Comparison of Monte Carlo simulations and theoretical calculations of nuclear shielding characteristics of various borate glasses including Bi, V, Fe, and Cd

The aim of this study is to evaluate both buildup factors and photon attenuation effectiveness of some borate glasses doped by Cd, Fe, V, and Bi. The mass attenuation coefficients (μ_m) of these glass systems have been calculated via MCNP6 and GEANT4 computer simulation codes over 0.02-10 MeV energy range and compared with the theoretical results of WinXCOM program. And then, half-value layer, (HVL), mean free path (MFP), and effective atomic number (Z_eff) for the different content based glasses have been determined. Through G-P fitting process, exposure buildup factors (EBF) have been found in the energy range of 0.015-15 MeV up to 40 mfp. It can be concluded that SrBiO20 glass is alternative material in terms of photon attenuation, respectively.

AB1470 DOES TESTING FOR SAA IS MORE BENEFICIAL THAN CRP FOR THE FOLLOW-UP OF PATIENTS WITH FMF?

Background

In order to follow subclinical inflammation and adjust the therapy for an optimal disease control, clinicians seek for readily accessible, affordable and reproducible markers. C reactive protein (CRP) is widely used for this purpose. Some suggest that the Serum Amyloid A (SAA) is preferable to CRP as a biomarker of inflammation in FMF patients1.

Objectives

To evaluate and to compare the sensitivity of the serum SAA and CRP levels in FMF patients.

Methods

Serum SAA and CRP levels were measured in 45 patients. 153 measurements from 28 patients with M694V homozygous mutation and 74 measurements from 17 patients with M694V heterozygous mutation were obtained during a mean follow-up of 1 year. For the analysis, the folds of normal CRP and SAA values were used for correlation. Serum levels of the given markers were measured with nephelometric kits (normal CRP levels < 5 mg/L and SAA levels < 6,8 mg/L). More than one and half fold increasement of CRP and SAA was defined as an active inflammation. The correlation coefficients and their significance were calculated using the Spearman test.

Results

Except a patient, all patients in whole cohort were on prophylactic colchicine. Among 28 patients with M694V homozygous mutation, a patient with adalimumab, 12 (42,8%) patients with anti-IL-1 regimens. Of the 17 patients with M694V heterozygous mutation, four (23,5%) were under anti-IL-1 treatment. There was a total of 227 measurements of CRP and SAA from 45 patients. Twenty-five (11%) measurements were obtained during the attack period in and the remaining 202 measurements were collected in attack free period. Figure 1 demonstrates the correlation between CRP and SAA levels (r=0.8, p< 0,001). Both acute phase reactants were increased in 72 (31,7%) measurements, while in 13 (5,7%) CRP level was high but SAA level was normal and in 31 (13,6%) SAA level was high however CRP level was within the normal limits. The vast majority (30:31) of high SAA with normal CRP levels were observed in patients with M694V homozgous mutation. The mean increase in CRP of the entire cohort was 2,06 ± 3,34-fold, whereas mean increase in SAA was 6,23 ± 15,04-fold of the normal levels.

Figure 1.

The folds of the serum CRP and SAA levels in the entire cohort.

Conclusion

According to our results, serial testing of SAA does not provide any additional advantages over CRP. Readily accessible and affordable bio-marker CRP seems to be sufficient for follow-up of patients with FMF.

References

[1]DOI: 10.1038/nrrheum.2010.181

Disclosure of Interests

None declared

AB1082 FREQUENCY AND SEVERITY OF COVID-19 IN PATIENTS WITH VARIOUS RHEUMATIC DISEASES TREATED REGULARLY WITH COLCHICINE OR HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE

Background

Several anti-inflammatory drugs which were targeted different mechanisms and investigated for both prevention and treatment for COVID-19.

Objectives

The current study aimed to investigate whether patients regularly using colchicine or hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have an advantage of protection from COVID-19 or developing less severe disease.

Methods

Patients who were taking colchicine or HCQ regularly for a rheumatic disease including Familial Mediterranean Fever, Behçet’s syndrome, Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, Rheumatoid Arthritis and Sjogren’s syndrome as well as their healthy household contacts as the control group were included into the study. The clinical data regarding COVID-19 were collected using a standard form, and serum samples were analyzed for anti-SARS-COV-2 nucleocapsid IgG. Patients treated with any biologic or immunosuppressive treatments were not included into the study.

Results

A total of 635 regular colchicine users with their 643 household contacts and 317 regular HCQ users with their 333 household contacts were analyzed. Anti-SARS-Cov2 IgG was positive in 43 (6.8%) regular colchicine users and 35 (5.4%) household contacts (OR=1.3; 95% CI:0.8-2; p=0.3) (Table 1). COVID-19 related symptoms were described by 29 (67.4%) of the patients and 17 (48.6%) household contacts (OR=2.2; 95% CI:0.9-5.5; p=0.09), and hospital admission was observed in five (11.6%) and one (2.9%) of these subjects (OR=4.5; 95% CI:0.5-40.2; p=0.1), respectively (Figure 1). Seropositive subjects were observed in 22 (6.9%) regular HCQ users and 24 (7.2%) household contacts (OR=1.1; CI:0.6-1.9; p=0.8) (Table 1). COVID-19-related symptoms occurred in 16 (72.7%) of the 22 patients and 12 (50%) of 24 household contacts (OR=2.7; 95% CI:0.8-9.1; p=0.1). Three patients (13.6%) were admitted to hospital, while one household contact (4.2%) was hospitalized (OR=3.6; 95% CI:0.3- 37.8; p=0.2) (Figure 1). Disease-specific analyses disclosed that there was no significant difference in terms of COVID-19 frequency and severity between a particular disease subset and household contacts (Table 1). Univariate logistic regression analysis showed no effect of age and gender on the SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence rate among regular colchicine or HCQ users and household contacts (p=0.2 and p=0.7, respectively for colchicine users versus contacts, p=0.7 and p=0.3, respectively for HCQ users versus contacts).

