2022 EULAR recommendations for screening and prophylaxis of chronic and opportunistic infections in adults with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases.

OBJECTIVES: To develop EULAR recommendations for screening and prophylaxis of chronic and opportunistic infections in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD). METHODS: An international Task Force (TF) (22 members/15 countries) formulated recommendations, supported by systematic literature review findings. Level of evidence and grade of recommendation were assigned for each recommendation. Level of agreement was provided anonymously by each TF member. RESULTS: Four overarching principles (OAP) and eight recommendations were developed. The OAPs highlight the need for infections to be discussed with patients and with other medical specialties, in accordance with national regulations. In addition to biologic/targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for which screening for latent tuberculosis (TB) should be performed, screening could be considered also before conventional synthetic DMARDs, glucocorticoids and immunosuppressants. Interferon gamma release assay should be preferred over tuberculin skin test, where available. Hepatitis B (HBV) antiviral treatment should be guided by HBV status defined prior to starting antirheumatic drugs. All patients positive for hepatitis-C-RNA should be referred for antiviral treatment. Also, patients who are non-immune to varicella zoster virus should be informed about the availability of postexposure prophylaxis should they have contact with this pathogen. Prophylaxis against Pneumocystis jirovecii seems to be beneficial in patients treated with daily doses >15-30 mg of prednisolone or equivalent for >2-4 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations provide guidance on the screening and prevention of chronic and opportunistic infections. Their adoption in clinical practice is recommended to standardise and optimise care to reduce the burden of opportunistic infections in people living with AIIRD.

Consensus statement on blocking interleukin-6 receptor and interleukin-6 in inflammatory conditions: an update.

BACKGROUND: Targeting interleukin (IL)-6 has become a major therapeutic strategy in the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory disease. Interference with the IL-6 pathway can be directed at the specific receptor using anti-IL-6Rα antibodies or by directly inhibiting the IL-6 cytokine. This paper is an update of a previous consensus document, based on most recent evidence and expert opinion, that aims to inform on the medical use of interfering with the IL-6 pathway. METHODS: A systematic literature research was performed that focused on IL-6-pathway inhibitors in inflammatory diseases. Evidence was put in context by a large group of international experts and patients in a subsequent consensus process. All were involved in formulating the consensus statements, and in the preparation of this document. RESULTS: The consensus process covered relevant aspects of dosing and populations for different indications of IL-6 pathway inhibitors that are approved across the world, including rheumatoid arthritis, polyarticular-course and systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis, giant cell arteritis, Takayasu arteritis, adult-onset Still's disease, Castleman's disease, chimeric antigen receptor-T-cell-induced cytokine release syndrome, neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder and severe COVID-19. Also addressed were other clinical aspects of the use of IL-6 pathway inhibitors, including pretreatment screening, safety, contraindications and monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: The document provides a comprehensive consensus on the use of IL-6 inhibition to treat inflammatory disorders to inform healthcare professionals (including researchers), patients, administrators and payers.

Effectiveness of remote care interventions: a systematic review informing the 2022 EULAR Points to Consider for remote care in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic literature review (SLR) on different outcomes of remote care compared with face-to-face (F2F) care, its implementation into clinical practice and to identify drivers and barriers in order to inform a task force formulating the EULAR Points to Consider for remote care in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). METHODS: A search strategy was developed and run in Medline (PubMed), Embase and Cochrane Library. Two reviewers independently performed standardised data extraction, synthesis and risk of bias (RoB) assessment. RESULTS: A total of 2240 references were identified. Forty-seven of them fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Remote monitoring (n=35) was most frequently studied, with telephone/video calls being the most common mode of delivery (n=30). Of the 34 studies investigating outcomes of remote care, the majority addressed efficacy and user perception; 34% and 21% of them, respectively, reported a superiority of remote care as compared with F2F care. Time and cost savings were reported as major benefits, technical aspects as major drawback in the 13 studies that investigated drivers and barriers of remote care. No study addressed remote care implementation. The main limitation of the studies identified was the heterogeneity of outcomes and methods, as well as a substantial RoB (50% of studies with high RoB). CONCLUSIONS: Remote care leads to similar or better results compared with F2F treatment concerning efficacy, safety, adherence and user perception outcomes, with the limitation of heterogeneity and considerable RoB of the available studies.

