Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
    • 50th Volume Reprints
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services

User menu

  • My Cart
  • Log In

Search

  • Advanced search
The Journal of Rheumatology
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services
  • My Cart
  • Log In
The Journal of Rheumatology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
    • 50th Volume Reprints
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • Follow jrheum on Twitter
  • Visit jrheum on Facebook
  • Follow jrheum on LinkedIn
  • Follow jrheum on YouTube
  • Follow jrheum on Instagram
  • Follow jrheum on RSS
EditorialEditorial

The COVID-19 Vaccine Landscape: What a Rheumatologist Needs to Know

Katie Bechman, Mrinalini Dey, Mark Yates, Marwan Bukhari, Kevin Winthrop and James B. Galloway
The Journal of Rheumatology August 2021, 48 (8) 1201-1204; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.210106
Katie Bechman
1K. Bechman, PhD, M. Yates, PhD, J.B. Galloway, PhD, Centre for Rheumatic Diseases, Kings College London, London, UK;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Katie Bechman
  • For correspondence: katie.bechman@kcl.ac.uk
Mrinalini Dey
2M. Dey, MB BChir., Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, University of Liverpool, and Rheumatology, Aintree University Hospital, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Mrinalini Dey
Mark Yates
1K. Bechman, PhD, M. Yates, PhD, J.B. Galloway, PhD, Centre for Rheumatic Diseases, Kings College London, London, UK;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Mark Yates
Marwan Bukhari
3M. Bukhari, PhD, Rheumatology, Royal Lancaster Infirmary, Lancaster, UK;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Marwan Bukhari
Kevin Winthrop
4K. Winthrop, MD, MPH, Division of Infectious Diseases, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Kevin Winthrop
James B. Galloway
1K. Bechman, PhD, M. Yates, PhD, J.B. Galloway, PhD, Centre for Rheumatic Diseases, Kings College London, London, UK;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for James B. Galloway
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
  • eLetters
PreviousNext
Loading

In January 2020, a new strain of coronavirus was described. Less than 3 months later, a pandemic was declared. Within 9 months, the first vaccine received emergency authorization. Keeping up with the infodemic has been arduous, due to the unparalleled pace of scientific study. Here, we summarize the work toward a vaccine, framing the progress in a manner relevant to physicians managing patients on immune modulation.

The SARS-CoV-2 vaccines

SARS-CoV-2 is a positive sense single-stranded RNA virus. Like other coronaviruses, it has 4 structural components: spike, envelope, membrane, and nucleocapsid proteins. The spike protein facilitates binding and fusion to host cells, making it an attractive vaccine antigen. There have been 3 approaches in developing a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine: (1) attaching the spike protein to a nonreplicating viral vector; (2) using messenger RNA (mRNA) technology to induce host spike protein synthesis; and (3) delivery of spike protein with an adjuvant.

The AstraZeneca vaccine takes the first approach, using a replication-deficient chimpanzee adenovirus vector containing the spike gene. Once inside a cell, the vector uses the cell’s existing molecular machinery to transcribe DNA to mRNA and produce the spike protein. Replication-deficient viral vector-based vaccines have been used safely in immunosuppressed individuals. The second approach is employed by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, who have produced the first vaccines to be licensed using synthetic mRNA technology. mRNA is within a lipid droplet, protecting it from enzymatic breakdown and enabling cell entry. The mRNA strand induces spike protein synthesis without entering the cell’s nucleus or affecting genetic material. Finally, Novovax have developed a protein-based vaccine, currently in submission for licensing. Manufactured from moth cells infected with baculovirus, it contains a modified spike gene, producing the spike protein. This is harvested and assembled into nanoparticles. It is combined with an immunity-priming adjuvant (matrix M1), enhancing vaccine response. The spike protein is taken up by cells and presented on their surface.

