Citations

The enigmatic eosinophil has emerged as an exciting component of the immune system, involved in a plethora of homeostatic and inflammatory responses. Substantial progress has been achieved through experimental systems manipulating eosinophils in vivo, initially in mice and more recently in humans. Researchers using eosinophil knockout mice have identified a contributory role for eosinophils in basal and inflammatory processes and protective immunity. Primarily fueled by the purported proinflammatory role of eosinophils in eosinophil-associated diseases, a series of anti-eosinophil therapeutics have emerged as a new class of drugs. These agents, which dramatically deplete eosinophils, provide a valuable opportunity to characterize the consequences of eosinophil knockout humans. Herein, we comparatively describe mouse and human eosinophil knockouts. We put forth the view that human eosinophils negatively contribute to a variety of diseases and, unlike mouse eosinophils, do not yet have an identified role in physiological health; thus, clarifying all roles of eosinophils remains an ongoing pursuit.

Lawsonella clevelandensis, an emerging pathogen, was first described in 2016, and has been implicated in abdominal, breast and spinal abscesses in a limited number of cases. Being a fastidious organism, it is primarily identified with molecular methods. With the incorporation of broad-range PCR testing in clinical diagnostics, L. clevelandensis has been increasingly reported in the literature. We describe a case of a 65-year-old man who presented with bilateral psoas abscesses secondary to aorto-bi-iliac vascular graft infection with L. clevelandensis identified using 16S rRNA/PCR sequencing. The patient underwent surgical resection and replacement of infected graft, followed by 6 weeks of intravenous antibiotic therapy and then chronic suppression with doxycycline and cefadroxil. He was infection-free at last follow-up.

AbstractBackgroundNeutropenia is a risk factor for development of infections; however, the direct effect of neutropenia on development of bloodstream infection (BSI) is not known. D‐index, which is area between the neutrophil time curve and a neutrophil count of 0.5 × 109/L, incorporates the combined effect of severity and duration of neutropenia. We aimed to evaluate whether D‐index can be used as a marker for BSI in patients with allogeneic stem cell transplantation.MethodWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation between January 1, 2005, and September 30, 2015. The primary outcome measure was the development of BSI within 30 days of transplantation.ResultsA total of 714 patients were included in the study of whom 101 developed BSI. Patients with BSI had a significantly higher median D‐index value compared with patients who did not have BSI (4990 vs. 3570, P < .001). As a marker, the performance of the D‐index was similar to that of the duration of profound neutropenia (P = .18) and significantly better than the total duration of neutropenia (P = .001).ConclusionThe D‐index performed better than the total duration of neutropenia as a marker for BSI in patients with allogeneic stem cell transplantation. There was no difference between D‐index and, a more easily calculable indicator, duration of profound neutropenia.

OBJECTIVE Posterior fossa decompression with duraplasty (PFDD) is commonly performed for Chiari I malformation (CM-I) with syringomyelia (SM). However, complication rates associated with various dural graft types are not well established. The objective of this study was to elucidate complication rates within 6 months of surgery among autograft and commonly used nonautologous grafts for pediatric patients who underwent PFDD for CM-I/SM. METHODS The Park-Reeves Syringomyelia Research Consortium database was queried for pediatric patients who had undergone PFDD for CM-I with SM. All patients had tonsillar ectopia ≥ 5 mm, syrinx diameter ≥ 3 mm, and ≥ 6 months of postoperative follow-up after PFDD. Complications (e.g., pseudomeningocele, CSF leak, meningitis, and hydrocephalus) and postoperative changes in syrinx size, headaches, and neck pain were compared for autograft versus nonautologous graft. RESULTS A total of 781 PFDD cases were analyzed (359 autograft, 422 nonautologous graft). Nonautologous grafts included bovine pericardium (n = 63), bovine collagen (n = 225), synthetic (n = 99), and human cadaveric allograft (n = 35). Autograft (103/359, 28.7%) had a similar overall complication rate compared to nonautologous graft (143/422, 33.9%) (p = 0.12). However, nonautologous graft was associated with significantly higher rates of pseudomeningocele (p = 0.04) and meningitis (p < 0.001). The higher rate of meningitis was influenced particularly by the higher rate of chemical meningitis (p = 0.002) versus infectious meningitis (p = 0.132). Among 4 types of nonautologous grafts, there were differences in complication rates (p = 0.02), including chemical meningitis (p = 0.01) and postoperative nausea/vomiting (p = 0.03). Allograft demonstrated the lowest complication rates overall (14.3%) and yielded significantly fewer complications compared to bovine collagen (p = 0.02) and synthetic (p = 0.003) grafts. Synthetic graft yielded higher complication rates than autograft (p = 0.01). Autograft and nonautologous graft resulted in equal improvements in syrinx size (p < 0.0001). No differences were found for postoperative changes in headaches or neck pain. CONCLUSIONS In the largest multicenter cohort to date, complication rates for dural autograft and nonautologous graft are similar after PFDD for CM-I/SM, although nonautologous graft results in higher rates of pseudomeningocele and meningitis. Rates of meningitis differ among nonautologous graft types. Autograft and nonautologous graft are equivalent for reducing syrinx size, headaches, and neck pain.

