Neuropsychiatric symptoms in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: mixed methods analysis of patient-derived attributional evidence in the international INSPIRE project.

OBJECTIVE: Attribution of neuropsychiatric symptoms in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) relies heavily on clinician assessment. Limited clinic time, variable knowledge, and symptom under-reporting contributes to discordance between clinician assessments and patient symptoms. We obtained attributional data directly from patients and clinicians in order to estimate and compare potential levels of direct attribution to SLE of multiple neuropsychiatric symptoms using different patient-derived measures. METHODS: Quantitative and qualitative data analysed included: prevalence and frequency of neuropsychiatric symptoms, response to corticosteroids, and concurrence of neuropsychiatric symptoms with non-neuropsychiatric SLE disease activity. SLE patients were also compared with controls and inflammatory arthritis (IA) patients to explore attributability of neuropsychiatric symptoms to the direct disease effects on the brain/nervous system. RESULTS: We recruited 2,817 participants, including 400 clinicians. SLE patients (n = 609) reported significantly higher prevalences of neuropsychiatric symptoms than controls (n = 463) and IA patients (n = 489). SLE and IA patients' quantitative data demonstrated multiple neuropsychiatric symptoms relapsing/remitting with other disease symptoms such as joint pain. Over 45% of SLE patients reported resolution/improvement of fatigue, positive sensory symptoms, severe headache, and cognitive dysfunction with corticosteroids. Evidence of direct attributability in SLE was highest for hallucinations and severe headache. SLE patients had greater reported improvement from corticosteroids (p= 0.008), and greater relapsing-remitting with disease activity (p< 0.001) in the comparisons with IA patients for severe headache. Clinician and patients reported insufficient time to discuss patient-reported attributional evidence. Symptoms viewed as indirectly related/non-attributable were often less prioritised for discussion and treatment. CONCLUSION: We found evidence indicating varying levels of direct attributability of both common and previously unexplored neuropsychiatric symptoms in SLE patients, with hallucinations and severe headache assessed as the most directly attributable. There may also be-currently under-estimated-direct effects on the nervous system in IA and other systemic rheumatological diseases.

Attribution of neuropsychiatric symptoms and prioritisation of evidence in the diagnosis of neuropsychiatric lupus: mixed methods analysis of patient and clinician perspectives from the international INSPIRE study.

OBJECTIVE: Neuropsychiatric lupus (NPSLE) is challenging to diagnose. Many neuropsychiatric symptoms, such as headache and hallucinations, cannot be verified by tests or clinician assessment. We investigated prioritisations of methods for diagnosing NPSLE and attributional views. METHODS: Thematic and comparative analyses were used to investigate how clinicians prioritise sources of evidence from a 13-item list, and explore discordances in clinician and patient perspectives on attribution. RESULTS: We identified high levels of variability and uncertainty in clinicians' assessments of neuropsychiatric symptoms in SLE patients. In attributional decisions, clinicians (surveys n = 400, interviews n = 50) ranked clinicians' assessments above diagnostic tests (many of which they reported were often unenlightening in NPSLE). Clinicians ranked patient opinion of disease activity last, and 46% of patients reported never/rarely having been asked if their SLE was flaring, despite experienced patients often having "attributional insight". SLE Patients (surveys n = 676, interviews n = 27) estimated higher attributability of neuropsychiatric symptoms to the direct effects of SLE on the nervous system than clinicians (p < 0.001 for all symptoms excluding mania), and 24% reported that their self-assessment of disease activity was never/rarely concordant with their clinicians. Reports of misattributions were common, particularly of non-verifiable diffuse symptoms. Terminology differed between clinicians and influenced attribution estimates. CONCLUSION: NPSLE diagnostic tests and clinician assessments have numerous limitations, particularly in detecting diffuse neuropsychiatric symptoms that can be directly attributable and benefit from immunosuppression. Our findings suggest that incorporating patient attributional insights-although also subject to limitations-may improve attribution decision-making. Consensus regarding terminology and interpretations of "direct attributability" is required.

Prevalence and identification of neuropsychiatric symptoms in systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases: an international mixed methods study.

