scholarly journals When steroids are not enough in immune-related hepatitis: current clinical challenges discussed on the basis of a case report

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e001322 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dimitrios C Ziogas ◽  
Aikaterini Gkoufa ◽  
Evangelos Cholongitas ◽  
Panagiotis Diamantopoulos ◽  
Amalia Anastasopoulou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Liver Toxicity ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Steroid Resistant ◽  
Immune Mediated ◽  
Cancer Types ◽  
Clinical Considerations ◽  
Steroid Refractory

Unleashing adaptive immunity via immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) in many cancer types led to durable antitumor responses and prolonged survivals and also added some new immune-related adverse events (irAEs) to the ‘old-fashioned’ safety profile of chemotherapy. Among bowel and endocrine irAEs, immune-mediated hepatotoxicity/hepatitis is a less common and far less well-studied toxicity, which, however, could develop into a serious complication, especially when it becomes persistent or refractory to steroids. Its incidence, onset and severity vary widely, depending on the type of underlying treated cancer, the class, the dosage and the duration of immunotherapy as well as the way of its administration (as a single agent or in combination with other ICPI or chemotherapy). In this study, we present a patient with metastatic melanoma who developed severe steroid-resistant ir-hepatitis after treatment with ipilimumab and required triple concurrent immunosuppression with prednisolone, mycofenolate mofetil and tacrolimus in order for his liver toxicity to be resolved. Intrigued by this case, we focused further on melanoma, as the disease-paradigm of immunotherapy in cancer, reviewed the reported incidence of hepatotoxicity among phase III ICPIs-containing trials on melanoma and discussed the main clinical considerations regarding the diagnosis and the management of persistent/steroid-refractory ir-hepatitis. As more clinical experience is gradually gained on this challenging topic, better answers are provided to questions about the appropriate diagnostic workup, the necessity of liver biopsy, the available immunosuppressive options beyond corticosteroids (their combinations and/or their sequence) as well as the correct decision on withdrawing or resuming immunotherapy. Nonetheless, a thorough multidisciplinary discussion is still required to individualize the overall approach in each case after failure of steroids.

Cabozantinib in advanced HCC patients previously treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: A territory-wide cohort study.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16179-e16179
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Sum Lung Wong ◽  
Yawen Dong ◽  
Vikki Tang ◽  
Thomas Wai-Tong Leung ◽  
Cynthia SY Yeung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Acquired Resistance ◽  
Previous Treatment ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Primary Resistance ◽  
Grade 3

e16179 Background: Cabozantinib is licensed for use as second- or third-line treatment for sorafenib-exposed advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) based on the phase III CELESTIAL trial. However, its use in the post-immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) setting has yet to be described. We evaluated the pattern of use, efficacy, survival and tolerability of cabozantinib in aHCC patients with previous treatment by ICIs. Methods: We did a multi-centre, territory-wide study analysing aHCC patients who received cabozantinib after prior ICIs. Objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), time-to-progression (TTP), overall survival (OS) and treatment related adverse events (TRAEs) were assessed. Results: Thirty-one patients were included. The median age was 58.0 (range 41-85) and 77.4% had Child-Pugh A cirrhosis. 51.6% of patients received single agent cabozantinib and 48.4% received cabozantinib in combination with ICIs. ≥80% of patients received cabozantinib beyond the second-line and 93.5% of patients had prior TKIs. All patients received prior anti-PD-1 and 61.3% had prior anti-CTLA-4. The median follow-up was 15.2 months. For single agent cabozantinib patients, the ORR was 6.3%, DCR was 31.3% and median TTP was 3.5 months (95% C.I. 1.2-5.8). For cabozantinib-ICI combination patients, the ORR was 6.7%, DCR was 26.7% and median TTP was 2.3 months (95% C.I. 1.4-3.1). The overall median OS was 8.9 months (95% C.I. 5.7-11.9). Single agent cabozantinib patients had a significantly shorter OS compared to cabozantinib-ICI combination patients (8.3 months (95% C.I. 1.3-15.2) vs. 15.1 months (95% C.I. 11.1-19.2), p = 0.047). There was no significant difference in OS among patients with primary resistance to prior ICI regimes compared to those with acquired resistance (primary resistance 8.28 months (95% C.I. 5.04-11.5) vs. acquired resistance 8.90 months (95% C.I. 3.49-14.3), p = 0.472). Overall, 67.7% and 6.5% of patients experienced TRAEs of all grade and grade ≥3 respectively. The most common TRAE was hand-foot syndrome. 62.5% of single agent cabozantinib patients had any grade TRAE and no such patients had grade ≥3 TRAE. Conclusions: Cabozantinib had good anti-tumour activity and survival outcomes with acceptable toxicity in aHCC patients with previous treatment by ICIs.

