| 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. |
- Gupta, L., et al.
(författare)
-
COVID-19 SEVERITY AND VACCINE BREAKTHROUGH INFECTIONS IN IDIOPATHIC INFLAMMATORY MYOPATHIES, OTHER SYSTEMIC AUTOIMMUNE AND INFLAMMATORY DISEASES, AND HEALTHY INDIVIDUALS : RESULTS FROM THE COVID-19 VACCINATION IN AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES (COVAD) STUDY.
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - : HighWire Press. - 0003-4967 .- 1468-2060. ; 81:Suppl. 1, s. 334-336
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Significant gaps are present in the evidence of the spectrum and severity of COVID-19 infection in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM). IIM patients typically require immunosuppressive therapy, may have multiple disease sequelae, and frequent comorbidities, and thus may be more susceptible to severe COVID-19 infection and complications (1). The possibility of attenuated immunogenicity and reduced efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines due to concomitant immunosuppressive medication is a major concern in these patients, and there is little data available on COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infections (BI) in IIM (2).ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare disease spectrum and severity and COVID-19 BI in patients with IIM, other systemic autoimmune and inflammatory diseases (SAIDs) and healthy controls (HCs).MethodsWe developed an extensive self-reporting electronic-survey (COVAD survey) featuring 36 questions to collect respondent demographics, SAID details, COVID-19 infection history, COVID-19 vaccination details, 7-day post vaccination adverse events and patient reported outcome measures using the PROMIS tool. After pilot testing, validation, translation into 18 languages on the online platform surveymonkey.com, and vetting by international experts, the COVAD survey was circulated in early 2021 by a multicenter study group of >110 collaborators in 94 countries. BI was defined as COVID-19 infection occurring more than 2 weeks after receiving 1st or 2nd dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. We analyzed data from the baseline survey for descriptive and intergroup comparative statistics based on data distribution and variable type.Results10900 respondents [mean age 42 (30-55) years, 74% females and 45% Caucasians] were analyzed. 1,227 (11.2%) had IIM, 4,640 (42.6%) had other SAIDs, and 5,033 (46.2%) were HC. All respondents included in the final analysis had received a single dose of the vaccine and 69% had received 2 primary doses. Pfizer (39.8%) was the most common vaccine received, followed by Oxford/AstraZeneca (13.4%), and Covishield (10.9%). IIM patients were older, had a higher Caucasian representation and higher Pfizer uptake than other SAIDs, and HC. A higher proportion of IIM patients received immunosuppressants than other SAIDs.IIMs were at a lower risk of symptomatic pre-vaccination COVID-19 infection compared to SAIDs [multivariate OR 0.6 (0.4-0.8)] and HCs [multivariate OR 0.39 (0.28-0.54)], yet at a higher risk of hospitalization due to COVID-19 compared to SAIDs [univariate OR 2.3 (1.2-3.5)] and HCs [multivariate OR 2.5 (1.1-5.8)]. BIs were very uncommon in IIM patients, with only 17 (1.4%) reporting BI. IIM patients were at a higher risk of contracting COVID-19 prior to vaccination than ≤2 weeks of vaccination [univariate OR 8 (4.1-15)] or BI [univariate OR 4.6 (2.7-8.0)]. BIs were equally severe compared to when they occurred prior to vaccination in IIMs, and were comparable between IIM, SAIDs, and HC (Figure 1), though BI disease duration was shorter in IIMs than SAIDs (7 vs 11 days, p 0.027). 13/17 IIM patients with BI were on immunosuppressants.ConclusionIIM patients experienced COVID-19 infection less frequently prior to vaccination but were at a higher risk of hospitalization and requirement for oxygen therapy compared with patients with HC. Breakthrough COVID-19 infections were rare (1.4%) in vaccinated IIM patients, and were similar to HC and SAIDs, except for shorter disease duration in IIM.References[1]Brito-Zerón P, Sisó-Almirall A, Flores-Chavez A, Retamozo S, Ramos-Casals M. SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with systemic autoimmune diseases. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2021 Jun;39(3):676–87.[2]Wack S, Patton T, Ferris LK. COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disease: Review of available evidence. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021 Nov;85(5):1274–84.AcknowledgementsThe authors thank all members of the COVAD study group for their invaluable role in the collection of data. The authors thank all respondents for filling the questionnaire. The authors thank The Myositis Association, Myositis India, Myositis UK, the Myositis Global Network, Cure JM, Cure IBM, Sjögren’s India Foundation, EULAR PARE, and various other patient support groups and organizations for their invaluable contribution in the dissemination of this survey among patients which made the data collection possible. The authors also thank all members of the COVAD study group.Disclosure of InterestsLatika Gupta: None declared, Leonardo Santos Hoff: None declared, Naveen R: None declared, Parikshit Sen: None declared, Samuel Katsuyuki Shinjo: None declared, Jessica Day Grant/research support from: JD has received research funding from CSL Limited, James B. Lilleker: None declared, Vishwesh Agarwal: None declared, Sinan Kardes: None declared, Minchul Kim: None declared, Ashima Makol: None declared, Marcin Milchert: None declared, Tamer A Gheita: None declared, Babur Salim: None declared, Tsvetelina Velikova: None declared, Abraham Edgar Gracia-Ramos: None declared, Ioannis Parodis Speakers bureau: IP has received research funding and/or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Elli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis and F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG., Consultant of: IP has received research funding and/or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Elli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis and F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG., Grant/research support from: IP has received research funding and/or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Elli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis and F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG., Albert Selva-O’Callaghan: None declared, Elena Nikiphorou Speakers bureau: EN has received speaker honoraria/participated in advisory boards for Celltrion, Pfizer, Sanofi, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Lilly, Consultant of: EN has received speaker honoraria/participated in advisory boards for Celltrion, Pfizer, Sanofi, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Lilly, Grant/research support from: EN holds research grants from Pfizer and Lilly., Tulika Chatterjee: None declared, Ai Lyn Tan Speakers bureau: ALT has received honoraria for advisory boards and speaking for Abbvie, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB., Consultant