Safety of Inactivated Influenza Vaccine in Cancer Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Safety of nivolumab monotherapy in five cancer types: pooled analysis of post-marketing surveillance in Japan

BACKGROUND

Nivolumab has been approved for treating ≥ 10 cancer types. However, there is limited information on the incidence of rare, but potentially serious, treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), as well as notable TRAEs in patients with certain medical disorders or older patients in Japan.

METHODS

We performed pooled analyses of data from published post-marketing surveillance in Japan of nivolumab monotherapy for patients with malignant melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, renal cell carcinoma, head and neck cancer, and gastric cancer to determine the frequencies of 20 categories of TRAEs of special interest overall and in patient groups with higher perceived safety risks (history of autoimmune disease, interstitial lung disease, tuberculosis, or hepatitis B/C; patients vaccinated during nivolumab treatment; and older patients [≥ 75 years]).

RESULTS

The overall population comprised 7421 patients treated with nivolumab. TRAEs were reported in 49.1% of patients, with grade ≥ 3 TRAEs in 16.7%. Endocrine disorders (14.4%), hepatobiliary disorders (10.9%), and interstitial lung disease (7.0%) were the three most common categories (any grade). The incidences of rare TRAEs with high risk of becoming serious, which occurred in < 1% of patients, were consistent with those in previous reports. The frequencies of TRAEs were not markedly increased in the specified patient groups relative to the overall population.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the largest study examining the safety of nivolumab-treated patients in real-world clinical practice including rare but potentially serious TRAEs. We found no new signals in the safety of nivolumab among the patient groups relative to the overall population, and no additional safety measures are required in these groups. Trial registration UMIN000048892 (overall analysis), JapicCTI-163272 (melanoma), Japic-163271 (non-small cell lung cancer), JapicCTI-184071 (head and neck cancer), JapicCTI-184070 (gastric cancer), and JapicCTI-184069 (renal cell cancer).

The safety of seasonal influenza vaccination among adults prescribed immune checkpoint inhibitors: A self-controlled case series study using administrative data

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy for patients undergoing cancer treatment carries a risk of severe immune-related adverse events (IRAEs). Questions remain about whether seasonal influenza vaccination might increase the risk of developing IRAEs among these patients given that vaccines are immunomodulatory. Previous vaccine safety studies on patients with cancer prescribed ICI therapy have demonstrated conflicting results.

METHODS

Using health administrative data from Ontario, Canada among adults diagnosed with cancer who had been prescribed ICI therapy and who had received an influenza vaccine from 2012 to 2019, we conducted a self-controlled case series study. The pre-vaccination control period started 42-days post-ICI initiation until 14-days prior to vaccination, the risk period was 1-42 days post-vaccination, and the post-vaccination control period was after the risk period until ICI discontinuation or a maximum period of two years. Emergency department (ED) visit(s) and/or hospitalization for any cause after ICI initiation was used to identify severe IRAEs. We fitted a fixed-effects Poisson regression model accounting for seasonality and calendar time to estimate relative incidence of IRAEs between risk and control periods.

RESULTS

We identified 1133 records of cancer patients who received influenza vaccination while prescribed ICI therapy. Most were aged ≥ 66 years (73 %), were male (63 %), had lung cancer (54 %), and had received ICI therapy with a programmed cell death protein 1(PD-1) inhibitor (91 %). A quarter (26 %) experienced an ED visit and/or hospitalization during the observation period. Rates of ED visits and/or hospitalizations in the risk vs. control periods were similar, with an incidence rate ratio of 1.04 (95 % CI: 0.75-1.45). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses yielded similar results.

CONCLUSION

Seasonal influenza vaccination was not associated with an increased incidence of ED visit or hospitalization among adults with cancer treated with ICI therapy and our results support further evidence of vaccine safety.

Readily available drugs and other interventions to potentially improve the efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade in cancer

To improve the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for cancer treatment, various strategies, including combination therapies with repurposed drugs, are being explored. Several readily available interventions with potential to enhance programmed death 1 (PD-1) blockade have been identified. However, these interventions often remain overlooked due to the lack of financial incentives for their development, making them financial orphans. This review summarizes current knowledge regarding off-label drugs, supplements, and other readily available interventions that could improve the efficacy of PD-1 blockade. The summary of each intervention includes the proposed mechanism of action for combination with checkpoint inhibitors and data from animal and human studies. Additionally, we include summaries of common interventions to be avoided by patients on PD-1 blockade. Finally, we present approaches for conducting further studies in patients, with the aim of expediting the clinical development of these interventions. We strive to increase awareness of readily available combination therapies that may advance cancer immunotherapy and help patients today.

Immunogenicity and safety of influenza vaccine in patients with lung cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors: A single-center prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Patients with lung cancer have a high risk of influenza complications. International guidelines recommend annual influenza vaccination for patients with cancer. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are progressively used to treat lung cancer. Data regarding immunogenicity and safety of influenza vaccine are limited in patients with lung cancer receiving ICIs; therefore, we conducted this single-center, prospective observational study in the Japanese population.

METHODS

Patients with lung cancer receiving ICIs and influenza immunization were enrolled. Blood samples were collected from patients for serum antibody titer measurement pre- and 4 ± 1 weeks post-vaccination. The primary endpoint was seroprotection rate (sP) at 4 ± 1 weeks post-vaccination. The secondary endpoints were geometric mean titer (GMT), mean fold rise, seroresponse rate (sR), seroconversion rate (sC), and immune-related adverse events (irAEs), defined as adverse effects caused by ICI administration, 6 months post-vaccination.

RESULTS

Influenza vaccination in the 23 patients included in the immunogenicity analyses significantly increased GMT for all strains, and sP, sR, and sC were 52%-91%, 26%-39%, and 26%-35%, respectively. In the 24 patients included in the safety analyses, 7 (29%) and 5 (21%) patients exhibited systemic and local reactions, respectively. Only one patient (4%) (hypothyroidism, grade 2) showed post-vaccination irAEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, influenza vaccination in patients with lung cancer receiving ICIs showed acceptable immunogenicity and safety, thus supporting annual influenza vaccination in this population.

Immune-related adverse events and disease outcomes after the third dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-BNT162b2 vaccine in cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors

BACKGROUND

The clinical implications of the third dose of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors are currently unknown. We performed a prospective analysis of the Vax-On-Third study to investigate the effects of antibody response on immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and disease outcomes.

METHODS

Recipients of the booster dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-BNT162b2 vaccine who had received at least one course of an anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment before vaccination for an advanced solid malignancy were eligible.

RESULTS

The current analysis included 56 patients with metastatic disease (median age: 66 years; male: 71%), most of whom had a lung cancer diagnosis and were being treated with pembrolizumab- or nivolumab-based regimens. The optimal cut-point antibody titer of 486 BAU/mL allowed a dichotomization of recipients into low-responders (Low-R, < 486 BAU/mL) or high-responders (High-R, ≥ 486 BAU/mL). After a median follow-up time of 226 days, 21.4% of patients experienced moderate to severe irAEs without any recrudescence of immune toxicities preceding the booster dose. The frequencies of irAE before and after the third dose did not differ, but an increase in the cumulative incidence of immuno-related thyroiditis was observed within the High-R subgroup. On multivariate analysis, an enhanced humoral response correlated with a better outcome in terms of durable clinical benefit, which resulted in a significant reduction in the risk of disease control loss but not mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings would strengthen the recommendation not to change anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment plans based on current or future immunization schedules, implying that all these patients should be closely monitored.

