scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Cardiotoxicity of immune checkpoint inhibitors

TL;DR: The mechanisms of the most prominent checkpoint inhibitors are described, specifically ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4, the godfather of checkpoint inhibitors) patient and monoclonal antibodies targeting PD-1 and PD-L1 (eg, atezolizumab).
Abstract: Cardiac toxicity after conventional antineoplastic drugs (eg, anthracyclines) has historically been a relevant issue. In addition, targeted therapies and biological molecules can also induce cardiotoxicity. Immune checkpoint inhibitors are a novel class of anticancer drugs, distinct from targeted or tumour type-specific therapies. Cancer immunotherapy with immune checkpoint blockers (ie, monoclonal antibodies targeting cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4), programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and its ligand (PD-L1)) has revolutionised the management of a wide variety of malignancies endowed with poor prognosis. These inhibitors unleash antitumour immunity, mediate cancer regression and improve the survival in a percentage of patients with different types of malignancies, but can also produce a wide spectrum of immune-related adverse events. Interestingly, PD-1 and PD-L1 are expressed in rodent and human cardiomyocytes, and early animal studies have demonstrated that CTLA-4 and PD-1 deletion can cause autoimmune myocarditis. Cardiac toxicity has largely been underestimated in recent reviews of toxicity of checkpoint inhibitors, but during the last years several cases of myocarditis and fatal heart failure have been reported in patients treated with checkpoint inhibitors alone and in combination. Here we describe the mechanisms of the most prominent checkpoint inhibitors, specifically ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4, the godfather of checkpoint inhibitors) patient and monoclonal antibodies targeting PD-1 (eg, nivolumab, pembrolizumab) and PD-L1 (eg, atezolizumab). We also discuss what is known and what needs to be done about cardiotoxicity of checkpoint inhibitors in patients with cancer. Severe cardiovascular effects associated with checkpoint blockade introduce important issues for oncologists, cardiologists and immunologists.
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The epidemiology, treatment and management of the various immune-related adverse events that can occur in patients receiving immune-checkpoint inhibitors are described.
Abstract: Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), including anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4), anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and anti-programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibodies, are arguably the most important development in cancer therapy over the past decade. The indications for these agents continue to expand across malignancies and disease settings, thus reshaping many of the previous standard-of-care approaches and bringing new hope to patients. One of the costs of these advances is the emergence of a new spectrum of immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which are often distinctly different from the classical chemotherapy-related toxicities. Owing to the growing use of ICIs in oncology, clinicians will increasingly be confronted with common but also rare irAEs; hence, awareness needs to be raised regarding the clinical presentation, diagnosis and management of these toxicities. In this Review, we provide an overview of the various types of irAEs that have emerged to date. We discuss the epidemiology of these events and their kinetics, risk factors, subtypes and pathophysiology, as well as new insights regarding screening and surveillance strategies. We also highlight the most important aspects of the management of irAEs.

1,032 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: CD8 + T cell priming is directed essentially as a corroboration work between cells of innate immunity including dendritic cells (DCs) and natural killer (NK) cells with CD4 + T cells in adoptive immunity for making durable and efficient antitumor immune responses.
Abstract: CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) are preferred immune cells for targeting cancer. During cancer progression, CTLs encounter dysfunction and exhaustion due to immunerelated tolerance and immunosuppression within the tumor microenvironment (TME), with all favor adaptive immune-resistance. Cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs), macrophage type 2 (M2) cells, and regulatory T cells (Tregs) could make immunologic barriers against CD8 + T cell-mediated antitumor immune responses. Thus, CD8 + T cells are needed to be primed and activated toward effector CTLs in a process called tumor immunity cycle for making durable and efficient antitumor immune responses. The CD8 + T cell priming is directed essentially as a corroboration work between cells of innate immunity including dendritic cells (DCs) and natural killer (NK) cells with CD4 + T cells in adoptive immunity. Upon activation, effector CTLs infiltrate to the core or invading site of the tumor (so-called infiltrated-inflamed [I-I] TME) and take essential roles for killing cancer cells. Exogenous reactivation and/or priming of CD8 + T cells can be possible using rational immunotherapy strategies. The increase of the ratio for costimulatory to coinhibitory mediators using immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) approach. Programmed death-1 receptor (PD-1)-ligand (PD-L1) and CTL-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) are checkpoint receptors that can be targeted for relieving exhaustion of CD8 + T cells and renewing their priming, respectively, and thereby eliminating antigen-expressing cancer cells. Due to a diverse relation between CTLs with Tregs, the Treg activity could be dampened for increasing the number and rescuing the functional potential of CTLs to induce immunosensitivity of cancer cells.

824 citations


Cites background from "Cardiotoxicity of immune checkpoint..."

