| 1. |
- Sen, P, et al.
(författare)
-
Vaccine hesitancy decreases in rheumatic diseases, long-term concerns remain in myositis: a comparative analysis of the COVAD surveys
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Rheumatology (Oxford, England). - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1462-0332 .- 1462-0324. ; 62:10, s. 3291-3301
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- ObjectiveCOVID-19 vaccines have a favorable safety profile in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) such as idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs); however, hesitancy continues to persist among these patients. Therefore, we studied the prevalence, predictors and reasons for hesitancy in patients with IIMs, other AIRDs, non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs) and healthy controls (HCs), using data from the two international COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) e-surveys.MethodsThe first and second COVAD patient self-reported e-surveys were circulated from March to December 2021, and February to June 2022 (ongoing). We collected data on demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 infection and vaccination history, reasons for hesitancy, and patient reported outcomes. Predictors of hesitancy were analysed using regression models in different groups.ResultsWe analysed data from 18 882 (COVAD-1) and 7666 (COVAD-2) respondents. Reassuringly, hesitancy decreased from 2021 (16.5%) to 2022 (5.1%) (OR: 0.26; 95% CI: 0.24, 0.30, P < 0.001). However, concerns/fear over long-term safety had increased (OR: 3.6; 95% CI: 2.9, 4.6, P < 0.01). We noted with concern greater skepticism over vaccine science among patients with IIMs than AIRDs (OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.08, 3.2, P = 0.023) and HCs (OR: 4; 95% CI: 1.9, 8.1, P < 0.001), as well as more long-term safety concerns/fear (IIMs vs AIRDs – OR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.2, 2.9, P = 0.001; IIMs vs HCs – OR: 5.4 95% CI: 3, 9.6, P < 0.001). Caucasians [OR 4.2 (1.7–10.3)] were likely to be more hesitant, while those with better PROMIS physical health score were less hesitant [OR 0.9 (0.8–0.97)].ConclusionVaccine hesitancy has decreased from 2021 to 2022, long-term safety concerns remain among patients with IIMs, particularly in Caucasians and those with poor physical function.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Acosta-Herrera, M, et al.
(författare)
-
Genome-wide meta-analysis reveals shared new loci in systemic seropositive rheumatic diseases
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Annals of the rheumatic diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 78:3, s. 311-319
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) are heterogeneous and complex conditions with overlapping clinical symptoms and elevated familial aggregation, which suggests the existence of a shared genetic component. In order to identify this genetic background in a systematic fashion, we performed the first cross-disease genome-wide meta-analysis in systemic seropositive rheumatic diseases, namely, systemic sclerosis, systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis and idiopathic inflammatory myopathies.MethodsWe meta-analysed ~6.5 million single nucleotide polymorphisms in 11 678 cases and 19 704 non-affected controls of European descent populations. The functional roles of the associated variants were interrogated using publicly available databases.ResultsOur analysis revealed five shared genome-wide significant independent loci that had not been previously associated with these diseases: NAB1, KPNA4-ARL14, DGQK, LIMK1 and PRR12. All of these loci are related with immune processes such as interferon and epidermal growth factor signalling, response to methotrexate, cytoskeleton dynamics and coagulation cascade. Remarkably, several of the associated loci are known key players in autoimmunity, which supports the validity of our results. All the associated variants showed significant functional enrichment in DNase hypersensitivity sites, chromatin states and histone marks in relevant immune cells, including shared expression quantitative trait loci. Additionally, our results were significantly enriched in drugs that are being tested for the treatment of the diseases under study.ConclusionsWe have identified shared new risk loci with functional value across diseases and pinpoint new potential candidate loci that could be further investigated. Our results highlight the potential of drug repositioning among related systemic seropositive rheumatic IMIDs.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Leclair, V, et al.
