Estimated number of lives directly saved by COVID-19 vaccination programmes in the WHO European Region from December, 2020, to March, 2023: a retrospective surveillance study.

BACKGROUND: By March, 2023, 54 countries, areas, and territories (hereafter CAT) in the WHO European Region had reported more than 2·2 million COVID-19-related deaths to the WHO Regional Office for Europe. Here, we estimated how many lives were directly saved by vaccinating adults in the WHO European Region from December, 2020, to March, 2023. METHODS: In this retrospective surveillance study, we estimated the number of lives directly saved by age group, vaccine dose, and circulating variant-of-concern (VOC) period, regionally and nationally, using weekly data on COVID-19 mortality and infection, COVID-19 vaccination uptake, and SARS-CoV-2 virus characterisations by lineage downloaded from The European Surveillance System on June 11, 2023, as well as vaccine effectiveness data from the literature. We included data for six age groups (25-49 years, 50-59 years, ≥60 years, 60-69 years, 70-79 years, and ≥80 years). To be included in the analysis, CAT needed to have reported both COVID-19 vaccination and mortality data for at least one of the four older age groups. Only CAT that reported weekly data for both COVID-19 vaccination and mortality by age group for 90% of study weeks or more in the full study period were included. We calculated the percentage reduction in the number of expected and reported deaths. FINDINGS: Between December, 2020, and March, 2023, in 34 of 54 CAT included in the analysis, COVID-19 vaccines reduced deaths by 59% overall (CAT range 17-82%), representing approximately 1·6 million lives saved (range 1·5-1·7 million) in those aged 25 years or older: 96% of lives saved were aged 60 years or older and 52% were aged 80 years or older; first boosters saved 51% of lives, and 60% were saved during the Omicron period. INTERPRETATION: Over nearly 2·5 years, most lives saved by COVID-19 vaccination were in older adults by first booster dose and during the Omicron period, reinforcing the importance of up-to-date vaccination among the most at-risk individuals. Further modelling work should evaluate indirect effects of vaccination and public health and social measures. FUNDING: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Area and individual level analyses of demographic and socio-economic disparities in COVID-19 vaccination uptake in Belgium.

Vaccination has played a major role in overcoming the COVID-19 pandemic. However, vaccination status can be influenced by demographic and socio-economic factors at individual and area level. In the context of the LINK-VACC project, the Belgian vaccine register for the COVID-19 vaccination campaign was linked at individual level with other registers, notably the COVID-19 laboratory test results and demographic and socio-economic variables from the DEMOBEL database. The present article aims at investigating to which extent COVID-19 vaccination status is associated with area level and/or individual level demographic and socio-economic factors. From a sample of all individuals tested for SARS-CoV-2 (LINK-VACC sample) demographic and socio-economic indicators are derived and their impact on vaccination coverages at an aggregated geographical level (municipality) is quantified. The same indicators are calculated for the full Belgian population, allowing to assess the representativeness of the LINK-VACC sample with respect to the impact of demographic and socio-economic disparities on vaccination uptake. In a second step, hierarchical models are fitted to the individual level LINK-VACC data to disentangle the individual and municipality effects allowing to evaluate the added value of the availability of individual level data in this context. The most important effects observed at the individual level are reflected in the aggregated data at the municipality level. Multilevel analyses show that most of the demographic and socio-economic impacts on vaccination are captured at the individual level, although accounting for area level in individual level analyses improve the overall description.