Figure 1.

Severity of COVID-19 in regular colchicine or HCQ users and these patients’ household contacts

Table 1.

Disease specific outcomes of the entire cohort

VariableFMF (n=373)FMF HHC* (n=386)PBehcet Patients (n=262)Behcet HHC (N=257)PSLE Patients (N=197)SLE HH (n=221)pRA Patients (n=79)RA HH (n=73)PSjögren patients (N=41)Sjögren HH (N=39)pAge, mean ± SD years36.4 ± 13.236.3 ± 16.10.942.9 ± 11.438.1 ± 15.20.00144.2 ± 12.639.4 ± 170.00253.9 ± 10.340.3 ± 16.60.00157.1 ± 11.246.2 ± 16.10.001Gender, n (%) Female249 (66.8)173 (44.8)0.001160 (61.1)118 (45.9)0.001184 (93.4)75 (33.9)0.00173 (61.1)20 (27.4)0.00141 (100)10 (25.1)0.001Positive antibody to SARS-COV-2, n (%)25 (6.7)23 (5.9)0.618 (6.9)12 (4.7)0.314 (7.1)19 (8.6)0.64 (5.1)2 (2.7)0.54 (9.8)3 (7.7)0.9Symptomatic COVID-19 in seropositive cases, n (%)18 (72)10 (43.4)0.0411 (61.1)7 (58.3)0.611 (78.6)9 (47.3)0.073 (75)0 (0)0.42 (50)3 (100)0.4Hospital admission in seropositive cases, n (%)1 (3.8)0 (0)-4 (22.2)1 (8.3)0.32 (14.3)0 (0)0.21 (25)0 (0)-1 (25)1 (33.3)0.3Mean colchicine dose, mg/day ± SD1.5 ± 0.4--1.4 ±0.4-----------Mean duration of colchicine usage, years ± SD11.3 ± 8.3--10.4 ± 7.7-----------Mean HCQ dose, mg/day ± SD------263.6 ± 95.1--255 ± 90.8--273.7 ± 132.5--Mean duration of HCQ usage, years ± SD------10.1 ± 6.6--7.3 ± 5.2--9 ± 6.3--

HCQ hydroxychloroquine, FMF familial mediterranean fever, HHC household contacts, RA rheumatoid arthritis, SLE systemic lupus erythematosus

Conclusion

Being on a regular treatment of colchicine or HCQ was not resulted in the prevention of COVID-19 or amelioration of its manifestations.

Disclosure of Interests

None declared

AB1305 A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF AA AMYLOIDOSIS AMONG PATIENTS WITH BEHÇET’S SYNDROME

Background

Data on patients with Behçet’s syndrome (BS) complicated with AA amyloidosis is limited to case reports or case series with a small number of patients.

Objectives

In this study, we aimed to perform a systematic review (SR) of published reports on BS patients with AA amyloidosis.

Methods

PubMed and EMBASE were searched with the keywords “Behcet* AND amyloidosis”, without date and language restriction, until May 2020. Two independent reviewers (SNE, GK) performed title/abstract and full text screening and data extraction. A third reviewer (GH) made the final decision in case of disagreement between the two reviewers. Studies that reported patients who were reported by authors as having BS and AA amyloidosis were included. The risk of bias assessment was done using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool.

Results

The systematic literature search yielded 760 articles of which 703 were excluded after title and abstract review. After full-text review, we further excluded 15 duplicate articles and 1 article was added after handsearching the reference lists of the full texts. Finally, we included 43 articles reporting 96 cases. Among these articles, 38 were case reports and 5 were case series reporting between 6 and 14 patients. All patients but 8 were reported from Mediterranean countries. The quality of all articles according to GRADE was very low due to the lack of a control group.

The main features of the patients were male predominance (81/96, 84%), a high frequency of major organ involvement (62/80, 77.5%) especially vascular involvement (60%), a low frequency of comorbidities predisposing to AA amyloidosis (11/96, 11.5%), and a very low frequency of gastrointestinal involvement (3/72, 4%). All but 8 patients were diagnosed with BS and AA amyloidosis simultaneously. The most common presentation was nephrotic syndrome (60/81, 74%). Presenting symptoms other than proteinuria were diarrhea (n=2), acute renal failure (n=2), upper gastrointestinal bleeding (n=1), end stage renal disease (ESRD) (n=1), cardiac symptoms due to cor pulmonale (n=1), and hypertension (n=1). Renal biopsy (72%) and rectal biopsy (17%) were the most commonly used procedures to diagnose AA amyloidosis.

After diagnosing AA amyloidosis, colchicine was initiated in 58 patients, cyclophosphamide in 16, and biologics in 3 (1 anakinra and 2 tocilizumab). In the 67 patients with available data on follow-up, 43% of the patients were followed-up for ≤1 year and median follow-up duration was 20 months (IQR: 4-48). Among the 64 patients with available data, 30 (47%) had developed ESRD. Among the 72 patients with available data on survival status, 30 patients (42%) had died. Ten patients (33%) had died within 6 months, 15 had died after a median follow-up of 48 months (IQR: 24-150), and follow-up duration was not available in the remaining 5 patients including 3 patients whose diagnoses were made by autopsy. Reasons for death were infection (n=7), ESRD (n=6), intractable diarrhea (n=3), pulmonary embolism (n=1), cor pulmonale (n=1), hemorrhage due to pulmonary artery aneurysm (n=1), liver cirrhosis (n=1), gastric cancer (n=1), subarachnoid hemorrhage (n=1), and not reported (n=8).

Conclusion

Male gender and major organ involvement, especially vascular involvement, appear to be risk factors for the development of AA amyloidosis in BS patients. While BS patients complicated with AA amyloidosis have been reported rarely, it is a fatal complication of BS. One third of the patients had died within 6 months after AA amyloidosis diagnosis.

