Systemic sclerosis and cancer in the UK: An epidemiological analysis using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

BACKGROUND: Cancer can cause mortality in systemic sclerosis (SSc). We investigated the association between cancer and SSc using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). METHODS: A validated case-ascertainment strategy identified SSc patients in the CPRD. A cohort study design examined cancer occurrence following SSc, with SSc patients matched to six non-SSc comparators by age, sex and GP-practice. Prevalent and incident cases of SSc were analysed separately. Descriptive statistics and Cox analyses determined hazard ratios for cancer occurrence. A case-control study (matched 1:6) examined cancer occurrence prior to SSc. RESULTS: From 10.1 million individuals in CPRD, 1,588 of cases of SSc were identified. Two hundred and six cancers followed SSc diagnosis (116 in prevalent and 90 in incident cohort). Commonest cancers were mucocutaneous (4.5%), lung (2.1%) and breast (1.9%). The proportion of SSc patients developing cancer was significantly higher than non-SSc in both incident (11.2% vs 9.7%, p= 0.02) and prevalent cohorts (14.8% vs 12.1%, p= 0.03); particularly for lung cancer (2.6% vs 0.9% in prevalent cohort, p< 0.001). Overall incidence of cancer in the SSc groups was 17.6/1000 person years, compared with 13.9/1000 person years in non-SSc group. The adjusted hazard ratios for cancer was 1.41 (95% CI 1.14-1.75) and 1.32 (95% CI 1.04-1.67) for prevalent and incident SSc respectively. No increased risk of cancer prior to SSc diagnosis was identified in case-control study. CONCLUSION: We have identified an increased risk of cancer diagnosis following, but not before, SSc diagnosis. Our findings could support screening recommendations for cancer in SSc.

Development of a measuring app for systemic sclerosis-related digital ulceration (SALVE: Scleroderma App for Lesion VErification).

OBJECTIVES: To test the hypothesis that photographs (in addition to self-reported data) can be collected daily by patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc) using a smartphone app designed specifically for digital lesions, and could provide an objective outcome measure for use in clinical trials. METHODS: An app was developed to collect images and patient reported outcome measures (PROMS) including Pain score and the Hand Disability in Systemic Sclerosis-Digital Ulcers (HDISS-DU) questionnaire. Participants photographed their lesion(s) each day for 30 days and uploaded images to a secure repository. Lesions were analysed both manually and automatically, using a machine learning approach. RESULTS: 25 patients with SSc-related digital lesions consented of whom 19 completed the 30-day study, with evaluable data from 27 lesions. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) baseline Pain score was 5.7 (2.4) and HDISS-DU 2.2 (0.9), indicating high lesion and disease-related morbidity. 506 images were used in the analysis (mean number of used images per lesion 18.7, SD 8.3). Mean (SD) manual and automated lesion areas at day 1 were 11.6 (16.0) and 13.9 (16.7) mm2 respectively. Manual area decreased by 0.08mm2 per day (2.4mm2 over 30 days) and automated area by 0.1mm2 (3.0mm2 over 30 days). Average gradients of manual and automated measurements over 30 days correlated strongly (r = 0.81). Manual measurements were on average 40% lower than automated, with wide limits of agreement. CONCLUSION: Even patients with significant hand disability were able to use the app. Automated measurement of finger lesions could be valuable as an outcome measure in clinical trials.

A phase 2 trial investigating the efficacy and safety of the mPGES-1 inhibitor vipoglanstat in systemic sclerosis-related Raynaud's.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to test the hypothesis, in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study that vipoglanstat, an inhibitor of microsomal prostaglandin E synthase-1 (mPGES-1) which decreases prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) and increases prostacyclin biosynthesis, improves RP. METHODS: Patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc) and ≥7 RP attacks during the last screening week prior to a baseline visit were randomised to four weeks treatment with vipoglanstat 120 mg or placebo. A daily electronic diary captured RP attacks (duration and pain) and Raynaud's Condition Score, with change in RP attacks/week as primary end point. Cold challenge assessments were performed at baseline and end of treatment. Exploratory endpoints included patients' and physicians' global impression of change, Assessment of Scleroderma-associated Raynaud's Phenomenon questionnaire, mPGES-1 activity, and urinary excretion of arachidonic acid metabolites. RESULTS: Sixty-nine subjects received vipoglanstat (n = 33) or placebo (n = 36). Mean weekly number of RP attacks (baseline; vipoglanstat 14.4[SD 6.7], placebo 18.2[12.6]) decreased by 3.4[95% CI -5.8;-1.0] and 4.2[-6.5;-2.0] attacks per week (p= 0.628) respectively. All patient reported outcomes improved, with no difference between the groups. Mean change in recovery of peripheral blood flow after cold challenge did not differ between the study groups. Vipoglanstat fully inhibited mPGES-1, resulting in 57% reduction of PGE2 and 50% increase of prostacyclin metabolites in urine. Vipoglanstat was safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Although vipoglanstat was safe, and well tolerated in a dose achieving full inhibition of mPGES-1, it was ineffective in SSc-related RP. Further development and evaluation of vipoglanstat will therefore be in other diseases where mPGES-1 plays a pathogenetic role.

