Effect of Systemic Steroid Use for Immune-Related Adverse Events in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Receiving PD-1 Blockade Drugs

Immunologic Profiling of Immune-Related Cutaneous Adverse Events with Checkpoint Inhibitors Reveals Polarized Actionable Pathways

PURPOSE

Immune-related cutaneous adverse events (ircAE) occur in ≥50% of patients treated with checkpoint inhibitors, but the underlying mechanisms for ircAEs are poorly understood.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Phenotyping/biomarker analyses were conducted in 200 patients on checkpoint inhibitors [139 with ircAEs and 61 without (control group)] to characterize their clinical presentation and immunologic endotypes. Cytokines were evaluated in skin biopsies, skin tape strip extracts, and plasma using real-time PCR and Meso Scale Discovery multiplex cytokine assays.

RESULTS

Eight ircAE phenotypes were identified: pruritus (26%), maculopapular rash (MPR; 21%), eczema (19%), lichenoid (11%), urticaria (8%), psoriasiform (6%), vitiligo (5%), and bullous dermatitis (4%). All phenotypes showed skin lymphocyte and eosinophil infiltrates. Skin biopsy PCR revealed the highest increase in IFNγ mRNA in patients with lichenoid (P < 0.0001) and psoriasiform dermatitis (P < 0.01) as compared with patients without ircAEs, whereas the highest IL13 mRNA levels were detected in patients with eczema (P < 0.0001, compared with control). IL17A mRNA was selectively increased in psoriasiform (P < 0.001), lichenoid (P < 0.0001), bullous dermatitis (P < 0.05), and MPR (P < 0.001) compared with control. Distinct cytokine profiles were confirmed in skin tape strip and plasma. Analysis determined increased skin/plasma IL4 cytokine in pruritus, skin IL13 in eczema, plasma IL5 and IL31 in eczema and urticaria, and mixed-cytokine pathways in MPR. Broad inhibition via corticosteroids or type 2 cytokine-targeted inhibition resulted in clinical benefit in these ircAEs. In contrast, significant skin upregulation of type 1/type 17 pathways was found in psoriasiform, lichenoid, bullous dermatitis, and type 1 activation in vitiligo.

CONCLUSIONS

Distinct immunologic ircAE endotypes suggest actionable targets for precision medicine-based interventions.

Survival Impact of Glucocorticoid Administration for Adverse Events During Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Combination Therapy in Patients with Previously Untreated Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The impact of glucocorticoid administration for adverse events (AEs), including immune-related AEs, on the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combination therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To clarify the prognostic impact of glucocorticoid use for AEs during first-line ICI combination therapy for advanced RCC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated data from 194 patients who received dual ICI combination therapy [i.e., immunotherapy (IO)-IO] or combinations of ICIs with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) as first-line therapy. The patients were divided into two groups according to the history of glucocorticoid administration in each treatment group. Survival based on glucocorticoid administration was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 101 (52.0%) and 93 (48.0%) patients received IO-IO and IO-TKI combination therapy, respectively. Glucocorticoids were administered to 46 (46%) and 22 (24%) patients in the IO-IO and IO-TKI groups, respectively. In the IO-IO group, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly longer in patients with glucocorticoid administration than in those without administration (median PFS: 14.4 versus 3.45 months, p = 0.0005; median OS: 77.6 versus 33.9 months, p = 0.0025). Multivariable analysis showed that glucocorticoid administration was an independent predictor of longer PFS (hazard ratio: 0.43, p = 0.0005) and OS (hazard ratio: 0.35, p = 0.0067) after adjustment for covariates. In the IO-TKI group, neither PFS nor OS significantly differed between patients treated with and without glucocorticoid administration (PFS: p = 0.0872, OS: p = 0.216).

CONCLUSIONS

Glucocorticoid administration did not negatively impact the effectiveness of ICI combination therapy for RCC, prompting glucocorticoid treatment use when AEs develop.

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.

