Safety and Efficacy of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Patients With Cancer and Preexisting Autoimmune Disease: A Nationwide, Multicenter Cohort Study

Immunotherapy in patients with autoimmune disease

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) such as cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and programmed cell death protein ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors are widely used for the treatment of multiple cancers. Seven of these agents are currently FDA approved in the US as first or second line options for solid tumors and hematologic malignancies. These agents work by downregulating pathways that suppress T-cell activation and thereby mounting an immune response to the tumor. In general, ICI are well tolerated with only mild to moderate toxicity. However, in some patients severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs) that mimic the presentation of autoimmune diseases (AID) may occur. It is believed that irAEs occur due to disruption of immunologic self-tolerance, a mechanism that also seems to explain AID. Patients with pre-existing AID are usually excluded from prospective clinical trials due to concerns for flares of the underline AID. There is limited retrospective evidence supporting the use of ICI in patients with some pre-existing AID. These patients have an increased risk of malignancy and there is an unmet need to study ICIs in this population. This manuscript intends to review the current available evidence for the safety and activity of ICIs in patients with pre-existing AID. We summarize the reported use of ICI in patients with pre-existing AID according to the primary tumor site and type of ICI used.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Despite the advances in screening protocols and treatment options, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is still considered to be the most lethal malignancy in patients with liver cirrhosis. Moreover, the survival outcomes after failure of first-line therapy for unresectable HCC is still poor with limited therapeutic options. One of these options is immune checkpoint inhibitors. The aim of this study is to comprehensively review the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors for patients with HCC.

Nebenwirkungen immunonkologischer Therapien

Immunonkologische Therapien und insbesondere die Immuncheckpoint-Inhibitoren (ICPi) als Hauptvertreter dieser neuen Substanzklasse kommen bei zunehmender Anzahl von soliden und teils auch hämatologischen Tumorentitäten und Indikationen zum Einsatz. Die relativ hohen (Langzeit-)Tumoransprechraten auch in fortgeschrittenen und therapierefraktären Stadien haben die therapeutischen Möglichkeiten der Onkologie geradezu revolutioniert. Gleichzeitig bringt der zunehmende Einsatz von ICPi auch neue Herausforderungen: Immunonkologische Therapien verursachen ein breites Spektrum an autoimmunen Nebenwirkungen, sogenannten „immune-related adverse events“ (irAEs), die teilweise klassischen Autoimmunopathien ähneln und jedes Organsystem betreffen können. Die große Mehrheit der ICPi-behandelten Patienten erlebt ein irAE an mindestens einem Organsystem und davon weisen ca. 5–20% ein rheumatisches irAEs auf. Diese sind interessanterweise mit einem besseren Tumoransprechraten bei ICPi-Therapie assoziiert und können entweder die Erstmanifestation einer klassischen entzündlich-rheumatischen Erkrankung oder auch nur eine transiente Nebenwirkung mit spezifischen Charakteristika sein. Zweifelsohne wird das interdisziplinäre Management immunvermittelter Nebenwirkungen auch den Rheumatologen in den nächsten Jahren zunehmend beschäftigen. Der vorliegende Artikel fasst die Erkenntnisse zum klinischen Management von irAEs für den praktizierenden Rheumatologen zusammen.

Safety and efficacy of atezolizumab in patients with autoimmune disease: Subgroup analysis of the SAUL study in locally advanced/metastatic urinary tract carcinoma

AIM

Patients with pre-existing autoimmune disease (AID) are typically excluded from clinical trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors, and there are limited data on outcomes in this population. The single-arm international SAUL study of atezolizumab enrolled a broader 'real-world' patient population. We present outcomes in patients with a history of AID.

METHODS

Patients with locally advanced/metastatic urinary tract carcinoma received atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 weeks until loss of clinical benefit or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end-point was safety. Overall survival (OS) was a secondary end-point. Subgroup analyses of AID patients were prespecified.

RESULTS

Thirty-five of 997 treated patients had AID at baseline, most commonly psoriasis (n = 15). Compared with non-AID patients, AID patients experienced numerically more adverse events (AEs) of special interest (46% versus 30%; grade ≥3 14% versus 6%) and treatment-related grade 3/4 AEs (26% versus 12%), but without relevant increases in treatment-related deaths (0% versus 1%) or AEs necessitating treatment discontinuation (9% versus 6%). Pre-existing AID worsened in four patients (11%; two flares in two patients); three of the six flares resolved, one was resolving, and two were unresolved. Efficacy was similar in AID and non-AID patients (median OS, 8.2 versus 8.8 months, respectively; median progression-free survival, 4.4 versus 2.2 months; disease control rate, 51% versus 39%).