OBJECTIVE: A limited range of neuropsychiatric symptoms have been reported in systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs), with varied symptom prevalence. This study aimed to investigate a wider range of potential symptoms than previous studies, compare patient self-reports with clinician estimates, and explore barriers to symptom identification. METHODS: Mixed methods were used. Data from SARDs patients (n = 1853) were compared with controls (n = 463) and clinicians (n = 289). In-depth interviews (n = 113) were analysed thematically. Statistical tests compared means of survey items between: patients and controls, 8 different SARD groups, and clinician specialities. RESULTS: Self-reported lifetime prevalences of all 30 neuropsychiatric symptoms investigated (including cognitive, sensorimotor and psychiatric) were significantly higher in SARDs than controls. Validated instruments assessed 55% of SARDs patients as currently having depression and 57% anxiety. Barriers to identifying neuropsychiatric symptoms included: 1) limits to knowledge, guidelines, objective tests, and inter-specialty cooperation; 2) subjectivity, invisibility and believability of symptoms; and 3) under-eliciting, under-reporting and under-documenting. A lower proportion of clinicians (4%) reported never/rarely asking patients about mental health symptoms than the 74% of patients who reported never/rarely being asked in clinic (p< 0.001). Over 50% of SARDs patients had never/rarely reported their mental health symptoms to clinicians; a proportion under-estimated at < 10% by clinicians (p< 0.001). CONCLUSION: Neuropsychiatric symptom self-reported prevalences are significantly higher in SARDs than controls, and greatly underestimated by most clinicians. Research relying on medical records and current guidelines is unlikely to accurately reflect patients' experiences of neuropsychiatric symptoms. Improved inter-specialty communication and greater patient involvement is needed in SARD care and research.

Will 'the feeling of abandonment' remain? Persisting impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on rheumatology patients and clinicians.

OBJECTIVE: To better understand rheumatology patient and clinician pandemic-related experiences, medical relationships and behaviours in order to help identify the persisting impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and inform efforts to ameliorate the negative impacts and build upon the positive ones. METHODS: Rheumatology patients and clinicians completed surveys (patients n = 1543, clinicians n = 111) and interviews (patients n = 41, clinicians n = 32) between April 2021 and August 2021. A cohort (n = 139) of systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease patients was also followed up from March 2020 to April 2021. Analyses used sequential mixed methods. Pre-specified outcome measures included the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental wellbeing score (WEMWBS), satisfaction with care and healthcare behaviours. RESULTS: We identified multiple ongoing pandemic-induced/increased barriers to receiving care. The percentage of patients agreeing they were medically supported reduced from 74.4% pre-pandemic to 39.7% during-pandemic. Ratings for medical support, medical security and trust were significantly (P <0.001) positively correlated with patient WEMWBS and healthcare behaviours, and decreased during the pandemic. Healthcare-seeking was reduced, potentially long-term, including from patients feeling 'abandoned' by clinicians, and a 'burden' from government messaging to protect the NHS. Blame and distrust were frequent, particularly between primary and secondary care, and towards the UK government, who <10% of clinicians felt had supported clinicians during the pandemic. Clinicians' efforts were reported to be impeded by inefficient administration systems and chronic understaffing, suggestive of the pandemic having exposed and exacerbated existing healthcare system weaknesses. CONCLUSION: Without concerted action-such as rebuilding trust, improved administrative systems and more support for clinicians-barriers to care and negative impacts of the pandemic on trust, medical relationships, medical security and patient help-seeking may persist in the longer term. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is part of a pre-registered longitudinal multi-stage trial, the LISTEN study (ISRCTN-14966097), with later COVID-related additions registered in March 2021, including a pre-registered statistical analysis plan.

COVID-19 and shielding: experiences of UK patients with lupus and related diseases.

