Managing varicella zoster virus contact and infection in patients on anti-rheumatic therapy

Position statement on infection screening, prophylaxis, and vaccination of pediatric patients with rheumatic diseases and immunosuppressive therapies, part 3: precautions in situations of surgery, fever, and opportunistic infections

The objective of this study is to provide practical recommendations on the management of pediatric patients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases receiving immunosuppressive therapies. The recommendations specifically address the cases of surgery, fever, and opportunistic infections (varicella, herpes-zoster, tuberculosis, invasive fungal disease). A qualitative approach was applied. A narrative literature review was performed via Medline. Primary searches were conducted using MeSH terms and free text to identify publications on infections and vaccinations in pediatric patients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases receiving immunosuppressive therapies. The results were presented and discussed in a nominal group meeting, comprising a committee of 12 pediatric rheumatologists from the Infection Prevention and Treatment Working Group of the Spanish Society of Pediatric Rheumatology. Several recommendations were generated. A consensus procedure was implemented via a Delphi process; this was extended to members of the Spanish Society of Pediatric Rheumatology and Spanish Society of Pediatric Infectious Disease of the Spanish Association of Pediatrics. Participants produced a score ranging from 0 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree). Agreement was defined as a vote ≥ 7 by at least 70% of participants. The literature review included more than 400 articles. Overall, 63 recommendations (19 on surgery, fever, and opportunistic infections) were generated and voted by 59 pediatric rheumatologists and other pediatric specialists. Agreement was reached for all 63 recommendations. The recommendations on special situations cover management in cases of surgery, fever, and opportunistic infections (varicella, herpes-zoster, tuberculosis, and invasive fungal disease).  Conclusions: Hereby, we provided consensus and updated of recommendations about the management of special situations such as surgery, fever, and opportunistic in children with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases receiving immunosuppressive therapies. Several of the recommendations depend largely on clinical judgement and specific balance between risk and benefit for each individual and situation. To assess this risk, the clinician should have knowledge of the drugs, the patient's previous situation as well as the current infectious disease, in addition to experience. What is Known: • Infectious diseases and related complications are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases. • Information on how to manage the treatment in situations of fever, opportunistic infections, and surgery in children is limited, and guidelines for action are often extrapolated from adults. What is New: • In the absence of strong evidence, a literature review and a Delphi survey were conducted to establish a series of expert recommendations that could support the clinical practice, providing a practical and simple day-to-day approach to be used by pediatric rheumatologists.

Position statement on infection screening, prophylaxis, and vaccination in pediatric patients with rheumatic diseases and immunosuppressive therapies, part 2: infection prophylaxis

This study aims to provide practical recommendations on prophylaxis for infection in pediatric patients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases receiving/scheduled to receive immunosuppressive therapy. A qualitative approach was applied. A narrative literature review was performed via Medline. Primary searches were conducted using MeSH terms and free text to identify articles that analyzed data on infections and vaccinations in pediatric patients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases receiving immunosuppressive therapy. The results were presented and discussed in a nominal group meeting comprising a committee of 12 pediatric rheumatologists from the Prevention and Treatment of Infections Working Group of the Spanish Society of Pediatric Rheumatology. Several recommendations were generated. A consensus procedure was implemented via a Delphi process that was extended to members of the Spanish Society of Pediatric Rheumatology and the Vaccine Advisory Committee of the Spanish Association of Pediatrics. Participants produced a score ranging from 0 (completely disagree) to 10 (completely agree). Agreement was considered to have been reached if at least 70% of participants voted ≥ 7. The literature review included more than 400 articles. Overall, 63 recommendations were generated (23 on infection prophylaxis) and voted by 59 pediatric rheumatologists and other pediatric specialists, all of whom achieved the pre-established level of agreement. The recommendations on prophylaxis of infection cover vaccination and prophylaxis against varicella zoster virus, tuberculosis, Pneumocystis jiroveccii, and invasive fungal infections in pediatric patients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases receiving/scheduled to receive immunosuppressive therapy.  Conclusion: Based on current evidence and a Delphi process, we provided consensus and updated recommendations on prophylaxis and treatment of infections to guide those caring for pediatric rheumatology patients. What is Known: •Data largely derived from adults find that infectious diseases and related complications are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases. •It is crucial to be aware of the preventive measures that should be implemented to prevent these infections in children, although most guidelines are often extrapolated from adult cases. What is New: •In the absence of evidence, a literature review and a Delphi survey were conducted to establish a series of expert recommendations that could prove useful in clinical practice, providing a practical and simple day-to-day approach to be used by pediatric rheumatologists. •The recommendations focus on tuberculosis, herpes zoster virus, fungal infections, and Pneumocystis jirovecii.