of: ALT has received honoraria for advisory boards and speaking for Abbvie, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB., Arvind Nune: None declared, Lorenzo Cavagna: None declared, Miguel A Saavedra: None declared, Nelly Ziade Speakers bureau: NZ has received speaker fees, advisory board fees and research grants from Pfizer, Roche, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, NewBridge, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Pierre Fabre; none is related to this manuscript, Consultant of: NZ has received speaker fees, advisory board fees and research grants from Pfizer, Roche, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, NewBridge, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Pierre Fabre; none is related to this manuscript, Grant/research support from: NZ has received speaker fees, advisory board fees and research grants from Pfizer, Roche, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, NewBridge, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Pierre Fabre; none is related to this manuscript, Johannes Knitza: None declared, Masataka Kuwana: None declared, Oliver Distler Speakers bureau: OD has/had consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from or has served as a speaker for the following companies in the area of potential treatments for systemic sclerosis and its complications in the last three years: Abbvie, Acceleron, Alcimed, Amgen, AnaMar, Arxx, Baecon, Blade, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, ChemomAb, Corbus, CSL Behring, Galapagos, Glenmark, GSK, Horizon (Curzion), Inventiva, iQvia, Kymera, Lupin, Medac, Medscape, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Roche, Roivant, Sanofi, Serodapharm, Topadur and UCB. Patent issued “mir-29 for the treatment of systemic sclerosis” (US8247389, EP2331143)., Consultant of: OD has/had consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from or has served as a speaker for the following companies in the area of potential treatments for systemic sclerosis and its complications in the last three years: Abbvie, Acceleron, Alcimed, Amgen, AnaMar, Arxx, Baecon, Blade, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, ChemomAb, Corbus, CSL Behring, Galapagos, Glenmark, GSK, Horizon (Curzion), Inventiva, iQvia, Kymera, Lupin, Medac, Medscape, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Roche, Roivant, Sanofi, Serodapharm, Topadur and UCB. Patent issued “mir-29 for the treatment of systemic sclerosis” (US8247389, EP2331143)., Grant/research support from: OD has/had consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from or has served as a speaker for the following companies in the area of potential treatments for systemic sclerosis and its complications in the last three years: Abbvie, Acceleron, Alcimed, Amgen, AnaMar, Arxx, Baecon, Blade, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, ChemomAb, Corbus, CSL Behring, Galapagos, Glenmark, GSK, Horizon (Curzion), Inventiva, iQvia, Kymera, Lupin, Medac, Medscape, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Roche, Roivant, Sanofi, Serodapharm, Topadur and UCB. Patent issued “mir-29 for the treatment of systemic sclerosis” (US8247389, EP2331143)., Hector Chinoy Speakers bureau: HC has been a speaker for UCB, Biogen., Consultant of: HC has received consulting fees from Novartis, Eli Lilly, Orphazyme, Astra Zeneca, Grant/research support from: HC has received grant support from Eli Lilly and UCB, Vikas Agarwal: None declared, Rohit Aggarwal Consultant of: RA has/had a consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from the following companies-Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Genentech, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca, Corbus, Kezar, and Abbvie, Janssen, Alexion, Argenx, Q32
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Andreoli, L., et al.
(författare)
-
COVID-19 VACCINE SAFETY DURING PREGNANCY AND BREASTFEEDING IN WOMEN WITH AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES : RESULTS FROM THE COVAD STUDY
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - : HighWire Press. - 0003-4967 .- 1468-2060. ; 82:Suppl. 1, s. 56-57
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant and breastfeeding women with autoimmune diseases (AID) is often attributed to the fear of adverse events (AE) and disease flares (DF). No data are available regarding COVID-19 vaccine safety in this population.Objectives: We aimed at describing delayed-onset (>7 days) vaccine-related AE (minor and major), DF, and related AID treatment modifications from the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study.Methods: Among complete responses from 9201 participants as of June 21, 2022, 6787 (73.8%) were women. Six subgroups were identified upon diagnosis of AID vs healthy controls (HC) and their pregnancy/breastfeeding status at the time of any dose of vaccine (Figure 1).Results: Forty pregnant and 52 breastfeeding AID patients were identified and their vaccination rates (at least one dose) was 100% and 96.2%, respectively (Table 1). Overall AE, minor AE, and major AE were reported significantly more frequently by pregnant than non-pregnant patients (45% vs. 26%, p=0.01; 40% vs. 25.9%, p=0.03; 17.5% vs. 4.6%, p<0.01), but no difference was found in comparison with pregnant HC. No difference was observed between breastfeeding patients and HC. Post-vaccination DF were reported by 17.5% of pregnant and 20% of breastfeeding patients, and by 18% of age- and disease-matched control patients (n=2315). All DF in pregnant/breastfeeding patients were managed with glucocorticoids and a fifth of them required initiation or change in immunosuppressive treatment.Conclusion: This study provides the first insights into the safety of COVID-19 vaccination during the antenatal period in women with AID. While AEs were more commonly reported by pregnant patients with AID, these were no higher than among pregnant healthy controls without AID. These observations are reassuring, likely to strengthen physician-patient communication and overcome hesitancy as the benefits for the mother and fetus by passive immunization are likely to overweigh the potential risks of AE and DF.Reference: [1]Fazal ZZ, et al; COVAD Study Group. COVAD survey 2 long-term outcomes: unmet need and protocol. Rheumatol Int 2022; 42:2151-2158.
|
|
| 10. |
- Aoude, M., et al.
(författare)
-
TREATMENT PATTERNS OF IDIOPATHIC INFLAMMATORY MYOPATHIES : RESULTS FROM AN INTERNATIONAL COHORT OF OVER 1,400 PATIENTS
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - : HighWire Press. - 0003-4967 .- 1468-2060. ; 81:Suppl. 1, s. 105-106