Disclosure of Interests

Güzin Karatemiz: None declared, Sinem Nihal Esatoglu Speakers bureau: Sinem Nihal Esatoglu has received honorariums for presentations from UCB Pharma, Roche, Pfizer, and Merck Sharp Dohme., Mert Gurcan: None declared, Yesim Ozguler Speakers bureau: Yesim Ozguler has received honorariums for presentations from UCB Pharma, Novartis, and Pfizer., Sebahattin Yurdakul: None declared, Vedat Hamuryudan Speakers bureau: Vedat Hamuryudan has served as a speaker for AbbVie, Celgene, Novartis, and UCB Pharma., Grant/research support from: Vedat Hamuryudan has received grant/research support from Celgene., Izzet Fresko: None declared, Melike Melikoglu: None declared, Emire Seyahi Speakers bureau: Emire Seyahi has received honorariums for presentations from Novartis, Pfizer, AbbVie, and Gliead., Serdal Ugurlu: None declared, Huri Ozdogan: None declared, Hasan Yazici: None declared, Gulen Hatemi Speakers bureau: Gulen Hatemi has served as a speaker for AbbVie, Celgene, Novartis, and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: Gulen Hatemi has received grant/research support from Celgene.

POS1378 ARTHRITIS IN PATIENTS WITH FAMILY MEDITERRANEAN FEVER

Background

Familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) is an inherited autoinflammatory disease characterized by recurrent episodes of fever and serositis. Arthritis is one of the most common attack manifestations. Arthritis in FMF is usually in the form of acute mono- or oligoarthritis of the large joints of the lower extremities. While acute attacks of arthritis usually heal without causing permanent deformity, the severe, long-lasting form of chronic arthritis can last for months or even years and result in permanent deformity.

Objectives

In this study, we described the characteristics of joint involvement in FMF in a single cohort.

Methods

The medical records of patients with joint involvement from our cohort of 2350 patients who were diagnosed with familial Mediterranean fever were retrospectively scanned through the files and hospital database. The prevalence, demographic information, genetic test results, clinical features, features of joint involvement, treatments and responses, acute phase values in the attack and remission periods, and family history of patients with joint involvement were recorded.

Results

953 patients (n=953) from a total of 2350 patients had arthralgia or arthritis (40%). In our study, the male/female ratio was found to be 0.49 (male n=316, female n=637). The number of patients who underwent genetic testing was 787 (82%), and 702 (89%) of these patients had mutations in the MEFV gene. The most common pathogenic mutation is the M694V mutation with a rate of 43%. Concomitant diseases and their frequencies are shown in Table 1, the most common accompanying disease was spondylarthritis at a rate of 27%. Arthritis was present in the first attack in 55% (n=531), while arthritis was found in the ongoing attacks in 45%. The duration of the attack was between 24-96 hours in 77% (n=837) of the patients, and the duration was longer than 96 hours in 23% (n=116). The most common finding accompanying the attacks was exercise-related leg pain. Family history was present in 61% (n=580). 73% of the patients (n=696) were involved in the ankle and 51% were involved in the knee (n=492). The incidence of sacroiliitis was 14% (n=142). As for the number of joints, 91% of the patients had mono- and oligoarthritis. Asymmetric involvement was detected in 77% of the patients. Red arthritis was present in %73 of our study group. HLA-B27 was examined in 185 patients, 24 of them were positive (12%). It was found that 43% of the patients had treatment changes due to arthritis. Colchicine dose increases and changes were performed in 32% of these patients. NSAIDs were started in 21%, corticosteroids in 15%, DMARDs in 12%, anti-TNF in 10%, and anti-IL-1 in 8%. The mean dose of colchicine was as 1.56 ± 0.5 mg. Unresponsiveness to colchicine was found in 21% (n=122).

Table 1.

Concomitant diseases of our FMF cohort

Conclusion

FMF diagnosis should definitely be considered in people with red mono-oligoarthritis in the large joints of the lower extremities. One of the most important features of joint involvement in FMF patients is the short duration of arthritis. The accompanying effort-related leg pain is an important symptom that should suggest FMF. In patients with a diagnosis of FMF and arthritis, the required colchicine dose in the treatment and the rate of colchicine unresponsiveness are higher than in other attack types. The incidence of sacroiliitis and spondyloarthropathy increases in patients with FMF, and joint involvement features are similar. FMF should be considered in the differential diagnosis of patients with inflammatory low back pain.

Disclosure of Interests

None declared

AB1323 THE MYSTERY OF FAMILIAL MEDITERRANEAN FEVER: IS THERE ANY FACTOR TRIGGERING THE ATTACKS?

Background

Familial Mediterranean Fever (FMF) is an autoinflammatory disease characterized by recurrent episodes of fever and serositis. Although it is known that the attack frequency differs among patients carrying different mutant genotypes [1], whether physical and environmental factors play a role in triggering attacks or whether they have an influence on timing of attacks remains to be elucidated.

Objectives

We aimed to identify different conditions causing flare-ups in FMF course and to investigate if there is a significant difference between patients carrying distinct mutations, regarding the distribution of the factors mentioned.

Methods

Two hundred patients were randomly selected among individuals who were routinely followed-up with FMF diagnosis in our centre. Individuals carrying only a variant of unknown significance or polymorphism such as R202Q, according to Infevers database, were excluded in order to gather a cohort consisting of patients with definite FMF. An inquiry was made based upon triggering factors determined by the patients themselves. The patients were classified into subgroups by their sex and mutation genotype. Since M694V variant is responsible for pronounced FMF course [2], we sorted the patients according to their status for M694V mutant allele. Group A included patients carrying M694V homozygously. Group B included patients carrying at least one M694V mutant allele whereas Group C consisted of patients who were non-M694V carriers. Chi-square test was performed to assess distribution of the trigger factors in terms of establishing its significance.

Results

Detailed distribution of trigger factors is shown in Table 1. 144 out of 200 patients described a culprit condition. Patients usually stated more than one factor, however some patients reported only one. The most-reported trigger factors by the cohort are summarized as following: 76 emotional stress (38%), 60 menstruation (30%), 40 cold exposure (20%), 34 fatigue (17%), 13 seasonal changes (6.5%). The distribution of trigger factors between Group A, B, and C were non-significant (p=0.88).

