Exploring the Role of Target Expression in Treatment Efficacy of Antibody-Drug Conjugates (ADCs) in Solid Cancers: A Comprehensive Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) offer a promising path for cancer therapy, leveraging the specificity of monoclonal antibodies and the cytotoxicity of linked drugs. The success of ADCs hinges on precise targeting of cancer cells based on protein expression levels. This review explores the relationship between target protein expression and ADC efficacy in solid tumours, focusing on results of clinical trials conducted between January 2019 and May 2023. RECENT FINDINGS: We hereby highlight approved ADCs, revealing their effectiveness even in low-expressing target populations. Assessing target expression poses challenges, owing to variations in scoring systems and biopsy types. Emerging methods, like digital image analysis, aim to standardize assessment. The complexity of ADC pharmacokinetics, tumour dynamics, and off-target effects emphasises the need for a balanced approach. This review underscores the importance of understanding target protein dynamics and promoting standardized evaluation methods in shaping the future of ADC-based cancer therapies.

Intratumoral Immunotherapy: Is It Ready for Prime Time?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review presents the rationale for intratumoral immunotherapy, technical considerations and safety. Clinical results from the latest trials are provided and discussed. RECENT FINDINGS: Intratumoral immunotherapy is feasible and safe in a wide range of cancer histologies and locations, including lung and liver. Studies mainly focused on multi-metastatic patients, with some positive trials such as T-VEC in melanoma, but evidence of clinical benefit is still lacking. Recent results showed improved outcomes in patients with a low tumor burden. Intratumoral immunotherapy can lower systemic toxicities and boost local and systemic immune responses. Several studies have proven the feasibility, repeatability, and safety of this approach, with some promising results in clinical trials. The clinical benefit might be improved in patients with a low tumor burden. Future clinical trials should focus on adequate timing of treatment delivery during the course of the disease, particularly in the neoadjuvant setting.

Evaluation of supportive care needs, sexuality and quality of life in phase 1 trials: a prospective monocentric study.

PURPOSE: Patients enrolled in oncology phase 1 trials (ph1) usually have advanced heavily pre-treated cancers with few therapeutic options. Quality of life (QoL) is one of the key cancer-treatment outcome measures, especially in ph1, and sexuality is an important part of Qol but rarely explored. This prospective study aims to assess supportive care needs, QoL and sexuality in ph1. METHODS: Between September 2020 and June 2021, we prospectively recruited patients enrolled in ph1 at Gustave Roussy in France. Supportive care needs, QoL (EORTC QLQ-C30) and sexuality (female sexual function index for women, male sexual health questionnaire [MSHQ] for men) were assessed at baseline, one, three and 5 months. We performed multivariate analyses to identify associations between clinical characteristics, QoL and quality of sexual life over time. RESULTS: At baseline, we analyzed 187 patients (45% women (n = 84) and 55% men (n = 103)). Patients expressed the need for consultations in pain management, nutrition, psychology and sexology in 28%, 26%, 19% and 9%, respectively. Lower global QoL was independently associated with Royal Marsden Hospital score (p = 0.012), urogenital location tumor (p = 0.021), elevated CRP levels (p = 0.014) and pain intensity (p = 0.005). Ninety-two percent of women had sexual dysfunction. In men, a lower MSHQ score was independently associated with urogenital location tumor (p = 0.021), ECOG Performance Status (p = 0.006), comorbidity at risk (p = 0.024) and pain intensity (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: There are significant needs for supportive care in ph1, especially in some subgroups of patients. New models of care should be developed to improve early phase pathways.

Understanding genetic determinants of resistance to immune checkpoint blockers.

The advent of immune checkpoint blockers (ICB) has revolutionized patient outcome in many tumor types. However, only a minority of patients truly benefits from these therapies and displays a durable and robust anti-tumor response that translates into improved outcome. Thorough mechanistic preclinical studies and comprehensive investigations performed in tumor biopsies of patients treated with ICB have unveiled multiple resistance mechanisms involving both tumor-intrinsic and tumor-extrinsic characteristics. Here, we comprehensively review all known tumor-intrinsic genetic and epigenetic resistance mechanisms to ICB, provide an evaluation of their current level of evidence and propose rationale therapeutic strategies to circumvent them.

Patterns of progression in patients treated for immuno-oncology antibodies combination.

BACKGROUND: New patterns of progression under immune-oncology (IO) antibodies (mAb) have been described such as pseudoprogression. Except for melanoma, variations between studies reveal difficulties to establish their prevalence. METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled patients participating in IO phase I trials at Gustave Roussy cancer center for solid tumors excluding melanoma. Radiological assessment according to iRECIST was correlated with prospectively registered patient characteristics and outcomes. Pseudoprogression (PsPD) was defined as RECIST-defined progression followed by stabilization or decrease at the next imaging, and dissociated response (DisR) as concomitant decrease in some tumor lesions and increase in others at a same timepoint. RESULTS: Among 360 patients included, 74% received IO mAb combination: 45% with another IO mAb, 20% with targeted therapy and 10% with radiotherapy. The overall response rate was 19.7%. PsPD were observed in 10 (2.8%) patients and DisR in 12 (3.3%) patients. Atypical responses (AR), including PsPD and DisR, were not associated with any patient's baseline characteristics. Compare with typical responder patients, patients experiencing AR presented a shorter iPFS (HR 0.34; p < 0.001) and OS (HR 0.27; p = 0.026). Among the 203 patients who progressed in 12 weeks, 80 (39.4%) patients were treated beyond progression. PD was confirmed in 80% of cases, while 10% of patients presented a response. CONCLUSION: Pseudoprogression and dissociated response are uncommon patterns of progression. Their prevalence should be balanced with the rate of real progressing patients treated beyond progression. Prognosis or on-treatment biomarkers are needed to identify early patients who will benefit from immunotherapy.

Managing Hyperprogressive Disease in the Era of Programmed Cell Death Protein 1/Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Blockade: A Case Discussion and Review of the Literature.

A breakthrough in oncology over the last 5 years, immunotherapy has proved its salutary effects in a wide range of solid tumors. The targeting of the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) pathway can restore a competent antitumor T-cell response by addressing key tumor immune evasion mechanisms. This novel mechanism of action is associated with new patterns of responses that were not observed with conventional treatments such as chemotherapy or targeted therapies. Thus, hyperprogressive disease (HPD), an unexpected acceleration of cancer evolution after starting immunotherapy, has been reported by several groups with a PD-1/PD-L1 blockade. This tumor flare-up phenomenon is associated with a poorer outcome and is suspected to be an immune-related adverse event. Despite been highly debated, the issue of HPD is currently a real challenge for oncologists' practice in terms of patients' information, diagnosis, and management. Herein, we describe the case of a 57-year-old man diagnosed with metastatic urothelial carcinoma who developed a rapid tumor growth after an anti-PD-L1+ IO combination. This case illustrates how current practice should evolve to address the HPD reality in the anticheckpoint era. KEY POINTS: Hyperprogressive disease (HPD) is an unexpected acceleration of cancer growth after starting immunotherapy that is associated with a poor outcome. Definition of HPD is based on comparing kinetics of tumor growth before and after starting immunotherapy. No predictive biomarker has been homogenously identified in the reported studies. Suspected pathophysiology includes expansion of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) + regulatory T cells, exhaustion of compensatory T cells, modulation of pro-tumorigenic immune cell subsets, activation of aberrant inflammation, or activation of oncogenic signaling. HPD is one of the most controversial immune-related adverse events, as the liability of immunotherapy in this tumor deleterious flare-up phenomenon has not been proved yet. The reported incidence of HPD in retrospective studies varies across different solid tumor types from 6% to 29%. This phenomenon has been mainly suspected in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), and in urothelial carcinomas, where several randomized phase III trials have shown early crossing over of survival curves. In the context of anti-PD-1/programmed death-ligand 1 therapy, in particular for NSCLC, HNSCC, or urothelial carcinoma, the authors recommend performing an early computed tomography (CT) assessment at week 3-4. In the case of an early progression, tumor molecular characterization by tumor biopsy or circulating tumor DNA could be urged. Immunotherapy discontinuation should be discussed. Performing a confirmatory CT scan 4 weeks later to exclude pseudoprogression should not be the rule. Early switch to cytotoxic therapy may counteract the deleterious flare-up. Patients should be informed of the risk of developing HPD. Health authorities and trial sponsors could monitor and report the rates of tumor flares in trials in order to help oncologists to properly inform their patients about the expected rates of HPD.

[Management of adverse events associated with cancer immunotherapy]. / Prise en charge des effets indésirables de l'immunothérapie des cancers.

Management of adverse events associated with cancer immunotherapy The advent of the new anti-CTLA4 and anti-PD1/PD-L1 immunotherapies is a revolution in medical oncology. First, their mechanism of action is a real paradigm shift: instead of targeting the tumor cell itself, these treatments seek to overcome immunosuppression induced by the tumor or its microenvironment. By lifting the brakes of the immune system, these immune checkpoints blockers can induce prolonged anti-tumor responses and increase patient survival. These new immunotherapies also have a different toxicity profile compared to conventional anti-cancer treatments, known as immune-related adverse events. They result from the activation of the immune system against normal tissues and can trigger autoimmune diseases. This singular profile of toxicity prompts us to modify our clinical practice.

Prise en charge des effets indésirables de l'immunothérapie des cancers. L'arrivée des nouvelles immunothérapies anti-CTLA4 et anti-PD1/PD-L1 constitue une réelle révolution en oncologie médicale. Tout d'abord, leur mécanisme d'action est un vrai changement de paradigme : au lieu de cibler la cellule tumorale elle-même, ces traitements cherchent à vaincre l'immunosuppression induite par la tumeur ou son micro- environnement. En levant les freins du système immunitaire, ces bloqueurs des points de contrôle du système immunitaire permettent d'induire des réponses antitumorales prolongées et d'augmenter la survie des patients. Ces nouvelles immunothérapies présentent également un profil de toxicité différent des traitements anticancéreux conventionnels, appelés effets indésirables liés à l'immunité. Ils résultent de l'activation du système immunitaire contre les tissus normaux de l'organisme et peuvent être à l'origine de manifestations auto-immunes. Ce profil singulier de toxicité nous pousse à modifier nos pratiques cliniques.

A radiomics approach to assess tumour-infiltrating CD8 cells and response to anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy: an imaging biomarker, retrospective multicohort study.

BACKGROUND: Because responses of patients with cancer to immunotherapy can vary in success, innovative predictors of response to treatment are urgently needed to improve treatment outcomes. We aimed to develop and independently validate a radiomics-based biomarker of tumour-infiltrating CD8 cells in patients included in phase 1 trials of anti-programmed cell death protein (PD)-1 or anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) monotherapy. We also aimed to evaluate the association between the biomarker, and tumour immune phenotype and clinical outcomes of these patients. METHODS: In this retrospective multicohort study, we used four independent cohorts of patients with advanced solid tumours to develop and validate a radiomic signature predictive of immunotherapy response by combining contrast-enhanced CT images and RNA-seq genomic data from tumour biopsies to assess CD8 cell tumour infiltration. To develop the radiomic signature of CD8 cells, we used the CT images and RNA sequencing data of 135 patients with advanced solid malignant tumours who had been enrolled into the MOSCATO trial between May 1, 2012, and March 31, 2016, in France (training set). The genomic data, which are based on the CD8B gene, were used to estimate the abundance of CD8 cells in the samples and data were then aligned with the images to generate the radiomic signatures. The concordance of the radiomic signature (primary endpoint) was validated in a Cancer Genome Atlas [TGCA] database dataset including 119 patients who had available baseline preoperative imaging data and corresponding transcriptomic data on June 30, 2017. From 84 input variables used for the machine-learning method (78 radiomic features, five location variables, and one technical variable), a radiomics-based predictor of the CD8 cell expression signature was built by use of machine learning (elastic-net regularised regression method). Two other independent cohorts of patients with advanced solid tumours were used to evaluate this predictor. The immune phenotype internal cohort (n=100), were randomly selected from the Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus database of patient medical records based on previously described, extreme tumour-immune phenotypes: immune-inflamed (with dense CD8 cell infiltration) or immune-desert (with low CD8 cell infiltration), irrespective of treatment delivered; these data were used to analyse the correlation of the immune phenotype with this biomarker. Finally, the immunotherapy-treated dataset (n=137) of patients recruited from Dec 1, 2011, to Jan 31, 2014, at the Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, who had been treated with anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 monotherapy in phase 1 trials, was used to assess the predictive value of this biomarker in terms of clinical outcome. FINDINGS: We developed a radiomic signature for CD8 cells that included eight variables, which was validated with the gene expression signature of CD8 cells in the TCGA dataset (area under the curve [AUC]=0·67; 95% CI 0·57-0·77; p=0·0019). In the cohort with assumed immune phenotypes, the signature was also able to discriminate inflamed tumours from immune-desert tumours (0·76; 0·66-0·86; p<0·0001). In patients treated with anti-PD-1 and PD-L1, a high baseline radiomic score (relative to the median) was associated with a higher proportion of patients who achieved an objective response at 3 months (vs those with progressive disease or stable disease; p=0·049) and a higher proportion of patients who had an objective response (vs those with progressive disease or stable disease; p=0·025) or stable disease (vs those with progressive disease; p=0·013) at 6 months. A high baseline radiomic score was also associated with improved overall survival in univariate (median overall survival 24·3 months in the high radiomic score group, 95% CI 18·63-42·1; vs 11·5 months in the low radiomic score group, 7·98-15·6; hazard ratio 0·58, 95% CI 0·39-0·87; p=0·0081) and multivariate analyses (0·52, 0·35-0·79; p=0·0022). INTERPRETATION: The radiomic signature of CD8 cells was validated in three independent cohorts. This imaging predictor provided a promising way to predict the immune phenotype of tumours and to infer clinical outcomes for patients with cancer who had been treated with anti-PD-1 and PD-L1. Our imaging biomarker could be useful in estimating CD8 cell count and predicting clinical outcomes of patients treated with immunotherapy, when validated by further prospective randomised trials. FUNDING: Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale, and SIRIC-SOCRATE 2.0, French Society of Radiation Oncology.

