Cassandra Calabrese

Objective: To compare the effectiveness and safety of interleukin 6 receptor inhibitors (IL-6Ris) and conventional synthetic immunomodulators (csIM) in patients with polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) who received glucocorticoids (GC) and initiated a new therapy for PMR. Methods: We evaluated the effectiveness and safety of IL-6Ris in a retrospective comparative cohort created from the US Medicare fee-for-service medical and part D prescription claims data. Patients with PMR, on GC, without prior IL-6Ri exposure and initiating IL-6Ri/csIM therapy were identified. These patients were categorised into csIM-naïve and csIM-experienced cohorts and matched using direct methods and propensity score methods. Primary endpoints were time-to-GC discontinuation and time-to-minimal GC use (≤2 mg/day or stop GC) through year 1. Incidence rates (IRs) for adverse events of special interest were reported for IL-6Ri and csIM initiators through year 2. Results: We included 415 matched treatment pairs (187/228, csIM-naïve/csIM-experienced). IL-6Ri initiators were more likely to discontinue GC (adjusted HR (aHR) 1.28, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.60; p=0.031) or achieve minimal GC use (aHR 1.28, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.58; p=0.025) by year 1 versus csIM initiators. At year 1, IR (95% CI)/100 patient-years for primary hospitalised infections was higher for IL-6Ri initiators versus csIM initiators (12.2 (95% CI 8.9 to 16.3) vs 5.7 (95% CI 3.6 to 8.6)); however, it was similar for year 2 (5.8 (95% CI 3.3 to 9.6) vs 6.4 (95% CI 3.8 to 10.1)). For other events of interest, the IRs were low and comparable in both groups. Conclusions: IL-6Ri therapy was more effective as a steroid-sparing agent than csIM for PMR with no new safety findings.

Background: Immunocompromised patients, especially those receiving B–cell–depleting therapy (BCDT), remain at high risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID–19). Although monoclonal antibodies showed benefit pre–Omicron, the real–world effectiveness of the oral antivirals in BCDT recipients is unclear. Methods: We emulated a target trial using the Cleveland Clinic electronic health record. Adult patients (≥18 years) with immune–mediated inflammatory diseases who received rituximab or ocrelizumab and tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 between 19 December 2021 and 30 June 2025 were eligible. The primary endpoint was hospitalization or death within 21 days; the secondary endpoint was death within 90 days. Propensity scores adjusted for confounding, and Weighted Cox regression models were used to evaluated treatment effects. Results: Among 255 853 COVID–19 cases, 876 met criteria for the nirmatrelvir/ritonavir cohort (411 treated, 465 untreated) and 566 for the molnupiravir cohort (91 treated, 475 untreated). In the nirmatrelvir/ritonavir cohort, 18 (4.4%) of treated versus 43 (9.2%) of untreated patients were hospitalized or died within 21 days. After weighting, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir reduced the hazard by 44% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31–0.99). In the molnupiravir cohort, 6 (6.6%) of treated and 46 (9.7%) of untreated patients met the primary endpoint; the weighted HR was 0.56 (95% CI, 0.24–1.33), not statistically significant. Conclusions: Early outpatient nirmatrelvir/ritonavir significantly lowers the risk of COVID–19–related hospitalization or death in patients on BCDT. Molnupiravir showed a nonsignificant trend toward benefit. These findings support prioritizing nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for high–risk immunocompromised populations.

Patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) like rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at higher risk for severe COVID-19 and long-term complications in bone health. Emerging clinical evidence demonstrated that SARS-CoV-2 infection reduces bone turnover and promotes bone loss, but the mechanism underlying worsened bone health remains elusive. This study sought to identify specific immune mediators that exacerbated preexisting IMIDs after SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Plasma samples from 4 groups were analyzed: healthy, IMID only, COVID-19 only, and COVID-19 + IMID. Using high-throughput multiplexed proteomics, we profiled 1,500 protein biomarkers and identified 148 unique biomarkers in COVID-19 patients with IMIDs, including elevated inflammatory cytokines (e.g., IL-17F) and bone resorption markers. Long-term circulating SARS-CoV-2 ORF8, a virulence factor for COVID-19, was detected in the COVID + IMID group. RA was one of the most common IMIDs in our study. ORF8 treatment of RA-derived human osteoblasts (RA-hOBs) increased levels of inflammatory ( TNF , IL6 , CCL2 ) and bone resorption ( RANKL /osteoprotegerin ratio) markers compared with healthy controls. Supernatants from ORF8-treated RA-hOBs drove the differentiation of macrophages into osteoclast-like cells. These findings suggest that SARS-CoV-2 exposure can exacerbate IMIDs through ORF8-driven inflammation and osteoclastogenesis, highlighting potential therapeutic targets for managing COVID-19–induced bone pathologies.

