In-person versus virtual administration of the American College of Radiology gold standard cognitive battery in systemic lupus erythematosus: Are they interchangeable?

OBJECTIVE

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many research studies were adapted, including our longitudinal study examining cognitive impairment (CI) in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Cognitive testing was switched from in-person to virtual. This analysis aimed to determine if the administration method (in-person vs. virtual) of the ACR-neuropsychological battery (ACR-NB) affected participant cognitive performance and classification.

METHODS

Data from our multi-visit, SLE CI study included demographic, clinical, and psychiatric characteristics, and the modified ACR-NB. Three analyses were undertaken for cognitive performance: (1) all visits, (2) non-CI group visits only and (3) intra-individual comparisons. A retrospective preferences questionnaire was given to participants who completed the ACR-NB both in-person and virtually.

RESULTS

We analysed 328 SLE participants who had 801 visits (696 in-person and 105 virtual). Demographic, clinical, and psychiatric characteristics were comparable except for ethnicity, anxiety and disease-related damage. Across all three comparisons, six tests were consistently statistically significantly different. CI classification changed in 11/71 (15%) participants. 45% of participants preferred the virtual administration method and 33% preferred in-person.

CONCLUSIONS

Of the 19 tests in the ACR-NB, we identified one or more problems with eight (42%) tests when moving from in-person to virtual administration. As the use of virtual cognitive testing will likely increase, these issues need to be addressed - potentially by validating a virtual version of the ACR-NB. Until then, caution must be taken when directly comparing virtual to in-person test results. If future studies use a mixed administration approach, this should be accounted for during analysis.

OP0286 CHARACTERISTICS ASSOCIATED WITH SEVERE COVID-19 OUTCOMES IN SYSTEMIC LUPUS ERYTHEMATOSUS (SLE): RESULTS FROM THE COVID-19 GLOBAL RHEUMATOLOGY ALLIANCE (COVID-19 GRA)

Background:

An increased risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes may be seen in patients with autoimmune diseases on moderate to high daily doses of glucocorticoids, as well as in those with comorbidities. However, specific information about COVID-19 outcomes in SLE is scarce.

Objectives:

To determine the characteristics associated with severe COVID-19 outcomes in a multi-national cross-sectional registry of COVID-19 patients with SLE.

Methods:

SLE adult patients from a physician-reported registry of the COVID-19 GRA were studied. Variables collected at COVID-19 diagnosis included age, sex, race/ethnicity, region, comorbidities, disease activity, time period of COVID-19 diagnosis, glucocorticoid (GC) dose, and immunomodulatory therapy. Immunomodulatory therapy was categorized as: antimalarials only, no SLE therapy, traditional immunosuppressive (IS) drug monotherapy, biologics/targeted synthetic IS drug monotherapy, and biologic and traditional IS drug combination therapy. We used an ordinal COVID-19 severity outcome defined as: not hospitalized/hospitalized without supplementary oxygen; hospitalized with non-invasive ventilation; hospitalized with mechanical ventilation/extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; and death. An ordinal logistic regression model was constructed to assess the association between demographic characteristics, comorbidities, medications, disease activity and COVID-19 severity. This assumed that the relationship between each pair of outcome groups is of the same direction and magnitude.

Results:

Of 1069 SLE patients included, 1047 (89.6%) were female, with a mean age of 44.5 (SD: 14.1) years. Patient outcomes included 815 (78.8%) not hospitalized/hospitalized without supplementary oxygen; 116 (11.2) hospitalized with non-invasive ventilation, 25 (2.4%) hospitalized with mechanical ventilation/extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and 78 (7.5%) died. In a multivariate model (n=804), increased age [OR=1.03 (1.01, 1.04)], male sex [OR =1.93 (1.21, 3.08)], COVID-19 diagnosis between June 2020 and January 2021 (OR =1.87 (1.17, 3.00)), no IS drug use [OR =2.29 (1.34, 3.91)], chronic renal disease [OR =2.34 (1.48, 3.70)], cardiovascular disease [OR =1.93 (1.34, 3.91)] and moderate/high disease activity [OR =2.24 (1.46, 3.43)] were associated with more severe COVID-19 outcomes. Compared with no use of GC, patients using GC had a higher odds of poor outcome: 0-5 mg/d, OR =1.98 (1.33, 2.96); 5-10 mg/d, OR =2.88 (1.27, 6.56); >10 mg/d, OR =2.01 (1.26, 3.21) (Table 1).

Table 1.

Characteristics associated with more severe COVID-19 outcomes in SLE. (N=804)

OR (95% CI)Age, years1.03 (1.01, 1.04)Sex, Male1.93 (1.21, 3.08)Race/Ethnicity, Non-White vs White1.47 (0.87, 2.50)RegionEuropeRef.North America0.67 (0.29, 1.54)South America0.67 (0.29, 1.54)Other1.93 (0.85, 4.39)Season, June 16th 2020-January 8th 2021 vs January-June 15th 20201.87 (1.17, 3.00)Glucocorticoids0 mg/dayRef.0-5 mg/day1.98 (1.33, 2.96)5-10 mg/day2.88 (1.27, 6.56)=>10 mg/day2.01 (1.26, 3.21)Medication CategoryAntimalarial onlyRef.No IS drugs2.29 (1.34, 3.91)Traditional IS drugs as monotherapy1.17 (0.77, 1.77)b/ts IS drugs as monotherapy1.00 (0.37, 2.71)Combination of traditional and b/ts IS1.00 (0.55, 1.82)Comorbidity BurdenNumber of Comorbidities (excluding renal and cardiovascular disease)1.39 (0.97, 1.99)Chronic renal disease2.34 (1.48, 3.70)Cardiovascular disease1.93 (1.34, 3.91)Disease Activity, Moderate/ high vs Remission/ low 2.24 (1.46, 3.43)