Flares in IIMs and the timeline following COVID-19 vaccination: a combined analysis of the COVAD-1 and -2 surveys.

OBJECTIVES: Disease flares in the post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination period represent a prominent concern, though risk factors are poorly understood. We studied these flares among patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) and other autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs). METHODS: The COVAD-1 and -2 global surveys were circulated in early 2021 and 2022, respectively, and we captured demographics, comorbidities, AIRDs details, COVID-19 infection history and vaccination details. Flares of IIMs were defined as (a) patient self-reported, (b) immunosuppression (IS) denoted, (c) clinical sign directed and (d) with >7.9-point minimal clinically significant improvement difference worsening of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) PROMISPF10a score. Risk factors of flares were analysed using regression models. RESULTS: Of 15 165 total respondents, 1278 IIMs (age 63 years, 70.3% female, 80.8% Caucasians) and 3453 AIRDs were included. Flares of IIM were seen in 9.6%, 12.7%, 8.7% and 19.6% patients by definitions (a) to (d), respectively, with a median time to flare of 71.5 (10.7-235) days, similar to AIRDs. Patients with active IIMs pre-vaccination (OR 1.2; 95% CI 1.03, 1.6, P = 0.025) were prone to flares, while those receiving rituximab (OR 0.3; 95% CI 0.1, 0.7, P = 0.010) and AZA (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1, 0.8, P = 0.016) were at lower risk. Female gender and comorbidities predisposed to flares requiring changes in IS. Asthma (OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.05, 2.50, P = 0.028) and higher pain visual analogue score (OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.11, 1.27, P < 0.001) were associated with disparity between self-reported and IS-denoted flares. CONCLUSION: A diagnosis of IIMs confers an equal risk of flares in the post-COVID-19 vaccination period to AIRDs, with active disease, female gender and comorbidities conferring a higher risk. Disparity between patient- and physician-reported outcomes represents a future avenue for exploration.

Characteristics and risk factors of COVID-19 breakthrough infections in Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies: Results from the COVAD study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore prevalence, characteristics and risk factors of COVID-19 breakthrough infections (BIs) in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) using data from the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study. METHODS: A validated patient self-reporting e-survey was circulated by the COVAD study group to collect data on COVID-19 infection and vaccination in 2022. BIs were defined as COVID-19 occurring ≥14 days after 2 vaccine doses. We compared BIs characteristics and severity among IIMs, other autoimmune rheumatic and non-rheumatic diseases (AIRD, nrAID), and healthy controls (HC). Multivariable Cox regression models assessed the risk factors for BI, severe BI and hospitalisations among IIMs. RESULTS: Among 9449 included response, BIs occurred in 1447 (15.3%) respondents, median age 44 years (IQR 21), 77.4% female, and 182 BIs (12.9%) occurred among 1406 IIMs. Multivariable Cox regression among IIMs showed age as a protective factor for BIs [Hazard Ratio (HR)=0.98, 95%CI = 0.97-0.99], hydroxychloroquine and sulfasalazine use were risk factors (HR = 1.81, 95%CI = 1.24-2.64, and HR = 3.79, 95%CI = 1.69-8.42, respectively). Glucocorticoid use was a risk factor for severe BI (HR = 3.61, 95%CI = 1.09-11.8). Non-White ethnicity (HR = 2.61, 95%CI = 1.03-6.59) was a risk factor for hospitalisation. Compared with other groups, patients with IIMs required more supplemental oxygen therapy (IIM = 6.0% vs AIRD = 1.8%, nrAID = 2.2%, and HC = 0.9%), intensive care unit admission (IIM = 2.2% vs AIRD = 0.6%, nrAID, and HC = 0%), advanced treatment with antiviral or monoclonal antibodies (IIM = 34.1% vs AIRD = 25.8%, nrAID = 14.6%, and HC = 12.8%), and had more hospitalisation (IIM = 7.7% vs AIRD = 4.6%, nrAID = 1.1%, and HC = 1.5%). CONCLUSION: Patients with IIMs are susceptible to severe COVID-19 BI. Age and immunosuppressive treatments were related to the risk of BIs.

Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection in fully vaccinated patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: results from the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Disease (COVAD) study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the occurrence of breakthrough COVID-19 infections (BIs) in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) compared with patients with other rheumatic autoimmune diseases (rAIDs), patients with non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs), and healthy controls (HCs). METHODS: The study was based on data from 7035 fully vaccinated respondents to the online COVAD questionnaire with SLE (N = 852), rAIDs (N = 3098), or nrAIDs (N = 414), and HCs (N = 2671). BI was defined as COVID-19 infection occurring in individuals vaccinated with ≥ 2 doses (or 1 dose of J&J) ≥ 14 days after vaccination and not after 6 months since the last vaccine dose. Data were analysed using linear and logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 91/852 (10.7%) SLE patients reported at least one BI. The frequency of BIs in SLE patients was comparable to that among HCs (277/2671; p = 0.847) and patients with nrAID (39/414; p = 0.552) but higher than that among patients with other rAIDs (235/3098; p = 0.005). No demographic factors or treatments were associated with BIs in SLE patients (p ≥ 0.05 for all). Joint pain was more frequent in SLE patients than in HCs (odds ratio [OR]: 3.38; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.89-6.04; p < 0.001) or nrAID patients (OR: 2.44; 95% CI: 1.04-5.75; p = 0.041). Patient with SLE did not report a higher frequency of hospitalisation or need for advanced treatment for COVID-19 infection compared with disease controls and HCs, respectively. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 vaccination conferred similar protection against COVID-19 infection in terms of frequency and severity in patients with SLE to that reported by healthy individuals.

Correlates of breakthrough COVID-19 in vaccinated patients with systemic sclerosis: survival analysis from a multicentre international patient-reported survey.

This study aimed to assess the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of breakthrough infection (BI) following coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccination in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc), a risk group associated with an immune-suppressed state and high cardiopulmonary disease burden. Cross-sectional data from fully vaccinated respondents with SSc, non-SSc autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), and healthy controls (HCs) were extracted from the COVAD database, an international self-reported online survey. BI was defined according to the Centre for Disease Control definition. Infection-free survival was compared between the groups using Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank tests. Cox proportional regression was used to assess the association between BI and age, sex, ethnicity, and immunosuppressive drugs at the time of vaccination. The severity of BI in terms of hospitalization and requirement for oxygen supplementation was compared between groups. Of 10,900 respondents, 6836 fulfilled the following inclusion criteria: 427 SSc, 2934 other AIRDs, and 3475 HCs. BI were reported in 6.3% of SSc, 6.9% of non-SSc AIRD, and 16.1% of HCs during a median follow-up of 100 (IQR: 60-137) days. SSc had a lower risk for BI than HC [hazard ratio (HR): 0.56 (95% CI 0.46-0.74)]. BIs were associated with age [HR: 0.98 (0.97-0.98)] but not ethnicity or immunosuppressive drugs at the time of vaccination. Patients with SSc were more likely to have asymptomatic COVID-19, but symptomatic patients reported more breathlessness. Hospitalization [SSc: 4 (14.8%), HCs: 37 (6.6%), non-SSc AIRDs: 32(15.8%)] and the need for oxygenation [SSc: 1 (25%); HC: 17 (45.9%); non-SSc AIRD: 13 (40.6%)] were similar between the groups. The incidence of BI in SSc was lower than that in HCs but comparable to that in non-SSc AIRDs. The severity of BI did not differ between the groups. Advancing age, but not ethnicity or immunosuppressive medication use, was associated with BIs.

'I turned in my man card': a qualitative study of the experiences, coping styles and support needs of men with systemic sclerosis.

