Search

Objectives: To determine the association between radiologic joint damage (JD) and a lower lean body mass (LBM) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients., Methods: A cross-sectional study from a single center established RA cohort. JD and appendicular LBM (arms and legs) were measured with the Sharp/van der Heijde (SvdH) score and dual x-ray absorptiometry expressed as kg/m 2 , respectively. A univariable analysis was used to determine the association between JD an LBM; then, a multivariable regression model was performed to evaluate the persistence of this association, adjusted by age, gender, disease duration, socioeconomic status (by the Graffar method), tobacco use, anticitrullinated protein antibody levels, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints for RA with erythrocyte sedimentation rate, glucocorticoid use (as prednisone equivalent), disease-modifying antirheumatic drug use, body mass index, and disability (by the multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire)., Results: Two hundred forty-seven patients were included; the average (SD) age was 63.0 (12.8) years, disease duration 20 (15.00) years, the total SvdH was 66 (86.75), and the aLBM was 13.6 (3.82) kg/m 2 . In the univariable analysis, a lower appendicular LBM was associated with higher SvdH score on the female population, in terms of the total ( B = -8.6, p < 0.01), bone erosion (-4.4, p < 0.01), and joint space narrowing (-4.2, p < 0.01) scores; this correlation remained in the multivariable analysis in terms of total SvdH ( B = -9.5, p < 0.01), bone erosion (-5.2, p < 0.01), and joint space narrowing (-4.3, p < 0.01)., Conclusions: A lower LBM in female patients was associated with more severe JD independently of other variables examined. Strategies aimed at preserving LBM could have a favorable impact on the course of disease., Competing Interests: M.F.U.-G. has grant support from Janssen and Pfizer, and he has been a speaker for GSK. The other authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the response to rituximab (RTX) as treatment for lupus nephritis (LN) in a Latin American Lupus cohort., Methods: The medical records from LN patients from a single-center cohort spanning between January 2012 and December 2020 were reviewed. Demographic factors (age at diagnosis and baseline, gender), disease duration, previous and concomitant treatments, serum creatinine, and 24-hour proteinuria (24-HP) levels at baseline, and 6th and 12th months were obtained. Complete response (CR) or responder status was defined according to the LUNAR, AURORA-1, and BLISS-LN trials., Results: Thirty-six patients received RTX as induction treatment; 32 (88.9%) were women. Their age at baseline and disease duration were 32.6 (11.7) and 7.6 (6.5) years, respectively. The time between renal biopsy and RTX use was 2.64 (4.41) years. At baseline, serum creatinine and 24-HP levels were 1.5 (1.5) mg/dL and 3.4 (2.8) g, respectively. At months 6 and 12, serum creatinine levels were 1.6 (1.6) and 1.6 (1.5) mg/dL, and 24-HP were 2.2 (2.2) and 1.6 (1.5) g, respectively. According to LUNAR and AURORA-1 criteria, CR at 6th and 12th months were 6/34 (17.6%) and 8/30 (26.7%) and 6/34 (17.6%) and 7/31 (22.6%) patients, respectively. According to BLISS-LN criteria, responders at 6th and 12th months were 9/34 (26.5%) and 10/31 (32.3%) patients, respectively., Conclusions: CR and responder status were reached in less than one third of LN patients treated with RTX, regardless of the criteria used to define them. However, serum creatinine levels did not increase, and there was a decrease in proteinuria levels during the follow-up., Competing Interests: M.F.U.-G. has grant support from Janssen and Pfizer, and he has been speaker for GSK and AztraZeneca. The other authors have disclosed no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate the predictive value of the LFA-REAL ClinRO (Lupus Foundation of America Rapid Evaluation of Activity in Lupus clinician-reported outcome) on damage accrual in systemic lupus erythematosus patients., Methods: Data from a prevalent lupus cohort were used. The LFA-REAL ClinRO includes 9 domains: mucocutaneous (global and 3 subdomains), musculoskeletal (global and 2 subdomains), cardiorespiratory, neuropsychiatric, renal, hematological, constitutional, vasculitis, and other (it allows for other or rare manifestations). For each domain, a 0- to 100-mm visual analog scale is used, and global domains are included except for the mucocutaneous and musculoskeletal domains where the subdomains are included; it allows for 3 manifestations under "other," so the score ranges from 0 to 1400 (sum of 14 in the visual analog scale). Damage was assessed with the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology damage index. Generalized estimating equations were performed, being the outcome the increase in the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology damage index; confounders from the previous visit were included; adjusted multivariable models were done. Incidence rate ratios per 10-unit increase in the LFA-REAL ClinRO were reported. Similar models were performed to evaluate the impact of the SLEDAI-2K (SLE Disease Activity Index) and physician global assessment on damage to determine which measure would better predict damage accrual., Results: Three-hundred thirty-one patients and 1425 visits were included, 1.9 (SD 1.2) years of follow-up. Disease duration at baseline was 10.7 (7.4) years. The mean LFA-REAL ClinRO was 18.2 (SD 30.7). During the follow-up visits, 63 (17.9%) patients accrued damage once; 4 (1.1%) accrued damage twice. The LFA-REAL ClinRO was predictive of damage accrual even after adjustment for possible confounders (incidence rate ratio 1.10 (95% confidence interval 1.04-1.16; p < 0.001). Similar results were obtained using the SLEDAI-2K and the physician global assessment., Conclusion: The LFA-REAL ClinRO is predictive of damage accrual, even after adjusting for possible confounders., Competing Interests: M.F.U.-G. has grant support from Janssen and Pfizer, has been speaker for GSK and AztraZeneca, and has been member of the advisory boards for AztraZeneca and Ferrer; R.V.G.-C. has grant support from Pfizer; C.R.-S. and V.R.P.-Q. have grant support from Janssen. The other authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Since the development of the OMERACT Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) Core Outcome Set (COS) in 1998, many new SLE domains have been identified and measures developed, creating a need to update the SLE COS. To revisit the 1998 SLE COS and research agenda domains, and generate new candidate domains, we conducted this study of patients with SLE and collaborators., Objective: (1) To evaluate existing candidate SLE domains for inclusion in the SLE COS. (2) To generate additional candidate SLE domains for COS consideration. (3) To engage SLE collaborators, including patients, in developing the updated SLE COS., Methods: The OMERACT SLE Working Group's steering committee developed a survey to assess the importance of candidate SLE domains and generate additional domains for consideration towards the SLE COS. Patients with SLE followed at the University of Toronto Lupus Clinic (patient group) and members of the OMERACT SLE Working Group (collaborator group) were invited to complete the survey between August 2022 and February 2023., Results: A total of 175 patients were invited and 100 completed the survey. Of 178 collaborators invited, 145 completed the survey. Patients tended to prioritize life-impact domains while collaborators prioritized clinical domains. Both patients and collaborators recommended additional domains to those included in the 1998 SLE COS and research agenda., Conclusion: The domain inclusion and importance results demonstrate that patients and collaborators prioritize different domains, so capturing the perspectives of both groups is essential to ensure a holistic assessment of SLE. The results of the study identify domains that already have a high level of agreement for potential inclusion in the SLE COS, domains that require further explanation, and novel domains that warrant consideration., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

SLE presents significant challenges for patients and health-care professionals (HCPs), both across Europe and worldwide. Improving health-care outcomes for patients with SLE requires a comprehensive understanding of patient disease pathways. In particular, the geographical distance between SLE patients and specialized care centres, combined with the scarcity of rheumatologists, exacerbates delays in diagnosis and management. Also, the initial SLE symptoms can often be non-specific, and providing guidelines for primary HCPs and other non-specialists is extremely important. Improvement in access to treatment is also important, with several recently approved therapies for SLE not being available in several European countries and many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Furthermore, in the LMICs in which these treatments are available, they are not always covered by the health-care system, making their access almost impossible for those of lower socio-economic status. A number of provisions are already in place within the European Union, to improve access to care for patients with rare and complex diseases, including those with SLE. In particular, European Reference Networks (ERNs), such the ERN for Autoimmune Diseases ReCONNET, are virtual networks involving HCPs across Europe with the aim of improving the care of patients with rare and complex diseases that require highly specialized treatment and a concentration of knowledge and resources. In addition, lupus patient organizations such as Lupus Europe play a crucial role in raising awareness of SLE and advocating for improved access to care. Together, we can work towards a future where all people living with lupus receive the comprehensive and timely care they deserve., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

