Revaccination of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus or rheumatoid arthritis without an initial COVID-19 vaccine response elicits seroconversion in half of the patients.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of COVID-19 mRNA revaccination (two doses) on the antibody response in patients with rheumatic diseases (RD) who were initial vaccine non-responders. Further, to examine if B-cell levels or T-cell responses before revaccination predicted seroconversion. METHODS: From a RD cohort vaccinated with the standard two-dose COVID-19 vaccinations, we enrolled cases without detectable antibody responses (n=17) and controls with detectable antibody response (n=29). Blood donors (n=32) were included as additional controls. Samples were collected before and six weeks after completed revaccination. Total antibodies and specific IgG, IgA, and IgM against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibodies, and SARS-CoV-2 reacting CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells were measured before and after revaccination. B-cells (CD19+CD45+) were quantified before revaccination. RESULTS: Forty-seven percent of cases had detectable neutralising antibodies after revaccination. However, antibody levels were significantly lower than in controls and blood donors. Revaccination induced an antibody class switch in cases with a decrease in IgM and increase in IgG. No significant difference was observed in T-cell responses before and after revaccination between the three groups. Only 29% of cases had measurable B-cells compared to 100% of controls and blood donors. Fifty percent of revaccinated cases who seroconverted had measurable B-cells before revaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Forty-seven percent of initial non-responders seroconverted after two-dose revaccination but still had lower levels of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies compared with controls and blood donors. RD patients without a detectable serological response after the initial COVID-19 mRNA vaccine had a T-cell response similar to immunocompetent controls and blood donors.

Rituximab-treated rheumatic patients: B cells predict seroconversion after COVID-19 boost or revaccination in initial vaccine non-responders.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of either a booster vaccine (one dose) or revaccination (two doses 3 weeks apart) on the antibody response to the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in patients with rheumatic disease (RD) treated with rituximab (RTX) who had not produced vaccine-reactive antibodies after the initial two vaccine doses. Further, to examine if B cell levels in peripheral blood predicted seroconversion. METHODS: We included 91 RTX-treated RD patients previously vaccinated against COVID-19. Patients were offered revaccination or a single booster vaccination with an mRNA vaccine. Serum total antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein were measured before and 6 weeks after the last vaccine dose. B cells (CD19+CD45+) were measured by flow cytometry at inclusion. RESULTS: Of RD patients with undetectable SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels before inclusion, seroconversion was seen in 38% 6 weeks after the booster dose and 32% after revaccination. Patients receiving revaccination had significantly higher antibody levels than patients receiving a booster dose (P < 0.001). In both univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis, only B cells higher than 10/µl before boost or revaccination were associated with seroconversion (P = 0.009 and P = 0.01, respectively). Seroconversion was independent of age, gender, diagnosis, cumulative RTX dose, RTX treatment time and time since last RTX treatment. CONCLUSION: Continuously impaired humoral response to mRNA vaccines was found in most RTX-treated patients after a booster dose or revaccination. Seroconversion was observed in approximately one-third of the patients. Measurable B cells before boosting or revaccination was the strongest predictor of antibody response after boost or revaccination.

[VEXAS gene variants explain previously unrecognized clinical syndrome].

This review aims to make clinicians aware of the newly described syndrome, VEXAS. VEXAS should become an obvious differential diagnosis in cases of unexplained inflammation, anemia, and rheumatological and/or hematological manifestations. Patients with VEXAS are typically male aged > 60, with inflammation, and macrocytic anaemia. On suspicion of cancer or infections patients have frequently been exposed to extensive diagnostic procedures and hospital admissions. In this review, we summarise the current knowledge of VEXAS regarding pathogenesis, symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment.

Biological therapy and international travel: A questionnaire survey among Danish patients with rheumatic disease.

OBJECTIVE: To describe travel activities, preparations, and health problems encountered by patients with arthritis receiving biological therapy. METHODS: A travel survey was conducted in a Danish rheumatology outpatient clinic by distribution of a semistructured questionnaire to 300 consecutive patients with arthritis. RESULTS: Among the 273 (91%) patients returning the questionnaire, a history of traveling outside Denmark was reported by 203 (74%) respondents and outside Europe by 92 (34%). In 81% of the patients, travel activities had not decreased after the initiation of biological treatment. However, 24% reported that they had become more cautious regarding the choice of travel destination. Pre-travel advice was sought by less than one-third of the patients, whereas travel insurance was taken out by 86%, but only half of them had disclosed information about the biological treatment. Treatment was discontinued temporarily while traveling in 26% of patients on subcutaneous biologics. The main reason for discontinuation was concern about transport and storage of medicine. Only 6% of the travelers had experienced health problems, which were of only minor importance. CONCLUSION: Treatment with biologics seems not to have any major influence on international travel activity among Danish patients with arthritis. Health problems when traveling were of minor importance. However, pre-travel advice issues, including treatment compliance, transport of medicine, and insurance coverage, need to be addressed proactively by the outpatient clinic staff as part of patient consultation.

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis facing sick leave or work disability meet varying regulations: a study among rheumatologists and patients from 44 European countries.

OBJECTIVES: To describe and explore differences in formal regulations around sick leave and work disability (WD) for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), as well as perceptions by rheumatologists and patients on the system's performance, across European countries. METHODS: We conducted three cross-sectional surveys in 50 European countries: one on work (re-)integration and social security (SS) system arrangements in case of sick leave and long-term WD due to RA (one rheumatologist per country), and two among approximately 15 rheumatologists and 15 patients per country on perceptions regarding SS arrangements on work participation. Differences in regulations and perceptions were compared across categories defined by gross domestic product (GDP), type of social welfare regime, European Union (EU) membership and country RA WD rates. RESULTS: Forty-four (88%) countries provided data on regulations, 33 (75%) on perceptions of rheumatologists (n=539) and 34 (77%) on perceptions of patients (n=719). While large variation was observed across all regulations across countries, no relationship was found between most of regulations or income compensation and GDP, type of SS system or rates of WD. Regarding perceptions, rheumatologists in high GDP and EU-member countries felt less confident in their role in the decision process towards WD (ß=-0.5 (95% CI -0.9 to -0.2) and ß=-0.5 (95% CI -1.0 to -0.1), respectively). The Scandinavian and Bismarckian system scored best on patients' and rheumatologists' perceptions of regulations and system performance. CONCLUSIONS: There is large heterogeneity in rules and regulations of SS systems across Europe in relation to WD of patients with RA, and it cannot be explained by existing welfare regimes, EU membership or country's wealth.