Programmed Death Ligand 1 Expression in Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma in Pediatric Patients

Aoki, Takahiro; Kyushiki, Masashi; Kishimoto, Hiroshi; Yanagi, Masato; Mori, Makiko; Arakawa, Yuki; Hino, Moeko; Shimojo, Naoki; Koh, Katsuyoshi

doi:10.1097/mph.0000000000001030

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Treating pediatric r/r lymphoma patients with nivolumab has displayed some initial favorable results. In a study of children with HL, 10 out of 11 children were found with PD-L1 expression in more than 50% of tumor cells [155]. Correspondingly, a recent study on children reported PD-1 expression in 19.4% of HL cases and in 18.2% of r/r HL cases, while PD-L1 expression in more than 50% of tumor cells was documented in 67.7% of HL cases and in 72.7% of r/r HL cases, suggesting that comparable responses to PD-1/PD-L1 blockade would be expected in patients undergoing first-, second-, or third-line therapy [156].…”

Section: Targeting Pd-1 or Pd-l1mentioning

confidence: 99%

Invasive Fungal Diseases in Children with Hematological Malignancies Treated with Therapies That Target Cell Surface Antigens: Monoclonal Antibodies, Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and CAR T-Cell Therapies

Kyriakidis

Vasileiou

Roilides

et al. 2021

JoF

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since 1985 when the first agent targeting antigens on the surface of lymphocytes was approved (muromonab-CD3), a multitude of such therapies have been used in children with hematologic malignancies. A detailed literature review until January 2021 was conducted regarding pediatric patient populations treated with agents that target CD2 (alefacept), CD3 (bispecific T-cell engager [BiTE] blinatumomab), CD19 (denintuzumab mafodotin, B43, BiTEs blinatumomab and DT2219ARL, the immunotoxin combotox, and chimeric antigen receptor [CAR] T-cell therapies tisagenlecleucel and axicabtagene ciloleucel), CD20 (rituximab and biosimilars, 90Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan, ofatumumab, and obinutuzumab), CD22 (epratuzumab, inotuzumab ozogamicin, moxetumomab pasudotox, BiTE DT2219ARL, and the immunotoxin combotox), CD25 (basiliximab and inolimomab), CD30 (brentuximab vedotin and iratumumab), CD33 (gemtuzumab ozogamicin), CD38 (daratumumab and isatuximab), CD52 (alemtuzumab), CD66b (90Y-labelled BW 250/183), CD248 (ontuxizumab) and immune checkpoint inhibitors against CTLA-4 (CD152; abatacept, ipilimumab and tremelimumab) or with PD-1/PD-L1 blockade (CD279/CD274; atezolizumab, avelumab, camrelizumab, durvalumab, nivolumab and pembrolizumab). The aim of this narrative review is to describe treatment-related invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) of each category of agents. IFDs are very common in patients under blinatumomab, inotuzumab ozogamicin, basiliximab, gemtuzumab ozogamicin, alemtuzumab, and tisagenlecleucel and uncommon in patients treated with moxetumomab pasudotox, brentuximab vedotin, abatacept, ipilimumab, pembrolizumab and avelumab. Although this new era of precision medicine shows promising outcomes of targeted therapies in children with leukemia or lymphoma, the results of this review stress the necessity for ongoing surveillance and suggest the need for antifungal prophylaxis in cases where IFDs are very common complications.

show abstract

Section: Targeting Pd-1 or Pd-l1mentioning

confidence: 99%