COVID-19, which is caused by infection with SARS-CoV-2, is characterized by lung pathology and extrapulmonary complications^1,2. Type I interferons (IFNs) have an essential role in the pathogenesis of COVID-19 (refs ^3–5). Although rapid induction of type I IFNs limits virus propagation, a sustained increase in the levels of type I IFNs in the late phase of the infection is associated with aberrant inflammation and poor clinical outcome^5–17. Here we show that the cyclic GMP-AMP synthase (cGAS)–stimulator of interferon genes (STING) pathway, which controls immunity to cytosolic DNA, is a critical driver of aberrant type I IFN responses in COVID-19 (ref. ¹⁸). Profiling COVID-19 skin manifestations, we uncover a STING-dependent type I IFN signature that is primarily mediated by macrophages adjacent to areas of endothelial cell damage. Moreover, cGAS–STING activity was detected in lung samples from patients with COVID-19 with prominent tissue destruction, and was associated with type I IFN responses. A lung-on-chip model revealed that, in addition to macrophages, infection with SARS-CoV-2 activates cGAS–STING signalling in endothelial cells through mitochondrial DNA release, which leads to cell death and type I IFN production. In mice, pharmacological inhibition of STING reduces severe lung inflammation induced by SARS-CoV-2 and improves disease outcome. Collectively, our study establishes a mechanistic basis of pathological type I IFN responses in COVID-19 and reveals a principle for the development of host-directed therapeutics.

Convergent experimental and clinical evidence have established the pathophysiological importance of pro-inflammatory pathways in coronary artery disease. Notably, the interest in treating inflammation in patients suffering acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is now expanding from its chronic aspects to the acute setting. Few large outcome trials have proven the benefits of anti-inflammatory therapies on cardiovascular outcomes by targeting the residual inflammatory risk (RIR), i.e. the smouldering ember of low-grade inflammation persisting in the late phase after AMI. However, these studies have also taught us about potential risks of anti-inflammatory therapy after AMI, particularly related to impaired host defence. Recently, numerous smaller-scale trials have addressed the concept of targeting a deleterious flare of excessive inflammation in the early phase after AMI. Targeting different pathways and implementing various treatment regimens, those trials have met with varied degrees of success. Promising results have come from those studies intervening early on the interleukin-1 and -6 pathways. Taking lessons from such past research may inform an optimized approach to target post-AMI inflammation, tailored to spare ‘The Good’ (repair and defence) while treating ‘The Bad’ (smouldering RIR) and capturing ‘The Ugly’ (flaming early burst of excess inflammation in the acute phase). Key constituents of such a strategy may read as follows: select patients with large pro-inflammatory burden (i.e. large AMI); initiate treatment early (e.g. ≤12 h post-AMI); implement a precisely targeted anti-inflammatory agent; follow through with a tapering treatment regimen. This approach warrants testing in rigorous clinical trials.

The only causative treatment for IgE-mediated allergies is allergen-specific immunotherapy. However, fewer than 5% of allergy patients receive immunotherapy because of its long duration and risk of allergic side effects. We aimed at enhancing s.c. immunotherapy by direct administration of allergen into s.c. lymph nodes. The objective was to evaluate safety and efficacy compared with conventional s.c. immunotherapy. In a monocentric open-label trial, 165 patients with grass pollen-induced rhinoconjunctivitis were randomized to receive either 54 s.c. injections with pollen extract over 3 years [cumulative allergen dose 4,031,540 standardized quality units (SQ-U)] or 3 intralymphatic injections over 2 months (cumulative allergen dose 3,000 SQ-U). Patients were evaluated after 4 months, 1 year, and 3 years by nasal provocation, skin prick testing, IgE measurements, and symptom scores. Three low-dose intralymphatic allergen administrations increased tolerance to nasal provocation with pollen already within 4 months ( P < 0.001). Tolerance was long lasting and equivalent to that achievable after standard s.c. immunotherapy ( P = 0.291 after 3 years). Intralymphatic immunotherapy ameliorated hay fever symptoms ( P < 0.001), reduced skin prick test reactivity ( P < 0.001), decreased specific serum IgE ( P < 0.001), caused fewer adverse events than s.c. immunotherapy ( P = 0.001), enhanced compliance ( P < 0.001), and was less painful than venous puncture ( P = 0.018). In conclusion, intralymphatic allergen administration enhanced safety and efficacy of immunotherapy and reduced treatment time from 3 years to 8 weeks.

On behalf of the EORTC Cutaneous Lymphoma Tumours Group (EORTC-CLTG) and following up on earlier versions published in 2006 and 2017 this document provides an updated standard for the treatment of mycosis fungoides and Sézary syndrome (MF/SS). It considers recent relevant publications and treatment options introduced into clinical practice after 2017. Consensus was established among the authors through a series of consecutive consultations in writing and a round of discussion. Treatment options are assigned to each disease stage and, whenever possible and clinically useful, separated into first- and second line options annotated with levels of evidence. Major changes to the previous version include the incorporation of chlormethine, brentuximab vedotin, and mogamulizumab, recommendations on the use of pegylated interferon α (after withdrawal of recombinant unpegylated interferons), and the addition of paragraphs on supportive therapy and on the care of older patients. Still, skin-directed therapies are the most appropriate option for early-stage MF and most patients have a normal life expectancy but may suffer morbidity and impaired quality of life. In advanced disease treatment options have expanded recently. Most patients receive multiple consecutive therapies with treatments often having a relatively short duration of response. For those patients prognosis is still poor and only for a highly selected subset long term remission can be achieved with allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Understanding of the disease, its epidemiology and clinical course, and its most appropriate management are gradually advancing, and there is well-founded hope that this will lead to further improvements in the care of patients with MF/SS.