Validation of myocarditis diagnoses in the Swedish patient register for analyses of potential adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccines are associated with an increased risk of myocarditis using hospital discharge diagnoses as an outcome. The validity of these register-based diagnoses is uncertain. Methods: Patient records for subjects < 40 years of age and a diagnosis of myocarditis in the Swedish National Patient Register were manually reviewed. Brighton Collaboration diagnosis criteria for myocarditis were applied based on patient history, clinical examination, laboratory data, electrocardiograms, echocardiography, magnetic resonance imaging and myocardial biopsy. Poisson regression was used to estimate incidence rate ratios, comparing the register-based outcome variable to validated outcomes. Interrater reliability was assessed by a blinded re-evaluation. Results: Overall, 95.6% (327/342) of cases registered as myocarditis were confirmed (definite, probable or possible myocarditis according to Brighton Collaboration diagnosis criteria, positive predictive value 0.96 [95% CI 0.93-0.98]). Of the 4.4% (15/342) cases reclassified as no myocarditis or as insufficient information, two cases had been exposed to the COVID-19 vaccine no more than 28 days before the myocarditis diagnosis, two cases were exposed >28 days before admission and 11 cases were unexposed to the vaccine. The reclassification had only minor impact on incidence rate ratios for myocarditis following COVID-19 vaccination. In total, 51 cases were sampled for a blinded re-evaluation. Of the 30 randomly sampled cases initially classified as either definite or probably myocarditis, none were re-classified after re-evaluation. Of the in all 15 cases initially classified as no myocarditis or insufficient information, 7 were after re-evaluation re-classified as probable or possible myocarditis. This re-classification was mostly due to substantial variability in electrocardiogram interpretation. Conclusion: This validation of register-based diagnoses of myocarditis by manual patient record review confirmed the register diagnosis in 96% of cases and had high interrater reliability. Reclassification had only a minor impact on the incidence rate ratios for myocarditis following COVID-19 vaccination.

Safety of biological and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs for rheumatoid arthritis as used in clinical practice: results from the ARTIS programme.

OBJECTIVE: Longitudinal clinical registry-infrastructures such as Anti-Rheumatic Therapies in Sweden (ARTIS) allow simultaneous comparison of the safety of individual immunomodulatory drugs used in clinical practice, with consistent definitions of treatment cohorts, follow-up and outcomes. Our objective was to assess and compare incidence rates of key safety outcomes for individual targeted synthetic or biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/ts DMARDs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), updating previous reports and including newer treatments including Janus Kinase inhibitors (JAKi). METHODS: Nationwide register-based cohort study including all patients with RA in Sweden registered as starting any b/tsDMARD 1 January 2010 through 31 December 2020, followed until 30 June 2021 (N=20 117). The incidence rates of selected outcomes, identified through national healthcare registers, were compared between individual b/tsDMARDs, adjusted for confounding by demographics, RA disease characteristics and comorbidity. RESULTS: There were marked differences in treatment discontinuations due to adverse events (rates per 1000 person-years ranged from 18 on rituximab to 57 on tofacitinib), but few significant differences were observed for the serious adverse events under study. Neither cardiovascular events nor general serious infections were more frequent on baricitinib or tofacitinib versus bDMARDs, but JAKi were associated with higher rates of hospital-treated herpes zoster (HR vs etanercept, 3.82 (95% CI 2.05 to 7.09) and 4.00 (1.59 to 10.06)). Low number of events limited some comparisons, in particular for sarilumab and tofacitinib. CONCLUSION: Data from ARTIS supports that the b/tsDMARDs currently used to treat RA have acceptable and largely similar safety profiles, but differences exist in particular concerning tolerability and specific infection risks.

Federated analyses of multiple data sources in drug safety studies.

