scholarly journals Hemophagocytic Lymphohistiocytosis Secondary to PD-1 and IDO Inhibition in a Patient with Refractory Glioblastoma

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 508-514
Author(s):  
Rohit Thummalapalli ◽  
Thatcher Heumann ◽  
Julie Stein ◽  
Sarah Khan ◽  
David S. Priemer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Solid Tumors ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Hemophagocytic Lymphohistiocytosis ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Altered Mental Status ◽  
Rapid Onset ◽  
History Of

Immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI)-based approaches have transformed the treatment landscape of numerous solid tumors. Glioblastoma (GBM) is an aggressive and almost universally fatal disease which is in need of novel treatment options, and combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors, including dual agent therapy, are starting to be explored in refractory GBM. Growing adoption of ICI-based approaches in solid tumors has been met with improved understanding of immune-related adverse events (IRAEs), including primary hematologic adverse events. Although management guidelines for multiple hematologic IRAEs have been established, the emergence of hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) secondary to ICI therapy has only rarely been described, and its pathogenesis and optimal management are incompletely understood. We present the case of a 74-year-old male with a history of refractory GBM treated with PD-1 and indoleamine-pyrrole 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) inhibition who experienced acute liver injury, followed by progressive fevers, altered mental status, and cytopenias. Serum studies and examination of spleen and bone marrow pathology were consistent with HLH, which was refractory to steroids and ultimately resulted in his rapid clinical decline. Here, we review prior cases of HLH secondary to ICI therapy across solid tumors, and explore potential mechanisms contributing to the rapid onset and refractory nature of our patient’s HLH syndrome. We hope to further highlight HLH as an emerging hematologic IRAE secondary to ICI therapy, and suggest that new practice guidelines begin to recognize HLH as a characteristic hematologic IRAE in patients treated with PD-1 and other immune checkpoint inhibitors.

scholarly journals Immune-related adverse events of immune checkpoint inhibitors: a brief review

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Myers
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Hematologic Malignancies ◽  
T Cell Response ◽  
Proactive Management ◽  
Organ Systems

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (icis) such as inhibitors of ctla-4, PD-1, and PD-L1, given as monotherapy or combination therapy have emerged as effective treatment options for immune-sensitive solid tumours and hematologic malignancies. The benefits of icis can be offset by immune-related adverse events (iraes) that leave all organ systems vulnerable and subsequently increase the risk for morbidity and mortality.Because of fluctuating onset and prolonged duration, the toxicities associated with iraes represent a shift from the understanding of conventional anticancer toxicities. The ctla-4 and PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors modulate T-cell response differently, resulting in distinct toxicity patterns, toxicity kinetics, and dose–toxicity relationships. Using individualized patient education, screening, and assessment for the early identification of iraes is key to proactive management and is therefore key to improving outcomes and prolonging therapy.Management of iraes is guided by appropriate grading, which sets the stage for the treatment setting (outpatient vs. inpatient), ici treatment course (delay vs. discontinuation), supportive care, corticosteroid use, organ specialist consultation, and additional immunosuppression. Health care professionals in oncology must work collaboratively with emergency and community colleagues to facilitate an understanding of iraes in an effort to optimize seamless care.

Implementation of a pharmacy consult service for evaluation of immune checkpoint inhibitor related adverse events at a large community hospital

2020 ◽  
pp. 107815522097026
Author(s):  
Jeff Kamta ◽  
Bren Magruder ◽  
Lisa Hymel
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Delayed Presentation ◽  
Consult Service ◽  
Organ Systems ◽  
History Of ◽  
Secondary Outcomes

Introduction Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are novel oncolytic therapies associated with various immune related adverse events (irAEs) affecting multiple organ systems, which may have a delayed presentation. Identification of irAEs and prompt initiation of appropriate treatment represents a challenge to clinicians. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a pharmacy consult service in identification and management of irAEs. Methodology: This was a single center, retrospective study. Patients included were: ≥18 years old, admitted as inpatients, and reported a history of cancer treatment within the last year. A pharmacy consult was developed and implemented for patients who reported a history of ICI therapy within the last year. Education regarding the consult service was provided to select physicians, nurses, and all pharmacists. Primary outcome: percent of admitted patients reporting ICI therapy within the last year, who required pharmacist intervention for an irAE. Secondary outcomes: types of interventions performed, percentage of recommendation acceptance, pharmacist time spent. Results Fifty-one patients received a pharmacy immunotherapy consult. Seventeen patients (33%) met the primary outcome. Thirty-three separate recommendations were made by pharmacists for these 17 patients. The secondary outcomes of interventions made and percentage accepted (n; % accepted): Initiation/adjustment of steroid therapy (20; 40%), placement of a consult for oncology or other specialist (10; 70%), other therapeutic interventions (3; 67%). Average time spent by pharmacist on initial consultations (SD): 29 minutes (15). Conclusion A pharmacy consult service may help to increase identification of patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors and initiate timely interventions.

Immune-related Adverse Events and Survival in Solid Tumors Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fausto Petrelli ◽  
Giulia Grizzi ◽  
Michele Ghidini ◽  
Antonio Ghidini ◽  
Margherita Ratti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Solid Tumors ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors

scholarly journals SARS-CoV-2 infection and adverse events in patients with cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors: an observational prospective study

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. e001694
Author(s):  
Mario Mandala ◽  
Paul Lorigan ◽  
Matilde De Luca ◽  
Andrea Bianchetti ◽  
Barbara Merelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Antigen Expression ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Exact Test ◽  
Cancer Subtypes ◽  
Patients With Cancer

BackgroundIn ambulatory patients with cancer with asymptomatic or pauci-symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, the safety of targeted therapies (TTs), chemotherapy (CT) or immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) therapy is still unknown.Material and methodsFrom the start of the first epidemic wave of SARS-CoV-2 in Bergamo, Italy, we have prospectively screened all consecutive outpatients who presented for treatment to the Oncology Division of the Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo for SARS-CoV-2 antigen expression. We identified patients treated with ICIs and compared these to patients with the same cancer subtypes treated with TTs or CT.ResultsBetween March 5 and May 18, 293 consecutive patients (49% melanoma, 34% non-small cell lung cancer, 9% renal cell carcinoma, 8% other) were included in this study: 159 (54%), 50 (17%) and 84 (29%) received ICIs, CT or TTs, respectively. Overall 89 patients (30.0%) were SARS-CoV-2 positive. Mortality of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients was statistically significantly higher compared with SARS-CoV-2 negative patients (8/89 vs 3/204, respectively, Fisher’s exact test p=0.004). All deaths were due to COVID-19. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were more frequent in SARS-CoV-2-positive patients compared with SARS-CoV-2-negative cases (Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) test p=0.0008). The incidence of SAEs in SARS-CoV-2 positive compared with SARS-CoV-2 negative patients was similar in ICI and CT patients (17.3% and 3.7% for positive and negative patients in ICIs and 15.4% and 2.7% in CT, Breslow-Day test p=0.891). No COVID-19-related SAEs were observed in the TTs patients.ConclusionsThe incidence of SAEs was higher for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients treated with ICIs and CT, mostly in advanced disease. No SAEs were observed in patients treated with TTs. SAEs were COVID-19 related rather than treatment related. Treatment with ICIs does not appear to significantly increase risk of SAEs compared with CT. This information should be considered when determining treatment options for patients.

Targeted therapies and checkpoint inhibitors in sarcoma

QJM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Vasella ◽  
E Gousopoulos ◽  
M Guidi ◽  
G Storti ◽  
S Y Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Targeted Therapy ◽  
Solid Tumors ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Suppressor Gene ◽  
Treatment Practice ◽  
Therapeutic Concepts