CONCLUSIONS

In 35 atezolizumab-treated patients with pre-existing AID, incidences of special- interest and treatment-related AEs appeared acceptable. AEs were manageable, rarely requiring atezolizumab discontinuation. Treating these patients requires caution, but pre-existing AID does not preclude atezolizumab therapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02928406.

Current and emerging treatment options for lung cancer in patients with pre-existing connective tissue disease

An association between connective tissue disease (CTD) and lung cancer has been claimed in accumulating studies. However, the management of lung cancer with CTD is challenging because the pre-existing CTDs have proved to be significant risk factors for treatment-related toxicity, resulting in poor survival. In this review, we summarize the available information related to the treatment for lung cancer with CTD, discuss risk factors for treatment-related toxicities and management recommendations, which attempts to approach lung cancer with comorbid CTD systematically. Preliminary data show that: i) limited studies have focused on the effect of traditional therapeutic modalities, such as surgical treatment and chemotherapy; ii) with the development of the modern radiation techniques, radiotherapy would be well tolerated in this challenging clinical situation, but a cautious decision should be made for patients with CTD associated interstitial lung disease (ILD); iii) for patients with inactive CTD, immunotherapy was shown to have excellent local control with acceptable toxicity; iv) little information is available on the effects of tyrosine kinase inhibitors because of acute exacerbation (AE) of ILD risks; v) antiangiogenic therapy might be useful in preventing the progression in both lung cancer and CTD without increasing the AE-ILD risk; vi) Nintedanib would be a potentially promising novel therapy since it has recently been developed with promising results for both lung cancer and CTD-ILD. Further large-scale, randomized, controlled studies are still required to develop better therapeutic management for patients with lung cancer and pre-existing CTD.

Liver toxicity as a limiting factor to the increasing use of immune checkpoint inhibitors

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) improve clinical outcomes in patients suffering from different types of cancer. Liver toxicity is one of the immune-related adverse events associated with immunotherapy; although not common, its management is challenging as it is extremely heterogeneous in terms of presentation and severity. Differences in the development and evolution of ICI-related toxicity in healthy or cirrhotic livers have not yet been elucidated. Assessing causality is key to diagnosing ICI-induced liver toxicity; liver biopsies can assist not only in the differential diagnosis but also in assessing the severity of histological liver damage. The current classification of severity overestimates the grade of liver injury and needs to be revised to reflect the views of hepatologists. Spontaneous improvements in ICI-related liver toxicity have been reported, so corticosteroid therapy should probably be individualised not systematic. The reintroduction of ICIs in a patient with previous immune-mediated hepatitis may be possible, but the risk/benefit ratio should be considered, as the risk factors for hepatitis recurrence are currently unclear. The management of these patients, requiring a balance between efficacy, toxicity and specific treatments, necessitates multidisciplinary collaboration. The incidence of immune-related liver toxicity will continue to rise based on the increasing use of ICIs for most cancers, mandating improved understanding and management of this complication.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced musculoskeletal manifestations

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) associate with a wide range of immune-related adverse events (Ir-AE), including musculoskeletal manifestations. We aimed at identifying all studies reporting musculoskeletal Ir-AE. An electronic (Medline, Scopus and Web of Science) search was performed using two sets of key words. The first set consisted of: arthritis, musculoskeletal, polymyalgia rheumatica and myositis. The second set consisted of: anti-PD-1, anti-PD-L1, anti-CTLA-4, ipilimumab, tremelimumab, pembrolizumab, nivolumab, atezolizumab, avelumab and durvalumab. We identified 3 prospective studies, 17 retrospective studies and 4 case series reporting 363 patients in total. Combined data from all three prospective studies provide a prevalence rate of 6.13%. Most patients were males (59.68%) and the vast majority (73%) were on programmed death-1 (PD-1)/programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibitors. Most studies report a median time of ≤ 12 weeks from first ICI administration to symptom onset. The main clinical phenotypes reported were: (a) inflammatory arthritis (57.57%), (b) myositis (14.04%) and (c) polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) (12.12%). A total of 256 patients required steroids (70.52%) and 67 patients (18.45%) were treated with DMARDs. Positive auto-antibodies and family history of any autoimmune disease were present in 18.48% and 19.04% of cases, respectively. Only a few patients (19%) had to discontinue treatment due to musculoskeletal Ir-AE. Two prospective studies show that significantly more patients with musculoskeletal Ir-AE exhibit a favorable oncologic response compared to patients not exhibiting such manifestations whereas retrospective studies show that 77.22% of patients with musculoskeletal Ir-AE have a good tumor response. One out of 15 patients treated with ICI will develop musculoskeletal Ir-AE; in most cases the severity of these manifestations is mild/moderate and usually ICI may be continued. Rheumatologists should familiarize with this new clinical entity and develop relevant therapeutic algorithms.

