Efficacy and tolerance of immune checkpoint inhibitors in transplant patients with cancer: A systematic review

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Use in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: A Systematic Review

Chronic immunosuppression in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) leads to an increased risk of a wide variety of cancers. Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy is indicated for many of these; however, the risks and benefits of ICI use in the SOTR population have not been well characterized. We performed a systematic literature review identifying 119 reported cases of ICI use among SOTRs. Treatments used included PD-1 inhibition (75.6%), CTLA-4 inhibition (12.6%), PD-L1 inhibition (1.7%), and combination and/or sequential ICI therapy (10.1%). The most common cancers included cutaneous melanoma (35.3%), hepatocellular carcinoma (22.7%), and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (18.5%). The overall objective response rate (ORR) was 34.5%, with a median duration of response of 8.0 months. Ongoing response was seen in 21.0%. Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma had significantly better ORR compared with other cancer types (68.2% vs 26.8%; odds ratio [OR], 5.85; P =.0006). Factors associated with improved ORR included increasing time from transplant to ICI (OR, 1.09; P =.008) and preemptive reduction in intensity of the graft maintenance immunosuppressive regimen (50.0% vs 18.5%; OR, 4.40; P =.0088). Rejection occurred in 41.2%, graft failure in 23.5%, and immune-related adverse events in 18.5%. Factors significantly associated with allograft rejection included allograft PD-L1 positivity (100% vs 0%; P<.0001) and absence of tacrolimus in the immunosuppressive regimen (48.7% vs 25.6%; OR, 0.36; P =.019). The most common cause of death was progressive malignancy (64.0%), followed by graft failure (24.0%). Our analysis provides current benchmark data to help inform management of SOTRs with advanced cancers that are reflected by our patient cohort. Biomarker development, more robust datasets, and prospective study of concomitant immunosuppression management may help refine decision-making in this complex scenario in the future. Close coordination of care between the medical oncologist and transplant specialist is encouraged to help optimize treatment outcomes.

Immunotherapies for hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver cancer, more specifically hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), is the second leading cause of cancer-related death and its incidence is increasing globally. Around 50% of patients with HCC receive systemic therapies, traditionally sorafenib or lenvatinib in the first line and regorafenib, cabozantinib or ramucirumab in the second line. In the past 5 years, immune-checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized the management of HCC. The combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab has been shown to improve overall survival relative to sorafenib, resulting in FDA approval of this regimen. More recently, durvalumab plus tremelimumab yielded superior overall survival versus sorafenib and atezolizumab plus cabozantinib yielded superior progression-free survival. In addition, pembrolizumab monotherapy and the combination of nivolumab plus ipilimumab have received FDA Accelerated Approval in the second-line setting based on early efficacy data. Despite these major advances, the molecular underpinnings governing immune responses and evasion remain unclear. The immune microenvironment has crucial roles in the development and progression of HCC and distinct aetiology-dependent immune features have been defined. Inflamed and non-inflamed classes of HCC and genomic signatures have been associated with response to immune-checkpoint inhibitors, yet no validated biomarker is available to guide clinical decision-making. This Review provides information on the immune microenvironments underlying the response or resistance of HCC to immunotherapies. In addition, current evidence from phase III trials on the efficacy, immune-related adverse events and aetiology-dependent mechanisms of response are described. Finally, we discuss emerging trials assessing immunotherapies across all stages of HCC that might change the management of this disease in the near future.

