Humoral and cellular response to the COVID-19 vaccine in immunocompromised children.

BACKGROUND: A suboptimal response to the 2-dose COVID-19 vaccine series in the immunocompromised population prompted recommendations for a 3rd primary dose. We aimed to determine the humoral and cellular immune response to the 3rd COVID-19 vaccine in immunocompromised children. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of immunocompromised participants, 5-21 years old, who received 2 prior doses of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. Humoral and CD4/CD8 T-cell responses were measured to SARS-CoV-2 spike antigens prior to receiving the 3rd vaccine dose and 3-4 weeks after the 3rd dose was given. RESULTS: Of the 37 participants, approximately half were solid organ transplant recipients. The majority (86.5%) had a detectable humoral response after the 2nd and 3rd vaccine doses, with a significant increase in antibody levels after the 3rd dose. Positive T-cell responses increased from being present in 86.5% to 100% of the cohort after the 3rd dose. CONCLUSIONS: Most immunocompromised children mount a humoral and cellular immune response to the 2-dose COVID-19 vaccine series, which is significantly augmented after receiving the 3rd vaccine dose. This supports the utility of the 3rd vaccine dose and the rationale for ongoing emphasis for vaccination against COVID-19 in this population. IMPACT: Most immunocompromised children mount a humoral and cellular immune response to the 2-dose COVID-19 vaccine series, which is significantly augmented after receiving the 3rd vaccine dose. This is the first prospective cohort study to analyze both the humoral and T-cell immune response to the 3rd COVID-19 primary vaccine dose in children who are immunocompromised. The results of this study support the utility of the 3rd vaccine dose and the rationale for ongoing emphasis for vaccination against COVID-19 in the immunosuppressed pediatric population.

Genomic answers for children: Dynamic analyses of >1000 pediatric rare disease genomes.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to provide comprehensive diagnostic and candidate analyses in a pediatric rare disease cohort through the Genomic Answers for Kids program. METHODS: Extensive analyses of 960 families with suspected genetic disorders included short-read exome sequencing and short-read genome sequencing (srGS); PacBio HiFi long-read genome sequencing (HiFi-GS); variant calling for single nucleotide variants (SNV), structural variant (SV), and repeat variants; and machine-learning variant prioritization. Structured phenotypes, prioritized variants, and pedigrees were stored in PhenoTips database, with data sharing through controlled access the database of Genotypes and Phenotypes. RESULTS: Diagnostic rates ranged from 11% in patients with prior negative genetic testing to 34.5% in naive patients. Incorporating SVs from genome sequencing added up to 13% of new diagnoses in previously unsolved cases. HiFi-GS yielded increased discovery rate with >4-fold more rare coding SVs compared with srGS. Variants and genes of unknown significance remain the most common finding (58% of nondiagnostic cases). CONCLUSION: Computational prioritization is efficient for diagnostic SNVs. Thorough identification of non-SNVs remains challenging and is partly mitigated using HiFi-GS sequencing. Importantly, community research is supported by sharing real-time data to accelerate gene validation and by providing HiFi variant (SNV/SV) resources from >1000 human alleles to facilitate implementation of new sequencing platforms for rare disease diagnoses.

2021 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Treatment of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Recommendations for Nonpharmacologic Therapies, Medication Monitoring, Immunizations, and Imaging.

OBJECTIVE: To provide recommendations for the management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) with a focus on nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging, irrespective of JIA phenotype. METHODS: We developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations. RESULTS: Recommendations in this guideline include the use of physical therapy and occupational therapy interventions; a healthy, well-balanced, age-appropriate diet; specific laboratory monitoring for medications; widespread use of immunizations; and shared decision-making with patients/caregivers. Disease management for all patients with JIA is addressed with respect to nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional. CONCLUSION: This clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis, and a concurrent 2021 guideline on oligoarthritis, temporomandibular arthritis, and systemic JIA. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver.

