Upper airway disease diagnosis as a predictive biomarker of therapeutic response to biologics in severe asthma.

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease sharing airway instability but with different biology, risk factors, and response-to-therapy patterns. Biologics have revolutionized the one-size-fits-to-all approach to personalized medicine in severe asthma (SA), which relies on the identification of biomarkers that define distinct endotypes. Thus, blood eosinophils and, to some extent, exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) can predict the response to approved anti-type 2 (T2) biologics (anti-IgE, anti-IL-5, and anti-IL-4R alpha), whereas age at onset and comorbidities such as anxiety/depression, obesity, reflux, and upper airway disease (UAD) also influence therapeutic responses in SA. In this article, focusing on the predictive value of biomarkers for the therapeutic response to biologics in SA, we first summarize the level of prediction achieved by T2 biomarkers (blood eosinophils, FeNO) and then review whether data support the predictive value of upper airway diagnosis on such outcomes. Post hoc analysis of most studies with T2 biologics suggests that chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and, to a lower extent, allergic rhinitis may help in predicting clinical response. Considering that T2 biologics are now also approved for the treatment of severe CRSwNP, diagnosis of upper airway disease is a key step in determining eligibility for such therapy.

Poly(2-dimethylamino ethylmethacrylate)-based polymers to camouflage red blood cell antigens.

Poly(2-dimethylamino-ethylmethacrylate) (PDMAEMA) is a cationic polymer when dissolved in a 7.4 pH fluid. Owing to its ionic nature, this polycation interacts with the negatively charged cell membrane surface of red blood cells (RBCs). The electrostatic self-assembly of PDMAEMA on RBCs membrane can be employed for inducing the formation of a polymeric shield camouflaging blood group antigens on RBCs as a valuable strategy for developing "universal RBCs" for blood transfusion. The purpose of this research was to evaluate the camouflaging ability of PDMAEMA homopolymers and PDMAEMA-co-poly(ethylene glycol) copolymers differing in molecular weight and architecture. Surprisingly, the PDMAEMAs caused a partially masking, no masking, and sensitization of the same RBCs population. The MW and architecture of the polymers as well as temperature of PDMAEMA-RBCs treatment influenced the results observed. Herein, the very particular reactivity of PDMAEMAs and RBCs is analyzed and discussed.