Hypersensitivity reactions and anaphylaxis to checkpoint inhibitor-monoclonal antibodies and desensitization

Immune Reactions in Major Types of Oncological Treatment

In recent years, there has been a noticeable development in oncological treatment, including chemotherapy and biological treatment. Despite their significant effectiveness, they are not free from side effects, such as allergic and dermatological reactions. These reactions can vary in severity and outcome, including potential death. Examples, among others, are type I-IV hypersensitivity reactions of various origins and skin reactions including rashes, itching and redness, but also severe cutaneous syndromes. Due to the therapy used, these may include Stevens-Johnson syndrome, toxic epidermal necrolysis, drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms, drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome and acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis. In some cases, it is necessary to interrupt therapy, which may result in a poorer outcome and shorten the patient's survival. This paper reviews various types of research documents published since 2016. It aims to systematize the latest knowledge and highlight the need for further research into ways to avoid adverse reactions.

Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to antineoplastic agents - A practical guide for the oncologist

Immediate hypersensitivity reactions (IHRs) to antineoplastic agents occur frequently, and every oncologist will encounter these reactions in their clinical practice at some point. The clinical signature of IHRs can range from mild to life-threatening, and their occurrence can substantially impede the treatment course of patients with cancer. Yet, clear guidelines regarding the diagnosis and management are scarce, especially from an oncologic point of view. Therefore, herein, we review the definition, pathophysiology, epidemiology, diagnosis and management of IHRs to chemotherapeutic agents and monoclonal antibodies. First, we focus on defining the specific entities that comprise IHRs and discuss their underlying mechanisms. Then, we summarize the epidemiology for the antineoplastic agents that represent the most common causes of IHRs, i.e., platinum compounds, taxanes and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). Next, we describe the possible clinical pictures and the comprehensive diagnostic work-up that should be executed to identify the culprit and safe alternatives for the future. Finally, we finish with reviewing the treatment options in both the acute phase and after recovery, with the aim to improve the oncologic care of patients with cancer.

Utilizing Biologics in Drug Desensitization

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this literature review was to review the latest advancements with biologics in rapid drug desensitization. Our methodology was to highlight both desensitization to biologics themselves and the use of biologics in desensitization to both biologic and nonbiologic drugs.

RECENT FINDINGS

Biologics are a vast category of drugs that include monoclonal antibodies, nanobodies, modern vaccinations, and even hormones. Desensitization to biologics can be safely performed through standardized procedure. Biomarkers are used both in vitro and in vivo to help identify and classify hypersensitivity reactions. Hypersensitivity reactions to the mRNA vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 present their own unique challenges to management. There are specific excipients in monoclonal antibodies that are thought to be responsible for many of their hypersensitivity reactions. Certain biologics can even be used to assist in desensitization to other drugs. Rapid drug desensitization is a standardized procedure that may be able to help many patients who have experienced hypersensitivity reactions to biologics and would best be treated with them to continue to receive them. Biologic drugs have opened a new era in medicine for the prevention and treatment of infectious diseases, cancer, and inflammatory diseases. Hypersensitivity reactions to biologics are quite common. This literature review presents the latest advancements in our understanding of hypersensitivity reactions to biologics, how rapid drug desensitization can be used to continue therapy despite history of hypersensitivity, and how biologics themselves can be used to aid in desensitization itself.

Tumor-associated neutrophils and macrophages exacerbate antidrug IgG-mediated anaphylactic reaction against an immune checkpoint inhibitor

BACKGROUND

With the increased use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), side effects and toxicity are a great concern. Anaphylaxis has been identified as a potential adverse event induced by ICIs. Anaphylaxis is a life-threatening medical emergency. However, the mechanisms and factors that can potentially influence the incidence and severity of anaphylaxis in patients with cancer remain unclear.

METHODS

Healthy, murine colon 26, CT26, breast 4T1, EMT6, and renal RENCA tumor-bearing mice were treated with an anti-PD-L1 antibody (clone 10F.9G2). Symptoms of anaphylaxis were evaluated along with body temperature and mortality. The amounts of antidrug antibody and platelet-activating factor (PAF) in the blood were quantified via ELISA and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Immune cells were analyzed and isolated using a flow cytometer and magnetic-activated cell sorting, respectively.

RESULTS

Repeated administration of the anti-PD-L1 antibody 10F.9G2 to tumor-bearing mice caused fatal anaphylaxis, depending on the type of tumor model. After administration, antidrug immunoglobulin G (IgG), but not IgE antibodies, were produced, and PAF was released as a chemical mediator during anaphylaxis, indicating that anaphylaxis was caused by an IgG-dependent pathway. Anaphylaxis induced by 10F.9G2 was treated with a PAF receptor antagonist. We identified that neutrophils and macrophages were PAF-producing effector cells during anaphylaxis, and the tumor-bearing models with increased numbers of neutrophils and macrophages showed lethal anaphylaxis after treatment with 10F.9G2. Depletion of both neutrophils and macrophages using clodronate liposomes prevented anaphylaxis in tumor-bearing mice.

CONCLUSIONS

Thus, increased numbers of neutrophils and macrophages associated with cancer progression may be risk factors for anaphylaxis. These findings may provide useful insights into the mechanism of anaphylaxis following the administration of immune checkpoint inhibitors in human subjects.

Airway disorders associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy: Two case reports and a systematic review

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are widely used for the treatment of various malignant neoplasms. Interstitial lung disease is a well-known immune-related adverse event, however, ICI-induced airway disease remains under-recognized. Herein, we report two similar cases of pembrolizumab-induced tracheobronchitis presenting as persistent chronic cough and dyspnea. Blood tests revealed elevated C-reactive protein levels without eosinophilia. Spirometry demonstrated mild airflow obstruction. Computed tomography revealed diffuse thickening of the tracheobronchial walls and bronchiectasis predominantly in the lower lobes. Bronchoscopy revealed edematous and erythematous tracheobronchial mucosa, and bronchial biopsy tissue exhibited marked inflammation with predominant infiltration of CD8+ lymphocytes. Subsequently, pembrolizumab-induced tracheobronchitis was diagnosed in both cases. Cessation of pembrolizumab and initiation of erythromycin, inhaled corticosteroids, and long-acting beta-agonists gradually improved the symptoms, airflow obstruction, and radiographic findings. These were completely resolved in one case. The other case initially showed a poor response to systemic corticosteroids combined with the aforementioned drugs, but improved gradually and almost completely. These cases exemplify ICI-induced airway disease that is, an under-recognized manifestation of immune-related adverse events. In addition, we have systematically searched the PubMed database for articles on ICI-induced airway disease, categorized the retrieved articles as eosinophilic and non-eosinophilic airway diseases, and reviewed the differences in treatment and prognoses between these two categories.

A review on targeting tumor microenvironment: The main paradigm shift in the mAb-based immunotherapy of solid tumors

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) as biological macromolecules have been remarked the large and growing pipline of the pharmaceutical market and also the most promising tool in modern medicine for cancer therapy. These therapeutic entities, which consist of whole mAbs, armed mAbs (i.e., antibody-toxin conjugates, antibody-drug conjugates, and antibody-radionuclide conjugates), and antibody fragments, mostly target tumor cells. However, due to intrinsic heterogeneity of cancer diseases, tumor cells targeting mAb have been encountered with difficulties in their unpredictable efficacy as well as variability in remission and durable clinical benefits among cancer patients. To address these pitfalls, the area has undergone two major evolutions with the intent of minimizing anti-drug responses and addressing limitations experienced with tumor cell-targeted therapies. As a novel hallmark of cancer, the tumor microenvironment (TME) is becoming the great importance of attention to develop innovative strategies based on therapeutic mAbs. Here, we underscore innovative strategies targeting TME by mAbs which destroy tumor cells indirectly through targeting vasculature system (e.g., anti-angiogenesis), immune system modulation (i.e., stimulation, suppression, and depletion), the targeting and blocking of stroma-based growth signals (e.g., cancer-associated fibroblasts), and targeting cancer stem cells, as well as, their effector mechanisms, clinical uses, and relevant mechanisms of resistance.