|LETTER TO THE EDITOR
|Year : 2019 | Volume
| Issue : 4 | Page : 127-128
Cancer immunotherapy in the immunosuppressed patients and its relevance to clinical practice
Vaia Florou, Ignacio Garrido-Laguna
Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
|Date of Submission||10-Sep-2019|
|Date of Acceptance||12-Sep-2019|
|Date of Web Publication||03-Oct-2019|
Dr. Ignacio Garrido-Laguna
Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
|How to cite this article:|
Florou V, Garrido-Laguna I. Cancer immunotherapy in the immunosuppressed patients and its relevance to clinical practice. J Immunother Precis Oncol 2019;2:127-8
|How to cite this URL:|
Florou V, Garrido-Laguna I. Cancer immunotherapy in the immunosuppressed patients and its relevance to clinical practice. J Immunother Precis Oncol [serial online] 2019 [cited 2019 Dec 5];2:127-8. Available from: http://www.jipoonline.org/text.asp?2019/2/4/127/268506
A recent editorial by Hajjar concisely highlighted the key challenges of cancer immunotherapy in immunocompromised patients. We wish to expand on those emerging issues and their relevance to clinical practice.
Since the advent and inclusion of cancer immunotherapies in the treatment of solid cancers and hematologic malignancies, their impact on immunosuppressed patients was prominently questioned. Cancer immunotherapy not only offers novel mechanisms of action but also offers lack of cross-resistance with other treatment modalities. Although the concept of cancer immunosurveillance is certainly not new, it was not until recently that immune evasion was considered a hallmark of cancer and that any disequilibrium of the immune function has the potential to drive or promote carcinogenesis. The mechanisms of immune evasion leading to cancer are complex and not completely elucidated yet, but the higher incidence of certain malignancies in immunosuppressed patient is well established., The degree of this association is highly variable and depends on the specific aspects of immune deficiency and other factors, such as the duration of immunosuppression, the immunomodulatory agents used, and the different patient populations. However, a more intriguing and perhaps even less understood aspect is the bidirectional relationship between immunosuppression and malignancy and their interplay with agents manipulating and directing the immune system toward antitumor responses.
Limited data exist, to date, on the efficacy of immunotherapy in this unique population of immunosuppressed patients. These patients were excluded from early immunotherapy trials; however, retrospective studies reported safe use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in patients with underlying immunosuppression due to HIV infection or autoimmune disorders., Clinical trials are underway to answer the question of safety and efficacy of ICI in these patients. On the other hand, literature on the safety and efficacy of ICI is rather conflicting in transplant recipients, where there is a real risk of potentially fatal organ rejections. Interestingly, no association between the particular ICI used and rejection was observed, and most patient deaths were ultimately attributed to disease progression rather than graft rejection sequelae. Nevertheless, with graft rejection rates of close to 40%, physicians should be wary using immunotherapies in this context, where clinical trials are lacking due to rarity of these patients.
Finally, one has to also consider immunosuppressed patients those receiving steroids at low dose for a variety of reasons. Many patients receive steroids for dyspnea, fatigue, or cerebral edema. There is evidence stemming from retrospective studies on patients with lung cancer, supporting that early or baseline use of corticosteroids impacts adversely ICI response rates and outcomes., In those cases, it is reasonable switching to alternative medications or decreasing corticosteroid dose (<10 mg), if feasible, recognizing that patients who are receiving steroids have typically more aggressive and extensive disease, which represents a possible confounding effect when interpreting these data. In contrast, late use of steroids in the treatment course may confer improved outcomes, perhaps reflecting the evidence linking immune-related adverse events and efficacy of ICI.,
Immunocompromised patients with cancer pose a real challenge for clinicians. and the incidence is only about to increase as supportive care is optimized further. In parallel, as the knowledge of the immune system expands, more mechanisms between the interaction of immunosuppressive states, malignancy, and immunotherapies will hopefully be unveiled. In the meantime, clinicians do have some evidence to apply in patient care, with caution and clinical judgment always having paramount importance.
Financial support and sponsorship
The authors disclosed no funding related to this article.
Conflicts of interest
The authors disclosed no conflicts of interest related to this article.
| References|| |
Hajjar J. Cancer immunotherapy for the immunosuppressed: Dissecting the conundrum of safety and efficacy. J Immunother Precis Oncol
Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: The next generation. Cell
Grulich AE, van Leeuwen MT, Falster MO, et al. Incidence of cancers in people with HIV/AIDS compared with immunosuppressed transplant recipients: A meta-analysis. Lancet
Giat E, Ehrenfeld M, Shoenfeld Y. Cancer and autoimmune diseases. Autoimmun Rev
Husnain M, Park W, Ramos JC, et al. Complete response to ipilimumab and nivolumab therapy in a patient with extensive extrapulmonary high-grade small cell carcinoma of the pancreas and HIV infection. J Immunother Cancer
Shah M, Jizzini M, Majzoub I, et al. Safety of immune checkpoint blockade in patients with cancer and preexisting autoimmune diseases and/or chronic inflammatory disorders. J Immunother Precis Oncol
Fisher J, Zeitouni N, Fan W, et al. Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy in solid organ transplant recipients: A patient-centered systematic review. J Am Acad Dermatol
2019. pii: S0190-9622 (19) 32317-5.
Arbour KC, Mezquita L, Long N, et al. Impact of baseline steroids on efficacy of programmed cell death-1 and programmed death-ligand 1 blockade in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol
Fucà G, Galli G, Poggi M, et al. Modulation of peripheral blood immune cells by early use of steroids and its association with clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. ESMO Open
Fujii T, Colen RR, Bilen MA, et al. Incidence of immune-related adverse events and its association with treatment outcomes: The MD Anderson Cancer Center experience. Invest New Drugs