Humoral and T Cell Response to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the SARS-CoV-2-specific humoral and T cell response after a two-dose regimen of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: In this observational study, patients with RA who are ≥18 years of age and vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 according to the Argentine National Health Ministry's vaccination strategy were included. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies (ELISA-COVIDAR test), neutralizing activity (cytotoxicity in VERO cells), and specific T cell response (IFN-γ ELISpot Assay) were assessed after the first and second dose. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients with RA were included. Mostly, homologous regimens were used, including Gam-COVID-Vac (27.5%), ChAdOx1 (24.2%), and BBIBP-CorV (22.5%). The most frequent combination was Gam-COVID-Vac/mRNA-1273 (21.7%). After the second dose, 81.7% presented with anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, 70.0% presented with neutralizing activity, and 65.3% presented with specific T cell response. The use of BBIBP-CorV and treatment with abatacept (ABA) and rituximab (RTX) were associated with undetectable antibodies and no neutralizing activity after two doses. BBIBP-CorV was also associated with the absence of T cell response. The total incidence of adverse events was 357.1 events per 1,000 doses, significantly lower with BBIBP-CorV (166.7 events per 1,000 doses, P < 0.02). CONCLUSION: In this RA cohort vaccinated with homologous and heterologous regimens against COVID-19, 2 out of 10 patients did not develop anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG, 70% presented with neutralizing activity, and 65% presented with specific T cell response. The use of BBIBP-CorV was associated with deficient humoral and cellular response, whereas treatment with ABA and RTX resulted in an impaired anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG formation and neutralizing activity.

Immune Response to SARS-CoV-2 Third Vaccine in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Had No Seroconversion After Primary 2-Dose Regimen With Inactivated or Vector-Based Vaccines.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the immune response after a third dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with undetectable antibody titers after the primary regimen of 2 doses. METHODS: Patients with RA with no seroconversion after 2 doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and who received a third dose of either an mRNA or vector-based vaccine were included. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies, neutralizing activity, and T cell responses were assessed after the third dose. RESULTS: A total of 21 nonresponder patients were included. At the time of vaccination, 29% were receiving glucocorticoids and 85% biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (including 6 taking abatacept [ABA] and 4 taking rituximab [RTX]). The majority (95%) received the BNT162b2 vaccine and only one of them received the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine. After the third dose, 91% of the patients presented detectable anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and 76% showed neutralizing activity. Compared to other treatments, ABA and RTX were associated with the absence of neutralizing activity in 4 out of 5 (80%) patients and lower titers of neutralizing antibodies (median 3, IQR 0-20 vs 8, IQR 4-128; P = 0.20). Specific T cell response was detected in 41% of all patients after the second dose, increasing to 71% after the third dose. The use of ABA was associated with a lower frequency of T cell response (33% vs 87%, P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: In this RA cohort, 91% of patients who failed to seroconvert after 2 doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine presented detectable anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG after a third dose. The use of ABA was associated with a lower frequency of specific T cell response.

Estudio descriptivo de las adaptaciones de la consulta reumatológica durante la pandemia de COVID-19 / Descriptive study of the adaptations of the rheumatological consultation during the COVID-19 pandemic

Introducción: la pandemia de COVID-19 tuvo un gran impacto en la sociedad en general. El aislamiento impuesto modificó las relaciones interpersonales, incluyendo las consultas médicas. Objetivos: describir las consultas reumatológicas en el Servicio de Reumatología del Instituto de Rehabilitación Psicofísica (IREP) durante la pandemia por COVID-19, y compararlas con las recibidas durante 2019. Materiales y métodos: estudio observacional. Se registraron las consultas recibidas durante marzo-septiembre de 2020. Se recolectaron datos sociodemográficos, número y motivo de las consultas realizadas por paciente. Se llevó a cabo un análisis de regresión logística múltiple para estimar las variables asociadas a la consulta presencial. Resultados: se registraron 1.703 consultas; 798 pacientes consultaron al menos una vez, la mediana de consulta por paciente fue de 3 (RIC 1-12). La principal vía de consulta fue por correo electrónico (57%), solo el 13% fue de forma presencial. El principal motivo fue la solicitud de recetas (60%) seguido por consultas por la enfermedad (23%). Se observó una reducción del total de las consultas con respecto al año previo del 57% (3.961) y una reducción mayor del 94% en el número de consultas presenciales (224). La consulta médica presencial durante la pandemia se asoció independientemente con el sexo masculino (OR: 2.4 IC 95% 1,6-3,6), la consulta por enfermedad de base (OR: 5.8 IC 95% 4,1-8,3) y la ausencia de cobertura social (OR: 2.3 IC 95% 1,6-3,3). Conclusiones: las consultas reumatológicas, especialmente las presenciales, disminuyeron sustancialmente durante la pandemia.