Background: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is characterised by increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality risk. We aimed to examine the prevalence of traditional cardiovascular risk factors and their control in an international survey of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus., Methods: In this multicentre, cross-sectional study, cardiovascular risk factor data from medical files of adult patients (aged ≥18) with SLE followed between Jan 1, 2015, and Jan 1, 2020, were collected from 24 countries, across five continents. We assessed the prevalence and target attainment of cardiovascular risk factors and examined potential differences by country income level and antiphospholipid syndrome coexistence. We used the Systemic Coronary Risk Evaluation algorithm for cardiovascular risk estimation, and the European Society of Cardiology guidelines for assessing cardiovascular risk factor target attainment. People with lived experience were not involved in the research or writing process., Findings: 3401 patients with SLE were included in the study. The median age was 43·0 years (IQR 33-54), 3047 (89·7%) of 3396 patients were women, 349 (10.3%) were men, and 1629 (48·1%) of 3390 were White. 556 (20·7%) of 2681 patients had concomitant antiphospholipid syndrome. We found a high cardiovascular risk factor prevalence (hypertension 1210 [35·6%] of 3398 patients, obesity 751 [23·7%] of 3169 patients, and hyperlipidaemia 650 [19·8%] of 3279 patients), and suboptimal control of modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (blood pressure [target of <130/80 mm Hg], BMI, and lipids) in the entire SLE group. Higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors but a better blood pressure (target of <130/80 mm Hg; 54·9% [1170 of 2132 patients] vs 46·8% [519 of 1109 patients]; p<0·0001), and lipid control (75·0% [895 of 1194 patients] vs 51·4% [386 of 751 patients], p<0·0001 for high-density lipoprotein [HDL]; 66·4% [769 of 1158 patients] vs 60·8% [453 of 745 patients], p=0·013 for non-HDL; 80·9% [1017 of 1257 patients] vs 61·4% [486 of 792 patients], p<0·0001 for triglycerides]) was observed in patients from high-income versus those from middle-income countries. Patients with SLE with antiphospholipid syndrome had a higher prevalence of modifiable cardiovascular risk factors, and significantly lower attainment of BMI and lipid targets (for low-density lipoprotein and non-HDL) than patients with SLE without antiphospholipid syndrome., Interpretation: High prevalence and inadequate cardiovascular risk factor control were observed in a large multicentre and multiethnic SLE cohort, especially among patients from middle-income compared with high-income countries and among those with coexistent antiphospholipid syndrome. Increased awareness of cardiovascular disease risk in SLE, especially in the above subgroups, is urgently warranted., Funding: None., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AGS has received speaker fees from Merck and Schering-Plough, Bristol Myers Squibb, UCB, Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly and Women's College Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada. AMK has received speaker fees from Boehringer Ingelheim and Sanofi; has participated on advisory boards for Pfizer, Gilead, and Boehringer Ingelheim; and has received congress sponsorship from Pfizer, Celgene, UCB, Mylan, and Roche. GJP-E has received grants from Janssen; consulting fees from GSK, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Novartis, and Bago; speakers fees from GSK, Werfen, Janssen, AstraZeneca, and Novartis; support for attending meetings and travel from GSK, AstraZeneca, and Boehringer Ingelheim; and for participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board from RemeGen, AstraZeneca, and Janssen. GAK has received consulting fees from Janssen and Scipher; and for participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board from Janssen. MFU-G has received grant support from Janssen and Pfizer; has been a speaker for GSK and AstraZeneca; and has been a member of advisory boards for AstraZeneca and Ferrer. NC-C has received grants from Roche and UCB. EH has received consulting fees and meeting fees from Johnson & Johnson, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, GSK, Roche-Chugai, and Sanofi-Genzyme; speaking fees from Johnson & Johnson, GSK, and Roche-Chugai; and research funding from Commonwealth Serum Laboratories Behring, GSK, Roche-Chugai, and Johnson & Johnson. NP has received grants from Gilead Sciences Hellas and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. OAM has received speaker's fees or payment for advisory boards from AbbVie, APSEN, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celltrion, GSK, and Janssen. MS has received research grants and consulting fees, and has participated as a speaker for: AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, and AstraZeneca. ACSM has received speaker fees from GSK and AstraZeneca. All other authors and SURF-SLE and APS Collaborators declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Objectives: This study aims to determine the independent impact of definitions of remission/low disease activity (LDA) on direct/indirect costs (DCs, ICs) in a multicentre inception cohort., Methods: Patients from 31 centres in 10 countries were enrolled within 15 months of diagnosis and assessed annually. Five mutually exclusive disease activity states (DAS) were defined as (1) remission off-treatment: clinical (c) SLEDAI-2K=0, without prednisone/immunosuppressants; (2) remission on-treatment: cSLEDAI-2K=0, prednisone ≤5 mg/day and/or maintenance immunosuppressants; (3) LDA-Toronto Cohort (TC): cSLEDAI-2K≤2, without prednisone/immunosuppressants; (4) modified lupus LDA state (mLLDAS): SLEDAI-2K≤4, no activity in major organs/systems, no new activity, prednisone ≤7.5 mg/day and/or maintenance immunosuppressants and (5) active: all remaining assessments.At each assessment, patients were stratified into the most stringent DAS fulfilled and the proportion of time in a DAS since cohort entry was determined. Annual DCs/ICs (2021 Canadian dollars) were based on healthcare use and lost workforce/non-workforce productivity over the preceding year.The association between the proportion of time in a DAS and annual DC/IC was examined through multivariable random-effects linear regressions., Results: 1692 patients were followed a mean of 9.7 years; 49.0% of assessments were active. Remission/LDA (per 25% increase in time in a remission/LDA state vs active) were associated with lower annual DC/IC: remission off-treatment (DC -$C1372; IC -$C2507), remission on-treatment (DC -$C973; IC -$C2604,) LDA-TC (DC -$C1158) and mLLDAS (DC -$C1040). There were no cost differences between remission/LDA states., Conclusions: Our data suggest that systemic lupus erythematosus patients who achieve remission, both off and on-therapy, and reductions in disease activity incur lower costs than those experiencing persistent disease activity., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MRWB has received consulting fees, speaking fees and/or honoraria from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen and Sanofi Genzyme. MFU-G has received consulting and/or speaking fees from AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Ferrer and a research grant from Janssen. CG has received consulting fees, speaking fees, and/or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Abbvie, Amgen, Sanofi, and UCB (less than $10 000 each). DJW has received consulting fees from Merck, EMD Serono, Pfizer, Lilly and Glenmark (less than $10 000 each). PRF has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca and GlaxoSmithKline (less than $10 000 each). DDG received consulting fees and/or honoraria from GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca (less than $10 000). INB has received consulting fees, speaking fees, and/or honoraria from Eli Lilly, UCB, Roche, Merck Serono, MedImmune (less than $10 000 each) and grants from UCB, Genzyme Sanofi, and GlaxoSmithKline. EMG has paid consultation with investment analysts Guidepoint Global Gerson Lerman Group. RR-G has received consulting fees from Cabaletta, BristolMyersSquibb, Biogen, Merck, and Ampel Solutions (all less than $10 000 each). RFvV has received consulting fees, speaking fees and/or honoraria from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Biotest, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB (less than $10 000 each) and research support from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and UCB. MI has received consulting fees from UCB and Amgen (less than $10 000 each). KK has received grants from UCB, Human Genome Sciences/GlaxoSmithKline, Takeda, Ablynx, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and Kyowa Hakko Kirin, and has received consulting fees from Exagen Diagnostics, Genentech, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Anthera (less than $10 000 each). AEC has received consulting fees, speaking fees, and/or honoraria from AstraZeneca, BristolMyersSquibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Roche and Otsuka (less than $10 000 each) and a research grant from GlaxoSmithKline. No other disclosures relevant to this article were reported., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ on behalf of EULAR.)

