Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Rechallenge Safety and Efficacy in Stage IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients After Immune-Related Adverse Events

Safety, efficacy, and survival outcomes of immune checkpoint inhibitors rechallenge in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUNDS

There is little evidence on the safety, efficacy, and survival benefit of restarting immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in patients with cancer after discontinuation due to immune-related adverse events (irAEs) or progressive disease (PD). Here, we performed a meta-analysis to elucidate the possible benefits of ICI rechallenge in patients with cancer.

METHODS

Systematic searches were conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. The objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and incidence of irAEs were the outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies involving 2026 patients were analyzed. ICI rechallenge was associated with a lower incidence of all-grade (OR, 0.05; 95%CI, 0.02-0.13, P < .05) and high-grade irAEs (OR, 0.37; 95%CI, 0.21-0.64, P < .05) when compared with initial ICI treatment. Though no significant difference was observed between rechallenge and initial treatment regarding ORR (OR, 0.69; 95%CI, 0.39-1.20, P = .29) and DCR (OR, 0.85; 95%CI, 0.51-1.40, P = 0.52), patients receiving rechallenge had improved PFS (HR, 0.56; 95%CI, 0.43-0.73, P < .05) and OS (HR, 0.55; 95%CI, 0.43-0.72, P < .05) than those who discontinued ICI therapy permanently. Subgroup analysis revealed that for patients who stopped initial ICI treatment because of irAEs, rechallenge showed similar safety and efficacy with initial treatment, while for patients who discontinued ICI treatment due to PD, rechallenge caused a significant increase in the incidence of high-grade irAEs (OR, 4.97; 95%CI, 1.98-12.5, P < .05) and a decrease in ORR (OR, 0.48; 95%CI, 0.24-0.95, P < .05).

CONCLUSION

ICI rechallenge is generally an active and feasible strategy that is associated with relative safety, similar efficacy, and improved survival outcomes. Rechallenge should be considered individually with circumspection, and randomized controlled trials are required to confirm these findings.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors rechallenge in non-small cell lung cancer: Current evidence and future directions

Immunotherapy, remarkably immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), has significantly altered the treatment landscape for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Despite their success, the discontinuation of ICIs therapy may occur due to factors such as prior treatment completion, disease progression during ICIs treatment, or immune-related adverse events (irAEs). As numerous studies highlight the dynamic nature of immune responses and the sustained benefits of ICIs, ICIs rechallenge has become an attractive and feasible option. However, the decision-making process for ICIs rechallenge in clinical settings is complicated by numerous uncertainties. This review systematically analyses existing clinical research evidence, classifying ICIs rechallenge into distinct clinical scenarios, exploring methods to overcome ICIs resistance in rechallenge instances, and identifying biomarkers to select patients likely to benefit from rechallenge. By integrating recent studies and new technologies, we offer crucial recommendations for future clinical trial design and provide a practical guideline to maximize the therapeutic benefits of immunotherapy for NSCLC patients.

Safety and Efficacy of Rechallenge With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Advanced Solid Tumor: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have drastically shifted the current landscape toward a wide variety of malignancies. However, ICIs are interrupted owing immune-related adverse events (irAEs), therapy completion, and disease progression. The risk-benefit of rechallenged ICIs remains inconclusive. Herein, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ICI rechallenge in the treatment of advanced solid tumor.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched to analyze the efficacy and safety of ICI rechallenge. The study protocol was approved by the PROSPERO International Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022372222). The last updated search date was March 2, 2024. Objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and incidence rates of all- and high-grade irAEs were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 41 retrospective studies comprising 2343 patients were ultimately enrolled for qualitative and quantitative assessments. A total of 1200 (51.2%) individuals were male and the median age was 66 years (range 18-97 years). The majority of the tumors was lung cancer (n = 898, 38.3%). The occurrence rates of all-grade and high-grade (grade 3 or 4) irAEs between initial and readministration ICIs were not significantly different (all-grade: OR, 0.75, 95% CI: 0.39-1.45, p = 0.40; I2 = 87%; high-grade: OR, 0.96, 95% CI: 0.62-1.49, p = 0.87, I2 = 65%). ICIs restart presented a decreased ORR and DCR compared to initial ICI administration (ORR: OR, 0.36, 95% CI: 0.23-0.56, p < 0.00001; I2 = 67%; DCR: OR, 0.62, 95% CI: 0.43-0.89, p = 0.010; I2 = 53%). Seven studies with 513 patients for survival analysis revealed a nonsignificant difference in OS between the ICIs rechallenge and discontinuation cohorts (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.35 to 1.35, p = 0.27).

