Search

We characterize the kinematic and magnetic properties of H  i filaments located in a high Galactic latitude region (165° < α < 195° and 12° < δ < 24°). We extract three-dimensional filamentary structures using fil3d from the Galactic Arecibo L -Band Feed Array H  i (GALFA-H  i) survey 21-cm emission data. Our algorithm identifies coherent emission structures in neighbouring velocity channels. Based on the mean velocity, we identify a population of local and intermediate velocity cloud (IVC) filaments. We find the orientations of the local (but not the IVC) H  i filaments are aligned with the magnetic field orientations inferred from Planck 353 GHz polarized dust emission. We analyse position–velocity diagrams of the velocity-coherent filaments, and find that only 15 per cent of filaments demonstrate significant major-axis velocity gradients with a median magnitude of 0.5 km s−1 pc−1, assuming a fiducial filament distance of 100 pc. We conclude that the typical diffuse H  i filament does not exhibit a simple velocity gradient. The reported filament properties constrain future theoretical models of filament formation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To develop international consensus-based recommendations for early referral of individuals with suspected polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR)., Methods: A task force including 29 rheumatologists/internists, 4 general practitioners, 4 patients and a healthcare professional emerged from the international giant cell arteritis and PMR study group. The task force supplied clinical questions, subsequently transformed into Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome format. A systematic literature review was conducted followed by online meetings to formulate and vote on final recommendations. Levels of evidence (LOE) (1-5 scale) and agreement (LOA) (0-10 scale) were evaluated., Results: Two overarching principles and five recommendations were developed. LOE was 4-5 and LOA ranged between 8.5 and 9.7. The recommendations suggest that (1) each individual with suspected or recently diagnosed PMR should be considered for specialist evaluation, (2) before referring an individual with suspected PMR to specialist care, a thorough history and clinical examination should be performed and preferably complemented with urgent basic laboratory investigations, (3) individuals with suspected PMR with severe symptoms should be referred for specialist evaluation using rapid access strategies, (4) in individuals with suspected PMR who are referred via rapid access, the commencement of glucocorticoid therapy should be deferred until after specialist evaluation and (5) individuals diagnosed with PMR in specialist care with a good initial response to glucocorticoids and a low risk of glucocorticoid related adverse events can be managed in primary care., Conclusions: These are the first international recommendations for referral of individuals with suspected PMR, which complement the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology/American College of Rheumatology management guidelines for established PMR., Competing Interests: Competing interests: KKK: Research grants from Independent Research Fund Denmark, Danish Rheumatic Association and Central Denmark Region unrelated to this project. SES: Research grants from Rheumatology Research Foundation, Bristol Myers Squibb Foundation. Clinical trial support from AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline; Consulting fees from Sanofi (funds toward research support); Data Safety Monitoring Board on MINT trial, Advisory Board for Sanofi (funds toward research support). E-MH: Has received grants unrelated to this manuscript from Novo Nordic Foundation, Roche, Novartis; Personal fees from AbbVie, Sanofi, SOBI, Merck Sharp & Dohme and Union Chimique Belge. AD: Consulting fees from Sanofi; Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Sanofi; Board member Vasculitis Foundation. LN: Has received Honorarium from Abbvie; Trustee of the charity PMR-GCA Scotland. SM: Consulting fees from Astrazeneca; Honoraria from Vifor. KJW: Grants from Eli Lilly, Kiniksa, BMS; Consulting fees from Amgen, Sanofi. Honoraria from Amgen. CP: Consulting fee from Pfizer. MP: Consulting fee from Novartis; Clinical trial participant for Abbvie, Amgen, AstraZeneca. HIK: Honoraria from Roche, eTherapeutic Guidelines Australia; Board member Australian Rheumatology Association; Clinical trials for Roche, Abbvie, Sun, Emerald, Novartis, Biogen, Sanofi, Syneos. CEO: Consultancy for Abbvie; Speaking honoraria from Abbvie, Janssen, Novartis and Roche; Advisory board for Abbvie. WAS: Has received honoraria from Abbvie, Chugai, GlaxoSmithKline, Medac, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi ; Support for attending meetings/travel from Abbvie, Chugai, GlaxoSmithKline, Medac, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi; Participated in advisory board from Abbvie, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Sanofi; Principle investigator of phases 2 and 3 studies sponsored by Abbvie, GlaxoSmithKlinie, Novartis and Sanofi. EBrouwer: As an employee of the UMCG received a speaker fee for a talk on GCA at a post EULAR symposium in the Netherlands in 2023 which was paid to the UMCG; As an employee of the UMCG received grants from