum. 2012;64(2):513-22.

[4]Rothwell S, Chinoy H, Lamb JA et al. Focused HLA analysis in Caucasians with myositis identifies significant associations with autoantibody subgroups. Ann Rheum Dis. 2019;78(7):996-1002.

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared

OP0094 EULAR-ACR 2019 CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA FOR SLE: CAN WE CLASSIFY USING LABORATORY TESTS ALONE?

Background:

The EULAR-ACR 2019 (EULAR19) classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) were developed to improve the sensitivity and specificity of previous criteria. Notably, both the EULAR19 and existing SLICC-SLE 2012 (SLICC12) criteria can classify patients as having SLE by the presence of immunology and haematological abnormalities in the absence of any signs or symptoms.

Objectives:

To validate the EULAR19 criteria, with comparison to existing criteria, in a large cohort of patients with an established systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease (SARD).

Methods:

We recruited 227 adult patients who were ANA positive with ≥1 clinical feature suggestive of a SARD, from three hospitals in the North West of England. Clinician diagnosis was used as gold standard; we then applied the EULAR19, SLICC12 and the ACR-SLE 1997 (ACR97) criteria.

Results:

Of the 227 patients recruited, by clinician diagnosis, 89 patients (36%) had SLE, 43 (17%) primary Sjögren’s (pSS), 62 (25%) undifferentiated CTD (UCTD), 25 (10%) systemic sclerosis (SSc) and 8 (3%) an inflammatory myositis. The characteristics of these patients and the breakdown of the EULAR19 criteria are outlined in figure 1.

Figure 1.

Baseline characteristics and classification criteria compared across five SARD diagnoses.

The sensitivity and specificity of the EULAR19 is similar to ACR97 (sensitivity 84% (95% CI 75-91%) vs. 87% (95% CI 78-93%) and specificity 78% (95% CI 70-84%) vs. 76% (95% CI 68-83%) respectively). The SLICC12 criteria by contrast are more sensitive (94% (95% CI 87-98%)) and less specific (61% (95% CI 52-69%)) in this cohort.

Figure 2 illustrates patients with a clinician diagnosis of SLE or UCTD who meet each of the classification criteria. Of the 89 patients with a clinician diagnosis of SLE, 39 (44%) patients would have sufficient points to meet EULAR19 criteria on blood test results alone in the absence of clinical symptoms. Four pSS patients and 4 UCTD patients would also meet EULAR19 criteria from positive blood results alone.

Figure 2.

Venn diagrams illustrating patients with SLE and UCTD who meet the EULAR19, ACR97 and SLICC12 classification criteria. No criteria refers to the patients not meeting any of the three SLE classification criteria.

Conclusion:

These results suggest that the EULAR19 criteria perform comparably to the ACR97 criteria when applied to an established cohort of SARDs. Similar to SLICC12, it is possible to classify patients as having SLE using the EULAR19 criteria by haematological and other laboratory tests. To what extent haematological abnormalities can be potentially used as the sole ‘clinical criteria’ needs consideration.

SLE n=89pSS n=43UCTD n=62SSc n=25Myositis n=8Female N (%)82 (92)42 (98)53 (85)24 (96)8 (100)Age, mean (SD) /years44 (13)52 (12)47 (13)60 (9)53 (7)Disease duration, mean (SD) /years12 (10)6 (5)5 (7)9 (11)3 (3)SLE classification criteriaEULAR SLE 2019, N (%)75 (84)10 (23)20 (32)1 (4)0ACR SLE 1997, N (%)77 (87)9 (21)21 (34)2 (8)1 (13)SLICC SLE 2012, N (%)84 (94)15 (35)33 (53)4 (16)2 (25)EULAR-ACR 2019 criteriaConstitutional, N (%)10 (11)2 (5)1 (2)01 (13)Neuropsychiatric, N (%)3 (3)01 (2)1 (4)0Mucocutaneous, N (%)71 (80)13 (30)27 (44)2 (8)2 (25)Serosal, N (%)13 (15)1 (2)2 (3)00Musculoskeletal, N (%)52 (58)14 (33)22 (35)3 (12)3 (38)Renal, N (%)30 (34)001 (4)0Haematological, N (%)44 (49)12 (28)10 (16)3 (12)0Antiphospholipid antibodies, N (%)43 (48)7 (16)17 (27)4 (16)0Low complement, N (%)48 (54)10 (23)10 (16)3 (12)1 (13)Anti-Sm, N (%)19 (21)2 (5)4 (6)1 (4)0Anti-dsDNA, N (%)50 (56)8 (19)12 (19)01 (13)

Disclosure of Interests:

Sarah Dyball: None declared, John Reynolds: None declared, Eoghan McCarthy: None declared, Sahena Haque: None declared, Ariane Herrick: None declared, Hector Chinoy: None declared, Ellen Bruce: None declared, Ben Parker Grant/research support from: GSK and Sanofi Genzyme, Consultant of: GSK, AstraZenaca, UCV, Abbvie, Pfizer, BMS, Celltrion, Ian N. Bruce Grant/research support from: Genzyme Sanofi, GSK, and UCB, Consultant of: Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, UCB, Iltoo, and Merck Serono, Speakers bureau: UCB

SAT0631-HPR WHEN CAN I STOP MY STEROIDS? THE PATIENT PERSPECTIVE ON GLUCOCORTICOID USAGE IN ADULT INFLAMMATORY MYOPATHY

Background:

Glucocorticoids (GC) are long established as a first line treatment in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (IIM), in which high dose, long duration treatment is often required. GC usage is associated with a wide range of adverse effects (AEs). The patient perspective on the risks and benefits of GCs is not well studied and no prior studies assesses this issue in IIM patients (1).

Objectives:

To describe the perspective of IIM patients on GC treatment.

Methods:

We deployed an online survey distributed using the Myositis UK page on Healthunlocked.com, an online social network for health, with approximately 450 patients registered. Patients with diagnosed IIM were invited to take part on an anonymised basis. Respondents were asked to grade the severity on a Likert scale (1 to 5) of all AEs experienced in relation to GC. Additionally, respondents were asked to write about their concerns and to rate their overall experience with GC treatment.

Results:

In total, 122 completed surveys were received. Forty five percent (55/122) of respondents had dermatomyositis, 27% (33/122) polymyositis, 10% (12/122) anti-synthetase syndrome, 18% (22/122) other inflammatory myopathies. Seventy-nine percent (96/122) of respondents were female and the mean age overall was 50 years (SD [standard deviation] 14).

The median reported current daily dose of prednisolone was 15 mg and median treatment duration was 5.3 years at the time of survey completion. Females were more likely to stay on GCs for longer than males (5.4vs4.7 years, p=0.046).

Table 1.

Mean severity and frequency for each adverse effect.

All respondents(n=122)Male(n=26)Female(n=96)<60 years(n=89)≥60 years(n=33)Moon face3.3 (1.9)2 (2.1)*3.6 (1.7)*3.5 (1.8)2.7 (2)Weight gain3.4 (1.7)3.1 (1.6)3.4 (1.8)3.5 (1.7)3.1 (1.9)Acne1.1 (1.5)1 (1.5)1.2 (1.6)1.3 (1.6)0.7 (1.2)Hair loss2 (1.8)0.8 (1.4)*2.4 (1.8)*2.2 (1.8)**1.5 (1.9)**Facial hair2.1 (1.8)0.7 (1.3)*2.5 (1.8)*2.3 (1.8)1.7 (1.8)Thin skin2.2 (1.9)1.8 (2)2.3 (1.8)2.2 (1.9)2.3 (1.9)Bruising2.2 (1.7)2.1 (1.9)2.2 (1.7)2.2 (1.7)2 (1.9)Stretch marks1.3 (1.9)0.9 (1.5)1.4 (1.8)1.5 (1.9)**0.6 (1.2)**Nausea1.4 (1.7)1.6 (1.8)1.4 (1.6)1.5 (1.6)1.2 (1.7)Heartburn1.9 (1.8)1.8 (1.9)1.9 (1.8)2 (1.8)1.5 (1.8)Hunger2.8 (1.7)2.2 (1.9)*3 (1.6)*3 (1.6)2.4 (2)Mood swings2.7 (1.6)2.1 (1.8)2.7 (1.5)2.8 (1.6)2.6 (1.6)Sleep disturbances3.1 (1.5)2.9 (1.7)3.2 (1.4)3.2 (1.5)3 (1.5)Cataracts0.6 (1.3)1.1 (1.8)0.5 (1.1)0.5 (1.2)1 (1.6)Glaucoma0.4 (1.1)0.6 (1.5)0.3 (0.9)0.4 (1)0.4 (1)Hypertension1.6 (1.7)1.8 (1.7)1.5 (1.7)1.5 (1.7)1.8 (1.8)Diabetes0.8 (1.6)1 (1.6)0.8 (1.6)0.7 (1.5)1 (1.8)Water retention2.2 (1.7)1.7 (1.6)2.3 (1.8)2.3 (1.8)1.9 (1.6)Infections2.2 (1.7)2.2 (1.8)2.2 (1.7)2.2 (1.7)2.1 (1.7)Fractures0.5 (1.1)0.5 (1.2)0.5 (1.1)0.5 (1.6)0.5 (1.1)

