Diagnosis and management of endothelial disorders following haematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Haematopoietic stem cell transplantation is a mainstay of therapy for numerous malignant and nonmalignant diseases. Endothelial activation and dysfunction occur after stem cell transplantation, driven by various patient- and transplant-specific factors. This can manifest as one of the relatively uncommon endothelial injury syndromes, such as sinusoidal obstruction syndrome, transplant-associated thrombotic microangiopathy, idiopathic pneumonia syndrome, capillary leak syndrome, engraftment syndrome or posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome. This review focuses on the pathogenesis, classification and diagnosis of these disorders, as well as provides guidance on risk mitigation and treatment.

OP0065 INFLIXIMAB BIOSIMILAR-TO-BIOSIMILAR SWITCHING IN PATIENTS WITH INFLAMMATORY RHEUMATIC DISEASES: CLINICAL OUTCOMES IN REAL-WORLD PATIENTS FROM THE DANBIO REGISTRY

Background

In routine care, biosimilar-to-biosimilar infliximab switching may occur to save costs (=non-medical switching). Previous studies have investigated the efficacy and safety of switches from originator infliximab to a corresponding biosimilar in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (1). However, the outcomes after switching from one infliximab biosimilar to a second infliximab biosimilar remain scarcely investigated.

Denmark has recently conducted a nationwide mandatory infliximab biosimilar-to-biosimilar switch.

Objectives

To investigate the effectiveness of infliximab biosimilar-to-biosimilar switch (CTP-13 to GP1111) among patients with RA, PsA and AxSpA, including patients who had previously switched from originator (originator-experienced) to CT-P13 as well as patients who were originator-naïve.

Methods

Observational cohort study based on DANBIO registry (for clinical data upon switch =baseline) linked with national patient registries (to identify prior comorbidities). Patients with RA, PsA or AxSpA who performed a biosimilar-to-biosimilar switch from CT-P13 to GP1111 between April 1st 2019 and February 1st 2020 were included. Patient were divided into two groups: originator-naïve and originator-experienced. Main outcomes in the two groups were one-year GP1111 treatment retention (Kaplan Meier “drug survival curves”) and changes in disease activity 4 months before versus 4 months after switch in individual patients. Also, factors associated with GP1111 treatment retention for both groups combined were explored with Cox proportional hazard regression analyses, stratified by diagnosis (univariate-, age-and gender adjusted and fully adjusted). Analyses were adjusted for relevant clinical factors (for details: see Table 1)

Table 1.

Baseline variables associated with GP1111 withdrawal (RA shown below, similar findings for PsA and AxSpA)

UnivariateAge- and gender adjustedMultivariateHR (95% CI)p-valueHR (95% CI)p-valueHR (95%CI)p-valueRAFemale gender0.9 (0.6-1.3)0.4-0.7 (0.5-1.2)0.2Age, years1.0 (0.9-1.0)0.9-1.0 (0.9-1.1)0.6Originator-experienced versus originator naïve to infliximab0.5 (0.3-0.8)0.0020.5 (0.3-0.8)0.0020.4 (0.2-0.9)0.01Methotrexate use, yes0.5 (0.3-0.7)<0.0010.5 (0.3-0.7)<0.0010.6 (0.4-0.9)0.01Comorbidities ≥11.1 (0.7-1.5)0.81.1 (0.7-1.5)0.80.9 (0.6-1.4)0.7In remission (yes)0.4 (0.3-0.6)<0.0010.4 (0.2-0.6)<0.0010.5 (0.3-0.7)<0.001DAS281.7 (1.4-1.9)<0.0011.7 (1.5-1.9)<0.001--Patient global VAS, mm1.0 (1.0-1.1)<0.0011.0 (1.0-1.1)<0.001--

Results

In total, 1,605 patients underwent an infliximab biosimilar-to-biosimilar switch and were included; 1,171 were originator-naïve and 434 were originator-experienced, 685 RA/314 PsA/606 AxSpA, median disease duration was 9 years, 42% were in DAS28/ASDAS remission at the time of switch.

At one year, 83% (95% CI 81-85) of the originator-naive and 92% (95% CI 90-95) of the originator-experienced switchers maintained GP1111 treatment (Figure 1). Changes in disease activity 4 months pre- and post-switch were close to zero for all disease activity measures (e.g. DAS28, ASDAS, VAS pain, not shown).

The risk of GP1111 withdrawal was lower in originator-experienced compared to originator-naïve patients in patients with RA and PsA: HR 0.4 (95% CI 0.2-0.9, p-value 0.01) and HR 0.1 (0.1-0.6, p=0.01), but not significantly for AxSpA 0.56 (0.27-1.13, p=0.1). Across all indications, lower disease activity at baseline (DAS28/ASDAS remission) was associated with higher retention (Table 1).

Conclusion

Biosimilar-to-biosimilar infliximab switch was effective and well-tolerated in >1,500 real-world patients. Retention was higher in originator-experienced switchers and patients, who were in remission at the time of the switch, suggesting retention to be more affected by patient-related than drug-related factors.

References

[1]Glintborg et al, ARD, 2017; 76: 1426–1431

Acknowledgements

We thank departments reporting to the DANBIO registry.