(författare)
-
HLA-DRB1 ASSOCIATIONS WITH AUTOANTIBODY-DEFINED SUBGROUPS IN IDIOPATHIC INFLAMMATORY MYOPATHIES (IIM)
- 2022
-
Ingår i: ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES. - : BMJ. - 0003-4967 .- 1468-2060. ; 81, s. 104-105
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- There is a gap between how IIM patients are classified in practice and current validated classification criteria1. Also, different associations with genetic variations in HLA can inform about different T-cell mechanisms involved in disease pathogenesis.ObjectivesWe aimed to systematically study associations between HLA-DRB1 alleles, clinical manifestations, and autoantibody-defined IIM subgroups.MethodsWe included 1348 IIM patients from five European countries. An unsupervised cluster analysis was performed using 14 autoantibodies: anti-Jo1, -PL7, -PL12, -EJ, -OJ, -SRP, -U1RNP, -Ro52, -Mi2, -TIF1γ, -MDA5, -PMScl, -SAE1, and -NXP2 to identify patients’ subgroups. Logistic regressions were used to estimate the associations between HLA-DRB1 alleles, clinical manifestations and the identified subgroups.ResultsEight subgroups were defined by the autoantibody status (Table 1). Three of the subgroups (1, 2 and 6) have overlapping autoantibodies, while four are almost monospecific (3,4,5 and 7), and one (8) has patients negative for tested autoantibodies. Figure 1 represents the significant associations between HLA-DRB1 alleles and the eight subgroups. Heliotrope rash and Gottron’s sign were significantly more frequent in subgroups 3 (OR:2.2 95%CI:[1.1-4.8], OR:2.6 95%CI:[1.3-5.9], respectively), 4 (OR:12 95%CI:[3.6-75], OR:7.8 95%CI:[2.8-33], respectively) and 7 (OR:22 95%CI:[4.5-385], OR:10 95%CI:[3.1-65], respectively), and Raynaud’s phenomenon was significantly more frequent in subgroup 6 (OR:3.3 95%CI:[1.2-11]).Table 1.Autoantibody-defined subgroups using an unsupervised cluster analysis.Subgroups/ MedoidsVariables1 Ro522 U1RNP3 PMScl4 Mi25 Jo16 Jo1/Ro527 TIF18 None*Alln (%)137 (10)183 (14)107 (8)65 (5)119 (9)140 (10)78 (6)519 (39)1348 (100)Female (%)93 (68)116 (63)79 (74)45 (69)76 (64)96 (69)64 (82)313 (60)882 (65)Age at diagnosis, median (IQR)56 (16)51.5 (23)51 (25)57 (22.5)47.5 (23.25)52 (19.5)53.5 (21.75)58 (22)55 (23)AutoantibodiesAnti-Jo106 (3)01 (2)119 (100)140 (100)00266 (20)Anti-PL77 (5)13 (7)00000020 (1.5)Anti-PL125 (4)3 (2)1 (1)01 (1)00010 (0.7)Anti-EJ2 (2)00000002 (0.1)Anti-OJ07 (4)0000007 (0.5)Anti-TIF110 (7)2 (1)2 (2)00078 (100)092 (7)Anti-Mi21 (1)1 (1)1 (1)65 (100)02 (1)0070 (5)Anti-SAE18 (6)23 (13)00000031 (2)Anti-NXP21 (1)23 (13)1 (1)0000025 (2)Anti-MDA59 (7)10 (6)1 (1)1 (2)01 (1)0022 (2)Anti-SRP8 (6)32 (18)00000040 (3)Anti-Ro52137 (100)16 (9)000140 (100)00293 (22)Anti-PMScl11 (8)1 (1)107 (100)00000119 (9)Anti-U1RNP079 (43)0003 (2)0082 (6)*IIM patients negative for the tested autoantibodies.Figure 1.Forest plot of significant associations of HLA. *DRB1 alleles with autoantibody-defined subgroups. Scandinavia includes patients from Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.ConclusionOur study reveals that certain subgroups of IIM patients are characterized by overlap of myositis -specific and -associated autoantibodies, which in turn are associated with different HLA-DRB1 alleles including potential novel associations. These results point to different disease mechanisms in the subgroups, as well as suggest that IIM classification could be improved by integrating broader serological and genetic data.References[1]Parker MJS, Oldroyd A, Roberts ME, et al. The performance of the European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology idiopathic inflammatory myopathies classification criteria in an expert-defined 10 year incident cohort. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2019;58(3):468-475.AcknowledgementsWe thank all the patients who participated in the study.Disclosure of InterestsValerie Leclair: None declared, Angeles Shunashy Galindo-Feria: None declared, Simon Rothwell: None declared, Olga Kryštůfková: None declared, Heřman Mann: None declared, Louise Pyndt Diederichsen: None declared, helena andersson: None declared, Martin Klein: None declared, Sarah Tansley: None declared, Neil McHugh: None declared, Janine Lamb: None declared, Jiří Vencovský Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Biogen, Boehringer, Eli Lilly, Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Werfen, Consultant of: Abbvie, Argenx, Boehringer, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Octapharma, Pfizer, UCB, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Hector Chinoy: None declared, Marie Holmqvist: None declared, Leonid Padyukov: None declared, Ingrid E. Lundberg Shareholder of: Roche and Novartis, Consultant of: Corbus Pharmaceuticals Inc, Astra Zeneca, Bristol Myer´s Squibb, Corbus Pharmaceutical, EMD Serono Research & Development Institute, Argenx, Octapharma, Kezaar, Orphazyme, and Janssen, Grant/research support from: Astra Zeneca, Lina M. Diaz-Gallo: None declared
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Lundberg, IE, et al.
