The clinical use of immune checkpoint inhibitors is expanding rapidly. Oncology practitioners will therefore be required to recognize and manage irAEs in a growing patient population. Early recognition and treatment are essential to prevent patient morbidity and mortality, and adherence to established algorithms is recommended.
We observed a 91% incidence of clinically significant immune-related AEs leading to frequent emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and systemic immunosuppression. Immuno-oncology trials should routinely report these metrics. Most patients do not tolerate 4 doses of nivo + ipi; however, 4 doses may not be required for clinical benefit.
Both the combination of nivolumab + ipilimumab and single‐agent anti‐PD‐1 immunotherapy have demonstrated survival benefit for patients with advanced melanoma. As the combination has a high rate of serious side effects, further analyses in randomized trials of combination versus anti‐PD‐1 immunotherapy are needed to understand who benefits most from the combination. Clinical laboratory values that were routinely collected in randomized studies may provide information on the relative benefit of combination immunotherapy. To prioritize which clinical laboratory factors to ultimately explore in these randomized studies, we performed a single‐center, retrospective analysis of patients with advanced melanoma who received nivolumab + ipilimumab either as part of a clinical trial (n = 122) or commercial use (n = 87). Baseline routine laboratory values were correlated with overall survival (OS) and overall response rate (ORR). Kaplan–Meier estimation and Cox regression were performed. Median OS was 44.4 months, 95% CI (32.9, Not Reached). A total of 110 patients (53%) responded (CR/PR). Significant independent variables for favorable OS included the following: high relative eosinophils, high relative basophils, low absolute monocytes, low LDH, and a low neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio. These newly identified factors, along with those previously reported to be associated with anti‐PD‐1 monotherapy outcomes, should be studied in the randomized trials of nivolumab + ipilimumab versus anti‐PD‐1 monotherapies to determine whether they help define the patients who benefit most from the combination versus anti‐PD‐1 alone.
Prospective clinical sequencing of advanced endometrial cancer can help refine prognosis and aid treatment decision making by simultaneously detecting microsatellite status, germline predisposition syndromes, and potentially actionable mutations. A small overall proportion of all patients tested received investigational, genomically matched therapy as part of clinical trials.
High-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) is an archetypal cancer of genomic instability1–4 patterned by distinct mutational processes5,6, tumour heterogeneity7–9 and intraperitoneal spread7,8,10. Immunotherapies have had limited efficacy in HGSOC11–13, highlighting an unmet need to assess how mutational processes and the anatomical sites of tumour foci determine the immunological states of the tumour microenvironment. Here we carried out an integrative analysis of whole-genome sequencing, single-cell RNA sequencing, digital histopathology and multiplexed immunofluorescence of 160 tumour sites from 42 treatment-naive patients with HGSOC. Homologous recombination-deficient HRD-Dup (BRCA1 mutant-like) and HRD-Del (BRCA2 mutant-like) tumours harboured inflammatory signalling and ongoing immunoediting, reflected in loss of HLA diversity and tumour infiltration with highly differentiated dysfunctional CD8+ T cells. By contrast, foldback-inversion-bearing tumours exhibited elevated immunosuppressive TGFβ signalling and immune exclusion, with predominantly naive/stem-like and memory T cells. Phenotypic state associations were specific to anatomical sites, highlighting compositional, topological and functional differences between adnexal tumours and distal peritoneal foci. Our findings implicate anatomical sites and mutational processes as determinants of evolutionary phenotypic divergence and immune resistance mechanisms in HGSOC. Our study provides a multi-omic cellular phenotype data substrate from which to develop and interpret future personalized immunotherapeutic approaches and early detection research.
BackgroundThere are limited treatment options for patients with metastatic or recurrent cervical cancer. Platinum-based chemotherapy plus the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor antibody bevacizumab remains the mainstay of advanced treatment. Pembrolizumab is Food and Drug Agency approved for programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) positive cervical cancer with a modest response rate. This is the first study to report the efficacy and safety of the PD-L1 antibody atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab in advanced cervical cancer.MethodsWe report the results from a phase II, open-label, multicenter study (NCT02921269). Patients with advanced cervical cancer were treated with bevacizumab 15 mg/kg intravenous every 3 weeks and atezolizumab 1200 mg intravenous every 3 weeks. The primary objective was to measure the objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.ResultsIn the total evaluable population (n=10), zero patients achieved an objective response as assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) V.1.1, resulting in a confirmed ORR of 0%. Of note, there were two patients who achieved an unconfirmed PR. The DCR by RECIST V.1.1 was 60% (0% complete response, 0% partial response, 60% stable disease). Median PFS was 2.9 months (95% CI, 1.8 to 6) and median OS was 8.9 months (95% CI, 3.4 to 21.9). Safety results were generally consistent with the known safety profile of both drugs, notably with two high-grade neurologic events.ConclusionsThe combination of bevacizumab and atezolizumab did not meet the predefined efficacy endpoint, as addition of bevacizumab to PD-L1 blockade did not appear to enhance the ORR in cervical cancer.
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.