Infection is the second leading cause of death among psoriasis patients on phototherapy or systemic medications. The types of infections associated with psoriasis remain poorly understood. The aim of our study was to determine the risk of opportunistic infection (OI) among patients with psoriasis. We conducted a cohort study of patients with (N=199,700) and without (N=954,315) psoriasis in The Health Improvement Network electronic medical record database. Patients receiving phototherapy or systemic therapy were considered to have moderate-to-severe psoriasis (N=12,442). The OI outcome was defined by a diagnostic code for any one of the following: actinomycosis/nocardia, aspergillosis, BK virus, cytomegalovirus, cryptococcus, systemic mycoses, pneumocystis, progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy, tuberculosis, and toxoplasmosis. The incidence rates of OI were 1.9, 1.8, and 3.8 per 10,000 person-years for all patients with psoriasis and those with mild and moderate-to-severe disease, respectively, versus 2.1 per 10,000 person-years for those without psoriasis. The most common OI among patients with psoriasis was tuberculosis with an incidence rate of 1.0 per 10,000 person-years. In multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses adjusting for age, gender, body mass index, drinking, comorbid diseases, corticosteroid use, history of infection or hospitalization, and Townsend deprivation score, we found an increased risk of OI among patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis compared with patients without psoriasis: hazard ratio 1.86 (95% confidence interval, 1.23-2.83). Risk of OI was not increased among patients with mild psoriasis. Our results suggest that increased awareness of OIs, particularly tuberculosis, may be important for psoriasis patients receiving therapies for moderate-to-severe disease.

Objective

Patients with rheumatic diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and lupus have increased risk of infection and are treated with medications that may increase this risk yet are also hypothesized to help treat COVID-19. We set out to understand how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the lives of these patients in the United States.

Methods

Participants in a US-wide longitudinal observational registry responded to a supplemental COVID-19 questionnaire by e-mail on March 25, 2020, about their symptoms, COVID-19 testing, health care changes, and related experiences during the prior 2 weeks. Analysis compared responses by diagnosis, disease activity, and new onset of symptoms. Qualitative analysis was conducted on optional free-text comment fields.

Results

Of the 7061 participants invited to participate, 530 responded, with RA as the most frequent diagnosis (61%). Eleven participants met COVID-19 screening criteria, of whom two sought testing unsuccessfully. Six others sought testing, three of whom were successful, and all test results were negative. Not quite half of participants (42%) reported a change to their care in the prior 2 weeks. Qualitative analysis revealed four key themes: emotions in response to the pandemic, perceptions of risks from immunosuppressive medications, protective measures to reduce risk of COVID-19 infection, and disruptions in accessing rheumatic disease medications, including hydroxychloroquine.

Conclusion

After 2 weeks, many participants with rheumatic diseases already had important changes to their health care, with many altering medications without professional consultation or because of hydroxychloroquine shortage. As evidence accumulates on the effectiveness of potential COVID-19 treatments, effort is needed to safeguard access to established treatments for rheumatic diseases.

Despite the increasing use of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) cardiovascular (CV) risk score in clinical practice, few studies have compared this score to the Framingham risk score among rheumatologic patients. We calculated Framingham and 2013 ACC/AHA risk scores in subjects with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and assessed demographic, CV, and rheumatologic characteristics associated with discordant scores (high-risk ACC/AHA scores but low-risk Framingham scores). SLE and RA subjects drawn from two population-based cohort studies were assessed during in-person study visits. We used chi-squared tests and t tests to examine the association of discordant CV risk scores with baseline characteristics. Eleven (7.0%) of 157 SLE subjects and 11 (11.5%) of 96 RA subjects had discordant CV risk scores with high ACC/AHA scores and low Framingham scores. These findings did not significantly change when a 1.5 multiplier was applied to the Framingham score. Rheumatologic disease duration, high-sensitivity CRP levels, African-American race, diabetes, current use of anti-hypertensive medication, higher age, and higher systolic blood pressure were each significantly associated with discordant risk scores. Approximately 10% of SLE and RA subjects had discordant 10-year CV risk scores. Our findings suggest that the use of the 2013 ACC/AHA risk score could result in changes to lipid-lowering therapy recommendations in a significant number of rheumatologic patients. Prospective studies are needed to compare which score better predicts CV events in rheumatologic patients, especially those with risk factors associated with discordant risk scores.

Therapeutic targets have been defined for axial and peripheral spondyloarthritis (SpA) in 2012, but the evidence for these recommendations was only of indirect nature. These recommendations were re-evaluated in light of new insights. Based on the results of a systematic literature review and expert opinion, a task force of rheumatologists, dermatologists, patients and a health professional developed an update of the 2012 recommendations. These underwent intensive discussions, on site voting and subsequent anonymous electronic voting on levels of agreement with each item. A set of 5 overarching principles and 11 recommendations were developed and voted on. Some items were present in the previous recommendations, while others were significantly changed or newly formulated. The 2017 task force arrived at a single set of recommendations for axial and peripheral SpA, including psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The most exhaustive discussions related to whether PsA should be assessed using unidimensional composite scores for its different domains or multidimensional scores that comprise multiple domains. This question was not resolved and constitutes an important research agenda. There was broad agreement, now better supported by data than in 2012, that remission/inactive disease and, alternatively, low/minimal disease activity are the principal targets for the treatment of PsA. As instruments to assess the patients on the path to the target, the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) for axial SpA and the Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) and Minimal Disease Activity (MDA) for PsA were recommended, although not supported by all. Shared decision-making between the clinician and the patient was seen as pivotal to the process. The task force defined the treatment target for SpA as remission or low disease activity and developed a large research agenda to further advance the field.