Vaccine efficacy

Phase III vaccine trials have demonstrated high efficacy: > 90% with Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna; 70% with AstraZeneca. Direct comparisons are problematic due to differences in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case ascertainment between studies. Importantly, the AstraZeneca vaccine did not identify patients in the vaccine arm with severe COVID-19 who required hospitalization.1

Patients receiving immunosuppression are considered clinically extremely vulnerable (CEV). Many have spent the pandemic “shielding.” National recommendations by vaccination and immunization committees advise that the vaccination program prioritize CEV individuals.2,3,4

There are currently no data on the immune response to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients receiving immunosuppression. Published trials have excluded immunosuppressed patients, and most listed autoimmune conditions in their exclusion criteria (Table 1). It is possible that individuals receiving immunosuppressive therapy may mount less robust immune responses to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, as is observed with other vaccines in this patient population, subject to the type and dose of immunosuppression. For example, a 30–40% reduction in IgG response is observed with the influenza vaccination in patients on methotrexate (MTX).5 However, trial data have demonstrated comparatively high titers of neutralizing antibody against SARS-CoV-2 post vaccination in immunocompetent individuals compared to that following natural infection.6 It is therefore likely that immunosuppressed patients will mount clinically meaningful neutralizing antibody titers, even if they are numerically lower than immunocompetent individuals. Research in this area is anticipated to be published imminently.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Exclusion criteria on autoimmune disease and immunosuppression for each vaccine RCT.

It is tempting to consider measuring serological response to determine vaccine immunogenicity. Some commercial COVID-19 antibody assays measure immune response to the nucleocapsid, and not the spike, protein.7 These tests would remain negative post vaccination. It is also unclear if antibody titers are the best surrogate of vaccine efficacy. Measures of T cell response may be superior.8

Reports of new SARS-CoV-2 variants are concerning, as mutations could theoretically evade the vaccine-induced antibody response. Pfizer and Moderna have tested serum from immunized patients and demonstrated effective neutralization to the UK strain (B.1.1.7) but reduced capacity against the South African (B.1.351) variant. The true effect of mutation events will be clarified by the proportion of fully vaccinated patients subsequently hospitalized with a variant strain.9

Extending the dosing schedule

The UK SARS-CoV-2 vaccination program has delayed the second dose, a decision not replicated in other countries to date and one that has generated much skepticism from the medical community. This is based on prioritizing first doses to as many people as possible. Understanding the effect of this delay requires consideration of reasons for sequential vaccine dosing: (1) to increase the initial immune response; and (2) to strengthen response durability. The initial immune response to licensed SARS-CoV-2 vaccines is strong, but uncertainties remain about the duration of protection offered.

The AstraZeneca trial included longer spacing between doses: 59% of UK and 19% of Brazilian trial participants received the second dose 9–12+ weeks after the first.1 Vaccine efficacy after the second dose was higher in patients with > 6 weeks between doses (65% vs 53%). This is seen with routine vaccinations where increased duration between doses is advantageous in strengthening IgG durability.10

There is limited evidence on protection offered by a single SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose. Pfizer-BioNTech report vaccine efficacy of 52% after the first dose until the second dose (3-week spacing), rising to > 90% after the second dose.11 This does not imply that the first dose is 52% effective, as the immunological response would be expected to strengthen irrespective of the second dose. There are simply no data on single-dose efficacy beyond 21 days. Public Health England’s exploratory analysis (full data not publicly available) of the AstraZeneca trial participants receiving 1 standard dose reports 73% efficacy.4

There is justification for dose spacing from a public health perspective. Given that the UK was following a similar trajectory to other European countries, we may have been facing a third wave of COVID-19 infection. The UK vaccination program immunized 15 million people with their first dose by mid-February, targeting at-risk groups, accounting for 88% of all COVID-19 deaths.12 Delaying the second dose will be a trade-off between stronger earlier individual immunity and moving toward population herd immunity.