Objective: This international task force aimed to provide healthcare professionals and persons living with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) with consensus-based recommendations for physical activity and exercise in SLE., Methods: Based on evidence from a systematic literature review and expert opinion, 3 overarching principles and 15 recommendations were agreed on by Delphi consensus., Results: The overarching principles highlight the importance of shared decision-making and the need to explain the benefits of physical activity to persons living with SLE and other healthcare providers. The 15 specific recommendations state that physical activity is generally recommended for all people with SLE, but in some instances, a medical evaluation may be needed to rule out contraindications. Pertaining to outdoor activity, photoprotection is necessary. Both aerobic and resistance training programmes are recommended, with a gradual increase in frequency and intensity, which should be adapted for each individual, and ideally supervised by qualified professionals., Conclusion: In summary, the consensus reached by the international task force provides a valuable framework for the integration of physical activity and exercise into the management of SLE, offering a tailored evidence-based and eminence-based approach to enhance the well-being of individuals living with this challenging autoimmune condition., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SG, TG, SA, GB, TD, YF, HH, KH, DK-H, K-YS, AL, LL, SS and AS-M have no disclosures. AM has received funding for an investigator-initiated study from GlaxoSmithKline (Project ID 10743). IP has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, Novartis and Pfizer. SZS has received grant funding from Pfizer and has consulted for GlaxoSmithKline, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals Inc, AstraZeneca, Lilly, LLC, Biogen and Cabaletta. MFU-G has received funding from Janssen and honoraria from AztraZeneca, Ferrer and GlaxoSmithKline. MYMY has received consultancy fees from Aurinia Pharmaceuticals and UCB and speaker fees from Alumis, Novartis and Roche. IP has received research funding and/or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia, Elli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Otsuka and Roche. LA is a consultant for Alexion, Alpine, Amgen, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Grifols, Janssen, LFB, Lilly, Menarini France, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugaï, Sêmeia and UCB., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) Working Group held a Special Interest Group (SIG) at the OMERACT 2023 conference in Colorado Springs where SLE collaborators reviewed domain sub-themes generated through qualitative research and literature review., Objective: The objective of the SIG and the subsequent meetings of the SLE Working Group was to begin the winnowing and binning of candidate domain sub-themes into a preliminary list of candidate domains that will proceed to the consensus Delphi exercise for the SLE COS., Methods: Four breakout groups at the SLE SIG in Colorado Springs winnowed and binned 132 domain sub-themes into candidate domains, which was continued with a series of virtual meetings by an advisory group of SLE patient research partners (PRPs), members of the OMERACT SLE Working Group Steering Committee, and other collaborators., Results: The 132 domain sub-themes were reduced to a preliminary list of 20 candidate domains based on their clinical and research relevance for clinical trials and research studies., Conclusion: A meaningful and substantial winnowing and binning of candidate domains for the SLE COS was achieved resulting in a preliminary list of 20 candidate domains., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Wils Nielsen, Lee Simon, Maya Desai, Yvonne Enman, Daniel Wallace, Cynthia Aranow, Meggan Mackay, Kimberly Trotter, Ali Duarte Garcia, John A Reynolds, Danaë Papachristos, Sandra Navarra, Amita Aggarwal, Chi Chiu Mok, Keishi Fujio, Rosalind Ramsey-Goldman, Aaron Howe, Behdin Nouwrouzi-Kia, Dennisse Bonilla, Julian Thumboo, Martin Aringer, Sindhu R. Johnson, Zahi Touma: None. Vibeke Strand:All support for the present manuscript (e.g., funding, provision of study materials, medical writing, article processing charges, etc.): I am a founding member of the executive committee of Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) [1992 – present], an international consensus organization that develops and validates outcome measures in rheumatology randomized controlled trials and longitudinal observational studies and has received arms-length funding from as many as 36 sponsors. Grants or Contracts from any entity: I am a founding member of the executive committee of Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) [1992 – present], an international consensus organization that develops and validates outcome measures in rheumatology randomized controlled trials and longitudinal observational studies and has received arms-length funding from as many as 36 sponsors. Ioannis Parodis:All support for the present manuscript (e.g., funding, provision of study materials, medical writing, article processing charges, etc.): I have received research funding from Amgen, I have received research funding from GlaxoSmithKline, I have received research funding from Astra-Zeneca, I have received research funding from Janssen Pharmaceuticals, I have received research funding from Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, I have received research funding from Novartis, I have received research funding from Elly Lilly and Company, I have received research funding from Otsuka Pharmaceutical, I have received research funding from Gilead Sciences, I have received research funding from F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG Payment or Honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers, bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: I have received research funding from Amgen, I have received research funding from GlaxoSmithKline, I have received research funding from Astra-Zeneca, I have received research funding from Janssen Pharmaceuticals, I have received research funding from Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, I have received research funding from Novartis, I have received research funding from Elly Lilly and Company, I have received research funding from Otsuka Pharmaceutical, I have received research funding from Gilead Sciences, I have received research funding from F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG Alfred Kim:Grants or Contracts from any entity: Rheumatology Research Foundation – Institution, National Multiple Sclerosis Society – Institution, GlaxoSmithKline – Institution, Novartis – Institution, NIH/NIAMS P30AR073752 – Institution, BMS – Institution Consulting Fees: Alexion Pharmaceuticals – Self, ANI Pharmaceuticals – Self, AstraZeneca – Self, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals – Self, Kypha Inc – Self, Pfizer Inc – Self Payment or Honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers, bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: GlaxoSmithKline – Self, Exagen Diagnostics – Self, UpToDate – Self Patents planned, issued, or pending: Kypha US Patent 1102931882 Leadership or fiduciary role in other board, society, committee or advocacy group, paid or unpaid: Lupus Foundation of America-Heartland Chapter – Unpaid, St Louis Rheumatology Association – Unpaid, Rheumatology Research Foundation – Unpaid, Lupus Research Alliance – Unpaid Daniel Wallace:Payment or Honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers, bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: Speakers bureau GSK, Merck-Serono, Astra Zeneca Yashaar Chaichian:Grants or Contracts from any entity: Lupus Therapeutics, LLC - Payments made to institution, Eli Lilly & Company - Payments made to institution, Amgen Inc. - Payments made to institution, Stanford University, Discovery Innovation Fund in Basic Biomedical Sciences - Payments made to institution Support for attending meetings and/or travel: Lupus Therapeutics, LLC (provided support to attend the 2022 and 2023 LuCIN Community Meeting) -Payments made to institution Oshrat Tayer-Shifman:Consulting Fees: Astra-Zeneca – Payed to me, Abbvie – Payed to me Support for attending meetings and/or travel: Astra-Zeneca – Payment made to institution Lai Shan Tam:Consulting Fees: Janssen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, and Sanofi – me Payment or Honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers, bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: Pfizer, Abbvie, Janssen – me Support for Attending Meetings and/or travel: abbvie – other institutions Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board: Pfizer, Abbvie, Janssen, AstraZeneca – me Leasdership or fiduciary role in other board, society, committee or advocacy group, paid or unpaid: Convenor of the APLAR Academy – unpaid Other financial and non-financial interests: Unrestricted grant from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer - To the Chinese University of Hong Kong Manuel F. Ugarte-Gil:Grants or Contracts: Janssen, GSK – Payments were made to my institution Consulting Fees: Astra-Zeneca Payment or Honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers, bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: Astra-Zeneca, GSK Guillermo Pons-Estel:Grants of Contracts from any entity: I received grant from Janssen – Payment was made to GLADEL (Latin American Group for the Study of Lupus) Payment or Honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers, bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: I received honoraria from GSK for lectures - Payment was made to myself, I received honoraria from Werfen for lectures - Payment was made to myself, I received honoraria from Novartis for lectures - Payment was made to myself, I received honoraria from Pfizer for lectures - Payment was made to myself, I received honoraria from Janssen for lectures - Payment was made to myself. Support for Attending Meetings and/or travel: I received support from ABBVIE to attend to the ACR 2021, I received support from Pfizer to attend to the EULAR 2023 Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board: I received honoraria from Janssen for Advisory Board - Payment was made to myself, I received honoraria from Astra Zeneca for Advisory Board - Payment was made to myself, I received honoraria from GSK for Advisory Board - Payment was made to myself, I received honoraria from Novartis for Advisory Board - Payment was made to myself Mandana Nikpour:Grants of Contracts from any entity: Research grants from Janssen to support the ongoing research of the Australian Scleroderma Cohort Study - Payments made to my institution Consulting Fees: I have consulted for Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim and Astra Zeneca - Payments made to me Payment or Honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers, bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: I have presented for Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Astra Zeneca and GSK - Payments made to me Support for Attending Meetings and/or travel: Support from Boehringer Ingelheim to attend the EULAR Conference in 2023 - No payment made to me or my institution Alberta Hoi:Grants or Contracts from any entity: Arthritis Australia - I was grant recipient, AstraZeneca - Sponsorship of the Australian Lupus Registry and Biobank and Asia Pacific Lupus Collaboration, and also contract research on unmet needs in Australian lupus patients, Perpetual IMPACT - fund I was grant recipient, BMS, Merck Serono, GSK, Eli Lilly, UCB - Sponsored Asia Pacific Lupus Collaboration, for which I contribute data towards, Janssen - Contracted the Asia Pacific Lupus Collaboration to conduct a research study on medication use Consulting Fees: UCB Advisory Board Payment or Honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers, bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: Novartis Speaker Fee, Janssen honoraria for chairing Juanita Romero-Diaz:Consulting Fees: Novartis, Biogen Support for Attending Meetings and/or travel: Boehringer Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board: Biogen Marta Mosca:Consulting Fees: Astra Zeneca, GSK, Lilly, UCB, BMS, Idorsia, Otsuka, Abbvie Payment or Honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers, bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: Atra Zeneca, GSK, Otsuka, Janssen, UCB, Abbvie Support for Attending Meetings and/or travel: Janssen to attend the European Lupus Meeting in 2022 Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board: Idorsia Leadership or fiduciary role in other board, society, committee or advocacy group, paid or unpaid: EMA liaison for EULAR Receipt of equipment, materials, drugs, medical writing, gifts or other services: I have received Anifrolumab as for compassionate use from Astra Zeneca Aaron Drucker:Grants of Contracts from any entity: National Eczema Association, Eczema Society of Canada, Canadian Dermatology Foundation, CIHR, NIH, PSI Foundation Consulting Fees: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health Payment or Honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers, bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: British Journal of Dermatology, American Academy of Dermatology, National Eczema Association, Canadian Dermatology Today Eric Morand:Grants of Contracts from any entity: grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Company, EMD Serono, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, and UCB Pharma – Research grants to institution Consulting Fees: Consulting fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Company, EMD Serono, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Servier, Wolf, Zenas Payment or Honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers, bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: Honoraria from AstraZeneca, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Gilead Support for Attending Meetings and/or travel: Travel support from AstraZeneca Leadership or fiduciary role in other board, society, committee or advocacy group, paid or unpaid: Board Director, Rare Voices Australia – Not for Profit, Board Directory, Exosome Biosciences Ian Bruce:Grants of Contracts from any entity: Janssen Research - Grant to institution, Astra Zeneca - Research Grant to institution, GSK - Research Grant to institution Consulting Fees: GSK - Speaker fees to institution, Astra Zeneca - Speaker fees to institution, Janssen - Speaker fees to institution Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board: AstraZeneca and Merck Serono - INB has served on boards for AstraZeneca and Merck Serono, (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background/objective: The 2019 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism Classification Criteria (2019 AECC) for IgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD) is considered a significant advancement in the study of this condition. Most studies evaluating their performance have focused on White and Asian patients, leaving a knowledge gap regarding Latin American populations. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the performance of the 2019 AECC for IgG4-RD in a cohort of Latin American patients., Methods: A multicenter medical records review study was conducted, involving centers from Argentina, Chile, Mexico, Peru, and Uruguay. Data on IgG4-RD patients and mimicker conditions were collected through a standardized online form. The criterion standard for diagnosing IgG4-RD was based on the fulfillment of the Comprehensive Diagnostic Criteria for IgG4-RD and/or the Consensus Statement on Pathology. The 2019 AECC was retrospectively applied., Results: We included 300 patients, with 180 (60%) having IgG4-RD and 120 (40%) having mimicker conditions. The 2019 AECC had a sensitivity of 66.7% and a specificity of 100%. Sensitivity increased to 73.3% when disease-specific autoantibody items were removed, without affecting specificity. The true-positive cases had more involved organs, a higher availability of biopsy results, and were more likely to belong to the Mikulicz/systemic and proliferative phenotypes., Conclusions: The use of the 2019 AECC for IgG4-RD in a Latin American population confirms its high specificity in excluding those without the disease. The presence of concomitant autoimmune diseases and clinically nonsignificant disease-specific autoantibodies excludes a significant number of patients from fulfilling the criteria., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Cognitive dysfunction is a prevalent manifestation of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). There is evidence for the role of antiphospholipid (aPL) antibodies on its etiopathogenesis. Our objective was to identify the association between aPL antibodies and cognitive dysfunction in SLE patients., Methods: This cross-sectional study included 135 patients evaluated from March 2015 to October 2017 at one center. Cognitive deficit was measured using the NEUROPSI test. Disease activity and damage were ascertained using the SLEDAI-2K (SLE Disease Activity Index 2000) and the SDI (Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index), respectively; aPL antibodies were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The association between cognitive dysfunction and aPL antibodies was evaluated using univariable and multivariable linear regression models adjusted for age, sex, education, socioeconomic status, disease duration, SLEDAI-2K, SDI, mean current dose of prednisone, time of exposure to glucocorticoids, and drug use (immunosuppressants, hydroxychloroquine, aspirin, and warfarin)., Results: One hundred thirty-one patients (97.1%) were women; their mean (SD) age was 46.6 (12.5) years; 59 patients (43.7%) had positivity for at least 1 aPL antibody. IgM anticardiolipin (aCL) was positive in 24.5%, IgG in 13.5%, IgM aβ2GP1 in 16.8%, IgG anti-β2 glycoprotein in 24.6%, and the lupus anticoagulant in 5.3%. Ninety patients (66.7%) had some cognitive dysfunction. In the univariable analysis, a significant correlation between the NEUROPSI score and IgM aCL antibodies was found (B = -20.87 [SE, 3.2]; p < 0.001), which remained significant in the multivariable model (B = -13.89 [SE, 3.14]; p < 0.001)., Conclusions: IgM aCL antibodies are associated with cognitive dysfunction in patients with SLE. Larger and longitudinal studies are needed to assess the impact of these findings., Competing Interests: M.F.U.-G. has grant support from Janssen and Pfizer, and he has been speaker for GSK and consultant for AstraZeneca; R.V.G.-C. has grant support from Pfizer; C.R.-S. and V.P.-Q. have grant support from Janssen. All other authors declare to have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Approximately one third of individuals worldwide have not received a COVID-19 vaccine. Although studies have investigated risk factors linked to severe COVID-19 among unvaccinated people with rheumatic diseases (RDs), we know less about whether these factors changed as the pandemic progressed. We aimed to identify risk factors associated with severe COVID-19 in unvaccinated individuals in different pandemic epochs corresponding to major variants of concern., Methods: Patients with RDs and COVID-19 were entered into the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Registry between March 2020 and June 2022. An ordinal logistic regression model (not hospitalized, hospitalized, and death) was used with date of COVID-19 diagnosis, age, sex, race and/or ethnicity, comorbidities, RD activity, medications, and the human development index (HDI) as covariates. The main analysis included all unvaccinated patients across COVID-19 pandemic epochs; subanalyses stratified patients according to RD types., Results: Among 19,256 unvaccinated people with RDs and COVID-19, those who were older, male, had more comorbidities, used glucocorticoids, had higher disease activity, or lived in lower HDI regions had worse outcomes across epochs. For those with rheumatoid arthritis, sulfasalazine and B-cell-depleting therapy were associated with worse outcomes, and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors were associated with improved outcomes. In those with connective tissue disease or vasculitis, B-cell-depleting therapy was associated with worse outcomes., Conclusion: Risk factors for severe COVID-19 outcomes were similar throughout pandemic epochs in unvaccinated people with RDs. Ongoing efforts, including vaccination, are needed to reduce COVID-19 severity in this population, particularly in those with medical and social vulnerabilities identified in this study., (© 2023 American College of Rheumatology.)

