Treatment of solid cancers with chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells is plagued by the lack of ideal target antigens that are both absolutely tumor specific and homogeneously expressed. We show that multi-antigen prime-and-kill recognition circuits provide flexibility and precision to overcome these challenges in the context of glioblastoma. A synNotch receptor that recognizes a specific priming antigen, such as the heterogeneous but tumor-specific glioblastoma neoantigen epidermal growth factor receptor splice variant III (EGFRvIII) or the central nervous system (CNS) tissue-specific antigen myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG), can be used to locally induce expression of a CAR. This enables thorough but controlled tumor cell killing by targeting antigens that are homogeneous but not absolutely tumor specific. Moreover, synNotch-regulated CAR expression averts tonic signaling and exhaustion, maintaining a higher fraction of the T cells in a naïve/stem cell memory state. In immunodeficient mice bearing intracerebral patient-derived xenografts (PDXs) with heterogeneous expression of EGFRvIII, a single intravenous infusion of EGFRvIII synNotch-CAR T cells demonstrated higher antitumor efficacy and T cell durability than conventional constitutively expressed CAR T cells, without off-tumor killing. T cells transduced with a synNotch-CAR circuit primed by the CNS-specific antigen MOG also exhibited precise and potent control of intracerebral PDX without evidence of priming outside of the brain. In summary, by using circuits that integrate recognition of multiple imperfect but complementary antigens, we improve the specificity, completeness, and persistence of T cells directed against glioblastoma, providing a general recognition strategy applicable to other solid tumors.

IMPORTANCE Cutaneous immune-related adverse events (cirAEs) are some of the earliest toxic reactions to emerge following immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) initiation. As an early indicator of robust inflammatory response, cirAEs may be associated with patterns of immune-mediated toxic effects, but associations between these events and noncutaneous immune-related adverse events (irAEs) remain underexplored.OBJECTIVES To characterize patterns of cirAEs and irAEs across care settings and examine associations between the features of first cirAE, overall irAE risk, and risk of specific irAE subtypes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSA retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single academic medical center. The cohort included 358 patients with cancer who initiated anti-programmed death 1/ligand 1 and/or anticytotoxic-T-lymphocyte-4 ICI therapy between January 1, 2016, and March 8, 2019, and developed 1 or more cirAEs, identified using International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision codes and confirmed via manual medical record review. All relevant information documented before March 31, 2020, was included.EXPOSURES Anti-programmed death 1/ligand 1 and/or anticytotoxic-T-lymphocyte-4 therapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESAssociations between specific cirAE morphologic classes and patterns of irAEs (occurrence, timeline, organ class, and specific toxic effects). Given the potential that shared underlying factors are associated with the risk of both noncutaneous and cutaneous toxic effects, the presence of observed positive associations between certain cirAE and irAE subtypes was hypothesized. RESULTSOf the 358 patients, 213 were men (59.5%); median age was 65 years (interquartile range, 55-73 years). Nearly half of the patients (177 [49.4%]) with cirAE also developed a noncutaneous irAE. Most patients (128 [72.3%]) experienced their first cirAE before developing any irAE. Several cirAE morphologic classes were found to be associated with overall, organ-based, and specific irAEs. More specifically, mucositis was found to be associated with overall irAE risk (odds ratio [OR], 5.28; 95% CI, 1.11-24.26; P = .04), gastrointestinal irAEs (OR, 5.70; 95% CI,; P = .04), and the specific diagnosis of gastroenterocolitis (OR, 6.80; 95% CI, 1.24-37.39; P = .03). In addition, psoriasis was associated with an increased risk of endocrine irAEs (OR, 4.54; 95% CI, 1.21-17.04; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this cohort study, these findings underscore the risk of multisystem toxic effects in patients experiencing cirAEs and highlight potential opportunities for dermatologists in the management of noncutaneous toxic effects.

Background and Aims Early reports suggest significant difficulty with enteral feeding in critically ill COVID-19 patients. This study aimed to characterize the prevalence, clinical manifestations, and outcomes of feeding intolerance in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Methods We examined 323 adult patients with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care units (ICUs) of Massachusetts General Hospital between March 11-June 28, 2020 who received enteral nutrition. Systematic chart review determined prevalence, clinical characteristics, and hospital outcomes (ICU complications, length of stay, and mortality) of feeding intolerance. Results Feeding intolerance developed in 56% of the patients and most commonly manifested as large gastric residual volumes (83.9%), abdominal distension (67.2%), and vomiting (63.9%). Length of intubation (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03-1.08), ≥1 GI symptom on presentation (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.59-0.97), and severe obesity (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.13-0.66) were independently associated with development of feeding intolerance. Compared to feed-tolerant patients, patients with incident feeding intolerance were significantly more likely to suffer cardiac, renal, hepatic, and hematologic complications during their hospitalization. Feeding intolerance was similarly associated with poor outcomes including longer ICU stay (median [IQR] 21.5 [14-30] vs. 15 [9-22] days, P <0.001), overall hospitalization time (median [IQR] 30.5 [19-42] vs. 24 [15-35], P <0.001) and in-hospital mortality (33.9% vs. 16.1%, P <0.001). Feeding intolerance was independently associated with an increased risk of death (HR 3.32; 95% CI 1.97-5.6). Conclusions Feeding intolerance is a frequently encountered complication in critically ill COVID-19 patients in a large tertiary care experience and is associated with poor outcomes.

Background Cutaneous immune-related adverse events (cirAEs) are a common sideeffect of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, prior work examining these toxicities in detail has considered only the fraction of events evaluated by dermatologists. Associations between dermatology referral, cirAE treatment and survival outcomes remain underexplored across care settings. Objectives To comprehensively categorize cirAE patterns among all patients treated with immunotherapy at our institution, and to evaluate: (i) the effect of dermatology referral on cirAE treatment and (ii) the impact of cirAE treatment on survival. Methods This was a retrospective cohort analysis of patients with cancer who initiated ICI therapy between 1 January 2016 and 8 March 2019 and developed one or more cirAEs, as screened for using International Classification of Diseases 10th revision codes and confirmed via manual chart review (n = 358). All relevant information documented prior to 31 March 2020 was included. Results CirAEs evaluated by dermatologists were significantly more likely to be treated than cirAEs that were not referred (odds ratio 6Á08, P < 0Á001). Patients who received any cirAE treatment had improved progression-free survival [hazard ratio (HR) 0Á59, P = 0Á001] and overall survival (HR 0Á58, P = 0Á007) compared with those who did not. Conclusions CirAEs evaluated by dermatologists were significantly more likely to be treated than cirAEs that were not referred, and patients who received any treatment for a cirAE had improved survival outcomes.What is already known about this topic?• Cutaneous immune-related adverse events (cirAEs) are common among patients on immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy, occurring in up to one-third of ICI monotherapy recipients.• Despite the prevalence of cirAEs, the relationships between dermatology referral, cirAE treatment and survival outcomes remain underexplored.What does this study add?• CirAEs evaluated by dermatologists were significantly more likely to be treated than cirAEs that were not referred, and patients who received treatment had improved survival.• Our findings underscore the vital role of dermatologists in oncological care and suggest that closer collaboration between oncologists and dermatologists may be valuable in supporting comprehensive cirAE treatment.