Disclosure of Interests

Hafsah Nabi Grant/research support from: Research grant from Sandoz, who had no influence on the analysis, interpretation and presentation of data., Merete L. Hetland Speakers bureau: Biogen, Celltrion, Janssen Biologics B.V, MSD, Pfizer, Samsung Biopis, Consultant of: Biogen, Celltrion, Janssen Biologics B.V, MSD, Pfizer,

Samsung Biopis, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Biogen, BMS, Eli Lilly Denmark A/S,

Lundbeck Fond, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Novartis, Anne Gitte Loft Paid instructor for: AbbVie, Eli Lilly Denmark A/S, Janssen- Cilag A/S, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly Denmark A/S, Janssen-Cilag

A/S, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Oliver Hendricks Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Pfizer, Novartis, Dorte Jensen: None declared, Jens Kristian Pedersen: None declared, Søren Andreas Just: None declared, Kamilla Danebod: None declared, Heidi Lausten Munk: None declared, Salome Kristensen: None declared, Natalia Manilo: None declared, Ada Colic: None declared, Asta Linauskas: None declared, Pia Høger Thygesen: None declared, Louise Brot Christensen: None declared, Maren Høgberget Kalisz: None declared, Niels Lomborg: None declared, Jolanta Grydehøj: None declared, Johnny Raun: None declared, Rabiah Ahmed: None declared, Frank Mehnert: None declared, Niels Steen Krogh: None declared, Bente Glintborg Grant/research support from: BMS, Pfizer, Sandoz.

POS0373 WHO ARE IN AND WHO ARE NOT? CHARACTERISTICS OF PATIENTS WITH INFLAMMATORY RHEUMATIC DISEASES ACCEPTING AN ONLINE SYSTEM FOR REMOTELY ENTERING PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOMES. EXPERIENCE FROM THE DANISH DANBIO REGISTRY

Background

Digital solutions for online monitoring of chronic diseases are increasingly implemented in health care, but not all patients might have access, skills, or interest in using them. Fueled by the COVID-19 pandemic and the urgent need for remote consultations, an online website to enter patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from home (DANBIO-from-home, https://danbio.dk) was implemented on May 15th 2020 for patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) followed in the Danish nationwide DANBIO registry.

Objectives

To explore the use of DANBIO-from-home during the first 1½ year after launching, with focus on a) characteristics of patients who did versus who did not access the webpage, and b) impact of patient age on time to first entry.

Methods

DANBIO-from-home allows PROs to be entered remotely by computer, tablet, or smartphone after secure log-on. All patients followed in DANBIO were informed about this option by invitations sent through eBoks, a national infrastructure for electronic communication, available to 80-90% of Danish citizens. Patients were encouraged to access DANBIO-from-home before planned rheumatology consultations, or when participating in the voluntary questionnaire survey ‘You and your rheumatic disease during times with corona-virus’ (on three occasions: May 2020, Nov 2020, June 2021) (ref). Follow-up ended Dec 1st 2021.

Characteristics of patients who did/did not access DANBIO-from-home during follow-up are explored by multivariable logistic regression analyses adjusted by clinical factors (gender/age-group/diagnosis/disease duration/use of biologics/HAQ/PASS). Time to first entry of PRO using DANBIO-from-home is presented as cumulative incidence curves by age group.

Results

Among 33,776 patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases followed in DANBIO, 68% used DANBIO-from-home at least once during follow-up (Table 1). Patients who used the system were less frequently below 40 years or above 80 years old, more frequently biologically treated and had lower HAQ-score than patients who did not use it.

Table 1.Data entry, DANBIO-from-home solution N=33,776YES, 68%NO, 32%Gender, female6436Gender, male7822Age strata, yrs< 40623840-60732761-807228>803961DiagnosisRA6723AxSpA6931PsA7030Biologic treatment, yes*7327PASS, yes7129Age, yrs, median (IQR)62 (52-71)65 (50-77)Time since diagnosis, yrs, median (IQR)9 (5-16)10 (5-17)HAQ, median (IQR)0.5 (0.125-1.0)0.625 (0.125-1.25)

Row percentages unless otherwise shown

* latest visit before March 2020

AxSpA: Axial spondyloarthritis, HAQ: health assessment questionnaire, PASS: patient acceptable symptom scale, PsA: psoriatic arthritis, RA: rheumatoid arthritis

In logistic regression analyses, factors associated with DANBIO-from-home access were: female gender (odds ratio, OR 1.2 (1.1;1.3)), age group 40-60 (1.8 (1.6;2.0)) or 61-80 yrs (1.9 (1.7;2.19) and not age >80 yrs (0.6 (0.5;0.7) with age <40 as the reference), biologic treatment (1.4 (1.3;1.5)), higher HAQ (1.3 (0.3;1.4)), scoring PASS ‘no’ (1.1 (1.02;1.2)) (all p <0.001), whereas disease duration and diagnosis had no impact.

Time to first entry was longest in in patients >80 yrs followed by the <40 yrs group. For all age-groups, and most pronounced for age <40 yrs, the use increased when invitations to questionnaire surveys were sent out. (Figure 1)

Conclusion

A web-based system for secure remote entry of PROs was well-received after a nationwide launch. Patient-related factors had a substantial impact on the use. Lower use in the elderly might indicate lack of technical skills or facilities, whereas low use in younger age groups, which improved over time, is likely driven by other factors. Further analyses are planned to explore if lack of use impacts treatment outcomes.