scholarly journals Predictable clinical benefits without synergy in trials of combination therapies with immune checkpoint inhibitors

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam (C.) Palmer ◽  
Benjamin Izar ◽  
Haeun Hwangbo ◽  
Peter Sorger
Keyword(s):  
Survival Data ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cancer Therapies ◽  
Immune Priming ◽  
Clinical Benefits

Abstract Hundreds of clinical trials are currently underway testing combinations of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs) with other cancer therapies in the hope that drug combinations will be more effective than monotherapy. Enhanced efficacy is proposed to result from drug additivity or synergy involving mechanisms such as immune priming. In this paper we re-analyze progression free survival data from thirteen recent Phase III trials of ICI combinations and find that observed benefits are fully and accurately accounted for by an increased chance that each patient will respond to a single-agent, consistent with the predictions of drug independence, with no requirement for additive or synergistic efficacy. Thus, the likely anti-tumor efficacy of new ICI combinations can be reliably predicted from monotherapy data (Pearson r=0.98, P < 5×10-9, n = 4173 patients and 8 types of cancer), although predicting adverse effects is not yet possible. Realizing the clinical potential of drug additivity or synergy is likely to require biomarkers that identify patients in whom multiple constituents of a drug combination are active.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: Basics and Challenges

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (17) ◽  
pp. 3009-3025 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bin Li ◽  
Ho Lam Chan ◽  
Pingping Chen
Keyword(s):  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Modern World ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Mutation Status ◽  
Anti Cancer ◽  
Cancer Types ◽  
Shed Light

Cancer is one of the most deadly diseases in the modern world. The last decade has witnessed dramatic advances in cancer treatment through immunotherapy. One extremely promising means to achieve anti-cancer immunity is to block the immune checkpoint pathways – mechanisms adopted by cancer cells to disguise themselves as regular components of the human body. Many review articles have described a variety of agents that are currently under extensive clinical evaluation. However, while checkpoint blockade is universally effective against a broad spectrum of cancer types and is mostly unrestricted by the mutation status of certain genes, only a minority of patients achieve a complete response. In this review, we summarize the basic principles of immune checkpoint inhibitors in both antibody and smallmolecule forms and also discuss potential mechanisms of resistance, which may shed light on further investigation to achieve higher clinical efficacy for these inhibitors.

scholarly journals Role of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Cervical Cancer: From Preclinical to Clinical Data

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. 2089
Author(s):  
Simona Duranti ◽  
Antonella Pietragalla ◽  
Gennaro Daniele ◽  
Camilla Nero ◽  
Francesca Ciccarone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Hpv Infection ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Cervical Cancers ◽  
Relapsed Disease

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is the recognized cause of almost all cervical cancers. Despite the reduction in incidence due to a wide use of screening programs and a specific vaccine, the prognosis of cervical cancer remains poor, especially for late-stage and relapsed disease. Considering the elevated rates of PD-L1 expression in up to 80% of cervical cancers, a strong rationale supports the use of immunotherapy to restore the immune response against tumor. The aim of this review is to analyze the possible role of immune checkpoint inhibitors in cervical cancer treatment, with a particular focus on the rationale and on the results of phase I and II clinical trials. An overview of ongoing phase III studies with possible future areas of development is also provided.

scholarly journals Immune-Related Adverse Events (irAE) in Cancer Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICI) and Survival Outcomes Correlation: To Rechallenge or Not?

