Side Effect Registry Immuno-Oncology

Side Effect Registry Immuno-Oncology

SERIO is a registry for adverse events of immunotherapies (immune-related adverse events, irAE): The aim of SERIO is to collect rare, complex and therapy-refractory cases to obtain knowledge for better side effect management and eventually be able to understand pathogenesis and predict side effects also in special patients (i.e. with autoimmune disease or solid organ transplant).

Myositis
Arthritis
Arthritis
Lichen ruber
Lichen ruber
Pneumonitis
Pneumonitis

Case of the Month

54 year old woman with checkpoint-inhibitor induced Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada syndrome (VKH)

Medical history
  • 11/2017 cutaneous melanoma of the right foot (Breslow tumor thickness 6 mm)
    • initial stage: pT4bN2aM0, IIIC (AJCC 2017), BRAF wild-type, NRAS Q61R-mutation
  • 01/2019: disseminated pulmonary, hepatic and lymph node metastases
Oncological therapy
  • 01/2018-01/2019 adjuvant immunotherapy with ipilimumab (1 mg/kg bw) every 6 weeks and nivolumab 240 mg every two weeks (CheckMate-915 clinical trial)
  • 02/2019 combined immunotherapy with ipilimumab (3 mg/kg bw) and nivolumab (1 mg/kg bw) due to progressive disease (three cycles)
  • 06/2019 - today: dacarbazine (DTIC) every three weeks
Immune-related adverse event

Nine weeks after initiation of the combined immunotherapy with ipilimumab (3 mg/kg bw) and nivolumab (1 mg/kg bw) the patient presented to our dermato-oncological ambulance with dizziness, imbalance and an acute bilateral hearing loss due to an immune-mediated bilateral vestibulopathy. Furthermore, she suffered from progressive visual loss in both eyes (0.1 in the right eye; 0.8 in the left eye). ophthalmologic consultation confirmed a papillitis, retinal vasculitis as well as an uveitis. An alopecia areata universalis as well as leukotrichia induced by CPIs was already known. Thus, we diagnosed Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada syndrome (VKH).

How did we proceed?

Therapy with methylprednisolone (1 g/d) was initiated for three days and was tapered in the following weeks. The bilateral vestibulopathy remained irreversible; the patient still requires hearing aids on both sides. Contrary to that an improvement in vision was achieved in the right eye (0.1 à 0.32).

Could we continue the immunotherapy?

Immunotherapy was interrupted; instead a chemotherapy with dacarbazine was initiated. Current staging showed stable disease.  

Our conclusion

VKH is an inflammatory disease syndrome characterized by bilateral uveitis in combination with alopecia, vitiligo or auditory manifestations, as shown in our patient. It is caused by a systemic immune reaction against melanocytes and can possibly be induced by immune checkpoint-inhibitors (Bricout et al., J Immunotherapy, 2017).

Ophthalmic irAEs occur in less than 1% of patients under immunotherapy and include uveitis, episcleritis and scleritis. Only few case reports about VKH exist (Crosson et al. J Immunotherapy, 2016). Wong et al. first reported a case of bilateral ipilimumab induced vitritis, choroiditis and retinal detachments due to VKH. As in our case, high-dose corticosteroids led to a quick improvement (Wong et al., Retin Cases Brief Rep., 2012).

Oncologists should be aware of possible ophthalmic and systemic findings induced by immunotherapy and should consider quick ophthalmologic consultation.

51 year old woman with exacerbation of multiple sclerosis under immunotherapy

medical history
  • 12/2019 cutaneous melanoma of the capillitium (Bresslow tumor thickness 1,2 mm)
    • Initial stage: pT2aN0M0, IB (AJCC), BRAF wild-type, NRAS mutation, c-Kit wild-type
  • 12/2020: disseminated pulmonary, hepatic and lymph node metastases
Risk profile

multiple sclerosis, no treatment due to stable disease

Oncological therapy

12/2020 – 02/2021 combined immunotherapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab (4 cycles)

Immune-related adverse event

Two weeks after initiation of the immunotherapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab the patient presented to the emergency room with nausea, fatigue and dizziness. Laboratory results showed hyponatriaemia as well as a low cortisol level (> 0,2 µg/dl) that could not be stimulated through ACTH. Hydrocortisone was initiated due to an immune-related hypophysitis. One week later the patient presented again to the emergency room due to progressive increase in muscle tone of the left leg and left arm as well as the loss of the ability to walk.