PURPOSE: Studies of rare side effects of new drugs with limited exposure may require pooling of multiple data sources. Federated Analyses (FA) allow real-time, interactive, centralized statistical processing of individual-level data from different data sets without transfer of sensitive personal data. METHODS: We review IT-architecture, legal considerations, and statistical methods in FA, based on a Swedish Medical Products Agency methodological development project. RESULTS: In a review of all post-authorisation safety studies assessed by the EMA during 2019, 74% (20/27 studies) reported issues with lack of precision in spite of mean study periods of 9.3 years. FA could potentially improve precision in such studies. Depending on the statistical model, the federated approach can generate identical results to a standard analysis. FA may be particularly attractive for repeated collaborative projects where data is regularly updated. There are also important limitations. Detailed agreements between involved parties are strongly recommended to anticipate potential issues and conflicts, document a shared understanding of the project, and fully comply with legal obligations regarding ethics and data protection. FA do not remove the data harmonisation step, which remains essential and often cumbersome. Reliable support for technical integration with the local server architecture and security solutions is required. Common statistical methods are available, but adaptations may be required. CONCLUSIONS: Federated Analyses require competent and active involvement of all collaborating parties but have the potential to facilitate collaboration across institutional and national borders and improve the precision of postmarketing drug safety studies.

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

OBJECTIVES: To compare risks for COVID-19-related outcomes in inflammatory joint diseases (IJDs) and across disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) during the first two waves of the pandemic and to assess effects of the pandemic on rheumatology care provision. METHODS: Through nationwide multiregister linkages and cohort study design, we defined IJD and DMARD use annually in 2015-2020. We assessed absolute and relative risks of hospitalisation or death listing COVID-19. We also assessed the incidence of IJD and among individuals with IJD, rheumatologist visits, DMARD use and incidence of selected comorbidities. RESULTS: Based on 115 317 patients with IJD in 2020, crude risks of hospitalisation and death listing COVID-19 (0.94% and 0.33% across both waves, respectively) were similar during both waves (adjusted HR versus the general population 1.33, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.43, for hospitalisation listing COVID-19; 1.23, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.40 for death listing COVID-19). Overall, biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs)/targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (tsDMARDs) did not increase risks of COVID-19 related hospitalisation (with the exception of a potential signal for JAK inhibitors) or death. During the pandemic, decreases were observed for IJD incidence (-7%), visits to rheumatology units (-16%), DMARD dispensations (+6.5% for bDMARD/tsDMARDs and -8.5% for conventional synthetic DMARDs compared with previous years) and for new comorbid conditions, but several of these changes were part of underlying secular trends. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with IJD are at increased risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes, which may partially be explained by medical conditions other than IJD per se. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has exerted measurable effects on aspects of rheumatology care provision demonstrated, the future impact of which will need to be assessed.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on morbidity and mortality in patients with inflammatory joint diseases and in the general population: a nationwide Swedish cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate absolute and relative risks for all-cause mortality and for severe COVID-19 in inflammatory joint diseases (IJDs) and with antirheumatic therapies. METHODS: Through Swedish nationwide multiregister linkages, we selected all adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA, n=53 455 in March 2020), other IJDs (here: spondyloarthropathies, psoriatic arthritis and juvenile idiopathic arthritis, n=57 112), their antirheumatic drug use, and individually matched population referents. We compared annual all-cause mortality March-September 2015 through 2020 within and across cohorts, and assessed absolute and relative risks for hospitalisation, admission to intensive care and death due to COVID-19 March-September 2020, using Cox regression. RESULTS: During March-September 2020, the absolute all-cause mortality in RA and in other IJDs was higher than 2015-2019, but relative risks versus the general population (around 2 and 1.5) remained similar during 2020 compared with 2015-2019. Among patients with IJD, the risks of hospitalisation (0.5% vs 0.3% in their population referents), admission to intensive care (0.04% vs 0.03%) and death (0.10% vs 0.07%) due to COVID-19 were low. Antirheumatic drugs were not associated with increased risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes, although for certain drugs, precision was limited. CONCLUSIONS: Risks of severe COVID-19-related outcomes were increased among patients with IJDs, but risk increases were also seen for non-COVID-19 morbidity. Overall absolute and excess risks are low and the level of risk increases are largely proportionate to those in the general population, and explained by comorbidities. With possible exceptions, antirheumatic drugs do not have a major impact on these risks.

The profile of the COvid-19 VACcination register SAFEty study in Sweden (CoVacSafe-SE).