Characterization of liver injury induced by cancer immunotherapy using immune checkpoint inhibitors.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Immunotherapy for metastatic cancer can be complicated by the onset of hepatic immune-related adverse events (IRAEs). This study compared hepatic IRAEs associated with anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/PD ligand 1 (PD-L1) and anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). METHODS: Among 536 patients treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 or CTLA-4 immunotherapies, 19 (3.5%) were referred to the liver unit for grade ≥3 hepatitis. Of these patients, nine had received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 and seven had received anti-CTLA-4 mAbs, in monotherapy or in combination with anti-PD-1. Liver investigations were undertaken in these 16 patients, including viral assays, autoimmune tests and liver biopsy, histological review, and immunostaining of liver specimens. RESULTS: In the 16 patients included in this study, median age was 63 (range 33-84) years, and nine (56%) were female. Time between therapy initiation and hepatitis was five (range, 1-49) weeks and median number of immunotherapy injections was two (range, 1-36). No patients developed hepatic failure. Histology related to anti-CTLA-4 mAbs demonstrated granulomatous hepatitis including fibrin ring granulomas and central vein endotheliitis. Histology related to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs was characterised by lobular hepatitis. The management of hepatic IRAEs was tailored according to the severity of both the biology and histology of liver injury: six patients improved spontaneously; seven received oral corticosteroids at 0.5-1 mg/kg/day; two were maintained on 0.2 mg/kg/day corticosteroids; and one patient required pulses and 2.5 mg/kg/day of corticosteroids, and the addition of a second immunosuppressive drug. In three patients, immunotherapy was reintroduced without recurrence of liver dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: Acute hepatitis resulting from immunotherapy for metastatic cancer is rare (3.5%) and, in most cases, not severe. Histological assessment can distinguish between anti-PD-1/PD-L1 and anti-CTLA-4 mAb toxicity. The severity of liver injury is helpful for tailoring patient management, which does not require systematic corticosteroid administration. LAY SUMMARY: Immunotherapy for metastatic cancer can be complicated by immune-related adverse events in the liver. In patients receiving immunotherapy for metastatic cancer who develop immune-mediated hepatitis, liver biopsy is helpful for the diagnosis and evaluation of the severity of liver injury. This study demonstrates the need for patient-oriented management, which could eventually avoid unnecessary systemic corticosteroid treatment.

[Cardiac and vascular toxicity of chemotherapies]. / Toxicité cardiaque et vasculaire des chimiothérapies.

Cardiac and vascular toxicity of chemotherapies. Cardiovascular complications due to oncologic management are multiple including left ventricular systolic dysfunction, acute myocarditis, hypertension, and QT interval prolongation. Their frequencies are variable depending on the drugs administered. Anthracycline, molecular targeted agents and immune check points inhibitors could lead to left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Anthracyclines could provoke left ventricular systolic dysfunction, which is considered in most of cases as dose-dependent, cumulative and generally irreversible (type 1 toxicity). Targeted molecular agents could lead to left ventricular systolic dysfunction and/or congestive heart failure, which does not appear to be dose dependent, usually reversible at the cessation of treatment and/or the introduction of a cardio-protective treatment (type 2 toxicity).

Toxicité cardiaque et vasculaire des chimiothérapies. Les complications cardiovasculaires secondaires aux prises en charge oncologiques sont multiples, comprenant les dysfonctions systoliques du ventricule gauche et/ou l'insuffisance cardiaque, les myocardites aiguës, l'hypertension artérielle, et l'allongement de l'intervalle QT. Les fréquences et de mécanismes de ces toxicités sont variables, dépendant de la chimiothérapie administrée. Les anthracyclines peuvent entraîner une dysfonction systolique du ventricule gauche et/ou une insuffisance cardiaque ; cette toxicité est considérée comme dépendant de la dose, cumulative et en général irréversible - toxicité de type 1. Les thérapies moléculaires ciblées peuvent entraîner une dysfonction systolique du ventricule gauche, qui ne semble pas être dépendante de la dose administrée, le plus souvent réversible à l'arrêt du traitement et/ou à l'instauration d'un traitement cardioprotecteur adapté - toxicité de type2.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Targeting immune checkpoints has led to promising results in metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). By restoring antitumor immunity, these treatments are able to induce prolonged clinical responses. The level of activity and the durability of responses observed in phase I trials has led most companies to launch phases II and III trials whose results are highly expected. RECENT FINDINGS: In this review, we present efficacy and toxicity results of the different immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) currently developed in NSCLC and report other checkpoints currently explored. The specific profile of tumor responses and immune-related toxicity observed with immunotherapy will be addressed. Finally, to illustrate the new insights into the development of these drugs, we will give an overview of the different ICIs combination studies evaluated in NSCLC and will discuss the role of programmed cell death-L1 as a potential biomarker. SUMMARY: This review will address some of the future challenges of ICIs in NSCLC.

T cells target APOBEC3 proteins in human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected humans and simian immunodeficiency virus-infected Indian rhesus macaques.

APOBEC3 proteins mediate potent antiretroviral activity by hypermutating the retroviral genome during reverse transcription. To counteract APOBEC3 and gain a replicative advantage, lentiviruses such as human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) and simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) have evolved the Vif protein, which targets APOBEC3 proteins for proteasomal degradation. However, the proteasome plays a critical role in the generation of T cell peptide epitopes. Whether Vif-mediated destruction of APOBEC3 proteins leads to the generation and presentation of APOBEC3-derived T cell epitopes on the surfaces of lentivirus-infected cells remains unknown. Here, using peptides derived from multiple Vif-sensitive APOBEC3 proteins, we identified APOBEC3-specific T cell responses in both HIV-1-infected patients and SIV-infected rhesus macaques. These results raise the possibility that these T cell responses may be part of the larger antiretroviral immune response.

Ocular surface toxicities associated with modern anticancer therapies.

Cancer treatments have recently shifted from broad-spectrum cytotoxic therapies to more focused treatments, maximizing anticancerous activity while reducing toxicity to healthy cells. These modern anticancer therapies (MATs) encompass a wide range of innovative molecules that include immune checkpoint inhibitors and other targeted anticancer therapies, comprising antibody drug conjugates and inhibitors of signal transduction. Some MATs are associated with ocular surface adverse events that can cause severe discomfort and even lead to loss of vision. While these complications remain rare, they are probably underreported. It is likely that both oncologists and ophthalmologists will come across MATs-associated ocular surface-adverse events in their practices, owing to the increasing number of patients being treated with MATs. Rapid identification of ocular surface-adverse events is crucial, as early intervention can manage these conditions to avoid vision loss and reduce negative impacts on quality of life. We discuss characteristics of ocular surface pathologies attributed to MATs, describe the suspected underlying pathophysiological mechanisms, and outline the main lines of treatment.

Phase 1 first-in-human dose-escalation study of ANV419 in patients with relapsed/refractory advanced solid tumors.

Patients with advanced cancer, previously treated with immune checkpoint blockade therapy, may retain residual treatment when undergoing the initial infusion of experimental monotherapy in phase 1 clinical trials. ANV419, an antibody-cytokine fusion protein, combines interleukin-2 (IL-2) with an anti-IL-2 monoclonal antibody, aiming to stimulate the expansion of CD8 T and natural killer lymphocytes while restricting regulatory T lymphocytes. In the recent publication of the phase 1 dose escalation study of ANV419, a notable gap exists in detailed information regarding patients' prior antitumoral treatments, specifically programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) targeted monoclonal antibodies. Some patients likely retained residual anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies, potentially influencing the outcomes of ANV419. In a separate clinical cohort, we retrospectively measured the residual concentration of nivolumab and pembrolizumab, revealing persistent serum concentrations of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies even months after treatment cessation. This underscores the importance of comprehensively documenting prior immunotherapy details in clinical trials. Such information is crucial for understanding potential interactions that may impact both immunological and clinical effects.

Is local ablative stereotactic radiation therapy a valuable rescue strategy for time on drug in patients enrolled in phase I trials?

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced tumours enrolled in phase I trials display strong treatment expectations and few therapeutic alternatives. When oligo-acquired resistance (≤3 lesions of disease progression; OAR) occurs, local ablative stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) could allow disease control and continuing the experimental systemic treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from patients enrolled in phase I trials evaluating systemic treatments, who experienced OAR while on the phase I systemic therapy and subsequently received SRT between 01/2014-04/2023 were retrospectively analysed. PFS1 (trial entry to OAR), PFS2 (SRT to first subsequent relapse), time to next systemic treatment (TTNT), and OS were assessed. First subsequent patterns of relapse after SRT were distinguished as OAR2, which could be locally rechallenged, or systemic acquired resistance (>3 lesions of disease progression; SAR). When available, correlations between molecular profile and pathway enrichments of OAR and SAR were explored. RESULTS: Forty-two patients with 52 oligoprogressive lesions were analysed. The median follow-up was 24 months. SRT allowed a median PFS2 of 7.1 months and a median TTNT of 12.8 months. PFS2 included 49% OAR2 and 51% SAR. Median time to first subsequent relapse (9.6 months vs 3.5 months, P=0.014) and TTNT (22.4 months vs 7.6 months, P<0.001) were longer for OAR2 as compared to SAR. No severe toxicities were reported. A PFS1 <6 months and de novo oligoprogressive lesions associated with the presence of SAR. More diverse enriched gene pathways were observed for SAR as compared to OAR2. CONCLUSION: In patients enrolled in phase I trials, OAR managed with SRT may increase time on investigational systemic treatments. Predictive factors reflecting tumour aggressiveness and clonal heterogeneity could help deciphering OAR2 from SAR and maximize SRT output in the oligoprogressive setting.

Toxicity of immunotherapy combinations with chemotherapy across tumor indications: Current knowledge and practical recommendations.

Chemotherapy associated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors is currently the standard of care in several tumor indications. This combination approach improves progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and complete pathological response (pCR) in several cancer types both in the early and metastatic approaches. However, the distinct spectrum of toxicities between cytotoxic side effects and immune related adverse events (irAEs) with similar clinical presentations and different management strategies remains a challenge in daily practice for healthcare professionals. This review summarizes the most common toxicities reported in the randomized clinical trials that led to the subsequent FDA approval of these combinations, across tumor indications. We cite in particular: non-small cell lung cancer, small cell lung cancer, triple negative breast cancer, squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, gastric carcinoma, esophageal carcinoma, cervical carcinoma and biliary tract carcinoma. We found that the combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy was associated with an increased incidence of all grade adverse events (RR 1.11 [1.09; 1.12]) without an excess in treatment related mortality when compared to chemotherapy alone. We report also an increase in the incidence of serious adverse events (grade ≥ 3) (RR 1.16 [1.10;1.24]); in particular: high grade diarrhea, dyspnea, fatigue, rash and elevated liver enzymes. Together with the collaboration of our institutional network of organ specialists with expertise in irAEs, we propose practical recommendations for physicians to enhance clinical care and management of patients undergoing treatment with combined ICI immunotherapy and chemotherapy.

Reactions and adverse events induced by T-cell engagers as anti-cancer immunotherapies, a comprehensive review.

T-cell engagers (TCE) are cancer immunotherapies that have recently demonstrated meaningful benefit for patients with hematological malignancies and solid tumors. The anticipated widespread use of T cell engagers poses implementation challenges and highlights the need for guidance to anticipate, mitigate, and manage adverse events. By mobilizing T-cells directly at the contact of tumor cells, TCE mount an obligatory and immediate anti-tumor immune response that could result in diverse reactions and adverse events. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) is the most common reaction and is largely confined to the first drug administrations during step-up dosage. Cytokine release syndrome should be distinguished from infusion related reaction by clinical symptoms, timing to occurrence, pathophysiological aspects, and clinical management. Other common reactions and adverse events with TCE are immune effector Cell-Associated Neurotoxicity Syndrome (ICANS), infections, tumor flare reaction and cytopenias. The toxicity profiles of TCE and CAR-T cells have commonalities and distinctions that we sum-up in this review. As compared with CAR-T cells, TCE are responsible for less frequently severe CRS or ICANS. This review recapitulates terminology, pathophysiology, severity grading system and management of reactions and adverse events related to TCE.