OBJECTIVES: Men with SSc have a more severe clinical phenotype and reduced survival compared with women. No previous psychosocial studies have focused solely on men with SSc. This study aimed to explore experiences, coping strategies and support preferences of men with SSc. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An international qualitative research study comprising seven focus groups (three USA, four UK) of 25 men with SSc. Transcripts were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three overarching themes and one underpinning theme were identified. In 'impact of SSc on masculinity', the men described an 'impact on roles and activities', reported 'sex, intimacy, and erectile dysfunction' as a salient issue that may be overlooked by clinicians, and experienced challenges to 'masculine self-image'. 'Dealing with SSc' meant 'always being prepared', 'becoming an expert' and 'balancing priorities' in responsibilities, activities and symptom management. In 'support for living with SSc' men were selective in '(Not) talking about SSc', would '(reluctantly) accept help' and described 'preferences for support'. Underpinning these experiences was 'facing an uncertain future' with some participants preferring not to focus on an unpredictable future, and others worrying about disease progression. CONCLUSION: These novel data suggest SSc impacts male patients' masculine identity and roles, and although they will accept practical help, they may mask the full emotional impact. Sex and intimacy are important overlooked issues with erectile dysfunction often not discussed at diagnosis. Further research should develop a self-management intervention for men with rheumatic diseases with a combination of disease-specific and common core components.

Construct validity and reliability of the assessment of systemic sclerosis-associated raynaud's phenomenon (ASRAP) questionnaire.

OBJECTIVES: Assessment of construct validity and reliability of a novel patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument for assessing the severity and impact of Raynaud's phenomenon (RP) in systemic sclerosis (SSc). METHODS: An international multicentre study validation study of the 27-item Assessment of Systemic sclerosis-associated RAynaud's Phenomenon (ASRAP) and 10-item short-form (ASRAP-SF) questionnaires. The relationship between ASRAP questionnaires and demographics, clinical phenotype and legacy instruments for assessing SSc-RP severity, disability and pain was assessed. Repeatability was evaluated at 1-week. Anchor-based statements of health status facilitated assessment of ASRAP thresholds of meaning. RESULTS: Four hundred and twenty SSc subjects were enrolled. There was good correlation between ASRAP (and ASRAP-SF) with RP visual analogue scale (VAS) and Scleroderma Health Assessment Questionnaire RP VAS (rho range 0.648-0.727, p< 0.001). Correlation with diary-based assessment of SSc-RP attack frequency and duration was lower (rho range 0.258-0.504, p< 0.001). ASRAP questionnaires had good correlation with instruments for assessing disability, hand function, pain and global health assessment (rho range 0.427-0.575, p< 0.001). Significantly higher ASRAP scores were identified in smokers, patients with active digital ulceration (DU), previous history of DU and calcinosis (p< 0.05 for all comparisons). There was excellent repeatability at 1-week amongst patients with stable SSc-RP symptoms (intra-class coefficients of 0.891 and 0.848, p< 0.001). Patient-acceptable symptom state thresholds for ASRAP and ASRAP-SF were 45.34 and 45.77 respectively. A preliminary Minimally Important Clinical Difference threshold of 4.17 (95% CI 0.53-7.81, p= 0.029) was estimated. CONCLUSION: ASRAP and ASRAP-SF questionnaires are valid and reliable novel PRO instruments for assessing the severity and impact of SSc-RP.

A Phase II randomized controlled trial of oral prednisolone in early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (PRedSS).

OBJECTIVES: Although the painful and disabling features of early diffuse cutaneous SSc (dcSSc) have an inflammatory basis and could respond to corticosteroids, corticosteroids are a risk factor for scleroderma renal crisis. Whether or not they should be prescribed is therefore highly contentious. Our aim was to examine safety and efficacy of moderate-dose prednisolone in early dcSSc. METHODS: PRedSS set out as a Phase II, multicentre, double-blind randomized controlled trial, converted to open-label during the Covid-19 pandemic. Patients were randomized to receive either prednisolone (∼0.3 mg/kg) or matching placebo (or no treatment during open-label) for 6 months. Co-primary endpoints were the HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and modified Rodnan skin score (mRSS) at 3 months. Over 20 secondary endpoints included patient reported outcome measures reflecting pain, itch, fatigue, anxiety and depression, and helplessness. Target recruitment was 72 patients. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were randomized (17 prednisolone, 18 placebo/control). The adjusted mean difference between treatment groups at 3 months in HAQ-DI score was -0.10 (97.5% CI: -0.29, 0.10), P = 0.254, and in mRSS -3.90 (97.5% CI: -8.83, 1.03), P = 0.070, both favouring prednisolone but not significantly. Patients in the prednisolone group experienced significantly less pain (P = 0.027), anxiety (P = 0.018) and helplessness (P = 0.040) than control patients at 3 months. There were no renal crises, but sample size was small. CONCLUSION: PRedSS was terminated early primarily due to the Covid-19 pandemic, and so was underpowered. Therefore, interpretation must be cautious and results considered inconclusive, indicating the need for a further randomized trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03708718.

