Safety of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and the BBV152 vaccines in 724 patients with rheumatic diseases: a post-vaccination cross-sectional survey.

Patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal (RMD) diseases may be at higher risks for COVID-19 infection. Data on the safety of the adenoviral vector-borne ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and the heat-inactivated BBV152 Vaccines in this group are limited. 724 patients with RMD who had received at least one dose of either the ChAdOx1 or the BBV152 were audited to find out post-vaccination adverse effect (AE) or disease flares. The AE rates in patients with autoimmune rheumatic disease (AIRD) were compared with those with non-AIRD RMDs. The mean age of the cohort was 59.9 (± 10.43) years with a female (n = 581; 80.24%) majority. 523 (70.8%) had AIRD. The ChAdOx1 and the BBV152 vaccines were received by 624 (86.18%) and 77 (10.63%), respectively. 23 (3.17%) were unaware of which vaccine they had received. 238 (32.87%) of patients had at least one comorbidity. 436 (60.22%) participants [306 (59.64%) of those with AIRD and 130 (61.61%) with other RMDs] had at least one adverse effect (AE). Four patients reported flare of arthritis that resolved within 5 days. No patient had any severe AE or required hospitalization. All AEs were self-limiting. Both the ChAdOx1 and the BBV152 vaccines appear safe in RMDs. AEs do not differ between patients with AIRD or non-AIRD. This information can help negate vaccine hesitancy amongst all stakeholders.

Antibody responses after documented COVID-19 disease in patients with autoimmune rheumatic disease.

Patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRD) are suspected to have less robust immune responses during COVID-19 due to underlying immune dysfunction and the use of immune-suppressive drugs. Fifty consecutive patients with a diagnosis of AIRD on disease-modifying drugs were included at around 30 days after a confirmatory test for COVID-19. Fifty controls matched one to one for age, sex, and severity of COVID-19 were also included at around 30 days after testing positive for COVID-19. Antibody titers for anti-spike protein IgG and anti-nucleocapsid protein IgG were estimated. Cases (mean age 45.9 ± 13; 76% females) and controls (mean age 45.9 ± 13; 76% females) had similar proportion of comorbidities. Of the cases, 4 had moderate and 1 had severe COVID-19, while 3 and 1 of controls had moderate and severe COVID-19 respectively. Positivity of anti-N IgG was similar between patients (80%) and controls (90%) (p = 0.26). Similarly, anti-S IgG was positive in 82% of patients and 86% of controls (p = 0.79). Both the antibodies were negative in seven (14%) patients and five (10%) of controls (p = 0.76, Fischer exact test). Only anti-N IgG titers were lower in patients as compared to controls. In four patients with rheumatoid arthritis, two with spondyloarthritis and one with eosinophilic fasciitis both antibodies were not detectable. They did not differ from the rest of the cohort in clinical characteristics. The patients with AIRD had adequate protective antibody responses to COVID-19 at a median of 30 days post-infection. Thus, the presence of AIRD or the use of immunosuppressants does not seem to influence the development of humoral immune response against COVID-19. Key Points • Patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRD) are suspected to have less robust immune responses. • In our cohort of 50 patients with AIRD with confirmed COVID-19, only seven did not have detectable protective antibodies at 30 days post infection. • Patients with AIRD on immunosuppressants have adequate protective antibodies post COVID-19 disease, at rates similar to that in health controls.

Switching to teleconsultation for rheumatology in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic: feasibility and patient response in India.

The emergent COVID-19 pandemic dictates an urgent switch to teleconsultation. India has high patient to rheumatologist ratio, and patients have limited concepts about telemedicine. Thus, we attempted to find the feasibility and acceptance of patients in switching to teleconsultation. The CARE rheumatology clinic at Kerala, India, caters to average 170 (range: 140-240) patients per day. Patients with prefixed appointments had two-level screening for eligibility for teleconsultation. Those eligible were given the option for teleconsultation on the widely available WhatsApp app. Of those who completed teleconsultations, 100 were chosen at random to provide feedback. In the first 7 days, out of 1469 appointments, 975 were found eligible for teleconsultation. Of these, 723 (74%) opted for it. The average footfall in the clinic was reduced to 67 (range 29-117). The proportion of patients accepting teleconsultations increased with time. Amongst the 100 respondents, median satisfaction was 9 (IQR 8-10) and recommendation for continuing was 9.5 (IQR 8-10) on a 0-10 scale. Multivariate analysis showed the recommendation score was dependent on beliefs about social distancing, perceptions about clinical examination, and the satisfaction score of the first teleconsultation. Age, sex, availability of personal video conferencing app or of vehicles did not independently influence this score. Without teleconsultation facilities, three-fourths of the respondents would have stopped drugs or self-medicated. The switch was feasible and accepted by patients. It enabled quick reduction in the number of persons travelling to the centre. Not making the switch could have deprived approximately three-quarters of these patients of proper medical care. Key Points • Patient to rheumatologist ratios in India is heavily skewed and awareness about telemedicine is limited. • Switch to telemedicine was feasible and allowed a decrease in the number of people attending the clinic. • Not switching could have lead to disruption of care or self-medication in a majority of patients.