Safety and effectiveness of abatacept in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: results from the PRINTO/PRCSG registry.

OBJECTIVE: To report the interim 5-year safety and effectiveness of abatacept in patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) in the PRINTO/PRCSG registry. METHODS: The Abatacept JIA Registry (NCT01357668) is an ongoing observational study of children with JIA receiving abatacept; enrolment started in January 2013. Clinical sites enrolled patients with JIA starting or currently receiving abatacept. Eligible patients were assessed for safety (primary end point) and effectiveness over 10 years. Effectiveness was measured by clinical 10-joint Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score (cJADAS10) in patients with JIA over 5 years. As-observed analysis is presented according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines. RESULTS: As of 31 March 2020, 587 patients were enrolled; 569 are included in this analysis (including 134 new users) with 1214.6 patient-years of safety data available. Over 5 years, the incidence rate (IR) per 100 patient-years of follow-up of serious adverse events was 5.52 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.27, 7.01) and of events of special interest was 3.62 (95% CI: 2.63, 4.86), with 18 serious infections (IR 1.48 [95% CI: 0.88, 2.34]). As early as month 3, 55.9% of patients achieved cJADAS10 low disease activity and inactive disease (20.3%, 72/354 and 35.6%, 126/354, respectively), sustained over 5 years. Disease activity measures improved over 5 years across JIA categories. CONCLUSION: Abatacept was well tolerated in patients with JIA, with no new safety signals identified and with well-controlled disease activity, including some patients achieving inactive disease or remission. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01357668.

Assessing Pediatric Rheumatology Fellow Competence in the Milestone Era: Past, Present, and Future.

Starting in 2015, pediatric rheumatology fellowship training programs were required by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education to assess fellows' academic performance within 21 subcompetencies falling under six competency domains. Each subcompetency had four or five milestone levels describing developmental progression of knowledge and skill acquisition. Milestones were standardized across all pediatric subspecialties. As part of the Milestones 2.0 revision project, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education convened a workgroup in 2022 to write pediatric rheumatology-specific milestones. Using adult rheumatology's Milestones 2.0 as a starting point, the workgroup revised the patient care and medical knowledge subcompetencies and milestones to reflect requirements and nuances of pediatric rheumatology care. Milestones within four remaining competency domains (professionalism, interpersonal and communication skills, practice-based learning and improvement, and systems-based practice) were standardized across all pediatric subspecialties, and therefore not revised. The workgroup created a supplemental guide with explanations of the intent of each subcompetency, 25 in total, and examples for each milestone level. The new milestones are an important step forward for competency-based medical education in pediatric rheumatology. However, challenges remain. Milestone level assignment is meant to be informed by results of multiple assessment methods. The lack of pediatric rheumatology-specific assessment tools typically result in clinical competency committees determining trainee milestone levels without such collated results as the foundation of their assessments. Although further advances in pediatric rheumatology fellowship competency-based medical education are needed, Milestones 2.0 importantly establishes the first pediatric-specific rheumatology Milestones to assess fellow performance during training and help measure readiness for independent practice.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies.

BACKGROUND: Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, there have been concerns regarding the risks of infection in patients with autoimmune disease. In this study, we investigated the impact of the pandemic on patients with juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (JIIM). METHODS: Data were collected using a patient/caregiver survey via Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) database. Eligibility included JIIM diagnosis and current age less than 21 years old. Surveys were distributed via the CureJM organization, social media, Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) network and Dr. Peter Dent Pediatric Rheumatology Bulletin Board. RESULTS: Eighty-four respondents accessed the survey, 70 (83%) consented to participate, and 54 out of 70 completed the full survey (77%). Twenty-seven out of 57 patients (47%) tested positive for COVID-19, with 7 (12%) testing positive more than once. Despite broad usage of immunosuppressive medications, 24 out of 27 (89%) reported mild symptoms with none requiring hospitalization. Four patients reported a flare of JIIM symptoms after COVID-19; three of whom held immunomodulatory medications during their infection. Thirty-seven out of 54 respondents (69%) reported vaccination against COVID-19, with 9 out of 37 (24%) reporting minor vaccine side effects and one reporting JIIM flare post vaccination. Twenty-one out of 54 (39%) respondents reported psychosocial concerns related to the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with JIIM, including those on multiple immunosuppressive medications, had mild symptoms related to COVID-19. Most patients tolerated COVID-19 vaccination well. Few patients had disease flare post-COVID-19 or vaccination. Mental health concerns were demonstrated in JIIM patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis for the General Practitioner.

