Literature DB >> 34935288

Immune checkpoint inhibitor-related adverse events in lung cancer: Real-world incidence and management practices of 1905 patients in China.

Yuequan Shi1, Jian Fang2, Chengzhi Zhou3, Anwen Liu4, Yan Wang5, Qingwei Meng6, Cuimin Ding7, Bin Ai8, Yangchun Gu9, Yu Yao10, Hong Sun10, Hui Guo10, Cuiying Zhang11, Xia Song12, Junling Li5, Bei Xu13, Zhiqiang Han14, Meijun Song15, Tingyu Tang16, Peifeng Chen17, Hongmin Lu18, Yongjie Shui19, Guangyuan Lou20, Dongming Zhang1, Jia Liu1, Xiaoyan Liu1, Xiangning Liu1, Xiaoxing Gao1, Qing Zhou1, Minjiang Chen1, Jing Zhao1, Wei Zhong1, Yan Xu1, Mengzhao Wang1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are the standard treatment for advanced lung cancer, but immune-related adverse events (irAEs) remain poorly understood, especially in a real-world setting.
METHODS: A multicenter observational study was conducted. Medical records of lung cancer patients treated with ICIs at 26 hospitals from January 1, 2015, to February 28, 2021, were retrieved. Types of ICIs included antiprogrammed cell death 1 or antiprogrammed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) monotherapy, anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 monotherapy, or combination therapy.
RESULTS: In total, 1905 patients with advanced lung cancer were evaluated. The median age was 63 (range 28-87) years, and the male/female ratio was 3.1:1 (1442/463). The primary histological subtype was adenocarcinoma (915). A total of 26.9% (512/1905) of the patients developed 671 irAEs, and 5.8% (110/1905) developed 120 grade 3-5 irAEs. Median duration from ICI initiation to irAEs onset was 56 (range 0-1160) days. The most common irAEs were thyroid dysfunction (7.2%, 138/1905), pneumonitis (6.5%, 124/1905), and dermatological toxicities (6.0%, 115/1905). A total of 162 irAEs were treated with steroids and 11 irAEs led to death. Patients with positive PD-L1 expression (≥1%) and who received first-line ICI treatment developed more irAEs. Patients who developed irAEs had a better disease control rate (DCR, 71.3% [365/512] vs. 56.0% [780/1145]; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The incidence rate of irAEs was 26.9% in a real-world setting. IrAEs might be related to a better DCR, but clinicians should be more aware of irAE recognition and management in clinical practice.
© 2021 The Authors. Thoracic Cancer published by China Lung Oncology Group and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  advanced lung cancer; immune checkpoint inhibitors; immune-related adverse events; real-world data

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34935288      PMCID: PMC8807338          DOI: 10.1111/1759-7714.14274

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Thorac Cancer        ISSN: 1759-7706            Impact factor:   3.500


INTRODUCTION

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have substantially improved clinical outcomes in many types of cancer and are increasingly being used in early disease settings, including advanced lung cancer. Response to treatment occurs in a substantial fraction of patients and is frequently durable. The Food and Drug Administration approved the antiprogrammed cell death‐1 (PD‐1) antibody, pembrolizumab in combination with chemotherapy, as a first‐line therapy for metastatic non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), irrespective of programmed cell death ligand‐1 (PD‐L1) status in July 2018 based on the results reported by the Keynote‐189 and Keynote‐407 studies. Subsequently, pembrolizumab was approved for metastatic NSCLC by the National Medical Products Administration of China on March 28, 2019. Other anti‐PD‐1/PD‐L1 antibodies, including camrelizumab, sintilimab, and tislelizumab, have also been approved in China. Currently, PD‐1/ PD‐L1 monotherapy or PD‐1/PD‐L1‐combined chemotherapy has become the first‐line standard treatment for advanced lung cancer according to the status of PD‐L1 expression. As with other treatments, use of ICIs has been associated with immune‐related adverse events (irAEs) that are potentially severe, or even fatal. , The incidence of irAEs have been reported to vary between 24% and 38% in patients with advanced lung cancer treated with ICI‐based therapy. , , , , , However, the above reported data were from randomized clinical trials (RCTs), which did not report irAEs in a real‐world setting. The special population for ICI treatment includes patients affected by chronic viral infection or with pre‐existent autoimmune diseases (AIDs), patients aged over 75 years, or those with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) score of 2–3. Therefore, it is crucial to obtain real‐world information about the safety profile of ICIs in patients. Furthermore, irAE management has rarely been reported. Hence, we conducted this observational study to identify the incidence, spectrum, clinical characteristics, and management practices of irAEs in a real‐world setting in Chinese patients with advanced lung cancer.

METHODS

Study population

This multicenter observational study aimed to evaluate the safety of ICIs and investigate the status of irAE management practices in a real‐world setting in China. We enrolled patients who were (1) >18 years, (2) had pathologically confirmed stage III–IV lung cancer including non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and (3) treated with ICI monotherapy or ICI‐based combination therapy for at least one dose, from 26 hospitals across 10 provinces in China between January 1, 2015, and February 28, 2021.

