Explore the vast range of titles available.

The published results of the post-marketing ORAL Surveillance study, which compared the Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor tofacitinib with anti-TNF therapy in older patients with rheumatoid arthritis who have cardiovascular risk factors, have led to changes in the recommendations for the use of JAK inhibitors. Although new safety signals have emerged for tofacitinib, namely malignancy and cardiovascular disease, it should be noted that these signals are relative to those seen with TNF blockers. The new data further raise our intrigue that venous thromboembolism might be a true risk related to JAK inhibition. Reassuringly, the totality of the findings from this newly published study and the other data collected to date suggest that JAK inhibitors can be used safely at approved doses by many patients with rheumatoid arthritis.In this Perspective article, the authors discuss the results of the post-marketing ORAL Surveillance study comparing the safety of the JAK inhibitor tofacitinib and TNF inhibition in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, as well as the potential implications for clinical practice.

Key Points Several new drugs have been introduced into clinical IBD therapy in the past few decades that have helped to reduce corticosteroid use (e.g. anti-TNF and anti-integrin agents) A large unmet need for novel therapeutic approaches exists, as many patients do not respond to the clinically approved drugs, including TNF blockers and vedolizumab Many new therapeutic approaches have been developed based on studies in IBD mouse models, analyses of IBD tissues and new insights into inflammatory pathways in other chronic inflammatory disorders Cytokine blockers (such as ustekinumab and JAK inhibitors) suppressing cytokine signalling are probably a new addition to our future clinical armamentarium for patients with IBD New therapeutic concepts might enable achievement of new strict end points in IBD therapy, including mucosal healing, deep remission, transmural healing and histological healing Identification of biomarkers to predict and monitor therapeutic success will be crucial to enable individualized therapy The management of IBD has undergone major advances with the development of biologic agents. Here, Markus Neurath provides an overview of current and future therapeutic targets for IBD, including insights into the mechanisms and rationale behind such approaches. Various therapeutic advances have led to a paradigm shift in the clinical management of patients with IBD. The introduction of immunosuppressive (such as azathioprine) and biologic agents (such as TNF blockers) has markedly reduced the need to use corticosteroids for therapy. Furthermore, the α4β7 integrin blocker vedolizumab has been introduced for clinical IBD therapy. Moreover, various new inhibitors of cytokines (for example, IL-6–IL-6R and IL-12–IL-23 blockers or apremilast), modulators of cytokine signalling events (for example, JAK inhibitors or SMAD7 blocker), inhibitors of transcription factors (for example, GATA3 or RORγt) and new anti-adhesion and anti-T-cell-activation and migration strategies (for example, β7 integrin, sphingosine 1-phosphate receptors and MAdCAM1 inhibitors, regulatory T-cell therapy and stem cells) are currently being evaluated in controlled clinical trials. This Review aims to provide a comprehensive overview about current and future therapeutic approaches for IBD therapy. Furthermore, potential mechanisms of action of these therapeutic approaches and their implications for clinical therapy in IBD are discussed.

A 15-year-old patient with cystic fibrosis with a disseminated Mycobacterium abscessus infection was treated with a three-phage cocktail following bilateral lung transplantation. Effective lytic phage derivatives that efficiently kill the infectious M. abscessus strain were developed by genome engineering and forward genetics. Intravenous phage treatment was well tolerated and associated with objective clinical improvement, including sternal wound closure, improved liver function, and substantial resolution of infected skin nodules. Clinical use of engineered bacteriophages for the treatment of disseminated mycobacterial infection.

Important advancements in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have been achieved over the past two decades, increasing our understanding of the disease biology and mechanisms of tumour progression, and advancing early detection and multimodal care. The use of small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immunotherapy has led to unprecedented survival benefits in selected patients. However, the overall cure and survival rates for NSCLC remain low, particularly in metastatic disease. Therefore, continued research into new drugs and combination therapies is required to expand the clinical benefit to a broader patient population and to improve outcomes in NSCLC.

Our ability to generate bacterial strains with unique and increasingly complex functions has rapidly expanded in recent times. The capacity for DNA synthesis is increasing and costing less; new tools are being developed for fast, large-scale genetic manipulation; and more tested genetic parts are available for use, as is the knowledge of how to use them effectively. These advances promise to unlock an exciting array of 'smart' bacteria for clinical use but will also challenge scientists to better optimize preclinical testing regimes for early identification and validation of promising strains and strategies. Here, we review recent advances in the development and testing of engineered bacterial diagnostics and therapeutics. We highlight new technologies that will assist the development of more complex, robust and reliable engineered bacteria for future clinical applications, and we discuss approaches to more efficiently evaluate engineered strains throughout their preclinical development.

Increasing number of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have been approved for chronic haematopoietic neoplasms and inflammatory/autoimmune diseases. We aimed to assess safety of the first three approved JAK inhibitors: ruxolitinib, tofacitinib and baricitinib. In this retrospective observational study, pharmacovigilance data were extracted from the World Health Organization database. Adverse events are classified according to Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities hierarchy. Until February 28, 2021, all Individual Case Safety Reports [ICSRs] with the suspected drug ruxolitinib, tofacitinib or baricitinib were included. Disproportionality analysis was performed and the information component (IC) was estimated. Adverse events were considered a significant signal if the lower end of the 95% credibility interval of the IC (IC025) was positive. We identified 126,815 ICSRs involving JAK inhibitors. Ruxolitinib, tofacitinib and baricitinib were associated with infectious adverse events (IC025 1.7, especially with viral [herpes and influenza], fungal, and mycobacterial infectious disorders); musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders (IC025 1.1); embolism and thrombosis (IC025 0.4); and neoplasms (IC025 0.8, especially malignant skin neoplasms). Tofacitinib was associated with gastrointestinal perforation events (IC025 1.5). We did not find a significant increase in the reporting of major cardiovascular events. We identified significant association between adverse events and ruxolitinib, tofacinitib and baricitinib in international pharmacovigilance database.

