Methods and Applications of Artificial Intelligence

I. Vlahavas,C. Spyropoulos

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46014-4

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

A review of cancer immunotherapy toxicity

Lucy Boyce Kennedy,April K. S. Salama

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21596

2020-03-01

Abstract:Cancer immunotherapies, including checkpoint inhibitors and adoptive cell therapy, manipulate the immune system to recognize and attack cancer cells. These therapies have the potential to induce durable responses in multiple solid and hematologic malignancies and thus have transformed treatment algorithms for numerous tumor types. Cancer immunotherapies lead to unique toxicity profiles distinct from the toxicities of other cancer therapies, depending on their mechanism of action. These toxicities often require specific management, which can include steroids and immune‐modulating therapy and for which consensus guidelines have been published. This review will focus on the toxicities of checkpoint inhibitors and chimeric antigen receptor T cells, including pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management.
FACING THE EROSION PROBLEM.

H. H. Bennett

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.81.2101.321

IF: 56.9

1935-04-05

Science

Abstract:TiE productive agricultural lands of the United States are being seriously impaired and even destroyed on a vast scale. The plant nutrients and the soil body itself are being removed from fields and over-grazed ranges at an ever-increasing rate under existing methods of unwise land usage, with the effect not only of impoverishing and even destroying the uplands but of covering fertile lower slopes and productive alluvial plains with poor subsoil material washed out of the hills. Moreover, the products of erosion are filling stream channels and costly reservoirs ; increased runoff from soil-stripped, gully-riddled slopes is increasing the hazard of floods; and many streams muddied with silt and colloidal clay have been deserted by valuable species of fish. This irreparable damage is increasing at an accelerated 'Presented before Section 0, American Association for the rate. Centuries would be required to build back the soil swept out of the fields and overgrazed pastures of the nation by this process that continues with every rain heavy enough to cause water to run downhill. We have been maintaining our agricultural production at the expense of the substance of the land.
Toxicity in the era of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy

Synat Keam,Naimah Turner,Fernanda G Kugeratski,Rene Rico,Jocelynn Colunga-Minutti,Rayansh Poojary,Sayan Alekseev,Anisha B Patel,Yuanteng Jeff Li,Ajay Sheshadri,Monica E Loghin,Karin Woodman,Ashley E Aaroe,Sarah Hamidi,Priyanka Chandrasekhar Iyer,Nicolas L Palaskas,Yinghong Wang,Roza Nurieva

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2024.1447021

2024-08-23

Abstract:Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) reinvigorate anti-tumor immune responses by disrupting co-inhibitory immune checkpoint molecules such as programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4). Although ICIs have had unprecedented success and have become the standard of care for many cancers, they are often accompanied by off-target inflammation that can occur in any organ system. These immune related adverse events (irAEs) often require steroid use and/or cessation of ICI therapy, which can both lead to cancer progression. Although irAEs are common, the detailed molecular and immune mechanisms underlying their development are still elusive. To further our understanding of irAEs and develop effective treatment options, there is pressing need for preclinical models recapitulating the clinical settings. In this review, we describe current preclinical models and immune implications of ICI-induced skin toxicities, colitis, neurological and endocrine toxicities, pneumonitis, arthritis, and myocarditis along with their management.
Toxicities of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: Itis-Ending Adverse Reactions and More