Data collection and recognition of irAEs

Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients were collected, including age, sex, comorbidities, clinical stage, number of metastatic sites, tumor histology type, ECOG PS status, driving gene mutations, PD‐L1 expression status, treatment type, treatment line of ICIs, ICI duration, and disease control rate (DCR). Response assessment was performed according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) by computed tomography scans every 6 to 8 weeks after the administration of the first dose of ICIs by the investigator. The definition of irAEs was based on (1) pathological evidence of irAE, (2) multidisciplinary adjudication including two or more oncologists, or (3) clinical improvement with an irAE‐based treatment. , , , Data was collected on the management practices of irAEs, including use and duration of steroids, and outcome of irAEs. Immune toxicity‐related discontinuation of ICIs and rechallenge with ICIs were also collected. The procedures followed were in accordance with the principles of Good Clinical Practice and the Declaration of Helsinki. The study was approved by the local ethics committee on human experimentation (Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Internal Review Board protocol number SK‐1315, approved on August 31, 2020).

Statistical analysis

Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the cohorts' medical histories and clinical parameters. Counts and percentages were produced for categorical variables, whereas the mean ± standard deviation (SD) or median (interquartile range [IQR]) were computed for continuous variables. The chi‐squared and Mann–Whitney U tests were used to compare the demographic characteristics between patients without irAEs and those with irAEs. All statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS software (version 26.0; SPSS). The figures were developed using GraphPad Prism 8.0.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics

A total of 1905 patients with advanced lung cancer were enrolled in this study. The median age was 63 years (range 28–87) years. Many of the patients had NSCLC (89.9%, 1712/1905), where 48.0% (915/1712) had adenocarcinoma, and 34.0% (647/1712) had squamous cell carcinoma. A total of 471 patients had a positive driver mutation record, and the leading driving mutations were epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) 19/21 (n = 163) and KRAS (n = 132). PD‐L1 expression was determined from histological specimens in 441 (23.1%) cases, and 283 (64.2%, 283/441) showed positive PD‐L1 results (PD‐L1 ≥ 1%). A total of 1488 patients were diagnosed with metastatic disease, with 208 patients developing liver metastases and 330 developing brain metastases. The clinical features of the 1905 patients with advanced lung cancer treated with ICI‐based treatment are shown in Table 1.
TABLE 1

Clinical features of the 1905 patients with advanced lung cancer treated with ICI‐based treatment

CharacteristicTotalWithout irAEsWith irAEs p‐value
N = 1905 N = 1393 N = 512
Age, median (IQR), year63 (56.25, 68)63 (56, 68)64 (58, 69)0.902
Age0.902
>75128 (6.7%)93 (6.7%)35 (6.8%)
<751777 (93.3%)1300 (93.3%)477 (93.2%)
Sex0.063
Female463 (24.3%)354 (25.4%)109 (21.3%)
Male1442 (75.7%)1039 (74.6%)403 (78.7%)
History of Interstitial pneumonitis1.000
Yes14 (0.7%)10 (0.7%)4 (0.8%)
No1891 (99.3%)1383 (99.3%)508 (99.2%)
History of autoimmune disease0.353
Yes13 (0.7%)8 (0.6%)5 (1.0%)
No1892 (99.3%)1385 (99.4%)507 (99.0%)
History of chronic viral infection0.819
Yes35 (1.8%)25 (1.8%)10 (2.0%)
No1870 (98.2%)1368 (98.2%)502 (98.0%)
Clinical stage0.795
III417 (21.9%)307 (22.0%)110 (21.5%)
IV1488 (78.1%)1086 (78.0%)402 (78.5%)
Number of metastatic sites
>2324 (17.0%)254 (18.2%)70 (13.7%)0.024*
≤21581 (83.0%)1139 (81.8%)442 (86.3%)
Histologic types0.076
Non‐small cell lung cancer1709 (89.7%)1240 (89.0%)469 (91.6%)
Adenocarcinoma915 (48.0%)667 (47.9%)248 (48.4%)
Squamous cell carcinoma647 (34.0%)464 (33.3%)183 (35.7%)
Large cell carcinoma34 (1.8%)20 (1.4%)14 (2.7%)
Other113 (5.9%)89 (6.4%)24 (4.7%)
Small cell lung cancer196 (10.3%)153 (11.0%)43 (8.4%)
ECOG performance status0.480
0–11755 (92.1%)1277 (91.7%)478 (93.4%)
2–3150 (7.9%)116 (8.3%)34 (6.6%)
EGFR 19/21 mutation0.024*
Positive163 (8.6%)127 (9.1%)36 (7.0%)
Negative670 (35.2%)466 (33.5%)204 (39.8%)
Not assessed1072 (56.3%)800 (57.4%)272 (53.1%)
KRAS mutation0.900
Positive132 (6.9%)96 (6.9%)36 (7.0%)
Negative306 (16.1%)227 (16.3%)79 (15.4%)
Not assessed1467 (77.0%)1070 (76.8%)397 (77.5%)
PD‐L1 expression status0.000*
Positive283 (14.9%)176 (12.6%)107 (20.9%)
Negative158 (8.3%)113 (8.1%)45 (8.8%)
Not assessed1464 (76.9%)1104 (79.3%)360 (70.3%)
Treatment line of ICI0.001*
First line1056 (55.4%)745 (53.5%)311 (60.7%)
Second line497 (26.1%)365 (26.2%)132 (25.8%)
Third or more352 (18.5%)283 (20.3%)69 (13.5%)
Treatment pattern0.130
Concurrent with chemotherapy1162 (61.0%)864 (62.0%)298 (58.2%)
ICI only743 (39.0%)529 (38.0%)214 (41.8%)
ICI duration, median (IQR), cycle5 (3–10)5 (2–8)6 (4–12)0.000*
Best treatment response0.000*
CR/PR/SD1145 (60.1%)780 (56.0%)365 (71.3%)
PD163 (8.6%)136 (9.8%)27 (5.3%)
NA597 (31.3%)477 (34.2%)120 (23.4%)