Transplant Onconephrology in Patients With Kidney Transplants

Cancer is a leading cause of death in patients with kidney transplantation. Patients with kidney transplants are 10- to 200-times more likely to develop cancers after transplant than the general population, depending on the cancer type. Recent advances in cancer therapies have dramatically improved survival outcomes; however, patients with kidney transplants face unique challenges of immunosuppression management, cancer screening, and recurrence of cancer after transplant. Patients with a history of cancer tend to be excluded from transplant candidacy or are required to have long cancer-free wait time before wait-listing. The strategy of pretransplant wait time management may need to be revisited as cancer therapies improve, which is most applicable to patients with a history of multiple myeloma. In this review, we discuss several important topics in transplant onconephrology: the current recommendations for pretransplant wait times for transplant candidates with cancer histories, cancer screening post-transplant, post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder, strategies for transplant patients with a history of multiple myeloma, and novel therapies for patients with post-transplant malignancies. With emerging novel cancer treatments, it is critical to have multidisciplinary discussions involving patients, caregivers, transplant nephrologists, and oncologists to achieve patient-oriented goals.

De Novo Malignancies after Kidney Transplantation

Cancer is an important outcome after kidney transplantation because it is the second leading cause of death in most Western countries. The excess risk of cancer after transplantation is approximately two to three times higher than the age- and sex-matched general population, driven largely by viral- and immune-related cancers. Once cancer develops, outcomes are generally poor, particularly for those with melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, and post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease. More importantly, effective screening and treatment strategies are limited in this high-risk population. In this review, we begin with a patient's journey that maps the experience of living with a kidney transplant and understand the patient's knowledge, education, and experience of cancer in the context of transplantation. The epidemiology and burden of cancer in recipients of kidney transplants, along with the up-to-date screening and treatment strategies, are discussed. We also focus on the current understanding of optimal care for recipients of kidney transplants who are living with cancer from the patients' perspectives.

Renal Cell Carcinoma and Kidney Transplantation: A Narrative Review

Kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) are at increased risk of developing renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The cancer can be encountered at different steps in the transplant process. RCC found during work-up of a transplant candidate needs treatment and to limit the risk of recurrence usually a mandatory observation period before transplantation is recommended. An observation period may be omitted for candidates with incidentally discovered and excised small RCCs (<3 cm). Likewise, RCC in the donor organ may not always preclude usage if tumor is small (<2 to 4 cm) and removed with clear margins before transplantation. After transplantation, 90% of RCCs are detected in the native kidneys, particularly if acquired cystic kidney disease has developed during prolonged dialysis. Screening for RCC after transplantation has not been found cost-effective. Treatment of RCC in KTRs poses challenges with adjustments of immunosuppression and oncologic treatments. For localized RCC, excision or nephrectomy is often curative. For metastatic RCC, recent landmark trials in the nontransplanted population demonstrate that immunotherapy combinations improve survival. Dedicated trials in KTRs are lacking. Case series on immune checkpoint inhibitors in solid organ recipients with a range of cancer types indicate partial or complete tumor response in approximately one-third of the patients at the cost of rejection developing in ~40%.

Emerging Concepts in Managing Malignancy in Kidney Transplant Patients

Cancer remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in kidney transplant recipients, due to long-term immunosuppression. Salient issues to consider in decreasing the burden of malignancy among kidney transplant recipients include pretransplant recipient evaluation, post-transplant screening and monitoring, and optimal treatment strategies for the kidney transplant recipients with cancer. In this review, we address cancer incidence and outcomes, approaches to cancer screening and monitoring pretransplant and post-transplant, as well as treatment strategies, immunosuppressive management, and multidisciplinary approaches in the kidney transplant recipients with cancer.

Urological Cancers and Kidney Transplantation: a Literature Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this review is to provide an overview of epidemiology, risk factors, and treatment of urological malignancies in renal transplant recipients (RTR).

RECENT FINDINGS

Although optimal immunosuppressive therapy and cancer management in these patients remain controversial, adherence to general guidelines is recommended. Kidney transplantation is recognized as the standard of care for the treatment of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) as it offers prolonged survival and better quality of life. In the last decades, survival of RTRs has increased as a result of improved immunosuppressive therapy; nonetheless, the risk of developing cancer is higher among RTRs compared to the general population. Urological malignancies are the second most common after hematological cancer and often have more aggressive behavior and poor prognosis.

Treatment of Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Special Populations

Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) may develop in patients with dysregulated immune activation (pre-existing autoimmune diseases or immunosuppression due to hematopoietic/solid organ transplant recipients), patients with a compromised immune function (long-term immunosuppression), and patients carrying chronic viral infections, or those affected by lymphoproliferative diseases. It should be also considered that patients presenting with immunosuppression have a high incidence of cSCC (65-250-times higher than general population), highlighting the central role played by the immune system in the development of cSCC. All these cases must be considered as "special populations" for treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), as the safety and activity of these drugs have not been studied on these specific cases, since these patients were excluded from clinical trials leading to approval of ICIs. It is therefore important to gain as much information as possible from the analysis of real-life data, to derive an indication to be adopted in everyday clinical setting. Moreover, therapeutic alternatives other than ICIs are scarce, mainly consisting in chemotherapy and anti-EGFR agents, whose activity is lower than immunotherapy and whose toxicity (particularly with chemotherapy) are not sustainable by this frail population. Here, we describe the current evidence of treatment with ICIs in special populations and conclude that it is necessary to find a balance between treatment risks (toxicities) and benefits (efficacy), as well as engaging a multidisciplinary team of experts to thoroughly manage and treat these patients.

Adoptive Cell Transfer of Allogeneic Epstein–Barr Virus-Specific T Lymphocytes for Treatment of Refractory EBV-Associated Posttransplant Smooth Muscle Tumors: A Case Report

Posttransplant smooth muscle tumors (PTSMTs) are rare Epstein–Barr virus (EBV)-associated neoplasms, mostly occurring after solid organ transplantation. Current therapeutic strategies include surgery and reduction of immunosuppressive medication. We describe for the first time a novel treatment approach for PTSMT by adoptive cell transfer (ACT) of EBV-specific T cells to a 20-year-old patient with a medical history of cardiac transplantation, posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease, and multilocular PTSMT. During ACT, mild cytokine release syndrome occurred, while no unexpected safety signals were recorded. We observed in vivo expansion of EBV-specific T cells and reduction of EBV viremia. Best response was stable disease after 4 months with reduction of EBV viremia and normalization of lactate dehydrogenase levels. ACT with EBV-specific T cells may be a safe and efficacious therapeutic option for PTSMT that warrants further exploration.

Treatment of metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma in a solid organ transplant recipient with programmed death-1 checkpoint inhibitor therapy

Limited data exist on the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) for the treatment of metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTR). We report a case of a SOTR who developed metastatic disease following multiple surgeries, three cycles of adjuvant radiotherapy, and minimization of immunosuppression. He was subsequently treated with pembrolizumab and achieved a complete response. However, the patient developed ICI-induced allograft rejection requiring therapy discontinuation. The allograft was salvaged following IVIg and steroids. The patient developed recurrent disease which failed rechallenge with pembrolizumab but achieved a partial response following cemiplimab administration. This case illustrates the potential to treat metastatic CSCC in a SOTR with anti-programmed death-1 therapy and preserve graft function despite allograft rejection.

Advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma of the head in two renal transplanted patients treated with cemiplimab

It is well known that organ transplant recipients are prone to develop non-melanoma skin cancers, particularly cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC). This is explained by the long-term use of immunosuppressants and thus the decrease of the immunosurveillance that protects from developing malignant tumours. Solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) are 65-250 times more likely to develop cSCC compared to the general population (Am J Transplant 2017; 17: 2509). Moreover, in these patients cSCCs follow a more aggressive course. Close follow-up and regular skin check-ups by a dermatologist are, therefore, crucial in the management of these patients. When detected early, cSCC can be easily and effectively treated by a simple excision. However, when advanced, outcomes are poor. Immune checkpoints inhibitors (ICIs) have been recently added to our arsenal and represent a breakthrough, having proved to be effective in achieving long-term responses. We, hereby, present two cases of difficult-to-treat cSCCs in renal transplanted patients.

Targeting of the tumor microenvironment by curcumin

The tumor microenvironment (TME) is made up of several cells and molecules that affect the survival of cancer cells. Indeed, certain (immunosuppressive) cells which promote tumors can promote the growth of tumors by stimulating the proliferation of cancer cells and promoting angiogenesis. During tumor growth, antitumoral immunity includes natural killer cells and CD8+ T cells cannot overcome immunosuppressive responses and cancer cell proliferation. In order to achieve the appropriate therapeutic response, we must kill cancer cells and suppress the release of immunosuppressive molecules. The balance between anti-tumor immunity and immunosuppressive cells, such as regulatory T cells (Tregs), cancer-associated fibroblasts, tumor-associated macrophages, and myeloid-derived suppressor cells plays a key role in the suppression or promotion of cancer cells. Curcumin is a plant-derived agent that has shown interesting properties for cancer therapy. It has shown that not only directly inhibit the growth of cancer cells, but can also modulate the growth and activity of immunosuppressant and tumor-promoting cells. In this review, we explain how curcumin modulates interactions within TME in favor of tumor treatment. The potential modulating effects of curcumin on the responses of cancer cells to treatment modalities such as immunotherapy will also be discussed.

Rescue liver re-transplantation after graft loss due to severe rejection in the setting of pre-transplant nivolumab therapy

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have been used to treat hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) since 2017. The safety of ICIs in the setting of solid organ transplantation remains controversial. When used in the post-transplant setting, ICIs have been associated with high allograft rejection rates, but there are few published reports on the use of ICIs prior to transplant. We present the first reported case of rescue liver re-transplantation after loss of the first allograft due to severe acute rejection with extensive hepatic necrosis in the setting of pre-transplant ICI therapy with the PD-1 inhibitor nivolumab. It is likely that the durable immune response triggered by nivolumab contributes to graft rejection, therefore extreme caution should be taken when using ICIs before transplant until further investigation has been conducted on their safety in the pre-transplant setting.

Immunological Markers, Prognostic Factors and Challenges Following Curative Treatments for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related mortalities worldwide. Patients with early-stage HCC are eligible for curative treatments, such as surgical resection, liver transplantation (LT) and percutaneous ablation. Although curative treatments provide excellent long-term survival, almost 70–80% of patients experience HCC recurrence after curative treatments. Tumor-related factors, including tumor size, number and differentiation, and underlying liver disease, are well-known risk factors for recurrence following curative therapies. Moreover, the tumor microenvironment (TME) also plays a key role in the recurrence of HCC. Many immunosuppressive mechanisms, such as an increase in regulatory T cells and myeloid-derived suppressor cells with a decrease in cytotoxic T cells, are implicated in HCC recurrence. These suppressive TMEs are also modulated by several factors and pathways, including mammalian target of rapamycin signaling, vascular endothelial growth factor, programmed cell death protein 1 and its ligand 1. Based on these mechanisms and the promising results of immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) in advanced HCC, there have been several ongoing adjuvant studies using a single or combination of ICB following curative treatments in HCC. In this review, we strive to provide biologic and immunological markers, prognostic factors, and challenges associated with clinical outcomes after curative treatments, including resection, LT and ablation.

Chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy: Which drugs can be safely used in the solid organ transplant recipients?

In solid organ transplant recipients, cancer is associated with worse prognosis than in the general population. Among the causes of increased cancer‐associated mortality, are the limitations in selecting the optimal anticancer regimen in solid organ transplant recipients, because of the associated risks of graft toxicity and rejection, drug‐to‐drug interactions, reduced kidney or liver function, and patient frailty and comorbid conditions. The advent of immunotherapy has generated further challenges, mainly because checkpoint inhibitors increase the risk of rejection, which may have life‐threatening consequences in recipients of life‐saving organs. In general, there are no safe or unsafe anticancer drugs. Rather, the optimal choice of the anticancer regimen results from a careful risk/benefit assessment, from the awareness of potential pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug‐to‐drug interactions, and of the risk of drug overexposure in patients with kidney or liver dysfunction. In this review, we summarize general principles that may help the oncologists and transplant physicians in the multidisciplinary management of recipients of solid organ transplantation with cancer who are candidates for chemotherapy, targeted therapy, or immunotherapy.