Moataz Ellithi,Radowan Elnair,Guy Vin Chang,Mohamed A Abdallah

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.6935

2020-02-10

Cureus

Abstract:Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have revolutionized the treatment of cancer worldwide. Not long ago, before the introduction of ICIs, many cancers incurred a grave prognosis on patients due to the lack of effective therapies. For instance, patients with malignant melanoma survive longer and experience a better quality of life than ever before due to agents such as nivolumab and ipilimumab. Nevertheless, toxicities associated with the use of ICIs have been increasingly recognized in clinical trials as well as oncology practice. The widespread usage of ICIs and the expected addition of newer ICIs to the arsenal of medications to fight cancer raise awareness of the potential toxicities of these medications. Once these toxicities develop, immunosuppression with or without withholding immunotherapy is the standard of care. Because the long-term adverse effects of these toxicities and the impact of stopping therapy on survival are not well characterized, a joint decision by both the oncologist and the patient should be carried out if stopping therapy is being considered. Nevertheless, long-term data is necessary to guide such decisions. In this article, we will discuss common ICI's immune-related adverse events with a simplified approach to recognizing and managing these events.
The toxicity of cell therapy: Mechanism, manifestations, and challenges

Yongjia Jin,Yan Dong,Jin Zhang,Jingwei Sun,Yarong Liu,Yong Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jat.4100

IF: 3.3

2021-01-01

Journal of Applied Toxicology

Abstract:Adoptive cell therapy (ACT), including tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), T cell receptor engineered T cell (TCR-T), and chimeric antigen receptor engineered T cell (CAR-T), has shown significant clinical benefits for cancer treatment. However, all of these ACT therapies are associated with toxicities from mild to life threatening in clinic. Common ACT-related toxicities include cytokine release syndrome (CRS) resulting from immune activation, neurological toxicity, on-target/off tumor or off-target toxicities, and toxicities associated with lymphodepletion preconditioning and high does IL-2 administration. This review summarizes clinical manifestations of adverse events associated with ACT treatment and discusses the underlying pathological mechanisms. Moreover, challenges and opportunities of managing ACT-related toxicities have been discussed to give an indication of how to improve the safety of ACT treatment without dampening the therapeutic effect.
Adverse Events of Oncologic Immunotherapy and Their Management

Fedricker Diane Barber,Fedricker D Barber

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/apjon.apjon_6_19

2019-07-01

Abstract:Over the past two decades, immunotherapy has emerged as a promising treatment option for patients with cancer. However, newer versions of immunotherapy, such as checkpoint inhibitors, may be associated with unusual adverse effects (AEs) that can range in severity from mild to life-threatening. Unlike common AEs of conventional chemotherapy, which have a predictable nadir or cyclic pattern after administration, AEs of these newer immunotherapies are variable, depending on the type of immunotherapy, route of administration, and mechanism of action. The onset and resolution of these AEs may be present at any time, during administration of treatment, a few weeks after administration of treatment, or several months after completion of treatment. Therefore, improving outcomes in patients undergoing oncologic immunotherapy requires oncology nurses' knowledge and understanding of various immunotherapy agents, as well as early recognition and management of potential AEs, especially AEs associated with checkpoint inhibitors and other therapies that manipulate T-cell activation causing autoimmune toxicity. This article draws upon current evidence from systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and expert consensus guidelines to provide a brief overview of common immunotherapies used in cancer and management of their associated AEs.

nursing
Immune-Related Adverse Events Induced by Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and CAR-T Cell Therapy: A Comprehensive Imaging-Based Review

Chiara Pozzessere,Bianca Mazini,Patrick Omoumi,Mario Jreige,Leslie Noirez,Antonia Digklia,François Fasquelle,Christine Sempoux,Clarisse Dromain

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16142585

2024-07-20

Cancers

Abstract:Immunotherapy has revolutionized oncology care, improving patient outcomes in several cancers. However, these therapies are also associated with typical immune-related adverse events due to the enhanced inflammatory and immune response. These toxicities can arise at any time during treatment but are more frequent within the first few months. Any organ and tissue can be affected, ranging from mild to life-threatening. While some manifestations are common and more often mild, such as dermatitis and colitis, others are rarer and more severe, such as myocarditis. Management depends on the severity, with treatment being held for >grade 2 toxicities. Steroids are used in more severe cases, and immunosuppressive treatment may be considered for non-responsive toxicities, along with specific organ support. A multidisciplinary approach is mandatory for prompt identification and management. The diagnosis is primarily of exclusion. It often relies on imaging features, and, when possible, cytologic and/or pathological analyses are performed for confirmation. In case of clinical suspicion, imaging is required to assess the presence, extent, and features of abnormalities and to evoke and rule out differential diagnoses. This imaging-based review illustrates the diverse system-specific toxicities associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors and chimeric antigen receptor T-cells with a multidisciplinary perspective. Clinical characteristics, imaging features, cytological and histological patterns, as well as the management approach, are presented with insights into radiological tips to distinguish these toxicities from the most important differential diagnoses and mimickers—including tumor progression, pseudoprogression, inflammation, and infection—to guide imaging and clinical specialists in the pathway of diagnosing immune-related adverse events.

