Background: Cardiovascular safety concerns for major cardiovascular events (MACE) were raised during the clinical trials of romosozumab. We aimed to evaluate the cardiovascular safety profile of romosozumab in a large pharmacovigilance database. Methods: All cases reported between January 2019 and December 2020 where romosozumab was reported were extracted from the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). The outcome of interest was MACE (myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or cardiovascular death). A disproportionality analysis was conducted by estimating the reporting odds ratios (RORs) and 95% confidence intervals. Disproportionality analyses were stratified by sex and reporting region (US, Japan, other). Results: Of the 1995 eligible cases with romosozumab, the majority (N = 1188; 59.5%) originated from Japan. Overall, 206 suspected MACE reports were identified, of which the majority (n = 164; 13.8%) were from Japan, and 41 (5.2%) were from the United States (US). Among Japanese reports, patients were older and more frequently male than reports from the US. Similarly, cases with a reported MACE were older and had higher reports of cardioprotective drugs than those without cardiovascular events. Elevated reports for MACE (ROR 4.07, 95% CI: 2.39–6.93) was identified overall, which was primarily driven by the significant disproportionality measures in the Japanese reports. Conclusions: The current pharmacovigilance study identified a potential signal for elevated MACE, particularly in Japan. The results support the current safety warnings from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to avoid use in high-risk patients.

Acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP) is a rare skin reaction, commonly caused by drugs. Available evidence mostly relies on small studies or case reports. We collected published AGEP case reports and, subsequently, described the patient characteristics, suspect and concomitant drugs, time to onset, disease management, and clinical prognosis. This study included 297 AGEP patients (64.3% women) obtained from 250 published case reports or case series with individual patient data. AGEP affected patients of all ages, but the majority of patients (88.2%) were ≥25 years old. The most frequently reported suspect drugs were anti-infectives for systemic use (36.5%), particularly antibacterials for systemic use (31.0%), and especially beta-lactam antibacterials (18.3%) and macrolides (4.3%). Other frequent suspect drugs were antineoplastics (12.2%), and anti-inflammatory/anti-rheumatic products (5.2%) plus hydroxychloroquine (12.8%). Mean time to onset was 9.1 days (standard deviation SD 13.94). Some patients developed fever (64.3%) and systemic involvement (18.9%), and most patients (76.4%) received pharmacological treatment for AGEP. Seven patients died, although five of them were already critically ill prior to AGEP. In conclusion, antibiotics remain the most common suspected cause of AGEP. While case mortality rate may be up to 2.5%, disentangling the role of AGEP on the fatal outcome from the role of the preexisting health conditions remains challenging.

Treatment response to biologics and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients can be classified as primary or secondary non-response, based on evidence of an initial response. Conceptually, primary non-response is generally considered if the drug was ineffective, with no clinical response within the initial treatment period, while secondary non-response would be considered if, after an initial response, the effectiveness is lost over time.1–4 Despite these generally accepted definitions, there is no consensus on how to operationalise these concepts. Consequently, the current observational evidence is highly heterogeneous and the prevalence of primary versus secondary failure remains largely unknown.

Objective To assess the impact of elevated body mass index (BMI) in the achievement of minimal disease activity (MDA) and several definitions of remission in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in Switzerland. Secondarily, to assess the overlapping across the study outcomes. Methods This observational cohort study in the Swiss Clinical Quality Management in Rheumatic Diseases (SCQM) registry included patients with PsA starting their first biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (b/tsDMARD) from 1997 to 30 June 2018. Exposure was BMI category at b/tsDMARD start: overweight, obese, and normal weight (reference). Logistic regression was used to assess the achievement of MDA and remission at ≤12 months, as well as treatment persistence at 1 year, in overweight patients and patients with obesity compared with the normal weight group. Remission was defined by Disease Activity for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA), clinical DAPSA (cDAPSA) and 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28). Additionally, overlapping across study outcomes was investigated. Results The study included 306 (39.5%) normal weight patients, 285 (36.8%) overweight patients and 183 (23.6%) patients with obesity. Compared with the normal weight group, patients with obesity had lower odds of achieving MDA at ≤12 months (adjusted OR (ORadj) 0.45, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.82). This was consistent with the observed reduced odds of achieving DAPSA-remission (ORadj 0.42, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.85), cDAPSA-remission (ORadj 0.51, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.96) and DAS28-remission (ORadj 0.51, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.81) in patients with obesity versus normal weight patients. Among the 125 patients achieving MDA, the majority (81.8% normal weight, 80.0% overweight, 78.9% obese) achieved cDAPSA-remission. No differences were observed in the odds to achieving treatment persistence between the BMI strata. Conclusions Obesity halved the likelihood of achieving MDA and remission in patients with PsA with b/tsDMARDs compared with those with normal weight, while it did not impact treatment persistence. High overlapping of patients achieving the outcomes MDA and cDAPSA-remission was observed across every BMI group.

Although sex and gender are recognized as major determinants of health and immunity, their role is rarely considered in clinical practice and public health. We identified six bottlenecks preventing the inclusion of sex and gender considerations from basic science to clinical practice, precision medicine and public health policies. (i) A terminology-related bottleneck, linked to the definitions of sex and gender themselves, and the lack of consensus on how to evaluate gender. (ii) A data-related bottleneck, due to gaps in sex-disaggregated data, data on trans/non-binary people and gender identity. (iii) A translational bottleneck, limited by animal models and the underrepresentation of gender minorities in biomedical studies. (iv) A statistical bottleneck, with inappropriate statistical analyses and results interpretation. (v) An ethical bottleneck posed by the underrepresentation of pregnant people and gender minorities in clinical studies. (vi) A structural bottleneck, as systemic bias and discriminations affect not only academic research but also decision makers. We specify guidelines for researchers, scientific journals, funding agencies and academic institutions to address these bottlenecks. Following such guidelines will support the development of more efficient and equitable care strategies for all.