Explore the vast range of titles available.

Understanding co-occurrence patterns and prognostic implications of immune-related adverse events is crucial for immunotherapy management. However, previous studies have been limited by sample size and generalisability. In this study, we leveraged a multi-institutional cohort and a population-level database to investigate co-occurrence patterns of and survival outcomes after multi-organ immune-related adverse events among recipients of immune checkpoint inhibitors. In this retrospective study, we identified individuals who received immune checkpoint inhibitors between May 31, 2015, and June 29, 2022, from the Massachusetts General Hospital, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (Boston, MA, USA; MGBD cohort), and between April 30, 2010, and Oct 11, 2021, from the independent US population-based TriNetX network. We identified recipients from all datasets using medication codes and names of seven common immune checkpoint inhibitors, and patients were excluded from our analysis if they had incomplete information (eg, diagnosis and medication records) or if they initiated immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy after Oct 11, 2021. Eligible patients from the MGBD cohort were then propensity score matched with recipients of immune checkpoint inhibitors from the TriNetX database (1:2) based on demographic, cancer, and immune checkpoint inhibitor characteristics to facilitate cohort comparability. We applied immune-related adverse event identification rules to identify patients who did and did not have immune-related adverse events in the matched cohorts. To reduce the likelihood of false positives, patients diagnosed with suspected immune-related adverse events within 3 months after chemotherapy were excluded. We performed pairwise correlation analyses, non-negative matrix factorisation, and hierarchical clustering to identify co-occurrence patterns in the MGBD cohort. We conducted landmark overall survival analyses for patient clusters based on predominant immune-related adverse event factors and calculated accompanying hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs, focusing on the 6-month landmark time for primary analyses. We validated our findings using the TriNetX cohort. We identified 15 246 recipients of immune checkpoint inhibitors from MGBD and 50 503 from TriNetX, of whom 13 086 from MGBD and 26 172 from TriNetX were included in our propensity score-matched cohort. Median follow-up durations were 317 days (IQR 113–712) in patients from MGBD and 249 days (91–616) in patients from TriNetX. After applying immune-related adverse event identification rules, 8704 recipients of immune checkpoint inhibitors were retained from MGBD, of whom 3284 (37·7%) had and 5420 (62·3%) did not have immune-related adverse events, and 18 162 recipients were retained from TriNetX, of whom 5538 (30·5%) had and 12 624 (69·5%) did not have immune-related adverse events. In both cohorts, positive pairwise correlations of immune-related adverse events were commonly observed. Co-occurring immune-related adverse events were decomposed into seven factors across organs, revealing seven distinct patient clusters (endocrine, cutaneous, respiratory, gastrointestinal, hepatic, musculoskeletal, and neurological). In the MGBD cohort, the patient clusters that predominantly had endocrine (HR 0·53 [95% CI 0·40–0·70], p<0·0001) and cutaneous (0·61 [0·46–0·81], p=0·0007) immune-related adverse events had favourable overall survival outcomes at the 6-month landmark timepoint, while the other clusters either had unfavourable (respiratory: 1·60 [1·25–2·03], p=0·0001) or neutral survival outcomes (gastrointestinal: 0·86 [0·67–1·10], p=0·23; musculoskeletal: 0·97 [0·78–1·21], p=0·78; hepatic: 1·20 [0·91–1·59], p=0·19; and neurological: 1·30 [0·97–1·74], p=0·074). Similar results were found in the TriNetX cohort (endocrine: HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·60–0·93], p=0·0078; cutaneous: 0·62 [0·48–0·82], p=0·0007; respiratory: 1·21 [1·00–1·46], p=0·044), except for the neurological cluster having unfavourable (rather than neutral) survival outcomes (1·30 [1·06–1·59], p=0·013). Reliably identifying the immune-related adverse event cluster to which a patient belongs can provide valuable clinical information for prognosticating outcomes of immunotherapy. These insights can be leveraged to counsel patients on the clinical impact of their individual constellation of immune-related adverse events and ultimately develop more personalised surveillance and mitigation strategies. US National Institutes of Health.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have now been approved in numerous and diverse cancer types and combination regimens. Effective recognition and treatment of ICI toxicities, which might occur acutely, affect any organ system, and produce many distinct clinical syndromes, have emerged as essential goals of ICI management. Thus, developing robust diagnostic and management approaches for ICI toxicity across the health-care system is an urgent and unmet clinical need. In this Personal View, we describe barriers to high-quality care that have constrained the most effective management of patients with cancer receiving ICI treatment. We review education initiatives to enhance patient and physician awareness, which is necessary given the broad spectrum of ICI toxicities often experienced by patients, and assess various systems-based approaches that maximise the chances of appropriate management. In addition, we describe research pipelines that broaden evidence-based approaches and the pathobiology of these novel events. Developing effective, systematic approaches for the recognition and treatment of ICI toxicities will continue to grow in importance as these agents proliferate in cancer care.

BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have improved survival and are increasingly used for non-small cell lung cancer. However, use may be limited by immune-related adverse events such as checkpoint-inhibitor pneumonitis (CIP). Literature estimates for CIP incidence are inconsistent. Real-world adherence to guidelines, clinical course, and healthcare utilization in the treatment of CIP has not been described in large cohorts.MethodsA combined claims and electronic health record database (TriNetX) was used to identify 13,113 patients with lung cancer treated with programmed cell death receptor/ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitors, and a propensity score-matched control cohort treated with chemotherapy or targeted therapies. The attributable risk of CIP was calculated in the first 12 months after therapy by comparing the incidence of diagnosis codes for pneumonitis/pneumonia between cohorts. Cases of CIP, identified by the most specific code for drug-induced respiratory conditions, were further analyzed for medication usage, rates of diagnostic bronchoscopy, ICI discontinuation rates, and usage of hospital services compared with patients receiving PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors who did not develop CIP.ResultsThe attributable risk of pneumonitis to PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors was 2.49% (95% CI, 1.50% to 3.47%). Median time to onset in the CIP subcohort was 3.9 months (IQR, 2.1–7.3 months). Steroid and antibiotic use increased dramatically after a pneumonitis diagnosis, and 70.2% of patients permanently discontinued ICI therapy. Compared with controls, patients with CIP had more than a threefold increased risk of needing critical care (relative risk 3.59, 95% CI, 2.31 to 5.57) and an increased risk of mortality (HR 2.34, 95% CI, 1.47 to 3.71).ConclusionsIn a large claims-based analysis, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors increase the risk of pneumonitis in patients with lung cancer by 2.49%. Cases of CIP are associated with high healthcare utilization, discontinuation of ICIs, and mortality.

BackgroundImmune-related adverse events (irAEs) are a serious side effect of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy for patients with advanced cancer. Currently, predisposing risk factors are undefined but understanding which patients are at increased risk for irAEs severe enough to require hospitalization would be beneficial to tailor treatment selection and monitoring.MethodsWe performed a retrospective review of patients with cancer treated with ICIs using unidentifiable claims data from an Aetna nationwide US health insurance database from January 3, 2011 to December 31, 2019, including patients with an identified primary cancer and at least one administration of an ICI. Regression analyses were performed. Main outcomes were incidence of and factors associated with irAE requiring hospitalization in ICI therapy.ResultsThere were 68.8 million patients identified in the national database, and 14 378 patients with cancer identified with at least 1 administration of ICI in the study period. Patients were followed over 19 117 patient years and 504 (3.5%) developed an irAE requiring hospitalization. The incidence of irAEs requiring hospitalization per patient ICI treatment year was 2.6%, rising from 0% (0/71) in 2011 to 3.7% (93/2486) in 2016. Combination immunotherapy (OR: 2.44, p<0.001) was associated with increased odds of developing irAEs requiring hospitalization, whereas older patients (OR 0.98 per additional year, p<0.001) and those with non-lung cancer were associated with decreased odds of irAEs requiring hospitalization (melanoma OR: 0.70, p=0.01, renal cell carcinoma OR: 0.71, p=0.03, other cancers OR: 0.50, p<0.001). Sex, region, zip-code-imputed income, and zip-code unemployment were not associated with incidence of irAE requiring hospitalization. Prednisone (72%) and methylprednisolone (25%) were the most common immunosuppressive treatments identified in irAE hospitalizations.ConclusionsWe found that 3.5% of patients initiating ICI therapy experienced irAEs requiring hospitalization and immunosuppression. The odds of irAEs requiring hospitalization were higher with younger age, treatment with combination ICI therapy (cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated 4 and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) or programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)), and lower for other cancers compared with patients on PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors with lung cancer. This evidence from the first nationwide study of irAEs requiring hospitalization in the USA identified the real-world epidemiology, risk factors, and treatment patterns of these irAEs which may guide treatment and management decisions.