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) are a group of heterogeneous autoimmune disorders with limited standardization of treatment protocols.ObjectivesTo evaluate frequency and patterns of various treatments used for IIM based on disease subtype, world region, and organ involvement.MethodsCross-sectional data from the international CoVAD self-report e-survey1 was extracted on Sep 14th, 2021. Patient details included demographics, IIM subtypes (dermatomyositis (DM), polymyositis (PM), inclusion body myositis (IBM), antisynthetase syndrome (ASSD), necrotizing myositis (NM) and overlap myositis (OM)), clinical symptoms, disease duration and activity, and current treatments. Treatments were categorized in corticosteroids (CS), antimalarials, immunosuppressants (IS), intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG), biologics, and others. Typical clinical symptoms (dyspnea, dysphagia) were used as surrogate for organ involvement. Factors associated with IS were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for IIM subtype, demographics, world region, disease activity, and prevalent clinical symptoms (>10%).ResultsIn 1418 patients with IIM, median age was 61 years [IQR 49-70], 62.5% were females, median disease duration was 6 years [IQR 3-11], most common subset was DM (32.4%).The most used treatments were IS (49.4%, including Methotrexate 19.6%, Mycophenolate Mofetil 18.2%, Azathioprine 8.8%, Cyclosporine 2.7%, Tacrolimus 2%, Leflunomide 1.6%, Sulfasalazine 1%, and Cyclophosphamide 0.6%), followed by CS (40.8%), antimalarials (13.8%) and IVIG (9.4%). Biologics were used in 4.3% of patients.Treatment patterns differed significantly by IIM subtypes with a higher frequency of IS (77.7%) and CS (63.4%) use in ASSD; antimalarials (28.6%) and biologics (9.8%) use in OM and IVIG use in NM (24.6%) (Table 1). Also, treatment patterns were different in regions of the world (Figure 1), with a higher frequency of CS use in Europe (60.5%) and IS use in South America (77.2%). Antimalarials were most used in Asia (19.4%), while IVIG use was most common in Oceania (16.9%). Dyspnea was associated with higher use of IS (69.9%) and CS (65.8%) (p<0.001), whereas dysphagia was negatively associated with IS (39.7%) and CS (32.7%) likely due to a higher proportion in IBM patients reporting dysphagia.Table 1.Current Treatments for IIM, Stratified by Disease SubtypesDermatomyositisPolymyositisInclusion Body MyositisAnti-synthetase syndromeNecrotizing myositisOverlap syndromeAll IIMp-valueNumber of patients459182348148572241418Immunosuppressants*269 (58.6)107 (58.8)39 (11.2)115 (77.7)40 (70.2)130 (58.0)700 (49.4)<0.001Corticosteroids208 (48.0)81 (46.8)32 (9.7)90 (63.4)32 (59.3)103 (50.0)546 (40.8)<0.001Antimalarials99 (21.6)7 (3.8)0 (0.0)25 (16.9)1 (1.8)64 (28.6)196 (13.8)<0.001Intravenous Immunoglobulins54 (11.8)16 (8.8)19 (5.5)10 (6.8)14 (24.6)20 (8.9)133 (9.4)<0.001Biologics**17 (3.7)7 (3.8)0 (0.0)13 (8.8)2 (3.5)22 (9.8)61 (4.3)<0.001Others***6 (1.3)0 (0.0)0 (0.0)1 (0.7)0 (0.0)5 (2,2)12 (0.8)0.098*Methotrexate (278), Mycophenolate Mofetil (258), Azathioprine (125), Cyclosporine (38), Tacrolimus (28), Leflunomide (23), Sulfasalazine (14), Cyclophosphamide (9). **Rituximab (44), Abatacept (5), TNF inhibitors (4), Tocilizumab (3), Belimumab (3), Secukinumab (1). ***JAK(10) and PDE4 inhibitors (2)Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed an association of IS with the IIM subtype (least used in IBM (OR 0.07 [95%CI 0.04-0.13] compared to DM), world region (most used in South America (OR 2.35 [1.12-4.91] compared to North America), active and worsening disease activity (OR 3.49 [1.76-6.91] compared to remission), and some clinical features (dyspnea, fatigue, and muscle weakness).ConclusionIIM treatment patterns differ significantly by disease subtypes, world regions and organ involvement, highlighting the need for unified international consensus-driven guidelines.References[1]Parikshit S. et al. Rheumatol Int. 2022 Jan;42(1):23–9.Disclosure of InterestsNone declared
|
|
| 11. |
|
|
| 12. |
- Fornaro, M., et al.
(författare)
-
MULTIMORBIDITY AND PROMIS HEALTH OUTCOMES IN PATIENTS WITH IDIOPATHIC INFLAMMATORY MYOPATHIES : DATA FROM A LARGE, GLOBAL E-SURVEY (COVAD STUDY)
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - : HighWire Press. - 0003-4967 .- 1468-2060. ; 82:Suppl. 1, s. 942-943
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: Prevalence of comorbidities and their impact on health outcomes in Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) is limited.Objectives: This study aimed to explore the prevalence of multimorbidity in patients with IIMs, other autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) and Healthy controls (HCs). We further explore the impact of comorbidities on patients’ physical, mental, and social health assessed by the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS instruments).Methods: Data for this study were acquired from the COVAD 2 e-survey hosted by a study group consisting of 167 collaborators in 110 countries. Basic multimorbidity (BM) was defined as the co-occurrence of two or more comorbidities in an individual, while complex multimorbidity (CM) signified the co-occurrence of 3 or more chronic conditions affecting 3 or more different organ systems. PROMIS global physical health (PGP), mental health (PGM), fatigue 4a (F4a) and physical function short form (SF10) were analysed using descriptive statistics and linear regression models. Hierarchical Clustering on Principal Components was performed to outline the grouping.Results: Of 10740 complete respondents, 1558 IIMs, 4591 AIRDs and 3652 HCs were analysed. Individuals with IIMs exhibited high burden of any comorbidity (OR: 1.62 vs AIRDs and 2.95 vs HCs,p<0.01), BM (OR 1.66 vs AIRDs and 3.52 vs HCs,p<0.01), CM (OR: 1.69 vs AIRDs and 6.23 vs HCs,p<0.01), and mental health disorders (MHDs) (OR 1.33 vs AIRDs and 2.63 vs HCs,p<0.01).IIM patients with comorbidities (and MHDs) had worse physical function (low PGP, PGM, SF10 and higher F4a scores, all p<0.001). Worse physical function (PGP) was predicted by age (0.35; 0.030), active disease (-1.51; <0.001), BM (-1.11; <0.001), and MHDs (-1.47; <0.001). PGM was impacted by age (0.51; 0.004), active disease (-1.34, <0.001), BM (-0.75; 0.001) and MHDs (-2.22; <0.001). Determinants of SF10a were age (-3.86; <0.001), active disease (-7.03, <0.001), female (2.85, <0.001), BM (-2.95; <0.001) and MHDs (-2.37; <0.001). Fatigue (F4a) was impacted by age (-0.96, <0.001), active disease (1.45, <0.001), country human development index (0.95; 0.036), BM (1.11; <0.001); and MHDs (2.17; <0.001).Four distinct clusters (Figure 1A, Table 1) were identified i.e., cluster 0: lower burden of comorbidities and good health status; cluster 1: older patients, whit higher burden of comorbidities and poor health status, cluster 2: patients with higher prevalence of MHDs, lower PGP and PGM; and higher F4a scores; and lastly Cluster 3 that comprised older patients with an average burden of comorbidities and overall good health status according to PROMIS scores.Dermatomyositis, anti-synthetase syndrome, necrotizing autoimmune myopathy were similarly represented in all clusters, whilst inclusion body myositis and polymyositis were more predominant in clusters 1 (40.6% and 17.2%) and 3 (32 % and 17.5%), while overlap myositis was more represented in cluster 2 (25.6%) and 0 (32.7%) (Figure 1B).Conclusion: Patients with IIMs have a higher burden of comorbidities that adversely impact physical and mental health, calling for optimized approaches for holistic patient management.
|
|
| 13. |
- Grignaschi, S., et al.
(författare)
-
HIGH FATIGUE SCORES IN PATIENTS WITH IDIOPATHIC INFLAMMATORY MYOPATHIES : A MULTIGROUP COMPARATIVE STUDY FROM THE COVAD E-SURVEY
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - : HighWire Press. - 0003-4967 .- 1468-2060. ; 81:Suppl. 1, s. 748-748
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) are a rare, multisystem, heterogeneous diseases, and contribute to high psychological burden. The patients’ perception of physical health, deteriorating independence and social and environmental relationships may not always be a direct function of disease activity. To face with these aspects, several worldwide specialized organization have recommended the use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) both in clinical trials and observational studies to highlight patient’s perception of the disease (1). Unfortunately, data on fatigue scores in IIM is limited.ObjectivesWe compared fatigue VAS scores in patients with IIM, autoimmune diseases (AIDs) and healthy controls (HCs) and triangulated them with PROMIS physical function in a large international cohort made up of answers from the e-survey regarding the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study.MethodsData of 16327 respondents was extracted from the COVAD database on August 31th 2021. VAS fatigue scores were compared between AID, HC and IIM using univariate followed by multivariate analysis after adjusting for baseline differences. We further performed a propensity score matched analysis on 1827 subjects after adjusting for age, gender and ethnicity. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used for continuous variables and chi-square test for categorical variables, and Bonferroni’s correction was applied for the post hoc analyses considering IIMs as a reference group.ResultsWe analyzed answers from 6988 patients, with a mean age of 43.8 years (SD 16.2). The overall percentage of female was 72% and the population ethnicity was mainly composed of White (55.1%), followed by Asian (24.6%), and Hispanic (13.8%). The overall fatigue VAS was 3.6 mm (SD 2.7). IIMs VAS was 4.8 mm (SD 2.6), AIDs 4.5 mm (SD 2.6), and HC 2.8 mm (SD 2.6) (P <0,001). VAS fatigue scores of IIMs were comparable with AIDs (P 0.084), albeit significantly higher than the HCs (P <0,001). Notably, fatigue VAS was lower in IIMs than AIDs in two distinct subsets: inactive disease as defined by the patient’s perception and the “excellent” general health condition group, where IIMs had worse scores (P <0,05). Interestingly, fatigue VAS was comparable in active disease defined by physician assessment, patient perception, based on general functional status, or when defined by steroid dose being prescribed. Notably, after propensity matched analysis of patients adjusting for gender, age and ethnicity (1.827 answers, i.e. 609 subjects per group, P =1) the differences disappeared and IIMs and AIDs had comparable fatigue levels across all levels of disease activity, although the fatigue discrepancies with HCs were substantially confirmed.After application of a multivariate linear regression analysis we found that lower fatigue VAS scores were related to HC (P <0,001), male gender (P <0,001), Asian and Hispanic ethnicities (P <0,001 and 0,003).ConclusionOur study confirms that there is a higher prevalence of fatigue in all the AIDs patients, with comparable VAS scores between IIMs and other AIDs. We can also read our data commenting that females and/or Caucasians patients suffer a higher impact of this manifestation of chronic autoimmune diseases upon their lives. This is why these subjects, to our judgement, should be carefully evaluated during outpatients visits and to whom we should spend some extra time to discuss health related issues and how to improve them.References[1]Regardt, M. et al. OMERACT 2018 Modified Patient-reported Outcome Domain Core Set in the Life Impact Area for Adult Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies. J. Rheumatol.46, 1351–1354 (2019).Figure 1.distribution of Fatigue VAS scores in the three population evaluated. IIM idiopathic inflammatory myositis; AID autoimmune diseases; HC healthy controls; * P < 0,05.Disclosure of InterestsNone declared
|
|
| 14. |
- Gupta, L., et al.
(författare)
-
COMORBIDITIES, COMPLEX MULTIMORBIDITY AND PROMIS HEALTH OUTCOMES AMONGAUTOIMMUNE RHEUMATIC DISEASES : DATA FROM THE COVAD STUDY
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - : HighWire Press. - 0003-4967 .- 1468-2060. ; 82:Suppl. 1, s. 555-556
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: Comorbidities have a profound impact on the QoL of patients living with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs). Unfortunately, global data on the burden of comorbidities and its impact on health outcomes in this vulnerable group is scarce.Objectives: We studied the prevalence, distribution and clustering of comorbidities and multimorbidity among patients with AIRDs and healthy controls (HCs) and its impact on health outcomes, utilizing data from the ongoing 2nd COVAD study.Methods: The COVAD study is a global e-survey that embodies patient voice while empowering collaborators and young researchers. The study group of 157 physicians across 106 countries from February-June 2022 captured details of AIRDs, autoimmune and non-autoimmune comorbidities, and validated patient reported outcomes. Human Development Index (UNDP 2021-22) of country of residence was taken as a surrogate marker for socioeconomic status (SES).Basic multimorbidity (BM), Complex multimorbidity (CM), Autoimmune multimorbidity (AM) are defined as the co-occurrence of ≥2 non-rheumatic comorbidities, ≥3 non-rheumatic chronic conditions affecting ≥3 different organ systems [1] and ≥3 autoimmune diseases (AIDs) in an individual respectively.PROMIS global physical health (PGP), mental health (PGM), fatigue 4a (F4a) and physical function short form (SF10) scores were calculated for the different groups and compared using descriptive statistics, linear regression and cluster analysis (hierarchical followed by K means).Results: Of 17,612 total respondents, 6149 (62.7%) had underlying AIRDs and 3652 (37.3%) were HCs, with female (80.8%) and Caucasian (53.9%) predominance in the former.All types of multimorbidity were more frequent in AIRDs than HCs, including any comorbidity (77.1% versus 25.0%; OR: 2.9; 2.7-3.2), BM (21.0% vs 6.2%; 4.0; 3.4-4.6), and CM (3.1% vs 0.5%; 6.4; 3.9-10.4), and with prevalence increasing with age (p<0.001) (Figure 1A, B). Comorbidity prevalence was the highest among Americans and Australians (72% each).Patients with AIRDs had poorer health outcomes than HCs, including lower PGP, PGM, SF10, F4a scores (all p<0.001). Among AIRDs, those with comorbidities had lower physical function and PROMIS scores (PGP, PGM, and SF10), and reported fatigue more often (all p<0.001).Female gender, and underlying BM and AM particularly predisposed patients to worse physical health (lower PGP, lower SF10a) and mental health outcomes (lower PGM). While advanced age (-1.815; <0.001), and lower SES (0.871; 0.027) specifically predicted poorer physical function (lower SF10a). Fatigue (higher F4a) was seen more frequently among women (1.711; <0.001), and those with BM (1.142; 0.002); AM (1.768; 0.011), and higher SEC (0.478; 0.016).Cluster analysis of patients with AIRDs revealed 2 clusters (Figure 1C 1D); cluster 1 with low PGP, PGM, SF10 and high F4a; cluster 2 with high PGP, PGM, SF10 and low F4a. The clusters differed predominantly based on the frequency of comorbidities; any comorbidity (59.7% vs 41.8%; p<0.001), BM (28.5% vs 14.7%; 0.001); CM (4.5% vs 1.9%; <0.001), and AM (10.0% vs 4.0%; <0.001).Conclusion: Comorbidities complicate three-quarters of individuals living with AIRDs, and have an outsized impact on self-reported physical function, perceived fatigue, and QoL. Substantial regional differences call for further exploration of key drivers of this important aspect to allow optimized multidisciplinary and holistic care in anticipation of poorer outcomes.Reference: [1]Harrison C, Britt H, Miller G, Henderson J. Examining different measures of multimorbidity, using a large prospective cross-sectional study in Australian general practice. BMJ Open. 2014 Jul 1;4(7):e004694.
|
|
| 15. |
|
|
| 16. |
|
|
| 17. |
|
|
| 18. |
- Ravichandran, N., et al.