  • ...CTLA‐4 would compete with CD28 in binding to the CD80 and/or CD86 expressed on the DCs that results in a reduced inducible activity of DCs on CD8+ T cells with the subsequent suppression of these cells (Nejad et al., 2016; Varricchi et al., 2017; Figure 1)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The epidemiology of immune checkpoint inhibitor-mediated cardiotoxic effects, as well as their clinical presentation, subtypes, risk factors, pathophysiology, and clinical management, are discussed, including the introduction of a new surveillance strategy.
Abstract: Summary Immune checkpoint inhibitors are a new class of anticancer therapies that amplify T-cell-mediated immune responses against cancer cells. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown important benefits in phase 3 trials, and several agents have been approved for specific malignancies. Although adverse events from immune checkpoint inhibitors are a common occurrence, cardiotoxic effects are uncommon, but are often serious complications with a relatively high mortality. Most cardiotoxic effects appear to be inflammatory in nature. Clinical assessment of a combination of biomarkers, electrocardiography, cardiac imaging, and endomyocardial biopsy can be used to confirm a possible diagnosis. In this Review, we discuss the epidemiology of immune checkpoint inhibitor-mediated cardiotoxic effects, as well as their clinical presentation, subtypes, risk factors, pathophysiology, and clinical management, including the introduction of a new surveillance strategy.

341 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Cardiovascular events were higher after initiation of ICIs, potentially mediated by accelerated progression of atherosclerosis and increased atherosclerotic plaque progression was attenuated with concomitant use of statins or corticosteroids.
Abstract: Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) treat an expanding range of cancers. Consistent basic data suggest that these same checkpoints are critical negative regulators of atherosclerosis. T...

218 citations

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Ipilimumab, with or without a gp100 peptide vaccine, as compared with gp100 alone, improved overall survival in patients with previously treated metastatic melanoma.
Abstract: Background An improvement in overall survival among patients with metastatic melanoma has been an elusive goal. In this phase 3 study, ipilimumab — which blocks cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–associated antigen 4 to potentiate an antitumor T-cell response — administered with or without a glycoprotein 100 (gp100) peptide vaccine was compared with gp100 alone in patients with previously treated metastatic melanoma. Methods A total of 676 HLA-A*0201–positive patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma, whose disease had progressed while they were receiving therapy for metastatic disease, were randomly assigned, in a 3:1:1 ratio, to receive ipilimumab plus gp100 (403 patients), ipilimumab alone (137), or gp100 alone (136). Ipilimumab, at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight, was administered with or without gp100 every 3 weeks for up to four treatments (induction). Eligible patients could receive reinduction therapy. The primary end point was overall survival. Results The median overall survival was 10.0 months among patients receiving ipilimumab plus gp100, as compared with 6.4 months among patients receiving gp100 alone (hazard ratio for death, 0.68; P<0.001). The median overall survival with ipilimumab alone was 10.1 months (hazard ratio for death in the comparison with gp100 alone, 0.66; P = 0.003). No difference in overall survival was detected between the ipilimumab groups (hazard ratio with ipilimumab plus gp100, 1.04; P = 0.76). Grade 3 or 4 immune-related adverse events occurred in 10 to 15% of patients treated with ipilimumab and in 3% treated with gp100 alone. There were 14 deaths related to the study drugs (2.1%), and 7 were associated with immune-related adverse events. Conclusions Ipilimumab, with or without a gp100 peptide vaccine, as compared with gp100 alone, improved overall survival in patients with previously treated metastatic melanoma. Adverse events can be severe, long-lasting, or both, but most are reversible with appropriate treatment. (Funded by Medarex and Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00094653.)

13,081 citations


"Cardiotoxicity of immune checkpoint..." refers background in this paper

  • ...107–109 IRAEs associated with the use of ipilimumab were already evident in phase I studies, but now their incidence and severity are well-recognised.(66) 110 IRAEs are common, usually reversible and not severe in most patients....

    [...]

