This study aimed to assess the baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with rheumatic diseases and identify the risk factors associated with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. This was a retrospective study in a tertiary care center conducted through the period between March 2020 and November 2020 and included all adult patients with rheumatic diseases who tested positive on the COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. We assessed the patients’ demographic data, history of rheumatic disease, COVID-19 symptoms and experimental treatment, if any, their disease course, and outcome. In all, 47 patients were included, and most were females. The commonest rheumatic diseases were rheumatoid arthritis (53.2%), followed by systemic lupus erythematosus (21.3%), and psoriatic arthritis (10.6%). Methotrexate and hydroxychloroquine were the most commonly used disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in 36.1% and 25.5%, respectively. Out of 47 patients, 48.9% required hospitalization with a median hospital stay of 7 days. Severe COVID-19 pneumonia, defined as clinical signs of pneumonia plus one of the following: respiratory rate > 30 bpm, severe respiratory distress, or oxygen saturation < 90% in room air was observed in 19.1% of the patients, and one patient died. We found that elderly patients with a mean age of 65.3 years were more likely to develop severe COVID-19 pneumonia and that was statistically significant. Our study showed that elderly patients with a mean age of 65 years and having rheumatic diseases had an increased risk of hospital admission and development of severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

Purpose Ability to work is an important endpoint in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). It is not clear what outcome measures should be used to guide treatment in order to maximize workability. This study addressed the impact of RA on workability in a Saudi population and examined the correlation between objective measures of disease activity and reduced workability. This will allow better understanding of treatment targets that will translate into improved workability. Patients and methods Data were collected through a digital patient record keeper: The Rheumatoid Arthritis Saudi Database. Male and female patients, ≥18 years of age, that met the American College for Rheumatology criteria for diagnosis of RA, were recruited, regardless of treatment. Demographic and disease-specific data were collected. Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS-28) was used to define patients as low (DAS-28 ≤3.2) vs high (DAS-28 >3.2) disease activity. Health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and musculoskeletal ultrasound 7 joint score were documented also. The work productivity and activity impairment (WPAI) score was used to measure absenteeism, presenteeism, overall work impairment, and activity impairment. DAS-28 score was correlated with WPAI score and linear regression used to identify the demographic and measures of treatment response that predict improvement in WPAI score. Results Higher absenteeism and more activity impairment were seen for patients with persistent DAS-28 >3.2 (non-achievers). HAQ and VAS scores correlated with presenteeism, overall work impairment, and activity impairment. Conclusion Disease activity, as defined by DAS-28 score, correlates with absenteeism and work impairment in a Saudi population. However, on linear regression analysis, HAQ and VAS scores were the only measures predictive of work impairment. These scores should be used to monitor response to treatment regimens that aim to maximize work potential for Saudi individuals.

We report a case of 30-year-old female who presented initially with hair loss, photosensitive malar rash, morning stiffness and synovitis. She was diagnosed with Rhupus syndrome based on clinical and laboratory findings. Few months after starting hydroxychloroquine, esomeprazole and azathioprine, and failing methotrexate (because of erosive pillinduced esophagitis), she presented with generalized maculopapular dusky reddish rash in her body, back and extremities. Her anti-double stranded-DNA, anti-nuclear antibody, anti-Ro/SSA and anti-La/SSB were positive. Anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody was moderately positive. She had low complements: C3 and C4. Herpes simplex IgM and mycoplasma tested negative. Skin biopsy from right arm showed evidence of erythema multiform. She met the criteria for the diagnosis of Rowell syndrome. We managed her with hydroxychloroquine, prednisolone, mycophenolate mofetil and topical agents and discontinued esomeprazole. We also review the management of Rowell syndrome in the literature.

Over the last decade, biologic therapeutic proteins have advanced the treatment of diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Therapeutic antibodies such as infliximab, adalimumab, rituximab, tocilizumab, golimumab, certolizumab pegol, the receptor construct etanercept, and abatacept, an anticluster of differentiation (CD)80/anti-CD86 fusion protein, are used as treatment for RA and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, certolizumab pegol, and etanercept are inhibitors of tumor necrosis factor (TNF), a key regulator of inflammation. Left untreated, progression of rheumatic diseases due to inflammation can lead to irreversible joint damage and serious disability. One limitation for the use of therapeutic antibodies is immunogenicity, the induction of antibodies by the adaptive immune system in response to foreign substances. The development of antidrug antibodies (ADAs) has a varying impact on the clinical efficacy of biologic agents for the treatment of RA and AS, depending on whether the ADAs are neutralizing or non-neutralizing. Studies have indicated that neutralizing ADAs are associated with a reduced efficacy, decreased drug survival, increased instances of dose escalation, and adverse events. Comparison studies of anti-TNF biologics have demonstrated that each drug has a different sustained efficacy profile depending on immunogenicity. The purpose of this review is to provide rheumatologists with information regarding the effect of neutralizing antibodies on the sustainable efficacy of anti-TNF biologic therapies. This information will be of value to practicing rheumatologists in Africa and the Middle East who should take into account the potential for changes in the efficacy and safety of biologic therapies and closely monitor patients under their care.

No abstract

Background: Tofacitinib is the first Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor approved for treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Several clinical trials have evaluated the safety and effectiveness of tofacitinib in adult patients with moderately to severely active RA. Real-world studies provide invaluable insights into routine clinical practice. We aim to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of RA patients.Methods: Over a period of two years, we included 50 consecutive RA patients who were treated with tofacitinib. Clinical disease activity, assessed by disease activity score (DAS) 28 -erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), as well as adverse events (AEs) were evaluated.Results: A total of 50 patients (84% female) were enrolled in the study. The mean age at initiation of tofacitinib was 48.54 ± 15.97 years. The mean time of treatment with tofacitinib was 18.06 ± 2.04 months. Patients were treated with tofacitinib 5 mg BID with 32% receiving tofacitinib as monotherapy. A total of 74% of the patients had been prescribed at least one biological treatment. The treatment target was achieved in 42 patients (82%). Baseline characteristics and previous treatment regimens did not predict clinical response to tofacitinib. Fifteen patients discontinued the treatment: seven due to ineffectiveness, four due to pregnancy, and five due to adverse events. The most common infectious adverse event was herpes zoster (4%) while the most common observed laboratory abnormalities were elevation in low density lipoprotein (LDL) and high density lipoprotein (HDL) in 6% and 8% of the patients, respectively. Conclusion: Our results indicate that tofacitinib is effective in real-world settings even as monotherapy. The treatment target was attained by 82% of the patients on tofacitinib. The safety profile of tofacitinib was generally consistent with previous studies.

Vaccination of healthcare providers has recently gained focused attention of public health officials. As HCPs have direct contact with the population, and HCPs significantly influence the population, this study aimed to compare the acceptance rate, advocacy rate, and beliefs about the COVID-19 vaccine among HCPs in two time periods. In this repeated cross-sectional study, different HCPs were assessed in two periods ten months apart, i.e., November to December 2020 and September to October 2021, which were before and after COVID-19 vaccine approval by authorities. The study was conducted in Qatif Central Hospital, Eastern Region of Saudi Arabia. There were 609 respondents: 236 participants in the first period and 373 participants in the second period. Only 13 participants did not get the COVID-19 vaccine. There was around a 40% difference in the acceptance rate between the two study periods; the latter period was higher at 94.7%. Furthermore, 24.1% was the difference between the willingness to advocate the COVID-19 vaccine for others; the first period had a lower percentage (60.1%). Overall, results of the study showed that vaccine hesitancy, as well as the willingness to advocate for the vaccine, were improved between the pre-vaccine approval period and post-vaccine approval period, showing that the efforts made by the government improved COVID-19 acceptance and advocacy among HCPs. However, vaccine hesitancy is not a new issue, and for a better understanding of HCPs’ beliefs, a qualitative study is needed.

No abstract