Patient-physician discordance impairs outcomes in early rheumatoid arthritis through less consistent treat-to-target implementation.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess whether patient-physician discordance regarding disease activity affects T2T-implementation and clinical outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: This was an analysis of the 2-year T2T-guided trial Care in early RA (CareRA). During year 1, DMARD escalations were mandated by the protocol when DAS28-CRP was >3.2. During year 2, treatment was at the rheumatologists' discretion. At each visit we assessed T2T-implementation, defined as escalating DMARDs if DAS28-CRP >3.2. Patient-physician discordance was defined by the discordance score (DS), a weighted difference between patient-reported and clinical/laboratory outcomes. Using generalised linear mixed models and multilevel mediation analysis, we studied the association between time-varying DS, T2T-implementation and the odds of remission (SDAI ≤3.3), physical functioning (HAQ-score), and radiographic progression at year 2. RESULTS: Over 2 years, 379 patients were assessed at 3129 follow-up visits. On 445 (14%) of these visits, DAS28-CRP was >3.2, and DMARDs were escalated in 217/445 (49%) of such cases. T2T-implementation declined over time and was consistently lower during the second year (year 1: 57-66%; year 2: 17-52%). Higher DS over time was negatively associated with remission and physical functioning at year 2, partly mediated by a lower proportion of T2T-adherent visits. No such association was found for radiographic progression. CONCLUSION: Even in a trial setting, T2T was applied on only around 50% of visits. T2T was less likely to be implemented with increasing patient-physician discordance regarding disease activity, which was in turn associated with less remission and worse functional outcome, but not with radiographic progression.

Sociodemographic and socioeconomic disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake in Belgium: a nationwide record linkage study.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have identified important social inequalities in SARS-CoV-2 infections and related COVID-19 outcomes in the Belgian population. The aim of our study was to investigate the sociodemographic and socioeconomic characteristics associated with the uptake of COVID-19 vaccine in Belgium. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the uptake of a first COVID-19 vaccine dose among 5 342 110 adults (≥18 years) in Belgium on 31 August 2021. We integrated data from four national data sources: the Belgian vaccine register (vaccination status), COVID-19 Healthdata (laboratory test results), DEMOBEL (sociodemographic/socioeconomic data) and the Common Base Register for HealthCare Actors (individuals licensed to practice a healthcare profession in Belgium). We used multivariable logistic regression analysis for identifying characteristics associated with not having obtained a first COVID-19 vaccine dose in Belgium and for each of its three regions (Flanders, Brussels and Wallonia). RESULTS: During the study period, 10% (536 716/5 342 110) of the Belgian adult population included in our study sample was not vaccinated with a first COVID-19 vaccine dose. A lower COVID-19 vaccine uptake was found among young individuals, men, migrants, single parents, one-person households and disadvantaged socioeconomic groups (with lower levels of income and education, unemployed). Overall, the sociodemographic and socioeconomic disparities were comparable for all regions. CONCLUSIONS: The identification of sociodemographic and socioeconomic disparities in COVID-19 vaccination uptake is critical to develop strategies guaranteeing a more equitable vaccination coverage of the Belgian adult population.

Factors underlying COVID-19 booster vaccine uptake among adults in Belgium.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate factors influencing the uptake of first and second COVID-19 booster vaccines among adults in Belgium, particularly age, sex, region of residence and laboratory confirmed COVID-19 infection history. RESULTS: A binomial regression model was used with having received the first or second booster as outcome and age, sex, region of residence and infection history as fixed variables. Among adults, there was generally a higher uptake to receive the first booster among older age groups compared to younger ones. Females, individuals residing in Flanders and those with no previous COVID-19 infection were more likely to receive the first booster. For the second booster, the same age trend was seen as for the first booster. Males, individuals residing in Flanders and those who tested positive for COVID-19 once after first booster were more likely to receive the second booster. Individuals with multiple positive COVID-19 tests before and after primary course or first booster were less likely to receive the subsequent booster dose compared to COVID-naïve individuals. This information could be used to guide future vaccination campaigns during a pandemic and can provide valuable insights into booster uptake patterns.

COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection and hospitalisation in Belgium, July 2021 to May 2022.

