Marie Kostine

Immune related adverse events associated with anti-CTLA-4 antibodies: systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundTargeting CTLA-4 is a recent strategic approach in cancer control: blocking CTLA-4 enhances an antitumor immunity by promoting T-cell activation and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte proliferation. This induction of a tolerance break against the tumor may be responsible for immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Our objective was to assess the incidence and nature of irAEs in oncologic patients receiving anti-CTLA-4 antibodies (ipilimumab and tremelimumab).MethodsA systematic search of literature up to February 2014 was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases to identify relevant articles. Paired reviewers independently selected articles for inclusion and extracted data. Pooled incidence was calculated using R©, package meta.ResultsOverall, 81 articles were included in the study, with a total of 1265 patients from 22 clinical trials included in the meta-analysis. Described irAEs consisted of skin lesions (rash, pruritus, and vitiligo), colitis, and less frequently hepatitis, hypophysitis, thyroiditis, and some rare events such as sarcoidosis, uveitis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, immune-mediated cytopenia and polymyalgia rheumatic/Horton. The overall incidence of all-grade irAEs was 72 % (95 % CI, 65–79 %). The overall incidence of high-grade irAEs was 24 % (95 % CI, 18–30 %). The risk of developing irAEs was dependent of dosage, with incidence of all-grade irAEs being evaluated to 61 % (95 % CI, 56–66 %) for ipilimumab 3 mg/kg and 79 % (95 % CI, 69–89 %) for ipilimumab 10 mg/kg. Death due to irAEs occurred in 0.86 % of patients.The median time of onset of irAEs was about 10 weeks (IQR, 6–12) after the onset of treatment, corresponding with the first three cycles but varied according to the organ system involved. Such immune activation could also be indicative for tumor-specific T-cell activation and irAE occurrence was associated with clinical response to CTLA-4 blocking in 60 % of patients.ConclusionThe price of potential long-term survival to metastatic tumors is an atypical immune toxicity, reflecting the mechanism of action of anti-CTLA-4 antibodies. A better knowledge of these irAEs and its management in a multidisciplinary approach will help to reduce morbidity and therapy interruptions.

Targeting Nerve Growth Factor (NGF) for Pain Management: What Does the Future Hold for NGF Antagonists?

It is unanimously accepted that there is an unmet need for pain medications that are both effective and safe. Unfortunately, no really novel analgesics have been approved over the past three decades. In view of both experimental and clinical evidence of a major role for nerve growth factor (NGF) in the generation and maintenance of a wide range of pain states, drug discovery efforts focusing on the development of anti-NGF agents have aroused particular interest. Several humanized anti-NGF monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have entered clinical trials as potential analgesics. In this respect, tanezumab is at an advanced stage of clinical development while fulranumab, fasinumab and ABT-110, previously known as PG110, are in early phases of clinical development. This Current Opinion article aims at describing the rationale for targeting NGF for pain, reviewing the analgesic efficacy and safety of anti-NGF agents based on data from fully published studies, conference abstracts, and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) website, and discussing the possible future of these agents in managing chronic pain. Anti-NGF mAbs produced significant pain relief and functional improvement in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee and/or hip. Conversely, studies in non-specific lower back pain generated mixed results; overall, this condition appeared to be less responsive to anti-NGF agents than osteoarthritis. Finally, there was no conclusive evidence of the effectiveness of anti-NGF mAbs in some types of chronic visceral or neuropathic pain. Furthermore, these studies raised safety concerns about anti-NGF mAbs. As a class, these drugs may cause or worsen peripheral neuropathies. But the most problematic issue—which prompted the FDA to place studies of these compounds on clinical hold in 2010—was rapid joint destruction leading to joint replacement surgery. The aetiologies of these side effects have been much debated and their pathophysiology is poorly understood. After an Arthritis Advisory Committee meeting held in March 2012, pharmaceutical companies negotiated with the FDA on the conditions for restarting clinical studies. Although the FDA lifted its clinical hold, there remain many unresolved issues about the long-term efficacy and safety of anti-NGF mAbs. While acknowledging that the future of these drugs is unforeseeable, it appears that they may not be the safe and effective painkillers that have been awaited for decades.

