Immunotherapy holds the potential to induce durable responses, but only a minority of patients currently respond. The etiologies of primary and secondary resistance to immunotherapy are multifaceted, deriving not only from tumor intrinsic factors, but also from the complex interplay between cancer and its microenvironment. In addressing frontiers in clinical immunotherapy, we describe two categories of approaches to the design of novel drugs and combination therapies: the first involves direct modification of the tumor, while the second indirectly enhances immunogenicity through alteration of the microenvironment. By systematically addressing the factors that mediate resistance, we are able to identify mechanistically-driven novel approaches to improve immunotherapy outcomes.
Expanding the US Food and Drug Administration–approved indications for immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with cancer has resulted in therapeutic success and immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Neurologic irAEs (irAE-Ns) have an incidence of 1%–12% and a high fatality rate relative to other irAEs. Lack of standardized disease definitions and accurate phenotyping leads to syndrome misclassification and impedes development of evidence-based treatments and translational research. The objective of this study was to develop consensus guidance for an approach to irAE-Ns including disease definitions and severity grading. A working group of four neurologists drafted irAE-N consensus guidance and definitions, which were reviewed by the multidisciplinary Neuro irAE Disease Definition Panel including oncologists and irAE experts. A modified Delphi consensus process was used, with two rounds of anonymous ratings by panelists and two meetings to discuss areas of controversy. Panelists rated content for usability, appropriateness and accuracy on 9-point scales in electronic surveys and provided free text comments. Aggregated survey responses were incorporated into revised definitions. Consensus was based on numeric ratings using the RAND/University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Appropriateness Method with prespecified definitions. 27 panelists from 15 academic medical centers voted on a total of 53 rating scales (6 general guidance, 24 central and 18 peripheral nervous system disease definition components, 3 severity criteria and 2 clinical trial adjudication statements); of these, 77% (41/53) received first round consensus. After revisions, all items received second round consensus. Consensus definitions were achieved for seven core disorders: irMeningitis, irEncephalitis, irDemyelinating disease, irVasculitis, irNeuropathy, irNeuromuscular junction disorders and irMyopathy. For each disorder, six descriptors of diagnostic components are used: disease subtype, diagnostic certainty, severity, autoantibody association, exacerbation of pre-existing disease or de novo presentation, and presence or absence of concurrent irAE(s). These disease definitions standardize irAE-N classification. Diagnostic certainty is not always directly linked to certainty to treat as an irAE-N (ie, one might treat events in the probable or possible category). Given consensus on accuracy and usability from a representative panel group, we anticipate that the definitions will be used broadly across clinical and research settings.
PURPOSE To analyze long-term outcomes after treatment discontinuation of anti–programmed death-1 (anti–PD-1) therapy in a cohort of patients with melanoma with the longest follow-up yet available to our knowledge, including a majority of patients treated outside of a clinical trial. We also assessed efficacy of retreatment with anti–PD-1 therapy with or without ipilimumab in relapsing patients. METHODS We retrospectively analyzed all patients with nonuveal, unresectable stage III/IV melanoma treated with single-agent anti–PD-1 therapy at Memorial Sloan Kettering from 2009-2018 who had discontinued treatment and had at least 3 months of follow-up after discontinuation (n = 396). Overall survival for patients with complete response (CR) was calculated from time of CR. Time to treatment failure for patients with CR was time from CR to the next melanoma treatment or death. RESULTS CRs were seen in 102 of 396 patients (25.8%). The median number of months of treatment after CR was zero (range, stopped before CR to 26 months after CR). With a median follow-up of 21.1 months from time of CR in patients who did not relapse, the probability of being alive and not needing additional melanoma therapy at 3 years was 72.1%. There was no significant association between treatment duration and relapse risk. In multivariable analysis, CR was associated with M1b disease and cutaneous versus mucosal or acral primaries. Among the 78 patients (of 396) retreated after disease progression, response was seen in 5 of 34 retreated patients with single-agent anti–PD-1 therapy and 11 of 44 patients escalated to anti–PD-1 plus ipilimumab. CONCLUSION In our cohort, most patients discontinued treatment at the time of CR. Most CRs were durable but the probability of treatment failure was 27% at 3 years. Responses to retreatment were infrequent. The optimal duration of treatment after CR is not yet established.
Data from observational studies indicate that both physical activity as well as exercise (i.e., structured physical activity) is associated with reductions in the risk of recurrence and cancer mortality after a diagnosis of certain forms of cancer. Emerging evidence from pre-clinical studies indicate that physical activity / exercise paradigms regulate intratumoral vascular maturity and perfusion, hypoxia, and metabolism and augments the anti-tumor immune response. Such responses may, in turn, enhance response to standard anticancer treatments. For instance, exercise improves efficacy of chemotherapeutic agents, and there is rationale to believe that it will also improve radiotherapy response. This review overviews the current preclinical as well as clinical evidence supporting exercise modulation of therapeutic response and postulated biological mechanisms underpinning such effects. We also examine the implications for tumor response to radiation, chemotherapy and immunotherapy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.