CONCLUSION

Rechallenging immunotherapy is feasible, and patients should be carefully evaluated by a multidisciplinary team prior to initial therapy for close monitoring and assessment of the risk-benefit ratio. Therefore, prospective trials are essential to guide clinicians in the decision-making process. PROSPERO Registration: CRD42022372222.

The correlation between immune-related adverse events and efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized cancer treatment by targeting the cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 and programmed death-1/ligand-1. Although immune checkpoint inhibitors show promising therapeutic efficacy, they often cause immune-related adverse events. Immune-related adverse events differ from the side effects of conventional chemotherapy and require vigilant monitoring. These events predominantly affect organs, such as the colon, liver, lungs, pituitary gland, thyroid and skin, with rare cases affecting the heart, nervous system and other tissues. As immune-related adverse events result from immune activation, indicating the reinvigoration of exhausted immune cells that attack both tumors and normal tissues, it is theoretically possible that immune-related adverse events may signal a better response to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Recent retrospective studies have explored the link between immune-related adverse event development and clinical efficacy; however, the predictive value of immune-related adverse events in the immune checkpoint inhibitor response remains unclear. Additionally, studies have focused on immune-related adverse events, timing of onset and immunosuppressive treatments. This review focuses on pivotal studies of the association between immune-related adverse events and outcomes in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Safety and efficacy of restarting immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer patients following immune-related adverse events: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of restarting immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after experiencing immune-related adverse events (irAEs).

METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify studies investigating the safety and efficacy of restarting ICIs in NSCLC patients after irAEs. Outcome measures, including objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) after ICI restarting, were extracted. Meta-analysis was performed using the R meta-package.

RESULTS

Four studies involving a total of 326 subjects were included, comprising 137 patients who restarted ICI treatment after irAEs and 189 patients who did not restart ICI treatment. The results revealed that ICI restarting was associated with an increased ORR (OR = 2.36, 95% CI 1.49-3.84), prolonged PFS (HR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.42-0.86), and prolonged OS (HR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.43-0.99) compared to non-restarting. The incidence of irAEs after ICI restarting was 45% (95% CI 0.27-0.63).

CONCLUSION

Restarting ICI treatment after discontinuation due to previous irAEs appears to be a reasonable option for NSCLC patients. However, a comprehensive assessment of the potential benefits and risks to individual patients is crucial, and close monitoring of irAEs is warranted.

Diagnosis, management, and outcomes of immune checkpoint inhibitor induced acute interstitial nephritis: A single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-associated acute interstitial nephritis (AIN) is a recognized complication of immunotherapy (IO), but literature on its management and outcomes is limited.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients who received ICIs and developed biopsy-proven or clinically-suspected ICI-associated AIN at the University of Virginia Comprehensive Cancer Center from 2012-2023. We analyzed baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes, including treatment interruption and rechallenge rates. Acute kidney injury (AKI) was defined as a ≥ 1.5-fold increase in baseline creatinine under seven days, a two-fold increase above the upper limit of normal, or an increase by ≥0.3 mg/dL. Kidney function returning to within 0.3 mg/dL or less than twice baseline was considered complete (CRc) and partial (PRc) recovery, respectively.

RESULTS

We identified 12 cases of ICI-AIN: four by biopsy (33%) and eight (67%) by clinical suspicion. Two patients received anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD1, six received anti-PD1 alone, and four received chemo-immunotherapy. The majority (58%) of patients developed AIN within the first 5 cycles. Eight patients developed ≥ Grade 3 AKI, and six developed multiple irAEs. ICI was permanently discontinued in seven patients (58%) and temporarily interrupted in four (30%). The CRc and PRc rates were 67% and 8%, respectively. Upon AIN onset, the best disease response was stable disease in five patients, partial response in three, and progressive disease in three. Median overall survival was 4.87 years, and progression-free survival was 1.5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Rechallenge with IO after kidney irAE may be possible in some patients but requires careful evaluation on an individual basis.

Retreatment with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in the New Scenario of Immunotherapy in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

The advent of immunotherapy has transformed the treatment paradigm for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In the past few years, several studies have investigated the potential role of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in resectable and unresectable locally advanced disease, achieving remarkable results that led to their approval in clinical practice. However, there is limited evidence on immunotherapy rechallenge after recurrence, with the majority of available knowledge coming from retrospective studies which involve heavily pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC. The recent introduction in the curative setting and the potential regulatory restrictions raise questions about the optimal choice of first-line and subsequent therapies for patients with systemic relapse. The role of immunotherapy readministration in this new scenario needs to be clarified, as well as the identification of patients for whom it is more appropriate, including clinical characteristics, duration of response, switching to other ICIs, reasons for discontinuation and immune-related toxicity. Here, we review literature on rechallenge with immunotherapy, including efficacy, safety profile and potential predictive factors of response.

Clinical characteristics and novel strategies of immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge therapy for non-small cell lung cancer: a comprehensive review

Treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has entered the immunotherapy era, marked by significant survival improvements due to the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, owing to factors, such as disease progression, long-term use, and side effects, some patients discontinue immunotherapy, resulting in limited subsequent treatment option and a negative impact on their survival and quality of life. We have collected relevant data which reveal that ICI rechallenge may be an effective clinical strategy. However, many factors affect the efficacy of rechallenge, including patient characteristics, initial treatment drugs, treatment duration, efficacy, toxicity, and side effects. Additionally, the side effects of rechallenge and mechanisms of reversing drug resistance play crucial roles. Identifying suitable candidates, optimizing treatment plans and duration, enhancing treatment efficacy, and minimizing toxicity and adverse effects in rechallenges are pressing clinical needs. Addressing these issues can provide guidance for the clinical use of immunotherapy rechallenges to better serve patients. This review focuses on the clinical considerations and strategies for immune therapy rechallenges in NSCLC.

Immune-Related Adverse Events and Survival Among Patients With Metastatic NSCLC Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Importance

Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) secondary to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy reportedly improve overall survival (OS) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, studies have been small and the association between irAE severity and OS remains poorly defined.

Objective

To examine the association between irAEs and their severity with OS in patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC receiving ICIs.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective observational cohort study included patients with NSCLC receiving ICIs between March 1, 2014, and November 30, 2021, with follow-up until March 31, 2023. Data analysis was completed April 26, 2023. The Alberta Immunotherapy Database, a provincial, multicenter cohort, was used to capture data from patients receiving ICIs in Alberta, Canada. Participants included 803 patients 18 years or older who received at least 1 cycle of ICI (alone or with chemotherapy), agnostic to treatment line.

Exposure

Developing an irAE mandating delay or discontinuation of ICI therapy and/or systematic corticosteroids for management of toxic effects (hereinafter referred to as clinically meaningful irAEs).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was association between irAEs and OS according to Kaplan-Meier analysis. Clinically meaningful irAEs were identified. Patients with poor prognosis (survival <3 months) who may have died prior to irAE development were excluded from OS analysis, mitigating immortal time bias. Adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression analyses ascertained variables associated with OS.

Results

Among the 803 patients included in the analysis, the median age of patients with irAEs was 69.7 (IQR, 63.1-75.2) years and the median age of those without irAEs was 67.5 (IQR, 60.4-73.3) years, with comparable sex distribution (139 of 295 men [47.1%] and 156 of 295 women [52.9%] with irAEs vs 254 of 505 men [50.3%] and 251 of 505 women [49.7%] without irAEs). Mitigating immortal time bias (n = 611), irAEs were associated with OS (median OS with irAEs, 23.7 [95% CI, 19.3-29.1] months; median OS without irAEs, 9.8 [95% CI, 8.7-11.4] months; P < .001). No OS difference was associated with treatment in hospital vs as outpatients for an irAE (median OS, 20.8 [95% CI, 11.7-30.6] vs 25.6 [95% CI, 20.1-29.8] months; P = .33). Developing irAEs remained associated with OS in the total cohort after Cox proportional hazards regression with known prognostic characteristics (hazard ratio, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.40-0.70]; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of 803 patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC receiving ICIs, developing a clinically meaningful irAE was associated with improved OS. This association was not compromised by hospitalization for severe toxic effects. Whether and how ICI therapy resumption after an irAE is associated with OS warrants further study.

Efficacy of rechallenge immunotherapy after immune monotherapy resistance in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

Drug resistance inevitably occurs despite the encouraging results of immunotherapy. This study attempted to investigate immunotherapy rechallenge treatment regimens and factors associated with outcomes in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) according to resistance status.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on patients with advanced NSCLC who received immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) monotherapy and immune rechallenge between March 2016 and December 2022. Primary resistance (RR) was defined by an absence of response after treatment administered for less than 6 months before progression. Acquired resistance (AR) was defined as a response to immunotherapy treatment administered for more than 6 months before progression. Disease progression in as many as three lesions was defined as systemic progression, whereas disease progression in fewer than three lesions was defined as oligo-progression.