(författare)
-
PREVALENCE, CHARACTERISTICS, AND PREDICTORS OF BREAKTHROUGH COVID-19 INFECTIONS IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS : DATA FROM THE COVID-19 VACCINATION IN AUTOIMMUNE DISEASE (COVAD) STUDY
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - : HighWire Press. - 0003-4967 .- 1468-2060. ; 82:Suppl. 1, s. 56-56
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: Global data on COVID-19 breakthrough infections (BI) following COVID-19 vaccination among autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) and especially rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is scarce.Objectives: This study aimed to examine the characteristics of COVID-19 BI among patients with RA and compare them with AIRDs and healthy controls (HCs).Methods: A global e-survey, January-May 2022, collected data on COVID-19 vaccination, and BI in patients with RA, AIRDs, non-rheumatic autoimmune disease (nrAIDs), and HCs. BI was defined as infection after both primary or booster vaccine doses. Severe BI was defined as the need for hospitalization, including intensive unit care, oxygen therapy, or advanced treatment in the form of monoclonal antibodies.Results: Of the 9595 vaccinated respondents of the e-survey, 3224 (33.6%) reported COVID-19. One BI was reported in 323/1802 (17.9%) patients with RA, 584/3869 (15.0%) patients with other AIRDs, and 467/3435 (13.5%) HCs. Similarly, second BI was reported by 280 (8.6%); 42 (2.3%) among RA, 90 (2.3%) among other AIRDs, and 124 (3.6%) among HCs.The prevalence of first BI in patients with RA was higher than that in those with AIRDs (OR=1.2; 95%CI=1.1-1.4; p=0.001) and HCs (OR=1.4; 95%CI=1.2-1.6; p<0.001), but similar to nrAIDs (p=0.783). The prevalence of second BI was lower in patients with RA than in HCs (OR=0.6; 95%CI=0.4-0.9; p=0.012) and nrAIDs (OR=0.4; 95%CI=0.2-0.7; p=0.004), but similar to AIRDs (p=0.991). When compared with HCs, patients with RA reported significantly higher joint pain, hospitalizations, and need for advanced treatment at first BI. Patients with RA from very high HDI countries had lower hazard of first BI than those from high HDI countries (HR=0.026; 95%CI=0.001-0.6; p=0.027). Rituximab use predicted more frequent hospitalization (OR=3.4; 95%CI=1.3-11.4; p=0.045) and severe BI (OR=3.0; 95%CI=1.2-7.3; p=0.014).Conclusion: Nearly one in five patients with RA reported BI. BI prevalence was higher in patients with RA and of higher severity than in HCs. Country HDI was an important determinant of outcomes, suggesting potential impact of environmental dynamics, local vaccination policy, and syndemic constructs that merit further exploration. Rituximab use predicted more frequent hospitalizations and more severe BI.
|
|
| 19. |
|
|
| 20. |
|
|
| 21. |
|
|
| 22. |
- Yoshida, A., et al.
(författare)
-
IMPAIRED HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE IN PATIENTS WITH IDIOPATHIC INFLAMMATORY MYOPATHIES : A CROSS-SECTIONAL ANALYSIS FROM AN INTERNATIONAL SURVEY
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - : HighWire Press. - 0003-4967 .- 1468-2060. ; 82:Suppl. 1, s. 952-953
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: Comprehensive and large-scale assessment of health-related quality of life in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) worldwide is lacking. The second COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD-2) study [1] is an international, multicentre, self-reported e-survey assessing several aspects of COVID-19 infection and vaccination as well as validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to outline patient experience in various autoimmune diseases (AIDs), with a particular focus on IIMs.Objectives: To investigate physical and mental health in a global cohort of IIM patients compared to those with non-IIM autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), non-rheumatic AIDs (NRAIDs), and those without AIDs (controls), using Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) global health data obtained from the COVAD-2 survey.Methods: Demographics, AID diagnoses, comorbidities, disease activity, treatments, and PROMs were extracted from the COVAD-2 database. The primary outcomes were PROMIS Global Physical Health (GPH) and Global Mental Health (GMH) scores. Secondary outcomes included PROMIS physical function short form-10a (PROMIS PF-10a), pain visual analogue scale (VAS), and PROMIS Fatigue-4a scores. Each outcome was compared between IIMs, non-IIM AIRDs, NRAIDs, and controls. Factors affecting GPH and GMH scores in IIMs were identified using multivariable regression analysis.Results: A total of 10,502 complete responses from 1582 IIMs, 4700 non-IIM AIRDs, 545 NRAIDs, and 3675 controls, which accrued as of May 2022, were analysed. Patients with IIMs were older [59±14 (IIMs) vs. 48±14 (non-IIM AIRDs) vs. 45±14 (NRAIDs) vs. 40±14 (controls) years, p<0.001] and more likely to be Caucasian [82.7% (IIMs) vs. 53.2% (non-IIM AIRDs) vs. 62.4% (NRAIDs) vs. 34.5% (controls), p<0.001]. Among IIMs, dermatomyositis (DM) and juvenile DM were the most common (31.4%), followed by inclusion body myositis (IBM) (24.9%). Patients with IIMs were more likely to have comorbidities [68.1% (IIMs) vs. 45.7% (non-IIM AIRDs) vs. 45.1% (NRAIDs) vs. 26.3% (controls), p<0.001] including mental disorders [33.4% (IIMs) vs. 28.2% (non-IIM AIRDs) vs. 28.4% (NRAIDs) vs. 17.9% (controls), p<0.001].GPH median scores were lower in IIMs compared to NRAIDs or controls [13 (interquartile range 10–15) IIMs vs. 13 (11–15) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 15 (13–17) NRAIDs vs. 17 (15–18) controls, p<0.001] and PROMIS PF-10a median scores were the lowest in IIMs [34 (25–43) IIMs vs. 40 (34–46) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 47 (40–50) NRAIDs vs. 49 (45–50) controls, p<0.001]. GMH median scores were lower in AIDs including IIMs compared to controls [13 (10–15) IIMs vs. 13 (10–15) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 13 (11–16) NRAIDs vs. 15 (13–17) controls, p<0.001]. Pain VAS median scores were higher in AIDs compared to controls [3 (1–5) IIMs vs. 4 (2–6) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 2 (0–4) NRAIDs vs. 0 (0–2) controls, p<0.001]. Of note, PROMIS Fatigue-4a median scores were the highest in IIMs [11 (8–14) IIMs vs. 8 (10–14) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 9 (7–13) NRAIDs vs. 7 (4–10) controls, p<0.001].Multivariable regression analysis in IIMs identified older age, male sex, IBM, comorbidities including hypertension and diabetes, active disease, glucocorticoid use, increased pain and fatigue as the independent factors for lower GPH scores, whereas coexistence of interstitial lung disease, mental disorders including anxiety disorder and depression, active disease, increased pain and fatigue were the independent factors for lower GMH scores.Conclusion: Both physical and mental health are significantly impaired in patients with IIMs compared to those with non-IIM AIDs or those without AIDs. Our results call for greater attention to patient-reported experience and comorbidities including mental disorders to provide targeted approaches and optimise global well-being in patients with IIMs.
|
|
| 23. |
- Bérard, Adrien, et al.
