Clinical Features, Survival, and Burden of Toxicities in Survivors More Than One Year After Lung Cancer Immunotherapy

Autopsy case: Pathological complete response in an advanced lung cancer patient with severe immune related adverse events and COVID-19

A 51-year-old man with advanced lung cancer underwent chemotherapy including an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI). Subsequently, he developed ICI-related pneumonitis and colitis, followed by a ten-month treatment course of high doses of steroids. An infection with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.5 variant caused lethal respiratory failure. Autopsy examination revealed no evidence of viable lung cancer cells in the evaluated organs including the lungs, suggesting that pathological complete response (pCR) could be successfully achieved by ICI treatment in advanced lung cancer patients. Recognizing steroid-resistant ICI-related adverse events as critical factors in severe COVID-19 emphasizes the need for appropriate assessment of ICI-induced pCR.

Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors combinations as first-line systemic treatment in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) with platinum-based chemotherapy (PlatinumCT) or with another ICI in the first-line setting for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) have mixed results.

METHODS

Records were searched electronically from January 2019 to January 2024. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate OS, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate (ORR).

RESULTS

Immune-based combinations were associated with an OS (HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.61-0.92; p < 0.001; I2= 84.1%) and PFS benefit in the intention-to-treat population (HR: 0.67; 95%CI: 0.51-0.89; p < 0.001; I2 = 89.7%). There was no ORR improvement with immune-based combinations (HR: 1.36; 95% CI:0.84-2.20; p < 0.001; I2 = 92.6%).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and study-level meta-analysis demonstrated that the immune-based combinations in first-line treatment for patients with mUC are associated with survival benefit.

Health Care Contact Days Among Older Cancer Survivors

PURPOSE

Health care contact days-days spent receiving health care outside the home-represent an intuitive, practical, and person-centered measure of time consumed by health care.

METHODS

We linked 2019 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey and traditional Medicare claims data for community-dwelling older adults with a history of cancer. We identified contact days (ie, spent in a hospital, emergency department, skilled nursing facility, or inpatient hospice or receiving ambulatory care including an office visit, procedure, treatment, imaging, or test) and described patterns of total and ambulatory contact days. Using weighted Poisson regression models, we identified factors associated with contact days.

RESULTS

We included 1,168 older adults representing 4.51 million cancer survivors (median age, 76.4 years, 52.8% women). The median (IQR) time from cancer diagnosis was 65 (27-126) months. In 2019, these adults had mean (standard deviation) total contact days of 28.4 (27.6) and ambulatory contact days of 24.2 (23.6). These included days for tests (8.0 [8.8]), imaging (3.6 [4.1]), visits with any clinicians (12.4 [11.5]), and visits with primary care clinicians (4.4 [4.7]), and nononcology specialists (7.1 [9.4]) specifically. Sixty-four percent of days with a nonvisit ambulatory service (eg, a test) were not on the same day as a clinician visit. Factors associated with more total contact days included younger age, lower income, more chronic conditions, poor self-rated health, and tendency to "go to doctor as soon as feel bad."

CONCLUSION

Older adult cancer survivors spent nearly 1 month of the year receiving health care outside the home. This care was largely ambulatory, often delivered by nononcologists, and varied by factors beyond clinical characteristics. These results highlight the need to recognize patient burdens and improve survivorship care delivery, including through care coordination.

Immune-Related Toxicity in NSCLC: Current State-of-the-Art and Emerging Clinical Challenges

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have become standard-of-care for the treatment of NSCLC; however, their use brings with it the risk of a unique set of inflammatory side effects, termed immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The recognition, diagnosis, and management of irAEs have become essential to clinical practice, with the potential for high-grade toxicities affecting treatment decision-making. This manuscript provides a state-of-the-art review of irAEs as they pertain to patients with NSCLC, by summarizing the common and severe toxicities of the standard immune checkpoint inhibitor regimens and clinical treatment settings relevant to this disease and future directions.

