CHU Dinant Godinne UCL Namur

Rhinosinusitis is a significant and increasing health problem which results in a large financial burden on society. This evidence based position paper describes what is known about rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps, offers evidence based recommendations on diagnosis and treatment, and considers how we can make progress with research in this area. Rhinitis and sinusitis usually coexist and are concurrent in most individuals; thus, the correct terminology is now rhinosinusitis. Rhinosinusitis (including nasal polyps) is defined as inflammation of the nose and the paranasal sinuses characterised by two or more symptoms, one of which should be either nasal blockage/obstruction/congestion or nasal discharge (anterior/posterior nasal drip), +/- facial pain/pressure, +/- reduction or loss of smell; and either endoscopic signs of polyps and/or mucopurulent discharge primarily from middle meatus and/or; oedema/mucosal obstruction primarily in middle meatus, and/or CT changes showing mucosal changes within the ostiomeatal complex and/or sinuses. The paper gives different definitions for epidemiology, first line and second line treatment and for research. Furthermore the paper describes the anatomy and (patho)physiology, epidemiology and predisposing factors, inflammatory mechanisms, evidence based diagnosis, medical and surgical treatment in acute and chronic rhinosinusitis and nasal polyposis in adults and children. Evidence based schemes for diagnosis and treatment are given for the first and second line clinicians. Moreover attention is given to complications and socio-economic cost of chronic rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps. Last but not least the relation to the lower airways is discussed.

EPOS 2012: European position paper on rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps 2012. A summary for otorhinolaryngologists. no immunosuppressants IV D no nasal saline irrigation Ib, no data in single use D yes for symptomatic relief topical antibiotics no data D no anti-IL-5 no data D unclear phytotherapy no data D no decongestant topical / oral no data in single use D no mucolytics no data D no oral antihistamine in allergic patients no data D no antimycotics -topical Ia (-) ** A(-) no antimycotics -systemic Ib (-)# A(-) $ no anti leukotrienes Ib (-) A(-) no anti-IgE Ib (-) A(-) no * Some of these studies also included patients with CRS with nasal polyps. % short term antibiotics shows one positive and one negative study. Therefore recommendation C. oral antibiotic short term <4 weeks Ib(-) # A(-)* no intravenous antibiotics III(-) ## C(-) ** no # Ib (-): Ib study with a negative outcome.

Abstract The genetic make-up of an individual contributes to the susceptibility and response to viral infection. Although environmental, clinical and social factors have a role in the chance of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and the severity of COVID-19 1,2 , host genetics may also be important. Identifying host-specific genetic factors may reveal biological mechanisms of therapeutic relevance and clarify causal relationships of modifiable environmental risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection and outcomes. We formed a global network of researchers to investigate the role of human genetics in SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity. Here we describe the results of three genome-wide association meta-analyses that consist of up to 49,562 patients with COVID-19 from 46 studies across 19 countries. We report 13 genome-wide significant loci that are associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection or severe manifestations of COVID-19. Several of these loci correspond to previously documented associations to lung or autoimmune and inflammatory diseases 3–7 . They also represent potentially actionable mechanisms in response to infection. Mendelian randomization analyses support a causal role for smoking and body-mass index for severe COVID-19 although not for type II diabetes. The identification of novel host genetic factors associated with COVID-19 was made possible by the community of human genetics researchers coming together to prioritize the sharing of data, results, resources and analytical frameworks. This working model of international collaboration underscores what is possible for future genetic discoveries in emerging pandemics, or indeed for any complex human disease.

Aminoglycosides are highly potent, broad-spectrum antibiotics with many desirable properties for the treatment of life-threatening infections ([28][1]). Their history begins in 1944 with streptomycin and was thereafter marked by the successive introduction of a series of milestone compounds (

BACKGROUND: The combination of bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone is a standard treatment for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. Daratumumab has shown efficacy in combination with standard-of-care regimens in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 706 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation to receive nine cycles of bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone either alone (control group) or with daratumumab (daratumumab group) until disease progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: white cells), as compared with 6.2% of those in the control group (P<0.001). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were hematologic: neutropenia (in 39.9% of the patients in the daratumumab group and in 38.7% of those in the control group), thrombocytopenia (in 34.4% and 37.6%, respectively), and anemia (in 15.9% and 19.8%, respectively). The rate of grade 3 or 4 infections was 23.1% in the daratumumab group and 14.7% in the control group; the rate of treatment discontinuation due to infections was 0.9% and 1.4%, respectively. Daratumumab-associated infusion-related reactions occurred in 27.7% of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation, daratumumab combined with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone resulted in a lower risk of disease progression or death than the same regimen without daratumumab. The daratumumab-containing regimen was associated with more grade 3 or 4 infections. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; ALCYONE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02195479 .).

The treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been revolutionised over the past decade by the increasing use of immunomodulators. With such immunomodulation, the potential for opportunistic infection is a key safety concern for patients with IBD. Opportunistic infections pose particular problems for the clinician: they are often difficult to recognise and are associated with appreciable morbidity or mortality, because they are potentially serious and hard to treat effectively. This led the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation (ECCO) to update the previous Consensus meeting on opportunistic infections in IBD. To organise the work, infections were classified into six major topics. Guideline statements of 2009 were analysed systematically by the chairs and the working parties. In parallel, the working parties performed a systematic literature search of their topic with the appropriate key words using Medline/Pubmed and the Cochrane database, as well as their own files. The evidence level (EL) was graded according to the 2011 Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=5653). Provisional update guideline statements were then posted on a weblog. Discussions and exchange of the literature evidence among the working party members was then performed on the weblog. The working parties then met in Lille on the 15th–16th of November 2012 to agree on the statements. Consensus was defined as agreement by > 80% of participants, termed a Consensus Statement and numbered for convenience in the document. This paper is the product of work by gastroenterologists, infectious disease experts and pediatricians. It provides guidance on the prevention, detection and management of opportunistic infections in patients of all age categories with IBD. After a section on definitions and risk factors for developing opportunistic infection, there are five sections on different infectious agents, followed by a section on information and guidance for patients with IBD travelling frequently or to less economically developed countries. In the final section, a systematic work up and vaccination programme is proposed for consideration in patients exposed to immunomodulator therapies. The final document on each topic was written by the workgroup leader and their working party. Statements are intended to be read in context with qualifying comments and not read in isolation. The final text was edited for consistency of style by JF Rahier, F Magro, R Eliakim and JF Colombel before being circulated and approved by the participants. In some areas the level of evidence is generally low, which reflects the paucity of randomised controlled trials. Consequently expert opinion is included where appropriate. An immunocompromised host has an alteration in phagocytic, cellular, or humoral immunity that increases the risk of an infectious complication or an opportunistic process. Patients may also be immunocompromised if they have a breach of their skin or mucosal defense barriers that permits microorganisms to cause either local or systemic infection.1 There is no clearcut definition of an immunocompromised state. Three categories are recognised by the Centers for Disease Control,2 depending on the severity of immunosuppression: Persons who are severely immunocompromised not as a result of HIV infection: Severe immunosuppression can be the result of congenital immunodeficiency, leukemia, lymphoma, generalised malignancy or therapy with alkylating agents, antimetabolites, radiation, or high doses of corticosteroids (2 mg/kg body weight, or > 20 mg/day of prednisolone, Section 2.4.1) Persons with HIV infection Persons with conditions that cause limited immune deficits (e.g. hyposplenism and renal failure) An opportunistic infection may be defined as a usually progressive infection by a microorganism that has limited (or no) pathogenic capacity under ordinary circumstances, but which is able to cause serious disease as a result of the predisposing effect of another disease or of its treatment.3 Patients with IBD should not be routinely considered to have altered immunocompetence [EL5] per se, despite evidence of impaired innate mucosal immunity. Different immunomodulators may alter immune responsiveness by different mechanisms and to varying degrees, but there is currently no single method of evaluating the effects of immunosuppression on the immune system [EL5] From genome wide association studies there is increasing evidence of an aberrant immune response in IBD.4 Susceptibility loci involve both the innate and adaptive immune response towards a diminished diversity of commensal microbiota.5 Description of the numerous mechanisms contributing to this dysimmunity is beyond the scope of this article. Despite evidence of defective mucosal immunity, there is no proof of a systemic immune defect in patients with IBD in the absence of concomitant immunomodulator therapy. Patients with IBD are therefore rendered immunocompromised through their treatment. Immunomodulators commonly used in inflammatory bowel disease are corticosteroids, thiopurines, methotrexate, calcineurin inhibitors, anti-tumor necrosis factor agents, or other biologics. Their modes of action differ, but they all compromise to some extent the immune To there is no to immunosuppression in patients with IBD. IBD patients risk of opportunistic infections are with immunomodulators in and with In and a of serious infections should be is an risk factor for opportunistic infections in IBD factors not the to opportunistic infection, but the infection to and to an extent that is not are factors for developing an opportunistic In a were associated with and bowel was therefore also patients with disease and the have defined categories of that are to the to or and that are to the and The immunomodulators commonly used in IBD and associated with an risk of infections corticosteroids, thiopurines, methotrexate, calcineurin inhibitors, and other corticosteroids, a to 20 of for is associated with an risk of infections and infections have all been associated with the use of immunomodulator therapy in IBD. Despite different mechanisms of of can to of a immunomodulator and a of infection has been and that use was commonly associated with with infections and therapy with or There are commonly the infectious be the of that immunomodulators as risk