2021 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Treatment of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Therapeutic Approaches for Oligoarthritis, Temporomandibular Joint Arthritis, and Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To provide updated guidelines for pharmacologic management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), focusing on treatment of oligoarthritis, temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthritis, and systemic JIA with and without macrophage activation syndrome. Recommendations regarding tapering and discontinuing treatment in inactive systemic JIA are also provided. METHODS: We developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations. RESULTS: Similar to those published in 2019, these JIA recommendations are based on clinical phenotypes of JIA, rather than a specific classification schema. This guideline provides recommendations for initial and subsequent treatment of JIA with oligoarthritis, TMJ arthritis, and systemic JIA as well as for tapering and discontinuing treatment in subjects with inactive systemic JIA. Other aspects of disease management, including factors that influence treatment choice and medication tapering, are discussed. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional. CONCLUSION: This clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver.

2021 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Treatment of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Recommendations for Nonpharmacologic Therapies, Medication Monitoring, Immunizations, and Imaging.

OBJECTIVE: To provide recommendations for the management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) with a focus on nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging, irrespective of JIA phenotype. METHODS: We developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations. RESULTS: Recommendations in this guideline include the use of physical therapy and occupational therapy interventions; a healthy, well-balanced, age-appropriate diet; specific laboratory monitoring for medications; widespread use of immunizations; and shared decision-making with patients/caregivers. Disease management for all patients with JIA is addressed with respect to nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional. CONCLUSION: This clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis, and a concurrent 2021 guideline on oligoarthritis, temporomandibular arthritis, and systemic JIA. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver.

2021 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Treatment of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Therapeutic Approaches for Oligoarthritis, Temporomandibular Joint Arthritis, and Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To provide updated guidelines for pharmacologic management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), focusing on treatment of oligoarthritis, temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthritis, and systemic JIA with and without macrophage activation syndrome. Recommendations regarding tapering and discontinuing treatment in inactive systemic JIA are also provided. METHODS: We developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations. RESULTS: Similar to those published in 2019, these JIA recommendations are based on clinical phenotypes of JIA, rather than a specific classification schema. This guideline provides recommendations for initial and subsequent treatment of JIA with oligoarthritis, TMJ arthritis, and systemic JIA as well as for tapering and discontinuing treatment in subjects with inactive systemic JIA. Other aspects of disease management, including factors that influence treatment choice and medication tapering, are discussed. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional. CONCLUSION: This clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver.

Assessing the Validity and Reliability of the Effects of Youngsters' Eyesight on Quality of Life Questionnaire Among Children With Uveitis.

OBJECTIVE: The Effects of Youngsters' Eyesight on Quality of Life (EYE-Q) questionnaire measures vision-related functioning (VRF) and vision-related quality of life (VRQoL) in children with uveitis. Our aim was to revise the alpha version of the EYE-Q to refine VRF and VRQoL subscales and to assess the validity of the EYE-Q. METHODS: Children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), JIA-associated uveitis, and other noninfectious uveitis were enrolled. Patients and parents completed the EYE-Q, Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (overall quality of life), and Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (physical functioning). The development site completed the alpha version of the EYE-Q, and the composite sites completed the beta version. We compared item-subscale correlations, internal consistency, and construct and discriminant validity among the different versions. RESULTS: Of the 644 patients enrolled, 61.6% completed the alpha version, and 38.4% the beta version of the EYE-Q. Mean ± SD patient age was 11.1 ± 4.2 years, and 70% were female. Fewer White patients (73.5%) completed the alpha version compared to the beta version (86.2%; P < 0.001). With the exception of patient-reported VRF, both versions had similar item-subscale correlations. Version comparisons on scale internal consistencies indicated significant differences for parent- and patient-reported VRF, but each scale had a Cronbach's α of >0.80 beta. When data were combined, the EYE-Q showed significant differences between JIA-only and uveitis patients on all parent and patient scores, except for patient-reported VRF. CONCLUSION: The EYE-Q appears to be a valid measure of VRF and VRQoL in pediatric uveitis. Our results suggest it may be used as an outcome measure in multicenter pediatric uveitis studies.

