Search

Patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRDs) are at increased risk for severe infections. Vaccine responses and safety profiles may differ between AIIRD patients and the general population. While patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRDs) often experience diminished humoral responses and reduced vaccine efficacy, factors such as the type of immunosuppressant medications used and the specific vaccine employed contribute to these outcomes. Notably, individuals undergoing B cell depletion therapy tend to have poor vaccine immunogenicity. However, despite these considerations, vaccine responses are generally considered clinically sufficient. Ideally, immunosuppressed AIIRD patients should receive vaccinations at least two weeks before commencing immunosuppressive treatment. However, it is common for many patients to already be on immunosuppressants during the immunization process. Vaccination rarely triggers flares in AIIRDs; if flares occur, they are typically mild. Despite the heightened infection risk, including COVID-19, among AIIRD patients with rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, sarcoidosis, and other diseases on immunosuppressants, the vaccination rates remain suboptimal. The future directions of vaccination in the era of immunosuppression will likely involve customized vaccines with enhanced adjuvants and alternative delivery methods. By addressing the unique challenges faced by immunosuppressed individuals, we may improve vaccine efficacy, reduce the risk of infections, and ultimately enhance the health outcomes. Additionally, clinical trials to evaluate the safety and efficacy of temporarily discontinuing immunosuppressants during vaccination in various AIIRDs are crucial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose of study: To assess and compare glaucoma knowledge between Jordanian patients with glaucoma and non-glaucoma ophthalmic patients. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was developed after an extensive literature search to investigate glaucoma-related knowledge among participants with glaucoma visiting the Jordan University Hospital clinics from October 2021 to February 2022. Responses were compared to a sample of ophthalmic participants with eye conditions other than glaucoma visiting the ophthalmology clinics at the same time frame. Results: A total of 256 participants filled out the survey, of which 53.1% were diagnosed with glaucoma while 46.9% had ophthalmic conditions other than glaucoma. Our sample of participants is characterized by a mean age of 52.2 ± 17.8 years and a male-to-female ratio of 1.04:1. Overall, participants with glaucoma were more aware of their disease than participants with other ophthalmic conditions. Compared to their ophthalmic non-glaucoma counterparts, those diagnosed with glaucoma face significantly more daily life difficulties due to their ophthalmic disease (p <0.001). Results of the independent sample t-test demonstrate that participants with glaucoma have significantly higher knowledge scores (p <0.001) and were able to recognize more glaucoma symptoms than their non-glaucoma counterparts (p = 0.002). Similarly, those with a positive family history of glaucoma displayed higher knowledge (p = 0.005). Multivariate linear regression demonstrates that family history of glaucoma, higher symptom recognition score, reliance on ophthalmologists, and the internet for glaucoma-related information are positive predictors of higher knowledge scores. Conclusion: We have demonstrated that both glaucoma and non-glaucoma ophthalmic patients display average levels of glaucoma knowledge. Raising awareness through various interventions may improve the lifestyles of patients with glaucoma and alleviate the economic burden associated with treating the disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Antenatal suspicion of placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) currently relies on ultrasonographic findings, color doppler, and MRI, which have rendered it operator and expertise‐dependent. No serum markers for PAS have been integrated into clinical practice yet. The aim of this meta‐analysis was to identify potential serum markers for PAS by investigating third‐trimester serum levels of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEFG), placental growth factor (PIGF), and soluble Fms‐like tyrosine kinase‐1 (sFlt‐1) among PAS‐cases and controls. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, EBSCO, Web of Science, and CNKI databases were systematically searched for relevant articles. Random‐effects model was applied to calculate the overall standardized mean difference (SMD) for each marker. Subgroup analysis and meta‐regression were performed to assess for potential covariates. Results: Eight studies involving 366 PAS‐cases and 518 controls were included. Third trimester sFlt‐1 levels were significantly lower in PAS‐cases when compared to controls (SMD = −7.76, 95%CI = −10.42 to −5.10). This was, to a certain extent, consistent among studies though they differed in their extent of significance. Levels of VEGF (SMD = 1.59, 95%CI = −0.07 to 3.25) and PlGF (SMD = −0.49, 95%CI = −1.66 to 0.67) were not significantly different between PAS cases and controls, in which studies demonstrated conflicting results. Conclusions: Third trimester sFlt‐1 levels may be useful to predict PAS. Nonetheless, further studies are recommended to better understand conflicting results before adopting either VEGF or PlGF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Individuals with self-declared sarcoidosis are at increased risk of COVID-19 related morbidity and mortality for which vaccination can be lifesaving. Despite this, vaccine hesitancy remains a large barrier to global acceptance of vaccination against COVID-19. We aimed to identify individuals with sarcoidosis who had and had not been vaccinated against COVID-19 vaccine to 1) establish a safety profile of COVID-19 vaccination in those with sarcoidosis and 2) to elucidate factors that contribute to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy., Methods: A questionnaire inquiring about COVID-19 vaccination status, vaccination side effects, and willingness for future vaccination was distributed from December 2020 to May 2021 to individuals with sarcoidosis living in the US and European countries. Details regarding sarcoidosis manifestations and treatment were solicited. Vaccine attitudes were classified as pro or anti-COVID-19 vaccination for subgroup analysis., Results: At the time of questionnaire administration, 42% of respondents had already received a COVID-19 vaccination, most of whom either denied side effects or reported a local reaction only. Those off sarcoidosis therapy were more likely to report systemic side effects. Among subjects who had not yet received a COVID-19 vaccine, 27% of individuals reported they would not receive one once available. Reasons against vaccination were overwhelmingly related to the lack of confidence in vaccine safety and/or efficacy and less related to concerns associated with convenience or complacency. Black individuals, women, and younger adults were more likely to decline vaccination., Conclusions: Among individuals with sarcoidosis, COVID-19 vaccination is well-accepted and well-tolerated. Subjects on sarcoidosis therapy reported significantly less vaccination side effects, and thus the correlation between side effects, vaccine type, and vaccine efficacy requires further investigation. Strategies to improve vaccination should focus on improving knowledge and education regarding vaccine safety and efficacy, as well as targeting sources of misinformation, particularly in young, black, and female subpopulations.