the Dutch Arthritis Society DAS and the EU/EFPIA/Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking Immune-Image grant no 831514 which were paid to the UMCG. SM: Consultancy on behalf of her institution for Roche/Chugai, Sanofi, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Pfizer; Investigator on clinical trials for Sanofi, GSK, Sparrow; speaking/lecturing on behalf of her institution for Roche/Chugai, Vifor, Pfizer, UCB, Novartis and AbbVie; chief investigator on STERLING-PMR trial, funded by NIHR; patron of the charity PMRGCAuk. No personal remuneration was received for any of the above activities. Support from Roche/Chugai to attend EULAR2019 in person and from Pfizer to attend ACR Convergence 2021 virtually. SM is supported in part by the NIHR Leeds Biomedical Research Centre. VD-P has received honorarium from Abbvie, Chugai, Novartis, BMS, Support for attending meetings/travel from Novartis; Participated in advisory borad from Abbvie, Novartis. All other authors have no competing interests., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ on behalf of EULAR.)

Overdiagnosis occurs when patients are diagnosed with a disease that would otherwise never have affected the quality or duration of their lives. This often happens unintentionally through well-meaning screening programmes that aim to detect diseases during so-called subclinical stages. Recently, it has been suggested that patients with polymyalgia rheumatica should be screened for giant cell arteritis to identify those at higher risk of relapse or vascular complications. Screening for interstitial lung disease for patients with rheumatoid arthritis has also been recommended to identify patients who could benefit from pulmonary interventions. These potential benefits must be weighed against foreseeable harms. Such harms include the uncovering of incidental findings that necessitate additional medical follow-up, the financial costs associated with screening initiatives, the risk of overtreatment through increased immunosuppression in patients who might not have otherwise required it, and the psychosocial burden of a new diagnosis. Randomised clinical trials and prospective cohort studies of screening interventions should be conducted to establish the risks and benefits and identify patients most likely to benefit from them. This Viewpoint covers risks that overdiagnosis presents to the field of rheumatology, with focus on rheumatoid arthritis and polymyalgia rheumatica., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MP has participated in clinical trials with AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Amgen, and Novartis, and received consulting fees from Novartis, AstraZeneca, and GSK. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Observational research from large population databases may be affected by unmeasured confounding and time-related biases, such as immortal time bias. Modern causal inference practice applies propensity score-based methods, new-user designs, and other strategies to mitigate bias. The degree to which these methodologic approaches adequately address bias for any particular study may be difficult to measure. Recently, the incorporation of positive and negative controls has been identified as a means to assess for the impacts of residual confounding and/or time-related biases. The objective of this commentary is to describe the role of positive and negative controls in observational research. We offer recommendations for incorporating controls into critical appraisal and observational research projects., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: Neuroinflammatory adverse events have been observed among new users of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors. No studies to date have compared the real-world risk of TNFs with other new users of biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs). The objective of this study is to describe the risk of neuroinflammatory disease after initiation b/tsDMARDs., Methods: This new user comparative effectiveness cohort study used a large US-based electronic health records database to describe the unadjusted incidence of neuroinflammatory adverse events over a 3-year period. The cohort included patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, Crohn's disease, or ulcerative colitis initiating treatment with a TNF inhibitor (n = 93,661) or other b/tsDMARD (n = 38,354)., Results: Among 132,015 patients included in the analysis, the most common first biologic agent was a TNF inhibitor; the unadjusted incidence of neuroinflammatory events was numerically lower among new users of TNF inhibitors (incidence 1.34 per 1,000 patient-years) as compared with the combined non-TNF group (1.69 per 1,000 patient-years). There was no significant association between TNF exposure and neuroinflammatory events as compared with the combined non-TNF b/tsDMARDs overall (hazard ratio 1.01; 95% confidence interval 0.75-1.36) and within each disease group., Conclusion: The overall risk of neuroinflammatory events among new users of TNF inhibitors did not differ substantially as compared with new users of other b/tsDMARDs. Meta-analyses of randomized trials should be conducted to corroborate these findings, which may be affected by channeling bias., (© 2024 American College of Rheumatology.)