Table 1.

The distribution of triggering factors in subgroups.

GroupTotal(%)Reported trigger factor (%)Mens- truation(%)Emotionalstress(%)Cold exposure(%)Fatigue(%)Seasonalchanges(%)Others(%)Female12397 (78.8)60 (48.8)47 (38.2)24 (19.5)19 (15.4)7 (5.7)6 (4.9)Male7747 (61)-29 (37.7)16 (20.8)15 (19.5)6 (7.8)7 (9.1)Group A6144 (72.1)14 (23)24 (39.3)13 (21.3)12 (19.7)4 (6.6)6 (9.8)Group B165120 (72.7)49 (29.7)66 (40)34 (20.6)29 (17.6)13 (7.9)11 (6.6)Group C3524 (68.6)11 (31.4)10 (28.6)6 (17.1)5 (14.3)01 (2.8)

Group A: M694V homozygous patients, Group B: patients with at least one M694V allele, Group C: non-M694V carriers

Conclusion

We concluded that trigger factors did not vary between distinct mutant genotypes. Although emotional stress is the most reported trigger factor by the participants, one should bear in mind that emotional stress influences most chronic diseases negatively. We also observed that menstruation overtly triggers an FMF attack. Additionally, cold exposure should be considered as a notable trigger factor. It is still unclear what triggers an FMF attack in 28% of the patients, remains a mystery.

References

[1]Grossman C, Kassel Y, Livneh A, Ben-Zvi I. Familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) phenotype in patients homozygous to the MEFV M694V mutation. Eur J Med Genet. 2019 Jun;62(6):103532. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmg.2018.08.013.

[2]Egeli BH, Ugurlu S. Familial Mediterranean Fever: Clinical State Of The Art. QJM. 2020 Oct 20:hcaa291. doi: 10.1093/qjmed/hcaa291.

Disclosure of Interests

None declared

AB1325 DIAGNOSTIC DELAY IN FAMILIAL MEDITERRANEAN FEVER: IS IT STILL A PROBLEM?

Background

Familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) is a rare hereditary autoinflammatory disease with disease onset in childhood in most cases. Although autoinflammatory disease awareness is increasing among physicians, delayed diagnosis is still prevalent as a cause of greater morbidity[1].

Objectives

We aimed to study the characteristics of FMF patients diagnosed between 2000-2010 and 2011-2021 and to see if there was a difference in diagnostic delay.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated the medical records of the FMF patients followed up in our rheumatology clinic that were diagnosed between 2000-2021 and split them into two groups according to the year they received their diagnosis. There were 1151 patients diagnosed between 2000-2010 (Group 1) and 821 patients diagnosed between 2011-2021 (Group 2). The data studied included gender, age of onset, diagnostic delay, attack characteristics, MEFV mutation, and family history.

Results

The median current age of patients in Group 1 is 37 years (IQR:30-46) and the median current age of the patients in Group 2 is 36 years (IQR:29-44). The female to male ratio was 1.57 in Group 1 and 1.75 in Group 2, with no significant difference between the groups. Group 2 had later disease onset (p<0.001) and later diagnosis (p<0.001) than Group 1 as shown in the Table 1. The proportion of patients with at least one M694V mutation was higher in Group 2 (p<0.001). The attack durations did not vary between the groups. There was no significant difference in the prevalence of abdominal pain, fever, arthritis, and arthralgia between Group 1 and Group 2. Chest pain (p=0.005), myalgia (p<0.001), and erysipelas-like erythema (p=0.041) were more common in Group 2 than Group 1. Patients with positive family history were more frequent in Group 2 than Group 1 (p=0.046).

Table 1.Group 1 (2000-2010, n=1151)Group 2 (2011-2021, n=821)pFemale/Male, n704/447522/2990.275Age at onset, median (IQR) years13 (7-21)18 (12-26)<0.001Delay in diagnosis, median (IQR) years4 (1-11)5,5(2-15)<0.001Attack duration, median (IQR) years3(2-4)3(2-4)0.325Presence of at least one M694V mutation (%)526(46%)390(60%)<0.001Presence of abdominal pain in the initial attack (%)936(81%)669(81%)0.926Presence of fever in the initial attack (%)855(74%)592(72%)0.281Presence of chest pain in the initial attack (%)218(19%)199(24%)0.005Presence of arthritis in the initial attack (%)330(29%)215(26%)0.224Presence of arthralgia in the initial attack (%)213(19%)170(21%)0.223Presence of myalgia in the initial attack (%)45(4%)65(8%)<0.001Presence of erysipelas like erythema in the initial attack (%)31(3%)36(4%)0.041Presence of positive family history (%)652(57%)502(61%)0.046

Conclusion

There was some increase in the diagnostic delay in 2011-2021 compared to 2000-2010. This may be partly due to the later onset of symptoms in patients diagnosed in 2011-2021, which could have led the physicians to consider other differential diagnoses. Nevertheless, diagnostic delay in FMF still seems a prevalent problem that should be addressed to prevent excess morbidity and mortality.

References

[1]Erdogan M, Ugurlu S, Ozdogan H, Seyahi E. Familial Mediterranean fever: misdiagnosis and diagnostic delay in Turkey. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2019;37 Suppl 121(6):119-124.

Disclosure of Interests

None declared

AB1322 APPENDICITIS STILL A MISDIAGNOSIS FOR FMF PATIENTS

Background

Familial Mediterranean Fever(FMF) is an autoinflammatory disease characterized by recurrent polyserositis attacks. Attacks typically consist of fever and/or abdominal pain and/or chest pain and/or arthritis. The disease is caused by mutations in the MEFV gene. Abdominal pain during the attacks is frequently misdiagnosed as acute abdomen and these patients go undersurgical intervention is not uncommon [1].