Secondary causes of inflammatory bowel diseases

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), conventionally consist of Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis. They occur in individuals with high risk genotype for the disease in the setting of appropriate environmental factors. The pathogenesis of IBD involves a dysregulated autoimmune response to gut dysbiosis, which in turn is triggered due to exposure to various inciting environmental factors. But there is no clearly defined etiology of IBD and this type of disease is termed as “idiopathic IBD”, “classic IBD”, or “primary IBD”. We reviewed the current medical literature and found that certain etiological factors may be responsible for the development of IBD or IBD-like conditions, and we consider this form of de novo IBD as “secondary IBD”. Currently known factors that are potentially responsible for giving rise to secondary IBD are medications; bowel altering surgeries and transplantation of organs, stem cells or fecal microbiome. Medications associated with the development of secondary IBD include; immunomodulators, anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha agents, anti-interleukin agents, interferons, immune stimulating agents and checkpoint inhibitors. Colectomy can in some cases give rise to de novo CD, pouchitis of the ileal pouch, or postcolectomy enteritis syndrome. After solid organ transplantation or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, the recipient may develop de novo IBD or IBD flare. Fecal microbiota transplantation has been widely used to treat patients suffering from recurrent Clostridium difficile infection but can also causes IBD flares.

Immunotherapy Alone or in Combination with Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the management of metastatic and selected cases of unresectable advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Importantly for patients, this implies that in the absence of a targetable oncogenic driver [especially epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene mutations and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangements] and in the presence of high programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression (≥ 50%), they are eligible for mono-therapy with pembrolizumab thereby avoiding chemotherapy as the first line of treatment. This mono-immunotherapy approach for high PD-L1 metastatic NSCLC is associated with improved overall survival (OS) and radiological responses (RR) with lesser toxicity as compared with conventional platinum doublet chemotherapy for both non-squamous and squamous histological types.However, majority of NSCLC patients either have no or low expression of PD-L1 (< 50%) and such patients derive greater benefit from a combination of PD-1/PD-L1 ICIs with platinum doublet chemotherapy as compared with chemotherapy alone. Again, benefits are seen for both OS and RRs. However, combining immunotherapy with chemotherapy, in general, does lead to higher toxicity than those seen with either of the two alone.Additionally, for non-squamous NSCLC patients, clinicians should not initiate ICI treatment till the results of common targetable genetic alterations like EGFR mutation, ALK, and ROS1 gene rearrangement testing are known (preferably on broad next generation sequencing) and are negative (even if results of PD-L1 testing are available)-as targeted therapies remain the cornerstone of treatment for patients harboring these oncogenic drivers.It is worth mentioning that PD-1 and PD-L1 ICIs are very expensive, and their usage is associated with occurrence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) which occasionally can be severe. Hence, it is important to discuss efficacy, toxicity, and cost-related to ICI treatment with each and every patient at diagnosis in order to help them decide if they are willing to go ahead with this form of therapy either singly (for high PD-L1 expressors) or in combination with chemotherapy (for others).

Untangling the Multidisciplinary Care Web: Streamlining Care Through an Immune-Related Adverse Events (IRAE) Tumor Board

Immune-related adverse events (IRAEs) are becoming increasingly common as the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors expands into more tumor types and treatment settings. Although the majority of IRAEs are mild and can be managed in the outpatient setting by the medical oncologist, severe IRAEs can be life threatening and often require complex care coordination among multiple providers. These providers include a variety of non-oncology specialists who have interest and expertise in managing IRAEs. Multiple systems-based solutions have been proposed in the literature, but these need to be tailored to the needs and resources of each practice setting. In this article, we highlight the challenges of IRAE care by presenting an illustrative case from our institution. We then describe the format and structure of the IRAE Tumor Board established at the University of Washington/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance/Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. Finally, we discuss how this tumor board attempts to address clinical issues related to complex IRAE presentations and provide IRAE education.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors in women with gynecologic cancers: Practical considerations