As it stands, international organizations (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, World Health Organization) and regulatory bodies (U.S. Food and Drug Administration [FDA], European Medicines Agency [EMA]) have advised vaccination schedules should be followed as designed in vaccine trials. While the rest of the world watches, time will tell if the UK decision was wise.

The question surrounding immunosuppression

In immunosuppressed patients, the rationale for spacing doses is complex. The blunting of initial immune response and timing of vaccinations around disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment require consideration. Current guidelines advise routine vaccines are administered during quiescent disease and before planned immunosuppression. Given the unpredictable natural history of autoimmune diseases in terms of flare, it is not practical to risk delaying vaccination to await disease control. For patients commencing planned immunosuppressive treatment, UK national recommendations advise that SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are offered at least 2 weeks before therapy, when their immune system is better able to respond, and that the second dose is administered before starting treatment. This likely necessitates offering the second dose at the recommended minimum spacing (3–4 weeks after the first dose).4

For patients already on immune modulation, the literature on routine vaccinations could be extrapolated. However, responses differ across vaccinations. Synthetic and biological DMARDs demonstrate immunogenicity with the influenza vaccine, but changes in serologic response are seen with the pneumococcal vaccine. Rituximab clearly suppresses humoral responses to both vaccines13,14 and is anticipated to exert a similar effect on the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. The general advice to vaccinate at least 6 months after administration and 4 weeks before the next course of B cell–depleting therapy may not be possible with the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, especially if using longer dosing intervals. Current routine vaccination guidelines suggest that immunization may be considered under B cell–depleting therapy, taking into consideration a potential suboptimal response to the vaccine. This may be a pragmatic decision, made on an individual basis. For some patients, there may be justification to interrupt conventional synthetic DMARD therapy. This is demonstrated in influenza vaccine randomized controlled trials where IgG responses were greater when MTX was discontinued for 2 weeks post vaccination.5,15 The benefit of interrupting treatment may be offset by disease flare.16 Destabilizing disease control during the pandemic might pose greater risk.

Safety

There are limited data on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine safety in our patient population. Acute side-effects in healthy volunteers include fever, myalgia, headache, nausea, fatigue, and injection site reactions. These may be more pronounced after the second dose. Risk of allergy is higher with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (1:100,000 vs 1:1,000,000 with most vaccines).17 This may relate to the polyethylene glycol (PEG) ingredient, also in the Moderna vaccine. Similar PEG allergy is reported with certolizumab pegol. The FDA, European Medicines Evaluation Agency, and Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency advise individuals with severe allergy/anaphylaxis to any vaccine component to avoid vaccination. Longer-term effects have not yet been defined. There is a theoretical risk that the vaccine may trigger autoimmunity by molecular mimicry, with antibodies to spike proteins cross-reacting with structurally similar host proteins.18 The vaccines may also drive inflammation by their potent type I interferon response.19 These are yet to be described, and current literature on existing vaccinations in our patients is reassuring, with no changes in disease activity and only mild adverse events,14 although studies were underpowered for safety and were unable to detect rare events. The safety of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines will remain under immense scrutiny in the coming months. Reports of central venous sinus thrombosis combined with thrombocytopenia occurring in the days following vaccination have been described and are currently under investigation by the EMA.20 Estimates of risk and benefit clearly favor vaccination and the narrative from healthcare professionals to patients and the general public will be crucial in maintaining trust.

Conclusion

If you have read to the end of this editorial, we hope you have taken away our key messages. The benefits of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines outweigh the risks for our patients. Even if vaccination produces a smaller IgG response, it likely still confers protection. At present there is no rationale to choose one vaccine over another. A universal decision on DMARD interruption has not been made and there may be clinicians who make personalized decisions for their patients. Future research needs to address the question of vaccine effectiveness (not solely immunogenicity) in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases.

Footnotes

  • This work was primarily supported by Medical Research Council as a Clinical Training Research Fellowship to KB (CTRF-MR/R001332/1).

