Clinical characteristics and genetic analysis of A20 haploinsufficiency.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical and genetic characteristics of 3 children with Haploinsufficiency of A20 (HA20). METHODS: The clinical and genetic testing data of 3 children with HA20 treated at Capital Institute of Pediatrics (CIP) between August 2016 and October 2019 were retrospectively analysed. RESULT: Patient 1 presented with arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease, patient 2 presented with axial spinal arthritis and lupus-like syndrome, and patient 3 presented with recurrent oral ulcers, gastrointestinal ulcers, and perianal abscesses. Regarding laboratory tests, patients were found to have elevated white blood cell (WBC) count, C-reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). The CRP and ESR was reported to be high in all the patients. The WBC was reported to be high in patient 1 and 3. Patient 2 was positive for antinuclear antibodies, anti-Sjögren's syndrome antigen A, dsDNA, rheumatoid factor and Coombs test. Genetic testing showed that all three patients had heterozygous mutation in TNFAIP3 gene. As for the treatment, patient 1 was treated with TNFα antagonist, patient 2 was treated with TNF α antagonist and sulfasalazine, and patient 3 was treated with corticosteroids and thalidomide. Patients 1 and 2 were followed for four and 3 months, respectively. There was an improvement in joint and gastrointestinal symptoms; inflammatory indices and rheumatoid factor (RF) were normal, and dsDNA and Coombs test became negative. Patient 3 was treated at another hospital and showed gradual improvement in oral ulcers and perianal abscesses. CONCLUSION: HA20 is a single-gene auto-inflammatory disease caused by mutation in tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α-induced protein 3 (TNFAIP3) gene. It may present as Behçet-like syndrome and resemble various other autoimmune diseases as well. Corticosteroids and immunosuppressive agents are effective treatments, and cytokine antagonists can be used in refractory cases. Whole-exome genetic testing should be proactively performed for children with early-age onset or Behçet-like syndrome to achieve early diagnosis and accurate treatment.

Adaptations to the current ECCO/ESPGHAN guidelines on the management of paediatric acute severe colitis in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: a RAND appropriateness panel.

OBJECTIVE: Paediatric acute severe colitis (ASC) management during the novel SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic is challenging due to reliance on immunosuppression and the potential for surgery. We aimed to provide COVID-19-specific guidance using the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation/European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition guidelines for comparison. DESIGN: We convened a RAND appropriateness panel comprising 14 paediatric gastroenterologists and paediatric experts in surgery, rheumatology, respiratory and infectious diseases. Panellists rated the appropriateness of interventions for ASC in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results were discussed at a moderated meeting prior to a second survey. RESULTS: Panellists recommended patients with ASC have a SARS-CoV-2 swab and expedited biological screening on admission and should be isolated. A positive swab should trigger discussion with a COVID-19 specialist. Sigmoidoscopy was recommended prior to escalation to second-line therapy or colectomy. Methylprednisolone was considered appropriate first-line management in all, including those with symptomatic COVID-19. Thromboprophylaxis was also recommended in all. In patients requiring second-line therapy, infliximab was considered appropriate irrespective of SARS-CoV-2 status. Delaying colectomy due to SARS-CoV-2 infection was considered inappropriate. Corticosteroid tapering over 8-10 weeks was deemed appropriate for all. After successful corticosteroid rescue, thiopurine maintenance was rated appropriate in patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 swab and asymptomatic patients with positive swab but uncertain in symptomatic COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Our COVID-19-specific adaptations to paediatric ASC guidelines using a RAND panel generally support existing recommendations, particularly the use of corticosteroids and escalation to infliximab, irrespective of SARS-CoV-2 status. Consideration of routine prophylactic anticoagulation was recommended.

Do disease-modifying drugs (DMD) have a positive impact on the occurrence of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis? Comment.

Very recent data from cohorts, such as that of the French Observatory of Multiple Sclerosis (OFSEP) and the MSBase cohort, are the subject of new statistical analyses using propensity scores that enable the matching of relapses frequency, EDSS, age, and sex ratio in patient populations for comparisons with each other, which reduces selection biases. The first data from these cohorts revealed a decline in transition to secondary progressive MS with the most effective disease-modifying drugs currently available, especially when these drugs were used early in the disease. However, these studies remain limited regarding the number of patients, the duration of follow-up, the use of imperfect methodologies, and the level of evidence remains low. The Gothenburg cohort in Sweden, which has been followed since the 1950s, found that 14% of benign non-progressive multiple sclerosis (MS) never evolved to secondary progression after more than 45 years of evolution. EDSS 7 was reached after 48 years of disease (median), and 50% evolved to secondary progressive MS after 15 years (consistent with data from the historic London, Ontario cohort). These data demonstrate that most people living with MS evolve without treatment to a significant long-term disability and that this evolution is closely linked to secondary progression (more than the relapse frequency). Benign forms appear as MS that never passes into secondary progressive MS. Recent data demonstrate that the delay until transition to secondary progression (more than 30 years in the MSBase cohort) and the delay in reaching EDSS 6 decreased since the introduction of disease-modifying drugs 20 years ago. However, randomized placebo-controlled trials do not last more than 2 or 3 years, and many biases may be involved in long-term follow-up studies: worsening patients who are lost to follow-up ("informative censoring" bias: only good responders to treatment remain primarily under the same long-term treatment and are followed); changes in the populations in the most recent studies with a lower rate of relapse and lower progression of disability at the beginning of the disease prior to initiating treatments; and environmental changes that remain largely misunderstood and may contribute to a natural evolution towards less severe disease.

Do disease-modifying drugs (DMD) have a positive impact on the occurrence of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis? No.

RR MS evolution has changed since the beginning of the availability of MS disease-modifying drugs (DMD). Before concluding a unique impact of the efficiency of DMD, careful analysis of long-term studies has to be conducted. Analysis of the literature points out a few bias in the long-term follow of MS patients under DMD: indication of DMD has changed since 20 years, diagnosis criteria are not the same (including the Will Rogers phenomen), and so far population are not homogeneous and comparable. Analysis criteria of the efficiency of the treatments are not the same, pending on the date of the publications. References concerning the long-term impact of DMD are in fact very limited. In addition, long-term efficiency of 2nd line treatments is not available. Another explanation of the change of MS evolution could be the lower evolutivity of MS patients since 2 decades. Analysis of placebo group in pivotal studies, argues to a decrease of the relapse annual rate and mean EDSS score in the more recent studies and recent MS diagnosed patients. To conclude, long-term evolution of MS patients is more favorable, influence of DMD is likely, but not unique.

Do disease-modifying drugs (DMD) have a positive impact on the occurrence of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis? Yes.

During the 20 past years, the management of multiple sclerosis (MS) has largely changed especially concerning therapeutical approach. Before 1996, treatments were restricted to corticosteroids for relapses, several symptomatic treatments and unselective immunosuppressive drugs (azathioprine, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate) with a low evidence of any efficacy. In the present review, we analyze the principal real-life cohorts of MS during several periods (before therapeutical modern area, first-generation treatment area and most recent period). Despite many methodological problems, we observe globally a delay of around 3-5 years between untreated cohorts and first-generation treatments for going to EDSS 6 which is probably the most robust score. This delay is clearly increase to at least 15 years with the most recent cohort treated first and second-line treatments confirming that early and more intensive treatment are necessary to have a long-term efficacy on disability progression and especially on severe disability represent by EDSS 6. Larger cohorts with longer follow-up is necessary to confirm these tendencies and OFSEP observatory or MS base will probably provide us the possibility to conclude in a couple of years.

