Safety and Effectiveness of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Older Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review of 48 Real-World Studies

Hepatotoxicity in Cancer Immunotherapy: Diagnosis, Management, and Future Perspectives

Cancer immunotherapy, particularly immune checkpoint inhibitors, has positively impacted oncological treatments. Despite its effectiveness, immunotherapy is associated with immune-related adverse events (irAEs) that can affect any organ, including the liver. Hepatotoxicity primarily manifests as immune-related hepatitis and, less frequently, cholangitis. Several risk factors, such as pre-existing autoimmune and liver diseases, the type of immunotherapy, and combination regimens, play a role in immune-related hepatotoxicity (irH), although reliable predictive markers or models are still lacking. The severity of irH ranges from mild to severe cases, up to, in rare instances, acute liver failure. Management strategies require regular monitoring for early diagnosis and interventions, encompassing strict monitoring for mild cases to the permanent suspension of immunotherapy for severe forms. Corticosteroids are the backbone of treatment in moderate and high-grade damage, alone or in combination with additional immunosuppressive drugs for resistant or refractory cases. Given the relatively low number of events and the lack of dedicated prospective studies, much uncertainty remains about the optimal management of irH, especially in the most severe cases. This review presents the main features of irH, focusing on injury patterns and mechanisms, and provides an overview of the management landscape, from standard care to the latest evidence.

Toxicity of Cancer Immunotherapies in Older Patients: Does Age Make a Difference?

The use of immunotherapy agents especially immune checkpoint inhibitors is growing, and toxicities known as immune-related adverse events affecting any organ system may develop as a consequence of the treatment. With an ageing population, a considerable number of patients who will receive these therapies will be older adults. However, older patients who have highly heterogenous clinical characteristics, age-related changes in the immune system, a higher prevalence of comorbidities and frailty have been poorly represented in clinical trials, leaving gaps in understanding the safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor agents in this subgroup. Therefore, the safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors is a primary point of consideration when treating older patients with cancer. The available evidence is conflicting, but it generally suggests that the incidence of immune-related adverse events is not necessarily higher in older patients, but it may have a different profile. It is important to also note that the management of immune-related adverse events can be a challenge in these patients, owing to the risks associated with the use of corticosteroids and a reduced physiological reserve. A comprehensive characterisation of immune ageing, potential biomarkers to predict immune-related adverse events, the use of measures for frailty, enrolling older patients with cancer to clinical trials and analysis of real-world data are necessary to improve the evidence-based decision making for immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment in a geriatric oncology population.

Hepatobiliary complications of immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have dramatically changed the landscape of cancer therapy. Over the last decade, both their primary focus in trials and clinical application have exponentially risen, with repeated demonstrations of their efficacy in improving survival in various cancer types. The adverse effects of these drugs on various organ systems were recognised in early phase studies. Given their relatively new emergence on the market, there has been increasing interest into short- and long-term effects and management of ICIs in real-world settings. ICI-related hepatobiliary toxicities are often challenging to diagnose and difficult to distinguish from other causes of deranged liver biochemical tests. The aim of this review is to provide an up-to-date and detailed exploration of the hepatobiliary complications of ICIs, including pathogenesis and approaches to diagnosis and management.

Safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients aged over 80 years: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Immuno-oncology (IO) drugs are essential for treating various cancer types; however, safety concerns persist in older patients. Although the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) is similar among age groups, higher rates of hospitalization or discontinuation of IO therapy have been reported in older patients. Limited research exists on IO drug safety and risk factors in older adults. Our investigation aimed to assess the incidence of irAEs and identify the potential risk factors associated with their development.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis reviewed the clinical data extracted from the medical records of patients aged > 80 years who underwent IO treatment at our institution. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess the incidence of irAEs.

RESULTS

Our study included 181 patients (median age: 82 years, range: 80-94), mostly men (73%), with a performance status of 0-1 in 87% of the cases; 64% received IO monotherapy. irAEs occurred in 35% of patients, contributing to IO therapy discontinuation in 19%. Our analysis highlighted increased body mass index, eosinophil counts, and albumin levels in patients with irAEs. Eosinophil count emerged as a significant risk factor for any grade irAEs, particularly Grade 3 or higher, with a cutoff of 118 (/μL). The group with eosinophil counts > 118 had a higher frequency of irAEs, and Grade 3 or higher events than the group with counts ≤ 118.

