SAPHO—a diagnosis to consider in patients with refractory costochondritis

Background

SAPHO syndrome (synovitis, acne, pustulosis, hyperostosis, and osteitis) is a rare, heterogeneous, self-limited disease of unknown etiology. It involves progressive bone and joint damage, and skin and bone lesions may occur at different times in the course of the disease. Skin lesions are characterized by neutrophil dermatosis. Its management is empirical and mainly symptomatic, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are the first-line treatment.

Case presentation

Forty-seven-year-old female presented with a 7-year history of costochondral pain. It had progressive onset, chronical course, with no other associated symptoms, and no other joint involvement. She was treated with intermittent NSAID (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), which provided only partial pain relief; there was bilateral tender swelling of the sternoclavicular region, the skin over the sternoclavicular area was slightly erythematous, but there were no other skin lesions, and based on imaging findings, a diagnosis of SAPHO syndrome was established. The patient received an infusion of zoledronic acid with subsequent complete resolution of her chest wall symptoms, and completely improved after 3 days.

Conclusions

This case is considered atypical presentation of SAPHO syndrome, without skin changes, long-term persistence of refractory symptoms, and the diagnosis was established by imaging, with complete resolution after zoledronic acid infusion. SAPHO is a differential diagnosis in patients with chronic costochondritis. Therapeutic failure to NSAID is a key to its diagnostic suspicion. Also, early diagnostic suspicion is associated with better outcomes.

Efficacy and safety of intravenous immunoglobulin in patients with lupus nephritis: A systematic review of the literature

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) is an anti-inflammatory drug with an unclear role in the treatment of patients with lupus nephritis (LN). This systematic review evaluates the evidence for IVIg in the care of patients with LN.

METHODOLOGY

A systematic search was done in the PubMed, EMBASE, BVS and OVID databases - All EBM Reviews following the PRISMA methodology (registration in PROSPERO CRD42021236662). The variables were extracted: indications for use, dosage, partial or complete response, adverse reactions, initiation of renal replacement therapy, reduction of proteinuria, and mortality. The quality assessment was done with the "The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal tools for use in Systematic Reviews Checklist". In addition, synthesis reports were prepared through the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis - SWiM guide.

RESULTS

A total of 2328 articles were obtained (28 were considered for inclusion). When the studies were evaluated, IVIg therapy was found to be between 60% to 70% effective (except for patients with class V LN) with overall responses (complete + partial) even for patients who are refractory to first line treatment. Normalization (<0.5 g) of nephrotic proteinuria occurred in 24% of cases with infrequent adverse events and a mortality plus dialysis composite of 11.5% and 24.1% (most representative study).

CONCLUSION

In patients with LN refractory to conventional treatment or co-infection situations, the reported data seem to demonstrate effectiveness of IVIg therapy. There are few adverse reactions and caution is exercised when using it on patients with class V NL. However, given the lack of controlled studies with long-term follow-up, these data should be interpreted cautiously thus encouraging the development of high-quality RCTs.

Comparison of the sensitivity of the EULAR / ACR 2019 and SLICC 2012 classification criteria in a Colombian population with systemic lupus erythematosus

BACKGROUND

/Objective: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a multisystem autoimmune disease with a wide range of clinical manifestations. The latest classification criteria, EULAR/ACR 2019, have not been validated in a Latin American population of Amerindian ancestry. The objective of this study is to compare the sensitivity of the EULAR/ACR 2019 and SLICC 2012 classification criteria in a group of SLE patients with the above ancestry.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was done. Data were obtained from the review of medical records of patients who met the inclusion criteria. The overall sensitivity of the criteria was calculated and compared to each other using the McNemar test.

RESULTS

146 medical records of patients from two referral centers were included. There were no differences in the sensitivity of the EULAR/ACR and SLICC 2012 criteria (84.9% versus 85.6% p = 0.79) nor were differences found when the groups based on disease duration were compared: less than 5 years (91.0% versus 92.5% p = 0.70), between 5 and 10 years (82.8% versus 82.8% p = 1), and 10 years or more (76.7% versus 76.7% p = 1). However, SLICC 2012 criteria was found to better classify patients with a less than 5-year disease duration compared to those with 10-year duration or more (92.5% versus 76.4% p = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

There are no statistically significant differences between the EULAR/ACR and SLICC 2012 criteria in the population studied. Nor were differences found when evaluating them by age at diagnosis and duration of the disease except when the group with less than 5 years of duration was compared to those with 10 years or more using the SLICC 2012 criteria.

[SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) in Patients with some Degree of Immunosuppression]

Antecedentes

No es claro si los pacientes con algún grado de inmunosupresión tienen peores desenlaces en la infección por SARS-CoV-2, en comparación con la población sana.

Objetivo

Realizar una revisión narrativa de la información disponible sobre infección por SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes inmunosuprimidos, especialmente pacientes con cáncer, trasplantados, con patologías neurológicas, inmunodeficiencias primarias y secundarias.

Resultados

Los pacientes con cáncer y tratamiento reciente del mismo (quimioterapia o cirugía) e infección por SARS-CoV-2 tienen mayor riesgo de peores desenlaces. En los pacientes trasplantados (renal, cardiaco y hepático), con patologías neurológicas (esclerosis múltiple [EM], neuromielitis óptica [NMODS], miastenia grave [MG]), inmunodeficiencias primarias e infección por virus de inmunodeficiencia humana (VIH) en asociación con uso de inmunosupresores, los estudios no han mostrado tendencia a peores desenlaces.

Conclusión

Dada la poca evidencia con que contamos hasta el momento no es claro el comportamiento de la infección por SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes con inmunosupresión, pero los estudios actuales no han mostrado peores desenlaces en este tipo de pacientes, a excepción de los pacientes con cáncer.

SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) in patients with some degree of immunosuppression

BACKGROUND

It is not clear whether patients with some degree of immunosuppression have worse outcomes in SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared to healthy people.

OBJECTIVE

To carry out a narrative review of the information available on infection by SARS-CoV-2 in immunosuppressed patients, especially patients with cancer, transplanted, neurological diseases, primary and secondary immunodeficiencies.

RESULTS

Patients with cancer and recent cancer treatment (chemotherapy or surgery) and SARS-CoV-2 infection have a higher risk of worse outcomes. In transplant patients (renal, cardiac and hepatic), with neurological pathologies (multiple sclerosis (MS), neuromyelitis optica (NMODS), myasthenia gravis (MG)), primary immunodeficiencies and infection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in association with immunosuppressants, studies have shown no tendency for worse outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Given the little evidence we have so far, the behaviour of SARS-CoV-2 infection in immunosuppressed patients is unclear, but current studies have not shown worse outcomes, except for patients with cancer.