Abbreviations: ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitor; irAEs, immune‐related adverse events; IQR, interquartile range; ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; PD‐L1, programmed cell death‐ligand 1; CR, complete response; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease; PD, progressive disease. *, means that the p value is statistically significant.

Clinical features of the 1905 patients with advanced lung cancer treated with ICI‐based treatment Abbreviations: ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitor; irAEs, immune‐related adverse events; IQR, interquartile range; ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; PD‐L1, programmed cell death‐ligand 1; CR, complete response; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease; PD, progressive disease. *, means that the p value is statistically significant. The median number of ICI cycles received was five (IQR, 3–10). The most widely used ICI was pembrolizumab (n = 598), followed by sintilimab (n = 455), nivolumab (n = 273), and camrelizumab (n = 176). The treatment patterns and types of ICIs are shown in Figure 1. The mean treatment course of pembrolizumab was 5.7 months, followed by 4.3 months for sintilimab, 4.1 months for nivolumab, 3.6 months for camrelizumab and 3.9 months for treprizumab. The treatment durations and the mean incidence rate of irAEs per month according to ICIs type are listed in Table 2. A total of 55.4% (1056/1905) of the patients received ICIs as first‐line therapy, and 497 (26.1%) patients received ICIs as second‐line therapy. More than half of the patients (61.0%, 1162/1905) received ICI‐combined chemotherapy, paclitaxel being mostly used as the cytotoxic partner drug (n = 494). Only 23 patients received cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen‐4 (CTLA‐4) antibody plus nivolumab or durvalumab.
FIGURE 1

Treatment patterns of immune checkpoint inhibitors and incidence of immune‐related adverse events according to ICI types. irAEs, immune‐related adverse events

TABLE 2

Treatment duration and irAEs incidence per treatment months according to ICI types

Number of patientsTotal duration of ICI exposure (months)Mean duration of ICI exposure (months)Number of patients who developed irAEsMean incidence of irAEs /months
Pembrolizumab59834095.71634.8%
Sintilimab45519574.3874.4%
Nivolumab27311194.1736.5%
Camrelizumab1766343.6619.6%
Treprizumab1254883.9326.6%
Tisilizumab815997.4284.7%
Atezolizumab623295.3237.0%
Durvalumab342116.2115.2%

Abbreviations: ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitor; irAEs, immune‐related adverse events.

Treatment patterns of immune checkpoint inhibitors and incidence of immune‐related adverse events according to ICI types. irAEs, immune‐related adverse events Treatment duration and irAEs incidence per treatment months according to ICI types Abbreviations: ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitor; irAEs, immune‐related adverse events.

Treatment response

A total of 1308 patients were available with response assessment records. A total of 518 patients experienced the best overall response of partial response (PR), and 627 patients experienced stable disease (SD). In patients with squamous NSCLC who received first‐line therapy, the objective response rate (ORR) was 54.5% in patients receiving ICI‐combined chemotherapy, and 37.3% in patients receiving ICI monotherapy (p = 0.019). The DCRs were 93.6% and 93.2%, respectively (p = 0.908). As for patients with nonsquamous NSCLC who were not positive for EGFR 19/21 mutation and received first‐line treatment, the ORR was 53.4% in patients who received ICI‐combined chemotherapy, and 40.2% in patients receiving ICI monotherapy (p = 0.027). The DCRs were 95.2% and 87.6%, respectively (p = 0.013). In patients with nonsquamous NSCLC who were positive for EGFR 19/21 mutations and failed targeted first‐line therapy, the ORR of patients who received ICI‐combined chemotherapy was 40.6%, while the ORR of patients who received ICI monotherapy was 27.3% (p = 0.494). The DCR was 100.0% and 54.5%, respectively (p = 0.000). For patients with SCLC who received first‐line ICI‐combined chemotherapy (n = 66), the ORR was 74.2% (49 PR, 49/66), and the DCR was 90.9% (49 PR, 11 SD, 60/66). The treatment responses are presented in Table 3.
TABLE 3

