Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Rechallenge and Resumption: a Systematic Review

Rechallenge of anti-PD-1 antibody combined with chemotherapy shows promising efficacy in the treatment of advanced metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma: A case report

This report presents the case of a 53-year-old man who was diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma and developed lung metastasis after undergoing surgery and interventional treatment. The lung metastasis progressed multiple times while the patient was undergoing successive treatments with Lenvatinib, Apatinib combined with Camrelizumab and Regorafenib. Eventually, a positive response was achieved with Tislelizumab combined with Xelox. The patient has been receiving Tislelizumab combined with Xelox for 23 months and has maintained a complete response to treatment. This case indicates that combining immune rechallenge with chemotherapy is beneficial for metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma.

Rechallenge with immune-checkpoint inhibitors in patients with advanced-stage lung cancer

Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally, with many patients diagnosed with advanced-stage disease. Treatment in this setting relies on systemic therapies, including chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy. Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), which promote or restore antitumour immunity by inhibiting immunosuppressive signalling pathways, are currently the most widely used immunotherapies in these patients. However, immune-related adverse events (irAEs) or disease progression often necessitate discontinuation of these agents, leaving many patients with limited subsequent treatment options. In this scenario, ICI rechallenge has emerged as a potential strategy. Despite this potential, evidence for ICI rechallenge after either disease progression or irAEs in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer is limited and evidence for those with small cell lung cancer seems to be non-existent. In this Review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the available data on ICI rechallenge in the context of both disease progression and irAEs, including a summary of current guidance on clinical management and detailed discussions of safety and efficacy. We also highlight important unanswered questions in an attempt to guide future research in this area.

Clinical factors influencing retreatment with anti-PD-(L)1 therapies after treatment in early-stage cancers: a modified Delphi consensus study

Anti-programmed death (ligand) 1 (anti-PD-(L)1) therapies were first introduced in the metastatic setting and have since been approved and reimbursed for treating early-stage cancers in the adjuvant, perioperative, and neoadjuvant settings in many cancer types. Current evidence supporting anti-PD(L)-1 retreatment after relapse with prior neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant anti-PD(L)1 therapy is limited and inconclusive. There is no guidance for clinicians on how and when to retreat with anti-PD-(L)1 therapies when anti-PD-(L)1 therapy was administered in the neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant setting. This study aimed to reach consensus on factors to guide decision-making regarding retreatment with anti-PD-(L)1 therapies after prior therapy with an anti-PD-(L)1 agent. This modified Delphi study consisted of a clinician survey across 10 countries followed by three real-time virtual Delphi panels involving clinical experts who had completed the survey. Clinical experts were experienced in using anti-PD-(L)1 treatments in early-stage cancers and/or as retreatment of patients with recurrences following early-stage treatment with anti-PD-(L)1 therapies. Of 28 clinicians providing survey responses, 20 participated in one of three Delphi panels. There was consensus that retreatment can be defined as 'repeated treatment with the same therapeutic class following relapse after or during neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant treatment.' All three panels agreed that decisions around retreatment should consider 'prior immune-related adverse events/toxicity,' 'time-related factors' (eg, time since completion of full treatment course and since discontinuation) and 'previous patient response' (often referred to by clinicians as tumor response, which may have reflected their experience with metastatic disease). Other factors identified as important included country-specific practices, treatment availability, and reimbursement. Generally, the clinical experts considered that retreatment could be considered from ≥3 to 6 months after stopping initial anti-PD-(L)1 treatment, or from ≥6 months after relapse/recurrence. In conclusion, clinicians across different regions recognized a role for retreating patients with anti-PD-(L)1 therapies after initial anti-PD-(L)1 treatment for early-stage cancers. Consensus was reached on some factors to consider regarding whether and when to retreat, although differences in clinical practice between countries/geographical regions made it difficult to achieve consensus for some more nuanced elements of retreatment. Further evidence could help better inform retreatment decisions.