Mean severity on a Likert scale (0-5), mean (SD);*p<0.05, male vs female; **p<0.05, <60 years vs ≥60 years.

Frequency (number of patients reporting adverse effect as present), heatmap:White (0-33%), light grey (33-66%), dark grey (66-100%).

The mean number of reported AEs to GC treatment per patient was 12 (SD 5). Female respondents reported a greater number of AEs compared to males (12.6vs10.1, p=0.019). The three most commonly experienced AEs were: sleep disturbance (93%), mood swings (86%) and weight gain (86%). Only 54% of respondents agreed that the information given about the potential risks of GC treatment was adequate. Mean severity and frequency of AEs is represented in table 1.

Conclusion:

Adverse effects are common, and those rated more severe by patients were physical and behavioural (such as weight gain or sleep disturbance). Female patients reported more severe AEs compared to men.

References:

[1]Van Der Goes MC, Jacobs JWG, Boers M, Andrews T, Blom-Bakkers MAM, Buttgereit F, et al. Patient and rheumatologist perspectives on glucocorticoids: An exercise to improve the implementation of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations on the management of systemic glucocorticoid therapy in rheumatic diseases. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010 Jun;69(6):1015–21.

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared

Frequency, mutual exclusivity and clinical associations of myositis autoantibodies in a combined European cohort of idiopathic inflammatory myopathy patients

Objectives

To determine prevalence and co-existence of myositis specific autoantibodies (MSAs) and myositis associated autoantibodies (MAAs) and associated clinical characteristics in a large cohort of idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (IIM) patients.

Methods

Adult patients with confirmed IIM recruited to the EuroMyositis registry (n = 1637) from four centres were investigated for the presence of MSAs/MAAs by radiolabelled-immunoprecipitation, with confirmation of anti-MDA5 and anti-NXP2 by ELISA. Clinical associations for each autoantibody were calculated for 1483 patients with a single or no known autoantibody by global linear regression modelling.

Results

MSAs/MAAs were found in 61.5% of patients, with 84.7% of autoantibody positive patients having a sole specificity, and only three cases (0.2%) having more than one MSA. The most frequently detected autoantibody was anti-Jo-1 (18.7%), with a further 21 specificities each found in 0.2–7.9% of patients. Autoantibodies to Mi-2, SAE, TIF1, NXP2, MDA5, PMScl and the non-Jo-1 tRNA-synthetases were strongly associated (p < 0.001) with cutaneous involvement. Anti-TIF1 and anti-Mi-2 positive patients had an increased risk of malignancy (OR 4.67 and 2.50 respectively), and anti-SRP patients had a greater likelihood of cardiac involvement (OR 4.15). Interstitial lung disease was strongly associated with the anti-tRNA synthetases, anti-MDA5, and anti-U1RNP/Sm. Overlap disease was strongly associated with anti-PMScl, anti-Ku, anti-U1RNP/Sm and anti-Ro60. Absence of MSA/MAA was negatively associated with extra-muscular manifestations.

Conclusions

Myositis autoantibodies are present in the majority of patients with IIM and identify distinct clinical subsets. Furthermore, MSAs are nearly always mutually exclusive endorsing their credentials as valuable disease biomarkers.

•

Myositis specific autoantibodies very rarely coexist in the one individual allowing endotypes to be more precisely defined.

•

The association of anti-TIF1 and cancer-associated myositis is confirmed with a cut-off age of over 58 years.

•

In a large combined European myositis cohort associations of anti-SRP with carditis and anti-Mi-2 with cancer have emerged.