How did we proceed?

MRI scan of the brain did not show any new foci that could explain the acute deterioration. A lymphomonocytic pleocytosis with liquor-specific oligoclonal gammopathy was detected in liquor analysis. An acute exacerbation of the preexisting multiple sclerosis under immunotherapy was suspected. Therapy with methylprednisolone (1 g/d) was initiated for five days. Spasticity improved and the patient was able to walk short distances again.

Could we continue the immunotherapy?

Immunotherapy was interrupted due to this severe neurological immune-related adverse event. The symptoms remained stable even after discontinutation of the therapy with methylprednisolone. Staging showed regressive liver as well as pulmonary metastases in March 2021. Six months after the initiation of the immunotherapy high liver enzymes were detected (GOT: 1113 U/l,
GPT: 2154 U
/l ). Due to immune-related hepatitis (CTCAE grade 4) a therapy with methylprednisolone was reinitiated, under which liver enzymes decreased.

Our conclusion

Neurological irAEs are rare in less than 1% of patients under immunotherapy (Spain et al., Ann oncol. 2017), but might be underreported due to lack of recognition. There are few case reports about MS relapse under immunotherapy, with description of rapid neurological progression and even death. As in our example all patients suffered from other immune-related adverse events. (Garcia et al., Clin Transl Oncol. 2019). Most neurological adverse events show good response to steroids, especially if initiated promptly (Larkin et al., The Oncologist 2017). Prospective studies are neccessary to provide information about risk factors, clinical presentation, outcome and therapy optimization.

Pleuritis and peripheral edema due to Immunotherapy

Patient medical history
  • 73 year old patient
  • Melanoma of unknown primary
    • stage IV M1d (1), BRAF wildtype, NRAS Mutation, c-Kit wildtype
  • 08/2016: iliac lymph node metastasis (3,5 x 2,5 x 1,5 cm)
  • 10/2017: hemorrhagic cerebral metastasis
  • 11/2019: lymph node metastasis of the left tigh
  • 03/2020: cutaneous metastases
Oncological therapy
  • 10/2016 – 11/2016: radiotherapy
  • 01/2017: lymph node dissection inguinal left
  • 10/2017: resection of cerebral melanoma metastasis 
  • 11/2017: stereotactic radiotherapy in area of resected metastasis
  • 11/2017 – 11/2018: pembrolizumab
  • 11/2019: resection of lymph node metastasis
  • 03/2020 – 05/2020: intratumoral oncolytic viral therapy
Immune-related adverse event

One year after initiation of the immunotherapy with Pembrolizumab the patient presented with massive edema of both lower legs, thighs and scrotum as well as dyspnea due to pleural effusion.

How did we proceed?

A cardiovascular as well as nephrological genesis of the edema and pleural effusions could be excluded (normal left ventricular function, serumelectrophoresis without pathological findings, exclusion of proteinuria).

Pleura puncture was conducted. Pleural fluid did not show any malignant cell but lots of lymphocytes, expecting it to be the result of an immune-related pleuritis. Prednisone with 30 mg per day was initiated.

Could we continue the immunotherapy?

Immunotherapy was interrupted. The prednisone in combination with diuretic therapy initially led to a reduction of the edemas. A few weaks after tapering off the steroids, recurrent pleural effusion was observed. Therefore Pembrolizumab could not be rechallenged again. Unfortunately the patient died due to deterioration of his general condition.

Our conclusion

Only few publications report the occurence of immune-related serositis, mostly affecting patients with metastatic lung cancer and pericardial effusions. Most patients present with dyspnea, but also asymtomatic pericardial effusion was described, expecting the incidence to be higher than initially thought (Anastasia et al., Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer, 2019). Other authors describe rapidly accumulating effusions under Nivolumab especially in patients with malignant involvement of visceral spaces. Sometimes it might be hard to differentiate between tumour progression and immune-related adverse event. In such cases the detection of lymphocytes in the pleural or pericardial fluid might be helpful, pointing out a positive effect of steroids (Kolla and Patel, Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer, 2016).  

