Search

Objective: To analyze the long-term survival of subcutaneous biosimilar tumor necrosis factor inhibitors compared to the originator molecules in patients with rheumatic diseases, as well as the factors associated with drug discontinuation., Methods: Retrospective analysis of BIOBADASER, the Spanish multicenter prospective registry of patients with rheumatic disease receiving biologic and targeted disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Patients who started etanercept (ETN) or adalimumab (ADA) from January 2016 to October 2023 were included. The survival probabilities of biosimilars and originators were compared using Kaplan-Meier estimating curves. To identify factors associated with differences in the retention rates, hazard ratios (HR) were estimated using Cox regression models for all and specific causes (inefficacy or adverse events [AEs]) of discontinuation., Results: A total of 4162 patients received 4723 treatment courses (2991 courses of ADA and 1732 courses of ETN), of which 722 (15.29%) were with originator molecules and 4001 (84.71%) were with biosimilars. The originators were more frequently discontinued than biosimilars (53.32% vs 33.37%, respectively). The main reason for discontinuation was inefficacy (60.35% of the treatments). The risk of overall discontinuation was lower for biosimilars (adjusted HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75-0.95). Female sex, obesity, and second or later treatment lines increased the risk of discontinuation, whereas disease duration and the use of concomitant methotrexate were associated with a greater survival. When assessing cause-specific reasons of discontinuation, excluding nonmedical switching, the results from the crude and adjusted analyses showed no significant differences in the retention rate between biosimilars and originators., Conclusion: No significant differences were found between treatments in long-term survival due to inefficacy or AEs., (Copyright © 2024 by the Journal of Rheumatology.)

SARS-CoV-2 infections in children are frequently asymptomatic or mild and can go unnoticed. This study aimed to describe the seroprevalence and clinical course of SARS-CoV-2 in a cohort of children with rheumatic diseases in a real-life setting and assess possible risk factors. A cross-sectional study was performed in a paediatric rheumatology unit (September 2020 to February 2021). At inclusion, a specific questionnaire was completed and SARS-CoV-2 serology was performed. Demographics, treatment and disease activity of patients with and without laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were compared. A total of 105 children were included. SARS-CoV-2 infection was demonstrated in 27 patients (25.7%). The mean age was 11.8 years, and most patients were females (72.4%). The most frequent underlying condition was juvenile idiopathic arthritis (70.3%; 19/27). Patients received immunosuppressive treatment in 78% of cases (21/27). Overall, 44.4% (12/27) of infected patients were asymptomatic. A total of 66.7% (18/27) of patients did not require medical assistance. Three patients required hospital admission because of COVID-19. Children with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were less frequently in remission (52% vs 72%; p 0.014). Moderate disease activity and treatment with oral corticosteroids were associated with higher risk for SARS-CoV-2 (OR 5.05; CI 95%: 1.56-16.3 and OR 4.2; CI 95%: 1.26-13.9, respectively). In a cohort of Spanish paediatric patients with rheumatic diseases, clinical course of COVID-19 was mild, with more than one third of asymptomatic cases. Higher disease activity and oral corticosteroids appear to be risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Key Points • We aimed to investigate the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a cohort of Spanish paediatric patients with RD, testing both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. We also compared treatment and disease activity of patients with and without laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. • In our cohort of 105 paediatric patients with rheumatic diseases, the clinical course of COVID-19 was mild and 44% of cases were asymptomatic. Three cases required hospital admission with no complications. Seroprevalence was 20%. • No association was found between disease activity or treatment with corticosteroids and symptomatic or asymptomatic infection. Higher disease activity and treatment with oral corticosteroids appeared to be risk factors for laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to International League of Associations for Rheumatology (ILAR).)

