(Hu)Mankind

Medieval Drama: the summer-stock theater of late Medieval Europe! Once considered merely the poor (and distant!) relation of Shakespearean Theater, Medieval drama has now emerged as a vibrant field of study in its own right. In ENG 312 we explore conflicting theories concerning the origin and development of Medieval drama, examine its social roles, discuss issues of text and performance, and compare the relative merits of “good literature” and “good drama.” This course always culminates with a public performance of an original adaptation of a Medieval Play, translated and staged by the students themselves. This year’s production was an adaptation of Mankind (ca. 1470), a Morality Play. While Everyman is certainly the best-known example of the genre, a number of other, much funnier Morality Plays leavened the harsh, moralistic tone of Judgment with aspects of the so-called “Comedy of Evil.” Mankind, also perhaps the first example of professional theater in England, is a sidesplitting, zany play about death and dying with just such a twist: It’s both profound and playful, and it gives new meaning to the phrase, “died laughing.” What a hoot! Since we learn by doing in this class, our final project was a public production of our own creative and original version of the play entitled (Hu)Mankind 2020, performed at 4:00 PM on Friday, 29 April 2022 on the stage in the Kline Theatre at Gettysburg College. This year’s whacky, off-the-wall theme was memento mori! The recording of this production is split into three videos. The first, roughly 21-minute video begins with the pre-show introduction to the play and ends with Mankind’s threat to beat with her shovel the demons New Style, Nowadays, and Nothing. The second video begins with Mankind’s enactment of her threat to beat with her shovel the demons New Style, Nowadays, and Nothing, and ends with the collection of tithes from the audience for the summoning of the Devil Titivillus. $59.25 and 5.00 Euros raised during this gag were donated to the Gettysburg Community Soup Kitchen. The third, concluding video begins with the summoning of the Devil Titivillus and ends with the cast’s curtain call and presentation of gifts of appreciation to Joey Maguschak, beloved class peer learning associate

Risdiplam in Patients Previously Treated with Other Therapies for Spinal Muscular Atrophy: An Interim Analysis from the JEWELFISH Study

Introduction: Risdiplam is a survival of motor neuron 2 (SMN2) splicing modifier for the treatment of patients with spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). The JEWELFISH study (NCT03032172) was designed to assess the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics (PD) of risdiplam in previously treated pediatric and adult patients with types 1–3 SMA. Here, an analysis was performed after all patients had received at least 1 year of treatment with risdiplam. Methods: Patients with a confirmed diagnosis of 5q-autosomal recessive SMA between the ages of 6 months and 60 years were eligible for enrollment. Patients were previously enrolled in the MOONFISH study (NCT02240355) with splicing modifier RG7800 or treated with olesoxime, nusinersen, or onasemnogene abeparvovec. The primary objectives of the JEWELFISH study were to evaluate the safety and tolerability of risdiplam and investigate the PK after 2 years of treatment. Results: A total of 174 patients enrolled: MOONFISH study (n = 13), olesoxime (n = 71 patients), nusinersen (n = 76), onasemnogene abeparvovec (n = 14). Most patients (78%) had three SMN2 copies. The median age and weight of patients at enrollment was 14.0 years (1–60 years) and 39.1 kg (9.2–108.9 kg), respectively. About 63% of patients aged 2–60 years had a baseline total score of less than 10 on the Hammersmith Functional Motor Scale–Expanded and 83% had scoliosis. The most common adverse event (AE) was upper respiratory tract infection and pyrexia (30 patients each; 17%). Pneumonia (four patients; 2%) was the most frequently reported serious AE (SAE). The rates of AEs and SAEs per 100 patient-years were lower in the second 6-month period compared with the first. An increase in SMN protein was observed in blood after risdiplam treatment and was comparable across all ages and body weight quartiles. Conclusions: The safety and PD of risdiplam in patients who were previously treated were consistent with those of treatment-naïve patients