US Rheumatologists Research Articles

Patterns of Infliximab Biosimilar Uptake for Medicare, Medicaid, and Private Insurance from 2016 to 2022.

Biosimilars have the potential to reduce spending on biologic drugs, yet uptake has been slower than anticipated. We investigated how successive introductions of infliximab biosimilars influenced their adoption by major US insurance providers. Data came from the Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness, a national registry with electronic health records from more than 1,100 US rheumatologists. All infliximab administrations (bio-originator or biosimilar) to patients aged ≥18 years from April 2016 to September 2022 were included. We used an interrupted time series to model the effect of each infliximab biosimilar release (infliximab-dyyb, November 2016; infliximab-adba, July 2017; and infliximab-axxq, July 2020) on uptake across Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurers. With the first and second biosimilar releases, biosimilar uptake rose slowly, with average annual increases of ≤5% from 2016 to June 2020 (Medicare 3.2%, Medicaid 5.2%, and private insurance 1.8%). With the third biosimilar release in July 2020, the average annual increase reached 13% for Medicaid and 16.4% for private insurance but remained low for Medicare (5.6%). By September 2022, uptake was higher for Medicaid (43.8%) and private insurance (38.5%) than for Medicare (24%). Our results have two key findings for policy makers. First, our results suggest that one or two biosimilars may not generate enough competition to speed adoption rates for biosimilars. Second, Medicare, which covers most patients receiving biologics nationally, had slow adoption rates even after the third biosimilar was introduced. Policy levers to speed adoption among Medicare beneficiaries are needed.

Knowledge of and Stated Adherence to the 2020 ACR Guideline for Gout Management: Results of a Survey of US Rheumatologists.

This report evaluates rheumatologists' stated adherence to and agreement with the 2020 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Guideline for the Management of Gout. A 57-item questionnaire was administered to a sample of US rheumatologists. Stated adherence scores were based on several guideline recommendations reported to be followed by rheumatologists in practice, whereas stated agreement scores were based on whether respondents always followed the recommendations. All 201 rheumatologists approached completed the questionnaire. The mean overall stated adherence score was 11.5 (maximum 15), whereas the mean overall stated agreement score was 7.7 (maximum 14). Less experienced rheumatologists (≤ 8 yrs; n = 49) were likely to claim adherence to more individual ACR recommendations than those with more experience (> 8 yrs; n = 152; mean stated adherence score: 12.3 vs 11.3; P ≤ 0.05). Rheumatologists who claimed to see ≤ 75 patients with gout in 6 months (n = 66) had a mean stated adherence score of 12.1 vs 11.2 for those who claimed to have seen > 75 patients (P ≤ 0.05). Approximately 78% of rheumatologists claimed to follow the guideline for initiating urate-lowering therapy (ULT), and 89% were likely to prescribe allopurinol as a first-line ULT. Claimed adherence to recommendations for dosing was lower (febuxostat: 43%; allopurinol: 39%). Rheumatologists from academic settings were more likely to prescribe an interleukin-1 inhibitor for gout flares. The self-reported practice of the surveyed US rheumatologists was generally concordant with the 2020 ACR Guideline for the Management of Gout. However, there were gaps in guideline knowledge and stated adherence among rheumatologists, mainly concerning the dosing of treatment regimens.

Axial Spondyloarthritis Treatment Recommendations and Disease Activity Monitoring in Clinical Practice: Results of an Online Survey.