IS: immunosuppressive. b/ts: biologics/targeted synthetics

Conclusion:

Increased age, male sex, glucocorticoid use, chronic renal disease, cardiovascular disease and moderate/high disease activity at time of COVID-19 diagnosis were associated with more severe COVID-19 outcomes in SLE. Potential limitations include possible selection bias (physician reporting), the cross-sectional nature of the data, and the assumptions underlying the outcomes modelling.

Acknowledgements:

The views expressed here are those of the authors and participating members of the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance and do not necessarily represent the views of the ACR, EULAR) the UK National Health Service, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), or the UK Department of Health, or any other organization.

Disclosure of Interests:

Manuel F. Ugarte-Gil Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Janssen, Graciela S Alarcon: None declared, Andrea Seet: None declared, Zara Izadi: None declared, Cristina Reategui Sokolova: None declared, Ann E Clarke Consultant of: AstraZeneca, BristolMyersSquibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Exagen Diagnostics, Leanna Wise: None declared, Guillermo Pons-Estel: None declared, Maria Jose Santos: None declared, Sasha Bernatsky: None declared, Lauren Mathias: None declared, Nathan Lim: None declared, Jeffrey Sparks Consultant of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Inova, Janssen, and Optum unrelated to this work., Grant/research support from: Amgen and Bristol-Myers Squibb, Zachary Wallace Consultant of: Viela Bio and MedPace, Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb and Principia/Sanofi, Kimme Hyrich Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Grant/research support from: MS, UCB, and Pfizer, Anja Strangfeld Speakers bureau: AbbVie, MSD, Roche, BMS, Pfizer, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS, Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi, Lilly, Mylan, Hexal, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi-Aventis, and UCB, Laure Gossec Consultant of: Abbvie, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Grant/research support from: Lilly, Mylan, Pfizer, Loreto Carmona: None declared, Elsa Mateus Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Abbvie, Novartis, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly Portugal, Sanofi, Grünenthal S.A., MSD, Celgene, Medac, Pharmakern, GAfPA, Saskia Lawson-Tovey: None declared, Laura Trupin: None declared, Stephanie Rush: None declared, Gabriela Schmajuk: None declared, Patti Katz: None declared, Lindsay Jacobsohn: None declared, Samar Al Emadi: None declared, Emily Gilbert: None declared, Ali Duarte-Garcia: None declared, Maria Valenzuela-Almada: None declared, Tiffany Hsu: None declared, Kristin D’Silva: None declared, Naomi Serling-Boyd: None declared, Philippe Dieudé Consultant of: Boerhinger Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly, Sanofi, Pfizer, Chugai, Roche, Janssen unrelated to this work, Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugaii, Pfizer, unrelated to this work, Elena Nikiphorou: None declared, Vanessa Kronzer: None declared, Namrata Singh: None declared, Beth Wallace: None declared, Akpabio Akpabio: None declared, Ranjeny Thomas: None declared, Suleman Bhana Consultant of: AbbVie, Horizon, Novartis, and Pfizer (all <$10,000) unrelated to this work, Wendy Costello: None declared, Rebecca Grainger Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Cornerstones, Jonathan Hausmann Consultant of: Novartis, Sobi, Biogen, all unrelated to this work (<$10,000), Jean Liew Grant/research support from: Pfizer outside the submitted work, Emily Sirotich Grant/research support from: Board Member of the Canadian Arthritis Patient Alliance, a patient run, volunteer based organization whose activities are largely supported by independent grants from pharmaceutical companies, Paul Sufka: None declared, Philip Robinson Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB (all < $10,000), Consultant of: Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB (all < $10,000), Pedro Machado Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this study (all < $10,000)., Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this study (all < $10,000), Milena Gianfrancesco: None declared, Jinoos Yazdany Consultant of: Eli Lilly and AstraZeneca unrelated to this project

OP0288 MACHINE LEARNING ALGORITHMS TO PREDICT COVID-19 ACUTE RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYNDROME IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATIC DISEASES: RESULTS FROM THE GLOBAL RHEUMATOLOGY ALLIANCE PROVIDER REGISTRY

Background:

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening complication of COVID-19 and has been reported in approximately one-third of hospitalized patients with COVID-191. Risk factors associated with the development of ARDS include older age and diabetes2. However, little is known about factors associated with ARDS in the setting of COVID-19, in patients with rheumatic disease or those receiving immunosuppressive medications. Prediction algorithms using traditional regression methods perform poorly with rare outcomes, often yielding high specificity but very low sensitivity. Machine learning algorithms optimized for rare events are an alternative approach with potentially improved sensitivity for rare events, such as ARDS in COVID-19 among patients with rheumatic disease.

Objectives:

We aimed to develop a prediction model for ARDS in people with COVID-19 and pre-existing rheumatic disease using a series of machine learning algorithms and to identify risk factors associated with ARDS in this population.

