COVID-19 and Cancer: Special Considerations for Patients Receiving Immunotherapy and Immunosuppressive Cancer Therapies

Patient perspectives on cancer care during COVID-19: A qualitative study

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic posed unique challenges to cancer-related care as health systems balanced competing risks of timely delivery of care and minimizing exposure to infection in a high-risk, immunocompromised patient population. This study aimed to better understand how pandemic-related factors affected the patient experience of cancer care during this time.

METHODS

We conducted fifteen semi-structured interviews with adults from rural counties in Maryland who were diagnosed with and/or actively treated for cancer at the TidalHealth healthcare network between January 2020 and October 2022.

RESULTS

Interviews from fifteen participants were analyzed. Two major themes emerged including COVID Impact on Care, and COVID Impact on Mental Health. Subthemes under COVID Impact on Care include Staffing Shortages, Hospital Regulations, Visitation, Importance of Advocacy, and Telehealth Utilization, and subthemes under COVID Impact on Mental Health include Loneliness, Support Networks, and Perceptions of COVID and Personal Protection. Overall, participants described positive care experiences despite notable delays, disruptions to continuity of care, difficult transitions to telemedicine, visitation policies that limited patient support, increased mental health struggles related to social distancing measures, and greater desire for patient advocacy.

CONCLUSION

Our findings reveal significant impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on experiences of cancer treatment and survivorship in a more vulnerable, rural patient population with lower healthcare access and income level. Our findings suggest areas for targeted interventions to limit disruptions to quality care in future public health emergencies.

Current Technologies and Future Perspectives in Immunotherapy towards a Clinical Oncology Approach

Immunotherapy is now established as a potent therapeutic paradigm engendering antitumor immune response against a wide range of malignancies and other diseases by modulating the immune system either through the stimulation or suppression of immune components such as CD4+ T cells, CD8+ T cells, B cells, monocytes, macrophages, dendritic cells, and natural killer cells. By targeting several immune checkpoint inhibitors or blockers (e.g., PD-1, PD-L1, PD-L2, CTLA-4, LAG3, and TIM-3) expressed on the surface of immune cells, several monoclonal antibodies and polyclonal antibodies have been developed and already translated clinically. In addition, natural killer cell-based, dendritic cell-based, and CAR T cell therapies have been also shown to be promising and effective immunotherapeutic approaches. In particular, CAR T cell therapy has benefited from advancements in CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing technology, allowing the generation of several modified CAR T cells with enhanced antitumor immunity. However, the emerging SARS-CoV-2 infection could hijack a patient's immune system by releasing pro-inflammatory interleukins and cytokines such as IL-1β, IL-2, IL-6, and IL-10, and IFN-γ and TNF-α, respectively, which can further promote neutrophil extravasation and the vasodilation of blood vessels. Despite the significant development of advanced immunotherapeutic technologies, after a certain period of treatment, cancer relapses due to the development of resistance to immunotherapy. Resistance may be primary (where tumor cells do not respond to the treatment), or secondary or acquired immune resistance (where tumor cells develop resistance gradually to ICIs therapy). In this context, this review aims to address the existing immunotherapeutic technologies against cancer and the resistance mechanisms against immunotherapeutic drugs, and explain the impact of COVID-19 on cancer treatment. In addition, we will discuss what will be the future implementation of these strategies against cancer drug resistance. Finally, we will emphasize the practical steps to lay the groundwork for enlightened policy for intervention and resource allocation to care for cancer patients.

Teclistamab impairs humoral immunity in patients with heavily pretreated myeloma: importance of immunoglobulin supplementation

ABSTRACT

Teclistamab and other B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-targeting bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) have substantial activity in patients with heavily pretreated multiple myeloma (MM) but are associated with a high rate of infections. BCMA is also expressed on normal plasma cells and mature B cells, which are essential for the generation of a humoral immune response. The aim of this study was to improve the understanding of the impact of BCMA-targeting BsAbs on humoral immunity. The impact of teclistamab on polyclonal immunoglobulins and B cell counts was evaluated in patients with MM who received once-weekly teclistamab 1.5 mg/kg subcutaneously. Vaccination responses were assessed in a subset of patients. Teclistamabinduced rapid depletion of peripheral blood B cells in patients with MM and eliminated normal plasma cells in ex vivo assays. In addition, teclistamab reduced the levels of polyclonal immunoglobulins (immunoglobulin G [IgG], IgA, IgE, and IgM), without recovery over time while receiving teclistamab therapy. Furthermore, response to vaccines against Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae type B, and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 was severely impaired in patients treated with teclistamab compared with vaccination responses observed in patients with newly diagnosed MM or relapsed/refractory MM. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) use was associated with a significantly lower risk of serious infections among patients treated with teclistamab (cumulative incidence of infections at 6 months: 5.3% with IVIG vs 54.8% with observation only [P < .001]). In conclusion, our data show severe defects in humoral immunity induced by teclistamab, the impact of which can be mitigated by the use of immunoglobulin supplementation. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT04557098.

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and the Multi-Hit Hypothesis of Oncogenesis

Cancer is a complex and dynamic disease. The "hallmarks of cancer" were proposed by Hanahan and Weinberg (2000) as a group of biological competencies that human cells attain as they progress from normalcy to neoplastic transformation. These competencies include self-sufficiency in proliferative signaling, insensitivity to growth-suppressive signals and immune surveillance, the ability to evade cell death, enabling replicative immortality, reprogramming energy metabolism, inducing angiogenesis, and activating tissue invasion and metastasis. Underlying these competencies are genome instability, which expedites their acquisition, and inflammation, which fosters their function(s). Additionally, cancer exhibits another dimension of complexity: a heterogeneous repertoire of infiltrating and resident host cells, secreted factors, and extracellular matrix, known as the tumor microenvironment, that through a dynamic and reciprocal relationship with cancer cells supports immortality, local invasion, and metastatic dissemination. This staggering intricacy calls for caution when advising all people with cancer (or a previous history of cancer) to receive the COVID-19 primary vaccine series plus additional booster doses. Moreover, because these patients were not included in the pivotal clinical trials, considerable uncertainty remains regarding vaccine efficacy, safety, and the risk of interactions with anticancer therapies, which could reduce the value and innocuity of either medical treatment. After reviewing the available literature, we are particularly concerned that certain COVID-19 vaccines may generate a pro-tumorigenic milieu (i.e., a specific environment that could lead to neoplastic transformation) that predisposes some (stable) oncologic patients and survivors to cancer progression, recurrence, and/or metastasis. This hypothesis is based on biological plausibility and fulfillment of the multi-hit hypothesis of oncogenesis (i.e., induction of lymphopenia and inflammation, downregulation of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) expression, activation of oncogenic cascades, sequestration of tumor suppressor proteins, dysregulation of the RNA-G quadruplex-protein binding system, alteration of type I interferon responses, unsilencing of retrotransposable elements, etc.) together with growing evidence and safety reports filed to Vaccine Adverse Effects Report System (VAERS) suggesting that some cancer patients experienced disease exacerbation or recurrence following COVID-19 vaccination. In light of the above and because some of these concerns (i.e., alteration of oncogenic pathways, promotion of inflammatory cascades, and dysregulation of the renin-angiotensin system) also apply to cancer patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, we encourage the scientific and medical community to urgently evaluate the impact of both COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination on cancer biology and tumor registries, adjusting public health recommendations accordingly.

Influence of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccine Booster among Cancer Patients on Active Treatment Previously Immunized with Inactivated versus mRNA Vaccines: A Prospective Cohort Study

Cancer patients on chemotherapy have a lower immune response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Therefore, through a prospective cohort study of patients with solid tumors receiving chemotherapy, we aimed to determine the immunogenicity of an mRNA vaccine booster (BNT162b2) among patients previously immunized with an inactivated (CoronaVac) or homologous (BNT162b2) SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody (NAb) seropositivity at 8-12 weeks post-booster. The secondary end points included IgG antibody (TAb) seropositivity and specific T-cell responses. A total of 109 patients were included. Eighty-four (77%) had heterologous vaccine schedules (two doses of CoronaVac followed by the BNT162b2 booster) and twenty-five had (23%) homologous vaccine schedules (three doses of BNT162b2). IgG antibody positivity for the homologous and heterologous regimen were 100% and 96% (p = 0.338), whereas NAb positivity reached 100% and 92% (p = 0.13), respectively. Absolute NAb positivity and Tab levels were associated with the homologous schedule (with a beta coefficient of 0.26 with p = 0.027 and a geometric mean ratio 1.41 with p = 0.044, respectively). Both the homologous and heterologous vaccine regimens elicited a strong humoral and cellular response after the BNT162b2 booster. The homologous regimen was associated with higher NAb positivity and Tab levels after adjusting for relevant covariates.

Severe COVID-19: Drugs and Clinical Trials

By January of 2023, the COVID-19 pandemic had led to a reported total of 6,700,883 deaths and 662,631,114 cases worldwide. To date, there have been no effective therapies or standardized treatment schemes for this disease; therefore, the search for effective prophylactic and therapeutic strategies is a primary goal that must be addressed. This review aims to provide an analysis of the most efficient and promising therapies and drugs for the prevention and treatment of severe COVID-19, comparing their degree of success, scope, and limitations, with the aim of providing support to health professionals in choosing the best pharmacological approach. An investigation of the most promising and effective treatments against COVID-19 that are currently available was carried out by employing search terms including "Convalescent plasma therapy in COVID-19" or "Viral polymerase inhibitors" and "COVID-19" in the Clinicaltrials.gov and PubMed databases. From the current perspective and with the information available from the various clinical trials assessing the efficacy of different therapeutic options, we conclude that it is necessary to standardize certain variables-such as the viral clearance time, biomarkers associated with severity, hospital stay, requirement of invasive mechanical ventilation, and mortality rate-in order to facilitate verification of the efficacy of such treatments and to better assess the repeatability of the most effective and promising results.

Lung Adenocarcinoma Size Decrease after SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination during Long-Term Pembrolizumab Treatment: A Case Report

A man in his late 40s was diagnosed with clinical stage 4B lung adenocarcinoma with a PD-L1 tumor proportion score of 100% and high tumor mutational burden. A partial response was achieved after administration of pembrolizumab. The patient received two doses of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (BNT162b2) after 59 courses, and a chest computed tomography revealed consolidation in the peri-tumoral area, which subsequently disappeared, and the tumor continued to shrink in the next 4 months. This case provides indirect evidence for the persistence of cancer immunity during long-term treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors and the potential for further activation.

Fatal Outcome of COVID-19 Relapse in a Fully Vaccinated Patient with Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Receiving Maintenance Therapy with the Anti-CD20 Monoclonal Antibody Obinutuzumab: A Case Report

Few data are available regarding the effectiveness of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in immunocompromised patients. Vaccination may have a suboptimal efficacy in this population, in particular if patients are exposed to anti-B-cell therapy. We report the virological and clinical characteristics of a patient with follicle center lymphoma under bimonthly maintenance therapy with obinutuzumab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody. Despite three doses of BNT162b2 vaccine, the patient was infected by the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. After an initial period of clinical and molecular remission due to early therapy with sotrovimab, the patient experienced a fatal relapse sustained by the same viral strain.