Synergistic Effect of a Plant-Derived Protein Hydrolysate and Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi on Eggplant Grown in Open Fields: A Two-Year Study

Plant biostimulants, such as plant protein hydrolysates (PHs) and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AM), are natural products capable of increasing the yield and quality of crops and decreasing the ecological impact of plant growing cycles. However, there is little research on the mutual application of different categories of biostimulants (microbial and non-microbial). The current study was conducted to examine the effects of "Trainer" PH application (0 or 3 mL L-1) and AM (R. irregularis) inoculation on the growth, yield, quality and nitrogen indices of "Birgah" F-1 eggplant cultivated for two years (2020 and 2021). Results revealed that the combined application of PH and AM significantly enhanced total and marketable yields, average marketable fruit weight and number of marketable fruits by 23.7%, 36.4%, 19.0% and 11.1% compared to non-treated plants (control), respectively. Moreover, biostimulants increased the soluble solids content (SSC), chlorogenic acid, total anthocyanins, K and Mg in the fruits by 16%, 4.6%, 6.4%, 8.6% and 23.9% compared to control plants, respectively. Interestingly, the mutual application of PH and AM improved fruit quality by reducing the glycoalkaloid concentration (-19.8%) and fruit browning potential (-38%). Furthermore, both biostimulants exerted a synergistic action, enhancing nitrogen use efficiency and nitrogen uptake efficiency by 26.7% and 18.75%, respectively. On the other hand, productive and fruit-quality features were significantly influenced by the year due to remarkable differences in terms of maximum temperature between the first and second cultivation cycles. Overall, our research underlined that PH and AM can positively interact to improve the performance of eggplant cultivated in open fields

Current Acquaintance on Agronomic Biofortification to Modulate the Yield and Functional Value of Vegetable Crops: A Review

Fresh vegetables and fruits have always been the mainstays of good nutrition as providers of fiber, beneficial phytochemicals (such as vitamins and phenolic compounds), and minerals. Today and in the future, biofortification is a promising strategy to increase the concentration of these compounds. Considering the importance of minerals in human health, the enrichment of fresh produce for consumption has been considered through specific agronomic approaches. This review discusses, in detail, the latest findings on vegetable agronomic biofortification, aimed at increasing the concentration of crucial minerals, such as iron (Fe), zinc (Zn), iodine (I), selenium (Se), molybdenum (Mo), and silicon (Si), in edible portions, focusing on the direct and indirect effects of this strategy. Although agronomic biofortification is considered a feasible technique, the approach is complex due to the many interactions between the microelement bioavailability for both plants and consumers. Therefore, the effects of biofortification on human health and the influence of beneficial and antinutritional compounds were discussed in detail to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of this practice

Case Report: A child with NFKB1 haploinsufficiency explaining the linkage between immunodeficiency and short stature

We report the case of a patient with common variable immunodeficiency (CVID) presenting with short stature and treated with recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH). Whole exome sequencing revealed a novel single-nucleotide duplication in the NFKB1 gene (c.904dup, p.Ser302fs), leading to a frameshift and thus causing NFKB1 haploinsufficiency. The variant was considered pathogenic and was later found in the patient’s mother, also affected by CVID. This is the first reported case of a patient with CVID due to NFKB1 mutation presenting with short stature. We analyzed the interconnection between NFKB1 and GH – IGF-1 pathways and we hypothesized a common ground for both CVID and short stature in our patient

Considerations on biologicals for patients with allergic disease in times of the COVID-19 pandemic: An EAACI statement

The outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2-induced coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic re-shaped doctor-patient interaction and challenged capacities of healthcare systems. It created many issues around the optimal and safest way to treat complex patients with severe allergic disease. A significant number of the patients are on treatment with biologicals, and clinicians face the challenge to provide optimal care during the pandemic. Uncertainty of the potential risks for these patients is related to the fact that the exact sequence of immunological events during SARS-CoV-2 is not known. Severe COVID-19 patients may experience a “cytokine storm” and associated organ damage characterized by an exaggerated release of pro-inflammatory type 1 and type 3 cytokines. These inflammatory responses are potentially counteracted by anti-inflammatory cytokines and type 2 responses. This expert-based EAACI statement aims to provide guidance on the application of biologicals targeting type 2 inflammation in patients with allergic disease. Currently, there is very little evidence for an enhanced risk of patients with allergic diseases to develop severe COVID-19. Studies focusing on severe allergic phenotypes are lacking. At present, noninfected patients on biologicals for the treatment of asthma, atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, or chronic spontaneous urticaria should continue their biologicals targeting type 2 inflammation via self-application. In case of an active SARS-CoV-2 infection, biological treatment needs to be stopped until clinical recovery and SARS-CoV-2 negativity is established and treatment with biologicals should be re-initiated. Maintenance of add-on therapy and a constant assessment of disease control, apart from acute management, are demanded

Long-term effectiveness of benralizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma patients treated for 96-weeks: data from the ANANKE study

Background: The efficacy of benralizumab has been broadly demonstrated in severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA), but only few real-life studies evaluated its long-term effects. Here we present novel data from the ANANKE study in which a large cohort of SEA patients was treated for up to 96 weeks. Methods: ANANKE (NCT04272463) is an observational retrospective Italian study investigating the key characteristics of SEA patients (collected during the 12 months prior to benralizumab initiation) and the clinical outcomes during benralizumab treatment (annual exacerbation rate [AER], lung function, asthma control, OCS use, healthcare resource utilization). A post hoc analysis was also conducted in groups of patients based on history of previous biologic therapy (bio-experienced versus naïve patients). Analyses were descriptive only. Results: Before benralizumab initiation, evaluable SEA patients (N = 162, 61.1% females, mean age 56.0 ± 12.7) showed a median blood eosinophil count (BEC) of 600 cells/mm3 (IQR: 430–890). Patients experienced frequent exacerbations (annualized exacerbation rate [AER]: 4.10, severe AER: 0.98), with impaired lung function and poor asthma control (median ACT score: 14) despite 25.3% reported oral corticosteroid (OCS) use. Nasal polyposis was present in 53.1% patients; 47.5% patients were atopic. After 96 weeks since the start of benralizumab, nearly 90% patients were still on treatment; benralizumab dramatically decreased exacerbations (AER: − 94.9%; severe AER: − 96.9%), improved respiratory parameters (median increase in pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume [pre-BD FEV1]: + 400 mL) and asthma control (median ACT score: 23) while eliminating OCS in 60% patients. Importantly, benralizumab effects were either maintained or progressively improved over time, accompanied by a nearly complete depletion of BEC. Benralizumab reduced AER both in naïve (any AER: − 95.9%; severe AER: − 97.5%) and bio-experienced patients (any AER: − 92.4%; severe AER: − 94.0%). Conclusions: Profound and sustained improvements in all asthma outcomes were observed with benralizumab. The correct identification of patients’ eosinophilic-driven asthma phenotype was essential to ensure the achievement of such remarkable results. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04272463

Delphi consensus on the current clinical and therapeutic knowledge on Anderson-Fabry disease

BACKGROUND: Management of Anderson-Fabry disease (AFD) is contentious, particularly regarding enzyme replacement therapy (ERT). We report results of a Delphi consensus panel on AFD management. METHODS: A survey to gauge consensus among AFD experts was distributed online and responses were analysed. Statements on: 1) diagnosis; 2) when starting ERT; 3) management of ERT infusion and adverse reactions; and 4) follow-up/monitoring response to therapy and progression of disease were included. Responses without consensus were discussed with an enlarged panel and modified to reach consensus. RESULTS: 15 experts responded to the survey. After plenary discussion among the enlarged panel, consensus was reached on most statements. Key points were the use of a target organ biopsy to show Gb3 deposits in symptomatic women with negative molecular analysis, the need for ERT in symptomatic women and in all patients with persistent signs and symptoms±organ damage. It was agreed to assess vital signs before ERT administration and use a 0.2μL filter on infusion to reduce the risk of adverse reactions, that serum should be drawn prior to the first infusion for anti-agalsidase antibody analysis to have a baseline value if a subsequent adverse reaction appears, and that pre-medication is required in those with prior infusion reactions. Holter ECG monitoring, cardiac and brain MRI, renal parameters, and abdominal ultrasound were considered important for the assessment of disease progression and response at ERT. CONCLUSIONS: This consensus supplies guidance to healthcare providers on best practice in the management of patients with AFD and indicates a need for more guidanc

The effect of immunomodulators on the immunogenicity of TNF-blocking therapeutic monoclonal antibodies: a review

Therapeutic monoclonal antibodies have revolutionized the treatment of various inflammatory diseases. Immunogenicity against these antibodies has been shown to be clinically important: it is associated with shorter response duration because of diminishing concentrations in the blood and with infusion reactions. Concomitant immunomodulators in the form of methotrexate or azathioprine reduced the immunogenicity of therapeutic antibodies in rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn disease, and juvenile idiopathic arthritis. The occurrence of adverse events does not increase when immunomodulators are added to therapeutic antibodies. The mechanism whereby methotrexate and azathioprine influence immunogenicity remains unclear. Evidence-based consensus on prescribing concomitant immunomodulators is needed

Practice pattern for the use of intravenous iloprost for the treatment of peripheral vasculopathy in systemic sclerosis: A case–control study from the Italian national multicenter “SPRING” (Systemic Sclerosis Progression InvestiGation) Registry

Background: Intravenous iloprost has been widely used for the treatment of systemic sclerosis peripheral vasculopathy. No agreement has been found on the regimen and the dosage of intravenous iloprost in different scleroderma subset conditions. This study aimed to evaluate the modalities of intravenous iloprost administration within a large cohort of systemic sclerosis patients from the SPRING Registry and to identify any associated clinical-demographic, instrumental or therapeutic data.Patients and Methods: Data of systemic sclerosis patients treated with intravenous iloprost for at least 1 year (case group) were retrospectively analyzed, including different timing and duration of intravenous iloprost session, and compared with those of untreated patients (control group).Results: Out of 1895 analyzed patients, 937 (49%) received intravenous iloprost treatment, while 958 (51%) were assigned to the control group. Among cases, about 70% were treated every 4 weeks, 24% with an interval of more than 4 weeks, and only 6% of less than 4 weeks. Most patients receiving the treatment every 4 weeks, or less, underwent infusion cycle for 1 day only, while if it was scheduled with an interval of more than 4 weeks, a total number of 5 consecutive days of infusions was the preferred regimen. The comparison between the two groups revealed that patients treated with intravenous iloprost had a higher frequency of DUs (p < 0.001), pitting scars (p < 0.001), diffuse cutaneous involvement (p < 0.001), interstitial lung disease (p < 0.002), as well as higher rates of anti-topoisomerase I, "late" scleroderma pattern at nailfold videocapillaroscopy. These findings were confirmed by multivariate analysis.Conclusion: Our data provide a picture on the Italian use of intravenous iloprost among systemic sclerosis patients and showed that it was usually employed in patients with a more aggressive spectrum of the disease. The disparity of intravenous iloprost treatment strategies in the different centers suggests the need of a rational therapeutical approach based on the clinical characteristics of different patients' subsets