Search

Graft versus host disease (GVHD) can occur at any period post allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation as a common clinical complication contributing to significant morbidity and mortality. Acute GVHD develops in approximately 30-50% of patients receiving transplants from matched related donors. High doses of steroids are used as first-line treatment, but are unsuccessful in around 40% of patients, resulting in the diagnosis of steroidrefractory acute GVHD. Consensus has yet to develop for the management of steroid-refractory acute GVHD, and prognosis at six months has been estimated at around 50%. Thus, it is critical to find effective treatments that increase survival of steroid-refractory acute GVHD. This article describes the currently known characteristics, pathophysiology, and treatments for GVHD, with a special focus on recent advances in cell therapies. In particular, a novel cell therapy using decidua stromal cells (DSCs) was recently shown to have promising results for acute GVHD, with improved effectiveness over previous treatments including mesenchymal stromal cells. At the Karolinska Institute, severe acute GVHD patients treated with placenta-derived DSCs supplemented with either 5% albumin or 10% AB plasma displayed a one-year survival rate of 76% and 47% respectively. Furthermore, patients with steroid-refractory acute GVHD, displayed survival rates of 73% with albumin and 31% with AB plasmasupplemented DSCs, compared to the 20% survival rate in the mesenchymal stromal cell control group. Adverse events and deaths were found to be attributed only to complications of hematopoietic stem cell transplant and GVHD, not to the study intervention. ASC Therapeutics, Inc, in collaboration with the Karolinska Institute, will soon initiate a phase 2 multicenter, open-label study to further assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous DSC treatment in sixty patients with Grade II-IV steroid-refractory acute GVHD. This novel cell therapy represents a promising treatment to combat the poor prognosis that steroid-refractory acute GVHD patients currently face. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The government of Spain increased spending for scientific research by about 15% per year from 1983 to 1991, bringing it from 0.48% of gross national product to 0.9%. But in 1992 the science budget increased only at the rate of inflation, and the same is expected for 1993. This leaves Spain's research spending among the lowest of the European countries. Spanish industry and universities are not making up for the decrease in public funding of research.

Spain's Council for Scientific Research (CSIC) withdrew its suspension orders on 14 scientists in the Biological Research Centre, Madrid. These scientists were evaluated as inefficient and unproductive, and were considered a liability to the institute. Scientists representing the council's management pressurized the CSIC to accede to their demand and issue reinduction orders.

The Spanish scientific community is trying to expand outside of Madrid and Barcelona in its efforts to raise the level of science in the country. The major hurdles to these efforts include shrinking government funding and administrative obstacles posed by Spain's state research council such as approvals for tenured positions. A plant biology institute and a food technology institute are being planned for Valencia, while a molecular biology institute will be opened in Seville. Funding will come from industry and from the EC.

Introduction: Currently, a few in vivo gene replacement therapies are commercially available, with many in clinical development for the treatment of some inherited monogenic diseases. These disorders arise from mutations in genes encoding essential proteins with a well understood biological function. Wide adoption of gene replacement therapies requires solid safety and efficacy profiles with demonstrable long-term durability and cost-benefit advantages vs standard therapies., Areas Covered: This expert review outlines the challenges and opportunities in treating hemophilia, including the progression from in vivo gene therapies toward in vivo gene editing, focusing on pre-clinical and emerging clinical data for gene editing and addressing the need for sustained and durable gene expression during hepatocyte proliferation when the liver is unable to maintain steady gene expression and protein production., Expert Opinion: In vivo gene editing in liver tissues may be able to rescue patients younger than 18 years who are not eligible for gene replacement therapies, with hemophilia as a prime example.

Introduction: Hemophilia comprises a group of X-linked hemorrhagic disorders that result from a deficiency of coagulation factors. The disorder affects mainly males and leads to chronic pain, joint deformity, reduced mobility, and increased mortality. Current therapies require frequent administration of replacement clotting factors, but the emergence of alloantibodies (inhibitors) diminishes their efficacy. New therapies are being developed to produce the deficient clotting factors and prevent the emergence of inhibitors., Areas Covered: This article provides an update on the characteristics and disease pathophysiology of hemophilia A, as well as current treatments, with a special focus on ongoing clinical trials related to gene replacement therapies., Expert Opinion: Gene replacement therapies provide safe, durable, and stable transgene expression while avoiding the challenges of clotting factor replacement therapies in patients with hemophilia. Improving the specificity of the viral construct and decreasing the therapeutic dose are critical toward minimizing cellular stress, induction of the unfolded protein response, and the resulting loss of protein production in liver cells. Next-generation gene therapies incorporating chimeric DNA sequences in the transgene can increase clotting factor synthesis and secretion, and advance the efficacy, safety, and durability of gene replacement therapy for hemophilia A as well as other blood clotting disorders.

Objective: To estimate the comparative lifetime cost-effectiveness of sequenced therapy with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists as the initial therapeutic intervention for patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: Because patients with RA switch regimens many times throughout the course of disease, sequenced therapeutic interventions were modeled, continuing until the last effective agent failed or death occurred. The model used published clinical outcomes from short-term, randomized controlled trials. Direct treatment costs and costs of lost productivity were modeled for each of 5 alternative treatment sequences. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are expressed as quality-adjusted lifeyears (QALY) gained., Results: Treatment sequences that included TNF antagonists produced a greater number of QALY than conventional disease modifying antirheumatic drug regimens alone. The cost-effectiveness of sequenced therapy initiated with adalimumab plus methotrexate (MTX) extendedly dominated both infliximab-plus-MTX-initiated and etanercept sequences. The cost of adalimumab plus MTX per QALY was US $47,157 excluding productivity losses, and $19,663 including productivity losses. A supplementary sequence that incorporated adalimumab-plus-MTX-initiated first-line therapy followed by another TNF antagonist as second-line therapy was modeled; this sequence resulted in additional QALY gained and extendedly dominated all single-TNF strategies., Conclusion: Of the 3 single-TNF antagonist sequences, the adalimumab-plus-MTX-initiated sequence was cost-effective in producing the greatest number of QALY. Multiple TNF strategies, such as the supplementary sequence modeled in this analysis, may be cost-effective in producing even greater health gain.

Objective: To estimate relative efficiencies of the 7 rheumatoid arthritis (RA) Core Data Set measures to distinguish adalimumab from control treatments in 4 clinical trials., Methods: Four adalimumab clinical trials were analyzed for arithmetic and percentage changes for each Core Data Set measure from baseline to endpoint: 3 assessor/physician measures -- swollen joints, tender joints, and global estimate; 1 laboratory test -- C-reactive protein; and 3 patient measures -- physical function, pain, and global estimate. Relative efficiencies of each measure to distinguish adalimumab from control group responses were assessed, with tender joint count as the referent measure., Results: Relative efficiencies were in a similar range for physician/assessor, patient, and laboratory measures, with some variation between trials. Among physician/assessor measures, relative efficiencies for global estimates were greater than for swollen and tender joint counts in 8/8 comparisons. Among patient measures, relative efficiencies for global estimates were greater than for physical function and pain scores in at least 6/8 comparisons. Among all measures, relative efficiencies for patient global estimates were greater than for swollen joint counts in 5/8 comparisons, and for tender joint counts in 8/8 comparisons., Conclusion: Patient and physician/assessor measures distinguished adalimumab from control treatment groups in similar ranges. Among all measures, physician/assessor global estimate was most efficient, and tender joint count least efficient, in all 4 trials. This information suggests that while joint counts are the most specific measure to assess RA, their sensitivity to detect treatment effects in patients with RA is generally no greater, and usually less, than other measures.

Objective: To analyze 2 indices composed of the 3 patient reported outcomes (PRO) in the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Core Data Set--physical function, pain, and global estimate--without joint count or laboratory data, for capacities to distinguish active from control treatments in 4 pivotal clinical trials., Methods: Data from 4 clinical trials involving adalimumab, in combination with methotrexate or other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) or as monotherapy, versus control treatment were made available to analyze properties of various indices. A categorical PRO-Index M was defined as "majority" improvement in 2 of the 3 PRO measures at 20%, 50%, and 70% levels; results were evaluated to analyze agreement with ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 responses and an "all Core Data Set measures" index based on 4 of the 7 measures having such levels of improvement. A continuous PRO-Index C was defined as the median or 2nd highest of 3 percentage differences from baseline to endpoint; results were evaluated to analyze agreement with a continuous ACR-N, "all Core Data Set measures" index, and Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28)., Results: All indices distinguished active versus control treatment at similar levels, including PRO-Index M versus ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 responses, and PRO-Index C versus DAS28., Conclusion: PRO indices based only on patient questionnaire data, without joint counts or laboratory tests, may be useful quantitative measures of therapeutic efficacy for use in standard rheumatology clinical care.