factors for opportunistic infection the are to risk of both and infections in for in were and with and > 20 In the the for all infectious was with > the risk of opportunistic infection There are no in the IBD that a associated with risk of The risk of infections has been to use of corticosteroids in IBD patients corticosteroids and therapy and in the of infectious in a of In this a has therapy to infectious in Crohn's disease but not a different of not an risk with therapy for all therapy is associated with of serious infection in in the of treatment of opportunistic serious infections and of were in patients as in the and for The an risk of serious infections with therapy in Crohn's disease less that for corticosteroids and of all randomised controlled in a risk of opportunistic infections with immunomodulator an risk of infection, to a varying that has not been is the that of immunomodulator therapy in IBD are associated with an in the risk of opportunistic infection risk if immunomodulator was increasing if or were used to microorganisms is a risk factor for opportunistic infection in the immunocompromised with potential of and to areas may the risk of infection in IBD patients on immunomodulators consideration should be to patients and patients who not to be to immunomodulators as that are is to is to high as a with a a with infection or of in an where or other such as or are increases the risk for an opportunistic infection in the who are on immunomodulator microorganisms have been to be of in In both and in have been the of of In less economically developed the immunocompromised may be to and is defined as the of immune that to an of the to infection and to disease and In this there is evidence of in the innate and adaptive immune there is evidence that immune has to the infections commonly in the of the other there are to that infections with such as and infections are to 20 in the in In infections are in with the with the of of and In IBD age has been as an risk factor for of patients age > as a predisposing factor for opportunistic infections to age This was by who also an of opportunistic infections in patients or the of infections and in patients with for IBD as with patients or is of to patients with agents, age has also been as a of infection in a with The evidence in the IBD literature that immunosuppression increases the risk for but infections usually a 20 on in IBD who to an infection In of of IBD are and may be with immune such as altered and patients are to such as have been as risk factors for infection in disease and In IBD have been in as an risk factor for is immunomodulator therapy in patients with the immune system is of the to an immune The immune response can in has a on and is associated with impaired immunity, as well as and and of the to opportunistic infections and to to with cause and of immune the of infections and the impaired response to is in Crohn's disease and as to or often is of is factors to in to of and renal of and of or altered with to bowel and disease or bowel immunity has been in both in and in the and risk of infection has not been in IBD. has been as an risk factor for an risk of in patients with an level It is this was cause or a often reflects as a of infection or disease and is not a of in IBD a or has been associated with opportunistic infection in patients with or of are the body and the of a to a of and is a is of the IBD a to an IBD and immunomodulator therapy in with a 20 be in for using should be should be by detection of This is to the potential risk of as a result of concomitant infection with other or by the effects of Immunomodulators may are not but should be used with The on the severity of IBD and the of the The risk that therapy or with IBD therapy IBD should be the for treatment The the of infection in patients with IBD and its to immunomodulator therapy in patients of were in patients with were to corticosteroids and in to The severity of was for for of This also and for the of an was the cause of In there is a agreement in patients as the of with the of in and In studies have that the The of corticosteroids on disease has been in patients in are associated with and the in this is the of to in IBD patients to be to that in of as is in not to have a effect on the of and not to disease for of with HIV in may In a systematic with on patients who were with agents, for of the evidence that therapy be for infection a of as an to and therapy for patients with to response to a therapy in of patients with with no effect treatment with to or infection are vaccination or for potential infection is not In previous European no agreement be for or in the of to immunomodulators. on in some a and effect with other to and should be can be used in IBD patients of concomitant the other treatment for infection in with Crohn's disease is generally not therapy may this This is in to where therapy not to have an and the inhibitors, are of the which is for the of both and It has been in that the of both and which to serious or In the of or the therapy and may of used for IBD the risk of IBD by therapy or with IBD therapy should be the of treatment and consideration on an There are no of infection developing immunomodulator therapy. of immunomodulator therapy is not IBD patients should be for of IBD to In patients with should also be vaccination is in all patients with IBD. of vaccination is impaired in by the disease and by response should be doses of the may be to of should be in patients risk and for immunomodulator treatment has patients who are should with high to of the of in to Patients with and may have of with therapy used in IBD should be but therapy is not is of is a complication of immunosuppression in the of or in up to if therapy is not of therapy in patients with is by the of immunomodulators on the of infection in IBD be The of of in IBD were treatment and have been the of were other immunomodulators such as corticosteroids or thiopurines, that immunosuppression may studies the of infection in IBD patients and its to therapy have been in to of IBD patients with In of of patients with with The information is the and of immunomodulators in IBD that used in therapy and in other inflammatory conditions immunomodulators. In this of the patients who were treatment with or immunomodulators for a of were for not treatment. was in