References

[1]Glintborg et al, Rheumatology. 2021 Oct 9;60:SI3-SI12

Disclosure of Interests

Bente Glintborg Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS, Pfizer, Dorte Vendelbo Jensen: None declared, Lene Terslev Speakers bureau: Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Janssen, Oliver Hendricks Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, Mikkel Østergaard Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi and UCB, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Merck, Novartis, Simon Horskjær Rasmussen: None declared, Mogens Pfeiffer-Jensen: None declared, Thomas Adelsten: None declared, Ada Colic: None declared, Kamilla Danebod: None declared, Malene Kildemand: None declared, Anne Gitte Loft Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Heidi Lausten Munk: None declared, Jens Kristian Pedersen: None declared, René Østgård Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi and UCB., Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Christian Møller Sørensen: None declared, Niels Steen Krogh: None declared, Jette Nørgaard Agerbo: None declared, Connie Ziegler: None declared, Merete Lund Hetland Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Biogen, BMS, Celtrion, Eli Lilly Denmark A/S, Janssen Biologics B.V, Lundbeck Fonden, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Biopis, Sandoz

POS0761 TIME-DEPENDENT ANALYSES OF CLINICAL MANIFESTATIONS OF SYSTEMIC LUPUS ERYTHEMATOSUS IDENTIFY PATIENTS AT HIGH RISK OF INCIDENT PROTEINURIA

Background

Nephritis (LN) in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is still a major determinant of poor prognosis[1].

The vast majority of LN occurs in proximity to the SLE diagnosis[2]. Identification of individuals at high risk, especially early onset SLE, is therefore warranted. Inclusion of risk factors prior to the SLE diagnosis may thus be of importance to enable sufficient risk factor profiling. SLE-patients seem to cluster according to clinical and serological phenotypes suggesting distinct disease trajectories[3-5].

Objectives

To determine if incident proteinuria associated with the debut age of non-renal SLE characteristics.

Methods

Data of SLE patients from six Danish centers were obtained from the Danbio-database from 2017 – 2020. The occurrence and timing of proteinuria was compared with first time onset of any non-renal manifestations as defined by the 1997 American College of Rheumatology Classification Criteria. Cox-regression models were used to identify risk factors for incident proteinuria. Time from first occurring non-renal manifestation to incident proteinuria or censoring defined time at risk. Covariates were eliminated if p >0.01 in a ‘backwards’ manner. After the model reduction process p-values <0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results

586 SLE patients, mainly white (94%) women (88%), mean age at inclusion of 34.6 years (standard deviation, SD = 0.6 years) and observed for a mean of 14.9 years (SD =0.5 years), were recruited. The cumulative prevalence of proteinuria was 40%. Male gender hazard ratio, HR = 1.35 (range 0.77-2.35), p=0.009, lymphopenia HR = 1.77 (range 1.24-2.52), p=0.005 were associated with incident proteinuria. In contrast, patients with discoid rash had lower risk of incident proteinuria HR 0.42 (range 0.21-0.83), p=0.01. Male patients with lymphopenia had the highest risk of proteinuria with a one-, 5- and 10-year risk of proteinuria ranging from 9-27%, 34-75% and 51-89 %, depending on the age at presentation (debut at 20, 30, 40 or 50 years). The corresponding risk-profiles for women with lymphopenia were 3-9%, 8-34% and 12-58%, respectively, as illustrated in Figure 1.

Conclusion

The occurrences of lymphopenia and discoid rash were oppositely associated with risk of incident proteinuria and the risk effects varied according to gender and patient age at onset of these manifestations. Thus, the risk of proteinuria may not be constant but could vary according to presentation of non-renal manifestations that may call for a differentiated clinical follow-up. Based on these findings, we suggest that the debut age of known prognostic factors, even prior to the SLE diagnosis should be considered when designing prognostic statistical models.

References

[1]Faurschou, M., et al., Prognostic factors in lupus nephritis: diagnostic and therapeutic delay increases the risk of terminal renal failure. J Rheumatol, 2006. 33(8): p. 1563-9.

[2]Hanly, J.G., et al., The frequency and outcome of lupus nephritis: results from an international inception cohort study. Rheumatology (Oxford), 2016. 55(2): p. 252-62.

[3]Diaz-Gallo, L.M., et al., Four Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Subgroups, Defined by Autoantibodies Status, Differ Regarding HLA-DRB1 Genotype Associations and Immunological and Clinical Manifestations. ACR Open Rheumatol, 2022. 4(1): p. 27-39.

[4]Jacobsen, S., et al., A multicentre study of 513 Danish patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. II. Disease mortality and clinical factors of prognostic value. Clin Rheumatol, 1998. 17(6): p. 478-84.

[5]Leffers, H.C.B., et al., Smoking associates with distinct clinical phenotypes in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a nationwide Danish cross-sectional study. Lupus Sci Med, 2021. 8(1).

Disclosure of Interests

Martin Andersen Employee of: Novo Nordisk A/S: 2010-2014, Anders Stockmarr: None declared, Henrik Leffers: None declared, Anne Troldborg: None declared, Anne Voss: None declared, Salome Kristensen: None declared, Bent Deleuran: None declared, Lene Dreyer Speakers bureau: Speakers bureau: Eli Lilly, Galderma and Janssen, Grant/research support from: Grant from BMS outside the present work, Laura Johnsen: None declared, Ada Colic: None declared, Søren Jacobsen: None declared

POS1197 REMOTE AND PHYSICAL CONSULTATIONS DURING THE FIRST 15 MONTHS OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: USE AND PATIENT-SATISFACTION IN PATIENTS WITH INFLAMMATORY RHEUMATIC DISEASES FOLLOWED IN THE DANBIO REGISTRY

Background

During COVID-19 related lockdowns, physical attendance may be replaced by remote (by telephone, email, video consultations in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD). During re-opening of society, reallocation of health-care resources could potentially cause persistent changes in access to physical consultations.