Introduction: COVID-19 pandemic had a great impact on society in general. The imposed isolation modified interpersonal relationships, including medical consultations. Objectives: describe the rheumatologic consultations in the Rheumatology Service from Instituto de Rehabilitación Psicofísica (IREP) during the COVID-19 pandemic and compare them with those received the previous year. Materials and methods: observational study. Consultations during March-September 2020 were recorded. Sociodemographics, numbers, and reasons for consultations made per patient were collected. A multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate variables associated with the in-person consultation. Results: 1,703 consultations were registered. 798 patients consulted at least 1 time, and the median number of consultations per patient was 3 (IQR 1-12). The main method of consultation was by email (57%); only 13% were in person. The main reason was requesting prescriptions (60%) followed by consultations for the disease (23%). We observed a reduction in the total number of consultations compared to the same period in 2019 of 57% (3,961 consultations) and an even greater reduction of 94% in the number of in-person consultations (224 consultations). In-person medical consultation during the pandemic was independently associated with male sex (OR: 2,4, 95%CI 1,6-3,6), consultation due to illness (OR: 5,8, 95%CI 4,1-8,3) and lack of social coverage (OR: 2,3. 95%CI 1,6-3,3). Conclusions: rheumatologic consultations, especially in-person, were substantially reduced during the pandemic.

Respuesta immune humoral asociada a las vacunas contra SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes con artritis reumatoidea: datos del registro SAR-CoVAC / Humoral immune response associated to the vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with rheumatic arthritis: data from the SAR-CoVAC registry

Introducción: la artritis reumatoidea (AR) y los tratamientos indicados para su manejo pueden afectar la respuesta a la vacuna para SARS-CoV-2. Sin embargo, aún no se cuenta con datos locales. Objetivos: evaluar la respuesta humoral de la vacuna para SARS-CoV-2 y su seguridad en esta población. Materiales y métodos: estudio observacional. Se incluyeron pacientes ≥18 años, con AR ACR/EULAR 2010 que recibieron la vacunación para SARS-CoV-2. Detección de IgG anti-proteína S (kit COVIDAR). Resultados: se incluyeron 120 pacientes con AR. El 24,4% recibió tratamiento con glucocorticoides, 50,9% drogas biológicas y 13,3% inhibidores de JAK (janus kinases). El 6% había tenido infección por SARS-CoV-2 previamente. La vacuna más utilizada en la primera dosis fue Sputnik V (52,9%). El 25% recibió esquemas heterólogos. Luego de la primera dosis, el 59% presentó una prueba no reactiva o indeterminada, y un 18% luego de la segunda dosis. La aplicación de esquemas homólogos de vacuna Sinopharm (63,6% vs 13,3%, p<0,0001), y el uso de abatacept (27,3% vs 5,1%, p=0,005) y rituximab (18,2% vs 0%, p=0,001) al momento de la vacunación se asociaron a un resultado no reactivo o indeterminado. Conclusiones: similar a lo reportado en otras poblaciones internacionales, en esta cohorte, dos de cada 10 pacientes no desarrollaron anticuerpos. Una menor respuesta se asoció con la vacuna Sinopharm y al tratamiento con abatacept y rituximab.

Introduction: rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and its treatments can affect the response to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. However, we still do not have local data. Objectives: to evaluate the humoral response of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and its safety in this population. Materials and methods: observational study. Patients ≥18 years of age, with RA ACR/EULAR 2010 who had received vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 were included. Detection of anti-protein S IgG (COVIDAR Kit). Results: a total of 120 patients with RA were included. A quarter was receiving glucocorticoids, 50.9% biological drugs and 13.3% JAK inhibitors (janus kinases). Only 6% had a history SARS-CoV-2 infection. The most used vaccine was Sputnik V (52.9%) and 25% received mixed regimenes. After the first dose, 59% had a non-reactive or indeterminate test, and after the second, 18% were still having this result. The application of homologous Sinopharm vaccine regimen (63.6% vs 13.3%, p<0.0001) and the use of abatacept (27.3% vs 5.1%, p=0.005) and rituximab (18.2% vs 0%, p=0.001) at vaccination was associated with a non-reactive or indeterminate result. Conclusions: similar to other international populations, in this cohort, two out of 10 patients did not develop antibodies. A lower response was associated with the Sinopharm vaccine and treatment with abatacept and rituximab.

Prevalencia de automedicación de antiinflamatorios y analgésicos en la práctica ambulatoria / Pravalence of self-medication of anti-inflamatory and analgesic in ambulatory practice

La automedicación con AINEs y analgésicos es una práctica extendida tanto en países desarrollados como en desarrollo. Existen pocas intervenciones educacionales para disminuir esta práctica común y riesgosa. El objetivo primario del presente estudio fue determinar la prevalencia de automedicación en pacientes que son atendidos en instituciones públicas o privadas de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Para ello se reclutaron 1486 pacientes ambulatorios y se determinó la prevalencia y factores asociados. Resultados: La prevalencia de automedicación en la Ciudad de Buenos Aires fue del 34,6% siendo mayor en las mujeres, ancianos y pacientes atendidos en el ámbito público.

Self-medication is extensively practised in both developed andunderdeveloped countries. There are few educational interventionsto diminish this common and risky practice. The primary objectiveof this trial was to determine the prevalence of self-medicationin patients of public and private institutions of Buenos Aires City.For that reason, 1486 outpatients were recruited to evaluate theprevalence and associated factors. Results: The prevalence of selfmedicationin Buenos Aires city was 34.6%. It was more importantin females, and in public institutions.