a Crohn's disease with and with corticosteroids and of infection to be with the immunosuppression used in in to patients IBD patients have to be for infection to infection or vaccination In patients with evidence of infection, and should also be The by infection, in systematic vaccination of all patients In the for vaccination has been the the of as as not in with high but also in or The of infection in IBD is that in the the of to areas may a local In this the of and may cause of to to frequently with a of often The vaccination 20 single and is to in the of IBD in with The of followed by and a if no response is has a the to The response should be to the patients vaccination per of > are to if treatment is the other a has to immune response in patients who and is the in The of is not well but for or in with and high In treatment with is to the of immunomodulators and for their Patients with high should treatment to patients are according to for of and that are and in IBD patients on immunomodulator and are the for IBD patients to their of and of In a of infection is the of may not be In the of immunosuppression with a high and of is for may Crohn's disease but not and may cause may in patients who are but and as well as in with and that of in IBD for is not patients should be routinely for of as well as for in and to on immunomodulator therapy on There are no of infection immunomodulator or therapies. where expert opinion has there is no treatment for infection in in the of immunomodulators disease or the of This has been for corticosteroids which the of by effects on as well as of the immune In IBD patients with infection, immunomodulators should be or of the infection or In treatment is in infection as is for for HIV is for and patients with and should of immunomodulator on of risk and severity of infections in patients immunomodulator therapy immunomodulators are not in patients is for patients risk The effect of corticosteroids on the of HIV infection in IBD patients has been are used as therapy in the treatment of of HIV infections such as or that patients immune is if this which is that used to treat IBD has a effect in HIV disease It is to use corticosteroids for the therapy of IBD patients with HIV infection who have immune and but no are the use of and its effect on HIV infection in IBD patients is with a 20 HIV IBD patients with IBD in HIV patients in HIV patients were The of patients were has been in the of HIV infection, by contributing to HIV through of have also been associated with of HIV infection and the of infectious It has also been proposed that as a of a immune response to may the There some studies on the effects of therapy on the of HIV infection which have been and of IBD patients or patients with have that in HIV a in HIV in a the effect of a therapy with in HIV patients with and > The response to was or to a treatment is difficult to such a that therapy may be to IBD patients with HIV infection and not have the effects on HIV HIV patients may be with if by the of IBD but they should be and to HIV infection are appropriate. to by using and in is appropriate for exposed to or are to be and is appropriate. IBD patients immunomodulator or therapy are for HIV infection HIV and with if infection is to infection, because of the potential of such therapy in HIV It is to the risk of HIV into The of inflammatory bowel disease in patients should be and treatment in with appropriate to the on the effect of immune treatment with on the of concomitant HIV and no are It is to that and immune that IBD patients have infectious IBD therapy if they not The to infection of IBD patients HIV on the of the is the risk may be different to but less increases the the of a with for of was but was potential immunomodulators and of the of are There may be or effects of the different in of or effects HIV infection can immunomodulator therapy but its should be a with Crohn's disease who HIV infection therapy with with this for From a of HIV infection should be according to with appropriate of immunomodulator or therapy should be considered if there is no response to by or in for infection is not before immunomodulator therapy In patients with should be by or before increasing immunomodulator therapy In of with in the immunomodulator therapy should be and of immunomodulators considered In of systemic immunomodulator therapy be therapy is often associated with of This is usually or by a is It is appropriate to a infection by or and disease as have that is frequently in patients with with or but In their were in all patients and or in agree with previous studies that of immunomodulator or therapy is but if therapy is with the of infection immunomodulator treatment may be There is no different are therapy for infection, the potential for not a of infections to for infection in IBD patients is not the patients are Different for the of infection are The high in the that is of limited for the of infection, but detection of can be used to infection in or This patients risk and the are but have of if is and to or are but as an of are to infection and treatment in immunocompromised if of by is not with using are and for infection in or The commonly used for of infection and disease is detection of through in and in the The of are high the potential for and detection in a wide of and and in In patients with has been in in and in of The has been to be a of is the therapy of for After a to for the of the to may be considered if depending on the and local In of or (e.g. is an or not treatment or of immunomodulator therapy and usually or is but associated with a treatment with or other and of is associated with and are for infection is not to of immunomodulator therapy infection is not a to immunomodulator therapy The for therapy should be considered in patients with or infection or immunomodulator therapy there is a is by or as a cause of IBD before increasing immunomodulator therapy In the of disease immunomodulator therapy should be and immunomodulators or and may be and in immunocompromised In a IBD patients therapy skin or with patients on may cause systemic infections with morbidity and and has potential for in immunocompromised may be the of This but complication of is in immunocompromised There is no for Patients should be if they have a of or infection, to and should be for patients with to