scholarly journals Fatal adverse events associated with programmed cell death protein 1 or programmed cell death-ligand 1 monotherapy in cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 175883591989575
Author(s):  
Bin Zhao ◽  
Hong Zhao ◽  
Jiaxin Zhao
Keyword(s):  
Cell Death ◽  
Programmed Cell Death ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Solid Tumors ◽  
Sequential Analysis ◽  
Trial Sequential Analysis ◽  
Tumor Type ◽  
Organ Systems ◽  
Fatal Adverse Events ◽  
Cell Death Protein

Background: The introduction of antibodies targeting programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) into clinical practice has had a revolutionary effect on cancer treatment. However, the incidence and risk of fatal adverse events (FAEs) following PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor administration are controversial. Methods: We performed a systematic search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors (atezolizumab, avelumab, durvalumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab) in Embase, PubMed, the Cochrane database, and abstracts presented at American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society of Medical Oncology from inception to July 2018. FAEs were extracted from each study and pooled to calculate overall incidence and odds ratios (ORs). Results: In total, 20 RCTs involving 12,398 patients with solid tumors were included in this study. The overall incidence of FAEs with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors was 0.43% [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.25–0.66%]. However, the incidences of FAEs varied significantly by tumor type and median follow-up time. Compared with conventional agents, the application of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors significantly reduced the risk of FAEs (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.35–0.89; p = 0.015). Moreover, trial sequential analysis confirmed that our results were solid and reliable; further studies were unlikely to alter this conclusion. FAEs occurred dispersed in major organ systems, with the most common mortalities appearing in the respiratory system (46.2%). Conclusions: Compared with conventional treatment, PD-1/PD-L1 blockade monotherapy is associated with a significantly reduced risk of mortality in patients with solid tumors.

scholarly journals Toxicidade Cutânea dos Inibidores de Checkpoint Imunológico: Uma Revisão Narrativa

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 335
Author(s):  
Nuno Gomes ◽  
Vincent Sibaud ◽  
Filomena Azevedo ◽  
Sofia Magina
Keyword(s):  
Cell Death ◽  
Programmed Cell Death ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
T Lymphocyte ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Cytotoxic T Lymphocyte ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Cutaneous Toxicity ◽  
Cell Death Protein

Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitors revolutionized anti-neoplastic treatment. Recently, the European Medicines Agency and the United States Food and Drug Administration approved inhibitors of various immune checkpoints, namely the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4, programmed cell death protein 1 and its ligand. Despite the added benefits in the treatment of several neoplasms, immune checkpoint blockade may also be associated with multiple immune-related adverse events.Material and Methods: A literature review in PubMed database on the cutaneous toxicity of immune checkpoint inhibitors was performed until April 30, 2019.Results and Discussion: A total of 380 articles were initially screened, of which 75 are the basis of this bibliographic review. The immune checkpoint inhibitors monoclonal antibodies produce their beneficial effects by activating the patient’s immune system. This activation also results in adverse events that can affect any organ, whereas cutaneous toxicity is the most frequent and precocious. The adverse events of the programmed cell death protein 1 and its ligand and of the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 are similar (class effect), despite the apparent higher skin toxicity of inhibitors of the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (or its use in combination with inhibitors of programmed cell death protein 1 and its ligand). The most common cutaneous toxicities are maculopapular exanthema and pruritus, but other more specific adverse effects (e.g. lichenoid or psoriasiform reaction, vitiligo, sarcoidosis, among others) or located in the oral mucosa and/or adnexa are underreported.Conclusion: Given the high rate of cutaneous toxicity associated with new immune checkpoint inhibitors and their impact on quality of life, their early recognition and appropriate approach are crucial in the treatment of cancer patients. Observation by a dermatologist should be provided in patients with certain toxicities.

scholarly journals Monitoring and Management of Immune‐Related Adverse Events Associated With Programmed Cell Death Protein‐1 Axis Inhibitors in Lung Cancer

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grainne M. O'Kane ◽  
Catherine Labbé ◽  
Mark K. Doherty ◽  
Kelvin Young ◽  
Hamzeh Albaba ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Death ◽  
Programmed Cell Death ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Cell Death Protein

scholarly journals Current status of treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors for gastrointestinal, hepatobiliary, and pancreatic cancers

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 175628482094877
Author(s):  
Yuji Eso ◽  
Hiroshi Seno
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cell Death ◽  
Programmed Cell Death ◽  
Solid Tumors ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
The United States ◽  
Pancreatic Cancers ◽  
Cell Death Protein

The development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4), programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), or programmed cell death protein ligand 1 (PD-L1) has revolutionized the treatment strategy in various types of cancers. In addition, recent studies have revealed that tumor microsatellite instability (MSI) status and tumor mutation burden (TMB) contribute significantly to the therapeutic response to anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody (mAb), which led to an accelerated approval to pembrolizumab for the treatment of MSI-high or mismatch-repair-deficient solid tumors after conventional chemotherapies in 2017 and for the treatment of TMB-high solid tumors in 2020 by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). In the field of gastrointestinal cancers, many clinical trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of various regimens such as ICI monotherapy, the combination of anti-CTLA-4 mAb and anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAb, and combination of ICI and conventional chemotherapy or tyrosine kinase inhibitor have been reported or are in progress. This review summarizes MSI status and TMB in gastrointestinal, hepatobiliary, and pancreatic cancers, and provides the results of most relevant clinical trials evaluating ICIs. We also discuss the development of biomarkers required for improving the selection of patients with a high probability of benefiting from treatment with ICIs, and potential therapeutic strategies that could help to enhance anticancer responses of ICIs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document