scholarly journals Cancer Immunotherapy: Imaging Assessment of Novel Treatment Response Patterns and Immune-related Adverse Events

Radiographics ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 424-437 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer J. Kwak ◽  
Sree Harsha Tirumani ◽  
Annick D. Van den Abbeele ◽  
Phillip J. Koo ◽  
Heather A. Jacene
2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 97.1-98
Author(s):  
S. Shoop-Worrall ◽  
K. Hyrich ◽  
L. Wedderburn ◽  
W. Thomson ◽  
N. Geifman

Background:In children and young people (CYP) with JIA, we have previously identified clusters with different patterns of disease impact following methotrexate (MTX) initiation. It is unclear whether clusters of treatment response following etanercept (ETN) therapy exist and whether, in a group of CYP who have responded inadequately to or had adverse events on methotrexate, similar treatment response patterns exist. Novel response patterns would aid stratified treatment approaches through better understanding and potential forecasting of more specific response patterns across multiple domains of disease.Objectives:To identify and characterise trajectories of juvenile arthritis disease activity score (JADAS) components following ETN initiation for JIA.Methods:ETN-naïve CYP with non-systemic JIA were selected if enrolled prior to January 2019 in at least one of four CLUSTER consortium studies: BSPAR-ETN, BCRD, CAPS and CHARMS, at point of starting ETN as their first biological therapy. JADAS components (active joint count, physician’s global assessment (0-10cm), parental global evaluation (0-10cm) and standardised ESR (0-10) were collected at ETN initiation and during the following year.Multivariate group-based trajectory models, that identify clusters of CYP with similar patterns of change over time, were used to explore ETN response clusters across the different JADAS components. Censored-normal (global scores, ESR) and zero-inflated Poisson (active joint count) models were used, adjusting for year of ETN initiation. Optimal models were selected based on a combination of model fit (BIC), parsimony, and clinical plausibility.Results:Of the 1003 CYP included, the majority were female (70%) and of white ethnicity (90%), with rheumatoid factor-negative JIA the most common disease category (39%).The optimal model identified five trajectory clusters of disease activity following initiation of ETN (Figure 1). Clusters following ETN were similar and covered similar proportions of CYP to those previously identified following MTX: Fast (Group 1: 13%) and Slow (Group 2: 10%) response, active joint count improves but either physician (Group 3: 6%) or parent global scores (Group 4: 34%) remain persistently raised and a group with persistent raised scores across all JADAS components (Group 5: 36%). Compared to the persistent disease cluster, those with greater improvement had lower age and higher functional ability at ETN initiation and those with persistent raised parent global scores had lower ESR levels and were less likely to be RF-positive at ETN initiation.Figure 1.Clusters identified following ETN initiation in children and young people recruited to the UK BSPAR-ETN, BCRD, CAPS and CHARMS studies.Conclusion:This study has identified that within CYP initiating ETN, similar response clusters are evident to those previously identified following MTX. This commonality suggests a new framework for understanding treatment response, beyond a simple responder/non-responder analysis at a set point, which applies across multiple drugs despite different mechanisms of action and previous unfavourable treatment outcomes. Understanding both clinical factors associated with, and biological mechanisms underpinning, these clusters would aid stratified medicine in JIA.Acknowledgements:We thank the children, young people and families involved in CLUSTER, as well as clinical staff, administrators and data management teams. Funding for CLUSTER has been provided by generous grants from the MRC, Versus Arthritis, GOSH children’s charity, Olivia’s vision and the NIHR Manchester and GOSH BRC schemes.Disclosure of Interests:Stephanie Shoop-Worrall: None declared, Kimme Hyrich Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Grant/research support from: BMS, UCB, Pfizer, Lucy Wedderburn Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Sobi, Wendy Thomson Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Sobi, Nophar Geifman Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Sobi


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 54.1-54
Author(s):  
S. Benamar ◽  
C. Lukas ◽  
C. Daien ◽  
C. Gaujoux-Viala ◽  
L. Gossec ◽  
...  

