Patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRDs) are at increased risk for severe infections. Vaccine responses and safety profiles may differ between AIIRD patients and the general population. While patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRDs) often experience diminished humoral responses and reduced vaccine efficacy, factors such as the type of immunosuppressant medications used and the specific vaccine employed contribute to these outcomes. Notably, individuals undergoing B cell depletion therapy tend to have poor vaccine immunogenicity. However, despite these considerations, vaccine responses are generally considered clinically sufficient. Ideally, immunosuppressed AIIRD patients should receive vaccinations at least two weeks before commencing immunosuppressive treatment. However, it is common for many patients to already be on immunosuppressants during the immunization process. Vaccination rarely triggers flares in AIIRDs; if flares occur, they are typically mild. Despite the heightened infection risk, including COVID-19, among AIIRD patients with rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, sarcoidosis, and other diseases on immunosuppressants, the vaccination rates remain suboptimal. The future directions of vaccination in the era of immunosuppression will likely involve customized vaccines with enhanced adjuvants and alternative delivery methods. By addressing the unique challenges faced by immunosuppressed individuals, we may improve vaccine efficacy, reduce the risk of infections, and ultimately enhance the health outcomes. Additionally, clinical trials to evaluate the safety and efficacy of temporarily discontinuing immunosuppressants during vaccination in various AIIRDs are crucial.

Purpose of study: To assess and compare glaucoma knowledge between Jordanian patients with glaucoma and non-glaucoma ophthalmic patients.Methods: A cross-sectional survey was developed after an extensive literature search to investigate glaucoma-related knowledge among participants with glaucoma visiting the Jordan University Hospital clinics from October 2021 to February 2022. Responses were compared to a sample of ophthalmic participants with eye conditions other than glaucoma visiting the ophthalmology clinics at the same time frame.Results: A total of 256 participants filled out the survey, of which 53.1% were diagnosed with glaucoma while 46.9% had ophthalmic conditions other than glaucoma. Our sample of participants is characterized by a mean age of 52.2 ± 17.8 years and a male-to-female ratio of 1.04:1. Overall, participants with glaucoma were more aware of their disease than participants with other ophthalmic conditions. Compared to their ophthalmic non-glaucoma counterparts, those diagnosed with glaucoma face significantly more daily life difficulties due to their ophthalmic disease (p <0.001). Results of the independent samplet-test demonstrate that participants with glaucoma have significantly higher knowledge scores (p <0.001) and were able to recognize more glaucoma symptoms than their non-glaucoma counterparts (p = 0.002). Similarly, those with a positive family history of glaucoma displayed higher knowledge (p = 0.005). Multivariate linear regression demonstrates that family history of glaucoma, higher symptom recognition score, reliance on ophthalmologists, and the internet for glaucoma-related information are positive predictors of higher knowledge scores.Conclusion: We have demonstrated that both glaucoma and non-glaucoma ophthalmic patients display average levels of glaucoma knowledge. Raising awareness through various interventions may improve the lifestyles of patients with glaucoma and alleviate the economic burden associated with treating the disease.

Background: Individuals with self-declared sarcoidosis are at increased risk of COVID-19 related morbidity and mortality for which vaccination can be lifesaving. Despite this, vaccine hesitancy remains a large barrier to global acceptance of vaccination against COVID-19. We aimed to identify individuals with sar-coidosis who had and had not been vaccinated against COVID-19 vaccine to 1) establish a safety profile of COVID-19 vaccination in those with sarcoidosis and 2) to elucidate factors that contribute to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Methods: A questionnaire inquiring about COVID-19 vaccination status, vaccination side effects, and willingness for future vaccination was distributed from December 2020 to May 2021 to individuals with sarcoidosis living in the US and European countries. Details regarding sarcoidosis manifestations and treat-ment were solicited. Vaccine attitudes were classified as pro or anti-COVID-19 vaccination for subgroup analy-sis. Results: At the time of questionnaire administration, 42% of respondents had already received a COVID-19 vaccination, most of whom either denied side effects or reported a local reaction only. Those not on sarcoidosis therapy were more likely to report systemic side effects. Among subjects who had not yet received a COVID-19 vaccine, 27% of individuals reported they would not receive one once available. Reasons against vaccination were overwhelmingly related to the lack of confidence in vaccine safety and/or efficacy and less related to concerns associated with convenience or complacency. Black individuals, women, and younger adults were more likely to decline vaccination. Conclusions: Among individuals with sarcoidosis, COVID-19 vaccination is well-accepted and well-tolerated. Subjects on sarcoidosis therapy reported significantly less vaccination side effects, and thus the correlation between side effects, vaccine type, and vaccine efficacy requires further investigation. Strategies to improve vaccination should focus on improving knowledge and education regarding vaccine safety and efficacy, as well as targeting sources of misinformation, particularly in young, black, and female subpopulations.