AB1173 INCIDENT CASES OF COVID-19 AND VACCINATION ADHERENCE IN A MULTICENTRIC COHORT OF INFLAMMATORY ARTHRITIS IN BRAZIL

Background

The SARS-CoV-2 virus has caused a worldwide health crisis. Patients with inflammatory arthritis are at higher risk of hospitalization and death by COVID-19 due to comorbidities or immunosuppressive treatments. Vaccination is one the most important strategies to control the pandemic.

Objectives

To evaluate the incident cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a multicentric cohort of inflammatory arthritis in Brazil.

Methods

BiobadaBrasil is a multicentric registry-based cohort study of Brazilian patients with rheumatic diseases starting their first bDMARD or tsDMARD (1). The present analysis is a retrospective evaluation of adult patients with inflammatory arthritis (rheumatoid arthritis – RA, spondylarthritis -SpA and psoriatic arthritis-PsA) that were alive since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemics in Brazil in February 2020. We evaluated the incidence and severity of COVID-19 infection and the adherence to anti- SARS-CoV-2 vaccines schedules, up to January 2022.

Results

A total of 300 patients were interviewed and 69 (23.0%) reported confirmed anti-SARS-CoV infection and 5 (1.7%) had a second infection. Among known infected patients, 18.8% need hospitalization and oxygen support, 7.2% were admitted at ICU, and 5.8% died. After COVID-19 infection, 31.8% reported worsening of disease activity but only 6.1% had modification in medication due to disease activity. Distribution of cases followed the pattern of waves observed in Brazil (Figure 1). Regarding vaccination, 285 (95%) reported to have received at least one dose of any anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine: 43% received the first with the adenovirus ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca) adenovirus vaccine, 32% received the Sinovac-CoronaVac inactivated vaccine, 22% received the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNtech) mRNA vaccine and 3% received the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNtech) adenovirus vaccine. Almost all (98.1%) of these patients had already received the second dose of vaccine and after the first and second vaccine doses, 6% and 4% of patients, respectively, reported worsening of articular disease activity, while, after the third dose, no patient reported disease activity worsening.

Figure 1.

Conclusion

During the pandemics, patients with inflammatory arthritis had a pattern of distribution of cases very similar to general population. Adherence to vaccination is high and well tolerated.

References

[1]Bredemeier et al. J Rheumatol 2021;48:1519-27

Disclosure of Interests

None declared

POS0242 THE EFFECT OF ANTIMALARIALS ON THE OVERALL SAFETY AND PERSISTENCE OF TREATMENT WITH BIOLOGIC AGENTS OR JAK INHIBITORS IN RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS

Background

Antimalarials (AM) are frequently part of the initial scheme of conventional synthetic DMARDs in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and have been associated with lower incidence of diabetes and better lipid profile in these patients (1). However, the role of AM in schemes involving biologic (b-) or targeted synthetic (ts-) DMARDs has been much less extensively studied. In addition, a recent large scale study (2) and a consensus article (1) casted doubt on the long-term cardiovascular safety of AM.

Objectives

To evaluate the association of concomitant use of AM with the overall safety and survival of

treatment course among patients receiving one or multiple courses of bDMARDs or tsDMARDs

Methods

BiobadaBrasil is a multicentric registry-based cohort study of Brazilian patients with rheumatic diseases starting their first bDMARD or tsDMARD (3). The present analysis includes RA patients recruited from Jan 2009 to Oct 2019, followed-up over one or multiple (up to six) courses of treatment (latest date, Nov 19, 2019). A treatment course is defined as a period during which the medication scheme does not change. The primary outcome was the incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs). Total and system-specific adverse events (AEs), treatment interruption for any reason, interruption due to AEs and due to inefficacy served as secondary outcomes. Negative binomial regression with generalized estimating equations (to calculate the incidence rate ratios [ÌRRs]) and extended (frailty) Cox proportional hazards models were used for statistical analyses (both types of analyses including time-varying covariates over multiple courses of treatment).