BackgroundThe Belgian COVID-19 vaccination campaign aimed to reduce disease spread and severity.AimWe estimated SARS-CoV-2 variant-specific vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection (VEi) and hospitalisation (VEh), given time since vaccination and prior infection.MethodsNationwide healthcare records from July 2021 to May 2022 on testing and vaccination were combined with a clinical hospital survey. We used a test-negative design and proportional hazard regression to estimate VEi and VEh, controlling for prior infection, time since vaccination, age, sex, residence and calendar week of sampling.ResultsWe included 1,932,546 symptomatic individuals, of whom 734,115 tested positive. VEi against Delta waned from an initial estimate of 80% (95% confidence interval (CI): 80-81) to 55% (95% CI: 54-55) 100-150 days after the primary vaccination course. Booster vaccination increased initial VEi to 85% (95% CI: 84-85). Against Omicron, an initial VEi of 33% (95% CI: 30-36) waned to 17% (95% CI: 15-18), while booster vaccination increased VEi to 50% (95% CI: 49-50), which waned to 20% (95% CI: 19-21) 100-150 days after vaccination. Initial VEh for booster vaccination decreased from 96% (95% CI: 95-96) against Delta to 87% (95% CI: 86-89) against Omicron. VEh against Omicron waned to 73% (95% CI: 71-75) 100-150 days after booster vaccination. While recent prior infections conferred higher protection, infections occurring before 2021 remained associated with significant risk reduction against symptomatic infection. Vaccination and prior infection outperformed vaccination or prior infection only.ConclusionWe report waning and a significant decrease in VEi and VEh from Delta to Omicron-dominant periods. Booster vaccination and prior infection attenuated these effects.

Vaccine effectiveness against transmission of alpha, delta and omicron SARS-COV-2-infection, Belgian contact tracing, 2021-2022.

OBJECTIVES: Vaccine effectiveness against transmission (VET) of SARS-CoV-2-infection can be estimated from secondary attack rates observed during contact tracing. We estimated VET, the vaccine-effect on infectiousness of the index case and susceptibility of the high-risk exposure contact (HREC). METHODS: We fitted RT-PCR-test results from HREC to immunity status (vaccine schedule, prior infection, time since last immunity-conferring event), age, sex, calendar week of sampling, household, background positivity rate and dominant VOC using a multilevel Bayesian regression-model. We included Belgian data collected between January 2021 and January 2022. RESULTS: For primary BNT162b2-vaccination we estimated initial VET at 96% (95%CI 95-97) against Alpha, 87% (95%CI 84-88) against Delta and 31% (95%CI 25-37) against Omicron. Initial VET of booster-vaccination (mRNA primary and booster-vaccination) was 87% (95%CI 86-89) against Delta and 68% (95%CI 65-70) against Omicron. The VET-estimate against Delta and Omicron decreased to 71% (95%CI 64-78) and 55% (95%CI 46-62) respectively, 150-200 days after booster-vaccination. Hybrid immunity, defined as vaccination and documented prior infection, was associated with durable and higher or comparable (by number of antigen exposures) protection against transmission. CONCLUSIONS: While we observed VOC-specific immune-escape, especially by Omicron, and waning over time since immunization, vaccination remained associated with a reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2-transmission.

Validation and predictive capacity of a Dutch version of the FLARE-RA questionnaire within the context of a TNFi-tapering trial.