Systemic sclerosis associated interstitial lung disease: a conceptual framework for subclinical, clinical and progressive disease.

OBJECTIVES: To establish a framework by which experts define disease subsets in systemic sclerosis associated interstitial lung disease (SSc-ILD). METHODS: A conceptual framework for subclinical, clinical and progressive ILD was provided to 83 experts, asking them to use the framework and classify actual SSc-ILD patients. Each patient profile was designed to be classified by at least four experts in terms of severity and risk of progression at baseline; progression was based on 1-year follow-up data. A consensus was reached if ≥75% of experts agreed. Experts provided information on which items were important in determining classification. RESULTS: Forty-four experts (53%) completed the survey. Consensus was achieved on the dimensions of severity (75%, 60 of 80 profiles), risk of progression (71%, 57 of 80 profiles) and progressive ILD (60%, 24 of 40 profiles). For profiles achieving consensus, most were classified as clinical ILD (92%), low risk (54%) and stable (71%). Severity and disease progression overlapped in terms of framework items that were most influential in classifying patients (forced vital capacity, extent of lung involvement on high resolution chest CT [HRCT]); risk of progression was influenced primarily by disease duration. CONCLUSIONS: Using our proposed conceptual framework, international experts were able to achieve a consensus on classifying SSc-ILD patients along the dimensions of disease severity, risk of progression and progression over time. Experts rely on similar items when classifying disease severity and progression: a combination of spirometry and gas exchange and quantitative HRCT.

Vaccine hesitancy decreases in rheumatic diseases, long-term concerns remain in myositis: a comparative analysis of the COVAD surveys.

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 vaccines have a favorable safety profile in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) such as idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs); however, hesitancy continues to persist among these patients. Therefore, we studied the prevalence, predictors and reasons for hesitancy in patients with IIMs, other AIRDs, non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs) and healthy controls (HCs), using data from the two international COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) e-surveys. METHODS: The first and second COVAD patient self-reported e-surveys were circulated from March to December 2021, and February to June 2022 (ongoing). We collected data on demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 infection and vaccination history, reasons for hesitancy, and patient reported outcomes. Predictors of hesitancy were analysed using regression models in different groups. RESULTS: We analysed data from 18 882 (COVAD-1) and 7666 (COVAD-2) respondents. Reassuringly, hesitancy decreased from 2021 (16.5%) to 2022 (5.1%) (OR: 0.26; 95% CI: 0.24, 0.30, P < 0.001). However, concerns/fear over long-term safety had increased (OR: 3.6; 95% CI: 2.9, 4.6, P < 0.01). We noted with concern greater skepticism over vaccine science among patients with IIMs than AIRDs (OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.08, 3.2, P = 0.023) and HCs (OR: 4; 95% CI: 1.9, 8.1, P < 0.001), as well as more long-term safety concerns/fear (IIMs vs AIRDs - OR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.2, 2.9, P = 0.001; IIMs vs HCs - OR: 5.4 95% CI: 3, 9.6, P < 0.001). Caucasians [OR 4.2 (1.7-10.3)] were likely to be more hesitant, while those with better PROMIS physical health score were less hesitant [OR 0.9 (0.8-0.97)]. CONCLUSION: Vaccine hesitancy has decreased from 2021 to 2022, long-term safety concerns remain among patients with IIMs, particularly in Caucasians and those with poor physical function.

Flares in autoimmune rheumatic diseases in the post-COVID-19 vaccination period-a cross-sequential study based on COVAD surveys.

