Some previous studies reported that probiotics might decrease the severity of chemotherapy-induced mucositis. This study assessed the potential protective effect of Lactobacillus plantarum ATCC 8014 on 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) induced intestinal mucositis in the Wistar rats. The CrlWI rats were divided into two groups of six animals (F, L) and one group of 5 animals (M). Group L received for 9 days 3.32×109 CFU/ml of Lactobacillus plantarum orally. In the 7th day of the experiment 400 mg of 5-FU was administered intraperitoneally in groups L and F. Group M received only the vehicles. All animals were sacrificed in the 9th day. Eleven histological characteristics of mucositis were quantified from 0 (normal) to 3 (severe) for duodenum, jejunum and colon. Semiquantitative grades measured Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) immunopositive cells. The independent groups were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test, Mann-Whitney U test, with a Bonferroni correction for alpha (P≤0.016). In the group F, treated with 5-FU, the most affected areas were the jejunum and the duodenum. The medium score of histological lesions was 27 for jejunum (minimum 25, maximum 32) and 21 for duodenum (minimum 18, maximum 29). Graded microscopic mucosal changes of the jejunum were significantly lower in group L compared with group F (U=0, P=0.009, Mann-Whitney test). The histological changes depicted on the duodenal and colonic mucosa were less severe in group L than in group F, but without reaching the statistical significance (duodenum U=6, P=0.172, Mann-Whitney test; colon U=12, P=0.916, Mann-Whitney test). Although the TLR4 immunoexpression was more intense in group L, no significant statistical difference was revealed at duodenum, jejunum or colonic mucosa. Significantly fewer microscopic changes were depicted in L group on the jejunum, suggesting a potential beneficial effect of Lactobacillus plantarum at this level in 5-FU induced mucositis.Interleukin 1 (IL-1), a central mediator of innate immunity, is considered a master cytokine of local and systemic inflammation. IL-1 has emerged as pivotal in the pathogenesis of autoinflammatory diseases (AIDs), and blockade of its pathway has become a crucial target for therapy. Anakinra (ANA), a recombinant IL-1β receptor antagonist, was the first anti-IL-1 agent employed in clinical practice. ANA is currently approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis, adult-onset Still’s disease, and cryopyrin-associated autoinflammatory syndrome. It has also been successfully used for off-label treatment of various monogenic, polygenic, or undefined etiology systemic AIDs. This review describes currently available evidence for the off-label use of ANA in pediatric rheumatologic diseases. Specifically, the use of ANA in Kawasaki disease, idiopathic recurrent pericarditis, Behçet disease, monogenic AIDs, undifferentiated AIDs, chronic non-bacterial osteomyelitis, macrophage activation syndrome, and febrile infection-related epilepsy, in terms of its safety and efficacy. In selected pediatric rheumatic disorders, the off-label administration of ANA appears to be effective and safe. In order to control severe and/or relapsing disease, ANA should be considered as a valuable treatment option in children suffering from rare inflammatory diseases. However, currently available data consist of retrospective studies and short case series; thus, randomized controlled trials and larger series with long-term follow up are mandatory to better assess the efficacy and cost effectiveness of ANA in these challenging patients.

The aim of our study was to synthesize evidence on the occurrence of malignancy in spondyloarthritis (SpA), from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing biologics with non-biologics and biologics to each other.

We systematically searched Medline, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Scopus and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception until 31 October 2018. RCTs with ⩾24-week follow-up were included. We extracted data using standardized forms and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. We performed pair-wise meta-analyses and network meta-analyses to compare the risk of malignancy for each biologics class and SpA type. We reported the Peto odds ratio (OR) of any malignancy along with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Bayesian posterior probabilities comparing risk of malignancy of each biologic class with non-biologics were computed as supplementary measures.

Fifty-four trials were included; most (44/54) had follow-up <1 year. Among 14,245 patients, 63 developed a malignancy. While most Peto ORs were >1, they had wide 95% CI and

 >0.05. The overall Peto OR comparing biologics with non-biologics was 1.42 (95% CI 0.80-2.53). Only interleukin-17 inhibitors in peripheral SpA had

 <0.05 (Peto OR 2.77, 95% CI 1.07-7.13); the posterior probability that the risk was higher than non-biologics was 98%. Stratified analyses revealed no consistent trend by prior exposure to biologics, duration of follow-up, study quality, study-arm crossover, analytical approaches and type of malignancy.

Our findings indicate no overall elevated risk of malignancy with biologics in SpA. As our meta-analyses are unable to conclude on the long-term risk, long-term pharmacovigilance of biologics in SpA may still be warranted.

Our findings indicate no overall elevated risk of malignancy with biologics in SpA. As our meta-analyses are unable to conclude on the long-term risk, long-term pharmacovigilance of biologics in SpA may still be warranted.

Within the past few years, there has been tremendous growth in clinical trials of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies. selleck Unlike those of many small-molecule pharmaceuticals, CAR T-cell therapy clinical trials are fraught with risks due to the use of live cell products. The aim of this study is to reach a consensus with experts on the most relevant set of risks that practically occur in CAR T-cell therapy clinical trials.

A Delphi method of consensus development was used to identify the risks in CAR T-cell therapy clinical trials, comprising three survey rounds. The expert panel consisted of principal investigators, clinical research physicians, members of institutional ethics committees, and Good Clinical Practice managers.

Of the 24 experts invited to participate in this Delphi study, 20 participants completed Round 1, Round 2, and Round 3. Finally, consensus (defined as >80% agreement) was achieved for 54 risks relating to CAR T-cell clinical trials. Effective interventions related to these risks are needed to ensure the proper protection of subject health and safety.