Flare Assessment in Rheumatoid Arthritis (FLARE-RA) is a self-administered tool aiming to capture current or recent flares in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We aimed to externally validate the FLARE-RA instrument and its existing cutoffs for flare detection within a bDMARD-tapering context in established RA. Data were analyzed from the Tapering Etanercept in Rheumatoid Arthritis (TapERA) trial, which studied the feasibility of tapering etanercept in patients with established RA in sustained remission. The English FLARE-RA was translated and cross-culturally adapted into Dutch, and internal consistency and test-retest reliability were evaluated with Crohnbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Participants completed the FLARE-RA 3-monthly for 12 months. Accuracy and optimal cutoffs of FLARE-RA to detect DAS28-defined flares were assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC). Association of FLARE-RA scores with current and future flares was studied using logistic generalized estimating equations (GEE). The Dutch FLARE-RA showed excellent internal consistency and test-retest reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.96; ICC 0.96 [95% CI 0.70-1.00]). Discriminatory capacity of FLARE-RA to detect flares was acceptable (AUC 0.77, 0.80, and 0.72 for global, arthritis, and general symptoms subscales, respectively), with an optimal global score cutoff of 4/10. In GEE-models, higher FLARE-RA scores were associated with increased odds of both current and future flares. We successfully translated and cross-culturally adapted the FLARE-RA into a Dutch version and validated its capacity to detect flares in a bDMARD-tapering context in established RA. Finally, higher FLARE-RA scores might indicate an increased risk of future flares.Trial registration: EU Clinical Trials Register, https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2012-004631-22/BE , EudraCT number 2012-004,631-22. Key Points • Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the FLARE-RA resulted in a Dutch version with excellent internal consistency and test-retest reliability. • The FLARE-RA is a valid instrument to detect current OMERACT-defined flares within a bDMARD tapering setting, with an optimal global score cutoff of 4/10. • Higher scores on the FLARE-RA are associated with increased risk of future flares, which could be particularly relevant when considering DMARD tapering.

Clinical Severity of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant Compared with Delta among Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients in Belgium during Autumn and Winter Season 2021-2022.

This retrospective multi-center matched cohort study assessed the risk for severe COVID-19 (combination of severity indicators), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and in-hospital mortality in hospitalized patients when infected with the Omicron variant compared to when infected with the Delta variant. The study is based on a causal framework using individually-linked data from national COVID-19 registries. The study population consisted of 954 COVID-19 patients (of which, 445 were infected with Omicron) above 18 years old admitted to a Belgian hospital during the autumn and winter season 2021-2022, and with available viral genomic data. Patients were matched based on the hospital, whereas other possible confounders (demographics, comorbidities, vaccination status, socio-economic status, and ICU occupancy) were adjusted for by using a multivariable logistic regression analysis. The estimated standardized risk for severe COVID-19 and ICU admission in hospitalized patients was significantly lower (RR = 0.63; 95% CI (0.30; 0.97) and RR = 0.56; 95% CI (0.14; 0.99), respectively) when infected with the Omicron variant, whereas in-hospital mortality was not significantly different according to the SARS-CoV-2 variant (RR = 0.78, 95% CI (0.28-1.29)). This study demonstrates the added value of integrated genomic and clinical surveillance to recognize the multifactorial nature of COVID-19 pathogenesis.

Incidence and Risk Factors of COVID-19 Vaccine Breakthrough Infections: A Prospective Cohort Study in Belgium.

The objective of this study was to investigate the incidence and risk factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infections. We included all persons ≥18 years that had been fully vaccinated against COVID-19 for ≥14 days, between 1 February 2021 and 5 December 2021, in Belgium. The incidence of breakthrough infections (laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infections) was determined. Factors associated with breakthrough infections were analyzed using COX proportional hazard models. Among 8,062,600 fully vaccinated adults, we identified 373,070 breakthrough infections with an incidence of 11.2 (95%CI 11.2-11.3)/100 person years. Vaccination with Ad26.COV2.S (HR1.54, 95%CI 1.52-1.56) or ChAdOx1 (HR1.68, 95%CI 1.66-1.69) was associated with a higher risk of a breakthrough infection compared to BNT162b2, while mRNA-1273 was associated with a lower risk (HR0.68, 95%CI 0.67-0.69). A prior COVID-19-infection was protective against a breakthrough infection (HR0.23, 95%CI 0.23-0.24), as was an mRNA booster (HR0.44, 95%CI 0.43-0.45). During a breakthrough infection, those who had a prior COVID-19 infection were less likely to have COVID-19 symptoms of almost all types than naïve persons. We identified risk factors associated with breakthrough infections, such as vaccination with adenoviral-vector vaccines, which could help inform future decisions on booster vaccination strategies. A prior COVID-19 infection lowered the risk of breakthrough infections and of having symptoms, highlighting the protective effect of hybrid immunity.