  • ...In fact, combined anti-CTLA-4 and antiPD-1 blockade further enhances antitumour activity and patient survival.(66) 83 89 90 In addition, combination of four different types of immunotherapies eradicated several experimental tumours viewed as intractable....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Anti-PD-1 antibody produced objective responses in approximately one in four to one in five patients with non-small-cell lung cancer, melanoma, or renal-cell cancer; the adverse-event profile does not appear to preclude its use.
Abstract: Background Blockade of programmed death 1 (PD-1), an inhibitory receptor expressed by T cells, can overcome immune resistance. We assessed the antitumor activity and safety of BMS-936558, an antibody that specifically blocks PD-1. Methods We enrolled patients with advanced melanoma, non–small-cell lung cancer, castrationresistant prostate cancer, or renal-cell or colorectal cancer to receive anti–PD-1 antibody at a dose of 0.1 to 10.0 mg per kilogram of body weight every 2 weeks. Response was assessed after each 8-week treatment cycle. Patients received up to 12 cycles until disease progression or a complete response occurred. Results A total of 296 patients received treatment through February 24, 2012. Grade 3 or 4 drugrelated adverse events occurred in 14% of patients; there were three deaths from pulmonary toxicity. No maximum tolerated dose was defined. Adverse events consistent with immune-related causes were observed. Among 236 patients in whom response could be evaluated, objective responses (complete or partial responses) were observed in those with non–small-cell lung cancer, melanoma, or renal-cell cancer. Cumulative response rates (all doses) were 18% among patients with non–small-cell lung cancer (14 of 76 patients), 28% among patients with melanoma (26 of 94 patients), and 27% among patients with renal-cell cancer (9 of 33 patients). Responses were durable; 20 of 31 responses lasted 1 year or more in patients with 1 year or more of follow-up. To assess the role of intratumoral PD-1 ligand (PD-L1) expression in the modulation of the PD-1–PD-L1 pathway, immunohistochemical analysis was performed on pretreatment tumor specimens obtained from 42 patients. Of 17 patients with PD-L1–negative tumors, none had an objective response; 9 of 25 patients (36%) with PD-L1–positive tumors had an objective response (P = 0.006). Conclusions Anti–PD-1 antibody produced objective responses in approximately one in four to one in five patients with non–small-cell lung cancer, melanoma, or renal-cell cancer; the adverse-event profile does not appear to preclude its use. Preliminary data suggest a relationship between PD-L1 expression on tumor cells and objective response. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00730639.)

10,674 citations


"Cardiotoxicity of immune checkpoint..." refers background in this paper

  • ...The incidence of IRAEs seems to be lower with anti-PD-1 therapy than with ipilimumab.(9) 66 In general, IRAEs caused by ICIs resemble the autoimmune manifestations observed in PD-1-deficient mice....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Preliminary clinical findings with blockers of additional immune-checkpoint proteins, such as programmed cell death protein 1 (PD1), indicate broad and diverse opportunities to enhance antitumour immunity with the potential to produce durable clinical responses.
Abstract: Immune checkpoints refer to the plethora of inhibitory pathways that are crucial to maintaining self-tolerance. Tumour cells induce immune checkpoints to evade immunosurveillance. This Review discusses the progress in targeting immune checkpoints, the considerations for combinatorial therapy and the potential for additional immune-checkpoint targets.

10,602 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Nivolumab was associated with even greater efficacy than docetaxel across all end points in subgroups defined according to prespecified levels of tumor-membrane expression (≥1, ≥5%, and ≥10%) of the PD-1 ligand.
Abstract: BackgroundNivolumab, a fully human IgG4 programmed death 1 (PD-1) immune-checkpoint–inhibitor antibody, disrupts PD-1–mediated signaling and may restore antitumor immunity. MethodsIn this randomized, open-label, international phase 3 study, we assigned patients with nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that had progressed during or after platinum-based doublet chemotherapy to receive nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight every 2 weeks or docetaxel at a dose of 75 mg per square meter of body-surface area every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival. ResultsOverall survival was longer with nivolumab than with docetaxel. The median overall survival was 12.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.7 to 15.0) among 292 patients in the nivolumab group and 9.4 months (95% CI, 8.1 to 10.7) among 290 patients in the docetaxel group (hazard ratio for death, 0.73; 96% CI, 0.59 to 0.89; P=0.002). At 1 year, the overall survival rate was 51% (95% CI, 45 to 56) with nivolumab ve...

7,474 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Among patients with advanced, previously treated squamous-cell NSCLC, overall survival, response rate, and progression-free survival were significantly better with nivolumab than with docetaxel, regardless of PD-L1 expression level.
Abstract: BackgroundPatients with advanced squamous-cell non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have disease progression during or after first-line chemotherapy have limited treatment options. This randomized, open-label, international, phase 3 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 programmed death 1 (PD-1) immune-checkpoint–inhibitor antibody, as compared with docetaxel in this patient population. MethodsWe randomly assigned 272 patients to receive nivolumab, at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight every 2 weeks, or docetaxel, at a dose of 75 mg per square meter of body-surface area every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival. ResultsThe median overall survival was 9.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.3 to 13.3) with nivolumab versus 6.0 months (95% CI, 5.1 to 7.3) with docetaxel. The risk of death was 41% lower with nivolumab than with docetaxel (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.79; P<0.001). At 1 year, the overall survival rate was 42% (95% CI, 3...

6,869 citations

Related Papers (5)