Immune-related adverse events in non-small cell lung cancer: Occurrence, mechanisms and therapeutic strategies

The emergence of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has heralded a transformative era in the therapeutic landscape of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). While ICIs have demonstrated clinical efficacy in a portion of patients with NSCLC, these treatments concurrently precipitate a spectrum of immune-related adverse events (irAEs), encompassing mild to severe manifestations, collectively posing a risk of significant organ damage. Consequently, there exists an imperative to augment our comprehension of the pathophysiological underpinnings of irAEs and to formulate more efficacious preventive and ameliorative strategies. In this comprehensive review, we delineate the clinical presentation of organ-specific irAEs in patients with NSCLC and provide an in-depth analysis of recent advancements in understanding the mechanisms driving ICI-induced toxicity. Furthermore, we discuss potential strategies and targets for ameliorating these irAEs. Ultimately, this review aims to furnish valuable insights to guide further research endeavours in the context of irAEs in NSCLC patients.

Survivorship outcomes in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become a central part of cancer care. However, the survivorship outcomes in patients treated with ICIs are understudied. Therefore, we conducted a scoping review to evaluate the current status of the field and to establish research gaps regarding survivorship outcomes with ICIs in real-life cohorts.

METHODS

We used the Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase databases to systematically filter published studies with real-life cohorts from January 1, 2010, until October 19, 2022. Studies evaluating at least one survivorship outcome in ICI-treated patients were included.

RESULTS

A total of 39 papers were included. Quality of life (QoL) (n = 23), toxicity burden (n = 16), and psychosocial issues (n = 9) were the most frequently evaluated survivorship outcomes. Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy and a response to treatment were associated with better QoL. In addition, the ICIs were associated with grade 3 or higher immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in 10-15% and late/long-term irAEs in 20-30% of the survivors. Regarding psychosocial problems, over 30% of survivors showed evidence of anxiety and depression, and 30-40% of survivors reported neurocognitive impairments.

CONCLUSION

The survivors treated with ICIs have impairments in most survivorship domains. Further research is needed to gather data on the understudied survivorship outcomes like late and long-term effects, fertility, financial toxicity, and return to work in survivors treated with ICIs.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Available evidence demonstrates that a significant portion of survivors treated with ICIs have a significant toxicity burden, lower QoL than the general population, and a high rate of psychosocial problems.

Immunotherapy through the Lens of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Immunotherapy has revolutionised anti-cancer treatment in solid organ malignancies. Specifically, the discovery of CTLA-4 followed by PD-1 in the early 2000s led to the practice-changing clinical development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Patients with lung cancer, including both small cell (SCLC) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), benefit from the most commonly used form of immunotherapy in immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), resulting in increased survival and quality of life. In NSCLC, the benefit of ICIs has now extended from advanced NSCLC to earlier stages of disease, resulting in durable benefits and the even the emergence of the word 'cure' in long term responders. However, not all patients respond to immunotherapy, and few patients achieve long-term survival. Patients may also develop immune-related toxicity, a small percentage of which is associated with significant mortality and morbidity. This review article highlights the various types of immunotherapeutic strategies, their modes of action, and the practice-changing clinical trials that have led to the widespread use of immunotherapy, with a focus on ICIs in NSCLC and the current challenges associated with advancing the field of immunotherapy.

The role of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) as adjuvant treatment in renal cell carcinoma (RCC): A systematic review and meta-analysis

Pembrolizumab, a PD-1 ICI is approved for the adjuvant treatment of postnephrectomy patients with clear cell RCC in some countries worldwide. However, recent negative data from randomized clinical trials (RCT) with another ICIs makes the benefit of this treatment uncertain. A systematic review and study-level meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the benefit of disease-free survival (DFS) with adjuvant ICI treatment for patients with localized and/or metastatic resected RCC. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement, a systematic search was performed in PUBMED/MEDLINE, Scopus and EMBASE up to September 15, 2022. The statistical analysis was performed by ProMeta 3 software in intention-to-treat (ITT) population and in predetermined subgroups. Four RCT totalizing 3407 patients were included in this analysis. Systemic immunotherapy was pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, nivolumab, and ipilimumab plus nivolumab in 496, 390, 404, and 405 patients, respectively. In the ITT population there was a nonstatistically significant DFS benefit with adjuvant ICI (HR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.69-1.04). Regarding the subgroups, there was a DFS benefit for PD-L1 positive (HR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.55-0.94), intermediate-high risk patients (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.63-0.94), and patients with sarcomatoid component (HR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.43-0.99). This meta-analysis did not demonstrate a statistically significant DFS benefit in overall population, however considering the heterogeneity between the RCTs the use of adjuvant ICI should be individualized.