2022 EULAR points to consider for remote care in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases.

BACKGROUND: Remote care and telehealth have the potential to expand healthcare access, and the COVID-19 pandemic has called for alternative solutions to conventional face-to-face follow-up and monitoring. However, guidance is needed on the integration of telehealth into clinical care of people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMD). OBJECTIVE: To develop EULAR points to consider (PtC) for the development, prioritisation and implementation of telehealth for people with RMD. METHODS: A multidisciplinary EULAR task force (TF) of 30 members from 14 European countries was established, and the EULAR standardised operating procedures for development of PtC were followed. A systematic literature review was conducted to support the TF in formulating the PtC. The level of agreement among the TF was established by anonymous online voting. RESULTS: Four overarching principles and nine PtC were formulated. The use of telehealth should be tailored to patient's needs and preferences. The healthcare team should have adequate equipment and training and have telecommunication skills. Telehealth can be used in screening for RMD as preassessment in the referral process, for disease monitoring and regulation of medication dosages and in some non-pharmacological interventions. People with RMD should be offered training in using telehealth, and barriers should be resolved whenever possible.The level of agreement to each statement ranged from 8.5 to 9.8/10. CONCLUSION: The PtC have identified areas where telehealth could improve quality of care and increase healthcare access. Knowing about drivers and barriers of telehealth is a prerequisite to successfully establish remote care approaches in rheumatologic clinical practice.

EULAR recommendations for the management and vaccination of people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases in the context of SARS-CoV-2: the November 2021 update.

The first EULAR provisional recommendations on the management of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) in the context of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), largely based on expert opinion, were published in June 2020. Since then, an unprecedented number of clinical studies have accrued in the literature. Several SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been approved for population-wide vaccination programmes in EULAR-affiliated countries. Studies regarding vaccination of patients with (inflammatory) RMDs have released their first results or are underway.EULAR found it opportune to carefully review to what extent the initially consensus expert recommendations stood the test of time, by challenging them with the recently accumulated body of scientific evidence, and by incorporating evidence-based advice on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. EULAR started a formal (first) update in January 2021, performed a systematic literature review according to EULAR's standard operating procedures and completed a set of updated overarching principles and recommendations in July 2021. Two points to consider were added in November 2021, because of recent developments pertaining to additional vaccination doses.

Safety of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: results from the EULAR Coronavirus Vaccine (COVAX) physician-reported registry.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the safety of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in people with inflammatory/autoimmune rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease (I-RMD). METHODS: Physician-reported registry of I-RMD and non-inflammatory RMD (NI-RMDs) patients vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. From 5 February 2021 to 27 July 2021, we collected data on demographics, vaccination, RMD diagnosis, disease activity, immunomodulatory/immunosuppressive treatments, flares, adverse events (AEs) and SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections. Data were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: The study included 5121 participants from 30 countries, 90% with I-RMDs (n=4604, 68% female, mean age 60.5 years) and 10% with NI-RMDs (n=517, 77% female, mean age 71.4). Inflammatory joint diseases (58%), connective tissue diseases (18%) and vasculitis (12%) were the most frequent diagnostic groups; 54% received conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), 42% biological DMARDs and 35% immunosuppressants. Most patients received the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine (70%), 17% AstraZeneca/Oxford and 8% Moderna. In fully vaccinated cases, breakthrough infections were reported in 0.7% of I-RMD patients and 1.1% of NI-RMD patients. I-RMD flares were reported in 4.4% of cases (0.6% severe), 1.5% resulting in medication changes. AEs were reported in 37% of cases (37% I-RMD, 40% NI-RMD), serious AEs in 0.5% (0.4% I-RMD, 1.9% NI-RMD). CONCLUSION: The safety profiles of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with I-RMD was reassuring and comparable with patients with NI-RMDs. The majority of patients tolerated their vaccination well with rare reports of I-RMD flare and very rare reports of serious AEs. These findings should provide reassurance to rheumatologists and vaccine recipients and promote confidence in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine safety in I-RMD patients.