  • The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

  • See CRA COVID-19 vaccine guideline, page 1330

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Voysey M,
    2. Clemens SAC,
    3. Madhi SA,
    4. Weckx LY,
    5. Folegatti PM,
    6. Aley PK, et al.
    Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCOV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK. Lancet 2021;397:99-111.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Government of Canada
    . National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI): guidance on the prioritization of initial doses of COVID-19 vaccine(s). [Internet. Accessed April 27, 2021.] Available from: www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/immunization/national-advisory-committee-on-immunizationnaci/guidance-prioritization-initial-doses-covid-19-vaccines.html
  3. 3.↵
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
    . Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Recommendation for allocation of COVID-19 vaccine in United States. [Internet. Accessed April 27, 2021]. Available from: www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/covid-19.html
  4. 4.↵
    1. GOV.UK
    . Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI). Public Health England. COVID-19: the green book, chapter 14a. [Internet. Accessed April 27, 2021]. Available from: www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-the-green-book-chapter-14a
  5. 5.↵
    1. Park JK,
    2. Lee YJ,
    3. Shin K,
    4. Ha Y-J,
    5. Lee EY,
    6. Song YW, et al.
    Impact of temporary methotrexate discontinuation for 2 weeks on immunogenicity of seasonal influenza vaccination in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised clinical trial. Ann Rheum Dis 2018;77:898-904.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Sahin U,
    2. Muik A,
    3. Vogler I,
    4. Derhovanessian E,
    5. Kranz LM,
    6. Vormehr M, et al.
    Bnt162b2 induces SARS-CoV-2-neutralising antibodies and T cells in humans. medRxiv 2020 December 11 [Preprint. Accessed April 27, 2021]. Available from: doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.09.20245175
  7. 7.↵
    1. Whitman JD,
    2. Hiatt J,
    3. Mowery CT, et al.
    Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 serology assays reveals a range of test performance. Nat Biotechnol 2020;38:1174-83.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. McElhaney JE,
    2. Xie D,
    3. Hager WD,
    4. Barry MB,
    5. Wang Y,
    6. Kleppinger A, et al.
    T cell responses are better correlates of vaccine protection in the elderly. J Immunol 2006:176:6333-9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    1. Wu K,
    2. Werner AP,
    3. Moliva JI,
    4. Koch M,
    5. Choi A,
    6. Stewart-Jones GBE, et al.
    mRNA-1273 vaccine induces neutralizing antibodies against spike mutants from global SARS-CoV-2 variants. bioRxiv 2021 Jan 25 [Preprint. Accessed April 27, 2021]. Available from: doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.25.427948
  10. 10.↵
    1. Rümke HC,
    2. Loch HP,
    3. Hoppenbrouwers K,
    4. Vandermeulen C,
    5. Malfroot A,
    6. Helm K, et al.
    Immunogenicity and safety of a measles–mumps–rubella–varicella vaccine following a 4-week or a 12-month interval between two doses. Vaccine 2011;29:3842-9.
    OpenUrl
  11. 11.↵
    1. Polack FP,
    2. Thomas SJ,
    3. Kitchin N,
    4. Absalon J,
    5. Gurtman A,
    6. Lockhart S, et al.
    Safety and efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 vaccine. N Engl J Med 2020;383:2603-15.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Department of Health and Social Care
    . UK COVID-19 vaccines delivery plan. [Internet. Accessed April 27, 2021]. Available from: assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/951928/uk-covid-19-vaccines-delivery-plan-final.pdf
  13. 13.↵
    1. Furer V,
    2. Rondaan C,
    3. Heijstek MW,
    4. Agmon-Levin N,
    5. van Assen S,
    6. Bijl M, et al.
    2019 update of EULAR recommendations for vaccination in adult patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases. Ann Rheum Dis 2020;79:39-52.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    1. Rondaan C,
    2. Furer V,
    3. Heijstek MW,
    4. Agmon-Levin N,
    5. Bijl M,
    6. Breedveld FC, et al.
    Efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of vaccination in adult patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases: a systematic literature review for the 2019 update of EULAR recommendations. RMD Open 2019;5:e001035.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    1. Park JK,
    2. Lee MA,
    3. Lee EY,
    4. Song YW,
    5. Choi Y,
    6. Winthrop KL, et al.
    Effect of methotrexate discontinuation on efficacy of seasonal influenza vaccination in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised clinical trial. Ann Rheum Dis 2017;76:1559-65.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    1. Park JK,
    2. Kim MJ,
    3. Choi Y,
    4. Winthrop K,
    5. Song YW,
    6. Lee EB.
    Effect of short-term methotrexate discontinuation on rheumatoid arthritis disease activity: post-hoc analysis of two randomized trials. Clin Rheumatol 2020;39:375-9.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  17. 17.↵
    1. Castells MC,
    2. Phillips EJ.
    Maintaining safety with SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. N Engl J Med 2021;384:643-9.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Shah S,
    2. Danda D,
    3. Kavadichanda C,
    4. Das S,
    5. Adarsh MB,
    6. Negi VS.
    Autoimmune and rheumatic musculoskeletal diseases as a consequence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and its treatment. Rheumatol Int 2020;40:1539-54.
    OpenUrl
  19. 19.↵
    1. Pardi N,
    2. Hogan MJ,
    3. Porter FW,
    4. Weissman D.
    mRNA vaccines – a new era in vaccinology. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2018;17:261-79.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Mahase E.
    Covid-19: AstraZeneca vaccine is not linked to increased risk of blood clots, finds European Medicine Agency. BMJ 2021;372:n774.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Rheumatology
Vol. 48, Issue 8
1 Aug 2021
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by Author
  • Editorial Board (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about The Journal of Rheumatology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The COVID-19 Vaccine Landscape: What a Rheumatologist Needs to Know
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from The Journal of Rheumatology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the The Journal of Rheumatology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
The COVID-19 Vaccine Landscape: What a Rheumatologist Needs to Know
Katie Bechman, Mrinalini Dey, Mark Yates, Marwan Bukhari, Kevin Winthrop, James B. Galloway
The Journal of Rheumatology Aug 2021, 48 (8) 1201-1204; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.210106