Clinical practice guidelines are not always followed consistently. To better understand potential barriers to the implementation of treatment recommendations in axial spondyloarthritis and ankylosing spondylitis (axSpA/AS), an online survey was conducted. Email invitations were sent to US rheumatology care providers in January 2023. The questionnaire included 20 questions, with an estimated completion time of 5-7 minutes. One hundred four of 441 (24%) invitees participated, including 80/104 (77%) board-certified rheumatologists and 20/104 (19%) fellows. Survey participants identified UpToDate (85%), treatment guidelines (74%), and colleagues (54%) as relevant sources of knowledge for managing axSpA/AS. Of the participants, 64% and 53% considered themselves to be at least moderately familiar with the American College of Rheumatology/Spondylitis Association of America/Spondyloarthritis Research and Treatment Network (ACR/SAA/SPARTAN) and Assessment of Spondyloarthritis international Society/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (ASAS/EULAR) treatment recommendations for axSpA/AS, respectively. Whereas 69% of participants agreed or strongly agreed that disease activity scores are useful for making treatment decisions in axSpA/AS, only 37% measure patient-reported outcomes (PROs) frequently (≥ 50% of clinic visits) while 82% do so for C-reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). PROs are typically recorded during clinic encounters (65%) and CRP/ESR are obtained after the visit (86%). Of the participants, 57% and 47% considered the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score to be at least moderately useful for measuring disease activity in axSpA/AS, respectively; 41% and 37% thought the same about the ASAS 20% improvement criteria and Clinical Disease Activity Index, respectively. Treatment guidelines are an important resource for rheumatologists who manage patients with axSpA/AS. Although there is general agreement that disease activity monitoring is important, the implementation of the respective recommendations is lacking. Reasons may include lack of familiarity and an underdeveloped infrastructure to efficiently collect PROs.

Steroid-sparing effect of belimumab: results from a retrospective observational study of real-world data

ObjectiveComparison of oral corticosteroid (OCS) use in patients with SLE in a US rheumatology network pre- and post-belimumab initiation.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study (GSK Study 214140) used data from the Patient-Important...

Industry Payments to United States Rheumatologist-Authors of Publications in High-Impact Rheumatology Journals.

A skewed percentage of industry payments goes to "key opinion leaders" (KOLs) whose prominence and influence has increased with time. Given that KOL is neither precisely defined nor quantifiable, we turned to the level of industry payments as a surrogate quantifiable metric and assessed the associations between industry payments to US rheumatologists and their authorships of publications in high-impact rheumatology journals. Payments to US rheumatologists during the 2015-2020 interval were obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payments database, and authorships were tallied for calendar year 2021 publications in the four rheumatology journals (Lancet Rheumatol, Nat Rev Rheumatol, Ann Rheum Dis, Arthritis Rheumatol) with the highest 2021 journal impact factors and journal citation indicators. Differences between groups were determined by chi-squared test, unpaired Student's t-test, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Mann-Whitney rank sum test, and Kruskal-Wallis one-way ANOVA on ranks. Correlations were calculated using Spearman rank order. A P value ≤0.05 was considered significant. There were 278 individual US rheumatologists who received industry payments and served as authors of publications in the four high-impact rheumatology journals. Non-research-associated payments to these individuals strongly correlated with research-associated payments. Payments to male US rheumatologists were greater than those to their female counterparts, and payments strongly correlated with the number of publications among male authors but only weakly, and often not significantly, among female authors. A substantial fraction of the authorships in calendar year 2021 publications in four high-impact rheumatology journals arose from a very small percentage of all US rheumatologists who had received industry payments during the 2015-2020 interval. Payments to male US rheumatologist-authors were strikingly different from those to female US rheumatologist-authors, and further investigation is needed to explain the glaring difference in payments.

Development of American College of Rheumatology Quality Measures for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Modified Delphi Process With Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness (RISE) Registry Data Review.

We aimed to develop readily measurable digital quality measure statements for clinical care in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) using a multistep process guided by consensus methods. Using a modified Delphi process, an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) workgroup of SLE experts reviewed all North American and European guidelines from 2000 to 2020 on treatment, monitoring, and phenotyping of patients with lupus. Workgroup members extracted quality constructs from guidelines, rated these by importance and feasibility, and generated evidence-based quality measure statements. The ACR Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness (RISE) Registry was queried for measurement data availability. In 3 consecutive Delphi sessions, a multidisciplinary Delphi panel voted on the importance and feasibility of each statement. Proposed measures with consensus on feasibility and importance were ranked to identify the top 3 measures. Review of guidelines and distillation of 57 quality constructs resulted in 15 quality measure statements. Among these, 5 met high consensus for importance and feasibility, including 2 on treatment and 3 on laboratory monitoring measures. The 3 highest-ranked statements were recommended for further measure specification as SLE digital quality measures: 1) hydroxychloroquine use, 2) limiting glucocorticoid use >7.5 mg/day to <6 months, and 3) end-organ monitoring of kidney function and urine protein excretion at least every 6 months. The Delphi process selected 3 quality measures for SLE care on hydroxychloroquine, glucocorticoid reduction, and kidney monitoring. Next, measures will undergo specification and validity testing in RISE and US rheumatology practices as the foundation for national implementation and use in quality improvement programs.