Methods:

We used data from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance (GRA) Registry from March 24 to Nov 1, 2020. ARDS diagnosis was indicated by the reporting clinician. Five machine learning algorithms optimized for rare events predicted ARDS using 42 variables covering patient demographics, rheumatic disease diagnoses, medications used at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, and comorbidities. Model performance was assessed using accuracy, area under curve, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. Adjusted odds ratios corresponding to the 10 most influential predictors from the best performing model were derived using hierarchical multivariate mixed-effects logistic regression that accounted for within-country correlations.

Results:

A total of 5,931 COVID-19 cases from 67 countries were included in the analysis. Mean (SD) age was 54.9 (16.0) years, 4,152 (70.0%) were female, and 2,399 (40.5%) were hospitalized. ARDS was reported in 388 (6.5% of total and 15.6% of hospitalized) cases. Statistically significant differences in the risk of ARDS were observed by demographics, diagnoses, medications, and comorbidities using unadjusted univariate comparisons (data not shown). Gradient boosting machine (GBM) had the highest sensitivity (0.81) and was considered the best performing model (Table 1). Hypertension, interstitial lung disease, kidney disease, diabetes, older age, glucocorticoids, and anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies were associated with the development of ARDS while tumor necrosis factor inhibitors were associated with a protective effect (Figure 1).

Table 1.

Performance of machine learning algorithms.

GBMSVMGLMNETNNETRFAccuracy0.790.680.660.660.67AUC0.750.700.740.580.74Sensitivity0.810.680.650.680.67Specificity0.490.600.730.480.68PPV0.960.960.970.950.97NPV0.160.120.130.090.13

GBM: Gradient Boosting Machine, SVM: Support vector machines, GLMNET: Lasso and Elastic-Net Regularized Generalized Linear Models, NNET: Neural Networks, RF: Random Forest. AUC: Area Under Curve; PPV: Positive Predictive Value; NPV: Negative Predictive Value.

Conclusion:

In this global cohort of patients with rheumatic disease, a machine learning model, GBM, predicted the onset of ARDS with 81% sensitivity using baseline information obtained at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis. These results identify patients who may be at higher risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes. Further studies are necessary to validate the proposed prediction model in external cohorts and to evaluate its clinical utility. Disclaimer: The views expressed here are those of the authors and participating members of the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance, and do not necessarily represent the views of the ACR, NIH, (UK) NHS, NIHR, or the department of Health.

References:

[1]Tzotzos SJ, Fischer B, Fischer H, Zeitlinger M. 2020;24(1):516.

[2]Wu C, Chen X, Cai Y, et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2020;180(7):934-943.

Acknowledgements:

The COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance.

Disclosure of Interests:

Zara Izadi: None declared, Milena Gianfrancesco: None declared, Kimme Hyrich Speakers bureau: Abbvie and grant income from BMS, UCB, and Pfizer, all unrelated to this study., Anja Strangfeld Speakers bureau: AbbVie, MSD, Roche, BMS, Pfizer, outside the submitted work., Grant/research support from: A consortium of 13 companies (among them AbbVie, BMS, Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi, Lilly, Mylan, Hexal, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi-Aventis, and UCB) supporting the German RABBIT register., Laure Gossec Consultant of: Abbvie, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB., Grant/research support from: Lilly, Mylan, Pfizer, all unrelated to this study., Loreto Carmona Consultant of: Loreto Carmona’s institute works by contract for laboratories among other institutions, such as Abbvie Spain, Eisai, Gebro Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme España, S.A., Novartis, Farmaceutica, Pfizer, Roche Farma, Sanofi Aventis, Astellas Pharma, Actelion Pharmaceuticals España, Grünenthal GmbH, and UCB Pharma., Elsa Mateus Grant/research support from: LPCDR received grants from Abbvie, Novartis, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly Portugal, Sanofi, Grünenthal S.A., MSD, Celgene, Medac, Pharmakern, GAfPA and Pfizer., Saskia Lawson-Tovey: None declared, Laura Trupin: None declared, Stephanie Rush: None declared, Gabriela Schmajuk: None declared, Lindsay Jacobsohn: None declared, Patti Katz: None declared, Samar Al Emadi: None declared, Leanna Wise: None declared, Emily Gilbert: None declared, Maria Valenzuela-Almada: None declared, Ali Duarte-Garcia: None declared, Jeffrey Sparks Consultant of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Inova, Janssen, and Optum unrelated to this work., Grant/research support from: Amgen and Bristol-Myers Squibb., Tiffany Hsu: None declared, Kristin D’Silva: None declared, Naomi Serling-Boyd: None declared, Suleman Bhana Employee of: Suleman Bhana reports non-branded marketing campaigns for Novartis (<$10,000)., Wendy Costello: None declared, Rebecca Grainger Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Cornerstones and travel assistance from Pfizer (all < $10,000)., Jonathan Hausmann Consultant of: Novartis, unrelated to this work (<$10,000)., Jean Liew Grant/research support from: Pfizer, outside the submitted work., Emily Sirotich Grant/research support from: Emily Sirotich is a Board Member of the Canadian Arthritis Patient Alliance, a patient run, volunteer-based organization whose activities are largely supported by independent grants from pharmaceutical companies., Paul Sufka: None declared, Zachary Wallace Consultant of: Viela Bio and MedPace, outside the submitted work., Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb and Principia/Sanofi., Pedro Machado Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this study (all < $10,000)., Philip Robinson Consultant of: Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB and travel assistance from Roche (all < $10,000)., Jinoos Yazdany Consultant of: Eli Lilly and Astra Zeneca, unrelated to this project.