(författare)
-
2017 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology classification criteria for adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies and their major subgroups
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Annals of the rheumatic diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 76:12, s. 1955-1964
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- To develop and validate new classification criteria for adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) and their major subgroups.MethodsCandidate variables were assembled from published criteria and expert opinion using consensus methodology. Data were collected from 47 rheumatology, dermatology, neurology and paediatric clinics worldwide. Several statistical methods were used to derive the classification criteria.ResultsBased on data from 976 IIM patients (74% adults; 26% children) and 624 non-IIM patients with mimicking conditions (82% adults; 18% children), new criteria were derived. Each item is assigned a weighted score. The total score corresponds to a probability of having IIM. Subclassification is performed using a classification tree. A probability cut-off of 55%, corresponding to a score of 5.5 (6.7 with muscle biopsy) ‘probable IIM’, had best sensitivity/specificity (87%/82% without biopsies, 93%/88% with biopsies) and is recommended as a minimum to classify a patient as having IIM. A probability of ≥90%, corresponding to a score of ≥7.5 (≥8.7 with muscle biopsy), corresponds to ‘definite IIM’. A probability of <50%, corresponding to a score of <5.3 (<6.5 with muscle biopsy), rules out IIM, leaving a probability of ≥50 to <55% as ‘possible IIM’.ConclusionsThe European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology (EULAR/ACR) classification criteria for IIM have been endorsed by international rheumatology, dermatology, neurology and paediatric groups. They employ easily accessible and operationally defined elements, and have been partially validated. They allow classification of ‘definite’, ‘probable’ and ‘possible’ IIM, in addition to the major subgroups of IIM, including juvenile IIM. They generally perform better than existing criteria.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Aggarwal, R, et al.
(författare)
-
2016 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism criteria for minimal, moderate, and major clinical response in adult dermatomyositis and polymyositis: An International Myositis Assessment and Clinical Studies Group/Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organisation Collaborative Initiative
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Annals of the rheumatic diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 76:5, s. 792-801
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- To develop response criteria for adult dermatomyositis (DM) and polymyositis (PM). Expert surveys, logistic regression, and conjoint analysis were used to develop 287 definitions using core set measures. Myositis experts rated greater improvement among multiple pairwise scenarios in conjoint analysis surveys, where different levels of improvement in 2 core set measures were presented. The PAPRIKA (Potentially All Pairwise Rankings of All Possible Alternatives) method determined the relative weights of core set measures and conjoint analysis definitions. The performance characteristics of the definitions were evaluated on patient profiles using expert consensus (gold standard) and were validated using data from a clinical trial. The nominal group technique was used to reach consensus. Consensus was reached for a conjoint analysis-based continuous model using absolute per cent change in core set measures (physician, patient, and extramuscular global activity, muscle strength, Health Assessment Questionnaire, and muscle enzyme levels). A total improvement score (range 0–100), determined by summing scores for each core set measure, was based on improvement in and relative weight of each core set measure. Thresholds for minimal, moderate, and major improvement were ≥20, ≥40, and ≥60 points in the total improvement score. The same criteria were chosen for juvenile DM, with different improvement thresholds. Sensitivity and specificity in DM/PM patient cohorts were 85% and 92%, 90% and 96%, and 92% and 98% for minimal, moderate, and major improvement, respectively. Definitions were validated in the clinical trial analysis for differentiating the physician rating of improvement (p<0.001). The response criteria for adult DM/PM consisted of the conjoint analysis model based on absolute per cent change in 6 core set measures, with thresholds for minimal, moderate, and major improvement.
|
|
