Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 220
Filtrar
1.
J Immunother Cancer ; 9(10)2021 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34635495

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are approved to treat multiple cancers. Retrospective analyses demonstrate acceptable safety of ICIs in most patients with autoimmune disease, although disease exacerbation may occur. Psoriasis vulgaris is a common, immune-mediated disease, and outcomes of ICI treatment in patients with psoriasis are not well described. Thus we sought to define the safety profile and effectiveness of ICIs in patients with pre-existing psoriasis. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, patients from eight academic centers with pre-existing psoriasis who received ICI treatment for cancer were evaluated. Main safety outcomes were psoriasis exacerbation and immune-related adverse events (irAEs). We also assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival. RESULTS: Of 76 patients studied (50 (66%) male; median age 67 years; 62 (82%) with melanoma, 5 (7%) with lung cancer, 2 (3%) with head and neck cancer, and 7 (9%) with other cancers; median follow-up 25.1 months (range=0.2-99 months)), 51 (67%) received anti-PD-1 antibodies, 8 (11%) anti-CTLA-4, and 17 (22%) combination of anti-PD-1/CTLA-4. All patients had pre-existing psoriasis, most frequently plaque psoriasis (46 patients (61%)) and 15 (20%) with psoriatic arthritis. Forty-one patients (54%) had received any prior therapy for psoriasis although only two (3%) were on systemic immunosuppression at ICI initiation. With ICI treatment, 43 patients (57%) experienced a psoriasis flare of cutaneous and/or extracutaneous disease after a median of 44 days of receiving ICI. Of those who experienced a flare, 23 patients (53%) were managed with topical therapy only; 16 (21%) needed systemic therapy. Only five patients (7%) required immunotherapy discontinuation for psoriasis flare. Forty-five patients (59%) experienced other irAEs, 17 (22%) of which were grade 3/4. PFS with landmark analysis was significantly longer in patients with a psoriasis flare versus those without (39 vs 8.7 months, p=0.049). CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter study, ICI therapy was associated with frequent psoriasis exacerbation, although flares were manageable with standard psoriasis treatments and few required ICI discontinuation. Patients who experienced disease exacerbation performed at least as well as those who did not. Thus, pre-existing psoriasis should not prevent patients from receiving ICIs for treatment of malignancy.

2.
J Am Acad Dermatol ; 85(4): 956-966, 2021 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34332798

RESUMO

IMPORTANCE: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have emerged as active therapies for a variety of cancers. Cutaneous toxicities are common immune-related adverse events and patients will often be referred to dermatologists for evaluation. OBSERVATIONS: Cutaneous adverse events to ICIs can have a variety of clinical presentations. Among the more common are eczematous, morbilliform, and lichenoid dermatoses, as well as vitiligo and pruritus. Less common adverse events include psoriasiform dermatoses, bullous disorders, and severe cutaneous adverse reactions, including Stevens-Johnson syndrome, toxic epidermal necrolysis, and drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms. Because of the immunologic mechanism of ICIs, there are also a variety of rheumatologic adverse reactions with cutaneous manifestations, such as scleroderma, dermatomyositis, cutaneous lupus erythematosus, and various vasculitides. These cutaneous reactions often respond to topical or systemic steroids, although specific toxicities may have alternative treatments available. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: As they become more widely prescribed, dermatologists will see an increasing number of patients with cutaneous adverse events caused by ICI therapies. Accurately diagnosing and treating these toxicities is paramount to achieving the most favorable outcomes for patients.