Objectives

Severe abdominal pain during FMF attacks is frequently misdiagnosed as acute abdomen and patients receive surgical intervention. In this study, we aim to compare the clinical and genetic characteristics of FMF patients with appendectomies to those without appendectomies.

Methods

We reviewed 176 patients with FMF who went under appendectomy. We randomly matched these patients with 176 FMF patients without appendectomy for comparison. We compared clinical manifestations, MEFV mutations, and treatment modalities.

Results

In this study, 176 patients with FMF went under appendectomy. Only 2 of these appendectomies were performed after FMF diagnosis. In the appendectomy group fever(84% vs 68%), abdominal pain(91% vs 79%), pathogenic exon 10 mutations(65% vs 59%), lower leg pain(0.5% vs 0%) and orchitis(0.5% vs 0%) were more common but only the abdominal pain and fever was statistically significant. In the control group chest pain(18% vs 19%), arthralgia(46% vs 53%), arthritis(29% vs 37%), anti IL-1 usage(3% vs 5%), amyloidosis (0% vs 3%) and erysipelas(1% vs 3%) were more common but none of them were statistically significant. Myalgia(3%) was the same in both groups[Table 1]. Median diagnostic delay was 8(IQR 2-15) years in the appendectomy group and 3.5(IQR1-10) years in the control group.

Table 1.

Characteristics of the patients

No Of Patients(%)AppendicitisNo Of Patients(%)P valueControl GroupPatients176(100)176(100)Fever148(84)120(68)0.0007Abdominal Pain160(91)139(79)0.0029Chest Pain32(18)33(19)1Arthralgia81(46)94(53)0.20Arthritis51(29)65(37)0.12Myalgia5(3)5(3)1Erysipelas2(1)5(3)0.45Lower Leg Pain1(0.5)0(0)-Orchitis1(0.5)0(0)-Anti IL-1 usage6(3)9(5)0.6Amyloidosis0(0)6(3)-Diagnostic Delay8.5(IQR2-15) years3.5(IQR1-10) years0.0002Pathogenic Exon 10 Mutations114(65)103(59)0.27Appendectomy Before FMF diagnosis174(99)0(0)

Conclusion

Even after the discovery of colchicine and identification of the MEFV gene diagnosis of FMF remains a challenge. Previous studies reported a median diagnostic delay of 8.2-11 years. In these studies, 28%-32% of the patients went under abdominal surgical intervention before the diagnosis of the FMF[2,3]. The most common symptoms of FMF(fever and abdominal pain) are also the most common symptoms of acute abdomen. Thus distinguishing between FMF and acute abdomen in undiagnosed FMF patients represents an understated problem. These patients have a longer diagnostic delay[8(IQR 2-15) vs 3.5(IQR1-10) years], worse control of attacks, poorer quality of life. In our study, most of the appendectomies were unnecessary in the FMF patients. Thus we recommend investigating the patient for FMF if the evidence of the acute abdomen does not expand beyond the symptoms.

References

[1]Ozdogan H, Ugurlu S. Familial Mediterranean Fever. Presse Med. 2019 Feb;48(1 Pt 2):e61-e76.

[2]Erdogan M, Ugurlu S, Ozdogan H, Seyahi E. Familial Mediterranean fever: misdiagnosis and diagnostic delay in Turkey. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2019 Nov-Dec;37 Suppl 121(6):119-124.

[3]Hageman IMG, Visser H, Veenstra J, Baas F, Siegert CEH. Familial Mediterranean Fever (FMF): a single centre retrospective study in Amsterdam.

Disclosure of Interests

None declared

POS1351 CAUSES OF HOSPITALIZATION IN BEHÇET SYNDROME

Background:

The causes of hospitalization may provide important information on the course of diseases and treatment-related adverse effects.

Objectives:

We aimed to determine the causes and outcome of hospitalizations among patients with Behçet Syndrome (BS) in a dedicated center.

Methods:

We surveyed hospitalization records in our clinic between January 2002 and December 2019 and identified those with a diagnosis of BS. The records of these patients were reviewed for demographic and clinical features, causes of hospitalization and outcome. We divided hospitalization causes into 2 as being BS related (organ involvement or deterioration) and non-BS related (treatment complication or others).

Results:

Three-hundred and thirty BS patients (75% men, mean age 37.7 ±11.4 SD years) were hospitalized for a total of 456 times during 18 years. The mean disease duration was 10.8± 8.8 SD years. Two-hundred and ninety-one (64%) patients were using immunosuppressives (IS) with or without corticosteroids (CSs) and 72 (16%) of them were under biologic treatment at the time of hospitalization. The mean duration of hospitalization was 12.7±10.7 SD days. The reasons for hospitalization were directly related to BS in 259 patients (57%) and non-related to BS in 191 (42%). Six patients were hospitalized for both BS and non-BS related reasons at the same time. The most common reasons were vascular involvement (n=169, 64%) for BS related reasons and infections (n=64, 32%) for non-BS related reasons (Table 1). Patients hospitalized for BS related causes were younger (35.2±10.6 vs 41.1±11.7, p<0.001), had short mean disease duration (8.5±7.5 vs. 13.6±9.4 years, p<0.001), stayed shorter in the hospital (11.6±8.6 vs 14.0±12.9 days p=0.03) and had less frequent IS±CSs use (59% vs 70%, p=0.02) compared to those with non-BS related hospitalizations. There were no differences between the groups regarding gender distribution (203 M/62 F vs. 143 M/54 F) and use of biologic agents (15% vs 17%). Three patients died during hospitalization. The reasons were malignancy, infection and right heart failure due to pulmonary artery thrombosis and pulmonary hypertension, respectively.

Conclusion:

Vascular involvement is the leading cause of hospitalization among BS patients, followed by infections. The predominance of men among hospitalized patients underlines the relatively severe course of BS in men. The retrospective design and inclusion of patients who were hospitalized only in the rheumatology unit are limitations of this study.

Table 1.

