Göran Ramin Boeckel

Background: Tacrolimus is a key component of immunosuppressive therapy after renal transplantation but is characterized by a narrow therapeutic index and considerable pharmacokinetic variability. Although the month 3 concentration-to-dose (C/D) ratio identifies fast metabolizers at an increased risk of inferior outcomes after transplantation, very early C/D ratios lack prognostic value. Therefore, identifying early exposure metrics that capture cumulative tacrolimus exposure rather than single time-point concentrations represents an important challenge for therapeutic drug monitoring. This study evaluated whether early tacrolimus underexposure (trough concentration <8 ng/mL during postoperative days 1–10) predicts 12-month acute rejection (AR) and examined its association with the month 3 metabolizer phenotype. Methods: This retrospective single-center study analyzed 374 kidney transplant recipients with complete pharmacokinetic data for the month 3 C/D classification and an extended cohort of 609 recipients transplanted between 2007 and 2018 for rejection analyses. Results: The primary end point was biopsy-proven AR within 12 months. A threshold of 0.29 for the proportion of postoperative days 1–10 with trough levels <8 ng/mL provided the highest sensitivity-specificity balance. Values above this cutoff independently predicted 12-month AR. Early tacrolimus exposure patterns showed only a modest ability to discriminate the month 3 metabolizer phenotype. Conclusions: Early tacrolimus underexposure is a simple and clinically relevant predictor of 12-month AR, complementing C/D-ratio-based risk stratification at 3 months. These findings align with the evidence that high early tacrolimus clearance and low tacrolimus exposure increase AR risk and support the recommendations for optimizing early tacrolimus dosing.

Background: Clinical tools to structure kidney transplant waitlist management at the time of listing are limited. We evaluated a simple, donor-independent clinical grading applied at waitlist registration to stratify patients according to post-transplant risk. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 465 adult kidney transplant recipients from two German centers (2018–2023). Patients were assigned to three clinical grading groups based on age and comorbidities, and to three immunologic groups based on pre-immunization. One-year outcomes included mortality, graft loss, eGFR, albuminuria, and rejection. Results: Higher clinical grades were associated with worse one-year outcomes, including lower eGFR and higher rates of death or graft loss, whereas immunologic grading was associated with waiting time but not short-term post-transplant outcomes. These associations appeared robust to donor characteristics in sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: A simple, listing-time clinical grading may support structured waitlist management before donor information is available. External validation is required.

Soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (sFlt-1) is a secreted protein that binds heparan sulfate expressed on the endothelial glycocalyx (eGC). In this paper we analyze how excess sFlt-1 causes conformational changes in the eGC, leading to monocyte adhesion, a key event triggering vascular dysfunction. In vitro exposure of primary human umbilical vein endothelial cells to excess sFlt-1 decreased eGC height and increased stiffness as determined by atomic force microscopy (AFM). Yet, structural loss of the eGC components was not observed, as indicated by Ulex europaeus agglutinin I and wheat germ agglutinin staining. Moreover, the conformation observed under excess sFlt-1, a collapsed eGC, is flat and stiff with unchanged coverage and sustained content. Functionally, this conformation increased the endothelial adhesiveness to THP-1 monocytes by about 35%. Heparin blocked all these effects, but the vascular endothelial growth factor did not. In vivo administration of sFlt-1 in mice also resulted in the collapse of the eGC in isolated aorta analyzed ex vivo by AFM. Our findings show that excess sFlt-1 causes the collapse of the eGC and favors leukocyte adhesion. This study provides an additional mechanism of action by which sFlt-1 may cause endothelial dysfunction and injury.