Hip fractures exceed 250,000 cases annually in the United States, with the worldwide incidence projected to increase by 240-310% by 2050. Hip fractures are predominantly diagnosed by radiologist review of radiographs. In this study, we developed a deep learning model by extending the VarifocalNet Feature Pyramid Network (FPN) for detection and localization of proximal femur fractures from plain radiography with clinically relevant metrics. We used a dataset of 823 hip radiographs of 150 subjects with proximal femur fractures and 362 controls to develop and evaluate the deep learning model. Our model attained 0.94 specificity and 0.95 sensitivity in fracture detection over the diverse imaging dataset. We compared the performance of our model against five benchmark FPN models, demonstrating 6-14% sensitivity and 1-9% accuracy improvement. In addition, we demonstrated that our model outperforms a state-of-the-art transformer model based on DINO network by 17% sensitivity and 5% accuracy, while taking half the time on average to process a radiograph. The developed model can aid radiologists and support on-premise integration with hospital cloud services to enable automatic, opportunistic screening for hip fractures., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: This manuscript assesses the incidence of Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia (PJP) among patients receiving contemporary treatment regimens for antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV) and adverse events associated with PJP prophylaxis., Methods: Incident users of rituximab or cyclophosphamide for AAV were identified in the TriNetX electronic health records database from 2011 to 2022. The incidence rates (IRs) of PJP in the first 6 months of induction therapy with rituximab and/or cyclophosphamide and during postinduction maintenance therapy with rituximab were calculated. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and confidence intervals (CIs) for the risk of adverse events commonly associated with PJP prophylaxis., Results: We identified 1,461 AAV cases who received induction therapy with rituximab (69.7%), cyclophosphamide (18.9%), or both (11.4%). Prophylaxis prescribed within 30 days of induction included trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (30.7%), atovaquone (5.4%), dapsone (3.8%), and pentamidine (0.8%). During induction therapy, 10 cases of PJP were identified (IR 15.0 cases per 1,000 patient-years); no deaths occurred. In adjusted analyses, those who received prophylaxis had a higher risk of leukopenia (HR 3.1; 95% CI 1.1-8.6), rash (HR 1.9; 95% CI 1.0-3.6), and nephropathy (HR 2.6; 95% CI 1.3-5.1) than those who did not. During rituximab maintenance therapy (n = 709), five cases of PJP were identified (IR 2.1 cases per 1,000 person-years), one of whom died during the hospitalization associated with a PJP diagnosis., Conclusion: Rates of PJP in patients with AAV were lower than previously observed, and few cases occurred during rituximab maintenance therapy. PJP prophylaxis was associated with adverse events., (© 2023 American College of Rheumatology.)

Competing Interests: MP declares support from a Rheumatology Research Foundation Scientist Development Grant; research funding related to clinical trials by AbbVie, AstraZeneca, and Amgen; and consulting fees from Novartis. BG declares no competing interests.

