Macrophage expression and prognostic significance of the long pentraxin PTX3 in COVID-19.

Long pentraxin 3 (PTX3) is an essential component of humoral innate immunity, involved in resistance to selected pathogens and in the regulation of inflammation1-3. The present study was designed to assess the presence and significance of PTX3 in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)4-7. RNA-sequencing analysis of peripheral blood mononuclear cells, single-cell bioinformatics analysis and immunohistochemistry of lung autopsy samples revealed that myelomonocytic cells and endothelial cells express high levels of PTX3 in patients with COVID-19. Increased plasma concentrations of PTX3 were detected in 96 patients with COVID-19. PTX3 emerged as a strong independent predictor of 28-d mortality in multivariable analysis, better than conventional markers of inflammation, in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The prognostic significance of PTX3 abundance for mortality was confirmed in a second independent cohort (54 patients). Thus, circulating and lung myelomonocytic cells and endothelial cells are a major source of PTX3, and PTX3 plasma concentration can serve as an independent strong prognostic indicator of short-term mortality in COVID-19.

Belzutifan versus Everolimus for Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Belzutifan, a hypoxia-inducible factor 2α inhibitor, showed clinical activity in clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma in early-phase studies. METHODS: In a phase 3, multicenter, open-label, active-controlled trial, we enrolled participants with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who had previously received immune checkpoint and antiangiogenic therapies and randomly assigned them, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive 120 mg of belzutifan or 10 mg of everolimus orally once daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects occurred. The dual primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival. The key secondary end point was the occurrence of an objective response (a confirmed complete or partial response). RESULTS: A total of 374 participants were assigned to belzutifan, and 372 to everolimus. At the first interim analysis (median follow-up, 18.4 months), the median progression-free survival was 5.6 months in both groups; at 18 months, 24.0% of the participants in the belzutifan group and 8.3% in the everolimus group were alive and free of progression (two-sided P = 0.002, which met the prespecified significance criterion). A confirmed objective response occurred in 21.9% of the participants (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.8 to 26.5) in the belzutifan group and in 3.5% (95% CI, 1.9 to 5.9) in the everolimus group (P<0.001, which met the prespecified significance criterion). At the second interim analysis (median follow-up, 25.7 months), the median overall survival was 21.4 months in the belzutifan group and 18.1 months in the everolimus group; at 18 months, 55.2% and 50.6% of the participants, respectively, were alive (hazard ratio for death, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.07; two-sided P = 0.20, which did not meet the prespecified significance criterion). Grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause occurred in 61.8% of the participants in the belzutifan group (grade 5 in 3.5%) and in 62.5% in the everolimus group (grade 5 in 5.3%). Adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment in 5.9% and 14.7% of the participants, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Belzutifan showed a significant benefit over everolimus with respect to progression-free survival and objective response in participants with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who had previously received immune checkpoint and antiangiogenic therapies. Belzutifan was associated with no new safety signals. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck; LITESPARK-005 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04195750.).

Atezolizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor130): final overall survival analysis results from a randomised, controlled, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: IMvigor130 demonstrated statistically significant investigator-assessed progression-free survival benefit with first-line atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A) versus placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Overall survival was not improved in interim analyses. Here we report the final overall analysis for group A versus group C. METHODS: In this global, partially blinded, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study, patients (aged ≥18 years) with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer and who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled at 221 hospitals and oncology centres in 35 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), with a permuted block method (block size of six) and an interactive voice and web response system, stratified by PD-L1 status, Bajorin risk factor score, and investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy, to receive atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A), atezolizumab monotherapy (group B), or placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C). Sponsors, investigators, and patients were masked to assignment to atezolizumab or placebo (ie, group A and group C) and atezolizumab monotherapy (group B) was open label. For groups A and C, all patients received gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 intravenously; day 1 and day 8 of each 21-day cycle), plus investigator's choice of carboplatin (area under curve 4·5 mg/mL per min or 5 mg/mL per min; intravenously) or cisplatin (70 mg/m2 intravenously), plus either atezolizumab (1200 mg intravenously) or placebo on day 1 of each cycle. Co-primary endpoints of the study were investigator-assessed progression-free survival and overall survival for group A versus group C in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (ie, all randomised patients), and overall survival for group B versus group C, tested hierarchically. Final overall survival and updated safety outcomes (safety population; all patients who received any amount of any study treatment component) for group A versus group C are reported here. The final prespecified boundary for significance of the overall survival analysis was one-sided p=0·021. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02807636, and is active but no longer recruiting. FINDINGS: Between July 15, 2016, and July 20, 2018, 1213 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment, of whom 851 were assigned to group A (n=451) and group C (n=400). 338 (75%) patients in group A and 298 (75%) in group C were male, 113 (25%) in group A and 102 (25%) in group C were female, and 346 (77%) in group A and 304 (76%) in group C were White. At data cutoff (Aug 31, 2022), after a median follow up of 13·4 months (IQR 6·2-30·8), median overall survival was 16·1 months (95% CI 14·2-18·8; 336 deaths) in group A versus 13·4 months (12·0-15·3; 310 deaths) in group C (stratified hazard ratio 0·85 [95% CI 0·73-1·00]; one-sided p=0·023). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were anaemia (168 [37%] of 454 patients who received atezolizumab plus chemotherapy vs 133 [34%] of 389 who received placebo plus chemotherapy), neutropenia (167 [37%] vs 115 [30%]), decreased neutrophil count (98 [22%] vs 95 [24%]), thrombocytopenia (95 [21%] vs 70 [18%]), and decreased platelet count (92 [20%] vs 92 [24%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 243 (54%) patients who received atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and 196 (50%) patients who received placebo plus chemotherapy. Treatment-related deaths occurred in nine (2%; acute kidney injury, dyspnoea, hepatic failure, hepatitis, neutropenia, pneumonitis, respiratory failure, sepsis, and thrombocytopenia [n=1 each]) patients who received atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and four (1%; unexplained death, diarrhoea, febrile neutropenia, and toxic hepatitis [n=1 each]) who received placebo plus chemotherapy. INTERPRETATION: Progression-free survival benefit with first-line combination of atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy did not translate into a significant improvement in overall survival in the ITT population of IMvigor130. Further research is needed to understand which patients might benefit from first-line combination treatment. No new safety signals were observed. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Atezolizumab monotherapy versus chemotherapy in untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor130): final overall survival analysis from a randomised, controlled, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The primary analysis of IMvigor130 showed a significant progression-free survival benefit with first-line atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A) versus placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer. However, this finding did not translate into significant overall survival benefit for group A versus group C at the final analysis, precluding formal statistical testing of outcomes with atezolizumab monotherapy (group B) versus group C. Here we report the final overall survival results for group B versus group C; this report is descriptive and should be considered exploratory due to the study's statistical design. METHODS: In this global, partially blinded, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study, patients (aged ≥18 years) who had locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer previously untreated in the metastatic setting and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled at 221 hospitals and oncology centres in 35 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using a permuted block method (block size of six) and an interactive voice and web response system, stratified by PD-L1 status, Bajorin score, and investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy, to receive either atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A), atezolizumab alone (group B), or placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C). Sponsors, investigators, and patients were masked to assignment to atezolizumab or placebo in group A and group C; atezolizumab monotherapy in group B was open label. For groups B and C, atezolizumab (1200 mg) or placebo was administered intravenously every 3 weeks. Chemotherapy involved 21-day cycles of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 body surface area on day 1 and day 8 of each cycle) plus the investigator's choice of carboplatin (area under the curve 4·5 mg/mL per min or 5 mg/mL per min) or cisplatin (70 mg/m2 body surface area), administered intravenously. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival in group A versus group C, and overall survival in group B versus group C, tested hierarchically, in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, and then the populations with high PD-L1 tumour expression (immune cell [IC] expression score of IC2/3) if the results from group A versus group C were significant. Here, we report the co-primary endpoint of overall survival for group B versus group C in the ITT and IC2/3 populations. The ITT population for this analysis comprised concurrently enrolled patients in groups B and C who were randomly assigned to treatment. For the safety analysis, all patients enrolled in group B and group C who received any study treatment were included. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02807636, and is active but no longer recruiting. FINDINGS: Between July 15, 2016, and July 20, 2018, 1213 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment, of whom 362 patients were assigned to group B and 400 to group C, of whom 360 and 359, respectively, were enrolled concurrently (ITT population). 543 (76%) of 719 patients were male, 176 (24%) were female, and 534 (74%) were White. As of data cutoff (Aug 31, 2022), after a median follow-up of 13·4 months (IQR 6·2-30·8), median overall survival was 15·2 months (95% CI 13·1-17·7; 271 deaths) in group B and 13·3 months (11·9-15·6; 275 deaths) in group C (stratified hazard ratio 0·98 [95% CI 0·82-1·16]). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were anaemia (two [1%] in patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy vs 133 [34%] in those who received placebo plus chemotherapy), neutropenia (one [<1%] vs 115 [30%]), decreased neutrophil count (0 vs 95 [24%]), and decreased platelet count (one [<1%] vs 92 [24%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 163 (46%) patients versus 196 (50%). Treatment-related deaths occurred in three (1%; n=1 each, pneumonia, interstitial lung disease, large intestinal obstruction) patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy and four (1%; n=1 each, diarrhoea, febrile neutropenia, unexplained death, toxic hepatitis) who received placebo plus chemotherapy. INTERPRETATION: The final analysis from IMvigor130 did not show a significant improvement in overall survival with first-line atezolizumab monotherapy compared with platinum-based chemotherapy in the intention-to-treat population. The safety profile of atezolizumab monotherapy remained acceptable after extended follow-up, with no new safety signals. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Cisplatin eligibility in the neoadjuvant setting of patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer undergoing radical cystectomy.