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines have been rapidly implemented in national vaccination programs world-wide after accelerated approval processes. The large population exposure achieved in very short time requires systematic monitoring of safety. The Swedish Medical Products Agency has launched a project platform for epidemiological surveillance to detect and characterise suspected adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines in Sweden. METHODS: The platform includes all individuals 12 years or older in Sweden in 2021 and will be updated annually. Data, including vaccine and COVID-19 disease data, socioeconomic and demographic data, comorbidity, prescribed medicines and healthcare utilisation outcomes, are obtained from several national registers in collaboration with other Swedish Government agencies. Data from 2015 to 2019 are used as a historical comparison cohort unexposed to both the COVID-19 pandemic and to the COVID-19 vaccines. RESULTS: The primary study cohort includes 8,305,978 adults 18 years and older permanently residing in Sweden on 31 December 2020. The historical control cohort includes 8,679,641 subjects. By 31 July 2021, around 50% of those 18 years and older and two-thirds of those 50 years and older were vaccinated with at least one dose, 90% of those 70 years or older had two doses. CONCLUSIONS: The nationwide register-based study cohort created by the Swedish Medical Products Agency with regular updates of individual level linkage of COVID-19 vaccination exposure data to other health data registers will facilitate both safety signal detection and evaluation and other pharmacoepidemiological studies.

Change in risk for narcolepsy over time and impact of definition of onset date following vaccination with AS03 adjuvanted pandemic A/H1N1 influenza vaccine (Pandemrix) during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic.

PURPOSE: To estimate risk for narcolepsy in defined time windows following exposure to adjuvanted A(H1N1) pandemic vaccine (Pandemrix) and impact of different definitions of index date for the narcolepsy diagnosis. METHODS: Vaccine exposure in approximately 30% of the Swedish population in 2009 was linked to information on narcolepsy diagnosis retrieved from the national patient registry. Cases were verified by a systematic chart review. Poisson regression was used to compare incidence in defined time windows following vaccination. RESULTS: Of 266 cases of narcolepsy identified, 25% (66/266) were prevalent cases with symptom onset documented before vaccine exposure. Incident cases had a median time interval between first symptom and the date recorded in the patient registry of 64 weeks (IQR 39-107) when vaccinated (N = 182) and 65 weeks (IQR 51-72) when unvaccinated (N = 16). With first symptom defining index date, the adjusted risk for narcolepsy in younger patients was increased 14 times during the first year after vaccination, three times elevated the second year, but with no detectable increased risk more than 2 years after vaccination exposure. Using the index date from the patient registry, the adjusted increase in risk was about seven times elevated for all three time intervals. CONCLUSIONS: The magnitude of the estimated increased risk for narcolepsy following exposure to the A(H1N1) pandemic vaccine is highly dependent on the method used to determine the index date for disease onset. The sometimes very long and potentially variable interval from first symptom to a health care registry diagnosis complicates estimations of risk.

2018 EULAR recommendations for a core data set to support observational research and clinical care in giant cell arteritis.

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) represents the most common form of primary systemic vasculitis and is frequently associated with comorbidities related to the disease itself or induced by the treatment. Systematically collected data on disease course, treatment and outcomes of GCA remain scarce. The aim of this EULAR Task Force was to identify a core set of items which can easily be collected by experienced clinicians, in order to facilitate collaborative research into the course and outcomes of GCA. A multidisciplinary EULAR task force group of 20 experts including rheumatologists, internists, epidemiologists and patient representatives was assembled. During a 1-day meeting, breakout groups discussed items from a previously compiled collection of parameters describing GCA status and disease course. Feedback from breakout groups was further discussed. Final consensus was achieved by means of several rounds of email discussions after the meeting. A three-round Delphi survey was conducted to determine a core set of parameters including the level of agreement. 117 parameters were regarded as relevant. Potential items were subdivided into the following categories: General, demographics, GCA-related signs and symptoms, other medical conditions and treatment. Possible instruments and assessment intervals were proposed for documentation of each item. To facilitate implementation of the recommendations in clinical care and clinical research, a minimum core set of 50 parameters was agreed. This proposed core set intends to ensure that relevant items from different GCA registries and databases can be compared for the dual purposes of facilitating clinical research and improving clinical care.

Comparative effectiveness of abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab and TNFi biologics in RA: results from the nationwide Swedish register.