Vaccine effectiveness against onward transmission of SARS-CoV2-infection by variant of concern and time since vaccination, Belgian contact tracing, 2021.

BACKGROUND: During the first half of 2021, we observed high vaccine effectiveness (VE) against SARS-CoV2-infection. The replacement of the alpha-'variant of concern' (VOC) by the delta-VOC and uncertainty about the time course of immunity called for a re-assessment. METHODS: We estimated VE against transmission of infection (VET) from Belgian contact tracing data for high-risk exposure contacts between 26/01/2021 and 14/12/2021 by susceptibility (VEs) and infectiousness of breakthrough cases (VEi) for a complete schedule of Ad26.COV2.S, ChAdOx1, BNT162b2, mRNA-1273 as well as infection-acquired and hybrid immunity. We used a multilevel Bayesian model and adjusted for personal characteristics (age, sex, household), background exposure, calendar week, VOC and time since immunity conferring-event. FINDINGS: VET-estimates were higher for mRNA-vaccines, over 90%, compared to viral vector vaccines: 66% and 80% for Ad26COV2.S and ChAdOx1 respectively (Alpha, 0-50 days after vaccination). Delta was associated with a 40% increase in odds of transmission and a decrease of VEs (72-64%) and especially of VEi (71-46% for BNT162b2). Infection-acquired and hybrid immunity were less affected by Delta. Waning further reduced VET-estimates: from 81% to 63% for BNT162b2 (Delta, 150-200 days after vaccination). We observed lower initial VEi in the age group 65-84 years (32% vs 46% in the age group 45-64 years for BNT162b2) and faster waning. Hybrid immunity waned slower than vaccine-induced immunity. INTERPRETATION: VEi and VEs-estimates, while remaining significant, were reduced by Delta and waned over time. We observed faster waning in the oldest age group. We should seek to improve vaccine-induced protection in older persons and those vaccinated with viral-vector vaccines.

New indicator for discordance between patient-reported and traditional disease activity outcomes in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To unravel disease impact in early RA by separately quantifying patient-reported (PRF), clinical (CF) and laboratory (LF) factors. We propose a new indicator, the discordance score (DS), for early identification and prediction of patient's unmet needs and of future achievement of sustained remission (SR) and RA-related quality of life (QoL). METHODS: Factor-scores obtained by factor analysis in the CareRA trial, allowed to compute DS, reflecting the difference between PRF and the mean of CF and LF. Improvement from baseline to week 104 (%) and area-under-the-curve (AUC) across time points per factor-score were calculated and compared between patients achieving/not achieving sustained (week 16-104) remission (DAS28CRP < 2.6) with ANOVA. Logistic and linear regressions were used to predict SR based on previous factor and discordance scores, and QoL at year 1 and 2 based on DS at week 16. RESULTS: PRF, CF and LF scores improved rapidly within 8 weeks. PRF improved 57%, CF 90% and LF 27%, in those achieving SR, compared with 32% (PRF: P = 0.13), 77% (CF: P < 0.001) and 9% (LF: P = 0.36) in patients not achieving SR. Patients achieving SR had an AUC of 15.7, 3.4 and 4.8 for PRF, CF and LF, respectively, compared with 33.2, 10.1 and 7.2 in participants not achieving SR (P < 0.001 for all). Early discordance was associated with later factor scores, QoL and self-efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: All factor scores improved rapidly, especially in patients achieving sustained remission. Patient-reported burden improved less. Discordance scores could help predicting the need for additional non-pharmacological interventions to achieve sustained remission and decrease disease impact.