Cemiplimab in an organ transplant patient

Patient medical history
  • 68 year old patient
  • 07/2018 squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the head
    • initial tumor stage: cT4 cN0 M0, G3
    • p53 mutation, PDL1 expression: 25%, 70% in recurrent tumor (06/2020)
  • 07/2018 extirpation
  • 03 - 07/2019 resection of recurrent tumor
  • 12/2019 local progression
  • 06/2020 PET-CT: Metastases of bones (t1, t4, l3, l4, os ilii), lymph nodes (regional, hilar, mediastinal) and pleural metastases
Risk profile
  • kidney transplantation in 2012 (end-stage kidney disease caused by IgA nephropathy)
  • immunosuppressive therapy with tacrolimus (5mg 1-0-0), everolimus (1,5mg 1-0-1) and prednisolone (2,5mg 1-0-0 every second day)
  • since 05/2020: everolimus monotherapy (0,5mg 1-0-0)
Oncological therapy
  • 11/2019 bleomycin-based electrochemotherapy, local progression 
  • 12/2020 radiotherapy, cumulative dose of 60 Gy, local progression and distant metastases
  • 06/2020 Cetuximab (6 cycles), Carboplatin (1 cycle), mixed response
  • 09/2020 Cemiplimab (5 cycles) à acute transplant rejection, partial response
Immune-related adverse event

After five cycles of Cemiplimab the patient presented with skin rash and an acute deterioration of the kidney function.

How did we proceed?

Because a transplant rejection was suspected, high-dose systemic corticosteroid therapy was initiated (1 mg/kg bw/day for seven days, followed by 0,5 mg/kg bw/day for seven days). Additionally, topical corticosteroids were used for the exanthema. Everolimus was continued without interruption.

Could we continue the immunotherapy?

Immunotherapy was interrupted. The systemic corticosteroid therapy quickly led to stabilisation of the kidney function. While maintaining the immunosuppressive therapy with everolimus in the same dosage, the therapy with cemiplimab was continued. A PET-CT showed partial response and fortunately recently ongoing stable disease. Kidney function has been stable since then.

Our conclusion

Long-term immunosuppression is associated with a higher risk of malignancy. The decision whether to start an immunotherapy in patients with organ transplantation is complex due to potential induction of organ rejection and only limited data on predictive factors. A retrospective analysis of 64 case reports shows that the risk for a graft rejection might depend on the transplanted organ, with the highest graft rejection rate in renal allografts (44% vs. 39 % in liver and 20% in cardiac allografts). Patients who were treated with PD-1 inhibitors showed higher rates of allograft rejection compared to those who were treated with CTLA-4 inhibitors (39% vs. 23%, Kumar et al., Oncologist, 2020). Despite the immunosuppression with everolimus, cemiplimab checkpoint inhibitor therapy induced a tumor response in this heavily pretreated patient. In a retrospective analysis Abdel-Wahab et al. found that low-dose prednisolone therapy was associated with a high risk for graft rejection, whereas calcineurin inhibitors were associated with a worse tumor response (Abdel-Wahabet al. Journal for ImmunoTherapyof Cancer, 2019). A preclinical study showed that the combination of checkpoint- inhibitors with mTor inhibitors potentiates the anti-tumor immunity (Langdon et al., Oncoimmunology, 2018), suggesting a potentially beneficial combination in organ transplant patients. Further investigation and prospective clinical trials are needed to evaluate how immunotherapy can be optimized in organ transplant patients.

Who we are

SERIO was originally initiated by dermatooncologists at the University Hospital of Erlangen in 2011 with the first documented case dating back to 2009. We are a certified cancer center and home to the German center of Immunotherapy (DZI). There was soon an intensive collaboration with endocrinologists, cardiologists and gastroenterologists that led to our interdisciplinary tox-board. We have also continuously collaborated within the Working Group Dermatooncolgy (ADO) to conduct projects, share experiences and gain new insights. More than 1000 cases of rare complex or very severe side effects from five countries were collected in a period of almost 10 years. We now host an online register in cooperation with the Paul-Ehrlich Institute. Today, we are cooperating with side effect specialists all over the world and hope to improve side effect management for cancer patients.

SERIO is there to help physicians manage side effects and obtain better knowledge on side effects induced by immunotherapy.

What we do 

  • Collect and analyze cases of rare, complex, severe and therapy-refractory side effects induced by immunotherapy
  • Give recommendations for treating physicians confronted with difficult irAE
  • Conduct research and support for people conducting research with regard to irAE