Explore the vast range of titles available.

Iron availability is dynamically remodeled during infection and inflammation and has traditionally been interpreted within the framework of nutritional immunity, where iron sequestration restricts microbial growth. Increasing evidence, however, indicates that inflammatory iron redistribution has broader immunological consequences. Systemic and cell-intrinsic iron levels actively shape immune cell production, differentiation, metabolic configuration, and effector function across innate and adaptive immune compartments. Rather than uniformly suppressing immunity, inflammation-driven hypoferremia selectively biases hematopoiesis and immune output, while locally regulated cellular and subcellular iron handling determines microbe-specific immune effector functions. In addition, the availability of metabolically active iron further defines immunometabolic state by regulating mitochondrial respiration, tricarboxylic acid cycle activity, and redox balance, thereby shaping both immune cell function and the host-pathogen interface. Together, these observations support a view of iron as an instructive immunometabolic signal that integrates systemic regulation with cellular and organelle-specific programs during infection and inflammation. This review synthesizes recent evidence across these organizational scales, highlights emerging trade-offs between host defense and iron homeostasis, and discusses how mechanistic insight into iron-sensitive immune pathways may inform strategies to modulate inflammation and antimicrobial immune effector function.

(1) Objectives: To describe the clinical characteristics and clinical course of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and autoimmune diseases (ADs) compared to the general population. (2) Methods: We used information available in the nationwide Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry, which retrospectively compiles data from the first admission of adult patients with COVID-19. We selected all patients with ADs included in the registry and compared them to the remaining patients. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality during admission, readmission, and subsequent admissions, and secondary outcomes were a composite outcome including the need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission, invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilation (MV), or death, as well as in-hospital complications. (3) Results: A total of 13,940 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 were included, of which 362 (2.6%) had an AD. Patients with ADs were older, more likely to be female, and had greater comorbidity. On the multivariate logistic regression analysis, which involved the inverse propensity score weighting method, AD as a whole was not associated with an increased risk of any of the outcome variables. Habitual treatment with corticosteroids (CSs), age, Barthel Index score, and comorbidity were associated with poor outcomes. Biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) were associated with a decrease in mortality in patients with AD. (4) Conclusions: The analysis of the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry shows that ADs do not lead to a different prognosis, measured by mortality, complications, or the composite outcome. Considered individually, it seems that some diseases entail a different prognosis than that of the general population. Immunosuppressive/immunoregulatory treatments (IST) prior to admission had variable effects.

Introduction: Hemodialysis patients may present alterations in body composition. Nephrology units have tools such as bioimpedance and the Malnutrition Inflammation Score (MIS) to prevent, detect and diagnose malnutrition.Objectives: To assess the impact of an educational intervention on the nutritional status of haemodialysis patients using the MIS and bioimpedance.Material and Method: Quasi-experimental study carried out in 48 haemodialysis patients. Sociodemographic and clinical variables as well as patient body composition were analysed in two measurements using bioimpedance and MIS. Patients with an MIS≥6 received a nutritional intervention, with a reassessment at 6 months.Results: Mean age was 69.9±13.6 years; 29 (60.41%) were male. Patients had been on haemodialysis for a median of 24 (P25:10.3-P75:59.3) months. Patients with MIS values≥6 were 24 (50%), receiving such an educational intervention. In patients who did not receive the intervention the MIS value worsened at 6 months (3.4 vs. 5.4, p=0.002).Conclusions: People who did not receive an educational intervention worsened their nutritional outcomes compared to those who did. The importance of systematically using validated instruments such as bioimpedance and the MIS to monitor the nutritional status of haemodialysis patients should be emphasised. Introducción: Los pacientes en hemodiálisis pueden presentar alteraciones en su composición corporal, para ello las unidades de nefrología cuentan con herramientas, como son la bioimpedancia y la escala “Malnutrition Inflamation Score” para prevenir, detectar y diagnosticar estados de desnutrición.Objetivos: Evaluar el impacto de una intervención educativa sobre el estado nutricional de los pacientes en hemodiálisis, medido mediante la escala Malnutrición Inflamación y la bioimpedancia.Material y Método: Estudio cuasiexperimental realizado en 48 pacientes sometidos a hemodiálisis. Se analizaron variables sociodemográficas y clínicas, de composición corporal de los pacientes en dos mediciones, mediante bioimpedancia y escala de malnutrición MIS.Los pacientes que presentaron una puntuación de la escala MIS≥6 recibieron una intervención nutricional, evaluándolos nuevamente a los 6 meses.Resultados: La media de edad fue de 69,9±13,6 años, 29 (60,41%) eran hombres. Los pacientes llevaban en tratamiento con hemodiálisis una mediana de tiempo de 24(P25:10,3-P75:59,3) meses.Los pacientes que presentaron valores de la escala MIS≥6 fueron 24(50%), recibiendo la intervención educativa.En los pacientes que no recibieron la intervención el resultado MIS empeoró a los 6 meses (3,4 vs 5,4, p=0,002).Conclusiones: Aquellas personas que no recibieron una intervención educativa empeoraron sus resultados nutricionales frente a quienes si la recibieron. Cabe destacar la importancia de utilizar de forma sistematizada instrumentos validados, como la bioimpedancia y la escala MIS, para hacer un seguimiento del estado nutricional de los pacientes en hemodiálisis.