IMPORTANCEAgents targeting programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)/PD ligand 1 (PD-L1) improve long-term survival across many advanced cancers and are now used as adjuvant therapy for resected stage III and IV melanomas. The incidence and spectrum of chronic immune-related adverse events (irAEs) have not been well defined.OBJECTIVE To determine the incidence, time course, spectrum, and associations of chronic irAEs arising from adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis retrospective multicenter cohort study was conducted between 2015 and 2020 across 8 academic medical centers in the United States and Australia. Patients with stage III to IV melanomas treated with anti-PD-1 in the adjuvant setting were included.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Incidence, types, and time course of chronic irAEs (defined as irAEs persisting at least 12 weeks after therapy cessation). RESULTS Among 387 patients, the median (range) age was 63 (17-88) years, and 235 (60.7%) were male. Of these patients, 267 (69.0%) had any acute irAE, defined as those arising during treatment with anti-PD-1, including 52 (19.5%) with grades 3 through 5 events; 1 patient each had fatal myocarditis and neurotoxicity. Chronic irAEs, defined as those that persisted beyond 12 weeks of anti-PD-1 discontinuation, developed in 167 (43.2%) patients, of which most (n = 161; 96.4%) were mild (grade 1 or 2) and most persisted until last available follow-up (n = 143; 85.6%). Endocrinopathies (73 of 88; 83.0%), arthritis (22 of 45; 48.9%), xerostomia (9 of 17; 52.9%), neurotoxicities (11 of 15; 73.3%), and ocular events (5 of 8; 62.5%) were particularly likely to become chronic. In contrast, irAEs affecting visceral organs (liver, colon, lungs, kidneys) had much lower rates of becoming chronic irAEs; for example, colitis became chronic in 6 of 44 (13.6%) cases, of which 4 of 6 (66.7%) resolved with prolonged follow-up. Age, gender, time of onset, and need for steroids were not associated with the likelihood of chronicity of irAEs. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCEIn this multicenter cohort study, chronic irAEs associated with anti-PD-1 therapy appear to be more common than previously recognized and frequently persisted even with prolonged follow-up, although most were low grade. The risks of chronic irAEs should be integrated into treatment decision-making.

No abstract

BackgroundRecent research suggests that baseline body mass index (BMI) is associated with response to immunotherapy. In this study, we test the hypothesis that worsening nutritional status prior to the start of immunotherapy, rather than baseline BMI, negatively impacts immunotherapy response.MethodsWe studied 629 patients with advanced cancer who received immune checkpoint blockade at New York University. Patients had melanoma (n=268), lung cancer (n=128) or other primary malignancies (n=233). We tested the association between BMI changes prior to the start of treatment, baseline prognostic nutritional index (PNI), baseline BMI category and multiple clinical end points including best overall response (BOR), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).ResultsDecreasing pretreatment BMI and low PNI were associated with worse BOR (p=0.04 and p=0.0004), ORR (p=0.01 and p=0.0005), DCR (p=0.01 and p<0.0001), PFS (p=0.02 and p=0.01) and OS (p<0.001 and p<0.001). Baseline BMI category was not significantly associated with any treatment outcomes.ConclusionStandard of care measures of worsening nutritional status more accurately associate with immunotherapy outcomes than static measurements of BMI. Future studies should focus on determining whether optimizing pretreatment nutritional status, a modifiable variable, leads to improvement in immunotherapy response.

Background Recent preclinical data suggest that there may be therapeutic synergy between immune checkpoint blockade and inhibition of the coagulation cascade. Here, we investigate whether patients who received immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and were on concomitant anticoagulation (AC) experienced better treatment outcomes than individuals not on AC.Affiliation: Kindly confirm if corresponding authors affiliation is identified correctly.The corresponding author's affiliation is correct. Methods We studied a cohort of 728 advanced cancer patients who received 948 lines of ICI at NYU (2010–2020). Patients were classified based on whether they did (n = 120) or did not (n = 828) receive therapeutic AC at any point during their treatment with ICI. We investigated the relationship between AC status and multiple clinical endpoints including best overall response (BOR), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and the incidence of bleeding complications.Affiliations: Journal instruction requires a country for affiliations; however, this is missing in affiliations 1 to 5. Please verify if the provided country is correct and amend if necessary.The country is correct for all affiliations (1 - 5). Results Treatment with AC was not associated with significantly different BOR (P = 0.80), ORR (P =0.60), DCR (P =0.77), PFS (P = 0.59), or OS (P =0.64). Patients who received AC were significantly more likely to suffer a major or clinically relevant minor bleed (P = 0.05). Conclusion AC does not appear to impact the activity or efficacy of ICI in advanced cancer patients. On the basis of our findings, we caution that there is insufficient evidence to support prospectively evaluating the combination of AC and immunotherapy.

Background Early reports on cancer patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) corroborated speculation that cancer patients are at increased risk for becoming infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) and developing severe COVID‐19. However, cancer patients are a heterogeneous population and their corresponding risk may be different. Aim To compare COVID‐19 presentation in patients with active malignancy to those with a history of cancer to determine the impact of cancer status on COVID‐19 outcomes in the two groups. Methods and results Of the 6724 patients who were hospitalized at NYU Langone Health (3/16/20‐7/31/20) and tested positive for SARS‐CoV‐2, 580 had either active cancer ( n = 221) or a history of cancer ( n = 359). We compared the baseline clinicodemographic characteristics and hospital courses of the two groups. We studied the relationship between cancer status and the rate of admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), use of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), and all‐cause mortality. The two groups had similar laboratory results associated with COVID‐19 infection, incidence of venous thromboembolism, and incidence of severe COVID‐19. Active cancer status was not associated with the rate of ICU admission ( p = .307) or use of IMV ( p = .236), but was significantly associated with worse all‐cause mortality in both univariate and multivariate analysis with odds ratios of 1.48 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04–2.09; p = .028) and 1.71 (95% CI: 1.12–2.63; p = .014), respectively. Conclusion Active cancer patients had worse survival outcomes compared to patients with a history of cancer despite similar COVID‐19 disease characteristics in the two groups. Our data suggest that cancer care should continue with minimal interruptions during the pandemic to bring about response and remission as soon as possible.