Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To increase awareness, outline strategies, and offer guidance on the recommended management of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICPi) therapy. METHODS:A multidisciplinary panel of medical oncology, dermatology, gastroenterology, rheumatology, pulmonology, endocrinology, neurology, hematology, emergency medicine, nursing, trialists, and advocacy experts was convened to update the guideline. Guideline development involved a systematic literature review and an informal consensus process. The systematic review focused on evidence published from 2017 through 2021. RESULTS:A total of 175 studies met the eligibility criteria of the systematic review and were pertinent to the development of the recommendations. Because of the paucity of high-quality evidence, recommendations are based on expert consensus. RECOMMENDATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:Recommendations for specific organ system-based toxicity diagnosis and management are presented. While management varies according to the organ system affected, in general, ICPi therapy should be continued with close monitoring for grade 1 toxicities, except for some neurologic, hematologic, and cardiac toxicities. ICPi therapy may be suspended for most grade 2 toxicities, with consideration of resuming when symptoms revert ≤ grade 1. Corticosteroids may be administered. Grade 3 toxicities generally warrant suspension of ICPis and the initiation of high-dose corticosteroids. Corticosteroids should be tapered over the course of at least 4-6 weeks. Some refractory cases may require other immunosuppressive therapy. In general, permanent discontinuation of ICPis is recommended with grade 4 toxicities, except for endocrinopathies that have been controlled by hormone replacement. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To increase awareness, outline strategies, and offer guidance on the recommended management of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in patients treated with chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. METHODS:A multidisciplinary panel of medical oncology, neurology, hematology, emergency medicine, nursing, trialists, and advocacy experts was convened to develop the guideline. Guideline development involved a systematic literature review and an informal consensus process. The systematic review focused on evidence published from 2017 to 2021. RESULTS:The systematic review identified 35 eligible publications. Because of the paucity of high-quality evidence, recommendations are based on expert consensus. RECOMMENDATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:The multidisciplinary team issued recommendations to aid in the recognition, workup, evaluation, and management of the most common CAR T-cell-related toxicities, including cytokine release syndrome, immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome, B-cell aplasia, cytopenias, and infections. Management of short-term toxicities associated with CAR T cells begins with supportive care for most patients, but may require pharmacologic interventions for those without adequate response. Management of patients with prolonged or severe CAR T-cell-associated cytokine release syndrome includes treatment with tocilizumab with or without a corticosteroid. On the basis of the potential for rapid decline, patients with moderate to severe immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome should be managed with corticosteroids and supportive care.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

OBJECTIVE:Patients with melanoma and early stable disease (SD) with pembrolizumab have unclear prognosis. We present post hoc analyses of long-term outcomes for patients with early SD, partial response (PR) or complete response (CR) with pembrolizumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS:Patients who received pembrolizumab in the KEYNOTE-001 and KEYNOTE-006 studies and had SD, PR or CR at weeks 12 or 24 were included. RESULTS:Of 294 patients in the week 12 analysis, 107 (36.4%) had SD at week 12, of whom 7 (6.5%) had a best overall response of CR, 43 (40.2%) had PR and 57 (53.3%) had SD. Forty-eight-month overall survival (OS) rates were 95.2%, 73.0% and 47.7%, respectively, for patients with CR, PR and SD at week 12. Similar results were observed in the 241 patients in the week 24 analysis. Forty-eight-month OS rates were 72.1% for patients with SD at week 12 followed by subsequent response and 75.0% for patients with PR at week 12 followed by no change in response or progression. Thirty-six-month and 48-month OS rates were 11.6% and not reached, respectively, for patients with SD at week 12 followed by progression before week 24. CONCLUSIONS:A substantial proportion of patients (46.7%) with early (week 12) SD with pembrolizumab achieved subsequent PR or CR. Patients with SD at week 12 and subsequent CR/PR had similar survival to those who maintained PR. In contrast, patients with SD at week 12 and subsequent progression had poor survival outcomes. These findings may guide treatment decisions for patients achieving early SD. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01295827 (KEYNOTE-001); NCT01866319 (KEYNOTE-006).

BACKGROUND:Nivolumab (an anti-programmed death-1 antibody) is an adjuvant standard of care for patients with high-risk resected melanoma, although a watch-and-wait strategy remains an option. In the absence of head-to-head evidence, an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) of adjuvant nivolumab versus placebo, the proxy for a watch-and-wait strategy, was conducted in patients with high-risk resected melanoma. METHODS:An ITC using the Bucher method compared nivolumab with placebo using intention-to-treat population data from the phase III CheckMate 238 (nivolumab vs ipilimumab; minimum follow-up, 4 years; NCT02388906) and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 18071 (ipilimumab vs placebo; minimum follow-up, ≈4.5 years; NCT00636168) trials. The end-points were recurrence-free survival (RFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS). To account for cross-trial differences in staging and subsequent therapy, additional analyses examined patients with stage IIIB/IIIC disease and adjusted post-recurrence survival in EORTC 18071, respectively. RESULTS:Nivolumab versus placebo was associated with clinically meaningful improvements in RFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.68) and OS (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.45-0.89). Nivolumab versus placebo was also associated with clinically meaningful improvements in RFS (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.40-0.69), DMFS (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.46-0.83) and OS (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.47-0.97) in patients with stage IIIB/IIIC disease and in OS (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.46-0.92) in the overall population after adjusting post-recurrence survival in EORTC 18071. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This ITC shows that adjuvant nivolumab provides clinically meaningful improvements in RFS, DMFS and OS versus a watch-and-wait strategy in high-risk resected melanoma.

BACKGROUND:Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are common, clinically significant autoinflammatory toxicities observed with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Preexisting immune-mediated inflammatory disease (pre-IMID) is considered a relative contraindication to ICI due to the risk of inciting flares. Improved understanding of the risks and benefits of treating pre-IMID patients with ICI is needed. METHODS:We studied melanoma patients treated with ICI and enrolled in a prospective clinicopathological database. We compiled a list of 23 immune-mediated inflammatory diseases and evaluated their presence prior to ICI. We tested the associations between pre-IMID and progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and irAEs. RESULTS:In total, 483 melanoma patients were included in the study; 74 had pre-IMID and 409 did not. In patients receiving ICI as a standard of care (SoC), pre-IMID was significantly associated with irAEs (p = 0.04) as well as improved PFS (p = 0.024) and OS (p = 0.007). There was no significant association between pre-IMID and irAEs (p = 0.54), PFS (p = 0.197), or OS (p = 0.746) in patients treated through a clinical trial. Pre-IMID was significantly associated with improved OS in females (p = 0.012), but not in males (p = 0.35). CONCLUSIONS:The dichotomy of the impact of pre-IMID on survival and irAEs in SoC versus clinical trial patients may reflect the inherit selection bias in patients accrued in clinical trials. Future mechanistic work is required to better understand the differences in outcomes between female and male pre-IMID patients. Our data challenge the notion that clinicians should avoid ICI in pre-IMID patients, although close monitoring and prospective clinical trials evaluating ICI in this population are warranted.

BACKGROUND:Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) shows lasting benefits in advanced melanoma; however, not all patients respond to this treatment and many develop potentially life-threatening immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Identifying individuals who will develop irAEs is critical in order to improve the quality of care. Here, we prospectively demonstrate that the gut microbiome predicts irAEs in melanoma patients undergoing ICB. METHODS:Pre-, during, and post-treatment stool samples were collected from 27 patients with advanced stage melanoma treated with IPI (anti-CTLA-4) and NIVO (anti-PD1) ICB inhibitors at NYU Langone Health. We completed 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing, DNA deep shotgun metagenomic, and RNA-seq metatranscriptomic sequencing. The divisive amplicon denoising algorithm (DADA2) was used to process 16S data. Taxonomy for shotgun sequencing data was assigned using MetaPhlAn2, and gene pathways were assigned using HUMAnN 2.0. Compositionally aware differential expression analysis was performed using ANCOM. The Cox-proportional hazard model was used to assess the prospective role of the gut microbiome (GMB) in irAES, with adjustment for age, sex, BMI, immune ICB treatment type, and sequencing batch. RESULTS:= 0.88, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:We identified two distinct fecal bacterial community clusters which are associated differentially with irAEs in ICB-treated advanced melanoma patients.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are increasingly used to treat advanced cancer. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is associated with an increased risk of malignancies; however, patients with RA have been excluded from ICI trials. In this study, we evaluated risk of toxicity after initiation of ICI treatment in RA patients. METHODS:We conducted a single-institution, medical records review analysis to assess the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and autoimmune disease (AID) flares among patients with AIDs treated with ICIs from 2011 to 2018. A subgroup analysis for RA patients was performed with frequencies of irAEs and AID flares reported. RESULTS:Twenty-two patients with RA who were treated with ICI for malignancy were identified. At the time of ICI initiation, 86% had inactive RA disease activity. Immune-related adverse events occurred in 7 (32%) of patients, with 2 (9%) developing grade 3 (i.e., severe) irAEs. Immune checkpoint inhibitors were temporarily discontinued because of irAEs in 5 patients (23%), and permanently in 1 patient. Rheumatoid arthritis flares occurred in 12 patients (55%). Of those, 10 (83%) received oral corticosteroids with an adequate treatment response. CONCLUSIONS:Our analysis suggests that irAEs following ICI treatment are not increased among RA patients compared with other cancer patients. Heightened RA disease activity during ICI treatment is common, but most adverse events are manageable with oral corticosteroids, and few require permanent ICI discontinuation. A close collaboration between the oncologist and rheumatologist is advisable when considering ICIs in patients with RA.

BACKGROUND:Several therapeutic options are now available in the adjuvant melanoma setting, mandating an understanding of their benefit‒risk profiles in order to make informed treatment decisions. Herein we characterize adjuvant nivolumab select (immune-related) treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and evaluate possible associations between safety and recurrence-free survival (RFS) in the phase III CheckMate 238 trial. METHODS:Patients with resected stage IIIB-C or IV melanoma received nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (n=452) or ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses and then every 12 weeks (n=453) for up to 1 year or until disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. First-occurrence and all-occurrence select TRAEs were analyzed within discrete time intervals: from 0 to 3 months of treatment, from >3-12 months of treatment, and from the last dose (regardless of early or per-protocol treatment discontinuation) to 100 days after the last dose. Possible associations between select TRAEs and RFS were investigated post randomization in 3-month landmark analyses and in Cox model analyses (including a time-varying covariate of select TRAE), within and between treatment groups. RESULTS:From the first nivolumab dose to 100 days after the last dose, first-occurrence select TRAEs were reported in 67.7% (306/452) of patients. First-occurrence select TRAEs were reported most frequently from 0 to 3 months (48.0%), during which the most common were pruritus (15.5%) and diarrhea (15.3%). Most select TRAEs resolved within 6 months. There was no clear association between the occurrence (or not) of select TRAEs and RFS by landmark analysis or by Cox model analysis within treatment arms or comparing nivolumab to the ipilimumab comparator arm. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Results of this safety analysis of nivolumab in adjuvant melanoma were consistent with its established safety profile. In the discrete time intervals evaluated, most first-occurrence TRAEs occurred early during treatment and resolved. No association between RFS and select TRAEs was evident. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER/BACKGROUND:NCT02388906.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Effective treatment options are limited for patients with advanced (metastatic or unresectable) melanoma who progress after immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies. Adoptive cell therapy using tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes has demonstrated efficacy in advanced melanoma. Lifileucel is an autologous, centrally manufactured tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte product. METHODS:We conducted a phase II open-label, single-arm, multicenter study in patients with advanced melanoma who had been previously treated with checkpoint inhibitor(s) and BRAF ± MEK targeted agents. Lifileucel was produced from harvested tumor specimens in central Good Manufacturing Practice facilities using a streamlined 22-day process. Patients received a nonmyeloablative lymphodepletion regimen, a single infusion of lifileucel, and up to six doses of high-dose interleukin-2. The primary end point was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST, version 1.1. RESULTS:Sixty-six patients received a mean of 3.3 prior therapies (anti-programmed death 1 [PD-1] or programmed death ligand 1 [PD-L1]: 100%; anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein-4: 80%; BRAF ± MEK inhibitor: 23%). The ORR was 36% (95% CI, 25 to 49), with two complete responses and 22 partial responses. Disease control rate was 80% (95% CI, 69 to 89). Median duration of response was not reached after 18.7-month median study follow-up (range, 0.2-34.1 months). In the primary refractory to anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 therapy subset, the ORR and disease control rate were 41% (95% CI, 26 to 57) and 81% (95% CI, 66 to 91), respectively. Safety profile was consistent with known adverse events associated with nonmyeloablative lymphodepletion and interleukin-2. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Lifileucel demonstrated durable responses and addresses a major unmet need in patients with metastatic melanoma with limited treatment options after approved therapy, including the primary refractory to anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 therapy subset.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:While immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have revolutionized the treatment of cancer by producing durable antitumor responses, only 10%-30% of treated patients respond and the ability to predict clinical benefit remains elusive. Several studies, small in size and using variable analytic methods, suggest the gut microbiome may be a novel, modifiable biomarker for tumor response rates, but the specific bacteria or bacterial communities putatively impacting ICI responses have been inconsistent across the studied populations. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN/METHODS:= 303 unique patients) using a uniform computational approach. RESULTS:= 105). CONCLUSIONS:Our analysis highlights the development of biomarkers for nonresponse, rather than response, in predicting ICI outcomes and suggests a new approach to identify patients who would benefit from microbiome-based interventions to improve response rates.