Background After critical illness, patients are often left with impairments in physical, social, emotional, and cognitive functioning. Peer support interventions have been implemented internationally to ameliorate these issues. Objective To explore what patients believed to be the key mechanisms of effectiveness of peer support programs implemented during critical care recovery. Methods In a secondary analysis of an international qualitative data set, 66 telephone interviews with patients were undertaken across 14 sites in Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States to understand the effect of peer support during recovery from critical illness. Prevalent themes were documented with framework analysis. Results Most patients who had been involved in peer support programs reported benefit. Patients described 3 primary mechanisms: (1) sharing experiences, (2) care debriefing, and (3) altruism. Conclusion Peer support is a relatively simple intervention that could be implemented to support patients during recovery from critical illness. However, more research is required into how these programs can be implemented in a safe and sustainable way in clinical practice.

Background: The phase 1b/2 CARTITUDE-1 study (NCT03548207) is evaluating ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel; JNJ-68284528; LCAR-B38M CAR-T cells), a chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy with 2 B-cell maturation antigen-targeting single-domain antibodies, in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) multiple myeloma (MM). Cytokine release syndrome (CRS), a known side effect of CAR-T therapy, can be mild to life-threatening and requires careful monitoring and management. Here, we analyzed CRS and cytokine profiles in CARTITUDE-1. Methods: Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) had a diagnosis of MM per International Myeloma Working Group criteria, measurable disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤1, received ≥3 prior regimens or were double-refractory to a proteasome inhibitor and immunomodulatory drug, and received an anti-CD38 antibody. Bridging therapy was permitted after apheresis. At 5-7 days prior to cilta-cel infusion, lymphodepletion was performed with cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 and fludarabine 30 mg/m2 daily for 3 days. Cilta-cel was administered as a single infusion at a target dose of 0.75×106 (range: 0.5-1.0×106) CAR+ viable T cells/kg. CRS was graded using Lee et al (Blood 2014) in the phase 1b portion and American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT) in the phase 2 portion. In this combined analysis, Lee et al criteria were mapped to ASTCT criteria for patients in the phase 1b portion. Serum samples for cytokine profiling were collected prior to lymphodepletion, prior to cilta-cel infusion and 2 hours post-infusion on Day 1, at regular time points until Day 100, and if CRS was suspected or reported. Results: A total of 97 patients with R/R MM were treated with cilta-cel; median follow-up for this analysis was 8.8 months (range: 1.5-20.4). CRS was reported in 92 (94.8%) patients. A total of 48 (49.5%) patients had grade 1 CRS, 38 (39.2%) had grade 2, 4 (4.1%) had grade 3, and 1 had grade 5 (1.0%); maximum toxicity grade according to the ASTCT consensus grading system could not be derived for 1 patient with CRS in the phase 1b portion. Median time to CRS onset from cilta-cel infusion was 7.0 days (range: 1-12). Median duration of CRS was 4.0 days (range: 1-27, excluding n=1 with 97 days). Supportive measures to treat CRS or CRS symptoms were administered to 87 (89.7%) patients, most commonly tocilizumab (69.1%), acetaminophen (68.0%), corticosteroids (20.6%), and anakinra (18.6%). CRS resolved in 91 (98.9%) patients; the patient with grade 5 CRS/hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis died on Day 99 subsequent to sequelae of grade 4 CRS. Across all patients, levels of interleukin (IL)-6, IL-10, and interferon-γ peaked at Days 7-14 post-cilta-cel infusion. Conclusions: CRS after cilta-cel treatment was low grade and manageable in most patients with R/R MM. The low rate of grade ≥3 CRS, median time to CRS onset of 7.0 days, and median duration of 4.0 days suggests outpatient dosing of cilta-cel may be feasible; this approach is being explored in the phase 2 CARTITUDE-2 study (NCT04133636). Disclosures Lin: Gamida Cells: Consultancy; Sorrento: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Vineti: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Legend BioTech: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Martin:Janssen: Research Funding; AMGEN: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy. Cohen:Novartis: Other: Patents/Intellectual property licensed, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda,: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech/Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jakubowiak:AbbVie, Amgen, BMS/Celgene, GSK, Janssen, Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive, Juno: Consultancy, Honoraria. Usmani:Celgene: Other; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Speaking Fees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; SkylineDX: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Speaking Fees, Research Funding; Array Biopharma: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; BMS, Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Speaking Fees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Speaking Fees, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. Madduri:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Speaking Engagement, Speakers Bureau; Foundation Medicine: Consultancy, Honoraria; Legend: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Speaking Engagement, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kinevant: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Speaking Engagement, Speakers Bureau. Stewart:Janssen, BMS, Sanofi-Aventis, GSK: Honoraria; Tempus, Inc., Genomics England LLC: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Singh:Janssen: Current Employment. Zudaire:Janssen: Current Employment. Yeh:Janssen: Current Employment. Allred:Janssen: Current Employment. Olyslager:Janssen: Current Employment. Banerjee:Janssen: Current Employment. Goldberg:Johnson & Johnson: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Schecter:Janssen: Current Employment. Jackson:Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center: Consultancy; Janssen: Current Employment. Deraedt:Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Geng:Legend Biotech USA Inc.: Current Employment. Wu:Legend Biotech USA Inc.: Current Employment. Carrasco:Legend Biotech USA Inc.: Current Employment. Akram:Legend Biotech USA Inc.: Current Employment. Hossain:Legend Biotech USA Inc.: Current Employment. Wang:Legend Biotech USA Inc.: Current Employment. Berdeja:CRISPR Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; EMD Sorono: Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding; Servier: Consultancy; Vivolux: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Kesios: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Legend: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellularity: Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Glenmark: Research Funding; CURIS: Research Funding; Bioclinica: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bluebird: Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding; Acetylon: Research Funding; Prothena: Consultancy; Lilly: Research Funding. Jagannath:BMS, Janssen, Karyopharm, Legend Biotech, Sanofi, Takeda: Consultancy.