Mining Autoimmune-Disorder-Linked Molecular-Mimicry Candidates in Clostridioides difficile and Prospects of Mimic-Based Vaccine Design: An In Silico Approach

Molecular mimicry, a phenomenon in which microbial or environmental antigens resemble host antigens, has been proposed as a potential trigger for autoimmune responses. In this study, we employed a bioinformatics approach to investigate the role of molecular mimicry in Clostridioides difficile-caused infections and the induction of autoimmune disorders due to this phenomenon. Comparing proteomes of host and pathogen, we identified 23 proteins that exhibited significant sequence homology and were linked to autoimmune disorders. The disorders included rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, Alzheimer's disease, etc., while infections included viral and bacterial infections like HIV, HCV, and tuberculosis. The structure of the homologous proteins was superposed, and RMSD was calculated to find the maximum deviation, while accounting for rigid and flexible regions. Two sequence mimics (antigenic, non-allergenic, and immunogenic) of ≥10 amino acids from these proteins were used to design a vaccine construct to explore the possibility of eliciting an immune response. Docking analysis of the top vaccine construct C2 showed favorable interactions with HLA and TLR-4 receptor, indicating potential efficacy. The B-cell and T-helper cell activity was also simulated, showing promising results for effective immunization against C. difficile infections. This study highlights the potential of C. difficile to trigger autoimmunity through molecular mimicry and vaccine design based on sequence mimics that trigger a defensive response.

Twelve-Month Follow-up of the Immune Response After COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Genitourinary Cancers: A Prospective Cohort Analysis

BACKGROUND

Vaccinations against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have had a transformative impact on morbidity and mortality. However, the long-term impact of vaccination on patients with genitourinary cancers is currently unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study aimed to assess seroconversion rates in patients with genitourinary cancers receiving COVID-19 vaccination. Patients with prostate cancer, renal cell carcinoma, or urothelial cancer who had not been vaccinated for COVID-19 were included. Blood samples were obtained at baseline and after 2, 6, and 12 months of one dose of an FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccine. Antibody titer analysis was performed using the SCoV-2 Detect IgG ELISA assay, and the results were reported as immune status ratio (ISR). A paired t-test was used for comparison of ISR values between timepoints. In addition, T-cell receptor (TCR) sequencing was performed to assess for differences in TCR repertoire 2 months after vaccination.

RESULTS

Out of 133 patients enrolled, 98 baseline blood samples were collected. At 2-, 6-, and 12-month time points 98, 70, and 50 samples were collected, respectively. Median age was 67 (IQR, 62-75), with the majority of patients diagnosed with prostate (55.1%) or renal cell carcinoma (41.8%). Compared to baseline (0.24 [95% CI, 0.19-0.31]) a significant increase in the geometric mean ISR values was observed at the 2-month timepoint (5.59 [4.76-6.55]) (P < .001). However, at the 6-month timepoint, a significant decrease in the ISR values was observed (4.66 [95% CI, 4.04-5.38]; P < .0001). Notably, at the 12-month timepoint, the addition of a booster dose resulted in an absolute increase in the ISR values compared to those who did not receive a booster dose (P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Only a minority of patients with genitourinary cancers did not ultimately achieve satisfactory seroconversion after receiving commercial COVID-19 vaccination. Cancer type or treatment rendered did not appear to affect the immune response mounted after vaccination.

COVID-19 vaccination is associated with enhanced efficacy of anti-PD-(L)1 immunotherapy in advanced NSCLC patients: a real-world study

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine has played a major role in ending the pandemic. However, little is known about the influence of COVID-19 vaccine on the efficacy of immunotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study is to explore whether COVID-19 vaccine impacts the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in NSCLC patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the survival data of ICI-treated 104 patients with stage III-IV NSCLC, who either received COVID-19 vaccination (n = 25) or no vaccination (n = 79). The potential risk factors, in particular roles of COVID-19 vaccination in the efficacy of ICIs in these patients, were evaluated.

RESULTS

Our results showed significantly improved ORR (28.0% vs. 11.39%, p = 0.05) and DCR (88.0% vs. 54.43%, p = 0.005) in the COVID-19 vaccinated group compared with the non-vaccinated group. Regarding the long-term survival benefits, COVID-19 vaccine showed profound influence both on the PFS (HR = 0.16, p = 0.021) and OS (HR = 0.168, p = 0.019) in patients with NSCLC under ICIs treatment. The PFS (p < 0.001) or OS (p < 0.001) was significantly improved in the COVID-19 vaccinated group, compared with the non-vaccinated group. Moreover, CD4 T cell (p = 0.047) level was higher in the COVID-19 vaccinated group than in the non-vaccinated group.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccination enhances anti-PD-1 immunotherapy efficacy in patients with stage III-IV NSCLC, suggesting that COVID-19 vaccination may provide additional benefit to NSCLC patients.

Pleiotropic Effects of Influenza Vaccination

Influenza vaccines are designed to mimic natural influenza virus exposure and stimulate a long-lasting immune response to future infections. The evolving nature of the influenza virus makes vaccination an important and efficacious strategy to reduce healthcare-related complications of influenza. Several lines of evidence indicate that influenza vaccination may induce nonspecific effects, also referred to as heterologous or pleiotropic effects, that go beyond protection against infection. Different explanations are proposed, including the upregulation and downregulation of cytokines and epigenetic reprogramming in monocytes and natural killer cells, imprinting an immunological memory in the innate immune system, a phenomenon termed "trained immunity". Also, cross-reactivity between related stimuli and bystander activation, which entails activation of B and T lymphocytes without specific recognition of antigens, may play a role. In this review, we will discuss the possible nonspecific effects of influenza vaccination in cardiovascular disease, type 1 diabetes, cancer, and Alzheimer's disease, future research questions, and potential implications. A discussion of the potential effects on infections by other pathogens is beyond the scope of this review.

Chinese expert consensus recommendations for the administration of immune checkpoint inhibitors to special cancer patient populations

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting programmed cell death 1, programmed cell death ligand 1, and cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 have shown significantly durable clinical benefits and tolerable toxicities and have improved the survival of patients with various types of cancer. Since 2018, the National Medical Products Administration of China has approved 17 ICIs as the standard treatment for certain advanced or metastatic solid tumors. As ICIs represent a broad-spectrum antitumor strategy, the populations eligible for cancer immunotherapy are rapidly expanding. However, the clinical applications of ICIs in cancer patient populations with special issues, a term that refers to complex subgroups of patients with comorbidities, special clinical conditions, or concomitant medications who are routinely excluded from prospective clinical trials of ICIs or are underrepresented in these trials, represent a great real-world challenge. Although the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) has provided recommendations for screening before the use of ICIs in special populations, the recommendations for full-course management remain insufficient. The CSCO Expert Committee on Immunotherapy organized leading medical oncology and multidisciplinary experts to develop a consensus that will serve as an important reference for clinicians to guide the proper application of ICIs in special patient populations. This article is a translation of a study first published in Chinese in The Chinese Clinical Oncology (ISSN 1009-0460, CN 32-1577/R) in May 2022 (27(5):442-454). The publisher of the original paper has provided written confirmation of permission to publish this translation in Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology.