Objectives

To explore use of remote consultations in patients with IRD followed in the nationwide DANBIO registry at three time points (lockdown from spring 2020 followed by gradual reopening of society) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, to explore satisfaction with treatment access, and preferred mode of consultation including potentially associated clinical factors.

Methods

We performed a nationwide survey where three times, an online questionnaire (Q) “You and your arthritis in times of COVID-19” with questions regarding use of and access to remote and physical consultations was sent to all patients in DANBIO (Q1: March-April 2020, Q2: November 2020, Q3: May 2021). (ref)

Patient characteristics were captured in DANBIO (gender/age/diagnosis/biological therapy) and from the questionnaire (work status/comorbidities/EQ-5D). Use of physical and/or remote consultations 0-3 months before surveys and satisfaction with access was identified. Clinical factors associated with a preference for physical consultations at time of Q3 (versus remote contact (telephone/e-mail/video)) were explored with multivariable logistic regression analysis.

Results

Totally, 12,789/14,755/13,921 patients responded to Q1/Q2/Q3, respectively, with 23,311 unique patients participating in at least one survey. Characteristics of patients responding to Q3 are shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Respondents to questionnaire 3, n=13,921.

GenderFemale63%Median age, IQR, years64 (54-72)DiagnosisRheumatoid arthritis64%Psoriatic arthritis16%Axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA)12%Other8%Current occupational statusWorking41%No. of self-reported comorbidities≥165%Current biologic useyes27%*EQ-5D, median (IQR)0.8 (0.7-0.9)

EQ-5D: EuroQol quality of life (5-dimension)

*By March 2020

During the preceding 3 months, proportions of patients with physical/remote consultations were 22%/45%, 41%/38%, 40%/39% for Q1, Q2, Q3, respectively. Remote consultations were mainly by telephone, whereas email (<5%) and video (<1%) were rarely used. In all three surveys, only 7% of respondents found that access to counseling with their rheumatologist had deteriorated during the pandemic (Figure 1A) whereas the majority found it to be unchanged or did not know. The preferred contact form was physical consultations (68-74%, Figure 1B, not available for Q1). Factors associated with preference for physical consultation were female gender, higher age (>60 years), biological treatment, low EQ-5D and not having axial spondyloarthritis, whereas work status and comorbidities were without significance (logistic regression analyses, details not shown).

Figure 1.

Conclusion

Despite a widespread use of remote consultations during the pandemic, nationwide questionnaire surveys performed at three time-points during the COVID-19 pandemic showed that most patients were satisfied with access to rheumatic counseling. Nevertheless, in-person contacts were preferred by most patients, mainly women and elderly.

References

[1]Glintborg B, al. RMD Open. 2021;7(1).

Acknowledgements

Patients and Danish departments contributing to the DANBIO registry. Lundbeck foundation for funding

Disclosure of Interests

Bente Glintborg Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS, Pfizer, Dorte Vendelbo Jensen: None declared, Lene Terslev Speakers bureau: Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Oliver Hendricks Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, Mikkel Østergaard Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi and UCB, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Merck, Novartis, Simon Horskjær Rasmussen: None declared, Mogens Pfeiffer-Jensen: None declared, Thomas Adelsten: None declared, Ada Colic: None declared, Kamilla Danebod: None declared, Malene Kildemand: None declared, Anne Gitte Loft Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Heidi Lausten Munk: None declared, Jens Kristian Pedersen: None declared, René Østgård: None declared, Christian Møller Sørensen: None declared, Niels Steen Krogh: None declared, Jette Nørgaard Agerbo: None declared, Connie Ziegler: None declared, Merete Lund Hetland Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Biogen, BMS, Celtrion, Eli Lilly Denmark A/S, Janssen Biologics B.V, Lundbeck Fonden, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Biopis, Sandoz

POS1226 CLINICAL FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH A POSITIVE SARS-CoV-19 TEST AND WITH FREQUENT TESTING DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC IN >10.000 PATIENTS WITH INFLAMMATORY RHEUMATIC DISEASES. RESULTS FROM A NATIONWIDE SURVEY FROM THE DANISH DANBIO REGISTRY

Background

Patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) have used self-isolation and social distancing during the pandemic to avoid SARS-CoV-19 infection (reference). In countries with unlimited and free access to SARS-CoV-19 testing, anxiety or other patient related factors might potentially increase test-frequency.

Objectives

In patients with IRD followed in the nationwide DANBIO registry we aimed to explore clinical factors including self-isolation associated with a) a positive SARS-CoV-19 test result (‘infection’), b) higher frequency of SARS-CoV-19 testing during the first 1½ year of the pandemic.

Methods

In May-June 2020, IRD patients followed in the quality registry, DANBIO (n=36,152), were invited to participate in the voluntary online questionnaire survey ‘You and your rheumatic disease during times with corona-virus’. Patient characteristics, treatment and patient reported outcomes were captured in DANBIO and from the questionnaire. Patients were considered as self-isolating if they agreed to the question: I stay at home and avoid others as much as possible.

After written consent, information on dates and SARS-CoV-19 test results (by PCR, polymerase chain reaction) during follow-up (until Nov 2021 and thus before entry of the Omicron variant) was obtained through linkage to the nationwide laboratory system.