should be considered for patients with who are therapy. or are as of and infection with but is not and are for Patients with or should be for section for of in skin or the or in doses for often a not of immunomodulators or systemic immunomodulators should not be infection, may be or for is in a with or may cause or therapy for IBD. therapy with or and of are and other or of or treatment can be and the for consideration on a is in patients with but cause or an The risk of is of patients should be by for to a of or of doses of should be for patients should the of to of immunomodulator therapy can be a of all therapy patients should therapy should not be infection with or In the of infection immunomodulator treatment should be and immunomodulator therapy in if therapy can be all have over and has [EL5] is often or in immunocompromised or or In a of in five of 20 of IBD on an risk of for and in a is also with an risk of IBD patients with were thiopurines, as patients evidence of five with In with a of the is with a doses of of and should be by of (or for to the is or or the up in a or they should be for It is to a which may for by patients with IBD should doses of a or the before immunomodulators are should be of all high of (or for a or are to be on high as are prednisolone, or for or for immune should be an with IBD has to or on exposed After patients should be for and in the of the provides both and It is in and a single is routinely for of over of IBD patients immunomodulators before and as for to therapy with of or are not considered to safety and are not as for of that may be in patients with the and safety of this vaccination is not in IBD patients with immunomodulators should and are is not for of or can be in or a skin The of on the are and and can in no and are on the and of the and the of the or not and for have but work is to the and to for are not to to the or action in and therapy should be treatment doses and the or with are to therapy is Immunomodulators should not be or Patients should be and with It may be to immunomodulator therapy for infection before of immunomodulator therapy should be considered In infection immunomodulator therapy may be considered and immunomodulator therapy In the of disease immunomodulator the should be in with appropriate Immunomodulators should be In the in the with of by is the of and the risk of infection in the is associated with a risk of patients and with of infection and of In has an risk of among IBD on In the of therapy a of for of The risk to result in for of but to be with a for In patients on thiopurines, of the were usually of in patients not on therapy. infection may pose a particular among patients under in the infectious associated of infectious have been in patients on is with or renal has been to the risk of in renal but the risk of in IBD is to this should be considered before of immunomodulator then be used in to in patients the The and are for infection is by the detection and the with usually or has a high for or in high risk and but The limited IBD or increases in of associated and by a is to infectious and in to the of for is not an as are often not therapy not the of infectious in therapy may be for have no in the treatment of the limited infection with and and therapy should be or if In infection, therapy with or may be despite the of are for infection, but are should be for and management of of therapy may result in of In the absence of or of is the of therapy for may also be for is for with if with immunomodulators In patients with of immunomodulator therapy should be considered vaccination is for and according to or past infection with is not a for immunomodulator therapy It is immunomodulators can the of the but there are of in immunocompromised studies in an risk of infection and studies in by IBD also that were the risk of infection and a using of and is in In a of and was approved in are and high infection in on local vaccination is for before of In the of or local vaccination to in some depending on of The is in for with vaccination for a can be to immunocompromised IBD to to immunocompromised through age and who not or all doses they were with being with and in this doses of the were and of and to or is a of or and reflects infection the are for of infection, because not all patients and can a or to of is for of a infection, but infection is and usually is limited to the detection of in immunocompromised is as for the is to patients on immunomodulators they have a is not for in the because there is currently no evidence that or treatment the risk of to in this for or of infections are for and studies a of associated with and in with IBD to the The risk of an associated with and has also been to in patients on immunomodulator the a in not in of IBD and In all factors and are if with IBD and on immunomodulators are to have as high risk patients according to local or The that who are immunocompromised should be the of and may be considered for of their infection with is no to and in particular are considered of IBD in with Crohn's and may be associated with infection with of There are of an of in immunocompromised of immunomodulators may be in patients with with on immunomodulators not a there are of in patients who have been on for is with a but the risk of the IBD by has to be considered and with the in patients therapy have been in Patients on immunomodulator therapy are considered to an risk for the of infection vaccination with is an to The is not not to have an on the of inflammatory bowel disease vaccination of patients on immunomodulators is in with is in patients immunomodulator in on therapy patients with a of should treatment in the of or not an has been treatment should be on an in with on the of infection in patients with IBD. the of not in IBD patients immunosuppression is generally considered to the risk of vaccination is the method for infection and is therefore for patients on immunomodulators in the for Disease of are should be used for age and is not for patients on immunomodulators. In the may be used for on IBD patients on immunomodulators are considered to be risk and vaccination has been with and proof of is There is to that vaccination may be less in patients with IBD The use of may also response to the immune response to vaccination in patients with IBD and is not associated with a

The treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been revolutionised over the past decade by the increasing use of immunomodulators, mainly azathioprine (AZA)/6-mercaptopurine (6-MP) and methotrexate (MTX), together with the advent of biological therapy. Immunomodulators are being used more often and earlier in the course of the disease. 1 The introduction of biologic agents, especially inhibitors of the key proinflammatory cytokine, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) initiated a new therapeutic era, whose use has grown continuously since their introduction in 1998. 2 With such immunomodulation, the potential for opportunistic infection is a key safety concern for patients with IBD. Opportunistic infections pose particular problems for the clinician: they are often difficult to recognise and are associated with appreciable morbidity or mortality, because they are potentially serious and hard to treat effectively. Enhancing awareness and improving the knowledge of gastroenterologists about opportunistic infections are important elements to optimise patient outcomes through the development of preventive or early diagnostic strategies.

INTRODUCTION : The introduction and broad use of new immunosuppressive agents, including biologic agents and JAK inhibitors, have revolutionised treatment of inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] in recent decades. With such immunosuppression, the potential for opportunistic infection is a key safety concern. [...]

The European Lung White Book -a major new overview of respiratory health in Europe

The crude incidence of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) in the European Union is 2.3, the mortality 0.4 cases/100 000/year. Young adults aged 20–40 years are most often affected. Slightly more men than women are diagnosed with HL. Histologically, classical HL (cHL) accounting for ∼95% of all HL cases is distinguished from nodular lymphocyte-predominant HL (NLPHL) representing ∼5% of all HL cases.

Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD) is a rare form of non-Langerhans histiocytosis, with noncodified therapeutic management and high mortality. No treatment has yet been shown to improve survival in these patients. We conducted a multicenter prospective observational cohort study to assess whether extraskeletal manifestations and interferon-α treatment would influence survival in a large cohort of ECD patients. To achieve this goal, we thoroughly analyzed the clinical presentation of 53 patients with biopsy-proven ECD, and we performed a survival analysis using Cox proportional hazard model. Fifty-three patients (39 men and 14 women) with biopsy-proven ECD were followed up between November 1981 and November 2010. Forty-six patients (87%) received interferon-α and/or PEGylated interferon-α. Multivariate survival analysis using Cox proportional hazard model revealed that central nervous system involvement was an independent predictor of death (hazard ratio = 2.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-5.52; P = .006) in our cohort. Conversely, treatment with interferon-α was identified as an independent predictor of survival (hazard ratio = 0.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.70; P = .006). Although definitive confirmation would require a randomized controlled trial, these results suggest that interferon-α improves survival in ECD patients. This may be seen as a significant advance, as it is the first time a treatment is shown to improve survival in this multisystemic disease with high mortality.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic monoclonal anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) antibodies are associated with immune-mediated enterocolitis. The aim of this study was to provide a detailed description of this entity. METHODS: We included patients with endoscopic signs of inflammation after anti-CTLA-4 infusions for cancer treatment. Other causes of enterocolitis were excluded. Clinical, biological and endoscopic data were recorded. A single pathologist reviewed endoscopic biopsies and colectomy specimens from 27 patients. Patients with and without enterocolitis after ipilimumab-treated melanoma were compared, to identify clinical factors associated with enterocolitis. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients with anti-CTLA-4 enterocolitis were included (ipilimumab n = 37; tremelimumab n = 2). The most frequent symptom was diarrhoea. Ten patients had extra-intestinal manifestations. Most colonoscopies showed ulcerations involving the rectum and sigmoid, 66% of patients had extensive colitis, 55% had patchy distribution and 20% had ileal inflammation. Endoscopic colonic biopsies showed acute colitis in most patients, while half of the patients had chronic duodenitis. Thirty-five patients received steroids that led to complete clinical remission in 13 patients (37%). Twelve patients required infliximab, of whom 10 (83%) responded. Six patients underwent colectomy (perforation n = 5; toxic megacolon n = 1); one of them died postoperatively. Four patients had a persistent enterocolitis at follow-up colonoscopy. Patients with enterocolitis were more frequently prescribed NSAIDs compared with patients without enterocolitis (31 vs 5%, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Ipilimumab and tremelimumab may induce a severe and extensive form of inflammatory bowel disease. Rapid escalation to infliximab should be advocated in patients who do not respond to steroids. Patients treated with anti-CTLA-4 should be advised to avoid NSAIDs.