Although the public health emergency associated with the COVID-19 pandemic has ended, challenges remain, especially for individuals with rheumatic diseases. We aimed to assess the historical and ongoing effects of COVID-19 on individuals with rheumatic diseases and rheumatology practices globally, with specific attention to vulnerable communities and lessons learned. We reviewed literature from several countries and regions, including Africa, Australia and New Zealand, China, Europe, Latin America, and the US. In this review, we summarize literature that not only examines the impact of the pandemic on individuals with rheumatic diseases, but also research that reports the lasting changes to rheumatology patient care and practice, and health service use. Across countries, challenges faced by individuals with rheumatic diseases during the pandemic included disruptions in health care and medication supply shortages. These challenges were associated with worse disease and mental health outcomes in some studies, particularly among those who had social vulnerabilities defined by socioeconomic, race, or rurality. Moreover, rheumatology practice was impacted in all regions, with the uptake of telemedicine and changes in health care utilization. While many regions developed rapid guidelines to disseminate scientific information, misinformation and disinformation remained widespread. Finally, vaccine uptake among individuals with rheumatic diseases has been uneven across the world. As the acute phase of the pandemic wanes, ongoing efforts are needed to improve health care access, stabilize rheumatology drug supplies, improve public health communication, and implement evidence-based vaccination practices to reduce COVID-19 morbidity and mortality among individuals with rheumatic diseases., (© 2023 American College of Rheumatology.)

Background: Fatigue is reported as the most prevalent symptom by patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Fatigue management is complex due to its multifactorial nature. The aim of the study was to assess the usefulness of an innovative digital tool to manage fatigue in SLE, in a completely automated manner., Methods: The «Lupus Expert System for Assessment of Fatigue» (LEAF) is free digital tool which measures the intensity and characteristics of fatigue and assesses disease activity, pain, insomnia, anxiety, depression, stress, fibromyalgia and physical activity using validated patient-reported instruments. Then, LEAF automatically provides personalised feedback and recommendations to cope with fatigue., Results: Between May and November 2022, 1250 participants with SLE were included (95.2% women, median age 43yo (IQR: 34-51)). Significant fatigue (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue <34) was reported by 78.9% of patients. In univariate analysis, SLE participants with fatigue were more likely to be women (p=0.01), perceived their disease as more active (p<0.0001), had higher levels of pain (p<0.0001), anxiety (p<0.0001), depression (p<0.0001), insomnia (p<0.0001), stress (p<0.0001) and were more likely to screen for fibromyalgia (p<0.0001), compared with patients without significant fatigue. In multivariable analysis, parameters independently associated with fatigue were insomnia (p=0.0003), pain (p=0.002), fibromyalgia (p=0.008), self-reported active SLE (p=0.02) and stress (p=0.045). 93.2% of the participants found LEAF helpful and 92.3% would recommend it to another patient with SLE., Conclusion: Fatigue is commonly severe in SLE, and associated with insomnia, pain, fibromyalgia and active disease according to patients' perspective. Our study shows the usefulness of an automated digital tool to manage fatigue in SLE., Competing Interests: Competing interests: J-CS-M has received speaking fees from GSK. MFU-G reports research grants from Pfizer and Janssen, consultant fee from AstraZeneca and speaker fee from GSK and AstraZeneca. MP has received consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, GSK and Otsuka. LA has acted as a consultant for Alexion, Alpine, Amgen, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, Biogen, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Kezaar, GSK, Janssen, LFB, Lilly, Medac, Novartis, Otsuka, Pfizer, Roche-Chugaï and UCB., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Innate immune responses through the production of type I interferon-α (anti-IFN-α) play an essential role in the defense against viruses. The autoantibodies (auto-Abs) anti-IFN-α are implicated in COVID-19 pathogenesis with higher levels among patients with worse prognoses. The study aimed to assess the levels of anti-IFN-α auto-Abs in Peruvian patients with severe/critical hospitalized COVID-19 compared to asymptomatic/mild COVID-19 outpatients and healthy controls. We analyzed 101 serum samples, including 56 (55.5%) severe/critical, 13 (12.3%) asymptomatic/mild COVID-19 patients, and 32 (32.2%) healthy controls, which we tested using a commercial ELISA anti-IFN-α-auto-Abs kit. We observed seropositivity of 48.2% (26/54) to anti-IFN-α auto-Abs among the severe/critical COVID-19 group, but 0% (0/13) and 3.1% (1/32) among the asymptomatic/mild COVID-19 and healthy groups ( P  = 0.021), respectively. Furthermore, we observed a significant association between the log 10 of anti-IFN-α auto-Abs and the COVID-19 status, with the log 10 of anti-IFN-α auto-Abs levels being significantly higher among the severe/critical COVID-19 group compared to the healthy controls (β = 1.20; confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.72-1.67; P  < 0.001). Such association remains significant either when adjusted by age and gender (adjusted β = 1.16; 95% CI: 0.62-1.70; P  < 0.001) and when adjusted by the subjects' age, gender, and obesity (adjusted β = 1.16; 95% CI: 0.62-1.70; P  < 0.001). Despite not measuring neutralizing activity, this study highlights the high frequency of these auto-Abs in the Peruvian population with a worse prognosis of COVID-19.

Objective: To develop the first evidence-based Pan American League of Associations for Rheumatology (PANLAR) guidelines for the treatment of Takayasu arteritis (TAK)., Methods: A panel of vasculitis experts developed a series of clinically meaningful questions addressing the treatment of TAK patients in the PICO (population/intervention/comparator/outcome) format. A systematic literature review was performed by a team of methodologists. The evidence quality was assessed according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations/Assessment/Development/Evaluation) methodology. The panel of vasculitis experts voted each PICO question and made recommendations, which required ≥70% agreement among the voting members., Results: Eleven recommendations were developed. Oral glucocorticoids are conditionally recommended for newly diagnosed and relapsing TAK patients. The addition of nontargeted synthetic immunosuppressants (e.g., methotrexate, leflunomide, azathioprine, or mycophenolate mofetil) is recommended for patients with newly diagnosed or relapsing disease that is not organ- or life-threatening. For organ- or life-threatening disease, we conditionally recommend tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (e.g., infliximab or adalimumab) or tocilizumab with consideration for short courses of cyclophosphamide as an alternative in case of restricted access to biologics. For patients relapsing despite nontargeted synthetic immunosuppressants, we conditionally recommend to switch from one nontargeted synthetic immunosuppressant to another or to add tumor necrosis factor inhibitors or tocilizumab. We conditionally recommend low-dose aspirin for patients with involvement of cranial or coronary arteries to prevent ischemic complications. We strongly recommend performing surgical vascular interventions during periods of remission whenever possible., Conclusion: The first PANLAR treatment guidelines for TAK provide evidence-based guidance for the treatment of TAK patients in Latin American countries., Competing Interests: D.G.F.-Á. is consultant to Abbvie, Bristol Myers-Squibb, Eli Lilly, Fresenius Kabi, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer. M.V.S. is a speaker for and consultant to and receives research support from Abbvie, Bristol Myers-Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, and AstraZeneca. S.J.M. is a speaker for and consultant to and receives research support from Abbvie, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, and Janssen. M.F.U.-G. receives research support and consulting fee from and is a speaker for Janssen, Pfizer, AztraZeneca, and GlaxoSmithKline. L.F.F.-S. is a speaker for Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim Co Ltd, Roche México, and Werfen Mexico. L.M.S.-R. is a speaker for and consultant to the advisory board of Novartis, Pfizer, Janssen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Sanofi-Genzyme, Biopas, Amgen, Boehringer, Roche, and Eli Lilly. A.B. is a speaker and consultant to Abbvie, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. E.R.S.G. is a speaker for and consultant to and receives research support from Abbvie, Amgen, Bristol Myers-Squibb, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, and UCB. S.U. is a consultant to and receives research support from Kiniksa, Janssen, and Genentech. The other authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Considerable variability exists in the way health-care providers treat patients with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis in Latin America. The most frequently used treatments for ANCA-associated vasculitis are cyclophosphamide and prolonged glucocorticoid tapers; however, randomised controlled trials conducted over the past 30 years have led to the development of several evidence-based treatment alternatives for these patients. Latin America faces socioeconomic challenges that affect access to care, and the use of certain costly medications with proven efficacy ANCA-associated vasculitis is often restricted. For these reasons, the Pan American League of Associations for Rheumatology developed the first ANCA-associated vasculitis treatment guidelines tailored for Latin America. A panel of local vasculitis experts generated clinically meaningful questions related to the treatment of ANCA-associated vasculitis using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (PICO) format. Following the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology, a team of methodologists conducted a systematic literature review. The panel of vasculitis experts voted on each PICO question and made recommendations, which required at least 70% agreement among the voting members. 21 recommendations and two expert opinion statements for the treatment of ANCA-associated vasculitis were developed, considering the current evidence and the socioeconomic characteristics of the region. These recommendations include guidance for the use of glucocorticoids, non-glucocorticoid immunosuppressants, and plasma exchange., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests Several authors of these guidelines, including voting members, have interacted with the pharmaceutical industry including the manufacturers of some of the drugs mentioned in these recommendations. However, none of the authors received any support or fee directly or indirectly related to or influencing the development of these guidelines. SJM reports being a speaker for, consulting for, and receiving research support from Roche, Pfizer, AbbVie, Janssen, Sandoz, and GlaxoSmithKline. MFU-G reports being a speaker for and receiving research support and consulting fees from Janssen, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, AbbVie, and Pfizer. LFF-S reports being a speaker for and doing medical writing for the American College of Rheumatology, Sociedad Española de Reumatología, Editorial Médica Panamericana, and Elsevier. DGF-Á reports being a speaker for Amgen, Janssen, Novartis, Eli Lilly, and Pfizer; and receiving support for attending meetings from Janssen. MS reports being a speaker for, consulting for, and receiving research support from AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, and AstraZeneca. EIS reports consulting for Janssen. AWSdS reports being on the advisory board of Vifor Pharma. LMS-R reports being a speaker for, consulting for, and being on the advisory board of Novartis, Pfizer, Janssen, Roche, and Eli Lilly. AMB reports being a speaker for and consulting for AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Pfizer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. ERSG reports being a speaker for, consulting for, and receiving research support from AbbVie, Amgen, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sandoz. SU reports consulting for and receiving research support from Kiniksa, Janssen, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, and Sanofi. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The long-term impact of childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in adult SLE patients in comparison to those with adult-onset SLE is unknown. We aim to examine and compare HRQoL trajectories in adults with adolescent- and adult-onset SLE., Methods: Patients enrolled in the LUpus in MInorities: NAture versus Nurture cohort were included. Adolescent-onset SLE were those diagnosed before 24 years of age, and adult-onset SLE were those diagnosed otherwise. Sociodemographic, clinical, medications, behavioral/psychological, and functioning data were obtained. Longitudinal trajectories of the physical component summary (PCS) and the mental component summary (MCS) Short Form 36 health survey scores were compared between the groups using a linear mixed model accounting for time-dependent and independent covariates., Results: A total of 470 SLE patients were included (95 with adolescent-onset SLE and 375 with adult-onset SLE). The mean ± SD age at diagnosis was 19.7 ± 2.8 years in the adolescent group and 39.3 ± 11.0 years in the adult group. The baseline PCS scores were higher (better physical functioning) in adolescent-onset SLE than in adult-onset SLE (38.9 versus 34.3, respectively; P < 0.001); however, the baseline MCS scores were comparable between the groups (41.4 versus 40.5, respectively; P = 0.53). The HRQoL improved equally in both groups with no statistically significant difference within and between the groups (last mean PCS and MCS scores 43.9 and 45.3 in adolescent-onset SLE; 38.1 and 43 in adult-onset SLE)., Conclusions: Adults with adolescent-onset SLE exhibited better physical functioning than those in the adult SLE group, despite more severe disease; noteworthy, HRQoL was below the general US population, despite clinically meaningful improvement in HRQoL over time in both groups., (© 2022 American College of Rheumatology.)

