RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of abatacept (ABA) in monotherapy (ABAMONO) vs combined ABA [ABA plus MTX (ABAMTX) or ABA plus non-MTX conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) (ABANON-MTX)] in RA patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) (RA-ILD). METHODS: This was a restrospective multicentre study of RA-ILD Caucasian patients treated with ABA. We analysed in the three groups (ABAMONO, ABAMTX, ABANON-MTX) the following outcome variables: (i) dyspnoea; (ii) forced vital capacity (FVC) and diffusion capacity of the lung for the carbon monoxide (DLCO); (iii) chest high-resolution CT (HRCT); (iv) DAS28-ESR; (v) CS-sparing effect; and (vi) ABA retention and side-effects. Differences between basal and final follow-up were evaluated. Multivariable linear regression was used to assess the differences between the three groups. RESULTS: We studied 263 RA-ILD patients (mean ± s.d. age 64.6 ± 10 years) [ABAMONO (n = 111), ABAMTX (n = 46) and ABANON-MTX (n = 106)]. At baseline, ABAMONO patients were older (67 ± 10 years) and took higher prednisone dose [10 (interquartile range 5-15) mg/day]. At that time, there were no statistically significant differences in sex, seropositivity, ILD patterns, FVC and DLCO, or disease duration. Following treatment, in all groups, most patients experienced stabilization or improvement in FVC, DLCO, dyspnoea and chest HRCT as well as improvement in DAS28-ESR. A statistically significant difference between basal and final follow-up was only found in CS-sparing effect in the group on combined ABA (ABAMTX or ABANON-MTX). However, in the multivariable analysis, there were no differences in any outcome variables between the three groups. CONCLUSION: In Caucasian individuals with RA-ILD, ABA in monotherapy or combined with MTX or with other conventional-DMARDs seems to be equally effective and safe. However, a CS-sparing effect is only observed with combined ABA.
Assuntos
Abatacepte/uso terapêutico , Artrite Reumatoide/tratamento farmacológico , Doenças Pulmonares Intersticiais/tratamento farmacológico , Metotrexato/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Antirreumáticos/uso terapêutico , Quimioterapia Combinada , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Real-world data regarding rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and its association with interstitial lung disease (ILD) is still scarce. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of RA and ILD in patients with RA (RAILD) in Spain, and to compare clinical characteristics of patients with RA with and without ILD using natural language processing (NLP) on electronic health records (EHR). METHODS: Observational case-control, retrospective and multicentre study based on the secondary use of unstructured clinical data from patients with adult RA and RAILD from nine hospitals between 2014 and 2019. NLP was used to extract unstructured clinical information from EHR and standardise it into a SNOMED-CT terminology. Prevalence of RA and RAILD were calculated, and a descriptive analysis was performed. Characteristics between patients with RAILD and RA patients without ILD (RAnonILD) were compared. RESULTS: From a source population of 3 176 165 patients and 64 241 683 EHRs, 13 958 patients with RA were identified. Of those, 5.1% patients additionally had ILD (RAILD). The overall age-adjusted prevalence of RA and RAILD were 0.53% and 0.02%, respectively. The most common ILD subtype was usual interstitial pneumonia (29.3%). When comparing RAILD versus RAnonILD patients, RAILD patients were older and had more comorbidities, notably concerning infections (33.6% vs 16.5%, p<0.001), malignancies (15.9% vs 8.5%, p<0.001) and cardiovascular disease (25.8% vs 13.9%, p<0.001) than RAnonILD. RAILD patients also had higher inflammatory burden reflected in more pharmacological prescriptions and higher inflammatory parameters and presented a higher in-hospital mortality with a higher risk of death (HR 2.32; 95% CI 1.59 to 2.81, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We found an estimated age-adjusted prevalence of RA and RAILD by analysing real-world data through NLP. RAILD patients were more vulnerable at the time of inclusion with higher comorbidity and inflammatory burden than RAnonILD, which correlated with higher mortality.
