Inhibition of p38 signaling curtails the SARS-CoV-2 induced inflammatory response but retains the IFN-dependent antiviral defense of the lung epithelial barrier.

SARS-CoV-2 is the causative agent of the immune response-driven disease COVID-19 for which new antiviral and anti-inflammatory treatments are urgently needed to reduce recovery time, risk of death and long COVID development. Here, we demonstrate that the immunoregulatory kinase p38 MAPK is activated during viral entry, mediated by the viral spike protein, and drives the harmful virus-induced inflammatory responses. Using primary human lung explants and lung epithelial organoids, we demonstrate that targeting p38 signal transduction with the selective and clinically pre-evaluated inhibitors PH-797804 and VX-702 markedly reduced the expression of the pro-inflammatory cytokines IL6, CXCL8, CXCL10 and TNF-α during infection, while viral replication and the interferon-mediated antiviral response of the lung epithelial barrier were largely maintained. Furthermore, our results reveal a high level of drug synergism of both p38 inhibitors in co-treatments with the nucleoside analogs Remdesivir and Molnupiravir to suppress viral replication of the SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, revealing an exciting and novel mode of synergistic action of p38 inhibition. These results open new avenues for the improvement of the current treatment strategies for COVID-19.

Adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone versus placebo in patients with resected stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease (IMMUNED): final results of a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The IMMUNED trial previously showed significant improvements in recurrence-free survival for adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab as well as for adjuvant nivolumab alone in patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease after resection or radiotherapy. Here, we report the final analysis, including overall survival data. METHODS: IMMUNED was an investigator-sponsored, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-arm, phase 2 trial conducted in 20 academic medical centres in Germany. Eligible patients were aged 18-80 years with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease after surgery or radiotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to either nivolumab plus ipilimumab (nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks), nivolumab monotherapy (nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks), or matching placebo, for up to 1 year. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints were time-to-recurrence, overall survival, progression-free survival or recurrence-free survival 2 (in patients in the placebo group who crossed over to nivolumab monotherapy after experiencing disease recurrence), and safety endpoints. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02523313), and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Sept 2, 2015, and Nov 20, 2018, 175 patients were enrolled in the study, and 167 were randomly assigned to receive either nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n=56), nivolumab plus ipilimumab-matching placebo (n=59), or double placebo control (n=52). At a median follow-up of 49·2 months (IQR 34·9-58·1), 4-year recurrence-free survival was 64·2% (95% CI 49·2-75·9) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 31·4% (19·7-43·8) in the nivolumab alone group, and 15·0% (6·7-26·6) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio (HR) for recurrence for the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group versus placebo was 0·25 (97·5% CI 0·13-0·48; p<0·0001), and for the nivolumab group versus placebo was 0·60 (0·36-1·00; p=0·024). Median overall survival was not reached in any treatment group. The HR for overall survival was significantly in favour of the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group versus placebo (HR 0·41; 95% CI 0·17-0·99; p=0·040), but not for the nivolumab group versus placebo (HR 0·75; 0·36-1·56; p=0·44). 4-year overall survival was 83·8% (95% CI 68·8-91·9) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 72·6% (57·4-83·2) in the nivolumab alone group, and 63·1% (46·9-75·6) in the placebo group. The median progression-free survival or recurrence-free survival 2 of patients in the placebo group who crossed over to nivolumab monotherapy after experiencing disease recurrence was not reached (95% CI 21·2 months to not reached). Rates of grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events remained largely unchanged compared with our previous report, occurring in 71% (95% CI 57-82) of the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, and 29% (95% CI 17-42) of patients receiving nivolumab alone. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Both active regimens continued to show significantly improved recurrence-free survival compared with placebo in patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease who were at high risk of recurrence. Overall survival was significantly improved for patients receiving nivolumab plus ipilimumab compared with placebo. Use of subsequent anti-PD-1-based therapy was high in patients in the placebo group after recurrence and most likely impacted the overall survival comparison of nivolumab alone versus placebo. The recurrence-free and overall survival benefit of nivolumab plus ipilimumab over placebo reinforces the change of practice already initiated for the treatment of patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Beyond Vaccines: Clinical Status of Prospective COVID-19 Therapeutics.