Biologics Initiation in Rheumatoid Arthritis by Race and Ethnicity: Results From a Randomized Survey Study.

To investigate whether the race and ethnicity of a patient with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) influences rheumatologists' likelihood of choosing to initiate biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) treatment. We conducted a randomized survey experiment in which identical brief case vignettes of hypothetical patients with RA were sent to US rheumatologists (respondents). Three of the four cases included some level of treatment decision ambiguity whereas the fourth case strongly favored bDMARD initiation. Each respondent was shown the four case vignettes, with the race and ethnicity (Black, Hispanic, White) randomly assigned for each case. Each vignette offered multiple choices for next therapeutic step, which we summarized using frequencies and proportions by race and ethnicity version. Among 159 US rheumatologists, we found that for the three cases with some level of treatment decision ambiguity, there was little to no variability in the proportions of respondents who chose to start a biologic for the Black and Hispanic variants (cases 1, 2, and 3). For case 4, respondents generally agreed to start a biologic with some minimal variability across the variants (92.6% for the Black version, 98.1% for the Hispanic version, and 96.2% for the White version). There are conflicting data regarding bDMARD use and initiation in patients with RA based on the sex and race of the patient. This work adds to this conversation by examining how the next therapeutic step chosen by rheumatologists varied by the race and ethnicity of the hypothetical patient.

ACR Presidential Address: Rheumatologists-Folks You Can Trust.

ACR Presidential Address: Rheumatologists-Folks You Can Trust.

An Evaluation of Burnout Among U.S. Rheumatology Fellows: A National Survey.

To evaluate levels of burnout and correlates of burnout among U.S. rheumatology fellows. U.S. rheumatology fellows were invited to complete an electronic survey in 2019. Burnout was assessed utilizing Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI). Measures of depression, fatigue, quality of life, and training year were also collected. Open-ended questions about perceived factors to promote resiliency and factors leading to increased burnout were included. Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to examine correlates of burnout. Open-ended responses were analyzed using thematic analysis. Response rate was 18.5% (105 of 567 pediatric and adult rheumatology fellows). Over one-third (38.5%) of PGY4 and 16.7% of PGY5/6 fellows reported at least one symptom of burnout. 12.8% of PGY4 fellows met criteria for depression compared with 2.4% of PGY5/6. PGY4 fellows reported worse fatigue and poorer quality of life compared with PGY5/6. In multivariable models controlling for training year and gender, older age (> 31) was associated with lower odds of burnout. Thematic analysis of openended responses identified factors that help reduce burnout: exercise, family/friends, sleep, support at work, and hobbies. Factors contributing to burnout: pager, documentation, long hours, and demands of patient care. This national survey of U.S. rheumatology fellows reveals that early trainee level and younger age are associated with worse levels of fatigue, quality of life, and burnout. While awareness of and strategies to reduce burnout are needed for all fellows, targeted interventions for younger fellows and those in their first year of training may be of highest yield.

Virtually Speaking: The Impact of a Nationwide Synchronous and Asynchronous Learning Forum.

To address significant disruptions in didactic education precipitated by the COVID-19 pandemic, a group of rheumatology program directors collaborated with the American College of Rheumatology to create a virtual fellows-in-training (V-FIT) program. A working group was composed to develop the virtual didactic program comprising live virtual sessions of core curricular rheumatology topics that were recorded to permit asynchronous learning. Nationally recognized educators were invited to lead sessions to fill the void in didactic education occurring on a broad scale across US rheumatology fellowship training programs. Demographic information, live and asynchronous participation data, and feedback surveys were collected from participants in the program. There were 3 components to V-FIT: the Virtual Rheumatology Learning (ViRL) series, the Virtual Rheumatology Practicum (ViP), and the Virtual Rheumatology Teaching Lessons (ViTLs). The ViRL program had global impact with more than 2,000 learners from more than 55 countries. ViP provided a standardized curriculum of rheumatology topics for incoming first-year fellows. ViTLs addressed advanced and interdisciplinary rheumatic disease topics for learners at all stages. With collaboration, adaptation, and innovation, the V-FIT program not only maintained but also enhanced education for rheumatology trainees, was enriched by national and international participation, and provided standardized, broadly accessible content with interdisciplinary learning.

Treatment of Sarcoidosis in US Rheumatology Practices: Data From the American College of Rheumatology's Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness (RISE) Registry.

Sarcoidosis is often treated with glucocorticoids, although the use of biologics is growing. Prescribing patterns for biologics for patients with sarcoidosis in US rheumatology practices have never been examined. Given that there are no steroid-sparing US Food and Drug Administration-approved therapies for sarcoidosis, we sought to characterize the real-world treatment of sarcoidosis and to assess practice-level variation in prescribing patterns. We conducted an observational study of patients with sarcoidosis using data from the Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness (RISE) registry (2014-2018). The RISE registry represents an estimated 32% of the US clinical rheumatology workforce. Adult patients with ≥2 codes for sarcoidosis ≥30 days apart were included. We examined sarcoidosis-specific medication use at any time during the study period. Data were analyzed at the practice level. A total of 3,276 patients with sarcoidosis from 184 practices were included. Of those patients, 75.1% were women, with a mean age of 59.0 ± 12.5 years; 48.3% were White and 27.6% were Black. Overall, 59.3% of patients were prescribed glucocorticoids, and 24.7% received prolonged glucocorticoid therapy (≥10 mg/day for ≥90 days). In all, 12.1% received a biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (tsDMARD), most commonly tumor necrosis factor inhibitors. There was wide practice-level variation among 31 practices with ≥30 patients with sarcoidosis; biologic use ranged from 15.6% to 69.2%. Infliximab represented the most common biologic prescribed. In a large sample of US rheumatology practices, 12.1% of patients with sarcoidosis received biologics or tsDMARDs. We found high variability in biologic use across practices. The significant use of long-term glucocorticoids suggests unmet therapeutic needs in this patient population.

Industry Payments to Practicing US Rheumatologists, 2014-2019.

Payments from the pharmaceutical industry to practicing physicians may influence prescribing behavior. This study was undertaken to investigate the nature, quantity, and geographic distribution of payments to US rheumatologists. General payments from industry sponsors to US rheumatologists from 2014 to 2019 were extracted from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payments database. Gender was identified by linking physicians to the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System registry. Data were reported in aggregate, trends over time were assessed using linear regression models, and differences by gender were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. Over the 6-year time period from 2014 to 2019, a total of 1,610,668 payments totaling $221,254,966 were made to 5,723 rheumatologists. The median payment was $15 (interquartile range [IQR] $10 to $22), and the median total amount received by individual rheumatologists over the 6-year period was $2,818 (IQR $464 to $11,560). The majority of rheumatologists (3,416 of 5,723 [60%]) received less than $5,000, but 368 of 5,723 (6%) received more than $100,000 each and accounted for 78% of the total. The yearly value of payments increased over time ($3,703,264 per year; P < 0.001), and the median payment to male rheumatologists was significantly higher than the median payment to female rheumatologists ($3,723 [IQR $542 to $15,841] versus $2,084 [IQR $394 to $8,186]; P < 0.001). The value of industry payments has increased over time, and a large amount is concentrated among a small number of rheumatologists. Future studies should investigate the degree to which industry payments have influenced prescribing in the field of rheumatology.

