Search

Objectives To establish reference intervals (RIs) for work ability, at-work productivity loss and overall productivity loss in the general working population and to compare work ability and at-work productivity loss of patients with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease (iRMD) with this population.Methods Cross-sectional analysis among patients with iRMDs and population controls without iRMDs having paid work and participating in a Dutch cohort study. They reported on three work outcomes: work ability (0–10), at-work productivity loss and overall productivity loss (0%–100%). A generalised additive model for location, shape and scale parameters was used to establish age-specific RIs and percentile curves for controls. The proportion of patients and controls below each percentile curve was compared.Results 413 controls were included; 73% female, with mean age 53 (SD 10) years, 60% had high education, mean work ability was 8.7 (1.6), at-work productivity loss 6.3% (7.2) and overall work productivity loss 11% (25.6).Percentile curves illustrated that work ability and at-work/overall work productivity loss were worse with increasing age. For instance, for work ability, the 95% RI for 22 to 29-year individuals was 5.9–10, while for individuals between 50 and 59 years, it was 4.9–9.1. Patients compared with controls had worse work outcomes, especially for at-work and overall productivity loss.Conclusion Work ability and productivity are not perfect in the general population, based on the newly developed RIs for the three work outcomes. This calls for caution to not overestimate the iRMD impact on work outcomes. Nevertheless, iRMD patients have worse work ability and higher work productivity loss, compared with controls.

Objectives Methotrexate (MTX) is one of the most commonly used medications to treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, the effect of MTX treatment on cellular immune responses remains incompletely understood. This raises concerns about the vulnerability of these patients to emerging infections and following vaccination.Methods In the current study, we investigated the impact of MTX treatment in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disease on B and CD4 T cell SARS-CoV-2 vaccination responses. Eighteen patients with RA and two patients with psoriatic arthritis on MTX monotherapy were included, as well as 10 patients with RA without immunosuppressive treatment, and 29 healthy controls. CD4 T and B cell responses were analysed 7 days and 3–6 months after two SARS-CoV-2 messenger RNA vaccinations. High-dimensional flow cytometry analysis was used to analyse fresh whole blood, an activation-induced marker assay to measure antigen-specific CD4 T cells, and spike probes to study antigen-specific B cells.Results Seven days following two SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations, total B and T cell counts were similar between MTX-treated patients and controls. In addition, spike-specific B cell frequencies were unaffected. Remarkably, the frequency of antigen-specific CD4 T cells was reduced in patients using MTX and correlated strongly with anti-RBD IgG antibodies. These results suggest that decreased CD4 T cell activity may result in slower vaccination antibody responses in MTX-treated patients.Conclusion Taken together, MTX treatment reduces vaccine-induced CD4 T cell activation, which correlates with lower antibody responses.Trial registration number NL8900.

Background During the COVID-19 pandemic, we developed a digital research platform to longitudinally investigate COVID-19-related outcomes in patients with rheumatic diseases and healthy controls. We used home finger-prick testing in order to collect serum samples remotely and increase the overall efficiency of the platform. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the success rate of the finger prick and patients’ perspective towards the finger prick.Methods Serum samples were collected up to five times during follow-up, either via a venepuncture at the research institute or a finger prick from participants’ home. Participants were asked to complete a digital evaluation questionnaire of the finger prick after their attempts.Results A total of 2135 patients and 899 controls performed at least one finger prick and were included in this study. The first finger prick was successfully done by 92% (95% CI: 90% to 93%) of patients, 94% (95% CI: 92% to 95%) of controls, 93% (95% CI: 92% to 94%) of all participants aged ≤70 years and 89% (95% CI: 86% to 92%) of all participants aged >70 years. Sex did not impact these success rates. Repeated failure occurred in 11/439 (0.8%) patients and 4/712 (0.6%) controls. Both patients and controls were less willing to perform a finger prick for individual healthcare compared with scientific research.Conclusion The vast majority of participants, among which elderly and patients with rheumatic diseases, were able to successfully draw the required amount of blood for serological analyses. This shows that finger-prick testing is suitable for a high-throughput implementation to monitor patients remotely.

Objectives This study aims to assess current cardiovascular disease risk and prevalence of risk factors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritis (SpA).Methods 2050 consecutive patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) and 939 controls were included, with 1308 patients with RA, 356 patients with PsA and 386 patients with SpA. In a prospective cohort setting, questionnaires regarding previous cardiovascular events and risk factors were used to assess cardiovascular risk and prevalence in patients with IA by calculating ORs using logistic regression models.Results ‘Traditional’ cardiovascular (CV) risk factors were significantly elevated in patients with IA compared with controls. Cardiovascular disease (CVD) ORs were increased in patients with RA and PsA compared with controls, 1.61 (95% CI: 1.04 to 2.48) and 2.12 (95% CI: 1.23 to 3.66), respectively, and a trend towards increased odds was observed in patients with SpA (OR 1.43; 95% CI: 0.79 to 2.59). After adjusting for traditional risk factors, CV risk was not increased in patients with RA (OR; 0.95, 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.55), PsA (OR 1.19; 95% CI: 0.64 to 2.22) and SpA (OR; 0.91, 95% CI: 0.47 to 1.77).Conclusion CVD is currently still more prevalent in patients with IA compared with healthy controls and, more importantly, this elevated risk is highly influenced by an increased prevalence of ‘traditional’ CV risk factors. More attention to, as well as improvements in, identification and treatment of ‘traditional’ risk factors, need to be made for not only RA, but other IA conditions as well.