OBJECTIVE: Flares of autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) following COVID-19 vaccination are a particular concern in vaccine-hesitant individuals. Therefore, we investigated the incidence, predictors and patterns of flares following vaccination in individuals living with AIRDs, using global COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) surveys. METHODS: The COVAD surveys were used to extract data on flare demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 history, and vaccination details for patients with AIRDs. Flares following vaccination were identified as patient-reported (a), increased immunosuppression (b), clinical exacerbations (c) and worsening of PROMIS scores (d). We studied flare characteristics and used regression models to differentiate flares among various AIRDs. RESULTS: Of 15 165 total responses, the incidence of flares in 3453 patients with AIRDs was 11.3%, 14.8%, 9.5% and 26.7% by definitions a-d, respectively. There was moderate agreement between patient-reported and immunosuppression-defined flares (K = 0.403, P = 0.022). Arthritis (61.6%) and fatigue (58.8%) were the most commonly reported symptoms. Self-reported flares were associated with higher comorbidities (P = 0.013), mental health disorders (MHDs) (P < 0.001) and autoimmune disease multimorbidity (AIDm) (P < 0.001).In regression analysis, the presence of AIDm [odds ratio (OR) = 1.4; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.7; P = 0.003), or a MHD (OR = 1.7; 95% CI: 1.1, 2.6; P = 0.007), or being a Moderna vaccine recipient (OR = 1.5; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.2; P = 0.014) were predictors of flares. Use of MMF (OR = 0.5; 95% CI: 0.3, 0.8; P = 0.009) and glucocorticoids (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.8; P = 0.003) were protective.A higher frequency of patients with AIRDs reported overall active disease post-vaccination compared with before vaccination (OR = 1.3; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.5; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Flares occur in nearly 1 in 10 individuals with AIRDs after COVID vaccination; people with comorbidities (especially AIDm), MHDs and those receiving the Moderna vaccine are particularly vulnerable. Future avenues include exploring flare profiles and optimizing vaccine strategies for this group.

COVID-19 vaccine safety during pregnancy and breastfeeding in women with autoimmune diseases: results from the COVAD study.

OBJECTIVES: We investigated COVID-19 vaccine safety in pregnant and breastfeeding women with autoimmune diseases (AID) in the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study. METHODS: Delayed-onset (>7 days) vaccine-related adverse events (AE), disease flares (DF), and AID-related treatment modifications were analyzed upon diagnosis of AID versus healthy controls (HC) and the pregnancy/breastfeeding status at the time of at least one dose of vaccine. RESULTS: Among the 9201 participants to the self-administered online survey, 6787 (73.8%) were women. Forty pregnant and 52 breastfeeding patients with AID were identified, of whom the majority had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine (100% and 96.2%, respectively). AE were reported significantly more frequently in pregnant than in non-pregnant patients (overall AE 45% vs 26%, p= 0.01; minor AE 40% vs 25.9%, p= 0.03; major AE 17.5% vs 4.6%, p< 0.01), but no difference was found in comparison with pregnant HC. No difference was observed between breastfeeding patients and HC with respect to AE. Post-vaccination DF were reported by 17.5% of pregnant and 20% of breastfeeding patients, and by 18.3% of age- and disease-matched non-pregnant and non-breastfeeding patients (n = 262). All pregnant/breastfeeding patients who experienced a DF were managed with glucocorticoids; 28.6% and 20% of them required initiation or change in immunosuppressants, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study provides reassuring insights into the safety of COVID-19 vaccines administered to women with AID during the gestational and post-partum periods, helping overcome hesitant attitudes, as the benefits for the mother and the fetus by passive immunization appear to outweigh potential risks.

Delayed adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination in patients with systemic sclerosis and other autoimmune diseases: a substudy of the COVAD-2 cohort.

Data on short-term safety of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc) were explored previously in the first COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune diseases (COVAD) survey conducted in 2021. However, delayed adverse events (ADEs) (occurring > 7 days post-vaccination) are poorly characterized in these patients with SSc. In this study, we analysed delayed COVID-19 vaccine-related ADEs among patients with SSc, other systemic autoimmune and inflammatory disorders (SAIDs) and healthy controls (HCs) using data from the second COVAD study conducted in 2022. The COVAD-2 study was a cross-sectional, patient self-reported global e-survey conducted from February to June 2022. Data on demographics, SSc/SAID disease characteristics, COVID-19 infection history, and vaccination details including delayed ADEs as defined by the Centre for Disease Control were captured and analysed. Among 17,612 respondents, 10,041 participants fully vaccinated against COVID-19 were included for analysis. Of these, 2.6% (n = 258) had SSc, 63.7% other SAIDs, and 33.7% were HCs. BNT162b2 Pfizer (69.4%) was the most administered vaccine, followed by MRNA-1273 Moderna (32.25%) and ChadOx1 nCOV-19 Oxford/AstraZeneca (12.4%) vaccines. Among patients with SSc, 18.9% reported minor, while 8.5% experienced major delayed ADEs, and 4.6% reported hospitalization. These frequencies were comparable to those of the ADEs reported by other patients with SAIDs and HCs. However, patients with SSc reported a higher frequency of difficulty in breathing than HCs [OR 2.3 (1.0-5.1), p = 0.042]. Patients with diffuse cutaneous SSc experienced minor ADEs [OR 2.1 (1.1-4.4), p = 0.036] and specifically fatigue more frequently [OR 3.9 (1.3-11.7), p = 0.015] than those with limited cutaneous SSc. Systemic sclerosis patients with concomitant myositis reported myalgia more frequently [OR 3.4 (1.1-10.7), p = 0.035], while those with thyroid disorders were more prone to report a higher frequency of joint pain [OR 5.5 (1.5-20.2), p = 0.009] and dizziness [OR 5.9 (1.3-27.6), p = 0.024] than patients with SSc alone. A diagnosis of SSc did not confer a higher risk of delayed post-COVID-19 vaccine-related ADEs overall compared with other SAIDs and HCs. However, the diffuse cutaneous phenotype and coexisting autoimmune conditions including myositis and thyroid disease may increase the risk of minor ADEs. These patients may benefit from pre-vaccination counselling, close monitoring, and early initiation of appropriate care in the post-COVID-19 vaccination period.