Musculoskeletal complaints are common among children in the primary care setting. Joint pain can be categorized as either inflammatory or noninflammatory (also known as mechanical), and differentiating between these 2 categories affects a physician's differential diagnosis and plan for evaluation. Patients with inflammatory arthritis will frequently present to the primary care physician with musculoskeletal complaints. Specific features in the history and physical examination distinguish juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) from other musculoskeletal etiologies. (1)JIA is the most common cause of inflammatory joint pain in children younger than 16 years, with a variable worldwide incidence; in Europe and North America, the incidence is approximately 7.8 to 8.3 per 1,000, with prevalence rates between 12.8 and 45 per 100,000. (2) It is thought that as many as 8 million children in the world have chronic arthritis. (2) Given its prevalence, it is important for the primary care physician to be able to appropriately recognize this condition and in doing so prevent a delay in diagnosis and management. Arthritis is a common cause of disability in children, and complications of JIA can be severe. Many therapies used in JIA have adverse effects and contraindications (specifically vaccinations and teratogen exposure) that require recognition by the primary care physician. This article discusses the differences between inflammatory and noninflammatory joint pain, the diagnosis and various categories of JIA, long-term outcomes and complications associated with JIA, and the general management of JIA with special emphasis on adverse effects and contraindications of therapies.

Treatment escalation patterns to start biologics in refractory moderate juvenile dermatomyositis among members of the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance.

BACKGROUND: Despite new and better treatments for juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM), not all patients with moderate severity disease respond adequately to first-line therapy. Those with refractory disease remain at higher risk for disease and glucocorticoid-related complications. Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) have become part of the arsenal of treatments for JDM. However, prospective comparative studies of commonly used biologics are lacking. METHODS: The Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) JDM biologics workgroup met in 2019 and produced a survey assessing current treatment escalation practices for JDM, including preferences regarding use of biologic treatments. The cases and questions were developed using a consensus framework, requiring 80% agreement for consensus. The survey was completed online in 2020 by CARRA members interested in JDM. Survey results were analyzed among all respondents and according to years of experience. Chi-square or Fisher's exact test was used to compare the distribution of responses to each survey question. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-one CARRA members responded to the survey (denominators vary for each question). Of the respondents, 88% were pediatric rheumatologists, 85% practiced in the United States, and 43% had over 10 years of experience. For a patient with moderately severe JDM refractory to methotrexate, glucocorticoids, and IVIG, approximately 80% of respondents indicated that they would initiate a biologic after failing 1-2 non-biologic DMARDs. Trials of methotrexate and mycophenolate were considered necessary by 96% and 60% of respondents, respectively, before initiating a biologic. By weighed average, rituximab was the preferred biologic over abatacept, tocilizumab, and infliximab. Over 50% of respondents would start a biologic by 4 months from diagnosis for patients with refractory moderately severe JDM. There were no notable differences in treatment practices between respondents by years of experience. CONCLUSION: Most respondents favored starting a biologic earlier in disease course after trialing up to two conventional DMARDs, specifically including methotrexate. There was a clear preference for rituximab. However, there remains a dearth of prospective data comparing biologics in refractory JDM. These findings underscore the need for biologic consensus treatment plans (CTPs) for refractory JDM, which will ultimately facilitate comparative effectiveness studies and inform treatment practices.

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, Sjögren Syndrome, and Mixed Connective Tissue Disease in Children and Adolescents.

Juvenile systemic lupus erythematosus (jSLE), mixed connective tissue disease (jMCTD), and Sjögren syndrome (jSS) are systemic autoimmune and inflammatory disorders with distinct patterns of organ involvement. All are characterized by autoantibody formation, with antinuclear (ANA) and anti-double-stranded DNA common in jSLE, ANA with high-titer ribonucleoprotein antibody in jMCTD, and Sjögren syndrome A and Sjögren syndrome B antibodies + ANA in jSS. Recognition, monitoring, and management for primary care providers are discussed, focusing on the role of primary physicians in recognizing and helping maintain optimal health in children with these potentially life-threatening diseases.

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the efficacy and safety of rilonacept in the treatment of systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of rilonacept, an interleukin-1 inhibitor, in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. METHODS: An initial 4-week double-blind placebo phase was incorporated into a 24-week randomized multicenter design, followed by an open-label phase. Seventy-one children who had active arthritis in ≥2 joints were randomized (1:1) to the 2 arms of the study. Patients in the rilonacept arm received rilonacept (loading dose 4.4 mg/kg followed by 2.2 mg/kg weekly, subcutaneously) beginning on day 0. Patients in the placebo arm received placebo for 4 weeks followed by a loading dose of rilonacept at week 4 followed by weekly maintenance doses. The primary end point was time to response, using the adapted American College of Rheumatology Pediatric 30 criteria coupled with the absence of fever and taper of the dosage of systemic corticosteroids, using prespecified criteria. RESULTS: The time to response was shorter in the rilonacept arm than in the placebo arm (χ(2) = 7.235, P = 0.007). The secondary analysis, which used the same response criteria, showed that 20 (57%) of 35 patients in the rilonacept arm had a response at week 4 compared with 9 (27%) of 33 patients in the placebo arm (P = 0.016). Exacerbation of systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) was the most common severe adverse event. More patients in the rilonacept arm had elevated liver transaminase levels (including levels more than 3 times the upper limit of normal) compared with those in the placebo arm. Adverse events were similar in the 2 arms of the study. CONCLUSION: Rilonacept was generally well tolerated and demonstrated efficacy in active systemic JIA.

Recognition, diagnosis, and treatment of histoplasmosis complicating tumor necrosis factor blocker therapy.

Life-threatening histoplasmosis is one of the most common opportunistic infections in patients receiving tumor necrosis factor (TNF) blockers. Delays in considering the diagnosis may lead to increased morbidity and mortality. Most affected patients present with pneumonitis, usually accompanied by additional signs of progressive dissemination, or with signs of progressive dissemination alone. The diagnosis often can be promptly established using antigen detection or direct examination of bronchoalveolar lavage specimens. If histoplasmosis is diagnosed promptly, antifungal therapy is highly effective. After a favorable clinical response, the safety of both discontinuation of antifungal therapy and the resumption of TNF blocker remains undetermined. The management of the immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome that may follow discontinuation of TNF blockers also requires investigation. Prescribers should become aware of the recognition, diagnosis, and treatment of histoplasmosis and educate recipients about decreasing their risk of exposure and both recognizing and reporting signs of early infection.

Thoracoscopy-assisted Heller myotomy for the treatment of achalasia: results of a minimally invasive technique.

BACKGROUND: Several surgical methods have been described to treat achalasia with a recent trend toward utilizing minimally invasive techniques to perform a myotomy. Since 1998 our institution has utilized a minimally invasive thoracoscopy-assisted technique (ThAM) that allows a myotomy to be performed under direct visualization. METHODS: From 1992 to 2002, 57 patients underwent transthoracic Heller myotomy at our institution. Thirty-eight patients (67%) who underwent ThAM were reviewed and compared with 19 (33%) who previously underwent myotomy through a standard open left thoracotomy (OM). RESULTS: There were no operative deaths in the ThAM group (n = 38) and 4 patients (11%) experienced minor morbidity. Four ThAM patients required conversion to open thoracotomy and 2 were lost to follow-up. Of the remaining 32 patients, 29 have improved postoperative dysphagia scores after a mean follow-up of 17 months. Only 4 patients have required further endoscopic or surgical intervention. Compared with the OM group, ThAM patients experienced significantly shorter average surgery time (97 versus 139 minutes), less blood loss (80 versus 155 mL), less postoperative narcotic requirement (8 versus 20 days), and shorter recovery to normal activity (20 versus 73 days). CONCLUSIONS: Thoracoscopy-assisted myotomy results in excellent relief of dysphagia in the short term and would be expected to have long-term results similar to OM. Shorter operating and recovery times as compared with OM without the need for an antireflux procedure makes ThAM an attractive minimally invasive technique.