Infections after kidney transplantation: A comparison of mTOR-Is and CNIs as basic immunosuppressants. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Side effects of the immunosuppressive therapy after solid organ transplantation are well known. Recently, significant benefits were shown for mTOR-Is with respect to certain viral infections in comparison with CNIs. However, reported total incidences of infections under mTOR-Is vs CNIs are usually not different. This raises the question to additional differences between these immunosuppressants regarding development and incidence of infections. METHODS: The current literature was searched for prospective randomized controlled trials in renal transplantation. There were 954 trials screened of which 19 could be included (9861 pts.). The 1-year incidence of infections, patient and graft survival were assessed in meta-analyses. RESULTS: Meta-analysis on 1-year incidence of infections showed a significant benefit of an mTOR-I based therapy when combined with a CNI vs CNI-based therapy alone (OR 0.76). There was no difference between mTOR-I w/o CNI and CNI therapy (OR 0.97). For pneumonia, a significant disadvantage was seen only for mTOR-I monotherapy compared to CNI's (OR 2.09). The incidence of CMV infections was significantly reduced under mTOR-I therapy (combination with CNI: OR 0.30; mTOR w/o CNI: OR: 0.46). There was no significant difference between mTOR-I and CNI therapy with respect to patient survival (mTOR-I w/o CNI vs CNI: OR 1.22; mTOR-I with CNI vs CNI: OR 0.86). Graft survival was negatively affected by mTOR-I monotherapy (OR 1.52) but not when combined with a CNI (OR 0.97). CONCLUSION: Following renal transplantation the incidence of infections is lower when mTOR-Is are combined with a CNI compared to a standard CNI therapy. Pneumonia occurs more often under mTOR-I w/o CNI.

What are the infectious risks with disease-modifying drugs for multiple sclerosis and how to reduce them? A review of literature.

Patients with multiple sclerosis taking immunosuppressive therapy may be at risk of reactivating latent pathogens, community-acquired infections, worsening asymptomatic chronic infections, and contracting de novo infections. This risk was evaluated mainly in short-term clinical trials and few studies have investigated this risk in real-life settings. In clinical practice, this infectious risk should be evaluated when a multiple sclerosis diagnosis is made in order to propose specific follow-up or immunization as soon as possible and thus avoid contraindications or risk of lowered vaccination responses. Systematic screening should also be proposed for each patient before second-line therapy to ensure the risk is in line with the treatment plan. This systematic screening must include HIV and hepatitis B and C for all patients before treatment. The immunization schedule needs to be updated and influenza vaccine could be proposed each year for patients receiving disease-modifying drugs. Prevention is preferable to treatment, reducing both infectious morbidity and mortality, as well as interruptions in multiple sclerosis therapy. Therefore, preventive approaches should be tailored to individual patient and treatment risk factors. In this review, we describe the infectious risk with immunossuppressive therapies and propose minimal screening recommendations to evaluate the risk and adapt the prevention and strategy of immunization to each case at multiple sclerosis diagnosis and at specific follow-up visits to avoid difficulties using live-attenuated vaccines or risk reduced immune responses.

[Treatment of juvenile myasthenia gravis]. / Tratamiento de la miastenia gravis juvenil.

Juvenile myasthenia gravis is a rare autoimmune disease, which has made it difficult to collect data from prospective randomized controlled trials to evaluate the efficacy and results of different treatments. Although there are differences between the juvenile myasthenia gravis and that of the adult, the data provided by some researches in adults in the treatment of juvenile myasthenia gravis have been used. The different therapeutic options will be evaluated, with the different evidences that sustain it and a treatment algorithm will be elaborated keeping always in mind that each patient offers us different challenges.

La miastenia gravis juvenil es una enfermedad autoimmune poco frecuente, por lo que ha sido difícil recopilar datos de estudios controlados aleatorizados prospectivos para evaluar la eficacia y los resultados de distintos tratamientos. Si bien hay diferencias entre la miastenia gravis juvenil y la del adulto, se han utilizado los datos aportados por algunas investigaciones en adultos en el tratamiento de la miastenia gravis juvenil. Se evaluarán las distintas opciones terapéuticas, con las distintas evidencias que lo sostienen y se elaborará un algoritmo de tratamiento teniendo siempre presente que cada paciente nos ofrece distintos desafíos.

Tratamiento de la miastenia gravis juvenil / Treatment of juvenile myasthenia gravis

La miastenia gravis juvenil es una enfermedad autoimmune poco frecuente, por lo que ha sido difícil recopilar datos de estudios controlados aleatorizados prospectivos para evaluar la eficacia y los resultados de distintos tratamientos. Si bien hay diferencias entre la miastenia gravis juvenil y la del adulto, se han utilizado los datos aportados por algunas investigaciones en adultos en el tratamiento de la miastenia gravis juvenil. Se evaluarán las distintas opciones terapéuticas, con las distintas evidencias que lo sostienen y se elaborará un algoritmo de tratamiento teniendo siempre presente que cada paciente nos ofrece distintos desafíos.

Juvenile myasthenia gravis is a rare autoimmune disease, which has made it difficult to collect data from prospective randomized controlled trials to evaluate the efficacy and results of different treatments. Although there are differences between the juvenile myasthenia gravis and that of the adult, the data provided by some researches in adults in the treatment of juvenile myasthenia gravis have been used. The different therapeutic options will be evaluated, with the different evidences that sustain it and a treatment algorithm will be elaborated keeping always in mind that each patient offers us different challenges.

Pemphigus vulgaris.

Pemphigus vulgaris is a chronic autoimmune bullous dermatosis that results from the production of autoantibodies against desmogleins 1 and 3. It is the most frequent and most severe form of pemphigus, occurring universally, usually between 40 and 60 years of age. It usually begins with blisters and erosions on the oral mucosa, followed by lesions on other mucous membranes and flaccid blisters on the skin, which can be disseminated. There is a clinical variant, pemphigus vegetans, which is characterized by the presence of vegetating lesions in the large folds of the skin. Clinical suspicion can be confirmed by cytological examination, histopathological examination, and direct and indirect immunofluorescence tests. The treatment is performed with systemic corticosteroids, and immunosuppressive drugs may be associated, among them azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil. More severe cases may benefit from corticosteroids in the form of intravenous pulse therapy, and recent studies have shown a beneficial effect of rituximab, an anti-CD20 immunobiological drug. It is a chronic disease with mortality around 10%, and septicemia is the main cause of death. Patients need long-term and multidisciplinary follow-up.

[Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. A review]. / Miopatías inflamatorias idiopáticas: una mirada actualizada al diagnóstico y el manejo.

Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) are a heterogeneous group of acquired immune-mediated diseases, which typically involve the striated muscle with a variable involvement of the skin and other organs. Clinically, they are characterized by proximal muscle weakness, elevation of muscle enzymes, myopathic changes on electromyography and an abnormal muscle biopsy. The different IIM have been classified according to their distinctive histopathologic features in dermatomyositis (DM), polymyositis (PM), inclusion body myositis (IBM) and immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy (IMNM). Several myositis-specific antibodies are associated with the different phenotypes, as well as with different risk of neoplastic disease and systemic complications. The basis for the treatment of DM, PM, and IMNM is immunosuppression. For IBM there are only symptomatic treatments. Steroids, associated or not with other immunosuppressant drugs, are the first line of treatment. Biologic drugs will allow future individualized therapies. The 10-year survival of DM, PM and IMNM is 62 to 90%. The leading causes of death are neoplastic, lung and cardiac complications. IBM does not impair survival, although it affects the quality of life.

Immunomodulatory Therapy Does Not Increase the Risk of Cancer in Persons With Inflammatory Bowel Disease and a History of Extracolonic Cancers.

OBJECTIVES: Immunosuppressant therapies (IMTs; thiopurines, anti-tumor necrosis factor agents) may influence the immunologic control of cancer and might facilitate the spread and recurrence of cancer. This study assesses the impact of the use of IMTs on the development of incident cancers (recurrent or new) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and a history of malignancy. METHODS: Patients with IBD included in the ENEIDA registry with a history of cancer without being exposed to IMTs were identified and retrospectively reviewed and compared regarding further treatment with IMTs or not by means of a log-rank test. RESULTS: Overall, 520 patients with previous extracolonic cancer naive to IMTs before the diagnosis of cancer were identified. Of these, 146 were subsequently treated with IMTs (exposed), whereas 374 were not (nonexposed). The proportion of patients with incident cancers was similar in both exposed (16%) and nonexposed (18%) patients (P = 0.53); however, there was more than a 10-year difference in the age at index cancer between these 2 groups. Cancer-free survival was 99%, 98%, and 97% at 1, 2, and 5 years in exposed patients, and 97%, 96%, and 92% at 1, 2, and 5 years in non-exposed patients, respectively (P = 0.03). No differences in incident cancer rates were observed between exposed and nonexposed patients when including only those who were exposed within the first 5 years after cancer diagnosis. DISCUSSION: In patients with IBD and a history of cancer not related to immunosuppression, the use of IMTs is not associated with an increased risk of new or recurrent cancers even when IMTs are started early after cancer diagnosis.

Pemphigus vulgaris

Abstract: Pemphigus vulgaris is a chronic autoimmune bullous dermatosis that results from the production of autoantibodies against desmogleins 1 and 3. It is the most frequent and most severe form of pemphigus, occurring universally, usually between 40 and 60 years of age. It usually begins with blisters and erosions on the oral mucosa, followed by lesions on other mucous membranes and flaccid blisters on the skin, which can be disseminated. There is a clinical variant, pemphigus vegetans, which is characterized by the presence of vegetating lesions in the large folds of the skin. Clinical suspicion can be confirmed by cytological examination, histopathological examination, and direct and indirect immunofluorescence tests. The treatment is performed with systemic corticosteroids, and immunosuppressive drugs may be associated, among them azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil. More severe cases may benefit from corticosteroids in the form of intravenous pulse therapy, and recent studies have shown a beneficial effect of rituximab, an anti-CD20 immunobiological drug. It is a chronic disease with mortality around 10%, and septicemia is the main cause of death. Patients need long-term and multidisciplinary follow-up.

Miopatías inflamatorias idiopáticas: una mirada actualizada al diagnóstico y el manejo / Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: a review

Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) are a heterogeneous group of acquired immune-mediated diseases, which typically involve the striated muscle with a variable involvement of the skin and other organs. Clinically, they are characterized by proximal muscle weakness, elevation of muscle enzymes, myopathic changes on electromyography and an abnormal muscle biopsy. The different IIM have been classified according to their distinctive histopathologic features in dermatomyositis (DM), polymyositis (PM), inclusion body myositis (IBM) and immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy (IMNM). Several myositis-specific antibodies are associated with the different phenotypes, as well as with different risk of neoplastic disease and systemic complications. The basis for the treatment of DM, PM, and IMNM is immunosuppression. For IBM there are only symptomatic treatments. Steroids, associated or not with other immunosuppressant drugs, are the first line of treatment. Biologic drugs will allow future individualized therapies. The 10-year survival of DM, PM and IMNM is 62 to 90%. The leading causes of death are neoplastic, lung and cardiac complications. IBM does not impair survival, although it affects the quality of life.

Therapy for Proliferative Lupus Nephritis.

Proliferative lupus nephritis requires prompt diagnosis and treatment with immunosuppressive therapy. Cyclophosphamide is the longest studied agent, but mycophenolate mofetil has recently emerged as an efficacious induction and maintenance treatment that does not impart the risk of infertility. However, overall remission rates remain suboptimal and there is a need for improved therapeutic options. To this end, ongoing clinical studies are focusing on agents that target key molecules and pathways implicated in the pathogenesis of lupus nephritis based on previous animal and human studies. This article reviews key findings of trials supporting established induction and maintenance treatment regimens along with novel therapeutic investigations.