OBJECTIVES: Current guidelines rank abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab and TNF-inhibitors (TNFi) as having equal effectiveness for the treatment of RA, at least as second line therapies. These recommendations are mainly based on meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, with few direct drug-drug comparisons. Our objective was to compare the real-world absolute and relative effectiveness among RA patients starting any of the available biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs). METHODS: We used the Swedish Rheumatology Register to identify patients with RA initiating TNFi, rituximab, abatacept or tocilizumab in 2010-2016 as first bDMARD (n = 9333), or after switch from TNFi as first bDMARD (n = 3941). National Swedish registers provided additional covariates and censoring events. Effectiveness was assessed 3 and 12 months after treatment start, as the proportion remaining on therapy and with EULAR Good Response, HAQ improvement >0.2, zero swollen/tender joints and CDAI remission. Adjusted differences were estimated with multivariable linear regression. RESULTS: Patients starting non-TNFi (vs TNFi) as first bDMARD had a higher proportion remaining on drug and reaching most response outcomes as first bDMARD (1-year EULAR Good Response/HAQ improvement: TNFi 24.9/25.4%, rituximab 28.6/37.2%, abatacept 31.9/33.7%, tocilizumab 50.9/43.1%). After switch from a first TNFi, rituximab and tocilizumab, but not abatacept, were associated with significantly better response measures than TNFi (1-year EULAR Good Response/HAQ improvement: TNFi 11.6/16.1%, rituximab 24.8/33.2%, abatacept 13.1/17.5%, tocilizumab 34.1/29.4%). Differences remained significant after adjusting for potential confounders. CONCLUSION: Treatment outcomes among RA patients treated in Swedish clinical practice are in line with a superior effectiveness of non-TNFi bDMARDs, in particular tocilizumab and rituximab, compared with TNFi.

Utility of registries for post-marketing evaluation of medicines. A survey of Swedish health care quality registries from a regulatory perspective.

AIM: The aim of this study was to describe content and procedures in some selected Swedish health care quality registries (QRs) of relevance to regulatory decision-making. METHODS: A workshop was organized with participation of seven Swedish QRs which subsequently answered a questionnaire regarding registry content on drug treatments and outcomes. Patient populations, coverage, data handling and quality control, as well as legal and ethical aspects are presented. Scientific publications from the QRs are used as a complementary measure of quality and scientific relevance. RESULTS: The registries under study collect clinical data of high relevance to regulatory and health technology agencies. Five out of seven registries provide information on the drug of interest. When applying external quality criteria, we found a high degree of fulfillment, although information on medication was not sufficient to answer all questions of regulatory interest. A notable strength is the option for linkage to the Prescribed Drug Registry and to information on education and socioeconomic status. Data on drugs used during hospitalization were also collected to some extent. Outcome measures collected resemble those used in relevant clinical trials. All registries collected patient-reported outcome measures. The number of publications from the registries was substantial, with studies of appropriate design, including randomized registry trials. CONCLUSIONS: Quality registries may provide a valuable source of post-marketing data on drug effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness. Closer collaboration between registries and regulators to improve quality and usefulness of registry data could benefit both regulatory utility and value for health care providers.

Increased availability of paracetamol in Sweden and incidence of paracetamol poisoning: using laboratory data to increase validity of a population-based registry study.

PURPOSE: To estimate the incidence trend and outcome of paracetamol poisoning, in relation to increased availability of paracetamol from non-pharmacy outlets in 2009. METHOD: Patients' serum paracetamol results over 14 years (2000-2013) from 20 (out of 21) regions in Sweden were linked to national registers of hospital care, cause of death, and prescriptions. Paracetamol poisonings were defined by serum paracetamol levels, hospital diagnoses, or cause of death. The change in incidence of poisonings following increased availability of paracetamol was analysed by using segmental regression of time series. RESULTS: Of the 12 068 paracetamol poisonings, 85% were classified as intentional self-harm. Following increased availability from non-pharmacy outlets, there was a 40.5% increase in the incidence of paracetamol poisoning, from 11.5/100 000 in 2009 to 16.2/100 000 in 2013. Regression analyses indicated a change in the trend (p < 0.0001) but not an immediate jump in the incidence (p = 0.5991) following the increased availability. Adjusting for trends in hospital episodes for self-harm, suicides, and the sales volume of paracetamol did not influence the result. All-cause mortality at 30 days (3.2%) did not change over time. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of paracetamol poisoning in Sweden has increased since 2009, contrasting the decreased incidence in the period of 2007-2009. The change in trend was temporally associated with the introduction of availability of paracetamol from non-pharmacy outlets but did not appear to be related to sales volume of paracetamol or general trends in self-harm or suicides. © 2017 Commonwealth of Australia. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cancer risk in patients with spondyloarthritis treated with TNF inhibitors: a collaborative study from the ARTIS and DANBIO registers.

