Among the Poxviridae family, orthopoxvirus is the most notorious genus. Several DNA viruses belonging to this group are known to produce human disease from the life-threatening variola virus (VARV) (the causative agent of smallpox), monkeypox virus (MPXV), cowpox virus (CPXV), and vaccinia virus (VACV). These orthopoxviruses still remain a public health concern as VACV or CPXV still cause emerging endemic threads, especially in developing countries. MPXV is able to cause sporadic human outbreaks of a smallpox-like zoonotic disease and, in May 2022, hundreds of cases related to MPXV have been reported from more than 30 countries around the globe. At the end of July, monkeypox (MPX) outbreak was even declared a global health emergency by the World Health Organization (WHO). Many aspects remain unclear regarding this outbreak and a deep understanding of orthopoxvirus might have crucial and evident implications. During the era in which people under 45 years old are not protected against VACV, the potential use of orthopoxviruses as a biological weapon raises global concern considering the rapid spreading of the current MPX outbreak in vulnerable populations. Hence, we review the most recent evidence about phylogenesis, pathogenesis, prevention, and treatment for this concerning disease.

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic poses a great threat to global public health. The original wild-type strain of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has genetically evolved, and several variants of concern (VOC) have emerged. On 26 November 2021, a new variant named Omicron (B.1.1.529) was designated as the fifth VOC, revealing that SARS-CoV-2 has the potential to go beyond the available therapies. The high number of mutations harboured on the spike protein make Omicron highly transmissible, less responsive to several of the currently used drugs, as well as potentially able to escape immune protection elicited by both vaccines and previous infection. We reviewed the latest publication and the most recent available literature on the Omicron variant, enlightening both reasons for concern and high hopes for new therapeutic strategies.

In 2021 the scientific community’s efforts have been focused on solving the back-breaking challenge of the COVID-19 pandemic, but sexually transmitted infections (STI) are still one of the most common global health problems. Syphilis is a systemic disease caused by the spirochaete Treponema pallidum (TP) and is one of the oldest known diseases. Its incidence has increased in the last few years and syphilis still remains a contemporary plague that continues to afflict millions of people worldwide. Despite research improvements, syphilis pathogenesis is not completely clear; clinical presentation is very heterogeneous and the diagnosis can sometimes be difficult. Furthermore, few therapeutic options are available, and a vaccine has not been found yet. In this review, we describe the most recent evidence concerning the clinical manifestation, diagnosis, treatment and vaccine prospectives for this disease.

Background: Syphilis infection does not confer definitive and protective immunity against reinfection, and crucial aspects of repeated episodes of syphilis are far from being understood, especially among people living with HIV (PLWH). Methods: In order to explore the burden of syphilis in a large cohort of HIV-negative patients and PLWH, this retrospective study describes the demographics, clinical presentation and treatment outcome of patients with syphilis treated at our clinic from 2013 to 2021. Results: Within the study period, 1859 syphilis episodes (827, 44.5% first infections and 1032, 55.5% reinfections) were recorded. A total of 663 patients, of whom 347 (52%) had PLWH, were considered. Syphilis was mostly diagnosed in males (77%) and European (79%) patients. More than half of syphilis episodes were recorded during the late latent stage (64%) or during follow-up/screening visits for other diseases, while symptomatic stages led to a diagnosis in almost half of HIV-negative patients (p < 0.001). PLWH with syphilis infection were predominantly homo/bisexual (p < 0.001). A significantly higher rate of syphilis reinfection was observed in PLWH, who also demonstrated a higher range of subsequent episodes. The serofast state was found to be similar at the 6- and 12-month follow-up visits. The multivariate analysis carried out in the HIV-positive group showed that an RPR titre >1:16 was an independent predictor for serological non-response. Conclusions: Syphilis reinfections are predominantly diagnosed in HIV-positive MSM. The high rate of asymptomatic presentation among PLWH supports the role of periodical syphilis screening. In PLWH, the only baseline factor associated with an increased risk of non-response was an RPR titre >1:16, while assessment at 12 months after treatment increased the possibility of detecting a serological response, indicating that PLWH have a slower serological response to treatment.

Use of doravirine (DOR), a new nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors recently approved for HIV treatment, is still unclear in clinical practice and real-life data are scarce. We retrospectively investigated the rationale for switching people with HIV to DOR-containing/-based regimens in a real-life cohort. Among 132 patients (68.9% males, median age 56 years), the main reasons to start DOR were prevention of toxicities (39.4%) and dyslipidemia (18.2%). DOR was combined with integrase inhibitors in 40.9% cases, and in 25.7% of patients, DOR was prescribed without availability of a genotypic resistance test. Twenty-four weeks after the switch to DOR-containing/-based regimens, no significant changes in CD4+ T-cell count, CD4/CD8 ratio, detectable HIV-RNA, serum creatinine levels, and body weight were detected. By contrast, a significant reduction in lipids (both cholesterol and triglycerides) was observed in 52 patients for whom a follow-up assessment was available (P = .008 and .01, respectively). Our data confirmed that switching to DOR-containing/-based regimens may have a favorable impact on lipid profile and a neutral impact on weight gain. However, more data are needed to support its use in patients who do not have a genotypic test available or have an extensive nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors-associated resistance, as well as its use in a dual regimen, especially in combination with second-generation integrase inhibitors.

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been known since the 1970s. However, their therapeutic potential in the medical field has recently emerged, with the advancement of manufacturing techniques. Initially exploited mainly in the oncology field, mAbs have become increasingly relevant in Infectious Diseases. Numerous mAbs have been developed against SARS-CoV 2 and have proven their effectiveness, especially in the management of the mild-to-moderate disease. In this review, we describe the monoclonal antibodies currently authorized for the treatment of the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) and offer an insight into the clinical trials that led to their approval. We discuss the mechanisms of action and methods of administration as well as the prophylactic and therapeutic labelled indications (both in outpatient and hospital settings). Furthermore, we address the critical issues regarding mAbs, focusing on their effectiveness against the variants of concern (VoC) and their role now that a large part of the population has been vaccinated. The purpose is to offer the clinician an up-to-date overview of a therapeutic tool that could prove decisive in treating patients at high risk of progression to severe disease.