Immunoadsorption and plasma exchange : efficient treatment options for neurological autoimmune diseases

Background Therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) and immunoadsorption (IA) are first or second line treatment options in patients with neurological autoimmune diseases, including multiple sclerosis, neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders (NMSOD), chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, acute inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (Guillain-Barré syndrome), and autoimmune encephalitis. Methods In this prospective randomized controlled monocentric study, we assessed safety and efficacy of therapy with IA or TPE in patients with neurological autoimmune diseases. Treatment response was assessed using various neurological scores as well by measuring immunoglobulin and cytokine concentrations. Clinical outcome was evaluated by application of specific scores for the underlying diseases. Results A total of 32 patients were analyzed. Among these, 19 patients were treated with TPE and 13 patients with IA. IA and TPE therapy showed a comparable significant treatment response. In patients with MS and NMOSD, mean EDSS before and after treatment showed a significant reduction after treatment with IA. We observed a significant reduction of the pro-inflammatory cytokines IL-12, lL-17, IL-6, INF-γ, and tumor necrosis factor alpha during IA treatment, whereas this reduction was not seen in patients treated with TPE. Conclusions In summary, both IA and TPE were effective and safe procedures for treating neurological autoimmune diseases. However, there was a trend towards longer therapy response in patients treated with IA compared to TPE, possibly related to a reduction in plasma levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines seen only in the IA-treated group

Six-Month Follow-Up after Vaccination with BNT162b2: SARS-CoV-2 Antigen-Specific Cellular and Humoral Immune Responses in Hemodialysis Patients and Kidney Transplant Recipients

Hemodialysis patients (HDP) and kidney transplant recipients (KTR) have a high risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 with poor clinical outcomes. Because of this, vaccination of these groups of patients against SARS-CoV-2 is particularly important. However, immune responses may be impaired in immunosuppressed and chronically ill patients. Here, our aim was to compare the efficacy of an mRNA-based vaccine in HDP, KTR, and healthy subjects. Design: In this prospective observational cohort study, the humoral and cellular response of prevalent 192 HDP, 50 KTR, and 28 healthy controls (HC) was assessed 1, 2, and 6 months after the first immunization with the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. Results: After 6 months, 97.5% of HDP, 37.9% of KTR, and 100% of HC had an antibody response. Median antibody levels were 1539.7 (±3355.8), 178.5 (±369.5), and 2657.8 (±2965.8) AU/mL in HDP, KTR, and HC, respectively (p ≤ 0.05). A SARS-CoV-2 antigen-specific cell response to vaccination was found in 68.8% of HDP, 64.5% of KTR, and 90% of HC. Conclusion: The humoral response rates to mRNA-based vaccination of HDPs are comparable to HCs, but antibody titers are lower. Furthermore, HDPs have weaker T-cell response to vaccination than HCs. KTRs have very low humoral and antigen-specific cellular response rates and antibody titers, which requires other vaccination strategies in addition to booster vaccination