Implications of cancer prior to and after heart transplantation

Cancer and cardiovascular disease share many risk factors. Due to improved survival of patients with cancer, the cohort of cancer survivors with heart failure referred for heart transplantation (HT) is growing. Specific considerations include time interval between cancer treatment and HT, risk for recurrence and risk for de novo malignancy (dnM). dnM is an important cause of post-HT morbidity and mortality, with nearly a third diagnosed with malignancy by 10 years post-HT. Compared with the age-matched general population, HT recipients have an approximately 2.5-fold to 4-fold increased risk of developing cancer. HT recipients with prior malignancy show variable cancer recurrence rates, depending on years in remission before HT: 5% recurrence if >5 years in remission, 26% recurrence if 1-5 years in remission and 63% recurrence if <1 year in remission. A myriad of mechanisms influence oncogenesis following HT, including reduced host immunosurveillance from chronic immunosuppression, influence of oncogenic viruses, and the cumulative intensity and duration of immunosuppression. Conversely, protective factors include acyclovir prophylaxis, use of proliferation signal inhibitors (PSI) and female gender. Management involves reducing immunosuppression, incorporating a PSI for immunosuppression and heightened surveillance for allograft rejection. Cancer treatment, including immunotherapy, may be cardiotoxic and lead to graft failure or rejection. Additionally, there exists a competing risk to reduce immunosuppression to improve cancer outcomes, which may increase risk for rejection. A multidisciplinary cardio-oncology team approach is recommended to optimise care and should include an oncologist, transplant cardiologist, transplant pharmacist, palliative care, transplant coordinator and cardio-oncologist.

Immunotherapy use outside clinical trial populations: never say never?

BACKGROUND

Based on favourable outcomes in clinical trials, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), most notably programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors, are now widely used across multiple cancer types. However, due to their strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, clinical studies often do not address challenges presented by non-trial populations.

DESIGN

This review summarises available data on the efficacy and safety of ICIs in trial-ineligible patients, including those with autoimmune disease, chronic viral infections, organ transplants, organ dysfunction, poor performance status, and brain metastases, as well as the elderly, children, and those who are pregnant. In addition, we review data concerning other real-world challenges with ICIs, including timing of therapy switch, relationships to radiotherapy or surgery, re-treatment after an immune-related toxicity, vaccinations in patients on ICIs, and current experience around ICI and coronavirus disease-19. Where possible, we provide recommendations to aid the often-difficult decision-making process in those settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Data suggest that ICIs are often active and have an acceptable safety profile in the populations described above, with the exception of PD-1 inhibitors in solid organ transplant recipients. Decisions about whether to treat with ICIs should be personalised and require multidisciplinary input and careful counselling of patients with respect to potential risks and benefits. Clinical judgements need to be carefully weighed, considering factors such as underlying cancer type, feasibility of alternative treatment options, or activity in trial-eligible patients.

Application of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Solid Organ Transplantation Recipients: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Solid organ transplantation (SOT) is a treatment method for end-stage organ diseases and improve their life quality, while using long-term immunosuppressant drugs (ISD) is needed to suppress the function of the immune system. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are a class of anti-tumor drugs that kill tumors by activating the autoimmune system. The primary objective of our systematic review is to investigate the risk factors for organ rejection and the efficacy of ICIs in solid organ transplantation recipients (SOTRs).

