Effects of an immunosuppressive therapy on the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibition in metastatic melanoma - An analysis of the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG.

BACKGROUND: The impact of immunosuppressive therapy (IST) on immune-checkpoint inhibition (ICI) is unclear. METHODS: Patients with unresectable advanced melanoma (MM) treated with ICI in the years 2011-2020 were identified from the prospective multicenter German skin cancer registry ADOREG. Patients with IST within 60 days before, or within 30 days after start of ICI were compared to patients without IST. End points were disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) determined by Kaplan-Meier method. Prognostic factors were evaluated in a Cox regression model. RESULTS: Of 814 patients treated with ICI, 73 (9%) received concomitant IST, mainly steroids. Patients with brain metastases (BM) received IST more frequently (n = 34/130 patients; 26%), than patients without BM (39/684 patients; 6%). In patients without BM, IST initiated before, but not IST initiated after start of ICI was significantly associated with worse PFS (univariate hazard ratio (HR) 2.59, 95% confidence interval (95%-CI) 1.07-6.28, p = 0.035; multivariate HR 3.48, 95%-CI 1.26-9.6, p = 0.016). There was no association between IST and OS or DCR. In patients with BM, IST initiated before, but not after start of ICI was significantly associated with worse OS (univariate HR 2.06, 95%-CI 1.07-3.95, p = 0.031; multivariate HR 5.91, 95%-CI 1.74-20.14, p = 0.004). There was no association between IST and PFS or DCR. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving IST 60 days before start of ICI showed a tendency to an impaired therapy outcome. IST initiated within 30 days after start of ICI, mainly due to early side effects, did not affect the efficacy of ICI therapy.

Lipase elevation and type 1 diabetes mellitus related to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy - A multicentre study of 90 patients from the German Dermatooncology Group.

AIM: Immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) triggers immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The relevance of lipase elevation remains unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Skin cancer patients with newly detected serum lipase elevation (at least twofold upper normal limit) or newly diagnosed type I diabetes mellitus upon ICI therapy were retrospectively collected at 14 German skin cancer centres. RESULTS: We identified 68 patients with lipase elevation occurring after a median time of 19 (range 1-181) weeks on ICI, 15 (22%) thereof had symptoms consistent with pancreatitis. Forty-seven patients (73%) had other irAE, mainly colitis. Discontinuation (n = 24, 35%) or interruption (n = 26, 38%) of ICI resulted in decrease of lipase after reinduction of ICI lipase levels increased again in 12 of 24 patients. In 18 patients (27%), ICI was continued unchanged, and in 12 (67%) of them, lipase levels normalised. Twenty-two patients were identified with newly diagnosed type I diabetes mellitus related to ICI, and 12 (55%) thereof had also lipase elevation mainly shortly before or after the diagnosis of diabetes. Fourteen (64%) patients had other irAE, mainly thyroiditis. Irrespective of lipase elevation, patients frequently showed a rapid onset with ketoacidosis, decreased c-peptide, and strongly increased blood glucose levels. CONCLUSION: Increased serum lipase during ICI is often not associated with pancreatitis but with other irAE as possible cause. Therefore, it might be sufficient to regularly monitor blood glucose levels and perform further workup only in case of signs or symptoms of pancreatitis and/or exocrine pancreas insufficiency.