Citations

Abstract Objective Flares of autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) following COVID-19 vaccination are a particular concern in vaccine-hesitant individuals. Therefore, we investigated the incidence, predictors and patterns of flares following vaccination in individuals living with AIRDs, using global COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) surveys. Methods The COVAD surveys were used to extract data on flare demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 history, and vaccination details for patients with AIRDs. Flares following vaccination were identified as patient-reported (a), increased immunosuppression (b), clinical exacerbations (c) and worsening of PROMIS scores (d). We studied flare characteristics and used regression models to differentiate flares among various AIRDs. Results Of 15 165 total responses, the incidence of flares in 3453 patients with AIRDs was 11.3%, 14.8%, 9.5% and 26.7% by definitions a–d, respectively. There was moderate agreement between patient-reported and immunosuppression-defined flares (K = 0.403, P = 0.022). Arthritis (61.6%) and fatigue (58.8%) were the most commonly reported symptoms. Self-reported flares were associated with higher comorbidities (P = 0.013), mental health disorders (MHDs) (P < 0.001) and autoimmune disease multimorbidity (AIDm) (P < 0.001). In regression analysis, the presence of AIDm [odds ratio (OR) = 1.4; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.7; P = 0.003), or a MHD (OR = 1.7; 95% CI: 1.1, 2.6; P = 0.007), or being a Moderna vaccine recipient (OR = 1.5; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.2; P = 0.014) were predictors of flares. Use of MMF (OR = 0.5; 95% CI: 0.3, 0.8; P = 0.009) and glucocorticoids (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.8; P = 0.003) were protective. A higher frequency of patients with AIRDs reported overall active disease post-vaccination compared with before vaccination (OR = 1.3; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.5; P < 0.001). Conclusion Flares occur in nearly 1 in 10 individuals with AIRDs after COVID vaccination; people with comorbidities (especially AIDm), MHDs and those receiving the Moderna vaccine are particularly vulnerable. Future avenues include exploring flare profiles and optimizing vaccine strategies for this group.

Abstract Background The shared inherited genetic contribution to risk of different cancers is not fully known. In this study, we leverage results from 12 cancer genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to quantify pairwise genome-wide genetic correlations across cancers and identify novel cancer susceptibility loci. Methods We collected GWAS summary statistics for 12 solid cancers based on 376 759 participants with cancer and 532 864 participants without cancer of European ancestry. The included cancer types were breast, colorectal, endometrial, esophageal, glioma, head and neck, lung, melanoma, ovarian, pancreatic, prostate, and renal cancers. We conducted cross-cancer GWAS and transcriptome-wide association studies to discover novel cancer susceptibility loci. Finally, we assessed the extent of variant-specific pleiotropy among cancers at known and newly identified cancer susceptibility loci. Results We observed widespread but modest genome-wide genetic correlations across cancers. In cross-cancer GWAS and transcriptome-wide association studies, we identified 15 novel cancer susceptibility loci. Additionally, we identified multiple variants at 77 distinct loci with strong evidence of being associated with at least 2 cancer types by testing for pleiotropy at known cancer susceptibility loci. Conclusions Overall, these results suggest that some genetic risk variants are shared among cancers, though much of cancer heritability is cancer-specific and thus tissue-specific. The increase in statistical power associated with larger sample sizes in cross-disease analysis allows for the identification of novel susceptibility regions. Future studies incorporating data on multiple cancer types are likely to identify additional regions associated with the risk of multiple cancer types.

Abstract Background: Engaging diverse populations in cancer genomics research is of critical importance and is a fundamental goal of the NCI Participant Engagement and Cancer Genome Sequencing (PE-CGS) Network. Established as part of the Cancer Moonshot, PE-CGS is a consortium of stakeholders including clinicians, scientists, genetic counselors, and representatives of potential study participants and their communities. Participant engagement is an ongoing, bidirectional, and mutually beneficial interaction between study participants and researchers. PE-CGS sought to set priorities in participant engagement for conducting the network's research. Methods: PE-CGS deliberatively engaged its stakeholders in the following four-phase process to set the network's research priorities in participant engagement: (i) a brainstorming exercise to elicit potential priorities; (ii) a 2-day virtual meeting to discuss priorities; (iii) recommendations from the PE-CGS External Advisory Panel to refine priorities; and (iv) a virtual meeting to set priorities. Results: Nearly 150 PE-CGS stakeholders engaged in the process. Five priorities were set: (i) tailor education and communication materials for participants throughout the research process; (ii) identify measures of participant engagement; (iii) identify optimal participant engagement strategies; (iv) understand cancer disparities in the context of cancer genomics research; and (v) personalize the return of genomics findings to participants. Conclusions: PE-CGS is pursuing these priorities to meaningfully engage diverse and underrepresented patients with cancer and posttreatment cancer survivors as participants in cancer genomics research and, subsequently, generate new discoveries. Impact: Data from PE-CGS will be shared with the broader scientific community in a manner consistent with participant informed consent and community agreement.

