Lessons to be Learnt from Real-World Studies on Immune-Related Adverse Events with Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Clinical Perspective from Pharmacovigilance
- PMID: 32725437
- PMCID: PMC7434791
- DOI: 10.1007/s11523-020-00738-6
Lessons to be Learnt from Real-World Studies on Immune-Related Adverse Events with Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Clinical Perspective from Pharmacovigilance
Abstract
The advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) caused a paradigm shift both in drug development and clinical practice; however, by virtue of their mechanism of action, the excessively activated immune system results in a multitude of off-target toxicities, the so-called immune-related adverse events (irAEs), requiring new skills for timely diagnosis and a multidisciplinary approach to successfully manage the patients. In the recent past, a plethora of large-scale pharmacovigilance analyses have characterized various irAEs in terms of spectrum and clinical features in the real world. This review aims to summarize and critically appraise the current landscape of pharmacovigilance studies, thus deriving take-home messages for oncologists. A brief primer to study design, conduction, and data interpretation is also offered. As of February 2020, 30 real-world postmarketing studies have characterized multiple irAEs through international spontaneous reporting systems, namely WHO Vigibase and the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System. The majority of studies investigated a single irAE and provided new epidemiological evidence about class-specific patterns of irAEs (i.e. anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 [CTLA-4] versus anti-programmed cell death 1 [PD-1] receptor, and its ligand [PD-L1]), kinetics of appearance, co-occurrences (overlap) among irAEs, and fatality rate. Oncologists should be aware of both strengths and limitations of these pharmacovigilance analyses, especially in terms of data interpretation. Optimal management (including rechallenge), predictivity of irAEs (as potential biomarkers of effectiveness), and comparative safety of ICIs (also in terms of combination regimens) represent key research priorities for next-generation real-world studies.
Conflict of interest statement
Andrea Ardizzoni reports grants and personal fees from BMS, personal fees from MSD, Eli-Lilly, Boehringer, and Pfizer, and grants from Celgene, outside the submitted work. Emanuel Raschi reports personal fees from Novartis, outside the submitted work. Milo Gatti, Francesco Gelsomino, Elisabetta Poluzzi, and Fabrizio De Ponti declare no potential conflicts of interest relevant to the contents of this article.
Figures
References
-
- Hoos A. Development of immuno-oncology drugs—from CTLA4 to PD1 to the next generations. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2016;15:235–247. - PubMed
-
- Postow MA, Sidlow R, Hellmann MD. Immune-related adverse events associated with immune checkpoint blockade. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:158–168. - PubMed
-
- Baraibar I, Melero I, Ponz-Sarvise M, Castanon E. Safety and tolerability of immune checkpoint inhibitors (PD-1 and PD-L1) in cancer. Drug Saf. 2019;42:281–294. - PubMed
-
- Martins F, Sykiotis GP, Maillard M, Fraga M, Ribi C, Kuntzer T, et al. New therapeutic perspectives to manage refractory immune checkpoint-related toxicities. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20:e54–e64. - PubMed
-
- Barquìn-Garcìa A, Molina-Cerrillo J, Garrido P, Garcia-Palos D, Carrato A, Onso-Gordoa T. New oncologic emergencies: what is there to know about inmunotherapy and its potential side effects? Eur J Intern Med. 2019;66:1–8. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials
Miscellaneous
