Safety and immunogenicity of influenza A(H3N2) component vaccine in juvenile systemic lupus erythematosus

Abstract Introduction Seasonal influenza A (H3N2) virus is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in the last 50 years in population that is greater than the impact of H1N1. Data assessing immunogenicity and safety of this virus component in juvenile systemic lupus erythematosus (JSLE) is lacking in the literature. Objective To evaluate short-term immunogenicity and safety of influenza A/Singapore (H3N2) vaccine in JSLE. Methods 24 consecutive JSLE patients and 29 healthy controls (HC) were vaccinated with influenza A/Singapore/INFIMH-16-0019/2016(H3N2)-like virus. Influenza A (H3N2) seroprotection (SP), seroconversion (SC), geometric mean titers (GMT), factor increase in GMT (FI-GMT) titers were assessed before and 4 weeks post-vaccination. Disease activity, therapies and adverse events (AE) were also evaluated. Results JSLE patients and controls were comparable in current age [14.5 (10.1–18.3) vs. 14 (9–18.4) years, p = 0.448] and female sex [21 (87.5%) vs. 19 (65.5%), p = 0.108]. Before vaccination, JSLE and HC had comparable SP rates [22 (91.7%) vs. 25 (86.2%), p = 0.678] and GMT titers [102.3 (95% CI 75.0–139.4) vs. 109.6 (95% CI 68.2–176.2), p = 0.231]. At D30, JSLE and HC had similar immune response, since no differences were observed in SP [24 (100%) vs. 28 (96.6%), p = 1.000)], SC [4 (16.7%) vs. 9 (31.0%), p = 0.338), GMT [162.3 (132.9–198.3) vs. 208.1 (150.5–287.8), p = 0.143] and factor increase in GMT [1.6 (1.2–2.1) vs. 1.9 (1.4–2.5), p = 0.574]. SLEDAI-2K scores [2 (0–17) vs. 2 (0–17), p = 0.765] and therapies remained stable throughout the study. Further analysis of possible factors influencing vaccine immune response among JSLE patients demonstrated similar GMT between patients with SLEDAI  0.05). Conclusion This is the first study that identified adequate immune protection against H3N2-influenza strain with additional vaccine-induced increment of immune response and an adequate safety profile in JSLE. ( www.clinicaltrials.gov , NCT03540823)

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field