Rate of severe and fatal infections in a cohort of patients with interstitial lung disease associated with rheumatoid arthritis: a multicenter prospective study.

Objective: To describe severe infection, foci of infection, microorganisms, associated factors, and impact on mortality in patients with rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD). Patients and methods: The study was based on a multicenter prospective cohort of patients with RA-ILD followed up from 2015 to 2023. The main outcome measures were incident severe infection and fatal infection. We evaluated infectious foci, etiologic agents, vaccination status, variables associated with lung function, and clinical-therapeutic variables in RA. The incidence rate (IR) for infection and mortality was calculated per 100 person-years, and 3 multivariate models were constructed to explore factors associated with infection. Results: We followed up 148 patients with RA-ILD for a median 56.7 months (699.3 person-years). During this period, 142 patients (96%) had at least 1 infection. A total of 368 infectious episodes were recorded, with an IR of 52.6 per 100 person-years. Of the 48 patients who died, 65% did so from infection. Respiratory infections were the most common first infection (74%), infection overall (74%), and fatal infection (80%) and were caused mostly by SARS CoV-2, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and influenza A virus. The factors associated with an increased risk of infection and death in patients with RA-ILD were age, inflammatory activity, and therapy with corticosteroids and immunosuppressants. Conclusion: Patients with RA-ILD have a high risk of serious infection, especially respiratory infection. Infection develops early, is recurrent, and is frequently fatal. The presence of associated factors such as advanced age, joint inflammation, and treatment highlight the importance of integrated and preventive medical care.

Analysis of comorbidity in rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease: a nested case-cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe comorbid conditions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD) and to analyze factors associated with multimorbidity. METHODS: Nested case-cohort study of 2 prospective cohorts: one with RA-ILD (cases) and another with RA but not ILD (controls). The cohorts were matched for age, sex, and time since diagnosis. Multimorbidity was defined as the co-occurrence of 2 or more chronic diseases, in addition to RA and ILD. We evaluated the comorbid conditions included in the Charlson Comorbidity Index, cardiovascular risk factors, neuropsychiatric conditions, and other frequent conditions in RA. We also recorded clinical-laboratory variables, inflammatory activity according to the 28-joint Disease Activity Score, C-reactive protein (CRP), physical function, and pulmonary function. We performed 2 multivariate analyses to identify factors associated with multimorbidity in RA and RA-ILD. RESULTS: The final study population comprised 110 cases and 104 controls. Multimorbidity was more frequent among cases than controls (80 [72.7] vs 60 [57.7]; p = 0.021). In both groups, multimorbidity was associated with ILD (OR [95% CI] 1.92 [1.03-3.59]; p = 0.039), age (OR [95% CI] 1.05 [1.01-1.08]; p = 0.004), CRP (OR [95% CI] 1.16 [1.05-1.29]; p = 0.003), and erosions (OR [95% CI] 1.05 [1.01-1.08]; p = 0.004); in the cases, it was associated with CRP (OR [95% CI] 1.17 [1.01-1.35]; p = 0.027), anti-citrullinated peptide antibody (OR [95% CI] 1.23 [1.14-13.02]; p = 0.049), and forced vital capacity (OR [95% CI] 0.79 [0.96-0.99]; p = 0.036). CONCLUSION: In patients with RA, multimorbidity was associated with ILD, systemic inflammation, and advanced age.

Safety and Effectiveness of Abatacept in a Prospective Cohort of Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis-Associated Interstitial Lung Disease.

OBJECTIVE: To prospectively evaluate the safety and efficacy profile of abatacept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD). METHODS: We performed a prospective observational multicenter study of a cohort of patients with RA-ILD treated with abatacept between 2015 and 2021. Patients were evaluated using high-resolution computed tomography and pulmonary function tests at initiation, 12 months, and the end of follow-up. The effectiveness of abatacept was evaluated based on whether ILD improved, stabilized, progressed, or was fatal. We also evaluated factors such as infection, hospitalization, and inflammatory activity using the 28-joint Disease Activity Score with the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR). Cox regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with progression of lung disease. RESULTS: The study population comprised 57 patients with RA-ILD treated with abatacept for a median (IQR) of 27.3 (12.2-42.8) months. Lung disease had progressed before starting abatacept in 45.6% of patients. At the end of follow-up, lung disease had improved or stabilized in 41 patients (71.9%) and worsened in 13 (22.8%); 3 patients (5.3%) died. No significant decreases were observed in forced vital capacity (FVC) or in the diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO).The factors associated with progression of RA-ILD were baseline DAS28-ESR (OR [95% CI], 2.52 [1.03-3.12]; p = 0.041), FVC (OR [95% CI], 0.82 [0.70-0.96]; p = 0.019), and DLCO (OR [95% CI], 0.83 [0.72-0.96]; p = 0.018). Only 10.5% of patients experienced severe adverse effects. CONCLUSION: Pulmonary function and joint inflammation stabilized in 71% of patients with RA-ILD treated with abatacept. Abatacept had a favorable safety profile.

Analysis of the implementation of an innovative IT solution to improve waiting times, communication with primary care and efficiency in Rheumatology.

OBJECTIVE: To describe in detail an innovative program based on telemedicine for semi-automated prioritization of referrals from Primary Care (PC) to Rheumatology, for reproducibility purposes, and to present the results of the implementation study. METHODS: The context and situation were carefully analyzed, paying attention to all processes in place, referral numbers, waiting times, and number of complementary tests prior to discharge from Rheumatology. The composition of the team, aims, users, scope, and implementation phases were defined. Eight process indicators were established and measured before and 32 months after the program implementation. RESULTS: The program, which includes IT circuits, algorithms based on response to specific guideline-based checklists, e-consultation, and appointments based on priority, was fully implemented in our health area after a pilot study in two PC centers. After implementation, 6185 rheumatology referrals showed an e-consultation response delay of 8.95 days, and to first face-to-face visit (after e-consultation) of 12.6 (previous delay before program implementation was 83.1 days). Resolution by e-consultation reached 20% (1195 patients did not need seeing the rheumatologist to have the problem solved), and 1369 patients (32%) were discharged after the first visit. The overall resolution rate was 44.0% (2564 discharges/5830 e-consultations). From a random sample of 100 visits, only 10% of patients needed additional complementary tests to make a diagnosis and decision by Rheumatology (20.9% decrease from previous period). CONCLUSION: A careful analysis of the situation and processes, with implementation of simple IT circuits, allows for the improvement of the efficiency and resolution of problems in Rheumatology.

How to investigate: Suspected systemic rheumatic diseases in patients presenting with muscle complaints.

Muscular symptoms, which may be due to multiple causes, are one of the most common early complaints in a rheumatology practice. Musculoskeletal symptoms in rheumatic conditions are very varied, ranging from mechanical problems to muscular symptoms derived from inflammatory and systemic autoimmune diseases. Several drugs commonly used by different specialists and certain drugs used in rheumatology can also cause a wide variety of muscle symptoms. A description of different systemic autoimmune diseases follows to describe the different forms of involvement of the musculoskeletal system that they cause, as well as the main causes with which a differential diagnosis should be made. In this chapter, we will try to give some clues to reach an early diagnosis using clinical criteria, particularly based on a directed anamnesis and physical examination, discussing possible guidelines for the complimentary tests that may be required in patients with muscle complaints.