OP0006 ASSOCIATIONS OF BASELINE USE OF BIOLOGIC OR TARGETED SYNTHETIC DMARDS WITH COVID-19 SEVERITY IN RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS: RESULTS FROM THE COVID-19 GLOBAL RHEUMATOLOGY ALLIANCE

Background:

Targeted DMARDs may dampen the inflammatory response in COVID-19, perhaps leading to a less severe clinical course. However, some DMARD targets may impair viral immune defenses. Due to sample size limitations, previous studies of DMARD use and COVID-19 outcomes have combined several heterogeneous rheumatic diseases and medications, investigating a single outcome (e.g., hospitalization).

Objectives:

To investigate the associations of baseline use of biologic or targeted synthetic (b/ts) DMARDs with a range of poor COVID-19 outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods:

We analyzed voluntarily reported cases of COVID-19 in patients with rheumatic diseases in the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance physician registry (March 12, 2020 - January 6, 2021). We investigated RA treated with b/tsDMARD at the clinical onset of COVID-19 (baseline): abatacept (ABA), rituximab (RTX), Janus kinase inhibitors (JAK), interleukin-6 inhibitors (IL6i), or tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi). The outcome was an ordinal scale (1-4) for COVID-19 severity: 1) no hospitalization, 2) hospitalization without oxygen need, 3) hospitalization with any oxygen need or ventilation, or 4) death. Baseline covariates including age, sex, smoking, obesity, comorbidities (e.g., cardiovascular disease, cancer, interstitial lung disease [ILD]), concomitant non-biologic DMARD use, glucocorticoid use/dose, RA disease activity, country, and calendar time were used to estimate propensity scores (PS) for b/tsDMARD. The primary analysis used PS matching to compare each drug class to TNFi. Ordinal logistic regression estimated ORs for the COVID-19 severity outcome. In a sensitivity analysis, we used traditional multivariable ordinal logistic regression adjusting for covariates without matching.

Results:

Of the 1,673 patients with RA on b/tsDMARDs at the onset of COVID-19, (mean age 56.7 years, 79.6% female) there were n=154 on ABA, n=224 on RTX, n=306 on JAK, n=180 on IL6i, and n=809 on TNFi. Overall, 498 (34.3%) were hospitalized and 112 (6.7%) died. Among all patients, 353 (25.3%) were ever smokers, 197 (11.8%) were obese, 462 (27.6%) were on glucocorticoids, 1,002 (59.8%) were on concomitant DMARDs, and 299 (21.7%) had moderate/high RA disease activity. RTX users were more likely than TNFi users to have ILD (11.6% vs. 1.7%) and history of cancer (7.1% vs. 2.0%); JAK users were more likely than TNFi users to be obese (17.3% vs. 9.0%). After propensity score matching, RTX was strongly associated with greater odds of having a worse outcome compared to TNFi (OR 3.80, 95% CI 2.47, 5.85; Figure). Among RTX users, 42 (18.8%) died compared to 27 (3.3%) of TNFi users (Table). JAK use was also associated with greater odds of having a worse COVID-19 severity (OR 1.52, 95%CI 1.02, 2.28). ABA or IL6i use were not associated with COVID-19 severity compared to TNFi. Results were similar in the sensitivity analysis and after excluding cancer or ILD.

Table 1.

Frequencies for the ordinal COVID-19 severity outcome for patients with RA on biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs (n=1673).

COVID-19 outcomes by severity scale (n,%)ABAn=154RTXn=224JAKn=306IL6in=180TNFi n=8091)Not hospitalized113 (73.3%)121 (54.0%)220 (71.9%)150 (83.3%)666 (82.3%)2)Hospitalization without oxygenation10 (6.5%)14 (6.2%)11 (3.6%)9 (5.0%)53 (6.5%)3)Hospitalization with any oxygenation or ventilation16 (10.4%)47 (21.0%)52 (17.0%)16 (8.9%)63 (7.8%)4)Death15 (9.7%)42 (18.8%)23 (7.5%)5 (2.8%)27 (3.3%)

Conclusion:

In this large global registry of patients with RA and COVID-19, baseline use of RTX or JAK was associated with worse severity of COVID-19 compared to TNFi use. The very elevated odds for poor COVID-19 outcomes in RTX users highlights the urgent need for risk-mitigation strategies, such as the optimal timing of vaccination. The novel association of JAK with poor COVID-19 outcomes requires replication.

Acknowledgements:

The views expressed here are those of the authors and participating members of the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance and do not necessarily represent the views of the ACR, EULAR, the UK National Health Service, the National Institute for Health Research, the UK Department of Health, or any other organization.

