Background Accurate prediction of coronary artery aneurysms ( CAAs ) in patients with Kawasaki disease remains challenging in North American cohorts. We sought to develop and validate a risk model for CAA prediction. Methods and Results A binary outcome of CAA was defined as left anterior descending or right coronary artery Z score ≥2.5 at 2 to 8 weeks after fever onset in a development cohort (n=903) and a validation cohort (n=185) of patients with Kawasaki disease. Associations of baseline clinical, laboratory, and echocardiographic variables with later CAA were assessed in the development cohort using logistic regression. Discrimination (c statistic) and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow) of the final model were evaluated. A practical risk score assigning points to each variable in the final model was created based on model coefficients from the development cohort. Predictors of CAAs at 2 to 8 weeks were baseline Z score of left anterior descending or right coronary artery ≥2.0, age <6 months, Asian race, and C-reactive protein ≥13 mg/ dL (c=0.82 in the development cohort, c=0.93 in the validation cohort). The CAA risk score assigned 2 points for baseline Z score of left anterior descending or right coronary artery ≥2.0 and 1 point for each of the other variables, with creation of low- (0-1), moderate- (2), and high- (3-5) risk groups. The odds of CAA s were 16-fold greater in the high- versus the low-risk groups in the development cohort (odds ratio, 16.4; 95% CI , 9.71-27.7 [ P<0.001]), and >40-fold greater in the validation cohort (odds ratio, 44.0; 95% CI, 10.8-180 [ P<0.001]). Conclusions Our risk model for CAA in Kawasaki disease consisting of baseline demographic, laboratory, and echocardiographic variables had excellent predictive utility and should undergo prospective testing.

Objective

To provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of vaccinations in children and adults with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).

Methods

This guideline follows American College of Rheumatology (ACR) policy guiding management of conflicts of interest and disclosures and the ACR guideline development process, which includes the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. It also adheres to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) criteria. A core leadership team consisting of adult and pediatric rheumatologists and a guideline methodologist drafted clinical population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. A review team performed a systematic literature review for the PICO questions, graded the quality of evidence, and produced an evidence report. An expert Voting Panel reviewed the evidence and formulated recommendations. The panel included adult and pediatric rheumatology providers, infectious diseases specialists, and patient representatives. Consensus required ≥70% agreement on both the direction and strength of each recommendation.

Results

This guideline includes expanded indications for some vaccines in patients with RMDs, as well as guidance on whether to hold immunosuppressive medications or delay vaccination to maximize vaccine immunogenicity and efficacy. Safe approaches to the use of live attenuated vaccines in patients taking immunosuppressive medications are also addressed. Most recommendations are conditional and had low quality of supporting evidence.

Conclusion

Application of these recommendations should consider patients' individual risk for vaccine-preventable illness and for disease flares, particularly if immunosuppressive medications are held for vaccination. Shared decision-making with patients is encouraged in clinical settings.

Objective

To provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of vaccinations in children and adults with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).

Methods

This guideline follows American College of Rheumatology (ACR) policy guiding management of conflicts of interest and disclosures and the ACR guideline development process, which includes the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. It also adheres to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) criteria. A core leadership team consisting of adult and pediatric rheumatologists and a guideline methodologist drafted clinical population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. A review team performed a systematic literature review for the PICO questions, graded the quality of evidence, and produced an evidence report. An expert Voting Panel reviewed the evidence and formulated recommendations. The panel included adult and pediatric rheumatology providers, infectious diseases specialists, and patient representatives. Consensus required ≥70% agreement on both the direction and strength of each recommendation.

Results

This guideline includes expanded indications for some vaccines in patients with RMDs, as well as guidance on whether to hold immunosuppressive medications or delay vaccination to maximize vaccine immunogenicity and efficacy. Safe approaches to the use of live attenuated vaccines in patients taking immunosuppressive medications are also addressed. Most recommendations are conditional and had low quality of supporting evidence.

Conclusion

Application of these recommendations should consider patients' individual risk for vaccine-preventable illness and for disease flares, particularly if immunosuppressive medications are held for vaccination. Shared decision-making with patients is encouraged in clinical settings.

The translation of research findings into clinical practice is challenging, especially fields like in pediatric rheumatology, where the evidence base is limited, there are few clinical trials, and the conditions are rare and heterogeneous. Implementation science methodologies have been shown to reduce the research- to- practice gap in other clinical settings may have similar utility in pediatric rheumatology. This paper describes the key discussion points from the inaugural Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Implementation Science retreat held in February 2020. The aim of this report is to synthesize those findings into an Implementation Science Roadmap for pediatric rheumatology research. This roadmap is based on three foundational principles: fostering curiosity and ensuring discovery, integration of research and quality improvement, and patient-centeredness. We include six key steps anchored in the principles of implementation science. Applying this roadmap will enable researchers to evaluate the full range of research activities, from the initial clinical design and evidence acquisition to the application of those findings in pediatric rheumatology clinics and direct patient care.