AbstractCOVID-19 infections are characterized by inflammation of the lungs and other organs that ranges from mild and asymptomatic to fulminant and fatal. Patients who are immunocompromised and those with cardiopulmonary comorbidities appear to be particularly afflicted by this illness. During pandemic conditions, many aspects of cancer care have been impacted. One important clinical question is how to manage patients who need anticancer therapy, including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) during these conditions. Herein, we consider diagnostic and therapeutic implications of using ICI during this unprecedented period of COVID-19 infections. In particular, we consider the impact of ICI on COVID-19 severity, decisions surrounding continuing or interrupting therapy, diagnostic measures in patients with symptoms or manifestations potentially consistent with either COVID-19 or ICI toxicity, and resumption of therapy in infected patients. While more robust data are needed to guide clinicians on management of patients with cancer who may be affected by COVID-19, we hope this commentary provides useful insights for the clinical community.

Since the first approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in 2011, these agents have rapidly become an integral treatment option across tumor types. However, with the increased adoption of ICIs, the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) continues to rise, and rare toxicity continues to be reported. Here, we present a case of a 70-year-old male patient with widespread metastatic melanoma who developed rapid onset anasarca and transaminitis after initiation of dual anti-PD-1/CTLA-4 inhibition with nivolumab and ipilimumab. An extensive workup was performed with serologies returning positive for anti-tissue transglutaminase immunoglobulin (tTG-IgA) and endoscopy revealing duodenal mucosal atrophy with duodenal biopsies confirming celiac disease. All symptoms resolved after initiation of a gluten-free diet without the addition of immunosuppression. This case highlights the importance of considering celiac disease in patients with suspected protein-losing enteropathy on ICI, the fulminant nature this uncommon irAE can present with, and underscores the broad differential clinicians must maintain when managing presumed irAEs.

BackgroundDupilumab has been added to National Cancer Comprehensive Network guidelines as a therapeutic strategy for managing certain cutaneous immune-related adverse events (cirAEs) from immune checkpoint blockade (ICB). However, little is known about the implications of dupilumab for cancer outcomes in this population. In this multi-institutional study, we evaluate the impact of dupilumab treatment on survival among ICB recipients.MethodsWe conducted a multi-institutional retrospective cohort study of ICB recipients from the Mass General Brigham Healthcare System and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. The dupilumab group was compared with two control groups who did not receive dupilumab: with and without cirAEs (control groups 1 and 2, respectively) that were 1:2 matched on sex, race, age at ICB initiation, Charlson Comorbidity Score, year of ICB initiation, and ICB type. Manual chart review was performed to obtain cirAE characteristics, systemic glucocorticoid use, dupilumab treatment, vital status, and last contact date. Time-varying multivariable Cox proportional hazards regressions were used to evaluate the impact of dupilumab on overall survival, adjusted for sex, race, age at ICB initiation, ICB type, Charlson Comorbidity Index score, cancer type, cancer stage at ICB initiation, and systemic glucocorticoid use.ResultsA total of 53 cirAE patients treated with dupilumab were compared with two control groups of 106 patients each. Most patients receiving dupilumab demonstrated either complete or partial resolution of their cirAE (88.7%). In multivariable modeling, the overall survival of the dupilumab group was not significantly different from control group 1 (HR=0.74, 95% CI: 0.35 to 1.60, p=0.5) or control group 2 (HR=0.70, 95% CI: 0.32 to 1.51, p=0.4). However, the use of systemic glucocorticoids within 2 years after ICB initiation was associated with poorer overall survival when comparing the dupilumab group to control group 1 (HR=2.03, 95% CI: 1.04 to 3.96, p=0.039) and control group 2 (HR=2.21, 95% CI: 1.25 to 3.91, p=0.006).ConclusionsThis study suggests that dupilumab is an effective therapy for recalcitrant cirAEs and does not adversely impact mortality. Due to the observed detrimental effects of systemic glucocorticoid therapy, this study suggests the need to shift away from systemic glucocorticoid immunosuppression and toward targeted immune modulators for irAE management, though prospective randomized trials are necessary to investigate this.