Time to first positive PCR and associated characteristics were explored by multivariable Cox regression analyses with hazard ratios, HR, adjusted for: gender/age-group/ diagnosis/biologic therapy/working/ self-isolation/HAQ/EQ-5D. Day 0 was defined as the date of first positive test in cohort (May-07-2020).

Number of SARS-CoV-19 tests (median (IQR)), and characteristics associated with higher test frequency (upper quartile) was explored with multivariable logistic regression analyses (odds ratios, OR, adjustment like above).

Results

In 10,098 included patients, 2.8% were infected during follow-up (Table 1). Age and HAQ seemed lower in infected (Table 1, Figure 1). In multivariable Cox regression analyses, male gender was associated with higher infection risk (HR 1.38 (1.05;1.80) whereas risk was lower in the age-group 61-80 years (0.60 (0.39;0.92) vs. below 40 years). Other factors were statistically insignificant.

Table 1.Total populationSARS-CoV-19 testsNumber of testsPOSITIVE*NEGATIVE<9≥9Patient number10,098282981674062692Patient %1003977426Female, %66543977228Male, %34443977723Age, yrs, median (IQR)61 (51-70)56 (47-55)61 (51-70)55 (47-61)64 (54-72)Age, strata, yrs< 40969496623840-603898496594161-8049842988515>80247199973DiagnosisAxSpA14644966634RA63452987624PsA16893977030Other6004967931Biologic treatment, yes**38313977228HAQ, median**0.50.3750.50.3750.5EQ-5D, median0.80.80.80.80.8Self-isolating, yes84743977426Working46164965842

Row percentage unless otherwise shown

* At least one positive PCR before Nov 2021

**May 2020

AxSpA: Axial spondyloarthritis, EQ-5D: EuroQol quality of life (5D), HAQ: health assessment questionnaire, IQR: interquartile range, PsA: psoriatic arthritis, RA: rheumatoid arthritis

Median number of PCR tests was 4 (IQR 1-9). In patients with <9 tests, 2.6% were infected whereas for patients with ≥9 tests, 3.2% were infected. Patients with ≥9 tests were younger, more frequently female and working in univariate (Table 1) and adjusted analyses, whereas other characteristics were statistically insignificant (details not shown).

Conclusion

Few patients with IRD were infected during the first 1½ years of the pandemic. Gender and age were associated with infection risk and frequency of testing. Self-isolation and a range of other clinical characteristics had no impact, which to some extent may be due to behavioral differences across age-groups.

References

[1]Glintborg B et al, RMD open, 2021

Disclosure of Interests

Bente Glintborg Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS, Pfizer, Dorte Vendelbo Jensen: None declared, Lene Terslev Speakers bureau: Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Janssen, Oliver Hendricks Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, Mikkel Østergaard Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Merck, Novartis, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi and UCB, Simon Horskjær Rasmussen: None declared, Mogens Pfeiffer-Jensen: None declared, Thomas Adelsten: None declared, Ada Colic: None declared, Kamilla Danebod: None declared, Malene Kildemand: None declared, Anne Gitte Loft Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Heidi Lausten Munk: None declared, Jens Kristian Pedersen: None declared, René Østgård Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Christian Møller Sørensen: None declared, Niels Steen Krogh: None declared, Jette Nørgaard Agerbo: None declared, Connie Ziegler: None declared, Merete Lund Hetland Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Biogen, BMS, Celtrion, Eli Lilly Denmark A/S, Janssen Biologics B.V, Lundbeck Fonden, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Biopis, Sandoz

POS0056 ANXIETY AND CONCERNS RELATED TO THE WORK SITUATION DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC IN >5,000 PATIENTS WITH INFLAMMATORY RHEUMATIC DISEASE FOLLOWED IN THE DANISH DANBIO REGISTRY, RESULTS FROM A NATIONWIDE QUESTIONNAIRE

Background:

During the COVID-19 pandemic, widespread changes in how we work have been observed. Working from home is not an option for everyone. At work it may be difficult to keep social distance, which may lead to fear and anxiety of being infected with SARS-CoV-19 or of spreading the virus.

Objectives:

To explore frequency of anxiety and concerns related to work in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases(IRD) during the COVID-19 pandemic and to identify patient and disease characteristics associated with increased anxiety.

Methods:

Patients in routine care followed in the nationwide Danish DANBIO registry were invited to answer an on-line questionnaire regarding current rheumatic disease activity, behavior and anxiety including current work-status and -concerns. Responses were linked to patient data previously recorded in DANBIO. Clinical factors associated with work-related concerns (completely/mostly agree versus neither/nor, completely/mostly disagree) were explored with multivariable logistic regression.

Results:

Among 14,758 respondents (38% of eligible patients), 5,950 patients (40%) were currently working (60% full time/31% part time/9% self-employed) (61% female, 53% rheumatoid arthritis/19% psoriatic arthritis/20% axial spondyloarthritis/9% other). Although 68% reported that the workplace helped to make necessary interventions, work-related concerns and anxiety were frequent. Thus, 22% found it difficult (completely/mostly agree) to keep physical distance at work and 20% were worried about going to work (Figure 1).

Factors associated with concerns about going to work were female gender, longer education, other chronic conditions, biological therapy, and higher (=poorer) EQ-5D, whereas diagnosis was without significance. Similar patterns were found for other work-related concerns (not shown).