The field of rheumatology has experienced dozens of novel drug approvals in the past two and a half decades, but the regulatory mechanisms underpinning these decisions are not well understood. In the USA, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) evaluates the safety and efficacy of novel drugs through the New Drug Application (NDA) process. When additional content expertise is required to evaluate scientific or technical matters, the FDA may convene Human Drug Advisory Committees. To better understand the landscape of rheumatology NDAs and the FDA use of advisory committees, we performed a review of all rheumatic disease drug applications from 1996 to 2021 that were granted approval by the FDA. Our review identified 31 NDAs, seven of which utilized an advisory committee. The indications for using advisory committees and their influence on ultimate approvals was not clear. Recommendations to improve transparency and increase public trust in FDA decisions are provided., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide high-quality evidence for treatment efficacy, but many RCTs remain unpublished. The objective of this study was to describe the proportion of unpublished RCTs in five rheumatic diseases and to identify factors associated with publication., Methods: Registered RCTs for five rheumatic diseases (SLE, vasculitis, spondyloarthritis, SS and PsA) with over 30 months since study completion were identified using ClinicalTrials.gov. Index publications were identified by NCT ID numbers and structured text searches of publication databases. The results of unpublished studies were identified in abstracts and press releases; reasons for non-publication were assessed by surveying corresponding authors., Results: Out of 203 studies that met eligibility criteria, 17.2% remained unpublished, representing data from 4281 trial participants. Higher proportions of published trials were phase 3 RCTs (57.1% vs 28.6% unpublished, P < 0.05) or had a positive primary outcome measure (64.9% vs 25.7% unpublished, P < 0.001). In a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, a positive outcome was independently associated with publication (hazard ratio 1.55; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.22). Corresponding authors of 10 unpublished trials cited ongoing preparation of the manuscript (50.0%), sponsor/funder issues (40.0%) and unimportant/negative result (20.0%) as reasons for lack of publication., Conclusions: Nearly one in five RCTs in rheumatology remain unpublished 2 years after trial completion, and publication is associated with positive primary outcome measures. Efforts to encourage universal publication of rheumatology RCTs and reanalysis of previously unpublished trials should be undertaken., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The practice of blinding treatment assignment in randomised controlled trials mitigates important biases in observational studies. Unblinding, whereby study participants or investigators become aware of treatment assignments, is an important threat to the validity of trial results. Rheumatology studies might be particularly susceptible to unblinding because rheumatic disease therapies often cause high rates of idiosyncratic side-effects and frequently rely on subjective endpoints. Despite this susceptibility, the degree to which unblinding occurs in randomised controlled trials in rheumatic diseases has rarely been assessed during trials or acknowledged as a limitation. Rheumatologists should be aware of this important threat to the validity of trial results, assessments of unblinding should be undertaken, and strategies to prevent unblinding should be deployed when feasible., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MP is supported by a Rheumatology Research Foundation Scientist Development Grant, receives research funding related to clinical trials by AbbVie (SELECT-GCA) and AstraZeneca (MANDARA), and consulting fees from Novartis. CB and DP declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Prolonged glucocorticoid tapers have been the standard of care for giant cell arteritis (GCA) and polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR), but recent advancements have improved outcomes for patients with GCA while reducing glucocorticoid-related toxicities. Many patients with GCA and PMR still experience persistent or relapsing disease, and cumulative exposure to glucocorticoids for both diseases remains high. The objective of this review is to define current treatment approaches as well as new therapeutic targets and strategies. Studies investigating inhibition of cytokine pathways, including interleukin-6, interleukin-17, interleukin-23, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, Janus kinase-signal transduction and activator of transcription, and others, will be reviewed., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: MP receives research funding from AbbVie and AstraZeneca and consulting fees from Novartis. He is supported by a Rheumatology Research Foundation Scientist Development Grant. SES has received research funding from AstraZeneca and been a consultant to Sanofi. He is supported by a Rheumatology Research Foundation RISE Pilot Award and the Bristol Myers Squibb Foundation Winn Career Development Award. RC has received speaker's fees from Janssen, Roche, Sanofi, AbbVie, Galapagos, Fresenius Kabi, and Viatris; funding for clinical trials from AbbVie; and grant and research support from Janssen, Celltrion, and Nordic Pharma. PM is a Medical Research Council-GlaxoSmithKline EMINENT clinical training fellow with project funding. PM reports consultancy fees from Swedish Orphan Biovitrum, AbbVie, EUSA Pharma, Boehringer Ingelheim, Union