Comprehensive Assessment of Quality of Life, Functioning, and Mental Health in Children With Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis and Noninfectious Uveitis.

OBJECTIVE: Pediatric uveitis can lead to sight-threatening complications and can impact quality of life (QoL) and functioning. We aimed to examine health-related QoL, mental health, physical disability, vision-related functioning (VRF), and vision-related QoL in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), JIA-associated uveitis (JIA-U), and other noninfectious uveitis. We hypothesized that there will be differences based on the presence of eye disease. METHODS: A multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted at four sites. Patients with JIA, JIA-U, or noninfectious uveitis were enrolled. Patients and parents completed the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL; health-related QoL), the Revised Childhood Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS; anxiety/depression), the Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (C-HAQ; physical disability), and the Effects of Youngsters' Eyesight on Quality of Life (EYE-Q) (VRF/vision-related QoL). Clinical characteristics and patient-reported outcome measures were compared by diagnosis. RESULTS: Of 549 patients, 332 had JIA, 124 had JIA-U, and 93 had other uveitis diagnoses. Children with JIA-U had worse EYE-Q scores compared to those with JIA only. In children with uveitis, those with anterior uveitis (JIA-U and uveitis only) had less ocular complications, better EYE-Q scores, and worse C-HAQ and PedsQL physical summary scores compared to those with nonanterior disease. In children with anterior uveitis, those with JIA-U had worse PedsQL physical summary and C-HAQ scores than anterior uveitis only. Further, EYE-Q scores were worse in children with bilateral uveitis and more visual impairment. There were no differences in RCADS scores among groups. CONCLUSION: We provide a comprehensive outcome assessment of children with JIA, JIA-U, and other uveitis diagnoses. Differences in QoL and function were noted based on underlying disease. Our results support the addition of a vision-specific measure to better understand the impact of uveitis.

Knowledge about juvenile idiopathic arthritis-associated uveitis: more frequent reminders are associated with higher patient and family uveitis knowledge.

BACKGROUND: Chronic anterior uveitis is a sight-threatening complication of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) and a primary contributor to long-term morbidity in people with JIA. Levels of knowledge about uveitis among JIA patients and their parents are unknown. A survey of JIA patients and parents was conducted to assess knowledge about uveitis complications and recommended screening. METHODS: A survey was developed consisting of six demographic questions, six arthritis/uveitis history questions, and nine uveitis knowledge questions. The survey was administered to JIA patients age 14 and older and parents of patients with JIA at three pediatric rheumatology practices and online through the Patients, Advocates, and Rheumatology Teams Network for Research and Service (PARTNERS) network. ANOVA, chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used to look for relationships between survey questions and demographic variables. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients and 111 parents completed the survey. Overall, 17.4% reported a history of uveitis, and 89.6% had heard of uveitis. The mean composite knowledge score was 6.46 ± 2.6 out of 9. Patients and parents with a history of uveitis had higher composite knowledge scores than their counterparts without a uveitis history (p = 0.01 and p < 0.01, respectively). Parents whose rheumatologist reminded them about eye exams at every visit had higher knowledge of the risk of blindness (p = 0.04), the risk for uveitis when arthritis is controlled (p = 0.02), the need for ongoing eye exams when off of medications (p = 0.01), and had a higher overall score (p = 0.02) than those who were reminded at some visits or not at all. CONCLUSIONS: JIA patients and parents report variable levels of knowledge regarding uveitis complications and recommended screening. Frequent discussion between the rheumatology provider and family about uveitis screening is associated with higher uveitis knowledge. Incorporating detailed and frequent education about uveitis into rheumatology clinic appointments may improve early uveitis detection and visual outcomes.

Physician practices for withdrawal of medications in inactive systemic juvenile arthritis, Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) survey.