Results

In total, 1316 patients (2335 treatment courses, 6711 patient-years [PY]) were enrolled. The overall incidence of serious adverse events was 9.2/100 PY. AM were used over 354 courses (1254.5 PY) of therapy. The IRRs for the primary and secondary outcomes are presented in Table 1. AM were also associated with better treatment course survival (Figure 1), reducing the risk of interruption due to AEs (multivariate hazard ratio: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.39 to 0.81, P=0.002) and inefficacy (0.65, 0.48 to 0.87, P=0.003).

Figure 1.Table 1.

Univariate and multivariate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of adverse events comparing use versus non-use (reference category) of antimalarials. Results are IRRs, 95% CIs, and P values.

Type of adverse event (n of events)Crude analysisAdjusted covariates*Serious adverse events (617)0.60 (0.41 to 0.87), P=0.0070.51 (0.37 to 0.69), P<0.001Any adverse event (3494)0.65 (0.54 to 0.77), P<0.0010.68 (0.57 to 0.81), P<0.001Cardiovascular‡Serious (52)1.04 (0.49 to 2.20), P=0.9241.06 (0.45 to 2.50), P=0.891Total (163)0.90 (0.59 to 1.38), P=0.6420.93 (0.59 to 1.45), P=0.737InfectionsSerious (277)0.78 (0.44 to 1.39), P=0.4040.53 (0.34 to 0.83), P=0.006Total (1400)0.77 (0.61 to 0.98), P=0.0330.75 (0.60 to 0.94), P=0.014Hepatic‡Total (66)0.20 (0.07 to 0.64), P=0.0070.16 (0.04 to 0.57), P=0.005Glicemic control-relatedTotal (34)0.74 (0.29 to 1.92), P=0.5400.73 (0.26 to 2.00), P=0.535DyslipidemiaTotal (83)0.60 (0.31 to 1.13), P=0.1140.55 (0.28 to 1.06), P=0.074

*Age, baseline DAS28, disease duration, gender, smoking, seropositivity (RF or anti-CCP), previous malignancy, interstitial lung disease, diabetes, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, renal failure, ischemic cardiomyopathy, COPD, heart failure, concomitant use of each cs-, b-, and tsDMARDs, corticosteroids, starting year, osteoporosis, hepatitis B and C, and treatment sequence. ‡ Excluding infections.

Conclusion

Among RA patients on treatment with bDMARDs or tsDMARDs, concomitant use of antimalarials reduced the incidence of serious and total AEs, including infections and hepatic AEs, and prolonged treatment course survival. No significant increase in the risk of cardiovascular AEs was observed.

References

[1]Desmarais et al. Arthritis Rheumatol 2021;73:2151-60.

[2]Lane et al. Lancet Rheumatol 2020;2:e698–e711

[3]Bredemeier et al. J Rheumatol 2021;48:1519-27.

Disclosure of Interests

None declared

Anti-CCP antibodies have more diagnostic impact than rheumatoid factor (RF) in a population tested for RF

To compare the diagnostic powers of rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP) in a population selected for its high statistical relevance, over a 6-month period, an informed consent to test for anti-CCP was obtained from 1,025 consecutive patients for whom RF was ordered at a University laboratory. Within 1 year, a diagnosis was obtained without informing the physician about the anti-CCP result. Extensive statistical analyses were performed. A total of 768 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria, and 132 were classified as having RA, yielding a pre-test probability of RA of 17%. The sensitivities for anti-CCP and RF were 62 and 64% (P = 0.83), and the specificities were 97 and 90% (P < 0.001), respectively. The positive predictive value (PPV) was 79% for anti-CCP and 56% for RF (P < 0.001), whereas the negative predictive value was 92% for both. The likelihood ratio (LR) was 17.9 for anti-CCP and 6.2 for RF (P < 0.005). Forty RA patients were diagnosed with RA of less than 2 years length, and the same significant statistic differences between anti-CCP and RF were observed. Placing the results of both tests together, or using different cutoff points, increased the diagnostic utility of the tests. The anti-CCP test has statistically shown significant higher specificity, PPV, and LR for RA than the RF test in a clinically diverse population. If new criteria are to be devised to help diagnose early RA, anti-CCP should be included because it has a greater diagnostic impact than RF.