Guidance on Noncorticosteroid Systemic Immunomodulatory Therapy in Noninfectious Uveitis: Fundamentals Of Care for UveitiS (FOCUS) Initiative

Topic: An international, expert-led consensus initiative to develop systematic, evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of noninfectious uveitis in the era of biologics. Clinical Relevance: The availability of biologic agents for the treatment of human eye disease has altered practice patterns for the management of noninfectious uveitis. Current guidelines are insufficient to assure optimal use of noncorticosteroid systemic immunomodulatory agents. Methods: An international expert steering committee comprising 9 uveitis specialists (including both ophthalmologists and rheumatologists) identified clinical questions and, together with 6 bibliographic fellows trained in uveitis, conducted a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses protocol systematic review of the literature (English language studies from January 1996 through June 2016; Medline [OVID], the Central Cochrane library, EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS, BIOSIS, and Web of Science). Publications included randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective studies with sufficient follow-up, case series with 15 cases or more, peer-reviewed articles, and hand-searched conference abstracts from key conferences. The proposed statements were circulated among 130 international uveitis experts for review. A total of 44 globally representative group members met in late 2016 to refine these guidelines using a modified Delphi technique and assigned Oxford levels of evidence. Results: In total, 10 questions were addressed resulting in 21 evidence-based guidance statements covering the following topics: when to start noncorticosteroid immunomodulatory therapy, including both biologic and nonbiologic agents; what data to collect before treatment; when to modify or withdraw treatment; how to select agents based on individual efficacy and safety profiles; and evidence in specific uveitic conditions. Shared decision-making, communication among providers and safety monitoring also were addressed as part of the recommendations. Pharmacoeconomic considerations were not addressed. Conclusions: Consensus guidelines were developed based on published literature, expert opinion, and practical experience to bridge the gap between clinical needs and medical evidence to support the treatment of patients with noninfectious uveitis with noncorticosteroid immunomodulatory agents

Serum haptoglobin levels in ocular Behcet disease and acute phase proteins in the course of Behcet disease

WOS: 000263246000020PubMed: 18850559PURPOSE. Changes in concentrations of acute phase proteins in the serum of patients might be significant in the pathogenesis of Behcet disease. This report investigates the association between ocular disease activity and serum haptoglobin levels in patients with Behcet disease, and summarizes the current understanding of the correlation between acute phase proteins and Behcet disease based on both personal studies and data from the literature. METHODS. Thirty patients with Behcet disease with ocular involvement and 15 healthy subjects were included in the study. Of the 30 patients, 14 had acute uveitis and 16 had inactive ocular involvement at the time of enrollment. RESULTS. There was a significant difference in haptoglobin levels between the patients with active ocular disease and controls (p=0.0005). There was also a significant difference in haptoglobin levels between the patients with inactive ocular disease and control subjects (p<0.0001). However, no significant difference was observed among patients with active versus inactive uveitis with regard to serum haptoglobin levels. CONCLUSIONS. Higher serum haptoglobin levels in patients with Behcet disease compared to control subjects were obtained. However, elevated serum haptoglobin levels do not seem to be a risk factor for uveitis activity. Behcet disease is generally diagnosed by physical examinations and no laboratory marker has been widely accepted for follow-up of disease activity. (Eur J Ophthalmol 2008; 18: 787-91

Multiple independent introductions of Plasmodium falciparum in South America

The origin of Plasmodium falciparum in South America is controversial. Some studies suggest a recent introduction during the European colonizations and the transatlantic slave trade. Other evidence-archeological and genetic-suggests a much older origin. We collected and analyzed P. falciparum isolates from different regions of the world, encompassing the distribution range of the parasite, including populations from sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, and South America. Analyses of microsatellite and SNP polymorphisms show that the populations of P. falciparum in South America are subdivided in two main genetic clusters (northern and southern). Phylogenetic analyses, as well as Approximate Bayesian Computation methods suggest independent introductions of the two clusters from African sources. Our estimates of divergence time between the South American populations and their likely sources favor a likely introduction from Africa during the transatlantic slave trade