Background: This study aimed to assess the baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in pediatric patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMD) and identify the risk factors associated with symptomatic or severe disease defined as hospital admission, intensive care admission or death., Methods: An observational longitudinal study was conducted during the first year of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (March 2020-March 2021). All pediatric patients attended at the rheumatology outpatient clinics of six tertiary referral hospitals in Madrid, Spain, with a diagnosis of RMD and COVID-19 were included. Main outcomes were symptomatic disease and hospital admission. The covariates were sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and treatment regimens. We ran a multivariable logistic regression model to assess associated factors for outcomes., Results: The study population included 77 pediatric patients. Mean age was 11.88 (4.04) years Of these, 30 patients (38.96%) were asymptomatic, 41 (53.25%) had a mild-moderate COVID-19 and 6 patients (7.79%) required hospital admission. The median length of hospital admission was 5 (2-20) days, one patient required intensive care and there were no deaths. Previous comorbidities increased the risk for symptomatic disease and hospital admission. Compared with outpatients, the factor independently associated with hospital admission was previous use of glucocorticoids (OR 3.51; p = 0.00). No statistically significant risk factors for symptomatic COVID-19 were found in the final model., Conclusion: No differences in COVID-19 outcomes according to childhood-onset rheumatic disease types were found. Results suggest that associated comorbidities and treatment with glucocorticoids increase the risk of hospital admission., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

SARS-COV-2 infection has spread worldwide since it originated in December 2019, in Wuhan, China. The pandemic has largely demonstrated the resilience of the world's health systems and is the greatest health emergency since World War II. There is no single therapeutic approach to the treatment of COVID-19 and the associated immune disorder. The lack of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) has led different countries to tackle the disease based on case series, or from results of observational studies with off-label drugs. We as rheumatologists in general, and specifically rheumatology fellows, have been on the front line of the pandemic, modifying our activities and altering our training itinerary. We have attended patients, we have learned about the management of the disease and from our previous experience with drugs for arthritis and giant cell arteritis, we have used these drugs to treat COVID-19., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier España, S.L.U. and Sociedad Española de Reumatología y Colegio Mexicano de Reumatología. All rights reserved.)

The better understanding of the safety of biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs), as well as the emergence of new bDMARDs against different therapeutic targets and biosimilars have likely influenced the use patterns of these compounds over time. The aim of this study is to assess changes in demographic characteristics, disease activity and treatment patterns in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), or ankylosing spondylitis (AS) who started a first- or second-line biologic between 2007 and mid-2020. Patients diagnosed with RA, PsA or AS included in the BIOBADASER registry from January 2007 to July 2020 were included. According to the start date of a first- or second-line biologic therapy, patients were stratified into four time periods: 2007-2009; 2010-2013; 2014-2017; 2018-2020 and analyzed cross-sectionally in each period. Demographic and clinical variables, as well as the type of biologic used, were assessed. Generalized linear models were applied to study the evolution of the variables of interest over time periods, the diagnosis, and the interactions between them. A total of 4543 patients initiated a first biologic during the entire time frame of the study. Over the four time periods, disease evolution at the time of biologic initiation (p < 0.001), disease activity (p < 0.001), retention rate (p < 0.001) and the use of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors as a first-line treatment (p < 0.001) showed a significant tendency to decrease. Conversely, comorbidities, as assessed by the Charlson index (p < 0.001), and the percentage of patients using bDMARDs in monotherapy (p < 0.001), and corticosteroids (p < 0.001) tended to increase over time. Over the entire period of the study's analysis, 3289 patients started a second biologic. The following trends were observed: decreased DAS28 at switching (p < 0.001), lower retention rates (p = 0.004), and incremental changes to the therapeutic target between the first and second biologic (p < 0.001). From 2007 until now rheumatic patients who started a biologic were older, exhibited less clinical activity, presented more comorbidities, and switched to a different biologic more frequently and earlier., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Hydroxychloroquine is not efficacious as post-exposure prophylaxis against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It is not known whether as pre-exposure prophylaxis it may prevent COVID-19., Objective: To compare the incidence of COVID-19 in Spanish patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases treated with and without hydroxychloroquine., Patients and Methods: Retrospective electronic record review, from February 27th to June 21st, 2020, of patients with autoimmune inflammatory diseases followed at two academic tertiary care hospitals in Seville, Spain. The cumulative incidence of confirmed COVID-19, by PCR or serology, was compared between patients with and without hydroxychloroquine as part of their treatment of autoimmune inflammatory diseases., Results: Among 722 included patients, 290 (40%) were receiving hydroxychloroquine. During the seventeen-week study period, 10 (3.4% [95% CI: 1.7%-6.7%] cases of COVID-19 were registered among patients with hydroxychloroquine and 13 (3.0% [1.6%-5.1%]) (p = 0.565) in those without hydroxychloroquine. COVID-19 was diagnosed by PCR in four (1.4%, 95% CI 0.38%-3.5%) subject with hydroxychloroquine and six (1.4%, 95% CI 0.5%-3.0%) without hydroxychloroquine (p = 0.697). Three patients on hydroxychloroquine and four patients without hydroxychloroquine were admitted to the hospital, none of them required to be transferred to the intensive care unit and no patient died during the episode., Conclusions: The incidence and severity of COVID-19 among patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases with and without hydroxychloroquine was not significantly different., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: The recent outbreak of COVID-19 has raised concerns in the rheumatology community about the management of immunosuppressed patients diagnosed with inflammatory rheumatic diseases. It is not clear whether the use of biological agents may suppose a risk or protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection; however, it has been suggested that severe respiratory forms of COVID-19 occur as a result of exacerbated inflammation status and cytokine production. This prompted the use of interleukin 6 (IL-6) (tocilizumab and sarilumab) and IL-1 inhibitors (anakinra) in severe COVID-19 disease and more recently JAK1/2 inhibitor (baricitinib). Therefore, patients with rheumatic diseases provide a great opportunity to learn about the use of biological agents as protective drugs against SARS-CoV-2., Objectives: To estimate COVID-19 infection rate in patients treated with biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) for inflammatory rheumatic diseases (RMD), determine the influence of biological agents treatment as risk or protective factors and study the prognosis of patients with rheumatic diseases receiving biological agents compared to the general population in a third-level hospital setting in León, Spain., Methods: We performed a retrospective observational study including patients seen at our rheumatology department who received bDMARDs for rheumatic diseases between December 1st 2019 and December 1st 2020, and analysed COVID-19 infection rate. All patients who attended our rheumatology outpatient clinic with diagnosis of inflammatory rheumatic disease receiving treatment with biological agents were included. Main variable was the hospital admission related to COVID-19. The covariates were age, sex, comorbidities, biological agent, duration of treatment, mean dose of glucocorticoids and need for intensive care unit . We performed an univariate and multivariate logistic regression models to assess risk factors of COVID-19 infection., Results: There were a total of 4464 patients with COVID-19 requiring hospitalisation. 40 patients out of a total of 820 patients with rheumatic diseases (4.8%) receiving bDMARDs contracted COVID-19 and 4 required hospital care. Crude incidence rate of COVID-19 requiring hospital care among the general population was 3.6%, and it was 0.89% among the group with underlying rheumatic diseases. 90% of patients receiving bDMARDS with COVID-19 did not require hospitalisation. Out of the 4464 patients, 869 patients died, 2 of which received treatment with biological agents. Patients with rheumatic diseases who tested positive for COVID-19 were older (female: median age 60.8 IQR 46-74; male: median age 61.9 IQR 52-70.3) than those who were negative for COVID-19 (female: median age 58.3 IQR 48-69; male: median age 56.2 IQR 47-66), more likely to have hypertension (45% vs 26%, OR 2.25 (CI 1.18-4.27),p 0.02), cardiovascular disease (23 % vs 9.6%, OR 2.73 (1.25-5.95), p 0.02), be smokers (13% vs 4.6%, OR 2.95 (CI 1.09-7.98), p 0.04), receiving treatment with rituximab (20% vs 8%, 2.28 (CI 1.24-6.32), p 0.02) and a higher dose of glucocorticoids (OR 2.5 (1.3-10.33, p 0.02) and were less likely to be receiving treatment with IL-6 inhibitors (2.5% vs 14%, OR 0.16, (CI 0.10-0.97, p 0.03). When exploring the effect of the rest of the therapies between groups (affected patients vs unaffected), we found no significant differences in bDMARD proportions. IL-1 inhibitors, IL-6 inhibitors, JAK inhibitors and belimumab-treated patients showed the lowest incidence of COVID-19 among adult patients with rheumatic diseases. We found no differences in sex or rheumatological disease between patients who tested positive for COVID-19 and patients who tested negative., Conclusions: Overall, the use of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) does not associate with severe manifestations of COVID-19. Patients with rheumatic disease diagnosed with COVID-19 were more likely to be receiving a higher dose of glucocorticoids and treatment with rituximab. IL-6 inhibitors may have a protective effect., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To describe patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIRD) who had COVID-19 disease; to compare patients who required hospital admission with those who did not and assess risk factors for hospital admission related to COVID-19., Methods: An observational longitudinal study was conducted during the pandemic peak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (1 March 2020 to 24 April). All patients attended at the rheumatology outpatient clinic of a tertiary hospital in Madrid, Spain with a medical diagnosis of AIRD and with symptomatic COVID-19 were included. The main outcome was hospital admission related to COVID-19. The covariates were sociodemographic, clinical and treatments. We ran a multivariable logistic regression model to assess risk factors for the hospital admission., Results: The study population included 123 patients with AIRD and COVID-19. Of these, 54 patients required hospital admission related to COVID-19. The mean age on admission was 69.7 (15.7) years, and the median time from onset of symptoms to hospital admission was 5 (3-10) days. The median length of stay was 9 (6-14) days. A total of 12 patients died (22%) during admission. Compared with outpatients, the factors independently associated with hospital admission were older age (OR: 1.08; p=0.00) and autoimmune systemic condition (vs chronic inflammatory arthritis) (OR: 3.55; p=0.01). No statistically significant findings for exposure to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were found in the final model., Conclusion: Our results suggest that age and having a systemic autoimmune condition increased the risk of hospital admission, whereas disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were not associated with hospital admission., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is currently a global pandemic that affects patients with other pathologies. Here, we investigated the influence of treatments for osteoporosis and other non-inflammatory rheumatic conditions, such as osteoarthritis and fibromyalgia, on COVID-19 incidence. To this end, we conducted a cross-sectional study of 2,102 patients being treated at the Rheumatology Service of Hospital del Mar (Barcelona, Spain). In our cohort, COVID-19 cumulative incidence from March 1 to May 3, 2020 was compared to population estimates for the same city. We used Poisson regression models to determine the adjusted relative risk ratios for COVID-19 associated with different treatments and comorbidities. Denosumab, zoledronate and calcium were negatively associated with COVID-19 incidence. Some analgesics, particularly pregabalin and most of the studied antidepressants, were positively associated with COVID-19 incidence, whereas duloxetine presented a negative association. Oral bisphosphonates, vitamin D, thiazide diuretics, anti-hypertensive drugs and chronic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs had no effect on COVID-19 incidence in the studied population. Our results provide novel evidence to support the maintenance of the main anti-osteoporosis treatments in COVID-19 patients, which may be of particular relevance to elderly patients affected by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Background: The susceptibility of patients with rheumatic diseases and the risks or benefits of immunosuppressive therapies for COVID-19 are unknown., Methods: We performed a retrospective study with patients under follow-up in rheumatology departments from seven hospitals in Spain. We matched updated databases of rheumatology patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-positive PCR tests performed in the hospital to the same reference populations. Rates of PCR+ confirmed COVID-19 were compared among groups., Results: Patients with chronic inflammatory diseases had 1.32-fold higher prevalence of hospital PCR+ COVID-19 than the reference population (0.76% vs 0.58%). Patients with systemic autoimmune or immune-mediated disease (AI/IMID) showed a significant increase, whereas patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) or systemic lupus erythematosus did not. COVID-19 cases in some but not all diagnostic groups had older ages than cases in the reference population. Patients with IA on targeted-synthetic or biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), but not those on conventional-synthetic DMARDs, had a greater prevalence despite a similar age distribution., Conclusion: Patients with AI/IMID show a variable risk of hospital-diagnosed COVID-19. Interplay of ageing, therapies and disease-specific factors seem to contribute. These data provide a basis to improve preventive recommendations to rheumatic patients and to analyse the specific factors involved in COVID-19 susceptibility., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To investigate the incidence of COVID-19 in a cohort of adult and paediatric patients with rheumatic diseases receiving targeted biologic and synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (tDMARDs) and to explore the possible effect of these treatments in the clinical expression of COVID-19., Methods: A cross-sectional study comprising of a telephone survey and electronic health records review was performed including all adult and paediatric patients with rheumatic diseases treated with tDMARDs in a large rheumatology tertiary centre in Barcelona, Spain. Demographics, disease activity, COVID-19 related symptoms and contact history data were obtained from the start of the 2020 pandemic. Cumulative incidence of confirmed cases (SARS-CoV-2 positive PCR test) was compared to the population estimates for the same city districts from a governmental COVID-19 health database. Suspected cases were defined following WHO criteria and compared to those without compatible symptoms., Results: 959 patients with rheumatic diseases treated with tDMARDs were included. We identified 11 confirmed SARS-CoV-2 positive cases in the adult cohort and no confirmed positive cases in the paediatric cohort. COVID-19 incidence rates of the rheumatic patient cohort were very similar to that of the general population [(0.48% (95% CI 0.09 to 0.87%)] and [0.58% (95% CI 0.56 to 0.60%)], respectively. We found significant differences in tDMARDs proportions between the suspected and non-suspected cases ( p =0.002)., Conclusion: Adult and paediatric patients with rheumatic diseases on tDMARDs do not seem to present a higher risk of COVID-19 or a more severe disease outcome when compared to general population., Competing Interests: XM received speaker fees from Novartis and Sanofi-Genzyme. HB received speaker fees from Lilly, MSD and Pfizer. RCR received speaker fees from MSD. ETA received speaker fees from Roche and Bristol-Myer-Squib outside this work. SM received speaker fees, grant and honoraria from Roche and Bristol-Myer-Squib outside this work. MLC, MLL, EM, MPP, AED, MSL, EE, SA, GAS, APS, MBB, MAB, JDD, JL and AJ have nothing to disclose, (© 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To analyze the incidence rate (IR) and risk factors of cutaneous adverse events (CAE) in patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases treated with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists., Methods: We analyzed all patients from the BIOBADASER (Base de Datos de Productos Biológicos de la Sociedad Española de Reumatología) registry treated with a TNF antagonist (infliximab, etanercept, or adalimumab). Data collected included age, sex, diagnosis and duration of rheumatic disease, type of TNF antagonist, and concomitant treatment. Type of CAE was classified as local or systemic cutaneous manifestation related to treatment administration (infusion reaction), infection, malignancy, or autoimmune skin disease. Time of onset of CAE and outcome were also recorded. The IRs of CAE per 1,000 patient-years of exposure with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were estimated. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify potential risk factors for CAE., Results: A total of 5,437 patients were included, representing 17,330 patient-years of exposure. A total of 920 CAE were reported; the IRs per 1,000 patient-years were 53 (95% CI 50-57) for CAE, 28 (95% CI 25-30) for infection, 15 (95% CI 13-17) for infusion reactions, 5 (95% CI 4-6) for autoimmune skin diseases, and 3 (95% CI 2-4) for skin malignancy. The mean time between starting TNF antagonist treatment and CAE was 1.78 years. In 32% of patients, CAE required TNF antagonist withdrawal. The main risk factors for CAE were female sex and treatment with infliximab, leflunomide, and glucocorticoids., Conclusion: The IR of CAE in patients treated with TNF antagonists is significant and should be addressed carefully, and withdrawal of therapy is required in some cases., (Copyright © 2013 by the American College of Rheumatology.)

The aim of this study was to investigate the cumulated incidence and clinical characteristics of the psoriasiform lesions seen in a wide cohort of rheumatic patients exposed to anti-TNFα drugs in a tertiary care hospital from northern Spain. The study population included 450 patients exposed to anti-TNFα agents from 2001 to 2007 and treated in a university hospital in northern Spain. Two hundred patients were exposed to infliximab (44%), 129 (29%) to etanercept, and 121 (27%) to adalimumab. The cumulated incidence (CI) of this skin reaction was calculated for each of the three agents studied. Psoriasis and psoriasiform lesions were documented in 7 patients diagnosed with different rheumatic inflammatory conditions (1.56%). Cases of this adverse effect were identified with all three anti-TNFα agents available at that time, but less frequently with infliximab (CI: 0.5%) compared with etanercept (CI: 2.3%) or adalimumab (CI: 2.5%). The most common lesion was palmoplantar pustulosis (71.3% of the cases), and the latency period to the development of the lesions ranged from 4 to 38 months (mean 9 months). In four of the 7 patients, treatment was suspended, while in the remaining three patients treatment was continued. The CI of this skin reaction in our setting is similar to that published by others. Infliximab was found to be less frequently associated with this adverse event. In our experience, it is not always necessary to stop anti-TNFα therapy for the skin lesions to improve.

Background and Objectives: Whether the use of tumor necrosis factor antagonists increases the risk of infection remains a subject of open debate. Developing effective strategies of prevention and empirical treatment entails carefully establishing the etiology and prognosis of the infections., Patients and Methods: Analysis of the Spanish registry BIOBADASER (Feb-2000 to Jan-2006), a national drug safety registry of patients with rheumatic diseases., Results: 907 episodes of infection occurring in 6,969 patients were analyzed. The infection incidence observed was 53.09 cases/1,000 patients-years (CI 95% 49.69-56.66). The most frequent infections were skin infection (12.18 cases/1,000 patients-yrs), pneumonia (5.97 cases/1,000 patients-yrs), cystitis (3.92 cases/1,000 patients-yrs), tuberculosis (3.51 cases/1,000 patients-yrs) and arthritis (3.76 cases/1,000 patients-yrs). Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Salmonella spp. emerged as important pathogens. Varicella zoster virus and Herpes simplex virus caused most cases of viral infections. Mucocutaneous candidiasis accounted for most fungal infections. Mortality was increased in infected patients (log-rank test p<0.0001). Pneumonia, sepsis, tuberculosis, abdominal infection and endocarditis were associated with significant attributable mortality., Conclusions: A significant number of bacterial, viral and fungal infections occurred in patients with rheumatic diseases treated with TNF antagonists. The information of this study can illuminate clinicians globally on how to address infection in this vulnerable group of patients., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier España, S.L. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To describe the risk of cancer in patients exposed to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists., Methods: The following 2 clinical cohorts were studied: (1) BIOBADASER 2.0: a registry of patients suffering from rheumatic diseases exposed to TNF antagonists (2531 rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 1488 spondyloarthropathies, and 675 other rheumatic conditions); and (2) EMECAR: a cohort of 789 RA patients not exposed to TNF antagonists. Cancer incidence rates (IR) per 1000 patient-years and incidence rate ratios (IRR) were calculated for BIOBADASER 2.0 and EMECAR patients. The IR over time in BIOBADASER 2.0 patients was analyzed by joinpoint regression. The IRR was estimated to compare cancer rates in exposed versus nonexposed RA patients. Standardized incidence and mortality ratios (SIR, SMR) were also estimated. Risk factors for cancer in patients exposed to TNF antagonists were investigated by generalized linear models., Results: The SMR for cancer in BIODASER 2.0 was 0.67 (95% CI: 0.51-0.86), and the SIR was 0.1 (95% CI 0.03-0.23). The IR in RA patients exposed to TNF antagonists was 5.8 (95% CI: 4.4-7.6), and the adjusted IRR was 0.48 (95% CI: 0.09-2.45). The IR in patients with previous cancer was 26.4 (95% CI: 4.1-171.5). Age, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and steroids were associated with a higher risk of developing cancer. The IR decreased after the first 4 months of exposure, without statistical significance., Conclusion: Overall cancer and mortality rates in patients with rheumatic diseases exposed to TNF antagonists are no higher than in the background Spanish population. However special attention should be paid to elderly patients, those with previous cancers, and patients treated with steroids., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To compare the safety and retention rate of TNF antagonists used in approved indications (AIs) and non-AIs., Methods: Analysis of the Spanish registry BIOBADASER 2.0 (February 2000 to October 2009). Patients were classified into AIs and off-label uses (OUs), according to the European Medicines Agency approval. Retention rates, incidence rates (IRs) and IR ratios (IRRs) of adverse events (AEs) with 95% CI were compared between uses, by log-rank test, cause-specific Cox regression models and generalized linear models with Poisson's distribution., Results: First treatment with TNF antagonist was available in 5150 patients, of whom 4594 (89%) were AIs (2854 RA, 882 AS and 858 PsA) and 556 (11%) were OUs [437 chronic arthropathies in the spectrum of SpAs (CA) and 119 chronic immune-mediated diseases (CIDs)]. The IR of AE was largest in CID (649 events per 1000 patient-years) and lowest in PsA (250 events per 1000 patient-years). The occurrence of AEs was significantly associated with OU [IRR of CA vs RA 1.33 (95% CI 1.19, 1.49); IRR of CID vs RA 1.94 (95% CI 1.62, 2.31). The largest hazard ratio for discontinuation was for CID vs RA (1.33; 95% CI 1.02, 1.71) and especially vs AS (2.18; 95% CI 1.63, 2.90)., Conclusions: OUs of TNF antagonists need a very close ascertainment of risk/benefit. The safety and retention pattern for CID is similar to that for RA and the pattern for CA resembles that of AS. This study shows an additional value of a national registry.

Objective: To estimate the incidence of hospitalisation due to varicella zoster virus (VZV) infection in patients treated with tumour necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists for inflammatory rheumatic conditions and to compare it with the expected rate in the general population., Methods: Secondary data analysis was performed of two large databases: (1) the national registry of rheumatic diseases patients treated with biological agents (BIOBADASER); and (2) the national hospital discharge database Conjunto Mínimo Básico de Datos al Alta Hospitalaria. Hospitalisations due to shingles or chickenpox were analysed. For each condition the incidence rate (IR) and the age and gender standardised IR per 100,000 person-years plus the standardised incidence ratio (SIR) and the standardised incidence difference (SID) were estimated., Results: In patients exposed to TNF antagonists, the estimated IR of hospitalisation due to shingles was 32 cases per 100,000 patient-years (95% CI 14 to 78), the expected rate in the general population was 3.4 (95% CI 3.2 to 3.5), the SIR was 9 (95% CI 3 to 20) and the SID was 26 (95% CI 14 to 37). The estimated IR of hospitalisation due to chickenpox was 26 cases per 100,000 (95% CI 10 to 69), the expected rate was 1.9 (95% CI 1.8 to 2.0), the SIR was 19 (95% CI 5 to 47) and the SID 33 (95% CI 21 to 45)., Conclusions: Patients suffering rheumatic diseases exposed to TNF antagonists are hospitalised due to VZV infections significantly more frequently than expected in the general population. Since the absolute IR of hospitalisations due to chickenpox and shingles is low in these patients, the implementation of risky preventive measures may not be justified at present.

The incidence of tuberculosis among patients with systemic rheumatic diseases is much higher than in the general population (the risk is multiplied by 5 to 15 in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus). Reactivation of a latent tuberculosis is frequent, as assessed by the short delay of occurrence after a systemic rheumatic disease has been diagnosed. Besides immunosuppression induced by the underlying disease, the role of glucocorticoids and of immunosuppressive therapy including biotherapies using TNF antagonists must be underlined. Tuberculosis in such patients frequently presents as extrapulmonary or disseminated disease. A screening of tuberculosis is recommended before anti-TNF therapy, and includes previous history questioning, chest X ray, tuberculin skin test with 5 international units of tuberculin. Immunological methods of tuberculosis detection are under evaluation in these patients. If a latent tuberculosis infection is diagnosed, a specific tuberculosis chemoprophylaxis, started at least 3 weeks before initiation of TNF antagonists, has allowed to reduce the occurrence of anti-TNF-associated tuberculosis in patients living in Europe and North America. The screening strategies for tuberculosis should probably be extended in all patients with systemic rheumatic diseases receiving glucocorticoids and/or immunosuppressive therapy.

Objective: To evaluate the causes of new cases of active tuberculosis (ATB) in patients treated with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists included in the national registry BIOBADASER (Base de Datos de Productos Biológicos de la Sociedad Española de Reumatología) after the dissemination of recommendations to prevent reactivation of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI)., Methods: Incidence rate of ATB per 100,000 patient-years and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated in patients entering BIOBADASER after March 2002 and were stratified by compliance with recommendations (complete or incomplete). ATB rates in BIOBADASER were compared with the background rate and the rate in the rheumatoid arthritis cohort EMECAR (Estudio de la Morbilidad y Expresión Clínica de la Artritis Reumatoide) not treated with TNF antagonists. In addition, rates of ATB among patients treated with adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab were estimated and compared only for treatments started after September 2003, when all 3 drugs became fully available., Results: Following March 2002, a total of 5,198 patients treated with a TNF antagonist were registered in BIOBADASER. Fifteen ATB cases were noted (rate 172 per 100,000 patient-years, 95% CI 103-285). Recommendations were fully followed in 2,655 treatments. The probability of developing ATB was 7 times higher when recommendations were not followed (incidence rate ratio 7.09, 95% CI 1.60-64.69). Two-step tuberculosis skin test for LTBI was the major failure in complying with recommendations., Conclusion: New cases of ATB still occur in patients treated with all available TNF antagonists due to lack of compliance with recommendations to prevent reactivation of LTBI. Continuous evaluation of recommendations is required to improve clinical practice.

A progressive 69% increase in sales of hydrocortisone tablets was observed in Spain from 1988 to 1995. But there were no data suggesting an increase in the number of adrenal insufficiency cases. We aimed to assess the hydrocortisone prescription habits of physicians in 1996 in Madrid (Spain). An anonymous mail questionnaire was sent to 6130 randomly selected physicians (3345 generalists and 2785 specialists) of Madrid. Five hundred and forty-six questionnaires (8.8%) were returned. Three hundred and eighteen physicians (58.2%) sometimes prescribed oral hydrocortisone. 70.8% of these physicians prescribed hydrocortisone for chronic adrenal insufficiency, 17.3% for acute adrenal insufficiency, 7.9% for congenital adrenal hyperplasia, and 30.2% for inflammatory diseases (asthma, allergic diseases, urticaria, rheumatic diseases, ulcerative colitis). Prescription for inflammatory diseases was more frequent in male physicians, physicians older than 40 years, and general practitioners. We can conclude that the main indication for hydrocortisone prescription was chronic adrenal insufficiency but there was a significant number of physicians that used the drug in inflammatory diseases. As a drastic increase in prevalence of adrenal insufficiency seems unlikely, the augmentation in sales of hydrocortisone could be explained by its prescription for other pathologies., (Copyright 2002 Academic Press.)