Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients have a 50% increased risk of cardiovascular (CV)-related morbidity and mortality. This excess CV risk is closely linked to RA disease severity and chronic inflammation, hence is largely underestimated by traditional risk calculators such as the Framingham Risk Score. Epidemiological studies have shown that patients with RA are more likely to have silent ischemic heart disease, develop heart failure, and experience sudden death compared with controls. Elevations in pro-inflammatory cytokines, circulating autoantibodies, and specific T cell subsets, are believed to drive these findings by promoting atherosclerotic plaque formation and cardiac remodeling. Current European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) guidelines state that rheumatologists are responsible for the assessment and coordination of CV disease (CVD) risk management in patients with RA, yet the optimal means to do so remain unclear. While these guidelines focus on disease activity control to mitigate excess CV risk, rather than providing a precise algorithm for choice of therapy, studies suggest a differential impact on CV risk of nonbiologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), biologic DMARDs, and small molecule-based therapy. In this review, we explore the mechanisms linking the pathophysiologic intrinsic features of RA with the increased CVD risk in this population, and the impact of different RA therapies on CV outcomes.

Purpose of review Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a heterogeneous disease with a variable disease course. Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in patients with SSc. The present review highlights recent advances in the classification, diagnosis, and early detection of SSc-associated ILD (SSc-ILD). Recent findings Risk stratification through measurement of disease extent on high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) of the chest, longitudinal declines in pulmonary function tests (PFTs), and mortality prediction models have formed the basis for classifying clinically significant ILD. HRCT may be preferred over PFTs for screening, as PFTs lack sensitivity and have a high false-negative rate. Novel imaging modalities and biomarkers hold promise as adjunct methods for assessing the presence and severity of SSc-ILD, and predicting risk for progressive disease. Further validation is required prior to their use in clinical settings. Summary Classification of SSc-ILD has shifted to a personalized approach that considers an individual patient's probability of progressive disease through identification of risk factors, measurement of disease extent on HRCT, longitudinal declines in PFTs, and mortality prediction models. There remains an unmet need to develop screening guidelines for SSc-ILD.