Differentiation of COVID-19 Pneumonitis and ICI Induced Pneumonitis

mmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have become the standard of care treatment for several tumor types. ICI-induced pneumonitis is a serious complication seen with treatment with these agents. Cancer has been reported to be one of the risk factors for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), that has engulfed the world in the last couple of months. In patients with cancer treated with ICI who present at the emergency department with respiratory symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic, correct diagnosis can be challenging. Symptoms and radiological features of ICI pneumonitis can be overlapping with those of COVID-19 related pneumonia. For the latter, dexamethasone and remdesivir have shown encouraging results, while vaccines are currently being evaluated in phase III trials. The mainstay of treatment in ICI pneumonitis is immunosuppressive therapy, as this is a potentially fatal adverse event. It has been speculated that immunosuppression may be associated with increased risk of progression to severe COVID-19, especially during the early stage of infection with SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, distinction between these two entities is warranted. We summarize the clinical, radiological features as well as additional investigations of both entities, and suggest a diagnostic algorithm for distinctio

Toxicity of pemetrexed during renal impairment explained-Implications for safe treatment

Item does not contain fulltextPemetrexed is an important component of first line treatment in patients with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer. However, a limitation is the contraindication in patients with renal impairment due to hematological toxicity. Currently, it is unknown how to safely dose pemetrexed in these patients. The aim of our study was to elucidate the relationship between pemetrexed exposure and toxicity to support the development of a safe dosing regimen in patients with renal impairment. A population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis was performed based on phase II study results in three patients with renal dysfunction, supplemented with data from 106 patients in early clinical studies. Findings were externally validated with data of different pemetrexed dosing regimens. Alternative dosing regimens were evaluated using the developed model. We found that pemetrexed toxicity was driven by the time above a toxicity threshold concentration. The threshold for vitamin-supplemented patients was 0.110 mg/mL (95% CI: 0.092-0.146 mg/mL). It was observed that in patients with renal impairment (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR]: <45 mL/min) the approved dose of 500 mg/m(2) would yield a high probability of severe neutropenia in the range of 51.0% to 92.6%. A pemetrexed dose of 20 mg for patients (eGFR: 20 mL/min) is shown to be neutropenic-equivalent to the approved dose in patients with adequate renal function (eGFR: 90 mL/min), but would result in an approximately 13-fold lower area under the concentration-time curve. The pemetrexed exposure-toxicity relationship is explained by a toxicity threshold and substantially different from previously thought. Without prophylaxis for toxicity, it is unlikely that a therapeutic dose can be safely administered to patients with renal impairment

Efficacy of Ibandronate Loading Dose on Rapid Pain Relief in Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Cancer Induced Bone Pain: The NVALT-9 Trial

Introduction: Approximately 80% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with bone metastases have cancer induced bone pain (CIBP). Methods: The NVALT-9 was an open-label, single arm, phase II, multicenter study. Main inclusion criterion: bone metastasized NSCLC patients with uncontrolled CIBP [brief pain inventory [BPI] ≥ 5 over last 7 days]. Patients were treated with six milligram ibandronate intravenously (day 1–3) once a day. Main exclusion criteria: active secondary malignancy, systemic anti-tumor treatment and radiotherapy ≤4 weeks before study start, previous bisphosphonate treatment. Statistics: Simon's Optimal two-stage design with a 90% power to declare the treatment active if the pain response rate is ≥ 80% and 95% confidence to declare the treatment inactive if the pain response rate is ≤ 60%. If pain response is observed in ≤ 12 of the first 19 patients further enrollment will be stopped. Primary endpoint: bone pain response, defined as 25% decrease in worst pain score (PSc) over a 3-day period (day 5–7) compared to baseline PSc with maximum of 25% increase in mean analgesic consumption during the same period. Secondary endpoints: BPI score, quality of life, toxicity and World Health Organization Performance Score. Results: Of the 19 enrolled patients in the first stage, 18 were evaluable for response. All completed ibandronate treatment according to protocol. In 4 (22.2%), a bone pain response was observed. According to the stopping rule, further enrollment was halted. Discussion: Ibandronate loading doses lead to insufficient pain relief in NSCLC patients with CIBP

