Dataset Information

Genetic risk analysis of a patient with fulminant autoimmune type 1 diabetes mellitus secondary to combination ipilimumab and nivolumab immunotherapy.

ABSTRACT: Checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy is becoming an effective treatment modality for an increasing number of malignancies. As a result, autoinflammatory side-effects are also being observed more commonly in the clinic. We are currently unable to predict which patients will develop more severe toxicities associated with these treatment regimens.We present a patient with stage IV melanoma that developed rapid onset autoimmune type 1 diabetes (T1D) in response to combination ipilimumab and nivolumab immunotherapy. At the time of the patient's presentation with diabetes ketoacidosis, a confirmed anti-GAD antibody seroconversion was noted. Longer-term follow-up of this patient has demonstrated a durable complete response based on PET CT imaging along with a persistently undetectable C-peptide level. Single nucleotide polymorphism gene sequencing and HLA risk allele analysis has revealed the patient to lack any established genetic predisposition to the development of autoimmune T1D.While larger studies are necessary to better understand the role of genetic risk factors for the development of autoimmune toxicities in those patients undergoing checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy, these results suggest that pre-screening patients for known T1D risk alleles may not be indicated. Additional investigation is needed to determine whether an approach such as T cell receptor clonotypic analysis to identify the presence of autoreactive T cell clones may be an effective approach for predicting which patients are at risk for the development of autoinflammatory toxicities while undergoing checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy.

SUBMITTER: Lowe JR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5170902 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Genetic risk analysis of a patient with fulminant autoimmune type 1 diabetes mellitus secondary to combination ipilimumab and nivolumab immunotherapy.

Lowe Jared R JR Perry Daniel J DJ Salama April K S AK Mathews Clayton E CE Moss Larry G LG Hanks Brent A BA

Journal for immunotherapy of cancer 20161220

<h4>Background</h4>Checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy is becoming an effective treatment modality for an increasing number of malignancies. As a result, autoinflammatory side-effects are also being observed more commonly in the clinic. We are currently unable to predict which patients will develop more severe toxicities associated with these treatment regimens.<h4>Case presentation</h4>We present a patient with stage IV melanoma that developed rapid onset autoimmune type 1 diabetes (T1D) in resp ...[more]

PMID: 28031819

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNo meta-analysis has assessed the pooled frequencies of adverse events (AEs) induced by concomitant nivolumab plus ipilimumab regimen for anticancer-medications-naïve malignancies. Furthermore, no meta-analysis has compared detailed safety profiles between four doses of nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks (N3I1) and four doses of nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks (N1I3). Objectives of this study was estimating AE frequencies, and comparison of AE frequencies between N3I1 and N1I3 regimens.MethodsFour major electronic databases were searched; both interventional and observational studies were included. All primary cancer types were permitted. Patients should not have been previously treated with any anti-cancer medications. The frequency of AEs was pooled using a random-model meta-analysis using the generic inverse variance method. Protocol registration: UMIN000044090.ResultsForty articles representing 48 populations with 4,677 patients were included in the study. The pooled frequencies for key indicators were as follows: any AE, 81.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 77.5-85.1); grade 3 or higher AE, 40.6% (95% CI: 35.7-45.5); serious AE, 32.7% (95% CI: 22.4-43.1); AE leading to discontinuation, 28.3% (95% CI: 23.7-32.8); and treatment-related death, 0.7% (95% CI: 0.4-1.1). AEs with the highest incidence were fatigue (27.9%, 95% CI: 22.6-33.3), followed by diarrhea (26.0%, 95% CI: 21.5-30.5), pruritus (24.6%, 95% CI: 20.3-28.8), rash (24.0% 95% CI: 19.3-28.7), and elevated aspartate aminotransferase (21.2%, 95% CI: 14.9-27.5). Subgroup analyses demonstrated that N3I1, compared to N1I3, less frequently induced any AE (N1I3 95.7%, N3I1 84.5%, p = 0.003), grade 3 or higher AE (N1I3 64.3%, N3I1 35.7%, p < 0.001), and serious AE (N1I3 61.4%, N3I1 47.8%, p = 0.004).ConclusionsApproximately 40% of patients had grade 3 or higher AE. The N3I1 regimen was substantiated to trigger fewer any AEs, high grade AEs, and serious AE than the N1I3 regimen.