(författare)
-
Development and validation of a next-generation conceptual aero-structural sizing suite
- 2008
-
Ingår i: ICAS Secr. - Int. Counc. Aeronaut. Sci. ICAS. - 9781605607153 ; , s. 1718-1727
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- An overview of a novel variable-fidelity aerostructural computational suite targeted for prediction at the conceptual design phase is presented herein. The computational suite consists of two primary modules known as CADac (Computer Aided Design Aircraft) and NeoCASS (Next generation Conceptual Aero-Structural Sizing Suite). The methodology is based upon the integration of geometry construction, aerodynamic and structural analysis codes that combine depictive, computational, analytical, and semiempirical methods, validated in an aircraft design environment. The aerodynamics sub-space is analyzed using methods based upon a Vortex-Lattice Method used to examine large structural deformations, a Doublet Lattice Method in order to predict flutter boundaries in the subsonic speed regime, and, an Euler based method to cater for identification of flutter points in the transonic regime. A quasi-analytical method that provides accurate weights estimation and refined prediction of airframe moments of inertia data has also been introduced, thus facilitating a more comprehensive investigation of the quasi-static aeroelastic problem. To illustrate the new computational system capabilities, the methodology was applied to a complete flexible structural model of the B747-100 transport aircraft. The quasianalytical weight prediction of the NeoCASS suite was found to generate an accuracy of less than 0.5% error compared to published results.
|
|
| 24. |
- Cavagna, L., et al.
(författare)
-
A Fast MDO tool for Aeroelastic Optimization in Aircraft Conceptual Design
- 2008
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This paper presents a design tool based on computational methods for the aero-structural analysis and optimization of aircraft layouts at the conceptual design stage. The whole methodology is based upon the integration of geometry construction, aerodynamic and structural analysis codes that combine depictive, computational, analytical, and semiempirical methods, validated in an aircraft design environment. The two primary modules are presented: CADac (Computer Aided Design Aircraft) for parametric geometry handling and NeoCASS (Next generation Conceptual Aero-Structural Sizing Suite) for structural sizing and numerical aeroelastic analysis. The aero-structural numerical kernel enables the creation of efficient low-order, high fidelity models which makes particularly suitable to be succesfully used within an MDO framework to drive the optimization tool into the most appropriate direction. Indeed, solving adverse aeroelastic issues like divergence, control surfaces reversal, flutter, increased drag at cruise speed due to structural deformability may require considerable changes in the structural design, limitations in flight envelope or weight penalties. The late discovery of this type of issues may result in significant cost increases and, in some cases, it may even require to actually close the project. In order to overcome the insurgence of these issues, the influence of deformability on flight and handling performances, on structural weight and on design costs needs to be taken into account as early as possible in the design process.
|
|
| 25. |
|
|
| 26. |
|
|
| 27. |
|
|
| 28. |
|
|
| 29. |
|
|
| 30. |
|
|
| 31. |
|
|
| 32. |
- Rizzi, Arthur, et al.
(författare)
-
Aeroelastic analysis of the CAWAPI F-16XL configuration at transonic speeds
- 2014
-
Ingår i: 52nd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting - AIAA Science and Technology Forum and Exposition, SciTech 2014.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- This article present an aeroelastic study of CAWAPI F-16XL aircraft. The structural model for this aircraft is publicly available and is therefore replaced by a structural model estimate which is constructed based on data available in public literature. The aeroelastic solution is done using inviscid solution for two flight conditions - FC70 and FC79. The primary task is to assess importance of the aeroelastic effects on the solution and to asses weather large discrepancies observed at flight condition FC70 between the computational and experimental data.
|
|
| 33. |
|
|
| 34. |
- Sen, P, et al.
(författare)
-
COVID-19 VACCINATION-RELATED ADVERSE EVENTS AMONG AUTOIMMUNE DISEASE PATIENTS: RESULTS FROM THE COVID-19 VACCINATION IN AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES (COVAD) STUDY
- 2022
-
Ingår i: ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES. - : BMJ. - 0003-4967 .- 1468-2060. ; 81, s. 966-967
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- COVID-19 vaccines have been proven to be safe and effective in the healthy population at large. However, significant gaps remain in the evidence of their safety in patients with systemic autoimmune and inflammatory disorders (SAIDs). Patients and rheumatologists have expressed concerns regarding vaccination triggered allergic reactions, thrombogenic events, and other adverse events (ADEs) contributing to vaccine hesitancy (1)ObjectivesThis study aimed to assess and compare short term COVID-19 vaccination associated ADEs in patients with SAIDs and healthy controls (HC) seven days post-vaccination, as well as between patients with SAIDs receiving different vaccines.MethodsWe developed an comprehensive, patient self-reporting electronic-survey to collect respondent demographics, SAID details, COVID-19 infection history, COVID-19 vaccination details, 7-day post vaccination adverse events and patient reported outcome measures using the PROMIS tool. After pilot testing, validation, translation into 18 languages on the online platform surveymonkey.com, and vetting by international experts, the survey was circulated in early 2021 by a multicenter study group of >110 collaborators in 94 countries. ADEs were categorized as injection site pain, minor ADEs, major ADEs, and hospitalizations. We analyzed data from the baseline survey for descriptive and intergroup comparative statistics based on data distribution and variable type (data as median, IQR).Results10900 respondents [42 (30-55) years, 74% females and 45% Caucasians] were analyzed. 5,867 patients (54%) with SAIDs were compared with 5033 HCs. All respondents included in the final analysis had received a single dose of the vaccine and 69% had received 2 primary doses. Pfizer (39.8%) was the most common vaccine received, followed by Oxford/AstraZeneca (13.4%), and Covishield (10.9%). Baseline demographics differed by an older SAID population (mean age 42 vs. 33 years) and a greater female predominance (M:F= 1:4.7 vs. 1:1.8) compared to HCs.79% had minor and only 3% had major vaccine ADEs requiring urgent medical attention overall. In adjusted analysis, among minor ADEs, abdominal pain [multivariate OR 1.6 (1.14-2.3)], dizziness [multivariate OR 1.3 (1.2-1.5)], and headache [multivariate OR 1.67 (1.3-2.2)], were more frequent in SAIDs than HCs. Overall major ADEs [multivariate OR 1.9 (1.6-2.2)], and throat closure [multivariate OR 5.7 (2.9-11.3)] were more frequent in SAIDs though absolute risk was small (0-4%) and rates of hospitalization were similarly small in both groups, with a small absolute risk (0-4%). Specific minor ADEs frequencies were different among different vaccine types, however, major ADEs and hospitalizations overall were rare (0-4%) and comparable across vaccine types in patients with SAIDs (Figure 1).Figure 1.A. Post Vaccination ADEs in SAIDs compared to HCs. B. Proportions of post COVID-19 vaccination ADEs in SAIDs by vaccine type.ConclusionVaccination against COVID-19 is relatively safe and tolerable in patients with SAIDs. Certain minor vaccine ADEs are more frequent in SAIDs than HCs in this study, though are not severe and do not require urgent medical attention. SAIDs were at a higher risk of major ADEs than HCs, though absolute risk was small, and did not lead to increased hospitalizations. There are small differences in minor ADEs between vaccine types in patients with SAIDs.References[1]Boekel L, Kummer LY, van Dam KPJ, Hooijberg F, van Kempen Z, Vogelzang EH, et al. Adverse events after first COVID-19 vaccination in patients with autoimmune diseases. Lancet Rheumatol. 