Background:Polypharmacy is steadily increasing in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). They may interfere with treatment response and the occurrence of serious adverse events. Medications taken by a patient may reflect active comorbidities, whereas comorbidity indices usually used include past or current diseases.Objectives:To evaluate whether polypharmarcy is associated with treatment response and adverse events in an early RA cohort and to establish whether polypharmacy could represent a substitute of comorbidities.Methods:We used data from the French cohort ESPOIR, including 813 patients with early onset arthritis. Patients included the current study had to start their first disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) within 24 months of inclusion in the cohort. Disease activity data were collected at one, five and ten years from the initiation of the first DMARD. For each patient, treatments were collected at baseline and at five years. Medications count included all specialties other than background RA therapy, analgesics/NSAIDs and topicals. Polypharmacy was defined as a categorical variable based on the median and tertiles of distribution in the cohort. Treatment response was assessed by achieving DAS28 ESR remission (REM) at 1 year, 5 years and 10 years from the initiation of the first DMARD. The occurrence of severe adverse events (SAE) was measured by the occurrence of severe infection, hospitalization, or death during the 10-year follow-up. The association between patient’s characteristics and achievement of REM and occurrence of SAE were tested in univariate analysis. A logistic regression model was used to evaluate associations between polypharmacy and REM at 1 year, 5 years and 10 years (we used baseline polypharmacy for the 1-year analysis and five years polypharmacy for the 5- and 10-years analyses). Multivariate adjustment was made for age, sex, BMI, duration of disease, initial DAS28 ESR, initial HAQ, smoking status, rheumatic disease comorbidity index (RDCI).Results:The proportion of patients who achieved REM one year after the initiation of the first DMARD was 32.1% in the polypharmacy according to the median group (patients taken ≥2 medication) versus 67.9% in the non-polypharmacy group (p=0.07). At 5 years after the first DMARD, the proportion of patients with REM was 45.0% in the polypharmacy group versus 56.3% in the non-polypharmacy group (p=0.03). At 10 years the proportion of patients with REM was 32.5% in the polypharmacy group versus 67.5% (p=0.06). Patients who take greater or equal to 2 medications had a 40% lower probability of achieving REM (OR = 0.60 [0.38-0.94] p = 0.03) at 5 years from the first DMARD (if RDCI index was not included in the model). At 10 years, patients receiving multiple medications had a 43% lower probability of achieving REM (OR = 0.57 [0.34-0.94] p = 0.02). SAE incidence was 61 per 1000 patient-years. For patients who developed SAE all causes 71.4% where in the polypharmacy group versus 57.8% were in the non-polypharmacy group (p = 0.03; univariate analysis). These results are no longer significant after adjustment for comorbidities indices.Conclusion:In this early RA cohort, polypharmacy is associated with a poorer treatment response and increased risk of adverse events. Polypharmacy may represent a good substitute of comorbidities for epidemiological studies.Acknowledgements:We are grateful to Nathalie Rincheval (Montpellier) who did expert monitoring and data management and all theinvestigators who recruited and followed the patients (F. Berenbaum, Paris-Saint Antoine; MC. Boissier, Paris-Bobigny; A. Cantagrel, Toulouse; B. Combe, Montpellier; M. Dougados, Paris-Cochin; P. Fardellone and P. Boumier, Amiens; B. Fautrel, Paris-La Pitié; RM. Flipo, Lille; Ph. Goupille, Tours; F. Liote, Paris- Lariboisière; O. Vittecoq, Rouen; X. Mariette, Paris-Bicêtre; P. Dieude, Paris Bichat; A. Saraux, Brest; T. Schaeverbeke, Bordeaux; and J. Sibilia, Strasbourg).The work reported on in the manuscript did not benefit from any financial support. The ESPOIR cohort is sponsored by the French Society for Rheumatology. An unrestricted grant from Merck Sharp and Dohme (MSD) was allocated for the first 5 years. Two additional grants from INSERM were obtained to support part of the biological database. Pfizer, Abbvie, Lilly and more recently Fresenius and Biogen also supported the ESPOIR cohort.Disclosure of Interests:Soraya Benamar: None declared, Cédric Lukas Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, UCB, Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Novartis and Roche-Chugai, Claire Daien Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Abivax, BMS, MSD, Roche, Chugai, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Lilly, Consultant of: AbbVie, Abivax, BMS, MSD, Roche, Chugai, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Lilly, Cécile Gaujoux-Viala Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Medac, MSD, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Roche-Chugai, UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Medac, MSD, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Roche-Chugai, UCB, Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Laure Gossec Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis et UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis et UCB, Anne-Christine Rat Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Lilly, Consultant of: Pfizer, Lilly, Bernard Combe Speakers bureau: AbbVie; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Gilead; Janssen; Lilly; Merck; Novartis; Pfizer; Roche-Chugai; and Sanofi;, Consultant of: AbbVie; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Gilead; Janssen; Lilly; Merck; Novartis; Pfizer; Roche-Chugai; and Sanofi;, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche-Chugai., Jacques Morel Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Lilly, Médac, MSD, Nordic Pharma, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Lilly, Médac, MSD, Nordic Pharma, Pfizer, UCB, Grant/research support from: BMS, Pfizer