Distributions of BS related and non-BS related reasons of hospitalizations

BS patients hospitalized with BS related reasons(n of pts=195, n of hospitalizations=265)*BS patients hospitalized with non-BS related reasons(n of pts=170, n of hospitalizations=197)*Causes of hospitalizations (per hospitalization)Vascular inv. (n=169, 64 %)Pulmonary artery inv. (n=64, 24 %)Deep vein thrombosis (n=39, 15 %)Budd-Chiari synd. (n=24, 9%)Vena cava inf. thrombosis (n=19, 7 %)Peripheral artery inv. (n=15, 6 %)Vena cava sup. thrombosis (n=14, 5 %)Aorta inv. (n=14, 5%)Coronary artery inv. (n=4, 2 %)Infection (n=64, 32%)Pneumonia (n=17, 8%)Tuberculosis (n=8, 4%)Urinary tract inf (n=7, 4%)Gastroenteritis (n=4, 2%)Osteomyelitis (n=3, 2%)Septic arthritis (n=3, 2%)Aspergillosis (n=2, 1%)Nocardia (n=1, 1%)Salmonella (n=1, 1%)Others (n=18, 9%)Neurologic inv. (n=50, 19 %)Parenchymal inv. (n=37, 14%)Dural sinus thrombosis (n=13, 5%)Drug side effects other than infections (n=29, 15 %)Interferon (n=10, 5%)Azathioprine (n=7, 4%)Cyclosporine (n=5, 3%)Steroid (n=3, 2%)TNF antagonists (n=3, 2%)IVIG (n=1, 1%)GI inv. (n=18, 7%)Additional rheumatologic diseases (n=17, 9%)Joint inv. (n=12, 5%)Renal disease (n=16, 8 %)Mucocutaneous inv. (n=10, 4%)Cardiovascular dis. (n=12, 6%)Eye inv. (n=8, 3%)Avascular necrosis (n=4, 2%)Others (n=8, 3%)Malignancy (n=11, 6%)Others (n=40, 20%)

*Some patients were hospitalized more than one times and for both BS related and non-BS related reasons at different time and had more than one type of BS related and/or non-BS related reasons.

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared

AB1325-HPR THE TRANSITION FROM PEDIATRIC TO ADULT RHEUMATOLOGY OF 347 PATIENTS AT A SINGLE CENTER

Background:

Pediatric to adult rheumatology transition can be a challenge for both the patient and the clinician, especially in rheumatology as it includes chronic diseases with close follow-up.

Objectives:

The objective of this study is to understand our tertiary rheumatology center patient demographic transitioning from pediatric to adult rheumatology in order to design prospective studies enhancing the evidence of transition recommendations.

Methods:

Patients included in this study are regularly followed-up in our adult rheumatology clinic and were regularly followed up in our pediatric rheumatology clinic in the past. They were all diagnosed with a rheumatologic condition receiving treatment. The patient files were assessed to have a better understanding of their demographic, disease and treatment information.

Results:

Our cohort includes 347 patients diagnosed with a variety of conditions that are Familial Mediterranean Fever (FMF) (n=216), Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) (n=56), Juvenile Spondyloarthritis (jSPA) (n=39), Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) (n=20), Behçet’s Disease (n=7) and the rest of the rheumatologic conditions with less than 5 patients each. The mean age of the patients during transition, mean age of diagnosis, and follow-up duration are 21.34±1.7, 10.4±4.18, and 10.82±4.4 in respective order. The treatment regimens the patients received are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1.

Current Treatment Information of the Patients

Current Treatment InformationDMARD26Colchicine23Adalimumab21Etanercept10NSAID4Tocilizumab3Cyclophosphamide3Rituximab2Prednisolone7Mycophenolate Mofetil1Canakinumab1

Seven patients had FMF related attacks. In addition to attacks, one FMF patient had bilateral ankle pain and one patient had leg pain. One patient out of three diagnosed with Takayasu’s disease was still symptomatic. One patient had uveitis-related symptoms. One patient diagnosed with SLE had skin dryness. Furthermore, there were patients with sequelae formation. One patient diagnosed with oligoarticular JIA (oJIA) had bilateral hip sequela with the additional left hip prosthesis. One oJIA patient had micrognathia, and one had left knee sequela. One pJIA patient had small joint sequelae. One sJIA patient had bilateral hip sequelae. One jSPA patient had enthesopathy. One FMF patient had proteinuria due to amyloidosis formation. Another FMF patient had hip surgery due to sequela.

Conclusion:

Our center had patients with a variety of conditions with different natures of diseases. EULAR recommends the transition process to start no later than 14 years of age; however, this process started at the mean age of 21 in our patients. In most of these patients, especially the ones diagnosed with FMF, the control of disease activity was maintained. The transition of these different clinical entities might require certain amendments to the standard of care. For future references, we will be able to understand more about the adulthood prognosis of these clinical entities.

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared

FRI0498 DOES TESTING FOR SAA IS MORE BENEFICIAL THAN CRP FOR THE FOLLOW-UP OF FMF PATIENTS WITH M694V HETEROZYGOUS OR M694V HOMOZYGOUS MUTATIONS?

Background:

In order to follow subclinical inflammation and adjust the therapy for an optimal Familial Mediterranean Fever (FMF) disease control, clinicians seek for readily accessible, affordable and reproducible markers. C-reactive protein (CRP) is widely used for this purpose. Some suggest that CRP measures are not conclusive in all cases, especially at initial stages of inflammation. It is suggested that Serum Amyloid A (SAA) may be more reliable and sensitive in predicting an ongoing inflammation.

Objectives:

In order to evaluate and to compare the sensitivity of SAA and CRP in FMF patients with M694V homozygous and M694V heterozygous mutations respectively.

Methods:

Blood samples from 28 patients with M694V homozygous mutation and from 15 patients with M694V heterozygous mutation were obtained during a mean follow-up of 1 year. Multiple samples were drawn in both attacks and attack-free periods of FMF (153 from M694V Homozygous and 31 from M694V Heterozygous). For the analysis of the correlation, the folds of normal CRP and SAA levels were used. Serum levels of the given markers were measured with nephelometric kits (normal CRP levels <5 mg/L and SAA levels <6,8 mg/L). More than one-and-a-half-fold increase of CRP and SAA was defined as an active inflammation.