Dutch Oncology COVID-19 consortium:Outcome of COVID-19 in patients with cancer in a nationwide cohort study

Aim of the study: Patients with cancer might have an increased risk for severe outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To identify risk factors associated with a worse outcome of COVID-19, a nationwide registry was developed for patients with cancer and COVID-19. Methods: This observational cohort study has been designed as a quality of care registry and is executed by the Dutch Oncology COVID-19 Consortium (DOCC), a nationwide collaboration of oncology physicians in the Netherlands. A questionnaire has been developed to collect pseudonymised patient data on patients' characteristics, cancer diagnosis and treatment. All patients with COVID-19 and a cancer diagnosis or treatment in the past 5 years are eligible. Results: Between March 27th and May 4th, 442 patients were registered. For this first analysis, 351 patients were included of whom 114 patients died. In multivariable analyses, age ≥65 years (p < 0.001), male gender (p = 0.035), prior or other malignancy (p = 0.045) and active diagnosis of haematological malignancy (p = 0.046) or lung cancer (p = 0.003) were independent risk factors for a fatal outcome of COVID-19. In a subgroup analysis of patients with active malignancy, the risk for a fatal outcome was mainly determined by tumour type (haematological malignancy or lung cancer) and age (≥65 years). Conclusion: The findings in this registry indicate that patients with a haematological malignancy or lung cancer have an increased risk of a worse outcome of COVID-19. During the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, these vulnerable patients should avoid exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, whereas treatment adjustments and prioritising vaccination, when available, should also be considered

Is there any opportunity for immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy in non-small cell lung cancer patients with brain metastases?

Although brain metastases occur in almost one-third of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) either as monotherapy or combined with chemotherapy are the new standard of care in the first line setting, most trials excluded patients with asymptomatic and/or untreated brain metastases. Brain metastases have a major clinical impact due to the worsening of the patient’s prognosis and quality of life. Furthermore, the incidence of brain metastases is increasing in NSCLC patients, due to a longer survival and better imaging techniques. Therefore, brain metastases are increasingly becoming a research topic. Recent clinical data endorses ICI as a therapeutic strategy in this subpopulation of NSCLC patients, although the immune environment in brain metastases is more immune ignorant compared with the microenvironment in the primary tumour or in the extracranial metastases. In this review we summarize the current evidence of ICI strategy in NSCLC patients with brain metastases, including trial and real-life data. We also state that the different tumor microenvironment between brain metastases and primary tumor may explain the discordance on the response rate during treatment with ICI. Last, we focus on future directions, including the role and optimal sequence of cranial irradiation and ICI, prognostic scores, the best response assessment and new imaging techniques

Immune checkpoint inhibitors a new player in the therapeutic game of mesothelioma: New reality with new challenges

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare and orphan thoracic malignancy, with a poor prognosis as the majority of patients are diagnosed with unresectable MPM, with no significant improvements in the therapeutic strategy for over a decade. However, the recent approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in treatment naive patients with unresectable MPM marks a significant step forward and hope for the treatment of this disease. In this narrative review, we discuss the biological rationale to use ICI in the treatment of MPM. We summarize the current evidence for the efficacy of ICI in MPM and discuss several unresolved challenges regarding the use of ICI in this disease, such as the best upfront immune approach in MPM (ICI versus ICI plus chemotherapy), the optimal sequential treatment strategy according to the first-line treatment, and the potential role of predictive biomarkers

Current challenges of unresectable stage III NSCLC: are we ready to break the glass ceiling of the PACIFIC trial?

Consolidation anti-programmed death-ligand 1 has become a new standard of care in unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) following chemo-radiotherapy (CTRT), based on the results of two phase III trials. Advances remain however needed, in particular to reduce the risk of distant relapse and for treatment personalization. Newer strategies are currently being tested, including consolidation with dual immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), concurrent chemo-radioimmunotherapy and (chemo)-immunotherapy induction before CTRT. One randomized phase II reported better outcomes with a double ICI consolidation as compared with durvalumab alone. Three nonrandomized phase II trials also suggested that concurrent ICI-CTRT was feasible. Within this review, we summarize the current evidence, highlight ongoing trials and discuss challenges that will ideally lead to a cure for more patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC