Search

Social media has become an important venue for rheumatologists, patients, organizations, and other stakeholders to discuss recent research advances in diagnosis and management of rheumatic disorders. In this article, we describe the current state of how social media may enhance dissemination, discourse, and collaboration in rheumatology research. Social media may refer to social platforms like Twitter and Instagram or digital media like podcasts and other websites that are operated for providing as free, open-access medical education (FOAM). Twitter has been one of the most active social media venues and continues to host a vibrant rheumatology community. Examples of research discussions on Twitter include organic user tweets, educational threads (“tweetorials”), live-tweeting academic conferences, and journals posting recently-accepted articles. Some research collaborations have been initiated through social media interactions. Social media may also directly contribute to research by facilitating the recruitment of study participants and the collection of survey-based data. Thus, social media is an evolving and important tool to enhance research discourse, dissemination, and collaboration in rheumatology.

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical features at presentation of ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV) between African American (AA) and White patients.This is a chart review of cases between January 2003 and December 2018. African American patients with AAV were identified and matched in a 1:2 ratio with White comparators based on the year of diagnosis (±4 years). Data on demographics, clinical, and laboratory features and outcomes at presentation were collected. Descriptive statistics were used to compare the characteristics between groups.Thirty-two of 56 AA patients with AAV had complete data and were included for analysis. When compared with 64 matched White patients with AAV, AA patients were younger (47.5 vs 61.0 years, p = 0.001). Compared with White patients, AA patients with granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) (35 vs 55 years, p = 0.0006) and microscopic polyangiitis (MPA) (55.5 vs 65.0 years, p = 0.05) were younger. African American patients with GPA were more frequently female (p = 0.008), whereas AA patients with MPA were more frequently male (p = 0.03). No differences in disease manifestations, disease activity, and outcomes were observed between AA and White patients with AAV.In this single-center study, AA patients with AAV were diagnosed at a younger age than Whites; this was found in both the GPA and MPA disease phenotypes. No other significant differences were observed. Future studies are needed to confirm our findings and better describe differences of AAV in racial/ethnic minorities.

Objective To describe the prevalence of frailty in a single-centre cohort of patients with PMR and describe its association with health-related quality of life (HRQoL), cognition and sarcopenia. Methods This was a cross-sectional study of patients with PMR, according to 2012 EULAR/ACR Classification Criteria, presenting within 12 months of diagnosis and on treatment with glucocorticoids. Frailty was defined according to the Fried frailty criteria. HRQoL was assessed using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Computerized Adaptive Test (PROMIS-CAT) and cognition was assessed using the Mini-Mental State Examination. Sarcopenia was measured by DXA. Results Forty-one patients were enrolled. Prevalence of frailty and pre-frailty was 17% and 59%, respectively. Frail patients had higher inflammatory markers at diagnosis compared with pre-frail and robust patients. Of 27 patients with DXA results, 26% were sarcopenic. Frail patients had worse physical function, and more pain behaviour and interference compared with pre-frail and robust patients. In univariable analyses, frail patients were more likely to have worse physical function, and more pain behaviour and pain interference, which remained significant after adjusting for age. There were no significant associations between cognition or sarcopenia and frailty. Conclusions In this cohort of PMR patients, there was a higher prevalence of frailty and pre-frailty compared with that reported in community-dwelling elderly. Frailty was associated with worse physical function, and increased pain behaviour and pain interference, differences that were also clinically meaningful. Larger prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings and analyse the association of frailty with other PMR disease outcomes.

Objectives To explore current management practices for PMR by general practitioners (GPs) and rheumatologists including implications for clinical trial recruitment. Methods An English language questionnaire was constructed by a working group of rheumatologists and GPs from six countries. The questionnaire focused on: 1: Respondent characteristics; 2: Referral practices; 3: Treatment with glucocorticoids; 4: Diagnostics; 5: Comorbidities; and 6: Barriers to research. The questionnaire was distributed to rheumatologists and GPs worldwide via members of the International PMR/Giant Cell Arteritis Study Group. Results In total, 394 GPs and 937 rheumatologists responded to the survey. GPs referred a median of 25% of their suspected PMR patients for diagnosis and 50% of these were returned to their GP for management. In general, 39% of rheumatologists evaluated patients with suspected PMR >2 weeks after referral, and a median of 50% of patients had started prednisolone before rheumatologist evaluation. Direct comparison of initial treatment showed that the percentage prescribing >25 mg prednisolone daily for patients was 30% for GPs and 12% for rheumatologists. Diagnostic imaging was rarely used. More than half (56%) of rheumatologists experienced difficulties recruiting people with PMR to clinical trials. Conclusion This large international survey indicates that a large proportion of people with PMR are not referred for diagnosis, and that the proportion of treatment-naive patients declined with increasing time from referral to assessment. Strategies are needed to change referral and management of people with PMR, to improve clinical practice and facilitate recruitment to clinical trials.

Objective Our primary objective was to develop an Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core domain set to capture the impact of glucocorticoids (GC), both positive and negative, on patients with Rheumatic conditions. Methods The OMERACT Filter 2.1 was used to guide core domain selection. Systematic literature reviews, qualitative studies and quantitative surveys were conducted by the OMERACT GC Impact working group to identify candidate domains for a core domain set. A summary of prior work and Delphi exercise were presented at the OMERACT 2020 virtual GC workshop. A proposed GC Impact core domain set derived from this work was presented for discussion in facilitated breakout groups. Participants voted on the proposed GC Impact core domain set. Results 113 people, including 23 patient research partners, participated in two virtual workshops conducted at different times on the same day. The proposed mandatory domains to be evaluated in clinical trials involving GCs were: infection, bone fragility, hypertension, diabetes, weight, fatigue, mood disturbance and death. In addition, collection of disease specific outcomes was included in the core domain set as “mandatory in specific circumstances”. The proposed core domain set was endorsed by 100% (23/23) of the patient research partners and 92% (83/90) of the remaining participants, including clinicians, researchers and industry stakeholders. Conclusion A GC Impact core domain set was endorsed at the OMERACT 2020 virtual workshop. The OMERACT GC Impact working group will now progress to identify, develop and validate measurement tools to best address these domains in clinical trials.

Chronic systemic inflammation contributes directly to increased cardiovascular disease (CVD) burden in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Given the role of inflammation in severe forms of COVID-19, glucocorticoids and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) have been assessed as potential COVID-19 therapies. RECENT FINDINGS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that glucocorticoids reduce mortality in severe COVID-19. RCTs of DMARDs have shown mixed results varying on intervention and inclusion criteria. DMARDs, including colchicine or biologic agents, may improve COVID-19 outcomes in specific patient populations. SUMMARY: Glucocorticoids are an effective treatment for the management of severe COVID-19. Further studies are needed to better define the patient populations who could benefit from DMARD use, as well as provide guidance regarding the timing of these interventions.

Objective To determine the incidence of dementia in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) 65 years and older, and compare the incidence of dementia in patients with RA with prevalent cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD), CV risk factors but no prevalent CVD and neither (referent group). Methods We analyzed claims data from the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) from 2006–2014. Eligibility criteria included continuous medical and pharmacy coverage for ≥ 12 months (baseline period 2006), > 2 RA diagnoses by a rheumatologist and at least 1 medication for RA. CVD and CV risk factors were identified using codes from the Chronic Condition Data Warehouse. Incident dementia was defined by 1 inpatient or 2 outpatient claims, or one dementia specific medication. Age-adjusted incident rates were calculated within each age strata. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate Hazard Ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals. Results Among 56,567 patients with RA, 11,789 (20.1%) incident cases of dementia were included in the main analysis. Age adjusted incident rates were high among all groups and increased with age. After adjustment for age, sex, comorbidities and baseline CV and RA medications, patients with CVD and CV risk factors between 65 and 74 years had an increased risk for incident dementia compared to those without CVD and without CV risk factors (HR 1.18 (95% CI 1.04–1.33) and HR 1.03 (95% CI 1.00–1.11), respectively). We observed a trend towards increased risk in patients between 75 and 84 years with CVD at baseline. Conclusion Patients with RA with both CVD and CV risk factors alone are at an increased risk for dementia compared to those with neither CVD nor CV risk factors; however, this risk is attenuated with increasing age. The impact of RA treatment and CV primary prevention strategies in the prevention of dementia in patients with RA warrants further studies.

We read with interest the article by Pimentel-Quiroz et al revising ANCA-associated vsculitis (AAV) in Latin America. This region has more than 650 millon inhabitants with a mix of different ancestries that has brought about a large genetic and ethnic variability. The term "Hispanics," which has been largely used in the medical literature to refer to this population, represents a misnomer and fails to capture this heterogenecity...

To evaluate the risk of incident dementia associated with the use of biologics or targeted synthetic DMARDs (b/tsDMARD) compared to conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDS only in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).We analyzed claims data from the Center for MedicareMedicare Services (CMS) from 2006-2017. Patients with RA were identified as adults ≥40 years old and two RA diagnoses by a rheumatologist7 and365 days apart. Patients with a prior diagnosis of dementia were excluded. Use of cs/b/tsDMARDs was the exposure of interest. Person-time was classified as either: 1) b/tsDMARD exposed, which included tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors (TNFi)-bDMARDs, non-TNFi-bDMARDs or tsDMARDs with or without csDMARDs; 2) csDMARD-exposed: any csDMARD without b/tsDMARD. Patients could contribute time to different exposure groups if they changed medications. Incident dementia was defined as: 1 inpatient OR 2 outpatients ICD-9-CM or ICD-10 claims for dementia, OR prescription of a dementia-specific medication (rivastigmine, galantamine, memantine, donepezil, tacrine). Age-adjusted incident rates (IR) were calculated, and univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate Hazard Ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).We identified 141,326 eligible RA patients; 80% female and 75.3% white, median age 67 years and mean (SD) exposure time of 1.1 (1.5) years. There were 233,271 initiations of c/b/tsDMARDS and 3,794 cases of incident dementia during follow up. The crude IR of dementia was 2.0 (95% CI 1.9-2.1) per 100 person-years for patients on csDMARDs and 1.3 (95% CI 1.2-1.4) for patients on any b/tsDMARD. Patients on b/tsDMARDs had an adjusted 19% lower risk for dementia than patients on csDMARDs [HR 0.81 (95% CI 0.76-0.87)]. Subgroup analysis found comparable risk reductions between TNFi, non-TNFi, and tsDMARDs. on the risk of dementia.The incidence of dementia in patients with RA was lower in patients receiving b/tsDMARDs when compared to patients on csDMARD only. No differences were observed between different classes of b/tsDMARDs, suggesting that decreased risk is possibly explained by the overall decrease in inflammation rather than a specific mechanism of action of these drugs.

Background: The impact and consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on people with rheumatic disease are unclear. We developed the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Patient Experience Survey to assess the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on people with rheumatic disease worldwide. Methods: Survey questions were developed by key stakeholder groups and disseminated worldwide through social media, websites, and patient support organisations. Questions included demographics, rheumatic disease diagnosis, COVID-19 diagnosis, adoption of protective behaviours to mitigate COVID-19 exposure, medication access and changes, health-care access and communication with rheumatologists, and changes in employment or schooling. Adults age 18 years and older with inflammatory or autoimmune rheumatic diseases were eligible for inclusion. We included participants with and without a COVID-19 diagnosis. We excluded participants reporting only non-inflammatory rheumatic diseases such as fibromyalgia or osteoarthritis. Findings: 12 117 responses to the survey were received between April 3 and May 8, 2020, and of these, 10 407 respondents had included appropriate age data. We included complete responses from 9300 adults with rheumatic disease (mean age 46·1 years; 8375 [90·1%] women, 893 [9·6%] men, and 32 [0·3%] participants who identified as non-binary). 6273 (67·5%) of respondents identified as White, 1565 (16·8%) as Latin American, 198 (2·1%) as Black, 190 (2·0%) as Asian, and 42 (0·5%) as Native American or Aboriginal or First Nation. The most common rheumatic disease diagnoses included rheumatoid arthritis (3636 [39·1%] of 9300), systemic lupus erythematosus (2882 [31·0%]), and Sjogren's syndrome (1290 [13·9%]). Most respondents (6921 [82·0%] of 8441) continued their antirheumatic medications as prescribed. Almost all (9266 [99·7%] of 9297) respondents adopted protective behaviours to limit SARS-CoV-2 exposure. A change in employment status occurred in 2524 (27·1%) of 9300) of respondents, with a 13·6% decrease in the number in full-time employment (from 4066 to 3514). Interpretation: People with rheumatic disease maintained therapy and followed public health advice to mitigate the risks of COVID-19. Substantial employment status changes occurred, with potential implications for health-care access, medication affordability, mental health, and rheumatic disease activity. Funding: American College of Rheumatology.

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).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.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.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.

Summary Background Patients with primary systemic vasculitis or polymyalgia rheumatica might be at a high risk for poor COVID-19 outcomes due to the treatments used, the potential organ damage cause by primary systemic vasculitis, and the demographic factors associated with these conditions. We therefore aimed to investigate factors associated with COVID-19 outcomes in patients with primary systemic vasculitis or polymyalgia rheumatica. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 12, 2020, and April 12, 2021, who had a history of primary systemic vasculitis (antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody [ANCA]-associated vasculitis, giant cell arteritis, Behcet's syndrome, or other vasculitis) or polymyalgia rheumatica, and were reported to the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance registry were included. To assess COVID-19 outcomes in patients, we used an ordinal COVID-19 severity scale, defined as: (1) no hospitalisation; (2) hospitalisation without supplemental oxygen; (3) hospitalisation with any supplemental oxygen or ventilation; or (4) death. Multivariable ordinal logistic regression analyses were used to estimate odds ratios (ORs), adjusting for age, sex, time period, number of comorbidities, smoking status, obesity, glucocorticoid use, disease activity, region, and medication category. Analyses were also stratified by type of rheumatic disease. Findings Of 1202 eligible patients identified in the registry, 733 (61·0%) were women and 469 (39·0%) were men, and their mean age was 63·8 years (SD 17·1). A total of 374 (31·1%) patients had polymyalgia rheumatica, 353 (29·4%) had ANCA-associated vasculitis, 183 (15·2%) had giant cell arteritis, 112 (9·3%) had Behcet's syndrome, and 180 (15·0%) had other vasculitis. Of 1020 (84·9%) patients with outcome data, 512 (50·2%) were not hospitalised, 114 (11·2%) were hospitalised and did not receive supplemental oxygen, 239 (23·4%) were hospitalised and received ventilation or supplemental oxygen, and 155 (15·2%) died. A higher odds of poor COVID-19 outcomes were observed in patients who were older (per each additional decade of life OR 1·44 [95% CI 1·31–1·57]), were male compared with female (1·38 [1·05–1·80]), had more comorbidities (per each additional comorbidity 1·39 [1·23–1·58]), were taking 10 mg/day or more of prednisolone compared with none (2·14 [1·50–3·04]), or had moderate, or high or severe disease activity compared with those who had disease remission or low disease activity (2·12 [1·49–3·02]). Risk factors varied among different disease subtypes. Interpretation Among patients with primary systemic vasculitis and polymyalgia rheumatica, severe COVID-19 outcomes were associated with variable and largely unmodifiable risk factors, such as age, sex, and number of comorbidities, as well as treatments, including high-dose glucocorticoids. Our results could be used to inform mitigation strategies for patients with these diseases. Funding American College of Rheumatology and the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology.

Objective To compare cardiovascular disease (CVD) rates in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) beneficiaries of the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) with commercially insured RA patients. Method We created three cohorts of RA patients aged Results There were 380,336 RA patients, mean age 53.3 (SD 8.1) years, 21–24% male. Prevalence of comorbidities was higher in SSDI vs. Marketscan. SSDI RA patients in cohort 2 (model 3) had higher CVD risk (HR 1.23 (1.14–1.33). In cohort 3 (model 3), CVD risk was not statistically significantly different between SSDI and Marketscan (HR 0.89 (0.69–1.15). Conclusion RA patient beneficiaries of the SSDI had higher risk for CVD events than those employed. The differences in CVD events between SSDI and Marketscan were partially attributable to differences in CVD risk factors.

International audience; Objective. To evaluate the impact of telemedicine use during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on rheumatology trainees. Methods. A voluntary, anonymous, web-based survey was administered in English, Spanish, or French from August 19 to October 5, 2020. Adult and pediatric rheumatology trainees were invited to participate via social media and email. Using multiple-choice questions and Likert scales, the survey assessed prior and current telemedicine use, impact on training, and supervision after COVID-19 prompted rapid telemedicine implementation. Results. Surveys were received from 302 trainees from 33 countries, with 83% in adult rheumatology training programs. Reported telemedicine use increased from 13% before the pandemic to 82% during the pandemic. United States trainees predominantly used video visits, whereas outside the United States telemedicine was predominantly audio only. Most (65%) evaluated new patients using telemedicine. More respondents were comfortable using telemedicine for follow-up patients (69%) than for new patients (25%). Only 39% of respondents reported receiving telemedicine-focused training, including instruction on software, clinical skills, and billing, whereas more than half of United States trainees (59%) had training. Postconsultation verbal discussion was the most frequent form of supervision; 24% reported no supervision. Trainees found that telemedicine negatively impacted supervision (50%) and the quality of clinical teaching received (70%), with only 9% reporting a positive impact. Conclusions. Despite widespread uptake of telemedicine, a low proportion of trainees received telemedicine training, and many lacked comfort in evaluating patients, particularly new patients. Inadequate supervision and clinical teaching were areas of concern. If telemedicine remains in widespread use, ensuring appropriate trainee supervision and teaching should be prioritized. No funding was received for this study. 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 American College of Rheumatology, the European League Against Rheumatism, or any other organization.

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.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.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.Patients with RMDs have higher rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection and an increased mortality rate.

BackgroundWe describe the early experiences of adults with systemic rheumatic disease who received the COVID-19 vaccine.MethodsFrom 2 April to 30 April 2021, we conducted an online, international survey of adults with systemic rheumatic disease who received COVID-19 vaccination. We collected patient-reported data on clinician communication, beliefs and intent about discontinuing disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) around the time of vaccination, and patient-reported adverse events after vaccination.ResultsWe analysed 2860 adults with systemic rheumatic diseases who received COVID-19 vaccination (mean age 55.3 years, 86.7% female, 86.3% white). Types of COVID-19 vaccines were Pfizer-BioNTech (53.2%), Oxford/AstraZeneca (22.6%), Moderna (21.3%), Janssen/Johnson & Johnson (1.7%) and others (1.2%). The most common rheumatic disease was rheumatoid arthritis (42.3%), and 81.2% of respondents were on a DMARD. The majority (81.9%) reported communicating with clinicians about vaccination. Most (66.9%) were willing to temporarily discontinue DMARDs to improve vaccine efficacy, although many (44.3%) were concerned about rheumatic disease flares. After vaccination, the most reported patient-reported adverse events were fatigue/somnolence (33.4%), headache (27.7%), muscle/joint pains (22.8%) and fever/chills (19.9%). Rheumatic disease flares that required medication changes occurred in 4.6%.ConclusionAmong adults with systemic rheumatic disease who received COVID-19 vaccination, patient-reported adverse events were typical of those reported in the general population. Most patients were willing to temporarily discontinue DMARDs to improve vaccine efficacy. The relatively low frequency of rheumatic disease flare requiring medications was reassuring.

ObjectiveWe investigated prolonged COVID-19 symptom duration, defined as lasting 28 days or longer, among people with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs).MethodsWe analysed data from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Vaccine Survey (2 April 2021–15 October 2021) to identify people with SARDs reporting test-confirmed COVID-19. Participants reported COVID-19 severity and symptom duration, sociodemographics and clinical characteristics. We reported the proportion experiencing prolonged symptom duration and investigated associations with baseline characteristics using logistic regression.ResultsWe identified 441 respondents with SARDs and COVID-19 (mean age 48.2 years, 83.7% female, 39.5% rheumatoid arthritis). The median COVID-19 symptom duration was 15 days (IQR 7, 25). Overall, 107 (24.2%) respondents had prolonged symptom duration (≥28 days); 42/429 (9.8%) reported symptoms lasting ≥90 days. Factors associated with higher odds of prolonged symptom duration included: hospitalisation for COVID-19 vs not hospitalised and mild acute symptoms (age-adjusted OR (aOR) 6.49, 95% CI 3.03 to 14.1), comorbidity count (aOR 1.11 per comorbidity, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.21) and osteoarthritis (aOR 2.11, 95% CI 1.01 to 4.27). COVID-19 onset in 2021 vs June 2020 or earlier was associated with lower odds of prolonged symptom duration (aOR 0.42, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.81).ConclusionMost people with SARDs had complete symptom resolution by day 15 after COVID-19 onset. However, about 1 in 4 experienced COVID-19 symptom duration 28 days or longer; 1 in 10 experienced symptoms 90 days or longer. Future studies are needed to investigate the possible relationships between immunomodulating medications, SARD type/flare, vaccine doses and novel viral variants with prolonged COVID-19 symptoms and other postacute sequelae of COVID-19 among people with SARDs.

ObjectiveTo describe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and pregnancy outcomes in patients with rheumatic disease who were pregnant at the time of infection.MethodsSince March 2020, the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance has collected cases of patients with rheumatic disease with COVID-19. We report details of pregnant women at the time of COVID-19 infection, including obstetric details separately ascertained from providers.ResultsWe report on 39 patients, including 22 with obstetric detail available. The mean and median age was 33 years, range 24–45 years. Rheumatic disease diagnoses included rheumatoid arthritis (n = 9), systemic lupus erythematosus (n = 9), psoriatic arthritis/other inflammatory arthritides (n = 8), and antiphospholipid syndrome (n = 6). Most had a term birth (16/22), with 3 preterm births, 1 termination, and 1 miscarriage; 1 woman had yet to deliver at the time of report. One-quarter (n = 10/39) of pregnant women were hospitalized following COVID-19 diagnosis. Two of 39 (5%) required supplemental oxygen (both hospitalized); no patients died. The majority did not receive specific medication treatment for their COVID-19 (n = 32/39, 82%), and 7 patients received some combination of antimalarials, colchicine, anti–interleukin 1β, azithromycin, glucocorticoids, and lopinavir/ritonavir.ConclusionWomen with rheumatic diseases who were pregnant at the time of COVID-19 had favorable outcomes. These data have limitations due to the small size and methodology; however, they provide cautious optimism for pregnancy outcomes for women with rheumatic disease particularly in comparison to the increased risk of poor outcomes that have been reported in other series of pregnant women with COVID-19.

The novel coronavirus pandemic has affected the world, importantly, from a health perspective. Initial concern about all rheumatology patients being at risk has given way to a more nuanced view of the risks..

Objective.To identify shared and distinct features of giant cell arteritis (GCA) and coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) to reduce diagnostic errors that could cause delays in correct treatment.Methods.Two systematic literature reviews determined the frequency of clinical features of GCA and COVID-19 in published reports. Frequencies in each disease were summarized using medians and ranges.Results.Headache was common in GCA but was also observed in COVID-19 (GCA 66%, COVID-19 10%). Jaw claudication or visual loss (43% and 26% in GCA, respectively) generally were not reported in COVID-19. Both diseases featured fatigue (GCA 38%, COVID-19 43%) and elevated inflammatory markers (C-reactive protein [CRP] elevated in 100% of GCA, 66% of COVID-19), but platelet count was elevated in 47% of GCA but only 4% of COVID-19 cases. Cough and fever were commonly reported in COVID-19 and less frequently in GCA (cough, 63% for COVID-19 vs 12% for GCA; fever, 83% for COVID-19 vs 27% for GCA). Gastrointestinal upset was occasionally reported in COVID-19 (8%), rarely in GCA (4%). Lymphopenia was more common in COVID-19 than GCA (53% in COVID-19, 2% in GCA). Alteration of smell and taste have been described in GCA but their frequency is unclear.Conclusion.Overlapping features of GCA and COVID-19 include headache, fever, elevated CRP and cough. Jaw claudication, visual loss, platelet count and lymphocyte count may be more discriminatory. Physicians should be aware of the possibility of diagnostic confusion. We have designed a simple checklist to aid evidence-based evaluation of patients with suspected GCA.

As of the end of March 2020, the covid-19 pandemic has resulted in over 850 000 confirmed cases and an estimated 42 000 deaths worldwide.1 All agree that safe and effective therapies for treatment and prevention are urgently needed. In the midst of this rapidly progressing crisis, evidence has emerged suggesting that antimalarial medications, such as hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), may be efficacious for covid-19 treatment. After amplification from politicians, news outlets and social media, a rush to acquire supplies of HCQ resulted in worldwide shortages. Recent government policies may have exacerbated these issues, where wider use in both covid-19 treatment and prevention were authorised or recommended by India, the US Food and Drug Administration and other countries.2–4 In response to dwindling supplies, several US states have issued restrictions on HCQ use including limiting dispensation quantities and verifying indications.5–8 Rheumatologists, researchers and patient partners must advocate for the appropriate distribution and use of HCQ, as millions of people with rheumatic diseases worldwide depend on HCQ to control disease activity and maintain quality of life. In doing so, we must also remind ourselves to ‘make haste slowly’ ( festina lente ). Emanuel et al 9 published a well-timed commentary suggesting the following principles for fairly allocating scarce resources during the covid-19 crisis: equal treatment, attempts to maximise benefits and prioritising the most vulnerable. These recommendations echo prior guidance published in 2016 by the WHO on how to address future infectious disease outbreaks.10 The report cautioned that ‘special attention should be given to ensuring that persons who face heightened susceptibility to harm or injustice during infectious disease outbreaks are able to contribute to decisions about infectious disease outbreak planning and response’. This ethical framework offers health systems a structure for approaching the use and distribution of HCQ during the covid-19 pandemic to minimise …

Antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV) is a group of systemic necrotizing vasculitides that includes granulomatosis with polyangiitis, microscopic polyangiitis, and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis. Treatment of these conditions has improved during the past 2 decades with better understanding of these conditions and availability of newer agents. Cyclophosphamide (CYC) was the first drug demonstrated to afford successful treatment and improvement in AAV. With the emergence of newer agents with more favorable safety profiles, CYC is no longer the cornerstone of management of AAV. This article reviews existing data for treatment and the current role of CYC in the management of AAV.

We thank Tang et al. for their interest in our study and correspondence on an important clinical question. In May of 2020 when our literature search was last updated, we did not identify any case series, cohort studies, or randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the role of hydroxychloroquine as prophylaxis for COVID‐19. Consequently, our analysis was unable to address this issue. The authors should be commended for their efforts to conduct an RCT during the early phases of the pandemic when there was widespread misinformation about antimalarials. We empathize with the difficulties they encountered, which highlight broader issues impacting the COVID‐19 research agenda.

Giant cell arteritis, a common primary systemic vasculitis affecting older people, presents acutely as a medical emergency and requires rapid specialist assessment and treatment to prevent irreversible vision loss. Disruption of the health-care system caused by the COVID-19 pandemic exposed weak points in clinical pathways for diagnosis and treatment of giant cell arteritis, but has also permitted innovative solutions. The essential roles played by all professionals, including general practitioners and surgeons, in treating these patients have become evident. Patients must also be involved in the reshaping of clinical services. As an international group of authors involved in the care of patients with giant cell arteritis, we reflect in this Viewpoint on rapid service adaptations during the first peak of COVID-19, evaluate challenges, and consider implications for the future.

Objective To report the clinical experience with anakinra in preventing mechanical ventilation in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), symptoms of cytokine storm syndrome, and acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Methods To be included in this retrospective case series, patients must have had severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), fever, ferritin levels >1,000 ng/ml with 1 additional laboratory marker of hyperinflammation, and acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure was defined as requiring 15 liters of supplemental oxygen via a nonrebreather mask combined with 6-liter nasal cannula or use of ≥95% oxygen by high-flow nasal cannula. We excluded patients in whom there was suspicion of bacterial infection or who were receiving immunosuppressants. Subcutaneous anakinra was initiated at 100 mg every 6 hours and gradually tapered off completely. The primary outcome was the prevention of mechanical ventilation. Results Of the 14 patients who met the criteria, 11 patients received anakinra for a maximum of 19 days. Seven of the patients who started anakinra treatment ≤36 hours after onset of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure did not require mechanical ventilation, and all were discharged home. Four patients who started anakinra ≥4 days after onset of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure required mechanical ventilation. Of those, 3 patients were extubated (2 discharged home and 1 remained hospitalized), and 1 died. All 3 patients who met the criteria but did not receive anakinra required mechanical ventilation. Two patients were extubated (1 discharged home and 1 remained hospitalized), and 1 remained on mechanical ventilation. Conclusion Our data suggest that anakinra could be beneficial in treating COVID-19 patients with evidence of cytokine storm syndrome when initiated early after onset of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Our patient selection and treatment approach should be considered for investigation in a clinical trial to determine the safety and efficacy of anakinra in treating patients with COVID-19 and symptoms of cytokine storm syndrome.

Objective Antirheumatic disease therapies have been used to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) and its complications. We conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis to describe the current evidence. Methods A search of published and preprint databases in all languages was performed. Included studies described one or more relevant clinical outcomes in five or more people who were infected with SARS‐CoV‐2 and were treated with antirheumatic disease therapy between 01/01/2019 and 05/29/2020. Pairs of reviewers screened articles and extracted data and assessed risk of bias. A meta‐analysis of effect sizes using the random‐effects models was performed when possible. Results The search identified 3,935 articles, of which 45 were included (4 randomized controlled trials, 29 cohort studies, and 12 case series). All studies evaluated hospitalized patients and 29 out of 45 had been published in a peer‐reviewed journal. In a meta‐analysis of three cohort studies with a low risk of bias, hydroxychloroquine use was not significantly associated with mortality (pooled hazard ratio (HR) 1.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83‐2.42). In a meta‐analysis of two cohort studies with some concerns/high risk of bias, anakinra use was associated with lower mortality (pooled HR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1‐0.4). Evidence was inconclusive with regard to other antirheumatic disease therapies and the majority of other studies had a high risk of bias. Conclusion In this systematic review and meta‐analysis, hydroxychloroquine use was not associated with benefit or harm with regard to COVID‐19 mortality. The evidence supporting the effect of other antirheumatic disease therapies in COVID‐19 is currently inconclusive.

Granulomatosis with polyangiitis is a primary systemic vasculitis commonly described with the typical triad of upper airway, lung, and kidney involvement. Upper and lower airway involvement is characteristic in patients with granulomatosis with polyangiitis and can sometimes represent the initial or in some instances the sole manifestation. The objective of this review is to summarize the various clinical manifestations of localized disease in GPA and their treatment. Sinonasal disease is seen in up to 90% of patients. Otologic and ocular involvement is also commonly seen. Laryngeal and tracheal disease although less common is associated with significant morbidity and can be therapeutically challenging. Clinicians need to be aware of these localized GPA manifestations as they may be presenting disease features in the absence of other systemic findings. Treatment of localized GPA involves both immunosuppressive and surgical interventions for specific manifestations. Collaboration between specialists including rheumatologists, otolaryngologists, and ophthalmologists is often crucial to ensure optimal outcomes for patients. This is a narrative review that provides a comprehensive overview of localized granulomatosis with polyangiitis and current treatment options.

Hydroxychloroquine, an essential treatment for many patients with rheumatologic conditions, has garnered widespread attention as a potential treatment for COVID-19 infection. The authors appraise t...

Background:The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted healthcare delivery and education of physicians, including rheumatology trainees.Objectives:To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the clinical experiences, research opportunities, and well-being of rheumatology trainees.Methods:A voluntary, anonymous, web-based survey was administered in English, Spanish, or French from 19/08/2020 to 05/10/2020. Adult and paediatric rheumatology trainees worldwide in training in 2020 were invited to participate via social media and email. Using multiple choice questions, Likert scales, and free text answers, we assessed trainee patient care activities, redeployment, research, and well-being.Results:The 302 respondents were from 33 countries, with most (83%, 252/302) in adult rheumatology training. Many trainees (45%, 135/300) reported an increase in non-rheumatology clinical work (e.g. care of COVID-19 patients), with 52% of these (70/135) also continuing rheumatology clinical work. COVID-19 redeployment was not optional for 68% (91/134).Trainees reported a negative impact of the pandemic in their growth in rheumatology (Figure 1). They also reported a substantial impact on several training areas: outpatient clinics (79%, 238/302), inpatient consultations (59%, 177/302), formal teaching (55%, 167/302), procedures (53%, 147/302), teaching opportunities (52%, 157/302), and ultrasonography (36%, 110/302), with 87-96% perceiving a negative impact on these areas. Only 54% (159/294) reported feeling comfortable with their level of clinical supervision during the pandemic (Figure 1).Many trainees (46%, 128/280) reported changes in research experiences during the pandemic; 39% (110/285) reported that COVID-19 negatively affected their ability to continue their pre-pandemic research and 50% (142/285) reported difficulty maintaining research goals (Figure 1).Some rheumatology trainees reported having health condition(s) putting them at high risk for COVID-19 (10%, 30/302) and 14% of trainees (41/302) reported having had COVID-19 (Table 1). Only 53% (160/302) reported feeling physically safe in the workplace while 25% (76/302) reported not feeling physically safe; reasons included lack of training about COVID-19, lack of comfort in the clinical setting, insufficient personal protective equipment, immunocompromised state, and pregnancy. Half (151/302) reported burnout and 68% (204/302) an increase in stress from work during the pandemic (Figure 1), whilst 25% (75/302) reported that changes to their training programme negatively impacted their physical health.Conclusion:The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted the experience of rheumatology training as well as the well-being of trainees globally. Our data highlight concerns for rheumatology trainees including research opportunities and clinical care which should be a focus for curriculum planning.Figure 1.Rheumatology trainee perceptions of pandemic impact and changes in training programme.Table 1.Estimated hazard ratios, adjusted for age and gender, for individuals with rheumatoid arthritisEuropen = 89ROWn = 213Combinedn = 302Disability1 (1)9 (4)10 (3)High risk7 (8)23 (11)30 (10)Pregnant4 (5)15 (7)19 (6)Shielding/Quarantining12 (13)70 (33)82 (27)Acquired COVID-1920 (22)21 (10)41 (14)Disclosure of Interests:Kristen Young: None declared, Su-Ann Yeoh: None declared, Michael Putman: None declared, Elizabeth Graef: None declared, Francis Berenbaum: None declared, Richard Conway: None declared, Rebecca Grainger Speakers bureau: Speaker fees from Abbvie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Cornerstones, all not related to this work, Consultant of: Consultancy fees from Abbvie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Cornerstones, all not related to this work, Grant/research support from: Travel assistance from Pfizer, not related to this work, Adam Kilian: None declared, Maximilian Konig: None declared, Jean Liew Grant/research support from: Research grant from Pfizer unrelated to this manuscript, Pedro M Machado Speakers bureau: Speaker fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript, Consultant of: Consulting fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript, Sebastian E. Sattui: None declared, Jeffrey Sparks Consultant of: Consultancy for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Inova Diagnostics, Optum, and Pfizer unrelated to this manuscript, Grant/research support from: Research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb unrelated to this manuscript, Paul Sufka: None declared, Manuel Ugarte-Gil Grant/research support from: Research grants from Janssen and Pfizer unrelated to this manuscript, Laura Upton: None declared, Zachary Wallace: None declared, Jinoos Yazdany Consultant of: Consultancy for Astra Zeneca, Eli Lilly, and Pfizer, not related to this work, Grant/research support from: Research grants from Gilead and Pfizer, not related to this work, Arundathi Jayatilleke: None declared.

Background:The COVID-19 pandemic led to a rapid increase in remote consultations in rheumatology care. Due to the potential impact of this change on rheumatology clinical training, we investigated trainees’ experiences with telemedicine.Objectives:To assess the impact of telemedicine use during the COVID-19 pandemic on rheumatology training, including supervision.Methods:A voluntary, anonymous web-based survey was administered in English, Spanish, or French from 19/08/2020 to 05/10/2020. Adult and paediatric rheumatology trainees worldwide in training in 2020 were invited to participate via social media and email. Using multiple choice questions, Likert scales, and free text answers, we collected data regarding prior and current telemedicine use, training, and supervision.Results:302 respondents from 33 countries completed the survey, with most (83%, 252/302) in adult rheumatology training. Reported use of telemedicine increased from 13% (39/302) pre-pandemic to 82% (247/302) (Table 1). European trainees predominantly utilised audio-only compared to trainees from the rest of the world (ROW) who predominantly utilised audio-video telemedicine.Most trainees continued to evaluate new patients using telemedicine (65%, 161/247). A larger proportion of trainees were comfortable using telemedicine to evaluate follow-up (69% 170/247) versus new patients (25%, 41/161) (Figure 1).Only 32% (97/302) were trained in telemedicine, with the highest proportion among United States (US) trainees (59%, 69/116); subjects included software, clinical skills, and billing. The majority of trainees found this helpful (92%, 89/97).Supervision was most frequently in the form of verbal discussion after the consultation (Table 1); 24% (59/247) had no telemedicine supervision during the pandemic. In general, trainees found telemedicine negatively impacted their supervision (51%, 123/242) and clinical teaching quality (70%, 171/244); only 9% reported a positive impact on these areas.Conclusion:Adoption of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic has led to areas of concern for rheumatology trainees including inadequate supervision and clinical teaching. Our results suggest a need for education on evaluation of new patients using telemedicine, increasing telemedicine training, and ensuring adequate supervisory arrangements.Table 1.Telemedicine use, supervision, and training by region. Data is presented as n (%). Rest of the world (ROW) data includes Asia (50), Central and South America (23), Canada (12), Australia (8), and Africa (4).Europen = 89USn = 116ROWn = 97Combinedn = 302Telemedicine usePre-pandemic15 (17)9 (8)15 (15)39 (13)During pandemic64 (72)112 (97)71 (73)247 (82)Telemedicine modalitypre-pandemicAudio-only14 (93)3 (33)8 (53)25 (64)Audio-video1 (7)7 (78)7 (47)15 (38)Telemedicine modality during pandemicAudio-only56 (88)47 (42)51 (72)154 (62)Audio-video7 (11)100 (89)29 (41)136 (55)Supervisionpre-pandemicReal-time observation (part of visit)0 (0)4 (44)3 (20)7 (18)Real-time observation (full visit)0 (0)2 (22)2 (13)4 (10)Verbal discussion after8 (53)3 (33)7 (47)18 (46)Written communication after0 (0)0 (0)1 (7)1 (3)None7 (47)2 (22)5 (33)14 (36)Supervision during pandemicReal-time observation (part of visit)2 (3)54 (48)15 (21)71 (29)Real-time observation (full visit)3 (5)32 (29)8 (11)43 (17)Verbal discussion after32 (50)65 (58)28 (39)125 (51)Written communication after7 (11)15 (13)9 (13)31 (13)None28 (44)9 (8)22 (31)59 (24)Figure 1.Rheumatology trainee comfort levels in using telemedicine during the pandemic.Disclosure of Interests:Su-Ann Yeoh: None declared, Kristen Young: None declared, Michael Putman: None declared, Elizabeth Graef: None declared, Francis Berenbaum: None declared, Richard Conway: None declared, Rebecca Grainger Speakers bureau: Speaker fees from Abbvie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Cornerstones, all not related to this work, Consultant of: Consultancy fees from Abbvie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Cornerstones, all not related to this work, Grant/research support from: Travel assistance from Pfizer, not related to this work, Adam Kilian: None declared, Maximilian Konig: None declared, Jean Liew Grant/research support from: Research grant from Pfizer unrelated to this manuscript, Pedro M Machado Speakers bureau: Speaker fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript, Consultant of: Consulting fees from Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this manuscript, Sebastian E. Sattui: None declared, Jeffrey Sparks Consultant of: Consultancy for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Inova Diagnostics, Optum, and Pfizer unrelated to this manuscript, Grant/research support from: Research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb unrelated to this manuscript, Paul Sufka: None declared, Manuel Ugarte-Gil Grant/research support from: Research grants from Janssen and Pfizer unrelated to this manuscript, Laura Upton: None declared, Zachary Wallace: None declared, Jinoos Yazdany Consultant of: Consultancy for Astra Zeneca, Eli Lilly, and Pfizer, not related to this work, Grant/research support from: Research grants from Gilead and Pfizer, not related to this work, Arundathi Jayatilleke: None declared

The association between hyperuricemia and hypertension is controversial. Animal models, epidemiological data, and small clinical trials have favored a causative role for hyperuricemia in hypertension but more studies are necessary to elucidate putative mechanisms, population susceptibility, and potential for urate-lowering therapies (ULT) to decrease blood pressure (BP).To describe the background and design of the Serum Urate Reduction to Prevent Hypertension (SURPHER) study.SURPHER is a single center, double-blinded, crossover trial in which participants are randomly assigned to allopurinol (300mg) or placebo. Enrollment focused on adults 18-40years old with baseline systolic blood pressure≥120 and160mmHg or diastolic blood pressure≥80 and100mmHg, and serum urate ≥5.0mg/dL or ≥4.0mg/dL for men or women, respectively. SURPHER recruitment targets participants without chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate60mL/min/1.73m2), and without prior diagnosis of gout or use of ULT to treat gout. The primary outcome is change from baseline in blood pressure assessed by 24hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and mechanistic outcomes include changes in endothelial function as measured by flow-mediated dilation, as well as C-reactive protein levels.Since June 16, 2014 until present, SURPHER is recruiting participants in the city of Birmingham, Alabama.The study aims to enroll otherwise healthy young adults for a pharmacological intervention study with multiple study-related procedures. Challenges related to recruitment are anticipated and multiple strategies for increasing recruitment and retention are planned if necessary.

Objective Methods to improve informed consent efficiency and effectiveness are needed for pragmatic clinical trials. We compared informed consent using a tablet computer to a paper approach to assess comprehension and satisfaction of patients and clinic staff for a future osteoporosis clinical trial. Methods Nine community-based practices identified and recruited patients to compare the informed consent processes (tablet vs. paper) in a mock osteoporosis clinical trial. The tablet informed consent included an animation summarizing the trial, complete informed consent document, and questions to assess and reinforce comprehension of the study. Participants were women age ≥55 years with ≥1 year of alendronate use. We surveyed participants to assess comprehension and satisfaction and office staff for satisfaction and perceived time demands. Results The nine practices enrolled 33 participants. There was not a significant difference in comprehension between the tablet vs. paper informed consent [mean (SD) tablet: 12.2 (1.0) vs. paper: 11.4 (1.7)]. Office staff preferred the tablet to the paper informed consent for identifying potential study participants (two-sided t-test p = 0.02) despite an increased perceived time spent to complete the tablet process [tablet: 28.3 min (SD 16.3) vs. paper: 19.0 min (SD 6.9); p = 0.08]. Conclusions Although, there were no significant differences in participant satisfaction and comprehension with the tablet informed consent compared to a paper informed consent, patients and office staff trended towards greater satisfaction with the tablet informed consent. Larger studies are needed to further evaluate the utility of electronic informed consent in pragmatic clinical trials.

Despite being the most common type of inflammatory arthritis, gout is often poorly managed. Except for febuxostat and pegloticase, research in new therapeutic agents for the management of hyperuricemia in gout remained insufficient for several decades. With emerging evidence of possible roles of hyperuricemia in cardiometabolic comorbidities, as well as more convincing evidence regarding poor outcomes (e.g. disability, recurrent hospital admissions) in patients with uncontrolled gout, several agents are current under development. Increasing knowledge regarding renal urate transporters has resulted in the development of new generation uricosurics such as lesinurad and arhalofenate. This review aims at discussing current therapeutic strategies for gout, as well as their limitations and the possible role of emerging agents in the chronic management of hyperuricemia in gout. Drugs in phases I and II of development will be discussed, along with new agents and therapeutic classes, such as purine nucleoside phosphorylase inhibitors and dual-action drugs. These new developments are encouraging, and will hopefully contribute to a more adequate management of hyperuricemia in gout.

Crystal arthropathies are among the most common causes of painful inflammatory arthritis. Gout, the most common example, has been associated with cardiovascular and renal disease. In recent years, evidence for these associations and those involving other comorbidities, such as the metabolic syndrome, have emerged, and the importance of asymptomatic hyperuricemia has been established. In this review, an update on evidence, both experimental and clinical, is presented, and associations between hyperuricemia, gout, and several comorbidities are described. Causality regarding calcium pyrophosphate arthropathy and associated comorbidities is also reviewed.

Background: Regulatory T cells (Tregs) modulate the host response in infectious diseases and are key mediators of peripheral tolerance. Cryopreservation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) is commonly used in immunological field studies where access to complex laboratory tests is not feasible. Our objective is to assess the effects of cryopreservation on the flow cytometric detection of surface and intracellular markers of Tregs. Methods: Heparinized venous blood was obtained from 36 healthy individuals and 15 HIV-1 infected subjects. PBMCs were isolated and stained for surface and intracellular markers of Tregs. PBMCs from each subject were cryopreserved in liquid nitrogen with DMSO; these cells were thawed and stained at a later date. All samples were analyzed by flow cytometry. The proportion of Tregs was compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: Cryopreservation decreased the proportion of Tregs identified by surface and intracellular markers in healthy individuals and in HIV-1 patients. The proportion of CD4+CD25+FoxP3+ was decreased from 3.13 to 2.16% (P < 0.001) for non-HIV subjects and from 2.68 to 0.94% (P < 0.001) for HIV subjects, compared to fresh samples. Significant reduction was also observed for CD4+CD25+CD127lo-neg. However, the effect varied considerably between samples. The effect was similar among HIV and non-HIV patients (P = 0.38). Conclusions: Cryopreservation modulates the detection of surface and intracellular markers of Tregs. These results confirm that research on Tregs, including studies of HIV-1 infected patients, should be carried out prospectively on fresh samples in order to obtain unbiased conclusions. Results using cryopreserved cells should be regarded as only preliminary. © 2011 International Clinical Cytometry Society