Background Heterogeneity is a major obstacle to developing effective treatments for patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome. We aimed to develop a robust method for stratification, exploiting heterogeneity in patient-reported symptoms, and to relate these differences to pathobiology and therapeutic response. MethodsWe did hierarchical cluster analysis using five common symptoms associated with primary Sjögren's syndrome (pain, fatigue, dryness, anxiety, and depression), followed by multinomial logistic regression to identify subgroups in the UK Primary Sjögren's Syndrome Registry (UKPSSR). We assessed clinical and biological differences between these subgroups, including transcriptional differences in peripheral blood. Patients from two independent validation cohorts in Norway and France were used to confirm patient stratification. Data from two phase 3 clinical trials were similarly stratified to assess the differences between subgroups in treatment response to hydroxychloroquine and rituximab. FindingsIn the UKPSSR cohort (n=608), we identified four subgroups: Low symptom burden (LSB), high symptom burden (HSB), dryness dominant with fatigue (DDF), and pain dominant with fatigue (PDF). Significant differences in peripheral blood lymphocyte counts, anti-SSA and anti-SSB antibody positivity, as well as serum IgG, κ-free light chain, β2-microglobulin, and CXCL13 concentrations were observed between these subgroups, along with differentially expressed transcriptomic modules in peripheral blood. Similar findings were observed in the independent validation cohorts (n=396). Reanalysis of trial data stratifying patients into these subgroups suggested a treatment effect with hydroxychloroquine in the HSB subgroup and with rituximab in the DDF subgroup compared with placebo.Interpretation Stratification on the basis of patient-reported symptoms of patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome revealed distinct pathobiological endotypes with distinct responses to immunomodulatory treatments. Our data have important implications for clinical management, trial design, and therapeutic development. Similar stratification approaches might be useful for patients with other chronic immune-mediated diseases.

Objectives ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV) can affect all age groups. We aimed to show that differences in disease presentation and 6 month outcome between younger- and older-onset patients are still incompletely understood. Methods We included patients enrolled in the Diagnostic and Classification Criteria for Primary Systemic Vasculitis (DCVAS) study between October 2010 and January 2017 with a diagnosis of AAV. We divided the population according to age at diagnosis: <65 years or ≥65 years. We adjusted associations for the type of AAV and the type of ANCA (anti-MPO, anti-PR3 or negative). Results A total of 1338 patients with AAV were included: 66% had disease onset at <65 years of age [female 50%; mean age 48.4 years (s.d. 12.6)] and 34% had disease onset at ≥65 years [female 54%; mean age 73.6 years (s.d. 6)]. ANCA (MPO) positivity was more frequent in the older group (48% vs 27%; P = 0.001). Younger patients had higher rates of musculoskeletal, cutaneous and ENT manifestations compared with older patients. Systemic, neurologic,cardiovascular involvement and worsening renal function were more frequent in the older-onset group. Damage accrual, measured with the Vasculitis Damage Index (VDI), was significantly higher in older patients, 12% of whom had a 6 month VDI ≥5, compared with 7% of younger patients (P = 0.01). Older age was an independent risk factor for early death within 6 months from diagnosis [hazard ratio 2.06 (95% CI 1.07, 3.97); P = 0.03]. Conclusion Within 6 months of diagnosis of AAV, patients >65 years of age display a different pattern of organ involvement and an increased risk of significant damage and mortality compared with younger patients.

To develop and validate updated classification criteria for giant cell arteritis (GCA). Methods. Patients with vasculitis or comparator diseases were recruited into an international cohort. The study proceeded in 6 phases: 1) identification of candidate items, 2) prospective collection of candidate items present at the time of diagnosis, 3) expert panel review of cases, 4) data-driven reduction of candidate items, 5) derivation of a points-based risk classification score in a development data set, and 6) validation in an independent data set.Results. The development data set consisted of 518 cases of GCA and 536 comparators. The validation data set consisted of 238 cases of GCA and 213 comparators. Age ≥50 years at diagnosis was an absolute requirement for classification. The final criteria items and weights were as follows: positive temporal artery biopsy or temporal artery halo sign on ultrasound (+5); erythrocyte sedimentation rate ≥50 mm/hour or C-reactive protein ≥10 mg/liter (+3); sudden visual loss (+3); morning stiffness in shoulders or neck, jaw or tongue claudication, new temporal headache, scalp tenderness, temporal artery abnormality on vascular examination, bilateral axillary involvement on imaging, and fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography activity throughout the aorta (+2 each). A patient could be classified as having GCA with a cumulative score of ≥6 points. When these criteria were tested in the validation data set, the model area under the curve was 0.91 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.88-0.94) with a sensitivity of 87.0% (95% CI 82.0-91.0%) and specificity of 94.8% (95% CI 91.0-97.4%).Conclusion. The 2022 American College of Rheumatology/EULAR GCA classification criteria are now validated for use in clinical research.This criteria set has been approved by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Board of Directors and the EULAR Executive Committee. This signifies that the criteria set has been quantitatively validated using patient data, and it has undergone validation based on an independent data set. All ACR/EULAR-approved criteria sets are expected to undergo intermittent updates.The ACR is an independent, professional, medical and scientific society that does not guarantee, warrant, or endorse any commercial product or service.This article is published simultaneously in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. The Diagnostic and Classification Criteria in Vasculitis (DCVAS) study, which included the development of this classification criteria, was funded by grants from the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), EULAR, the Vasculitis Foundation, and the

Dermatomyositis and polymyositis are rare chronic inflammatory disorders with significant associated morbidity and mortality despite treatment. High-dose corticosteroids in addition to other interventions such as immunosuppressants, immunomodulators, and more recently, biologics are commonly used in clinical practice; however, there are no clear guidelines directing their use. Our objective was to systematically review the evidence for immunotherapy in the treatment of dermatomyositis and polymyositis. Relevant studies were identified through Embase and PubMed database searches. Trials were selected using pre-determined selection criteria and then assessed for quality. Randomized controlled trials and experimental studies without true randomization and including adult patients with definite or probable dermatomyositis or polymyositis were evaluated. Any type of immunotherapy was considered. Clinical improvement, judged by assessment of muscle strength after 6 months, was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included IMACS definition of improvement, improvements in patient and physician global scores, physical function, and muscle enzymes. Twelve studies met eligibility criteria. Differences in trial design, quality, and variable reporting of baseline characteristics and outcomes made direct comparison impossible. Although no treatment can be recommended on the basis of this review, improved outcomes were demonstrated with a number of agents including methotrexate, azathioprine, ciclosporin, rituximab, and intravenous immunoglobulin. Plasmapheresis and leukapheresis were of no apparent benefit. More high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to establish the role of immunosuppressive agents in the treatment of these conditions and the clinical context in which they are most likely to be beneficial.