Reasons for canakinumab initiation among patients with periodic fever syndromes: a retrospective medical chart review from the United States

BackgroundAlthough canakinumab has demonstrated efficacy in multiple trials in patients with periodic fever syndromes (PFS), the evidence on initiation of canakinumab among PFS patients in real world setting is not well understood. We aimed to characterize the reasons for canakinumab initiation among patients with PFS, specifically, cryopyrin-associated periodic syndrome (CAPS), hyperimmunoglobulin D syndrome/mevalonate kinase deficiency (HIDS/MKD), TNF receptor-associated periodic syndrome (TRAPS) and familial Mediterranean fever (FMF).MethodsPhysicians retrospectively reviewed the medical charts of PFS patients prescribed canakinumab between 2016 and 2018. Information collected included patient clinical characteristics, reasons for previous treatment discontinuation and canakinumab initiation. The results were summarized for overall patients, and by children (< 18 years) and adults and by subtype of PFS.ResultsFifty-eight physicians in the US (rheumatologists, 44.8 %; allergists/immunologists, 29.3 %; dermatologists, 25.9 %) abstracted information for 147 patients (children, 46.3 %; males, 57.1 %; CAPS, 36.7 %; TRAPS, 26.5 %; FMF, 26.5 %; HIDS/MKD, 6.8 %; Mixed, 3.4 %). Overall, most patients (90.5 %) received treatment directly preceding canakinumab (NSAIDs, 27.8 % [40.0 % in HIDS/MKD]; anakinra, 24.1 % [32.7 % in CAPS]; colchicine, 21.8 % [35.9 % in FMF]), which were discontinued due to lack of efficacy/effectiveness (39.5 %) and availability of a new treatment (36.1 %). The common reasons for canakinumab initiation were physician perceived efficacy/effectiveness (81.0 %; children, 75.0 %; adults, 86.1 %), lack of response to previous treatment (40.8 %; children, 38.2 %; adults, 43.0 %) and favorable safety profile/tolerability (40.1 %; children, 42.6 %; adults, 38.0 %). Within subtypes, efficacy/effectiveness was the most stated reason for canakinumab initiation in HIDS/MKD (90.9 %), lack of response to previous treatment in FMF (52.4 %) and convenience of administration/dosing in CAPS (27.1 %).ConclusionsThis study provided insights into how canakinumab is initiated in US clinical practice among PFS patients, with physician perceived efficacy/effectiveness of canakinumab, lack of response to previous treatment and favorable safety profile/tolerability of canakinumab being the dominant reasons for canakinumab initiation in all patients and in children and adults and PFS subtypes. Notably, the favorable safety profile/tolerability of canakinumab was more often the reason for initiation among children versus adults.

Efficacy and Outcomes of a Novel Telephone-based Gout Disease Management Program

Objective: Gout is the most common inflammatory arthritis in the United States. Despite published guidelines, management remains suboptimal, leading to unnecessary morbidity and increased cost of care. We have designed the gout disease management program (GDMP) to improve outcomes, increase patient satisfaction, and decrease healthcare utilization. Methods: Gout patients were seen at their usual rheumatology clinical visit and offered participation in the GDMP. Data were collected between April 2017 and November 2019. Serum uric acid (SUA) levels were measured at the initial outpatient encounter, at the entrance to GDMP, and every 4 weeks until SUA was at the goal of ≤6 mg/dl. Through telephonic encounters, gout-related recent hospitalizations, and ER or urgent care visits since the last encounter were ascertained. Self-reported gout medication usage and adherence were also determined. Patient satisfaction with GDMP was surveyed using a 5-point Likert scale. Results: A total of 158 patients were enrolled, of which 112 had ≥ 1 telephone encounter and were included in our analyses. During the telephone phase, 79 patients (70%) achieved the SUA goal of ≤6.0 mg/dl. Only 3 patients (2.6%) required hospitalization or visits to an ER or urgent care center due to gout flare, and 98% rated their encounter as a 5 on the 5-point Likert scale. Conclusion: Our telephone-based management program for gout led to improved clinical outcomes as defined by the ACR guidelines, decreased healthcare visits, and had high patient satisfaction. Significance and Innovations: • First telephone-based, rheumatology providers-led study to manage gout • Additional evidence to confirm the feasibility and benefit of telemedicine in common diseases • First study to show excellent patient satisfaction

Organizational context and the learning and change readiness climate for implementing an evidence-based shared decision-making aid in US rheumatology clinics