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 989
Author(s):  
Heidar J. Albandar ◽  
Jacob Fuqua ◽  
Jasim M. Albandar ◽  
Salahuddin Safi ◽  
Samuel A. Merrill ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Survival Outcomes ◽  
Limited Data ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Survival Difference ◽  
Histopathologic Diagnosis ◽  
Cancer Types

Introduction: There is growing recognition of immune related adverse events (irAEs) from immune checkpoint therapies being correlated with treatment outcomes in certain malignancies. There are currently limited data or consensus to guide management of irAEs with regards to treatment rechallenge. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis with an IRB-approved protocol of adult patients seen at the WVU Cancer Institute between 2011–2019 with a histopathologic diagnosis of active cancers and were treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) therapy. Results: Demographics were similar between the ICI interrupted irAE groups within cancer types. Overall, out of 548 patients who received ICI reviewed, there were 133 cases of ≥1 irAE found of any grade. Being treated with anti-CTLA-4 inhibitor ICI was associated with lower risk of death compared to anti-PD-1 ICI. The overall survival difference observed for irAE positive patients, between rechallenged (37.8 months, reinitiated with/without interruption; 38.6 months, reinitiated after interruption) and interrupted/non-reinitiated (i.e., discontinued) groups (24.9 months) was not statistically significant, with a numerical trend favoring the former. Conclusions: Our exploratory study did not identify significantly different survival outcomes among the Appalachian West Virginia adult cancer patients treated with ICI who developed irAE and had treatment reinitiated after interruption, when compared with those not reinitiated.

Patients with steroid-refractory toxicity following immune checkpoint inhibitors: Frequent hospitalizations and long duration of illness.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 2655-2655
Author(s):  
Mia Bothwell ◽  
Aaron Cheng ◽  
Leyre Zubiri ◽  
Meghan Mooradian ◽  
Yevgeniy R. Semenov ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Duration Of Illness ◽  
Long Duration ◽  
Steroid Refractory

2655 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of cancer with significantly improved outcomes, but these agents have a unique spectrum of toxicities known as immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The recommended treatment for non-endocrine toxicities is steroid based. However, a subset of patients (pts) is steroid-refractory and requires second-line immunosuppression. There is very little evidence regarding this population. In this retrospective study we report the 1) incidence 2) type of treatment used 3) natural history and 4) potential predictors of steroid-refractory irAE at a major academic medical center. Methods: The Research Patient Database Registry at Mass General Brigham was used to identify pts treated with an ICI from 1/5/2017 to 6/1/2019. Pharmaceutical records identified a subset of the cohort received a second-line immunosuppressive agent within a 15-month period after ICI. For pts with steroid-refractory irAE additional information was collected: demographics, ICI regimen, type/#/and severity of irAE, clinical characteristics, # of admissions, length of stay (LOS), amount and duration of steroid therapy, second line immunosuppression type, treatment discontinuation rates, response, and outcome of re-challenge. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to predict risk of refractory toxicity and study the association of different variables (age, sex, race, marital status, cancer and ICI types) with refractory toxicities. Results: We identified 61 pts (1.4%) with steroid-refractory irAEs (48 colitis, 4 myocarditis, 6 pneumonitis, 3 neurologic) out of the total ICI cohort (N=4,325). 60.7% received ICI monotherapy. 24.6% received ICI in the adjuvant setting. Median length of steroid duration was 68 days with max of 1135 days. Despite use of second line immunosuppression, 25.8% of pts were never able to discontinue steroids. Majority of pts (72.1%) had at least one hospitalization with median LOS of 7.5 days. 93.4% of pts permanently discontinued the ICI responsible for the irAE. Thirteen pts (21.3%) were later re-challenged with ICI and 7 (53.8%) of these developed a subsequent irAE. Anti-CTLA-4 therapy was associated with a 10-fold risk of refractory toxicity compared to PD-1 (p<.05). Best tumor response was complete response in 21.3% and partial response in 26.2%. Among different cancer types, melanoma was most strongly associated with refractory events (OR 2.97 in comparison to thoracic malignancy). Conclusions: Refractory toxicity is uncommon but leads to high rates of ICI discontinuation, frequent hospitalizations, and a long duration of illness with exposure to prolonged and high-doses of steroids. There is an urgent need for further investigation into predictive factors for steroid-refractory toxicity given that ICI is being used more frequently and in earlier lines of treatment.

