Senescence under appraisal: hopes and challenges revisited.

In recent years, cellular senescence has become the focus of attention in multiple areas of biomedical research. Typically defined as an irreversible cell cycle arrest accompanied by increased cellular growth, metabolic activity and by a characteristic messaging secretome, cellular senescence can impact on multiple physiological and pathological processes such as wound healing, fibrosis, cancer and ageing. These unjustly called 'zombie cells' are indeed a rich source of opportunities for innovative therapeutic development. In this review, we collate the current understanding of the process of cellular senescence and its two-faced nature, i.e. beneficial/detrimental, and reason this duality is linked to contextual aspects. We propose the senescence programme as an endogenous pro-resolving mechanism that may lead to sustained inflammation and damage when dysregulated or when senescent cells are not cleared efficiently. This pro-resolving model reconciles the paradoxical two faces of senescence by emphasising that it is the unsuccessful completion of the programme, and not senescence itself, what leads to pathology. Thus, pro-senescence therapies under the right context, may favour inflammation resolution. We also review the evidence for the multiple therapeutic approaches under development based on senescence, including its induction, prevention, clearance and the use of senolytic and senomorphic drugs. In particular, we highlight the importance of the immune system in the favourable outcome of senescence and the implications of an inefficient immune surveillance in completion of the senescent cycle. Finally, we identify and discuss a number of challenges and existing gaps to encourage and stimulate further research in this exciting and unravelled field, with the hope of promoting and accelerating the clinical success of senescence-based therapies

Annexin A1 Released in Extracellular Vesicles by Pancreatic Cancer Cells Activates Components of the Tumor Microenvironment, through Interaction with the Formyl-Peptide Receptors

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is one of the most aggressive cancers in the world. Several extracellular factors are involved in its development and metastasis to distant organs. In PC, the protein Annexin A1 (ANXA1) appears to be overexpressed and may be identified as an oncogenic factor, also because it is a component in tumor-deriving extracellular vesicles (EVs). Indeed, these microvesicles are known to nourish the tumor microenvironment. Once we evaluated the autocrine role of ANXA1-containing EVs on PC MIA PaCa-2 cells and their pro-angiogenic action, we investigated the ANXA1 paracrine effect on stromal cells like fibroblasts and endothelial ones. Concerning the analysis of fibroblasts, cell migration/invasion, cytoskeleton remodeling, and the different expression of specific protein markers, all features of the cell switching into myofibroblasts, were assessed after administration of wild type more than ANXA1 Knock-Out EVs. Interestingly, we demonstrated a mechanism by which the ANXA1-EVs complex can stimulate the activation of formyl peptide receptors (FPRs), triggering mesenchymal switches and cell motility on both fibroblasts and endothelial cells. Therefore, we highlighted the importance of ANXA1/EVs-FPR axes in PC progression as a vehicle of intercommunication tumor cells-stroma, suggesting a specific potential prognostic/diagnostic role of ANXA1, whether in soluble form or even if EVs are captured in PC

Mesoglycan connects Syndecan-4 and VEGFR2 through Annexin A1 and formyl peptide receptors to promote angiogenesis in vitro.

Mesoglycan is a mixture of glycosaminoglycans (GAG) with fibrinolytic effects and the potential to enhance skin wound repair. Here, we have used endothelial cells isolated from Wild Type (WT) and Syndecan-4 null (Sdc4-/-) C57BL/6 mice to demonstrate that mesoglycan promotes cell motility and in vitro angiogenesis acting on the co-receptor Syndecan-4 (SDC4). This latter is known to participate in the formation and release of extracellular vesicles (EVs). We characterized EVs released by HUVECs and assessed their effect on angiogenesis. Particularly, we focused on Annexin A1 (ANXA1) containing EVs, since they may contribute to tube formation via interactions with Formyl peptide receptors (FPRs). In our model, the bond ANXA1-FPRs stimulates the release of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF-A) that interacts with vascular endothelial receptor-2 (VEGFR2) and activates the pathway enhancing cell motility in an autocrine manner, as shown by Wound-Healing/invasion assays, and the induction of Endothelial to Mesenchymal Transition (EndMT). Thus, we have shown for the first time that mesoglycan exerts its pro-angiogenic effects in the healing process triggering the activation of the three interconnected molecular axis: mesoglycan-SDC4, EVs-ANXA1-FPRs and VEGF-A-VEGFR2

COVID-19-related mortality in kidney transplant and haemodialysis patients: A comparative, prospective registry-based study

