Search

Summary: Gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) is the main inhibitory neurotransmitter in adults. Depolarizing GABA responses have been well characterized at neuronal-population average level during typical neurodevelopment and partially in brain disorders. However, no investigation has specifically assessed whether a mosaicism of cells with either depolarizing or hyperpolarizing/inhibitory GABAergic responses exists in animals in health/disease at diverse developmental stages, including adulthood. Here, we showed that such mosaicism is present in wild-type (WT) and down syndrome (DS) neuronal networks, as assessed at increasing scales of complexity (cultures, brain slices, behaving mice). Nevertheless, WT mice presented a much lower percentage of cells with depolarizing GABA than DS mice. Restoring the mosaicism of hyperpolarizing and depolarizing GABA-responding neurons to WT levels rescued anxiety behavior in DS mice. Moreover, we found heterogeneous GABAergic responses in developed control and trisomic human induced-pluripotent-stem-cells-derived neurons. Thus, a heterogeneous subpopulation of GABA-responding cells exists in physiological/pathological conditions in mouse and human neurons, possibly contributing to disease-associated behaviors.

Objective. We aimed to report the real-world use and outcomes over time in immunocompromised individuals receiving tixagevimab/cilgavimab (T/C) pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Methods. This observational study included participants who received T/C PrEP, categorized into three groups: (i) No COVID-19 (NoC), i.e., participants who never had COVID-19; (ii) Hybrids (H), i.e., participants who had COVID-19 before PrEP; and (iii) Break-through Infections (BTIs), i.e., participants who had COVID-19 after PrEP. The study measured several immune markers at the administration of T/C (T0) at 3 (T1), 6 (T2), and 9 (T3) months afterward. These markers included: anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD) IgG antibodies; BA.5-neutralizing antibodies (nAbs); mucosal IgG; and T cell immunity. The incidence rate ratios for BTIs were analyzed using a Poisson regression model. Results. A total of 231 participants with a median age of 63 years (IQR 54.0–73.0). were included. Among these, 84% had hematological diseases and received a median of three vaccine doses. N = 72 participants belonged to the NoC group, N = 103 to the H group, and n = 56 to the BTI group (24%), with most BTIs being mild/moderate. The incidence rate (IR) of BTIs was 4.2 per 100 patient-months (95% CI 3.2–5.4), with no associated risk factors identified. There was a significant increase in anti-RBD IgG levels 3 months after the T/C administration in all groups, followed by a decline at 6 months, whereas at the same time points, geometric mean titers (GMTs) of anti-BA.5 nAbs were low for all groups and were around or below the detection threshold. No significant changes were observed in IFN-γ levels. The mucosal immune response was observed only 3 months after the PrEP administration. Conclusion. We provided a real-world experience model on the clinical efficacy of T/C PrEP in preventing severe COVID-19 during the Omicron wave through a comprehensive virological and immunological study. While waiting for the arrival of new monoclonal antibodies that can effectively neutralize the most recent variants, T/C PrEP remains the only viable strategy in the available armamentarium today to prevent COVID-19 complications in an extremely fragile population with suboptimal immune responses to COVID-19 vaccines.

ObjectivesThe aim of the study was to describe a cohort of B-cell-depleted immunocompromised (IC) patients with prolonged or relapsing COVID-19 treated with monotherapy or combination therapy.MethodsThis is a multicenter observational retrospective study conducted on IC patients consecutively hospitalized with a prolonged or relapsing SARS-CoV-2 infection from November 2020 to January 2023. IC COVID-19 subjects were stratified according to the monotherapy or combination anti-SARS-CoV-2 therapy received.ResultsEighty-eight patients were enrolled, 19 under monotherapy and 69 under combination therapy. The study population had a history of immunosuppression (median of 2 B-cells/mm3, IQR 1–24 cells), and residual hypogammaglobulinemia was observed in 55 patients. A reduced length of hospitalization and time to negative SARS-CoV-2 molecular nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) in the combination versus monotherapy group was observed. In the univariable and multivariable analyses, the percentage change in the rate of days to NPS negativity showed a significant reduction in patients receiving combination therapy compared to those receiving monotherapy.ConclusionIn IC persistent COVID-19 patients, it is essential to explore new therapeutic strategies such as combination multi-target therapy (antiviral or double antiviral plus antibody-based therapies) to avoid persistent viral shedding and/or severe SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Summary: Background: Pre-exposure vaccination with MVA-BN has been widely used against mpox to contain the 2022 outbreak. Many countries have defined prioritized strategies, administering a single dose to those historically vaccinated for smallpox, to achieve quickly adequate coverage in front of low supplies. Using epidemiological models, real-life effectiveness was estimated at approximately 36%–86%, but no clinical trials were performed. Few data on MVA-BN immunogenicity are currently available, and there are no established correlates of protection. Immunological response in PLWH in the context of the 2022 outbreak was also poorly described. Methods: Blood samples were collected from participants eligible for pre-exposure MVA-BN vaccination before (T1) receiving a full course of vaccine (single-dose for vaccine-experienced or smallpox-primed and two-dose for smallpox vaccine-naïve or smallpox non-primed) and one month after the last dose (T2 and T3, respectively). MPXV-specific IgGs were measured by in-house immunofluorescence assay, using 1:20 as screening dilution, MPXV-specific nAbs by 50% plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT50, starting dilution 1:10), and IFN-γ-producing specific T cells to MVA-BN vaccine, by ELISpot assay. Paired or unpaired t-test and Wilcoxon or Mann–Whitney test were used to analyse IgG and nAbs, and T-cell response, as appropriate. The probability of IgG and nAb response in vaccine-experienced vs. vaccine-naïve was estimated in participants not reactive at T1. The McNemar test was used to evaluate vaccination's effect on humoral response both overall and by smallpox vaccination history. In participants who were not reactive at T1, the proportion of becoming responders one month after full-cycle completion by exposure groups was compared by logistic regression and then analysed by HIV status strata (interaction test). The response was also examined in continuous, and the Average Treatment Effect (ATE) of the difference from baseline to schedule completion according to previous smallpox vaccination was estimated after weighting for HIV using a linear regression model. Self-reports of adverse effects following immunization (AEFIs) were prospectively collected after the first MVA-BN dose (T1). Systemic (S-AEFIs: fatigue, myalgia, headache, GI effects, chills) and local (L-AEFIs: redness, swelling, pain) AEFIs were graded as absent (grade 0), mild (1), moderate (2), or severe (3). The maximum level of severity for S-AEFIs and L-AEFIs ever experienced over the 30 days post-dose by vaccination exposure groups were analysed using a univariable multinomial logistic regression model and after adjusting for HIV status; for each of the symptoms, we also compared the mean duration by exposure group using an unpaired t-test. Findings: Among the 164 participants included, 90 (54.8%) were smallpox vaccine-experienced. Median age was 49 years (IQR 41–55). Among the 76 (46%) PLWH, 76% had a CD4 count >500 cells/μL. There was evidence that both the IgG and nAbs titers increased after administration of the MVA-BN vaccine. However, there was no evidence for a difference in the potential mean change in humoral response from baseline to the completion of a full cycle when comparing primed vs. non-primed participants. Similarly, there was no evidence for a difference in the seroconversion rate after full cycle vaccination in the subset of participants not reactive for nAbs at T1 (p = 1.00 by Fisher's exact test). In this same analysis and for the nAbs outcome, there was some evidence of negative effect modification by HIV (interaction p-value = 0.17) as primed people living with HIV (PLWH) showed a lower probability of seroconversion vs. non-primed, and the opposite was seen in PLWoH. When evaluating the response in continuous, we observed an increase in T-cell response after MVA-BN vaccination in both primed and non-primed. There was evidence for a larger increase when using the 2-dose vs. one-dose strategy with a mean difference of −2.01 log2 (p ≤ 0.0001), after controlling for HIV. No evidence for a difference in the risk of developing any AEFIs of any grade were observed by exposure group, except for the lower risk of grade 2 (moderate) fatigue, induration and local pain which was lower in primed vs. non-primed [OR 0.26 (0.08–0.92), p = 0.037; OR 0.30 (0.10–0.88), p = 0.029 and OR 0.19 (0.05–0.73), p = 0.015, respectively]. No evidence for a difference in symptom duration was also detected between the groups. Interpretation: The evaluation of the humoral and cellular response one month after the completion of the vaccination cycle suggested that MVA-BN is immunogenic and that the administration of a two-dose schedule is preferable regardless of the previous smallpox vaccination history, especially in PLWH, to maximize nAbs response. MVA-BN was safe as well tolerated, with grade 2 reactogenicity higher after the first administration in vaccine-naïve than in vaccine-experienced individuals, but with no evidence for a difference in the duration of these adverse effects. Further studies are needed to evaluate the long-term duration of immunity and to establish specific correlates of protection. Funding: The study was supported by the National Institute for Infectious Disease Lazzaro Spallanzani IRCCS “Advanced grant 5 × 1000, 2021” and by the Italian Ministry of Health “Ricerca Corrente Linea 2”.