Chimique Belge, and Lilly. PM receives co-funding by the National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Background: Targeted biological immunotherapies have been highly effective in controlling skin disease in patients with psoriasis, but whether therapy delays progression to inflammatory arthritis is unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the time to incident inflammatory arthritis among patients newly receiving biological therapies for psoriasis., Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we obtained data on a national sample of patients in the USA from the electronic health records database of the US-based TriNetX network. We included adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with two diagnostic codes for psoriasis (>30 days apart; International Classification of Diseases [ICD] codes) who had been newly prescribed a biologic (inhibitors of tumour necrosis factor [TNF], interleukin [IL]-17, IL-23, or IL-12/23, first prescribed on or after the date of receiving a first psoriasis diagnosis code). The time to incident inflammatory arthritis, defined by first occurrence of a diagnostic code for psoriatic arthritis or other inflammatory arthritis after initiation of biological therapy, was graphed with use of the Kaplan-Meier estimate. Time-dependent risk for inflammatory arthritis was calculated with weighted Cox proportional hazards regression with anti-TNF exposure as the reference, adjusted for demographic and clinical covariables. Sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate incident cases of psoriasis, increased exclusion periods for prevalent cases of inflammatory arthritis, drug switching, and more stringent disease and outcome definitions., Findings: Between Jan 1, 2014, and June 1, 2022, we identified 15 501 patients with psoriasis (mean age 50·2 years [SD 15·0]; 8399 [54·2%] women and 7102 [45·8%] men; 11 175 [72·1%] White). 976 (6·3%) of the 15 501 patients developed inflammatory arthritis, with a cumulative incidence of 2·6 cases per 100 person-years. In multivariable regression analyses, the risk of developing inflammatory arthritis was significantly lower in patients prescribed IL-12/23 inhibitors (adjusted HR 0·58, 95% CI 0·43-0·76) or IL-23 inhibitors (0·41, 0·17-0·95) than in patients prescribed TNF inhibitors. We found no significant difference for IL-17 inhibitors (0·86, 0·54-1·38) compared with TNF inhibitors. For IL-12/23 inhibitors, the results persisted in all sensitivity analyses. For IL-23 inhibitors, the results persisted in three of six sensitivity analyses, when a higher diagnostic threshold for incident arthritis was used and when excluding patients who developed arthritis within 3 or 6 months after first biologic prescription., Interpretation: In this large cohort study of patients with psoriasis, treatment with IL-12/23 inhibitors or IL-23 inhibitors was associated with reduced risk of progression to inflammatory arthritis compared with TNF inhibitors. Prospective observational cohorts with disease activity measures and pooled analyses of previous randomised trials are required to confirm these findings., Funding: None., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MP reports research funding from AbbVie and AstraZeneca; and consulting fees from Novartis. JL reports a research grant from Pfizer (completed in 2021). KG reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Almiral, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Dermavant, Dermira, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Leo, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun, UCB, and Union; payment or honoraria for speakers bureaus from Bristol Myers Squibb; and payment or honoraria for manuscript writing support from UCB, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Janssen (no involvement in the current manuscript). SS declares no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia (PJP) is an opportunistic fungal infection that affects immunocompromised patients. The objective of this study was to describe the incidence of PJP among patients with giant cell arteritis (GCA) or polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR)., Methods: A retrospective cohort study of incident cases of GCA and PMR was conducted using claims data from the TriNetX database to describe the incidence of PJP during the first 6 months of therapy. Additionally, a systematic review was performed to identify other publications describing PJP among patients with GCA or PMR., Results: During 547 patient-years of follow-up time, no cases of PJP were identified among 1,168 cases of GCA (incident rate 0 per 1,000 person-years); during 7,446 patient-years of follow up time, one case of PJP was identified out of 15,575 cases of PMR (incident rate 0.07 cases per 1,000 patient-years). This patient was alive at last follow up. Our systematic review identified 1 case-control study, 4 cohort studies, and 18 case series / case reports of PJP among patients with GCA or PMR. The incident rate of PJP was reported from one additional study for GCA and was estimated at 0.08 cases per 1,000 person years; no additional cohort studies were identified for patients with PMR. Over the entirety of the published literature, the total number of cases identified among case series and case reports was 33, from which 4 total deaths were identified., Conclusions: Patients with newly diagnosed GCA or PMR rarely develop PJP. Existing data does not support routine prescribing of PJP prophylaxis for either group of patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interests None. 1. Sebastian Sattui receives research funding related to clinical trials by AstraZeneca (MANDARA) and has provided unpaid consulting for Sanofi. 