OBJECTIVE: The shielding guidance in the UK for the clinically extremely vulnerable (CEV) commenced on 23 March 2020 in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The purpose of this study was to explore the impact of the pandemic and shielding on patients with lupus and related systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs). METHODS: This was a mixed-methods cohort study (n = 111) including pre-lockdown baseline surveys (March 2020), follow-up surveys (June 2020) and in-depth interviews during July 2020 (n = 25). RESULTS: Most participants had a high level of anxiety regarding their mortality risk from COVID-19 and supported the concept of shielding. Shielding allocations and communications were perceived as inconsistently applied and delivered. More than half of those not classified as CEV reported feeling abandoned, at increased risk and with no support. Shielding communications increased feelings of being 'cared about', but also increased fear, and the 'vulnerable' labelling was perceived by some to damage social and self-identity. More than 80% of those classified as CEV stated that the classification and subsequent communications had changed their social-mixing behaviour. Despite many negative impacts of COVID-19 and shielding/lockdown being identified, including isolation, fear and reduced medical care, the quantitative data during the pandemic showed increases in most measures of wellbeing (which was low at both time points) from pre-lockdown, including reductions in the impact of fatigue and pain (P-values < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Shielding classifications and communications were, in general, viewed positively, although they were perceived as inconsistently delivered and anxiety-provoking by some participants. More frequent positively framed communication and wellbeing support could benefit all SARD patients. Slower-paced lockdown lifestyles might confer health/wellbeing benefits for some people with chronic diseases.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the medical care and health-care behaviour of patients with lupus and other systemic autoimmune diseases: a mixed methods longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to explore the self-reported impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on changes to care and behaviour in UK patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases, to help ensure that patient experiences are considered in future pandemic planning. METHODS: This was a longitudinal mixed methods study, with a cohort completing baseline surveys in March 2020 and follow-up surveys in June 2020 (n = 111), combined with thematic analysis of the LUPUS UK forum and participant interviews (n = 28). RESULTS: Cancellations of routine care and difficulties in accessing medical support contributed to some participants deteriorating physically, including reports of hospitalizations. The majority of participants reported that fear of COVID-19 and disruptions to their medical care had also adversely impacted their mental health. Feeling medically supported during the pandemic was correlated with multiple measures of mental health and perceptions of care, including the Warwick-Edinburgh mental well-being score (r = 0.44, P = 0.01). Five themes were identified: detrimental reduction in care; disparities in contact and communication (medical security vs abandonment sub-theme); perceived and actual endangerment; the perfect storm of reduced clinician ability to help and increased patient reticence to seek help; and identifying the patients most vulnerable to reduced medical care. CONCLUSION: The diversion of resources away from chronic disease care was perceived by many participants to have caused adverse outcomes. Fear about increased vulnerability to COVID-19 was high, contributing to health-care-avoidant behaviours. This study also highlights the influence of clinician accessibility and patients feeling medically supported on multiple measures of physical and mental health.

'But you don't look sick': a qualitative analysis of the LUPUS UK online forum.

Lupus is a multi-system autoimmune rheumatic disease with increased morbidity and mortality. Some manifestations are life-threatening with many aspects of living with the disease, difficulties in diagnosis and accessing appropriate medical care, having an impact on quality of life. The disease itself, and these patients' perspectives, are currently poorly understood and under-researched. The LUPUS UK forum of conversations between over 25,000 members provides a rich environment to explore the views of these patients. Conversations on the LUPUS UK online forum were qualitatively explored using virtual ethnography and thematic analysis. The forum itself and positive medical relationships were widely considered to provide a means of support, understanding and validation. Forum members expressed difficulties in diagnosis, disease management, and the psychological and physical impact of living with an unpredictable, poorly understood disease, often with life-changing symptoms. Invalidating personal, social and medical environments were perceived as exacerbating these difficulties. Delays in diagnosis and misdiagnoses were frequently discussed as causing significant damage, especially when symptoms were disbelieved or dismissed. Invalidation was the key theme with further themes of: Uncertainty, Medical (mis)communications and misunderstandings, Navigating health systems and Resilience and support. Although effective care and support was reported by some members, the negative impact of living with an incurable, life-changing disease was often exacerbated by perceived invalidation, uncertainty, and difficulties in multiple areas of members' lives. Improved knowledge of the disease and greater support at all stages of the diagnostic journey could improve outcomes and quality of life for these patients.