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has exposed haemodialysis (HD) patients and kidney transplant (KT) recipients to an unprecedented life-threatening infectious disease, raising concerns about kidney replacement therapy (KRT) strategy during the pandemic. This study investigated the association of the type of KRT with COVID-19 severity, adjusting for differences in individual characteristics. Methods: Data on KT recipients and HD patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between 1 February 2020 and 1 December 2020 were retrieved from the European Renal Association COVID-19 Database. Cox regression models adjusted for age, sex, frailty and comorbidities were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for 28-day mortality risk in all patients and in the subsets that were tested because of symptoms. Results: A total of 1670 patients (496 functional KT and 1174 HD) were included; 16.9% of KT and 23.9% of HD patients died within 28 days of presentation. The unadjusted 28-day mortality risk was 33% lower in KT recipients compared with HD patients {HR 0.67 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-0.85]}. In a fully adjusted model, the risk was 78% higher in KT recipients [HR 1.78 (95% CI 1.22-2.61)] compared with HD patients. This association was similar in patients tested because of symptoms [fully adjusted model HR 2.00 (95% CI 1.31-3.06)]. This risk was dramatically increased during the first post-transplant year. Results were similar for other endpoints (e.g. hospitalization, intensive care unit admission and mortality >28 days) and across subgroups. Conclusions: KT recipients had a greater risk of a more severe course of COVID-19 compared with HD patients, therefore they require specific infection mitigation strategies

Recovery of dialysis patients with COVID-19 : health outcomes 3 months after diagnosis in ERACODA

Background. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related short-term mortality is high in dialysis patients, but longer-term outcomes are largely unknown. We therefore assessed patient recovery in a large cohort of dialysis patients 3 months after their COVID-19 diagnosis. Methods. We analyzed data on dialysis patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from 1 February 2020 to 31 March 2021 from the European Renal Association COVID-19 Database (ERACODA). The outcomes studied were patient survival, residence and functional and mental health status (estimated by their treating physician) 3 months after COVID-19 diagnosis. Complete follow-up data were available for 854 surviving patients. Patient characteristics associated with recovery were analyzed using logistic regression. Results. In 2449 hemodialysis patients (mean ± SD age 67.5 ± 14.4 years, 62% male), survival probabilities at 3 months after COVID-19 diagnosis were 90% for nonhospitalized patients (n = 1087), 73% for patients admitted to the hospital but not to an intensive care unit (ICU) (n = 1165) and 40% for those admitted to an ICU (n = 197). Patient survival hardly decreased between 28 days and 3 months after COVID-19 diagnosis. At 3 months, 87% functioned at their pre-existent functional and 94% at their pre-existent mental level. Only few of the surviving patients were still admitted to the hospital (0.8-6.3%) or a nursing home (∼5%). A higher age and frailty score at presentation and ICU admission were associated with worse functional outcome. Conclusions. Mortality between 28 days and 3 months after COVID-19 diagnosis was low and the majority of patients who survived COVID-19 recovered to their pre-existent functional and mental health level at 3 months after diagnosis

Impact of primary kidney disease on the effects of empagliflozin in patients with chronic kidney disease: secondary analyses of the EMPA-KIDNEY trial

Background: The EMPA KIDNEY trial showed that empagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary composite outcome of kidney disease progression or cardiovascular death in patients with chronic kidney disease mainly through slowing progression. We aimed to assess how effects of empagliflozin might differ by primary kidney disease across its broad population. Methods: EMPA-KIDNEY, a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, was conducted at 241 centres in eight countries (Canada, China, Germany, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, the UK, and the USA). Patients were eligible if their estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 20 to less than 45 mL/min per 1·73 m2, or 45 to less than 90 mL/min per 1·73 m2 with a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR) of 200 mg/g or higher at screening. They were randomly assigned (1:1) to 10 mg oral empagliflozin once daily or matching placebo. Effects on kidney disease progression (defined as a sustained ≥40% eGFR decline from randomisation, end-stage kidney disease, a sustained eGFR below 10 mL/min per 1·73 m2, or death from kidney failure) were assessed using prespecified Cox models, and eGFR slope analyses used shared parameter models. Subgroup comparisons were performed by including relevant interaction terms in models. EMPA-KIDNEY is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03594110. Findings: Between May 15, 2019, and April 16, 2021, 6609 participants were randomly assigned and followed up for a median of 2·0 years (IQR 1·5–2·4). Prespecified subgroupings by primary kidney disease included 2057 (31·1%) participants with diabetic kidney disease, 1669 (25·3%) with glomerular disease, 1445 (21·9%) with hypertensive or renovascular disease, and 1438 (21·8%) with other or unknown causes. Kidney disease progression occurred in 384 (11·6%) of 3304 patients in the empagliflozin group and 504 (15·2%) of 3305 patients in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·71 [95% CI 0·62–0·81]), with no evidence that the relative effect size varied significantly by primary kidney disease (pheterogeneity=0·62). The between-group difference in chronic eGFR slopes (ie, from 2 months to final follow-up) was 1·37 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (95% CI 1·16–1·59), representing a 50% (42–58) reduction in the rate of chronic eGFR decline. This relative effect of empagliflozin on chronic eGFR slope was similar in analyses by different primary kidney diseases, including in explorations by type of glomerular disease and diabetes (p values for heterogeneity all >0·1). Interpretation: In a broad range of patients with chronic kidney disease at risk of progression, including a wide range of non-diabetic causes of chronic kidney disease, empagliflozin reduced risk of kidney disease progression. Relative effect sizes were broadly similar irrespective of the cause of primary kidney disease, suggesting that SGLT2 inhibitors should be part of a standard of care to minimise risk of kidney failure in chronic kidney disease. Funding: Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, and UK Medical Research Council