The role of immunity in the pathogenesis of various pulmonary diseases, particularly interstitial lung diseases (ILDs), is being increasingly appreciated as mechanistic discoveries advance our knowledge in the field. Immune-mediated lung diseases demonstrate clinical and immunological heterogeneity and can be etiologically categorized into connective tissue disease (CTD)-associated, exposure-related, idiopathic, and other miscellaneous lung diseases including sarcoidosis, and post-lung transplant ILD. The immunopathogenesis of many of these diseases remains poorly defined and possibly involves either immune dysregulation, abnormal healing, chronic inflammation, or a combination of these, often in a background of genetic susceptibility. The heterogeneity and complex immunopathogenesis of ILDs complicate management, and thus a collaborative treatment team should work toward an individualized approach to address the unique needs of each patient. Current management of immune-mediated lung diseases is challenging; the choice of therapy is etiology-driven and includes corticosteroids, immunomodulatory drugs such as methotrexate, cyclophosphamide and mycophenolate mofetil, rituximab, or other measures such as discontinuation or avoidance of the inciting agent in exposure-related ILDs. Antifibrotic therapy is approved for some of the ILDs (e.g., idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis) and is being investigated for many others and has shown promising preliminary results. A dire need for advances in the management of immune-mediated lung disease persists in the absence of standardized management guidelines., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Sweis, Sweis, Alnaimat, Jansz, Liao, Alsakaty, Azam, Elmergawy, Hanson, Ascoli, Rubinstein and Sweiss.)

The pillars of scientific progress in rheumatology are experimentation and observation, followed by the publication of reliable and credible results. These data must then be independently verified, validated, and replicated. Peer and journal-specific technical and statistical reviews are paramount to improving rigor and reproducibility. In addition, research integrity, ethics, and responsible conduct training can help to reduce research misconduct and improve scientific evidence. As the number of published articles in rheumatology grows, the field has become critical for determining reproducibility. Prospective, longitudinal, randomized controlled clinical trials are the gold standard for evaluating clinical intervention efficacy and safety in this space. However, their applicability to larger, more representative patient populations with rheumatological disorders worldwide could be limited due to time, technical, and cost constraints involved with large-scale clinical trials. Accordingly, analysis of real-world, patient-centered clinical data retrieved from established healthcare inventories, such as electronic health records, medical billing reports, and disease registries, are increasingly used to report patient outcomes. Unfortunately, it is unknown whether this clinical research paradigm in rheumatology could be deployed in medically underserved regions., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Alnaimat, Sweis, Sweis, Ascoli, Korsten, Rubenstein and Sweiss.)