BACKGROUND: We describe a Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) survey of North American pediatric rheumatologists that assesses physician attitudes on withdrawal of medications in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (SJIA). METHODS: A REDCap anonymous electronic survey was distributed to 100 random CARRA JIA workgroup physician-voting members. The survey had three broad sections including: A) demographic information; B) physicians' opinions on clinical inactive disease (CID) in SJIA and C) existing practices for withdrawing medications in SJIA. RESULTS: The survey had an 86% response rate. 88 and 93% of participants agreed with the current criteria for CID and clinical remission on medications (CRM) respectively. 78% thought it necessary to meet CRM before tapering medications except steroids. 76% use CARRA SJIA consensus treatment plans always or the majority of the time. All participants weaned steroids first in SJIA patients on combination therapy, 47% waited > 6 months before tapering additional medications. 35% each tapered methotrexate over > 6 months and 2-6 months; however, 39% preferred tapering anakinra, canakinumab and tocilizumab more quickly over 2-6 months and favored spacing the dosing interval for canakinumab and tocilizumab. When patients are on combination therapy with methotrexate and biologics, 58% preferred tapering methotrexate first while others considered patient/family preference and adverse effects to guide their choice. CONCLUSION: Most CARRA members surveyed use published consensus treatment plans for SJIA and agree with validated definitions of CID and CRM. There was agreement with tapering steroids first in SJIA. There was considerable variability with tapering decisions of all other medications.

New-Onset Chronic Recurrent Multifocal Osteomyelitis in a Child With Chronic Uveitis.

Chronic recurrent multifocal osteomyelitis (CRMO) has rarely been associated with uveitis. The authors report a case of new CRMO in a 15-year-old boy with HLA-B27 positive chronic anterior uveitis controlled with methotrexate. This case highlights a potential association between chronic uveitis and CRMO. [J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2019;56:e38-e40.].

Improving the Safety of Teratogen Prescribing Practices in a Pediatric Rheumatology Clinic.

OBJECTIVES: Although teratogenic medications are commonly used to treat rheumatic disease, no standard model currently exists for educating adolescent patients about teratogenic risk or performing routine pregnancy screening. We performed a quality improvement project to increase education and pregnancy screening in girls and women of childbearing age prescribed teratogenic medications in our pediatric rheumatology clinic. METHODS: Eligible participants included female patients age 10 and older prescribed teratogenic medications in a single-center tertiary care pediatric rheumatology clinic. Seven plan-do-study-act cycles were completed to test the following interventions: visible project reminders, physician and nurse education, progress updates, previsit planning, and development of an electronic health record education template. Chart reviews were performed, and control charts were created for each aim to analyze improvement over time. RESULTS: At baseline, 57 of 231 (24.7%) clinic encounters of female patients age 10 years and older taking teratogenic medications had education documented within the last 12 months, and 47 of 231 (20.3%) had pregnancy screening performed at the visit. Implementation of our interventions resulted in improvement in documentation of annual teratogen education (904 of 1135; 79.6%) and routine pregnancy screening (940 of 1135; 82.8%), both of which were statistically significant (P < .0001). Control charts revealed special cause with sustained improvement over >1 year. CONCLUSIONS: The interventions made through this quality improvement project increased the frequency of both teratogen education and urine pregnancy screening in patients taking teratogenic medications. Development of a standardized education template in the electronic health record played a key role in sustaining these improvements over time.

Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Consensus Treatment Plans for Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis-Associated and Idiopathic Chronic Anterior Uveitis.