Impact of influenza vaccination on survival of patients with advanced cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (INVIDIa-2): final results of the multicentre, prospective, observational study

Background

The prospective multicentre observational INVIDIa-2 study investigated the clinical effectiveness of influenza vaccination in patients with advanced cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). In this secondary analysis of the original trial, we aimed to assess the outcomes of patients to immunotherapy based on vaccine administration.

Methods

The original study enrolled patients with advanced solid tumours receiving ICI at 82 Italian Oncology Units from Oct 1, 2019, to Jan 31, 2020. The trial's primary endpoint was the time-adjusted incidence of influenza-like illness (ILI) until April 30, 2020, the results of which were reported previously. Secondary endpoints (data cut-off Jan 31, 2022) included the outcomes of patients to immunotherapy based on vaccine administration, for which the final results are reported herein. A propensity score matching by age, sex, performance status, primary tumour site, comorbidities, and smoking habits was planned for the present analysis. Only patients with available data for these variables were included. The outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease-control rate (DCR).

Findings

The original study population consisted of 1188 evaluable patients. After a propensity score matching, 1004 patients were considered (502 vaccinated and 502 unvaccinated), and 986 of them were evaluable for overall survival (OS). At the median follow-up of 20 months, the influenza vaccination demonstrated a favourable impact on the outcome receiving ICI in terms of median OS [27.0 months (CI 19.5-34.6) in vaccinated vs. 20.9 months (16.6-25.2) in unvaccinated, p = 0.003], median progression-free survival [12.5 months (CI 10.4-14.6) vs. 9.6 months (CI 7.9-11.4), p = 0.049], and disease-control rate (74.7% vs. 66.5%, p = 0.005). The multivariable analyses confirmed the favourable impact of influenza vaccination in terms of OS (HR 0.75, 95% C.I. 0.62-0.92; p = 0.005) and DCR (OR 1.47, 95% C.I. 1.11-1.96; p = 0.007).

Interpretation

The INVIDIa-2 study results suggest a favourable immunological impact of influenza vaccination on the outcome of cancer patients receiving ICI immunotherapy, further encouraging the vaccine recommendation in this population and supporting translational investigations about the possible synergy between antiviral and antitumour immunity.

Funding

The Federation of Italian Cooperative Oncology Groups (FICOG), Roche S.p.A., and Seqirus.

Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of gynecologic cancer

Advanced gynecologic cancers have historically lacked effective treatment options. Recently, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of cervical cancer and endometrial cancer, offering durable responses for some patients. In addition, many immunotherapy strategies are under investigation for the treatment of earlier stages of disease or in other gynecologic cancers, such as ovarian cancer and rare gynecologic tumors. While the integration of ICIs into the standard of care has improved outcomes for patients, their use requires a nuanced understanding of biomarker testing, treatment selection, patient selection, response evaluation and surveillance, and patient quality of life considerations, among other topics. To address this need for guidance, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a multidisciplinary panel of experts to develop a clinical practice guideline. The Expert Panel drew on the published literature as well as their own clinical experience to develop evidence- and consensus-based recommendations to provide guidance to cancer care professionals treating patients with gynecologic cancer.

The implication of anti-PD-1 therapy in cancer patients for the vaccination against viral and other infectious diseases

The phenomenon of 'T cell exhaustion', a state of T cell dysfunction observed during chronic infections and cancers, has been a major obstacle in mounting appropriate immune responses against infectious agents or tumor antigens. The exhausted T cells are characterized by poor effector functions mainly due to the overexpression of inhibitory receptors such as programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), T cell immunoglobulin and mucin-domain containing 3 (TIM3), lymphocyte activation gene 3 (LAG3), and T cell immunoreceptor with immunoglobulin and immunoreceptor tyrosine-based inhibitory motif (ITIM) domain (TIGIT), commonly referred to as immune checkpoint (ICP) molecules. ICP blockade, especially of PD-1 that can potentially reverse T cell exhaustion and thereby re-stimulate the impaired immune system, is widely used in clinics as a promising therapeutic strategy for various cancers and is more recently being investigated in infectious diseases as well. In fact, cancer patients represent a population of immunocompromised individuals who are more susceptible to infections and associated complications, and thus the need for protective vaccinations against these diseases is of prime importance in this category. When it comes to vaccinating anti-PD-1-treated cancer patients against infectious diseases including COVID-19 and influenza, a special focus should be brought on the revived immune cells, which could be dynamically affected by the antigenic stimulation. However, since cancer patients are not generally included in clinical trials for designing vaccines against infectious diseases, the possible interaction between vaccine immune responses and ICP therapy is largely unexplored. Mechanistically, the reversal of T cell exhaustion by ICP in an otherwise immunocompromised population could be beneficial for the vaccine's efficacy, helping the immune system to mount a robust immune response. Nevertheless, patients with cancer undergoing anti-PD-1 blockade are known to experience immune-related adverse effects (irAEs). The risk of increasing the irAEs due to the overstimulation of the immune system during vaccination is a major concern. Therefore, while routine vaccination is indispensable for the protection of cancer patients, the impact of PD-1 blockade on vaccine responses against infectious agents requires careful consideration to avoid undesirable adverse effects that could impair the efficacy of anti-cancer treatment.

Lessons learnt from influenza vaccination in immunocompromised children undergoing treatment for cancer

Influenza infection contributes substantially to global morbidity and mortality, with children undergoing treatment for cancer among the most vulnerable due to immunosuppression associated with disease and treatment. However, influenza remains one of the most common vaccine-preventable diseases. Despite international guidelines recommending inactivated influenza vaccination on the basis of data supporting efficacy and an excellent safety profile in this population, uptake has often been suboptimal due to persisting hesitancy among both patients and oncologists regarding the ability of the vaccine to mount a sufficient immune response, the optimal vaccine schedule and timing, and the best method to assess response in immunocompromised populations. In this Review, we discuss the evidence regarding influenza vaccination in children with cancer, factors that influence response, and highlight strategies to optimise vaccination. Host immune factors play a substantial role, thus principles learnt from influenza vaccination can be broadly applied for the use of inactivated vaccines in children with cancer.

A Review of the Pharmacokinetic Characteristics of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Their Clinical Impact Factors

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been shown to be significant in improving the overall survival rate in certain malignancies with poor prognoses. However, only 20-40% of patients achieve long-term benefits, highlighting the relevance of the factors that influence the treatment, which can help clinicians improve their results and guide the development of new immune checkpoint therapies. In this study, the current pharmacokinetic aspects associated with the ICIs and the factors influencing clinical efficacy were characterised, including in terms of drug metabolism, drug clearance, hormonal effects and immunosuppressive effects.

SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Liver Disease: A Review of Pathogenesis and Outcomes

The impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been immense, and it continues to have lasting repercussions. While the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus primarily infects the respiratory system, other organ systems are affected, including the liver. Scientific knowledge on the role of SARS-CoV-2 infection and liver injury has evolved rapidly, with recent data suggesting specific hepatotropism of SARS-CoV-2. Moreover, additional concerns have been raised in regard to long-term liver damage, related to emerging cases of post-COVID-19 cholangiopathy and chronic cholestasis. Great effort has also been focused on studying how specific subpopulations with chronic medical conditions might be disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. One such population includes individuals with chronic liver disease (CLD) and cirrhosis, with an expanding body of research indicating these patients being particularly susceptible to adverse outcomes. In this review, we provide an updated summary on the current pathogenesis and mechanism of liver injury in the setting of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the association between health outcomes and SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with CLD, and the unique consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on the routine care of patients with CLD.

Effect of medical staff training on vaccination coverage in outpatients with cancer: An interventional multicenter before-and-after study

Purpose

Despite widely disseminated guidelines, pneumococcal and influenza vaccination coverage (VC) remains insufficient in patients with cancer receiving cancer treatment. We performed an interventional study to evaluate VC in patients with cancer treated at the medical oncology departments of three North-of-France hospitals and to assess the effect of medical staff training on VC in these patients.

Methods

A standardized questionnaire assessed VC in adult patients with cancer receiving anticancer treatment at three day hospitals during December 2-7, 2019. Subsequently (January 2020), we organized educational training sessions for medical staff from each hospital to discuss the current vaccination guidelines. To assess the impact of training on pneumococcal and influenza VC, we re-administered the same questionnaire in March 2020. Because there are no specific guidelines on Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis (DTP) vaccination and no improvement was expected, DTP VC acted as an internal control.

Results

In total, 272 patients from all three hospitals were enrolled in the "before study"; 156 patients from only two hospitals were enrolled in the "after study" as medical training and data collection at the third were impossible because of administrative reasons and COVID-19 pandemic. The predictors were age for DTP VC; treatment center for pneumococcal VC; and age, sex, and tumor histology (adenocarcinoma vs. others) for influenza VC. Neither influenza VC (42.6% vs. 55.1%, p = 0.08), nor pneumococcal VC were significantly improved post-intervention (11.8% vs. 15.4%, p = 1). There seems to be a small effect in the most fragile for influenza VC.

Conclusion

As expected, VC was very low in patients with cancer, consistent with the literature. There was no impact of the intervention for pneumococcal and influenza VC.

Diabetic ketoacidosis after the second dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in a patient with pembrolizumab-induced fulminant type 1 diabetes

We report a case of 77-year-old woman with fulminant type 1 diabetes (T1D) who developed diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) after the second dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine tozinameran. The patient had been diagnosed as having T1D associated with an immune-related adverse event caused by pembrolizumab at the age of 75. After the second dose of tozinameran, she developed DKA and needed intravenous insulin infusion and mechanical ventilation. Although the direct causal relationship between the vaccination and the DKA episode could not be proven in this case, published literatures had suggested the possibility of developing DKA after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with T1D. As the magnitude of the risk of the combination of the known adverse drug reactions of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine and T1D patients' vulnerability to sick-day conditions is not yet thoroughly assessed, future studies such as a non-interventional study with adequate sample size would be required to address this issue.

Combined Vaccination with B Cell Peptides Targeting Her-2/neu and Immune Checkpoints as Emerging Treatment Option in Cancer

The application of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), targeting tumor-associated (TAAs) or tumor-specific antigens or immune checkpoints (ICs), has shown tremendous success in cancer therapy. However, the application of mAbs suffers from a series of limitations, including the necessity of frequent administration, the limited duration of clinical response and the emergence of frequently pronounced immune-related adverse events. However, the introduction of mAbs has also resulted in a multitude of novel developments for the treatment of cancers, including vaccinations against various tumor cell-associated epitopes. Here, we reviewed recent clinical trials involving combination therapies with mAbs targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis and Her-2/neu, which was chosen as a paradigm for a clinically highly relevant TAA. Our recent findings from murine immunizations against the PD-1 pathway and Her-2/neu with peptides representing the mimotopes/B cell peptides of therapeutic antibodies targeting these molecules are an important focus of the present review. Moreover, concerns regarding the safety of vaccination approaches targeting PD-1, in the context of the continuing immune response, as a result of induced immunological memory, are also addressed. Hence, we describe a new frontier of cancer treatment by active immunization using combined mimotopes/B cell peptides aimed at various targets relevant to cancer biology.

Programmed Cell Death Protein 1 Axis Inhibition in Viral Infections: Clinical Data and Therapeutic Opportunities

A vital function of the immune system is the modulation of an evolving immune response. It is responsible for guarding against a wide variety of pathogens as well as the establishment of memory responses to some future hostile encounters. Simultaneously, it maintains self-tolerance and minimizes collateral tissue damage at sites of inflammation. In recent years, the regulation of T-cell responses to foreign or self-protein antigens and maintenance of balance between T-cell subsets have been linked to a distinct class of cell surface and extracellular components, the immune checkpoint molecules. The fact that both cancer and viral infections exploit similar, if not the same, immune checkpoint molecules to escape the host immune response highlights the need to study the impact of immune checkpoint blockade on viral infections. More importantly, the process through which immune checkpoint blockade completely changed the way we approach cancer could be the key to decipher the potential role of immunotherapy in the therapeutic algorithm of viral infections. This review focuses on the effect of programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 blockade on the outcome of viral infections in cancer patients as well as the potential benefit from the incorporation of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in treatment of viral infections.

Associations of influenza vaccination with severity of immune-related adverse events in patients with advanced thoracic cancers on immune checkpoint inhibitors

Background

Whether influenza vaccination (FV) is associated with the severity of immune-related adverse events (IRAEs) in patients with advanced thoracic cancer on immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is not fully understood.

Methods

Patients enrolled in this retrospective cohort study were identified from the Vanderbilt BioVU database and their medical records were reviewed. Patients with advanced thoracic cancer who received FV within 3 months prior to or during their ICI treatment period were enrolled in the FV-positive cohort and those who did not were enrolled in the FV-negative cohort. The primary objective was to detect whether FV is associated with decreased IRAE severity. The secondary objectives were to evaluate whether FV is associated with a decreased risk for grade 3-5 IRAEs and better survival times. Multivariable ordinal logistic regression was used for the primary analysis.

Results

A total of 142 and 105 patients were enrolled in the FV-positive and FV-negative cohorts, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in patient demographics or cumulative incidences of IRAEs between the two cohorts. In the primary analysis, FV was inversely associated with the severity of IRAEs (OR 0.63; p=0.046). In the secondary analysis, FV was associated with a decreased risk for grade 3-5 IRAEs (OR 0.42; p=0.005). Multivariable Cox regression showed that FV was not associated with survival times.

Conclusions

Our study showed that FV does not increase toxicity for patients with advanced thoracic cancer on ICIs and is associated with a decreased risk for grade 3-5 IRAEs. No statistically significant survival differences were found between patients with and without FV.

Severe infections in recipients of cancer immunotherapy: what intensivists need to know

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Given the increased number of cancer patients admitted in the ICU and the growing importance of immunotherapy in their therapeutic arsenal, intensivists will be increasingly confronted to patients treated with immunotherapies who will present with complications, infectious and immunologic.

RECENT FINDINGS

Apart from their specific immunologic toxicities, cancer immunotherapy recipients also have specific immune dysfunction and face increased infectious risks that may lead to intensive care unit admission.

SUMMARY

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy is associated with profound immunosuppression and the risks of bacterial, fungal and viral infections vary according to the time since infusion.Immune checkpoint blockers are associated with an overall favorable safety profile but associations of checkpoint blockers and corticosteroids and immunosuppressive drugs prescribed to treat immune-related adverse events are associated with increased risks of bacterial and fungal infections.The T-cell engaging bispecific therapy blinatumomab causes profound B-cell aplasia, hypogammaglobulinemia and neutropenia, but seems to be associated with fewer infectious adverse events compared with standard intensive chemotherapy.Lastly, intravesical administration of Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) can lead to disseminated BCGitis and severe sepsis requiring a specific antibiotherapy, often associated with corticosteroid treatment.

