Objective: To develop an evidence‐based guideline on contraception, assisted reproductive technologies (ART), fertility preservation with gonadotoxic therapy, use of menopausal hormone replacement therapy (HRT), pregnancy assessment and management, and medication use in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease (RMD).Methods: We conducted a systematic review of evidence relating to contraception, ART, fertility preservation, HRT, pregnancy and lactation, and medication use in RMD populations, using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to rate the quality of evidence and a group consensus process to determine final recommendations and grade their strength (conditional or strong). Good practice statements were agreed upon when indirect evidence was sufficiently compelling that a formal vote was unnecessary.Results: This American College of Rheumatology guideline provides 12 ungraded good practice statements and 131 graded recommendations for reproductive health care in RMD patients. These recommendations are intended to guide care for all patients with RMD, except where indicated as being specific for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus, those positive for antiphospholipid antibody, and/or those positive for anti‐Ro/SSA and/or anti‐La/SSB antibodies. Recommendations and good practice statements support several guiding principles: use of safe and effective contraception to prevent unplanned pregnancy, pre‐pregnancy counseling to encourage conception during periods of disease quiescence and while receiving pregnancy‐compatible medications, and ongoing physician‐patient discussion with obstetrics/gynecology collaboration for all reproductive health issues, given the overall low level of available evidence that relates specifically to RMD.Conclusion: This guideline provides evidence‐based recommendations developed and reviewed by panels of experts and RMD patients. Many recommendations are conditional, reflecting a lack of data or low‐level data. We intend that this guideline be used to inform a shared decision‐making process between patients and their physicians on issues related to reproductive health that incorporates patients’ values, preferences, and comorbidities.

Objective: To estimate the incidence and prevalence of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in a sociodemographically diverse southeastern Michigan source population of 2.4 million people.Methods: SLE cases fulfilling the American College of Rheumatology classification criteria (primary case definition) or meeting rheumatologist‐judged SLE criteria (secondary definition) and residing in Wayne or Washtenaw Counties during 2002–2004 were included. Case finding was performed from 6 source types, including hospitals and private specialists. Age‐standardized rates were computed, and capture–recapture was performed to estimate underascertainment of cases.Results: The overall age‐adjusted incidence and prevalence (ACR definition) per 100,000 persons were 5.5 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 5.0–6.1) and 72.8 (95% CI 70.8–74.8). Among females, the incidence was 9.3 per 100,000 persons and the prevalence was 128.7 per 100,000 persons. Only 7 cases were estimated to have been missed by capture–recapture, adjustment for which did not materially affect the rates. SLE prevalence was 2.3‐fold higher in black persons than in white persons, and 10‐fold higher in females than in males. Among incident cases, the mean ± SD age at diagnosis was 39.3 ± 16.6 years. Black SLE patients had a higher proportion of renal disease and end‐stage renal disease (ESRD) (40.5% and 15.3%, respectively) as compared to white SLE patients (18.8% and 4.5%, respectively). Black patients with renal disease were diagnosed as having SLE at younger age than white patients with renal disease (mean ± SD 34.4 ± 14.9 years versus 41.9 ± 21.3 years; P = 0.05).Conclusion: SLE prevalence was higher than has been described in most other population‐based studies and reached 1 in 537 among black female persons. There were substantial racial disparities in the burden of SLE, with black patients experiencing earlier age at diagnosis, >2‐fold increases in SLE incidence and prevalence, and increased proportions of renal disease and progression to ESRD as compared to white patients.

Background: Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can manifest in rapid decompensation and respiratory failure with elevated inflammatory markers, consistent with cytokine release syndrome for which IL-6 blockade is an approved treatment. Methods: We assessed effectiveness and safety of IL-6 blockade with tocilizumab in a single-center cohort of patients with COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation. The primary endpoint was survival probability postintubation; secondary analyses included an ordinal illness severity scale integrating superinfections. Outcomes in patients who received tocilizumab compared with tocilizumab-untreated controls were evaluated using multivariable Cox regression with propensity score inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Results: 154 patients were included, of whom 78 received tocilizumab and 76 did not. Median follow-up was 47 days (range, 28–67). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, although tocilizumab-treated patients were younger (mean: 55 vs 60 years), less likely to have chronic pulmonary disease (10% vs 28%), and had lower D-dimer values at time of intubation (median: 2.4 vs 6.5 mg/dL). In IPTW-adjusted models, tocilizumab was associated with a 45% reduction in hazard of death (HR, .55; 95% CI, .33–.90) and improved status on the ordinal outcome scale [OR per 1-level increase, .58; .36–.94). Although tocilizumab was associated with an increased proportion of patients with superinfections (54% vs 26%; P < .001), there was no difference in 28-day case fatality rate among tocilizumab-treated patients with versus without superinfection (22% vs 15%; P = .42). Staphylococcus aureus accounted for ~50% of bacterial pneumonia. Conclusions: In this cohort of mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients, tocilizumab was associated with lower mortality despite higher superinfection occurrence.

Objective: To develop an evidence‐based guideline on contraception, assisted reproductive technologies (ART), fertility preservation with gonadotoxic therapy, use of menopausal hormone replacement therapy (HRT), pregnancy assessment and management, and medication use in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease (RMD).Methods: We conducted a systematic review of evidence relating to contraception, ART, fertility preservation, HRT, pregnancy and lactation, and medication use in RMD populations, using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to rate the quality of evidence and a group consensus process to determine final recommendations and grade their strength (conditional or strong). Good practice statements were agreed upon when indirect evidence was sufficiently compelling that a formal vote was unnecessary.Results: This American College of Rheumatology guideline provides 12 ungraded good practice statements and 131 graded recommendations for reproductive health care in RMD patients. These recommendations are intended to guide care for all patients with RMD, except where indicated as being specific for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus, those positive for antiphospholipid antibody, and/or those positive for anti‐Ro/SSA and/or anti‐La/SSB antibodies. Recommendations and good practice statements support several guiding principles: use of safe and effective contraception to prevent unplanned pregnancy, pre‐pregnancy counseling to encourage conception during periods of disease quiescence and while receiving pregnancy‐compatible medications, and ongoing physician‐patient discussion with obstetrics/gynecology collaboration for all reproductive health issues, given the overall low level of available evidence that relates specifically to RMD.Conclusion: This guideline provides evidence‐based recommendations developed and reviewed by panels of experts and RMD patients. Many recommendations are conditional, reflecting a lack of data or low‐level data. We intend that this guideline be used to inform a shared decision‐making process between patients and their physicians on issues related to reproductive health that incorporates patients’ values, preferences, and comorbidities.