Abstract Objective COVID-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. Methods The 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. Results We 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)]. Conclusion Vaccine 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.

AbstractBackgroundAs gene‐targeted therapies are increasingly being developed for Parkinson's disease (PD), identifying and characterizing carriers of specific genetic pathogenic variants is imperative. Only a small fraction of the estimated number of subjects with monogenic PD worldwide are currently represented in the literature and availability of clinical data and clinical trial‐ready cohorts is limited.ObjectiveThe objectives are to (1) establish an international cohort of affected and unaffected individuals with PD‐linked variants; (2) provide harmonized and quality‐controlled clinical characterization data for each included individual; and (3) further promote collaboration of researchers in the field of monogenic PD.MethodsWe conducted a worldwide, systematic online survey to collect individual‐level data on individuals with PD‐linked variants in SNCA, LRRK2, VPS35, PRKN, PINK1, DJ‐1, as well as selected pathogenic and risk variants in GBA and corresponding demographic, clinical, and genetic data. All registered cases underwent thorough quality checks, and pathogenicity scoring of the variants and genotype–phenotype relationships were analyzed.ResultsWe collected 3888 variant carriers for our analyses, reported by 92 centers (42 countries) worldwide. Of the included individuals, 3185 had a diagnosis of PD (ie, 1306 LRRK2, 115 SNCA, 23 VPS35, 429 PRKN, 75 PINK1, 13 DJ‐1, and 1224 GBA) and 703 were unaffected (ie, 328 LRRK2, 32 SNCA, 3 VPS35, 1 PRKN, 1 PINK1, and 338 GBA). In total, we identified 269 different pathogenic variants; 1322 individuals in our cohort (34%) were indicated as not previously published.ConclusionsWithin the MJFF Global Genetic PD Study Group, we (1) established the largest international cohort of affected and unaffected individuals carrying PD‐linked variants; (2) provide harmonized and quality‐controlled clinical and genetic data for each included individual; (3) promote collaboration in the field of genetic PD with a view toward clinical and genetic stratification of patients for gene‐targeted clinical trials. © 2023 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Clinical trial participants do not reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of people with cancer. ASCO and the Association of Community Cancer Centers collaborated on a quality improvement study to enhance racial and ethnic equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) in cancer clinical trials. The groups conducted a pilot study to examine the feasibility, utility, and face validity of a two-part clinical trial site self-assessment to enable diverse types of research sites in the United States to (1) review internal data to assess racial and ethnic disparities in screening and enrollment and (2) review their policies, programs, procedures to identify opportunities and strategies to improve EDI. Overall, 81% of 62 participating sites were satisfied with the assessment; 82% identified opportunities for improvement; and 63% identified specific strategies and 74% thought the assessment had potential to help their site increase EDI. The assessment increased awareness about performance (82%) and helped identify specific strategies (63%) to increase EDI in trials. Although most sites (65%) were able to provide some data on the number of patients that consented, only two sites were able to provide all requested trial screening, offering, and enrollment data by race and ethnicity. Documenting and evaluating such data are critical steps toward improving EDI and are key to identifying and addressing disparities more broadly. ASCO and Association of Community Cancer Centers will partner with sites to better understand their processes and the feasibility of collecting screening, offering, and enrollment data in systematic and automated ways.

