scholarly journals Enhance the Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Efficacy with Radiotherapy Induced Immunogenic Cell Death: A Comprehensive Review and Latest Developments

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 678 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrien Procureur ◽  
Audrey Simonaggio ◽  
Jean-Emmanuel Bibault ◽  
Stéphane Oudard ◽  
Yann-Alexandre Vano
Keyword(s):  
Cell Death ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Tumor Antigens ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Mitotic Cell ◽  
Immunogenic Cell Death ◽  
Dna Damages ◽  
Multiple Tumor ◽  
Tumor Types

The immunogenic cell death (ICD) is defined as a regulated cell death able to induce an adaptive immunity. It depends on different parameters including sufficient antigenicity, adjuvanticity and favorable microenvironment conditions. Radiation therapy (RT), a pillar of modern cancer treatment, is being used in many tumor types in curative, (neo) adjuvant, as well as metastatic settings. The anti-tumor effects of RT have been traditionally attributed to the mitotic cell death resulting from the DNA damages triggered by the release of reactive oxygen species. Recent evidence suggests that RT may also exert its anti-tumor effect by recruiting tumor-specific immunity. RT is able to induce the release of tumor antigens, to act as an immune adjuvant and thus to synergize with the anti-tumor immunity. The advent of new efficient immunotherapeutic agents, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), in multiple tumor types sheds new light on the opportunity of combining RT and ICI. Here, we will describe the biological and radiobiological rationale of the RT-induced ICD. We will then focus on the interest to combine RT and ICI, from bench to bedside, and summarize the clinical data existing with this combination. Finally, RT technical adaptations to optimize the ICD induction will be discussed.

scholarly journals Is There a Place for Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Vulvar Neoplasms? A State of the Art Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 190
Author(s):  
Fulvio Borella ◽  
Mario Preti ◽  
Luca Bertero ◽  
Giammarco Collemi ◽  
Isabella Castellano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Younger Women ◽  
Multiple Tumor ◽  
Tumor Types

Vulvar cancer (VC) is a rare neoplasm, usually arising in postmenopausal women, although human papilloma virus (HPV)-associated VC usually develop in younger women. Incidences of VCs are rising in many countries. Surgery is the cornerstone of early-stage VC management, whereas therapies for advanced VC are multimodal and not standardized, combining chemotherapy and radiotherapy to avoid exenterative surgery. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are scarce due to the rarity of the disease and prognosis has not improved. Hence, new therapies are needed to improve the outcomes of these patients. In recent years, improved knowledge regarding the crosstalk between neoplastic and tumor cells has allowed researchers to develop a novel therapeutic approach exploiting these molecular interactions. Both the innate and adaptive immune systems play a key role in anti-tumor immunesurveillance. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated efficacy in multiple tumor types, improving survival rates and disease outcomes. In some gynecologic cancers (e.g., cervical cancer), many studies are showing promising results and a growing interest is emerging about the potential use of ICIs in VC. The aim of this manuscript is to summarize the latest developments in the field of VC immunoncology, to present the role of state-of-the-art ICIs in VC management and to discuss new potential immunotherapeutic approaches.

Association of LRP1B pathogenic genomic alterations with favorable outcomes with immune checkpoint inhibitors across multiple tumor types.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3007-3007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Landon Carter Brown ◽  
Ramy Sedhom ◽  
Eric B Schwartz ◽  
Jason Zhu ◽  
Chester Kao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Missense Mutations ◽  
Multiple Tumor ◽  
Tumor Types