BACKGROUND: Safety data on cancer risks following tumour necrosis factor α inhibitors (TNFi) in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) (here defined as ankylosing spondylitis (AS), undifferentiated spondarthropaties (SpA UNS), psoriatic arthritis (PsA)) are scarce. Our objective was to assess risks for cancer overall and for common subtypes in patients with SpA treated with TNFi compared with TNFi-naïve patients with SpA and to the general population. METHODS: From the Swedish (Anti-Rheumatic Therapy in Sweden (ARTIS)) and Danish (DANBIO) biologics registers, we assembled 8703 (ARTIS=5448, DANBIO=3255) patients with SpA initiating a first TNFi 2001-2011. From the Swedish National Patient and Population Registers we assembled a TNFi-naïve SpA cohort (n=28,164) and a Swedish age-matched and sex-matched general population comparator cohort (n=131 687). We identified incident cancers by linkage with the nationwide Swedish and Danish Cancer Registers 2001-2011, and calculated age-standardised and sex-standardised incidence ratios as measures of relative risk (RR). RESULTS: Based on 1188 cancers among the TNFi-naïve patients with SpA, RR of cancer overall was 1.1 (95% CI 1.0 to 1.2). Based on 147 cancers among TNFi initiators with SpA, RR versus TNFi-naïve was 0.8 (95% CI 0.7 to 1.0) and results were similar for AS and PsA when analysed separately. Site-specific cancer RRs: prostate 0.5 (95% CI 0.3 to 0.8), lung 0.6 (95% CI 0.3 to 1.3), colorectal 1.0 (95% CI 0.5 to 2.0), breast 1.3 (95% CI 0.9 to 2.0), lymphoma 0.8 (95% CI 0.4 to 1.8) and melanoma 1.4 (95% CI 0.7 to 2.6). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with SpA, treatment with TNFi was not associated with increased risks of cancer, neither overall nor for the six most common cancer types.

Risk for Congenital Malformation With H1N1 Influenza Vaccine: A Cohort Study With Sibling Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Earlier studies reporting varying risk estimates for congenital malformation in offspring of mothers undergoing vaccination against H1N1 influenza during pregnancy did not consider the potential role of confounding by familial (genetic and shared environmental) factors. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate an association between maternal H1N1 vaccination during pregnancy and offspring malformation, with familial factors taken into account. DESIGN: Population-based prospective study. SETTING: Sweden. PARTICIPANTS: Liveborn offspring born between 1 October 2009 and 1 October 2011 to mothers receiving monovalent AS03-adjuvanted H1N1 influenza vaccine (Pandemrix [GlaxoSmithKline]) during pregnancy. A total of 40 983 offspring were prenatally exposed to the vaccine, 14 385 were exposed within the first trimester (14 weeks), and 7502 were exposed during the first 8 weeks of pregnancy. Exposed offspring were compared with 197 588 unexposed offspring. Corresponding risks in exposed versus unexposed siblings were also estimated. MEASUREMENTS: Congenital malformation, with subanalyses for congenital heart disease, oral cleft, and limb deficiency. RESULTS: Congenital malformation was observed in 2037 (4.97%) exposed offspring and 9443 (4.78%) unexposed offspring. Adjusted risk for congenital malformation was 4.98% in exposed offspring versus 4.96% in unexposed offspring (risk difference, 0.02% [95% CI, -0.26% to 0.30%]). The corresponding risk differences were 0.16% (CI, -0.23% to 0.56%) for vaccination during the first trimester and 0.10% (CI, -0.41% to 0.62%) for vaccination in the first 8 weeks. Using siblings as comparators yielded no statistically significant risk differences. LIMITATIONS: The study was based on live births, and the possibility that data on miscarriage or induced abortion could have influenced the findings cannot be ruled out. Study power was limited in analyses of specific malformations. CONCLUSION: When intrafamilial factors were taken into consideration, H1N1 vaccination during pregnancy did not seem to be linked to overall congenital malformation in offspring, although risk increases for specific malformations could not be ruled out completely. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Swedish Research Council and Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research.