2021 Aug;3(8):e542–5.AcknowledgementsThe authors thank all members of the COVAD study group for their invaluable role in the collection of data. The authors thank all respondents for filling the questionnaire. The authors thank The Myositis Association, Myositis India, Myositis UK, the Myositis Global Network, Cure JM, Cure IBM, Sjögren’s India Foundation, EULAR PARE, and various other patient support groups and organizations for their invaluable contribution in the dissemination of this survey among patients which made the data collection possible. The authors also thank all members of the COVAD study group.Disclosure of InterestsParikshit Sen: None declared, Naveen R: None declared, Arvind Nune: None declared, James B. Lilleker: None declared, Vishwesh Agarwal: None declared, Sinan Kardes: None declared, Minchul Kim: None declared, Jessica Day Grant/research support from: JD has received research funding from CSL Limited., Marcin Milchert: None declared, Tamer A Gheita: None declared, Babur Salim: None declared, Tsvetelina Velikova: None declared, Abraham Edgar Gracia-Ramos: None declared, Ioannis Parodis Speakers bureau: IP has received research funding and/or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Elli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis and F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG., Consultant of: IP has received research funding and/or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Elli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis and F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG., Grant/research support from: IP has received research funding and/or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Elli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis and F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG., Albert Selva-O’Callaghan: None declared, Elena Nikiphorou Speakers bureau: EN has received speaker honoraria/participated in advisory boards for Celltrion, Pfizer, Sanofi, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Lilly, Consultant of: EN has received speaker honoraria/participated in advisory boards for Celltrion, Pfizer, Sanofi, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Lilly, Grant/research support from: EN has received speaker honoraria/participated in advisory boards for Celltrion, Pfizer, Sanofi, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Lilly, and holds research grants from Pfizer and Lilly., Tulika Chatterjee: None declared, Ai Lyn Tan Speakers bureau: ALT has received honoraria for advisory boards and speaking for Abbvie, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB., Consultant of: ALT has received honoraria for advisory boards and speaking for Abbvie, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB., Grant/research support from: ALT has received honoraria for advisory boards and speaking for Abbvie, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB., Lorenzo Cavagna: None declared, Miguel A Saavedra: None declared, Samuel Katsuyuki Shinjo: None declared, Nelly Ziade Speakers bureau: NZ has received speaker fees, advisory board fees and research grants from Pfizer, Roche, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, NewBridge, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Pierre Fabre; none is related to this manuscript., Consultant of: NZ has received speaker fees, advisory board fees and research grants from Pfizer, Roche, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, NewBridge, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Pierre Fabre; none is related to this manuscript., Grant/research support from: NZ has received speaker fees, advisory board fees and research grants from Pfizer, Roche, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, NewBridge, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Pierre Fabre; none is related to this manuscript., Johannes Knitza: None declared, Masataka Kuwana: None declared, Oliver Distler Speakers bureau: OD has/had consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from or has served as a speaker for the following companies in the area of potential treatments for systemic sclerosis and its complications in the last three years: Abbvie, Acceleron, Alcimed, Amgen, AnaMar, Arxx, Baecon, Blade, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, ChemomAb, Corbus, CSL Behring, Galapagos, Glenmark, GSK, Horizon (Curzion), Inventiva, iQvia, Kymera, Lupin, Medac, Medscape, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Roche, Roivant, Sanofi, Serodapharm, Topadur and UCB. Patent issued “mir-29 for the treatment of systemic sclerosis” (US8247389, EP2331143)., Consultant of: OD has/had consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from or has served as a speaker for the following companies in the area of potential treatments for systemic sclerosis and its complications in the last three years: Abbvie, Acceleron, Alcimed, Amgen, AnaMar, Arxx, Baecon, Blade, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, ChemomAb, Corbus, CSL Behring, Galapagos, Glenmark, GSK, Horizon (Curzion), Inventiva, iQvia, Kymera, Lupin, Medac, Medscape, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Roche, Roivant, Sanofi, Serodapharm, Topadur and UCB. Patent issued “mir-29 for the treatment of systemic sclerosis” (US8247389, EP2331143)., Grant/research support from: OD has/had consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from or has served as a speaker for the following companies in the area of potential treatments for systemic sclerosis and its complications in the last three years: Abbvie, Acceleron, Alcimed, Amgen, AnaMar, Arxx, Baecon, Blade, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, ChemomAb, Corbus, CSL Behring, Galapagos, Glenmark, GSK, Horizon (Curzion), Inventiva, iQvia, Kymera, Lupin, Medac, Medscape, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Roche, Roivant, Sanofi, Serodapharm, Topadur and UCB. Patent issued “mir-29 for the treatment of systemic sclerosis” (US8247389, EP2331143)., Hector Chinoy Speakers bureau: HC has served as a speaker for UCB, Biogen., Consultant of: HC has received consulting fees from Novartis, Eli Lilly, Orphazyme, Astra Zeneca, Grant/research support from: HC has received grant support from Eli Lilly and UCB, Vikas Agarwal: None declared, Rohit Aggarwal Consultant of: RA has/had a consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from for the following companies-Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Genentech, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca, Corbus, Kezar, Kyverna, Janssen, Roivant, Boehringer Ingelheim, Argenx, Q32, Alexion, EMD S
|
|
| 35. |
|
|
| 36. |
- Yoshida, A, et al.