A multicenter, prospective, observational study of nivolumab readministration for advanced gastric cancer (NIVO RETURNS)

Combination treatment with an anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) antibody, an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI), and chemotherapy is the standard treatment for patients with HER2-negative advanced gastric/esophagogastric cancer (AGC). ICI re-administration has been reported to have a clinical benefit for patients with lung cancer or melanoma. However, data on patients with AGC have not yet been collected. We plan to conduct a prospective, multicenter, observational NIVO RETURNS study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nivolumab monotherapy re-administration in patients with AGC refractory to initial anti-PD-1 or anti-programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) antibody treatment. Patients who have achieved clinical benefits (complete response, partial response, or stable disease for ≥ 6 months) from prior treatment, including anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy, will be included. The primary endpoint will be the objective response rate to nivolumab re-administration. We anticipate that our findings will contribute to the improvement of survival outcomes as later-line treatment for AGC.Clinical trial registration: UMIN000050515, UMIN000051044.

The efficacy of ICIs rechallenge in advanced small cell lung cancer after progression from ICIs plus chemotherapy: A real-world study

BACKGROUND

Rechallenging immune checkpoint inhibitors(ICIs) after resistance to initial ICIs plus chemotherapy(chemo-ICIs) remains uncertain in advanced small cell lung cancer(SCLC).

METHOD

The study retrospectively enrolled advanced SCLC patients who received ICIs after developing resistance to chemo-ICIs during hospitalization at Hunan Cancer Hospital from January 2020 to November 2023. The clinical outcomes and prognosis factors for ICIs rechallenge were further analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 175 patients were included, of which 82(46.86 %) patients had primary resistance(PR) and 93(53.14 %) patients developed acquired resistance(AR). The progression-free survival(PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR) of the total group were 3.3 months,16.57 %, and 53.71 %, respectively. The AR group exhibited significantly longer PFS compared to the PR group (4.5 months vs. 3.2 months, p = 0.012). In the PR group, a significantly longer PFS was found for ICIs rechallenge with interval treatment than without interval treatment(4.2 months vs. 3.1 months, p = 0.031). Within the AR group, the "new immunotherapy plus new chemotherapy" regimen showed a significantly longer PFS compared to the regimen of "maintain immunotherapy plus new chemotherapy" (8.3 months vs. 3.2 months, p = 0.014). The multivariate COX regression analyses demonstrated that both resistance pattern(p = 0.007) and treatment regimen(p = 0.039) independently served as risk factors for PFS in ICIs rechallenge.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that rechallenge of ICIs could be considered as a potential therapeutic strategy for advanced SCLC after progression from chemo-ICIs, particularly in patients with AR.

Efficacy and safety analysis of atezolizumab continuation beyond progression in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer

The advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has revolutionized the treatment landscape for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) patients. However, many patients eventually develop resistance to immunotherapy. While continued ICI therapy beyond disease progression has shown survival benefits in various cancers, research specific to ES-SCLC remains limited. Our study aimed to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab continuation therapy to optimize the ICI continuation strategies for ES-SCLC. In this multicenter study, all enrolled patients received continued atezolizumab in combination therapy as second-line (2L) treatment after progression of first-line (1L) chemo-immunotherapy. The efficacy was measured by median overall survival (mOS) and median progression-free survival (mPFS). Safety was evaluated based on incidence of adverse events (AEs). Among the 28 eligible patients in this study, mPFS was 4.07 months [95% CI: 1.15 to 6.98], and mOS was 18.87 months [95% CI: 15.28 to 22.45]. In the safety analysis, respiratory-related AEs were the most common, including cough (35.7%), dyspnea (35.7%), pneumonitis (35.7%). Additionally, thyroiditis (17.9%) was the most generally reported immune-related adverse events (irAEs). In subgroup analysis, the LTR group (1L-PFS ≥ 6 months) showed longer mOS compared with the STR group (1L-PFS < 6 months) [19.98 vs. 8.68 months, p = 0.021]. Patients with greater DpR (≥ 29% than < 29%) had longer mOS: 21.84 vs. 14.63, p < 0.01]. Atezolizumab continuation therapy demonstrated promising efficacy and manageable safety in ES-SCLC patients progressing after 1L chemo-immunotherapy, particularly in those with favorable 1L treatment responses.