Immunogenicity and Safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine in Patients with Melanoma Treated with Immunotherapy

Simple Summary

The efficacy and safety of the BNT126b2 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 has not been thoroughly studied in cancer patients treated with immunotherapy. This research aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of the vaccine in patients with melanoma under immunotherapy; at the same time, through the immunophenotyping of T cells and myeloid cells of the peripheral blood, it will be possible to look for changes in the subpopulations of such cells after vaccinations. The results of the study help establish the efficacy and safety of the vaccine in this population, especially since a theoretical concern exists about the vaccine triggering irAEs.

Abstract

The BNT162b2 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 has a proven efficacy and a favorable safety profile. In cancer patients under immunotherapy in the form of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), the efficacy of the vaccine has not been thoroughly studied, while a theoretical concern has also been raised about triggering immune-related adverse events (irAEs) by the vaccine. We conducted a prospective, non-interventional study on the immunogenicity and safety of the BNT162b2 vaccine in patients with advanced or metastatic melanoma treated with ICIs. Blood samples were obtained 0–4 days before the first dose and 12–21 days after the second dose of the vaccine for the quantification of the SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike antibody using an ELISA and immunophenotyping of the T and myeloid cell subpopulations. The active recording of AEs for a two-month period was conducted. Forty patients were included in the study. All but one (97.3%) achieved seroconversion after two doses of the vaccine and no correlations of the antibody titers with any of the studied parameters (age, gender, stage and duration of the disease, type of ICI, previous treatment, etc.) were found. Moreover, no differences in the subpopulations of the T cells (including the T-regulatory cells) or the myeloid cells were found pre- and post-vaccination. All AEs were low-grade, while one case of arthritis exacerbation was noted. The seroconversion rate in the studied population was high and was comparable to that of healthy subjects, while no major safety issues were raised during the safety follow-up. Finally, no derangements in the subpopulations of T cells or myeloid cells were noted. This is the first study focusing on the immunogenicity, safety, and effect of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines on the blood-cell immunophenotype status of patients with melanoma treated with ICIs.

PD-1 directed immunotherapy alters Tfh and humoral immune responses to seasonal influenza vaccine

Anti-programmed death-1 (anti-PD-1) immunotherapy reinvigorates CD8 T cell responses in patients with cancer but PD-1 is also expressed by other immune cells, including follicular helper CD4 T cells (Tfh) which are involved in germinal centre responses. Little is known, however, about the effects of anti-PD-1 immunotherapy on noncancer immune responses in humans. To investigate this question, we examined the impact of anti-PD-1 immunotherapy on the Tfh-B cell axis responding to unrelated viral antigens. Following influenza vaccination, a subset of adults receiving anti-PD-1 had more robust circulating Tfh responses than adults not receiving immunotherapy. PD-1 pathway blockade resulted in transcriptional signatures of increased cellular proliferation in circulating Tfh and responding B cells compared with controls. These latter observations suggest an underlying change in the Tfh-B cell and germinal centre axis in a subset of immunotherapy patients. Together, these results demonstrate dynamic effects of anti-PD-1 therapy on influenza vaccine responses and highlight analytical vaccination as an approach that may reveal underlying immune predisposition to adverse events.

Safety and Immunogenicity of mRNA Vaccines Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in Patients With Lung Cancer Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Multicenter Observational Study in Japan

INTRODUCTION

Patients with cancer have been prioritized for vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Nevertheless, there are limited data regarding the safety, efficacy, and risk of developing immune-related adverse events (irAEs) associated with mRNA vaccines in patients with lung cancer, especially those being actively treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

METHODS

This multicenter observational study was conducted at nine hospitals in Japan. Patients with lung cancer (≥20 y) actively treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors between 4 weeks prefirst vaccination and 4 weeks postsecond vaccination were enrolled. The primary end point was the incidence of irAEs of any grade on the basis of an assumed incidence without vaccination rate of 35%. Immunogenicity was assessed by measuring anti-spike (S)-IgG antibody levels against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.

RESULTS

A total of 126 patients with lung cancer (median age, 71 y; interquartile range, 65-74) were enrolled from May to November 2021 and followed up until December 2021. There were 26 patients (20.6%, 95% confidence interval: 13.9%-28.8%) and seven patients (5.6%, 95% confidence interval: 2.3%-11.1%) who developed irAEs of any grade pre- and postvaccination, respectively, which was lower than the predicted incidence without vaccination. None of the patients experienced exacerbation of preexisting irAE postvaccination. S-IgG antibodies were seroconverted in 96.7% and 100% of the patients with lung cancer and controls, respectively, but antibody levels were significantly lower in patients with lung cancer (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with lung cancer who were actively treated with ICIs were safely vaccinated without an increased incidence of irAEs; however, their vaccine immunogenicity was lower. This requires further evaluation.

Safety and Efficacy of Influenza Vaccination in Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors. Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

The potential increased risk of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) post-influenza vaccine is a concern in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis of studies reporting the effects of influenza vaccination in patients with cancer during ICI treatment. We searched five electronic databases until 01/2022. Two authors independently selected studies, appraised their quality, and collected data. The primary outcome was the determination of pooled irAE rates. Secondary outcomes included determination of immunogenicity and influenza infection rates and cancer-related outcomes. Nineteen studies (26 publications, n = 4705) were included; 89.5% were observational. Vaccinated patients reported slighter lower rates of irAEs compared to unvaccinated patients (32% versus 41%, respectively). Seroprotection for influenza type A was 78%-79%, and for type B was 75%. Influenza and irAE-related death rates were similar between groups. The pooled proportion of participants reporting a laboratory-confirmed infection was 2% (95% CI 0% to 6%), and influenza-like illness was 14% (95% CI 2% to 32%). No differences were reported on the rates of laboratory-confirmed infection between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. Longer progression-free and overall survival was also observed in vaccinated compared with unvaccinated patients. Current evidence suggests that influenza vaccination is safe in patients receiving ICIs, does not increase the risk of irAEs, and may improve survival.

Influenza Vaccination in Cancer Patients Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

The safety and efficacy of influenza vaccination is not well-studied in cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed aiming to summarize available data regarding influenza vaccination in ICI-treated cancer patients. Peer-reviewed studies or nonpeer-reviewed conference abstracts including ICI-treated cancer patients who received at least 1 dose of influenza vaccine were deemed eligible. A systematic search in PubMed/EMBASE was performed until October 26, 2021. Endpoints of interest included mortality as the primary outcome and secondary safety outcomes such as the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Twenty-five studies were included in the systematic review, among which 9 were included in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis of 3 studies (n=589, weighted age 64 y, men 61%, influenza vaccinated 32%) showed pooled odds ratio for death in influenza vaccinated versus nonvaccinated patients at 1.25 [(95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.81-1.92), P=non significant (NS)]. Meta-analysis of 6 studies studies (n=1285, weighted age 60 y, men 59%, influenza vaccinated 48%) showed pooled odds ratio for any irAEs in influenza vaccinated versus nonvaccinated patients at 0.82 [95% CI: 0.63-1.08, P=NS]. Similar results were observed in sensitivity analyses for serious irAEs, as well as when only peer-reviewed studies were included. Influenza vaccination appears to be a safe and reasonable intervention for cancer patients receiving ICIs. Most data are derived from retrospective observational studies. Randomized studies are needed to provide high-quality evidence.

Risk Factors and Biomarkers for Immune-Related Adverse Events: A Practical Guide to Identifying High-Risk Patients and Rechallenging Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are a range of complications associated with the use of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Two major classes of ICIs widely used are Cytotoxic T-Lymphocyte Antigen 4 (CTLA4) and Programmed Cell death-1 (PD-1)/Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors. High-grade irAEs are life-threatening and often cause a severe decline in performance status in such that patients do not qualify for any further anticancer treatments. It is difficult to generalize the evidence in the current literature on risk factors or biomarkers for the entire class of ICIs as the studies so far are either disease-specific (e.g., lung cancer or melanoma) or ICI agent-specific (e.g., pembrolizumab, ipilimumab) or irAE-specific (e.g., pneumonitis or gastritis). In this review, risk factors and biomarkers to consider before initiating or monitoring ICI are listed with a practical purpose in day-to-day practice. Risk factors are grouped into demographics and social history, medical history, and medication history, tumor-specific and agent-specific risk factors. A higher risk of irAE is associated with age <60 years, high body mass index, women on CTLA4 and men on PD-1/PD-L1 agents, and chronic smokers. Patients with significant kidney (Stage IV-V), cardiac (heart failure, coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, hypertension), and lung (asthma, pulmonary fibrosis, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) are at a higher risk of respective organ-specific irAEs. Pre-existing autoimmune disease and chronic use of certain drugs (proton pump inhibitors, diuretics, anti-inflammatory drugs) also increase the irAE-risk. Biomarkers are categorized into circulating blood counts, cytokines, autoantibodies, HLA genotypes, microRNA, gene expression profiling, and serum proteins. The blood counts and certain protein markers (albumin and thyroid-stimulating hormone) are readily accessible in current practice. High neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, eosinophil/monocyte/lymphocyte counts; TSH and troponins at diagnosis and drop in the white count and lymphocyte count can predict irAE. Other biomarkers with limited evidence are cytokines, autoantibodies, HLA genotypes, microRNA, and gene expression profiling. With fast-expanding approvals for ICIs in various cancer types, knowledge on risk factors and biomarkers can help providers assess the irAE-risk of their patients. Prospective disease and agent-specific studies are needed to provide further insight on this essential aspect of ICI therapy.

Systematic review of the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of high-dose seasonal influenza vaccines for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals ≥18 years of age

This review sought to assess the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of high-dose inactivated influenza vaccines (HD-IIV) for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals aged 18 years or older. A systematic literature search was conducted in electronic databases and grey literature sources up to 7 February 2020. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) were included. The search returned 28,846 records, of which 36 studies were included. HD-IIV was shown to have higher relative vaccine efficacy in preventing influenza compared with standard-dose influenza vaccines (SD-IIV3) in older adults (Vaccine effectiveness (VE) = 24%, 95% CI 10-37, one RCT). One NRSI demonstrated significant effect for HD-IIV3 against influenza B (VE = 89%, 95% CI 47-100), but not for influenza A(H3N2) (VE = 22%, 95% CI -82 to 66) when compared with no vaccination in older adults. HD-IIV3 showed significant relative effect compared with SD-IIV3 for influenza-related hospitalisation (VE = 11.8%, 95% CI 6.4-17.0, two NRSIs), influenza- or pneumonia-related hospitalisation (VE = 13.7%, 95% CI 9.5-17.7, three NRSIs), influenza-related hospital encounters (VE = 13.1%, 95% CI 8.4-17.7, five NRSIs), and influenza-related office visits (VE = 3.5%, 95% CI 1.5-5.5, two NRSIs). For safety, HD-IIV were associated with significantly higher rates of local and systemic adverse events compared with SD-IIV (combined local reactions, pain at injection site, swelling, induration, headache, chills and malaise). From limited data, compared with SD-IIV, HD-IIV were found to be more effective in the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza, for a range of proxy outcome measures, and associated with more adverse events.

Safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in oncologic patients undergoing numerous cancer treatment options: A retrospective single-center study

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV2 virus, has infected millions worldwide with cancer patients demonstrating a higher prevalence for severe disease and poorer outcomes. Recently, the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was released as the primary means to combat COVID-19. The currently reported incidence of local and systemic side effects was 27% in the general public. The safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine has not been studied in patients with an active cancer diagnosis who are either ongoing or plan to undergo oncologic therapy.This single center study reviewed the charts of 210 patients with active cancer diagnoses that received both doses of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. The development of side effects from the vaccine, hospitalizations or exacerbations from various oncologic treatment were documented. Type of oncologic treatment (immunotherapy, chemotherapy, hormonal, biologic, radiation or mixed) was documented to identify if side effects were related to treatment type. The time at which the vaccine was administered in relation to treatment onset (on long term therapy, within 1 month of therapy or prior to therapy) was also documented to identify any relationships.Sixty five (31%) participants experienced side effects from the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, however most were mild to moderate. Treatment protocol was not linked to the development of vaccine related side effects (P = .202), nor was immunotherapy (P = .942). The timing of vaccine administered in relation to treatment onset was also not related to vaccine related side effects (P = .653). Six (2.9%) participants were hospitalized and 4 (2%) died.The incidence of side effects in cancer patients is similar to what has been reported for the general public (31% vs 27%). Therefore, we believe that the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine is safe in oncologic patients undergoing numerous cancer treatments.

Infection risk and prophylaxis in patients with lymphoid cancer

Infections are a common cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with lymphoid cancer. With evolving cancer therapeutics, including new targeted and immunotherapies, clinicians need to be aware of additional risk factors and infections that may arise in patients treated with these agents. This "How I Treat" article will highlight fundamental issues including risk factors for infection, infectious diseases screenings and antimicrobial prophylaxis recommendations in patients with lymphoid cancers. We present 4 scenarios of patients with lymphoid cancers with varied infections and describe a treatment approach based on a combination of evidence-based data and experience, as there are limitations in objective infection data especially with newer agents. The goal of this discussion is to provide a framework for institutions and health care providers to develop their own approach in preventing and treating infections in patients with lymphoid cancer.

COVID-19 vaccine development from the perspective of cancer patients

Currently, many companies around the world are actively developing COVID-19 vaccines. Fourteen vaccines with reliable safety and effectiveness are being successfully distributed to the public. However, there is no specific clinical trial data of the vaccines currently on the market on cancer patients at various stages, so the safety and effectiveness on cancer patients is unknown. This mini-review aims to discuss the impact of COVID-19 on cancer patients, and the urgent need of COVID-19 vaccines for cancer patients. In this review, we described the current status of the COVID-19 vaccine usages in cancer patients, as well as discussed potential problems in the use of vaccine. In addition, we included an original survey of the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccines in 209 cancer patients and their family members. COVID-19 vaccine can provide cancer patients with social and medical benefits; therefore, clinical trials of vaccines on cancer patients are in great need.

Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of breast cancer

Breast cancer has historically been a disease for which immunotherapy was largely unavailable. Recently, the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced/metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) has demonstrated efficacy, including longer progression-free survival and increased overall survival in subsets of patients. Based on clinical benefit in randomized trials, ICIs in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of some patients with advanced/metastatic TNBC have been approved by the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA), expanding options for patients. Ongoing questions remain, however, about the optimal chemotherapy backbone for immunotherapy, appropriate biomarker-based selection of patients for treatment, the optimal strategy for immunotherapy treatment in earlier stage disease, and potential use in histological subtypes other than TNBC. To provide guidance to the oncology community on these and other important concerns, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a multidisciplinary panel of experts to develop a clinical practice guideline (CPG). The expert panel drew upon the published literature as well as their clinical experience to develop recommendations for healthcare professionals on these important aspects of immunotherapeutic treatment for breast cancer, including diagnostic testing, treatment planning, immune-related adverse events (irAEs), and patient quality of life (QOL) considerations. The evidence-based and consensus-based recommendations in this CPG are intended to give guidance to cancer care providers treating patients with breast cancer.

Influenza vaccination in cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is a concern that influenza vaccination may increase the incidence of immune-related adverse events in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the available data on the safety and efficacy of influenza vaccination in cancer patients receiving ICIs.

METHODS

Studies reporting safety and efficacy outcomes of influenza vaccination in cancer patients receiving ICIs were included. Only descriptive statistics were conducted to obtain a pooled rate of immune-related adverse events in vaccinated patients.

RESULTS

Ten studies assessing the safety and eight assessing the efficacy of influenza vaccination in cancer patients receiving ICIs were identified, for a total of 1124 and 986 vaccinated patients, respectively. Most patients had melanoma or lung cancer and received a single agent anti-PD-1, but also other tumour types and immunotherapy combinations were represented. No severe vaccination-related toxicities were reported. The pooled incidence of any grade immune checkpoint inhibitor-related adverse events was 28.9%. In the 6 studies specifying the incidence of grade 3-4 toxicities, the pooled incidence was 7.5%. No grade 5 toxicities were reported. No pooled descriptive analysis was conducted in studies reporting efficacy outcomes due to the heterogeneity of endpoints and data reporting. Nevertheless, among the eight studies included, seven reported positive efficacy outcomes of influenza vaccination.

CONCLUSION

The results of this systematic review support the safety and efficacy of influenza vaccination in cancer patients receiving ICIs. These results are particularly relevant in the context of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Immunotherapy use outside clinical trial populations: never say never?

BACKGROUND

Based on favourable outcomes in clinical trials, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), most notably programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors, are now widely used across multiple cancer types. However, due to their strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, clinical studies often do not address challenges presented by non-trial populations.

DESIGN

This review summarises available data on the efficacy and safety of ICIs in trial-ineligible patients, including those with autoimmune disease, chronic viral infections, organ transplants, organ dysfunction, poor performance status, and brain metastases, as well as the elderly, children, and those who are pregnant. In addition, we review data concerning other real-world challenges with ICIs, including timing of therapy switch, relationships to radiotherapy or surgery, re-treatment after an immune-related toxicity, vaccinations in patients on ICIs, and current experience around ICI and coronavirus disease-19. Where possible, we provide recommendations to aid the often-difficult decision-making process in those settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Data suggest that ICIs are often active and have an acceptable safety profile in the populations described above, with the exception of PD-1 inhibitors in solid organ transplant recipients. Decisions about whether to treat with ICIs should be personalised and require multidisciplinary input and careful counselling of patients with respect to potential risks and benefits. Clinical judgements need to be carefully weighed, considering factors such as underlying cancer type, feasibility of alternative treatment options, or activity in trial-eligible patients.

Indications for and contraindications of immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients with COVID-19 vaccination

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has lasted over 1 year and will not disappear in a short time. There is no specific remedy against the virus as yet. Vaccination is thus far one of the most important strategies for preventing COVID-19. Cancer patients with COVID-19 have a higher mortality because of immunosuppression. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are a novel anticancer strategy for blocking inhibitory pathways, which are related to the immune response. There is a question regarding whether COVID-19 vaccination and ICI treatment impact each other in cancer patients. This review explores both sides of the relationship between ICI treatment and COVID-19 vaccination and suggests good efficacy and safety of ICI treatment after COVID-19 vaccination as well as little impact on the virus protection and toxicity associated with COVID-19 vaccination during ICI treatment.

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has lasted over 1 year. Vaccination is a promising strategy for preventing COVID-19. Cancer patients are prone to infection with COVID-19, and these patients have high mortality. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are a novel anticancer strategy. Whether COVID-19 vaccination and ICI treatment impact each other in cancer patients remains unknown. This review explores both sides of the relationship between ICI treatment and COVID-19 vaccination and suggests good efficacy and safety of ICI treatment after COVID-19 vaccination as well as little impact on the virus protection and toxicity associated with COVID-19 vaccination during ICI treatment.

Medical Oncology Group of Australia position statement: COVID-19 vaccination in patients with solid tumours

People with cancer are vulnerable to increased morbidity and mortality from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). COVID-19 vaccination is key to protecting the population of people with cancer from adverse outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The Medical Oncology Group of Australia aimed to address the considerations around COVID-19 vaccination in people with cancer, in particular, safety and efficacy of vaccination. The assessment of patients with generalised allergic reaction to anti-cancer therapy containing vaccine components and practical implementation of vaccination of people on active anti-cancer therapy are also discussed.

[COVID-19 Vaccination for Cancer Patients: Progress and Preliminary Recommendations]

The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a serious impact on global health. COVID-19 vaccines may be one of the most effective measure to end the pandemic. High infection risk and higher serious incident and mortality rates have been shown in cancer patients with COVID-19. Therefore, cancer patients should be the priority group for COVID-19 prevention. Until now, data of COVID-19 vaccination for cancer patients is lacking. We review the interim data of safety and immune-efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination in cancer patients based on the latest studies. Due to the complicated immune systems of cancer patients caused by the malignancy and anticancer treatments, we proposed preliminary specific COVID-19 vaccination recommendations for cancer patients with different anticancer treatments and at different stages of the disease. Preventing COVID-19 with vaccinations for cancer patients is crucial, and we call for more large-scale clinical trials and real-world studies, for further COVID-19 vaccination recommendations development.
.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: Common Questions About Uncommon Adverse Events

At JADPRO Live Virtual 2020, Lisa Kottschade, APRN, MSN, CNP, highlighted considerations for advanced practitioners on the recognition and monitoring of rare and life-threatening immune-related adverse events (irAEs), as well as strategies for managing patients who have corticosteroid-refractory irAEs.

The Uro-oncology Patient and Vaccination Against SARS-CoV-2

As of April 13, 2021, 137 million cases of COVID-19 and 2.95 million deaths have been reported worldwide. On December 21, 2020, the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was approved for use in the European Union, with efficacy of 95% protection against COVID-19 infection. Several other vaccines are at different stages of assessment by the European Medicines Agency. In addition to the elderly, oncology patients are a vulnerable population in which COVID-19 infection may be more severe. However, owing to the design of the initial studies, evidence on the safety and efficacy of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in these patients is scarce and recommendations are based on the opinion of associations, stakeholders, and experts via extrapolation of information and experience for other vaccines, especially influenza vaccines. Despite the limited evidence, the consensus is that SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are safe and vaccination of oncology patients and their close relatives is recommended, although efficacy may be lower in patients with an impaired immune response and the need for additional booster doses is not yet clear. Recommendations include avoiding the use of vaccines based on viral vectors for patients with an impaired immune response, deferring vaccination for immunosuppressed patients or administering the vaccine before immunosuppression, and avoiding chemotherapy receipt between the two doses of a vaccine or on the same day that the vaccine is administered. These recommendations can be extrapolated to urology patients and although evidence is lacking, there should not be greater interference with SARS-CoV-2 vaccines from androgen deprivation therapy or intravesical bacillus Calmette-Guérin. However, large studies to provide strong evidence for uro-oncology patients are needed.

Patient summary

We looked at the effects of COVID-19 vaccination for patients with urological cancers. The consensus is that the vaccines are safe, and vaccination of cancer patients and their close relatives is recommended.

Ethical Considerations in Chemotherapy and Vaccines in Cancer Patients in Times of the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 situation is a worldwide health emergency with strong implications in clinical oncology. In this viewpoint, we address two crucial dilemmas from the ethical dimension: (1) Is it ethical to postpone or suspend cancer treatments which offer a statistically significant benefit in quality of life and survival in cancer patients during this time of pandemic?; (2) Should we vaccinate cancer patients against COVID-19 if scientific studies have not included this subgroup of patients? Regarding the first question, the best available evidence applied to the ethical principles of Beauchamp and Childress shows that treatments (such as chemotherapy) with clinical benefit are fair and beneficial. Indeed, the suspension or delay of such treatments should be considered malefic. Regarding the second question, applying the doctrine of double-effect, we show that the potential beneficial effect of vaccines in the population with cancer (or those one that has had cancer) is much higher than the potential adverse effects of these vaccines. In addition, there is no better and less harmful known solution.

INfluenza Vaccine Indication During therapy with Immune checkpoint inhibitors: a multicenter prospective observational study (INVIDIa-2)

Background

Until now, no robust data supported the efficacy, safety and recommendation for influenza vaccination in patients with cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs).

Methods

The prospective multicenter observational INfluenza Vaccine Indication During therapy with Immune checkpoint inhibitors (INVIDIa-2) study investigated the clinical effectiveness of influenza vaccination in patients with advanced cancer receiving ICIs, enrolled in 82 Italian centers from October 2019 to January 2020. The primary endpoint was the time-adjusted incidence of influenza-like illness (ILI) until April 30, 2020. Secondary endpoints regarded ILI severity and vaccine safety.

Results

The study enrolled 1279 patients; 1188 patients were evaluable for the primary endpoint analysis. Of them, 48.9% (581) received influenza vaccination. The overall ILI incidence was 8.2% (98 patients). Vaccinated patients were significantly more frequently elderly (p<0.0001), males (p=0.004), with poor European Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (p=0.009), affected by lung cancer (p=0.01), and by other non-cancer comorbidities (p<0.0001) when compared with unvaccinated. ILI incidence was not different basing on influenza vaccination: the time-to-ILI was similar in vaccinated and unvaccinated patients (p=0.62). ILI complications were significantly less frequent for patients receiving the vaccination (11.8% vs 38.3% in unvaccinated, p=0.002). ILI-related intravenous therapies were significantly less frequent in vaccinated patients than in unvaccinated (11.8% vs 29.8%, p=0.027). ILI lethality was, respectively, 0% in vaccinated and 4.3% in unvaccinated patients. Vaccine-related adverse events were rare and mild (1.5%, grades 1–2).

Conclusion

The INVIDIa-2 study results support a positive recommendation for influenza vaccination in patients with advanced cancer receiving immunotherapy.

Repurposing Infectious Diseases Vaccines Against Cancer

Vaccines used to prevent infections have long been known to stimulate immune responses to cancer as illustrated by the approval of the Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine to treat bladder cancer since the 1970s. The recent approval of immunotherapies has rejuvenated this research area with reports of anti-tumor responses with existing infectious diseases vaccines used as such, either alone or in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Here, we have reviewed and summarized research activities using approved vaccines to treat cancer. Data supporting a cancer therapeutic use was found for 16 vaccines. For 10 (BCG, diphtheria, tetanus, human papillomavirus, influenza, measles, pneumococcus, smallpox, typhoid and varicella-zoster), clinical trials have been conducted or are ongoing. Within the remaining 6, preclinical evidence supports further evaluation of the rotavirus, yellow fever and pertussis vaccine in carefully designed clinical trials. The mechanistic evidence for the cholera vaccine, combined with the observational data in colorectal cancer, is also supportive of clinical translation. There is limited data for the hepatitis B and mumps vaccine (without measles vaccine). Four findings are worth highlighting: the superiority of intravesical typhoid vaccine instillations over BCG in a preclinical bladder cancer model, which is now the subject of a phase I trial; the perioperative use of the influenza vaccine to limit and prevent the natural killer cell dysfunction induced by cancer surgery; objective responses following intratumoral injections of measles vaccine in cutaneous T-cell lymphoma; objective responses induced by human papillomavirus vaccine in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. All vaccines are intended to induce or improve an anti-tumor (immune) response. In addition to the biological and immunological mechanisms that vary between vaccines, the mode of administration and sequence with other (immuno-)therapies warrant more attention in future research.

SARS-CoV-2 infection: The role of PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4 axis

The outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 in Wuhan of China in December 2019 and its worldwide spread has turned into the COVID-19 pandemic. Respiratory disorders, lymphopenia, cytokine cascades, and the immune responses provoked by this virus play a major and fundamental role in the severity of the symptoms and the immunogenicity which it causes. Owing to the decrease in the inflammatory responses' regulation in the immune system and the sudden increase in the secretion of cytokines, it seems that an investigation of inhibitory immune checkpoints can influence theories regarding this disease's treatment methods. Acquired cell-mediated immune defense's T-cells have a key major contribution in clearing viral infections thus reducing the severity of COVID-19's symptoms. The most important diagnostic feature in individuals with COVID-19 is lymphocyte depletion, most importantly, T-cells. Due to the induction of interferon-γ (INF-γ) production by neutrophils and monocytes, which are abundantly present in the peripheral blood of the individuals with COVID-19, the expression of inhibitory immune checkpoints including, PD-1 (programmed death), PD-L1 and CTLA4 on the T-cells' surface is enhanced. The purpose of this review is to discuss the functions of these checkpoints and their effects on the dysfunction and exhaustion of T-cells, making them almost ineffective in individuals with COVID-19, especially in the cases with extreme symptoms.

EASL position paper on the use of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with chronic liver diseases, hepatobiliary cancer and liver transplant recipients

According to a recent World Health Organization estimate, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, which originated in China in 2019, has spread globally, infecting nearly 100 million people worldwide by January 2021. Patients with chronic liver diseases (CLD), particularly cirrhosis, hepatobiliary malignancies, candidates for liver transplantation, and immunosuppressed individuals after liver transplantation appear to be at increased risk of infections in general, which in turn translates into increased mortality. This is also the case for SARS-CoV-2 infection, where patients with cirrhosis, in particular, are at high risk of a severe COVID-19 course. Therefore, vaccination against various pathogens including SARS-CoV-2, administered as early as possible in patients with CLD, is an important protective measure. However, due to impaired immune responses in these patients, the immediate and long-term protective response through immunisation may be incomplete. The current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has led to the exceptionally fast development of several vaccine candidates. A small number of these SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates have already undergone phase III, placebo-controlled, clinical trials in healthy individuals with proof of short-term safety, immunogenicity and efficacy. However, although regulatory agencies in the US and Europe have already approved some of these vaccines for clinical use, information on immunogenicity, duration of protection and long-term safety in patients with CLD, cirrhosis, hepatobiliary cancer and liver transplant recipients has yet to be generated. This review summarises the data on vaccine safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy in this patient population in general and discusses the implications of this knowledge on the introduction of the new SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.