3007 Background: Low-density lipoprotein receptor-related protein 1b (LRP1b) is a putative tumor suppressor and one of the most frequently altered genes in cancer. Our prior single-center work suggested that LRP1B alterations may enrich for responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in solid tumors including prostate cancer; however, validation of these findings is needed. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective analysis of patients with LRP1B alterations (on tissue-based next-generation sequencing panels) treated with ICI at Duke, Johns Hopkins (JHU), and University of Michigan (UM). The primary objective was to assess the association between objective response rate (ORR) to ICI and pathogenic LRP1B alterations, defined as deletions or truncating alterations, when compared with LRP1B variants of undetermined significance (VUS), defined as missense mutations not predicted to be pathogenic in COSMIC. Missense changes with a COSCMIC FATHMM score of > 0.8 were categorized separately as likely pathogenic. Summary statistics, ORR, progression free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were calculated. Results: 101 patients (44 Duke, 35 JHU, 22 UM) with LRP1B alterations were treated with ICI. Median age was 61 (range 32-82). The most common tumor types by alteration (pathogenic or likely pathogenic/VUS%) were lung (33/47%), GI (17/13%), prostate (11/7%), sarcoma (2/9%), melanoma (11/0%), and others (26/24%). 93% of patients received single-agent PD-(L)1 inhibition. The ORR for patients with either pathogenic/likely pathogenic alterations, or VUS alterations was 57% and 18%, respectively. After excluding MSI-high or TMB-high ( > 10 mut/Mb) tumors, ORR was 14/25 (56%) and 6/36 (17%), respectively. Pathogenic or likely pathogenic LRP1B alterations were associated with longer PFS (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.24-0.63) and OS (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.36-0.95). Conclusions: This multicenter study shows impressive and durable objective response rates to ICI for patients harboring pathogenic LRP1B alterations when compared to those with LRP1B VUS, independent of TMB/MSI status. Further mechanistic insights and prospective validation studies are warranted. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Tumor Genotype Is Shaping Immunophenotype and Responses to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Solid Tumors

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 121-127
Author(s):  
Kathrina L. Marcelo-Lewis ◽  
Shhyam Moorthy ◽  
Ecaterina Ileana-Dumbrava
Keyword(s):  
Cell Death ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Blockade ◽  
Checkpoint Blockade ◽  
Mechanisms Of Resistance ◽  
Oncogenic Pathways ◽  
Immune Editing ◽  
Tumor Types

ABSTRACT A major breakthrough in cancer treatment was ushered in by the development of immune checkpoint blockade therapy such as anti-CTLA4 antibody and anti-PD-1 and anti-programmed cell death-ligand 1 antibodies that are now approved for use in an increasing number of malignancies. Despite the relative success of immune checkpoint inhibitors with certain tumor types, many patients still fail to respond to such therapies, and the field is actively trying to understand the mechanisms of resistance, intrinsic or acquired, to immune checkpoint blockade. Herein, we discuss the roles that somatic genomic mutations in oncogenic pathways play in immune editing, as well as some of the current approaches toward improving response to immunotherapy.

Impact of body mass index on survival rates in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15108-e15108
Author(s):  
Diana Maslov ◽  
Karine Tawagi ◽  
Victoria Simenson ◽  
Helen Yuan ◽  
Cameron Parent ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Body Mass Index ◽  
Body Mass ◽  
Significant Relationship ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Metastatic Cancer ◽  
Obese Patients ◽  
Multiple Tumor ◽  
Tumor Types

e15108 Background: Obesity is associated with 13 different cancer types, accounting for 40% of all cancers1. A few studies have linked a higher Body Mass Index (BMI) with longer Progression Free Survival (PFS) and Overall Survival (OS) from immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI)s in patients with advanced melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, and renal cell carcinoma2,3,4. Our study evaluates CPI efficacy in patients with multiple tumor types in relation to Body Mass Index (BMI). Methods: We retrospectively collected data from patients treated with CPIs alone who also received steroids during their treatment from a single institution. This data included demographics such as age, sex, and BMI. Response and progression were defined per RECIST v1.1. The association of BMI and PFS was assessed by exact chi-square test. Kaplan Meier and Cox proportional hazard regression methods were used to estimate the survival probability and hazard ratios. Results: We identified a total of 129 overweight or obese patients (49%) with stage IV cancer who received CPI therapy. CDC guidelines define overweight as BMI > 25 and obese as BMI > 30. There was a significant relationship between PFS and BMI. Median PFS for those overweight was 287 days and 479 days for obese. Those with BMI 18.5-25 (normal), median PFS was 128 days and 103 days for those underweight (BMI < 18.5), (p = .0024). There was also a significant relationship between OS and BMI. Median OS for those obese was 751 days, for those overweight was 462 days. Median OS for those normal weight was 281 days and those underweight was 273 days (p = .0005). Obese patients had a 48% reduced risk of progression of disease/death as compared to those who had normal BMI (Hazard Ratio 0.52, p = .019). Overweight had a 31.5% relative risk reduction (HR 0.685, p = .05). Overall Response Rate was not significant between the two groups but there was a strong trend (p = .087). Conclusions: Higher BMI was associated with improved PFS and OS in patients with metastatic cancer across 20 different tumor types. Further investigation into the immune mechanisms behind this may lead to improvement in CPI efficacy for all patients.

