Citations

AbstractPurposePepinemab, a humanized IgG4 monoclonal antibody, targets the SEMA4D (CD100) antigen to inhibit binding to its high‐affinity receptors (plexin B1/PLXNB1, plexin B2/PLXNB2) and low‐affinity receptor (CD72). SEMA4D blockade leads to increased cytotoxic T‐cell infiltration, delayed tumor growth, and durable tumor rejection in murine tumor models. Pepinemab was well tolerated and improved T cell infiltration in clinical studies in adults with refractory tumors. SEMA4D was identified as a strong candidate proto‐oncogene in a model of osteosarcoma. Based on these preclinical and clinical data, we conducted a phase 1/2 study to determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and immunogenicity, of pepinemab in pediatric patients with recurrent/refractory solid tumors, and activity in osteosarcoma.Experimental designPepinemab was administered intravenously on Days 1 and 15 of a 28‐day cycle at 20 mg/kg, the adult RP2D. Part A (phase 1) used a Rolling 6 design; Part B (phase 2) used a Simon 2‐stage design in patients with osteosarcoma. Pharmacokinetics and target saturation were evaluated in peripheral blood.ResultsPepinemab (20 mg/kg) was well tolerated and no dose‐limiting toxicities were observed during Part A. There were no objective responses. Two patients with osteosarcoma achieved disease control and prolonged stable disease. Pepinemab pharmacokinetics were similar to adults.ConclusionsPepinemab (20 mg/kg) is safe, well tolerated and resulted in adequate and sustained target saturation in pediatric patients. Encouraging disease control in two patients with osteosarcoma warrants further investigation with novel combination strategies to modulate the tumor microenvironment and antitumor immune response.Clinical trial registryThis trial is registered as NCT03320330 at Clinicaltrials.gov.DisclaimerThe content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

As the availability of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) expands, so has the need for interfacility transfer to ECMO centers. However, the impact of these transfers is unknown. We hypothesized that interfacility transfers would be associated with increased complications and mortality. This retrospective cohort study includes adult patients treated with venovenous (VV) ECMO at all four adult ECMO centers comprising our statewide registry. Complications, mortality, ECMO duration, length of stay, and disposition were compared based on cannulation at an ECMO center versus outside hospital and transferred by air versus ground after adjusting for baseline covariates/parameters. The study included 420 adult patients, 36% of whom were cannulated at an outside institution before transfer. Of these, 63% were transported by ground and the remainder by air. Risk adjusted logistic regression revealed similar odds of mortality between those cannulated at ECMO centers versus referring hospital and then transported (odds ratio [OR] = 0.77, confidence interval [CI] = 0.49–1.22). This study supports the practice of interfacility ECMO transfer.

Abstract Background The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) approach to malnutrition diagnosis is based on assessment of three phenotypic (weight loss, low body mass index, and reduced skeletal muscle mass) and two etiologic (reduced food intake/assimilation and disease burden/inflammation) criteria, with diagnosis confirmed by fulfillment of any combination of at least one phenotypic and at least one etiologic criterion. The original GLIM description provided limited guidance regarding assessment of inflammation, and this has been a factor impeding further implementation of the GLIM criteria. We now seek to provide practical guidance for assessment of inflammation. Methods A GLIM‐constituted working group with 36 participants developed consensus‐based guidance through a modified Delphi review. A multiround review and revision process served to develop seven guidance statements. Results The final round of review was highly favorable, with 99% overall “agree” or “strongly agree” responses. The presence of acute or chronic disease, infection, or injury that is usually associated with inflammatory activity may be used to fulfill the GLIM disease burden/inflammation criterion, without the need for laboratory confirmation. However, we recommend that recognition of underlying medical conditions commonly associated with inflammation be supported by C‐reactive protein (CRP) measurements when the contribution of inflammatory components is uncertain. Interpretation of CRP requires that consideration be given to the method, reference values, and units (milligrams per deciliter or milligram per liter) for the clinical laboratory that is being used. Conclusion Confirmation of inflammation should be guided by clinical judgment based on underlying diagnosis or condition, clinical signs, or CRP.

Intra-articular injection is a common way to deliver biologics to joints, but their effectiveness is limited by rapid clearance from the joint space. This barrier can be overcome by genetically modifying cells within the joint such that they produce anti-arthritic gene products endogenously, thereby achieving sustained, therapeutic, intra-articular concentrations of the transgene products without re-dosing. A variety of non-viral and viral vectors have been subjected to preclinical testing to evaluate their suitability for delivering genes to joints. The first transfer of a gene to a human joint used an ex vivo protocol involving retrovirally transduced, autologous, synovial fibroblasts. Recent advances in vector technology allow in vivo delivery using adeno-associated virus (AAV). We have developed an AAV vector encoding the interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (AAV.IL-1Ra) for injection into joints with osteoarthritis (OA). It showed efficacy and safety in equine and rat models of OA, leading to a recently-completed, investigator-initiated, Phase I, dose-escalation clinical trial in 9 subjects with mid-stage OA of the knee (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02790723). Three cohorts of three subjects with mild to moderate OA in the index knee were injected intra-articularly under ultrasound guidance with a low (10e11 viral genomes) medium (10e12 viral genomes) or high (10e13 viral genomes) dose of AAV.IL-1Ra and followed for one year. The data confirm safety, with evidence of sustained intra-articular expression of IL-1Ra and a clinical response in certain subjects. Funding for a subsequent Phase Ib trial involving 50 subjects (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05835895), expected to start later this year, has been acquired. Progress in this area has stimulated commercial activity and there are now at least seven different companies developing gene therapies for OA and a number of clinical trials are in progress.Acknowledgement: Clinical trial funded by US Department of Defense Clinical Trial Award W81XWH-16-1-0540.