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

 Request Permissions

Share
The COVID-19 Vaccine Landscape: What a Rheumatologist Needs to Know
Katie Bechman, Mrinalini Dey, Mark Yates, Marwan Bukhari, Kevin Winthrop, James B. Galloway
The Journal of Rheumatology Aug 2021, 48 (8) 1201-1204; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.210106
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • The SARS-CoV-2 vaccines
    • Vaccine efficacy
    • Extending the dosing schedule
    • The question surrounding immunosuppression
    • Safety
    • Conclusion
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
  • eLetters

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Work-Related Issues and a High Burden of Disease Are Frequent in Axial Spondyloarthritis: What Should We Be Doing Better?
  • 50th Year of Publication: Looking Back at the 1990s
  • From Prediction Tools to Precision Medicine in Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody–Associated Vasculitis
Show more Editorial

Similar Articles

Content

  • First Release
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Collections
  • Audiovisual Rheum
  • COVID-19 and Rheumatology

Resources

  • Guide for Authors
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Author Payment
  • Reviewers
  • Advertisers
  • Classified Ads
  • Reprints and Translations
  • Permissions
  • Meetings
  • FAQ
  • Policies

Subscribers

  • Subscription Information
  • Purchase Subscription
  • Your Account
  • Terms and Conditions

More

  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • My Alerts
  • My Folders
  • Privacy/GDPR Policy
  • RSS Feeds
The Journal of Rheumatology
The content of this site is intended for health care professionals.
Copyright © 2022 by The Journal of Rheumatology Publishing Co. Ltd.
Print ISSN: 0315-162X; Online ISSN: 1499-2752
Powered by HighWire