No abstract

Systemic sclerosis is a rare and chronic connective tissue disease with a multifaceted pathogenesis characterised by heterogeneous multi-organ clinical manifestations. Every year, many studies contribute to enrich the knowledge on the pathogenesis, organ involvement and treatment of this complex and severe disease. We herein provide an overview on the most relevant contributions published in the literature in 2020.

Biosimilar infliximab (INX) was recently approved by the European Medicine Agency for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis (AS), Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and psoriasis on the grounds that its pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy were comparable to those of innovator INX. The aim of this study was to investigate the real-life efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of switching from innovator to biosimilar INX in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA). Forty-one patients attending three Italian rheumatology centres with a previous diagnosis of SpA and clinically inactive or moderate disease activity (ASDAS-CRP < 2.1; 22 with AS, five with enteropathic arthritis, 10 with PsA, and four with undifferentiated SpA), who had been treated for more than 6 months with innovator INX in accordance with the ASAS/EULAR guidelines, were switched to biosimilar INX for pharmaco-economic reasons (Tuscany Law No. 450 of 7 April 2015) and followed up for 6 months. A record was kept of their BASDAI, BASFI, ASDAS-CRP, DAS28-CRP (in the presence of peripheral disease), MASES, VAS pain scores, the duration of morning stiffness, and adverse events (AEs). At the time of the switch, the patients had a median age of 50.9 years (range 23-80), a median disease duration of 124.5 months (range 14-372), and a median duration of treatment with innovator INX of 73.7 months (range 6-144). After 6 months of biosimilar INX therapy, there were no statistical differences in their median BASDAI (2.73 ± 1.5 vs. 2.6 ± 1.3, p = .27), BASFI (2.34 ± 1.3 vs. 2.17 ± 1.2, p = 0.051), ASDAS-CRP (1.35 ± 0.3 vs. 1.28 ± 0.2, p = 0.24), DAS28-CRP (2.66 ± 0.67 vs. 2.67 ± 0.35, p = 0.92), MASES (0.35 ± 0.7 vs. 0.17 ± 0.4, p = 0.08), or VAS pain scores (18 ± 14.7 vs. 16.7 ± 11.3, p = 0.55), whereas the median duration of morning stiffness had significantly decreased (7.2 ± 6.9 vs. 5.8 ± 6, p = 0.02). Furthermore, there was no change in circulating INX (4.22 ± 2.89 vs 4.84 ± 2.86 μg/mL, p = 0.80) or anti-INX antibody levels (27.76 ± 17.13 vs 27.27 ± 17.28 ng/mL, p = 0.98). The switch from innovator to biosimilar INX in this Italian multicentre SpA cohort was not associated with any statistically significance differences in efficacy, adverse events or anti-drug antibody level.

BACKGROUND During COVID‐19 pandemic, the early diagnosis of patients is a priority. Serological assays, in particular IgM and IgG anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2, have today several applications but the interpretation of their results remain an open challenge. Given the emerging role of the IgA isotype in the COVID‐19 diagnostics, we aimed to identify the SARS‐CoV‐2 IgA antibodies in a COVID‐19 population seronegative for IgM. METHODS A total of 30 patients hospitalized in San Giovanni di Dio Hospital (Florence, Italy) for COVID‐19, seronegative for IgM antibodies, have been studied for anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 antibodies. They all had a positive oro/nasopharyngeal swab reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction result. Assays used were a chemiluminescent assay measuring SARS‐CoV‐2 specific IgM and IgG (S+N) and an ELISA, measuring specific IgG (S1) and IgA antibodies against SARS‐CoV‐2. RESULTS Among the 30 patients, eight were positive for IgA, seven were positive for IgG (N+S) and two for IgG (S1), at first point (5‐7 days from the onset of symptoms). The IgA antibodies mean values at the second (9‐13 days) and third (21‐25 days) time points were even more than twice as high as IgG assays. The agreement between the two IgG assays was moderate (Cohen's K = 0.59; SE = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS The inclusion of the IgA antibodies determination among serological tests of the COVID‐19 diagnostic is recommended. IgA antibodies may help to close the serological gap of the COVID‐19. Variations among anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 IgG assays should be considered in the interpretation of results. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Background The dense fine speckled (DFS) is one of the most common patterns that can be observed as a result of the anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA) test on HEp-2 cells and is mostly caused by antibodies to DFS70 as the main antigenic target. As was recently demonstrated, isolated anti-DFS70 positivity can be used as an aid in the exclusion of ANA associated rheumatic diseases (AARD) due to the opportunity to better interpret unexplained positive IIF ANA results. Methods Our study included 333 subjects with AARD, 51 undifferentiated connective tissue disease (UCTD) patients, 235 disease controls and 149 healthy blood donors from an Italian cohort. All samples were tested for anti-DFS70 and anti-ENA antibodies using QUANTA Flash assays (Inova Diagnostics, San Diego, CA, USA). Results No differences in the prevalence of anti-DFS70 antibodies were seen among AARD, non-AARD and UCTD (2.1% [7/333] vs. 2.3% [9/384] vs. 5.9% [3/51], respectively; p-value = 0.188). AARD patients positive for anti-DFS70 antibodies showed in all cases an accompanying anti-ENA specificity. In contrast, monospecific anti-DFS70 antibodies showed a significantly different distribution with a clear trend across the main groups (AARD vs. non-AARD vs. UCTD: 0% [0/7] vs. 22% [2/9] vs. 100% [3/3], p = 0.007). Anti-DFS70 antibody levels among AARD, non-AARD and UCTD patients were not significantly different (p = 0.094). Within the anti-DFS70 antibody positive cases, AARD cohort showed a higher variability (median [min–max]: 3.2 [3.2–450.8] CU) compared to non-AARD (median [min–max]: 3.2 [3.2–75.7] CU) and UCTD patients (median [min–max]: 3.2 [3.2–59.0] CU). Conclusions Our preliminary data showed a similar frequency of anti-DFS70 antibodies in AARD, UCTD and non-AARD cohorts. Monospecificity of anti-DFS70 antibodies but not their mere presence is the key element in the diagnostic algorithm. Mono-specific anti-DFS70 antibodies might be a helpful biomarker to discriminate individuals with AARD from non-AARD presenting with a positive ANA.