Objective: To assess the main causes of death and the prognostic factors that influence mortality in patients with the catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome (CAPS).Methods: We analyzed the case reports of 250 patients included in the CAPS Registry up to February 2005. To identify prognostic factors for CAPS, we compared the main clinical and immunologic features and the types of treatment in the patients who died with those features in the patients who survived.Results: Recovery occurred in 56% of the episodes of CAPS and death occurred in 44%. Cerebral involvement, consisting mainly of stroke, cerebral hemorrhage, and encephalopathy, was considered the main cause of death, being present in 27.2% of patients, followed by cardiac involvement (19.8%) and infection (19.8%). The only factor we identified that was prognostic of a higher mortality rate was the presence of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). A higher recovery rate was associated with combined treatment with anticoagulants (ACs) plus corticosteroids (CS) plus plasma exchange (PE) (77.8%), followed by ACs plus CS plus PE and/or intravenous immunoglobulins (69%). In contrast, concomitant treatment with cyclophosphamide did not demonstrate additional benefit.Conclusion: Cerebral involvement (mainly consisting of stroke), cardiac involvement, and infections were considered the main causes of death in patients with CAPS. The presence of SLE was related to a higher mortality rate. According to the results of the present study, ACs plus CS plus PE should be the first line of therapy in patients with CAPS.

Objective: To describe the characteristics of patients with catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) included in the International Registry of patients with this condition (CAPS registry) and to analyse the value of the recently proposed preliminary criteria for the classification of catastrophic APS. Methods: A review of the first 220 patients included in the website based CAPS registry was undertaken and the preliminary criteria for their classification were tested; 175 unselected patients with systemic lupus erythematosus or APS, or both, acted as controls. Results: The mean age of the patients was 38 (14) years (range 7 to 74), with a female preponderance (F/M, 153/67). The main clinical manifestations included renal involvement in 154 (70%), pulmonary in 146 (66%), cerebral in 133 (60%), cardiac in 115 (52%), and cutaneous in 104 (47%); 114 patients (52%) recovered after the catastrophic APS event (mortality 48%). Patients who received the combination of anticoagulation plus steroids plus plasma exchange or intravenous immunoglobulins had the best survival rate (63%, p = 0.09). Sufficient data could be analysed for application of the classification criteria in 176 patients. According to the preliminary criteria, 89 patients (51%) could be classified as having “definite” and 70 (40%) as having “probable” catastrophic APS, thus given a sensitivity of 90.3% with a specificity of 99.4%. Positive and negative predictive values were 99.4% and 91.1%, respectively. Conclusions: The preliminary criteria for the classification of catastrophic APS and the CAPS registry are useful tools for epidemiological studies.

Objectives To describe the safety of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in people with inflammatory/autoimmune rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease (I-RMD). Methods Physician-reported registry of I-RMD and non-inflammatory RMD (NI-RMDs) patients vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. From 5 February 2021 to 27 July 2021, we collected data on demographics, vaccination, RMD diagnosis, disease activity, immunomodulatory/immunosuppressive treatments, flares, adverse events (AEs) and SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections. Data were analysed descriptively. Results The study included 5121 participants from 30 countries, 90% with I-RMDs (n=4604, 68% female, mean age 60.5 years) and 10% with NI-RMDs (n=517, 77% female, mean age 71.4). Inflammatory joint diseases (58%), connective tissue diseases (18%) and vasculitis (12%) were the most frequent diagnostic groups; 54% received conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), 42% biological DMARDs and 35% immunosuppressants. Most patients received the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine (70%), 17% AstraZeneca/Oxford and 8% Moderna. In fully vaccinated cases, breakthrough infections were reported in 0.7% of I-RMD patients and 1.1% of NI-RMD patients. I-RMD flares were reported in 4.4% of cases (0.6% severe), 1.5% resulting in medication changes. AEs were reported in 37% of cases (37% I-RMD, 40% NI-RMD), serious AEs in 0.5% (0.4% I-RMD, 1.9% NI-RMD). Conclusion The safety profiles of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with I-RMD was reassuring and comparable with patients with NI-RMDs. The majority of patients tolerated their vaccination well with rare reports of I-RMD flare and very rare reports of serious AEs. These findings should provide reassurance to rheumatologists and vaccine recipients and promote confidence in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine safety in I-RMD patients.