IL-31-dependent neurogenic inflammation restrains cutaneous type 2 immune response in allergic dermatitis.

Despite robust literature associating IL-31 with pruritic inflammatory skin diseases, its influence on cutaneous inflammation and the interplay between inflammatory and neurosensory pathways remain unmapped. Here, we examined the consequences of disrupting Il31 and its receptor Il31ra in a mouse model of house dust mite (HDM)-induced allergic dermatitis. Il31-deficient mice displayed a deficit in HDM dermatitis-associated scratching, consistent with its well-established role as a pruritogen. In contrast, Il31 deficiency increased the number and proportion of cutaneous type 2 cytokine-producing CD4+ T cells and serum IgE in response to HDM. Furthermore, Il4ra+ monocytes and macrophages capable of fueling a feedforward type 2 inflammatory loop were selectively enriched in Il31ra-deficient HDM dermatitis skin. Thus, IL-31 is not strictly a proinflammatory cytokine but rather an immunoregulatory factor that limits the magnitude of type 2 inflammatory responses in skin. Our data support a model wherein IL-31 activation of IL31RA+ pruritoceptors triggers release of calcitonin gene-related protein (CGRP), which can mediate neurogenic inflammation, inhibit CD4+ T cell proliferation, and reduce T cell production of the type 2 cytokine IL-13. Together, these results illustrate a previously unrecognized neuroimmune pathway that constrains type 2 tissue inflammation in the setting of chronic cutaneous allergen exposure and may explain paradoxical dermatitis flares in atopic patients treated with anti-IL31RA therapy.

Characteristics and clinical outcome in 312 patients with moderate to severe pneumonia due to SARS-COV-2 and hyperinflammation treated with anakinra and corticosteroids: A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical outcome (death and/or Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission) based on the time from hospital admission to the administration of anakinra and the possible usefulness of a "simplified" SCOPE score to stratify the risk of worse prognosis in our cohort of patients with moderate/severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, both vaccinated and unvaccinated, that received anakinra and corticosteroids. In addition, the clinical, analytical, and imaging characteristics of patients at admission are described. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of 312 patients admitted to Hospital Clínico San Cecilio in Granada for moderate/severe pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV-2 that received anakinra and corticosteroids between March 2020 and January 2022. Clinical and analytical data were collected as well as the patient outcome at 30 and 60 days after admission. Three treatment groups were established according to the time from hospital admission to administration of anakinra: early (1st-2nd day), intermediate (3rd-5th day), and late (after the 5th day). RESULTS: The median age was 67.4 years (IQR 22-97 years) and 204 (65.4%) were male. The most common comorbidity was hypertension (58%). The median time from the start of symptoms to anakinra administration was 6 days (IQR 5-10) and the SaFi (SaO2/FiO2) was 228 (IQR 71-471). The cure rate was higher in the early-onset anakinra group versus the late-onset group (73% vs 56.6%). The latter had a higher percentage of deaths (27.4%) and a greater number of patients remained hospitalized for a month (16%). On admission, the patients had elevated C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, and D-dimer values and decreased total lymphocytes. Analytical improvement was observed at both 72 hours and one month after treatment. 42 (13.5%) required ICU admission, and 23 (7.3%) orotracheal intubation. At 60 days, 221 (70.8%) were discharged, 87 (27.8%) had died and 4 (1.4%) remained hospitalized. The mean dose of anakinra was 1000 mg (100-2600 mg) with differences found between the dose administered and the clinical outcome. There were no differences in the primary outcome based on vaccination. A simplified SCOPE score at the start of anakinra administration was lower in patients with better clinical evolution. CONCLUSIONS: Early treatment with anakinra and corticosteroids was associated with a better outcome regardless of vaccination status. A simplified SCOPE was found to be a good prognostic tool.

Dexametasona frente a metilprednisolona ajustada al peso en pacientes con neumonía moderada-grave por SARS-CoV-2 / Dexamethasone versus weight-adjusted methylprednisolone in patients with moderate-severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia

Objetivos: Comparar el desenlace clínico (mortalidad y/o ingreso en UCI) a 30 días de los pacientes ingresados por neumonía moderada-grave por SARS-CoV-2 tratados con dexametasona tras el estudio RECOVERY frente aquellos tratados con metilprednisolona ajustada al peso.MétodosEstudio de cohortes retrospectivo de 65 pacientes con neumonía moderada-grave que recibieron 6 mg/día de dexametasona (grupo DXM) frente a 80 tratados con metilprednisolona ajustada al peso (grupo MTPN).ResultadosFallecieron 21 (32,3%) pacientes del grupo DXM vs. 8 (10%) del grupo MTPN (valor p < 0,001) y 29 (44,6%) del grupo DXM requirieron ingreso en UCI vs. 2 (2,5%) del grupo MTPN (valor p < 0,001). No hubo diferencias basales respecto a características sociodemográficas con un qSOFA medio superior en el grupo MTPN. La razón de riesgo para la mortalidad y el ingreso en UCI ajustada por edad, sexo y PCR al ingreso fue de 2,189 (1,082-4,426; IC 95%) y 10,589 (2,139-48,347; IC 95%) para el grupo DXM, respectivamente, vs. grupo MTPN.ConclusionesLa mortalidad e ingreso en UCI fue menor en pacientes tratados con metilprednisolona ajustada al peso frente a los tratados con dexametasona. (AU)

