Citations

Background and Aims: Biliary tract cancers are rare, heterogeneous cancers with poor prognoses. Bintrafusp alfa, a first-in-class bifunctional fusion protein composed of the extracellular domain of TGF-βRII (a TGF-β “trap”) fused to a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody blocking programmed death ligand 1, was evaluated in patients with locally advanced/metastatic chemorefractory biliary tract cancers. Approach and Results: This multicenter, single-arm, open-label, phase 2 study (NCT03833661) enrolled adults with locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer that was intolerant to or had failed first-line systemic platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients received 1200 mg bintrafusp alfa intravenously Q2W. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 assessed by IRC. Secondary endpoints included duration of response, durable response rate, safety, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Between March 2019 and January 2020, 159 patients were enrolled. Median follow-up was 16.1 (range, 0.0–19.3) months; 17 patients (10.7%; 95% CI: 6.4%–16.6%) achieved an objective response. Median duration of response was 10.0 (range, 1.9–15.7) months; 10 patients (6.3%; 95% CI: 3.1%–11.3%) had a durable response (≥6 mo). Median progression-free survival was 1.8 months (95% CI: 1.7–1.8 mo); median overall survival was 7.6 months (95% CI: 5.8–9.7 mo). Overall survival rates were 57.9% (6 mo) and 38.8% (12 mo). Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 26.4% of patients, including one treatment-related death (hepatic failure). Frequent grade ≥3 adverse events included anemia (3.8%), pruritus (1.9%), and increased alanine aminotransferase (1.9%). Conclusions: Although this study did not meet its prespecified primary endpoint, bintrafusp alfa demonstrated clinical activity as second-line treatment in this hard-to-treat cancer, with durable responses and a manageable safety profile.

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.

AbstractObjectivesTo compare pain intensity among individuals with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs), other systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), and without rheumatic disease (wAIDs).MethodsData were collected from the COVID‐19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study, an international cross‐sectional online survey, from December 2020 to August 2021. Pain experienced in the preceding week was assessed using numeral rating scale (NRS). We performed a negative binomial regression analysis to assess pain in IIMs subtypes and whether demographics, disease activity, general health status, and physical function had an impact on pain scores.ResultsOf 6988 participants included, 15.1% had IIMs, 27.9% had other AIRDs, and 57.0% were wAIDs. The median pain NRS in patients with IIMs, other AIRDs, and wAIDs were 2.0 (interquartile range [IQR] = 1.0–5.0), 3.0 (IQR = 1.0–6.0), and 1.0 (IQR = 0–2.0), respectively (P < 0.001). Regression analysis adjusted for gender, age, and ethnicity revealed that overlap myositis and antisynthetase syndrome had the highest pain (NRS = 4.0, 95% CI = 3.5–4.5, and NRS = 3.6, 95% CI = 3.1–4.1, respectively). An additional association between pain and poor functional status was observed in all groups. Female gender was associated with higher pain scores in almost all scenarios. Increasing age was associated with higher pain NRS scores in some scenarios of disease activity, and Asian and Hispanic ethnicities had reduced pain scores in some functional status scenarios.ConclusionPatients with IIMs reported higher pain levels than wAIDs, but less than patients with other AIRDs. Pain is a disabling manifestation of IIMs and is associated with a poor functional status.

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 &lt; 0.001). However, concerns/fear over long-term safety had increased (OR: 3.6; 95% CI: 2.9, 4.6, P &lt; 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 &lt; 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 &lt; 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.

Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there have been multiple peaks of the SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus virus 2) infection, mainly due to the emergence of new variants, each with a new set of mutations in the viral genome, which have led to changes in the pathogenicity, transmissibility, and morbidity. The Omicron variant is the most recent variant of concern (VOC) to emerge and was recognized by the World Health Organization (WHO) on 26 November 2021. The Omicron lineage is phylogenetically distinct from earlier variants, including the previously dominant Delta SARS-CoV-2 variant. The reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT–PCR) test, rapid antigen assays, and chest computed tomography (CT) scans can help diagnose the Omicron variant. Furthermore, many agents are expected to have therapeutic benefits for those infected with the Omicron variant, including TriSb92, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir, and their combination, corticosteroids, and interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor blockers. Despite being milder than previous variants, the Omicron variant threatens many lives, particularly among the unvaccinated, due to its higher transmissibility, pathogenicity, and infectivity. Mounting evidence has reported the most common clinical manifestations of the Omicron variant to be fever, runny nose, sore throat, severe headache, and fatigue. This review summarizes the essential features of the Omicron variant, including its history, genome, transmissibility, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, management, and the effectiveness of existing vaccines against this VOC.

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total hip and total knee arthroplasty continues to be a leading cause of re-operation and revision arthroplasty. Not only is the treatment of PJI notoriously challenging, but success rates are variable. Regardless of the surgical strategy used, successful management of PJI requires a comprehensive surgical debridement focused at eradicating the underlying biofilm followed by appropriate antimicrobial therapy. Although systemic antimicrobial delivery continues to be a cornerstone in the treatment of PJI, many surgeons have started using local antibiotics to deliver higher concentrations of antibiotics directly into the vulnerable joint and adjacent soft tissues, which often have compromised vascularity. Available evidence on the use of topical powder, bone cement, and calcium sulphate carriers for local delivery of antibiotics during the initial treatment of PJI is limited to studies that are extremely heterogeneous. There is currently no level-1 evidence to support routinely using these products. Further, appropriately powered, prospective studies are needed to quantify the safety and efficacy of antibiotic-located calcium-sulphate carriers to justify their added costs. These products should not encourage surgeons to deviate from best practice guidelines, such as those recommended during the International Consensus Meeting on Musculoskeletal Infections.

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.

The diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is challenging, often requiring multiple clinical specimens and diagnostic techniques, some with prolonged result turnaround times. Here, the diagnostic performance of the Investigational Use Only (IUO) BioFire Joint Infection (JI) Panel was compared to 16S rRNA gene-based targeted metagenomic sequencing (tMGS) applied to synovial fluid for PJI diagnosis.

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a dreadful complication of joint replacement. Noninvasive identification of infectious pathogens has been traditionnally limited to culture-based testing of synovial fluid which has poor sensitivity.

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.