Background: Two-dose COVID-19 vaccination often results in poor humoral response rates in patients with hematologic malignancies (HMs); yet responses to COVID-19 booster vaccines and the risk of COVID-19 infection post-booster are mostly uncertain. Methods: We included 200 outpatients with HMs and predominantly lymphoid neoplasms (96%, 191/200) in our academic center and reported on the humoral responses, which were assessed by measurement of anti-spike IgG antibodies in peripheral blood as early as 14 days after mRNA-based prime-boost vaccination, as well as factors hampering booster efficacy. Previous basic (double) immunization was applied according to the local recommendations with mRNA- and/or vector-based vaccines. We also report on post-booster COVID-19 breakthrough infections that emerged in the Omicron era and the prophylaxis strategies that were applied to poor and non-responders to booster vaccines. Results: A total of 55% (110/200) of the patients achieved seroconversion (i.e., anti-spike protein IgG antibody titer > 100 AU/mL assessed in median 48 days after prime-boost vaccination) after prime-boost vaccination. Multivariable analyses revealed age, lymphocytopenia, ongoing treatment and prior anti-CD20 B-cell depletion to be independent predictors for booster failure. With each month between anti-CD20-mediated B-cell depletion and booster vaccination, the probability of seroconversion increased by approximately 4% (p < 0.001) and serum–antibody titer (S-AbT) levels increased by 90 AU/mL (p = 0.011). Notably, obinutuzumab treatment was associated with an 85% lower probability for seroconversion after prime-boost vaccination compared to rituximab (p = 0.002). Of poor or non-responders to prime-boost vaccination, 41% (47/114) underwent a second booster and 73% (83/114) underwent passive immunization. COVID-19 breakthrough infections were observed in 15% (29/200) of patients after prime-boost vaccination with predominantly mild courses (93%). Next to seroconversion, passive immunization was associated with a significantly lower risk of COVID-19 breakthrough infections after booster, even in vaccine non-responders (all p < 0.05). In a small proportion of analyzed patients with myeloid neoplasms (9/200), the seroconversion rate was higher compared to those with lymphoid ones (78% vs. 54%, accordingly), while the incidence rate of COVID-19 breakthrough infections was similar (22% vs. 14%, respectively). Following the low frequency of myeloid neoplasms in this study, the results may not be automatically applied to a larger cohort. Conclusions: Patients with HMs are at a high risk of COVID-19 booster vaccine failure; yet COVID-19 breakthrough infections after prime-boost vaccination are predominantly mild. Booster failure can likely be overcome by passive immunization, thereby providing immune protection against COVID-19 and attenuating the severity of COVID-19 courses. Further sophistication of clinical algorithms for preventing post-vaccination COVID-19 breakthrough infections is urgently needed.

A 52-year-old German female presented with cervical lymphadenopathy and fever. Despite the initial symptom-presentation leading to the consideration of sarcoidosis, lymphoma, tuberculosis, and toxoplasmosis, an extensive serologic and histo- and molecular pathologic workup eventually indicated a likely diagnosis of tularemia. This case brings to light that tularemia is a diagnostic challenge and requires high reliance on the epidemiological context thorough patient history, and an extensive interdisciplinary diagnostic workup.

COVID-19 vaccines have become an integral element in the protection of cancer patients against SARS-CoV-2. To date, there are no direct comparisons of the course of COVID-19 infection in cancer patients between the pre- and post-vaccine era. We analyzed SARS-CoV-2 infections and their impact on cancer in COVID-19 vaccinated and non-vaccinated patients from three German cancer centers. Overall, 133 patients with SARS-CoV-2 were enrolled in pre- and post-vaccine eras: 84 non-vaccinated and 49 vaccinated, respectively. A mild course of COVID-19 was documented more frequently in vaccinated patients (49% vs. 29%), while the frequency of severe and critical courses occurred in approximately one-half of the non-vaccinated patients (22% vs. 42%, p = 0.023). Particularly, patients with hematologic neoplasms benefited from vaccination in this context (p = 0.031). Admissions to intermediate- and intensive-care units and the necessity of non-invasive and invasive respiratory support were reduced by 71% and 50% among vaccinated patients, respectively. The median length of admission was 11 days for non-vaccinated and 5 days for vaccinated patients (p = 0.002). COVID-19 mortality was reduced by 83% in vaccinated patients (p = 0.046). Finally, the median time from SARS-CoV-2 infection to restarting cancer therapy was 12 and 26 days among vaccinated and non-vaccinated groups, respectively (p = 0.002). Although this study does not have enough power to perform multivariate analyses to account for confounders, it provides data on COVID-19 in non-vaccinated and vaccinated cancer patients and illustrates the potential benefits of COVID-19 vaccines for these patients.

Patients with hematologic malignancies are at high risk of exacerbated condition and higher mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Bamlanivimab, casirivimab/imdevimab combination, and sotrovimab are monoclonal antibodies (mABs) that can reduce the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization. Clinical effectiveness of bamlanivimab and casirivimab/imdevimab combination has been shown for the Delta variant (B.1.617.2), but the effectiveness of the latter treatment against the Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) has been suggested to be reduced. However, the tolerability and clinical usage of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific mABs in patients with hematologic malignancies are less specified. We present a retrospective case series analysis of all SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with hematologic malignancies who received SARS-CoV-2-specific mABs at our facility between February and mid-December 2021. A total of 13 COVID-19 patients (pts) with at least one malignant hematologic diagnosis received SARS-CoV-2-specific mABs at our facility, with 3 pts receiving bamlanivimab and 10 pts receiving casirivimab/imdevimab combination. We observed SARS-CoV-2 clearance in five cases. Furthermore, we observed a reduction in the necessity for oxygen supplementation in five cases where the application was administered off-label. To the best of our knowledge, we present the largest collection of anecdotal cases of SARS-CoV-2-specific monoclonal antibody use in patients with hematological malignancies. Potential benefit of mABs may be reduced duration and/or clearance of persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection.