ObjectivesRecent insights supporting the safety of live-attenuated vaccines and novel studies on the immunogenicity of vaccinations in the era of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in paediatric patients with autoimmune/inflammatory rheumatic diseases (pedAIIRD) necessitated updating the EULAR recommendations.MethodsRecommendations were developed using the EULAR standard operating procedures. Two international expert committees were formed to update the vaccination recommendations for both paediatric and adult patients with AIIRD. After a systematic literature review, separate recommendations were formulated for paediatric and adult patients. For pedAIIRD, six overarching principles and seven recommendations were formulated and provided with the level of evidence, strength of recommendation and Task Force level of agreement.ResultsIn general, the National Immunisation Programmes (NIP) should be followed and assessed yearly by the treating specialist. If possible, vaccinations should be administered prior to immunosuppressive drugs, but necessary treatment should never be postponed. Non-live vaccines can be safely given to immunosuppressed pedAIIRD patients. Mainly, seroprotection is preserved in patients receiving vaccinations on immunosuppression, except for high-dose glucocorticoids and B-cell depleting therapies. Live-attenuated vaccines should be avoided in immunosuppressed patients. However, it is safe to administer the measles–mumps–rubella booster and varicella zoster virus vaccine to immunosuppressed patients under specific conditions. In addition to the NIP, the non-live seasonal influenza vaccination should be strongly considered for immunosuppressed pedAIIRD patients.ConclusionsThese recommendations are intended for paediatricians, paediatric rheumatologists, national immunisation agencies, general practitioners, patients and national rheumatology societies to attain safe and effective vaccination and optimal infection prevention in immunocompromised pedAIIRD patients.

Background Involving the end-users of scientific research (patients, carers and clinicians) in setting research priorities is important to formulate research questions that truly make a difference and are in tune with the needs of patients. We therefore aimed to generate a national research agenda for Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) together with patients, their caregivers and healthcare professionals through conducting a nationwide survey among these stakeholders. Methods The James Lind Alliance method was used, tailored with additional focus groups held to involve younger patients. First, research questions were gathered through an online and hardcopy survey. The received questions that were in scope were summarised and a literature search was performed to verify that questions were unanswered. Questions were ranked in the interim survey, and the final top 10 was chosen during a prioritisation workshop. Results Two hundred and seventy-eight respondents submitted 604 questions, of which 519 were in scope. Of these 604 questions, 81 were generated in the focus groups with younger children. The questions were summarised into 53 summary questions. An evidence checking process verified that all questions were unanswered. A total of 303 respondents prioritised the questions in the interim survey. Focus groups with children generated a top 5 of their most important questions. Combining this top 5 with the top 10s of patients, carers, and clinicians led to a top 21. Out of these, the top 10 research priorities were chosen during a final workshop. Research into pain and fatigue, personalised treatment strategies and aetiology were ranked high in the Top 10. Conclusions Through this study, the top 10 research priorities for JIA of patients, their caregivers and clinicians were identified to inform researchers and research funders of the research topics that matter most to them. The top priority involves the treatment and mechanisms behind persisting pain and fatigue when the disease is in remission.

ObjectivesTo study whether clinical remission (CR) and Low Lupus Disease Activity State (LLDAS) are achievable goals in childhood-onset SLE.MethodsData on medication use and disease activity were prospectively collected. LLDAS was defined as Safety of Estrogen in Lupus Erythematosus National Assesment-SLE disease Activity Index (SELENA-SLEDAI) ≤4 with zero scores for renal, Central Nervous System (CNS), serositis, vasculitis and constitutional components, no increase in any SLEDAI component since the previous visit, PGA ≤1, and prednisone dose ≤7.5 mg/day. CR on treatment (Tx) was defined as a Physician Global Assessment <0.5, SELENA-SLEDAI=0, with prednisone ≤5 mg/day and maintenance treatment with immunosuppressives. CR off Tx was the same but without prednisone or other immunosuppressive usage.Results51 patients (700 visits) were included. Within 3 months after diagnosis, 94.1% of children were treated with hydroxychloroquine and 60.8% with prednisone. Prednisone dosage decreased from a median of 0.74 mg/kg/day at diagnosis to 0.44 mg/kg/day at 3 months and 0.16 mg/kg/day at 6 months after diagnosis. Use of mycophenolate mofetil increased from 25.5% to 56.9% within 6 months after diagnosis. All children achieved LLDAS (median 186 days) and 72.5% remained in LLDAS >50% of time. 52.9% children achieved CR on Tx, and only 21.6% children achieved CR off Tx.ConclusionsLLDAS is an attainable treat-to-target goal in contrast to CR on and off Tx. Even more, LLDAS can be reached with limited use of corticosteroids with early introduction of immunosuppressives.

Background Involving the end-users of scientific research (patients, carers and clinicians) in setting research priorities is important to formulate research questions that truly make a difference and are in tune with the needs of patients. We therefore aimed to generate a national research agenda for Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) together with patients, their caregivers and healthcare professionals through conducting a nationwide survey among these stakeholders.Methods The James Lind Alliance method was used, tailored with additional focus groups held to involve younger patients. First, research questions were gathered through an online and hardcopy survey. The received questions that were in scope were summarised and a literature search was performed to verify that questions were unanswered. Questions were ranked in the interim survey, and the final top 10 was chosen during a prioritisation workshop. Results Two hundred and seventy-eight respondents submitted 604 questions, of which 519 were in scope. Of these 604 questions, 81 were generated in the focus groups with younger children. The questions were summarised into 53 summary questions. An evidence checking process verified that all questions were unanswered. A total of 303 respondents prioritised the questions in the interim survey. Focus groups with children generated a top 5 of their most important questions. Combining this top 5 with the top 10s of patients, carers, and clinicians led to a top 21. Out of these, the top 10 research priorities were chosen during a final workshop. Research into pain and fatigue, personalised treatment strategies and aetiology were ranked high in the Top 10.Conclusions Through this study, the top 10 research priorities for JIA of patients, their caregivers and clinicians were identified to inform researchers and research funders of the research topics that matter most to them. The top priority involves the treatment and mechanisms behind persisting pain and fatigue when the disease is in remission.

Background: Involving the end-users of scientific research (patients, carers and clinicians) in setting research priorities is important to formulate research questions that truly make a difference and are in tune with the needs of patients. We therefore aimed to generate a national research agenda for Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) together with patients, their caregivers and healthcare professionals through conducting a nationwide survey among these stakeholders.Methods: The James Lind Alliance method was used, tailored with additional focus groups held to involve younger patients. First, research questions were gathered through an online and hardcopy survey. The received questions that were in scope were summarised and a literature search was performed to verify that questions were unanswered. Questions were ranked in the interim survey, and the final top 10 was chosen during a prioritisation workshop.Results: Two hundred and seventy-eight respondents submitted 604 questions, of which 519 were in scope. Of these 604 questions, 81 were generated in the focus groups with younger children. The questions were summarised into 53 summary questions. An evidence checking process verified that all questions were unanswered. A total of 303 respondents prioritised the questions in the interim survey. Focus groups with children generated a top 5 of their most important questions. Combining this top 5 with the top 10 s of patients, carers, and clinicians led to a top 21. Out of these, the top 10 research priorities were chosen during a final workshop. Research into pain and fatigue, personalised treatment strategies and aetiology were ranked high in the Top 10.Conclusions: Through this study, the top 10 research priorities for JIA of patients, their caregivers and clinicians were identified to inform researchers and research funders of the research topics that matter most to them. The top priority involves the treatment and mechanisms behind persisting pain and fatigue when the disease is in remission.

Objective To study the association of serum IFNα2 levels measured by ultrasensitive single-molecule array (Simoa) and interferon type I gene signature (IGS) with disease activity and determine whether these assays can mark disease activity states in a longitudinal cohort of childhood-onset SLE patients. Methods Serum IFNα2 levels were measured in 338 samples from 48 cSLE patients and 67 healthy controls using IFNα Simoa assay. Five gene IGS was measured by RT-PCR in paired whole blood samples. Disease activity was measured by clinical SELENA-SLEDAI and BILAG-2004. Low disease activity was defined by Low Lupus Disease Activity State (LLDAS) and flares were characterized by SELENA-SLEDAI flare index. Analysis was performed using linear mixed models. Results A clear positive correlation was present between serum IFNα2 levels and the IGS (r = 0.78, p &lt; 0.0001). Serum IFNα2 levels and IGS showed the same significant negative trend in the first three years after diagnosis. In this timeframe, mean baseline serum IFNα2 levels decreased with 55.1% (Δ 201 fg/mL, p &lt; 0.001) to a mean value of 164 fg/mL, which was below the calculated threshold of 219.4 fg/mL, which discriminated between patients and healthy controls. In the linear mixed model, serum IFNα2 levels were significantly associated with both cSELENA-SLEDAI and BILAG-2004, while the IGS did not show this association. Both IFN-I assays were able to characterize LLDAS and disease flare in ROC analysis. Conclusions Serum IFNα2 levels measured by Simoa technology are associated with disease activity scores and characterize disease activity states in cSLE.

PurposeThe aim is to investigate the association among TLR7 and TLR9 serum levels with previous viral infections, disease activity and proinflammatory cytokine levels in SLE patients. Methods Cross-sectional observational study in SLE patients (SLICC/ACR 2012 criteria) and healthy controls (HC). Previous infection data with RNA (HCV) and DNA virus (CMV, Epstein-Barr, Herpes simplex, Parvovirus B19 or HBV), disease activity and clinical data were collected. Biological samples of SLE patients and HC from the medical visit were supplied to the TLR7, TLR9, IL10 and INF1A determination by enzymelinked immunoassay. Results 94 SLE patients (91.5% female) with a mean age of 51 ( 13) years old and 35 HC (80% female) and 42 (12) years old were recruited. Mean age at diagnosis was 33 ( 14) years old and mean disease evolution was 19 (10) years. Mean SLE-DAI index was 5.35 (4.58).The 48.94% of patients reported almost one DNA virus infections, the 2.13% reported HCV infection, the 4.25% with HCV and DNA virus, and the 31.92% not reported any infection. HC had no history of acute (3 months) or lasting chronic infections with viruses of bacteria.TLR7 and TLR9 did not correlate between them. TLR9 levels were significantly higher in SLE patients than HC (P<0,001). Even though TLR7 levels did not show any difference between both groups, an association with the age of individuals was observed (P<0,001).No association among TLR7 or TLR9 levels with CRP, ESR, anti-dsDNA, ENAs or antiphospholipid antibodies was observed, and nor with disease activity, age at diagnosis and disease evolution time. In contrast, however, we reported low TLR7 levels in SLE patients and antiphospholipid syndrome in comparison to those without antiphospholipid syndrome (P=0,001).High TLR9 levels were significantly associated to increased levels of IL10 and INF1A in SLE patients (P<0,001). TLR7 levels were not associated with INF1A levels but it is noticeable that there is a tendency to increase TLR7 levels in cases with increase of IL10 levels. Conclusions TLR9 is increased in SLE patients in comparison to HC. TLR7 increases with age. No evidence of association between previous infections and TLR levels was found. Nor do we observe any difference in TLR level according to autoantibodies presence or disease activity, probably due to the long-term SLE evolution and a good control of the disease.There was, however, an association between high TLR9 levels and increase of IL10 and INF1A.