BACKGROUND: Falls in the elderly is nowadays a major concern because of their consequences on elderly general health and moral states. Moreover, the aging of the population and the increasing life expectancy make the prediction of falls more and more important. The analysis presented in this article makes a first step in this direction providing a way to analyze gait and classify hospitalized elderly fallers and non-faller. This tool, based on an accelerometer network and signal processing, gives objective informations about the gait and does not need any special gait laboratory as optical analysis do. The tool is also simple to use by a non expert and can therefore be widely used on a large set of patients. METHOD: A population of 20 hospitalized elderlies was asked to execute several classical clinical tests evaluating their risk of falling. They were also asked if they experienced any fall in the last 12 months. The accelerations of the limbs were recorded during the clinical tests with an accelerometer network distributed on the body. A total of 67 features were extracted from the accelerometric signal recorded during a simple 25 m walking test at comfort speed. A feature selection algorithm was used to select those able to classify subjects at risk and not at risk for several classification algorithms types. RESULTS: The results showed that several classification algorithms were able to discriminate people from the two groups of interest: fallers and non-fallers hospitalized elderlies. The classification performances of the used algorithms were compared. Moreover a subset of the 67 features was considered to be significantly different between the two groups using a t-test. CONCLUSIONS: This study gives a method to classify a population of hospitalized elderlies in two groups: at risk of falling or not at risk based on accelerometric data. This is a first step to design a risk of falling assessment system that could be used to provide the right treatment as soon as possible before the fall and its consequences. This tool could also be used to evaluate the risk several times during the revalidation procedure.

The FL2000 study was undertaken to evaluate the combination of the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody rituximab with chemotherapy plus interferon in the first-line treatment of follicular lymphoma patients with a high tumor burden. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either 12 courses of the chemotherapy regimen CHVP (cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, etoposide, and prednisolone) plus interferon-alpha2a (CHVP+I arm) over 18 months or 6 courses of the same chemotherapy regimen combined with 6 infusions of 375 mg/m(2) rituximab and interferon for the same time period (R-CHVP+I arm). After a median follow-up of 5 years, event-free survival estimates were, respectively, 37% (95% confidence interval [CI], 29%-44%) and 53% (95% CI, 45%-60%) in the CHVP+I and R-CHVP+I arm (P = .001). Five-year overall survival estimates were not statistically different in the CHVP+I (79%; 95% CI, 72%-84%) and R-CHVP+I (84%; 95% CI, 78%-84%) arms. In a multivariate regression analysis, event-free survival was significantly influenced by both the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index score (hazard ratio = 2.08; 95% CI, 1.6%-2.8%) and the treatment arm (hazard ratio = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44%-0.78%). With a 5-year follow-up, the combination of rituximab with CHVP+I provides superior disease control in follicular lymphoma patients despite a shorter duration of chemotherapy. This study's clinical trial was registered at the National Institutes of Health website as no. NCT00136552.

BACKGROUND: Chemoradiotherapy is standard treatment for localized aggressive lymphoma. To determine the optimal therapy for nonelderly persons with low-risk localized lymphoma, we conducted a randomized trial comparing chemoradiotherapy with chemotherapy alone. METHODS: Previously untreated patients less than 61 years old with localized stage I or II aggressive lymphoma and no adverse prognostic factors according to the International Prognostic Index were randomly assigned to three cycles of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) plus involved-field radiotherapy (329 patients) or chemotherapy alone with dose-intensified doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vindesine, bleomycin, and prednisone (ACVBP) plus sequential consolidation (318 patients). RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 7.7 years, event-free and overall survival rates were significantly higher in the group given chemotherapy alone than in the group given CHOP plus radiotherapy (P<0.001 and P=0.001, respectively). The five-year estimates of event-free survival were 82 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 78 to 87 percent) for patients receiving chemotherapy alone and 74 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 69 to 78 percent) for those receiving chemoradiotherapy. The respective five-year estimates of overall survival were 90 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 87 to 93 percent) and 81 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 77 to 86 percent). In a multivariate analysis, event-free and overall survival rates were affected by treatment group, independently of tumor stage and the presence or absence of bulky disease. CONCLUSIONS: In patients under 61 years of age, chemotherapy with three cycles of ACVBP followed by sequential consolidation is superior to three cycles of CHOP plus radiotherapy for the treatment of low-risk localized lymphoma.

We conducted a randomized trial to compare the intensive conventional chemotherapy regimen ACVBP (doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vindesine, bleomycin, prednisone) with standard CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) in previously untreated patients with poor-risk aggressive lymphoma. Patients aged 61 to 69 years who had aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma with at least one prognostic factor of the age-adjusted international prognostic index (IPI) were included. ACVBP consisted of an induction phase of intensified chemotherapy and central nervous system (CNS) prophylaxis followed by a sequential consolidation phase. Of the 708 patients registered for the study, 635 were eligible. The rate of complete response was 58% in the ACVBP group and 56% in the CHOP group (P =.5). Treatment-related death occurred in 13% of the ACVBP group and 7% of the CHOP group (P =.014). At 5 years, the event-free survival was 39% in the ACVBP group and 29% in the CHOP group (P =.005). The overall survival was significantly longer for patients treated with ACVBP, at 5 years it was 46% compared with 38% for patients treated with CHOP (P =.036). CNS progressions or relapses were more frequent in the CHOP group (P =.004). Despite higher toxicity, the ACVBP regimen, used as first-line treatment for patients with poor-risk aggressive lymphoma, is superior to standard CHOP with regard to both event-free survival and overall survival.

The Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome conducted a randomized trial to compare bortezomib-dexamethasone (VD) as induction before high-dose therapy (HDT) and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) to a combination consisting of reduced doses of bortezomib and thalidomide plus dexamethasone (vtD) in patients with multiple myeloma. Overall, a total of 199 patients were centrally randomly assigned to receive VD or vtD. After 4 cycles, the complete response (CR) rate was the same in both groups (13% in the vtD arm, 12% in the VD arm, P = .74). However, the CR plus very good partial response (VGPR) rate was significantly higher in the vtD arm (49% vs 36%, P = .05). After ASCT, the CR plus VGPR rate was significantly higher in the vtD arm (74% vs 58%, P = .02). The reduced doses of bortezomib and thalidomide translated into a reduced incidence of peripheral neuropathy (PN): grade ≥ 2 PN were reported in 34% in the VD arm versus 14% in the vtD arm (P = .001). vtD, including reduced doses of bortezomib and thalidomide, yields higher VGPR rates compared with VD and can be considered a new effective triplet combination before HDT/ASCT.

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains the most common cardiac surgery performed today worldwide. The history of this procedure can be traced back for more than 100 years, and its development has been touched by several pioneers in the field of cardiac surgery, who have contributed with both their successes and failures. With ever increasing follow up and number of patients treated, thinking regarding optimal CABG technique evolves continually. This article reviews the history of CABG from its early experimental work to recent technological advances.

Objective Our aim was to prospectively assess the antibiotic resistance rates in Helicobacter pylori strains in Europe in 2018 and to study the link between antibiotic consumption in the community and H. pylori resistance levels in the different countries. Design The proportion of primary antibiotic resistance cases of H. pylori and their corresponding risk factors were investigated in 24 centres from 18 European countries according to a standardised protocol. Data on antibiotic consumption in the community were collected for the period 2008–2017. The link between antibiotic consumption and resistance data was assessed using generalised linear mixed models. The model with the best fit was selected by means of the Akaike Information Criterion. Results H. pylori resistance rates for the 1211 adult patients included were 21.4% for clarithromycin, 15.8% for levofloxacin and 38.9% for metronidazole and were significantly higher in Central/Western and Southern than in the Northern European countries. The best model fit was obtained for the Poisson distribution using 2013 consumption data. A significant association was found between H. pylori clarithromycin resistance and consumption in the community of macrolides (p=0.0003) and intermediate-acting macrolides (p=0.005), and between levofloxacin resistance and consumption of quinolones (p=0.0002) and second-generation quinolones (p=0.0003). Conclusion This study confirms the positive correlation between macrolide and quinolone consumption in the community and corresponding H. pylori resistance in European countries. Hence, H. pylori treatment with clarithromycin and levofloxacin should not be started without susceptibility testing in most European countries.

PURPOSE The PRIMA study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00140582 ) established that 2 years of rituximab maintenance after first-line immunochemotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with follicular lymphoma compared with observation. Here, we report the final PFS and overall survival (OS) results from the PRIMA study after 9 years of follow-up and provide a final overview of safety. METHODS Patients (&gt; 18 years of age) with previously untreated high–tumor-burden follicular lymphoma were nonrandomly assigned to receive one of three immunochemotherapy induction regimens. Responding patients were randomly assigned (stratified by induction regimen, response to induction treatment, treatment center, and geographic region) 1:1 to receive 2 years of rituximab maintenance (375 mg/m 2 , once every 8 weeks), starting 8 weeks after the last induction treatment, or observation (no additional treatment). All patients in the extended follow-up provided their written informed consent (data cutoff: December 31, 2016). RESULTS In total, 1,018 patients completed induction treatment and were randomly assigned to rituximab maintenance (n = 505) or observation (n = 513). Consent for the extended follow-up was provided by 607 patients (59.6%) of 1,018 (rituximab maintenance, n = 309; observation, n = 298). After data cutoff, median PFS was 10.5 years in the rituximab maintenance arm compared with 4.1 years in the observation arm (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.73; P &lt; .001). No OS difference was seen in patients randomly assigned to rituximab maintenance or observation (hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.40; P = .7948); 10-year OS estimates were approximately 80% in both study arms. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION Rituximab maintenance after induction immunochemotherapy provides a significant long-term PFS, but not OS, benefit over observation.