No abstract

This commentary aims to elaborate challenges in the regulatory approaches for accessing and investigating COVID-19 potential therapies either with off-label use, compassionate use, emergency use or for clinical trials. Since no therapies have been formally approved and completely effective and safe to date, the best clinical choice is acquired only after consistent and fair communication and collaboration between licensed clinicians, researchers, regulatory authorities, manufacturers and patients.

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has generated the largest global health crisis of the 21st century, evolving into accelerating socioeconomic disruption. In spite of all rapidly and widely emerging scientific data on epidemiology, diagnosis, prevention and treatment of the COVID-19 disease, severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is continuing to propagate in lack of definitive and specific therapeutic agents. Current therapeutic strategies are mainly focused on viral inhibition by antiviral drugs and hampering the exuberant immune response of the host by immunomodulatory drugs. In this review, we have studied the reports of the largest clinical trials intended to COVID-19 treatment published during the first year of the pandemics. In general, these results concentrate on seven therapeutic options: remdesivir, chloroguine/hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir combination, corticosteroids, tocilizumab, convalescent plasma and monoclonal antibodies. In line with the reviewed data, as of January 2021, most of the evidence support the use of remdesivir in hospitalized patients with moderate and severe forms of the disease and provide reliable data on the substantial beneficial effect of corticosteroids in patients requiring supplemental oxygen. Moreover, preliminary RECOVERY trial results have demonstrated the efficacy of tociluzumab in the treatment of critically ill patients. The reports presenting the outcomes of the other immune-based therapies under investigation are enthusiastically awaited.

Introduction: Since the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic, efforts have been made to understand the importance of broadly neutralising natural antibodies in determining the response to SARS-CoV-2. Previous studies have shown that allelic variants of the IGHV1-69 gene play a dominant role in protective natural antibody responses to several other viral pathogens, including influenza virus, hepatitis C virus, human immunodeficiency virus and, most notably, the SARS-CoV-2-related viruses SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. These allelic variants are commonly known as 51p1-related and differ from the other IGHV1-69 alleles (known as hv1263-related) in the presence of a Phe54 residue in the CDR2 region. Importantly, crystallographic studies have shown that the Phe54 residue is critical for the binding of IGHV1-69 antibodies to the SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV spike proteins. In this study, we evaluated the prevalence of 51p1 and hv1263 alleles and the clonality of 51p1- and hv1263-expressing B cells in a large cohort of healthy individuals and COVID-19 patients and correlated the findings with the severity of the disease. Мaterials and methods: A total of 419 samples were included in the study, of which 78 asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic individuals, 200 hospitalized patients with severe disease, 94 critically ill patients and 47 healthy donors. Peripheral blood was collected 8-20 days after the onset of symptoms and total cellular RNA was extracted from whole blood using an automated procedure. Аllelle-specific Ig-gene fingerprinting of IgM heavy chain transcripts was used to simultaneously analyse the clonality of the IgM+ B-cell population and the clonality of the 51p1- and hv1263-expressing B cell populations. The significance of the differences in the prevalence of clonal B-cell populations between healthy donors and patients and between patients with different severity of the disease was calculated with the Chi-Square test. Results: Analysis of the clonality of the IgM+ B-cell population showed a polyclonal pattern in most of the investigated healthy individuals (33/47, 70%) but in only 20% of all SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals (75/372, p<0.001). A significant difference was also observed between mildly affected and severely/critically ill patients [31/78 (39.7%) vs. 44/294 (15%), respectively) (p<0.001)], but not between severely and critically ill patients [28/200 (14,%) vs. 16/94 (17,1%), (p=n.s.)]. No 51p1 transcripts were detected in 74/372 (19.9%) of SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals and in 14/47 (29,8%) of the control group (p>0,01), while hv1263 transcripts were not detected in 155/289 (53,6%) and in 27/47 (68,6%) tasted patients and controls, respectively (p>0,05). We did not find a statistically significant difference in the prevalence of 51p1 and hv1263 alleles between patients with different disease severity. However, a significantly higher number of patients displayed clonal expansions of 51p1- or hv1263-expressing B cells (219/372(58.9%) and 118/244 (48,4%), respectively in comparison to healthy donors [5/47(10.6%) and 7/47(14.9%), respectively]. There was no statistically significant difference between mildly affected and severely/critically ill patients in the clonallity status of 51p1- 38/61 (62,3%) and 182/237 (76,7%) respectively or between hv1263- expressing B cells in the same two groups of patients [20/25 (80%) and 98/109 (89,9%), p>0.05]. Conclusions: Our results show that SARS-CoV-2 infection stimulates clonal expansions of IGHV1-69 -expressing B-cells, but this is independent of the severity of the disease. In addition, no difference in the prevalence of IGHV1-69 alleles was observed between patients at different stages of the disease, indicating that natural neutralizing antibodies encoded by this gene are not an important determinant of COVID-19 severity and progression. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Early-stage patients with Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) are diagnosed without need for treatment, managed with following. The distinct course of the disease is diverse, and planing treatment is barely projected at diagnosis.The aim of the study was first-time evaluation of international prognostic score to predict time to first treatment (TFT) in patients with early stage CLL (International Prognostic Score for Earlystage CLL IPS-E).Retrospective study of asymptomatic patients with CLL at early stage of disease in a period of time from January 2011 to January 2021.The median follow-up was 60 months (1-120 months). Individual patient data from 120 treatment-naïve CLL patients with Binet A stage were analyzed to composed International Prognostic Score for Early-stage CLL and correlated with Time to treatment failure (TTF).Using IPS-E patients were distributed in three groups: low risk with 7, 5%, intermediate risk with 44 % and high risk patients 49%.Average TFS was 29, 3 months for low risk group, 28, 6 months for intermediate-risk group and 27,1 months for high-risk group. Using prognostic nomogram we calculated 5 years probability of survival for low, intermediate and high risk group: 73%, 72% and 70% respectively with projected median survival of 9, 1 year for low risk group and 9, 0 year, 8, 9 years for intermediate and high risk groups.The IPS-E is a simple prognostic model that predicts the probability of treatment necessity in patients with early-stage CLL.