Abstract Sarcomas are defined as a group of mesenchymal malignancies with over 100 heterogeneous subtypes. As a rare and difficult to diagnose entity, micrometastasis is already present at the time of diagnosis in many cases. Current treatment practice of sarcomas consists mainly of surgery, (neo)adjuvant chemo- and/or radiotherapy. Although the past decade has shown that particular genetic abnormalities can promote the development of sarcomas, such as translocations, gain-of-function mutations, amplifications or tumor suppressor gene losses, these insights have not led to established alternative treatment strategies so far. Novel therapeutic concepts with immunotherapy at its forefront have experienced some remarkable success in different solid tumors while their impact in sarcoma remains limited. In this review, the most common immunotherapy strategies in sarcomas, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors, targeted therapy and cytokine therapy are concisely discussed. The programmed cell death (PD)-1/PD-1L axis and apoptosis-inducing cytokines, such as TNF-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL), have not yielded the same success like in other solid tumors. However, in certain sarcoma subtypes, e.g. liposarcoma or undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma, encouraging results in some cases when employing immune checkpoint inhibitors in combination with other treatment options were found. Moreover, newer strategies such as the targeted therapy against the ancient cytokine macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF) may represent an interesting approach worth investigation in the future.

scholarly journals Association of Blood Biomarkers and Autoimmunity with Immune Related Adverse Events in Patients with Cancer treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Despina Michailidou ◽  
Ali Khaki ◽  
Maria Morelli ◽  
Leonidas Diamantopoulos ◽  
Namrata Singh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
Blood Biomarkers ◽  
Lymphocyte Ratio ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
History Of

Abstract Background: Patients with cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) develop immune related adverse events (irAEs), however biomarkers are lacking. We hypothesized that clinicopathologic and laboratory factors would be associated with irAE risk and overall survival (OS) in this population.Methods: In a retrospective study of patients treated with ICIs we collected clinicopathologic, laboratory, irAEs and outcomes data. The association between baseline blood biomarkers, clinicopathologic features and irAEs was assessed by logistic regression adjusting for age, sex, smoking, cancer type, performance status, concomitant other systemic therapy, history of autoimmune disease (AD) and chronic infection. Optimal cutoff values of biomarkers were identified by recursive partitioning analysis.Results: 470 patients were identified; 156 (33%) developed irAEs, which were associated with baseline absolute lymphocyte count >2.6k/ul (adjusted [a]OR:4.12), neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) ≤5.3 (aOR:2.08) and monocyte to lymphocyte ratio (MLR)≤0.73 (aOR:3.11). Patients with pre-existing AD (aOR:2.81), family history of AD (aOR:5.86), and ICI combination (aOR:2.26) had higher odds of irAEs. Baseline NLR≤5.3 (aHR:0.68) and MLR≤0.73 (aHR:0.43) were associated with longer OS.Conclusion: irAE were associated with autoimmune history, ICI combination and baseline laboratory measurements. Lower NLR and MLR may have favorable prognostic value. Our hypothesis-generating findings require validation in larger prospective studies.

Use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients with pre-existing sarcoidosis

Immunotherapy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sang T Kim ◽  
Xerxes Pundole ◽  
Ramona Dadu ◽  
Olivier Lambotte ◽  
Manuel Ramos-Casals ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Hilar Lymphadenopathy ◽  
Subcutaneous Nodules ◽  
History Of ◽  
Fluctuating Course

Aim: To evaluate adverse events in cancer patients with pre-existing sarcoidosis receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Patients & methods: We retrospectively reviewed cancer patients with sarcoidosis who underwent treatment with ICI to determine frequency of sarcoidosis flares. Results: 32 patients with sarcoidosis received ICIs The median time to ICI initiation was 7 years (range: 1 month to 51 years). One patient (3%) with a 20-year remote history of sarcoidosis developed a clinically symptomatic exacerbation after three doses of atezolizumab, with hilar lymphadenopathy, subcutaneous nodules, arthritis and uveitis. Atezolizumab was discontinued and prednisone initiated. She had a fluctuating course with two additional flares. Conclusion: Frequency of flares in patients with a remote history of sarcoidosis who receive ICIs is low.

scholarly journals Immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced aseptic meningitis and encephalitis: a case-series and narrative review

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 204209862110047
Author(s):  
Laure Thouvenin ◽  
Timothée Olivier ◽  
Giuseppe Banna ◽  
Alfredo Addeo ◽  
Alex Friedlaender
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Aseptic Meningitis ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitor ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Plain Language ◽  
Wide Range

