Inflammatory subphenotypes previously identified in ARDS are associated with mortality at intensive care unit discharge: a secondary analysis of a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Intensive care unit (ICU)-survivors have an increased risk of mortality after discharge compared to the general population. On ICU admission subphenotypes based on the plasma biomarker levels of interleukin-8, protein C and bicarbonate have been identified in patients admitted with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) that are prognostic of outcome and predictive of treatment response. We hypothesized that if these inflammatory subphenotypes previously identified among ARDS patients are assigned at ICU discharge in a more general critically ill population, they are associated with short- and long-term outcome. METHODS: A secondary analysis of a prospective observational cohort study conducted in two Dutch ICUs between 2011 and 2014 was performed. All patients discharged alive from the ICU were at ICU discharge adjudicated to the previously identified inflammatory subphenotypes applying a validated parsimonious model using variables measured median 10.6 h [IQR, 8.0-31.4] prior to ICU discharge. Subphenotype distribution at ICU discharge, clinical characteristics and outcomes were analyzed. As a sensitivity analysis, a latent class analysis (LCA) was executed for subphenotype identification based on plasma protein biomarkers at ICU discharge reflective of coagulation activation, endothelial cell activation and inflammation. Concordance between the subphenotyping strategies was studied. RESULTS: Of the 8332 patients included in the original cohort, 1483 ICU-survivors had plasma biomarkers available and could be assigned to the inflammatory subphenotypes. At ICU discharge 6% (n = 86) was assigned to the hyperinflammatory and 94% (n = 1397) to the hypoinflammatory subphenotype. Patients assigned to the hyperinflammatory subphenotype were discharged with signs of more severe organ dysfunction (SOFA scores 7 [IQR 5-9] vs. 4 [IQR 2-6], p < 0.001). Mortality was higher in patients assigned to the hyperinflammatory subphenotype (30-day mortality 21% vs. 11%, p = 0.005; one-year mortality 48% vs. 28%, p < 0.001). LCA deemed 2 subphenotypes most suitable. ICU-survivors from class 1 had significantly higher mortality compared to class 2. Patients belonging to the hyperinflammatory subphenotype were mainly in class 1. CONCLUSIONS: Patients assigned to the hyperinflammatory subphenotype at ICU discharge showed significantly stronger anomalies in coagulation activation, endothelial cell activation and inflammation pathways implicated in the pathogenesis of critical disease and increased mortality until one-year follow up.

Towards personalized medicine: a scoping review of immunotherapy in sepsis.

Despite significant progress in our understanding of the pathophysiology of sepsis and extensive clinical research, there are few proven therapies addressing the underlying immune dysregulation of this life-threatening condition. The aim of this scoping review is to describe the literature evaluating immunotherapy in adult patients with sepsis, emphasizing on methods providing a "personalized immunotherapy" approach, which was defined as the classification of patients into a distinct subgroup or subphenotype, in which a patient's immune profile is used to guide treatment. Subgroups are subsets of sepsis patients, based on any cut-off in a variable. Subphenotypes are subgroups that can be reliably discriminated from other subgroup based on data-driven assessments. Included studies were randomized controlled trials and cohort studies investigating immunomodulatory therapies in adults with sepsis. Studies were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov, from the first paper available until January 29th, 2024. The search resulted in 15,853 studies. Title and abstract screening resulted in 1409 studies (9%), assessed for eligibility; 771 studies were included, of which 282 (37%) were observational and 489 (63%) interventional. Treatment groups included were treatments targeting the innate immune response, the complement system, coagulation and endothelial dysfunction, non-pharmalogical treatment, pleiotropic drugs, immunonutrition, concomitant treatments, Traditional Chinese Medicine, immunostimulatory cytokines and growth factors, intravenous immunoglobulins, mesenchymal stem cells and immune-checkpoint inhibitors. A personalized approach was incorporated in 70 studies (9%). Enrichment was applied using cut-offs in temperature, laboratory, biomarker or genetic variables. Trials often showed conflicting results, possibly due to the lack of patient stratification or the potential influence of severity and timing on immunomodulatory therapy results. When a personalized approach was applied, trends of clinical benefit for several interventions emerged, which hold promise for future clinical trials using personalized immunotherapy.

Heterogeneity of treatment effect of vilobelimab in COVID-19: a secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial.

In a phase 3 trial (PANAMO, NCT04333420), vilobelimab, a complement 5a (C5a) inhibitor, reduced 28-day mortality in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients. This post hoc analysis of 368 patients aimed to explore treatment heterogeneity through unsupervised learning. All available clinical variables at baseline were used as input. Treatment heterogeneity was assessed using latent class analysis (LCA), Ward's hierarchical clustering (HC) and the adjudication to previously described clinical sepsis phenotypes. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. For LCA, a 2-class latent model was deemed most suitable. In the LCA model, 82 (22%) patients were assigned to class 1 and 286 (78%) to class 2. Class 1 was defined by more severely ill patients with significantly higher mortality. In an adjusted logistic regression, no heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) between classes was observed (p = 0.998). For HC, no significant classes were found (p = 0.669). Using the previously described clinical sepsis subtypes, 41 patients (11%) were adjudicated subtype alpha (α), 17 (5%) beta (ß), 112 (30%) delta (δ) and 198 (54%) gamma (γ). HTE was observed between clinical subtypes (p = 0.001) with improved 28-day mortality after treatment with vilobelimab for the δ subtype (OR = 0.17, 95% CI 0.07-0.40, p < 0.001). No signal for harm of treatment with vilobelimab was observed in any class or clinical subtype. Overall, treatment effect with vilobelimab was consistent across different classes and subtypes, except for the δ subtype, suggesting potential additional benefit for the most severely ill patients.

Antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 variants induced by four different SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in health care workers in the Netherlands: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Emerging and future SARS-CoV-2 variants may jeopardize the effectiveness of vaccination campaigns. Therefore, it is important to know how the different vaccines perform against diverse SARS-CoV-2 variants. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In a prospective cohort of 165 SARS-CoV-2 naive health care workers in the Netherlands, vaccinated with either one of four vaccines (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, AZD1222 or Ad26.COV2.S), we performed a head-to-head comparison of the ability of sera to recognize and neutralize SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs; Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta and Omicron). Repeated serum sampling was performed 5 times during a year (from January 2021 till January 2022), including before and after booster vaccination with BNT162b2. Four weeks after completing the initial vaccination series, SARS-CoV-2 wild-type neutralizing antibody titers were highest in recipients of mRNA-1273, followed by recipients of BNT162b2 (geometric mean titers (GMT) of 358 [95% CI 231-556] and 214 [95% CI 153-299], respectively; p<0.05), and substantially lower in those vaccinated with the adenovirus vector-based vaccines AZD1222 and Ad26.COV2.S (GMT of 18 [95% CI 11-30] and 14 [95% CI 8-25] IU/ml, respectively; p<0.001). VOCs neutralization was reduced in all vaccine groups, with the greatest reduction in neutralization GMT observed against the Omicron variant (fold change 0.03 [95% CI 0.02-0.04], p<0.001). The booster BNT162b2 vaccination increased neutralizing antibody titers for all groups with substantial improvement against the VOCs including the Omicron variant. We used linear regression and linear mixed model analysis. All results were adjusted for possible confounding of age and sex. Study limitations include the lack of cellular immunity data. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this study shows that the mRNA vaccines appear superior to adenovirus vector-based vaccines in inducing neutralizing antibodies against VOCs four weeks after initial vaccination and after booster vaccination, which implies the use of mRNA vaccines for both initial and booster vaccination.

Comparative analysis of spike-specific IgG Fc glycoprofiles elicited by adenoviral, mRNA, and protein-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

IgG antibodies are important mediators of vaccine-induced immunity through complement- and Fc receptor-dependent effector functions. Both are influenced by the composition of the conserved N-linked glycan located in the IgG Fc domain. Here, we compared the anti-Spike (S) IgG1 Fc glycosylation profiles in response to mRNA, adenoviral, and protein-based COVID-19 vaccines by mass spectrometry (MS). All vaccines induced a transient increase of antigen-specific IgG1 Fc galactosylation and sialylation. An initial, transient increase of afucosylated IgG was induced by membrane-encoding S protein formulations. A fucose-sensitive ELISA for antigen-specific IgG (FEASI) exploiting FcγRIIIa affinity for afucosylated IgG was used as an orthogonal method to confirm the LC-MS-based afucosylation readout. Our data suggest that vaccine-induced anti-S IgG glycosylation is dynamic, and although variation is seen between different vaccine platforms and individuals, the evolution of glycosylation patterns display marked overlaps.

Real-world Evidence of the Effects of Novel Treatments for COVID-19 on Mortality: A Nationwide Comparative Cohort Study of Hospitalized Patients in the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Waves in the Netherlands.

Background: Large clinical trials on drugs for hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients have shown significant effects on mortality. There may be a discrepancy with the observed real-world effect. We describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands during 4 pandemic waves and analyze the association of the newly introduced treatments with mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and discharge alive. Methods: We conducted a nationwide retrospective analysis of hospitalized COVID-19 patients between February 27, 2020, and December 31, 2021. Patients were categorized into waves and into treatment groups (hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, neutralizing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 monoclonal antibodies, corticosteroids, and interleukin [IL]-6 antagonists). Four types of Cox regression analyses were used: unadjusted, adjusted, propensity matched, and propensity weighted. Results: Among 5643 patients from 11 hospitals, we observed a changing epidemiology during 4 pandemic waves, with a decrease in median age (67-64 years; P < .001), in in-hospital mortality on the ward (21%-15%; P < .001), and a trend in the ICU (24%-16%; P = .148). In ward patients, hydroxychloroquine was associated with increased mortality (1.54; 95% CI, 1.22-1.96), and remdesivir was associated with a higher rate of discharge alive within 29 days (1.16; 95% CI, 1.03-1.31). Corticosteroids were associated with a decrease in mortality (0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.96); the results of IL-6 antagonists were inconclusive. In patients directly admitted to the ICU, hydroxychloroquine, corticosteroids, and IL-6 antagonists were not associated with decreased mortality. Conclusions: Both remdesivir and corticosteroids were associated with better outcomes in ward patients with COVID-19. Continuous evaluation of real-world treatment effects is needed.

Personalised immunotherapy in sepsis: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Sepsis, a life-threatening organ dysfunction syndrome occurring in the context of severe infections, remains a major burden on global health with high morbidity and high mortality rates. Despite recent advances in the understanding of its pathophysiology, the treatment of sepsis remains supportive of nature with few interventions specifically designed for treating this complex syndrome. The focus of sepsis trials has increasingly shifted towards targeting excessive inflammation and immunosuppression using immunomodulatory agents. However, it remains uncertain how to identify patients that could benefit from such treatment, whether treatments can be tailored to an individual's immune profile, or at which stage of the disease the intervention should be initiated. In this scoping review, we provide a comprehensive overview of current available literature on immunostimulatory and immunosuppressive therapies against sepsis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The aim of this scoping review is to describe and summarise current literature evaluating immunotherapy in adult patients with sepsis. The review will be performed using the framework formulated by Arksey and O'Malley. A comprehensive literature and study collection will be executed by searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify clinical trials and cohort studies concerning immunotherapy in adult patients with sepsis. Screening will be performed independently and in duplicate by two reviewers who will also independently extract data into prespecified spreadsheets. We will summarise evidence in tabular format with descriptive statistics. The reported evidence will convey knowledge on the types of immunotherapies studied, and currently being studied, in adult patients with sepsis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval from a medical ethics committee is not required. Once completed, the review will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. These results will be of value to clinicians and researchers with an interest in advancing sepsis care.

ImmunoSep (Personalised Immunotherapy in Sepsis) international double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled randomised clinical trial: study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Sepsis is a major cause of death among hospitalised patients. Accumulating evidence suggests that immune response during sepsis cascade lies within a spectrum of dysregulated host responses. On the one side of the spectrum there are patients whose response is characterised by fulminant hyperinflammation or macrophage activation-like syndrome (MALS), and on the other side patients whose immune response is characterised by immunoparalysis. A sizeable group of patients are situated between the two extremes. Recognising immune endotype is very important in order to choose the appropriate immunotherapeutic approach for each patient resulting in the best chance to improve the outcome. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: ImmunoSep is a randomised placebo-controlled phase 2 clinical trial with a double-dummy design in which the effect of precision immunotherapy on sepsis phenotypes with MALS and immunoparalysis is studied. Patients are stratified using biomarkers. Specifically, 280 patients will be 1:1 randomly assigned to placebo or active immunotherapy as adjunct to standard-of-care treatment. In the active immunotherapy arm, patients with MALS will receive anakinra (recombinant interleukin-1 receptor antagonist) intravenously, and patients with immunoparalysis will receive subcutaneous recombinant human interferon-gamma. Τhe primary endpoint is the comparative decrease of the mean total Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score by at least 1.4 points by day 9 from randomisation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol is approved by the German Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices; the National Ethics Committee of Greece and by the National Organization for Medicines of Greece; the Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects and METC Oost Netherland for the Netherlands; the National Agency for Medicine and Medical Products of Romania; and the Commission Cantonale d'éthique de la recherche sur l'être human of Switzerland. The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04990232.

Time since SARS-CoV-2 infection and humoral immune response following BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination.

BACKGROUND: To optimise the use of available SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, some advocate delaying second vaccination for individuals infected within six months. We studied whether post-vaccination immune response is equally potent in individuals infected over six months prior to vaccination. METHODS: We tested serum IgG binding to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and neutralising capacity in 110 healthcare workers, before and after both BNT162b2 messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccinations. We compared outcomes between participants with more recent infection (n = 18, median two months, IQR 2-3), with infection-vaccination interval over six months (n = 19, median nine months, IQR 9-10), and to those not previously infected (n = 73). FINDINGS: Both recently and earlier infected participants showed comparable humoral immune responses after a single mRNA vaccination, while exceeding those of previously uninfected persons after two vaccinations with 2.5 fold (p = 0.003) and 3.4 fold (p < 0.001) for binding antibody levels, and 6.4 and 7.2 fold for neutralisation titres, respectively (both p < 0.001). The second vaccine dose yielded no further substantial improvement of the humoral response in the previously infected participants (0.97 fold, p = 0.92), while it was associated with a 4 fold increase in antibody binding levels and 18 fold increase in neutralisation titres in previously uninfected participants (both p < 0.001). Adjustment for potential confounding of sex and age did not affect these findings. INTERPRETATION: Delaying the second vaccination in individuals infected up to ten months prior may constitute a more efficient use of limited vaccine supplies. FUNDING: Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development ZonMw; Corona Research Fund Amsterdam UMC; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Reliability of visual assessment by non-expert nuclear medicine physicians and appropriateness of indications of [123I]FP-CIT SPECT imaging by neurologists in patients with early drug-naive Parkinson's disease.

PURPOSE: To determine the reliability of visual assessment of [123I]FP-CIT SPECT imaging by non-experts in dopamine transporter (DAT) SPECT imaging in patients with early drug-naive Parkinson's disease (PD). Also, we explored the indications of DAT SPECT imaging in clinical practice by neurologists. METHODS: We collected [123I]FP-CIT SPECT scans of the Levodopa in EArly Parkinson's disease (LEAP) trial participants that were made prior to recruitment, as part of routine clinical work-up. All scans were reassessed by an expert in DAT imaging. A survey on the use of DAT SPECT imaging was sent to all referring neurologists. RESULTS: The concordance of the initial local assessment and the expert reassessment was 98.7%. The survey showed that neurologists requested DAT SPECT imaging in only 73.6% of patients to differentiate between a neurodegenerative disease and non-neurodegenerative parkinsonism. CONCLUSIONS: Visual assessment of [123I]FP-CIT SPECT imaging by community nuclear medicine physicians in patients with early PD is reliable. Neurologists who request DAT SPECT scans are not always aware that the high accuracy is limited only to the differentiation between neurodegenerative and non-neurodegenerative parkinsonism. A significant portion of neurologists who request DAT SPECT scans is not always aware that the high accuracy is limited to the differentiation between neurodegenerative and non-neurodegenerative parkinsonism as DAT SPECT cannot reliably distinguish the various Parkinsonian syndromes.