Disclosure of Interests:

Jeffrey Sparks Consultant of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Inova, Janssen, and Optum, unrelated to this work, Grant/research support from: Amgen and Bristol-Myers Squibb, unrelated to this work, Zachary Wallace Consultant of: Viela Bio and MedPace, outside the submitted work., Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb and Principia/Sanofi, Andrea Seet: None declared, Milena Gianfrancesco: None declared, Zara Izadi: None declared, Kimme Hyrich Speakers bureau: Abbvie unrelated to this study, Grant/research support from: BMS, UCB, and Pfizer, all unrelated to this study, Anja Strangfeld Paid instructor for: AbbVie, MSD, Roche, BMS, Pfizer, outside the submitted work, Grant/research support from: grants from a consortium of 13 companies (among them AbbVie, BMS, Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi, Lilly, Mylan, Hexal, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi-Aventis, and UCB) supporting the German RABBIT register, outside the submitted work, Laure Gossec Consultant of: Abbvie, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, unrelated to this study, Grant/research support from: Lilly, Mylan, Pfizer, all unrelated to this study, Loreto Carmona: None declared, Elsa Mateus Grant/research support from: grants from Abbvie, Novartis, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly Portugal, Sanofi, Grünenthal S.A., MSD, Celgene, Medac, Pharmakern, GAfPA; grants and non-financial support from Pfizer, outside the submitted work, Saskia Lawson-Tovey: None declared, Laura Trupin: None declared, Stephanie Rush: None declared, Gabriela Schmajuk: None declared, Patti Katz: None declared, Lindsay Jacobsohn: None declared, Samar Al Emadi: None declared, Leanna Wise: None declared, Emily Gilbert: None declared, Ali Duarte-Garcia: None declared, Maria Valenzuela-Almada: None declared, Tiffany Hsu: None declared, Kristin D’Silva: None declared, Naomi Serling-Boyd: None declared, Philippe Dieudé Consultant of: Boerhinger Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly, Sanofi, Pfizer, Chugai, Roche, Janssen unrelated to this work, Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugaii, Pfizer, unrelated to this work, Elena Nikiphorou: None declared, Vanessa Kronzer: None declared, Namrata Singh: None declared, Manuel F. Ugarte-Gil Grant/research support from: Janssen and Pfizer, Beth Wallace: None declared, Akpabio Akpabio: None declared, Ranjeny Thomas: None declared, Suleman Bhana Consultant of: AbbVie, Horizon, Novartis, and Pfizer (all <$10,000) unrelated to this work, Wendy Costello: None declared, Rebecca Grainger Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Cornerstones, Jonathan Hausmann Consultant of: Novartis, Sobi, Biogen, all unrelated to this work (<$10,000), Jean Liew Grant/research support from: Yes, I have received research funding from Pfizer outside the submitted work., Emily Sirotich Grant/research support from: Board Member of the Canadian Arthritis Patient Alliance, a patient run, volunteer based organization whose activities are largely supported by independent grants from pharmaceutical companies, Paul Sufka: None declared, Philip Robinson Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB (all < $10,000), Consultant of: Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB (all < $10,000), Pedro Machado Speakers bureau: Yes, I have received consulting/speaker’s fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this study (all < $10,000)., Consultant of: Yes, I have received consulting/speaker’s fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this study (all < $10,000)., Jinoos Yazdany Consultant of: Eli Lilly and AstraZeneca unrelated to this project

POS1255 REACTOGENICITY OF SARS-COV-2 VACCINES IN PATIENTS WITH AUTOIMMUNE AND INFLAMMATORY DISEASE

Background:

Patients with autoimmune disease often require immunosuppressive medications that may increase their risk of developing severe illness from COVID-19. The importance of immunization in this population is particularly high. While the studied vaccines show efficacy in the general population, nothing is known regarding the immune response or safety profile in patients with autoimmune disease and those taking immunomodulatory medications.

Objectives:

To assess the safety profile and degree of adverse events from SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with autoimmune and inflammatory disease.

Methods:

This study is part of a larger prospective observational study examining the immunogenicity and safety profile of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with immune-mediated diseases taking immunomodulatory medications. Adults with an immune-mediated disease scheduled to receive either a Pfizer or Moderna SARS-COV-2 vaccine were enrolled in this study. Subjects participated in 3 study visits (pre-vaccine, dose 1 (D1) and dose 2 (D2)) where blood, for immunologic assays, and clinical data were collected. Assessments of adverse events (AE), including local and systemic symptoms and validated degree of AE severity were solicited within 7 days of receiving each vaccine dose.

Results:

To date, 70 patients with autoimmune and inflammatory disease have been enrolled. Demographic and clinical characteristics are shown in Table 1. Distribution of current immunomodulatory medications included prednisone 18.6%, conventional synthetic DMARD 55.7%, targeted synthetic DMARD 4.3%, and biologic DMARD 68.5%. Almost all participants experienced an adverse event following vaccination (D1 96%, D2 100%). Following D1 AEs were generally mild (76.5%) whereas following D2 a large portion of patients experienced AEs that were moderate (47.8%) and severe (30.5%). Injection site pain was the most common AE following both doses followed by arthralgias (D1 21.6%, D2 78.2%), fever (D1 21.6%, D2 70%) and fatigue (D1 21.6%, D2 65.2%) (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Solicited Local and Systemic Adverse Events. Percentage of participants who had endorsed an adverse event within 7 days of first or second dose of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine. ‘Other’ symptoms included chills, blurry vision, brain fog and dizziness.

Conclusion:

Patients with autoimmune and inflammatory disease experience a significant burden of adverse events following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination with both frequency and severity appearing greater than that of the reported results from the vaccine clinical trials. Several of the endorsed AEs such as fever, fatigue and arthralgias can also be commonly seen in rheumatologic diseases, mimicking flares. While SARS-CoV-2 immunization is crucial in patients with autoimmune diseases, this study demonstrates the importance of understanding the AEs experienced by this patient population to better inform patients of possible expected side effects of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and further management in the future.

Table 1.

Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Participants

Parameter N (%)N=70Age [years], mean (SD)Age group48.3 ± 16.4 < 6553 (75.7) 65+17 (24.3)Gender Female48 (68.6) Male20 (38.5) Other2 (2.9)Race White47 (67.1) Asian14 (20.0) Hispanic8 (11.4) Black1 (1.4) BMI [kg/m2], mean (SD)25.0 ± 5.4Immunologic Diagnosis Rheumatoid Arthritis21 (30.0) Spondyloarthritis*21 (30.0) Systemic Lupus Erythematous8 (11.4) Connective Tissue Disease, Other‡12 (17.1) Vasculitis3 (4.2) Inflammatory Bowel Disease7 (10.0) Autoinflammatory Syndrome5 (7.1) Multiple Sclerosis2 (2.9) IgG4 Related Disease2 (2.9)Disease Duration [years], mean (SD)9.0 ± 5Medications Prednisone13 (18.6)DMARDs Hydroxychloroquine16 (22.9) Methotrexate15 (21.4) Sulfasalazine6 (8.6) Tofacitinib3 (4.3) Azathioprine2 (2.9)Biologics TNF inhibitor33 (47.1) Rituximab7 (10) Abatacept6 (8.6) IL-23 inhibitor2 (2.9)

* Spondyloarthritis includes Axial Spondyloarthritis and Psoriatic Arthritis. ‡ Other Connective Tissue Disease includes scleroderma, Sjogren’s syndrome, polymyositis, and UCTD.

Disclosure of Interests:

Monica Yang: None declared, Patti Katz: None declared, Diana Paez: None declared, Alexander Carvidi: None declared, Mehrdad Matloubian: None declared, Mary Nakamura: None declared, Lianne S. Gensler Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GSK, and Novartis, Grant/research support from: Pfizer and UCB

Metabolic and Renal Effects of Mammalian Target of Rapamycin Inhibitors Treatment After Liver Transplantation: Real-Life Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors following liver transplantation (LT) are used to minimize calcineurin inhibitor (CNI)-related nephrotoxicity. Data about metabolic effects of mTOR inhibitors are still limited.

AIM

This study aims to determine the renal and metabolic effects of different mTOR inhibitor-based protocols in real-life LT patients.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of patients treated with mTOR inhibitors after LT. Demographics, treatment protocols, glomerular filtration rate (GFR), and metabolic parameters were collected over a period of 4 years. Initiation of blood pressure (BP), diabetes mellitus, and lipid medications was also noted.

RESULTS

Fifty-two LT recipients received mTOR inhibitors. GFR improved significantly (by 1.96 mL/min/year), with greater improvement in patients with baseline renal dysfunction (+13.3 mL/min vs +4.5 mL/min at 3 years). Conversion to an mTOR inhibitor during the first post-transplant year resulted in a more durable improvement in GFR (for 4 years vs only 1 year for later conversion).No significant weight gain or new-onset diabetes mellitus was observed. However, there was some increase in total cholesterol (+7 mg/dL) and blood pressure (+2 mm Hg during the third year and +8 mm Hg in the fourth years), followed by initiation of lipid-lowering and BP medications in 25% and 13% of patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with an mTOR inhibitor following LT resulted in improved kidney functions without significant negative metabolic effects such as weight gain or new-onset diabetes mellitus. This makes mTOR inhibitors a valuable immunosuppressive option in the face of the growing incidence of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis as a leading cause for LT.

Cerebral venous thrombosis and submandibular lithotripsy: A case report

We present the case of a 38-year-old woman with a diagnosis of cerebral venous thrombosis that developed after lithotripsy of the submandibular gland. Few cases of vessel thrombosis after lithotripsy have been reported in other organs, this is the unique cerebral case reported.

Long-Term Effects of Pregnancy on Renal Graft Function in Women After Kidney Transplantation Compared With Matched Controls

BACKGROUND

An important benefit associated with kidney transplantation in women of child-bearing age is increased fertility. We retrospectively evaluated the maternal and fetal complications and evolution of graft function associated with 22 pregnancies post-kidney and kidney-pancreas transplantation, compared with controls without pregnancy post-transplantation, who were matched for gender, year of transplantation, type of donor, age at transplantation, number of transplants, type of transplant (kidney vs kidney-pancreas), and cause of native kidney failure, as well as for renal parameters including serum creatinine and urine protein excretion 1 year before delivery.

RESULTS

The mean age at time of transplantation was 22.32 (range, 19.45-33.1) years. The mean interval between transplantation and delivery was 75.7 (range, 34-147.8) months. Main maternal complications were pre-eclampsia in 27.3%. The main fetal complications included delayed intrauterine growth (18.2%), preterm deliveries (89.4%), and one death at 3 days postdelivery. The mean serum creatinine level pre-pregnancy was 1.17 (range, 0.7-3.1) mg/dL. Graft failure was higher in the pregnancy group (6 vs 3) but did not differ statistically from the control group, and was associated with creatinine pre-pregnancy (odds ratio [OR], 1.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-3.45; P = .04), age at transplantation (1.13 [1.03-1.21]; P = .032), and time of follow-up (2.14 [1.27-2.98]; P = .026). Delta serum creatinine was not different in both groups: 1.05 ± 0.51 versus 0.99 ± 0.92 mg/dL, study versus control group, respectively (P = .17).

CONCLUSION

Pregnancy after kidney transplantation is associated with serious maternal and fetal complications. We did not observe a significantly increased risk of graft loss or reduced graft function in comparison with recipients with similar clinical characteristics.

Who receives contraception counseling when starting new lupus medications? The potential roles of race, ethnicity, disease activity, and quality of communication

OBJECTIVE

Family planning discussions are an important aspect of medical care for women with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) as active disease is a risk factor for poor pregnancy outcomes, and the medications used for treatment can be harmful to the fetus when used during conception and pregnancy. Our objective was to examine the impact of patient perception of quality and type of communication on receiving contraception counseling.

METHODS

Data were derived from patients enrolled in the University of California, San Francisco Lupus Outcomes Study. Individuals participate in a yearly structured telephone interview that includes assessment of contraception counseling when starting new medications, and measures of communication and decision making. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of not receiving contraception counseling.

RESULTS

Of the 68 women included in this analysis, one-third did not receive contraception counseling when starting new medications. Older age, white race, depressive symptoms, and higher SLE disease activity were independently associated with not receiving contraception counseling. Participants who did not receive contraception counseling rated their physicians lower in shared decision-making (SDM) communication.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates a gap in family planning counseling among women with SLE starting new medications. Future studies to address these potential areas of intervention, including education about the need for contraception through menopause, and mechanisms to engage in SDM surrounding contraception are needed to improve quality of care for women with lupus.

Decision optimization for face recognition based on an alternate correlation plane quantification metric

We consider a new approach for enhancing the discrimination performance of the VanderLugt correlator. Instead of trying to optimize the correlation filter, or propose a new decision correlation peak detection criterion, we propose herein to denoise the correlation plane before applying the peak-to-correlation energy (PCE) criterion. For that purpose, we use a linear functional model to express a given correlation plane as a linear combination of the correlation peak, noise, and residual components. The correlation peak is modeled using an orthonormalized function and the singular value decomposition method. A set of training correlation planes is then selected to create the correlation noise components. Finally, an optimized correlation plane is reconstructed while discarding the noise components. Independently of the filter correlation used, this technique denoises the correlation plane by lowering the correlation noise magnitude in case of true correlation and decreases the false alarm rate when the target image does not belong to the desired class. Test results are presented, using a composite filter and a face recognition application, to verify the effectiveness of the proposed technique.

Differences in activity limitation, pain intensity, and global health in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Sweden and the USA: a 5-year follow-up

OBJECTIVE

In this study we compared activity limitations, pain intensity, and global health in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Sweden and the USA and aimed to determine whether nationality is associated with these outcomes.

METHODS

We used longitudinal data from the 'Swedish TIRA project' (n = 149) and the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) RA panel study (n = 85). Data were collected annually concerning use of medications [disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), biologics, and corticosteroids], morning stiffness, number of swollen joints, and number of painful joints. Three self-reported outcome measures were examined: pain intensity measured on a 0-100 visual analogue scale (VAS), activity limitation according to the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), and global health. To analyse the data, the Student's t-test, the χ(2)-test, and the generalized estimating equation (GEE) method were used.

RESULTS

Nationality was significantly related to HAQ score and pain intensity, even after adjustment for covariates. The patients in the TIRA cohort reported a lower HAQ score and a higher pain intensity than the patients in the UCSF cohort. Nationality was not related to global health.

CONCLUSION

Patients with RA should be assessed with awareness of the psychosocial and cultural context because disability seems to be affected by nationality. Further knowledge to clarify how a multinational setting affects disability could improve the translation of interventions for patients with RA across nationalities.

Socioeconomic determinants of disability and depression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To examine the relationship between functional limitation, socioeconomic inequality, and depression in a diverse cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

The study design was cross-sectional and subjects were from the University of California, San Francisco RA Cohort. Patients were enrolled from 2 rheumatology clinics, an urban county public hospital and a university tertiary care medical center. Age, sex, race/ethnicity, disease activity, functional limitation, and medications were variables collected at clinical visits. The patient's clinic site was used as a proxy for his or her socioeconomic status. The outcome variable was depressive symptom severity measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire 9. Differences in characteristics between depressed and nondepressed patients were calculated using 2-sided t-tests or the Pearson's chi-square test. For the multivariate analysis, repeated measures with generalized estimating equations were used.

RESULTS

There were statistically significant differences between depressed and nondepressed patients related to race/ethnicity, public versus tertiary care hospital rheumatology clinic, disability, and medications. In the multivariate analysis, increased functional limitation and public clinic site remained significantly associated with increased depression scores. A significant interaction existed between clinic site and disability. Mean depression scores rose more precipitously as functional limitation increased at the public hospital rheumatology clinic.

CONCLUSION

There are disparities in both physical and mental health among individuals with low socioeconomic status. The psychological effects of disability vary in patients with RA such that a vulnerable population with functional limitations is at higher risk of developing depressive symptoms.

Predictors of depression in a multiethnic cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who experience depression have worse health outcomes. This study identifies predictors of depression in an ethnically and racially diverse population of patients with RA.

METHODS

Patients with RA in a prospective cohort at the San Francisco General Hospital outpatient rheumatology clinic were included if they were age >or=18 years, met the American College of Rheumatology classification criteria for RA, had a Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score collected, and had the RA-specific Disease Activity Score performed by a rheumatologist. The outcome variable was a depression score measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9), a self-report questionnaire validated to correlate with a diagnosis of major depression.

