Systemic lupus erythematosus presenting with atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome: a case report and review of the literature.

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) can present with a diverse array of hematologic manifestations, among which atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS) is a rare entity. SLE-triggered aHUS has significant morbidity and mortality without timely intervention, yet its frequency remains uncertain and optimal strategies for complement-directed therapies are largely expert-driven. We performed a comprehensive literature review and present a case of a 23-year-old female newly diagnosed with SLE/class IV lupus nephritis who developed aHUS that rapidly responded to the C5 antagonist, eculizumab. Review of the current literature identified forty-nine published cases of SLE with concurrent aHUS and revealed a predilection for aHUS in younger SLE patients, concurrent presentation with lupus nephritis, anti-dsDNA positivity, and complement system abnormalities. Over seventy percent of cases used eculizumab as complement-directed therapy with a trend towards faster time to improvement in laboratory parameters, though reported outcomes were highly variable. Early recognition of aHUS in SLE is pivotal in guiding appropriate therapeutic interventions, and prompt initiation of eculizumab may reduce the potential morbidity associated with plasmapheresis and additional immunosuppression. While eculizumab showcases promising results, its optimal timing and duration remain elusive. An understanding of a patients' complement genetics could aid management strategies, and ongoing research into complement-targeted therapies offers promising avenues for both SLE and aHUS treatment.

Social determinants of health as barriers to care for vasculitis: perspectives of patients and healthcare providers.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined patient and healthcare provider (HCP) perspectives on the impact of unmet social needs on healthcare barriers for patients with vasculitis. METHODS: Two surveys were developed to gather perspectives from patients with vasculitis, and HCPs specializing in vasculitis care. The patient survey also included a 20-question social needs assessment. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: One hundred patients and 31 HCPs completed the surveys between September 2022 and June 2023. Fifty-six percent of patients reported unmet social needs, with poor social and mental health (30%) being the most common. Sixty-three percent of patients with vasculitis perceived unmet social need(s) as barriers to healthcare access. Financial insecurity (30%), poor mental health (29%), and poor health knowledge (25%) were the most common barriers identified. Overall, HCPs perceived SDOH have a greater impact on healthcare access than the patients surveyed. Most patients (82%) and HCPs (90%) believed rheumatologists should help in the management of SDOH, specifically health knowledge and mental health. Few HCPs (10%) felt well-positioned to address patients' mental health. Suggested interventions that address social needs and improve healthcare access included referrals to community-based resources, providing educational materials, and virtual visits. CONCLUSION: Through patient and HCP perspectives, the impact of SDOH on healthcare access for patients with vasculitis was explored. Understanding the positive experiences and challenges faced by patients is crucial for developing targeted interventions to enhance healthcare access. These findings underscore the importance of ongoing efforts to improve the healthcare experience for patients with vasculitis. Key Points • The impact of unmet social needs on healthcare access for patients with vasculitis, illustrates the complex relationship between SDOH and healthcare outcomes. • Unmet social needs among patients with vasculitis, included poor social and mental health, financial and food insecurity, and a lack of health literacy, which may exacerbate challenges leading to poor health outcomes. • The differences in perspectives between patients and healthcare providers regarding the impact of certain SDOH on healthcare access, necessitates the importance of co-production in the development of interventions to improve healthcare delivery. • The importance of patient-centered care and tailored solutions was highlighted by the need for various interventions to address social needs and improve healthcare access, such as referrals to community-based resources, educational materials, and interprofessional collaboration.

Development and evaluation of shared decision-making tools in rheumatology: A scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Shared decision-making (SDM) tools are facilitators of decision-making through a collaborative process between patients/caregivers and clinicians. These tools help clinicians understand patient's perspectives and help patients in making informed decisions based on their preferences. Despite their usefulness for both patients and clinicians, SDM tools are not widely implemented in everyday practice. One barrier is the lack of clarity on the development and evaluation processes of these tools. Such processes have not been previously described in the field of rheumatology. OBJECTIVE: To describe the development and evaluation processes of shared decision-making (SDM) tools used in rheumatology. METHODS: Bibliographic databases (e.g., EMBASE and CINAHL) were searched for relevant articles. Guidelines for the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews were followed. Studies included were: addressing SDM among adults in rheumatology, focusing on development and/or evaluation of SDM tool, full texts, empirical research, and in the English language. RESULTS: Of the 2030 records screened, forty-six reports addressing 36 SDM tools were included. Development basis and evaluation measures varied across the studies. The most commonly reported development basis was the International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) criteria (19/36, 53 %). Other developmental foundations reported were: The Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF) (6/36, 16 %), Informed Medical Decision Foundation elements (3/36, 8 %), edutainment principles (2/36, 5.5 %), and others (e.g. DISCERN and MARKOV Model) (9/31,29 %). The most commonly used evaluation measures were the Decisional Conflict Scale (18/46, 39 %), acceptability and knowledge (7/46, 15 %), and the preparation for decision-making scale (5/46,11 %). CONCLUSION: For better quality and wider implementation of such tools, there is a need for detailed, transparent, systematic, and consistent reporting of development methods and evaluation measures. Using established checklists for reporting development and evaluation is encouraged.

Evidence for the use of cannabis-based medicines in osteoarthritis: a scoping review.