284 Real World Data of Sequencing Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICI) after Initial ICI

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (Suppl 3) ◽  
pp. A310-A310
Author(s):  
Krishna Gunturu ◽  
Muhammad Awidi ◽  
Rojer Ranjit ◽  
Brendan Connell ◽  
Rachel Carrasquillo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Death ◽  
Programmed Cell Death ◽  
Real World ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Clear Understanding ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
World Data

BackgroundICI revolutionized modern Oncology landscape and being utilized in metastatic to adjuvant and neo-adjuvant settings. As Oncologists, we are treating cancer patients with ICI every day, yet there is still a lot that is unknown about these drugs. We don’t have clear understanding of the efficacy and toxicity when sequencing one ICI for another. We conducted a retrospective review of real world data at Lahey Hospital and Medical Center to understand further and to pave path for prospective studies to understand this issue further to improve patient care.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed Oncology patient charts who received ICI between January1, 2014 to December 18, 2018. Total 483 patients received ICI during this time frame and 22 of these patients received a second ICI either as monotherapy or in combination with other ICI or chemotherapy.ResultsA total of 22 patients received subsequent ICI after the initial ICI as showed in table 1. 15 of the 22 (68%) patients were transitioned from one ICI to another monotherapy. 11 of these patients were transitioned secondary to disease progression (73%), three had immune related adverse events and one was switched per standard of care. One patient had ICI re-challenge. Three patients had a transition from ICI monotherapy to combination ICI therapy. One patient went onto chemo-immunotherapy and 2 patients transitioned from combination ICI to chemo-immunotherapy.Abstract 284 Table 1Real world data of sequencing immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) after initial ICIConclusionsICI therapy is evolving and patients are being treated with multiple lines of ICI. In current practices, ICI is frequently being transitioned from cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) or its ligand, programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) classes or combined with chemotherapy or targeted therapy. It would be prudent to explore the effects of sequencing these medications either as a monotherapy or in combination with other therapies to better serve our patients and to prevent financial toxicity.

scholarly journals Management of Hematologic Adverse Events Associated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Barnes Rogers, CRNP, MN, AOCN, ANP-BC ◽  
Carolyn Zawislak, MPAS, PA-C ◽  
Victoria Wong, PA-C
Keyword(s):  
Cell Death ◽  
Programmed Cell Death ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Blood Cells ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Cytotoxic T Lymphocyte ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
White Blood Cells ◽  
Activated T Cells

Immune checkpoint inhibitors target suppressor receptors, including cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4), programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1). The activated T cells are not antigen specific; therefore, the blockade of the immune checkpoint may result in the development of autoimmune adverse events. The most common immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are rash, colitis, and endocrinopathies. However, irAEs that affect the hematologic system are rare and can affect red blood cells (e.g., autoimmune hemolytic anemia), white blood cells, and platelets (e.g., immune thrombocytopenia). Usually one cell line is affected; however, in some cases, multiple cell lines can be affected. Other changes in the hematologic system can also be affected (e.g., cryoglobulinemia, cytokine release syndrome). Due to the rarity and lack of recognition of these AEs, the timing, spectrum of events, and clinical presentation are poorly understood. Management of hematologic irAEs usually involves the use of steroids; however, other agents (e.g., IVIG, cyclosporine, rituximab) or procedures (e.g., plasma exchange, transfusions) can also be used.

Cancer Immunotherapy-Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Bai ◽  
Ping Liang ◽  
Qian Li ◽  
Rui Feng ◽  
Jiang Liu
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Death ◽  
Programmed Cell Death ◽  
Cancer Immunotherapy ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Locoregional Therapy ◽  
Incidence And Mortality

: Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common malignancies, the incidence and mortality of which are increasing worldwide. Cancer immunotherapy has revolutionized cancer treatment in recent years. In particular, Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs) as new therapeutic tools have demonstrated encouraging antitumor activity and manageable tolerability in HCC. Immunologic checkpoint blockade with antibodies targeting Programmed cell Death-1 (PD-1), Programmed cell Death Ligand-1 (PD-L1), and Cytotoxic T Lymphocyte-Associated protein-4 (CTLA-4) strengthens tumor immunity by restoring exhausted T cells. Although the efficacy of combination treatment strategies using ICIs combined with other ICIs, molecular targeted agents, systemic therapy, or locoregional therapy has been well documented in numerous preclinical and clinical studies on several types of cancers, most HCC patients do not benefit from ICI treatment. This review highlights recent developments and potential opportunities related to ICIs and their combination in the management of HCC. The present article also includes recent patent review coverage on this topic.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document