The perception of stakeholders on the applicability of nurse-led clinics in the management of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: RA should be treated to target in a process of shared decision-making with patients. Person-centred care is essential to meeting specific patient needs. Nurse-led clinics, where a nurse is responsible for care, have demonstrated added value in some countries but are still not implemented widely. This study aimed to explore stakeholders' perceptions of advantages, disadvantages and conditions for the implementation of nurse-led clinics for RA in Belgium. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional qualitative study consisting of five semi-structured focus group interviews. Rheumatology nurses, patients with RA and rheumatologists were interviewed as stakeholders. The analysis was carried out by three researchers according to the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven (QUAGOL), formulating a conceptual framework of overarching themes and deconstructing this into perceived advantages, disadvantages and conditions. RESULTS: Two focus groups with nurses (total n = 16), two with patients (n = 17) and one with rheumatologists (n = 9) were conducted. The interview synthesis resulted in five overarching themes across stakeholders: efficiency of care, disease management, legal and organizational requirements, the conventional role of the nurse and the extended role of the nurse. All stakeholders perceived additional education for nurses as essential, but rheumatologists debated nurses' abilities to lead a rheumatology clinic. Furthermore, patients preferred care protocols to guide nurses, and care providers approached this reluctantly. Generally, patients with a well-controlled disease were perceived as the ideal candidates for nurse-led care. CONCLUSION: Nurse-led clinics could provide many benefits but require additional nurse education and a legal and organizational framework before being implemented widely and successfully.

'More than just chitchat': a qualitative study concerning the need and potential format of a peer mentor programme for patients with early rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Patients recently diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have specific educational and supportive needs. These could partly be addressed with mentoring by other patients living with RA. This qualitative study explores stakeholder perceptions towards peer mentoring in early RA care. METHODS: Two focus groups with patients with early RA (n=10), one with patient organisation representatives (n=5), one with rheumatologists (n=8) and one with rheumatology nurses (n=5) were held. Two patient research partners supported analysis and interpretation. RESULTS: Four overarching themes were found: added value, experience with peer mentoring, concerns and need in daily care. Patients and patient organisation representatives confirmed the potential of peer mentoring especially regarding sensitive topics not easily discussed with professionals. Patients felt it could provide additional understanding and recognition. Nurses and rheumatologists were less convinced of the added value of peer mentoring because patients never mentioned it and they were concerned about the loss of control over correct information provision. The need for peer mentoring was perceived as person and disease phase-dependent and should therefore be optional, rather than a care standard. The requirements for a peer mentorship programme remained challenging to define for stakeholders. However, all expressed the need for supervision by healthcare professionals and that peer mentors should be carefully selected, educated and matched to newly diagnosed patients. CONCLUSION: Peer mentoring and its implementation remain vague concepts, especially for healthcare providers. However, patients are interested in mentoring by peers, and the current results may support in effectively implementing such programmes early in the disease.

The ideal mHealth-application for rheumatoid arthritis: qualitative findings from stakeholder focus groups.

BACKGROUND: Shifts in treatment strategies for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have made ambulatory care more labour-intensive. These developments have prompted innovative care models, including mobile health (mHealth) applications. This study aimed to explore the perceptions of mHealth-inexperienced stakeholders concerning these applications in RA care. METHODS: We performed a qualitative study by focus group interviews of stakeholders including RA patients, nurses specialised in RA care and rheumatologists. The qualitative analysis guide of Leuven (QUAGOL), which is based on grounded theory principles, was used to thematically analyse the data. In addition, the Persuasive Systems Design (PSD) model was used to structure recommended app-features. RESULTS: In total, 2 focus groups with nurses (total n = 16), 2 with patients (n = 17) and 2 with rheumatologists (n = 25) took place. Six overarching themes emerged from the analysis. Efficiency of care and enabling patient empowerment were the two themes considered as expected benefits of mHealth-use in practice by the stakeholders. In contrast, 4 themes emerged as possible barriers of mHealth-use: the burden of chronic app-use, motivational aspects, target group aspects, and legal and organisational requirements. Additionally, recommendations for an ideal mHealth-app could be structured into 4 domains (Primary Task Support, Dialogue Support, Social Support and System Credibility) according to the PSD-framework. Most recommended features were related to improving ease of use (Task Support) and System Credibility. CONCLUSIONS: Although mHealth-apps were expected to improve care efficiency and stimulate patient empowerment, stakeholders were concerned that mHealth-app use could reinforce negative illness behaviour. For mHealth-apps to be successful in practice, challenges according to stakeholders were avoiding long-term poor compliance, finding the target audience and tailoring a legal and organisational framework. Finally, the ideal mHealth-application should above all be trustworthy and easy to use.