Background: Patients with cancer and an underlying autoimmune disease who are considering immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) need to know about the benefits and risks of severe immune-related adverse events and flares of the autoimmune condition. Objective: This study aims to develop and alpha test an educational website for patients with cancer. Methods: Learning topics, images, and website architecture (including flow and requirements) were developed and iteratively reviewed by members of a community scientist program, a patient advisory group, and content experts. Alpha testing was performed, measuring the site’s usability using the Suitability Assessment of Materials and its acceptability using the Ottawa Acceptability Measure. Results: The website included a home page; general information about ICBs; comprehensive modules on the benefits and risks of ICBs for patients with cancer and preexisting autoimmune diseases; general wellness information; and features such as a quiz, additional resources, and a glossary. For the alpha testing, 9 users assessed the newly developed website. Patient reviewers (n=5) had rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn disease, Sjogren syndrome, or vasculitis. Health care provider reviewers (n=4) were medical oncologists or rheumatologists. The median Suitability Assessment of Materials rating was 75 (IQR 70-79; range 0-100) for patients versus 66 (IQR 57-72; range 0-100) for providers (scores ≥70 indicate no substantial changes needed). Recommendations for improvement, mostly involving navigation and accessibility, were addressed. All participants expressed that the website was acceptable and balanced in terms of discussion of benefits and harms. Because half (2/4, 50%) of the providers suggested we increase the amount of information, we extended the content on the impact of having an autoimmune disease when considering ICB treatment, the probability of flares, and the management of flares in this context. Conclusions: The feedback led to minor revisions to enhance readability, navigation, and accessibility, ensuring the website’s suitability as a decision-making aid. The newly developed website could become a supporting tool to facilitate patient-physician discussion regarding ICBs.

For the rheumatologist, one of the greatest challenges since the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been determining which of our patients are at greatest risk for severe COVID-19, and who should be triaged for aggressive outpatient management with preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP), additional vaccine doses, and treatment with antivirals and/or monoclonal antibody products when infected. At present, although the US federal government declared an end to the public health emergency for COVID-19 in May 2023, SARS-CoV-2 is still with us.

BACKGROUND Patients with cancer and an underlying autoimmune disease who are considering immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) need to know about the benefits and risks of severe immune-related adverse events and flares of the autoimmune condition. OBJECTIVE This study aims to develop and alpha test an educational website for patients with cancer. METHODS Learning topics, images, and website architecture (including flow and requirements) were developed and iteratively reviewed by members of a community scientist program, a patient advisory group, and content experts. Alpha testing was performed, measuring the site’s usability using the Suitability Assessment of Materials and its acceptability using the Ottawa Acceptability Measure. RESULTS The website included a home page; general information about ICBs; comprehensive modules on the benefits and risks of ICBs for patients with cancer and preexisting autoimmune diseases; general wellness information; and features such as a quiz, additional resources, and a glossary. For the alpha testing, 9 users assessed the newly developed website. Patient reviewers (n=5) had rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn disease, Sjogren syndrome, or vasculitis. Health care provider reviewers (n=4) were medical oncologists or rheumatologists. The median Suitability Assessment of Materials rating was 75 (IQR 70-79; range 0-100) for patients versus 66 (IQR 57-72; range 0-100) for providers (scores ≥70 indicate no substantial changes needed). Recommendations for improvement, mostly involving navigation and accessibility, were addressed. All participants expressed that the website was acceptable and balanced in terms of discussion of benefits and harms. Because half (2/4, 50%) of the providers suggested we increase the amount of information, we extended the content on the impact of having an autoimmune disease when considering ICB treatment, the probability of flares, and the management of flares in this context. CONCLUSIONS The feedback led to minor revisions to enhance readability, navigation, and accessibility, ensuring the website’s suitability as a decision-making aid. The newly developed website could become a supporting tool to facilitate patient-physician discussion regarding ICBs. CLINICALTRIAL