METHODS

We searched four databases to find relevant articles up to January 2021. A total of 61 articles involving 106 SOTRs met the screening criteria and were included in our systematic review. The collected data were statistical described, and the risk factors were analyzed by logistic regression.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients (41.5%) developed host-versus-graft response (HVGR) after ICIs. mTOR inhibitors (pre-ICIs) (p = 0.069, OR = 0.377, 95% CI 0.132-1.078) and calcineurin inhibitors (post-ICIs) (p = 0.056, OR = 0.375, 95%CI 0.137-1.025) may help reduce the incidence of HVGR. Hormones (pre-ICIs) (p = 0.026, OR = 3.150, 95%CI 1.150-8.628) and anti-metabolites (pre-ICIs) (p = 0.022, OR = 3.214, 95%CI 1.185-8.720) may adversely affect the efficacy of ICIs. Only 35.6% of patients both responded well to ICIs treatment and did not develop HVGR.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review summarizes the use of ICIs in SOTRs and evaluates the efficacy of ICIs and the risk factors that induce HVGR. Through risk factor analysis, we found that mTOR inhibitors and calcineurin inhibitors may help to reduce the occurrence of HVGR; hormones and anti-metabolic drugs may have adverse effects on the efficacy of ICIs. In addition, there is a contradictory relationship between the occurrence of HVGR and the efficacy of ICIs.

Cancer immunotherapy in special challenging populations: recommendations of the Advisory Committee of Spanish Melanoma Group (GEM)

Cancer immunotherapy based on the use of antibodies targeting the so-called checkpoint inhibitors, such as programmed cell death-1 receptor, its ligand, or CTLA-4, has shown durable clinical benefit and survival improvement in melanoma and other tumors. However, there are some special situations that could be a challenge for clinical management. Persons with chronic infections, such as HIV-1 or viral hepatitis, latent tuberculosis, or a history of solid organ transplantation, could be candidates for cancer immunotherapy, but their management requires a multidisciplinary approach. The Spanish Melanoma Group (GEM) panel in collaboration with experts in virology and immunology from different centers in Spain reviewed the literature and developed evidence-based guidelines for cancer immunotherapy management in patients with chronic infections and immunosuppression. These are the first clinical guidelines for cancer immunotherapy treatment in special challenging populations. Cancer immunotherapy in chronically infected or immunosuppressed patients is feasible but needs a multidisciplinary approach in order to decrease the risk of complications related to the coexistent comorbidities.

Analysis of malignant melanoma risk and outcomes in solid organ transplant recipients: Assessment of transplant candidacy and the potential role of checkpoint inhibitors

Malignant melanoma (MM) causes tremendous morbidity and mortality in the solid organ transplant population and may arise in three different clinical scenarios: (1) pretransplant melanoma; (2) de novo melanoma post transplantation and (3) donor-derived melanoma. This manuscript primarily addresses the first two scenarios with respect to the evaluation and management of pretransplant MM, consideration of transplant candidacy and the occurrence and management of de novo MM post transplantation. The authors outline current evidence describing risks associated with pre-transplant melanoma to support recently established expert opinion for transplant candidacy.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy-associated graft intolerance syndrome in a failed kidney transplant recipient

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) are monoclonal antibodies against inhibitory receptors on T cells resulting in anticancer activity. In kidney transplant (KT) recipients, ICPI use has been associated with acute allograft rejection. In failed allografts, however, the effects of ICPIs are unknown. We present a case of a 66-year-old man with a history of diabetes, renal cell cancer, left native nephrectomy, and end-stage kidney disease. He received a deceased donor KT which failed after 6 years due to biopsy-proven recurrent diabetic nephrosclerosis. He was started on hemodialysis and his immunosuppression was gradually weaned off. A year later, he was diagnosed with renal cell cancer in his right native kidney requiring nephrectomy. He later developed metastasis and was started on combination ICPIs. He developed hematuria, allograft pain, and malaise consistent with graft intolerance syndrome 28 days after starting ICPIs. Urine culture and cystoscopy were normal. A computed tomography scan of his abdomen revealed an enlarged allograft with patchy enhancement. After a multidisciplinary discussion, he underwent transplant nephrectomy. Histopathology showed chronic active T cell-mediated rejection. As ICPI use becomes prevalent, practitioners need to be aware of its potential complications among KT recipients both with functioning and failed allografts.