Background: Limited data are available about the predictors and outcomes associated with prolonged SARS-CoV-2 RNA shedding (VS). Methods: A retrospective study including COVID-19 patients admitted to an Italian hospital between March 1 and July 1, 2020. Predictors of viral clearance (VC) and prolonged VS from the upper respiratory tract were assessed by Poisson regression and logistic regression analyses. The causal relation between VS and clinical outcomes was evaluated through an inverse probability weighted Cox model. Results: The study included 536 subjects. The median duration of VS from symptoms onset was 18 days. The estimated 30-day probability of VC was 70.2%. Patients with comorbidities, lymphopenia at hospital admission, or moderate/severe respiratory disease had a lower chance of VC. The development of moderate/severe respiratory failure, delayed hospital admission after symptoms onset, baseline comorbidities, or D-dimer >1000 ng/mL at admission independently predicted prolonged VS. The achievement of VC doubled the chance of clinical recovery and reduced the probability of death/mechanical ventilation. Conclusions: Respiratory disease severity, comorbidities, delayed hospital admission and inflammatory markers negatively predicted VC, which resulted to be associated with better clinical outcomes. These findings highlight the importance of prompt hospitalization of symptomatic patients, especially where signs of severity or comorbidities are present.

IntroductionImmunocompromised patients with B-cell depletion agents are at risk for persistence and/or severe SARS-COV-2 infection. We describe a case series of 21 COVID-19 patients under B cell depletion therapy, mostly treated with a combined therapy based on intravenous remdesevir (RDV) and steroid associated with SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies against Spike glycoprotein and/or hyper-immune convalescent plasma.MethodsThis is a single-center longitudinal study. We retrospectively enrolled a total number of 21 B-cell depleted consecutive hospitalized patients with COVID-19 at the Lazzaro Spallanzani National Institute for Infectious Diseases, Rome, Italy, from November 2020 to December 2021. Demographic characteristics, medical history, clinical presentation, treatment, adverse drug reactions, and clinical and virological outcome were collected for all patients. In a subgroup, we explore immune T cells activation, T cells specific anti-SARS-COV-2 response, and neutralizing antibodies.ResultsTwenty-one inpatients with B-cell depletion and SARS-COV-2 infection were enrolled. A median of 1 B cells/mm3 was detected. Eighteen patients presented hypogammaglobulinemia. All patients presented interstitial pneumonia treated with intravenous RDV and steroids. Sixteen patients were treated with monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein, four patients were treated with SARS-CoV-2 hyper-immune convalescent plasma infusion, and three patients received both treatments. A variable kinetic of T cell activation returning to normal levels at Day 30 after immunotherapy infusion was observed. All treated patients recovered.ConclusionIn COVID-19 immunosuppressed subjects, it is mandatory to establish a prompt, effective, and combined multi-target therapy including oxygen, antiviral, steroid, and antibody-based therapeutics, tailored to the patient’s clinical needs.

ObjectivesComparative analysis between different monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against SARS-CoV-2 are lacking. We present an emulation trial from observational data to compare effectiveness of Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab (BAM/ETE) and Casirivimab/Imdevimab (CAS/IMD) in outpatients with early mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in a real-world scenario of variants of concern (VoCs) from Alpha to Delta.MethodsAllocation to treatment was subject to mAbs availability, and the measured factors were not used to determine which combination to use. Patients were followed through day 30. Viral load was measured by cycle threshold (CT) on D1 (baseline) and D7.Primary outcome was time to COVID-19-related hospitalization or death from any cause over days 0-30. Weighted pooled logistic regression and marginal structural Cox model by inverse probability weights were used to compare BAM/ETE vs. CAS/IMD. ANCOVA was used to compare mean D7 CT values by intervention. Models were adjusted for calendar month, MASS score and VoCs. We evaluated effect measure modification by VoCs, vaccination, D1 CT levels and enrolment period.ResultsCOVID19-related hospitalization or death from any cause occurred in 15 of 237 patients in the BAM/ETE group (6.3%) and in 4 of 196 patients in the CAS/IMD group (2.0%) (relative risk reduction [1 minus the relative risk] 72%; p=0.024). Subset analysis carried no evidence that the effect of the intervention was different across stratification factors. There was no evidence in viral load reduction from baseline through day 7 across the two groups (+0.17, 95% -1.41;+1.74, p=0.83). Among patients who experienced primary outcome, none showed a negative RT-PCR test in nasopharyngeal swab (p=0.009) and 82.4% showed still high viral load (p

Monoclonal antibodies are laboratory-made proteins that mimic the immune system’s ability to fight off harmful microorganisms, including viruses such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-CoronaVirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medical Agency (EMA) have already authorized monoclonal antibodies of anti-SARS-CoV-2 to treat mild to moderate CoronaVIrus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) in patients at risk of developing severe disease. More recently, monoclonal antibodies anti-SARS-CoV-2 have been authorized for primary and secondary prophylaxis in patients at high risk of severe disease for background comorbidity. Primary or pre-exposure prophylaxis prevents COVID-19 in unexposed people, whereas secondary or postexposure prophylaxis prevent COVID-19 in recently exposed people to individuals with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2. This review focuses briefly on therapeutic indications of currently available monoclonal antibodies for COVID-19 pre- and postexposure prophylaxis and on the efficacy of convalescent plasma.