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to examine the organizational context that may support learning and change readiness climates that previous research has found to be conducive to implementing evidence-based interventions.Design/methodology/approachAn exploratory, mixed method evaluation that included 15 rheumatology clinics throughout the United States was performed. Quantitative data were collected using a web-based survey completed by 135 clinic members. Qualitative data were collected via semi-structured interviews with 88 clinic members.FindingsIn general, clinics reported strong, positive learning and change readiness climates. More complex organizations (e.g. multispecialty, academic medical centers) with rational/hierarchical cultures and members with longer tenure were associated with less supportive learning and change readiness climates. The authors’ findings highlight opportunities for organizational leaders and evidence-based intervention sponsors to focus their attention and allocate resources to settings that may be most susceptible to implementation challenges.Originality/valueFirst, the authors address a deficit in previous research by describing both the level and strength of the learning and change readiness climates for implementing an evidence-based shared decision-making aid (SDMA) and examine how these vary as a function of the organizational context. Second, the study examines a broader set of factors to assess the organizational context (e.g. organizational culture, organizational structure, ownership) than previous research, which may be especially salient for shaping the climate in smaller specialty clinics like those we study. Third, the authors utilize a mixed methods analysis to provide greater insights into questions of how and why organizational factors such as size and structure may influence the learning and change readiness climate.

Treatment Patterns, Disease Burden, and Outcomes in Patients with Giant Cell Arteritis and Polymyalgia Rheumatica: A Real-World, Electronic Health Record-Based Study of Patients in Clinical Practice.

IntroductionBecause of the chronic nature of giant cell arteritis (GCA) and/or polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR), patients may require continued glucocorticoid treatment to achieve treatment targets or prevent disease relapse, resulting in high cumulative doses. This study evaluated patterns of glucocorticoid use and outcomes in patients with GCA, PMR, or both.MethodsThis retrospective study used electronic medical records from a US rheumatology clinic utilizing the JointMan® (Discus Analytics, LLC) rheumatology software. Patients aged ≥ 50 years with a diagnosis of GCA or PMR and ≥ 1 entry for a glucocorticoid prescription after diagnosis were included. Outcomes at 2 years after glucocorticoid initiation included the proportion of patients discontinuing glucocorticoids for ≥ 6 months, proportion of patients discontinuing glucocorticoids for ≥ 6 months and remaining off glucocorticoids at 2 years, time to discontinuation of glucocorticoids for ≥ 6 months, and prednisone dose and were compared between patients with GCA only, PMR only, or GCA and PMR.ResultsAt 2 years after the initiation of glucocorticoids, 32% of patients (26/91) with GCA, 32% (248/779) with PMR, and 27% (26/97) with GCA and PMR discontinued glucocorticoids for ≥ 6 months; 17, 23, and 18% discontinued glucocorticoids for ≥ 6 months and remained off glucocorticoids at 2 years, respectively. Median (range) time to discontinuation of glucocorticoids for ≥ 6 months was 202.5 (0–635) days and shorter in patients with both GCA and PMR vs. GCA or PMR only. The majority of patients required daily prednisone at 2 years, with similar doses observed between groups.ConclusionsFewer than one-third of patients with GCA and/or PMR discontinued glucocorticoids for ≥ 6 months; the majority of patients required prednisone therapy for ≥ 2 years after its initiation. These data highlight the need for the use of more efficacious and glucocorticoid-sparing therapies in patients with GCA and/or PMR.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40744-021-00290-3.

The Association Between Physician Gender and Career Advancement Among Academic Rheumatologists in the United States.