Abstract Aims Anticoagulants are the mainstay treatment for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), and the CHA2DS2-VASc score is widely used to guide anticoagulation therapy in this cohort. However, utility of CHA2DS2-VASc in NVAF patients is debated, primarily because it is a vascular scoring system, which does not incorporate atrial fibrillation related parameters. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the discrimination ability of CHA2DS2-VASc in predicting ischaemic stroke overall, and in subgroups of patients with or without NVAF. Methods and results PubMed and Embase databases were searched till June 2020 for published articles that assessed the discrimination ability of CHA2DS2-VASc, as measured by C-statistics, during mid-term (2–5 years) and long-term (&gt;5 years) follow-up. Summary estimates were reported as random effects C-statistics with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Seventeen articles were included in the analysis. Nine studies (n = 453 747 patients) reported the discrimination ability of CHA2DS2-VASc in NVAF patients, and 10 studies (n = 138 262 patients) in patients without NVAF. During mid-term follow-up, CHA2DS2-VASc predicted stroke with modest discrimination in the overall cohort [0.67 (0.65–0.69)], with similar discrimination ability in patients with NVAF [0.65 (0.63–0.68)] and in those without NVAF [0.69 (0.68–0.71)] (P-interaction = 0.08). Similarly, at long-term follow-up, CHA2DS2-VASc had modest discrimination [0.66 (0.63–0.69)], which was consistent among patients with NVAF [0.63 (0.54–0.71)] and those without NVAF [0.67 (0.64–0.70)] (P-interaction = 0.39). Conclusion This meta-analysis suggests that the discrimination power of the CHA2DS2-VASc score in predicting ischaemic stroke is modest, and is similar in the presence or absence of NVAF. More accurate stroke prediction models are thus needed for the NVAF population.