Treatment response of 1308 patients

Total (n = 1308)Chemo‐immunotherapy (n = 785)Immunotherapy only (n = 523) p‐value
Squamous cell carcinoma N = 455 N = 284 N = 171
First‐line N = 279 N = 220 N = 59
ORR51.6% (144)54.5% (120)37.3% (22)0.019*
DCR94.3% (263)93.6% (206)93.2% (55)0.908
Second‐line N = 127 N = 50 N = 77
ORR33.9% (43)42.0% (21)28.6% (22)0.118
DCR84.3% (107)88.0% (44)81.8% (63)0.350
Nonsquamous cell carcinoma N = 735 N = 411 N = 324
Without positive EGFR mutation N = 610 N = 329 N = 281
First‐line N = 346 N = 249 N = 97
ORR49.7% (172)53.4% (133)40.2% (39)0.027*
DCR93.1% (332)95.2% (237)87.6% (85)0.013*
Second‐line N = 167 N = 51 N = 116
ORR25.7% (43)31.4% (16)23.3% (27)0.270
DCR86.8% (145)90.2% (46)85.3% (99)0.393
With positive EGFR 19/21 mutation who failed targeted therapy N = 125 N = 82 N = 43
Second‐line a N = 43 N = 32 N = 11
ORR37.3% (16)40.6% (13)27.3% (3)0.494
DCR65.1% (38)100% (32)54.5% (6)0.000*

Abbreviations: ORR, overall response rate; DCR, disease control rate; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; ORR, overall response rate.

Second line refers to patients who received TKI as first‐line therapy. *, means that the p value is statistically significant.

Treatment response of 1308 patients Abbreviations: ORR, overall response rate; DCR, disease control rate; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; ORR, overall response rate. Second line refers to patients who received TKI as first‐line therapy. *, means that the p value is statistically significant.

Incidence and spectrum of irAEs

A total of 671 irAEs were observed in 26.9% of patients (512/1905). The most common overall organ system immune‐related toxicities were the endocrine system (8.3%, 159/1905), pulmonary (6.7%, 124/1905), and skin (6.0%, 115/1905). For the subset of patients reported as having endocrine toxicities, the majority were thyroid dysfunction (7.2%, n = 138), including 108 hypothyroidism and 30 hyperthyroidism patients, followed by type I diabetes mellitus (including diabetic ketoacidosis [DKA], n = 12) and hypophysitis (n = 9). All patients who developed pulmonary toxicity were identified as having pneumonitis (6.7%, n = 124). For patients with dermatological toxicities, the majority were rash (n = 52), pruritus (n = 24), or both (n = 8). The incidence of grade 3–5 irAEs was 5.8% (110/1905), with the most common grades 3–5 irAEs being pneumonitis (1.8%, 35/1905), followed by dermatological toxicities (1.2%, 22/1905) and increased alanine aminotransferase (ALT, 0.8%, 16/1905). Eleven irAEs led to death, including nine from pneumonitis, one from liver failure, and one from myocarditis. Other irAEs (n = 17) included thrombocytopenia (n = 3), palpitation (n = 2), anemia (n = 2), hypoproteinemia (n = 1), elevated eosinophils (n = 2), elevated lactic dehydrogenase (n = 2), xerophthalmia (n = 1), cough (n = 1), drug‐induced sarcoidosis‐like reaction (n = 1), cholangitis (n = 1), and sialadenitis of the submandibular gland (n = 1). The spectrum of irAEs of our study is shown in Figure 2, and the organ distribution of grade 1–2 irAEs and grade 3–5 irAEs is shown in Table 4.
FIGURE 2

The organ distribution and spectrum of immune‐related adverse events. RCCEP, reactive capillary endothelial proliferation; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; GGT, gamma‐glutamyl transpeptidase; TBIL, total bilirubin; DBIL, direct bilirubin; SCr, serum creatinine; AMY, amylase; LPS, lipase; T1DM, type 1 diabetes; DKA, diabetic ketoacidosis; CNS, central nervous system; cTnI, cardiac troponin I; CK, creatine kinase; CK‐MB, creatine kinase isoenzymes

TABLE 4

Organ distribution of grade 1–2 irAEs and grade 3–5 irAEs

irAEsAll irAEsGrade 1–2 irAEsGrade 3–5 irAEs
N = 671 N = 556 N = 115
Thyroid dysfunction138136 (98.6%)2 (1.4%)
Pneumonitis12489 (71.8%)35 (28.2%)
Dermatological toxicity11593 (80.9%)22 (19.1%)
Elevated ALT/AST/GGT/TBIL/DBIL or liver failure5943 (72.9%)16 (27.1%)
Gastrointestinal toxicity3828 (73.7%)10 (26.3%)
Reactive cutaneous capillary endothelial proliferation3030 (100.0%)0
Elevated CK/CK‐MB or myositis2320 (87.0%)3 (13.0%)
Elevated cTnI or myocarditis2213 (59.1%)9 (40.9%)
Elevated AMY/LPS or acute pancreatitis2015 (75.0%)5 (25.0%)
Nephrological toxicity2017 (85.0%)3 (15.0%)
Fever or infusion reaction1918 (94.7%)1 (5.3%)
Fatigue1515 (100.0%)0
Elevated blood glucose, type I diabetes or DKA127 (58.3%)5 (41.7%)
Hypophysitis94 (44.4%)5 (55.6%)
CNS or neuromuscular disorder65 (83.3%)1 (16.7%)
Arthritis44 (100.0%)0
Others1714 (82.4%)3 (17.6%)

Abbreviations: irAEs, immune‐related adverse events; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; GGT, gamma‐glutamyl Transpeptidase; TBIL, total bilirubin; DBIL, direct bilirubin; CK, creatine kinase; CK‐MB, creatine kinase isoenzymes; cTnI, cardiac troponin I; AMY, amylase; LPS, lipase; DKA, diabetic ketoacidosis; CNS, central nervous system.