2. Michael Putman receives research funding from Abbvie and AstraZeneca and consulting fees from Novartis., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Geographic disparities in the distribution and practice patterns of rheumatology providers may negatively impact patients with rheumatic diseases. The objective of this study was to describe the distribution of rheumatologists with respect to the Area Deprivation Index (ADI) and to identify differences in practice patterns among Medicare Part D rheumatologist prescribers., Methods: We identified 5,882 rheumatologists who served a mean ± SD of 280 ± 208 Medicare Part D beneficiaries per year. In a Poisson regression model of the number of rheumatologists and the ADI of their practice location, for every increase of 10 on the ADI scale (range 0-100; higher = higher deprivation), there were 20.3% fewer rheumatologists (P < 0.001), resulting in 2.1 times as many rheumatologists per 100,000 people in the first ADI quintile when compared to the fifth ADI quintile., Results: The number of rheumatologists peaked in 2016 and decreased steadily thereafter across all quintiles. The prescribing rate per 100 beneficiaries was significantly different between quintiles across all studied drug classes except for opioids, but the trends were inconsistent and of unclear clinical significance., Conclusion: Rheumatologists tended to practice in areas with less deprivation, resulting in twice as many rheumatologists per 100,000 people in the quintile of lowest deprivation as opposed to the quintile with the highest deprivation. Public policy makers should be aware of these data and take steps to mitigate disparities in access to care as the rheumatology workforce shrinks., (© 2022 American College of Rheumatology.)

Background: Comparative efficacy randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compare two active interventions in a head-to-head design. They are useful for informing clinical practice guidelines, but the degree to which such trials inform clinical practice guidelines in rheumatology is unknown., Methods: The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) websites were searched from January 1, 2017, to June 12, 2021, for clinical practice guidelines. RCTs referenced by each guideline were identified, and information regarding design and outcomes were extracted. Clinical practice recommendations from each guideline were also analyzed., Results: Fifteen ACR- and nine EULAR-endorsed guidelines were included, which cited 609 RCTs and provided 481 recommendations. Referenced RCTs enrolled an average of 418 patients (SD 985), most commonly evaluated biologic/targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (70.1%), and infrequently used a head-to-head design (28%). A minority of recommendations received a high level of evidence (LOE) by the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology (2.9%) or an "A" grade by the Oxford Centre for Evidence based Medicine Standards (OCEBM) methodology (28.9%). LOE was higher for recommendations informed by RCTs (P < 0.001) or head-to-head RCTs (P = 0.008). Many recommendations received a strong recommendation despite low (8 [2.6%]) or very low (25 [8.3%]) LOE., Conclusion: Less than one in six rheumatology guideline recommendations are informed by head-to-head RCTs. Recommendations that were informed by head-to-head RCTs were more likely to have a high LOE by both GRADE and OCEBM. Efforts to introduce more comparative efficacy RCTs should be undertaken., (© 2022 The Authors. ACR Open Rheumatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To examine the frequency of, and risk factors for, disease flare following COVID-19 vaccination in patients with systemic rheumatic disease (SRD)., Methods: An international study was conducted from 2 April to 16 August 2021, using an online survey of 5619 adults with SRD for adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, including flares of disease requiring a change in treatment. We examined risk factors identified a priori based on published associations with SRD activity and SARS-CoV-2 severity, including demographics, SRD type, comorbidities, vaccine type, cessation of immunosuppressive medications around vaccination and history of reactions to non-COVID-19 vaccines, using multivariable logistic regression., Results: Flares requiring a change in treatment following COVID-19 vaccination were reported by 4.9% of patients. Compared with rheumatoid arthritis, certain SRD, including systemic lupus erythematosus (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.03, 2.20), psoriatic arthritis (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.20, 3.18) and polymyalgia rheumatica (OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.08, 2.48) were associated with higher odds of flare, while idiopathic inflammatory myopathies were associated with lower odds for flare (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31-0.96). The Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine was associated with higher odds of flare relative to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.07, 1.95), as were a prior reaction to a non-COVID-19 vaccine (OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.76, 3.54) and female sex (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.55, 4.72)., Conclusion: SRD flares requiring changes in treatment following COVID-19 vaccination were uncommon in this large international study. Several potential risk factors, as well as differences by disease type, warrant further examination in prospective cohorts., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology 2022. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US.)

