Search

Background Immune-related adverse events (IrAEs) associated with the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) may not be fully covered by existing measures like the PRO-CTCAE™. Selecting PRO-CTCAE™ items for monitoring symptomatic adverse events is hindered by the heterogeneity and complexity of IrAEs, and no standardised selection process exists. We aimed to reach expert consensus on the PRO-CTCAE™ symptom terms relevant for cancer patients receiving ICIs and to gather preliminary expert opinions about additional symptom terms reflecting ICI symptomatic toxicities. Additionally, we gathered expert consensus about a core set of priority symptom terms for prospective surveillance and monitoring. Design This Delphi study involved an international panel of experts (n = 6 physicians; n = 3 nurses, n = 1 psychiatrist and n = 1 patient advocates). Experts prioritised the relevance and importance of symptom terms to monitor in patients treated with ICIs. Results Experts reached a consensus on the relevance of all (n = 80) PRO-CTCAE™ Symptom Terms. Consensus on the importance of these symptom terms for prospective monitoring in patients receiving ICIs was reached for 81% (n = 65) of these terms. Additional symptoms terms (n = 56) were identified, with a consensus that 84% (47/56) of these additional symptom terms should also be considered when monitoring symptomatic IrAEs. Conclusion This study identified a prioritised list of symptom terms for prospective surveillance for symptomatic IrAEs in patients receiving ICI treatment. Our results indicate the need to strengthen the validity of PRO measures used to monitor patients receiving ICIs. While these results provided some support for the content validity of the PRO CTCAE™ and resulted in a preliminary set of salient symptomatic adverse events related to the use of ICIs, broader international agreement and patient involvement are needed to further validate our initial findings.

Objective Patients with autoimmune or inflammatory disease (AID) are susceptible to immune-related adverse events (irAEs) when treated with immune check-point inhibitors (ICIs). We decided to analyse the safety and effectiveness of anti-PD-1 antibodies in AID patients and look for an association between the presence of pre-existing AID and the clinical outcome. Methods In a prospective study of the REISAMIC registry of grade ≥2 irAEs occurring in ICI-treated patients, we studied the associations between pre-existing AID on one hand and irAE-free survival, overall survival and best objective response rate on the other. Results We identified 45 patients with 53 AIDs in REISAMIC. The cancer diagnoses included melanoma (n = 36), non–small-cell lung cancer (n = 6) and others (n = 3). The most frequent pre-existing AIDs were vitiligo (n = 17), psoriasis (n = 12), thyroiditis (n = 7), Sjogren syndrome (n = 4) and rheumatoid arthritis (n = 2). Twenty patients (44.4%) presented with at least one irAE: eleven of these were associated with a pre-existing AID (‘AID flare’). Treatment with anti-PD-1 antibodies was maintained in 15 of the 20 patients with an irAE. The IrAE-free survival time was significantly shorter in AID patients (median: 5.4 months) than in AID-free patients (median: 13 months, p = 2.1 × 10−4). The AID and AID-free groups did not differ significantly with regard to the overall survival time and objective response rate (p = 0.38 and 0.098, respectively). Conclusion In patients treated with anti-PD-1 antibody, pre-existing AID was associated with a significantly increased risk of irAEs. Our results indicate that cancer treatments with anti-PD-1 antibodies are just as effective in AID patients as they are in AID-free patients.

Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) was one of the first few cancers to be cured first with radiotherapy alone and then with a combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Around 80% of the patients with HL will be cured by first-line therapy. However, the ionising radiation not only produces cytotoxicity but also induces alterations in the microenvironment, and patients often struggle with the long-term consequences of these treatments, such as cardiovascular disorders, lung diseases and secondary malignancies. Hence, it is essential to improve treatments while avoiding delayed side-effects. Immunotherapy is a promising new treatment option for Hodgkin lymphoma, and anti- programmed death-1 (PD1) agents have produced striking results in patients with relapsed or refractory disease. The microenvironment of Hodgkin lymphoma appears to be unique in the field of human disease: the malignant Reed-Sternberg cells only constitute 1% of the cells in the lymphoma, but they are surrounded by an extensive immune infiltrate. Reed-Sternberg cells exhibit 9p24.1/PD-L1/PD-L2 copy number alterations and genetic rearrangements associated with programmed cell death ligand 1/ ligand 2 (PD-L1/2) overexpression, together with major histocompatibility complex-I (MHC-I) and major histocompatibility complex-II (MHC-II) downregulation (which may facilitate the tumour's immune evasion). Although HL may be a situation in which defective immune surveillance is restored by anti-PD1 therapy, it challenges our current explanation of how anti-PD1 agents work because MHC-I expression is required for CD8-T-cell-mediated tumour antigen recognition. Here, we review recent attempts to understand the defects in immune recognition in HL and to design an optimal evidence-based treatment for combination with anti-PD1.

INTRODUCTION: Life expectancy evaluation is crucial when selecting patients who may benefit from phase I studies. The Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) prognostic score, based on three objective variables (number of metastatic sites, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and serum albumin) was validated in patients treated with cytotoxics and targeted therapies. We aimed to determine if those factors were applicable to immune-checkpoint therapies (ICTs) in phase I trials and to evaluate new variables that may preclude a better prognosis in patients receiving ICT. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of survival risk factors in a discovery cohort of 155 patients enrolled into ICT phase I trials at our institution. We computed univariate analysis and multivariate analysis (MVA) of demographics, clinical and biological data to assess their prognostic value for overall survival (OS). MVA results were used to build a prognostic score for OS. A validation cohort of 113 patients enrolled in phase I ICT trials was used to prospectively validate this score. RESULTS: A total of 155 patients (M/F: 83/72; median age 59) receiving an experimental ICT between March 2012 and January 2016 were included in the discovery cohort. An MVA assessing the RMH score variables showed that low albumin (hazard ratio [HR] 1.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-2.86) and LDH > upper limit normal (ULN) (HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.12-3.15) were independent negative prognostic factors for OS. Interestingly, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) > 6 (HR 1.75, 95% CI 1.04-2.95) was associated with a decrease in OS. The number of metastases was not associated with a poorer outcome for this ICT cohort (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.51-1.35). A risk score based on the results of the MVA (NLR > 6 = 1; LDH > ULN = 1; albumin < 35 g/l = 1) showed that patients presenting a high score (>1) had a significantly shorter OS (20.4 weeks; 95% CI 5.7-35.2) compared to those with a low score (0 or 1) (68.9 weeks; 95% CI 50-83.7) (HR 2.9, 95% CI 1.87-4.64). In the validation cohort of 113 patients, again the patients presenting a high score showed an inferior OS (HR 6.3, 95% CI 2.7-14.8). CONCLUSION: In ICT phase I trials, traditional prognostic variables included in the RMH score may be suboptimal to determine patient's prognosis. In this context, the NLR is a significant prognostic variable. The Gustave Roussy Immune Score, based on albumin, LDH and NLR, allows a better selection of patients for ICT phase I trials.

Immune checkpoint blockade with antagonistic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting B7 immunoglobulin superfamily molecules (CTLA-4, PD-1, and PD-L1) generate long lasting anti-tumour immune responses translating into clinical benefit across many cancer types. However, many patients are primarily resistant to immune checkpoint blockade -based monotherapy and many others will eventually relapse. Therefore, new immunostimulatory targets are needed to overcome primary and secondary resistance to immunotherapy. Besides the B7 co-inhibitory receptors, the tumour necrosis factor receptor superfamily contains many other immune checkpoints, which could become the next generation immunomodulators. Among them stands OX40 (CD134), a co-stimulatory molecule that can be expressed by activated immune cells. Several anti-OX40 agonistic monoclonal antibodies are currently tested in early phase cancer clinical trials. Accumulating preclinical evidence supports their clinical development. However, conflicting results and controversies between in vitro and in vivo data point to the need for comprehensive ancillary studies to be performed in upcoming clinical trials to better understand the mechanism of action of anti-OX40 mAbs-based therapy.