Immunogenicity of biologic agents in rheumatoid arthritis patients: lessons for clinical practice

Anti-drug antibodies (ADAbs) develop in up to a third of patients treated with biologic agents, with such immunogenicity being one of the main reasons for the loss of efficacy observed in an important proportion of patients treated with such agents. The appearance of ADAbs has consequences in terms of efficacy and tolerance of the biodrug: the development of ADAbs is associated with a poorer clinical response and with an increased risk of adverse effects. Formation of ADAbs has been observed with all biologic DMARDs, but anti-TNF agent mAbs appear to be the largest contributors, independent of humanization of the antibody. ADAb identification is technically difficult and not standardized, partly explaining important variations between published studies. A variety of factors can influence the risk of ADAb appearance, some of which are linked to the treatment strategy, such as the combination with synthetic DMARDs or the rhythm of administration of the biodrug, whereas other factors are dependent on the patient, such as the level of inflammation at onset or body weight. The detection of these antibodies and/or the dosage of the biologic agent itself could have consequences for the bedside practice of clinicians and should be well understood. This review of the literature proposes an overview of the data published on the subject to help clinicians manage the biodrugs according to these new concepts.

Tocilizumab Treatment Decreases Circulating Myeloid Dendritic Cells and Monocytes, 2 Components of the Myeloid Lineage

Objective. Interleukin 6 (IL-6) and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) are proinflammatory cytokines involved in inflammatory response. Effective TNF-α blocker treatment is associated with an increase in circulating myeloid dendritic cells (mDC), suggesting their release from inflamed synovium. Currently, in vivo effects of IL-6 inhibition on DC are unknown. We monitored the changes in circulating mDC and plasmacytoid DC (pDC) during tocilizumab (TCZ) therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods. DC subset levels were evaluated by flow cytometry in patients with RA (n = 43) and in healthy volunteers (n = 20). In patients with RA, these levels were measured before and during TCZ therapy (8 mg/kg every 4 weeks). Response to TCZ therapy was evaluated at 12 weeks. Statistical analysis was based on Mann-Whitney U tests or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Results. At baseline, patients with active RA were characterized by a significantly lower level of circulating mDC and pDC compared to healthy donors. However, this difference did not correlate with any disease activity score. TCZ-treated patients who met the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) improvement criteria at Week 12 had significant reductions in mDC and monocyte levels as compared with EULAR nonresponders. Levels of pDC, CD4+ T cells, and CD8+ T cells remained stable during the TCZ courses, regardless of treatment response. Conclusion. Our study reveals an unexpected reduction of circulating mDC and monocytes in patients with RA in response to TCZ therapy. In accord with reports on neutrophils and platelets decreasing during TCZ therapy, our data suggest an effect of IL-6 inhibition on cells from myeloid lineage.

Rheumatic disorders associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with cancer—clinical aspects and relationship with tumour response: a single-centre prospective cohort study

Objectives To evaluate the prevalence and type of rheumatic immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), as well as the correlation with tumour response. Methods This was a single-centre prospective observational study including all cancer patients receiving ICIs. The occurrence of irAEs and tumour response was assessed on a regular basis. Patients who experienced musculoskeletal symptoms were referred to the department of rheumatology for clinical evaluation and management. Results From September 2015 to May 2017, 524 patients received ICIs and 35 were referred to the department of rheumatology (6.6%). All but one of the rheumatic irAEs occurred with anti-programmed cell death protein 1(PD-1)/PD-1 ligand 1(PD-L1) antibodies, with a median exposure time of 70 days. There were two distinct clinical presentations: (1) inflammatory arthritis (3.8%) mimicking either rheumatoid arthritis (n=7), polymyalgia rheumatica (n=11) or psoriatic arthritis (n=2) and (2) non-inflammatory musculoskeletal conditions (2.8%; n=15). One patient with rheumatoid arthritis was anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (anti-CCP) positive. Nineteen patients required glucocorticoids, and methotrexate was started in two patients. Non-inflammatory disorders were managed with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, analgesics and/or physiotherapy. ICI treatment was pursued in all but one patient. Patients with rheumatic irAEs had a higher tumour response rate compared with patients without irAEs (85.7% vs 35.3%; P<0.0001). Conclusion Since ICIs are used with increasing frequency, knowledge of rheumatic irAEs and their management is of major interest. All patients were responsive either to low-to-moderate doses of prednisone or symptomatic therapies and did not require ICI discontinuation. Furthermore, tumour response was significantly higher in patients who experienced rheumatic irAEs.

Efficacy of baricitinib in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

ABSTRACT Introduction: although the outcome for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (ra) has improved in the past decades, adequate disease control cannot be achieved in a substantial proportion of patients. new drugs with a novel mechanism of action, may represent a valuable addition to the current armamentarium. Areas covered: This review focuses on the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of baricitinib. Furthermore, the article summarizes and comments the drug’s efficacy and safety profile in RA patients. Expert opinion: Baricitinib is an oral targeted synthetic (ts) disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) that mainly inhibits JAK1 and JAK2. Baricitinib monotherapy, or in combination with conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs, has demonstrated its efficacy while having an acceptable safety profile in early active RA naive to DMARDs, and active RA with an inadequate response to csDMARDs and/or biologic (b)DMARDs. The future place of baricitinib in the management of RA patients will depend on several factors. However, baricitinib offer few advantages: oral administration, rapidity of action, efficacy in monotherapy and over adalimumab in one study and non-immunization. However, pending further safety data, current practice would be to start a bDMARD when the treatment target is not achieved with csDMARDs. Availability of additional long-term safety data may influence prescribing decisions.

Nerve Growth Factor Antagonists: Is the Future of Monoclonal Antibodies Becoming Clearer?

Although there is an unmet need for pain medications that are both effective and safe, virtually no novel analgesics have been approved over the past two decades. In view of both experimental and clinical evidence of a major role for nerve growth factor (NGF) in the generation and maintenance of a wide range of pain states, the clinical development of humanised anti-nerve growth factor monoclonal antibodies (anti-NGF mAbs) aroused particular interest. However, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) placed a clinical hold on anti-NGF mAb clinical studies in late 2010, first because of reports of serious joint-related adverse events, and afterwards because of sympathetic nervous system safety concerns. The development programmes of tanezumab and fasinumab resumed after the FDA lifted its hold in March 2015, whereas other anti-NGF mAbs were dropped by their sponsors. This article provides an updated review on the analgesic efficacy and safety of anti-NGF agents based on data from fully published studies and public information from websites, and discusses the possible future role of these agents in managing chronic pain. The efficacy of anti-NGF mAbs was highly variable depending on the chronic pain condition studied. The most consistent and convincing results were obtained in patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee and/or hip. Conversely, studies in non-specific lower back pain and peripheral neuropathic pain generated mixed results. Finally, there was no conclusive evidence of the effectiveness of anti-NGF mAbs in cancer pain and urological chronic pelvic pain syndromes. Treatment-emergent adverse events were similar across anti-NGF mAbs, thus being suggestive of ‘class-specific effects’. Although most patients tolerated anti-NGF agents well, neurosensory symptoms occurred frequently, and some patients developed new or worsened peripheral neuropathies. However, the most problematic safety issue was rapidly destructive arthropathies, leading to joint replacement surgery. To date, the aetiologies of joint-related side effects and their pathophysiology have not been clearly elucidated. However, some risk factors have been identified, such as higher doses of anti-NGF mAbs and longer drug exposure, concurrent nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use and pre-existing subchondral insufficiency fractures. Taken together, the present data suggest that low-dose anti-NGF mABs may exhibit a favourable risk-benefit ratio in selected patients with certain chronic pain conditions, especially symptomatic osteoarthritis.

Response to: ‘Drug-induced lupus erythematosus following immunotherapy with anti-programmed death-(ligand) 1’ by Michot et al

We thank Michot et al for their comments1 on our original paper entitled ‘Rheumatic disorders associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with cancer-clinical aspects and relationship with tumour response: a single-centre prospective cohort study’.2 We also appreciate the information added in the letter by Arnaud et al also reporting data from the WHO database.3 By adding this series of programmed death-(ligand) 1 (PD-(L)1)-induced lupus erythematosus, the authors contribute to our better knowledge of the wide spectrum of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Indeed, since PD-1-deficient mice spontaneously developed lupus-like autoimmune diseases with arthritis and glomerulonephritis,4 such clinical phenotypes could be expected in patients treated with anti PD-(L)1 agents. However, only a few cases of lupus-like cutaneous reaction have yet been reported with anti-PD-1 agents and, more surprisingly, one lupus-like …

Response to: ‘Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (Churg-Strauss) induced by immune checkpoint inhibitors’ by Delyon et al

We thank Delyon et al for their interest in our original paper1 and for reporting on a patient with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI)-induced eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA).2 Since the first description in 2014 of giant cell arthritis (GCA) following treatment with ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4 agent) in two patients with melanoma,3 several vasculitis cases have been reported, as recently highlighted by Daxini et al in a systematic literature review.4 Overall, they compiled 20 cases of confirmed ICI-induced …

Response to: ’Checkpoint inhibitor-induced polymyalgia rheumatica controlled by cobimetinib, a MEK 1/2 inhibitor' by Chan and Bass

We read with genuine interest the original case reported by Chan and Bass1 in response to our paper describing musculoskeletal immune-related adverse events (irAE) related to cancer immunotherapy.2 Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) represent an exciting new standard of care in selected advanced cancers and are being actively investigated in others. Unfortunately, only a subset of patients benefit from ICI and the current challenge is to transform the majority of non-responders to responders.3 This will likely be improved by combining ICI with other treatment strategies such as small molecules. Two MEK inhibitors, trametinib and cobimetinib, are …