Explore the vast range of titles available.

Cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone (CHOP) is used to treat patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Interval decrease from 3 weeks of treatment (CHOP-21) to 2 weeks (CHOP-14), and addition of rituximab to CHOP-21 (R-CHOP-21) has been shown to improve outcome in elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). This randomised trial assessed whether six or eight cycles of R-CHOP-14 can improve outcome of these patients compared with six or eight cycles of CHOP-14. 1222 elderly patients (aged 61–80 years) were randomly assigned to six or eight cycles of CHOP-14 with or without rituximab. Radiotherapy was planned to sites of initial bulky disease with or without extranodal involvement. The primary endpoint was event-free survival; secondary endpoints were response, progression during treatment, progression-free survival, overall survival, and frequency of toxic effects. Analyses were done by intention to treat. The trial is registered on National Cancer Institute website, number NCT00052936 and as EU-20243. 3-year event-free survival was 47·2% after six cycles of CHOP-14 (95% CI 41·2–53·3), 53·0% (47·0–59·1) after eight cycles of CHOP-14, 66·5% (60·9–72·0) after six cycles of R-CHOP-14, and 63·1% (57·4–68·8) after eight cycles of R-CHOP-14. Compared with six cycles of CHOP-14, the improvement in 3-year event-free survival was 5·8% (−2·8–14·4) for eight cycles of CHOP-14, 19·3% (11·1–27·5) for six cycles of R-CHOP-14, and 15·9% (7·6–24·2) for eight cycles of R-CHOP-14. 3-year overall survival was 67·7% (62·0–73·5) for six cycles of CHOP-14, 66·0% (60·1–71·9) for eight cycles of CHOP-14, 78·1% (73·2–83·0) for six cycles of R-CHOP-14, and 72·5% (67·1–77·9) for eight cycles of R-CHOP-14. Compared with treatment with six cycles of CHOP-14, overall survival improved by −1·7% (−10·0–6·6) after eight cycles of CHOP-14, 10·4% (2·8–18·0) after six cycles of R-CHOP-14, and 4·8% (−3·1–12·7) after eight cycles of R-CHOP-14. In a multivariate analysis that used six cycles of CHOP-14 without rituximab as the reference, and adjusting for known prognostic factors, all three intensified regimens improved 3-year event-free survival (eight cycles of CHOP-14: RR [relative risk] 0·76 [0·60–0·95], p=0·0172; six cycles of R-CHOP-14: RR 0·51 [0·40–0·65], p<0·0001; eight cycles of R-CHOP-14: RR 0·54 [0·43–0·69], p<0·0001). Progression-free survival improved after six cycles of R-CHOP-14 (RR 0·50 [0·38–0·67], p<0·0001), and eight cycles of R-CHOP-14 (RR 0·59 [0·45–0·77], p=0·0001). Overall survival improved only after six cycles of R-CHOP-14 (RR 0·63 [0·46–0·85], p=0·0031). In patients with a partial response after four cycles of chemotherapy, eight cycles were not better than six cycles. Six cycles of R-CHOP-14 significantly improved event-free, progression-free, and overall survival over six cycles of CHOP-14 treatment. Response-adapted addition of chemotherapy beyond six cycles, though widely practiced, is not justified. Of the four regimens assessed in this study, six cycles of R-CHOP-14 is the preferred treatment for elderly patients, with which other approaches should be compared.

ObjectiveTo determine whether a history of cerebrovascular disease (CVD) increases risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsIn a retrospective multicenter study, we retrieved individual data from in-patients treated March 1 to April 15, 2020 from COVID-19 registries of three hospitals in Saxony, Germany. We also performed a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA recommendations using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library databases and bibliographies of identified papers (last search on April 11, 2020) and pooled data with those deriving from our multicenter study. Of 3762 records identified, 11 eligible observational studies of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients were included in quantitative data synthesis.Risk ratios (RR) of severe COVID-19 according to history of CVD were pooled using DerSimonian and Laird random effects model. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran’s Q and I2-statistics. Severity of COVID-19 according to definitions applied in included studies was the main outcome. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for clusters of studies with equal definitions of severity.ResultsPooled analysis included data from 1906 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients (43.9% females, median age ranging from 39 to 76 years). Patients with previous CVD had higher risk of severe COVID-19 than those without [RR 2.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52–2.81; p < 0.0001]. This association was also observed in clusters of studies that defined severe manifestation of the disease by clinical parameters (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.22–1.71; p < 0.0001), necessity of intensive care (RR 2.79, 95% CI 1.83–4.24; p < 0.0001) and in-hospital death (RR 2.18, 95% CI 1.75–2.7; p < 0.0001).ConclusionA history of CVD might constitute an important risk factor of unfavorable clinical course of COVID-19 suggesting a need of tailored infection prevention and clinical management strategies for this population at risk.