oncology
Toxicities of Immunotherapy for Small Cell Lung Cancer

Yang Fu,Yue Zheng,Pei-Pei Wang,Zhen-Yu Ding

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.603658

IF: 4.7

2021-05-31

Frontiers in Oncology

Abstract:Small cell lung cancer (SCLC), composing 15–20% of lung cancer, is a fatal disease with extremely poor prognosis. In the past two decades, etoposide platinum doublet chemotherapy remained the only choice of therapy, with disappointing overall survival ≤1 year for the metastatic disease. Novel treatments including immunotherapy are urgently needed and extensively explored. Recently, in two phase III trials, atezolizumab and durvalumab were shown to bring survival benefit to patients. While immunotherapy brings better outcome, it is accompanied by adverse events different from traditional treatments. Although these immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are generally mild and can be managed, some irAEs (myocarditis, pneumonitis) may be severe and even life-threatening. Accompanying with the increasing application of immunotherapy in clinical practice, the irAEs should not be overlooked. In this review, the irAEs profile in clinical trials of immunotherapy for SCLC will be summarized, also its unique features compared with irAEs in other malignancies will be explored. This review may be helpful for the appropriate clinical use of immunotherapy for SCLC.

oncology
Given the ENHANCE trial results, ezetimibe is still unproven.

Allen J. Taylor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3949/CCJM.75.7.497

2008-07-01

Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine

Abstract:However, there was no evidence that ezetimbe, which has a unique mechanism of action, delivers a benefit in terms of clinical outcomes. Despite this, the use of ezetimibe (alone or in fixed-dose combination with simvastatin, a preparation sold as Vytorin) grew rapidly, generating annual sales of $5.2 billion. Clinicians and the manufacturer (Merck/Schering-Plough) broadly assumed that LDL-C reduction would carry ezetimibe’s day as clinical trials emerged. The assumption seemed reasonable, since evidence from the past 3 decades has established a clear link between lowering LDL-C levels via diverse mechanisms and positive clinical outcomes, particularly lower rates of cardiovascular disease and death. Indeed, LDL-C measurement is now a focus of cardiovascular risk assessment and management, as reflected in national treatment guidelines.
Improving Safety of Cancer Immunotherapy Via Delivery Technology.

Doudou Hu,Wei Zhang,Jianbin Tang,Zhuxian Zhou,Xiangrui Liu,Youqing Shen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2020.120407

IF: 14

2021-01-01

Biomaterials

Abstract:Breakthroughs in molecular mechanisms underlying immune-suppressive tumor microenvironment and paradigm shifts in the cancer-immunity response cycle have profoundly changed the landscape of cancer immunotherapy. However, one of the challenges is to mitigate the serious side effects caused by systemic autoimmunity and autoinflammatory responses following immunotherapy. Thus, restraining the activation of the immune system in healthy tissues is highly desirable to address this problem. Bioengineering and delivery technologies provide a solution to the issue. In this Review, we first introduce immune-related adverse effects of main immunotherapies and the underlying mechanisms, summarize strategies of designingde bioengineering and delivery systems to reduce their immunotoxicities, and highlight the importance of the development of immunotoxicity-related animal models.
Effectiveness of a community‐based nutrition programme to improve child growth in rural Ethiopia: a cluster randomized trial