ImportanceLate-onset meningitis (LOM) has been associated with adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes in children born extremely preterm.ObjectiveTo report the incidence of LOM during birth hospitalization and neurodevelopmental outcomes at 18 to 26 months’ corrected age.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cohort study is a secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective cohort of children born at 22 to 26 weeks’ gestation between 2003 and 2017 with follow-up from 2004 to 2021. The study was conducted at 25 Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network centers.ExposuresCulture-confirmed LOM.Main Outcomes and MeasuresIncidence and microbiology of LOM (2003-2017); lumbar puncture (LP) performance in late-onset sepsis (LOS) evaluations (2011-2017); composite outcome of death or neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI; 2004-2021).ResultsAmong 13 372 infants (median [IQR] gestational age, 25.4 [24.4-26.1] weeks; 6864 [51%] boys), LOM was diagnosed in 167 (1%); LOS without LOM in 4564 (34%); and neither LOS nor LOM in 8641 (65%). The observed incidence of LOM decreased from 2% (95% CI, 1%-3%) in 2003 to 0.4% (95% CI, 0.7%-1.0%) in 2017 (P < .001). LP performance in LOS evaluations decreased from 36% (95% CI, 33%-40%) in 2011 to 24% (95% CI, 21%-27%) in 2017 (P < .001). Among infants with culture-confirmed LOS, LP performance decreased from 58% (95% CI, 51%-65%) to 45% (95% CI, 38%-51%; P = .008). LP performance varied by center among all LOS evaluations (10%-59%, P < .001) and among those with culture-confirmed LOS (23%-79%, P < .001). LOM occurred in the absence of concurrent LOS in 27 of 167 cases (16%). The most common LOM isolates were coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (98 [59%]), Candida albicans (38 [23%]), and Escherichia coli (27 [16%]). Death or NDI occurred in 22 of 46 children (48%) with LOM due to coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, 43 of 67 (64%) due to all other bacterial pathogens, and 26 of 33 (79%) due to fungal pathogens. The adjusted relative risk of death or NDI was increased among children with LOM (aOR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.04-2.25) and among those with LOS without LOM (aOR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.29-1.54) compared with children with neither infection.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study, LP was performed with decreasing frequency, and the observed incidence of LOM also decreased. Both LOM and LOS were associated with increased risk of death or NDI; risk varied by LOM pathogen. The full association of LOM with outcomes of children born extremely preterm may be underestimated by current diagnostic practices.

Abstract Objective To determine COVID-19 vaccine-related adverse events (AEs) in the seven-day post-vaccination period in patients with SLE vs autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs), and healthy controls (HC). Methods Data were captured through the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) questionnaire (March–December 2021). Multivariable regression models accounted for age, gender, ethnicity, vaccine type and background treatment. Results Among 9462 complete respondents, 583 (6.2%) were SLE patients (mean age: 40.1 years; 94.5% females; 40.5% Asian; 42.9% Pfizer-recipients). Minor AEs were reported by 83.0% of SLE patients, major by 2.6%, hospitalization by 0.2%. AE and hospitalization frequencies were similar between patients with active and inactive SLE. Rashes were more frequent in SLE patients vs HC (OR; 95% CI: 1.2; 1.0, 1.5), chills less frequent in SLE vs AIRDs (0.6; 0.4, 0.8) and nrAIDs (0.5; 0.3, 0.8), and fatigue less frequent in SLE vs nrAIDs (0.6; 0.4, 0.9). Pfizer-recipients reported higher overall AE (2.2; 1.1, 4.2) and injection site pain (2.9; 1.6, 5.0) frequencies than recipients of other vaccines, Oxford/AstraZeneca-recipients more body ache, fever, chills (OR: 2.5, 3.0), Moderna-recipients more body ache, fever, chills, rashes (OR: 2.6, 4.3). Hospitalization frequencies were similar across vaccine types. AE frequencies were similar across treatment groups, although chills were less frequent in antimalarial users vs non-users (0.5; 0.3, 0.9). Conclusion While COVID-19 vaccination-related AEs were reported by four-fifths of SLE patients, those were mostly minor and comparable to AEs reported by healthy individuals, providing reassurance regarding COVID-19 vaccination safety in SLE.

Abstract Objectives The COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune diseases (COVAD) study aimed to assess short-term COVID-19 vaccination-related adverse events (AEs) in RA patients. Methods An online self-reported questionnaire (March–December 2021) was used to capture data related to COVID-19 vaccination-related AEs in RA, other autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) (excluding RA and inflammatory myositis), non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs) and healthy controls (HCs). Descriptive and multivariable regression analyses were performed. Results Of the 9462 complete respondents, 14.2% (n = 1347) had been diagnosed with RA; they had a mean (s.d.) age of 50.7 (13.7) years, 74.2% were women and 49.3% were Caucasian. In total, 76.9% and 4.2% of patients with RA reported minor and major AEs, respectively. Patients with active and inactive RA had similar AE and hospitalization frequencies. Overall, AEs were reported more frequently by BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 recipients and less frequently by BBV152 recipients compared with the rest. Major AE and hospitalization frequencies were similar across recipients of different vaccines. Patients receiving methotrexate and hydroxychloroquine reported fewer minor AEs than those patients not on them. Compared with HCs and patients with other AIRDs, patients with RA reported similar total AEs, overall minor AEs, and hospitalizations. Compared with nrAIDs, patients with RA reported lower frequencies of overall AEs, minor AEs (both odds ratio [OR] = 0.7; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.9), and injection site pain (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.8) with similar major AE and hospitalization frequencies. Conclusion Despite the differences in AE frequency across different COVID-19 vaccines, all were well tolerated in patients with RA and were comparable to HCs, providing reassurance as to the safety of COVID-19 vaccination.