Establishing the optimal treatment for COVID-19 patients remains challenging. Specifically, immunocompromised and pre-diseased patients are at high risk for severe disease course and face limited therapeutic options. Convalescent plasma (CP) has been considered as therapeutic approach, but reliable data are lacking, especially for high-risk patients. We performed a retrospective analysis of 55 hospitalized COVID-19 patients from University Hospital Duesseldorf (UKD) at high risk for disease progression, in a substantial proportion due to immunosuppression from cancer, solid organ transplantation, autoimmune disease, dialysis. A matched-pairs analysis (1:4) was performed with 220 patients from the Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2-infected Patients (LEOSS) who were treated or not treated with CP. Both cohorts had high mortality (UKD 41.8%, LEOSS 34.1%). A matched-pairs analysis showed no significant effect on mortality. CP administration before the formation of pulmonary infiltrates showed the lowest mortality in both cohorts (10%), whereas mortality in the complicated phase was 27.8%. CP administration during the critical phase revealed the highest mortality: UKD 60.9%, LEOSS 48.3%. In our cohort of COVID-19 patients with severe comorbidities CP did not significantly reduce mortality in a retrospective matched-pairs analysis. However, our data supports the concept that a reduction in mortality is achievable by early CP administration.

PurposeThe ongoing pandemic caused by the novel severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has stressed health systems worldwide. Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) seem to be more prone to a severe course of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) due to comorbidities and an altered immune system. The study’s aim was to identify factors predicting mortality among SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with CKD.MethodsWe analyzed 2817 SARS-CoV-2-infected patients enrolled in the Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2-infected patients and identified 426 patients with pre-existing CKD. Group comparisons were performed via Chi-squared test. Using univariate and multivariable logistic regression, predictive factors for mortality were identified.ResultsComparative analyses to patients without CKD revealed a higher mortality (140/426, 32.9% versus 354/2391, 14.8%). Higher age could be confirmed as a demographic predictor for mortality in CKD patients (> 85 years compared to 15–65 years, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 6.49, 95% CI 1.27–33.20, p = 0.025). We further identified markedly elevated lactate dehydrogenase (> 2 × upper limit of normal, aOR 23.21, 95% CI 3.66–147.11, p < 0.001), thrombocytopenia (< 120,000/µl, aOR 11.66, 95% CI 2.49–54.70, p = 0.002), anemia (Hb < 10 g/dl, aOR 3.21, 95% CI 1.17–8.82, p = 0.024), and C-reactive protein (≥ 30 mg/l, aOR 3.44, 95% CI 1.13–10.45, p = 0.029) as predictors, while renal replacement therapy was not related to mortality (aOR 1.15, 95% CI 0.68–1.93, p = 0.611).ConclusionThe identified predictors include routinely measured and universally available parameters. Their assessment might facilitate risk stratification in this highly vulnerable cohort as early as at initial medical evaluation for SARS-CoV-2.

PurposeReported antibiotic use in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is far higher than the actual rate of reported bacterial co- and superinfection. A better understanding of antibiotic therapy in COVID-19 is necessary.Methods6457 SARS-CoV-2-infected cases, documented from March 18, 2020, until February 16, 2021, in the LEOSS cohort were analyzed. As primary endpoint, the correlation between any antibiotic treatment and all-cause mortality/progression to the next more advanced phase of disease was calculated for adult patients in the complicated phase of disease and procalcitonin (PCT) ≤ 0.5 ng/ml. The analysis took the confounders gender, age, and comorbidities into account.ResultsThree thousand, six hundred twenty-seven cases matched all inclusion criteria for analyses. For the primary endpoint, antibiotic treatment was not correlated with lower all-cause mortality or progression to the next more advanced (critical) phase (n = 996) (both p > 0.05). For the secondary endpoints, patients in the uncomplicated phase (n = 1195), regardless of PCT level, had no lower all-cause mortality and did not progress less to the next more advanced (complicated) phase when treated with antibiotics (p > 0.05). Patients in the complicated phase with PCT > 0.5 ng/ml and antibiotic treatment (n = 286) had a significantly increased all-cause mortality (p = 0.029) but no significantly different probability of progression to the critical phase (p > 0.05).ConclusionIn this cohort, antibiotics in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients were not associated with positive effects on all-cause mortality or disease progression. Additional studies are needed. Advice of local antibiotic stewardship- (ABS-) teams and local educational campaigns should be sought to improve rational antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients.

Notch signalling is important for development and tissue homeostasis and activated in many human cancers. Nevertheless, mutations in Notch pathway components are rare in solid tumours. ZEB1 is an activator of an epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) and has crucial roles in tumour progression towards metastasis. ZEB1 and miR‐200 family members repress expression of each other in a reciprocal feedback loop. Since miR‐200 members target stem cell factors, ZEB1 indirectly induces stemness maintenance and associated drug resistance. Here, we link ZEB1 and its cancer promoting properties to Notch activation. We show that miR‐200 members target Notch pathway components, such as Jagged1 (Jag1) and the mastermind‐like coactivators Maml2 and Maml3, thereby mediating enhanced Notch activation by ZEB1. We further detected a coordinated upregulation of Jag1 and ZEB1, associated with reduced miR‐200 expression in two aggressive types of human cancer, pancreatic adenocarcinoma and basal type of breast cancer. These findings explain increased Notch signalling in some types of cancers, where mutations in Notch pathway genes are rare. Moreover, they indicate an additional way how ZEB1 exerts its tumour progressing functions. The ZEB1 transcription factor and miRNA‐200 repress each others’ expression, with important consequences for tumour metastasis. Here, Notch pathway components are found as miR‐200 targets, identifying a pathway whereby ZEB1 promotes Notch signalling in cancer cells. See also Vallejo et al in this issue.

