Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
- Working Paper (2)
Language
- English (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- Bailin (1)
- Banking Union (1)
- Retail Challenge (1)
- cell therapy (1)
- graft-versus host (1)
- hospital exemption (1)
- mesenchymal stromal cell (1)
- refractory aGvHD (1)
- steroid-resistant aGvHD (1)
- transplantation (1)
An optochemokine tandem was developed to control the release of calcium from endosomes into the cytosol by light and to analyze the internalization kinetics of G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) by electrophysiology. A previously constructed rhodopsin tandem was re-engineered to combine the light-gated Ca2+-permeable cation channel Channelrhodopsin-2(L132C), CatCh, with the chemokine receptor CXCR4 in a functional tandem protein tCXCR4/CatCh. The GPCR was used as a shuttle protein to displace CatCh from the plasma membrane into intracellular areas. As shown by patch-clamp measurements and confocal laser scanning microscopy, heterologously expressed tCXCR4/CatCh was internalized via the endocytic SDF1/CXCR4 signaling pathway. The kinetics of internalization could be followed electrophysiologically via the amplitude of the CatCh signal. The light-induced release of Ca2+ by tandem endosomes into the cytosol via CatCh was visualized using the Ca2+-sensitive dyes rhod2 and rhod2-AM showing an increase of intracellular Ca2+ in response to light.
To ensure the credibility of market discipline induced by bail-in, neither retail investors nor peer banks should appear prominently among the investor base of banks’ loss absorbing capital. Empirical evidence on bank-level data provided by the German Federal Financial Supervisory Authority raises a few red flags. Our list of policy recommendations encompasses disclosure policy, data sharing among supervisors, information transparency on holdings of bail-inable debt for all stakeholders, threshold values, and a well-defined upper limit for any bail-in activity. This document was provided by the Economic Governance Support Unit at the request of the ECON Committee.
(1) Background: Refractory acute graft-versus-host disease (R-aGvHD) remains a leading cause of death after allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Survival rates of 15% after four years are currently achieved; deaths are only in part due to aGvHD itself, but mostly due to adverse effects of R-aGvHD treatment with immunosuppressive agents as these predispose patients to opportunistic infections and loss of graft-versus-leukemia surveillance resulting in relapse. Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC) from different tissues and those generated by various protocols have been proposed as a remedy for R-aGvHD but the enthusiasm raised by initial reports has not been ubiquitously reproduced.
(2) Methods: We previously reported on a unique MSC product, which was generated from pooled bone marrow mononuclear cells of multiple third-party donors. The products showed dose-to-dose equipotency and greater immunosuppressive capacity than individually expanded MSCs from the same donors. This product, MSC-FFM, has entered clinical routine in Germany where it is licensed with a national hospital exemption authorization. We previously reported satisfying initial clinical outcomes, which we are now updating. The data were collected in our post-approval pharmacovigilance program, i.e., this is not a clinical study and the data is high-level and non-monitored.
(3) Results: Follow-up for 92 recipients of MSC-FFM was reported, 88 with GvHD ≥°III, one-third only steroid-refractory and two-thirds therapy resistant (refractory to steroids plus ≥2 additional lines of treatment). A median of three doses of MSC-FFM was administered without apparent toxicity. Overall response rates were 82% and 81% at the first and last evaluation, respectively. At six months, the estimated overall survival was 64%, while the cumulative incidence of death from underlying disease was 3%.
(4) Conclusions: MSC-FFM promises to be a safe and efficient treatment for severe R-aGvHD.
The SVB case is a wake-up call for Europe’s regulators as it demonstrates the destructive power of a bank-run: it undermines the role of loss absorbing capital, elbowing governments to bailout affected banks. Many types of bank management weaknesses, like excessive duration risk, may raise concerns of bank losses – but to serve as a run-trigger, there needs to be a large enough group of bank depositors that fails to be fully covered by a deposit insurance scheme. Latent run-risk is the root cause of inefficient liquidations, and we argue that a run on SVB assets could have been avoided altogether by a more thoughtful deposit insurance scheme, sharply distinguishing between loss absorbing capital (equity plus bail-in debt) and other liabilities which are deemed not to be bail-inable, namely demand deposits. These evidence-based insights have direct implications for Europe’s banking regulation, suggesting a minimum and a maximum for a banks’ loss absorption capacity.