The organ distribution and spectrum of immune‐related adverse events. RCCEP, reactive capillary endothelial proliferation; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; GGT, gamma‐glutamyl transpeptidase; TBIL, total bilirubin; DBIL, direct bilirubin; SCr, serum creatinine; AMY, amylase; LPS, lipase; T1DM, type 1 diabetes; DKA, diabetic ketoacidosis; CNS, central nervous system; cTnI, cardiac troponin I; CK, creatine kinase; CK‐MB, creatine kinase isoenzymes The incidence of irAEs according to the different ICIs is shown in Figure 1. Of the patients who received pembrolizumab (n = 598), 27.3% (n = 163) developed irAEs of any grade; this was followed by 19.1% (n = 87) of the patients who received sintilimab (n = 455), 26.7% (n = 73) of the patients who received nivolumab (n = 273), and 34.7% (n = 61) of the patients who received camrelizumab (n = 176) developed irAEs (Figure 1). Organ distribution of grade 1–2 irAEs and grade 3–5 irAEs Abbreviations: irAEs, immune‐related adverse events; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; GGT, gamma‐glutamyl Transpeptidase; TBIL, total bilirubin; DBIL, direct bilirubin; CK, creatine kinase; CK‐MB, creatine kinase isoenzymes; cTnI, cardiac troponin I; AMY, amylase; LPS, lipase; DKA, diabetic ketoacidosis; CNS, central nervous system. Among patients with irAEs (n = 512), 20.7% (394/1905) developed single system irAEs, and 6.2% (118/1905) developed multisystem irAEs (277 irAEs) with a maximum of four organ systems. Most patients with multisystem irAEs had two irAEs (4.3%, 81/1905). The most common irAEs were dermatitis (10.8%, 30/277) and thyroid dysfunction (9.0%, 25/277). The most common multisystem irAE patterns were dermatitis and thyroiditis (10.2%, 12/118), thyroiditis and pneumonitis (4.2%, 5/118), and pneumonitis and hepatitis (3.4%, 4/118). The median time from ICI initiation to the onset of the first irAE was 56 (range 0–1160) days, and to the second irAE was 124 days (range 6–879 days). There was no significant difference between the median time from ICI initiation to the onset of grade 1–2 irAEs (62, range 0–1239 days) and grade 3–5 irAEs (71, range 3–726 days; p = 0.151). The median time to onset of irAEs according to organ involvement is shown in Figure 3.
FIGURE 3

Duration between ICI initiation and onset of irAEs. The durations between ICI initiation and onset of irAEs are ploted with the median (the black dot) with interquartile range. The median duration for each irAEs are listed here: fever or infusion reaction, 12 days; CNS or neuromuscular system, 16 days; fatigue, 21 days; reactive cutaneous capillary endothelial proliferation, 41 days; gastrointestinal toxicity, 42.5 days; elevated ALT/AST/GGT/TBIL/DBIL or liver failure, 45 days; dermatological toxicity, 47 days; elevated cTnI or myocarditis, 50 days; thyroid dysfunction, 80 days; nephrological toxicity, 90 days; elevated blood glucose, T1DM, or DKA, 91.5 days; elevated AMY/LPS or acute pancreatitis, 92.5 days; pneumonitis, 99 days; elevated CK/CK‐MB or myositis, 101 days; hypophysitis, 132 days; and arthritis, 295 days. Abbreviations: ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitor; irAEs, immune‐related adverse events; CNS, central nervous system; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; GGT, gamma‐glutamyl transpeptidase; TBIL, total bilirubin; DBIL, direct bilirubin; cTnI, cardiac troponin I; T1DM, type 1 diabetes; DKA, diabetic ketoacidosis; AMY, amylase; LPS, lipase; CK, creatine kinase; CK‐MB, creatine kinase isoenzymes

Duration between ICI initiation and onset of irAEs. The durations between ICI initiation and onset of irAEs are ploted with the median (the black dot) with interquartile range. The median duration for each irAEs are listed here: fever or infusion reaction, 12 days; CNS or neuromuscular system, 16 days; fatigue, 21 days; reactive cutaneous capillary endothelial proliferation, 41 days; gastrointestinal toxicity, 42.5 days; elevated ALT/AST/GGT/TBIL/DBIL or liver failure, 45 days; dermatological toxicity, 47 days; elevated cTnI or myocarditis, 50 days; thyroid dysfunction, 80 days; nephrological toxicity, 90 days; elevated blood glucose, T1DM, or DKA, 91.5 days; elevated AMY/LPS or acute pancreatitis, 92.5 days; pneumonitis, 99 days; elevated CK/CK‐MB or myositis, 101 days; hypophysitis, 132 days; and arthritis, 295 days. Abbreviations: ICI, immune checkpoint inhibitor; irAEs, immune‐related adverse events; CNS, central nervous system; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; GGT, gamma‐glutamyl transpeptidase; TBIL, total bilirubin; DBIL, direct bilirubin; cTnI, cardiac troponin I; T1DM, type 1 diabetes; DKA, diabetic ketoacidosis; AMY, amylase; LPS, lipase; CK, creatine kinase; CK‐MB, creatine kinase isoenzymes