Author(s):  
Katerina Chatzidionysiou ◽  
Matina Liapi ◽  
Georgios Tsakonas ◽  
Iva Gunnarsson ◽  
Anca Catrina

Abstract Immunotherapy has revolutionized cancer treatment during the last years. Several monoclonal antibodies that are specific for regulatory checkpoint molecules, that is, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), have been approved and are currently in use for various types of cancer in different lines of treatment. Cancer immunotherapy aims for enhancing the immune response against cancer cells. Despite their high efficacy, ICIs are associated to a new spectrum of adverse events of autoimmune origin, often referred to as immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which limit the utility of these drugs. These irAEs are quite common and can affect almost every organ. The grade of toxicity varies from very mild to life-threatening. The pathophysiological mechanisms behind these events are not fully understood. In this review, we will summarize current evidence specifically regarding the rheumatic irAEs and we will focus on current and future treatment strategies. Treatment guidelines largely support the use of glucocorticoids as first-line therapy, when symptomatic therapy is not efficient, and for more persistent and/or moderate/severe degree of inflammation. Targeted therapies are higher up in the treatment pyramid, after inadequate response to glucocorticoids and conventional, broad immunosuppressive agents, and for severe forms of irAEs. However, preclinical data provide evidence that raise concerns regarding the potential risk of impaired antitumoral effect. This potential risk of glucocorticoids, together with the high efficacy and potential synergistic effect of newer, targeted immunomodulation, such as tumor necrosis factor and interleukin-6 blockade, could support a paradigm shift, where more targeted treatments are considered earlier in the treatment sequence.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. e002627
Author(s):  
Nicholas L Bayless ◽  
Jeffrey A Bluestone ◽  
Samantha Bucktrout ◽  
Lisa H Butterfield ◽  
Elizabeth M Jaffee ◽  
...  

Recent advances in cancer immunotherapy have completely revolutionized cancer treatment strategies. Nonetheless, the increasing incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) is now limiting the overall benefits of these treatments. irAEs are well-recognized side effects of some of the most effective cancer immunotherapy agents, including antibody blockade of the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 and programmed death protein 1/programmed-death ligand 1 pathways. To develop an action plan on the key elements needed to unravel and understand the key mechanisms driving irAEs, the Society for Immunotherapy for Cancer and the American Association for Cancer Research partnered to bring together research and clinical experts in cancer immunotherapy, autoimmunity, immune regulation, genetics and informatics who are investigating irAEs using animal models, clinical data and patient specimens to discuss current strategies and identify the critical next steps needed to create breakthroughs in our understanding of these toxicities. The genetic and environmental risk factors, immune cell subsets and other key immunological mediators and the unique clinical presentations of irAEs across the different organ systems were the foundation for identifying key opportunities and future directions described in this report. These include the pressing need for significantly improved preclinical model systems, broader collection of biospecimens with standardized collection and clinical annotation made available for research and integration of electronic health record and multiomic data with harmonized and standardized methods, definitions and terminologies to further our understanding of irAE pathogenesis. Based on these needs, this report makes a set of recommendations to advance our understanding of irAE mechanisms, which will be crucial to prevent their occurrence and improve their treatment.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 24-44
Author(s):  
I.Yu. Golovach ◽  
Ye.D. Yehudina

Thorax ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. thoraxjnl-2021-217260
Author(s):  
Tommaso Morelli ◽  
Kohei Fujita ◽  
Gil Redelman-Sidi ◽  
Paul T Elkington

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionised cancer treatment. However, immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are a common side effect which can mimic infection. Additionally, treatment of irAEs with corticosteroids and other immunosuppressant agents can lead to opportunistic infection, which we have classed as immunotherapy infections due to immunosuppression. However, emerging reports demonstrate that some infections can be precipitated by ICIs in the absence of immunosuppressive treatment, in contrast to the majority of reported cases. These infections are characterised by a dysregulated inflammatory immune response, and so we propose they are described as immunotherapy infections due to dysregulated immunity. This review summarises the rapidly emerging evidence of these phenomena and proposes a new framework for considering infection in the context of cancer immunotherapy.


