Effective treatment or prevention of immune side effects associated with checkpoint inhibitor therapy of cancer is an important goal in this new era of immunotherapy. Hepatitis due to immunotherapy with antibodies against PD-1 is uncommon and generally of low severity. We present an unusually severe case arising in a melanoma patient after more than 6 months uncomplicated treatment with anti-PD-1 in an adjuvant setting. The hepatitis rapidly developed resistance to high-dose steroids, requiring anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) to achieve control. Mass cytometry allowed comprehensive phenotyping of circulating lymphocytes and revealed that CD4+ T cells were profoundly depleted by ATG, while CD8+ T cells, B cells, NK cells and monocytes were relatively spared. Multiple abnormalities in CD4+ T cell phenotype were stably present in the patient before disease onset. These included a population of CCR4−CCR6− effector/memory CD4+ T cells expressing intermediate levels of the Th1-related chemokine receptor CXCR3 and abnormally high multi-drug resistance type 1 transporter (MDR1) activity as assessed by a rhodamine 123 excretion assay. Expression of MDR1 has been implicated in steroid resistance and may have contributed to the severity and lack of a sustained steroid response in this patient. The number of CD4+ rhodamine 123-excreting cells was reduced > 3.5-fold after steroid and ATG treatment. This case illustrates the need to consider this form of steroid resistance in patients failing treatment with corticosteroids. It also highlights the need for both better identification of patients at risk and the development of treatments that involve more specific immune suppression.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s00262-017-2107-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Pooled results to date suggest possible association between both the TGF-beta1 c10 polymorphism and a 3-SNP-haplotype of IL-10 and poor outcomes in renal transplantation, but this needs to be confirmed in larger studies.

The objective of this study was to re-evaluate the effect of arm position on blood pressure (BP) measurement with auscultatory and oscillometric methods including ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). The setting was the hospital outpatient department and the subjects chosen were normotensive and hypertensive. The effect of lowering the arm from heart level on indirect systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) measurement as well as the importance of supporting the horizontal arm were measured. In the sitting position, lowering the supported horizontal arm to the dependent position increased BP measured by a mercury device from 103 7 10/60 7 7 to 111 7 14/ 67 7 10 mmHg in normotensive subjects, a mean increase of 8/7 mmHg (Po0.01). In hypertensive subjects, a similar manoeuvre increased BP from 143 7 21/78 7 17 to 166 7 29/88 7 20 mmHg, an increase of 23/10 mmHg (Po0.01). Combined results from normotensive and hypertensive subjects demonstrate a direct and proportional association between BP (SBP and DBP) and the increase produced by arm dependency. Similar changes and associations were noted with oscillometric devices in the clinic situation. However, supporting the horizontal arm did not alter BP. Of particular interest, analysis of 13 hypertensive subjects who underwent ABPM on two occasions, once with the arm in the 'usual' position and once with the arm held horizontally for BP measurement during waking hours, demonstrated changes comparable to the other devices. The mean 12-hour BP was 154 7 19/82 7 10 mmHg during the former period and significantly decreased to 141 7 18/74 7 9 mmHg during the latter period (Po0.01). Regression analysis of the change in SBP and DBP with arm position change again demonstrated a close correlation (r 2 ¼ 0.8113 and 0.7273; Po0.001) with the artefact being larger with higher systolic and diastolic pressures. In conclusion, arm movements lead to significant artefacts in BP measurement, which are greater, the higher the systolic or diastolic pressure. These systematic errors occur when using both auscultatory and oscillometric (clinic and ABPM) devices and might lead to an erroneous diagnosis of hypertension and unnecessary medication, particularly in individuals with high normal BP levels. Since clinical interpretations of heart level vary, the horizontal arm position should be the unambiguous standard for all sitting and standing BP auscultatory and oscillometric measurements.

No abstract

Both the extent and rate of absorption of Cysporin are significantly less than those of Neoral. The 90% CI for the ratios of Cysporin/Neoral for AUC and C(max) lie within 0.80-1.25. Hence in this clinical context Cysporin is pharmacologically bioequivalent with Neoral. This study illustrates the importance of testing bioequivalence of generic cyclosporine A products in transplant recipients not healthy volunteers.