Genetic ancestry and clinical outcomes to immune checkpoint inhibitors among seven common cancers.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10536-10536
Author(s):  
Amin Nassar ◽  
Elio Adib ◽  
Sarah Abou Alaiwi ◽  
Elie Akl ◽  
Talal El Zarif ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
East Asian ◽  
Genetic Ancestry ◽  
Sequencing Data ◽  
Histologic Subtype ◽  
Cancer Types

10536 Background: Prior studies and clinical trials report associations between self-reported race and clinical outcomes to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs). However, comprehensive studies of ancestry-associated differences in clinical outcomes have not been performed. We derived genetic ancestry scores and assessed clinical outcomes in 1341 patients with cancer treated with ICIs. Methods: Patients at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute treated with ICIs only and with relevant cancer types and targeted exome sequencing data (Oncopanel) were included. Relevant cancer types included colorectal adenocarcinoma (CRC), esophagogastric adenocarcinoma (EGC), head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and urothelial carcinoma (UC). We developed a bioinformatics pipeline to infer fine-scale genetic ancestry for each patient (n=1341) directly from tumor sequencing data by leveraging off and on-target sequenced reads and external ancestry reference panels. Three ancestry scores were determined (African, East Asian, European). Overall survival (OS) and time-to-treatment failure (TTF) were compared by Cox logistic regression between ancestral populations. Hazard ratio (HR) was derived using multivariable analysis, adjusted for single versus combination therapy, prior lines of therapy, and tumor mutational burden (TMB, as percentiles). Results: Median follow-up was 37.8 months (m; interquartile range: 35.7-39.5m). Common cancer types included CRC (n=52), EGC (n=114), HNSCC (n=88), melanoma (n=274), NSCLC (n=571), RCC (n=99), and UC (n=143). A higher East Asian ancestry (EAS) was significantly associated with worse OS ( p=0.03) and TTF ( p=0.002) in patients with RCC, independent of the histologic subtype (Table). There was no significant association between any of the three ancestral populations and clinical outcomes in the other 6 cancer types. Conclusions: We described clinical outcomes to ICIs across three global populations in 7 cancers. As the medical field re-evaluates the use of self-reported race in clinical decision-making, we utilize a novel ancestry pipeline that can be readily applied to tumor-only sequencing panels and better characterize non-white populations. We find no ancestry differences in clinical outcomes except in patients with RCC treated with ICIs which will require future validation. We plan to analyze genomic correlates of response by ancestry in each of the cancer types to better understand these diverge clinical behaviors.[Table: see text]

Liver toxicity in the era of immune checkpoint inhibitors: A practical approach

2018 ◽  
Vol 132 ◽  
pp. 125-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carmen Belli ◽  
Massimo Zuin ◽  
Luca Mazzarella ◽  
Dario Trapani ◽  
Paolo D’Amico ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Liver Toxicity ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Practical Approach

scholarly journals Combinatorial benefit without synergy in recent clinical trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam C. Palmer ◽  
Benjamin Izar ◽  
Peter K. Sorger
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Combination Therapies ◽  
Anti Tumor Activity

ABSTRACTHundreds of clinical trials are testing whether combination therapies can increase the anti-tumor activity of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs). We find that the benefits of recently reported and approved combinations involving ICIs are fully accounted for by increasing the chance of a single-agent response (drug independence), with no requirement for additive or synergistic efficacy. Thus, the degree of success of combinations involving ICIs with other therapies is largely predictable.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document