Assuntos
Artrite Reumatoide , Doenças Pulmonares Intersticiais , Adulto , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Prevalência , Artrite Reumatoide/complicações , Artrite Reumatoide/epidemiologia , Doenças Pulmonares Intersticiais/diagnóstico , Doenças Pulmonares Intersticiais/epidemiologia , Doenças Pulmonares Intersticiais/etiologia , Aprendizado de MáquinaRESUMO
The aim of this study was to investigate the cumulated incidence and clinical characteristics of the psoriasiform lesions seen in a wide cohort of rheumatic patients exposed to anti-TNFα drugs in a tertiary care hospital from northern Spain. The study population included 450 patients exposed to anti-TNFα agents from 2001 to 2007 and treated in a university hospital in northern Spain. Two hundred patients were exposed to infliximab (44%), 129 (29%) to etanercept, and 121 (27%) to adalimumab. The cumulated incidence (CI) of this skin reaction was calculated for each of the three agents studied. Psoriasis and psoriasiform lesions were documented in 7 patients diagnosed with different rheumatic inflammatory conditions (1.56%). Cases of this adverse effect were identified with all three anti-TNFα agents available at that time, but less frequently with infliximab (CI: 0.5%) compared with etanercept (CI: 2.3%) or adalimumab (CI: 2.5%). The most common lesion was palmoplantar pustulosis (71.3% of the cases), and the latency period to the development of the lesions ranged from 4 to 38 months (mean 9 months). In four of the 7 patients, treatment was suspended, while in the remaining three patients treatment was continued. The CI of this skin reaction in our setting is similar to that published by others. Infliximab was found to be less frequently associated with this adverse event. In our experience, it is not always necessary to stop anti-TNFα therapy for the skin lesions to improve.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/efeitos adversos , Anticorpos Monoclonais/efeitos adversos , Antirreumáticos/efeitos adversos , Imunoglobulina G/efeitos adversos , Psoríase/induzido quimicamente , Fator de Necrose Tumoral alfa/antagonistas & inibidores , Adalimumab , Adulto , Idoso , Anticorpos Monoclonais/uso terapêutico , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêutico , Antirreumáticos/uso terapêutico , Etanercepte , Feminino , Humanos , Imunoglobulina G/uso terapêutico , Incidência , Infliximab , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Psoríase/epidemiologia , Receptores do Fator de Necrose Tumoral/uso terapêutico , Doenças Reumáticas/tratamento farmacológico , Espanha , Atenção Terciária à Saúde , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The recent outbreak of COVID-19 has raised concerns in the rheumatology community about the management of immunosuppressed patients diagnosed with inflammatory rheumatic diseases. It is not clear whether the use of biological agents may suppose a risk or protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection; however, it has been suggested that severe respiratory forms of COVID-19 occur as a result of exacerbated inflammation status and cytokine production. This prompted the use of interleukin 6 (IL-6) (tocilizumab and sarilumab) and IL-1 inhibitors (anakinra) in severe COVID-19 disease and more recently JAK1/2 inhibitor (baricitinib). Therefore, patients with rheumatic diseases provide a great opportunity to learn about the use of biological agents as protective drugs against SARS-CoV-2. OBJECTIVES: To estimate COVID-19 infection rate in patients treated with biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) for inflammatory rheumatic diseases (RMD), determine the influence of biological agents treatment as risk or protective factors and study the prognosis of patients with rheumatic diseases receiving biological agents compared to the general population in a third-level hospital setting in León, Spain. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational study including patients seen at our rheumatology department who received bDMARDs for rheumatic diseases between December 1st 2019 and December 1st 2020, and analysed COVID-19 infection rate. All patients who attended our rheumatology outpatient clinic with diagnosis of inflammatory rheumatic disease receiving treatment with biological agents were included. Main variable was the hospital admission related to COVID-19. The covariates were age, sex, comorbidities, biological agent, duration of treatment, mean dose of glucocorticoids and need for intensive care unit . We performed an univariate and multivariate logistic regression models to assess risk factors of COVID-19 infection. RESULTS: There were a total of 4464 patients with COVID-19 requiring hospitalisation. 40 patients out of a total of 820 patients with rheumatic diseases (4.8%) receiving bDMARDs contracted COVID-19 and 4 required hospital care. Crude incidence rate of COVID-19 requiring hospital care among the general population was 3.6%, and it was 0.89% among the group with underlying rheumatic diseases. 90% of patients receiving bDMARDS with COVID-19 did not require hospitalisation. Out of the 4464 patients, 869 patients died, 2 of which received treatment with biological agents. Patients with rheumatic diseases who tested positive for COVID-19 were older (female: median age 60.8 IQR 46-74; male: median age 61.9 IQR 52-70.3) than those who were negative for COVID-19 (female: median age 58.3 IQR 48-69; male: median age 56.2 IQR 47-66), more likely to have hypertension (45% vs 26%, OR 2.25 (CI 1.18-4.27),p 0.02), cardiovascular disease (23 % vs 9.6%, OR 2.73 (1.25-5.95), p 0.02), be smokers (13% vs 4.6%, OR 2.95 (CI 1.09-7.98), p 0.04), receiving treatment with rituximab (20% vs 8%, 2.28 (CI 1.24-6.32), p 0.02) and a higher dose of glucocorticoids (OR 2.5 (1.3-10.33, p 0.02) and were less likely to be receiving treatment with IL-6 inhibitors (2.5% vs 14%, OR 0.16, (CI 0.10-0.97, p 0.03). When exploring the effect of the rest of the therapies between groups (affected patients vs unaffected), we found no significant differences in bDMARD proportions. IL-1 inhibitors, IL-6 inhibitors, JAK inhibitors and belimumab-treated patients showed the lowest incidence of COVID-19 among adult patients with rheumatic diseases. We found no differences in sex or rheumatological disease between patients who tested positive for COVID-19 and patients who tested negative. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the use of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) does not associate with severe manifestations of COVID-19. Patients with rheumatic disease diagnosed with COVID-19 were more likely to be receiving a higher dose of glucocorticoids and treatment with rituximab. IL-6 inhibitors may have a protective effect.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêutico , Antirreumáticos/uso terapêutico , Fatores Biológicos/uso terapêutico , Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , Surtos de Doenças , Glucocorticoides/uso terapêutico , Substâncias Protetoras/uso terapêutico , Doenças Reumáticas/tratamento farmacológico , Rituximab/uso terapêutico , SARS-CoV-2/isolamento & purificação , Idoso , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/farmacologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Interleucina-6/antagonistas & inibidores , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , SARS-CoV-2/genética , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Espanha/epidemiologia , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
AIMS: To describe the methodology of REAPSER (Spanish Registry of Recent-onset Psoriatic Arthritis), its strengths and limitations. The aim of this study is to identify prognostic factors for the clinical and radiographic course in a cohort of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) diagnosed within 2years of symptom evolution. METHODS: Multicenter, observational and prospective study (with 2-year follow-up including annual visits). Baseline visit intended to reflect patient situation before the disease course was modified by treatments prescribed in rheumatology departments. Patients were invited to participate consecutively in one of their routine visits to the rheumatologist. 211 patients were included. Following data were collected: sociodemographic variables; employment situation; family history; personal history and comorbidities; anthropometric data; lifestyle; use of healthcare services; clinical situation at the time of PsA diagnosis; joint involvement and spinal pain; pain and overall assessment; enthesitis, dactylitis and uveitis; skin and nail involvement; functional situation and quality of life; radiographic evaluation; analytical determinations; treatment; axial and peripheral flare-ups. CONCLUSIONS: The REAPSER study includes a cohort of patients with recent-onset PsA, before the disease course was modified by disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs prescribed in rheumatology departments. Exhaustive information collected in each visit is expected to be an important data source for future analysis.