Failed B cell survival factor trials support the importance of memory B cells in multiple sclerosis

Clinical trials are probably the most informative experiments to help an understanding of multiple sclerosis (MS) biology. Recent successes with CD20‐depleting antibodies have focused attention towards B cell subsets as important mediators in MS. The trial of tabalumab (NTC00882999), which inhibits B cell activation factor (BAFF), is reported and reviewed and this trial is contrasted with the trial on the inhibition of a proliferation‐inducing ligand (APRIL) and BAFF using atacicept (NCT00642902). Both tabalumab and atacicept induce depletion of mature B cells and inhibit antibody formation, but they fail to deplete memory B cells and do not inhibit relapsing MS. Atacicept is reported to augment memory B cell responses and may precipitate relapse, suggesting the importance of APRIL. However, BAFF inhibition can enhance peripheral blood memory B cell responses, which was not associated with augmented relapse. Although other interpretations are possible, these data further support the hypothesis that memory B cells may be of central importance in relapsing MS, as they are the major CD20+ B cell subset expressing APRIL receptors. They also suggest that quantitative and/or qualitative differences in B cell responses or other factors, such as an immune‐regulatory effect associated with APRIL, may be important in determining whether MS reactivates following neutralization of peripheral B cell maturation and survival factors.     

Fragmentation of care as a barrier to optimal ESKD management

Caring for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in the United States is challenging, due in part to the complex epidemiology of the disease's progression as well as the ways in which care is delivered. As CKD progresses toward ESKD, the number of comorbidities increases and care involves multiple healthcare providers from multiple subspecialties. This occurs in the context of a fragmented US healthcare delivery system that is traditionally siloed by provider specialty, organization, as well as systems of payment and administration. This article describes the role of care fragmentation in the delivery of optimal ESKD care and identifies research gaps in the evidence across the continuum of care. We then consider the impact of care fragmentation on ESKD care from the patient and health system perspectives and explore opportunities for system-level interventions aimed at improving care for patients with ESKD.