10 research outputs found

    What Works When Treating Granulomatous Disease in Genetically Undefined CVID? A Systematic Review

    Get PDF
    Background: Granulomatous disease is reported in at least 8–20% of patients with common variable immunodeficiency (CVID). Granulomatous disease mainly affects the lungs, and is associated with significantly higher morbidity and mortality. In half of patients with granulomatous disease, extrapulmonary manifestations are found, affecting e.g. skin, liver, and lymph nodes. In literature various therapies have been reported, with varying effects on remission of granulomas and related clinical symptoms. However, consensus recommendations for optimal management of extrapulmonary granulomatous disease are lacking. Objective: To present a literature overview of the efficacy of currently described therapies for extrapulmonary granulomatous disease in CVID (CVID+EGD), compared to known treatment regimens for pulmonary granulomatous disease in CVID (CVID+PGD). Methods: The following databases were searched: Embase, Medline (Ovid), Web-of-Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar. Inclusion criteria were 1) CVID patients with granulomatous disease, 2) treatment for granulomatous disease reported, and 3) outcome of treatment reported. Patient characteristics, localization of granuloma, treatment, and association with remission of granulomatous disease were extracted from articles. Results: We identified 64 articles presenting 95 CVID patients with granulomatous disease, wherein 117 different treatment courses were described. Steroid monotherapy was most frequently described in CVID+EGD (21 out of 53 treatment courses) and resulted in remission in 85.7% of cases. In CVID+PGD steroid monotherapy was described in 15 out of 64 treatment courses, and was associated with remission in 66.7% of cases. Infliximab was reported in CVID+EGD in six out of 53 treatment courses and was mostly used in granulomatous disease affecting the skin (four out of six cases). All patients (n = 9) treated with anti-TNF-α therapies (infliximab and etanercept) showed remission of extrapulmonary granulomatous disease. Rituximab with or without azathioprine was rarely used for CVID+EGD, but frequently used in CVID+PGD where it was associated with remission of granulomatous disease in 94.4% (17 of 18 treatment courses). Conclusion: Although the number of CVID+EGD patients was limited, data indicate that steroid monotherapy often results in remission, and that anti-TNF-α treatment is effective for granulomatous disease affecting the skin. Also, rituximab with or without azathioprine was mainly described in CVID+PGD, and only in few cases of CVID+EGD

    Single-cell rna sequencing reveals heterogeneity and functional diversity of lymphatic endothelial cells

    Get PDF
    Lymphatic endothelial cells (LECs) line the lymphatic vasculature and play a central role in the immune response. LECs have abilities to regulate immune transport, to promote immune cell survival, and to cross present antigens to dendritic cells. Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA) technology has accelerated new discoveries in the field of lymphatic vascular biology. This review will summarize these new findings in regard to embryonic development, LEC heterogeneity with associated functional diversity, and interactions with other cells. Depending on the organ, location in the lymphatic vascular tree, and micro-environmental conditions, LECs feature unique properties and tasks. Furthermore, adjacent stromal cells need the support of LECs for fulfilling their tasks in the immune response, such as immune cell transport and antigen presentation. Although aberrant lymphatic vasculature has been observed in a number of chronic inflammatory diseases, the knowledge on LEC heterogeneity and functional diversity in these diseases is limited. Combining scRNA sequencing data with imaging and more in-depth functional experiments will advance our knowledge of LECs in health and disease. Building the case, the LEC could be put forward as a new therapeutic target in chronic inflammatory diseases, counterweighting the current immune-cell focused therapies

    Treatment Strategies for GLILD in Common Variable Immunodeficiency: A Systematic Review