Since November 2019 the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has caused nearly 200 million infection and more than 4 million deaths globally (Updated information from the World Health Organization, as on 2nd Aug 2021). Within only one year into the pandemic, several vaccines were designed and reached approval for the immunization of the world population. The remarkable protective effects of the manufactured vaccines are demonstrated in countries with high vaccination rates, such as Israel and UK. However, limited production capacities, poor distribution infrastructures and political hesitations still hamper the availability of vaccines in many countries. In addition, due to the emergency of SARS-CoV-2 variants with immune escape properties towards the vaccines the global numbers of new infections as well as patients developing severe COVID-19, remains high. New studies reported that about 8% of infected individuals develop long term symptoms with strong personal restrictions on private as well as professional level, which contributes to the long socioeconomic problems caused by this pandemic. Until today, emergency use-approved treatment options for COVID-19 are limited to the antiviral Remdesivir, a nucleoside analogue targeting the viral polymerase, the glucocorticosteroide Dexamethasone as well as neutralizing antibodies. The therapeutic benefits of these treatments are under ongoing debate and clinical studies assessing the efficiency of these treatments are still underway. To identify new therapeutic treatments for COVID-19, now and by the post-pandemic era, diverse experimental approaches are under scientific evaluation in companies and scientific research teams all over the world. To accelerate clinical translation of promising candidates, repurposing approaches of known approved drugs are specifically fostered but also novel technologies are being developed and are under investigation. This review summarizes the recent developments from the lab bench as well as the clinical status of emerging therapeutic candidates and discusses possible therapeutic entry points for the treatment strategies with regard to the biology of SARS-CoV-2 and the clinical course of COVID-19.

Adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab monotherapy versus placebo in patients with resected stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease (IMMUNED): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab and ipilimumab, alone or in combination, are widely used immunotherapeutic treatment options for patients with advanced-ie, unresectable or metastatic-melanoma. This criterion, however, excludes patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease. We therefore aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab monotherapy versus a placebo in this patient population. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial in 20 German academic medical centres. Eligible patients were aged 18-80 years with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease after surgery or radiotherapy. Key exclusion criteria included uveal or mucosal melanoma, previous therapy with checkpoint inhibitors, and any previous immunosuppressive therapy within the 30 days before study drug administration. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using a central, interactive, online system, to the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group (1 mg/kg of intravenous nivolumab every 3 weeks plus 3 mg/kg of intravenous ipilimumab every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by 3 mg/kg of nivolumab every 2 weeks), nivolumab monotherapy group (3 mg/kg of intravenous nivolumab every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab-matching placebo during weeks 1-12), or double-matching placebo group. The primary endpoint was the recurrence-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. The results presented in this report reflect the prespecified interim analysis of recurrence-free survival after 90 events had been reported. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02523313, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Sept 2, 2015, and Nov 20, 2018, 167 patients were randomly assigned to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n=56), nivolumab (n=59), or placebo (n=52). As of July 2, 2019, at a median follow-up of 28·4 months (IQR 17·7-36·8), median recurrence-free survival was not reached in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, whereas median recurrence-free survival was 12·4 months (95% CI 5·3-33·3) in the nivolumab group and 6·4 months (3·3-9·6) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio for recurrence for the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group versus placebo group was 0·23 (97·5% CI 0·12-0·45; p<0·0001), and for the nivolumab group versus placebo group was 0·56 (0·33-0·94; p=0·011). In the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, recurrence-free survival at 1 year was 75% (95% CI 61·0-84·9) and at 2 years was 70% (55·1-81·0); in the nivolumab group, 1-year recurrence-free survival was 52% (38·1-63·9) and at 2 years was 42% (28·6-54·5); and in the placebo group, this rate was 32% (19·8-45·3) at 1 year and 14% (5·9-25·7) at 2 years. Treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were reported in 71% (95% CI 57-82) of patients in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group and in 27% (16-40) of those in the nivolumab group. Treatment-related adverse events of any grade led to treatment discontinuation in 34 (62%) of 55 patients in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group and seven (13%) of 56 in the nivolumab group. Three deaths from adverse events were reported but were considered unrelated to the study treatment. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant therapy with nivolumab alone or in combination with ipilimumab increased recurrence-free survival significantly compared with placebo in patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease. The rates of grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events in both active treatment groups were higher than the rates reported in previous pivotal trials done in advanced melanoma with measurable disease. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Prevalence, associations, and trends of biliary-tract candidiasis: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Biliary obstruction and cholangitis are common problems in gastroenterology. Infections of the biliary tract with Candida and other fungal species have increasingly been seen in the last few years. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence, associations, and trends of biliary-tract candidiasis. DESIGN: A prospective, observational, diagnostic study. SETTING: University Hospital, Muenster, Germany. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients undergoing ERCP for various indications. RESULTS: In 54 of 123 patients, we found Candida species in bile samples (44%). In only 7 patients, candidiasis was suspected on endoscopy before mycologic proof. Only 4 of these 7 patients were correctly diagnosed with biliary candidiasis by simple morphologic aspects. The fungus was mainly differentiated as Candida albicans or Candida glabrata and rarely as Candida parapsilosis, Candida tropicalis, or other subspecies. Immunosuppression for various reasons was significantly associated with bile-duct candidiasis (P < .02). No significant association was found between positive fungal cultures and prior endoscopic sphincterotomy (P = .0824) or prior ERCP (P = .1152). Biliary candidiasis was neither associated with positive fungal cultures of buccal smears (P = .0722) nor with positive findings in stool samples (P = .0860). LIMITATIONS: Highly selected patient population. Buccal smears and stool samples were not obtained from all patients. Contamination artifacts cannot totally be excluded with the ERCP procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Candida species very frequently can be detected in the bile. Positive fungal cultures of bile samples are not just contamination artifacts. This has to be taken into account when designing an anti-infectious treatment for recurrent cholangitis or even more cholangiosepsis. Especially in immunosuppressed patients or recipients of long-term antibiotic therapy, physicians should screen for biliary-tract candidiasis during endoscopic examination.

Biliary tract candidiasis: diagnostic and therapeutic approaches in a case series.

BACKGROUND: Biliary obstruction with its wide range of potential causes is a common disorder in gastroenterology. Infections of the biliary tract with Candida and other fungal species leading to obstructive jaundice have increasingly been recognized in the last few years. Besides a few case reports, there are few data in the literature giving us an idea how to diagnose and treat these patients. METHODS: We report on a series of seven patients suffering from biliary tract candidiasis who were diagnosed and treated at our institution. Predisposition factors, reliability of various diagnostic modalities, and treatment options based on our own experience are presented and discussed. RESULTS: Besides the general diagnostic modalities such as laboratory findings or ultrasonography, we often observed mycelia in the bile duct system endoscopically. Typical morphological changes in peripheral bile ducts could be detected during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Aspiration of bile and subsequent microbiological analysis in combination with ERCP findings revealed diagnosis of bile duct candidiasis in all cases. Treatment included both antiinfectious drugs and endoscopic therapy such as bile duct drainage, lavage, or débridement. With respect to fungal eradication, therapy was successful in 71% of cases as proven by microbiological analysis of bile aspirates. Since many of these patients suffer not only from biliary mycosis but also from disease necessitating immunosuppression, the prognosis was poor in some cases. CONCLUSION: Biliary tract candidiasis because of immunosuppression is an increasingly recognized disease and remains a major clinical challenge. Besides laboratory analysis and ultrasonography, diagnostic modalities should include aspiration of bile during ERCP and microbiological analysis. Antiinfectious drug treatment as the main therapeutic column for biliary candidiasis should be complemented by endoscopic intervention.