Explore the vast range of titles available.

The worldwide antibiotic crisis has led to a renewed interest in phage therapy. Since time immemorial phages control bacterial populations on Earth. Potent lytic phages against bacterial pathogens can be isolated from the environment or selected from a collection in a matter of days. In addition, phages have the capacity to rapidly overcome bacterial resistances, which will inevitably emerge. To maximally exploit these advantage phages have over conventional drugs such as antibiotics, it is important that sustainable phage products are not submitted to the conventional long medicinal product development and licensing pathway. There is a need for an adapted framework, including realistic production and quality and safety requirements, that allowsa timely supplying of phage therapy products for ‘personalized therapy’ or for public health or medical emergencies. This paper enumerates all phage therapy product related quality and safety risks known to the authors, as well as the tests that can be performed to minimize these risks, only to the extent needed to protect the patients and to allow and advance responsible phage therapy and research.

Phages were discovered 100 years ago, and since then phage research has transformed fundamental and translational biosciences. In this Timeline, Salmond and Fineran discuss a century of phage research, describing the roles of phages in ecosystems and in driving bacterial evolution and virulence, and highlight their impact as a source of novel reagents that revolutionized molecular biology and biotechnology. Viruses that infect bacteria (bacteriophages; also known as phages) were discovered 100 years ago. Since then, phage research has transformed fundamental and translational biosciences. For example, phages were crucial in establishing the central dogma of molecular biology — information is sequentially passed from DNA to RNA to proteins — and they have been shown to have major roles in ecosystems, and help drive bacterial evolution and virulence. Furthermore, phage research has provided many techniques and reagents that underpin modern biology — from sequencing and genome engineering to the recent discovery and exploitation of CRISPR–Cas phage resistance systems. In this Timeline, we discuss a century of phage research and its impact on basic and applied biology.

•ZFNs, TALENs, and CRISPR/Cas-based RNA-guided DNA endonucleases are programmable site-specific nucleases.•Site-specific nucleases induce DNA DSBs that stimulate NHEJ and HDR at targeted genomic loci.•We discuss the therapeutic potential of site-specific nuclease technologies and discuss future prospects for the field. Zinc-finger nucleases (ZFNs) and transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs) comprise a powerful class of tools that are redefining the boundaries of biological research. These chimeric nucleases are composed of programmable, sequence-specific DNA-binding modules linked to a nonspecific DNA cleavage domain. ZFNs and TALENs enable a broad range of genetic modifications by inducing DNA double-strand breaks that stimulate error-prone nonhomologous end joining or homology-directed repair at specific genomic locations. Here, we review achievements made possible by site-specific nuclease technologies and discuss applications of these reagents for genetic analysis and manipulation. In addition, we highlight the therapeutic potential of ZFNs and TALENs and discuss future prospects for the field, including the emergence of clustered regulatory interspaced short palindromic repeat (CRISPR)/Cas-based RNA-guided DNA endonucleases.

The past three decades have witnessed remarkable advances in our ability to target specific elements of the immune and inflammatory response, fuelled by advances in both biotechnology and disease knowledge. As well as providing superior treatments for immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs), such therapies also offer unrivalled opportunities to study the underlying immunopathological basis of these conditions.In this review, we explore recent approaches to the treatment of IMIDs and the insights to pathobiology that they provide. We review novel biologic agents targeting the T-helper 17 axis, including therapies directed towards interleukin (IL)-17 (secukinumab, ixekizumab, bimekizumab), IL-17R (brodalumab), IL-12/23p40 (ustekinumab, briakinumab) and IL-23p19 (guselkumab, tildrakizumab, brazikumab, risankizumab, mirikizumab). We also present an overview of biologics active against type I and II interferons, including sifalumumab, rontalizumab, anifrolumab and fontolizumab. Emerging strategies to interfere with cellular adhesion processes involved in lymphocyte recruitment are discussed, including both integrin blockade (natalizumab, vedolizumab, etrolizumab) and sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor inhibition (fingolimod, ozanimod). We summarise the development and recent application of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors in the treatment of IMIDs, including first-generation pan-JAK inhibitors (tofacitinib, baricitinib, ruxolitinib, peficitinib) and second-generation selective JAK inhibitors (decernotinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib). New biologics targeting B-cells (including ocrelizumab, veltuzumab, tabalumab and atacicept) and the development of novel strategies for regulatory T-cell modulation (including low-dose IL-2 therapy and Tregitopes) are also discussed. Finally, we explore recent biotechnological advances such as the development of bispecific antibodies (ABT-122, COVA322), and their application to the treatment of IMIDs.