    Get PDF
    Introduction Besides recurrent infections, a proportion of patients with Common Variable Immunodeficiency Disorders (CVID) may suffer from immune dysregulation such as granulomatous-lymphocytic interstitial lung disease (GLILD). The optimal treatment of this complication is currently unknown. Experienced-based expert opinions have been produced, but a systematic review of published treatment studies is lacking. Goals To summarize and synthesize the published literature on the efficacy of treatments for GLILD in CVID. Methods We performed a systematic review using the PRISMA guidelines. Papers describing treatment and outcomes in CVID patients with radiographic and/or histologic evidence of GLILD were included. Treatment regimens and outcomes of treatment were summarized. Results 6124 papers were identified and 42, reporting information about 233 patients in total, were included for review. These papers described case series or small, uncontrolled studies of monotherapy with glucocorticoids or other immunosuppressants, rituximab monotherapy or rituximab plus azathioprine, abatacept, or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Treatment response rates varied widely. Cross-study comparisons were complicated because different treatment regimens, follow-up periods, and outcome measures were used. There was a trend towards more frequent GLILD relapses in patients treated with corticosteroid monotherapy when compared to rituximab-containing treatment regimens based on qualitative endpoints. HSCT is a promising alternative to pharmacological treatment of GLILD, because it has the potential to not only contain symptoms, but also to resolve the underlying pathology. However, mortality, especially among immunocompromised patients, is high. Conclusions We could not draw definitive conclusions regarding optimal pharmacological treatment for GLILD in CVID from the current literature since quantitative, well-controlled evidence was lacking. While HSCT might be considered a treatment option for GLILD in CVID, the risks related to the procedure are high. Our findings highlight the need for further research with uniform, objective and quantifiable endpoints. This should include international registries with standardized data collection including regular pulmonary function tests (with carbon monoxide-diffusion), uniform high-resolution chest CT radiographic scoring, and uniform treatment regimens, to facilitate comparison of treatment outcomes and ultimately randomized clinical trials

    Treatment Strategies for GLILD in Common Variable Immunodeficiency: A Systematic Review

    No full text
    Introduction: Besides recurrent infections, a proportion of patients with Common Variable Immunodeficiency Disorders (CVID) may suffer from immune dysregulation such as granulomatous-lymphocytic interstitial lung disease (GLILD). The optimal treatment of this complication is currently unknown. Experienced-based expert opinions have been produced, but a systematic review of published treatment studies is lacking. Goals: To summarize and synthesize the published literature on the efficacy of treatments for GLILD in CVID. Methods: We performed a systematic review using the PRISMA guidelines. Papers describing treatment and outcomes in CVID patients with radiographic and/or histologic evidence of GLILD were included. Treatment regimens and outcomes of treatment were summarized. Results: 6124 papers were identified and 42, reporting information about 233 patients in total, were included for review. These papers described case series or small, uncontrolled studies of monotherapy with glucocorticoids or other immunosuppressants, rituximab monotherapy or rituximab plus azathioprine, abatacept, or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Treatment response rates varied widely. Cross-study comparisons were complicated because different treatment regimens, follow-up periods, and outcome measures were used. There was a trend towards more frequent GLILD relapses in patients treated with corticosteroid monotherapy when compared to rituximab-containing treatment regimens based on qualitative endpoints. HSCT is a promising alternative to pharmacological treatment of GLILD, because it has the potential to not only contain symptoms, but also to resolve the underlying pathology. However, mortality, especially among immunocompromised patients, is high. Conclusions: We could not draw definitive conclusions regarding optimal pharmacological treatment for GLILD in CVID from the current literature since quantitative, well-controlled evidence was lacking. While HSCT might be considered a treatment option for GLILD in CVID, the risks related to the procedure are high. Our findings highlight the need for further research with uniform, objective and quantifiable endpoints. This should include international registries with standardized data collection including regular pulmonary function tests (with carbon monoxide-diffusion), uniform high-resolution chest CT radiographic scoring, and uniform treatment regimens, to facilitate comparison of treatment outcomes and ultimately randomized clinical trials

    Dutch Oncology COVID-19 consortium: Outcome of COVID-19 in patients with cancer in a nationwide cohort study

    Get PDF
    Aim of the study: Patients with cancer might have an increased risk for severe outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To identify risk factors associated with a worse outcome of COVID-19, a nationwide registry was developed for patients with cancer and COVID-19. Methods: This observational cohort study has been designed as a quality of care registry and is executed by the Dutch Oncology COVID-19 Consortium (DOCC), a nationwide collaboration of oncology physicians in the Netherlands. A questionnaire has been developed to collect pseudonymised patient data on patients' characteristics, cancer diagnosis and treatment. All patients with COVID-19 and a cancer diagnosis or treatment in the past 5 years are eligible. Results: Between March 27th and May 4th, 442 patients were registered. For this first analysis, 351 patients were included of whom 114 patients died. In multivariable analyses, age ≥65 years (p < 0.001), male gender (p = 0.035), prior or other malignancy (p = 0.045) and active diagnosis of haematological malignancy (p = 0.046) or lung cancer (p = 0.003) were independent risk factors for a fatal outcome of COVID-19. In a subgroup analysis of patients with active malignancy, the risk for a fatal outcome was mainly determined by tumour type (haematological malignancy or lung cancer) and age (≥65 years). Conclusion: The findings in this registry indicate that patients with a haematological malignancy or lung cancer have an increased risk of a worse outcome of COVID-19. During the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, these vulnerable patients should avoid exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, whereas treatment adjustments and prioritising vaccination, when available, should also be considered

    Life-prolonging treatment restrictions and outcomes in patients with cancer and COVID-19: an update from the Dutch Oncology COVID-19 Consortium

    Get PDF
    Aim of the study: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic significantly impacted cancer care. In this study, clinical patient characteristics related to COVID-19 outcomes and advanced care planning, in terms of non-oncological treatment restrictions (e.g. do-not-resuscitate codes), were studied in patients with cancer and COVID-19. Methods: The Dutch Oncology COVID-19 Consortium registry was launched in March 2020 in 45 hospitals in the Netherlands, primarily to identify risk factors of a severe COVID-19 outcome in patients with cancer. Here, an updated analysis of the registry was performed, and treatment restrictions (e.g. do-not-intubate codes) were studied in relation to COVID-19 outcomes in patients with cancer. Oncological treatment restrictions were not taken into account. Results: Between 27th March 2020 and 4th February 2021, 1360 patients with cancer and COVID-19 were registered. Follow-up data of 830 patients could be validated for this analysis. Overall, 230 of 830 (27.7%) patients died of COVID-19, and 60% of the remaining 600 patients with resolved COVID-19 were admitted to the hospital. Patients with haematological malignancies or lung cancer had a higher risk of a fatal outcome than other solid tumours. No correlation between anticancer therapies and the risk of a fatal COVID-19 outcome was found. In terms of end-of-life communication, 50% of all patients had restrictions regarding life-prolonging treatment (e.g. do-not-intubate codes). Most identified patients with treatment restrictions had risk factors associated with fatal COVID-19 outcome. Conclusion: There was no evidence of a negative impact of anticancer therapies on COVID-19 outcomes. Timely end-of-life communication as part of advanced care planning could save patients from prolonged suffering and decrease burden in intensive care units. Early discussion of treatment restrictions should therefore be part of routine oncological care, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic

    Life-prolonging treatment restrictions and outcomes in patients with cancer and COVID-19: an update from the Dutch Oncology COVID-19 Consortium

    No full text
    Aim of the study: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic significantly impacted cancer care. In this study, clinical patient characteristics related to COVID-19 outcomes and advanced care planning, in terms of non-oncological treatment restrictions (e.g. do-not-resuscitate codes), were studied in patients with cancer and COVID-19. Methods: The Dutch Oncology COVID-19 Consortium registry was launched in March 2020 in 45 hospitals in the Netherlands, primarily to identify risk factors of a severe COVID-19 outcome in patients with cancer. Here, an updated analysis of the registry was performed, and treatment restrictions (e.g. do-not-intubate codes) were studied in relation to COVID-19 outcomes in patients with cancer. Oncological treatment restrictions were not taken into account. Results: Between 27th March 2020 and 4th February 2021, 1360 patients with cancer and COVID-19 were registered. Follow-up data of 830 patients could be validated for this analysis. Overall, 230 of 830 (27.7%) patients died of COVID-19, and 60% of the remaining 600 patients with resolved COVID-19 were admitted to the hospital. Patients with haematological malignancies or lung cancer had a higher risk of a fatal outcome than other solid tumours. No correlation between anticancer therapies and the risk of a fatal COVID-19 outcome was found. In terms of end-of-life communication, 50% of all patients had restrictions regarding life-prolonging treatment (e.g. do-not-intubate codes). Most identified patients with treatment restrictions had risk factors associated with fatal COVID-19 outcome. Conclusion: There was no evidence of a negative impact of anticancer therapies on COVID-19 outcomes. Timely end-of-life communication as part of advanced care planning could save patients from prolonged suffering and decrease burden in intensive care units. Early discussion of treatment restrictions should therefore be part of routine oncological care, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic
    corecore