Conclusion:

In this cohort of >5,000 patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases followed in a nationwide registry, during the COVID-19 pandemic anxiety and concerns related to the work situation were frequent, especially in women and patients treated with biologicals, with other chronic diseases and with poor quality of life.

References:

[1]Glintborg et al, 2021, https://rmdopen.bmj.com/content/rmdopen/7/1/e001505.full.pdf

Table 1.

Factors associated with being worried (agree versus disagree) to go to work (Figure 1, panel F). Multivariable logistic regression analyses

Odds ratio (95% CI)pGenderfemale1male0.45 (0.38;0.54)<0.001Age, years>40140-601.12 (0.87;1.44)0.4>600.89 (0.67;1.20)0.5EducationLong1No/short0.80 (0.69;0.93)0.005Living alone, yes0.97 (0.79;1.20)0.8Other chronic condition, yes1.37 (1.17;1.59)<0.001Biological therapy1.36 (1.17;1.58)<0.001DiagnosisRheumatoid arthritis1Psoriatic arthritis1.21 (0.99;1.48)0.06Axial spondyloarthritis1.03 (0.84;1.28)0.8Other1.17 (0.89;1.54)0.3PASS, yes*1.03 (0.85;1.25)0.7SmokingCurrent1Previous1.17 (0.94;1.47)0.2Never1.10 (0.90;1.35)0.4EQ5D**0.03 (0.02;0.06)<0.001

*patient acceptable symptom state, **European Quality of Life, 5 dimensions

Disclosure of Interests:

Bente Glintborg Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS, Pfizer, Dorte Vendelbo Jensen: None declared, Sara Engel: None declared, Lene Terslev Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Janssen, Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, MSD, BMS and GE, Mogens Pfeiffer Jensen: None declared, Oliver Hendricks: None declared, Mikkel Østergaard Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi and UCB., Grant/research support from: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Merck, Novartis, Simon Horskjær Rasmussen: None declared, Thomas Adelsten: None declared, Ada Colic: None declared, Kamilla Danebod: None declared, Malene Kildemand: None declared, Anne Gitte Loft Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Heidi Lausten Munk: None declared, Jens Kristian Pedersen: None declared, René Østgård Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi and UCB., Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Christian Møller Sørensen: None declared, Niels Steen Krogh: None declared, Jette Nørgaard Agerbo: None declared, Connie Ziegler: None declared, Merete L. Hetland Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Biogen, BMS, Celtrion, Eli Lilly Denmark A/S, Janssen Biologics B.V, Lundbeck Fonden, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Biopis, Sandoz. MLH chairs the steering committee of the Danish Rheumatology Quality Registry (DANBIO), which receives public funding from the hospital owners and funding from pharmaceutical companies. MLH co-chairs the EuroSpA research collaboration, which generates real-world evidence of treatment of psoriatic arthritis and axial spondylorthritis based on secondary data and is partly funded by Novartis.

POS1170 SELF-PROTECTION STRATEGIES, HEALTH BEHAVIOR AND DISEASE ACTIVITY DURING THE FIRST WAVE, RE-OPENING AND SECOND WAVE OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC IN >7000 DANISH PATIENTS WITH INFLAMMATORY ARTHRITIS

Background:

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused lockdown, reduced access to face-to-face consultations, anxiety about taking immunosuppressive agents and self-isolation1 which potentially impact rheumatic disease control negatively. However, changes in behavior including self-protection strategies during the ongoing pandemic and impact on rheumatic disease activity have only been scarcely described.

The first COVID-19 wave hit Denmark in March 2020 followed by a gradual re-opening from mid-April and the second surge began in the late autumn of 2020.

Objectives:

To describe changes over time in self-protection strategies and health behavior during the first 8 months of the COVID-19 pandemic and to explore impact on self-reported disease activity and quality of life (=patient reported outcomes, PROs) in patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease (IRD) in DANBIO.

Methods:

Patients were invited to answer two on-line questionnaires regarding current behavior and disease specific PROs: One in June 2020 (including also questions regarding behavior in March 2020), and one in November 2020. Responses were linked to PROs collected as part of routine care before March 2020 (=Before) in DANBIO. For each PRO, changes (=delta values) between the two timepoints were calculated in individual patients.

Results:

Overall, 7,836 patients (22% of eligible patients) answered both questionnaires and were included (rheumatoid arthritis(RA): 5270(67%), psoriatic arthritis(PsA): 1217(15%), axial spondyloarthritis(AxSpA): 932(12%), other IRD: 417(5%). Patients reported highest levels of anxiety and self-protection in March with an improvement in June that was largely unchanged in November (Figure 1), e.g. proportions staying at home avoiding others as much as possible (completely or mostly agree) were 87%/49%/51% in March/June/November, respectively (Figure 1, Panel C).

Disease activity and proportions of patients reporting acceptable symptom state remained stable at the three time points (Table 1), with all median delta values being close to zero (not shown).

Conclusion:

In this large cohort of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases followed in the nationwide DANBIO registry, COVID-19 related self-protection strategies were highest in March 2020, but more than half of the patients also reported self-isolation in June and November. We found no negative impact of the pandemic on patient-reported outcomes, which remained largely unchanged and were similar to before the pandemic. The latter finding probably reflects that few patients reduced or withdrew from treatment due to fear of COVID-19.1

References:

[1]Glintborg et al, 2021, https://rmdopen.bmj.com/content/rmdopen/7/1/e001505.full.pdf

Table 1.

