UNASSIGNED: Numerous cases of long coronavirus disease (long COVID) have been reported in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARDs). Despite the reviews on clinical manifestations of long COVID in the general population, systematic reviews on ARD patients are scarce. Herein, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence and characteristics of long COVID in ARD patients.
UNASSIGNED: We searched the literature in PubMed and Embase as of 27 December 2022. Cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies relevant to long COVID in ARD patients were collected. Stratification based on the severity of COVID infection and subtypes of rheumatic diseases [systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease (SARD) vs non-autoimmune rheumatic disease (NARD)] was also undertaken. A random-effects model was used in the meta-analysis.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 15 relevant studies were identified from the literature. The prevalence of long COVID was 56% (95% CI 34, 76) in 2995 patients. Hospitalized COVID patients had a higher proportion of long COVID than non-hospitalized patients. The prevalence of long COVID was similar between SARD and NARD patients. In terms of symptoms, fatigue, arthralgia and pain were commonly reported in long COVID patients with ARDs.
UNASSIGNED: The characteristics of long COVID in ARD patients are generally similar to those in the general population despite a higher prevalence and a higher proportion of arthralgia and pain.

BACKGROUND: Nurses play an important role in the management of patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases. Little is known about the effectiveness of nurse-led interventions on patient-reported outcomes in this population. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the evidence of nurse-led interventions in systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases.
METHODS: Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, and Embase for studies published from database inception to September 2022. Studies were included if they were published in a peer-reviewed journal in English and evaluated the effectiveness of a nurse-led intervention using a randomized controlled trial design in adults with a systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease. Screening, full-text review, and quality appraisal were conducted by two independent reviewers.
RESULTS: A total of 162 articles were identified for possible inclusion, of which five studies were included. Four of five studies (80%) were conducted in systemic lupus erythematosus. There was significant variability in the types of nurse-led interventions; the majority included educational sessions and follow up counseling by a nurse (n = 4). The most common patient-reported outcomes were health-related quality of life (n = 3), fatigue (n = 3), mental health (including anxiety and depression) (n = 2), and self-efficacy (n = 2). The duration of the interventions varied from 12 weeks to 6 months. All studies included a nurse with specialized training and education and showed significant improvements in their primary outcomes. The majority of the studies (60%) were considered high methodological quality.
CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review provides emerging evidence for the use of nurse-led interventions in systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases. Our findings emphasize the important role of nurses in providing nonpharmacological strategies to help patients better manage their disease and improve health outcomes.

UNASSIGNED: Systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases can occur as paraneoplastic phenomena in the context of underlying malignancies. We present three illustrative clinical cases and a narrative literature review focusing on systemic sclerosis, dermatomyositis and palmar fasciitis and polyarthritis syndrome.
UNASSIGNED: Medical data of three patients from the University Hospitals Leuven were retrospectively and anonymously obtained and reviewed. A narrative review was performed, searching the databases of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library.
UNASSIGNED: Systemic sclerosis, dermatomyositis and palmar fasciitis and polyarthritis syndrome are systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases that can present as paraneoplastic phenomena. Systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases are often associated with the presence of specific autoantibodies, some associated with a high likelihood of underlying malignancy. The presence of anti-ribonucleic acid polymerase III antibodies and anti-transcription intermediary factor 1 gamma antibodies indicates an increased risk of underlying cancer in systemic sclerosis and dermatomyositis, respectively. Individual patient prognosis can be improved through early detection of underlying malignancy, hence the importance of adequate cancer screening.
UNASSIGNED: Some systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases can appear as paraneoplastic phenomena, whereby the presence of specific autoantibodies is known to be related to the likelihood of underlying malignancy. We highlight the importance of clinician\'s knowledge of these distinct features, as it facilitates early detection and treatment of underlying malignancy, thereby improving individual patient prognosis.

Anti-DFS70 antibodies have been proposed as a marker to exclude systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease (SARD). We conducted this systematic diagnostic test accuracy review and meta-analysis to determine the performance of anti-DFS70 antibodies in patients with a positive anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) test result to exclude SARD. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and the Cochrane Library up to 22 February 2021, and included studies examining the diagnostic accuracy of anti-DFS70 antibodies in patients with a positive ANA test result. The results were pooled using a hierarchical bivariate model and plotted in summary receiver operating characteristic curves. R software and Stata Statistical Software were used for the statistical analysis. Eight studies with 4168 patients were included. The summary sensitivity was 0.19 (95% confidence interval: 0.12-0.28) and the specificity was 0.93 (95% confidence interval: 0.88-0.96). The area under the curve was 0.69 (95% confidence interval: 0.64-0.72). The meta-regression analysis showed that targeting only ANA-associated rheumatic disease was associated with higher specificity. In addition, the studies with a non-SARD prevalence of <80% and using a chemiluminescence assay were associated with higher specificity. Anti-DFS70 antibodies have high specificity for the exclusion of SARD among patients presenting with a positive ANA test, but the sensitivity is low.