Results:

Except in one patient, all patients in the whole cohort were on prophylactic colchicine. Among 28 patients with M694V homozygous mutation, one patient was treated with adalimumab, and 12 patients with anti-IL-1 regimens. Among 15 patients with M694V heterozygous mutation, 4 were under anti-IL-1 treatment. There were a total of 183 measurements of CRP and SAA from 43 patients. Twenty-three measurements were obtained during the attack period in M694V homozygous group and the remaining 160 measurements were obtaine in attack-free period. The figure demonstrates the correlation between CRP and SAA results (r=0.745, p<0.001). Both acute phase reactants were increased in 69 measurements, while in 13, CRP was high but SAA was normal and in 31, SAA was high however CRP was within normal limits. The mean increase in CRP of the whole cohort was 2,37 ± 3,22-fold of the normal, whereas mean increase in SAA was 6,77 ± 13,23-fold of the normal.

Conclusion:

According to these results, serial testing of SAA does not provide any additional advantages over CRP. As it is readily accessible and affordable, CRP seems to be sufficient for the follow-up of FMF patients.

Figure:

Figure.

The folds CRP and SAA in whole M694V homozygous and heterozygous mutant population

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared

AB0055 SOLUBLE TREM-1 LEVELS IN FAMILIAL MEDITERRANEAN FEVER RELATED AA-AMYLOIDOSIS

Background:

Triggering Receptor Expressed on Myeloid cells-1 (TREM-1) is a monocyte and neutrophil receptor functioning in innate immunity. TREM-1 produces proinflammatory cytokines and serves for neutrophil degranulation. TREM-1 activity is well known in the pathogenesis of sepsis; hence it can be also present in autoinflammatory diseases such as the most common monogenic one, Familial Mediterranean Fever (FMF).

Objectives:

The objective of this study is to measure soluble TREM-1 (sTREM-1) activity in severe FMF cases complicated with systemic AA-Amyloidosis.

Methods:

The cohort of the study includes regularly followed FMF related AA-Amyloidosis patients in a tertiary center outpatient rheumatology clinic. Soluble TREM-1 levels were measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). In addition, demographic data, renal function tests, acute phase reactants, and medical prescription history was also noted and analyzed. None of the FMF diagnosed patients had an attack during the collection of the blood samples.

Results:

The patients were categorized into 4 groups: FMF related AA-Amyloidosis patients (A(+) FMF(+)), FMF unrelated AA-Amyloidosis (FMF(-) A(+)), FMF patients without Amyloidosis diagnosis (FMF(+) A (-)), and healthy controls (HC). The mean ages, TREM-1, C - reactive protein (CRP), and Creatinine levels of each group are shown in Table 1. TREM-1 levels were found to be significantly higher in A(+) FMF(+) group than FMF(+) A (-), and healthy control groups (p= 0.001 and 0.002). Nevertheless, this difference was not found in between A(+) FMF(+) and FMF(-) A(+) (p= 0.447). In addition, the TREM-1 levels of FMF(+) A (-), and healthy control groups were not different (0.532). In A(+) FMF(+) group, 36 patients used colchicine with the mean dose of 1.9±0.8 mg/day, 14 patients used anakinra, and 9 patients used canakinumab. In FMF(+) A (-) group all 20 patients used colchicine with the mean dose of 2.8±0.9 mg/day, 1 patient used anakinra, and 2 patients used canakinumab.

Table 1.

Clinical Features of Patients and TREM-1 levels

A(+) FMF(+)(n= 42)FMF(-) A(+)(n=5)FMF(+) A(-)(n=20)HC(n=20)Age43.9±12.954.8±1935.3±9.6435.4±6.57TREM-1735.3±566.51247.1±1349.2414.3±142.3439.2±104.6CRP11.1±14.251.3±98.325.8±541.8±1.7Creatinine1.6±1.83.28±4.170.7±0.150.7±0.15

Conclusion:

In conclusion, TREM-1 is a proinflammatory marker found significantly high in AA-amyloidosis patients regardless of their FMF diagnosis. TREM-1 may be useful in AA-amyloidosis follow-up and early diagnosis since currently there is a deficit of an early diagnostic marker of amyloidosis. This study is a cross-sectional one so it is hard to reach a conclusion on the effectiveness of TREM-1 during regular FMF follow-up for the secondary prevention of amyloidosis. However, the sensitivity of TREM-1 as a marker cannot be denied in amyloidosis.

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared

SAT0518 CANAKINUMAB TREATMENT IN ADULT PATIENTS WITH FAMILIAL MEDITERRANEAN FEVER: A SINGLE-CENTER STUDY

Background:

Familial Mediterranean Fever (FMF) is the most common autoinflammatory disease characterized by recurrent, self-remitting attacks of fever, serositis, arthritis, and erysipelas-like erythema. Canakinumab is an Interleukin-1β inhibitor that is shown to be effective and safe in treating colchicine resistant FMF patients.

Objectives:

The main objective of this study is to present the single tertiary center experience of adult FMF patients who received Canakinumab.

Methods:

The study is a retrospective analysis conducted at a tertiary rheumatology center experienced in FMF. The patients who had a clinical diagnosis of FMF and who were treated with at least a single subcutaneous injection of canakinumab were included. Patients with amyloidosis and pregnancy were excluded. In order to evaluate the disease status, acute phase reactants and patient-reported disease severity visual analog scale (VAS) scores were analyzed. Acute phase reactants were evaluated during attack-free periods. The VAS score was reported on a scale of 0-10, 10 meaning the disease at its most severe form, and 0 meaning the least.

Results:

Fifty-two patients (21 male, 31 female) with the mean age of 35.88±12.4 years, were included in this study. The presenting signs and symptoms of the patients are shown in Figure 1. The mean age of initial symptoms and diagnosis were 12.84±10.06 and 20.39±12.35 years in respective order. The treatment information of the patients before and during Canakinumab injections was shown in Table 1. The mean Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) decreased from 25.31±20.64 to 11.52±9.78 mm/hour. The mean C-reactive Protein (CRP) decreased from 28.18±47.04 to 2.02±2.31 mg/L (both p<0.0001). The mean VAS score decreased from 8.04±1.9 to 1.4±1.73 (p<0.0001). Canakinumab treatment was terminated in 33 patients, 22 of which was due to successful remission. The termination of the treatment was because of pregnancy or will of pregnancy in 4 patients, inadequate treatment response 3 patients, treatment noncompliance in 2 patients, chronic hepatitis C related cirrhosis in 1 patient, and change to a different biologic agent in 1 patient. The only side effect experienced was hallucinations in one patient who was already under remission.

Figure 1.

The Presenting Signs and Symptoms of the Patients

Table 1.

The Treatment Information of the Patients

Initial Mean Daily Colchicine Dose, mg (mean± standard deviation)1.68±0.46Mean Daily Colchicine Dose before Canakinumab Treatment, mg1.63±0.6The Mean Injection Number, n17.5±17.8Canakinumab Treatment Indication, n (%) Inadequate Response to Previous Treatment38 (73.08) Side Effect to Previous Treatment8 (15.38) Poly Arteritis Nodosa2 (3.85) Recurrent Pericarditis1 (1.92) CNS Vasculitis2 (3.85) Poor Anakinra Treatment Adherence1 (1.92) FMF Encephalopathy1 (1.92)

Conclusion:

Canakinumab seems effective in controlling the subclinical inflammation and raising the quality of life of the patient. It has a favorable side effect profile. According to our single-center, real-life data, Canakinumab can be used as an alternative treatment method in colchicine resistant patients.

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared

OP0272 LONG-TERM EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF CANAKINUMAB IN PATIENTS WITH COLCHICINE-RESISTANT FAMILIAL MEDITERRANEAN FEVER: RESULTS FROM THE RANDOMISED PHASE 3 CLUSTER TRIAL

Background:

Familial Mediterranean Fever (FMF) is a hereditary autoinflammatory disease associated with mutations in theMEFVgene. Colchicine is the cornerstone of current therapy for FMF; however, a subset of patients are resistant or intolerant to it. Previously published results from the CLUSTER trial [NCT02059291] demonstrated that canakinumab, a fully human anti-interleukin-1β monoclonal antibody, was effective in controlling and preventing flares in patients with colchicine-resistant familial Mediterranean fever (crFMF).1

Objectives:

To evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of canakinumab to treat patients with crFMF during Epoch 4 of the CLUSTER study.

Methods:

Patients with active crFMF (baseline flare) were enrolled in the CLUSTER study. During Epoch 4 (weeks 40 to 113), patients received open-label canakinumab 150 or 300 mg, every 4 or 8 weeks (q4w or q8w). Patients started Epoch 4 on the same regimen that they were receiving at the end of Epoch 3, and stepwise up-titration of canakinumab was allowed in patients who experienced a flare, to a maximum dose of 300 mg q4w. We evaluated disease activity every 8 weeks using the physician global assessment of disease activity (PGA), counting the number of flares (defined as PGA ≥2 and CRP >30 mg/L), and measuring serum concentrations of C reactive protein (CRP) and serum amyloid A (SAA). Safety was assessed by the determination and classification of adverse events (AEs). We analysed safety and efficacy separately in two subgroups of patients receiving a cumulative dose of canakinumab lower than 2700 mg, or equal or higher than 2700 mg.

Results:

Of the 61 patients with active crFMF who started the CLUSTER study, 60 entered Epoch 4 and 57 completed it. During the 72-week period, 35/60 (58.3%) patients experienced no flares, and 23/60 (38.3%) had one single flare, as compared with a median of 17.5 flares per year reported at baseline. The incidence of flares was similar in the two cumulative dose groups. PGA scores indicated no disease activity for the majority of patients throughout the study, in both cumulative dose groups. 23/57 (40%) of patients remained in the lower dosing group (150 mg q8w) until study end, whereas 9/57 (16%) required the highest dose allowed (300 mg q4w). Patients with higher body weight had an increased probability to require up-titration of canakinumab to control disease activity. Median CRP concentrations were lower than 10 mg/L at every time point in both cumulative dose groups, while median SAA concentrations remained in the 16-70 mg/L range, and were higher in the group receiving ≥2700 mg canakinumab (Figure 1). No opportunistic infections, renal disease caused by amyloidosis, new or unexpected AEs were reported.

Figure 1.

SAA and CRP blood levels in Epoch 4 of the CLUSTER study, in two subgroups of patients treated with a cumulative dose of canakinumab <2700 mg or ≥2700 mg

Conclusion:

Patients with crFMF treated with canakinumab during 72 weeks experienced a minimal incidence of flares and good control of clinical disease activity, with no new safety signals reported.

References:

[1]De Benedetti F et al.N Engl J Med2018;378:1908–19.

Disclosure of Interests:

Seza Özen Consultant of: Novartis, Pfizer, Speakers bureau: SOBI, Novartis, Eldad Ben-Chetrit Speakers bureau: Novartis, Ivan Foeldvari Consultant of: Novartis, Gil Amarilyo Grant/research support from: Novartis, Speakers bureau: Novartis, Huri Ozdogan: None declared, Steven Vanderschueren: None declared, Katherine Marzan Grant/research support from: Novartis, J Michelle Kahlenberg Grant/research support from: Celgene, BMS, Consultant of: Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingleheim, Elise Dekker Employee of: Novartis, Fabrizio De Benedetti Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Pfizer, Novartis, Novimmune, Sobi, Sanofi, Roche, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Novartis, Roche, Sobi, Isabelle Koné-Paut Consultant of: Novartis, Chugai, Pfizer, LFB, AbbVie, Novimmune, SOBI