2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_6) ◽  
pp. vi149-vi150
Author(s):  
Sarah Iglseder ◽  
Martha Nowosielski ◽  
Gabriel Bsteh ◽  
Armin Muigg ◽  
Johanna Heugenhauser ◽  
...  

Abstract BACKGROUND Although there is no proven standard therapy for leptomeningeal metastases (LM), treatment often includes intrathecal chemotherapy combined with whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT). Little is known on the toxicity of such combination therapies. We performed a retrospective safety analysis for the combination of intrathecal liposomal cytarabine with WBRT in patients with LM and validated the EANO-ESMO classification in this unique cohort. METHODS Treatment toxicities in patients diagnosed with LM between 2004 and 2014 were retrospectively analyzed according to the RTOG (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group) and NCI CTCAE V5.0 (Common Toxicity Criteria Adverse Events) toxicity criteria. Diagnostic criteria and treatment response as assessed by EANO-ESMO classification were correlated with survival by Kaplan Meier analysis and Breslow test. RESULTS 40 patients with LM who were treated with combined WBRT and intrathecal cytarabine, were identified. Ten patients (25%) experienced adverse events ≥ grade 3 according to the RTOG-toxicity criteria, in 22 patients (55%) CTCAE criteria ≥3 grade were detected. Median overall survival (mOS) was 124.0 days [72.9;175.1]. Median time to neurological progression was 52.0 days [41.1; 62.8]. When comparing the diagnostic criteria, patients with a positive CSF cytology (n=26) showed worse prognosis compared to patients with a negative CSF cytology (n=14) (mOS 84 days [44.0;124.0] versus 198.0 days [162.6;233.4] days, p=0.006, respectively). The EANO-ESMO response assessment correlated significantly with survival - “stable” (n=7) mOS 233.0 [76.5;389.5] days, “response” (n=10) mOS 206.0 [193.9;218.9] days, “progression” (n=17) mOS 45.0 [34.4;55.6] days, “suspicion of progression” (n=6) mOS 133.0 [65.8;200.2] days (overall, p< 0.001). CONCLUSIONS In this retrospective analysis, the treatment combination of WBRT and intrathecal liposomal cytarabine shows an acceptable safety profile. The EANO-ESMO classification for diagnosis and treatment response predicts survival


Author(s):  
Cristina Antón Rodríguez ◽  
Miguel Abal Posada ◽  
Lorena Alonso Alconada ◽  
Sonia Candamio Folgar ◽  
Rafael López López ◽  
...  

Background: Late state colorectal cancer treatments have important side effects that should be avoided in patients where drug effectiveness is not adequate. PrediCTC is a new biomarkers blood test developed to determinate the chemotherapy response in unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer patients that could allow to obviate unnecessary treatments. Aim: To assess from the Spanish Societal Perspective the cost-utility of the test PrediCTC compared to the computed tomography in aim to evaluate chemotherapy treatment response in late stage colorectal cancer patients. Methods: Based on the results of Barbazán et al., a Markov model has been developed, in which the different lines and cycles that the colorectal patient can receive and how they can move between them according to the computed tomography or PrediCTC have been represented. The effectiveness has been expressed in quality adjusted life years (QALYs), avoiding adverse events. Results: Base case analysis shows savings in different types of costs for PrediCTC (per patient): €14.30 in those arise from adverse events, €22,345.73 in chemotherapy costs, €4849.61 in other direct costs, and €306.21 in indirect costs. Although computed tomography 12-week assessed patients gain 0.17 QALYs compared with PrediCTC. Conclusions: From the Spanish Societal Perspective, PrediCTC is not a cost-utility option but allows to identify earlier patients who are not benefiting from first-line chemotherapy avoiding unnecessary side effects and costs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document