Objectives: To compare the 30-day outcome (mortality and/or ICU admission) of patients admitted for moderate-severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia treated with dexamethasone after the Recovery study versus those treated with weight-adjusted methylprednisolone.MethodsRetrospective cohort study of 65 patients with moderate-severe pneumonia who received dexamethasone 6 mg/day (DXM group) versus 80 treated with weight-adjusted methylprednisolone (MTPN group).ResultsTwenty-one (32.3%) patients in the DXM group died vs. 8 (10%) in the MTPN group (p-value < 0.001) and 29 (44.6%) in the DXM group required ICU admission vs. 2 (2.5%) of the MTPN group (p-value < 0.001). There were no baseline differences regarding sociodemographic characteristics with a higher mean qSOFA in the MTPN group. The hazard ratio for mortality and ICU admission adjusted for age, sex, and admission CRP was 2.189 (1.082–4.426; 95% CI) and 10.589 (2.139–48.347; 95% CI) for the DXM group, respectively, vs. MTPN group.ConclusionsMortality and admission to the ICU were lower in patients treated with weight-adjusted methylprednisolone compared to those treated with dexamethasone. (AU)

Dexamethasone versus weight-adjusted methylprednisolone in patients with moderate-severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia.

Objectives: To compare the 30-day outcome (mortality and/or ICU admission) of patients admitted for moderate-severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia treated with dexamethasone after the Recovery study versus those treated with weight-adjusted methylprednisolone. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of 65 patients with moderate-severe pneumonia who received dexamethasone 6 mg/day (DXM group) versus 80 treated with weight-adjusted methylprednisolone (MTPN group). Results: 21 (32.3%) patients in the DXM group died vs 8 (10%) in the MTPN group (p-value < 0.001) and 29 (44.6%) in the DXM group required ICU admission vs 2 (2,5%) of the MTPN group (p-value <0.001). There were no baseline differences regarding sociodemographic characteristics with a higher mean qSOFA in the MTPN group. The hazard ratio for mortality and ICU admission adjusted for age, sex, and admission CRP was 2.189 (1.082-4.426; 95% CI) and 10.589 (2.139-48.347; 95% CI) for the DXM group, respectively, vs. MTPN group. Conclusions: Mortality and admission to the ICU were lower in patients treated with weight-adjusted methylprednisolone compared to those treated with dexamethasone.

Objetivos: Comparar el desenlace clínico (mortalidad y/o ingreso en UCI) a 30 días de los pacientes ingresados por neumonía moderada-grave por SARS-CoV-2 tratados con dexametasona tras el estudio Recovery frente aquellos tratados con metilprednisolona ajustada al peso. Métodos: Estudio de cohortes retrospectivo de 65 pacientes con neumonía moderada-grave que recibieron 6 mg/día de dexametasona (grupo DXM) frente a 80 tratados con metilprednisolona ajustada al peso (grupo MTPN). Resultados: Fallecieron 21 (32,3%) pacientes del grupo DXM vs 8 (10%) del grupo MTPN (p-valor < 0,001) y 29 (44,6%) del grupo DXM requirieron ingreso en UCI vs 2 (2,5%) del grupo MTPN (p-valor < 0,001). No hubo diferencias basales respecto a características sociodemográficas con un qSOFA medio superior en el grupo MTPN. La razón de riesgo para la mortalidad y el ingreso en UCI ajustada por edad, sexo y PCR al ingreso fue de 2,189 (1,082−4,426; IC 95%) y 10,589 (2,139−48,347; IC 95%) para el grupo DXM, respectivamente, vs grupo MTPN. Conclusiones: La mortalidad e ingreso en UCI fue menor en pacientes tratados con metilprednisolona ajustada al peso frente a los tratados con dexametasona.