Despite how difficult the early diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is, which is mainly due to the heterogeneity and non-specificity of its clinical manifestations, SLE is currently being diagnosed more frequently than in past decades. In fact, there has been an increase in the incidence and prevalence of SLE over the last four decades; this can be explained by a number of reasons including a better knowledge of the pathogenesis of the disease which allows its earlier diagnosis, the rising ethnic and racial diversity of the world population, the use of the 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria that allows classifying patients earlier, and improvements in survival over the last decades, which results in an increase in the prevalent cases of SLE. In this article, we will also review the genetic, environmental, and lifestyle factors, that are reported to increase the risk of developing SLE and how preventive strategies through a clinical care pathway may prevent or delay the development of SLE and improve these patients' outcomes.

Objective: To determine the predictors of the occurrence of severe autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA) and its impact on damage accrual and mortality in SLE patients., Methods: Factors associated with time to severe AIHA (hemoglobin level ≤7 g/dL) occurring from the onset of SLE symptoms were examined by Cox proportional hazards regressions. The association of severe AIHA with mortality was examined by logistic regression analyses while its impact on damage was by negative binomial regression., Results: Of 1,349 patients, 49 (3.6%) developed severe AIHA over a mean (SD) follow-up time of 5.4 (3.8) years. The median time from the first clinical manifestation to severe AIHA was 111 days (IQR 43-450). By multivariable analysis, male sex (HR 2.26, 95% CI 1.02-4.75, p = 0.044), and higher disease activity at diagnosis (HR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.08, p = 0.025) were associated with a shorter time to severe AIHA occurrence. Of the SLEDAI descriptors, only hematologic (leukopenia and/or thrombocytopenia) showed a certain trend toward significance in the multivariable analysis (HR 2.36, 95% CI 0.91-6.13, p = 0.0772). Severe AIHA contributed neither to damage nor to mortality., Conclusions: Severe AIHA occurs during the early course of SLE. Male sex and higher disease activity at diagnosis emerged as independent predictors of a shorter time to severe AIHA occurrence. Although not statistically significant, hematological abnormalities at SLE diagnosis could predict the occurrence of severe AIHA in a shorter time. Damage and mortality did not seem to be impacted by the occurrence of severe AIHA.

SLE increases disease burden in those affected with it, and that is particularly the case in low- and middle-income countries. The 2019 Addressing Lupus Pillar of Health Advancement project is a multiphase initiative whose objective is to recognize, hierarchize and establish approaches for diligent SLE research, care and access to healthcare. Lack of access to high-cost medications that have been shown to be efficacious in the short term and that potentially reduce damage in SLE is a complex issue. In this review, we highlight opportunities and plans of action to diminish costs and improve access to therapies, which should be recognized and executed, preferably within regional strategies with multiple stakeholders (including supranational organizations, governments, the pharmaceutical industry, medical societies and the general population) connected with and grounded in structured and clear cost-effectiveness analysis., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

Objective: To evaluate the association between the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics frailty index (SLICC-FI) and damage accrual in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients., Methods: Patients from the multiethnic, multicenter LUpus in MInorities, NAture versus nurture (LUMINA) cohort were included. Damage was ascertained with the SLICC/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index (SDI) at last visit (range 0-51). The first visit in which the SLICC-FI score could be derived was considered as the baseline (range 0-1). Univariable and multivariable negative binomial regression models were performed to determine the association between the baseline SLICC-FI score (per 0.05 increase) and the change in the SDI score (difference between last and baseline SDI score), adjusted for sex, age at diagnosis, ethnicity, insurance, prednisone daily dose, and antimalarial and immunosuppressive drug use at baseline. Age and sex were included a priori in the multivariable model; the other variables were included if they reached P < 0.10 in the univariable models., Results: Of the 503 patients included, 454 (90.3%) were female, with a mean ± SD age of 37.1 ± 12.5 years at diagnosis. The mean ± SD baseline SLICC-FI score was 0.26 ± 0.06. The mean ± SD baseline SDI score was 0.6 ± 1.0, and the mean ± SD change in the SDI score was 1.9 ± 2.2. Higher SLICC-FI scores at baseline (per 0.05 increase) were associated with greater damage accrual in the multivariable model after adjustment for possible confounders (incidence rate ratio 1.20 [95% confidence interval 1.08-1.33], P = 0.0015)., Conclusion: The SLICC-FI is associated with damage accrual in SLE patients from a multiethnic cohort, supporting the importance of this index in the evaluation of SLE patients, combining several aspects of their disease., (© 2022 American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To determine the possible predictive value of self-efficacy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with SLE., Methods: Patients with SLE from the Almenara Lupus Cohort were included. Self-efficacy was ascertained with the six domains from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) self-efficacy for managing chronic conditions. For PROMIS domains, a score of 50 is the average for a clinical population (people with a chronic condition), a higher score indicates that the respondent has greater self-efficacy. HRQoL was ascertained with the physical and mental component summary (PCS and MCS) measures of the Short-Form 36 (SF-36). Generalised estimating equations were performed, using as outcome the PCS or MCS in the subsequent visit, and the self-efficacy domain in the previous visit; multivariable models were adjusted for possible confounders. The confounders were measured in the same visit as the self-efficacy domain., Results: Two-hundred and nine patients for a total of 564 visits were included; 194 (92.8%) patients were women and mean age at diagnosis was 36.4 (14.0) years. In the multivariable models, a better PCS was predicted by a better self-efficacy for managing symptoms, managing medications and treatments and managing social interactions and general self-efficacy; a better MCS was predicted by a better self-efficacy for managing daily activities, managing symptoms, managing medications and treatments and managing social interactions., Conclusion: A better self-efficacy is predictive of subsequent better HRQoL, even after adjustment for possible confounders. These results should encourage clinicians to develop strategies to improve self-efficacy in patients with SLE., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MFU-G has grant support from Janssen and Pfizer and he has been speaker for GSK; RVG-C has grant support from Pfizer; CR-S and VRP-Q have grant support from Janssen. All other authors declare to have no conflicts of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) affects more severely non-White populations, due to their genetic background and sociodemographic characteristics. Several studies have evaluated Latin American SLE patients to determine their genetic and clinical characteristics as well as prognostic factors; these studies have not only allowed the development of treatment guidelines aimed at the region but also to support regional and global projects. Additionally, educational activities in Spanish and Portuguese have been started to reduce our patients' health illiteracy. Despite the relatively low research output from Latin American countries, we consider that studies from our region coupled with the networks developed to increase our capabilities, could be a model for other rare autoimmune diseases., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Ugarte-Gil, Fuentes-Silva, Pimentel-Quiroz, Pons-Estel, Quintana, Pons-Estel and Alarcón.)

