Cheng, Karen

Abstract Objectives Medical nutrition therapy significantly impacts cardiovascular risk and overall health, but effects on muscle diseases remain unclear. This systematic review evaluates the safety and efficacy of dietary interventions and supplements on muscle disease outcomes. Methods A multidisciplinary team conducted a PRISMA-guided systematic review registered on PROSPERO. Searches were conducted across multiple databases and screened against pre-specified inclusion criteria. Results Of 107 full-text articles screened, 51 met inclusion criteria. Most identified interventions used dietary supplements rather than whole dietary approaches. In inflammatory myopathies, creatine (loading dose 20 g/day, maintenance 3 g/day) combined with exercise improved high-intensity functional performance in PM and DM over 6 months. In Duchenne muscular dystrophy, creatine (2–10 g/day for 8–16 weeks) improved maximal voluntary contraction and fatigue resistance. Carbohydrate-rich diets (65% CHO) reduced exercise-related symptoms in McArdle disease, while high-dose creatine (150 mg/kg/day) paradoxically worsened symptoms. Four trials of aceneuramic acid (6 g/day for 48 weeks) in GNE myopathy demonstrated dose-dependent strength improvements, leading to regulatory approval in Japan. High-protein supplementation showed positive trends for muscle preservation in critical illness myopathy. Quality assessment revealed 31% at low risk of bias, 49% with some concerns and 20% at high risk. Conclusion Evidence for nutritional interventions in muscle diseases remains limited, especially for inflammatory myopathies. The strongest support emerged for mechanistically targeted approaches: creatine with exercise, carbohydrate-rich and ketogenic diets in McArdle disease and sialic acid in GNE myopathy. Future research requires adequately powered multicentre trials with standardized outcomes, with focus on inflammatory myopathies.

AbstractBackgroundDespite the overall safety and efficacy of COVID‐19 vaccinations, rare cases of systemic autoimmune diseases (SAIDs) have been reported post‐vaccination. This study used a global survey to analyze SAIDs in susceptible individuals' post‐vaccination.MethodsA cross‐sectional study was conducted among participants with self‐reported new‐onset SAIDs using the COVID‐19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) 2 study dataset—a validated, patient‐reported e‐survey—to analyze the long‐term safety of COVID‐19 vaccines. Baseline characteristics of patients with new‐onset SAIDs and vaccinated healthy controls (HCs) were compared after propensity score matching based on age and sex in a 1:4 ratio.ResultsOf 16 750 individuals, 74 (median age 52 years, 79.9% females, and 76.7% Caucasians) had new‐onset SAID post‐vaccination, mainly idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) (n = 23, 31.51%), arthritis (n = 15; 20.53%), and polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) (n = 12, 16.40%). Higher odds of new‐onset SAIDs were noted among Caucasians (OR = 5.3; 95% CI = 2.9–9.7; p < .001) and Moderna vaccine recipients (OR = 2.7; 95% CI = 1.3–5.3; p = .004). New‐onset SAIDs were associated with AID multimorbidity (OR = 1.4; 95% CI = 1.1–1.7; p < .001), mental health disorders (OR = 1.6; 95% CI = 1.3–1.9; p < .001), and mixed race (OR = 2.2; 95% CI = 1.2–4.2; p = .010), where those aged >60 years (OR = 0.6; 95% CI = 0.4–0.8; p = .007) and from high/medium human development index (HDI) countries (compared to very high HDI) reported fewer events than HCs.ConclusionThis study reports a low occurrence of new‐onset SAIDs following COVID‐19 vaccination, primarily IIMs, PMR, and inflammatory arthritis. Identified risk factors included pre‐existing AID multimorbidity, mental health diseases, and mixed race. Revaccination was well tolerated by most patients; therefore, we recommend continuing COVID‐19 vaccination in the general population. However, long‐term studies are needed to understand the autoimmune phenomena arising post‐vaccination.

AbstractBackgroundThe pandemic presented unique challenges for individuals with autoimmune and rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) due to their underlying condition, the effects of immunosuppressive treatments, and increased vaccine hesitancy.ObjectivesThe COVID‐19 vaccination in autoimmune diseases (COVAD) study, a series of ongoing, patient self‐reported surveys were conceived with the vision of being a unique tool to gather patient perspectives on AIRDs. It involved a multinational, multicenter collaborative effort amidst a global lockdown.MethodsLeveraging social media as a research tool, COVAD collected data using validated patient‐reported outcomes (PROs). The study, comprising a core team, steering committee, and global collaborators, facilitated data collection and analysis. A pilot‐tested, validated survey, featuring questions regarding COVID‐19 infection, vaccination and outcomes, patient demographics, and PROs was circulated to patients with AIRDs and healthy controls (HCs).DiscussionWe present the challenges encountered during this international collaborative project, including coordination, data management, funding constraints, language barriers, and authorship concerns, while highlighting the measures taken to address them.ConclusionCollaborative virtual models offer a dynamic new frontier in medical research and are vital to studying rare diseases. The COVAD study demonstrates the potential of online platforms for conducting large‐scale, patient‐focused research and underscores the importance of integrating patient perspective into clinical care. Care of patients is our central motivation, and it is essential to recognize their voices as equal stakeholders and valued partners in the study of the conditions that affect them.