Background Various observations have suggested that the course of COVID-19 might be less favourable in patients with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases receiving rituximab compared with those not receiving rituximab. We aimed to investigate whether treatment with rituximab is associated with severe COVID-19 outcomes in patients with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases.Methods In this cohort study, we analysed data from the French RMD COVID-19 cohort, which included patients aged 18 years or older with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases and highly suspected or confirmed COVID-19. The primary endpoint was the severity of COVID-19 in patients treated with rituximab (rituximab group) compared with patients who did not receive rituximab (no rituximab group). Severe disease was defined as that requiring admission to an intensive care unit or leading to death. Secondary objectives were to analyse deaths and duration of hospital stay. The inverse probability of treatment weighting propensity score method was used to adjust for potential confounding factors (age, sex, arterial hypertension, diabetes, smoking status, body-mass index, interstitial lung disease, cardiovascular diseases, cancer, corticosteroid use, chronic renal failure, and the underlying disease [rheumatoid arthritis vs others]). Odds ratios and hazard ratios and their 95% CIs were calculated as effect size, by dividing the two population mean differences by their SD. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04353609.

IntroductionReactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in patients with past infection has been described in 5% to 10% of individuals undergoing immunosuppressive therapies. No data are available to date on the outcome of patients treated by tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα) inhibitors for chronic arthritis with a serological pattern of past HBV infection. The aim of our study was to monitor HBV markers in HBV surface antigen (HBsAg)-negative/anti-HBcAb-positive patients treated with a TNFα inhibitor for inflammatory arthritides.MethodsTwenty-one HBsAg-negative/anti-HBcAb-positive patients were included. HBV serological patterns were compared with those determined before starting TNFα inhibitors. Serum HBV DNA testing by polymerase chain reaction was additionally performed. Spearman correlation analysis was used and P < 0.05 was chosen as the significance threshold.ResultsBefore starting therapy, mean anti-HBsAb titre was 725 IU/L, no patient had an anti-HBsAb titre <10 IU/L, and 18 patients had an anti-HBsAb >100 IU/L. At a mean time of 27.2 months following therapy introduction, mean anti-HBsAb titre was 675 IU/L and anti-HBsAb titre remained >100 IU/L in 17 patients. There was a strong correlation between the first and second anti-HBsAb titres (r = 0.98, P = 0.013). Moreover, no patient had an anti-HBsAb titre below 10 IU/L or HBV reactivation (HBsAg seroreversion or positive HBV DNA detection). However, the anti-HBsAb titre decreased by more than 30% in 6 patients. The mean anti-HBsAb titre at baseline was significantly lower (P = 0.006) and the mean duration of anti-TNFα therapy, although non-significant (P = 0.09), was longer in these six patients as compared to patients without a decrease in anti-HBsAb titre.ConclusionsAnti-TNFα treatments are likely to be safe in patients with past hepatitis B serological pattern. However, the significant decrease of anti-HBsAb titre observed in a proportion of patients deserves HBV virological follow-up in these patients, especially in those with a low anti-HBsAb titre at baseline.

ObjectiveTo provide a table indicating the risk for developing anti citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA) positive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) according to one’s HLA-DRB1 genotype.MethodsWe HLA-DRB1 genotyped 857 patients with ACPA positive RA and 2178 controls from South Eastern and Eastern France and calculated Odds Ratios (OR) for developing RA for 106 of 132 possible genotypes accounting for 97% of subjects.ResultsHLA-DRB1 genotypic ORs for developing ACPA positive RA range from 28 to 0.19. HLA-DRB1 genotypes with HLA-DRB1*04SE (HLA-DRB1*0404, HLA-DRB1*0405, HLA-DRB1*0408), HLA-DRB1*04∶01, HLA-DRB1*01 are usually associated with high risk for developing RA. The second HLA-DRB1 allele in genotype somewhat modulates shared epitope associated risk. We did not identify any absolutely protective allele. Neither the Reviron, nor the du Montcel models accurately explains our data which are compatible with the shared epitope hypothesis and suggest a dosage effect among shared epitope positive HLA-DRB1 alleles, double dose genotypes carrying higher ORs than single dose genotypes.ConclusionHLA-DRB1 genotypic risk for developing ACPA positive RA is influenced by both HLA-DRB1 alleles in genotype. We provide an HLA-DRB1 genotypic risk table for ACPA positive RA.