3.
Oncologist ; 2021 Aug 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34390291

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Over the past few years, tumor next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels have evolved in complexity and have changed from selected gene panels with a handful of genes to larger panels with hundreds of genes, sometimes in combination with paired germline filtering and/or testing. With this move toward increasingly large NGS panels, we have rapidly outgrown the available literature supporting the utility of treatments targeting many reported gene alterations, making it challenging for oncology providers to interpret NGS results and make a therapy recommendation for their patients. METHODS: To support the oncologists at Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center (VICC) in interpreting NGS reports for patient care, we initiated two molecular tumor boards (MTBs)-a VICC-specific institutional board for our patients and a global community MTB open to the larger oncology patient population. Core attendees include oncologists, hematologist, molecular pathologists, cancer geneticists, and cancer genetic counselors. Recommendations generated from MTB were documented in a formal report that was uploaded to our electronic health record system. RESULTS: As of December 2020, we have discussed over 170 patient cases from 77 unique oncology providers from VICC and its affiliate sites, and a total of 58 international patient cases by 25 unique providers from six different countries across the globe. Breast cancer and lung cancer were the most presented diagnoses. CONCLUSION: In this article, we share our learning from the MTB experience and document best practices at our institution. We aim to lay a framework that allows other institutions to recreate MTBs. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: With the rapid pace of molecularly driven therapies entering the oncology care spectrum, there is a need to create resources that support timely and accurate interpretation of next-generation sequencing reports to guide treatment decision for patients. Molecular tumor boards (MTB) have been created as a response to this knowledge gap. This report shares implementation strategies and best practices from the Vanderbilt experience of creating an institutional MTB and a virtual global MTB for the larger oncology community. This report describe a reproducible framework that can be adopted to initiate MTBs at other institutions.

6.
Clin Cancer Res ; 2021 Aug 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34376536

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Programmed cell death receptor-1 (PD-1) inhibitors are frontline therapy in advanced melanoma. Severe immune-related adverse effects (irAEs) often require immunosuppressive treatment with glucocorticoids (GCCs), but GCC use and its correlation with patient survival outcomes during anti-PD-1 monotherapy remains unclear. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In this multicenter retrospective analysis, patients treated with anti-PD-1 monotherapy between 2009 and 2019 and detailed GCC use, data were identified from five independent cohorts, with median follow-up time of 206 weeks. IrAEs were tracked from the initiation of anti-PD-1 until disease progression, initiation of a new therapy, or last follow-up. Correlations between irAEs, GCC use, and survival outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Of the entire cohort of 947 patients, 509 (54%) developed irAEs. In the MGH cohort [irAE(+) n = 90], early-onset irAE (within 8 weeks of anti-PD-1 initiation) with high-dose GCC use (≥60-mg prednisone equivalent once a day) was independently associated with poorer post-irAE PFS/OS (progression-free survival/overall survival) [post-irAE PFS: HR, 5.37; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.10-13.70; P < 0.001; post-irAE OS: HR, 5.95; 95% CI, 2.20-16.09; P < 0.001] compared with irAEs without early high-dose GCC use. These findings were validated in the combined validation cohort [irAE(+) n = 419, post-irAE PFS: HR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.04-2.76; P = 0.04; post-irAE OS: HR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.15-3.39; P = 0.01]. Similar findings were also observed in the 26-week landmark analysis for post-irAE-PFS but not for post-irAE-OS. A sensitivity analysis using accumulated GCC exposure as the measurement achieved similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Early high-dose GCC use was associated with poorer PFS and OS after irAE onset. Judicious use of GCC early during anti-PD-1 monotherapy should be considered. Further prospective randomized control clinical trials designed to explore alternative irAE management options are warranted.

8.
Eur J Cancer ; 153: 213-222, 2021 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34214936

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Combination immunotherapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab has a high initial response rate in advanced melanoma; however, up to 55% of patients later progress. The efficacy and safety of ipilimumab re-induction in the setting of acquired resistance (AR) to combination immunotherapy is unknown. METHODS: Patients with advanced melanoma who initially achieved a complete response, partial response or sustained stable disease to induction combination immunotherapy then progressed and were reinduced with ipilimumab (alone or in combination with anti-PD-1) and were analysed retrospectively. Demographics, disease characteristics, efficacy and toxicity were examined. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were identified from 12 centres. The response rate to reinduction therapy was 12/47 (26%), and disease control rate was 21/47 (45%). Responses appeared more frequent in patients who developed AR after ceasing induction immunotherapy (30% vs. 18%, P = 0.655). Time to AR was 11 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8-15 months). After a median follow-up of 16 months (95% CI, 10-25 months), responders to reinduction had a median progression-free survival of 14 months (95% CI, 13, NR months), and in the whole cohort, the median overall survival from reinduction was 17 months (95% CI, 12-NR months). Twenty-seven (58%) immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were reported; 18 (38%) were grade 3/4, and in 11 of 27 (40%), the same irAE observed during induction therapy recurred. CONCLUSIONS: Reinduction with ipilimumab ± anti-PD-1 has modest clinical activity. Clinicians should be attentive to the risk of irAEs, including recurrence of irAEs that occurred during induction therapy. Future studies are necessary to determine best management after resistance to combination immunotherapy.