Yunhee Kang,Sungtae Kim,Sisay Sinamo,P. Christian

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/mcn.12349

Maternal and Child Nutrition

Abstract:Few trials have shown that promoting complementary feeding among young children is effective in improving child linear growth in resource-challenged settings. We designed a community-based participatory nutrition promotion (CPNP) programme adapting a Positive Deviance/Hearth approach that engaged mothers in 2-week nutrition sessions using the principles of 'learning by doing' around child feeding. We aimed to test the effectiveness of the CPNP for improving child growth in rural Ethiopia. A cluster randomized trial was implemented by adding the CPNP to the existing government nutrition programmes (six clusters) vs. government programmes only (six clusters). A total of 1790 children aged 6 to 12 months (876 in the intervention and 914 in the control areas) were enrolled and assessed on anthropometry every 3 months for a year. Multi-level mixed-effect regression analysis of longitudinal outcome data (n = 1475) examined the programme impact on growth, adjusting for clustering and enrollment characteristics. Compared with children 6 to 24 months of age in the control area, those in the intervention area had a greater increase in z scores for length-for-age [difference (diff): 0.021 z score/month, 95% CI: 0.008, 0.034] and weight-for-length (diff: 0.042 z score/month, 95% CI: 0.024, 0.059). At the end of the 12-month follow-up, children in the intervention area showed an 8.1% (P = 0.02) and 6.3% (P = 0.046) lower prevalence of stunting and underweight, respectively, after controlling for differences in the prevalence at enrollment, compared with the control group. A novel CPNP programme was effective in improving child growth and reducing undernutrition in this setting. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Improving Safety Of Cancer Immunotherapy Via Delivery Technology

Doudou Hu,Wei Zhang,Jianbin Tang,Zhuxian Zhou,Xiangrui Liu,Youqing Shen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2020.120407

IF: 14

2021-01-01

Biomaterials

Abstract:Breakthroughs in molecular mechanisms underlying immune-suppressive tumor microenvironment and paradigm shifts in the cancer-immunity response cycle have profoundly changed the landscape of cancer immunotherapy. However, one of the challenges is to mitigate the serious side effects caused by systemic autoimmunity and autoinflammatory responses following immunotherapy. Thus, restraining the activation of the immune system in healthy tissues is highly desirable to address this problem. Bioengineering and delivery technologies provide a solution to the issue. In this Review, we first introduce immune-related adverse effects of main immunotherapies and the underlying mechanisms, summarize strategies of designingde bioengineering and delivery systems to reduce their immunotoxicities, and highlight the importance of the development of immunotoxicity-related animal models.
Pulmonary Toxicity Associated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors-Based Therapy: Current Perspectives and Future Directions

Baohui Hong,Jiabing Zheng,Rong Chen,Caiyun Zheng,Bin Du,Ruping Ni,Jing Yang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-023-01357-6

2023-11-08

Drug Safety

Abstract:Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shown efficacy in tumor therapy. However, the risk of pulmonary toxicity from ICI-based treatment regimens remains unknown. We searched multiple databases and clinical trial websites from January 2015 to December 2021 and summarized the pulmonary toxicity profile and risk ranking of ICI-based treatments in cancer patients. We included a Phase III randomized clinical trial (RCT) in which the treatment group received at least one ICI and experienced pulmonary adverse events (PAEs). Our study, which included 104 RCTs, found the highest incidence of grades 1–2 and 3–5 treatment-associated PAEs (Tr-PAEs) in programmed death 1 (PD-1)+ chemotherapy and PD-1+ cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4), respectively. The first incidence rates of grades 1–2 and 3–5 immune-mediated PAEs (Im-PAEs) were PD1+CTLA-4+ chemotherapy and PD-L1 + CTLA4, respectively. Cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 + chemotherapy regimen and PD-L1+ targeted therapy drug (TTD)+ chemotherapy regimen had the highest risk of developing grades 1–2 and 3–5 Tr-PAEs. Programmed death-L1+ CTLA-4 has a higher risk of grade 3–5 Tr-PAEs than PD-L1. The risk of grade 1–2 pulmonary toxicity was significantly different in the high-dose and low-dose groups of nivolumab and atezolizumab. Nivolumab and atezolizumab induced dose-dependent grade 1–2 pulmonary toxicity. Among single-agent regimens, PD-1 showed the greatest grade 1–2 pulmonary toxicity. Programmed death-L1+ TTD+ chemotherapy showed the greatest grade 3–5 pulmonary toxicity in combination therapy. PD-L1+ TTD+ chemotherapy was associated with a higher risk of grade 3–5 Tr-PAEs and a lower risk of Im-PAEs. We recommend a targeted approach to managing PAE.