Advances in cervical cancer: current insights and future directions

In alignment with the World Health Organization's strategy to eliminate cervical cancer, substantial progress has been made in the treatment of this malignancy. Cervical cancer, largely driven by human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, is considered preventable and manageable because of its well-established etiology. Advancements in precision screening technologies, such as DNA methylation triage, HPV integration detection, liquid biopsies, and artificial intelligence-assisted diagnostics, have augmented traditional screening methods such as HPV nucleic acid testing and cytology. Therapeutic strategies aimed at eradicating HPV and reversing precancerous lesions have been refined as pivotal measures for disease prevention. The controversy surrounding surgery for early-stage cervical cancer revolves around identifying optimal candidates for minimally invasive and conservative procedures without compromising oncological outcomes. Recent clinical trials have yielded promising results for the development of systemic therapies for advanced cervical cancer. Immunotherapies, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), and targeted therapy have demonstrated significant effectiveness, marking a substantial advancement in cervical cancer management. Various combination therapies have been validated, and ongoing trials aim to enhance outcomes through the development of novel drugs and optimized combination regimens. The prospect of eradicating cervical cancer as the first malignancy to be eliminated is now within reach. In this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the latest scientific insights, with a particular focus on precision managements for various stages of cervical disease, and explore future research directions in cervical cancer.

A Case of Primary Lung Adenocarcinoma With Recurrent Brain Metastasis due to Transformation to Small Cell Carcinoma During Adjuvant Atezolizumab Therapy

Histologic transformation from non-small cell to small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a resistance mechanism to immune checkpoint inhibitors. We report herein a case of lung adenocarcinoma who developed liver and brain metastases during adjuvant atezolizumab therapy. The patient underwent a craniotomy to resect a brain metastasis, which was pathologically diagnosed as SCLC. He subsequently received platinum-based chemotherapy with durvalumab, resulting in sustained regression of the liver metastases. This case demonstrates a metastatic brain tumor-acquired resistance to atezolizumab through histologic transformation from adenocarcinoma to SCLC. Therefore, rebiopsy is needed if recurrent disease appears during immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

Treatment options for tumor progression after initial immunotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A real-world study

OBJECTIVE

Whether to continue administering immunotherapy to patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have experienced tumor progression remains controversial after immunotherapy. The aims were to explore survival outcomes after further immunotherapy post-progression and to determine the optimal combination therapy in such cases.

METHODS

Overall, 507 patients with NSCLC who underwent immunotherapy and experienced tumor progression were retrospectively divided into Immuno-combination and No-immuno groups according to whether additional combination therapy involving immunotherapy was administered post-progression. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the different treatment regimens for patients in the Immuno-combination group.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, there were 150 patients in the No-immuno group and 300 patients in the Immuno combination group. Superior PFS was observed in the Immuno-combination group compared with those in the No-immuno group (6-month PFS: 25.3 % vs. 60.6 %; 12-month PFS: 6.7 % vs. 24.4 %; P < 0.001). Similar intergroup differences were observed for OS (12-month OS: 22.3 % vs. 69.4 %; 18-month OS: 6.4 % vs. 40.4 %; P < 0.001). Superior PFS outcomes were observed in the Immuno+Antiangiogenic group compared with the Immuno+Chemo group (6-month PFS: 51.3 % vs. 71.5 %; 12-month PFS: 23.1 % vs. 25.7 %; P = 0.017). Similar differences in OS were observed between those same subgroups (12-month OS: 62.1 % vs. 77.9 %; 18-month OS: 33.3 % vs. 48.7 %; P = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Patients with NSCLC experiencing tumor progression post-immunotherapy can still benefit from further treatment, with immunotherapy combined with antiangiogenic therapy the most efficacious option.

Continuation of same programmed death-1 inhibitor regime beyond progression is a novel option for advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is a significant global malignancy with poor prognosis. Although the emergence of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) prolonged the duration of survival, resistance and progression are inevitable. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors in immunotherapy beyond progression (IBP).

METHOD

We divided the advanced gastric cancer patients who received two lines immunotherapy into same regimen group (with same PD-1 inhibitor regime after IBP) and different regimen group (with different PD-1 inhibitor regime after IBP). Statistical analysis conducted to compare patient characteristics and evaluate survival differences between groups.

RESULT

The clinical outcome analysis showed that the same PD-1 inhibitor regime seemed to exhibit a higher disease control rate (DCR) (51.8% vs. 29.2%, P = 0.062), significantly prolonged progression-free survival 2 (PFS2) (162 vs. 75 days, P = 0.001) and overall survival (OS) (312 vs. 166 days, P = 0.022) when compared with those of cross line. In the multivariate analysis, when using different regimen group as reference, the same regimen group was found to be independently associated with improved PFS2 [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.467, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.267-0.816, P = 0.008] and OS (HR = 0.508, 95%CI: 0.278-0.927, P = 0.027).

CONCLUSION

Continuation of the same type of PD-1 inhibitor regime in IBP shows clinical benefits and represents a promising therapeutic approach.

Durability of response to immune checkpoint blockade following treatment discontinuation and efficacy of rechallenge in advanced Merkel cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Advanced Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) has a high response rate to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapy, but the durability of responses once treatment is discontinued remains unclear. We therefore reviewed the long-term outcomes of advanced patients with MCC who discontinued ICB treatment after achieving favorable initial response.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of advanced patients with MCC treated at a single high-volume referral center, including all patients who received at least one dose of anti-programmed death receptor 1 (ligand) monotherapy for unresectable or metastatic disease, achieved stable disease (SD) or better, and discontinued treatment for a reason other than disease progression.

RESULTS

Of 195 advanced patients with MCC treated with ICB, we identified 45 who met the study criteria. Of these, 21 (46.6%) had a complete response (CR) to initial ICB treatment, 23 (51.1%) a partial response and 1 (2.2%) SD. 25 (55.6%) patients discontinued ICB electively and 20 (44.4%) discontinued due to toxicity. In total, 21 of the 45 patients (46.6%) experienced disease progression at a median of 11.3 months (range 2.1-22.7 months) from ICB cessation. There was a lower rate of progression in patients who achieved CR versus non-CR (23.8% vs 66.7%, p=0.006) and a trend towards a lower rate in those who discontinued electively versus due to toxicity (36.0% vs 60.0%, p=0.14). There was a higher risk for progression in patients with viral positive MCC compared with viral negative MCC (75.0 vs 30.8%, p=0.02). 16 of the 21 patients who experienced progression were retreated subsequently with ICB therapy, including both single-agent rechallenge (12) and escalation to combination ICB (4). 11 of 15 evaluable ICB-retreated patients (73.3%) achieved an objective response.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with advanced MCC have a substantial risk of disease progression following treatment discontinuation despite initial favorable ICB response, particularly in those that achieve less than a CR. Most of these patients maintain sensitivity to retreatment with the same drug class. Virus-positive MCC may be a risk factor for post-discontinuation relapse, which should be validated in future studies.

A Retrospective Analysis of the Prognostic Factors and Adverse Events in the Treatment of Mucosal Melanoma in a Single Centre

Background: Despite the dramatic advances in the management of metastatic cutaneous melanoma, there remains no consensus-based, evidence-based strategy for the management of mucosal melanoma. The rare nature of the disease, its late clinical presentation, and distinct tumour biology all complicate efforts to optimise patient outcomes. Methods: To this end, we carried out a monocentric, retrospective analysis of all patients diagnosed with mucosal melanoma and treated between 2013 and 2021. Both tumour- and patient-specific characteristics were recorded, in addition to immune-related adverse events, in order to provide real-world data on disease progression, treatment efficacy, and the identification of prognostic markers. Results: A total of 20 patients were identified (14 females and 6 males), with a mean age at diagnosis of 65.9 years. The median follow-up was 3.9 years (95% CI 1.4-6.4 years) from the initiation of systemic therapy. The median OS in the entire cohort was 1.9 years (95% CI 0.5-3.3 years). Performance status, sex, body mass index, and the presence of brain metastases were not associated with poorer outcomes. However, serum lactate dehydrogenase levels (LDH) (p = 0.04) and an NRAS mutation were markers of a poor prognosis (p = 0.004). Conclusuion: There is a pressing need for real-world, prospective, and clinical trial data to inform the optimal management of mucosal melanoma, and data supporting the use of adjuvant and neo-adjuvant immunotherapy are currently lacking. However, an elevated LDH is a reliable, independent negative prognostic marker. Inter-disciplinary management remains essential in order to develop optimal treatment strategies.