With an increasing number of patients eligible for immune checkpoint inhibitors, the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) is on the rise. Dermatologic immune-related adverse events (D-irAEs) are the most common and earliest to manifest, often with important downstream consequences for the patient. Current guidelines lack clarity in terms of diagnostic criteria for D-irAEs. The goal of this project is to better define D-irAE for the purposes of identification, diagnosis, and future study of this important group of diseases.The objectives of this project were to develop consensus guidance for an approach to D-irAEs including disease definitions and severity grading. Knowing that consensus among oncologists, dermatologists, and irAE subspecialists would be critical for usability, we formed a Dermatologic irAE Disease Definition Panel. The panel was composed of 34 experts, including oncologists, dermatologists, a rheumatologist, and an allergist/immunologist from 22 institutions across the USA and internationally. A modified Delphi consensus process was used, with two rounds of anonymous ratings by panelists and two virtual meetings to discuss areas of controversy. Panelists rated content for usability, appropriateness, and accuracy on 9-point scales in electronic surveys and provided free text comments. A working group aggregated survey responses and incorporated them into revised definitions. Consensus was based on numeric ratings using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method with prespecified definitions.Following revisions based on panelist feedback, all items received consensus in the second round of ratings. Consensus definitions were achieved for 10 core D-irAE diagnoses: ICI-vitiligo, ICI-lichen planus, ICI-psoriasis, ICI-exanthem, ICI-bullous pemphigoid, ICI-Grover’s, ICI-eczematous, ICI-eruptive atypical squamous proliferation, ICI-pruritus without rash, and ICI-erosive mucocutaneous. A standard evaluation for D-irAE was also found to reach consensus, with disease-specific exceptions detailed when necessary. Each disorder’s description includes further details on disease subtypes, symptoms, supportive exam findings, and three levels of diagnostic certainty (definite, probable, and possible).These consensus-driven disease definitions standardize D-irAE classification in a useable framework for multiple disciplines and will be the foundation for future work. Given consensus on their accuracy and usability from a representative panel group, we anticipate that they can be used broadly across clinical and research settings.

BackgroundNon-invasive biomarkers of immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated acute tubulointerstitial nephritis (ICI-nephritis) are urgently needed. Because ICIs block immune checkpoint pathways that include cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA4), we hypothesized that biomarkers of immune dysregulationpreviously defined in patients with congenital CTLA4 deficiency, including elevated soluble interleukin-2 receptor alpha (sIL-2R) and flow cytometric cell-based markers of B and T cell dysregulation in peripheral blood may aid the diagnosis of ICI-nephritis.MethodsA retrospective cohort of patients diagnosed with ICI-nephritis was compared with three prospectively enrolled control cohorts: ICI-treated controls without immune-related adverse events, patients not on ICIs with hemodynamic acute kidney injury (hemodynamic AKI), and patients not on ICIs with biopsy proven acute interstitial nephritis from other causes (non-ICI-nephritis). sIL-2R level and flow cytometric parameters were compared between groups using Wilcoxon rank sum test or Kruskal-Wallis test. Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated to define the accuracy of sIL-2R and flow cytometric biomarkers in diagnosing ICI-nephritis. The downstream impact of T cell activation in the affected kidney was investigated using archived biopsy samples to evaluate the gene expression of IL2RA, IL-2 signaling, and T cell receptor signaling in patients with ICI-nephritis compared with other causes of drug-induced nephritis, acute tubular injury, and histologically normal controls.ResultssIL-2R level in peripheral blood was significantly higher in patients with ICI-nephritis (N=24) (median 2.5-fold upper limit of normal (ULN), IQR 1.9–3.3), compared with ICI-treated controls (N=10) (median 0.8-fold ULN, IQR 0.5–0.9, p<0.001) and hemodynamic AKI controls (N=6) (median 0.9-fold-ULN, IQR 0.7–1.1, p=0.008). A sIL-2R cut-off point of 1.75-fold ULN was highly diagnostic of ICI-nephritis (area under the curve >96%) when compared with either ICI-treated or hemodynamic AKI controls. By peripheral blood flow cytometry analysis, lower absolute CD8+T cells, CD45RA+CD8+ T cells, memory CD27+B cells, and expansion of plasmablasts were prominent features of ICI-nephritis compared with ICI-treated controls. Gene expressions for IL2RA, IL-2 signaling, and T cell receptor signaling in the kidney tissue with ICI-nephritis were significantly higher compared with controls.ConclusionElevated sIL-2R level and flow cytometric markers of both B and T cell dysregulation may aid the diagnosis of ICI-nephritis.

Purpose of ReviewWhile immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy has improved melanoma patient outcomes, it has also resulted in the rise of unique immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Here, we review and synthesize irAE management recommendations from several oncological societies into a streamlined format to aid in diagnosis and management. We also include clinical pearls highlighting several recent research studies in this field.Recent FindingsKnowledge of immunotherapy toxicity has continually evolved, and several major oncologic societies have recently released new or updated guidelines.SummaryKeeping up with the evolving field of immunotherapy and related toxicities is crucial, because ICI use, in combination with other agents, will only continue to increase and likely result in new and different patterns of irAEs. Providing clear and concise references for clinicians will help ensure proper irAE evaluation and management going forward. We present one such reference here, covering management of common and/or serious irAEs.