Relevance of histamine and tryptase concentrations in nasal secretions after nasal challenges with phosphate buffered saline and allergen

In this prospective study, a quantitative determination of histamine and tryptase in nasal secretions after nasal phosphate buffered saline (PBS) and allergen challenge was performed in 18 atopic patients who were compared with ten non-allergic healthy volunteers. The aim of the study was to determine the normal and pathological concentrations of these important mediators in nasal secretions. The second objective was to test the relevance of these two mast cell secreted mediators after nasal challenge. Results showed that the concentrations of tryptase in almost all samples were under the minimal detection limit (< 0.5 μU/g) and only a sigrtificant increase of tryptase (median, 28 μU/g) occurred immediately after nasal allergen challenge in the patient group. Histamine concentration significantly increased after every nasal PBS challenge (median, 69 ng/g after first PBS challenge and 165 ng/g after second PBS challenge) in the control group, as well as in the patient group after both PBS (median, 69 ng/g) and allergen (median, 214 ng/g) challenge. On the other hand, a rapid onset of sneezing and increase in nasal airway resistance was experienced only in the patient group after nasal allergen challenge, but did not occur after PBS challenge even though the histamine concentrations significantly increased in both groups. This study suggests that tryptase is a more preferable marker than histamine in quantitative monitoring of mast cell activation especially during the early phase nasal allergic reaction

Changes in the central component of the hypothalamus-pituitary-thyroid axis in a rabbit model of prolonged critical illness

Introduction: Prolonged critically ill patients reveal low circulating thyroid hormone levels without a rise in thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH). This condition is labeled "low 3,5,3'-tri-iodothyronine (T3) syndrome" or "nonthyroidal illness syndrome (NTI)" or "euthyroid sick syndrome". Despite the low circulating and peripheral tissue thyroid hormone levels, thyrotropin releasing hormone (TRH) expression in the hypothalamus is reduced and it remains unclear which mechanism is responsible. We set out to study whether increased hypothalamic T3availability could reflect local thyrotoxicosis and explain feedback inhibition-induced suppression of the TRH gene in the context of the low T3syndrome in prolonged critical illness.Methods: Healthy rabbits were compared with prolonged critically ill, parenterally fed animals. We visualized TRH mRNA in the hypothalamus by in situ-hybridization and measured mRNA levels for the type II iodothyronine diodinase (D2), the thyroid hormone transporters monocarboxylate transporter (MCT) 8, MCT10 and organic anion co-transporting polypeptide 1C1 (OATP1C1) and the thyroid hormone receptors α (TRα) and β (TRβ) in the hypothalamus. We also measured the activity of the D2 and type III iodothyronine deiodinase (D3) enzymes.Results: In the hypothalamus of prolonged critically ill rabbits with low circulating T3 and TSH, we observed decreased TRH mRNA, increased D2 mRNA and increased MCT10 and OATP1C1 mRNA while MCT8 gene expression was unaltered as compared with healthy controls. This coincided with low hypothalamic thyroxine (T4) and low-normal T3concentrations, without a change at the thyroid hormone receptor level.Conclusions: Although expression of D2 and of the thyroid hormone transporters MCT10 and OATP1C1 were increased in the hypothalamus of prolonged critical ill animals, hypothalamic T4and T3content or thyroid hormone receptor expression were not elevated. Hence, decreased TRH gene expression, and hereby low TSH and T3 during prolonged critical illness, is not exclusively brought about by hypothalamic thyrotoxicosis, and infer other TRH suppressing factors to play a role

A guide to immunotherapy for COVID-19

Immune dysregulation is an important component of the pathophysiology of COVID-19. A large body of literature has reported the effect of immune-based therapies in patients with COVID-19, with some remarkable successes such as the use of steroids or anti-cytokine therapies. However, challenges in clinical decision-making arise from the complexity of the disease phenotypes and patient heterogeneity, as well as the variable quality of evidence from immunotherapy studies. This Review aims to support clinical decision-making by providing an overview of the evidence generated by major clinical trials of host-directed therapy. We discuss patient stratification and propose an algorithm to guide the use of immunotherapy strategies in the clinic. This will not only help guide treatment decisions, but may also help to design future trials that investigate immunotherapy in other severe infections

Dysregulated innate and adaptive immune responses discriminate disease severity in COVID-19

The clinical spectrum of COVID-19 varies and the differences in host response characterizing this variation have not been fully elucidated. COVID-19 disease severity correlates with an excessive pro-inflammatory immune response and profound lymphopenia. Inflammatory responses according to disease severity were explored by plasma cytokine measurements and proteomics analysis in 147 COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, peripheral blood mononuclear cell cytokine production assays and whole blood flow cytometry were performed. Results confirm a hyperinflammatory innate immune state, while highlighting hepatocyte growth factor and stem cell factor as potential biomarkers for disease severity. Clustering analysis reveals no specific inflammatory endotypes in COVID-19 patients. Functional assays reveal abrogated adaptive cytokine production (interferon-gamma, interleukin-17 and interleukin-22) and prominent T cell exhaustion in critically ill patients, whereas innate immune responses were intact or hyperresponsive. Collectively, this extensive analysis provides a comprehensive insight into the pathobiology of severe to critical COVID-19 and highlight potential biomarkers of disease severity

Effect of Convalescent Plasma on Organ Support-Free Days in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: The evidence for benefit of convalescent plasma for critically ill patients with COVID-19 is inconclusive. Objective: To determine whether convalescent plasma would improve outcomes for critically ill adults with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: The ongoing Randomized, Embedded, Multifactorial, Adaptive Platform Trial for Community-Acquired Pneumonia (REMAP-CAP) enrolled and randomized 4763 adults with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 between March 9, 2020, and January 18, 2021, within at least 1 domain; 2011 critically ill adults were randomized to open-label interventions in the immunoglobulin domain at 129 sites in 4 countries. Follow-up ended on April 19, 2021. Interventions: The immunoglobulin domain randomized participants to receive 2 units of high-titer, ABO-compatible convalescent plasma (total volume of 550 mL ± 150 mL) within 48 hours of randomization (n = 1084) or no convalescent plasma (n = 916). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary ordinal end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of intensive care unit-based organ support) up to day 21 (range, -1 to 21 days; patients who died were assigned -1 day). The primary analysis was an adjusted bayesian cumulative logistic model. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio (OR) greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority &gt;99%). Futility was defined as the posterior probability of an OR less than 1.2 (threshold for trial conclusion of futility &gt;95%). An OR greater than 1 represented improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both. The prespecified secondary outcomes included in-hospital survival; 28-day survival; 90-day survival; respiratory support-free days; cardiovascular support-free days; progression to invasive mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal mechanical oxygenation, or death; intensive care unit length of stay; hospital length of stay; World Health Organization ordinal scale score at day 14; venous thromboembolic events at 90 days; and serious adverse events. Results: Among the 2011 participants who were randomized (median age, 61 [IQR, 52 to 70] years and 645/1998 [32.3%] women), 1990 (99%) completed the trial. The convalescent plasma intervention was stopped after the prespecified criterion for futility was met. The median number of organ support-free days was 0 (IQR, -1 to 16) in the convalescent plasma group and 3 (IQR, -1 to 16) in the no convalescent plasma group. The in-hospital mortality rate was 37.3% (401/1075) for the convalescent plasma group and 38.4% (347/904) for the no convalescent plasma group and the median number of days alive and free of organ support was 14 (IQR, 3 to 18) and 14 (IQR, 7 to 18), respectively. The median-adjusted OR was 0.97 (95% credible interval, 0.83 to 1.15) and the posterior probability of futility (O

Interleukin-6 Receptor Antagonists in Critically Ill Patients with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of interleukin-6 receptor antagonists in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is unclear. METHODS: We evaluated tocilizumab and sarilumab in an ongoing international, multifactorial, adaptive platform trial. Adult patients with Covid-19, within 24 hours after starting organ support in the intensive care unit (ICU), were randomly assigned to receive tocilizumab (8 mg per kilogram of body weight), sarilumab (400 mg), or standard care (control). The primary outcome was respiratory and cardiovascular organ support-free days, on an ordinal scale combining in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and days free of organ support to day 21. The trial uses a Bayesian statistical model with predefined criteria for superiority, efficacy, equivalence, or futility. An odds ratio greater than 1 represented improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both. RESULTS: Both tocilizumab and sarilumab met the predefined criteria for efficacy. At that time, 353 patients had been assigned to tocilizumab, 48 to sarilumab, and 402 to control. The median number of organ support-free days was 10 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) in the tocilizumab group, 11 (interquartile range, 0 to 16) in the sarilumab group, and 0 (interquartile range, -1 to 15) in the control group. The median adjusted cumulative odds ratios were 1.64 (95% credible interval, 1.25 to 2.14) for tocilizumab and 1.76 (95% credible interval, 1.17 to 2.91) for sarilumab as compared with control, yielding posterior probabilities of superiority to control of more than 99.9% and of 99.5%, respectively. An analysis of 90-day survival showed improved survival in the pooled interleukin-6 receptor antagonist groups, yielding a hazard ratio for the comparison with the control group of 1.61 (95% credible interval, 1.25 to 2.08) and a posterior probability of superiority of more than 99.9%. All secondary analyses supported efficacy of these interleukin-6 receptor antagonists. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients with Covid-19 receiving organ support in ICUs, treatment with the interleukin-6 receptor antagonists tocilizumab and sarilumab improved outcomes, including survival. (REMAP-CAP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02735707.)