[Dexamethasone versus weight-adjusted methylprednisolone in patients with moderate-severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia]. / Dexametasona frente a metilprednisolona ajustada al peso en pacientes con neumonía moderada-grave por SARS-CoV-2.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the 30-day outcome (mortality and/or ICU admission) of patients admitted for moderate-severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia treated with dexamethasone after the Recovery study versus those treated with weight-adjusted methylprednisolone. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of 65 patients with moderate-severe pneumonia who received dexamethasone 6 mg/day (DXM group) versus 80 treated with weight-adjusted methylprednisolone (MTPN group). RESULTS: Twenty-one (32.3%) patients in the DXM group died vs. 8 (10%) in the MTPN group (p-value < 0.001) and 29 (44.6%) in the DXM group required ICU admission vs. 2 (2.5%) of the MTPN group (p-value < 0.001). There were no baseline differences regarding sociodemographic characteristics with a higher mean qSOFA in the MTPN group. The hazard ratio for mortality and ICU admission adjusted for age, sex, and admission CRP was 2.189 (1.082-4.426; 95% CI) and 10.589 (2.139-48.347; 95% CI) for the DXM group, respectively, vs. MTPN group. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality and admission to the ICU were lower in patients treated with weight-adjusted methylprednisolone compared to those treated with dexamethasone.

Tocilizumab in refractory Caucasian Takayasu's arteritis: a multicenter study of 54 patients and literature review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of tocilizumab (TCZ) in Caucasian patients with refractory Takayasu's arteritis (TAK) in clinical practice. METHODS: A multicenter study of Caucasian patients with refractory TAK who received TCZ. The outcome variables were remission, glucocorticoid-sparing effect, improvement in imaging techniques, and adverse events. A comparative study between patients who received TCZ as monotherapy (TCZMONO) and combined with conventional disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (cDMARDs) (TCZCOMBO) was performed. RESULTS: The study comprised 54 patients (46 women/8 men) with a median [interquartile range (IQR)] age of 42.0 (32.5-50.5) years. TCZ was started after a median (IQR) of 12.0 (3.0-31.5) months since TAK diagnosis. Remission was achieved in 12/54 (22.2%), 19/49 (38.8%), 23/44 (52.3%), and 27/36 (75%) patients at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. The prednisone dose was reduced from 30.0 mg/day (12.5-50.0) to 5.0 (0.0-5.6) mg/day at 12 months. An improvement in imaging findings was reported in 28 (73.7%) patients after a median (IQR) of 9.0 (6.0-14.0) months. Twenty-three (42.6%) patients were on TCZMONO and 31 (57.4%) on TCZCOMBO: MTX (n = 28), cyclosporine A (n = 2), azathioprine (n = 1). Patients on TCZCOMBO were younger [38.0 (27.0-46.0) versus 45.0 (38.0-57.0)] years; difference (diff) [95% confidence interval (CI) = -7.0 (-17.9, -0.56] with a trend to longer TAK duration [21.0 (6.0-38.0) versus 6.0 (1.0-23.0)] months; diff 95% CI = 15 (-8.9, 35.5), and higher c-reactive protein [2.4 (0.7-5.6) versus 1.3 (0.3-3.3)] mg/dl; diff 95% CI = 1.1 (-0.26, 2.99). Despite these differences, similar outcomes were observed in both groups (log rank p = 0.862). Relevant adverse events were reported in six (11.1%) patients, but only three developed severe events that required TCZ withdrawal. CONCLUSION: TCZ in monotherapy, or combined with cDMARDs, is effective and safe in patients with refractory TAK of Caucasian origin.

Glucocorticoides solos versus tocilizumab solo o glucocorticoides más tocilizumab en pacientes con neumonía grave por SARS-CoV-2 e inflamación moderada / Glucocorticoids alone versus tocilizumab alone or glucocorticoids plus tocilizumab in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and mild inflammation

Objetivos: Analizar si existen diferencias en desenlaces clínicos según el tratamiento inmunosupresor recibido en pacientes con neumonía grave por SARS-CoV-2 e inflamación moderada.MétodosEstudio de cohortes retrospectivo de 142 pacientes con neumonía grave COVID-19 e inflamación moderada. Se dividieron en tres grupos de tratamiento (pulsos de metilprednisolona solo [grupoI], tocilizumab solo [grupoII] y metilprednisolona más tocilizumab [grupoIII]). Analizamos las diferencias intergrupos en el curso clínico con un seguimiento de 60días y factores clínicos analíticos relacionados.ResultadosFallecieron 14 pacientes (9,8%): 8 (10%) del grupoI y 6 (9,5%) de los gruposII yIII. Quince (10,6%) ingresaron en UCI: 2 (2,5%) del grupoI, 4 (28,5%) del grupoII y 9 (18,4%) del grupoIII. La estancia media hospitalaria fue mayor en los del grupoII. La evolución clínica no se asoció al tratamiento administrado.ConclusionesEl uso de tocilizumab debería reservarse para escenarios de ensayos clínicos. Su utilización generalizada podría acompañarse de mayor estancia media hospitalaria e ingreso en UCI sin diferencias en la mortalidad con un potencial aumento de efectos adversos. (AU)