EULAR points to consider for the management of difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) points to consider (PtCs) for the management of difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis (D2T RA). METHODS: An EULAR Task Force was established comprising 34 individuals: 26 rheumatologists, patient partners and rheumatology experienced health professionals. Two systematic literature reviews addressed clinical questions around diagnostic challenges, and pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapeutic strategies in D2T RA. PtCs were formulated based on the identified evidence and expert opinion. Strength of recommendations (SoR, scale A-D: A typically consistent level 1 studies and D level 5 evidence or inconsistent studies) and level of agreement (LoA, scale 0-10: 0 completely disagree and 10 completely agree) of the PtCs were determined by the Task Force members. RESULTS: Two overarching principles and 11 PtCs were defined concerning diagnostic confirmation of RA, evaluation of inflammatory disease activity, pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions, treatment adherence, functional disability, pain, fatigue, goal setting and self-efficacy and the impact of comorbidities. The SoR varied from level C to level D. The mean LoA with the overarching principles and PtCs was generally high (8.4-9.6). CONCLUSIONS: These PtCs for D2T RA can serve as a clinical roadmap to support healthcare professionals and patients to deliver holistic management and more personalised pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapeutic strategies. High-quality evidence was scarce. A research agenda was created to guide future research.

2021 EULAR recommendations for the implementation of self-management strategies in patients with inflammatory arthritis.

BACKGROUND: An important but often insufficient aspect of care in people with inflammatory arthritis (IA) is empowering patients to acquire a good understanding of their disease and building their ability to deal effectively with the practical, physical and psychological impacts of it. Self-management skills can be helpful in this regard. OBJECTIVES: To develop recommendations for the implementation of self-management strategies in IA. METHODS: A multidisciplinary taskforce of 18 members from 11 European countries was convened. A systematic review and other supportive information (survey of healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patient organisations) were used to formulate the recommendations. RESULTS: Three overarching principles and nine recommendations were formulated. These focused on empowering patients to become active partners of the team and to take a more proactive role. The importance of patient education and key self-management interventions such as problem solving, goal setting and cognitive behavioural therapy were highlighted. Role of patient organisations and HCPs in promoting and signposting patients to available resources has been highlighted through the promotion of physical activity, lifestyle advice, support with mental health aspects and ability to remain at work. Digital healthcare is essential in supporting and optimising self-management and the HCPs need to be aware of available resources to signpost patients. CONCLUSION: These recommendations support the inclusion of self-management advice and resources in the routine management of people with IA and aim to empower and support patients and encourage a more holistic, patient-centred approach to care which could result in improved patient experience of care and outcomes.

