Reader response: Pearls & Oy-sters: Pembrolizumab-induced myasthenia gravis

Novel pathophysiological insights in autoimmune myasthenia gravis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review summarizes recent insights into the immunopathogenesis of autoimmune myasthenia gravis (MG). Mechanistic understanding is presented according to MG disease subtypes and by leveraging the knowledge gained through the use of immunomodulating biological therapeutics.

RECENT FINDINGS

The past two years of research on MG have led to a more accurate definition of the mechanisms through which muscle-specific tyrosine kinase (MuSK) autoantibodies induce pathology. Novel insights have also emerged from the collection of stronger evidence on the pathogenic capacity of low-density lipoprotein receptor-related protein 4 autoantibodies. Clinical observations have revealed a new MG phenotype triggered by cancer immunotherapy, but the underlying immunobiology remains undetermined. From a therapeutic perspective, MG patients can now benefit from a wider spectrum of treatment options. Such therapies have uncovered profound differences in clinical responses between and within the acetylcholine receptor and MuSK MG subtypes. Diverse mechanisms of immunopathology between the two subtypes, as well as qualitative nuances in the autoantibody repertoire of each patient, likely underpin the variability in therapeutic outcomes. Although predictive biomarkers of clinical response are lacking, these observations have ignited the development of assays that might assist clinicians in the choice of specific therapeutic strategies.

SUMMARY

Recent advances in the understanding of autoantibody functionalities are bringing neuroimmunologists closer to a more detailed appreciation of the mechanisms that govern MG pathology. Future investigations on the immunological heterogeneity among MG patients will be key to developing effective, individually tailored therapies.

Anticancer Drugs and the Nervous System

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews the clinical features, prognosis, and treatment of neurotoxicity from anticancer drugs, including conventional cytotoxic chemotherapy, biologics, and targeted therapies, with a focus on the newer immunotherapies (immune checkpoint inhibitors and chimeric antigen receptor T cells).

RECENT FINDINGS

Whereas neurologic complications from traditional chemotherapy are widely recognized, newer cancer therapies, in particular immunotherapies, have unique and distinct patterns of neurologic adverse effects. Anticancer drugs may cause central or peripheral nervous system complications. Neurologic complications of therapy are being seen with increasing frequency as patients with cancer are living longer and receiving multiple courses of anticancer regimens, with novel agents, combinations, and longer duration. Neurologists must know how to recognize treatment-related neurologic toxicity since discontinuation of the offending agent or dose adjustment may prevent further or permanent neurologic injury. It is also imperative to differentiate neurologic complications of therapy from cancer progression into the nervous system and from comorbid neurologic disorders that do not require treatment dose reduction or discontinuation.

SUMMARY

Neurotoxicity from cancer therapy is common, with effects seen on both the central and peripheral nervous systems. Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy and chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy are new cancer treatments with distinct patterns of neurologic complications. Early recognition and appropriate management are essential to help prevent further neurologic injury and optimize oncologic management.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myopathy: a clinicoseropathologically distinct myopathy

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized the landscape of cancer treatment. Alongside their many advantages, they elicit immune-related adverse events, including myopathy, which potentially result in substantial morbidity if not recognized and treated promptly. Current knowledge of immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myopathy is limited. We conducted a 5-year retrospective study of patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myopathy. Clinical features, survival and ancillary test findings were analysed and compared with those of immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy patients without immune checkpoint inhibitor exposure seen during the same time period. We identified 24 patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myopathy (median age 69 years; range 28-86) and 38 patients with immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy. Ocular involvement occurred in 9/24 patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor exposure, without electrodiagnostic evidence of neuromuscular transmission defect, and in none of the immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy patients (P < 0.001). Myocarditis occurred in eight immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myopathy patients and in none of the immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy patients (P < 0.001). Median creatine kinase was 686 IU/l in the immune checkpoint inhibitor cohort (seven with normal creatine kinase) compared to 6456 IU/l in immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy cohort (P < 0.001). Lymphopenia was observed in 18 and 7 patients with and without immune checkpoint inhibitor exposure, respectively (P < 0.001). Myopathological findings were similar between patients with and without immune checkpoint inhibitor exposure, consisting of necrotic fibres with no or subtle inflammation. Necrotic fibres however arranged in clusters in 10/11 immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myopathy patients but in none of the immune checkpoint inhibitor-naïve patients (P < 0.001). Despite the lower creatine kinase levels in immune checkpoint inhibitor-exposed patients, the number of necrotic fibres was similar in both groups. Immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myopathy patients had a higher frequency of mitochondrial abnormalities and less number of regenerating fibres than immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy patients (P < 0.001). Anti-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA reductase or signal recognition particle antibodies were absent in patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor exposure but positive in two-thirds of immune checkpoint inhibitor-naïve patients. Most patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myopathy responded favourably to immunomodulatory treatments, but four died from myopathy-related complications and one from myocarditis. Intubated patients had significantly shorter survival compared to non-intubated patients (median survival of 22 days; P = 0.004). In summary, immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myopathy is a distinct, treatable immune-mediated myopathy with common ocular involvement, frequent lymphopenia and necrotizing histopathology, which contrary to immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy, is featured by clusters of necrotic fibres and not accompanied by anti-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA reductase or signal recognition particle antibodies. Normal or mildly elevated creatine kinase level does not exclude the diagnosis.