Systemic sclerosis and COVID-19 vaccine safety: short-term insights from the global COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD) survey.

The safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines is understudied in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). We compared short-term adverse events (AEs) 7 days following vaccination in patients with SSc vs other rheumatic (AIRDs), non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs), and healthy controls (HCs). The COVID-19 Vaccination in autoimmune diseases (COVAD) self-reporting e-survey was circulated by a group of > 110 collaborators in 94 countries from March to December 2021. AEs were analyzed between different groups using regression models. Of 10,679 complete respondents [73.8% females, mean age 43 years, 53% Caucasians], 478 had SSc. 83% had completed two vaccine doses, Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) (51%) was the most common. Minor and major AEs were reported by 81.2% and 3.3% SSc patients, respectively, and did not differ significantly with disease activity or different vaccine types, though with minor symptom differences. Frequencies of AEs were not affected by background immunosuppression, though SSc patients receiving hydroxychloroquine experienced fatigue less commonly (OR 0.4; 95% CI 0.2-0.8). Frequency of AEs and hospitalisations were similar to other AIRDs, nrAIDs, and HC except a higher risk of chills (OR 1.3; 95% CI 1.0-1.7) and fatigue (OR 1.3; 95% CI 1.0-1.6) compared to other AIRDs. COVID-19 vaccines were largely safe and well tolerated in SSc patients in the short term. Background immunosuppression and disease activity did not influence the vaccination-related short-term AEs.

COVID-19 severity and vaccine breakthrough infections in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, other systemic autoimmune and inflammatory diseases, and healthy controls: a multicenter cross-sectional study from the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) survey.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the spectrum and severity of COVID-19 and vaccine breakthrough infections (BIs) among patients with IIMs, other systemic autoimmune and inflammatory diseases (SAIDs), and healthy controls (HCs). METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study with data from the COVAD study, a self-reported online global survey that collected demographics, COVID-19 history, and vaccination details from April to September 2021. Adult patients with at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose were included. BIs were defined as infections occurring > 2 weeks after any dose of vaccine. Characteristics associated with BI were analyzed with a multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: Among 10,900 respondents [42 (30-55) years, 74%-females, 45%-Caucasians] HCs were (47%), SAIDs (42%) and IIMs (11%). Patients with IIMs reported fewer COVID-19 cases before vaccination (6.2%-IIM vs 10.5%-SAIDs vs 14.6%-HC; OR = 0.6, 95% CI 0.4-0.8, and OR = 0.3, 95% CI 0.2-0.5, respectively). BIs were uncommon (1.4%-IIM; 1.9%-SAIDs; 3.2%-HC) and occurred in 17 IIM patients, 13 of whom were on immunosuppressants, and 3(18%) required hospitalization. All-cause hospitalization was higher in patients with IIM compared to HCs [23 (30%) vs 59 (8%), OR = 2.5, 95% CI 1.2-5.1 before vaccination, and 3 (18%) vs 9 (5%), OR = 2.6, 95% CI 1.3-5.3 in BI]. In a multivariate regression analysis, age 30-60 years was associated with a lower odds of BI (OR = 0.7, 95% CI 0.5-1.0), while the use of immunosuppressants had a higher odds of BI (OR = 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.7). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with IIMs reported fewer COVID-19 cases than HCs and other SAIDs, but had higher odds of all-cause hospitalization from COVID-19 than HCs. BIs were associated with the use of immunosuppressants and were uncommon in IIMs.

Long-term safety of COVID vaccination in individuals with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: results from the COVAD study.