RESULTS

Of 40 patients, 18 (45%) had primary resistance, and 22 (55%) developed AR. Overall survival (OS) was not reached. A significant difference in progression-free survival (PFS) was observed in individuals rechallenged with ICIs after AR and RR (7.0 months vs. 2.1 months, P = 0.003). Patients receiving interval treatment before rechallenge achieved longer PFS than those who did not (6.2 months vs. 4.0 months, P = 0.027). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that systemic progression was a risk factor significantly associated with PFS after ICI rechallenge (P = 0.006). After AR, ICI rechallenge prolonged the duration of PFS if patients developed oligo-progression (5.4 months vs. 1.1 months, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

ICI rechallenge is likely to be an option for patients with oligo-progression during rechallenge, particularly after AR.

Different associations between organ-specific immune-related adverse event and survival in non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with programmed death-1 inhibitors-based combination therapy

Background

The profile of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) due to programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors-based combination therapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and its relationship with survival have not been fully described.

Objective

Designed to capture the spectrum of irAEs and explore the association between irAEs and clinical outcomes in patients with NSCLC.

Design

This retrospective single-center study included patients with advanced NSCLC treated with PD-1 inhibitors (mainly in combination with chemotherapy) at Jiangsu Cancer Hospital.

Methods

The relationship between irAEs and survival was explored using landmark analysis and time-dependent Cox regression. The subgroup analyses focused on investigating the effects of organ-specific irAE, irAE grade, and steroid dose used to treat irAE.

Results

This study included 301 patients, 199 of whom received PD-1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy. The most common irAEs were skin toxicity (19.3%), endocrinopathy (21.3%), and pneumonitis (17.6%). In the entire cohort, the median progression-free survival (PFS) for patients developing and not developing irAE was 12.3 and 10.7 months (p < 0.001), and the median overall survival (OS) was 23.5 months and 20.1 months (p = 0.137), respectively. Subgroup analyses indicated that grade 3 or higher irAE, high steroid dose, and immune-related pneumonitis were detrimental to OS, whereas skin toxicity was beneficial to survival. These findings were further corroborated by both landmark analyses and Cox regression models conducted over four time points (1, 3, 6, and 12 months).

Conclusion

In the real world, NSCLC patients receiving PD-1 inhibitor-based combination therapy (particularly combined with chemotherapy) experience longer PFS with irAE, though not necessarily OS. Immune-related skin toxicity is associated with a better prognosis, whereas pneumonitis grade ⩾3 irAE and high steroid dose compromise survival. Clinicians should remain cognizant of the organ-specific manifestations of irAE and take proactive measures to mitigate the progression of irAE.

Re-immunotherapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients previously treated with anti-programmed death-1 and/or anti-programmed death ligand-1 antibodies

BACKGROUND

The role of re-immunotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains unclear. No studies have evaluated the re-immunotherapy regimen including anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 antibody for lung cancer treatment. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of re-immunotherapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced NSCLC previously treated with anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1) and/or anti-programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) antibodies.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients with advanced or recurrent NSCLC who received immunotherapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab (without concomitant cytotoxic chemotherapy) between November 2020 and November 2022 at the National Hospital Organization Kyoto Medical Center, Kyoto, Japan. Data were extracted from patients who had previously received immunotherapies with anti-PD-1 and/or anti-PD-L1 antibodies. Treatment responses and adverse events were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 67 patients who received immunotherapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, 23 were included in final analysis. The objective response rate was 17%, and the disease control rate was 48% for nivolumab plus ipilimumab therapy. The highest grade of immune-related adverse events was grade 3, occurring in 11% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Re-immunotherapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab after anti-PD-1 and/or anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy may be feasible and provide clinical benefit in selected patients. Further prospective studies are warranted to identify the patient population that may benefit from re-immunotherapy.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors: maximizing benefit whilst minimizing toxicity

INTRODUCTION

The advent of immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of cancer; anti-tumor efficacy has been observed with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in ~20 different cancer types with durable responses in some cases. However, the risk of toxicity in the form of immune-related adverse events (irAE) partially counterbalances these benefits, and there are no FDA-approved biomarkers to categorize patients by likelihood of response or risk of irAEs.

AREAS COVERED

We conducted a thorough review of the literature of clinical studies regarding ICI and their toxicities. In this review, we synthesize the current body of literature about ICI treatment and irAE by summarizing the classes and uses of ICI, how to identify patients at risk for irAE, present the current understanding of irAE development, describe ongoing research into biomarkers of irAE, examine opportunities for irAE prevention, described management of steroid refractory irAE, and highlight future directions for development of prevention and management strategies.

EXPERT OPINION

While ongoing biomarker studies are promising, it is unlikely that there will be a 'one-size-fits-all' approach to categorizing irAE risk. In contrast, improved management and irAE prophylaxis are potentially in reach, and ongoing trials will help elucidate best practices.