Immune checkpoint inhibitors are an exciting new class of cancer therapeutics. Recently, a PD-1 inhibitor has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for several indications that are relevant to patients with gynecologic malignancies. In this review, we explore the clinical considerations for the use of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in this population. Specifically, we will discuss the approved indications, recommended dosing, clinical monitoring while on treatment, common adverse events, and treatment of adverse events should they arise. Additionally, we will review mechanisms of resistance and other challenges associated with the use of checkpoint inhibitors. We will conclude with a discussion of possible future directions for immunotherapy in women with gynecologic cancers.

[Clinical management of rheumatic immune-related adverse events : Recognize and treat rheumatological side effects of checkpoint inhibition]

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPi) represent a major breakthrough in the treatment and prognosis of many cancers, particularly of malignant melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer; however, the high tumor response rates with ICPi are also frequently associated with autoimmune side effects, so-called immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which can involve virtually any organ system and mirror classical autoimmune diseases. Recent studies revealed that around 5-20% of patients treated with ICPi experience rheumatic irAEs covering the full spectrum of inflammatory rheumatic diseases. This article summarizes the state of the art of knowledge with respect to diagnostics and management of this newly recognized disease entity in rheumatology.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Mediated Diarrhea and Colitis: A Clinical Review

Immune-mediated diarrhea and colitis (IMDC) is among the most common immune-related adverse events in patients with cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Many factors will affect the risk of IMDC, including the type of ICI used, the type of underlying cancer, and patient characteristics. A recent study showed that preexisting inflammatory bowel disease significantly increases the risk of diarrhea and colitis with ICI treatment. In terms of management, early endoscopic evaluation improves clinical outcome by identifying high-risk patients who will benefit from early add-on immunosuppressants. Inflammatory markers, including fecal lactoferrin and calprotectin, are good screening tools to predict which patients are at risk for colitis. Calprotectin especially is associated with colitis outcome and can be used as a surrogate marker to follow treatment response. Corticosteroids remain the first-line medical treatment of IMDC management, and add-on therapy with vedolizumab or infliximab should be considered in selected patients. Fecal microbiota transplantation may be considered in refractory cases. The decision to resume ICI should be decided by balancing the risk of recurrent IMDC and the likelihood of benefiting from further ICI treatment. There is no clear evidence about whether the use of immunosuppressants will result in a worse cancer outcome. With emerging evidence, our understanding and management strategies are likely to evolve in the future.

Risk of scleroderma according to the type of immune checkpoint inhibitors

INTRODUCTION

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are associated with immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Among them, ICIs-induced systemic sclerosis (SSc) is poorly known.

METHODS

To better characterize this irAE, our comprehensive approach combined the description of ICIs-induced scleroderma cases, the systematic review of the literature and the analysis of VigiBase, the WHO pharmacovigilance database.

RESULTS

We identified two cases with underlying limited cutaneous SSc who presented a dramatic increase in the skin thickening following pembrolizumab, associated with scleroderma renal crisis in one case. In the literature, four cases of scleroderma and four cases of morphea have been reported with pembrolizumab or nivolumab. None following ipilimumab, atezolizumab or durvalumab were retrieved. Skin changes appeared or worsened more quickly with pembrolizumab than nivolumab, and had different patterns between both drugs. Patients with generalized skin changes required high-dose prednisone to improve skin thickening. Among the 2527 scleroderma cases identified in VigiBase, 35 were associated with ICIs. Nivolumab and pembrolizumab showed a disproportionality in scleroderma reporting. No disproportionality was found for ipilimumab, atezolizumab or durvalumab.

CONCLUSION

The risk of scleroderma or fibrosis extension in SSc patients should be considered when initiating anti-PD-1 agents. It suggests the role of PD-1/PD-L1 interaction in the pathophysiology of SSc.

Management of immune-related adverse events associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients: a patient-centred approach

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized cancer treatment. The number of indications is increasing and antibodies targeting the CTLA-4 and PD-1/PD-L1 pathways are now also prescribed in adjuvant settings and for metastatic cancer. However, ICIs reactivate autoreactive immune cells as well as tumour-specific T cells, which lead to immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in around 70% of treated patients. Although all organs can potentially be involved, the skin, gut, thyroid, lungs, liver, and joints are most frequently affected. Most irAEs occur in the first few months of treatment but late-onset toxicity-even after the ICI has been discontinued-is also possible. In terms of severity, most irAEs are grade 1-2. Some irAEs (especially myocarditis, pneumonitis, and encephalitis) are potentially fatal; in patients with highly suggestive clinical signs, treatment should be initiated before the diagnostic work-up has been completed. When confronted with an unexpected clinical sign, the physician must differentiate rapidly between an irAE, cancer progression, and another (unrelated) cause. The management of irAEs is based on the temporary or permanent discontinuation of the ICI and (for grade ≥ 2 events) the administration of steroids.

Efficacy and Toxicity of Immune -Checkpoint Inhibitors in Patients With Preexisting Autoimmune Disorders

Immunotherapy is an important armamentarium for cancer treatment nowadays. Apart from their significant effectiveness in controlling disease they also generate potential severe immune related adverse effects. Preexistence of immune related conditions may eventually predispose to the development of more severe complication and extreme caution have been taken in treating these patients. We performed a literature review searching for case reports and case series in order to offer evidence-based data for clinical management of these patients. Preexisting serological-only immune abnormalities or presence of a predisposing genetic background does not seem to confer significant risk but existing data is scarce. Most patients with preexistent autoimmune diseases can probably treated with checkpoint inhibitors as they seem to have at least the same response rate as the general cancer population. Under treatment, a significant part of them (at least 30%) can experience a flare of their baseline disease which can sometime be severe. Life-threatening cases seems rare and disease flare can be generally managed with steroids. The volume of available data is more important for rheumatologic diseases than for inflammatory bowel diseases were more caution should be observed. However, it has to be kept in mind that new immune related adverse effects (IrAE) are seen with a similar frequency as the flare of the baseline disease. Both flare-up's and newly developed IrAE are generally manageable with a careful clinical follow-up and prompt therapy.

Immune-related adverse events of checkpoint inhibitors

Cancer immunotherapies have changed the landscape of cancer treatment during the past few decades. Among them, immune checkpoint inhibitors, which target PD-1, PD-L1 and CTLA-4, are increasingly used for certain cancers; however, this increased use has resulted in increased reports of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). These irAEs are unique and are different to those of traditional cancer therapies, and typically have a delayed onset and prolonged duration. IrAEs can involve any organ or system. These effects are frequently low grade and are treatable and reversible; however, some adverse effects can be severe and lead to permanent disorders. Management is primarily based on corticosteroids and other immunomodulatory agents, which should be prescribed carefully to reduce the potential of short-term and long-term complications. Thoughtful management of irAEs is important in optimizing quality of life and long-term outcomes.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Related Myositis: From Biology to Bedside

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-related inflammatory diseases, including polymyositis (PM) and dermatomyositis (DM), in patients suffering from neoplastic disorders represent a medical challenge. The treatment of these conditions has taken on new urgency due to the successful and broad development of cancer-directed immunological-based therapeutic strategies. While primary and secondary PM/DM phenotypes have been pathophysiologically characterized, a rational, stepwise approach to the treatment of patients with ICI-related disease is lacking. In the absence of high-quality evidence to guide clinical judgment, the available data must be critically assessed. In this literature review, we examine partially neglected immunological and clinical findings to obtain insights into the biological profiles of ICI-related PM/DM and potential treatment options. We show that differential diagnosis is essential to stratifying patients according to prognosis and therapeutic impact. Finally, we provide a comprehensive assessment of druggable targets and suggest a stepwise patient-oriented approach for the treatment of ICI-related PM/DM.

EULAR points to consider for the diagnosis and management of rheumatic immune-related adverse events due to cancer immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors

Background

Rheumatic and musculoskeletal immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are observed in about 10% of patients with cancer receiving checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs). Given the recent emergence of these events and the lack of guidance for rheumatologists addressing them, a European League Against Rheumatism task force was convened to harmonise expert opinion regarding their identification and management.

Methods

First, the group formulated research questions for a systematic literature review. Then, based on literature and using a consensus procedure, 4 overarching principles and 10 points to consider were developed.