Project description:BackgroundMonoclonal antibodies targeting the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA4) (e.g., ipilimumab [IPI]) and the programmed cell death-1 (PD1) receptor (e.g., nivolumab [NIVO]) represent significant breakthroughs in the treatment of advanced melanoma. A combination of the 2 agents has demonstrated efficacy and survival benefits over NIVO or IPI monotherapy in treating advanced melanoma. We compared melanoma-specific costs following treatment with NIVO + IPI, NIVO monotherapy, or IPI monotherapy from the UK and German perspectives to ascertain whether these clinical benefits resulted in a cost advantage.MethodsPatient-level resource utilization data for the three treatment cohorts were obtained from the CheckMate 067 trial (NCT01844505). All melanoma-specific resources, including drugs (index, concomitant and subsequent melanoma medications), office visits, emergency room visits, hospitalizations, lab tests, procedures and surgeries, utilized over a 48-month evaluation period after start of index treatment were included. Unit costs specific to each geography were applied from external sources. Mean costs per surviving patients were calculated for each successive 30-day period from treatment start and aggregated over the evaluation period.ResultsThe total per-patient costs incurred by advanced melanoma patients over the 48-month period following treatment initiation with NIVO + IPI were 9% lower than NIVO monotherapy (£226k vs £248k) and 3% lower compared to IPI monotherapy (£226k vs. £233k) in the UK. In Germany, the total costs incurred by NIVO + IPI cohort were 5% lower than NIVO monotherapy (€258k vs €271k) and 4% lower compared to IPI monotherapy (€258k vs. €268k). Drug costs accounted for > 85% of total costs. Non-drug costs were slightly higher for NIVO + IPI and IPI monotherapy because of higher hospitalization rates. Costs incurred on subsequent drugs post progression were about 45% and 65% lower in NIVO + IPI cohort compared with NIVO and IPI monotherapy cohorts respectively.ConclusionsThe total costs incurred by a patient over a 48-month period following treatment initiation with NIVO + IPI are lower when compared with patients initiating monotherapies; further, the cost advantage is seen to be increasing over time. The clinical benefits offered by the regimen are thus supplemented by a cost advantage, as patients receiving either monotherapy treatment experience faster progression and, consequently, higher subsequent treatment costs. (Note: The cost results reported here are specific to the UK, and Germany, and may not be generalizable to other geographies).

Project description:BackgroundIn a phase 1 dose-escalation study, combined inhibition of T-cell checkpoint pathways by nivolumab and ipilimumab was associated with a high rate of objective response, including complete responses, among patients with advanced melanoma.MethodsIn this double-blind study involving 142 patients with metastatic melanoma who had not previously received treatment, we randomly assigned patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive ipilimumab (3 mg per kilogram of body weight) combined with either nivolumab (1 mg per kilogram) or placebo once every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram) or placebo every 2 weeks until the occurrence of disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The primary end point was the rate of investigator-assessed, confirmed objective response among patients with BRAF V600 wild-type tumors.ResultsAmong patients with BRAF wild-type tumors, the rate of confirmed objective response was 61% (44 of 72 patients) in the group that received both ipilimumab and nivolumab (combination group) versus 11% (4 of 37 patients) in the group that received ipilimumab and placebo (ipilimumab-monotherapy group) (P<0.001), with complete responses reported in 16 patients (22%) in the combination group and no patients in the ipilimumab-monotherapy group. The median duration of response was not reached in either group. The median progression-free survival was not reached with the combination therapy and was 4.4 months with ipilimumab monotherapy (hazard ratio associated with combination therapy as compared with ipilimumab monotherapy for disease progression or death, 0.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.23 to 0.68; P<0.001). Similar results for response rate and progression-free survival were observed in 33 patients with BRAF mutation-positive tumors. Drug-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were reported in 54% of the patients who received the combination therapy as compared with 24% of the patients who received ipilimumab monotherapy. Select adverse events with potential immunologic causes were consistent with those in a phase 1 study, and most of these events resolved with immune-modulating medication.ConclusionsThe objective-response rate and the progression-free survival among patients with advanced melanoma who had not previously received treatment were significantly greater with nivolumab combined with ipilimumab than with ipilimumab monotherapy. Combination therapy had an acceptable safety profile. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01927419.).

Dataset Information

Genetic risk analysis of a patient with fulminant autoimmune type 1 diabetes mellitus secondary to combination ipilimumab and nivolumab immunotherapy.

Publications

Genetic risk analysis of a patient with fulminant autoimmune type 1 diabetes mellitus secondary to combination ipilimumab and nivolumab immunotherapy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets