Macrophage Activation Syndrome as Onset of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Case Report and a Review of the Literature

Macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) is a potentially fatal condition. It is a rare complication of several autoimmune disorders, including systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (sJIA). The incidence of MAS associated with SLE is about 0.9–4.6% [1]. MAS is a multifarious disease, presenting with several signs and symptoms, including high fever, hepatomegaly, splenomegaly, hemorrhagic manifestations (e.g., purpura), and dysfunction of the central nervous system, like lethargy. Furthermore, MAS is characterized by several alterations in laboratory tests, including pancytopenia, hypofibrinogenemia, hypertriglyceridemia, and hyperferritinemia. MAS is classified among the group of hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH), which includes familial HLH and secondary HLH. Secondary HLH is triggered by several causes, including infection, drugs, malignancy, and rheumatic disorder [2]. We report a rare case of MAS that occurred as first manifestation of SLE treated with high dose intravenous methylprednisolone and oral cyclosporine

ANMCO/ELAS/SIBioC Consensus Document: Biomarkers in heart failure

Biomarkers have dramatically impacted the way heart failure (HF) patients are evaluated and managed. A biomarker is a characteristic that is objectively measured and evaluated as an indicator of normal biological or pathogenic processes, or pharmacological responses to a therapeutic intervention. Natriuretic peptides [B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal proBNP] are the gold standard biomarkers in determining the diagnosis and prognosis of HF, and a natriuretic peptide-guided HF management looks promising. In the last few years, an array of additional biomarkers has emerged, each reflecting different pathophysiological processes in the development and progression of HF: myocardial insult, inflammation, fibrosis, and remodelling, but their role in the clinical care of the patient is still partially defined and more studies are needed before to be well validated. Moreover, several new biomarkers have the potential to identify patients with early renal dysfunction and appear to have promise to help the management cardio-renal syndrome. With different biomarkers reflecting HF presence, the various pathways involved in its progression, as well as identifying unique treatment options for HF management, a closer cardiologist-laboratory link, with a multi-biomarker approach to the HF patient, is not far ahead, allowing the unique opportunity for specifically tailoring care to the individual pathological phenotype

State of the art of immunoassay methods for B-type natriuretic peptides: An update

The aim of this review article is to give an update on the state of the art of the immunoassay methods for the measurement of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and its related peptides. Using chromatographic procedures, several studies reported an increasing number of circulating peptides related to BNP in human plasma of patients with heart failure. These peptides may have reduced or even no biological activity. Furthermore, other studies have suggested that, using immunoassays that are considered specific for BNP, the precursor of the peptide hormone, proBNP, constitutes a major portion of the peptide measured in plasma of patients with heart failure. Because BNP immunoassay methods show large (up to 50%) systematic differences in values, the use of identical decision values for all immunoassay methods, as suggested by the most recent international guidelines, seems unreasonable. Since proBNP significantly cross-reacts with all commercial immunoassay methods considered specific for BNP, manufacturers should test and clearly declare the degree of cross-reactivity of glycosylated and non-glycosylated proBNP in their BNP immunoassay methods. Clinicians should take into account that there are large systematic differences between methods when they compare results from different laboratories that use different BNP immunoassays. On the other hand, clinical laboratories should take part in external quality assessment (EQA) programs to evaluate the bias of their method in comparison to other BNP methods. Finally, the authors believe that the development of more specific methods for the active peptide, BNP1–32, should reduce the systematic differences between methods and result in better harmonization of results

31st Annual Meeting and Associated Programs of the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC 2016) : part two

Background The immunological escape of tumors represents one of the main ob- stacles to the treatment of malignancies. The blockade of PD-1 or CTLA-4 receptors represented a milestone in the history of immunotherapy. However, immune checkpoint inhibitors seem to be effective in specific cohorts of patients. It has been proposed that their efficacy relies on the presence of an immunological response. Thus, we hypothesized that disruption of the PD-L1/PD-1 axis would synergize with our oncolytic vaccine platform PeptiCRAd. Methods We used murine B16OVA in vivo tumor models and flow cytometry analysis to investigate the immunological background. Results First, we found that high-burden B16OVA tumors were refractory to combination immunotherapy. However, with a more aggressive schedule, tumors with a lower burden were more susceptible to the combination of PeptiCRAd and PD-L1 blockade. The therapy signifi- cantly increased the median survival of mice (Fig. 7). Interestingly, the reduced growth of contralaterally injected B16F10 cells sug- gested the presence of a long lasting immunological memory also against non-targeted antigens. Concerning the functional state of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), we found that all the immune therapies would enhance the percentage of activated (PD-1pos TIM- 3neg) T lymphocytes and reduce the amount of exhausted (PD-1pos TIM-3pos) cells compared to placebo. As expected, we found that PeptiCRAd monotherapy could increase the number of antigen spe- cific CD8+ T cells compared to other treatments. However, only the combination with PD-L1 blockade could significantly increase the ra- tio between activated and exhausted pentamer positive cells (p= 0.0058), suggesting that by disrupting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis we could decrease the amount of dysfunctional antigen specific T cells. We ob- served that the anatomical location deeply influenced the state of CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes. In fact, TIM-3 expression was in- creased by 2 fold on TILs compared to splenic and lymphoid T cells. In the CD8+ compartment, the expression of PD-1 on the surface seemed to be restricted to the tumor micro-environment, while CD4 + T cells had a high expression of PD-1 also in lymphoid organs. Interestingly, we found that the levels of PD-1 were significantly higher on CD8+ T cells than on CD4+ T cells into the tumor micro- environment (p < 0.0001). Conclusions In conclusion, we demonstrated that the efficacy of immune check- point inhibitors might be strongly enhanced by their combination with cancer vaccines. PeptiCRAd was able to increase the number of antigen-specific T cells and PD-L1 blockade prevented their exhaus- tion, resulting in long-lasting immunological memory and increased median survival

Macrophage Activation Syndrome as Onset of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Case Report and a Review of the Literature

Macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) is a potentially fatal condition. It belongs to the hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis group of diseases. In adults, MAS is rarely associated with systemic lupus erythematosus, but it also arises as complication of several systemic autoimmune disorders, like ankylosing spondylitis, rheumatoid arthritis, and adult-onset Still’s disease. Several treatment options for MAS have been reported in the literature, including a therapeutic regimen of etoposide, dexamethasone, and cyclosporine. Here we report a case of 42-year-old woman in whom MAS occurred as onset of systemic lupus erythematosus

[ANMCO/ELAS/SIBioC Consensus document: Recommendations for the use of cardiac biomarkers in heart failure patients]

Biomarkers have dramatically impacted the way heart failure (HF) patients are evaluated and managed. A biomarker is a characteristic that is objectively measured and evaluated as an indicator of normal biological or pathogenic processes, or pharmacological responses to a therapeutic intervention. Natriuretic peptides (B-type natriuretic peptide [BNP] and N-terminal proBNP) are the gold standard biomarkers in determining the diagnosis and prognosis of HF, and a natriuretic peptide-guided HF management looks promising. In the last few years, an array of additional biomarkers has emerged, each reflecting different pathophysiological processes in the development and progression of HF: myocardial insult, inflammation, fibrosis and remodeling, but their role in the clinical care of the patient is still partially defined and more studies are needed before to be well validated. Moreover, several new biomarkers have the potential to identify patients with early renal dysfunction and appear to have promise to help the management cardio-renal syndrome.With different biomarkers reflecting HF presence, the various pathways involved in its progression, as well as identifying unique treatment options for HF management, a closer cardiologist-laboratory link, with a multi-biomarker approach to the HF patient, is not far ahead, allowing the unique opportunity for specifically tailoring care to the individual pathological phenotype

Mortality and risk factors of vaccinated and unvaccinated COVID-19 frail patients treated with anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies. A real-world study

Background: There is a scarcity of data on outcomes and predictors of therapeutic failure of mAbs in frail COVID-19 patients. Methods: Prospective study including consecutive COVID-19 outpatients referred by primary care physicians for mAbs treatment. Outcomes evaluated were 60-day mortality, time to SARS-CoV-2 clearance, need for hospitalization, and O2-therapy. Results: Among 1026 COVID-19 patients enrolled, 60.2% received casirivamab/imdevimab and 39.8% sotrivimab. Median age was 63 years, 52.4% were males and median time from positive nasopharyngeal swab to mAbs administration was 3 days [IQR, 2-5]. 78.1% were vaccinated. Overall, 60-day mortality was 2.14%. No differences in outcomes were observed between the two mAbs used. No difference was observed in mortality between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients (p=0.925), although lower rate of hospitalization (p&lt;0.005), less need for O2-therapy (p&lt;0.0001) and reduced nasopharyngeal swab negativity time (p&lt;0.0001) were observed in vaccinated. Early administration of mAbs was associated with lower mortality (p&lt;0.007), while corticosteroid use worsened prognosis (p&lt;0.004). Independent predictors associated with higher mortality were older age (p&lt;0.0001), presence of active haematological malignancies (p&lt;0.0001), renal failure (p&lt;0.041) and need for O2-therapy (p&lt;0.001). Conclusion: This study shows similar effectiveness among mAbs used regardless of vaccination status and identifies COVID-19 patients in whom mAbs have poor activity