pharmacology & pharmacy,public, environmental & occupational health,toxicology
Managing toxicities associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: consensus recommendations from the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) Toxicity Management Working Group

I. Puzanov,A. Diab,K. Abdallah,C. O. Bingham,C. Brogdon,R. Dadu,L. Hamad,S. Kim,M. E. Lacouture,N. R. LeBoeuf,D. Lenihan,C. Onofrei,V. Shannon,R. Sharma,A. W. Silk,D. Skondra,M. E. Suarez-Almazor,Y. Wang,K. Wiley,H. L. Kaufman,M. S. Ernstoff,on behalf of the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer Toxicity Management Working Group,

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40425-017-0300-z

IF: 12.469

2017-11-21

Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer

Abstract:Cancer immunotherapy has transformed the treatment of cancer. However, increasing use of immune-based therapies, including the widely used class of agents known as immune checkpoint inhibitors, has exposed a discrete group of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Many of these are driven by the same immunologic mechanisms responsible for the drugs’ therapeutic effects, namely blockade of inhibitory mechanisms that suppress the immune system and protect body tissues from an unconstrained acute or chronic immune response. Skin, gut, endocrine, lung and musculoskeletal irAEs are relatively common, whereas cardiovascular, hematologic, renal, neurologic and ophthalmologic irAEs occur much less frequently. The majority of irAEs are mild to moderate in severity; however, serious and occasionally life-threatening irAEs are reported in the literature, and treatment-related deaths occur in up to 2% of patients, varying by ICI. Immunotherapy-related irAEs typically have a delayed onset and prolonged duration compared to adverse events from chemotherapy, and effective management depends on early recognition and prompt intervention with immune suppression and/or immunomodulatory strategies. There is an urgent need for multidisciplinary guidance reflecting broad-based perspectives on how to recognize, report and manage organ-specific toxicities until evidence-based data are available to inform clinical decision-making. The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) established a multidisciplinary Toxicity Management Working Group, which met for a full-day workshop to develop recommendations to standardize management of irAEs. Here we present their consensus recommendations on managing toxicities associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

oncology,immunology
Inhibition of bronchospasm and ozone‐induced airway hyperresponsiveness in the guinea‐pig by CDP840, a novel phosphodiesterase type 4 inhibitor

M. Holbrook,N. Gozzard,Tina James,G. Higgs,B. Hughes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-5381.1996.tb15523.x