Corticosteroids and other immunosuppressants for immune-related adverse events and checkpoint inhibitor effectiveness in melanoma

BACKGROUND

Recent studies indicate an association between immunosuppression for immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and impaired survival in patients who received immune checkpoint inhibitors. Whether this is related to corticosteroids or second-line immunosuppressants is unknown. In the largest cohort thus far, we assessed the association of immunosuppressant type and dose with survival in melanoma patients with irAEs.

METHODS

Patients with advanced melanoma who received immunosuppressants for irAEs induced by first-line anti-PD-1 ± anti-CTLA-4 were included from 18 hospitals worldwide. Associations of cumulative and peak dose corticosteroids and use of second-line immunosuppression with survival from start of immunosuppression were assessed using multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression.

RESULTS

Among 606 patients, 404 had anti-PD-1 + anti-CTLA-4-related irAEs and 202 had anti-PD-1-related irAEs. 425 patients (70 %) received corticosteroids only; 181 patients (30 %) additionally received second-line immunosuppressants. Median PFS and OS from starting immunosuppression were 4.5 (95 %CI 3.4-8.1) and 31 (95 %CI 15-not reached) months in patients who received second-line immunosuppressants, and 11 (95 %CI 9.4-14) and 55 (95 %CI 41-not reached) months in patients who did not. High corticosteroid peak dose was associated with worse PFS and OS (HRadj 1.14; 95 %CI 1.01-1.29; HRadj 1.29; 95 %CI 1.12-1.49 for 80vs40mg), while cumulative dose was not. Second-line immunosuppression was associated with worse PFS (HRadj 1.32; 95 %CI 1.02-1.72) and OS (HRadj 1.34; 95 %CI 0.99-1.82) compared with corticosteroids alone.

CONCLUSIONS

High corticosteroid peak dose and second-line immunosuppressants to treat irAEs are both associated with impaired survival. While immunosuppression is indispensable for treatment of severe irAEs, clinicians should weigh possible detrimental effects on survival against potential disadvantages of undertreatment.

Evolving standards and future directions for systemic therapies in cervical cancer

Several groundbreaking clinical trials with the potential to transform the management paradigm of both locally advanced and persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancers have been presented in 2023. This review describes the reported data from INTERLACE and KEYNOTE-A18 in the locally advanced setting, as well as BEATcc, innovaTV 301 and DESTINY-PanTumor02 for advanced disease. The practice implications of their positive results are interpreted in the context of global health considerations, and updated treatment algorithms are proposed. Furthermore, emerging trends in drug development for cervical cancer are discussed. As the routine use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for curative and palliative indications increases in the foreseeable future, patients whose cervical cancers which persist, relapse or progress after prior ICI exposure will represent an area of unmet clinical need and form the key target population for next-generation trials. Future research will help shape oncologists' approaches in the optimal selection, sequencing and re-treatment or rechallenge of immuno-oncology agents and/or antibody-drug conjugates in women with cervical cancer.

Rechallenge of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) rechallenge in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a promising therapeutic strategy. The situation for ICI rechallenge can be divided into three categories: adverse events (AEs); resistance to ICIs, and rechallenge becomes compulsive because of tumor relapse while the patients had completed a 2 year course of immunotherapy. However, these categories are still controversial and should be explored further. Through voting at the 6th Straits Summit Forum on Lung Cancer, in this study we summarize the consensus of 147 experts in ICI rechallenges. A total of 97.74% experts agreed to rechallenge; 48.87% experts rechallenge with the original drug, and the others rechallenge with a different drug; 40.3% agreed to rechallenge directly after progression; 88.06% experts agreed to ICI rechallenge with a combination regimen; and factors such as previous performance status score, PD-1 expression, and age should also be considered. Understanding the the clinical studies in ICI rechallenge could bring us one step closer to understanding the consensus. In patients with advanced NSCLC who have suffered recurrent or distant metastasis after immunotherapy, the option of rechallenge with ICIs is a promising treatment option.

Safety and efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a retrospective study

We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) rechallenge in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The study included 111 patients who had previously received ICI therapy and experienced disease progression. The primary endpoints assessed were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR). Our findings revealed that the ICI rechallenge showed promising results in improving patient outcomes. OS (r) is the time from rechallenging with immune checkpoint inhibitors to the last follow-up or death from any cause. The median OS (r) was 14.3 months (95% CI 11.3-17.3 months), with a median PFS (r) of 5.9 months (95% CI 4.1-7.7 months). The ORR was 17.1%; the DCR was 82.3%. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that patients without brain or liver metastases had a longer OS (r) compared to those with metastases (21.6 vs. 13.8 months, χ2 = 3.873, P = 0.046; 20.8 vs. 9.1 months, χ2 = 10.733, P = 0.001, respectively). Moreover, patients without driver gene mutations exhibited significantly longer OS than those with mutations or wild-type patients (22.9 vs. 16.1 vs. 7.5 months, χ2 = 10.710, P = 0.005). Notably, patients who switched to a different ICI during the rechallenge had shorter OS than those who did not change medications (10.4 vs. 21.1 months, χ2 = 9.014, P = 0.003). The incidence of immune-related adverse events did not significantly differ between the two treatment phases. These findings suggest that ICI rechallenge may be a viable therapeutic strategy for select NSCLC patients. Further prospective studies are needed to validate these results and guide treatment decisions for advanced NSCLC.

Clinical characteristics and novel strategies of immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge therapy for non-small cell lung cancer: a comprehensive review

Treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has entered the immunotherapy era, marked by significant survival improvements due to the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, owing to factors, such as disease progression, long-term use, and side effects, some patients discontinue immunotherapy, resulting in limited subsequent treatment option and a negative impact on their survival and quality of life. We have collected relevant data which reveal that ICI rechallenge may be an effective clinical strategy. However, many factors affect the efficacy of rechallenge, including patient characteristics, initial treatment drugs, treatment duration, efficacy, toxicity, and side effects. Additionally, the side effects of rechallenge and mechanisms of reversing drug resistance play crucial roles. Identifying suitable candidates, optimizing treatment plans and duration, enhancing treatment efficacy, and minimizing toxicity and adverse effects in rechallenges are pressing clinical needs. Addressing these issues can provide guidance for the clinical use of immunotherapy rechallenges to better serve patients. This review focuses on the clinical considerations and strategies for immune therapy rechallenges in NSCLC.

A comprehensive pan-cancer analysis of CDH5 in immunological response

Background

Cadherin 5 (CDH5) functions critically in maintaining cell adhesion and integrity of endothelial and vascular cells. The expression of CDH5 is abnormal in tumor cells, which may have great potential to serve as a new immune checkpoint. The current pan-cancer analysis was performed to better understand the role of CDH5 in tumor.

Methods

The clinical significance and immunological function of CDH5 in pan-cancers were comprehensively analyzed based on the correlations between CDH5 and clinicopathologic features, prognosis values, tumor mutation burden (TMB), microsatellite instability (MSI), immune cells infiltration and immune response genes using 33 datasets from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). We further confirmed the expression of CDH5 in bladder cancer (BCa) tissues and cell lines. The CD8+ T cells were screened from peripheral blood of healthy controls and activated. BCa cell-CD8+ T cell co-culture assay and ELISA assay were carried out to verify the immunological function of CDH5.

Results

The expression of CDH5 was down-regulated in 8 types of tumors including in BCa but up-regulated in 4 types of tumors. CDH5 was significantly correlated with tumor stage in 6 types of tumors. In addition, CDH5 was positively or negatively correlated with tumor prognosis. Furthermore, CDH5 was closely associated with TMB in 15 types of tumors and with MSI in 9 types of tumors. KEGG-GSEA and Hallmarks-GSEA analyses results indicated that CDH5 was positively related to immune response in most tumor types. In many tumors, CDH5 showed a positive correlation with immune cell infiltration. Enrichment analyses demonstrated that CDH5 was significantly related to the expression of many immunomodulators and chemokines. Further experiments showed that CDH5 was low-expressed in BCa tissues and cell lines in comparison to adjacent normal tissues and normal urothelial cell line, but it was positively associated with a better prognosis of BCa patients. The results of in vitro co-culture assay and ELISA assay demonstrated that CDH5 could promote the function of CD8+ T cells in TME of BCa.

Conclusion

In summary, CDH5 was positively associated with a favorable prognosis and effective immune response in tumors, showing a great potential to serve as a novel tumor biomarker and immune checkpoint.

Hepatic cavernous hemangioma developed in non-small cell lung cancer patients after receiving Camrelizumab treatment: two case reports

Purpose

To report two cases of hepatic cavernous hemangioma, a rare complication, in patients with locally advanced and advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with PD-1 inhibitors. Additionally, to share clinical experiences related to the management of this condition.

Methods

Two patients with locally advanced and advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were enrolled in our hospital. Following the NCCN guidelines and expert consensus, both patients received standard treatment with Camrelizumab (PD-1 inhibitor). Subsequent abdominal CT scans revealed hepatic focal lesions that did not exhibit typical characteristics of metastatic tumors. Therefore, further systematic investigation was conducted to study the hepatic focal lesions.

Results

(1) Ultrasound-guided percutaneous biopsy confirmed the diagnosis of hepatic cavernous hemangioma. A multidisciplinary consultation concluded that it was an adverse drug reaction to Camrelizumab. (2) Ten-gene testing for both patients did not reveal any driver gene mutations associated with lung cancer. Apart from the occurrence of hepatic cavernous hemangioma, there were no signs of disease progression or worsening. (3) Both patients had resolution of hepatic cavernous hemangioma after switching to alternative PD-1 inhibitors or discontinuing PD-1 inhibitor treatment. One patient experienced hemorrhage related to the hepatic hemangioma, which was managed with hemostasis and symptomatic treatment, resulting in improvement. (4) Clinical outcomes: The first patient achieved a progression-free survival (PFS) of 33 months in first-line treatment and had not reached the PFS endpoint in second-line treatment, with an overall survival exceeding 56 months. The second patient had not reached the PFS endpoint in first-line treatment, with an overall survival exceeding 31 months.

Conclusion

Hepatic cavernous hemangioma is a rare and serious adverse reaction associated with PD-1 inhibitors. Camrelizumab may interact with the PD-1 molecule in a different manner compared to other PD-1 inhibitors, affecting the regulation of the VEGFR/ULBP2 signaling pathway. In future studies, next-generation sequencing may provide detailed molecular pathology information, which could help explain individual differences and provide a basis for the prevention or intervention of hepatic cavernous hemangioma.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Associated Nephrotoxicity