The purpose of this study was to conduct a scoping review to describe the evidence on the efficacy and safety of using cannabis-based medicines for osteoarthritis. The review was conducted following the framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley and reported following PRISMA extension for scoping reviews guidelines. We conducted a comprehensive search across various databases including MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, and Proquest, spanning from inception of each database to March 2023. We retrieved 2533 citations, and after deduplication, title and abstract screening, and full-text screening, 10 articles were included for analysis. These studies were composed of randomized-controlled trials (n = 4/10), cross-sectional surveys (n = 3/10), case studies (n = 2/10), and a cohort study (n = 1/10). Evidence for using cannabis-based medicines was mixed, with just 60% (n = 6/10) of included studies reporting statistically significant improvements in pain. Studies with larger samples sizes and longer durations of exposure did not find significant benefits for pain. The few adverse effects reported were generally mild and affected a minority of participants. Several studies also discovered that cannabis-based medicines were associated with a reduction in opioid use. Currently available data on the use of cannabis-based medicines in osteoarthritis is insufficient to make recommendations. Future research should address concerns regarding small sample sizes and short treatment durations to provide a more robust evidence base. Key Points • Current evidence remains mixed; studies that found a positive benefit with using cannabis-based medicines had limitations with small sample sizes and short durations of exposure • The use of cannabis-based medicines in osteoarthritis appears to be generally well tolerated, adverse effects are mild and experienced by a minority of participants • Cannabis-based medicines may decrease the use of opioids in patients with osteoarthritis • Future research should address the gaps in long-term efficacy and safety data.

Understanding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in vasculitis patients.

Objective: To identify the factors that impact COVID-19 vaccine decision-making in vaccine-hesitant vasculitis patients, and compare their perceptions with other rheumatology patients, given existence of data suggesting rheumatology patients may have disease-specific factors that influence their COVID-19 vaccine decision-making. Methods: This cross-sectional study surveyed adult rheumatology patients from the Kaye Edmonton Clinic Rheumatology Clinic, in Canada, between June and August 2021, using an anonymous online questionnaire. Survey responses were analyzed for statistical differences using chi-square analysis. Results: The COVID-19 Vaccine Perceptions Survey had a response rate of 70.9%. Of the total 231 respondents, 103 patients were diagnosed with vasculitis. At the time of the survey, 10.6% of vasculitis patients refused to receive a COVID-19 vaccine compared to 6.3% for other rheumatology patients. Compared to other rheumatology patients, vaccine-hesitant vasculitis patients were significantly more concerned about almost every aspect of available COVID-19 vaccines [e.g., safety (p < 0.001), components (p < 0.001)], and feared that they could contract SARS-CoV-2 from a vaccine (p < 0.001). These vaccine-hesitant patients were also significantly less pleased with the government's pandemic response, less confident in healthcare team-provided information (p < 0.001), and more likely to report that healthcare providers had no role in their COVID-19 vaccine decision-making (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Vaccine-hesitant vasculitis patients may have multiple considerations influencing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, including vaccine and disease-specific concerns, along with unfavorable perceptions of the healthcare system (government and healthcare providers). Healthcare providers can address some of these concerns by initiating patient-centered discussions around immunizations to help support educated decision-making.

Optimal length and usefulness of temporal artery biopsies in the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis: a 10-year retrospective review of medical records.

BACKGROUND: In giant cell arteritis, temporal artery biopsies often show vasculitis with giant cell formation, but optimal biopsy length for diagnosis is debated. We reviewed temporal artery biopsies from a 10-year period in the province of Alberta, Canada, to identify an ideal biopsy length in the diagnostic process for giant cell arteritis. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed electronic medical records of patients who had undergone a temporal artery biopsy procedure in Alberta between Jan 1, 2008, and Jan 1, 2018, as reported in the Data Integration and Management Repository of Alberta Health Services. We extracted data on baseline demographic characteristics (sex and age), inflammatory markers (erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR] and C-reactive protein [CRP]), temporal artery biopsy characteristics (side of biopsy and postfixation length), and final pathological diagnoses. All positive biopsies were reviewed by a single pathologist to ensure uniformity of pathological interpretation, with subsequent discordant results removed from analysis. Predictors of positive pathological diagnosis of giant cell arteritis were modeled by logistic regression, and the Akaike information criterion was used to compare logistic regression models with varying biopsy length cutoffs (0·5, 1·0, 1·5, 2·0, and 2·5 cm) to determine a change point for diagnostic sensitivity in postfixation length. FINDINGS: We extracted data on 1203 temporal artery biopsies; after removal of 13 discordant biopsies, 1190 biopsies from 1163 patients were reviewed. The mean age of patients was 72·0 years (SD 10·3) and 799 (68·7%) patients were women. 222 (18·7%) temporal artery biopsies were positive for giant cell arteritis. In univariable analysis, increases in age (71·3 years [SD 10·6] in negative biopsies vs 75·3 years [8·3] in positive biopsies; odds ratio [OR] 1·04 [95% CI 1·02-1·06]; p<0·0001)), ESR (36 mm/h [IQR 18-62] in negative biopsies vs 57 [31-79] in positive biopsies; 1·01 [1·01-1·02]; p<0·0001), CRP (12·1 mg/L [IQR 3·3-35·1] in negative biopsies vs 41·8 [14·6-82·4] in positive biopsies; 1·01 [1·01-1·01]; p<0·0001), and biopsy length (1·2 cm [IQR 0·9-1·7] in negative biopsies vs 1·6 [1·1-2·0] in positive biopsies; 1·28 [1·09-1·51]; p=0·0025) were associated with a positive pathological diagnosis. In multivariable analysis adjusted for age, ESR, and CRP, age (adjusted OR 1·04 [95% CI 1·02-1·05]; p=0·0001), CRP (1·01 [1·00-1·01]; p=0·0006), and biopsy length (1·22 [1·00-1·49]; p=0·047) remained statistically significant predictors. The Akaike information criterion determined a change point of 1·5 cm for diagnostic sensitivity. INTERPRETATION: Accounting for postfixation shrinkage, our findings suggest a 1·5-2·0 cm prefixation length as the optimal biopsy length to diagnose patients with giant cell arteritis, with greater lengths unlikely to provide significant additional diagnostic yield to justify risks associated with surgery. FUNDING: None.