9.
J Immunother Cancer ; 9(7)2021 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34281989

RESUMO

Expanding the US Food and Drug Administration-approved indications for immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with cancer has resulted in therapeutic success and immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Neurologic irAEs (irAE-Ns) have an incidence of 1%-12% and a high fatality rate relative to other irAEs. Lack of standardized disease definitions and accurate phenotyping leads to syndrome misclassification and impedes development of evidence-based treatments and translational research. The objective of this study was to develop consensus guidance for an approach to irAE-Ns including disease definitions and severity grading. A working group of four neurologists drafted irAE-N consensus guidance and definitions, which were reviewed by the multidisciplinary Neuro irAE Disease Definition Panel including oncologists and irAE experts. A modified Delphi consensus process was used, with two rounds of anonymous ratings by panelists and two 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. Aggregated survey responses were incorporated into revised definitions. Consensus was based on numeric ratings using the RAND/University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Appropriateness Method with prespecified definitions. 27 panelists from 15 academic medical centers voted on a total of 53 rating scales (6 general guidance, 24 central and 18 peripheral nervous system disease definition components, 3 severity criteria and 2 clinical trial adjudication statements); of these, 77% (41/53) received first round consensus. After revisions, all items received second round consensus. Consensus definitions were achieved for seven core disorders: irMeningitis, irEncephalitis, irDemyelinating disease, irVasculitis, irNeuropathy, irNeuromuscular junction disorders and irMyopathy. For each disorder, six descriptors of diagnostic components are used: disease subtype, diagnostic certainty, severity, autoantibody association, exacerbation of pre-existing disease or de novo presentation, and presence or absence of concurrent irAE(s). These disease definitions standardize irAE-N classification. Diagnostic certainty is not always directly linked to certainty to treat as an irAE-N (ie, one might treat events in the probable or possible category). Given consensus on accuracy and usability from a representative panel group, we anticipate that the definitions will be used broadly across clinical and research settings.


Assuntos
Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/diagnóstico , Inibidores de Checkpoint Imunológico/efeitos adversos , Imunoterapia/efeitos adversos , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso/diagnóstico , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Consenso , Humanos , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso/induzido quimicamente , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso/imunologia , Neurologistas/estatística & dados numéricos , Oncologistas/estatística & dados numéricos , Equipe de Assistência ao Paciente/organização & administração , Equipe de Assistência ao Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos
10.
J Immunother Cancer ; 9(7)2021 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34215691

RESUMO

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of cancer, improving outcomes in patients with advanced malignancies. The use of ICIs in clinical practice, and the number of ICI clinical trials, are rapidly increasing. The use of ICIs in combination with other forms of cancer therapy, such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or targeted therapy, is also expanding. However, immune-related adverse events (irAEs) can be serious in up to a third of patients. Critical questions remain surrounding the characteristics and outcomes of irAEs, and how they may affect the overall risk-benefit relationship for combination therapies. This article proposes a framework for irAE classification and reporting, and identifies limitations in the capture and sharing of data on irAEs from current clinical trial and real-world data. We outline key gaps and suggestions for clinicians, clinical investigators, drug sponsors, patients, and other stakeholders to make these critical data more available to researchers for pooled analysis, to advance contemporary understanding of irAEs, and ultimately improve the efficacy of ICIs.