Patient reported outcomes before March, in June and in November 2020 in patients with IRD. N=7,836

Before*June 2020Nov 2020Patient VAS global, mm30 (12-58)28 (10-54)29 (10-55)Patient VAS pain, mm27 (11-51)28 (11-51)29 (11-52)HAQ0.50 (0.13-1.0)0.50 (0.13-1.00)0.50 (0.13-1.00)EQ-5D0.80 (0.72-0.86)0.79 (0.71-0.86)0.80 (0.71-0.86)PASS, yes73%75%76%

Numbers are median (IQR) unless otherwise stated*Latest registration in DANBIO before March 2020Patient characteristics for RA/AxSpA/PsA/Other: female, %: 70/53/44/69. Age, years, median(IQR): 67(59-74)/62(54-69)/56(46-65)/59(50-68)Abbreviations: EQ-5D: Quality of life, 5 dimensions, HAQ: health assessment questionnaire, PASS: patient acceptable symptom state, VAS: visual analogue scale

Disclosure of Interests:

Bente Glintborg Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS, Pfizer, Dorte Vendelbo Jensen: None declared, Sara Engel: None declared, Lene Terslev Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Janssen, Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, MSD, BMS and GE, Mogens Pfeiffer Jensen: None declared, Oliver Hendricks Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, Mikkel Østergaard Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi and UCB., Grant/research support from: Research grants: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Merck, Novartis, Simon Horskjær Rasmussen: None declared, Thomas Adelsten: None declared, Kamilla Danebod: None declared, Ada Colic: None declared, Malene Kildemand: None declared, Anne Gitte Loft Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Heidi Lausten Munk: None declared, Jens Kristian Pedersen: None declared, René Østgård Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi and UCB., Grant/research support from: Research grants: Abbvie, Christian Møller Sørensen: None declared, Niels Steen Krogh: None declared, Jette Nørgaard Agerbo: None declared, Connie Ziegler: None declared, Merete L. Hetland Grant/research support from:: AbbVie, Biogen, BMS, Celtrion, Eli Lilly Denmark A/S, Janssen Biologics B.V, Lundbeck Fonden, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Biopis, Sandoz. MLH chairs the steering committee of the Danish Rheumatology Quality Registry (DANBIO), which receives public funding from the hospital owners and funding from pharmaceutical companies. MLH co-chairs the EuroSpA research collaboration, which generates real-world evidence of treatment of psoriatic arthritis and axial spondylorthritis based on secondary data and is partly funded by Novartis.

SAT0130 TREAT-TO-TARGET STRATEGY OF >8.000 PATIENTS WITH EARLY RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS: DOES SMOKING AFFECT ACHIEVEMENT OF REMISSION ON METHOTREXATE AND TIME TO START OF FIRST BIOLOGIC? RESULTS FROM THE NATIONWIDE DANISH DANBIO REGISTRY

Background:

Smoking is a known risk factor for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). It is largely unknown whether smoking has any impact on disease activity and treatment outcomes (e.g. achieving remission on methotrexate and time to first biological disease modifying anti-rheumatic treatments (bDMARD)) in early RA with a modern treat-to-target strategy.

Objectives:

To explore if smoking was associated with treatment outcomes in newly diagnosed patients with RA starting first conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs in routine care.

Methods:

Observational cohort study. Adult patients with RA starting first csDMARD during year 2010-2018 were identified in the Danish nationwide quality registry, DANBIO. Smoking status (current/never/previous) upon start of csDMARD (=baseline), disease activity, 1-year treatment outcomes and bDMARD treatment were retrieved from DANBIO. Data were censored Oct 2019.

Impact of smoking status was explored for the following outcomes: 1) median baseline disease activity baseline, 2) remission at 1-year (logistic regression analyses), 3) time to first bDMARD (Cox-regression analyses). Regression analyses were adjusted for gender and age.

Results:

Among 9515 patients, 8647 (91%) had available smoking status (Current 23%/never 50%/previous 27%) and were included. Baseline disease activity was independent of smoking status (Table 1). First line csDMARD was methotrexate in 91% of patients. Compared to never smokers, the current smokers were more often men, younger and sero-positive for IgM-RF and anti-CCP.

Table 1.

Patient characteristics and disease activity at baseline and 1 year stratified by smoking status. Numbers are medians (IQR) unless otherwise stated.

Smoking statusCurrentNeverPreviousBaselinePatient numbers, N200743082332Age, yrs58 (49-66)61 (48-71)62 (52-70)Female, %627163IgM-RF positive, %715465Anti-CCP positive, %715365DAS284.4 (3.4-5.3)4.4 (3.4-5.3)4.3 (3.3-5.3)CDAI18.7 (11.7-27.3)18.4 (10.9-27.4)18.5 (10.4-27.6)VAS patient global, mm60 (35-81)55 (30-77)55 (31-78)1 yearPatient number, N179338372053DAS282.6 (1.9-3.7)2.3 (1.7-3.4)2.5 (1.8-3.4)CDAI6.4 (2.8-12.5)4.9 (1.8-10.3)5.4 (2-10.8)DAS28-remission, %495753CDAI-remission, %273533VAS patient global, mm37 (14-67)29 (10-57)30 (11-58)

DAS28-response: DAS28(CRP)≤2.6; CDAI-remission: CDAI≤2.8

Never and previous smokers had higher odds of remission at 1 year’s follow-up compared to current smokers. In adjusted Cox regression analyses, baseline smoking was associated with shorter time to start of first bDMARD (Table 2).