CONCLUSION

IO therapy is a safe treatment option for patients > 80 years old. Furthermore, patients with elevated eosinophil counts at treatment initiation should be cautiously managed.

Immunotherapy use in older adults with cancer with frailty: A young SIOG review paper

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) became a treatment option in most tumor types and improved survival in patients with cancer in the last decade. Older patients with cancer are underrepresented in the pivotal clinical trials with ICIs. Older patients with cancer often have significant comorbidities and geriatric syndromes like frailty, which can complicate cancer care and treatment decisions. Frailty is among the most prevalent geriatric syndromes in patients with cancer and could lead to inferior survival and a higher risk of complications in patients treated with chemotherapy. However, the effect of frailty on the efficacy and safety of ICIs is understudied. This review focuses on the available evidence regarding the association between frailty and ICI efficacy and safety. Although the survival benefits of ICIs have generally been shown to be independent of age, the available real-world data has generally suggested higher rates of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and treatment discontinuation in older patients. While international organizations recommend conducting a comprehensive geriatric assessment CGA to assess and address frailty before the start of anti-cancer therapies, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 2 or higher is frequently used in clinical practice as synonymous with frailty, albeit with significant limitations. The available data has generally demonstrated diminished ICI efficacy in patients with an ECOG 2 or higher compared to patients with better performance status, while the incidence of high-grade irAEs were similar. Whilst evidence regarding outcomes with ICI in older patients and in those with sub-optimal performance status is growing, there is very limited data specifically evaluating the role of frailty with ICIs. These studies found a shortened overall survival, yet no evidence of a lower response rate to ICIs. These patients experienced more AEs, but they did not necessarily have a higher incidence of irAEs.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Geriatric Oncology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This manuscript will update prior reviews of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in light of basic science, translational, and clinical discoveries in the field of cancer immunology and aging.

RECENT FINDINGS

ICIs have led to significant advancements in the treatment of cancer. Landmark trials of ICIs have cited the efficacy and toxicity experienced by older patients, but most trials are not specifically designed to address outcomes in older patients. Underlying mechanisms of aging, like cellular senescence, affect the immune system and may ultimately alter the host's response to ICIs. Validated tools are currently used to identify older adults who may be at greater risk of developing complications from their cancer treatment. We review changes in the aging immune system that may alter responses to ICIs, report outcomes and toxicities in older adults from recent ICI clinical trials, and discuss clinical tools specific to older patients with cancer.

Incidence and Outcome of Neurologic Immune-Related Adverse Events Associated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Patients With Melanoma

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Neurologic immune-related adverse events (n-irAEs) reportedly occur in up to 8% of patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) of all age groups. We investigated the association between age and n-irAEs in patients treated with ICIs and examined the effect of n-irAEs on survival outcomes in a large cohort of patients with melanoma.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with advanced melanoma treated with ICIs at Ella Institute for Immuno-oncology and Melanoma between January 1, 2015, and April 20, 2022. The outcomes of interest were defined as the investigation of age-related frequency and severity of n-irAEs, the need for ICI interruption, the treatment required for n-irAE management, the safety of ICI reintroduction, and n-irAE's effect on survival.

RESULTS

ICI was administered to 937 patients. At least one irAE occurred in 73.5% (n = 689) of them. Among the study population, 8% (n = 76) developed a n-irAE, with a median age of 66 years in female and 68 years in male patients at onset. The median follow-up after n-irAE was 1,147 days (IQR: 1,091.5 range: 3,938). Fewer irAEs occurred in patients older than 70 years (median: 3 events, p = 0.04, CI 2.5-4.7) while specifically colitis and pneumonitis were more common in the 18-60 age group (p = 0.03, 95% CI 0.8-0.38, p = 0.009, 95% CI 0.06-0.2). Grade ≥ 3 toxicity was seen in 35.5% of patients across age groups. The median time from ICI administration to n-irAE development was 48 days across age groups. Common n-irAE phenotypes were myositis (44.7%), encephalitis (10.5%), and neuropathy (10.5%). N-irAE required hospitalization in 40% of patients and steroids treatment in 46% with a median of 4 days from n-irAE diagnosis to steroids treatment initiation. Nine patients needed second-line immunosuppressive treatment. Rechallenge did not cause additional n-irAE in 71% of patients. Developing n-irAE (HR = 0.4, 95% CI 0.32-0.77) or any irAE (HR = 0.7195% CI 0.56-0.88) was associated with longer survival.

DISCUSSION

N-irAEs are a relatively common complication of ICIs (8% of our cohort). Older age was not associated with its development or severity, in contrast with non-n-irAEs which occurred less frequently in the elderly population. Rechallenge did not result in life-threatening AEs. Development of any irAEs was associated with longer survival; this association was stronger with n-irAEs.

Associated Factors to Efficacy and Tolerance of Immunotherapy in Older Patients with Cancer Aged 70 Years and Over: Impact of Coprescriptions

BACKGROUND

Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint blockers (ICB) significantly improves the prognosis for an increasing number of cancers. However, data on geriatric populations taking ICB are rare.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify factors associated with the efficacy and tolerance of ICB in an older population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective monocentric study included consecutive patients aged ≥ 70 years with solid cancer who received ICB between January 2018 and December 2019. Efficacy was assessed by progression-free survival (PFS) and tolerance was defined as cessation of immunotherapy due to the occurrence of any adverse event.

RESULTS

One hundred and five patients (65.7% men) were included, mainly at the metastatic stage (95.2%); 50.5% had lung cancer. Most (80%) patients were treated with anti-PD1 (nivolumab, pembrolizumab), 19.1% with anti-PD-L1 (atezolizumab, durvalumab, and avelumab) and 0.9% with anti-CTLA4 ICB (ipilimumab). Median PFS was 3.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI) (2.75-5.70)]. PFS was shorter in univariate analysis when ICB was taken concomitantly with an antiplatelet agent (AP) [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.93; 95% CI (1.22-3.04); p = 0.005]. Tolerance was lower in univariate analysis for lung cancer [odds ratio (OR) = 3.03; 95% CI (1.07-8.56), p < 0.05] and in patients taking proton pump inhibitors (PPI) [OR = 5.50; 95% CI (1.96-15.42), p < 0.001]. There was a trend toward poorer tolerance among patients living alone [OR = 2.26; 95% CI (0.76-6.72); p = 0.14].

CONCLUSIONS

In older patients taking ICB for solid cancers, concomitant AP may influence efficacy and concomitant PPI may influence tolerance. Further studies are needed to confirm these results.

Cardiotoxicity Secondary to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in the Elderly: Safety in Real-World Data

INTRODUCTION

Immunotherapy represents a key pillar of cancer treatments, with high response rates and long survival. Its use is increasing, mainly at the expense of the geriatric population due to the ageing of this population. However, despite its benefit, its safety in certain areas such as cardiotoxicity is largely unknown. The aim of this study is to assess the safety of immunotherapy in elderly patients using real-world data.

METHODS

This is an ambispective study of patients ≥ 70 years old with solid tumours who were treated with immunotherapy at the University Hospital of Salamanca. Cardiotoxicity was assessed using the CTCAEv5.0 criteria.

RESULTS

In total, 195 patients were included (76.9% male and 23.1% female), with a mean age of 75 years [70-93]. The percentage of patients with cardiotoxicity was 1.54%; 1.35% of patients with previous heart disease were diagnosed with cardiotoxicity, and 1.65% of those without previous heart disease were diagnosed with cardiotoxicity. The median time from the initiation of treatment until the cardiac event was 45 days [14-96]. The most frequent toxicity was myocarditis in 66.7% of patients, followed by arrhythmias in 33.3% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Immunotherapy is shown to be a safe treatment in elderly cancer patients in terms of cardiotoxicity. The event rate shows no difference between patients with or without cardiac comorbidity.

Safety and efficacy of immunotherapy according to the age threshold of 80 years

BACKGROUND

To compare safety and efficacy of ICIs among patients<80 and those ≥80 years of age.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective observational cohort study comparing patients<80 and ≥80 years of age matched for cancer site (lung vs others) and participation in a clinical trial.

PRIMARY ENDPOINT

grade ≥2 toxicity during the first three months of ICI therapy. The two groups were compared using univariate and multivariate regression.