BACKGROUND: To examine the agreement of different calculated estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) formulas and measured creatinine clearance (CrCI) at the primary diagnosis of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a multicenter analysis of patients with MIBC, treated with cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and radical cystectomy (RC), or with RC alone, between 2011 and 2021. Baseline eGFR was computed using 4 calculated serum equations including Cockcroft-Gault (CG), MDRD, CKD-EPI 2009, and race-free CKD-EPI 2021. To examine the association between calculated eGFR and measured CrCI, subgroup analyses were performed among patients in whom measured 24-hour urine CrCl was determined. Cisplatin-ineligibility was defined as CrCI and/or eGFR < 60 mL/minute per 1.73 m2. RESULTS: Of 956 patients, 30.0%, 33.3%, 31.9%, and 27.7% were found to be cisplatin-ineligible by the CG, MDRD, CKD-EPI, and race-free CKD-EPI equations (P = .052). The concordance between calculated eGFR formulas was rated substantial (Cohen's kappa (k): 0.66-0.95). Among the subgroup (n = 245) with measured CrCl, 37 (15.1%) patients had a CrCI less than 60 mL/minute. Concordance between measured CrCl and calculated eGFR was poor (ĸ: 0.29-0.40). All calculated eGFR formulas markedly underestimated the measured CrCI. Specifically, 78%-87.5% of patients with a calculated eGFR between 40 and 59 mL/minute exhibited a measured CrCI ≥ 60 mL/minute. CONCLUSIONS: Comparing calculated eGFR formulas, similar percentages of patients with MIBC were deemed cisplatin-ineligible. However, a significant number of patients could be upgraded by being cisplatin-fit based on measured CrCI, particularly when the calculated eGFR was falling within the gray range of 40-59 mL/minute.

Rituximab retention rate in systemic sclerosis: a long term real-life multicenter study.

OBJECTIVES: to report real-life data on rituximab retention-rate as indicator of safety and efficacy in a multicentric national cohort of systemic sclerosis patients. METHODS: SSc patients treated with rituximab and followed for at least 36 months were included, clinically characterized, and longitudinally monitored. A competing risk analysis with sub-Hazard Ratio(sHR) definition was performed to explore the clinical variables linked to specific cause of rituximab discontinuation. RESULTS: One-hundred-fifty-two SSc-patients (mean age 47.3 ± 12.3 years; females 79.6%; diffuse disease 77.6%; anti-topoisomerase-I positivity 63.2%) were evaluated over a median(IQR) time of 3.3(1.7-5.0) years. The primary indication for rituximab were interstitial lung disease (ILD)(38.8%), worsening skin fibrosis(36.8%), and arthritis(13.8%); 138 patients(90.8%) received more than one rituximab course. The 5-years rituximab retention rate was 59.9%(44.6-64.7%). Clinical response was the most common reason for rituximab discontinuation[5.7(3.7-8.4) per 100 patient-year] and was associated with a shorter disease duration[sHR 0.8(0.7-0.9)], anti-topoisomerase-I negativity[sHR 0.4(0.2-0.9)], previous digital ulcers[sHR 2.6(1.1-6.2] and no history of arthritis[sHR 0.3 (0.1-0.8)]. Treatment failure was the second cause of rituximab discontinuation[3.7(2.2-6.0) per 100 patient-year] and was associated with anti-centromere antibody positivity[sHR 2.8(1.1-7.4)] and anti-topoisomerase-I negativity[sHR 0.2(0.1-0.6)]. Adverse events(AEs) were the less common cause of discontinuation[3.1(1.7-5.2) per 100 patient-year], associated with limited cutaneous subset[sHR 3.4(1.2-9.7)] and previous mycophenolate mofetil treatment[sHR 4.5(1.2-16.3)]. CONCLUSION: rituximab is a safe and effective treatment in SSc: clinical response emerged as the primary reason for rituximab discontinuation, and AEs had a limited impact on treatment persistence. The identification of specific disease features associated with a response to rituximab will be useful in the management of SSc-patients.

Long-term retention rate, adverse event temporal patterns and rescue treatment strategies of mycophenolate mofetil in systemic sclerosis: insights from real-life.