Table 2.

Impact of baseline smoking status on treatment outcomes

ComparisonOdds Ratio (95% CI)pDAS28-remission 1 yr, yes vs. no*Never vs. current smoker1.43 (1.27;1.62)<0.001Previous vs. current1.14 (0.99;1.30)0.07CDAI remission 1 yr, yes vs. no*Never vs. current1.53 (1.34;1.75)<0.001Previous vs. current1.29 (1.11;1.50)<0.001ComparisonHazard Ratio (95% CI)pStart of bDMARD duringfollow-up**Never vs current smoker0.85 (0.76;0.96)0.006Previous vs. current1.05 (0.93;1.19)0.4

*Logistic regression analyses (adjusted for gender and age)

** Cox regression analyses (adjusted for gender and age)

Conclusion:

In this observational study of >8000 patients with RA starting a first csDMARD, current smoking was associated with lower odds of achieving remission on methotrexate and higher chance of having started bMDARD compared to never smokers. Seropositivity may be an intermediate variable. Further analyses are planned to study impact of comorbidities and other confounding factors.

Acknowledgments :

Thank you to all patients and departments who contribute to the DANBIO registry

Disclosure of Interests: :

Bente Glintborg Grant/research support from: Grants from Pfizer, Biogen and Abbvie, Oliver Hendricks Grant/research support from: Pfizer, MSD, Ada Colic Consultant of: Advisory board Sanofi, Hanne Merete Lindegaard: None declared, Rabiah Ahmed: None declared, Anne Gitte Loft Grant/research support from: Novartis, Consultant of: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Gina Kollerup Speakers bureau: Eli Lilly, Marlene Andersen: None declared, Jolanta Grydehøj: None declared, Johnny Raun: None declared, Toke Thorgrimsen: None declared, Kasper Mortensen: None declared, Line Uhrenholt Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Eli Lilly and Novartis (not related to the submitted work), Dorte Jensen: None declared, Iben Ruge Grant/research support from: Novo Nordisk Foundation, Maren Kalisz: None declared, Kamilla Danebod: None declared, Niels Lomborg: None declared, Niels Steen Krogh: None declared, Merete L. Hetland Grant/research support from: BMS, MSD, AbbVie, Roche, Novartis, Biogen and Pfizer, Consultant of: Eli Lilly, Speakers bureau: Orion Pharma, Biogen, Pfizer, CellTrion, Merck and Samsung Bioepis

High-affinity binding of two molecules of cysteine proteinases to low-molecular-weight kininogen

Human low-molecular-weight kininogen (LK) was shown by fluorescence titration to bind two molecules of cathepsins L and S and papain with high affinity. By contrast, binding of a second molecule of cathepsin H was much weaker. The 2:1 binding stoichiometry was confirmed by titration monitored by loss of enzyme activity and by sedimentation velocity experiments. The kinetics of binding of cathepsins L and S and papain showed the two proteinase binding sites to have association rate constants kass,1 = 10.7-24.5 x 10(6) M-1 s-1 and kass,2 = 0.83-1.4 x 10(6) M-1 s-1. Comparison of these kinetic constants with previous data for intact LK and its separated domains indicate that the faster-binding site is also the tighter-binding site and is present on domain 3, whereas the slower-binding, lower-affinity site is on domain 2. These results also indicate that there is no appreciable steric hindrance for the binding of proteinases between the two binding sites or from the kininogen light chain.

Regulation of the activity of lysosomal cysteine proteinases by pH-induced inactivation and/or endogenous protein inhibitors, cystatins

The kinetics of pH-induced inactivation of human cathepsins B and L was studied by conventional and stopped-flow methods. The inactivation of both enzymes was found to be an irreversible, first-order process. The inactivation rate constants increased exponentially with pH for both enzymes. From log kinac vs pH plots, 3.0 and 1.7 protons were calculated to be desorbed for pH-induced inactivation of cathepsins L and B. Cathepsin B was thus substantially more stable than cathepsin L (approximately 15-fold at pH 7.0 and 37 degrees C). Cathepsin B was efficiently inhibited by cystatin C at pH 7.4, whereas the inhibition by stefin B and high molecular weight kininogen was only moderate. In contrast, cathepsin L was efficiently inhibited by both chicken cystatin and stefin B at this pH kass approximately 3.3 x 10(7) m-1 s-1).

The affinity-labelling of cathepsin S with peptidyl diazomethyl ketones. Comparison with the inhibition of cathepsin L and calpain

Since peptidyl diazomethyl ketones are useful irreversible inhibitors for inactivating cysteinyl proteinases in vitro and in vivo and in order to reveal their role, we set out to obtain selective and effective reagents for cathepsin S. A number of such derivatives with hydrophobic amino acid residues, such as valine, leucine and tryptophane in positions adjacent to the primary specificity site were synthesized and these provided inhibitors rapidly acting at high dilution. For example, 1 nM Z-Leu-Leu-Nle-CHN2 inactivates cathepsin S with k2nd = 4.6 x 10(6) M-1 x s-1 at pH 6.5, 25 degrees C. Similarities to the specificities of cathepsin L and calpain were evident. However, Z-Val-Val-NleCHN2 is over 300 times more effective in inactivating S than L. On the other hand, Z-Phe-Tyr(t-Bu)CHN2 is about 10(4) more effective against L than S. Reagents are thus now available for a clear discrimination between these proteases.