Off‐label prescribing of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy at a single pediatric cancer center
Ajami Gikandi,Susan N. Chi,Kee Kiat Yeo,Allison F. O'Neill,David S. Shulman,Steven G. DuBois,Natalie B. Collins
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.7154
IF: 4.711
2024-04-19
Cancer Medicine
Abstract:Patterns of off‐label use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in pediatric and young adult patients with cancer remain unclear. At our institution, we found that off‐label ICI was most commonly prescribed in the relapsed/refractory setting to patients with metastatic disease, and the treatment was generally well‐tolerated. The overall response rate was low, and the majority of patients eventually experienced disease progression. A few patients, however, had durable treatment responses. Background Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have improved outcomes in a variety of adult cancers and are prescribed with increasing frequency across oncology. However, patterns of off‐label use of ICI in pediatrics remain unclear. Methods This is a single‐institution, retrospective cohort study evaluating off‐label ICI use in pediatric and young adult patients with cancer treated at our institution from 2014 to 2022. Response was based on clinician assessment derived from clinical records. Immune‐related adverse events (iRAEs) were classified according to CTCAE v5.0. Results We identified 50 unique patients treated with off‐label ICI (28 with solid tumors, 20 with central nervous system (CNS) tumors, 2 with hematologic malignancies). At time of ICI initiation, only five patients (10%) had localized disease, and all but one patient was treated in the relapsed/refractory setting. All patients were treated with the FDA‐approved weight‐based dosing recommendations. Overall, there was disease control in 21 patients (42%), with best response including one complete response (melanoma), two partial responses (high‐grade glioma, CNS nongerminomatous germ cell tumor), and 18 patients with stable disease. Forty‐four patients (88%) eventually experienced disease progression. Among 22 patients (44%) experiencing iRAEs, 10 (20%) had a grade ≥3 irAE, 12 (24%) required corticosteroids, and 14 (28%) required ICI discontinuation. irAE occurrence was associated with significantly improved progression‐free survival (HR 0.35; 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.68; p = 0.002) and overall survival (HR 0.33; 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.66; p = 0.002). Conclusions At our institution, ICI was most commonly prescribed in the relapsed/refractory setting to patients with metastatic disease. The treatment was generally well‐tolerated in the pediatric population. The overall response rate was low, and the majority of patients eventually experienced disease progression. A few patients, however, had durable treatment responses. Further studies are needed to identify which pediatric patients are most likely to benefit from ICI.
oncology