Aim: To assess clinical outcomes according to the immunosuppressive treatment administered to patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and moderate inflammation.MethodsA retrospective observational cohort study involving 142 patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and moderate inflammation divided into three treatment groups (pulses of methylprednisolone alone [groupI], tocilizumab alone [groupII] and methylprednisolone plus tocilizumab [groupIII]). The aim was to assess intergroups differences in the clinical course with a 60-day follow-up and related analytical factors.Results14 patients (9,8%) died: 8 (10%) in groupI and 6 (9,5%) in groupsII andIII. 15 (10,6%) were admitted to ICU: 2 (2,5%) from groupI, 4 (28,5%) from groupII and 9 (18,4%) from groupIII. The mean hospital stay was longer in groupII and clinical outcome was not associated with treatment.ConclusionsTocilizumab seems to be not associated with better clinical outcomes and should be reserved for clinical trial scenario, since its widespread use may result in higher rate of ICU admission and longer mean hospital stay without differences in mortality rate and potentially adverse events. (AU)

Glucocorticoids alone versus tocilizumab alone or glucocorticoids plus tocilizumab in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and mild inflammation.

AIM: To assess clinical outcomes according to the immunosuppressive treatment administered to patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and moderate inflammation. METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort study involving 142 patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and moderate inflammation divided into three treatment groups (pulses of methylprednisolone alone [group I], tocilizumab alone [group II] and methylprednisolone plus tocilizumab [group III]). The aim was to assess intergroups differences in the clinical course with a 60-day follow-up and related analytical factors. RESULTS: 14 patients (9,8%) died: 8 (10%) in group I and 6 (9,5%) in groups II and III. 15 (10,6%) were admitted to ICU: 2 (2,5%) from group I, 4 (28,5%) from group II and 9 (18,4%) from group III. The mean hospital stay was longer in group II and clinical outcome was not associated with treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Tocilizumab seems to be not associated with better clinical outcomes and should be reserved for clinical trial scenario, since its widespread use may result in higher rate of ICU admission and longer mean hospital stay without differences in mortality rate and potentially adverse events.

OBJETIVOS: Analizar si existen diferencias en desenlaces clínicos según el tratamiento inmunosupresor recibido en pacientes con neumonía grave por SARS-CoV-2 e inflamación moderada. MÉTODOS: Estudio de cohortes retrospectivo de 142 pacientes con neumonía grave COVID-19 e inflamación moderada. Se dividieron en tres grupos de tratamiento (pulsos de metilprednisolona solo [grupo I], tocilizumab solo [grupo II] y metilprednisolona más tocilizumab [grupo III]). Analizamos las diferencias intergrupos en el curso clínico con un seguimiento de 60 días y factores clínicos analíticos relacionados. RESULTADOS: Fallecieron 14 pacientes (9,8%): 8 (10%) del grupo I y 6 (9,5%) de los grupos II y III. Quince (10,6%) ingresaron en UCI: 2 (2,5%) del grupo I, 4 (28,5%) del grupo II y 9 (18,4%) del grupo III. La estancia media hospitalaria fue mayor en los del grupo II. La evolución clínica no se asoció al tratamiento administrado. CONCLUSIONES: El uso de tocilizumab debería reservarse para escenarios de ensayos clínicos. Su utilización generalizada podría acompañarse de mayor estancia media hospitalaria e ingreso en UCI sin diferencias en la mortalidad con un potencial aumento de efectos adversos.

[Glucocorticoids alone versus tocilizumab alone or glucocorticoids plus tocilizumab in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and mild inflammation]. / Glucocorticoides solos versus tocilizumab solo o glucocorticoides más tocilizumab en pacientes con neumonía grave por SARS-CoV-2 e inflamación moderada.

AIM: To assess clinical outcomes according to the immunosuppressive treatment administered to patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and moderate inflammation. METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort study involving 142 patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and moderate inflammation divided into three treatment groups (pulses of methylprednisolone alone [groupI], tocilizumab alone [groupII] and methylprednisolone plus tocilizumab [groupIII]). The aim was to assess intergroups differences in the clinical course with a 60-day follow-up and related analytical factors. RESULTS: 14 patients (9,8%) died: 8 (10%) in groupI and 6 (9,5%) in groupsII andIII. 15 (10,6%) were admitted to ICU: 2 (2,5%) from groupI, 4 (28,5%) from groupII and 9 (18,4%) from groupIII. The mean hospital stay was longer in groupII and clinical outcome was not associated with treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Tocilizumab seems to be not associated with better clinical outcomes and should be reserved for clinical trial scenario, since its widespread use may result in higher rate of ICU admission and longer mean hospital stay without differences in mortality rate and potentially adverse events.