Probiotics have been defined as “Live microorganisms that when administered in adequate amounts confer a health benefit on the host”. This definition covers a wide range of applications, target populations and (combinations of) microorganisms. Improved knowledge on the importance of the microbiota in terms of health and disease has further diversified the potential scope of a probiotic intervention, whether intended to reach the market as a food, a food supplement or a drug, depending on the intended use. However, the increased interest in the clinical application of probiotics may require specific attention given their administration in a diseased population. In addition to safety, the impact of the type of product, in terms of quality, production method and, e.g., the acceptance of side effects, is now part of the current regulatory constraints for developers. In the European Union, foods are regulated by the European Food Safety Authority and drugs by the European Medicines Agency; in the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) deals with both categories. More recently, the FDA has defined a new “live biotherapeutic products” (LBP) category, clarifying pharmaceutical expectations. Since 2019, the quality requirements for this category of drug products have also been clarified by the European Pharmacopoeia (Ph. Eur.). Similar to all products intended to prevent or treat diseases, LBPs will have to be registered as medicinal products to reach the market in the US and in Europe. In this area, regulatory authorities and the pharmaceutical industry will routinely use guidelines of the “International Council for Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use” (ICH). Although ICH guidelines are not legally binding, they provide very important recommendations, recognized by almost all drug authorities in the world. In this review, we discuss some aspects of this regulatory framework, especially focusing on products with an intended use in a diseased or vulnerable target population.Prevention and treatment: When living microbes become medicinesRegulatory frameworks must be stretched to include microbe-based medicines such as “live biotherapeutic products” (LBPs). Some LBPs are similar by nature to probiotics, health-enhancing living microbes, except that they are meant to treat or prevent disease in sick or vulnerable individuals. Bruno Pot at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel in Belgium and co-workers have reviewed how current food and drug regulations in the United States and the European Union apply to living microorganisms. As for all drugs, in the case of LBPs, quality, safety, and efficacy must be demonstrated, but LBPs pose extra challenges because they contain live organisms, raising issues of stability over time and batch-to-batch variation. Differences in patients’ microbiomes and diets add further complications. This review helps to outline a way forward in this new and developing field of medicinal products.

Perianal fistulae in patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) can be associated with significant morbidity resulting in negative impact on quality of life. The last two decades have seen significant advancements in the management of perianal fistulas in CD, which has evolved into a multidisciplinary approach that includes gastroenterologists, colorectal surgeons, endoscopists and radiologists. Despite the introduction of new medical therapies such as antitumour necrosis factor and novel models of care delivery, the best fistula healing rates reported with combined medical and surgical approaches are approximately 50%. More recently, newer biologics, cell-based therapies as well as novel endoscopic and surgical techniques have been introduced raising new hopes that outcomes can be improved upon. In this review, we describe the modern management and the most recent advances in the management of complex perianal fistulising CD, which will likely impact clinical practice. We will explore optimal use of both older and newer biological agents, as well as new data on cell-based therapies. In addition, new techniques in endoscopic and surgical approaches will be discussed.

ABSTRACT Patients with refractory inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) face difficulty in the treatment strategy. Combined advanced targeted therapies may obtain higher therapeutic efficacy. However, few studies compare the efficacy and safety of dual biologic therapy (DBT) with biologic small‐molecule therapy (BMT) for refractory IBD. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of DBT with BMT. We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients with refractory IBD treated with DBT (n = 22) or BMT (n = 21). The primary outcome was the clinical remission rate at week 12. Secondary outcomes included the clinical response rate, endoscopic response rate, endoscopic remission rate, colectomy rate, and rate of adverse events (AEs) at week 12. At week 12, the clinical remission rates in the DBT group and BMT group were 22.7% and 28.6%, respectively. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups (p = 0.661). There were also no statistically significant differences between the DBT group and BMT group in the clinical response rate (68.2% vs. 71.4%, p = 0.817), endoscopic response rate (66.7% vs. 68.8%, p = 1.000), endoscopic remission rate (4.8% vs. 18.8%, p = 0.296) and colectomy rate (4.5% vs. 23.8%, p = 0.167). Two patients (9.5%) in the BMT group and no patients in the DBT group experienced AEs. However, the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.233). In conclusion, this study revealed that there may be similar effectiveness and safety of DBT and BMT for patients with refractory IBD. Further multi‐center, prospective randomized controlled trials are necessary to confirm this conclusion.

Biological therapy became available for psoriasis with the introduction of alefacept at the beginning of this century. Up to then, systemic treatment options comprised small molecule drugs, targeting the immune system in a non-specific manner. The first biologics targeted T-cell activation and migration and served as an alternative to small molecules. However, significant improvement in outcome was first accomplished with the introduction of tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors that were already approved for other inflammatory disorders, including rheumatic diseases. Along with the progress in understanding psoriasis pathogenesis, highly targeted and effective therapies have since developed with the perspective not only to improve but to clear psoriasis. These accomplishments enable future achievement of advanced goals to individualize treatment best suited for each patient. Mechanistic studies with patients treated with the new highly targeted biologics may guide us towards these goals. This review offers an overview of biologics developed for psoriasis and illustrate a historical progress in the treatment of this common chronic inflammatory skin condition.

BackgroundTargeting interleukin (IL)-6 has become a major therapeutic strategy in the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory disease. Interference with the IL-6 pathway can be directed at the specific receptor using anti-IL-6Rα antibodies or by directly inhibiting the IL-6 cytokine. This paper is an update of a previous consensus document, based on most recent evidence and expert opinion, that aims to inform on the medical use of interfering with the IL-6 pathway.MethodsA systematic literature research was performed that focused on IL-6-pathway inhibitors in inflammatory diseases. Evidence was put in context by a large group of international experts and patients in a subsequent consensus process. All were involved in formulating the consensus statements, and in the preparation of this document.ResultsThe consensus process covered relevant aspects of dosing and populations for different indications of IL-6 pathway inhibitors that are approved across the world, including rheumatoid arthritis, polyarticular-course and systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis, giant cell arteritis, Takayasu arteritis, adult-onset Still’s disease, Castleman’s disease, chimeric antigen receptor-T-cell-induced cytokine release syndrome, neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder and severe COVID-19. Also addressed were other clinical aspects of the use of IL-6 pathway inhibitors, including pretreatment screening, safety, contraindications and monitoring.ConclusionsThe document provides a comprehensive consensus on the use of IL-6 inhibition to treat inflammatory disorders to inform healthcare professionals (including researchers), patients, administrators and payers.