Comorbidity burden in the first three years after diagnosis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis or spondyloarthritis: a general practice registry-based study.

OBJECTIVES: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and spondyloarthritis (SpA) are chronic inflammatory rheumatic conditions with high levels of comorbidity requiring additional therapeutic attention. We aimed to compare the 3-year comorbidity incidence and pain medication prescription in patients diagnosed with RA, PsA or SpA versus controls. METHODS: Data between 1999 and 2012 were obtained from Intego, a general practitioner (GP) morbidity registry in Flanders, Belgium. Cases were identified by International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-2) codes representing 'rheumatoid/seropositive arthritis (L88)' or 'musculoskeletal disease other (L99)'. The registered keywords mapped to these ICPC-2 codes were further verified and mapped to a RA/SpA/PsA diagnosis. Controls were matched on age, gender, GP practice and diagnosis date. We analysed the 3-year comorbidity burden in cases and controls, measured by the Rheumatic Diseases Comorbidity Index (RDCI). All electronically GP-prescribed drugs were registered. RESULTS: In total, 738, 229 and 167 patients were included with a diagnosis of RA, SpA or PsA, respectively. Patients with RA or PsA had comparable median RDCI scores at baseline, but higher scores at year 3 compared with controls (RA: p=0.010; PsA: p=0.008). At baseline, depression was more prevalent in PsA patients vs controls (p<0.003). RA patients had a higher 3-year incidence of cardiovascular disease including myocardial infarction than controls (p<0.035). All disease population were given more prescriptions than controls for any pain medication type, even opioids excluding tramadol. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the increasing comorbidity burden of patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic conditions, especially for individuals with RA or PsA. The high opioid use in all populations was remarkable.

Short-term glucocorticoids reduce risk of chronic NSAID and analgesic use in early methotrexate-treated rheumatoid arthritis patients with favourable prognosis: subanalysis of the CareRA randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To explore non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) and analgesic use in early rheumatoid arthritis (eRA) patients with a favourable risk profile initiating methotrexate (MTX) with or without glucocorticoid (GC) bridging. METHODS: Patients with eRA (≤1 year) and favourable risk profile (no erosions, negative rheumatoid factor and anticitrullinated protein antibodiesor low disease activity) in the 2-year CareRA trial were randomised to MTX 15 mg with a step-down GC scheme (COBRA Slim), or MTX without oral GCs, Tight-Step-Up (TSU). Used analgesics were recorded, including frequency, start/end date and indication. Chronic intake (≥90 consecutive days in trial) of NSAIDs, acetaminophen, opioids including tramadol and antidepressants for the indication of musculoskeletal (MSK) pain was considered. Treatments were compared using χ2 and analysis of variance with Holm's correction for multiple testing. RESULTS: In total, 43 patients were randomised to COBRA Slim and 47 to TSU. At study inclusion, 33/43 (77%) of patients in the COBRA Slim and 32/47 (68%) in the TSU arm had been using analgesics (p=0.5). During the trial, 67 NSAID and analgesics were used for MSK pain in 26/43 (60%) COBRA Slim patients of which 9/43 (21%) daily chronically (DC), while 107 NSAID and analgesics were used in 43/47 (92%) TSU patients, of which 25/47 (53%) DC. The total number of patients on NSAID and analgesics at any time during the study (p<0.01) and chronically (p=0.01) was significantly different between treatment arms. Number of patients on DC NSAIDs was also significantly different (p<0.01) between COBRA Slim 6/43 (14%) and TSU 19/47 (40%). CONCLUSION: In eRA patients considered to have a favourable prognosis, initial oral GC bridging resulted in lower chronic NSAID and analgesic use. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01172639.