Infections in Biological and Targeted Synthetic Drug Use in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Where do We Stand? A Scoping Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The advent of biological and targeted synthetic therapies has revolutionized rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment. However, this has come at the price of an increased risk of infections. The aim of this study was to present an integrated overview of both serious and non-serious infections, and to identify potential predictors of infection risk in RA patients using biological or targeted synthetic drugs. METHODS: We systematically reviewed available literature from PubMed and Cochrane and performed multivariate meta-analysis with meta-regression on the reported infections. Randomized controlled trials and prospective and retrospective observational studies including patient registry studies were analyzed, combined as well as separately. We excluded studies focusing on viral infections only. RESULTS: Infections were not reported in a standardized manner. Meta-analysis showed significant heterogeneity that persisted after forming subgroups by study design and follow-up duration. Overall, the pooled proportions of patients experiencing an infection during a study were 0.30 (95% CI, 0.28-0.33) and 0.03 (95% CI, 0.028-0.035) for any kind of infections or serious infections only, respectively. We found no potential predictors that were consistent across all study subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The high heterogeneity and the inconsistency of potential predictors between studies show that we do not yet have a complete picture of infection risk in RA patients using biological or targeted synthetic drugs. Besides, we found non-serious infections outnumbered serious infections by a factor 10:1, but only a few studies have focused on their occurrence. Future studies should apply a uniform method of infectious adverse event reporting and also focus on non-serious infections and their impact on treatment decisions and quality of life.

Test, trace, isolate: evidence for declining SARS-CoV-2 PCR sensitivity in a clinical cohort.

Real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) on upper respiratory tract (URT) samples is the primary method to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infections and guide public health measures, with a supportive role for serology. We reinforce previous findings on limited sensitivity of PCR testing, and solidify this fact by statistically utilizing a firm basis of multiple tests per individual. We integrate stratifications with respect to several patient characteristics such as severity of disease and time since onset of symptoms. Bayesian statistical modelling was used to retrospectively determine the sensitivity of RT-PCR using SARS-CoV-2 serology in 644 COVID-19-suspected patients with varying degrees of disease severity and duration. The sensitivity of RT-PCR ranged between 80% - 95%; increasing with disease severity, it decreased rapidly over time in mild COVID-19 cases. Negative URT RT-PCR results should be interpreted in the context of clinical characteristics, especially with regard to containment of viral transmission based on 'test, trace and isolate'. Keywords: SARS-CoV-2, RT-PCR, serology, sensitivity, public health.