Results

The overarching principles defined the role of rheumatologists in the management of irAEs, highlighting the shared decision-making process between patients, oncologists and rheumatologists. The points to consider inform rheumatologists on the wide spectrum of musculoskeletal irAEs, not fulfilling usual classification criteria of rheumatic diseases, and their differential diagnoses. Early referral and facilitated access to rheumatologist are recommended, to document the target organ inflammation. Regarding therapeutic, three treatment escalations were defined: (1) local/systemic glucocorticoids if symptoms are not controlled by symptomatic treatment, then tapered to the lowest efficient dose, (2) conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, in case of inadequate response to glucocorticoids or for steroid sparing and (3) biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, for severe or refractory irAEs. A warning has been made on severe myositis, a life-threatening situation, requiring high dose of glucocorticoids and close monitoring. For patients with pre-existing rheumatic disease, baseline immunosuppressive regimen should be kept at the lowest efficient dose before starting immunotherapies.

Conclusion

These statements provide guidance on diagnosis and management of rheumatic irAEs and aim to support future international collaborations.

Immunotherapy to treat malignancy in patients with pre-existing autoimmunity

In the past 10 years, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become an additional pillar of cancer therapy by activating the immune system to treat a number of different malignancies. Many patients receiving ICIs develop immune-related adverse events (irAEs) that mimic some features of classical autoimmune diseases. Unfortunately, patients with underlying autoimmune conditions, many of whom have an increased risk for malignancy, have been excluded from clinical trials of ICIs due to a concern that they will have an increased risk of irAEs. Retrospective data from patients with autoimmune diseases and concomitant malignancy treated with ICIs are encouraging and suggest that ICIs may be tolerated safely in patients with specific autoimmune diseases, but there are no prospective data to guide management. In this manuscript, we review the relationship between pre-existing autoimmune disease and irAEs from checkpoint inhibitors. In addition, we assess the likelihood of autoimmune disease exacerbations in patients with pre-existing autoimmunity receiving ICI.

Autoimmune diseases and immune-checkpoint inhibitors for cancer therapy: review of the literature and personalized risk-based prevention strategy

Patients with cancer and with preexisting active autoimmune diseases (ADs) have been excluded from immunotherapy clinical trials because of concerns for high susceptibility to the development of severe adverse events resulting from exacerbation of their preexisting ADs. However, a growing body of evidence indicates that immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) may be safe and effective in this patient population. However, baseline corticosteroids and other nonselective immunosuppressants appear to negatively impact drug efficacy, whereas retrospective and case report data suggest that use of specific immunosuppressants may not have the same consequences. Therefore, we propose here a two-step strategy. First, to lower the risk of compromising ICI efficacy before their initiation, nonselective immunosuppressants could be replaced by specific selective immunosuppressant drugs following a short rotation phase. Subsequently, combining ICI with the selective immunosuppressant could prevent exacerbation of the AD. For the most common active ADs encountered in the context of cancer, we propose specific algorithms to optimize ICI therapy. These preventive strategies go beyond current practices and recommendations, and should be practiced in ICI-specialized clinics, as these require multidisciplinary teams with extensive knowledge in the field of clinical immunology and oncology. In addition, we challenge the exclusion from ICI therapy for patients with cancer and active ADs and propose the implementation of an international registry to study such novel strategies in a prospective fashion.

Recognition and management of the gastrointestinal and hepatic immune-related adverse events

Immunotherapy is revolutionizing the treatment paradigm for a broad spectrum of malignancies. However, the immune checkpoint inhibitors also cause a unique set of toxicities. In the digestive system, this has consisted for the most part as colitis and hepatotoxicity, but also include less-common manifestations. Baseline screening, early identification, timely diagnosis, rapid and adequate treatment can significantly minimize the toxicity of immunotherapy and improve prognosis. This article provides a comprehensive review of gastrointestinal and hepatic immune-related toxicities, including incidence, mechanism, clinical manifestation, diagnosis, treatment, and guidelines for resumption of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

Possibilities of Improving the Clinical Value of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapies in Cancer Care by Optimizing Patient Selection

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapies have become the most important medical therapies in many malignancies, such as melanoma, non-small-cell lung cancer, and urogenital cancers. However, due to generally low response rates of PD-(L)1 monotherapy, both PD-(L)1 combination therapies and novel therapeutics are under large-scale clinical evaluation. Thus far, clinical trials have rather suboptimally defined the patient population most likely to benefit from ICI therapy, and there is an unmet need for negative predictive markers aiming to reduce the number of non-responding patients in clinical practice. Furthermore, there is a strong need for basic tumor immunology research and innovative clinical trials to fully unleash the potential of ICI combinations for the benefit of patients.