Influence of COVID-19 pandemic on decisions for the management of people with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: a survey among EULAR countries.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate how the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic influenced decisions of rheumatologists and health professionals in rheumatology regarding the management of patients with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). METHODS: An English-language questionnaire was developed by a EULAR working group and distributed via national rheumatology societies of EULAR countries, EMEUNET and individual working group members. Responses were collected using an online survey tool. Descriptive statistics were calculated. RESULTS: We analysed 1286 responses from 35/45 EULAR countries. Due to containment measures, 82% of respondents indicated cancellation/postponement of face-to-face visits of new patients (84% of them offering remote consultation) and 91% of follow-up visits (96% with remote consultation). The majority of respondents (58%) perceived that the interval between symptom onset and first rheumatological consultations was longer during containment restrictions than before. Treatment decisions were frequently postponed (34%), and the majority (74%) of respondents stated that it was less likely to start a biological disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD)/targeted synthetic DMARD during the pandemic, mainly because of patients' fear, limited availability of screening procedures and decreased availability of rheumatological services. Use of (hydroxy)chloroquine (HCQ) and tocilizumab (TCZ) for the COVID-19 indication was reported by 47% and 42% of respondents, respectively, leading to a shortage of these drugs for RMDs indications according to 49% and 14% of respondents, respectively. CONCLUSION: Measures related to containment of COVID-19 pandemic led to a perceived delay between symptom onset and a first rheumatological visit, postponement of treatment decisions, and shortage of HCQ and TCZ, thereby negatively impacting early treatment and treat-to-target strategies.

Initiating tocilizumab, with or without methotrexate, compared with starting methotrexate with prednisone within step-up treatment strategies in early rheumatoid arthritis: an indirect comparison of effectiveness and safety of the U-Act-Early and CAMERA-II treat-to-target trials.

OBJECTIVES: Methotrexate (MTX), often combined with low moderately dosed prednisone, is still the cornerstone of initial treatment for early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). It is not known how this strategy compares with initial treatment with a biological. We therefore compared the effectiveness of tocilizumab (TCZ), or TCZ plus MTX (TCZ+MTX) with MTX plus 10 mg prednisone (MTX+pred), all initiated within a treat-to-target treatment strategy in early RA. METHODS: Using individual patient data of two trials, we indirectly compared tight-controlled treat-to-target strategies initiating TCZ (n=103), TCZ+MTX (n=106) or MTX+pred (n=117), using initiation of MTX (n=227) as reference. Primary outcome was Disease Activity Score assessing 28 joints (DAS28) over 24 months. To assess the influence of acute phase reactants (APRs), a disease activity composite outcome score without APR (ie, modification of the Clinical Disease Activity Index (m-CDAI)) was analysed. Secondary outcomes were remission (several definitions), physical function and radiographic progression. Multilevel models were used to account for clustering within trials and patients over time, correcting for relevant confounders. RESULTS: DAS28 over 24 months was lower for TCZ+MTX than for MTX+Pred (mean difference: -0.62 (95% CI -1.14 to -0.10)). Remission was more often achieved in TCZ+MTX and in TCZ versus MTX+pred (p=0.02/0.05, respectively). Excluding APRs from the disease activity outcome score, TCZ-based strategies showed a slightly higher m-CDAI compared with MTX+pred, but this was not statistically significant. Other outcomes were also not statistically significantly different between the strategies. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with early RA, although TCZ-based strategies resulted in better DAS28 and remission rates compared with MTX+pred, at least part of these effects may be due to a specific effect of TCZ on APRs.

Long-term outcomes after disease activity-guided dose reduction of TNF inhibition in rheumatoid arthritis: 3-year data of the DRESS study - a randomised controlled pragmatic non-inferiority strategy trial.