To determine the potential association between physician gender and academic advancement among US rheumatologists. We performed a nationwide, cross-sectional study of all rheumatologists practicing in the US in 2014 using a comprehensive database of all licensed physicians. Among academic rheumatologists, we estimated gender differences in faculty rank, adjusting for differences in physician age, years since residency graduation, publications, National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants, registered clinical trials, and appointment at a top 20 medical school using a multivariate logistic regression model. We also estimated gender differences in leadership positions (i.e., division director and fellowship program director). Among 6,125 total practicing rheumatologists, 941 (15%) had academic faculty appointments in 2014. Women academic rheumatologists (41.4%) were younger and had completed residency more recently than men. Women had fewer total publications, publications on which they were the first or last author, and NIH grants. In fully adjusted analyses, women were less likely to be full or associate professors than men, with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 0.78 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.62-0.99]). Women in rheumatology had similar odds as men of being a fellowship program director or division director (adjusted OR 0.99 [95% CI 0.69-1.43] and adjusted OR 0.96 [95% CI 0.66-1.41], respectively). Among academic rheumatologists, women are less likely than men to be full or associate professors but have similar odds of being fellowship program directors or division directors, when adjusting for several factors known to influence faculty promotion. These differences suggest barriers to academic promotion despite representation in leadership positions within rheumatology divisions.

US rheumatologists' beliefs and knowledge about biosimilars: a survey.

ObjectivesWe sought to evaluate perceptions of biosimilar products among US rheumatologists who prescribe TNF-α inhibitors, given that 10 TNF-α inhibitor biosimilars and two rituximab biosimilars have Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval.MethodsA 19-question self-administered online survey was conducted from 6 May to 1 June 2019, and fielded by WebMD, LLC. Rheumatologists (n = 9050) who were members of Medscape.com and its partner panels were invited to participate. Likert and other rating scales were used to collect responses, which were summarized descriptively.ResultsResponses were obtained from 320 board-certified US rheumatologists, 85% of whom were fellows of the ACR. Nearly all respondents were familiar with the FDA definition of a biosimilar product and were aware that an infliximab biosimilar was FDA approved; fewer realized that adalimumab, etanercept and rituximab biosimilars were also FDA approved. Most respondents (84%) were aware that an approved biosimilar was not automatically deemed interchangeable by the FDA. Rheumatologists were more likely to initiate biosimilar treatment for a biologic treatment-naïve patient with RA (73%) than they were to switch to the biosimilar for a patient with RA doing well on the reference product (35%).ConclusionsThe results of this survey suggest that US rheumatologists have a good understanding and acceptance of biosimilar products, particularly for the initiation of treatment in biologic-naïve individuals. They were hesitant to switch from a reference product to a biosimilar for a patient doing well on the reference product. Additional education on biosimilars is required to help inform treatment decisions by rheumatologists. A plain language summary of this article has been uploaded as supplementary material, available at Rheumatology online.

Association of Short-Term Ultraviolet Radiation Exposure and Disease Severity in Juvenile Dermatomyositis: Results From the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Legacy Registry.

Ultraviolet (UV) radiation is considered to be an important environmental factor in the clinical course of children with juvenile dermatomyositis (DM). We aimed to evaluate the association between UV radiation and severe disease outcomes in juvenile DM. This is a cross-sectional study of patients with juvenile DM enrolled in the US multicenter Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Legacy Registry from 2010 to 2015. The mean UV index (UVI) in the calendar month prior to symptom onset in each subject's zip code was calculated from daily satellite solar noon measurements. Multivariable logistic regression was used to model the relationship between the mean UVI and calcinosis as well as other outcomes of severe disease. Covariates included sex, race, age, time to diagnosis, disease duration, and latitude. In a multivariable model, there was no association between the mean UVI and calcinosis. African American race was associated with a 3-fold greater odds of calcinosis. However, there was a significant statistical interaction between race and mean UVI. Accounting for this interaction, the odds of calcinosis markedly decreased in African American subjects and steadily increased in non-African American subjects over a range of increasing the mean UVI. Higher mean UVI was associated with decreased odds of using biologics or nonmethotrexate disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and skin ulceration. We described a novel association between UV radiation, calcinosis, and race in a large cohort of patients with juvenile DM. This study furthers our knowledge of the role of UV radiation in the clinical course of juvenile DM and highlights the complex interplay between genes and environment in the clinical phenotypes and development of calcinosis in children with juvenile DM.

Perceptions and practices regarding the collaborative management of patients with psoriatic arthritis among US dermatologists and rheumatologists

Perceptions and practices regarding the collaborative management of patients with psoriatic arthritis among US dermatologists and rheumatologists