Safe Administration of Cemiplimab to a Kidney Transplant Patient with Locally Advanced Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Scalp

Immunotherapies directed at T-cell activation through antibodies targeting checkpoint proteins, such as programmed cell death 1 (PD1), are rapidly becoming the new standard of care in the treatment of several malignancies. Cemiplimab is a monoclonal antibody targeting PD1 that has recently emerged as a highly active treatment for locally advanced and metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC). Patients who have received an organ transplant (OTRs) have been traditionally excluded from clinical trials with checkpoint inhibitors (CIs), given concerns for organ rejection. Renal transplant recipients (RTRs) are more likely to develop cancers than the general population, and skin cancers are among the most frequent malignancies. We report the case of a 72-year-old man with a history of a kidney transplant who presented with a rapidly growing, locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the scalp that recurred within four weeks from surgical resection. The patient was able to safely receive ten cycles of cemiplimab so far with significant clinical benefit, and no issues with his kidney function, while continuing immunosuppression with low dose prednisone alone. An ongoing clinical trial (NCT04339062) is further exploring the safety of CIs in patients with metastatic CSCC who have previously received allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant or a kidney transplant.

Immunotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a focus on special subgroups

Following the success of immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) in different cancer types, a large number of studies are currently investigating ICBs in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), alone or in combination with other treatments. Both nivolumab and pembrolizumab, as well as the combination of nivolumab plus ipilimumab have been granted accelerated approval by the United States Food and Drug Administration for sorafenib-pretreated patients. While nivolumab and pembrolizumab both failed to meet their primary endpoints in phase III trials, the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab eventually improved overall and progression-free survival compared with sorafenib in a front-line phase III trial, and thus, will become the new standard of care in this setting. Despite this breakthrough, there are patient populations with certain underlying conditions that may not be ideal candidates for this new treatment either due to safety concerns or potential lack of efficacy. In this review, we discuss the safety of ICBs in patients with pre-existing autoimmune disease, IBD or a history of solid organ transplantation. Moreover, we summarise emerging preclinical and clinical data suggesting that ICBs may be less efficacious in patients with underlying non-alcoholic steatohepatitis or HCCs with activated Wnt/β-catenin signalling.

A multi-center study on safety and efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients with kidney transplant

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are widely used for various malignancies. However, their safety and efficacy in patients with a kidney transplant have not been defined. To delineate this, we conducted a multicenter retrospective study of 69 patients with a kidney transplant receiving ICIs between January 2010 and May 2020. For safety, we assessed the incidence, timing, and risk factors of acute graft rejection. For efficacy, objective response rate and overall survival were assessed in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma and melanoma, the most common cancers in our cohort, and compared with stage-matched 23 patients with squamous cell carcinoma and 14 with melanoma with a kidney transplant not receiving ICIs. Following ICI treatment, 29 out of 69 (42%) patients developed acute rejection, 19 of whom lost their allograft, compared with an acute rejection rate of 5.4% in the non-ICI cohort. Median time from ICI initiation to rejection was 24 days. Factors associated with a lower risk of rejection were mTOR inhibitor use (odds ratio 0.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.72) and triple-agent immunosuppression (0.67, 0.48-0.92). The objective response ratio was 36.4% and 40% in the squamous cell carcinoma and melanoma subgroups, respectively. In the squamous cell carcinoma subgroup, overall survival was significantly longer in patients treated with ICIs (median overall survival 19.8 months vs. 10.6 months), whereas in the melanoma subgroup, overall survival did not differ between groups. Thus, ICIs were associated with a high risk of rejection in patients with kidney transplants but may lead to improved cancer outcomes. Prospective studies are needed to determine optimal immunosuppression strategies to improve patient outcomes.

Lung Cancer Immunotherapy in Transplant Patients and in Patients With Autoimmune Diseases

The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) delivered great and new possibilities in modern treatment of many types of cancers. This therapy based on blockade of such molecules as CTLA-4 (cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen), PD-1 (programmed cell death receptor type 1), or PD-1 ligand (PD-L1) brings a new hope for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), melanoma, or head and neck squamous carcinoma. Efficacy of immunotherapy was proven in many clinical trials. Unfortunately, ICIs treatment was not addressed to the patients with preexisting allogeneic transplants or autoimmune diseases mainly due to high risk of transplant rejection, exacerbation of autoimmune diseases, and risk of serious toxicity. However, it is possible to receive anti-tumor response to ICIs treatment avoiding graft rejection by adjusting the immunosuppression. Obviously, it depends on the type of transplants: the use of immunotherapy is usually possible in kidney or corneal recipients, but it could be difficult in patients with liver and heart transplant. Therefore, the development of biomarkers for tumor response and transplant rejection in ICIs treated patients is essential. Data coming from published literature support the possibilities of using ICIs in patients with preexisting autoimmune diseases who undergoing proper management of side effects of immunotherapy or when the potential benefits of such treatment outweigh the potential risks. This depends on the type of autoimmune disease and may be difficult or not feasible in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus or systemic sclerosis. Therefore, it may be appropriate to include cancer patients with preexisting autoimmune disease or with allogeneic transplants in clinical trials using immunotherapy when no other effective cancer treatment options exist.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma-The Influence of Immunoanatomy and the Role of Immunotherapy

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality worldwide. Most patients are diagnosed with advanced disease, limiting their options for treatment. While current treatments are adequate for lower staged disease, available systemic treatments are limited, with marginal benefit at best. Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy, effective in treating liquid tumors such as B-cell lymphoma, presents a potentially promising treatment option for advanced HCC. However, new challenges specific to solid tumors, such as tumor immunoanatomy or the immune cell presence and position anatomically and the tumor microenvironment, need to be defined and overcome. Immunotherapy currently in use must be re-engineered and re-envisioned to treat HCC with the hopes of ushering in an answer to advanced stage solid tumor disease processes. Future therapy options must address the uniqueness of the tumors under the umbrella of HCC. This review strives to summarize HCC, its staging system, current therapy and immunotherapy medications currently being utilized or studied in the treatment of HCC with the hopes of highlighting what is being done and suggesting what needs to be done in the future to champion this therapy as an effective option.

Combination checkpoint blockade for metastatic cutaneous malignancies in kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint blockade has emerged as a highly effective treatment for patients with metastatic melanoma and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. Nivolumab blocks the interactions between programmed cell death protein 1 and programmed death ligand 1 allowing for activation of a latent immune response against the malignancy. Ipilimumab binds to and blocks cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4, alleviating the negative regulation of T-cell activation that is mediated by that checkpoint. Combination therapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab is associated with longer overall survival at 5 years compared with nivolumab monotherapy. Solid organ transplant recipients have a significantly higher risk of malignancies compared with the general population. There is limited data surrounding the efficacy of combination immunotherapy in solid organ transplant recipients, as these patients were excluded from seminal trials due to risk of organ rejection.

CASE PRESENTATIONS

Here we present four cases of combination immunotherapy in kidney transplant recipients. Three patients had metastatic melanoma, and one patient had metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. Two patients had radiographic responses from immunotherapy, one patient had stable disease, and one patient had disease progression. Only one patient had biopsy-proven rejection. At last follow-up, three patients had functioning grafts, though one required hemodialysis after treatment, and one patient succumbed to disease, but graft function remained intact throughout her course.

CONCLUSIONS

These cases describe the use of ipilimumab and nivolumab combination immunotherapy for cutaneous malignancies in kidney transplant recipients. They highlight the potential to preserve kidney graft function while effectively treating the disease.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03816332.