BACKGROUND: Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is a mainstay for the treatment of systemic sclerosis (SSc). The occurrence and implications of MMF-related adverse events on drug retention rates in real life remain poorly defined. We aimed to determine the MMF retention rate and to investigate the causes and patterns of discontinuation, adverse events (AEs) and treatment options used after discontinuation. METHODS: SSc patients who started MMF treatment underwent a retrospective longitudinal assessment for up to 5 years. We documented the incidence, predictors, and impacts of MMF treatment on gastrointestinal intolerance, infections, laboratory abnormalities, and cancer. Rescue strategies implemented after MMF discontinuation were recorded. RESULTS: The 5-year MMF retention rate of 554 patients stood at 70.7% and 19.6% of them stopped MMF due to AEs. One out of every four patients experienced a dose reduction or discontinuation of MMF due to AEs, with gastrointestinal intolerance being the predominant cause. The 5-year cumulative incidence rates for gastrointestinal intolerance, cancer, severe infections, and laboratory toxicity leading to MMF discontinuation were 6.4%, 4.1%, 3.1%, and 2.1%, respectively. Lower respiratory tract was the most affected, with bacteria being the predominant causative agent. Intestinal and pulmonary circulation involvement were tied to elevated AE rates and MMF discontinuation. The most common approaches post-MMF cessation were "watch and wait" and switch to rituximab. CONCLUSIONS: MMF use in SSc appears to be limited by the occurrence of AEs, both in terms of persistence and dosing of the drug. Rescue options after MMF discontinuation are limited and many patients remain without immunosuppressant.

Pembrolizumab plus either epacadostat or placebo for cisplatin-ineligible urothelial carcinoma: results from the ECHO-307/KEYNOTE-672 study.

BACKGROUND: Indoleamine 2,3- dioxygenase 1 (IDO1) is an immunosuppressive enzyme that has been correlated with shorter disease-specific survival in patients with urothelial carcinoma (UC). IDO1 may counteract the antitumor effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors. Epacadostat is a potent and highly selective inhibitor of IDO1. In the phase I/II ECHO-202/KEYNOTE-037 study, epacadostat plus pembrolizumab resulted in a preliminary objective response rate (ORR) of 35% in a cohort of patients with advanced UC. METHODS: ECHO-307/KEYNOTE-672 was a double-blinded, randomized, phase III study. Eligible adults had confirmed locally advanced/unresectable or metastatic UC of the urinary tract and were ineligible to receive cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive epacadostat (100 mg twice daily) plus pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks) or placebo plus pembrolizumab for up to 35 pembrolizumab infusions. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed ORR per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1). RESULTS: A total of 93 patients were randomized (epacadostat plus pembrolizumab, n = 44; placebo plus pembrolizumab, n = 49). Enrollment was stopped early due to emerging data from the phase III ECHO-301/KEYNOTE-252 study. The median duration of follow-up was 64 days in both arms. Based on all available data at cutoff, ORR (unconfirmed) was 31.8% (95% CI, 22.46-55.24%) for epacadostat plus pembrolizumab and 24.5% (95% CI, 15.33-43.67%) for placebo plus pembrolizumab. Circulating kynurenine levels numerically increased from C1D1 to C2D1 in the placebo-plus-pembrolizumab arm and decreased in the epacadostat-plus-pembrolizumab arm. Epacadostat-plus-pembrolizumab combination treatment was well tolerated with a safety profile similar to the placebo arm. Treatment discontinuations due to treatment-related adverse events were more frequent with epacadostat (11.6% vs. 4.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with epacadostat plus pembrolizumab resulted in a similar ORR and safety profile as placebo plus pembrolizumab in cisplatin-ineligible patients with previously untreated locally advanced/unresectable or metastatic UC. At a dose of 100 mg twice daily, epacadostat did not appear to completely normalize circulating kynurenine levels when administered with pembrolizumab. Larger studies with longer follow-up and possibly testing higher doses of epacadostat, potentially in different therapy settings, may be warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03361865, retrospectively registered December 5, 2017.

Necrotizing Sarcoid Granulomatosis in a Patient With Systemic Sclerosis.

Systemic sclerosis (SSc) rarely overlaps with noninfective granulomatous conditions, such as sarcoidosis or pneumoconiosis.1A 73-year-old White man with anti-Scl70 positive SSc was evaluated for arthralgia, fever, and weight loss.

Approaches for the diagnosis and treatment of VEXAS syndrome: the importance of clinical suspicion and the use of methotrexate.

Vacuoles, E1-enzyme, X-linked, Autoinflammatory, Somatic (VEXAS) syndrome is caused by mutations in the UBA1 gene in myeloid precursors, leading to systemic inflammatory manifestations. We present the case of a 75-year-old man presenting with fever, panniculitis, and macrocytic anemia testing repeatedly negative for UBA1 mutations in peripheral blood samples, but ultimately found positive on bone marrow mononuclear cell DNA. The man has been successfully treated with prednisone and methotrexate.