2022 EULAR recommendations for screening and prophylaxis of chronic and opportunistic infections in adults with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases

Objectives

To develop EULAR recommendations for screening and prophylaxis of chronic and opportunistic infections in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD).

Methods

An international Task Force (TF) (22 members/15 countries) formulated recommendations, supported by systematic literature review findings. Level of evidence and grade of recommendation were assigned for each recommendation. Level of agreement was provided anonymously by each TF member.

Results

Four overarching principles (OAP) and eight recommendations were developed. The OAPs highlight the need for infections to be discussed with patients and with other medical specialties, in accordance with national regulations. In addition to biologic/targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for which screening for latent tuberculosis (TB) should be performed, screening could be considered also before conventional synthetic DMARDs, glucocorticoids and immunosuppressants. Interferon gamma release assay should be preferred over tuberculin skin test, where available. Hepatitis B (HBV) antiviral treatment should be guided by HBV status defined prior to starting antirheumatic drugs. All patients positive for hepatitis-C-RNA should be referred for antiviral treatment. Also, patients who are non-immune to varicella zoster virus should be informed about the availability of postexposure prophylaxis should they have contact with this pathogen. Prophylaxis againstPneumocystis jiroveciiseems to be beneficial in patients treated with daily doses >15–30 mg of prednisolone or equivalent for >2–4 weeks.

Conclusions

These recommendations provide guidance on the screening and prevention of chronic and opportunistic infections. Their adoption in clinical practice is recommended to standardise and optimise care to reduce the burden of opportunistic infections in people living with AIIRD.

Clinical Management of Herpes Zoster in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis or Psoriatic Arthritis Receiving Tofacitinib Treatment

INTRODUCTION

Risk of herpes zoster (HZ) is increased with Janus kinase inhibitor use. We evaluated clinical study data relating to HZ management in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA) receiving tofacitinib.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis included data from 21 RA and 3 PsA clinical studies; data were pooled for tofacitinib doses. Outcomes of HZ events (serious and non-serious) and tofacitinib treatment changes were evaluated in response to first and second HZ events. Median time to resolution was stratified by dermatomal involvement, history of HZ prior to tofacitinib, changes to tofacitinib treatment, anti-viral and corticosteroid use, and tofacitinib dose.

RESULTS

Seven hundred eighty-three (11.1%, N = 7061) patients with RA experienced ≥ 1 HZ event, 63 (8.0%) of whom had ≥ 2 HZ events. In patients with PsA, 36 (4.6%, N = 783) experienced ≥ 1 HZ event, 1 (2.8%) of whom had ≥ 2 HZ events. For most HZ events, tofacitinib treatment was unchanged or temporarily discontinued. The majority of patients received anti-viral treatment, most within 3 days of onset. Post-herpetic neuralgia developed in 6.9% and 3.2% of patients with RA with first and second events, respectively, and in 2.8% of patients with PsA with a first event. Most first and second events resolved (RA: 97.6% and 96.8%, respectively; PsA: 94.4% and 100%, respectively). Median time to resolution was 22.0 days for first and 15.0 days for second events for RA and 20.5 days for first and 11.0 days for second events (n = 1) for PsA. Time to resolution of first events for RA and PsA was generally numerically shorter for patients with single dermatomal HZ, history of HZ, or anti-viral use versus those without.

CONCLUSION

Among patients receiving tofacitinib, recurrent events were more common in patients with RA versus PsA; HZ duration was shorter for repeat events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01262118, NCT01484561, NCT00147498, NCT00413660, NCT00550446, NCT00603512, NCT00687193, NCT01164579, NCT00976599, NCT01059864, NCT01359150, NCT02147587, NCT00960440, NCT00847613, NCT00814307, NCT00856544, NCT00853385, NCT01039688, NCT02187055, NCT00413699, NCT00661661, NCT01877668, NCT01882439, NCT01976364.

