Response to immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge after high-grade immune related adverse events in patients with advanced melanoma

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Payal Shah ◽  
Salman R. Punekar ◽  
Anna C. Pavlick
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (Suppl 3) ◽  
pp. A711-A711
Author(s):  
Matthew Robinson ◽  
Kevin Vervier ◽  
Simon Harris ◽  
David Adams ◽  
Doreen Milne ◽  
...  

BackgroundThe gut microbiome of cancer patients appears to be associated with response to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor (ICIs) treatment.1–4 However, the bacteria linked to response differ between published studies.MethodsLongitudinal stool samples were collected from 69 patients with advanced melanoma receiving approved ICIs in the Cambridge (UK) MELRESIST study. Pretreatment samples were analysed by Microbiotica, using shotgun metagenomic sequencing. Microbiotica’s sequencing platform comprises the world’s leading Reference Genome Database and advanced Microbiome Bioinformatics to give the most comprehensive and precise mapping of the gut microbiome. This has enabled us to identify gut bacteria associated with ICI response missed using public reference genomes. Published microbiome studies in advanced melanoma,1–3renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)4 were reanalysed with the same platform.ResultsAnalysis of the MELRESIST samples showed an overall change in the microbiome composition between advanced melanoma patients and a panel of healthy donor samples, but not between patients who subsequently responded or did not respond to ICIs. However, we did identify a discrete microbiome signature which correlated with response. This signature predicted response with an accuracy of 93% in the MELRESIST cohort, but was less predictive in the published melanoma cohorts.1–3 Therefore, we developed a bioinformatic analytical model, incorporating an interactive random forest model and the MELRESIST dataset, to identify a microbiome signature which was consistent across all published melanoma studies. This model was validated three times by accurately predicting the outcome of an independent cohort. A final microbiome signature was defined using the validated model on MELRESIST and the three published melanoma cohorts. This was very accurate at predicting response in all four studies combined (91%), or individually (82–100%). This signature was also predictive of response in a NSCLC study and to a lesser extent in RCC. The core of this signature is nine bacteria significantly increased in abundance in responders.ConclusionsAnalysis of the MELRESIST study samples, precision microbiome profiling by the Microbiotica Platform and a validated bioinformatic analysis, have enabled us to identify a unique microbiome signature predictive of response to ICI therapy in four independent melanoma studies. This removes the challenge to the field of different bacteria apparently being associated with response in different studies, and could represent a new microbiome biomarker with clinical application. Nine core bacteria may be driving response and hold potential for co-therapy with ICIs.Ethics ApprovalThe study was approved by Newcastle & North Tyneside 2 Research Ethics Committee, approval number 11/NE/0312.ReferencesMatson V, Fessler J, Bao R, et al. The commensal microbiome is associated with anti-PD-1 efficacy in metastatic melanoma patients. Science 2018;359(6371):104–108.Gopalakrishnan V, Spencer CN, Nezi L, et al. Gut microbiome modulates response to anti-PD-1 immunotherapy in melanoma patients. Science 2018;359(6371):97–103.Frankel AE, Coughlin LA, Kim J, et al. Metagenomic shotgun sequencing and unbiased metabolomic profiling identify specific human gut microbiota and metabolites associated with immune checkpoint therapy efficacy in melanoma patients. Neoplasia 2017;19(10):848–855.Routy B, Le Chatelier E, Derosa L, et al. Gut microbiome influences efficacy of PD-1-based immunotherapy against epithelial tumors. Science 2018;359(6371):91–97.


Author(s):  
Antoine N. Saliba ◽  
Zhuoer Xie ◽  
Alexandra S. Higgins ◽  
Xavier A. Andrade‐Gonzalez ◽  
Harry E. Fuentes‐Bayne ◽  
...  

Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (11) ◽  
pp. 1151
Author(s):  
Shinsuke Suzuki ◽  
Satoshi Toyoma ◽  
Yohei Kawasaki ◽  
Koh Koizumi ◽  
Nobuko Iikawa ◽  
...  

Background and Objectives: In recent years, the effectiveness of chemotherapy after immune checkpoint inhibitor administration has attracted attention in various cancers, including head and neck cancers. However, individual assessments of the administered chemotherapy regimens are insufficient. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of chemotherapy after immune checkpoint inhibitor administration in recurrent metastatic head and neck cancer by focusing on a single regimen. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed clinical and radiological data from the medical records of 18 patients with recurrent or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) who received systemic chemotherapy with weekly cetuximab and paclitaxel (Cmab + PTX) after progression following immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. The objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were assessed using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. Results: In all patients, the ORR, DCR, median PFS, and median OS were 44.4%, 72.2%, 3.8 months, and 9.6 months, respectively. Regarding AEs, three patients developed grade 3 neutropenia. Grade 3 anemia, paronychia, asthenia, and peripheral neuropathy were observed in one patient each. There were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusions: Cmab + PTX was shown to maintain high efficacy and acceptable safety for R/M HNSCC that progressed after ICI therapy. Further research is needed to establish optimal treatment sequences and drug combinations for recurrent R/M HNSCC.


Dermatitis ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandria M. Brown ◽  
Wylie Masterson ◽  
Jonathan Lo ◽  
Anisha B. Patel

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (S2) ◽  
Author(s):  
O.F. Khan ◽  
J. Monzon

Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy (ICIT) is now standard of care for a variety of cancers in both the metastatic and adjuvant settings. As a result, it is imperative to understand the timing, epidemiology, monitoring, diagnosis, and management of immune related adverse events (irAEs) associated with ICIT. This article reviews specific irAEs by organ system, consolidating recommendations from multiple guidelines and incorporating data from case reports to highlight additional evolving therapeutic options for patients. Managing these adverse events requires early recognition, early intervention, and education of both patients and the multidisciplinary health care team. Given the durable responses observed with ICIT, and the irreversible nature associated with some of these irAEs, further research into management of the sequelae of ICIT is required.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 576-583 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamzah Abu-Sbeih ◽  
David M. Faleck ◽  
Biagio Ricciuti ◽  
Robin B. Mendelsohn ◽  
Abdul R. Naqash ◽  
...  

PURPOSE The risk of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy–related GI adverse events in patients with cancer and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has not been well described. We characterized GI adverse events in patients with underlying IBD who received immune checkpoint inhibitors. PATIENTS AND METHODS We performed a multicenter, retrospective study of patients with documented IBD who received immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy between January 2010 and February 2019. Backward selection and multivariate logistic regression were conducted to assess risk of GI adverse events. RESULTS Of the 102 included patients, 17 received therapy targeting cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4, and 85 received monotherapy targeting programmed cell death 1 or its ligand. Half of the patients had Crohn’s disease, and half had ulcerative colitis. The median time from last active IBD episode to immunotherapy initiation was 5 years (interquartile range, 3-12 years). Forty-three patients were not receiving treatment of IBD. GI adverse events occurred in 42 patients (41%) after a median of 62 days (interquartile range, 33-123 days), a rate higher than that among similar patients without underlying IBD who were treated at centers participating in the study (11%; P < .001). GI events among patients with IBD included grade 3 or 4 diarrhea in 21 patients (21%). Four patients experienced colonic perforation, 2 of whom required surgery. No GI adverse event–related deaths were recorded. Anti–cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 therapy was associated with increased risk of GI adverse events on univariable but not multivariable analysis (odds ratio, 3.19; 95% CI, 1.8 to 9.48; P = .037; and odds ratio, 4.72; 95% CI, 0.95 to 23.53; P = .058, respectively). CONCLUSION Preexisting IBD increases the risk of severe GI adverse events in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document