Adalimumab in Patients with Active Noninfectious Uveitis

BACKGROUND: Patients with noninfectious uveitis are at risk for long-term complications of uncontrolled inflammation, as well as for the adverse effects of long-term glucocorticoid therapy. We conducted a trial to assess the efficacy and safety of adalimumab as a glucocorticoid-sparing agent for the treatment of noninfectious uveitis. METHODS: This multinational phase 3 trial involved adults who had active noninfectious intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, or panuveitis despite having received prednisone treatment for 2 or more weeks. Investigators and patients were unaware of the study-group assignments. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive adalimumab (a loading dose of 80 mg followed by a dose of 40 mg every 2 weeks) or matched placebo. All patients received a mandatory prednisone burst followed by tapering of prednisone over the course of 15 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the time to treatment failure occurring at or after week 6. Treatment failure was a multicomponent outcome that was based on assessment of new inflammatory lesions, best corrected visual acuity, anterior chamber cell grade, and vitreous haze grade. Nine ranked secondary efficacy end points were assessed, and adverse events were reported. RESULTS: The median time to treatment failure was 24 weeks in the adalimumab group and 13 weeks in the placebo group. Among the 217 patients in the intention-to-treat population, those receiving adalimumab were less likely than those in the placebo group to have treatment failure (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.36 to 0.70; P<0.001). Outcomes with regard to three secondary end points (change in anterior chamber cell grade, change in vitreous haze grade, and change in best corrected visual acuity) were significantly better in the adalimumab group than in the placebo group. Adverse events and serious adverse events were reported more frequently among patients who received adalimumab (1052.4 vs. 971.7 adverse events and 28.8 vs. 13.6 serious adverse events per 100 person-years). CONCLUSIONS: In our trial, adalimumab was found to be associated with a lower risk of uveitic flare or visual impairment and with more adverse events and serious adverse events than was placebo

Adalimumab in Active and Inactive, Non-Infectious Uveitis: Global Results from the VISUAL I and VISUAL II Trials

PURPOSE: Report global adalimumab safety and efficacy outcomes in patients with non-infectious uveitis. METHODS: Adults with non-infectious intermediate, posterior, or panuveitis were randomized 1:1 to receive placebo or adalimumab in the VISUAL I (active uveitis) or VISUAL II (inactive uveitis) trials. Integrated global and Japan substudy results are reported. The primary endpoint was time to treatment failure (TF). RESULTS: In the integrated studies, TF risk was significantly reduced (hazard ratio [95% CI]) with adalimumab versus placebo (VISUAL I: HR = 0.56 [0.40-0.76], p < 0.001; VISUAL II: HR = 0.52 [0.37-0.74], p < 0.001). In Japan substudies, no consistent trends were observed between groups (VISUAL I: HR = 1.20 [0.41-3.54]; VISUAL II: HR = 0.45 [0.20-1.03]). Adverse event rates were similar between treatment groups in both studies (854 to 1063 events/100 participant-years). CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab lowered time to TF versus placebo in the integrated population; no consistent trends were observed in Japan substudies. Safety results were consistent between studies

Safety and Efficacy of Adalimumab in Patients with Noninfectious Uveitis in an Ongoing Open-Label Study: VISUAL III

PURPOSE: To evaluate safety and efficacy of adalimumab in patients with noninfectious intermediate, posterior, or panuveitis. DESIGN: Phase 3, open-label, multicenter clinical trial extension (VISUAL III). PARTICIPANTS: Adults meeting treatment failure (TF) criteria or who completed VISUAL I or II (phase 3, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled) without TF. METHODS: Patients received adalimumab 40 mg every other week. Interim follow-up data were described from VISUAL III weeks 0 through 78. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Disease quiescence, steroid-free quiescence, active inflammatory chorioretinal/retinal vascular lesions, anterior chamber cell grade, vitreous haze grade, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and corticosteroid dose. Binary data were reported using nonresponder imputation (NRI), continuous data using last observation carried forward and as-observed analysis, and corticosteroid dose using observed-case analysis. Adverse events (AEs) were reported from first adalimumab dose in VISUAL III through interim cutoff. RESULTS: Of 424 patients enrolled, 371 were included in intent-to-treat analysis. At study entry, 242 of 371 (65%) patients had active uveitis; 60% (145/242, NRI) achieved quiescence at week 78, and 66% (95/143, as-observed) of those were corticosteroid free. At study entry, 129 of 371 (35%) patients had inactive uveitis; 74% (96/129, NRI) achieved quiescence at week 78, and 93% (89/96, as-observed) of those were corticosteroid free. Inflammatory lesions, anterior chamber grade, and vitreous haze grade showed initial improvement followed by decline in patients with active uveitis and remained stable in patients with inactive uveitis. BCVA improved in patients with active uveitis from weeks 0 to 78 (0.27 to 0.14 logMAR; left and right eyes; as-observed) and remained stable in patients with inactive uveitis. Mean corticosteroid dose decreased from 13.6 mg/day (week 0) to 2.6 mg/day (week 78) in patients with active uveitis and remained stable in those with inactive uveitis (1.5-1.2 mg/day). AEs (424 events/100 patient-years) and serious AEs (16.5 events/100 patient-years) were comparable with previous VISUAL trials. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with active uveitis at study entry who received adalimumab therapy were likely to achieve quiescence, improve visual acuity, and reduce their daily uveitis-related systemic corticosteroid use. Most patients with inactive uveitis at study entry sustained quiescence without a systemic corticosteroid dose increase. No new safety signals were identified

Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Adalimumab in Patients With Noninfectious Intermediate Uveitis, Posterior Uveitis, or Panuveitis

PURPOSE: To evaluate long-term efficacy and safety of extended treatment with adalimumab in patients with noninfectious intermediate, posterior, or panuveitis. DESIGN: Open-label, multicenter, phase 3 extension study (VISUAL III). PARTICIPANTS: Adults who had completed a randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 parent trial (VISUAL I or II) without treatment failure (inactive uveitis) or discontinued after meeting treatment failure criteria (active uveitis). METHODS: Patients received subcutaneous adalimumab 40 mg every other week. Data were collected for ≤362 weeks. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded until 70 days after the last dose of study drug. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Main outcome measures were long-term safety and quiescence; other efficacy variables included inflammatory lesions, anterior chamber cell and vitreous haze grade, macular edema, visual acuity, and dose of uveitis-related corticosteroids. RESULTS: Of 424 patients enrolled, 67% (283/424) had active uveitis and 33% (141/424) had inactive uveitis at study entry; 60 patients subsequently met exclusion criteria, and 364 patients were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. Efficacy variables were analyzed through week 150 when approximately 50% of patients (214/424) remained in the study. The percentage of patients in quiescence increased from 34% (122/364) at week 0 to 85% (153/180) at week 150. Corticosteroid-free quiescence was achieved by 54% (66/123) and 89% (51/57) of patients with active or inactive uveitis at study entry, respectively, by week 150. Mean daily dose of corticosteroids was reduced from 9.4±17.1 mg/day at week 0 (n=359) to 1.5±3.9 mg/day at week 150 (n=181). The percentage of patients who achieved other efficacy variables increased over time for those with active uveitis at study entry and was maintained for those with inactive uveitis. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent AEs of special interest for adalimumab were infections (n=275; 78.7 events/100 patient-years); AEs and serious AEs occurred at a rate of 396 events/100 patient-years and 15 events/100 patient-years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term treatment with adalimumab led to quiescence and reduced corticosteroid use for patients who entered VISUAL III with active uveitis and maintenance of quiescence for those with inactive uveitis. AEs were comparable to those reported in the parent trials and consistent with the known safety profile of adalimumab

RNA Methylation by the MIS Complex Regulates a Cell Fate Decision in Yeast

For the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, nutrient limitation is a key developmental signal causing diploid cells to switch from yeast-form budding to either foraging pseudohyphal (PH) growth or meiosis and sporulation. Prolonged starvation leads to lineage restriction, such that cells exiting meiotic prophase are committed to complete sporulation even if nutrients are restored. Here, we have identified an earlier commitment point in the starvation program. After this point, cells, returned to nutrient-rich medium, entered a form of synchronous PH development that was morphologically and genetically indistinguishable from starvation-induced PH growth. We show that lineage restriction during this time was, in part, dependent on the mRNA methyltransferase activity of Ime4, which played separable roles in meiotic induction and suppression of the PH program. Normal levels of meiotic mRNA methylation required the catalytic domain of Ime4, as well as two meiotic proteins, Mum2 and Slz1, which interacted and co-immunoprecipitated with Ime4. This MIS complex (Mum2, Ime4, and Slz1) functioned in both starvation pathways. Together, our results support the notion that the yeast starvation response is an extended process that progressively restricts cell fate and reveal a broad role of post-transcriptional RNA methylation in these decisions

Polycomb-mediated silencing in neuroendocrine prostate cancer

BACKGROUND: Neuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC) is a highly aggressive subtype of prostate cancer (PCa) for which the median survival remains less than a year. Current treatments are only palliative in nature, and the lack of suitable pre-clinical models has hampered previous efforts to develop novel therapeutic strategies. Addressing this need, we have recently established the first in vivo model of complete neuroendocrine transdifferentiation using patient-derived xenografts. Few genetic differences were observed between parental PCa and relapsed NEPC, suggesting that NEPC likely results from alterations that are epigenetic in nature. Thus, we sought to identify targetable epigenetic regulators whose expression was elevated in NEPC using genome-wide profiling of patient-derived xenografts and clinical samples. RESULTS: Our data indicate that multiple members of the polycomb group (PcG) family of transcriptional repressors were selectively upregulated in NEPC. Notably, CBX2 and EZH2 were consistently the most highly overexpressed epigenetic regulators across multiple datasets from clinical and xenograft tumor tissues. Given the striking upregulation of PcG genes and other transcriptional repressors, we derived a 185-gene list termed 'neuroendocrine-associated repression signature' (NEARS) by overlapping transcripts downregulated across multiple in vivo NEPC models. In line with the striking upregulation of PcG family members, NEARS was preferentially enriched with PcG target genes, suggesting a driving role for PcG silencing in NEPC. Importantly, NEARS was significantly associated with high-grade tumors, metastatic progression, and poor outcome in multiple clinical datasets, consistent with extensive literature linking PcG genes and aggressive disease progression. CONCLUSIONS: We have explored the epigenetic landscape of NEPC and provided evidence of increased PcG-mediated silencing associated with aberrant transcriptional regulation of key differentiation genes. Our results position CBX2 and EZH2 as potential therapeutic targets in NEPC, providing opportunities to explore novel strategies aimed at reversing epigenetic alterations driving this lethal disease

