Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic, multiorgan, systemic autoimmune disease that is more common in women than men and is typically diagnosed during reproductive age, necessitating sex-specific considerations in care. In women there is no substantive evidence to suggest that SLE reduces fertility, but subfertility may occur as a result of active disease, immunosuppressive drugs, and age-related declines in fertility related to delays in childbearing. Although pregnancy outcomes have improved, SLE still poses risks in pregnancy that contribute to poorer maternal and fetal outcomes. Cyclophosphamide, an important agent for the treatment of severe or life-threatening lupus, may adversely affect fertility, particularly with increases in dose and patient age. Fertility

Background Patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) are at risk of developing COVID-19 due to underlying immune abnormalities and regular use of immunosuppressant medications. We aimed to evaluate the presence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies in patients with SLE with or without previous COVID-19-related symptoms or RT-PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods For this analysis, we included patients with SLE from two cohorts based in New York City: the Web-based Assessment of Autoimmune, Immune-Mediated and Rheumatic Patients during the COVID-19 pandemic (WARCOV) study; and the NYU Lupus Cohort (a prospective registry of patients at NYU Langone Health and NYC Health + Hospitals/Bellevue). Patients in both cohorts were tested for SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies via commercially available immunoassays, processed through hospital or outpatient laboratories. Patients recruited from the NYU Lupus Cohort, referred from affiliated providers, or admitted to hospital with COVID-19 were tested for SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies as part of routine surveillance during follow-up clinical visits. Findings 329 patients with SLE were included in this analysis, 146 from the WARCOV study and 183 from the NYU Lupus Cohort, and were tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies between April 29, 2020, and Feb 9, 2021. 309 (94%) were women and 91 (28%) were of Hispanic ethnicity. 51 (16%) of 329 patients had a positive SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody test. Seropositive patients were more likely than seronegative patients to be Hispanic (24 [47%] of 51 vs 67 [24%] of 278). Other demographic variables, SLE-specific factors, and immunosuppressant use were not associated with SARS-CoV-2 positivity. Of the 29 patients with COVID-19 previously confirmed by RT-PCR, 18 (62%) were on immunosuppressants; 24 (83%) of 29 patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. Of 17 patients who had symptoms of COVID-19 but negative concurrent RT-PCR testing, one (6%) developed an antibody response. Of 26 patients who had COVID-19-related symptoms but did not undergo RT-PCR testing, six (23%) developed an antibody response. Of 83 patients who had no symptoms of COVID-19 and no RT-PCR testing, four (5%) developed an antibody response. Among 36 patients who were initially SARS-CoV-2 IgG positive, the majority maintained reactivity serially (88% up to 10 weeks, 83% up to 20 weeks, and 80% up to 30 weeks). Seven (70%) of ten patients with confirmed COVID-19 had antibody positivity beyond 30 weeks from disease onset.Interpretation Most patients with SLE and confirmed COVID-19 were able to produce and maintain a serological response despite the use of a variety of immunosuppressants, providing reassurance about the efficacy and durability of humoral immunity and possible protection against re-infection with SARS-CoV-2.

Ours is an age of unprecedented levels of environmental alteration and biodiversity loss. Beyond the exposure to environmental hazards, conditions such as environmental degradation, biotic impoverishment, climate change, and the loss of ecosystem services create important health threats by changing the ecology of many pathogens and increasing the incidence and/or severity of certain noncommunicable conditions. They also threaten health in the future by weakening the Earth's life support systems.Although physicians remain one of the most often accessed and most trusted sources of information about the environment, there is currently little emphasis on educating medical professionals about these environmental issues. This lack of training reduces the ability of most physicians to be efficient science-public interfaces and makes them ineffective at contributing to address the fundamental causes of environmental problems or participate in substantive environmental policy discussions. This is an important challenge facing medical education today.To turn medical students into effective physician-citizens, an already-overwhelmed medical school curriculum must make way for a thoughtful exploration of environmental stressors and their impacts on human health. The overarching question before medical educators is how to develop the competencies, standards, and curricula for this educational endeavor. To this end, the authors highlight some of the critical linkages between health and the environment and suggest a subset of key practical issues that need to be addressed in order to create environmental education standards for the physician of the future.