Management practices and clinical outcomes of irAEs

Of the 671 immune‐related toxicities, 24.1% (n = 162) were treated with steroids, including pneumonitis (n = 86), dermatitis (n = 16), hepatitis (n = 14), myocarditis (n = 10), colitis (n = 9), hypophysitis (n = 4), myositis (n = 4), pancreatitis (n = 3), encephalitis (n = 2), arthralgia (n = 2), and others (n = 12). Patients who developed endocrine system disorder and received hormone replacement treatment were not considered as treated with steroids. The median treatment course of steroids was 49 (range 1–300) days. Most patients improved after steroid therapy, and seven patients developed aggravated pneumonitis during steroid withdrawal. Intravenous immunoglobulin was used in 101 patients. Six patients were treated with an immunosuppressive or biological agent, including etanercept for grade 4 Stevens–Johnson syndrome, mycophenolate mofetil for grade 3 hepatitis, tocilizumab for grade 3 hepatitis, cyclosporine for grade 3 pneumonitis, rituximab for grade 3 proteinuria caused by membranous nephropathy, and tripterygium wilfordii for grade 3 eosinophilic dermatosis. A total of 178 irAEs led to discontinuation of the ICI treatment. One patient developed colitis after receiving ipilimumab plus nivolumab and continued with only nivolumab after relief of colitis. Clinicians attempted to rechallenge ICI treatment after 51 irAEs occurred. The leading irAEs were pneumonitis (n = 22), colitis (n = 9), and DKA (n = 5). One patient with pneumonitis and one patient with an infusion reaction developed relapse of the former irAEs after ICI rechallenge, and ICI treatment was then permanently discontinued.

Safety of ICIs in special population

Among the 1905 patients enrolled in this study, 13 patients had pre‐existing AID, including rheumatoid arthritis (n = 4), psoriasis (n = 3), Sjogren’s syndrome (n = 2), polymyalgia rheumatica (n = 1), bullous pemphigoid (n = 1), scleroderma (n = 1), and Guillain‐Barre syndrome (n = 1). Fourteen patients had comorbid mild interstitial pneumonitis prior to ICI treatment. Thirty‐five patients had chronic viral infection, including 14 patients who were hepatitis B virus carriers. There were seven patients with a history of hepatitis A (n = 2), B (n = 3), and C (n = 2) virus infection, which was relieved before ICI treatment. Two patients were positive for Treponema pallidum, and 12 patients had a history of HBV infection, but the detailed information was scant. A total of 128 patients were > 75 years old, and 150 patients were treated with ECOG PS 2–3 pre‐ICI‐treatment. The comparison of clinical characteristics between patients with and without irAEs showed that patients who developed irAEs were more likely to have fewer metastatic sites (without irAEs vs. with irAEs; 18.2% vs. 13.7%, p = 0.024), negative EGFR 19/21 mutations (33.5% vs. 39.8%, p = 0.024), positive PD‐L1 expression status (12.6% vs 20.9%, p < 0.001), first‐line ICIs treatment (53.5% vs. 60.7%, p = 0.001), and sustained disease control (CR + PR + SD, 56.0% vs 71.3%, p = 0.001). Median ICI duration was longer in patients who developed irAEs (median cycles, 5 vs. 6, p < 0.001). No significant differences in the incidence of irAEs were recorded in patients with comorbid diseases, age > 75 years, or poor ECOG PS status. The results are listed in Table 1.

DISCUSSION

In this study, we report the status of ICI treatment, clinical characteristics, and management practices of irAEs in the largest cohort studied to date in real‐world patients with advanced lung cancer in China. We observed an irAE incidence rate of 26.9%, with an incidence rate of grade 3–5 irAEs of 5.8%. This result is consistent with the data from prospective clinical trials reported in the literature. , , , , , Moreover, we found a relationship between positive PD‐L1 expression, longer ICI treatment duration, better DCR, and incidence of irAEs. No significantly higher incidence of irAEs was observed in this population. Our study found that patients with positive PD‐L1 expression had a significantly higher incidence of irAEs. A meta‐analysis of 6696 patients reported that higher PD‐L1 expression was significantly associated with the development of irAEs in multivariate analysis. PD‐L1 expression refers to the membrane expression of PD‐L1 by tumor cells, which was presumed to be a predictive biomarker for the patient response early in the use of anti‐PD‐(L)1 agents, which has been proven by several clinical trials. , , , Due to the relationship between the incidence of irAEs and better treatment response, it is essential to understand the relationship between high PD‐L1 expression and increased irAE incidence. We also observed that patients who developed irAEs had longer ICI durations and better DCRs than patients without irAEs. This result is in accordance with the published data. Across disease sites, including lung cancer and other solid tumors, patients who experience irAEs while on therapy with anti‐PD‐1 and anti‐PD‐L1 antibodies have been documented to experience improved outcomes as measured by ORR, progression‐free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). , , , , , , The occurrence of irAEs is thought to represent bystander effects from activated T cells and is consistent with the mechanism of ICIs. , Another reason to explain why patients experiencing irAEs usually have a better treatment response is that patients with durable response, which means greater ICI exposure, are more likely to develop treatment‐related adverse events. There is less possibility for patients who develop progressive disease soon after ICI initiation to develop irAEs in a short period. Our results did not reveal the safety concerns of ICIs in special populations. We focused on patients >75 years old, and there was no significant difference in the incidence of irAEs. Several retrospective studies have also attempted to study elderly patients. , , , , Only one study reported an increased rate of immune‐related colitis in patients >80 years of age. Regarding patients with poor ECOG PS (2–3), no evidence showed an inferior safety profile compared to patients with ECOG PS 0–1, though it is still suggested that ICIs should be used cautiously in such patients because of the poor survival benefit and heavy financial burden. Moreover, we focused on patients with comorbid autoimmune diseases (AID), which is also insignificant in irAE incidence. A retrospective real‐world study was recently conducted on 751 patients with advanced solid tumors treated with anti‐PD‐1 antibodies which found that although the incidence of any grade irAEs was higher in patients with pre‐existing AIDs, no significant difference was observed regarding grade 3–4 irAEs. No increased toxicity was reported in chronic hepatitis B or hepatitis C infection patients both in our study and in the literature although the evidence in the literature is quite scant. This study has limitations inherent to its retrospective study design. In this study, we mainly focused on real‐world irAE incidence and spectrum. Therefore, to record as many irAEs, we did not exclude patients whose medical records were not sufficient, which, for example, caused the lack of response assessment. Moreover, we did not include the survival data of patients, which is a drawback in demonstrating the relationship between irAEs and ICI efficacy. In addition, we focused on a special population in a real‐world setting. However, each population sample was small, which may not reveal the objective status. In conclusion, this study comprehensively analyzed the clinical features and management of ICI‐associated adverse events in a real‐world setting for advanced lung cancer patients in China. As the use of ICIs continues to increase, irAEs have become an increasingly important component of clinical practice. This study adds new evidence regarding real‐world management practices of irAEs for advanced lung cancer.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

All authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

FUNDING

This study is funded by CAMS Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (to MZW) (No: 2018‐I2M‐1‐003).
  37 in total

1.  Four-year survival with nivolumab in patients with previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a pooled analysis.

Authors:  Scott J Antonia; Hossein Borghaei; Suresh S Ramalingam; Leora Horn; Javier De Castro Carpeño; Adam Pluzanski; Marco A Burgio; Marina Garassino; Laura Q M Chow; Scott Gettinger; Lucio Crinò; David Planchard; Charles Butts; Alexander Drilon; Joanna Wojcik-Tomaszewska; Gregory A Otterson; Shruti Agrawal; Ang Li; John R Penrod; Julie Brahmer
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2019-08-14       Impact factor: 41.316

2.  Pembrolizumab plus Chemotherapy for Squamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Luis Paz-Ares; Alexander Luft; David Vicente; Ali Tafreshi; Mahmut Gümüş; Julien Mazières; Barbara Hermes; Filiz Çay Şenler; Tibor Csőszi; Andrea Fülöp; Jerónimo Rodríguez-Cid; Jonathan Wilson; Shunichi Sugawara; Terufumi Kato; Ki Hyeong Lee; Ying Cheng; Silvia Novello; Balazs Halmos; Xiaodong Li; Gregory M Lubiniecki; Bilal Piperdi; Dariusz M Kowalski
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2018-09-25       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).

Authors:  E A Eisenhauer; P Therasse; J Bogaerts; L H Schwartz; D Sargent; R Ford; J Dancey; S Arbuck; S Gwyther; M Mooney; L Rubinstein; L Shankar; L Dodd; R Kaplan; D Lacombe; J Verweij
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 9.162

4.  Immune-related adverse events predict the therapeutic efficacy of anti-PD-1 antibodies in cancer patients.

Authors:  J Rogado; J M Sánchez-Torres; N Romero-Laorden; A I Ballesteros; V Pacheco-Barcia; A Ramos-Leví; R Arranz; A Lorenzo; P Gullón; O Donnay; M Adrados; P Costas; J Aspa; A Alfranca; R Mondéjar; R Colomer
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2019-01-22       Impact factor: 9.162

5.  Durvalumab after Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Scott J Antonia; Augusto Villegas; Davey Daniel; David Vicente; Shuji Murakami; Rina Hui; Takashi Yokoi; Alberto Chiappori; Ki H Lee; Maike de Wit; Byoung C Cho; Maryam Bourhaba; Xavier Quantin; Takaaki Tokito; Tarek Mekhail; David Planchard; Young-Chul Kim; Christos S Karapetis; Sandrine Hiret; Gyula Ostoros; Kaoru Kubota; Jhanelle E Gray; Luis Paz-Ares; Javier de Castro Carpeño; Catherine Wadsworth; Giovanni Melillo; Haiyi Jiang; Yifan Huang; Phillip A Dennis; Mustafa Özgüroğlu
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2017-09-08       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Association of Immune-Related Adverse Events with Clinical Benefit in Patients with Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Treated with Nivolumab.