The embryonic programme ‘epithelial–mesenchymal transition’ (EMT) is thought to promote malignant tumour progression. The transcriptional repressor zinc‐finger E‐box binding homeobox 1 (ZEB1) is a crucial inducer of EMT in various human tumours, and was recently shown to promote invasion and metastasis of tumour cells. Here, we report that ZEB1 directly suppresses transcription of microRNA‐200 family members miR‐141 and miR‐200c, which strongly activate epithelial differentiation in pancreatic, colorectal and breast cancer cells. Notably, the EMT activators transforming growth factor β2 and ZEB1 are the predominant targets downregulated by these microRNAs. These results indicate that ZEB1 triggers an microRNA‐mediated feedforward loop that stabilizes EMT and promotes invasion of cancer cells. Alternatively, depending on the environmental trigger, this loop might switch and induce epithelial differentiation, and thus explain the strong intratumorous heterogeneity observed in many human cancers.

Persistent hemolytic anemia and a lack of oral treatments are challenges for patients with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria who have received anti-C5 therapy or have not received complement inhibitors. Iptacopan, a first-in-class oral factor B inhibitor, has been shown to improve hemoglobin levels in these patients. In two phase 3 trials, we assessed iptacopan monotherapy over a 24-week period in patients with hemoglobin levels of less than 10 g per deciliter. In the first, anti-C5-treated patients were randomly assigned to switch to iptacopan or to continue anti-C5 therapy. In the second, single-group trial, patients who had not received complement inhibitors and who had lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels more than 1.5 times the upper limit of the normal range received iptacopan. The two primary end points in the first trial were an increase in the hemoglobin level of at least 2 g per deciliter from baseline and a hemoglobin level of at least 12 g per deciliter, each without red-cell transfusion; the primary end point for the second trial was an increase in hemoglobin level of at least 2 g per deciliter from baseline without red-cell transfusion. In the first trial, 51 of the 60 patients who received iptacopan had an increase in the hemoglobin level of at least 2 g per deciliter from baseline, and 42 had a hemoglobin level of at least 12 g per deciliter, each without transfusion; none of the 35 anti-C5-treated patients attained the end-point levels. In the second trial, 31 of 33 patients had an increase in the hemoglobin level of at least 2 g per deciliter from baseline without red-cell transfusion. In the first trial, 59 of the 62 patients who received iptacopan and 14 of the 35 anti-C5-treated patients did not require or receive transfusion; in the second trial, no patients required or received transfusion. Treatment with iptacopan increased hemoglobin levels, reduced fatigue, reduced reticulocyte and bilirubin levels, and resulted in mean LDH levels that were less than 1.5 times the upper limit of the normal range. Headache was the most frequent adverse event with iptacopan. Iptacopan treatment improved hematologic and clinical outcomes in anti-C5-treated patients with persistent anemia - in whom iptacopan showed superiority to anti-C5 therapy - and in patients who had not received complement inhibitors. (Funded by Novartis; APPLY-PNH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04558918; APPOINT-PNH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04820530.).

The epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition transcription factor ZEB1 is involved in metastasis. It is now shown to regulate the tumour-initiating capacity of pancreatic and colorectal cancer cells, through the repression of the stemness-inhibiting miR200s, which are found to inhibit the polycomb repressor Bmi-1. Invasion and metastasis of carcinomas is promoted by the activation of the embryonic 'epithelial to mesenchymal transition' (EMT) program, which triggers cellular mobility and subsequent dissemination of tumour cells. We recently showed that the EMT-activator ZEB1 (zinc finger E-box binding homeobox 1) is a crucial promoter of metastasis and demonstrated that ZEB1 inhibits expression of the microRNA-200 (miR-200) family, whose members are strong inducers of epithelial differentiation. Here, we report that ZEB1 not only promotes tumour cell dissemination, but is also necessary for the tumour-initiating capacity of pancreatic and colorectal cancer cells. We show that ZEB1 represses expression of stemness-inhibiting miR-203 and that candidate targets of miR-200 family members are also stem cell factors, such as Sox2 and Klf4. Moreover, miR-200c, miR-203 and miR-183 cooperate to suppress expression of stem cell factors in cancer cells and mouse embryonic stem (ES) cells, as demonstrated for the polycomb repressor Bmi1. We propose that ZEB1 links EMT-activation and stemness-maintenance by suppressing stemness-inhibiting microRNAs (miRNAs) and thereby is a promoter of mobile, migrating cancer stem cells. Thus, targeting the ZEB1–miR-200 feedback loop might form the basis of a promising treatment for fatal tumours, such as pancreatic cancer.