RESULTS

Two hundred and ten consecutive patients were recruited, with the following characteristics: mean age: 66.5±16.8, 20% aged ≥80 years, 75% male, 97% ECOG-PS ≤ 2, 78% G8-index ≤ 14/17, 80% lung or kidney cancer, and 97% metastatic cancer. The grade ≥2 toxicity rate during the first three months of ICI therapy was 68%. Patients aged ≥80 years of age had a more significant (P<0.05) proportion of grade ≥2 non-hematological toxicities (64% vs 45%) than those aged<80 years: rash (14% vs 4%), arthralgia (7.1% vs 0.6%), colitis (4.7% vs 0.6%), cytolysis (7.1% vs 1.2%), gastrointestinal bleeding (2.4% vs 0%), onycholysis (2.4% vs 0%), oral mucositis (2.4% vs 0%), psoriasis (2.4% vs 0%), or other skin toxicities (25% vs 3%). Efficacy among patients ≥80 and<80 years of age was comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

Although non-hematological toxicities affected 20% more patients aged ≥80 years, hematological toxicities and efficacy were comparable between patients aged ≥80 and<80 years with advanced cancer and treated with ICIs.

Real-World Outcomes and Treatments Patterns Prior and after the Introduction of First-Line Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Simple Summary

The advent of immuno-oncology (IO) agents, particularly immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), has changed the treatment landscape of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We performed a retro-prospective study to describe the patients’ outcomes prior to and after the local regulatory approval of pembrolizumab as a first-line (1L) treatment in the real-world setting of an Italian cancer centre. Analyses were performed of a total of 694 patients with no or unknown oncogene addicted tumour, grouped into Pre- (n = 344) and Post- (n = 350) 1L IO populations. The study provides evidence of improvements in overall survival associated with the introduction of 1L immunotherapy, suggesting that receiving immunotherapy in the first-line rather than in the second- or later lines of treatment may be more favourable.

Abstract

Background: This study provides insights into the treatment use and outcomes of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients in a real-world setting prior to and after the availability of immuno-oncology (IO) regimens in the first line (1L). Methods: Metastatic NSCLC patients, who initiated systemic 1L anticancer treatment from 2014 to 2020, were identified from health records. Patients were grouped into Pre-1L IO and Post-1L IO, according to the availability of pembrolizumab 1L monotherapy at the date of initiating 1L systemic anticancer treatment. Patient characteristics, treatment patterns and outcomes were assessed by the cohort. Overall survival (OS) and real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: The most common 1L treatment was platinum-based chemotherapy regimens in both groups (≥46%), followed by single-agent chemotherapy (27.0%) in Pre-1L IO and pembrolizumab (26.0%) in Post-1L IO. Median OS was 6.2 (95% CI 5.5–7.4) in Pre- and 8.9 months (95% CI 7.5–10.6) in Post-1L IO, while rwPFS was 3.7 (95% CI 3.3–4.2) and 4.7 months (95% CI 3.9–5.7), respectively. Conclusions: Even if a small proportion of patients received a 1L IO, the data showed an improved survival outcomes in the Post-1L IO group.

Management of Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma in Older and Frail Patients: Have Novel Treatment Approaches Improved Their Care?

Patients with urothelial carcinoma tend to be older and frailer with a large number of chronic medical conditions. This is particularly pronounced in those with unresectable locally advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Prior to 2016, treatment options in advanced urothelial carcinoma were limited to chemotherapy, and as a result, a large number of patients were not receiving disease-directed management. Over the last 6 years, multiple alternative modalities including immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies have been introduced. They are being utilized clinically in older and frail patients, but there are limited studies investigating outcomes in these specific populations. Based upon current evidence, age does not impact the efficacy and tolerance of immune checkpoint inhibitors if patients are fit enough to receive therapy. In frailer patients, immune checkpoint inhibitors appear to be safe, but outcomes from largely retrospective studies demonstrate mixed data regarding their efficacy. Although there are indications from clinical trials that enfortumab vedotin, sacituzumab govitecan, and erdafitinib are also efficacious irrespective of age, there is still not enough evidence to draw definitive conclusions about their use in older and frail patients. Regardless, in all older patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma, it is critical to evaluate for frailty through geriatric screening tools and comprehensive assessments. Combining these evaluations with consideration of an individual patient's goals should be the foundation upon which therapeutic decisions are made in this population of patients.