OBJECTIVE: Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) are effective in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but disadvantages include adverse events (AEs) and high costs. This can be improved by disease activity-guided dose reduction (DR). We aimed to assess long-term outcomes of TNFi DR in RA by using 3-year data from the DRESS study (Dose REduction Strategy of Subcutaneous TNF inhibitors study). METHODS: In the intervention phase (month 0-18) of the DRESS study (Dutch trial register, NTR 3216), patients were randomised to DR or usual care (UC). In the extension phase (month 18-36), treatment strategies in both groups converged to continuation of protocolised tight control and allowed dose optimisation. Intention-to-treat analyses were done on flare, disease activity (28 joint count-based disease activity score with C reactive protein (DAS28-CRP)), functioning (health assessment questionnaire-disability index (HAQ-DI)), quality of life (Euroqol 5 dimensions 5 levels questionnaire (EQ5D-5L)), medication use, radiographic progression (Sharp van der Heijde score (SvdH)) and AE. RESULTS: 172/180 patients included in the DRESS study were included in the extension phase. Cumulative incidences of major flare were 10% and 12% (-2%, 95% CI -8 to 15) in DR and UC groups in the extension phase, and 17% and 14% (3%, 95% CI -9 to 13) from 0 to 36 months. Cumulative incidences of short-lived flares were 43% (33 to 52%)%) and 35% (23 to 49%)%) in DR and UC groups in the extension phase, and 83% (75 to 90%)%) and 44% (31 to 58%)%) from 0 to 36 months. Mean DAS28-CRP, HAQ-DI, EQ5D-5L and SvdH remained stable and not significantly different between groups. TNFi use remained low in the DR group and decreased in the UC group. Cumulative incidences of AE were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Safety and efficacy of disease activity guided TNFi DR in RA are maintained up to 3 years, with a large reduction in TNFi use, but no other benefits. Implementation of DR would vastly improve the cost-effective use of TNFi.

Disease activity-guided dose optimisation of adalimumab and etanercept is a cost-effective strategy compared with non-tapering tight control rheumatoid arthritis care: analyses of the DRESS study.

BACKGROUND: A disease activity-guided dose optimisation strategy of adalimumab or etanercept (TNFi (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors)) has shown to be non-inferior in maintaining disease control in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) compared with usual care. However, the cost-effectiveness of this strategy is still unknown. METHOD: This is a preplanned cost-effectiveness analysis of the Dose REduction Strategy of Subcutaneous TNF inhibitors (DRESS) study, a randomised controlled, open-label, non-inferiority trial performed in two Dutch rheumatology outpatient clinics. Patients with low disease activity using TNF inhibitors were included. Total healthcare costs were measured and quality adjusted life years (QALY) were based on EQ5D utility scores. Decremental cost-effectiveness analyses were performed using bootstrap analyses; incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB) was used to express cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: 180 patients were included, and 121 were allocated to the dose optimisation strategy and 59 to control. The dose optimisation strategy resulted in a mean cost saving of -€12 280 (95 percentile -€10 502; -€14 104) per patient per 18 months. There is an 84% chance that the dose optimisation strategy results in a QALY loss with a mean QALY loss of -0.02 (-0.07 to 0.02). The decremental cost-effectiveness ratio (DCER) was €390 493 (€5 085 184; dominant) of savings per QALY lost. The mean iNMB was €10 467 (€6553-€14 037). Sensitivity analyses using 30% and 50% lower prices for TNFi remained cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Disease activity-guided dose optimisation of TNFi results in considerable cost savings while no relevant loss of quality of life was observed. When the minimal QALY loss is compensated with the upper limit of what society is willing to pay or accept in the Netherlands, the net savings are still high. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR3216; Post-results.

EULAR Sjögren's syndrome disease activity index (ESSDAI): a user guide.

The EULAR Sjögren's syndrome (SS) disease activity index (ESSDAI) is a systemic disease activity index that was designed to measure disease activity in patients with primary SS. With the growing use of the ESSDAI, some domains appear to be more challenging to rate than others. The ESSDAI is now in use as a gold standard to measure disease activity in clinical studies, and as an outcome measure, even a primary outcome measure, in current randomised clinical trials. Therefore, ensuring an accurate and reproducible rating of each domain, by providing a more detailed definition of each domain, has emerged as an urgent need. The purpose of the present article is to provide a user guide for the ESSDAI. This guide provides definitions and precisions on the rating of each domain. It also includes some minor improvement of the score to integrate advance in knowledge of disease manifestations. This user guide may help clinicians to use the ESSDAI, and increase the reliability of rating and consequently of the ability to detect true changes over time. This better appraisal of ESSDAI items, along with the recent definition of disease activity levels and minimal clinically important change, will improve the assessment of patients with primary SS and facilitate the demonstration of effectiveness of treatment for patients with primary SS.