Objective: The aim was to assess rheumatology clinicians' perceptions of telemedicine and their experiences before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey and collected responses from rheumatology clinicians worldwide, between November 2020 and February 2021, regarding use and perceptions of telemedicine in rheumatology. We summarized data with descriptive statistics and qualitative analysis for free-text responses., Results: The survey was completed by 349 rheumatology clinicians from 49 countries; 59% were female and about two-thirds were in the 30-50 years age group. Academic affiliations were held by 55% of participants, and 44% were from North America. Before the pandemic, 24% of participants had experience with telemedicine, whereas about three-quarters used telemedicine for the first time during the pandemic. Overall, 56% thought they provided less adequate care with telemedicine. More than half of clinicians felt that telemedicine was adequate for evaluating crystalline arthritis, inflammatory arthritis and lupus flares. Telemedicine was felt to be inadequate for flares of myositis, vasculitis and scleroderma. Technical problems were reported in 29% of telemedicine encounters and were most commonly related to patient-encountered difficulties., Conclusion: Most rheumatology clinicians used telemedicine for the first time during the pandemic. The quality of care provided was thought to be inferior to that provided in person for specific clinical situations. Additional efforts are needed to address barriers to effective telemedicine, such as patient-related technology issues, challenges with building rapport and performing a physical examination, and to define the appropriate scope of clinical scenarios conducive to telemedicine., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

Objective: The relative risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease severity among people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) compared to those without RMDs is unclear. This study was undertaken to quantify the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in those with RMDs and describe clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in these patients., Methods: We conducted a systematic literature review using 14 databases from January 1, 2019 to February 13, 2021. We included observational studies and experimental trials in RMD patients that described comparative rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, oxygen supplementation/intensive care unit (ICU) admission/mechanical ventilation, or death attributed to COVID-19. Methodologic quality was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools or the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Risk ratios (RRs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated, as applicable for each outcome, using the Mantel-Haenszel formula with random effects models., Results: Of the 5,799 abstracts screened, 100 studies met the criteria for inclusion in the systematic review, and 54 of 100 had a low risk of bias. Among the studies included in the meta-analyses, we identified an increased prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with an RMD (RR 1.53 [95% CI 1.16-2.01]) compared to the general population. The odds of hospitalization, ICU admission, and mechanical ventilation were similar in patients with and those without an RMD, whereas the mortality rate was increased in patients with RMDs (OR 1.74 [95% CI 1.08-2.80]). In a smaller number of studies, the adjusted risk of outcomes related to COVID-19 was assessed, and the results varied; some studies demonstrated an increased risk while other studies showed no difference in risk in patients with an RMD compared to those without an RMD., Conclusion: Patients with RMDs have higher rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection and an increased mortality rate., (© 2021 The Authors. Arthritis & Rheumatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)