11.
Eur J Cancer ; 153: 168-178, 2021 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34182268

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Combination ipilimumab and nivolumab is approved for several malignancies. Toxicity most often occurs 6-10 weeks into treatment. Whether very early toxicity is harder to manage or influences efficacy is unknown. METHODS: Consecutive metastatic melanoma patients who developed hyperacute toxicity, defined as Grade 2+ irAE within 21 days of receiving ipilimumab + anti-PD-1 were retrospectively identified from nine centres. RESULTS: A total of 82 patients developed hyperacute toxicity (estimated incidence 9%), at a median 10 days (range 1-21). Toxicities included colitis (N = 23), rash (17), hepatitis (9), endocrine (9), pneumonitis (6) and neurotoxicity (4) and were G2 (38%), G3 (52%), G4 (6%) and G5 (2% myocarditis). Fifty-nine percent required treatment beyond oral steroids, including IV steroids (28%), infliximab and other immunosuppression (30%). A total of 29% patients developed an additional hyperacute toxicity and 26% another toxicity >21 days after treatment commencement but before further immunotherapy. The objective response rate (ORR) was 54%, and after a median 11.6 mo follow-up, median PFS was 7.4 mo. Increasing levels of immunosuppression was associated with a reduced PFS (12-month PFS 62% no immunosuppression versus 49% oral steroids versus 33% IV steroids versus 20% further immunosuppressants, p = 0.006). There was no significant difference in ORR or PFS by duration of immunosuppression. CONCLUSIONS: Hyperacute toxicities from combination immunotherapy have a wide spectrum and can be severe. Many patients require significant immunosuppression for prolonged durations and remain at risk of further severe toxicity. Melanoma outcomes in such patients appear similar to those of trial populations, although greater immunosuppression requirements may be associated with inferior outcomes.

12.
Mol Cancer ; 20(1): 85, 2021 06 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34092233

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: While immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) is the current first-line treatment for metastatic melanoma, it is effective for ~ 52% of patients and has dangerous side effects. The objective here was to identify the feasibility and mechanism of RAS/RAF/PI3K pathway inhibition in melanoma to sensitize tumors to ICB therapy. METHODS: Rigosertib (RGS) is a non-ATP-competitive small molecule RAS mimetic. RGS monotherapy or in combination therapy with ICB were investigated using immunocompetent mouse models of BRAFwt and BRAFmut melanoma and analyzed in reference to patient data. RESULTS: RGS treatment (300 mg/kg) was well tolerated in mice and resulted in ~ 50% inhibition of tumor growth as monotherapy and ~ 70% inhibition in combination with αPD1 + αCTLA4. RGS-induced tumor growth inhibition depends on CD40 upregulation in melanoma cells followed by immunogenic cell death, leading to enriched dendritic cells and activated T cells in the tumor microenvironment. The RGS-initiated tumor suppression was partially reversed by either knockdown of CD40 expression in melanoma cells or depletion of CD8+ cytotoxic T cells. Treatment with either dabrafenib and trametinib or with RGS, increased CD40+SOX10+ melanoma cells in the tumors of melanoma patients and patient-derived xenografts. High CD40 expression level correlates with beneficial T-cell responses and better survival in a TCGA dataset from melanoma patients. Expression of CD40 by melanoma cells is associated with therapeutic response to RAF/MEK inhibition and ICB. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support the therapeutic use of RGS + αPD1 + αCTLA4 in RAS/RAF/PI3K pathway-activated melanomas and point to the need for clinical trials of RGS + ICB for melanoma patients who do not respond to ICB alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01205815 (Sept 17, 2010).

13.
J Immunother Cancer ; 9(6)2021 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34172516

RESUMO

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are the standard of care for the treatment of several cancers. While these immunotherapies have improved patient outcomes in many clinical settings, they bring accompanying risks of toxicity, specifically immune-related adverse events (irAEs). There is a need for clear, effective guidelines for the management of irAEs during ICI treatment, motivating the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) to convene an expert panel to develop a clinical practice guideline. The panel discussed the recognition and management of single and combination ICI irAEs and ultimately developed evidence- and consensus-based recommendations to assist medical professionals in clinical decision-making and to improve outcomes for patients.

14.
Lancet Oncol ; 22(6): 836-847, 2021 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33989557

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Anti-PD-1 therapy (hereafter referred to as anti-PD-1) induces long-term disease control in approximately 30% of patients with metastatic melanoma; however, two-thirds of patients are resistant and will require further treatment. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (pembrolizumab or nivolumab) compared with ipilimumab monotherapy in patients who are resistant to anti-PD-(L)1 therapy (hereafter referred to as anti-PD-[L]1). METHODS: This multicentre, retrospective, cohort study, was done at 15 melanoma centres in Australia, Europe, and the USA. We included adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with metastatic melanoma (unresectable stage III and IV), who were resistant to anti-PD-(L)1 (innate or acquired resistance) and who then received either ipilimumab monotherapy or ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (pembrolizumab or nivolumab), based on availability of therapies or clinical factors determined by the physician, or both. Tumour response was assessed as per standard of care (CT or PET-CT scans every 3 months). The study endpoints were objective response rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety of ipilimumab compared with ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1. FINDINGS: We included 355 patients with metastatic melanoma, resistant to anti-PD-(L)1 (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or atezolizumab), who had been treated with ipilimumab monotherapy (n=162 [46%]) or ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (n=193 [54%]) between Feb 1, 2011, and Feb 6, 2020. At a median follow-up of 22·1 months (IQR 9·5-30·9), the objective response rate was higher with ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (60 [31%] of 193 patients) than with ipilimumab monotherapy (21 [13%] of 162 patients; p<0·0001). Overall survival was longer in the ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 group (median overall survival 20·4 months [95% CI 12·7-34·8]) than with ipilimumab monotherapy (8·8 months [6·1-11·3]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·50, 95% CI 0·38-0·66; p<0·0001). Progression-free survival was also longer with ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (median 3·0 months [95% CI 2·6-3·6]) than with ipilimumab (2·6 months [2·4-2·9]; HR 0·69, 95% CI 0·55-0·87; p=0·0019). Similar proportions of patients reported grade 3-5 adverse events in both groups (59 [31%] of 193 patients in the ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 group vs 54 [33%] of 162 patients in the ipilimumab group). The most common grade 3-5 adverse events were diarrhoea or colitis (23 [12%] of 193 patients in the ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 group vs 33 [20%] of 162 patients in the ipilimumab group) and increased alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase (24 [12%] vs 15 [9%]). One death occurred with ipilimumab 26 days after the last treatment: a colon perforation due to immune-related pancolitis. INTERPRETATION: In patients who are resistant to anti-PD-(L)1, ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 seemed to yield higher efficacy than ipilimumab with a higher objective response rate, longer progression-free, and longer overall survival, with a similar rate of grade 3-5 toxicity. Ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 should be favoured over ipilimumab alone as a second-line immunotherapy for these patients with advanced melanoma. FUNDING: None.


Assuntos
Inibidores de Checkpoint Imunológico/administração & dosagem , Ipilimumab/administração & dosagem , Melanoma/tratamento farmacológico , Receptor de Morte Celular Programada 1/genética , Idoso , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/administração & dosagem , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/efeitos adversos , Estudos de Coortes , Resistencia a Medicamentos Antineoplásicos/genética , Resistencia a Medicamentos Antineoplásicos/imunologia , Feminino , Humanos , Inibidores de Checkpoint Imunológico/efeitos adversos , Ipilimumab/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Melanoma/genética , Melanoma/imunologia , Melanoma/patologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Metástase Neoplásica , Nivolumabe/administração & dosagem , Nivolumabe/efeitos adversos , Tomografia por Emissão de Pósitrons combinada à Tomografia Computadorizada , Receptor de Morte Celular Programada 1/antagonistas & inibidores , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Estudos Retrospectivos
15.
J Immunother Cancer ; 9(5)2021 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33963010

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of immunotherapy have excluded patients with pre-existing autoimmune disease. While the safety and efficacy of single agent ipilimumab and anti-PD1 antibodies in patients with autoimmune disease has been examined in retrospective studies, no data are available for combination therapy which has significantly higher toxicity risk. We sought to establish the safety and efficacy of combination immunotherapy for patients with advanced melanoma and pre-existing autoimmune diseases. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients with advanced melanoma and pre-existing autoimmune disease who received combination ipilimumab and anti-PD1 at 10 international centers from March 2015 to February 2020. Data regarding the autoimmune disease, treatment, toxicity and outcomes were examined in patients. RESULTS: Of the 55 patients who received ipilimumab and anti-PD1, the median age was 63 years (range 23-83). Forty-six were treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab and nine with ipilimumab and pembrolizumab.Eighteen patients (33%) had a flare of their autoimmune disease including 4 of 7 with rheumatoid arthritis, 3 of 6 with psoriasis, 5 of 10 with inflammatory bowel disease, 3 of 19 with thyroiditis, 1 of 1 with Sjogren's syndrome, 1 of 1 with polymyalgia and 1 of 1 with Behcet's syndrome and psoriasis. Eight (44%) patients ceased combination therapy due to flare. Thirty-seven patients (67%) had an unrelated immune-related adverse event (irAE), and 20 (36%) ceased combination immunotherapy due to irAEs. There were no treatment-related deaths. Patients on immunosuppression (OR 4.59; p=0.03) had a higher risk of flare.The overall response rate was 55%, with 77% of responses ongoing. Median progression free survival and overall survival were 10 and 24 months, respectively. Patients on baseline immunosuppression had an overall survival of 11 months (95% CI 3.42 to 18.58) compared with 31 months without (95% CI 20.89 to 41.11, p=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with pre-existing autoimmune disease, not on immunosuppression and advanced melanoma, combination ipilimumab and anti-PD1 has similar efficacy compared with previously reported trials. There is a risk of flare of pre-existing autoimmune disorders, particularly in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and rheumatologic conditions, and patients on baseline immunosuppression.