The safety of JAK-1 inhibitors

As efficacy and safety data emerge, differences between JAK inhibitor subclasses are appearing. JAK1 selective drugs, upadacitinib and filgotinib, have broadly come with the same overarching safety recommendations as other immunosuppressive drugs for RA: caution is needed regarding infection risk; monitoring for laboratory abnormalities, including lipids and muscle enzymes, is indicated. A distinguishing feature of JAK inhibitors is a risk for zoster reactivation. Numerically, overall rates of serious infection are similar among JAK inhibitor classes. There are currently no signals for diverticular perforation. VTE incidence rates were similar across comparator groups for the JAK1 selective agents. These observations are not yet conclusive evidence for different safety profiles between JAK1 selective agents and other JAK inhibitors. Differences in study population, design, and concomitant steroid use are examples of potential confounders. It is too early to draw conclusions on long-term outcomes such as malignancy and cardiovascular risk. Post-marketing pharmacovigilance studies will be essential.

Vaccination With Live Attenuated Vaccines in Four Children With Chronic Myeloid Leukemia While on Imatinib Treatment

Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in childhood and adolescence is a rare malignancy that can successfully be treated with the tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) imatinib. According to the current experience, treatment is necessary for years and, in the majority of cases, a lifelong approach is required to control the malignant disease. To what extent imatinib causes immunosuppression in different age cohorts is a controversial discussion. According to general medical recommendations, live vaccines are contraindicated in individuals treated with imatinib. However, a recent increase in the number of globally reported cases of measles has been observed and continues to rise. Due to the high contagiousness of the virus, near-perfect vaccination coverage (herd immunity of 93 to 95%) is required to effectively protect against measles resurgence-a scenario that is not realistic in many countries. When four teenagers with CML (median age 13 years, range 12-15) who were enrolled into pediatric trial CML-paed II while on imatinib treatment (median treatment duration 36 months, range 11-84) were identified without protective measles and/or varicella titers, we carefully balanced the risks of a live vaccination under immunosuppressive TKI medication against the benefit of being protected. The patients underwent live vaccination with the live attenuated vaccines M-M-RVAX Pro® and Varivax® simultaneously (Patient #1), Priorix® and Varilix® consecutively (Patient #2), and Priorix® (Patients #3 and #4). While the first three patients were vaccinated while receiving TKI therapy, treatment with imatinib was interrupted in patient #4 for 1 week prior and 2 weeks after vaccination. Patients #1 and #3 reacted with stable long-term seroconversion. In Patient #2, serum titer conversion against measles and varicella could not be demonstrated and thus revaccination with Priorix® and Varilix® was performed 3 years later. However, protective titers did not develop or were lost again. Patient #4 also lost protective titers against measles when assessed 10 months after vaccination, but revaccination resulted in stable seroprotective titers over 12 months after the last vaccination during ongoing imatinib treatment. We conclude that in all patients, the safety of live vaccines could be documented, as no acute or late adverse events were observed. However, in line with observations that memory B-cells are lost under exposure to imatinib, revaccination may become necessary (two out of four patients in this small series lost their seroprotection). Considering that the number of cases is very small, we also suggest some criteria for decision-making regarding live vaccinations of CML patients treated with imatinib.

S2k guidelines for the treatment of psoriasis in children and adolescents - Short version part 2

The present guidelines are aimed at residents and board-certified physicians in the fields of dermatology, pediatrics, pediatric dermatology and pediatric rheumatology as well as policymakers and insurance funds. They were developed by dermatologists and pediatric dermatologists in collaboration with pediatric rheumatologists using a formal consensus process (S2k). The guidelines highlight topics such as disease severity, quality of life, treatment goals as well as problems associated with off-label drug therapy in children. Trigger factors and diagnostic aspects are discussed. The primary focus is on the various topical, systemic and UV-based treatment options available and includes recommendations for use and treatment algorithms. Other aspects addressed herein include vaccinations in children and adolescents with psoriasis as well as various disease subtypes such as guttate psoriasis, diaper psoriasis, pustular psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Finally, we also provide recommendations for imaging studies and the diagnostic workup to rule out tuberculosis prior to initiating systemic treatment. Note: This article constitutes part 2 of the Sk2 guidelines for the treatment of psoriasis in children and adolescents. Part 1 was published in last month's issue. It contained introductory remarks and addressed aspects of diagnosis and topical treatment.