Attribution: how is it relevant for loss and damage policy and practice?

Attribution has become a recurring issue in discussions about Loss and Damage (L&D). In this highly-politicised context, attribution is often associated with responsibility and blame; and linked to debates about liability and compensation. The aim of attribution science, however, is not to establish responsibility, but to further scientific understanding of causal links between elements of the Earth System and society. This research into causality could inform the management of climate-related risks through improved understanding of drivers of relevant hazards, or, more widely, vulnerability and exposure; with potential benefits regardless of political positions on L&D. Experience shows that it is nevertheless difficult to have open discussions about the science in the policy sphere. This is not only a missed opportunity, but also problematic in that it could inhibit understanding of scientific results and uncertainties, potentially leading to policy planning which does not have sufficient scientific evidence to support it. In this chapter, we first explore this dilemma for science-policy dialogue, summarising several years of research into stakeholder perspectives of attribution in the context of L&D. We then aim to provide clarity about the scientific research available, through an overview of research which might contribute evidence about the causal connections between anthropogenic climate change and losses and damages, including climate science, but also other fields which examine other drivers of hazard, exposure, and vulnerability. Finally, we explore potential applications of attribution research, suggesting that an integrated and nuanced approach has potential to inform planning to avert, minimise and address losses and damages. The key messages are In the political context of climate negotiations, questions about whether losses and damages can be attributed to anthropogenic climate change are often linked to issues of responsibility, blame, and liability. Attribution science does not aim to establish responsibility or blame, but rather to investigate drivers of change. Attribution science is advancing rapidly, and has potential to increase understanding of how climate variability and change is influencing slow onset and extreme weather events, and how this interacts with other drivers of risk, including socio-economic drivers, to influence losses and damages. Over time, some uncertainties in the science will be reduced, as the anthropogenic climate change signal becomes stronger, and understanding of climate variability and change develops. However, some uncertainties will not be eliminated. Uncertainty is common in science, and does not prevent useful applications in policy, but might determine which applications are appropriate. It is important to highlight that in attribution studies, the strength of evidence varies substantially between different kinds of slow onset and extreme weather events, and between regions. Policy-makers should not expect the later emergence of conclusive evidence about the influence of climate variability and change on specific incidences of losses and damages; and, in particular, should not expect the strength of evidence to be equal between events, and between countries. Rather than waiting for further confidence in attribution studies, there is potential to start working now to integrate science into policy and practice, to help understand and tackle drivers of losses and damages, informing prevention, recovery, rehabilitation, and transformation

Multi-messenger observations of a binary neutron star merger

On 2017 August 17 a binary neutron star coalescence candidate (later designated GW170817) with merger time 12:41:04 UTC was observed through gravitational waves by the Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo detectors. The Fermi Gamma-ray Burst Monitor independently detected a gamma-ray burst (GRB 170817A) with a time delay of ~1.7 s with respect to the merger time. From the gravitational-wave signal, the source was initially localized to a sky region of 31 deg2 at a luminosity distance of 40+8-8 Mpc and with component masses consistent with neutron stars. The component masses were later measured to be in the range 0.86 to 2.26 Mo. An extensive observing campaign was launched across the electromagnetic spectrum leading to the discovery of a bright optical transient (SSS17a, now with the IAU identification of AT 2017gfo) in NGC 4993 (at ~40 Mpc) less than 11 hours after the merger by the One- Meter, Two Hemisphere (1M2H) team using the 1 m Swope Telescope. The optical transient was independently detected by multiple teams within an hour. Subsequent observations targeted the object and its environment. Early ultraviolet observations revealed a blue transient that faded within 48 hours. Optical and infrared observations showed a redward evolution over ~10 days. Following early non-detections, X-ray and radio emission were discovered at the transient’s position ~9 and ~16 days, respectively, after the merger. Both the X-ray and radio emission likely arise from a physical process that is distinct from the one that generates the UV/optical/near-infrared emission. No ultra-high-energy gamma-rays and no neutrino candidates consistent with the source were found in follow-up searches. These observations support the hypothesis that GW170817 was produced by the merger of two neutron stars in NGC4993 followed by a short gamma-ray burst (GRB 170817A) and a kilonova/macronova powered by the radioactive decay of r-process nuclei synthesized in the ejecta