16.
Eur J Cancer ; 151: 72-83, 2021 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33971447

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: In patients with metastatic melanoma, progression of a single tumour lesion (solitary progression) after response to immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) is increasingly treated with local therapy. We evaluated the role of local therapy for solitary progression in melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic melanoma treated with ICI between 2010 and 2019 with solitary progression as first progressive event were included from 17 centres in 9 countries. Follow-up and survival are reported from ICI initiation. RESULTS: We identified 294 patients with solitary progression after stable disease in 15%, partial response in 55% and complete response in 30%. The median follow-up was 43 months; the median time to solitary progression was 13 months, and the median time to subsequent progression after treatment of solitary progression (TTSP) was 33 months. The estimated 3-year overall survival (OS) was 79%; median OS was not reached. Treatment consisted of systemic therapy (18%), local therapy (36%), both combined (42%) or active surveillance (4%). In 44% of patients treated for solitary progression, no subsequent progression occurred. For solitary progression during ICI (n = 143), the median TTSP was 29 months. Both TTSP and OS were similar for local therapy, ICI continuation and both combined. For solitary progression post ICI (n = 151), the median TTSP was 35 months. TTSP was higher for ICI recommencement plus local therapy than local therapy or ICI recommencement alone (p = 0.006), without OS differences. CONCLUSION: Almost half of patients with melanoma treated for solitary progression after initial response to ICI had no subsequent progression. This study suggests that local therapy can benefit patients and is associated with favourable long-term outcomes.

17.
Circ Res ; 128(11): 1780-1801, 2021 May 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33934609

RESUMO

Immune-based therapies have revolutionized cancer treatments. Cardiovascular sequelae from these treatments, however, have emerged as critical complications, representing new challenges in cardio-oncology. Immune therapies include a broad range of novel drugs, from antibodies and other biologics, including immune checkpoint inhibitors and bispecific T-cell engagers, to cell-based therapies, such as chimeric-antigen receptor T-cell therapies. The recognition of immunotherapy-associated cardiovascular side effects has also catapulted new research questions revolving around the interactions between the immune and cardiovascular systems, and the signaling cascades affected by T cell activation, cytokine release, and immune system dysregulation. Here, we review the specific mechanisms of immune activation from immunotherapies and the resulting cardiovascular toxicities associated with immune activation and excess cytokine production.

18.
Oncologist ; 26(9): 731-e1498, 2021 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33861486

RESUMO

LESSONS LEARNED: This study suggests that trametinib has significant clinical activity in non-V600 BRAF mutation and BRAF fusion metastatic melanoma, albeit in a small cohort. All patients with metastatic melanoma should undergo sequencing of the BRAF gene to identify noncanonical BRAF mutations that may indicate benefit from treatment with trametinib. BACKGROUND: Non-V600 BRAF mutations and BRAF fusions in aggregate occur in approximately 5% of all melanomas. Inhibition of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway has been implicated as a possible treatment strategy for these patients. METHODS: In this open-label, multicenter, phase II study, patients with advanced melanoma harboring mutations in BRAF outside V600 (non-V600) or BRAF fusions received trametinib 2.0 mg daily. Patients were divided into cohorts based on the intrinsic catalytic activity of BRAF mutation (high, cohort A; low/unknown, cohort B). The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) for patients in cohort A; secondary endpoints included ORR in cohort B, safety, and survival in both treatment arms. RESULTS: Among all patients, the ORR was 33% (three of nine patients), including 67% in cohort A and 17% in cohort B. Two patients had stable disease as best response, and six patients had some degree of tumor shrinkage. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.3 months. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in all patients (100%); most (89%) were grade 1-2. CONCLUSION: In contrast to recently described tumor-agnostic studies in a genetically similar population, trametinib had considerable activity in a small population of patients with melanoma harboring BRAF non-V600 mutations and fusions, providing rationale for sequencing in search of these genomic alterations.