Limited evidence on long-term COVID-19 vaccine safety in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) continues to contribute to vaccine hesitancy. We studied delayed-onset vaccine adverse events (AEs) in patients with IIMs, other systemic autoimmune and inflammatory disorders (SAIDs), and healthy controls (HCs), using data from the second COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study. A validated self-reporting e-survey was circulated by the COVAD study group (157 collaborators, 106 countries) from Feb-June 2022. We collected data on demographics, comorbidities, IIM/SAID details, COVID-19 history, and vaccination details. Delayed-onset (> 7 day) AEs were analyzed using regression models. A total of 15165 respondents undertook the survey, of whom 8759 responses from vaccinated individuals [median age 46 (35-58) years, 74.4% females, 45.4% Caucasians] were analyzed. Of these, 1390 (15.9%) had IIMs, 50.6% other SAIDs, and 33.5% HCs. Among IIMs, 16.3% and 10.2% patients reported minor and major AEs, respectively, and 0.72% (n = 10) required hospitalization. Notably patients with IIMs experienced fewer minor AEs than other SAIDs, though rashes were expectedly more than HCs [OR 4.0; 95% CI 2.2-7.0, p < 0.001]. IIM patients with active disease, overlap myositis, autoimmune comorbidities, and ChadOx1 nCOV-19 (Oxford/AstraZeneca) recipients reported AEs more often, while those with inclusion body myositis, and BNT162b2 (Pfizer) recipients reported fewer AEs. Vaccination is reassuringly safe in individuals with IIMs, with AEs, hospitalizations comparable to SAIDs, and largely limited to those with autoimmune multimorbidity and active disease. These observations may inform guidelines to identify high-risk patients warranting close monitoring in the post-vaccination period.

Domains and outcome measures for the assessment of limited cutaneous systemic sclerosis: an international collaborative scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to comprehensively identify instruments within relevant domains employed to assess lcSSc since the endorsement of its consensus definition in 1988. The overall objective is to inform the creation of a Combined Response Index for Scleroderma Trials Assessing lcSSc (CRISTAL). METHODS: MEDLINE and Embase were searched using terms selected to comprehensively retrieve titles and abstracts mentioning both lcSSc and dcSSc, along with those only mentioning lcSSc, SSc sine scleroderma, limited SSc and/or CREST/CRST. Because our initial assessment of the literature revealed that very few studies included only lcSSc subjects, we also assessed literature that included both cutaneous subsets. A total of 3964 titles and abstracts were screened by two reviewers, and 270 articles were selected for data extraction. RESULTS: We identified 27 domains encompassing 459 instruments. Instruments from 'Skin involvement', 'Pulmonary involvement' and 'Health-related quality of life and general functioning' were the most frequently retrieved. Among the 15 most represented instruments announced as primary end points in efficacy or effectiveness studies, 7 were clinician-reported outcomes (ROs), 7 were patient ROs, and one was a performance outcome (6 min-walk test). The mean proportion of lcSSc patients in studies of lcSSc, including studies that mention both lcSSc and dcSSc, was 56.4%, demonstrating that this subset is underrepresented in the literature, given that the prevalence of lcSSc ranges from 60% to 80% in national registries and international cohorts. CONCLUSION: This scoping literature review provides a comprehensive identification of domains and outcomes used to assess lcSSc. Our results also highlight that lcSSc is underrepresented in the literature.

The aetiopathogenic significance, clinical relevance and therapeutic implications of vasculopathy in idiopathic inflammatory myopathy.

It is 120 years since 'angiomyositis' was included alongside 'polymyositis' and 'dermatomyositis' in an attempt to propose a taxonomy that reflected the major clinical characteristics of idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (IIM). Endothelial injury, perivascular inflammation and capillary loss are important histological findings in affected tissues in IIM. Overt vascular clinical features including RP and abnormal nailfold capillaroscopy (NC) are also common in IIM. Despite the presence of endothelial injury, perivascular inflammation and capillary loss in affected tissues in IIM, and the presence of clinical features such as RP and NC abnormalities, the pathogenic and therapeutic implications of vasculopathy in IIM have been somewhat overlooked. RP and NC abnormalities are not always present, providing a valuable opportunity to explore aetiopathogenic factors driving vasculopathy within autoimmune rheumatic disease. The present review examines the aetiopathogenic, prognostic and therapeutic significance of vasculopathy in IIM. We describe the prevalence and clinical relevance of vasculopathy in IIM, and consider how vasculopathy may be better utilized to support improved IIM diagnosis and disease classification. Areas of unmet research need are highlighted where relevant.