CONTEXT

The clinical indications for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are rapidly expanding. However, adverse events affecting multiple organs, including kidneys leading to ICI-associated acute kidney injury (AKI), remain a significant challenge with ICI therapy. Although AKI is considered a rare complication, it can be severe and result in treatment interruption or discontinuation of ICIs. Despite a generally favorable kidney prognosis, the possibility of re-challenging ICI therapy remains a subject of debate, particularly for patients who have exhausted other treatment options or experienced severe AKI. Subject of Review: In a recent review article, Sprangers et al. provide a comprehensive overview of the possible mechanisms and clinical manifestations of ICI-associated AKI [Nat Rev Nephrol. 2022;18(12):794-805]. The authors propose a practical strategy for diagnosing and managing suspected cases of ICI-associated AKI, which includes identifying a subset of eligible patients who may be re-exposed to ICIs following an episode of AKI. Second Opinion: The authors of the review article offer several recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of ICI-associated nephrotoxicity. While we generally agree with the recommendations proposed by the authors, it is important to acknowledge that the available data primarily rely on small retrospective studies, as the authors have recognized. In addition, there are two key questions that need be carefully addressed in future studies: (1) the optimal dose and duration of corticosteroids and the use of alternative immunosuppressive agents in patients with ICI-associated nephrotoxicity and (2) a clear guideline for restarting ICI treatment in patients with AKI who have not fully recovered their kidney function.

Functional binding of PD1 ligands predicts response to anti-PD1 treatment in patients with cancer

Accurate predictive biomarkers of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are required for better stratifying patients with cancer to ICI treatments. Here, we present a new concept for a bioassay to predict the response to anti-PD1 therapies, which is based on measuring the binding functionality of PDL1 and PDL2 to their receptor, PD1. In detail, we developed a cell-based reporting system, called the immuno-checkpoint artificial reporter with overexpression of PD1 (IcAR-PD1) and evaluated the functionality of PDL1 and PDL2 binding in tumor cell lines, patient-derived xenografts, and fixed-tissue tumor samples obtained from patients with cancer. In a retrospective clinical study, we found that the functionality of PDL1 and PDL2 predicts response to anti-PD1 and that the functionality of PDL1 binding is a more effective predictor than PDL1 protein expression alone. Our findings suggest that assessing the functionality of ligand binding is superior to staining of protein expression for predicting response to ICIs.

Treatment Rechallenge With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

To examine patient and disease characteristics, toxicity, and clinical outcomes for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) who are rechallenged with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this retrospective cohort, we included patients treated with ICI for aUC after having prior ICI treatment. Endpoints included the evaluation of radiographic response and disease control rates with first and second ICI courses, outcomes based on whether there was a change in ICI class (anti-PD-1 vs. anti-PD-L1), and assessment of the reasons for ICI discontinuation.

RESULTS

We identified 25 patients with aUC from 9 institutions who received 2 separate ICI courses. ORR with first ICI and second ICI were 39% and 13%, respectively. Most patients discontinued first ICI due to progression (n = 19) or treatment-related toxicity (n = 4). Thirteen patients received non-ICI treatment between the first and second ICI, and 12 patients changed ICI class (anti-PD-1 vs. anti-PD-L1) at rechallenge. Among 10 patients who changed ICI class, 8 (80%) had progressive disease as best response with second ICI, while among 12 patients re-treated with the same ICI class, only 3 (25%) had progressive disease as best response at the time of rechallenge. With second ICI, most patients discontinued treatment due to progression (n = 18) or patient preference (n = 2).

CONCLUSIONS

A proportion of patients with aUC rechallenged with ICI-based regimens may achieve disease control, supporting clinical trials in that setting, especially with ICI-based combinations. Future studies are needed to validate our results and should also focus on identifying biomarkers predictive of benefit with ICI rechallenge.

Immunotherapy Resumption/Rechallenge in Melanoma Patients after Toxicity: Do We Have Another Chance?

Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have radically changed the prognosis of several neoplasias, among them metastatic melanoma. In the past decade, some of these new drugs have appeared together with a new toxicity spectrum previously unknown to clinicians, until now. A common situation in daily practice is that a patient experiences toxicity due to this type of drug and we need to resume or rechallenge treatment after resolving the adverse event. Methods: A PubMed literature review was carried out. Results: The published data regarding the resumption or rechallenge of ICI treatment in melanoma patients is scarce and heterogeneous. Depending on the study reviewed, the recurrence incidence of grade 3–4 immune-related adverse events (irAEs) ranged from 18% to 82%. Conclusion: It is possible to resume or rechallenge, but each patient should be evaluated by a multidisciplinary team for close monitoring and assessment of the risk/benefit ratio before initiating treatment.