•

Myositis associated autoantibodies are strongly associated with having myositis in association with another connective tissue disease.

Assessment of two screening tools to identify psoriatic arthritis in patients with psoriasis

BACKGROUND

Many patients with psoriasis have undiagnosed psoriatic arthritis. Low specificity is found with many PsA screening tools. A new instrument, the CONTEST questionnaire, was developed utilizing the most discriminative items from existing instruments.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the CONTEST and PEST screening tools.

METHODS

People attending secondary care clinics with psoriasis, but not PsA, completed the questionnaires, were assessed for function and quality of life, and had a physical examination. Patients thought to have PsA were compared to those without. The performance of CONTEST and PEST was compared using area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), and sensitivity and specificity at the previously published cut-offs.

RESULTS

A total of 451 dermatology patients were approached, 35% were reviewed and 27 (17%, 95% CI 12.3-21.7) had unidentified psoriatic arthritis. The sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) of PEST were 0.60 (0.42-0.78)/0.76 (0.69-0.83) and for CONTEST 0.53 (0.34-0.72)/0.71 (0.63-0.79). The confidence limits for the AUC overlapped (AUC for PEST 0.72 (0.61-0.84), for CONTEST 0.66 (0.54-0.77).

CONCLUSIONS

PEST and CONTEST questionnaires performed equally well, with no superiority of the new CONTEST tool.

Cytosolic 5'-nucleotidase 1A autoantibody profile and clinical characteristics in inclusion body myositis

OBJECTIVES

Autoantibodies directed against cytosolic 5'-nucleotidase 1A have been identified in many patients with inclusion body myositis. This retrospective study investigated the association between anticytosolic 5'-nucleotidase 1A antibody status and clinical, serological and histopathological features to explore the utility of this antibody to identify inclusion body myositis subgroups and to predict prognosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from various European inclusion body myositis registries were pooled. Anticytosolic 5'-nucleotidase 1A status was determined by an established ELISA technique. Cases were stratified according to antibody status and comparisons made. Survival and mobility aid requirement analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

Data from 311 patients were available for analysis; 102 (33%) had anticytosolic 5'-nucleotidase 1A antibodies. Antibody-positive patients had a higher adjusted mortality risk (HR 1.89, 95% CI 1.11 to 3.21, p=0.019), lower frequency of proximal upper limb weakness at disease onset (8% vs 23%, adjusted OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.68, p=0.005) and an increased prevalence of excess of cytochrome oxidase deficient fibres on muscle biopsy analysis (87% vs 72%, adjusted OR 2.80, 95% CI 1.17 to 6.66, p=0.020), compared with antibody-negative patients.

INTERPRETATION

Differences were observed in clinical and histopathological features between anticytosolic 5'-nucleotidase 1A antibody positive and negative patients with inclusion body myositis, and antibody-positive patients had a higher adjusted mortality risk. Stratification of inclusion body myositis by anticytosolic 5'-nucleotidase 1A antibody status may be useful, potentially highlighting a distinct inclusion body myositis subtype with a more severe phenotype.

Phenotype standardization for statin-induced myotoxicity

Statins are widely used lipid-lowering drugs that are effective in reducing cardiovascular disease risk. Although they are generally well tolerated, they can cause muscle toxicity, which can lead to severe rhabdomyolysis. Research in this area has been hampered to some extent by the lack of standardized nomenclature and phenotypic definitions. We have used numerical and descriptive classifications and developed an algorithm to define statin-related myotoxicity phenotypes, including myalgia, myopathy, rhabdomyolysis, and necrotizing autoimmune myopathy.

Interaction of HLA-DRB1*03 and smoking for the development of anti-Jo-1 antibodies in adult idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: a European-wide case study

Objectives

HLA-DRB1*03 is strongly associated with anti-Jo-1-positive idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) and there is now increasing evidence that Jo-1 antigen is preferentially expressed in lung tissue. This study examined whether smoking was associated with the development of anti-Jo-1 antibodies in HLA-DRB1*03-positive IIM.

Methods

IIM cases were selected with concurrent information regarding HLA-DRB1 status, smoking history and anti-Jo-1 antibody status. DNA was genotyped at DRB1 using a commercial sequence-specific oligonucleotide kit. Anti-Jo-1 antibody status was established using a line blot assay or immunoprecipitation.

Results

557 Caucasian IIM patients were recruited from Hungary (181), UK (99), Sweden (94) and Czech Republic (183). Smoking frequency was increased in anti-Jo-1-positive IIM cases, and reached statistical significance in Hungarian IIM (45% Jo-1-positive vs 17% Jo-1-negative, OR 3.94, 95% CI 1.53 to 9.89, p<0.0001). A strong association between HLA-DRB1*03 and anti-Jo-1 status was observed across all four cohorts (DRB1*03 frequency: 74% Jo-1-positive vs 35% Jo-1-negative, OR 5.55, 95% CI 3.42 to 9.14, p<0.0001). The frequency of HLA-DRB1*03 was increased in smokers. The frequency of anti-Jo-1 was increased in DRB1*03-positive smokers vs DRB1*03-negative non-smokers (42% vs 8%, OR 7.75, 95% CI 4.21 to 14.28, p<0.0001) and DRB1*03-positive non-smokers (42% vs 31%, p=0.08). In DRB1*03-negative patients, anti-Jo-1 status between smokers and non-smokers was not significantly different. No significant interaction was noted between smoking and DRB1*03 status using anti-Jo-1 as the outcome measure.

Conclusion

Smoking appears to be associated with an increased risk of possession of anti-Jo-1 in HLA-DRB1*03-positive IIM cases. The authors hypothesise that an interaction between HLA-DRB1*03 and smoking may prime the development of anti-Jo-1 antibodies.

Academic training in rheumatology in 2009: a UK trainee survey

Significant changes to the structure and entry into specialist training continue to be implemented. This is likely to have had a long-term impact on rheumatology service provision and the proportion of trainees undertaking academic medicine. An online questionnaire was sent to all trainees on the Joint Royal Colleges Postgraduate Training Board (JRCPTB) database. Out of 211 trainees, 141 responded (66.8%). Of these, 33 (23%) were registered for, or had been awarded, an MD or PhD with a wide variety of funding sources. Mainstream funding sources included Arthritis Research UK, the Medical Research Council, the National Institute for Health Research and the Wellcome Trust, but a substantial number of trainees (n = 17, 51.5%) also utilised other sources of funding. The data from this study will be valuable in the planning of future rheumatology training and academic career pathways and provide useful comparative data for other medical specialties.

Autoantibodies to a 140-kd protein in juvenile dermatomyositis are associated with calcinosis

OBJECTIVE

The identification of novel autoantibodies in juvenile dermatomyositis (DM) may have etiologic and clinical implications. The aim of this study was to describe autoantibodies to a 140-kd protein in children recruited to the Juvenile DM National Registry and Repository for UK and Ireland.

METHODS

Clinical data and sera were collected from children with juvenile myositis. Sera that recognized a 140-kd protein by immunoprecipitation were identified. The identity of the p140 autoantigen was investigated by immunoprecipitation/immunodepletion, using commercial monoclonal antibodies to NXP-2, reference anti-p140, and anti-p155/140, the other autoantibody recently described in juvenile DM. DNA samples from 100 Caucasian children with myositis were genotyped for HLA class II haplotype associations and compared with those from 864 randomly selected UK Caucasian control subjects.

RESULTS

Sera from 37 (23%) of 162 patients with juvenile myositis were positive for anti-p140 autoantibodies, which were detected exclusively in patients with juvenile DM and not in patients with juvenile DM-overlap syndrome or control subjects. No anti-p140 antibody-positive patients were positive for other recognized autoantibodies. Immunodepletion suggested that the identity of p140 was consistent with NXP-2 (the previously identified MJ autoantigen). In children with anti-p140 antibodies, the association with calcinosis was significant compared with the rest of the cohort (corrected P < 0.005, odds ratio 7.0, 95% confidence interval 3.0-16.1). The clinical features of patients with anti-p140 autoantibodies were different from those of children with anti-p155/140 autoantibodies. The presence of HLA-DRB1*08 was a possible risk factor for anti-p140 autoantibody positivity.

CONCLUSION

This study has established that anti-p140 autoantibodies represent a major autoantibody subset in juvenile DM. This specificity may identify a further immunogenetic and clinical phenotype within the juvenile myositis spectrum that includes an association with calcinosis.