End-hole Versus Microvalve Infusion Catheters in Patients Undergoing Drug-Eluting Microspheres-TACE for Solitary Hepatocellular Carcinoma Tumors: A Retrospective Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Pre-transplant locoregional therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) during bridge-to-transplant impacts recurrence and survival rates following liver transplantation. Optimizing the effectiveness of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in this population is imperative, and microvalve infusion catheters offer a means of such improvement. METHODS: All treatment-naive patients with solitary HCC tumors < 6.5 cm who underwent drug-eluting microspheres (DEM) TACE between 04/2015 and 08/2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Eighty-eight included patients underwent DEM-TACE with either standard end-hole catheters (EH) or microvalve infusion catheters (MVI). The EH (n = 70) and MVI (n = 18) cohorts had similar baseline tumor size, laboratory values, and tumor etiologies. RESULTS: Initial objective response rates were significantly higher in MVI vs. EH (100% vs. 76.5%, p = 0.019). There was no difference in adverse events between groups (p = 0.265). MVI patients exhibited lower AST (p = 0.003) and ALT (p = 0.044) at 6 months. Blinded pathological analysis of explanted livers showed greater concentrations of microspheres within the tumor relative to the surrounding tissue in MVI explants (88.7 ± 10.6%) versus the EH explants (55.3 ± 32.7%) (p = 0.002). There was significantly higher percentage tumor necrosis in the MVI group (89.0 ± 2.2%) compared with the EH group (56.1 ± 44.5%) (p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study of a single-center cohort, DEM-TACE procedures with MVI were associated with improved tumor response, increased deposition of microspheres within tumor tissue, and higher percentage tumor necrosis at explant relative to those performed using EH catheters.

Massive hepatic adenoma response to bland embolization: A case study.

Hepatic adenomas are rare, benign liver masses of rising incidence in the United States. We present a report of a 22-year-old asymptomatic female with a massive (14.2 × 11.4 cm), centrally located hepatic adenoma. The unique presentation of the adenoma in close proximity to the hepatic vasculature meant the patient was not a candidate for surgical resection. An arterial embolization was used as an alternative approach to initial treatment. Arterial branches supplying the adenoma were identified via computed tomography and embolized with embospheres and coils. The treatment resulted in a large reduction in size and density of the adenoma identified at a 1-month follow-up. The case supports further use of arterial embolization as an initial treatment for large adenomas to improve the outcome of subsequent surgical approaches.

Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors for survival following doxorubicin-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To identify prognostic factors for survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with transarterial chemoembolization with doxorubicin-eluting beads (DEBs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a retrospective, single-center analysis, tumor- and patient-related factors were recorded for univariate and multivariate analyses via Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression. Infiltrative HCC phenotype and portal vein invasion (PVI) were correlated, and patients with either or both were classified as having radiographically advanced (RAdv) HCC. The primary endpoint was overall survival, which was calculated from the time of first DEB chemoembolization procedure. RESULTS: A total of 168 patients underwent 248 procedures, of which 215 (86.7%) were outpatient procedures. Mean length of stay was 0.33 days, and 25 patients (10.1%) were readmitted within 30 days. A total of 33 patients underwent liver transplantation and were excluded from survival analyses. A total of 130 had cirrhosis; 62, 50, and 18 had Child class A, B, and C disease, respectively. Forty-one patients had infiltrative HCC phenotype, 28 of whom also had PVI. Multivariate analysis of survival in all patients showed α-fetoprotein (AFP), performance status (PS), RAdv HCC, Child classification, albumin level, and ascites to predict survival. In patients without RAdv HCC, AFP, PS, Child classification, albumin level, and International Normalized Ratio were independent predictors. Increased bilirubin level was not an independent risk factor for death. CONCLUSIONS: Independent prognostic factors in patients with HCC undergoing DEB chemoembolization have been identified. Increased bilirubin level was not an independent risk factor. These data can be used in HCC patient selection and counseling for DEB chemoembolization.