IF: 7.3

1996-07-01

British Journal of Pharmacology

Abstract:1 The activity of CDP840, a novel, potent and selective cyclic nucleotide phosphodiesterase type 4 (PDE 4) inhibitor, was evaluated in guinea‐pig models (in vitro and in vivo) of bronchospasm, ozone‐induced airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) and non‐cholinergic bronchoconstriction. Comparisons were made with (i) other PDE 4 inhibitors: CT1731 (S‐enantiomer of CDP840), rolipram, RP73401 and (ii) the clinically used agents salbutamol and theophylline. 2 CDP840 relaxed isolated trachea, under basal tone (EC50 4.5 ± 1.1 μm) being 17 fold less potent than rolipram (EC50 0.26 ± 0.13 μm) but attaining the same Emax (83 ± 6% of the response to 300 μm papaverine). 3 CDP840 relaxed tracheae pre‐contracted with carbachol (IC25 39 ± 9 μm) and histamine (IC25 4 ± 1 μm) producing monophasic curves. Stereoselectivity was not observed with CT1731 against either carbachol (IC25 33 ± 11 μm) or histamine (IC25 17 ± 10 μm). Aminophylline was 1.6 fold (carbachol) and 11 fold (histamine) less potent than CDP840. Rolipram and RP73401 produced tri‐phasic relaxation curves but were of similar potency (at the IC25 level) to CDP840 against carbachol (rolipram 18 ± 5 μm, RP73401 39 ± 1 μm) whereas against histamine they were approximately 20 fold more potent (rolipram 0.2 ± 0.1 μm, RP73401 0.2 ± 0.1 μm). In producing > 30% (carbachol) and > 60% (histamine) relaxation these inhibitors had similar potency and were poor compared to salbutamol. 4 Pre‐incubation with CDP840 (10 μm) did not antagonize histamine‐induced contraction of isolated trachea; however, it did cause a slight potentiation of the subsequent relaxation to salbutamol (IC50 23 ± 1 to 15 ± 2 nM) 5 Pretreatment (1 h) with either CDP840 (1 mg kg−1, i.p. or 3 mg kg−1, i.v.) or rolipram (1 mg kg−1, i.p.) did not bronchodilate or antagonize bronchospasm due to inhaled histamine in anaesthetized, ventilated guinea‐pigs. Salbutamol (1 mg kg−1, i.p.) did not bronchodilate but caused a parallel 7 fold rightward shift in the histamine dose‐response curve. 6 Stimulation of the vagus nerve in the presence of atropine resulted in a frequency‐related bronchoconstriction. CDP840 and rolipram (i.v.) inhibited the response being ∼ equipotent (EC50 ∼10 μg kg−1). Neither drug inhibited bronchospasm to inhaled substance P. 7 CDP840 (1–10 μg kg−1 i.p.) dose relatedly inhibited ozone‐induced bronchoconstriction. CT1731 (1 mg kg−1), rolipram (1 mg kg−1), RP73401 (10 μg kg−1) and aminophylline (10 mg kg−1) had no effect. Ozone‐induced AHR to inhaled histamine was inhibited by CDP840 in a dose‐related manner, 10 μg kg−1 abolishing the AHR. This effect was stereoselective as CT1731 was ∼30 fold less potent than CDP840. Rolipram was ∼100 fold less potent and RP73401 and aminophylline had no effect. CDP840 was orally active being ∼10 fold less potent compared to i.p. administration. 8 CDP840 is a poor spasmolytic and anti‐spasmogenic agent in response to exogenous mediators; however, it potently inhibits vagally mediated non‐cholinergic bronchoconstriction and ozone‐induced AHR to histamine. It is possible that regulation of cyclic AMP by PDE 4 contributes to neuronal sensitivity in the airways. Furthermore, CDP840 may suppress AHR without being an overt bronchodilator. Such a profile of activity may have therapeutic benefit in airways diseases such as asthma.
Interlaboratory Study of the Primary Antibody Response to Sheep Red Blood Cells in Outbred Rodents Following Exposure to Cyclophosphamide or Dexamethasone