Objectives: To identify risk factors for progression to severe COVID-19 and estimate the odds of severe COVID-19 associated with vaccination among patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods: This retrospective cohort study identified adults with SLE in the Merative™ MarketScan^® Databases. Patients were continuously enrolled the year before 1 April 2020 (baseline) and had a COVID-19 diagnosis between 1 April 2020 and the earliest of death, enrolment end or 31 December 2021. Severe COVID-19 was defined as hospitalisation with a COVID-19 diagnosis. Demographics on 1 April 2020, baseline comorbidities, corticosteroid use ≤30 days before COVID-19 diagnosis and other SLE medication use ≤6 months before COVID-19 diagnosis were assessed. Vaccination was identified by claims for a COVID-19 vaccine or vaccine administration. Backward stepwise logistic regression estimated odds of progression to severe COVID-19 associated with patient characteristics and vaccination. Results: Among 2890 patients with SLE with COVID-19, 500 (16.4%) had a COVID-19-related hospitalisation. Significant risk factors for progression to severe COVID-19 included rituximab (OR (95% CI) 2.92 (1.67 to 5.12)), renal failure (2.15 (95% CI 1.56 to 2.97)), Medicaid (vs Commercial; 2.01 (95% CI 1.58 to 2.57)), complicated hypertension (1.96 (95% CI 1.38 to 2.77)) and time of infection, among others. Vaccination had a significant protective effect (0.68(95% CI 0.54 to 0.87)) among all patients with SLE with COVID-19, but the effect was not significant among those with prior use of belimumab, rituximab or corticosteroids. Conclusions: Certain chronic comorbidities and SLE medications increase the odds of progression to severe COVID-19 among patients with SLE, but vaccination confers significant protection. Vaccine effectiveness may be attenuated by SLE treatments. Protective measures such as pre-exposure prophylaxis and booster vaccines should be encouraged among patients with SLE.

Patients with pre-existing autoimmune disorders and cancer considering immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) need to receive balanced information about the benefits and risk of developing immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and flare-ups of their autoimmune disease. To assess the learning needs of patients with cancer and pre-existing autoimmune disease regarding ICI treatment, we interviewed 29 patients with autoimmune disease and cancer from a comprehensive cancer center, of whom 20 had received ICI and 9 were candidates to receive ICI at a US Cancer Center. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted from August 2021 and January 2022. Interviewee’s opinions and preferences about content and information delivery methods were collected. We recorded and transcribed interviews and analyzed them using thematic analysis. Half of the participants were female, and their median (SD) age was 62.9 (±10.9) years. The identified health information needs included the following: (1) information on irAEs and autoimmune disease flare-ups; (2) benefits of ICI; (3) ICI mechanism in the context of autoimmune disease; (4) management of flare-ups; (5) reasons for stopping or modifying cancer or autoimmune disease treatment; (6) likelihood of autoimmune disease progression or organ damage; and (7) lifestyle changes that could help avoid irAEs. Patients who had received ICI and those who had not yet received treatment reported similar needs, although patients who had received ICI had more questions about cancer treatment modifications. Patients also expressed the need to better understand when to contact their provider and how to share information with multiple providers. Most patients wanted to receive information in visual formats for review at home and at their own pace. Patients expressed interest in having educational tools to facilitate shared decision-making with their physicians, and they identified several areas of health information concerning therapy with ICI. They also highlighted the importance of communication among their various providers.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have improved cancer outcomes but can cause severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and flares of autoimmune conditions in cancer patients with pre-existing autoimmune disease. The objective of this study was to identify the information physicians perceived as most useful for these patients when discussing treatment initiation with ICIs. Twenty physicians at a cancer institution with experience in the treatment of irAEs were interviewed. Qualitative thematic analysis was performed to organize and interpret data. The physicians were 11 medical oncologists and 9 non-oncology specialists. The following themes were identified: (1) current methods used by physicians to provide information to patients and delivery options; (2) factors to make decisions about whether or not to start ICIs in patients who have cancer and pre-existing autoimmune conditions; (3) learning points for patients to understand; (4) preferences for the delivery of ICI information; and (5) barriers to the implementation of ICI information in clinics. Regarding points to discuss with patients, physicians agreed that the benefits of ICIs, the probability of irAEs, and risks of underlying autoimmune condition flares with the use of ICIs were most important. Non-oncologists were additionally concerned about how ICIs affect the autoimmune disease (e.g., impact on disease activity, need for changes in medications for the autoimmune disease, and monitoring of autoimmune conditions).