Objective: To determine the association between race/ethnicity and COVID-19 outcomes in individuals with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)., Methods: Individuals with SLE from the US with data entered into the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance registry between March 24, 2020 and August 27, 2021 were included. Variables included age, sex, race, and ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic, other), comorbidities, disease activity, pandemic time period, glucocorticoid dose, antimalarials, and immunosuppressive drug use. The ordinal outcome categories were: not hospitalized, hospitalized with no oxygenation, hospitalized with any ventilation or oxygenation, and death. We constructed ordinal logistic regression models evaluating the relationship between race/ethnicity and COVID-19 severity, adjusting for possible confounders., Results: We included 523 patients; 473 (90.4%) were female and the mean ± SD age was 46.6 ± 14.0 years. A total of 358 patients (74.6%) were not hospitalized; 40 patients (8.3%) were hospitalized without oxygen, 64 patients (13.3%) were hospitalized with any oxygenation, and 18 (3.8%) died. In a multivariable model, Black (odds ratio [OR] 2.73 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.36-5.53]) and Hispanic (OR 2.76 [95% CI 1.34-5.69]) individuals had higher odds of more severe outcomes than White individuals., Conclusion: Black and Hispanic individuals with SLE experienced more severe COVID-19 outcomes, which is consistent with findings in the US general population. These results likely reflect socioeconomic and health disparities and suggest that more aggressive efforts are needed to prevent and treat infection in this population., (© 2022 The Authors. Arthritis Care & Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Considerable variability exists in the way that health-care providers treat patients with giant cell arteritis in Latin America, with patients commonly exposed to excessive amounts of glucocorticoids. In addition, large health disparities prevail in this region due to socioeconomic factors, which influence access to care, including biological treatments. For these reasons, the Pan American League of Associations for Rheumatology developed the first evidence-based giant cell arteritis treatment guidelines tailored for Latin America. A panel of vasculitis experts from Mexico, Colombia, Peru, Brazil, and Argentina generated clinically meaningful questions related to the treatment of giant cell arteritis in the population, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) format. Following the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation methodology, a team of methodologists did a systematic literature search, extracted and summarised the effects of the interventions, and graded the quality of the evidence. The panel of vasculitis experts voted on each PICO question and made recommendations, which required at least 70% agreement among the voting members to be included in the guidelines. Nine recommendations and one expert opinion statement for the treatment of giant cell arteritis were developed considering the most up-to-date evidence and the socioeconomic characteristics of Latin America. These recommendations include guidance for the use of glucocorticoids, tocilizumab, methotrexate, and aspirin for patients with giant cell arteritis., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests Several authors of these guidelines, including voting members, have interacted with the pharmaceutical industry including the manufacturers of some of the drugs mentioned in these recommendations. However, none of the authors received any support or fee directly or indirectly related to or influencing the development of these guidelines. DGF-A, MLB, and ERSG are part of PANLAR committees and were involved in the critical review and editing of the manuscript. No other PANLAR committee member was involved in the writing of the manuscript. NVZ, MLAF, FV, LC, and SS received financial support from PANLAR. MS, AB, SJM, EIS, AWSdS, LMS-R, MFU-G, LFF-S, and SU did not receive financial support for this project from any entity. In addition, MS reports speaker fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Elli Lilly, Pfizer, and Roche, and travel grants from Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, and AbbVie, all outside the submitted work. DGF-A reports consulting fees from AbbVie, speaker fees from Amgen, Janssen, Novartis, Elli Lilly, and Pfizer; travel grants from Janssen; and research grants from Pfizer, all outside the submitted work. AB reports speaker fees AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, all outside the submitted work. SJM reports speaker fees from Roche, Janssen, and GlaxoSmithKline, and travel grants from Roche, Pfizer, AbbVie, Janssen, and Sandoz, all outside the submitted work. EIS reports consulting fees from Janssen outside the submitted work. LMS-R reports consulting fees from Roche, Novartis, and Janssen, and travel grants from Janssen and Novartis, all outside the submitted work. MFU-G reports travel grants from Pfizer and AbbVie, and research grants from Janssen, all outside the submitted work. ERSG reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Janssen, Elli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sandoz; speaker fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Janssen, Elli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sandoz; travel grants from AbbVie; and research grants from Amgen, Novartis, Janssen, and Pfizer, all outside the submitted work. SU reports consulting fees from Kiniksa, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, and Janssen, and research grants from Genentech and Janssen, all outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an autoimmune disorder with significant health disparities, as it disproportionately and more severely affects vulnerable and disadvantaged population groups in the United States and around the world, that is, women, ethnic minorities, individuals living in poverty, less educated, and lacking medical insurance. Both, genetic and non-genetic factors, contribute to these disparities. To overcome these health disparities and reduce poor outcomes among disadvantaged SLE populations, interventions on non-genetic amendable factors, especially on social health determinants, are necessary.

Background: Clinical remission is the goal in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management; however, this can be difficult to achieve in several parts of the world. Our objective was to determine predictors of remission and remission/low disease activity (LDA) in RA., Methods: A longitudinal real-setting RA cohort was followed up (January 2016-2020). Predictors examined were sex, age at diagnosis, disease duration, socioeconomic status, tobacco use, rheumatoid factor titer, comorbidities (Charlson index), Simple Disease Activity Index (SDAI) score, disability (Multidimensional Disease Health Assessment Questionnaire), health-related quality of life (Short Form-36 questionnaire), glucocorticoid dose, biological/target synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, and conventional DMARD (c-DMARD) use. Univariable and multivariable generalized estimating equation models were done to determine predictors of remission (at a given visit) and sustained remission (2 consecutives visits), using the SDAI definition (0 or <3.3). Similarly, remission/LDA (SDAI <11) predictors were examined., Results: Five hundred thirty RA patients included the following: 160 patients (30.2%) achieved remission in at least 1 visit, and 126 patients (23.77%) achieved sustained remission. On the multivariable analysis glucocorticoid dose (odds ratio [OR], 1.060; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.027-1.094; p = 0.004) and current (OR, 2.293; 95% CI, 1.811-2.903; p < 0.001) or past (OR, 1.383; 95% CI, 1.127-1.698; p = 0.002) use of c-DMARDs predicted remission/LDA in at least 1 visit, whereas the SDAI (OR, 0.951; 95% CI, 0.942-0.959; p < 0.001), Multidimensional Disease Health Assessment Questionnaire (OR, 0.648; 95% CI, 0.549-0.764; p < 0.001), and age at diagnosis (OR, 0.994; 95% CI, 0.990-0.998; p = 0.004) were negative predictors. As to sustained remission/LDA, current (OR, 2.012; 95% CI, 1.458-2.776: p < 0.001) or past (OR, 1.517; 95% CI, 1.155-1.993; p = 0.003) use of c-DMARDs, having a better Short Form-36 questionnaire physical component summary (OR, 1.022; 95% CI, 1.014-1.029; p < 0.001), and older age at diagnosis (OR, 1.013; 95% CI, 1.003-1.022; p = 0.008) predicted it, whereas SDAI (OR, 0.949; 95% CI, 0.933-0.965; p < 0.001) and medium low/low socioeconomic status (OR, 0.674; 95% CI, 0.500-0.909; p = 0.010) were negative predictors., Conclusion: During follow-up of this real-world RA cohort, c-DMARD use predicted remission and remission/LDA. In contrast, disease activity was a negative predictor., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics Frailty Index (SLICC-FI) as a predictor of damage accrual in a primarily Mestizo SLE patient cohort., Methods: Patients from a single-center prevalent cohort were included. Damage accrual was defined as the increase in the SLICC/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) damage index (SDI) scores between the baseline and the last visits. The SLICC-FI was measured at baseline. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression models were performed to determine the association between the baseline SLICC-FI (per 0.05 increase) and the increase in the SDI, adjusted for possible confounders. Alternative analyses using negative binomial regression models including the difference between the last and the first SDI as outcome were performed., Results: Of the 265 patients included, 248 (93.6%) were female with mean (SD) age of 35.1 (13.6) years at diagnosis. At baseline, mean (SD) SLE disease duration was 7.3 (6.5) years, SDI was 1.0 (1.2) and the SLICC-FI was 0.22 (0.05). After a mean (SD) of 5.2 (2.2) years of follow-up, the SDI increased in 126 (47.5%) patients, and the final mean (SD) SDI score was 1.7 (1.7). Higher SLICC-FI scores at baseline predicted greater damage accrual in the univariable analysis [Hazard Ratio (HR) =1.38, (CI95% 1.16-1.65); p < 0.001] and in the multivariable model, after adjustment for possible confounders [HR = 1.30 (CI95% 1.02-1.66); p = 0.033]., Conclusion: SLICC-FI predicts the occurrence of damage accrual in a prevalent SLE Latin-American cohort with short or long disease duration, supporting the relevance of this index in the evaluation of SLE patients.

Objective: To determine the independent impact of different definitions of remission and low disease activity (LDA) on damage accrual., Methods: Patients with ≥2 annual assessments from a longitudinal multinational inception lupus cohort were studied. Five mutually exclusive disease activity states were defined: remission off-treatment: clinical Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (cSLEDAI)-2K=0, without prednisone or immunosuppressants; remission on-treatment: cSLEDAI-2K score=0, prednisone ≤5 mg/day and/or maintenance immunosuppressants; low disease activity Toronto cohort (LDA-TC): cSLEDAI-2K score of ≤2, without prednisone or immunosuppressants; modified lupus low disease activity (mLLDAS): Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index-2K score of 4 with no activity in major organ/systems, no new disease activity, prednisone ≤7.5 mg/day and/or maintenance immunosuppressants; active: all remaining visits. Only the most stringent definition was used per visit. Antimalarials were allowed in all. The proportion of time that patients were in a specific state at each visit since cohort entry was determined. Damage accrual was ascertained with the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index (SDI). Univariable and multivariable generalised estimated equation negative binomial regression models were used. Time-dependent covariates were determined at the same annual visit as the disease activity state but the SDI at the subsequent visit., Results: There were 1652 patients, 1464 (88.6%) female, mean age at diagnosis 34.2 (SD 13.4) years and mean follow-up time of 7.7 (SD 4.8) years. Being in remission off-treatment, remission on-treatment, LDA-TC and mLLDAS (per 25% increase) were each associated with a lower probability of damage accrual (remission off-treatment: incidence rate ratio (IRR)=0.75, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.81; remission on-treatment: IRR=0.68, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.75; LDA: IRR=0.79, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.92; and mLLDAS: IRR=0.76, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.89))., Conclusions: Remission on-treatment and off-treatment, LDA-TC and mLLDAS were associated with less damage accrual, even adjusting for possible confounders and effect modifiers., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All the following relationships are outside the submitted work. MF-UG: research support from Janssen and Pfizer. CG: consulting fees from the AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Centers for Disease Control, Morton Grove Pharmaceutical (MGP), Sanofi and UCB. AEC: consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Exagen Diagnostics and GlaxoSmithKline. DAI: consulting fees from Amgen, Merck Serono, AstraZeneca and Eli Lilly (the honoraria are passed onto a local arthritis charity). AR: consulting fees from Lilly. PRF: participation on advisory boards from AbbVie, AstraZeneca and Lilly. MAK: consulting fees from GSK. MI: consulting fees from AbbVie, UCB, Novartis, Janssen and Lilly., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Some patients with rheumatic diseases might be at higher risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We aimed to develop a prediction model for COVID-19 ARDS in this population and to create a simple risk score calculator for use in clinical settings., Methods: Data were derived from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Registry from March 24, 2020, to May 12, 2021. Seven machine learning classifiers were trained on ARDS outcomes using 83 variables obtained at COVID-19 diagnosis. Predictive performance was assessed in a US test set and was validated in patients from four countries with independent registries using area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. A simple risk score calculator was developed using a regression model incorporating the most influential predictors from the best performing classifier., Results: The study included 8633 patients from 74 countries, of whom 523 (6%) had ARDS. Gradient boosting had the highest mean AUC (0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67-0.88) and was considered the top performing classifier. Ten predictors were identified as key risk factors and were included in a regression model. The regression model that predicted ARDS with 71% (95% CI: 61%-83%) sensitivity in the test set, and with sensitivities ranging from 61% to 80% in countries with independent registries, was used to develop the risk score calculator., Conclusion: We were able to predict ARDS with good sensitivity using information readily available at COVID-19 diagnosis. The proposed risk score calculator has the potential to guide risk stratification for treatments, such as monoclonal antibodies, that have potential to reduce COVID-19 disease progression., (© 2022 The Authors. ACR Open Rheumatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Zonulin has previously been related to intestinal permeability in various inflammatory diseases, and more recently to the physiopathology of severe COVID-19 infections. We analysed serum samples from a previous study of a Peruvian cohort of hospitalised COVID-19 patients, for the quantification of zonulin by sandwich ELISA. Comparisons with clinical data, haematological and biochemical parameters and cytokine/chemokine levels were made. We found higher baseline zonulin levels in deceased patients, and zonulin was associated with fatal outcome in multivariable analyses, even after adjustment for age, gender, and obesity. There were also positive correlations between zonulin, creatinine, D-dimer values and prothrombin time, while inverse correlations were found for Sa/FiO 2 ratio and CCL5 (RANTES). Further longitudinal studies are recommended to analyse the variation of zonulin levels over time as well as their relationship with long-COVID., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Palomino-Kobayashi, Ymaña, Ruiz, Mayanga-Herrera, Ugarte-Gil and Pons.)