S. Loveless,G. Ladics,Charlene Smith,M. Holsapple,M. Woolhiser,K. White,D. Musgrove,R. Smialowicz,W. Williams

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15476910701385687

2007-01-01

Journal of Immunotoxicology

Abstract:EPA guidelines provide a choice in evaluating humoral immune system function in rats and mice immunized with sheep red blood cells (sRBC): an antibody-forming cell (AFC) assay or a sRBC-specific serum IgM enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Four different laboratories used both methods to detect suppression of the antibody response by cyclophosphamide (CP) or dexamethasone (DEX). Attempts were made to minimize interlaboratory variability through the use of common reagents and vendors; each laboratory used the same source for rodents, immunosuppressive agents, and one sheep for sRBCs, and determined optimal sRBC concentration for immunization and peak day of antibody response in female CD rats and CD1 mice. The CP dose at which statistical significance was first observed in each species was quite similar within each lab using either assay. For DEX, the AFC assay detected significant and greater suppression at lower concentrations compared to the ELISA in both rats and mice. All labs detected DEX suppression using an AFC assay, whereas only one lab detected significant suppression in both species using an ELISA. For both compounds the magnitude of suppression was greater using the AFC assay, and resulted in ID50 values which were lower in the AFC assay when compared to the ELISA. In addition, cross-species comparisons of ID50 values suggested rats were more sensitive than mice. These initial experiments with two chemicals indicated that the AFC assay is consistently better at identifying suppression of a T-dependent antibody response across laboratories following xenobiotic exposures in outbred rats and mice. Additional compounds will need to be evaluated before concluding that one method is superior or more sensitive to the other in detecting suppression of the antibody response.
Molecular mechanism of immunosuppressive agents.

G. Baumann

IF: 1.014

1992-08-01

Transplantation Proceedings

Abstract:
Toxicity and management in CAR T-cell therapy

Challice L Bonifant,Hollie J Jackson,Renier J Brentjens,Kevin J Curran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/mto.2016.11

2016-01-01

Abstract:T cells can be genetically modified to target tumors through the expression of a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR). Most notably, CAR T cells have demonstrated clinical efficacy in hematologic malignancies with more modest responses when targeting solid tumors. However, CAR T cells also have the capacity to elicit expected and unexpected toxicities including: cytokine release syndrome, neurologic toxicity, "on target/off tumor" recognition, and anaphylaxis. Theoretical toxicities including clonal expansion secondary to insertional oncogenesis, graft versus host disease, and off-target antigen recognition have not been clinically evident. Abrogating toxicity has become a critical step in the successful application of this emerging technology. To this end, we review the reported and theoretical toxicities of CAR T cells and their management.

oncology,medicine, research & experimental
Potentially fatal complications of new systemic anticancer therapies: pearls and pitfalls in their initial management

Milena Blaz Kovac,Bostjan Seruga

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/raon-2024-0027

2024-04-14

Radiology and Oncology

Abstract:Abstract Background Various types of immunotherapy (i.e. immune checkpoint inhibitors [ICIs], chimeric antigen receptor [CAR] T-cells and bispecific T-cell engagers [BiTEs]) and antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) have been used increasingly to treat solid cancers, lymphomas and leukaemias. Patients with serious complications of these therapies can be presented to physicians of different specialties. In this narrative review we discuss potentially fatal complications of new systemic anticancer therapies and some practical considerations for their diagnosis and initial treatment. Results Clinical presentation of toxicities of new anticancer therapies may be unpredictable and nonspecific. They can mimic other more common medical conditions such as infection or stroke. If not recognized and properly treated these toxicities can progress rapidly into life-threatening conditions. ICIs can cause immune-related inflammatory disorders of various organ systems (e.g. pneumonitis or colitis), and a cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) may develop after treatment with CAR T-cells or BiTEs. The cornerstones of management of these hyper-inflammatory disorders are supportive care and systemic immunosuppressive therapy. The latter should start as soon as symptoms are mild-moderate. Similarly, some severe toxicities of ADCs also require immunosuppressive therapy. A multidisciplinary team including an oncologist/haematologist and a corresponding organ-site specialist (e.g. gastroenterologist in the case of colitis) should be involved in the diagnosis and treatment of these toxicities. Conclusions Health professionals should be aware of potential serious complications of new systemic anticancer therapies. Early diagnosis and treatment with adequate supportive care and immunosuppressive therapy are crucial for the optimal outcome of patients with these complications.

oncology,radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging
What is the risk of hepatotoxicity induced by immune-checkpoint inhibitors and how can we avoid it?

