Objectives To assess antibody and T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) on disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Methods This prospective study recruited 100 patients with RA on a variety of DMARDs for antibody and T cell analysis, pre-vaccination and 4 weeks post-vaccination. Positive antibody response was defined as sera IgG binding to ≥1 antigen. Those that remained seronegative after first vaccination were retested 4 weeks after second vaccination; and if still seronegative after vaccination three. A T cell response was defined an ELISpot count of ≥7 interferon (IFN)γ-positive cells when exposed to spike antigens. Type I IFN activity was determined using the luminex multiplex assay IFN score. Results After vaccine one, in patients without prior SARS-CoV-2 exposure, 37/83 (45%) developed vaccine-specific antibody responses, 44/83 (53%) vaccine-specific T cell responses and 64/83 (77%) developed either antibody or T cell responses. Reduced seroconversion was seen with abatacept, rituximab (RTX) and those on concomitant methotrexate (MTX) compared to 100% for healthy controls (p<0.001). Better seroconversion occurred with anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) versus RTX (p=0.012) and with age ≤50 (p=0.012). Pre-vaccine SARS-CoV-2 exposure was associated with higher quantitative seroconversion (≥3 antibodies) (p<0.001). In the subgroup of non-seroconverters, a second vaccination produced seroconversion in 54% (19/35), and after a third in 20% (2/10). IFN score analysis showed no change post-vaccine. Conclusion Patients with RA on DMARDs have reduced vaccine responses, particularly on certain DMARDs, with improvement on subsequent vaccinations but with approximately 10% still seronegative after three doses.

Objective: To evaluate the impact of non-medical switch from rituximab originator (RTX-O) to biosimilar (RTX-B) in patients with RA. Methods: Between October 2017 and October 2019, all patients on RTX-O in our centre requiring re-treatment were switched to RTX-B unless declined by the patient or specified by the treating clinician. Switch strategy effectiveness was assessed retrospectively using DAS28-CRP(3) and RTX retention, with patients remaining on RTX-O as a comparator group. Results: The number of patients switching to RTX-B was 255/337 (75.7%) while 82 (24.3%) remained on RTX-O. There was no difference in DAS28-CRP(3) 4 months post-RTX-B switch vs the same time point post-RTX-O previous cycle (paired data available in 60%). Eighteen-month retention estimates were 75.6% (95% CI: 69.4, 80.7%) for RTX-B group and 82.3% (95% CI: 70.4, 89.8%) for RTX-O [adjusted hazard ratio 1.52 (95% CI: 0.85, 2.73)]. The number of patients who discontinued RTX-B for loss of effectiveness (LOE) was 42/255 (16.5%), five (2.0%) for adverse effects (AEs). Risk of RTX-B discontinuation was associated with comorbidities and ≥2 previous biologic DMARDs. Risk of adverse outcome RTX cessation was associated with comorbidities, and reduced risk with number of previous RTX-O cycles and pre-switch cycle B cell depletion. The number of patients who switched back to RTX-O was 34/255 (13.3%) (LOE: 30, AEs: 4), while 13/255 (5.1%) started other biologic/targeted synthetic DMARDs. Of patients who switched back for LOE, 28/30 remained on RTX-O at a mean 7.7 months follow-up. Conclusion: Non-medical switch to RTX-B was largely effective. Factors associated with RTX-B discontinuation, including comorbidities, previous biologic DMARDs, and RTX-O treatment history, may inform switch decisions. Most patients who switched back to RTX-O for LOE remained on treatment at short-term follow-up.

Background Hand involvement is an early manifestation of systemic sclerosis (SSc), culprit of diagnosis and classification, and recognised major driver of disability. Impairment of hand function burdens both limited and diffuse cutaneous subsets and therefore could be targeted as ‘basket’ endpoint in SSc. Nevertheless, its natural history in current standard of care is not well characterised, limiting the design of targeted trials. The aim of this study is to describe prevalence, natural history and clinical factors associated with hand function deterioration in a longitudinal, multicentre, observational SSc cohort. Methods Hand function was captured through the validated Cochin Hand Function Scale in patients consecutively enrolled in a multicentre observational study and observed over 24 months. Minimal clinically important differences and patient acceptable symptom state were analysed as previously described. Results Three hundred and ninety-six consecutive patients were enrolled from 10 centres; 201 with complete follow-up data were included in the analysis. Median (IQR) disease duration was 5 (2–11) years. One hundred and five (52.2%) patients reported clinically significant worsening. Accordingly, the proportion of patients reporting unacceptable hand function increased over 2 years from 27.8% to 35.8% (p<0.001). Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator analysis identified male gender, disease subset, Raynaud’s Condition Score, tenosynovitis and pain, as some of the key factors associated with worsening hand involvement. Conclusions Hand function deteriorates over time in more than 50% of SSc patients despite available therapies. The analysis of factors associated with hand function worsening supports the involvement of both inflammation, vascular and fibrotic processes in hand involvement, making it a hallmark clinical manifestation of SSc. Our data are poised to inform the design of intervention studies to target this major driver of disability in SSc.

Background: It is now accepted that the optimum treatment goal for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is sustained remission, as this has been shown to be associated with the best patient outcomes. There is little guidance on how to manage patients once remission is achieved; however, it is recommended that patients can taper therapy, with a view to discontinuing and achieving drug-free remission if treatment goals are maintained. This narrative review aims to present the current literature on drug-free remission in rheumatoid arthritis, with a view to identifying which strategies are best for disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) tapering and to highlight areas of unmet clinical need. Methods: We performed a narrative review of the literature, which included research articles, meta-analyses and review papers. The key search terms included were rheumatoid arthritis, remission, drug-free remission, b-DMARDS/biologics, cs-DMARDS and tapering. The databases that were searched included PubMed and Google Scholar. For each article, the reference section of the paper was reviewed to find additional relevant articles. Results: It has been demonstrated that DFR is possible in a proportion of RA patients achieving clinically defined remission (both on cs and b-DMARDS). Immunological, imaging and clinical associations with/predictors of DFR have all been identified, including the presence of autoantibodies, absence of Power Doppler (PD) signal on ultrasound (US), lower disease activity according to composite scores of disease activity and lower patient-reported outcome scores (PROs) at treatment cessation. Conclusions: DFR in RA may be an achievable goal in certain patients. This carries importance in reducing medication-induced side-effects and potential toxicity, the burden of taking treatment if not required and cost effectiveness, specifically for biologic therapy. Prospective studies of objective biomarkers will help facilitate the prediction of successful treatment discontinuation.