RESULTS

Three hundred forty-nine clinical visits for 172 patients were included in the analysis. Forty percent of patients scored >or=10 on the PHQ-9 during at least one clinic visit, which corresponds to a symptom severity of at least moderate depression. The mean PHQ-9 score was 7, corresponding to a symptom severity of mild depression. In the multivariate analysis, higher HAQ scores were associated with depression, and Asians had lower depression scores compared with Hispanic, white, and African American subjects.

CONCLUSION

Identifying associated predictors of depression in a diverse population of patients with RA can help guide treatment, which should include preventing disability and decreased function as well as targeting depressive symptoms more specifically in patients with RA.

Time use patterns among women with rheumatoid arthritis: association with functional limitations and psychological status

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed time use patterns among 375 women with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We hypothesized that (i) as functional limitations increased, time use imbalances would occur (i.e. time needed for obligatory activities would conflict with time needed for productive and free-time activities) and (ii) time use imbalances would be associated with psychological distress.

METHODS

Time use estimates were obtained from written questionnaires; other study data were collected from annual telephone interviews. Activities were categorized as obligatory, committed or discretionary, as defined by Verbrugge. Time use estimates were aggregated to define number of obligatory (e.g. self-care) activities requiring >2 h/day and a number of committed and discretionary activities in which no time was spent each day.

RESULTS

After adjusting for age, education, marital status and pain severity, women with more functional limitations were significantly more likely to spend >2 h/day in obligatory activities. As functional limitations increased, the proportion spending no time in each committed activity and many discretionary activities increased. Spending >2 h/day in obligatory activities was not significantly associated with poor psychological status, but spending no time in a greater number of committed and discretionary activities was associated with lower life satisfaction and higher levels of depressive symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Having more severe functional limitations appears to shift time use patterns towards more time spent in obligatory activities and less time spent in committed and discretionary activities. These imbalances in time use were associated with psychological distress, highlighting the need for women with RA to maintain important productive, social and discretionary activities.

A Kantian claim permitting the randomised clinical trial

Among the most contested aspects of medical research is the randomized clinical trial (RCT). While the majority of arguments justifying the RCT and its use in medical research rest within a utilitarian framework, many Kantians claim that a deontological ethical framework is prohibitive of the use RCTs in medical research. This paper argues that, in fact, the RCT is permissible within a deontological framework.

A national study of medical care expenditures for respiratory conditions

This study was undertaken to estimate the magnitude of medical care expenditures among persons with respiratory conditions in the USA in 1996, and the increment in expenditures attributable to these conditions. The study data were derived from the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a national sample of 21,571 persons. Of the 21,571, 1,027 reported one or more respiratory condition. After weighting, the individuals may represent about 12.1 million persons in the USA. All medical care expenditures of these individuals were tabulated, stratified by comorbidity status, and then compared to those among persons with nonrespiratory conditions or with no conditions. Regression techniques were then used to estimate the increment of healthcare expenditures attributable to the respiratory conditions. From a national total of $45.3 billion, medical care expenditures averaged $3,753 among persons with respiratory conditions. Hospital stays comprised the largest component (45%). The per capita increment in total expenditures attributable to respiratory conditions ranged from $1,003-2,588, from a national total ranging from $12.1-31.3 billion. The total medical care expenditure of persons with respiratory conditions was estimated to be $45.3 billion, of which $12.1-31.3 billion represents an increment in expenditures associated with the conditions themselves.

Are pressure ulcers preventable? A survey of experts

OBJECTIVE

There is considerable debate regarding whether pressure ulcers can truly be prevented in nursing homes. New pressure ulcers are often taken as a sign of negligence that can lead to a lawsuit. This study sought to determine expert opinion regarding the preventability of pressure ulcers, the resources available to nursing homes for prevention, and the role of negligence lawsuits in pressure ulcer care.

DESIGN

Survey mailed to a convenience sample of 98 experts in the field of pressure ulcer care. The survey contained 36 questions, most based on a 5-point Likert scale from "strongly agree"to"strongly disagree." Several questions asked respondents to rank items.

RESULTS

Sixty-five of 92 surveys were completed (6 were returned but not completed) for a response rate of 71%. Sixty-two percent of respondents disagreed with the statement that all pressure ulcers are preventable. Only 5% said that nursing homes have adequate resources to prevent all pressure ulcers. Although most respondents disagreed that pressure ulcers are necessarily a sign of neglect and that nursing homes should be sued when a resident develops a pressure ulcer, 38% agreed with the concept that lawsuits are an appropriate way to stimulate improvement in nursing home care.

CONCLUSION

The results of this survey demonstrated divergent expert opinion on whether pressure ulcers are preventable. The role of regulations and litigation in pressure ulcer prevention needs to be further defined.

Psychiatric consultation in the nursing home. A survey of six states

The authors examined availability, characteristics, and perceived adequacy of psychiatric consultation in nursing homes, as reported by directors of nursing, who returned 899 questionnaires. Thirty-eight percent of nursing home residents were judged to need a psychiatric evaluation; current frequency of consultation was rated as adequate by half of nursing directors. Nearly two-thirds reported that psychiatrists adequately provided diagnostic and medication recommendations; however, advice on nonpharmacologic management techniques, staff support, and dealing with staff stress and family conflicts was largely viewed as inadequate. Findings suggest that perceived need for psychiatric services is far greater than the level actually provided. Overall, more attention must be directed to identifying incentives for psychiatrists to practice in nursing homes, determining clinical effectiveness of mental health services, and examining effects of alternative payment mechanisms on level of care.