Immune checkpoint: The novel target for antitumor therapy

Inhibitory checkpoint molecules include programmed cell death-1 (PD-1), programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1), cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4), human endogenous retrovirus-H Long terminal repeat-associating 2 (HHLA2), B7 homolog 4 protein (B7-H4), T cell membrane protein-3 (TIM-3) and Lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3), which are up-regulated during tumorigenesis. These pathways are essential to down-regulate the immune system by blocking the activation of T cells. In recent years, immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) against PD-1, PD-L1, CTLA-4 or TIM-3 has made remarkable progress in the clinical application, revolutionizing the treatment of malignant tumors and improving patients' overall survival. However, the efficacy of ICBs in some patients does not seem to be good enough, and more immune-related adverse events (irAEs) will inevitably occur. Therefore, biomarkers research provides practical guidance for clinicians to identify patients who are most likely to benefit from or exhibit resistance to particular types of immune checkpoint therapy. There are two points in general. On the one hand, given the spatial and temporal differential expression of immune checkpoint molecules during immunosuppression process, it is essential to understand their mechanisms to design the most effective individualized therapy. On the other hand, due to the lack of potent immune checkpoints, it is necessary to combine them with novel biomarkers (such as exosomes and ctDNA) and other anticancer modalities (such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy).

Combining Immune Checkpoint and VEGFR Inhibition in Favorable Risk and Elderly Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors are the most commonly used medications in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Recently, large clinical trials have shown favorable outcomes in patients treated with combined immune checkpoint plus VEGFR inhibition compared with VEGFR inhibition alone. However, the benefit among favorable risk (based on International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium score) and elderly (age > 65 years) patients was not clear, leading to a discrepancy between United States Food and Drug Administration and European Association of Urology recommendations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched available literature for phase III randomized clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of combining immunotherapy plus VEGF/VEGFR inhibitors versus standard of care in patients with previously untreated mRCC. Combinations that were included in United States Food and Drug Administration recommendations or European Association of Urology guidelines were used for analysis. We performed a meta-analysis with a random effects model to evaluate the efficacy of immunotherapy-VEGFR inhibitor combinations compared with sunitinib in favorable risk and elderly patients.

RESULTS

Our analysis demonstrated that progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly prolonged with combination therapy compared with sunitinib in patients with age > 65 years (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.84; P = .001). The PFS in favorable risk disease was improved with combination therapy compared with sunitinib, but the difference was not statistically significant (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-1.01; P = .055).

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis strengthens the trend of beneficial effect in prolonging PFS in both subgroups compared with each trial alone, indicating that favorable risk and elderly patients with mRCC likely benefit from combining programmed cell death 1 or programmed cell death-ligand 1 and VEGFR inhibition.

Immunopathogenesis of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Related Adverse Events: Roles of the Intestinal Microbiome and Th17 Cells

The advent of novel, innovative, and effective anti-cancer immunotherapies has engendered an era of renewed optimism among cancer specialists and their patients. Foremost among these successful immunotherapies are monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) which target immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) molecules, most prominently cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein (CTLA-4) and programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) and its major ligand, PD-L1. These immunotherapeutic agents are, however, often associated with the occurrence of immune-mediated toxicities known as immune-related adverse events (IRAEs). The incidence of severe toxicities increases substantially when these agents are used together, particularly with CTLA-4 in combination with PD-1 or PD-L1 antagonists. Accordingly, dissociating the beneficial anti-tumor therapeutic activity of these agents from the emergence of IRAEs represents a significant challenge to attaining the optimum efficacy of ICI-targeted immunotherapy of cancer. This situation is compounded by an increasing awareness, possibly unsurprising, that both the beneficial and harmful effects of ICI-targeted therapies appear to result from an over-reactive immune system. Nevertheless, this challenge may not be insurmountable. This contention is based on acquisition of recent insights into the role of the gut microbiome and its products as determinants of the efficacy of ICI-targeted immunotherapy, as well as an increasing realization of the enigmatic involvement of Th17 cells in both anti-tumor activity and the pathogenesis of some types of IRAEs. Evidence linking the beneficial and harmful activities of ICI-targeted immunotherapy, recent mechanistic insights focusing on the gut microbiome and Th17 cells, as well as strategies to attenuate IRAEs in the setting of retention of therapeutic activity, therefore represent the major thrusts of this review.