No abstract

BackgroundMyasthenia gravis (MG) is a rare but life-threatening adverse event of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Given the limited evidence, data from a large cohort of patients is needed to aid in recognition and management of this fatal complication.MethodsWe reviewed our institutional databases to identify patients who had cancer and MG in the setting of ICI. We systematically reviewed the literature through August 2018 to identify all similar reported patients. We collected data on clinical and diagnostic features, management, and outcomes of these cases.ResultsSixty-five patients were identified. Median age was 73 years; 42 (65%) were males, 31 (48%) had metastatic melanoma, and 13 (20%) had a preexisting MG before ICI initiation. Most patients received anti-PD-1 (82%). Sixty-three patients (97%) developed ICI-related MG (new onset or disease flare) after a median of 4 weeks (1 to 16 weeks) of ICI initiation. Twenty-four patients (37%) experienced concurrent myositis, and respiratory failure occurred in 29 (45%). ICI was discontinued in 61 patients (97%). Death was reported in 24 patients (38%); 15 (23%) due to MG complication. A better outcome was observed in patients who received intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) or plasmapheresis (PLEX) as first-line therapy than in those who received steroids alone (95% vs 63% improvement of MG symptoms, p = 0.011).ConclusionsMG is a life-threatening adverse event of acute onset and rapid progression after ICI initiation. Early use of IVIG or PLEX, regardless of initial symptoms severity, may lead to better outcomes than steroids alone. Our data suggest the need to reassess the current recommendations for management of ICI-related MG until prospective longitudinal studies are conducted to establish the ideal management approach for these patients.

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations typically occur in exons 18–21 and are established driver mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)1–3. Targeted therapies are approved for patients with ‘classical’ mutations and a small number of other mutations4–6. However, effective therapies have not been identified for additional EGFR mutations. Furthermore, the frequency and effects of atypical EGFR mutations on drug sensitivity are unknown1,3,7–10. Here we characterize the mutational landscape in 16,715 patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC, and establish the structure–function relationship of EGFR mutations on drug sensitivity. We found that EGFR mutations can be separated into four distinct subgroups on the basis of sensitivity and structural changes that retrospectively predict patient outcomes following treatment with EGFR inhibitors better than traditional exon-based groups. Together, these data delineate a structure-based approach for defining functional groups of EGFR mutations that can effectively guide treatment and clinical trial choices for patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC and suggest that a structure–function-based approach may improve the prediction of drug sensitivity to targeted therapies in oncogenes with diverse mutations.

Background Checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) have revolutionized the treatment of cancer, but their use remains limited by off-target inflammatory and immune-related adverse events. Solid organ transplantation (SOT) recipients have been excluded from clinical trials owing to concerns about alloimmunity, organ rejection, and immunosuppressive therapy. Thus, we conducted a retrospective study and literature review to evaluate the safety of CPIs in patients with cancer and prior SOT. Methods Data were collected from the medical records of patients with cancer and prior SOT who received CPIs at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center from January 1, 2004, through March 31, 2018. Additionally, we systematically reviewed five databases through April 2018 to identify studies reporting CPIs to treat cancer in SOT recipients. We evaluated the safety of CPIs in terms of alloimmunity, immune-related adverse events, and mortality. We also evaluated tumor response to CPIs. Results Thirty-nine patients with allograft transplantation were identified. The median age was 63 years (range 14–79 years), 74% were male, 62% had metastatic melanoma, 77% received anti-PD-1 agents, and 59% had prior renal transplantation, 28% hepatic transplantation, and 13% cardiac transplantation. Median time to CPI initiation after SOT was 9 years (range 0.92–32 years). Allograft rejection occurred in 41% of patients (11/23 renal, 4/11 hepatic, and 1/5 cardiac transplantations), at similar rates for anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 therapy. The median time to rejection was 21 days (95% confidence interval 19.3–22.8 days). There were no associations between time since SOT and frequency, timing, or type of rejection. Overall, 31% of patients permanently discontinued CPIs because of allograft rejection. Graft loss occurred in 81%, and death was reported in 46%. Of the 12 patients with transplantation biopsies, nine (75%) had acute rejection, and five of these rejections were T cell-mediated. In melanoma patients, 36% responded to CPIs. Conclusions SOT recipients had a high allograft rejection rate that was observed shortly after CPI initiation, with high mortality rates. Further studies are needed to optimize the anticancer treatment approach in these patients. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s40425-019-0585-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Purpose NCI’s Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) is the universal framework for toxicity reporting in oncology trials. We sought to develop a CTCAE-compatible modified barium swallow (MBS) grade for the purpose of grading pharyngeal dysphagia as a toxicity endpoint in cooperative group organ preservation trials for head and neck cancer (HNC). We hypothesized that a 5-point CTCAE-compatible MBS grade (“DIGEST”) based on the interaction of pharyngeal residue and laryngeal penetration/aspiration ratings is feasible and psychometrically sound. Methods A modified Delphi exercise was conducted for content validation, expert consensus, and operationalization of DIGEST criteria. Two blinded raters scored 100 MBS conducted before or after surgical or non-surgical organ preservation. Intra- and inter-rater reliability were tested by weighted Kappa. Criterion validity against OPSE, MBSImP™©, MDADI, and PSS-HN was assessed with one-way ANOVA and post hoc pairwise comparisons between DIGEST grades. Results Intra-rater reliability was excellent (weighted Kappa=0.82–0.84) with substantial to almost perfect agreement between raters (weighted Kappa=0.67–0.81). DIGEST significantly discriminated levels of pharyngeal pathophysiology (MBSImP™©: r=0.77, p<0.0001), swallow efficiency (OPSE: r=−0.56, p<0.0001), perceived dysphagia (MDADI: r=−0.41, p<0.0001), and oral intake (PSS-HN diet: r=−0.49, p<0.0001). Conclusions With the development of DIGEST, we have adapted MBS rating to the CTCAE nomenclature of ordinal toxicity grading used in oncology trials. DIGEST offers a psychometrically sound measure for HNC clinical trials and investigations of toxicity profiles, dose-response, and predictive modeling.