Introduction.-No therapy has yet proven effective in COVID-19. Tocilizumab (TCZ) in patients with severe COVID-19 could be an effective treatment. Method.-We conducted a retrospective case-control study in the Nord Franche-Comté Hospital, France. We compared the outcome of patients treated with TCZ and patients without TCZ considering a combined primary endpoint: death and/or ICU admissions. Results.-Patients with TCZ (n = 20) had a higher Charlson comorbidity index (5.3 [±2.4] vs 3.4 [±2.6], P = 0.014), presented with more severe forms (higher level of oxygen therapy at 13 L/min vs 6 L/min, P < 0.001), and had poorer biological findings (severe lymphopenia: 676/mm 3 vs 914/mm 3 , P = 0.037 and higher CRP level: 158 mg/L vs 105 mg/L, P = 0.017) than patients without TCZ (n = 25). However, death and/or ICU admissions were higher in patients without TCZ than in the TCZ group (72% vs 25%, P = 0.002). Conclusion.-Despite the small sample size and retrospective nature of the work, this result strongly suggests that TCZ may reduce the number of ICU admissions and/or mortality in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia.

Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre-including this research content-immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. Short communication Predictive factors of mortality in patients treated with tocilizumab for acute respiratory distress syndrome related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of age on the therapeutic response to prednisone. This was a retrospective, monocentric study. We included patients diagnosed with PMR, according to ACR 2012 criteria. Patients were classified into two groups according to age (above or below 60 years old). We registered demographic, clinical, biological, imaging data, and therapeutic response profile. Local inflammation was evaluated at baseline with PET/CT imaging score. The treatment was standardised. The main endpoint was a corticosteroid dependence defined by the recurrence of PMR symptoms and/or the increase of CRP at two times. We included 14 patients younger than 60 years old (mean age 54 ± 0.8) and 28 patients older than 60 (mean age 75.8 ± 1.5). The "young PMR" group was mainly male (60 vs 27%; p < 0.05). Both groups were similar regarding morning stiffness, disease duration, WBC count, and CRP. The intensity of FDG uptake was lower (score of 16.9 ± 1.7 vs 26.5 ± 3.0; p < 0.05), there were more dependence on corticosteroids (60 vs 20%; p < 0.05) and methotrexate was more necessary (35 vs 6.5%; p < 0.05) in "young PMR" group. Young patients diagnosed with PMR are mostly men, are more dependent on corticosteroids, and have a lower PET-CT score at baseline in comparison to elderly patients diagnosed with PMR.

The aim of the study was to assess the impact (frequency and severity) of Covid-19 on patients treated with biological Disease Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs (bDMARDs) for inflammatory rheumatic disease and to compare it to a control group consisting of patients with musculoskeletal conditions not treated with bDMARDs.Patients and methods:A case control study in 200 outpatients with musculoskeletal conditions. 100 consecutive patients who have been treated with bDMARDs and 100 other consecutive patients who did not take bDMARDs were asked to complete a 15-item standardized questionnaire regarding demographic data. The following information was recorded: gender, age, weight, height, body mass index, professional activity, family status, total number of children and number of children under 18, rheumatic disease diagnosis, current treatment for rheumatism, type of containment, close contact with Covid-19 patients, Covid-19 symptoms, Covid-19 test result and hospitalization for Covid-19.Results:bDMARD patients mostly suffered from rheumatoid arthritis, or RA, (47%) and ankylosing spondylitis (42%). The most prescribed bDMARDs were TNFα inhibitors (57%), IL-6 blockers (12%) and JAK inhibitors (11%). The mean duration of the current biological treatment was 38.6 months. Patients from the control group were suffering chiefly from osteoarthritis (45%) and RA (21%). Compared to the control group, patients treated with bDMARDs were 10 years younger (p<0.001), fewer were retired (56% versus 31%) and more were on sick or incapacity leave (6% versus 18%). During lockdown, they were more likely to be working from home or working short term (27% versus 9%). 18 patients from the bDMARDs group stopped biological treatment: one because of Covid-19 evidenced by PCR, 11 because of symptoms suggesting Covid- 19 and only six from fear of contracting the disease. 12 patients, including the one Sars-CoV-2 +, resumed their treatment after a few weeks of interruption. There was no severe Covid-19 infection in the bDMARDs group. Among the three patients from the control group who had contracted Covid-19, one developed a very severe disease.Conclusion :This case-control study did not show an increase in the frequency or severity of Covid-19 in subjects suffering from chronic inflammatory rheumatism treated with biotherapies. Larger-scale studies are necessary before affirming that biologics do not expose patients to an increased risk of disease and complications.

No abstract