Outcomes of Budesonide as a Treatment Option for Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Related Colitis in Patients with Cancer

BACKGROUND

Current treatment guidelines for moderate to severe colitis (IMC) secondary to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) recommend systemic corticosteroids as the primary therapy in conjunction with biologics, namely infliximab and/or vedolizumab. We aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of oral budesonide in the treatment of IMC.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis at MD Anderson Cancer Center of adult cancer patients with a confirmed (based on clinical, radiographic and laboratory assessment) diagnosis of IMC between 1 January 2015 and 31 November 2022, treated with budesonide. Data collection included demographics, oncologic history, IMC-related information and outcomes up to 6 months after the last dose of ICI.

RESULTS

Our sample (n = 69) comprised primarily of Caucasian (76.8%) females (55.1%). The majority of patients received combination therapy with anti-PD-1/L1 and anti-CTLA-4 (49.3%), and the most common malignancy treated was melanoma (37.6%). The median grade of diarrhea was 3 and of colitis was 2. Of the 50 patients who underwent endoscopic evaluation, a majority had non-ulcerative inflammation (64%) and active colitis on histology (78%). Budesonide was used as primary treatment at onset of IMC in 56.5% patients, as well as a bridging therapy from systemic corticosteroids in 33.3%. Less than half of the patients (44.9%) required additional therapies such as biologics or fecal microbiota transplant. Additionally, 75.3% of patients achieved full remission of IMC and 24.6% had a recurrence of IMC. ICI was resumed in 31.9% of patients and 17.4% received other forms of cancer therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Budesonide may be an effective strategy to treat and prevent the recurrence of IMC. The remission rates observed in our analysis with budesonide alone are comparable to systemic corticosteroids. Patients that require an extended duration of steroid exposure and those with moderate to severe colitis may benefit from budesonide given its lower risk of infection and complications. Furthermore, we observe that budesonide may serve as a successful bridge from systemic corticosteroids with subsequent biologic treatment. Larger prospective studies are necessary to determine the role of budesonide as well as its safety profile.

Immune-related adverse events after immune checkpoint inhibitor exposure in adult cancer patients with pre-existing autoimmune diseases

PURPOSE

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy can predispose patients to immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and autoimmune disease (AD) flare-ups, but the characteristics of irAEs among patients with pre-existing ADs are largely unknown. We conducted this study to determine the clinical courses, irAEs, AD flares, treatment, and outcomes of patients with AD on ICIs.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of adult cancer patients at a large cancer center who were diagnosed with ADs before undergoing ICI therapy. Patients' clinical courses, complications, treatments, and outcomes related to both ADs flares and irAEs were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

The study included 197 patients. Most (55.4%) were women. Melanoma comprised the highest proportion (28.4%) of malignancies, and most (83.8%) patients received PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Fifty (25.3%) patients developed a new irAE after starting ICI therapy, while 29 (14.7%) patients had an AD flare-up. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease had the highest incidence of AD flare-ups (31.7%), while patients with Hashimoto hypothyroidism had the highest incidence of new irAEs (39.2%). Patients with inflammatory bowel disease had more severe adverse events. In our cohort, patients with a new diagnosis of irAE were treated with immunosuppressive therapy. AD flares were managed similarly. With regard to irAE manifestations, the most common presentations were colitis (24 [12.1%] patients), hepatic transaminase elevations (8 [4%] patients), and pneumonitis (7 [3.5%] patients).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that patients with gastrointestinal and rheumatologic ADs had a higher incidence of AD flare-ups, while patients with Hashimoto hypothyroidism and neurologic ADs had a higher incidence of new irAEs. Patients with prior ADs experiencing flare-ups or new irAEs after ICI therapy tend to require aggressive immunosuppressive treatment. Thorough evaluation of baseline disease status, appropriate medical management before ICI therapy, and early recognition of inflammatory exacerbation may help ensure long-term success in treating and improving outcomes in these patients.

Immunosuppression for immune-related adverse events during checkpoint inhibition: an intricate balance

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have changed perspectives for patients with cancer, but come with severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs). To prevent fatality or chronicity, these irAEs are often promptly treated with high-dose immunosuppressants. Until recently, evidence on the effects of irAE management on ICI efficacy has been sparse. As a result, algorithms for irAE management are mostly expert-opinion based and barely consider possible detrimental effects of immunosuppressants on ICI efficacy. However, recent growing evidence suggests that vigorous immunosuppressive management of irAEs comes with unfavourable effects on ICI efficacy and survival. With expansion of the indications of ICIs, evidence-based treatment of irAEs without hampering tumour control becomes more and more important. In this review, we discuss novel evidence from pre-clinical and clinical studies on the effects of different irAE management regimens including corticosteroids, TNF inhibition and tocilizumab on cancer control and survival. We provide recommendations for pre-clinical research, cohort studies and clinical trials that can help clinicians in tailored irAE management, minimising patients' burden while maintaining ICI efficacy.

The Feasibility, Acceptability, and Effectiveness of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Symptom Monitoring for Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Toxicities: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

Increasing use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in routine cancer care will increase the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Systems are needed to support remote monitoring for irAEs. Electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) symptom monitoring systems can help monitor and manage symptoms and side effects. We assessed the content and features of ePRO symptom monitoring systems for irAEs, and their feasibility, acceptability, and impact on patient outcomes and health care utilization.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in May 2022 on MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Quantitative and qualitative data relevant to the review questions were extracted and synthesized in tables.

RESULTS

Seven papers describing five ePRO systems were included. All systems collected PROs between clinic visits. Two of five used validated symptom questionnaires, 3/5 provided prompts to complete questionnaires, 4/5 provided reminders to self-report, and 3/5 provided clinician alerts for severe/worsening side effects. Four of five provided coverage of ≥26/30 irAEs in the ASCO irAE guideline. Feasibility and acceptability were demonstrated with consent rates of 54%-100%, 17%-27% of questionnaires generating alerts, and adherence rates of 74%-75%. One paper showed a reduction in grade 3-4 irAEs, treatment discontinuation, clinic visit duration, and emergency department presentations, while another showed no difference in these outcomes or the rate of steroid use.

CONCLUSION

There is preliminary evidence of the feasibility and acceptability of ePRO symptom monitoring for irAEs. However, further studies are needed to confirm the impact on ICI-specific outcomes, such as the frequency of grade 3-4 irAEs and duration of immunosuppression. Suggestions for the content and features of future ePRO systems for irAEs are provided.

Pancreatic adverse events in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors

Background and Aim

The inhibition of cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) and programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) has been a target for multiple drugs to enhance the T-cell antitumor activity. However, these immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) come with a panel of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) that include mainly endocrine, skin, and gastrointestinal effects. We report seven cases of pancreatic irAEs in patients treated with ICIs at our institute.

Methods

This is a case series; data was collected through chart review by 3 different data collectors and was analyzed separately by 2 physicians.

Results

Of these seven cases, two had diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), while five had pancreatitis diagnosed by a substantial rise in serum lipase. Pancreatitis was asymptomatic in two cases. A pancreatic biopsy in one case revealed type 2 autoimmune pancreatitis. The ICIs used included pembrolizumab, nivolumab, durvalumab, and avelumab. Treatment included steroids and holding the ICI therapy: three cases had complete resolution of pancreatitis while two cases required either a prolonged taper or a second course of prednisone for recurrence of pancreatitis. On the other hand, the DKA cases were treated with withdrawal of the ICI and starting insulin with no steroid therapy.

Conclusions

Pancreatitis and DKA are rare adverse events of ICIs that can be controlled by holding the ICI with or without starting steroids. Rechallenging the patient with the same ICI is possible in selected cases.

Evolving Management of Stage IV Melanoma

Significant advancements have been made in the treatment of advanced melanoma with the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors, novel immunotherapies, and BRAF/MEK-targeted therapies with numerous frontline treatment options. However, there remains suboptimal evidence to guide treatment decisions in many patients. These include patients with newly diagnosed disease, immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-resistant/ICI-refractory disease, CNS metastases, history of autoimmune disease, and/or immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Uveal melanoma (UM) is a rare melanoma associated with a poor prognosis in the metastatic setting. Systemic treatments, including checkpoint inhibitors, failed to demonstrate any survival benefit. Tebentafusp, a bispecific molecule, is the first treatment to improve overall survival (OS) in patients with HLA A*02:01-positive metastatic UM.

Association between Adverse Events and Prognosis in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between adverse events (AEs) and overall survival (OS) in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (atezo/beva). This was a multicenter study in which 130 patients were enrolled. Hypertension and skin disorders had a significant correlation with longer survival (median survival time (MST): not reached vs. 14.3 months and not reached vs. 14.8 months, p = 0.001 and p = 0.047, respectively). In contrast, liver injuries were significantly correlated with shorter survival (MST: 14.7 months vs. not reached, p = 0.036), and the median development time was 21 days. In a logistic regression analysis, fatigue ≥ grade 2, liver injury ≥ grade 3, and modified albumin–bilirubin grade 2b were identified as independent factors for discontinuation due to AEs. The OS in the no discontinuation due to AE group was significantly longer than that in the discontinuation due to AEs group (MST not reached vs. 11.2 months, p = 0.001). We concluded that the development of liver injury was a negative factor for OS and that we should be vigilant in monitoring AE during atezo/beva treatments.

Mesalamine and cholestyramine for immune checkpoint inhibitor-mediated diarrhea and colitis

PURPOSE

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are effective against various malignancies. However, adverse events including diarrhea and colitis can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. Recommendations for the management of ICI mediated diarrhea and colitis include steroids and biologics. Given their associated risks, this study evaluated the role of the non-immunosuppressive agents, mesalamine and or cholestyramine.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, descriptive, single-center study of adults who developed ICI diarrhea and colitis between 2010 and 2020 at MD Anderson Cancer Center. Clinical data and outcomes were compared between those treated with the non-immunosuppressive therapies mesalamine and/or cholestyramine alone versus those who received additional immunosuppression with steroids and biologics.

RESULTS

Our sample comprised 66 patients wherein, the mean age was 63 years, 71% were males, and 97% had stage III/IV cancers. Fourteen patients were treated successfully with non-immunosuppressive therapy. They had grade 1-3 diarrhea and 1-2 colitis with no difference in the rate of histologic colitis compared to those who received immunosuppressive therapy. They had less CTLA-4 inhibitor-based therapy (36% vs. 73%, p = 0.034), delayed onset of symptoms (159 vs. 64 days, p = 0.011), lower fecal calprotectin levels (56 vs. 234, p = 0.012) and were more likely to resume ICI therapy (64% vs. 25%, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Mesalamine and/or cholestyramine may be effective for mild ICI diarrhea and colitis among patients with delayed symptom onset with lower colonic inflammatory burden. Prospective studies randomizing patients with mild colitis between mesalamine/cholestyramine and immunosuppressive treatment are warranted to assess their efficacy and safety.

The role of kidney biopsy in immune checkpoint inhibitor nephrotoxicity

Immune checkpoint inhibitors, medications that boost host immune response to tumor cells, are now at the forefront of anti-cancer therapy. While efficacious in the treatment of patients with advanced cancer, immune checkpoint inhibitors can lead to serious autoimmune side effects involving any organ in the body. Immune checkpoint inhibitor nephrotoxicity is an increasingly recognized cause of acute kidney injury in patients with cancer. This review discusses the clinical and histopathologic diagnosis of immune checkpoint inhibitor nephrotoxicity, highlighting the need for more reliable non-invasive diagnostic testing. We focus on the controversy surrounding the role of kidney biopsy in diagnosis and management of suspected immune checkpoint inhibitor toxicity with inclination toward pursuing kidney biopsy in certain outlined circumstances. Finally, we briefly discuss treatment of immune checkpoint inhibitor nephrotoxicity and the decision to re-challenge immunotherapy in patients who experience these adverse events.