Authors:  Yukihiro Toi; Shunichi Sugawara; Yosuke Kawashima; Tomoiki Aiba; Sachiko Kawana; Ryohei Saito; Kyoji Tsurumi; Kana Suzuki; Hisashi Shimizu; Jun Sugisaka; Hirotaka Ono; Yutaka Domeki; Keisuke Terayama; Atsushi Nakamura; Shinsuke Yamanda; Yuichiro Kimura; Yoshihiro Honda
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2018-06-22

7.  Nivolumab Versus Docetaxel in Previously Treated Patients With Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Two-Year Outcomes From Two Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trials (CheckMate 017 and CheckMate 057).

Authors:  Leora Horn; David R Spigel; Everett E Vokes; Esther Holgado; Neal Ready; Martin Steins; Elena Poddubskaya; Hossein Borghaei; Enriqueta Felip; Luis Paz-Ares; Adam Pluzanski; Karen L Reckamp; Marco A Burgio; Martin Kohlhäeufl; David Waterhouse; Fabrice Barlesi; Scott Antonia; Oscar Arrieta; Jérôme Fayette; Lucio Crinò; Naiyer Rizvi; Martin Reck; Matthew D Hellmann; William J Geese; Ang Li; Anne Blackwood-Chirchir; Diane Healey; Julie Brahmer; Wilfried E E Eberhardt
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-10-12       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Immune checkpoint inhibitor-related adverse events in lung cancer: Real-world incidence and management practices of 1905 patients in China.

Authors:  Yuequan Shi; Jian Fang; Chengzhi Zhou; Anwen Liu; Yan Wang; Qingwei Meng; Cuimin Ding; Bin Ai; Yangchun Gu; Yu Yao; Hong Sun; Hui Guo; Cuiying Zhang; Xia Song; Junling Li; Bei Xu; Zhiqiang Han; Meijun Song; Tingyu Tang; Peifeng Chen; Hongmin Lu; Yongjie Shui; Guangyuan Lou; Dongming Zhang; Jia Liu; Xiaoyan Liu; Xiangning Liu; Xiaoxing Gao; Qing Zhou; Minjiang Chen; Jing Zhao; Wei Zhong; Yan Xu; Mengzhao Wang
Journal:  Thorac Cancer       Date:  2021-12-21       Impact factor: 3.500

9.  Atezolizumab for First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Nonsquamous NSCLC.

Authors:  Mark A Socinski; Robert M Jotte; Federico Cappuzzo; Francisco Orlandi; Daniil Stroyakovskiy; Naoyuki Nogami; Delvys Rodríguez-Abreu; Denis Moro-Sibilot; Christian A Thomas; Fabrice Barlesi; Gene Finley; Claudia Kelsch; Anthony Lee; Shelley Coleman; Yu Deng; Yijing Shen; Marcin Kowanetz; Ariel Lopez-Chavez; Alan Sandler; Martin Reck
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2018-06-04       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  4 in total

1.  Risk factors for severe immune-related adverse events after first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy or combination chemotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Toshiyuki Sumi; Yuta Koshshino; Motoki Sekikawa; Yuta Nagahisa; Keigo Matsuura; Naoki Shijubou; Koki Kamada; Hiroki Watanabe; Haruhiko Michimata; Daiki Nagayama; Yusuke Tanaka; Yuichi Yamada; Hirofumi Chiba
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2022-10-13       Impact factor: 3.651

Review 2.  Overview of Checkpoint Inhibitors Mechanism of Action: Role of Immune-Related Adverse Events and Their Treatment on Progression of Underlying Cancer.

Authors:  Patricia Iranzo; Ana Callejo; Juan David Assaf; Gaspar Molina; Daniel Esteban Lopez; David Garcia-Illescas; Nuria Pardo; Alejandro Navarro; Alex Martinez-Marti; Susana Cedres; Caterina Carbonell; Joan Frigola; Ramon Amat; Enriqueta Felip
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-05-30

3.  Immune checkpoint inhibitor-related adverse events in lung cancer: Real-world incidence and management practices of 1905 patients in China.

Authors:  Yuequan Shi; Jian Fang; Chengzhi Zhou; Anwen Liu; Yan Wang; Qingwei Meng; Cuimin Ding; Bin Ai; Yangchun Gu; Yu Yao; Hong Sun; Hui Guo; Cuiying Zhang; Xia Song; Junling Li; Bei Xu; Zhiqiang Han; Meijun Song; Tingyu Tang; Peifeng Chen; Hongmin Lu; Yongjie Shui; Guangyuan Lou; Dongming Zhang; Jia Liu; Xiaoyan Liu; Xiangning Liu; Xiaoxing Gao; Qing Zhou; Minjiang Chen; Jing Zhao; Wei Zhong; Yan Xu; Mengzhao Wang
Journal:  Thorac Cancer       Date:  2021-12-21       Impact factor: 3.500

Review 4.  ICIs-Related Cardiotoxicity in Different Types of Cancer.

Authors:  Mei Dong; Ting Yu; Zhenzhen Zhang; Jing Zhang; Rujian Wang; Gary Tse; Tong Liu; Lin Zhong
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Dev Dis       Date:  2022-06-28
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.