Maternal vaccination against H1N1 influenza and offspring mortality: population based cohort study and sibling design.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the mortality in offspring of mothers who had influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccination during pregnancy? METHODS: This was a prospective population based cohort study in seven healthcare regions in Sweden based on vaccinations taking place between 2 October 2009 and 26 November 2010. H1N1 vaccination data were linked with pregnancy and birth characteristics and offspring mortality data in 275,500 births (of which 1203 were stillbirths) from 137,886 mothers. Of these offspring, 41,183 had been exposed to vaccination with Pandemrix, a monovalent AS03 adjuvanted H1N1 influenza vaccine, during fetal life. A primary comparison group consisted of pregnancies of women who were not vaccinated during the same calendar period. In a second comparison, non-exposed siblings of infants prenatally exposed to vaccination were used as controls. Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios for stillbirth, early neonatal mortality (days 0-6 after birth), and subsequent mortality (beginning on day 7) in vaccinated versus non-vaccinated women, adjusting for mother's age at delivery, body mass index, parity, smoking, country of birth, and disposable income and for sex of offspring. STUDY ANSWER AND LIMITATIONS: The results of this study suggest that AS03 adjuvanted H1N1 vaccination during pregnancy does not affect the risk of stillbirth, early neonatal death, or later mortality in the offspring. During follow-up, 1172 stillbirths, 380 early neonatal deaths, and 706 deaths thereafter occurred. Compared with general population controls, this corresponded to adjusted hazard ratios of 0.83 (95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.04) for stillbirth, 0.71 (0.44 to 1.14) for early neonatal death, and 0.97 (0.69 to 1.36) for later death. When siblings were used as controls, adjusted hazard ratios were 0.88 (0.59 to 1.30) for stillbirth, 0.82 (0.46 to 1.49) for early neonatal death, and 0.78 (0.52 to 1.19) for later death. Limitations of the study include lack of data on miscarriage before gestational week 22, inability to ascertain which mothers had pandemic flu during pregnancy, and lack of data on factors influencing the decision to vaccinate during pregnancy. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: H1N1 vaccination during pregnancy is not associated with adverse fetal outcome or offspring mortality, including when familial factors are taken into account. FUNDING, COMPETING INTERESTS, DATA SHARING: This project was supported by grants from the Swedish Research Council and the Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research. NF was employed at the Swedish Medical Product Agency at the time of the study.

Are patients with rheumatoid arthritis still at an increased risk of tuberculosis and what is the role of biological treatments?

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the risk of tuberculosis (TB) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) both with and without exposure to biological therapy and to directly compare the risks between therapies. METHODS: Data from the Swedish National Population Registers, Tuberculosis Register and the Swedish Biologics Register were used to conduct a prospective population-based national cohort study (2002-2011). We estimated the rate of incident TB in the general population and in a cohort of biological-naïve and biological-exposed patients diagnosed with RA. Cox models were used to estimate HRs with particular attention to risks by calendar and follow-up time and individual biologics. RESULTS: Compared to the general population, RA patients not exposed to biologicals had a fourfold increased risk of TB (HR 4.2; 95% CI 2.7 to 6.7), which did not decline over calendar time. In contrast, the risk of TB in the biological-exposed RA population decreased since 2002 compared with biological-naïve; from HR=7.9 (95% CI 3.3 to 18.9) in 2002-2006 to HR=2.4 (95% CI 0.9 to 6.1) in 2007-2011. The HRs for most recent exposure to adalimumab and infliximab compared with etanercept were 3.1 (95% CI 0.8 to 12.5) and 2.7 (95% CI 0.7 to 10.9), respectively, and the HR for etanercept compared with biological-naïve RA was 1.7 (95% CI 0.6 to 4.6). CONCLUSIONS: In the past decade, the risk of TB has decreased among biological-exposed RA patients but remains higher than in biological-naïve RA patients. Most cases of TB in RA occur in biological-naïve RA patients, underscoring the elevated risk also in these patients.