(författare)
-
IMPAIRED PROMIS PHYSICAL FUNCTION IN IDIOPATHIC INFLAMMATORY MYOPATHY PATIENTS: RESULTS FROM THE MULTICENTER COVAD PATIENT REPORTED E-SURVEY
- 2022
-
Ingår i: ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES. - : BMJ. - 0003-4967 .- 1468-2060. ; 81, s. 720-722
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Evaluation of physical function is fundamental in the management of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs). Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is a National Institute of Health initiative established in 2004 to develop patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) with improved validity and efficacy. PROMIS Physical Function (PF) short forms have been validated for use in IIMs [1].ObjectivesTo investigate the physical function status of IIM patients compared to those with non-IIM autoimmune diseases (AIDs) and healthy controls (HCs) utilizing PROMIS PF data obtained in the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study, a large-scale, international self-reported e-survey assessing the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in AID patients [2].MethodsThe survey data regarding demographics, IIM and AID diagnosis, disease activity, and PROMIS PF short form-10a scores were extracted from the COVAD study database. The disease activity (active vs inactive) of each patient was assessed in 3 different ways: (1) physician’s assessment (active if there was an increased immunosuppression), (2) patient’s assessment (active vs inactive as per patient), and (3) current steroid use. These 3 definitions of disease activity were applied independently to each patient. PROMIS PF-10a scores were compared between each disease category (IIMs vs non-IIM AIDs vs HCs), stratified by disease activity based on the 3 definitions stated above, employing negative binominal regression model. Multivariable regression analysis adjusted for age, gender, and ethnicity was performed clustering countries, and the predicted PROMIS PF-10a score was calculated based on the regression result. Factors affecting PROMIS PF-10a scores other than disease activity were identified by another multivariable regression analysis in the patients with inactive disease (IIMs or non-IIM AIDs).Results1057 IIM patients, 3635 non-IIM AID patients, and 3981 HCs responded to the COVAD survey until August 2021. The median age of the respondents was 43 [IQR 30-56] years old, and 74.8% were female. Among IIM patients, dermatomyositis was the most prevalent diagnosis (34.8%), followed by inclusion body myositis (IBM) (23.6%), polymyositis (PM) (16.2%), anti-synthetase syndrome (11.8%), overlap myositis (7.9%), and immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy (IMNM) (4.6%). The predicted mean of PROMIS PF-10a scores was significantly lower in IIMs compared to non-IIM AIDs or HCs (36.3 [95% (CI) 35.5-37.1] vs 41.3 [95% CI 40.2-42.5] vs 46.2 [95% CI 45.8-46.6], P < 0.001), irrespective of disease activity or the definitions of disease activity used (physician’s assessment, patient’s assessment, or steroid use) (Figure 1). The largest difference between active IIMs and non-IIM AIDs was observed when the disease activity was defined by patient’s assessment (35.0 [95% CI 34.1-35.9] vs 40.1 [95% CI 38.7-41.5]). Considering the subgroups of IIMs, the scores were significantly lower in IBM in comparison with non-IBM IIMs (P < 0.001). The independent factors associated with low PROMIS PF-10a scores in the patients with inactive disease were older age, female gender, and the disease category being IBM, PM, or IMNM.ConclusionPhysical function is significantly impaired in IIMs compared to non-IIM AIDs or HCs, even in patients with inactive disease. The elderly, women, and IBM groups are the worst affected, suggesting that developing targeted strategies to minimize functional disability in certain groups may improve patient reported physical function and disease outcomes.References[1]Saygin D, Oddis CV, Dzanko S, et al. Utility of patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) physical function form in inflammatory myopathy. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2021; 51: 539-46.[2]Sen P, Gupta L, Lilleker JB, et al. COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD) survey protocol. Rheumatol Int. 2022; 42: 23-9.AcknowledgementsThe authors thank all respondents for filling the questionnaire. The authors thank The Myositis Association, Myositis India, Myositis UK, the Myositis Global Network, Cure JM, Cure IBM, Sjögren’s India Foundation, EULAR PARE, and various other patient support groups and organizations for their invaluable contribution in the dissemination of this survey among patients which made the data collection possible. The authors also thank all members of the COVAD study group.Disclosure of InterestsNone declared
|
|
| 37. |
- Gonzalez-Gay, MA, et al.
(författare)
-
Timing of onset affects arthritis presentation pattern in antisynthetase syndrome
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology. - 1593-098X. ; 36:1, s. 44-49
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective To evaluate if the timing of appearance with respect to disease onset may influence the arthritis presentation pattern in antisynthetase syndrome (ASSD). Methods The patients were selected from a retrospective large international cohort of ASSD patients regularly followed-up in centres referring to AENEAS collaborative group. Patients were eligible if they had an antisynthetase antibody testing positive in at least two determinations along with arthritis occurring either at ASSD onset (Group 1) or during the course of the disease (Group 2). Results 445 (70%; 334 females, 110 males, 1 transsexual) out of the 636 ASSD we collected had arthritis, in the majority of cases (367, 83%) from disease onset (Group 1). Patients belonging to Group 1 with respect to Group 2 had an arthritis more commonly polyarticular and symmetrical (p=0.015), IgM-Rheumatoid factor positive (p=0.035), erosions at hands and feet plain x-rays (p=0.036) and more commonly satisfying the 1987 revised classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (p=0.004). Features such as Raynaud's phenomenon, mechanic's hands and fever (e.g. accompanying findings) were more frequently reported in Group 2 (p=0.005). Conclusion In ASSD, the timing of appearance with respect to disease onset influences arthritis characteristics. In particular, RA features are more common when arthritis occurs from ASSD onset, suggesting an overlap between RA and ASSD in these patients. When arthritis appears during the follow-up, it is very close to a connective tissue disease-related arthritis. Also, the different prevalence of accompanying features between these two groups is in line with this possibility. © Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 2018.
|
|
| 38. |
- Mialon, B., et al.
(författare)
-
Benchmarking the prediction of dynamic derivatives : Wind tunnel tests, validation, acceleration methods
- 2010
-
Ingår i: AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference 2010. - 9781624101519
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- The dynamic derivatives are widely used in linear aerodynamic models which are considered to determine the flying qualities of an aircraft: The ability to predict them reliably, quickly and sufficiently early in the design process is more and more important. This paper describes some experimental and computational activities dealing with the determination of dynamic derivatives. The work has been carried out within the FP6 European project SimSAC. Numerical and experimental results are compared for two aircraft configurations: The generic civil transport aircraft, wing-fuselage-tail configuration DLR-F12 and a generic Transonic CRuiser (TCR), which is a canard configuration. Static and dynamic wind tunnel tests have been carried out for both configurations and are briefly described. The data base generated for the TCR configuration includes small amplitude oscillations, dedicated to the determination of dynamic derivatives, and large amplitude oscillations, in order to investigate the dynamic effects on nonlinear aerodynamic characteristics. The influence of the canard has been investigated. Dynamic derivatives have been determined on both configurations with a large panel of tools, from linear aerodynamic (Vortex Lattice Methods) to CFD (unsteady Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes solvers). Strong limitations of linear aerodynamic tools are observed for the canard configuration. A specific attention is paid to acceleration techniques in CFD methods, which allow the computational time to be dramatically reduced while keeping a satisfactory accuracy.
|
|
| 39. |
|
|