OBJECTIVE: Systemic immunosuppressive treatment of pediatric chronic anterior uveitis (CAU), both juvenile idiopathic arthritis-associated and idiopathic anterior uveitis, varies, making it difficult to identify best treatments. The Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) developed consensus treatment plans (CTPs) for CAU for the purpose of reducing practice variability and allowing future comparison of treatments using comparative effectiveness analysis techniques. METHODS: A core group of pediatric rheumatologists, ophthalmologists with uveitis expertise, and a lay advisor comprised the CARRA uveitis workgroup that performed a literature review on pharmacologic treatments, held teleconferences, and developed a case-based survey administered to the CARRA membership to delineate treatment practices. We held 3 face-to-face consensus meetings using nominal group technique to develop CTPs. RESULTS: The survey identified areas of treatment practice variability. We developed 2 CTPs for the treatment of CAU, case definitions, and monitoring parameters. The first CTP is directed at children who are naive to steroid-sparing medication, and the second at children initiating biologic therapy, with options for methotrexate, adalimumab, and infliximab. We defined a core data set and outcome measures, with data collection at 3 and 6 months after therapy initiation. The CARRA membership voted to accept the CTPs with a >95% approval (n = 233). CONCLUSION: Using consensus methodology, 2 standardized CTPs were developed for systemic immunosuppressive treatment of CAU. These CTPs are not meant as treatment guidelines, but are designed for further pragmatic research within the CARRA research network. Use of these CTPs in a prospective comparison effectiveness study should improve outcomes by identifying best practice options.

Consensus Treatment Plans for Chronic Nonbacterial Osteomyelitis Refractory to Nonsteroidal Antiinflammatory Drugs and/or With Active Spinal Lesions.

OBJECTIVE: To develop standardized treatment regimens for chronic nonbacterial osteomyelitis (CNO), also known as chronic recurrent multifocal osteomyelitis (CRMO), to enable comparative effectiveness treatment studies. METHODS: Virtual and face-to-face discussions and meetings were held within the CNO/CRMO subgroup of the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA). A literature search was conducted, and CARRA membership was surveyed to evaluate available treatment data and identify current treatment practices. Nominal group technique was used to achieve consensus on treatment plans for CNO refractory to nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) monotherapy and/or with active spinal lesions. RESULTS: Three consensus treatment plans (CTPs) were developed for the first 12 months of therapy for CNO patients refractory to NSAID monotherapy and/or with active spinal lesions. The 3 CTPs are methotrexate or sulfasalazine, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors with optional methotrexate, and bisphosphonates. Short courses of glucocorticoids and continuation of NSAIDs are permitted for all regimens. Consensus was achieved on these CTPs among CARRA members. Consensus was also reached on subject eligibility criteria, initial evaluations that should be conducted prior to the initiation of CTPs, and data items to collect to assess treatment response. CONCLUSION: Three consensus treatment plans were developed for pediatric patients with CNO refractory to NSAIDs and/or with active spinal lesions. Use of these CTPs will provide additional information on efficacy and will generate meaningful data for comparative effectiveness research in CNO.

Choosing Wisely: the American College of Rheumatology's Top 5 for pediatric rheumatology.

OBJECTIVE: To create a pediatric rheumatology Top 5 list as part of the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation's Choosing Wisely campaign. METHODS: Delphi surveys of a core group of representative pediatric rheumatology providers from across North America generated candidate Top 5 items. Items with high content agreement and perceived to be of prevalent use and of high impact were included in a survey of all American College of Rheumatology (ACR) members who identified themselves as providing care to pediatric patients. Items with the highest ratings were subjected to literature review and further evaluation. RESULTS: A total of 121 candidate items were proposed in the initial Delphi survey and were reduced to 28 items in subsequent surveys. These 28 items were sent to 1,198 rheumatology providers who care for pediatric patients, and 397 (33%) responded. Based upon survey data and literature review, the Top 5 items were identified. These items focused on testing for antinuclear antibodies, autoantibody panels, Lyme disease, methotrexate toxicity monitoring, and use of routine radiographs. CONCLUSION: The ACR pediatric rheumatology Top 5 is one of the first pediatric subspecialty-specific Choosing Wisely Top 5 lists and provides an opportunity for patients and providers to discuss appropriate use of health care in pediatric rheumatology.