Specific Cellular and Humoral Response after the Third Dose of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 RNA Vaccine in Patients with Immune-Mediated Rheumatic Diseases on Immunosuppressive Therapy.

OBJECTIVE: Data on cellular and humoral immunogenicity after the third dose of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases (IMRDs) are scarce. Herein, we evaluated the adaptive immune response in IMRD patients treated with different immunosuppressive therapies (conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [csDMARDs], biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [bDMARDs], and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [tsDMARDs]) after the booster of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine to determine whether any drug reduced the vaccine's response. METHODS: A single-center prospective study was conducted, including patients presenting with IMRD and healthy controls (HC). Specific anti-SARS-CoV-2 interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) production was evaluated between 8-12 weeks after the third dose of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. In addition, anti-Spike IgG antibody titers were also measured. RESULTS: Samples were obtained from 79 IMRD patients (51 women, 28 men; mean age 57 ± 11.3 years old): 43 rheumatoid arthritis, 10 psoriatic arthritis, 14 ankylosing spondylitis, 10 undifferentiated spondyloarthritis, and 2 inflammatory bowel disease-associated spondyloarthritis (IBD-SpA). In total, 31 HC (mean age 50.9 ± 13.1 years old, 67.7% women) were included in the study. Post-vaccine results displayed positive T-cell immune responses in 68 out of 79 (86.1%) IMRD patients (82.3% of those without prior COVID-19). All HC and IMRDs patients had an antibody response against the SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain; however, the HC response was significantly higher (median of 18,048 AU/mL) than in IMRDs patients (median of 6590.3 AU/mL, p < 0.001). MTX and leflunomide were associated with lower titers of IgG and IFN-γ responses. Among bDMARDs, adalimumab, etanercept, and guselkumab are associated with reduced cellular responses. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary data show that the majority of our IMRD patients develop cellular and humoral responses after the SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccination, emphasizing the relevance of vaccination in this group. However, the magnitude of specific responses was dependent on the immunosuppressive therapy administered. Specific vaccination protocols and personalized decisions about boosters are essential for these patients.

Nasoethmoidal Intestinal-Type Adenocarcinoma Treated with Cetuximab: Role of Liquid Biopsy and BEAMing in Predicting Response to Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Therapy.

Sinonasal intestinal-type adenocarcinomas (SNS-ITAC) are very rare tumors that resemble colorectal cancer in many of their pathological and molecular characteristics. Indeed, in most published series, 10%-14% of SNS-ITAC harbor mutations in KRAS. There is no standard systemic treatment in recurrent or metastatic SNS-ITAC, and there is no evidence of the use of any targeted agent in this entity. We present the case of a recurrent nasoethmoidal ITAC informed as RAS and BRAF wild-type by standard real-time polymerase chain reaction methods and treated with first-line cetuximab and irinotecan without response. Circulating tumor cells coupled to highly sensitive DNA analyses unveiled a mutation in KRAS exon 2 codon 12. Subsequent studies in the primary tumor using BEAMing detected a mutation in the same codon, confirming the KRAS mutated status of the tumor, and possibly explaining the absence of treatment response. This case exemplifies how liquid biopsy can aid in the correct and real-time molecular characterization of tumors even in a rare nonmetastatic cancer of the head and neck. KEY POINTS: Sinonasal intestinal type adenocarcinomas (SNS-ITAC) are rare tumors that commonly develop after a prolonged exposure to organic dusts (wood, leather, etc.), and that resemble colorectal cancer in some of their morphological and molecular characteristics.KRAS mutations have been described in 10%-14% in most series. However, its predictive value for guiding treatment decisions with targeted therapies (i.e., anti-epidermal growth factor receptor [EGFR] therapy) has not been defined.The first case of an SNS-ITAC treated with anti-EGFR therapy (cetuximab) is reported. Analysis of DNA from circulating tumor cells (CTCs) unveiled a mutation in KRAS not detected by standard methods in the primary tumor. However, RAS analysis using BEAMing detected a mutation in the primary tumor in the same codon of KRAS originally detected in CTCs, altogether possibly explaining the lack of treatment response.Liquid biopsy may allow for an accurate molecular diagnosis in rare, organ-confined tumors where few therapeutic options exist. Highly sensitive molecular diagnostics may aid in better characterizing rare entities harboring potentially druggable targets.

p16 gene methylation in colorectal cancer patients with long-term follow-up.

INTRODUCTION: p16 gene plays an important role in the cell cycle regulation and is considered an important tumor suppressor gene. Several mechanisms of gene inactivation have been described; in this study we have focused on p16 gene promoter methylation. In colorectal cancer p16 gene methylation is a frequent event. METHODS: 326 patients with sporadic colorectal cancer were included. DNA was extracted from tumor tissue samples obtained during the surgical procedure. Promoter methylation was analyzed using bisulfite modification and was detected by quantitative methylation-specific PCR. Frequency of p16 methylation was analyzed and compared with other clinicopathological variables. RESULTS: p16 gene methylation was detected in 24.8% of patients. Methylation was associated with differentiation grade and with tumor location: methylation was frequent in poorly differentiated tumors and had low frequency in distal colon. The p16 promoter methylation discriminated a subgroup of patients with better prognosis in poorly differentiated tumors. CONCLUSIONS: p16 methylation was a frequent event in our population and was able to induce differences in the overall survival of patients with poorly differentiated tumors.

Metilación de p16 en pacientes intervenidos de cáncer colorrectal tras un largo periodo de seguimiento / p16 gene methylation in colorectal cancer patients with long-term follow-up

Introducción: el gen p16 está implicado en la regulación del ciclo celular y se considera un importante gen supresor de tumores. Objetivos: se han descrito diferentes mecanismos de inactivación génica, en este estudio nos hemos centrado en la metilación del promotor del gen p16. En el cáncer colorrectal la metilación de p16 es una alteración frecuente. Material y métodos: se incluyeron 326 pacientes con cáncer colorrectal esporádico. El ADN se extrajo de muestras tumorales obtenidas durante la cirugía. La metilación del promotor se analizó mediante un proceso de modificación con bisulfito y posterior PCR cuantitativa especifica para metilación. Se analizó la frecuencia de la metilación de p16 y se comparó con las variables clinicopatológicas. Resultados: la metilación del gen p16 se detectó en el 24,8% de los pacientes. La metilación de p16 se relacionó con el grado de diferenciación y con la localización tumoral: la metilación fue mas frecuente en los tumores pobremente diferenciados y tuvo una baja frecuencia en el colon distal. La metilación del promotor de p16 discrimina un subgrupo de pacientes con mejor pronóstico en los tumores pobremente diferenciados. Conclusiones: la metilación de p16 es un evento frecuente en nuestra población y es capaz de inducir diferencias en la supervivencia global de los pacientes con tumores moderadamente diferenciados(AU)

Introduction: p16 gene plays an important role in the cell cycle regulation and is considered an important tumor suppressor gene. Several mechanisms of gene inactivation have been described; in this study we have focused on p16 gene promoter methylation. In colorectal cancer p16 gene methylation is a frequent event. Methods: 326 patients with sporadic colorectal cancer were included. DNA was extracted from tumor tissue samples obtained during the surgical procedure. Promoter methylation was analyzed using bisulfite modification and was detected by quantitative methylation- specific PCR. Frequency of p16 methylation was analyzed and compared with other clinicopathological variables. Results: p16 gene methylation was detected in 24,8% of patients. Methylation was associated with differentiation grade and with tumor location: methylation was frequent in poorly differentiated tumors and had low frequency in distal colon. The p16 promoter methylation discriminated a subgroup of patients with better prognosis in poorly differentiated tumors. Conclusions: p16 methylation was a frequent event in our population and was able to induce differences in the overall survival of patients with poorly differentiated tumors(AU)