Assuntos
Melanoma , Neoplasias Cutâneas , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Humanos , Imidazóis/uso terapêutico , Melanoma/tratamento farmacológico , Melanoma/genética , Mutação , Oximas/uso terapêutico , Inibidores de Proteínas Quinases/uso terapêutico , Proteínas Proto-Oncogênicas B-raf/genética , Piridonas/efeitos adversos , Pirimidinonas , Neoplasias Cutâneas/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Cutâneas/genética
19.
Nat Rev Endocrinol ; 17(7): 389-399, 2021 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33875857

RESUMO

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are monoclonal antibodies that target two key signalling pathways related to T cell activation and exhaustion, by binding to and inhibiting cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA4) or PD1 and its ligand PDL1. ICIs, such as nivolumab, pembrolizumab and ipilimumab, are approved for the treatment of numerous and diverse cancer types, in various combination regimens, and are now an established cornerstone of cancer therapeutics. Toxicities induced by ICIs are autoimmune in nature and are referred to as immune-related adverse events (irAEs); these events can affect any organ system in an unpredictable fashion. Importantly, irAEs can manifest as endocrinopathies involving the thyroid (hypothyroidism or thyrotoxicosis), pituitary (hypophysitis), adrenal glands (adrenal insufficiency) and pancreas (diabetes mellitus). These events are a frequent source of acute and persistent morbidity in patients treated with ICIs and can even be fatal. Over the past few years, there has been a growing understanding of the underlying pathogenesis of irAEs that has led to the development of more effective management strategies. Herein, we review the current understanding of the pathobiology, clinical manifestations and treatment approaches to endocrine toxicities arising from ICIs.


Assuntos
Doenças do Sistema Endócrino/induzido quimicamente , Inibidores de Checkpoint Imunológico/efeitos adversos , Antineoplásicos Imunológicos/efeitos adversos , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/epidemiologia , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/imunologia , Doenças do Sistema Endócrino/diagnóstico , Doenças do Sistema Endócrino/epidemiologia , Doenças do Sistema Endócrino/terapia , Humanos , Sistema Imunitário/efeitos dos fármacos , Sistema Imunitário/fisiologia , Imunoterapia/efeitos adversos , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias/epidemiologia , Neoplasias/imunologia
20.
Expert Opin Biol Ther ; : 1-12, 2021 May 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33890832

RESUMO

Introduction: Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) represent inhibitory immune checkpoints. Combination immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy with anti-CTLA-4 plus anti-PD-1 antibodies in preclinical models demonstrated greater anti-tumor effect than therapy with either antibody alone. Based upon this anti-tumor effect, anti-CTLA-4 plus anti-PD-1 antibodies have since been tested in a patients, across tumor types, with advanced malignancies.Areas covered: Herein we describe the biologic rationale for combining anti-CTLA-4 plus anti-PD-1 antibodies, the early studies which established different treatment schedules of the ICI combination in melanoma, the definitive studies which established the role for anti-CTLA-4 plus anti-PD-1 antibodies in patients with advanced malignancies and the toxicity profiles of these agents. We also discuss several experimental disease settings where combined CTLA-4 and PD-1 blockade is being explored.Expert opinion: We anticipate that combination therapy with anti-CTLA-4 plus anti-PD-1 antibodies will become a treatment standard for patients with cancers both responsive and unresponsive to single agent ICI therapy. Given the toxicity profile, we expect that most patients will be treated with lower doses of anti-CTLA-4 and full doses of anti-PD-1 antibodies, however, there may be instances in which a higher dose of anti-CTLA-4 is preferred.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...