Background: Along with the increasing use of immune checkpoint inhibitors comes a surge in immune-related toxicity. Here, we review the currently available data regarding neurological immune adverse events, and more specifically aseptic meningitis and encephalitis, and present treatment and diagnostic recommendations. Furthermore, we present five cases of immunotherapy-induced aseptic meningitis and encephalitis treated at our institution. Recent findings: Neurological immune-related adverse events, including aseptic meningitis and encephalitis, secondary to checkpoint inhibitors are a rare but complex and clinically relevant entity, comprising a wide range of diseases, most often presenting with symptoms with a wide range of differential diagnoses. Our case-series highlights the challenges of such entities and the importance of properly identifying and managing aseptic meningitis and encephalitis. Summary: Checkpoint inhibitor-induced meningoencephalitis warrants prompt investigations and treatment. Properly diagnosing aseptic meningitis, encephalitis, or mixed presentations may guide the treatment decision, as highlighted by our case-series. After rapid exclusion of alternative diagnoses, urgent corticosteroids are the therapeutic backbone but this could change in favour of highly specific cytokine-directed treatment options. Plain language summary Aseptic meningitis and encephalitis with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a single centre case-series and review of the literature Over the course of the past decade, checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized cancer care. With their favourable toxicity profile and potential for durable and deep responses, they have become ubiquitous across the field of oncology. Furthermore, combination checkpoint inhibitors are also gaining ground, with increased efficacy and, unfortunately, immune-related toxicity. While there are guidelines based on extensive clinical experience for frequent adverse events, uncommon entities are less readily identified and treated. Neurological immune-related adverse events secondary to checkpoint inhibitors are a rare but complex entity, comprising a wide range of diseases, most often presenting with aspecific symptoms. In this paper, we discuss a single institution case-series of patients with autoimmune aseptic meningitis and encephalitis, and we perform a narrative literature review on this subject. We conclude with our treatment recommendations based on available evidence.

scholarly journals Association of blood biomarkers and autoimmunity with immune related adverse events in patients with cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Despina Michailidou ◽  
Ali Raza Khaki ◽  
Maria Pia Morelli ◽  
Leonidas Diamantopoulos ◽  
Namrata Singh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
Monocyte Count ◽  
Blood Biomarkers ◽  
Lymphocyte Ratio ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
History Of

AbstractPatients with cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) develop immune related adverse events (irAEs), however biomarkers are lacking. We hypothesized that clinicopathologic and laboratory factors would be associated with irAE risk and overall survival (OS) in this population. In a retrospective study of patients treated with ICIs we collected clinicopathologic, laboratory, irAEs and outcomes data. The association between baseline blood biomarkers, clinicopathologic features and irAEs was assessed by logistic regression adjusting for age, sex, smoking, cancer type, performance status, concomitant other systemic therapy, history of autoimmune disease (AD), chronic infection and pre-existing systemic steroid use (regardless of dose). Optimal cutoff values of biomarkers were identified by recursive partitioning analysis. 470 patients were identified; 156 (33%) developed irAEs, which were associated with baseline absolute lymphocyte count > 2.6 k/ul (adjusted [a]OR: 4.30), absolute monocyte count > 0.29 k/ul (aOR: 2.34) and platelet count > 145 k/ul (aOR: 2.23), neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) ≤ 5.3 (aOR: 2.07) and monocyte to lymphocyte ratio (MLR) ≤ 0.73 (aOR: 2.96), as well as platelet to lymphocyte ratio ≤ 534 (aOR: 5.05). Patients with pre-existing AD (aOR: 2.57), family history of AD (aOR: 5.98), and ICI combination (aOR: 2.00) had higher odds of irAEs. Baseline NLR ≤ 5.3 (aHR: 0.68), MLR ≤ 0.73 (aHR: 0.43), PLT > 145 (aHR: 0.48) and PLR ≤ 534 (aHR: 0.48) were associated with longer OS. irAEs were associated with autoimmune history, ICI combination and baseline laboratory measurements. Lower NLR, MLR and PLR may have favorable prognostic value. Our hypothesis-generating findings require validation in larger prospective studies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document