Patient-derived T cells genetically reprogrammed to express CD19-specific chimeric antigen receptors (CARs) have shown remarkable clinical responses and are commercially available for the treatment of patients with certain advanced-stage B cell malignancies. Nonetheless, several trials have revealed pre-existing and/or treatment-induced immune responses to the mouse-derived single-chain variable fragments included in these constructs. These responses might have contributed to both treatment failure and the limited success of redosing strategies observed in some patients. Data from early phase clinical trials suggest that CAR T cells are also associated with immunogenicity-related events in patients with solid tumours. Generally, the clinical implications of anti-CAR immune responses are poorly understood and highly variable between different CAR constructs and malignancies. These observations highlight an urgent need to uncover the mechanisms of immunogenicity in patients receiving CAR T cells and develop validated assays to enable clinical detection. In this Review, we describe the current clinical evidence of anti-CAR immune responses and discuss how new CAR T cell technologies might impact the risk of immunogenicity. We then suggest ways to reduce the risks of anti-CAR immune responses to CAR T cell products that are advancing towards the clinic. Finally, we summarize measures that investigators could consider in order to systematically monitor and better comprehend the possible effects of immunogenicity during trials involving CAR T cells as well as in routine clinical practice.CD19-specific chimeric antigen (CAR)-modified T cells are approved for patients with advanced-stage forms of certain B cell malignancies. However, a subset of patients will have anti-CAR immune responses, leading to a lack of CAR T cell persistence and a rapid loss of any antitumour efficacy. In this Review, the authors describe the extent of anti-CAR immune responses in patients and suggest measures that could be used to better monitor for these events. Additionally, they describe novel approaches to CAR T cell therapy that might reduce the risk of such responses in the future.

Intra-articular drug delivery has a number of advantages over systemic administration; however, for the past 20 years, intra-articular treatment options for the management of knee osteoarthritis (OA) have been limited to analgesics, glucocorticoids, hyaluronic acid (HA) and a small number of unproven alternative therapies. Although HA and glucocorticoids can provide clinically meaningful benefits to an appreciable number of patients, emerging evidence indicates that the apparent effectiveness of these treatments is largely a result of other factors, including the placebo effect. Biologic drugs that target inflammatory processes are used to manage rheumatoid arthritis, but have not translated well into use in OA. A lack of high-level evidence and methodological limitations hinder our understanding of so-called ‘stem’ cell therapies and, although the off-label administration of intra-articular cell therapies (such as platelet-rich plasma and bone marrow aspirate concentrate) is common, high-quality clinical data are needed before these treatments can be recommended. A number of promising intra-articular treatments are currently in clinical development in the United States, including small-molecule and biologic therapies, devices and gene therapies. Although the prospect of new, non-surgical treatments for OA is exciting, the benefits of new treatments must be carefully weighed against their costs and potential risks.

IL-12 and IL-23 are closely related cytokines with important roles in the regulation of tissue inflammation. Converging evidence from studies in mice, human observational studies and population genetics supports the importance of these cytokines in the regulation of mucosal inflammation in the gut in particular. Ustekinumab, a therapeutic antibody targeting both cytokines is now widely licensed for the treatment of Crohn’s disease, including in Europe, the USA, Canada and Japan, whilst agents targeting IL-23 specifically are in late-phase clinical trials. We review the emerging understanding of the biology of IL-12 and IL-23, as well as that of their major downstream cytokines, including IL-17. In particular, we discuss how their biology has influenced the development of clinical trials and therapeutic strategies in IBD, as well as how findings from clinical trials, at times surprising, have in turn refocused our understanding of the underlying biology.

Preclinical and clinical data suggest that fibroblast growth factor 21 (FGF21) is anti-fibrotic, improves metabolic status and has potential to treat non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). We assessed the safety and efficacy of efruxifermin, a long-acting Fc-FGF21 fusion protein, for the treatment of NASH. BALANCED was a randomized, placebo-controlled study in patients with NASH conducted at 27 centers in the United States (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03976401 ). Eighty patients, stratified by hepatic fat fraction (HFF) and fibrosis stage, were randomized using a centrally administered minimization algorithm 1:1:1:1 to receive placebo ( n  = 21) or efruxifermin 28 mg ( n  = 19), efruxifermin 50 mg ( n  = 20) or efruxifermin 70 mg ( n  = 20) via weekly subcutaneous injection for 16 weeks. The primary endpoint—absolute change from baseline in HFF measured as magnetic resonance imaging–proton density fat fraction at week 12—was met. For the full analysis set, the least squares mean absolute changes (one-sided 97.5% confidence interval) from baseline in HFF were −12.3% (−infinity (−inf), −10.3), −13.4% (−inf, −11.4) and −14.1% (−inf, −12.1) in the 28-, 50- and 70-mg groups, respectively, versus 0.3% (−inf, 1.6) in the placebo group, with statistically significant differences between efruxifermin groups and placebo ( P  < 0.0001 each). Overall, 70 of 79 patients who received the study drug (89%) experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), with the majority grade 1–2 (64 (81%)), five (6%) grade 3 and one grade 4. The most commonly reported drug-related TEAEs were grade 1–2 gastrointestinal (36 (46%)). Treatment with efruxifermin significantly reduced HFF in patients with F1–F3 stage NASH, with an acceptable safety profile. Results from BALANCED, a phase 2a, multicenter, randomized controlled trial testing efruxifermin (a long-acting Fc-FGF21 fusion protein) over 16 weeks, demonstrated significant reductions in the hepatic fat fraction in patients with F1–F3 stage non-alcoholic steatohepatitis.