Background: Differences in the distribution of individual-level clinical risk factors across regions do not fully explain the observed global disparities in COVID-19 outcomes. We aimed to investigate the associations between environmental and societal factors and country-level variations in mortality attributed to COVID-19 among people with rheumatic disease globally., Methods: In this observational study, we derived individual-level data on adults (aged 18-99 years) with rheumatic disease and a confirmed status of their highest COVID-19 severity level from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance (GRA) registry, collected between March 12, 2020, and Aug 27, 2021. Environmental and societal factors were obtained from publicly available sources. The primary endpoint was mortality attributed to COVID-19. We used a multivariable logistic regression to evaluate independent associations between environmental and societal factors and death, after controlling for individual-level risk factors. We used a series of nested mixed-effects models to establish whether environmental and societal factors sufficiently explained country-level variations in death., Findings: 14 044 patients from 23 countries were included in the analyses. 10 178 (72·5%) individuals were female and 3866 (27·5%) were male, with a mean age of 54·4 years (SD 15·6). Air pollution (odds ratio 1·10 per 10 μg/m 3 [95% CI 1·01-1·17]; p=0·0105), proportion of the population aged 65 years or older (1·19 per 1% increase [1·10-1·30]; p<0·0001), and population mobility (1·03 per 1% increase in number of visits to grocery and pharmacy stores [1·02-1·05]; p<0·0001 and 1·02 per 1% increase in number of visits to workplaces [1·00-1·03]; p=0·032) were independently associated with higher odds of mortality. Number of hospital beds (0·94 per 1-unit increase per 1000 people [0·88-1·00]; p=0·046), human development index (0·65 per 0·1-unit increase [0·44-0·96]; p=0·032), government response stringency (0·83 per 10-unit increase in containment index [0·74-0·93]; p=0·0018), as well as follow-up time (0·78 per month [0·69-0·88]; p<0·0001) were independently associated with lower odds of mortality. These factors sufficiently explained country-level variations in death attributable to COVID-19 (intraclass correlation coefficient 1·2% [0·1-9·5]; p=0·14)., Interpretation: Our findings highlight the importance of environmental and societal factors as potential explanations of the observed regional disparities in COVID-19 outcomes among people with rheumatic disease and lay foundation for a new research agenda to address these disparities., Funding: American College of Rheumatology and European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology., Competing Interests: MID reports research support from Pfizer for unrelated work. AS reports grants from a consortium of 13 companies (AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi, Lilly, Mylan, Hexal, Merck, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi-Aventis, and UCB) supporting the German RABBIT register, and personal fees from lectures for AbbVie, Merck, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Pfizer, outside of the submitted work. EFM reports that the Portuguese League Against Rheumatic Diseases received support for specific activities: grants from Abbvie, Novartis, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly Portugal, Sanofi, Grünenthal SA, Merck, Celgene, Medac, Pharmakern, the Global Alliance for Patient Access; grants and non-financial support from Pfizer; and non-financial support from Grünenthal GmbH, outside of the submitted work. KLH reports receiving speaker fees from Abbvie and grant income from Bristol Myers Squibb, UCB, and Pfizer, unrelated to this work. KLH is also supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Manchester Biomedical Research Centre. LG reports research grants from Amgen, Galapagos, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, Sandoz, and Sanofi; and consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Biogen, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi-Aventis, and UCB, all unrelated to this work. LC has not received fees or personal grants from any laboratory, but her institute works by contract for laboratories among other institutions, such as Abbvie Spain, Eisai, Gebro Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme España, SA Pharma, Novartis Farmaceutica, Pfizer, Roche Farma, Sanofi, Aventis, Astellas Pharma, Actelion Pharmaceuticals España, Grünenthal GmbH, and UCB Pharma. JAS has performed consultancy for AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead, Inova Diagnostics, Janssen, and Optum, unrelated to this work. LW has received consulting or speaking fees from Aurinia Pharma, outside of the submitted work. MFU-G reports grant or research support from Jannsen and Pfizer, unrelated to this work. The Swedish Rheumatology Quality Register, with LL as register holder, has agreements with Abbvie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Sobi, and UCB for register data analyses, unrelated to this work. CR has received consulting or speaker fees from Abbvie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Glenmark, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Mylan, and Pfizer; and grants from Biogen, Lilly, and Nordic Pharma, all unrelated to this work. MJS has received speaker fees from Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Novartis, and Pfizer. AR has received speaker fees from Janssen, Pfizer, and Novartis. GP-E reports reports personal consulting fees, speaking fees, or both from Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Sandoz, and Sanofi, outside of the submitted work. PCR reports personal consulting fees, speaking fees, or both from Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB; and travel assistance from Roche. PMM has received consulting fees, speaker fees, or both from Abbvie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, unrelated to this work. PMM is supported by the NIHR University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre. ES is a Board Member of the Canadian Arthritis Patient Alliance, a patient-run, volunteer-based organisation whose activities are largely supported by independent grants from pharmaceutical companies. JWL has received research funding from Pfizer, outside of the submitted work. JSH is supported by grants from the Rheumatology Research Foundation and has salary support from the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance. JSH has performed consulting for Novartis, Sobi, and Biogen, unrelated to this work. PS reports honorarium for doing social media for American College of Rheumatology journals. RG reports personal fees, speaking fees, or both from Abbvie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and Cornerstones; and travel assistance from Pfizer. SB reports non-branded consulting fees for AbbVie, Horizon, and Novartis; and is employed by Pfizer. ZSW reports grant support from Bristol Myers Squibb and Principia–Sanofi; and performed consultancy for Viela Bio and MedPace, outside of the submitted work. ZSW's work is supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health. JY has performed consulting for Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Aurinia, and AstraZeneca, outside of the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Objective: We investigated prolonged COVID-19 symptom duration, defined as lasting 28 days or longer, among people with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs)., Methods: We 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., Results: We 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)., Conclusion: Most 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., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MP reports grants from AbbVie—SELECT-GCA Participating Center and AstraZeneca—MANDARA Participating Center; and consulting fees from Novartis, outside the submitted work. ES is a board member of the Canadian Arthritis Patient Alliance, a patient run, volunteer-based organisation whose activities are primarily supported by independent grants from pharmaceutical companies. SES reports research funding related to clinical trials from AstraZeneca (MANDARA) and is supported by the Vasculitis Clinical Research Consortium and Vasculitis Foundation, outside the submitted work. CH is a stockholder for Aurinia Pharmaceuticals; an Advisory Board member for Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals and UCB Pharmaceuticals; and reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca, UCB, Antidote and Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. MJL reports grants from American College of Rheumatology, during the conduct of the study and consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Actelion, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Gilead, Johnson & Johnson, Mallinckrodt, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, Sobi and Union Chimique Belge, outside the submitted work. SB reports non-branded consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Horizon Pharma, Novartis and Pfizer outside the submitted work, and is a Pfizer employee as of September 2021. RG reports speaker honoraria from AbbVie New Zealand, Cornerstones and Janssen New Zealand; speaker honoraria and non-financial support Pfizer Australia; non-financial support from Janssen Australia and personal fees from Novartis (all <$A10 000) outside the submitted work. PMM reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and Union Chimique Belge; and grants and consulting fees from Orphazyme, outside the submitted work. PCR reports personal fees from AbbVie, Gilead, Eli Lilly and Roche; grants and personal fees from Novartis, Union Chimique Belge, Janssen and Pfizer and non-financial support from Bristol Myers Squibb, outside the submitted work. ZSW reports grants from NIH, Bristol Myers Squibb and Principia/Sanofi; and personal fees from Viela Bio and MedPace, outside the submitted work. JY reports grants from NIH/NIAMS K24 during the conduct of the study and outside the submitted work, reports research grants from Gilead, BMS Foundation and AstraZeneca; consulting fees from Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Aurinia. MG-M reports consulting fees for BMS, BI, JNJ and Aurinia (all <$A10 000), outside the submitted work. RH reports grants from AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingleheim, Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and Union Chimique Belge, all paid to Spondylitis Association of America, and consultant fees from GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis, outside the submitted work. RH also owns stocks (<20 shares and representing <4% of personal investments) in AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Teva and Union Chimique Belge. DA-R is a scientific advisor for and reports personal fees from GlaxoSmithKilne Mexico unrelated to this work. RC reports speaker fees from Janssen, Roche, Sanofi and AbbVie, outside the submitted work. AD-G reports grants from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Rheumatology Research Foundation and Mayo Clinic, outside the submitted work. JAS has received consultant fees from Schipher, Crealta/Horizon, Medisys, Fidia, PK Med, Two Labs, Adept Field Solutions, Clinical Care options, Clearview healthcare partners, Putnam associates, Focus forward, Navigant consulting, Spherix, MedIQ, Jupiter Life Science, UBM, Trio Health, Medscape, WebMD and Practice Point communications; and the National Institutes of Health and the American College of Rheumatology. JAS has received institutional research support from Zimmer Biomet Holdings. JAS received food and beverage payments from Intuitive Surgical/Philips Electronics North America. JAS owns stock options in TPT Global Tech, Vaxart Pharmaceuticals, Atyu Biopharma, Adaptimmune Therapeutics, GeoVax Labs, Pieris Pharmaceuticals, Enzolytics, Seres Therapeutics, Tonix Pharmaceuticals Holding and Charlotte’s Web Holdings. JAS previously owned stock options in Amarin, Viking and Moderna pharmaceuticals. JAS is on the speaker’s bureau of Simply Speaking. JAS is a member of the executive of Outcomes Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT), an organisation that develops outcome measures in rheumatology and receives arms-length funding from eight companies. JAS serves on the FDA Arthritis Advisory Committee. JAS is the chair of the Veterans Affairs Rheumatology Field Advisory Board (FAB). JAS is the editor and the Director of the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group Satellite Center on Network Meta-analysis. JAS previously served as a member of the following committees: member, the American College of Rheumatology's (ACR) Annual Meeting Planning Committee (AMPC) and Quality of Care Committees, the Chair of the ACR Meet-the-Professor, Workshop and Study Group Subcommittee and the co-chair of the ACR Criteria and Response Criteria subcommittee. MFU-G reports research grants from Pfizer and Janssen, unrelated to this work. JSH reports grants from and Rheumatology Research Alliance; consulting fees from Novartis, Pfizer and Biogen; and is a member of the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA). JFS received research grant funding from the National Institutes of Health unrelated to this work (NIAMS R01 AR077103 and NIAID R01 AI154533). JSp is supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (grant numbers R01 AR077607, P30 AR070253 and P30 AR072577), the R. Bruce and Joan M. Mickey Research Scholar Fund, the Llura Gund Award for Rheumatoid Arthritis Research and Care and Bristol Myers Squibb; and personal fees for AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead, Inova Diagnostics, Janssen, Optum and Pfizer, unrelated to this work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Competing Interests: Competing interests: PK reports personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi-Aventis, Pfizer, Abbvie, Novartis Pharma, Eli Lilly and Bristol-Myers Squibb. FB reports personal fees from Boehringer, Bone Therapeutics, Expanscience, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Merck Sereno, MSD, Nordic, Novartis, Pfizer, Regulaxis, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, Servier, UCB, Peptinov, TRB Chemedica and 4P Pharma. AHK reports grants from National Institutes of Health (NIH)/National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS) and Rheumatology Research Foundation and personal fees from Exagen Diagnostics, Inc. and GlaxoSmithKline. Drs Liew and Graef have disclosed no conflicts of interest or competing interests. JAS reports grants from NIH/NIAMS/National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases/Autoimmune Centers of Excellence, the Rheumatology Research Foundation, the Brigham Research Institute, and the R. Bruce and Joan M. Mickey Research Scholar Fund as well as personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Inova, Janssen and Optum.

Aim: To determine characteristics associated with more severe outcomes in a global registry of people with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and COVID-19., Methods: People with SLE and COVID-19 reported in the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance registry from March 2020 to June 2021 were included. The ordinal outcome was defined as: (1) not hospitalised, (2) hospitalised with no oxygenation, (3) hospitalised with any ventilation or oxygenation and (4) death. A multivariable ordinal logistic regression model was constructed to assess the relationship between COVID-19 severity and demographic characteristics, comorbidities, medications and disease activity., Results: A total of 1606 people with SLE were included. In the multivariable model, older age (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.04), male sex (1.50, 1.01 to 2.23), prednisone dose (1-5 mg/day 1.86, 1.20 to 2.66, 6-9 mg/day 2.47, 1.24 to 4.86 and ≥10 mg/day 1.95, 1.27 to 2.99), no current treatment (1.80, 1.17 to 2.75), comorbidities (eg, kidney disease 3.51, 2.42 to 5.09, cardiovascular disease/hypertension 1.69, 1.25 to 2.29) and moderate or high SLE disease activity (vs remission; 1.61, 1.02 to 2.54 and 3.94, 2.11 to 7.34, respectively) were associated with more severe outcomes. In age-adjusted and sex-adjusted models, mycophenolate, rituximab and cyclophosphamide were associated with worse outcomes compared with hydroxychloroquine; outcomes were more favourable with methotrexate and belimumab., Conclusions: More severe COVID-19 outcomes in individuals with SLE are largely driven by demographic factors, comorbidities and untreated or active SLE. Patients using glucocorticoids also experienced more severe outcomes., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MFU-G has received research grants from Pfizer and Janssen, not related to this manuscript. AD-G is supported by the Rheumatology Research Foundation (Scientist Development Award) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CR-S has received research grants from Janssen, not related to this manuscript. AEC has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, BMS and GSK, all unrelated to this manuscript. LW has received consulting fees and speaker’s honoraria from Aurinia Pharma unrelated to this manuscript. GJP-E reports no competing interests related to this work. Outside of this work, he reports personal consulting and/or speaking fees from Pfizer, GSK, Janssen and Sanofi (all

The Physician Global Assessment International Standardisation COnsensus in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (PISCOS) study aimed to obtain an evidence-based and expert-based consensus standardisation of the Physician Global Assessment (PGA) scoring of disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). An international panel of 79 SLE experts participated in a three-round Delphi consensus process, in which 41 statements related to the PGA in SLE were rated, using a 0 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly agree) numerical rating scale. Statements with agreement of 75% or greater were selected and further validated by the expert panel. Consensus was reached on 27 statements, grouped in 14 recommendations, for the use of the PGA in SLE, design of the PGA scale, practical considerations for PGA scoring, and the relationship between PGA values and levels of disease activity. Among these recommendations, the expert panel agreed that the PGA should consist of a 0-3 visual analogue scale for measuring disease activity in patients with SLE in the preceding month. The PGA is intended to rate the overall disease activity, taking into account the severity of active manifestations and clinical laboratory results, but excluding organ damage, serology, and subjective findings unrelated to disease activity. The PGA scale ranges from "no disease activity" (0) to the "most severe disease activity" (3) and incorporates the values 1 and 2 as inner markers to categorise disease activity as mild (≥0·5 to 1), moderate (>1 and ≤2) and severe (>2 to 3). Only experienced physicians can rate the PGA, and it should be preferably scored by the same rater at each visit. The PISCOS results will allow for increased homogeneity and reliability of PGA ratings in routine clinical practice, definitions of remission and low disease activity, and future SLE trials., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MPi reports consulting fees from GSK and Astra Zeneca, and participation on an Advisory Board for GSK and Astra Zeneca. EFM reports grants from Janssen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Glaxo Smith Kline, Janssen, AbbVie, Amgen, Genentech, UCB, and Biogen; consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Biogen, EMD Serono, Bristol Myers Squibb, Capella, Glaxo Smith Kline, Genentech, Servier, and Wolf; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Biogen, and EMD Serono; and is Board Director of the not-for-profit advocacy organisation Rare Voices Australia. MT reports grants for research or education activities from Pfizer, Genesis, UCB, GSK, and MSD, and consultancy fees from Genesis, GSK, and Novartis. MFU-G reports grants from Pfizer and Janssen and support for attending meetings and travel from Pfizer, Tecnofarma, and AbbVie. RvV reports research grants from BMS, GSK, Lilly, and mUCB; grants for educational programmes from Pfizer and Roche; consultancy fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Biotest, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Pfizer, Servier, and UCB; and honoraria from AbbVie, Galapagos, Janssen, Pfizer, and UCB. LA reports grants from GSK; consulting fees from Alexion, Amgen, Astra-Zeneca, Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, GSK, Kezar, Janssen-Cilag, Medac, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, and UCB; and honoraria from Alexion, Amgen, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, Biogen BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, GSK, Kezar, Janssen-Cilag Medac, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, and UCB. MPe and EC declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

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

Introduction: Serological markers such as anti-double stranded (ds)DNA antibodies and complement fractions C3/C4, are integral components of disease activity assessment in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). However, it remains uncertain whether treatment should aim at restoration of serological abnormalities., Objectives: To analyze and critically appraise the literature on the prognostic impact of active lupus serology despite clinical disease quiescence., Methods: A systematic literature review was performed in PubMed and EMBASE using the PICOT(S) (population, index, comparator, outcome(s), timing, setting) system to identify studies evaluating the association of serum anti-dsDNA, C3 and C4 levels assessed at the time of clinical remission or during the disease course, against the risk for impending flares and organ damage. Risk of bias was determined by the Quality in Prognosis Studies and ROB2 tools for observational and randomized controlled studies, respectively., Results: Fifty-three studies were eligible, the majority having moderate (70.6%) or high (11.8%) risk of bias and not adequately controlling for possible confounders. C3 hypocomplementemia during stable/inactive disease was associated with increased risk (2.0 to 3.8-fold) for subsequent flare in three out of seven relevant studies. Three out of four studies reported a significant effect of C4 hypocomplementemia on flare risk, including one study in lupus nephritis (likelihood ratio-positive 12.0). An increased incidence of flares (2.0 to 2.8-fold) was reported in 11 out of 16 studies assessing the prognostic effect of high anti-dsDNA, and similarly, the majority of studies yielded significant relationships with renal flares. Six studies examined the effect of combined (rather than individual) serological activity, confirming the increased risk (2.0 to 2.7-fold) for relapses. No consistent association was found with organ damage., Conclusion: Notwithstanding the heterogeneity and risk of bias, existing evidence indicates a modest association between abnormal serology and risk for flare in patients with stable/inactive SLE. These findings provide limited support for inclusion of serology in the treat-to-target approach but rationalize to further investigate their prognostic implications especially in lupus nephritis.

Background: Flares in patients with SLE, regardless of their severity, have been associated with damage accrual. However, their impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) has not been fully evaluated. In fact, disease activity is only minimally associated with HRQoL., Objective: To determine the association between flares and HRQoL., Methods: Patients from the Almenara Lupus Cohort were included. Visits occurring between December 2015 and February 2020 were evaluated. Flares were defined as an increase on the SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) of at least 4 points; severe flares were those with a final SLEDAI-2K ≥12 and mild-moderate flares all the others. HRQoL was measured using the LupusQoL. Univariable and multivariable generalised estimating regression equations were performed, adjusting for possible confounders. Confounders were determined at one visit, whereas the outcome was determined on the subsequent visit; flares were determined based on the variation of the SLEDAI-2K between these visits., Results: Two hundred and seventy-seven patients were included; 256 (92.4%) were female, mean age at diagnosis was 36.0 (SD: 13.3) years and mean disease duration at baseline was 9.1 (SD: 7.1) years. Patients had mean of 4.8 (SD: 1.9) visits and a mean follow-up of 2.7 (1.1) years. Out of 1098 visits, 115 (10.5%) flares were defined, 17 were severe and 98 mild-moderate. After adjustment for possible confounders, only severe flares were associated with a poorer HRQoL in planning, pain, emotional health and fatigue., Conclusions: Severe flares, but not mild-moderate, flares are associated with poorer HRQoL., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MFU-G has grant support from Janssen and Pfizer. RVG-C has grant support from Pfizer. CR-S and VRP-Q have grant support from Janssen. FZ and CSK are employees of Janssen Scientific Affairs. All other authors declare to have no other conflicts of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)