Elisa Tassinari,Matteo Rosellini,Andrea Marchetti,Veronica Mollica,Francesco Massari

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17425255.2024.2314059

2024-02-06

Expert Opinion on Drug Metabolism & Toxicology

Abstract:KEYWORDS: Immunotherapy has recently revolutionized the treatment scenario of several solid malignancies. In fact, the use of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is constantly spreading across different histologies, disease settings, and lines of therapy, with plenty of pivotal clinical trials assessing their undiscussed role in everyday clinical practice [ Citation 1 ]. Furthermore, ICIs are usually well tolerated, with a low impact on a patient's quality of life (QoL), if compared to non-ICIs treatment regimens [ Citation 2 ]. Besides impressive clinical efficacy and acceptable manageability, a unique and probably underestimated spectrum of adverse reactions has been reported, with toxicities that may sometimes lead to treatment withdrawal and, uncommonly, to fulminant and fatal events. Indeed, the break of immune balance induced by ICIs and the subsequent reduction of T-cells tolerance leads to a novel class of side effects, known as immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which may involve all organs and systems, resulting in a wide spectrum of possible clinical presentations [ Citation 3 ]. irAEs' incidence seems to be underreported and affected by, among others, compound used (for instance, anti-CTLA-4 showed a less tolerable safety profile than anti-PD-1/PD-L1), combination strategies (such as dual ICIs or concomitant use of chemotherapy or tyrosine-kinase inhibitors – TKIs), tumor type, and individual risk factors (i.e. age, gender, comorbidity, diet, and microbiota) [ Citation 3 ]. They generally occur as grade 1 or 2 (according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events – CTCAE), with approximately 10–20% of patients experiencing grade 3 or 4 [ Citation 3 ]. The mainstay of irAEs' management – that lays its roots on early identification – is based on temporary or permanent discontinuation, corticosteroids administration, and, in special cases, immunomodulatory agents [ Citation 4 ].

pharmacology & pharmacy,biochemistry & molecular biology,toxicology

Methods and Applications of Artificial Intelligence

A review of cancer immunotherapy toxicity

FACING THE EROSION PROBLEM.

Toxicity in the era of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy

Toxicities of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: Itis-Ending Adverse Reactions and More

The toxicity of cell therapy: Mechanism, manifestations, and challenges

Adverse Events of Oncologic Immunotherapy and Their Management

Immune-Related Adverse Events Induced by Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and CAR-T Cell Therapy: A Comprehensive Imaging-Based Review

Toxicities of Immunotherapy for Small Cell Lung Cancer

Given the ENHANCE trial results, ezetimibe is still unproven.

Improving Safety of Cancer Immunotherapy Via Delivery Technology.

Effectiveness of a community‐based nutrition programme to improve child growth in rural Ethiopia: a cluster randomized trial

Improving Safety Of Cancer Immunotherapy Via Delivery Technology

Pulmonary Toxicity Associated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors-Based Therapy: Current Perspectives and Future Directions

Managing toxicities associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: consensus recommendations from the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) Toxicity Management Working Group

Inhibition of bronchospasm and ozone‐induced airway hyperresponsiveness in the guinea‐pig by CDP840, a novel phosphodiesterase type 4 inhibitor

Interlaboratory Study of the Primary Antibody Response to Sheep Red Blood Cells in Outbred Rodents Following Exposure to Cyclophosphamide or Dexamethasone

Molecular mechanism of immunosuppressive agents.

Toxicity and management in CAR T-cell therapy

Potentially fatal complications of new systemic anticancer therapies: pearls and pitfalls in their initial management

What is the risk of hepatotoxicity induced by immune-checkpoint inhibitors and how can we avoid it?