Search

Background: Understanding the risk relationship between statin use and immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in patients undergoing immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) therapy is crucial for optimizing oncological management., Objective: This study aimed to investigate whether the use of statins increases the risk of irAEs in patients receiving ICI therapy., Methods: This study primarily utilized data from FAERS database. Multivariable logistic regression was the principal method of analysis, and the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure was employed to adjust for multiple hypothesis testing., Results: In a group of 145,214 patients undergoing ICI therapy, 9,339 reported using statin medications. Multivariable analysis indicated an increased risk of irAEs among statin users (OR 1.199, 95% CI: 1.141-1.261; FDR p < 0.001) in comparison to those not using statins. Notably, increased risks were observed particularly in patients diagnosed with lung, pancreatic, and renal cancers. The link between statin usage and increased irAEs risk remained consistent across various ICIs treatments., Conclusions: Statin medication usage is linked to an elevated probability of experiencing irAEs in patients enrolled in ICI therapy. In cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors, careful consideration of statin use is essential to avoid potentially increased irAEs risk. These findings provide critical guidance for clinicians in developing treatment strategies that balance therapeutic efficacy and safety in oncological management., Competing Interests: Author RH was employed by Hangzhou Linan Guorui Health Industry Investment Co., Ltd. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Yang, Huang, Zhang, Liu, Liu, He and Peng.)

Introduction: The development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represents one of the most significant advancements in cancer treatment over the past decade. Nivolumab, a widely used ICI, has been incorporated into the therapeutic regimens for various cancers. As with any drug, this drug also has side effects, including class-specific immune-related adverse effects (irAEs). Although irAEs are not rare, their diagnosis can be challenging. This study examines the emergency department (ED) visits of patients undergoing nivolumab therapy, focusing on diagnostic challenges, evaluating the management, and outcomes of irAEs in the ED setting., Material and Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on adult patients who received nivolumab therapy for any cancer between April 1, 2018, and March 31, 2023, at a large, urban tertiary care center. In this study, we evaluated the ED visits of patients receiving nivolumab. In addition to previous studies, we evaluated irAEs in detail (percentage, recognizability, risk factors, reasons for late recognition, and outcome). Patient data were collected from electronic medical records and patient's medical files. The anamnesis, laboratory, and imaging results, ED management, and consultation notes were examined separately for each ED visit. Logistic regression models were employed to identify significant univariable predictors of ED visits and irAEs., Results: A total of 199 patients were included in the study, all of whom had metastatic cancer. Of these, 154 patients (77.4%) received nivolumab therapy for non-small cell lung cancer. Most patients (71.9%, n = 143) had at least one additional comorbidity. One hundred and eleven patients (55.8%) presented to the ED. Hypertension (OR: 2.425, 95% CI: 1.226-4.795, p = 0.011) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR: 2.489, 95% CI: 1.133-5.468, p = 0.023) were identified as risk factors for ED visits. A total of 21 irAEs were diagnosed (14 in ED, 6 in the oncology clinic, and 1 in the inpatient ward). Univariate analysis found no significant association between irAE diagnosis and any specific factors., Conclusion: A significant proportion of the patients treated with nivolumab for advanced cancer present to ED for ICI-related adverse events, although most cases were not attributable to irAEs. Due to the vague symptomatology of irAEs, their recognition and diagnosis in the ED can be challenging. Close collaboration between ED physicians and oncologists is paramount to the management of patients with cancer in the ED., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized cancer treatment by targeting the cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 and programmed death-1/ligand-1. Although immune checkpoint inhibitors show promising therapeutic efficacy, they often cause immune-related adverse events. Immune-related adverse events differ from the side effects of conventional chemotherapy and require vigilant monitoring. These events predominantly affect organs, such as the colon, liver, lungs, pituitary gland, thyroid and skin, with rare cases affecting the heart, nervous system and other tissues. As immune-related adverse events result from immune activation, indicating the reinvigoration of exhausted immune cells that attack both tumors and normal tissues, it is theoretically possible that immune-related adverse events may signal a better response to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Recent retrospective studies have explored the link between immune-related adverse event development and clinical efficacy; however, the predictive value of immune-related adverse events in the immune checkpoint inhibitor response remains unclear. Additionally, studies have focused on immune-related adverse events, timing of onset and immunosuppressive treatments. This review focuses on pivotal studies of the association between immune-related adverse events and outcomes in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permission@oup.com.)

Purpose: This study aims to investigate the underexplored prevalence of placebo-reported immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) trials., Methods: We searched public databases for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) involving ICI versus placebo treatments in patients with malignancies. Study characteristics and irAEs occurrences were extracted for meta-analyses using a random-effects model., Main Outcomes: Proportions of patients reported to experience any grade and grade 3 to 5 placebo irAEs; the risk ratio (RR) of reporting 'false' irAEs in the experiment arm (defined as 'false-irAE ratio', calculated by dividing the proportion of patients documented with irAEs in the placebo arm by that in the experimental arm)., Results: 47 RCTs with 30,119 patients were analyzed. The pooled proportion of patients reported to experience any grade and grade 3 to 5 irAEs among placebo participants was 22.85 % (17.33 %-29.50 %) and 3.40 % (2.35 %-4.63 %), respectively. The pooled proportion of placebo-treated patients who experienced serious irAEs was 0.67 % (0.03 %-1.91 %). Treatment discontinuation and death due to placebo irAEs occurred in 0.69 % (<0.01 %-1.30 %) and 0.12 % (<0.01 %-0.40 %) of patients, respectively. The false-irAE ratio for any grade and grade 3 to 5 irAEs were 0.49 and 0.28. The false-irAE ratio was significantly higher in RCTs with control arms of placebo plus non-immunotherapy than in those with placebo alone (any grade: 0.57 vs. 0.32, P < 0.001; grade 3 to 5: 0.36 vs. 0.12, P = 0.009)., Conclusion: Our analyses of placebo-treated participants in ICI RCTs document the common occurrence of placebo irAEs. These findings are important for interpreting irAE profiles, avoiding inappropriate therapeutic interventions., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) as anticancer therapy across a variety of malignancies has led to durable efficacy in a subset of patients. However, associated side effects denoted immune-related adverse events (irAEs) have emerged and can result in substantial morbidity and mortality. Particularly early in the experience of using these agents, a lack of standardized education regarding irAEs among patients and clinical providers may have contributed to poor outcomes. Optimal management of these emerging toxicities depends on a coordinated institutional approach. We hypothesized that centralized educational programs and electronic health record (EHR)-based interventions, targeted both toward ICI-treated patients as well as patient-interfacing providers, would improve patient outcomes., Methods: We created a multidisciplinary team of clinicians and associated staff to direct a coordinated approach to the education and management of patients receiving ICIs across our institution. A 3-tiered approach was designed: patient-centered, internally centered, and externally centered. Multimedia educational products were produced for patients to improve knowledge and awareness of ICIs and associated irAEs. An EHR-based banner was deployed to improve identification of patients receiving ICIs across disciplines. Tailored educational seminars were provided to clinicians who interact with ICI-treated patients at all levels. Educational seminars were also offered to local physicians and institutions. We assessed patient uptake of educational products and surrogate patient outcomes to measure the potential impact of our interventions., Results: Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC)-specific ICI identification cards were created and distributed to patients. By the end of the investigational period, 98.6% of ICI-treated patients reported receiving a card. An ICI-focused on-line portal was created accessible only to ICI-treated patients, with 9.4% of these patients accessing the portal in the first 6 months without marketing promotion. Deidentified surrogate clinical endpoints of corticosteroid use, direct referral unit (DRU) visits, and hospital admissions all improved during the study period., Conclusions: Institutionally directed educational initiatives are feasible at a free-standing academic cancer center and may lead to improved outcomes in patients developing irAEs from ICIs. More granular patient-specific data and studies at other types of institutions are necessary to determine the applicability of similar approaches on a broader scale., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) often cause immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The spectrum of irAEs and their managements has been partially clarified, however the knowledge on time-course of irAEs is not well understood., Methods: A retrospective study based on the medical record was performed. The study subjects were consisting of patients with various types of solid tumors for whom ICIs (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, durvalumab, atezolizumab, nivolumab plus ipilimumab) were used between April 2016 and October 2021. We focused on irAEs developed more than 1-year after commencement ICIs (delayed irAE group) and compared with irAEs developed within 1-year (non-delayed irAE group) in terms of types and severity of irAEs., Results: A total of 336 patients were enrolled in the study. Eighty-eight patients (26.2%) developed irAEs and 248 did not. Most of the patients developing irAEs were treated using PD-L1/PD-1 inhibitors. Eighty-one patients (24.1%) in non-delayed irAE group and 7 patients (2.1%) in delayed irAE group developed irAEs. The median onset of irAEs in the delayed irAE group was 18.6 months (range: 13.5-24.3). The types of irAEs observed in delayed irAE group were dermatitis (2 cases), pneumonitis (2 cases), nephritis (1 case), arthritis (1 case), and gastritis (1 case). The severity of irAEs was almost mild (≤G2), but one patient (.3%) developed G3 nephritis., Conclusion: PD-L1/PD-1 inhibitors frequently caused various irAEs but their severities were mostly tolerable. Few patients developed delayed irAE with mild toxities., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have transformed cancer treatment, improving outcomes for many patients. However, toxicities termed immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are limitations of these revolutionary treatments. These irAEs may resolve with treatment or ICI cessation (acute) or persist many months beyond therapy cessation (chronic). Acute irAEs were the first to be recognized and are thus more well studied. However, chronic irAEs have been highlighted in recent years and are becoming a topic of more intensive investigation. These chronic irAEs have been noted to affect many different organ systems, including endocrine, rheumatologic, gastrointestinal, dermatologic, neurologic, and cardiovascular systems. In this review, we discuss current knowledge surrounding the frequency, time course, and risk factors associated with chronic irAEs affecting various organ systems, treatment approaches, and future directions., Competing Interests: Competing interests: DBJ has served on advisory boards or as a consultant for BMS, Mallinckrodt, Merck, Mosaic ImmunoEngineering, Novartis, Oncosec, Pfizer, Targovax, and Teiko, and has received research funding from BMS and Incyte., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Fatigue is an immune-related adverse event (irAE) associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) used for cancer treatment. Chinese herbal medicines (Ho-zai) are used to treat cancer-related fatigue. However, no interactions between ICIs and Ho-zai have been reported. Herein, we investigated the risk of irAEs associated with the concomitant use of ICIs and Ho-zai., Methods: We extracted data of patients who used ICI and Ho-zai from the Japanese Adverse Event Reporting Database. The proportional reporting ratio (PRR) was calculated for patients using ICI, Ho-zai, or both. We focused on cases of interstitial lung disease (ILD) and colitis, which were among the most severe cases of irAEs among these patients. The shrinkage method used by the World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Center was used to detect the interactions., Results: Of the 799,670 patients in the database, 77,219, 2060, and 92 were using ICIs, Ho-zai, and combination treatment, respectively. The ILD and colitis groups included 39,388 and 17,522 patients, respectively. ILD signals were detected for both ICIs and Ho-zai. There were 24 cases of patients treated with concomitant ICIs and Ho-zai who developed ILD. For all combinations of all ICIs and all Ho-zai, Ω025 was negative, which suggested no ILD-related interactions. Colitis signals were detected for ICIs except for atezolizumab, avelumab, and durvalumab. There were eight patients treated with concomitant ICI and Ho-zai who developed colitis. For all combinations of all ICIs and all Ho-zai, Ω025 was negative, which suggested no colitis-related interactions., Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate interactions between ICIs and Ho-zai. Signals were detected for ILD in both ICI and Ho-zai groups, and colitis in the ICI group. However, the combined use of these treatments did not increase the risk of irAEs.

Background: Immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) can induce immune-related adverse events (irAEs) whose management is based on expert opinion and may require the prescription of steroids and/or immunosuppressants (ISs). Recent data suggest that these treatments can reduce the effectiveness of ICBs., Objective: To investigate the relationship between the use of steroids and/or ISs and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) among ICB-treated patients with an irAE., Methods: We prospectively collected data from the medical records of patients with solid tumors or lymphoma in the French REISAMIC cohort and who had been treated with ICBs between June 2014 and June 2020., Results: 184 ICB-treated patients experienced at least one Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade ≥ 2 irAE. 107 (58.2%) were treated with steroids alone, 20 (10.9%) with steroids plus IS, 57 (31.0%) not received steroids or IS. The median OS was significantly shorter for patients treated with steroids alone (25.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 22.3-32.4] than for patients treated without steroids or IS (63 months [95%CI: 40.4-NA]) and those receiving an IS with steroids (53.4 months [95%CI: 47.3-NA]) (p < 0.001). The median PFS was significantly shorter for patients treated with steroids alone (17.0 months [95%CI: 11.7-22.9]) than for patients treated without steroids or IS (33.9 months [95%CI: 18.0-NA]) and those receiving an IS with steroids (41.1 months [95%CI: 26.2-NA]) (p = 0.006). There were no significant intergroup differences in the hospital admission and infection rates., Conclusion: In a prospective cohort of ICB-treated patients, the use of IS was not associated with worse OS or PFS, contrasting with the use of steroids for the management of irAEs., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Immuno-oncology (IO) drugs are essential for treating various cancer types; however, safety concerns persist in older patients. Although the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) is similar among age groups, higher rates of hospitalization or discontinuation of IO therapy have been reported in older patients. Limited research exists on IO drug safety and risk factors in older adults. Our investigation aimed to assess the incidence of irAEs and identify the potential risk factors associated with their development., Methods: This retrospective analysis reviewed the clinical data extracted from the medical records of patients aged > 80 years who underwent IO treatment at our institution. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess the incidence of irAEs., Results: Our study included 181 patients (median age: 82 years, range: 80-94), mostly men (73%), with a performance status of 0-1 in 87% of the cases; 64% received IO monotherapy. irAEs occurred in 35% of patients, contributing to IO therapy discontinuation in 19%. Our analysis highlighted increased body mass index, eosinophil counts, and albumin levels in patients with irAEs. Eosinophil count emerged as a significant risk factor for any grade irAEs, particularly Grade 3 or higher, with a cutoff of 118 (/μL). The group with eosinophil counts > 118 had a higher frequency of irAEs, and Grade 3 or higher events than the group with counts ≤ 118., Conclusion: IO therapy is a safe treatment option for patients > 80 years old. Furthermore, patients with elevated eosinophil counts at treatment initiation should be cautiously managed., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) induce adverse events (irAEs) that do not respond to steroids, i.e. steroid-refractory (sr) irAEs, and irAEs in which steroids cannot be tapered, i.e. steroid-dependent (sd) irAEs, in about 10% of cases. An evidence-based analysis of the effectiveness of second-line immunosuppressive agents with regard to irAE and tumor control is lacking., Methods: The international web-based Side Effect Registry Immuno-Oncology (SERIO; http://serio-registry.org) is a collaborative initiative with the Paul-Ehrlich-Institute to document rare, severe, complex or therapy-refractory immunotherapy-induced side effects. The registry was queried on August 1, 2023 for cases of irAEs which were treated with second-line therapies., Results: From a total of 1330 cases, 217 patients (16.3%) received 249 second-line therapies. A total of 19 different second-line therapies were employed, including TNF-alpha antagonists (46.5%), intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG; 19.1%), mycophenolate mofetil (15.9%), and methotrexate (3.6%). Therapy choices were determined by the type of irAE. The time to onset of sr-/sd-irAEs after ICI initiation did not consistently differ from steroid-responsive irAEs. While 74.3% of sr-/sd-irAEs resolved and 13.1% had improved, 4.3% persisted, 3.9% resulted in permanent sequelae, and 4.3% in death with ongoing symptoms. Infliximab exhibited potential for earlier symptom improvement compared to mycophenolate mofetil or IVIG. Tumor response in patients with second-line treated sd-/sr-irAE was similar to patients with irAEs treated with steroids only., Conclusion: Several second-line therapies are effective against sr-/sd-irAEs, the second-line therapies show no clear negative impact on tumor response, and infliximab shows potential for faster improvement of symptoms. However, prospective comparative data are needed., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have significantly improved outcomes in various cancers. ICI treatment is associated with the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) which can affect any organ. Data on irAEs occurrence in relation to sex- differentiation and their association with gender-specific factors are limited., Aims: The primary objective of the G-DEFINER study is to compare the irAEs incidence in female and male patients who undergo ICI treatment. Secondary objectives are: to compare the irAEs incidence in pre- and postmenopausal female patients; to compare the irAEs incidence in female and male patients according to different clinical and gender-related factors (lifestyle, psychosocial, and behavioral factors). Exploratory objectives of the study are to compare and contrast hormonal, gene-expression, SNPs, cytokines, and gut microbiota profiles in relation to irAEs incidence in female and male patients., Methods and Results: The patients are recruited from Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Italy, St Vincent's University Hospital, Ireland, Oslo University Hospital, Norway, and Karolinska Insitutet/Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden. The inclusion of patients was delayed due to the Covid pandemic, leading to a total of 250 patients recruited versus a planned number of 400 patients. Clinical and translational data will be analyzed., Interpretation: The expected outcomes are to improve the management of cancer patients treated with ICIs, leading to more personalized clinical approaches that consider potential toxicity profiles. The real world nature of the trial makes it highly applicable for timely irAEs diagnosis.

With immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) becoming the mainstay of treatment for many cancers, managing their immune-related adverse events (irAEs) has become an important part of oncological care. This Review covers the clinical presentation of irAEs and crucial aspects of reversibility, fatality and long-term sequelae, with special attention to irAEs in specific patient populations, such as those with autoimmune diseases. In addition, the genetic basis of irAEs, along with cellular and humoral responses to ICI therapy, are discussed. Detrimental effects of empirically used high-dose steroids and second-line immunosuppression, including impaired ICI effectiveness, call for more tailored irAE-treatment strategies. We discuss open therapeutic challenges and propose potential avenues to accelerate personalized management strategies and optimize outcomes., (© 2024. Springer Nature America, Inc.)

Immunotherapy has revolutionized the cancer treatment landscape by opening up novel avenues for intervention. As the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has exponentially increased, so have immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The mechanism of irAEs may involve the direct damage caused by monoclonal antibodies and a sequence of immune responses triggered by T cell activation. Common side effects include dermatologic toxicity, endocrine toxicity, gastrointestinal toxicity, and hepatic toxicity. While relatively rare, neurotoxicity, cardiotoxicity, and pulmonary toxicity can be fatal. These toxicities pose a clinical dilemma regarding treatment discontinuation since they can result in severe complications and necessitate frequent hospitalization. Vigilant monitoring of irAEs is vital in clinical practice, and the principal therapeutic strategy entails the administration of oral or intravenous glucocorticoids (GSCs). It may be necessary to temporarily or permanently discontinue the use of ICIs in severe cases. Given that irAEs can impact multiple organs and require diverse treatment approaches, the involvement of a multidisciplinary team of experts is imperative. This review aims to comprehensively examine the pathogenesis, clinical manifestations, incidence, and treatment options for various irAEs., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Yan, Yu, Zhang, Chen, Fu, Tang and Liao.)

Background: Major demographical changes in Germany commenced in the 1960s. Ongoing humanitarian crises in the Ukraine with subsequent immigration will have also long-range effects on national provision of cancer treatment. Ensuring the best possible outcomes for each cancer patient undergoing radiotherapy requires the prediction and prevention of unfavorable side effects. Given that recent research has primarily focused on clinical outcome indicators solely, less is known regarding sociodemographic predictors of therapeutic outcomes, such as patient nationality. Here, we investigated whether the severity of early side effects after radiotherapy are associated with patient nationality and other sociodemographic and clinical characteristics., Methods: Out of 9187 patients treated at a German university medical center between 2017 and 2021, 178 German and 178 non-German patients were selected for matched-pair analysis based on diagnostic and demographic criteria. For all 356 patients, data on side effects from follow-up care after radiotherapy were collected., Results: Non-German patients were more likely to have severe side effects than German patients. Side effect severity was also associated with tumor entity, concomitant therapy, body mass index, and age., Conclusion: Foreign cancer patients are at higher risk of experiencing severe side effects of radiotherapy, suggesting a need to develop and implement targeted preventive measures for these patients. Further research investigating factors predicting the occurrence of radiotherapy side effects, including other sociodemographic characteristics, is needed to better personalize therapy regimens for cancer., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Cancer treatment is one of the most challenging topics in medical sciences. Different methods such as chemotherapy, tumor surgery, and immune checkpoint inhibitors therapy (ICIs) are potential approaches to treating cancer and killing tumor cells, but clinical studies have shown that they have been successful for a limited group of patients. Using viruses as a treatment can be considered as an effective treatment in the field of medicine. This is considered as a potential treatment, especially in comparison to chemotherapy, which has severe side effects related to the immune system. Most oncolytic viruses (OVs) have the potential to multiply in cancer cells, which are more than normal cells in malignant tissue and can induce immune responses. Therefore, tons of efforts and research have been started on the utilization of OVs as a treatment for cancer and have shown promising in treating cancers with less side effects. In this article, we have gathered studies about oncolytic viruses and their effectiveness in cancer treatment.Please confirm if the author names are presented accurately and in the correct sequence (given name, middle name/initial, family name). Author 1 Given name: [Omid Salahi] Last name [Ardekani], Author 2 Given name: [Mohammad Mehdi] Last name [Fazeli], Author 3 Given name: [Nillofar Asadi] Last name [Jemezghani]. Also, kindly confirm the details in the metadata are correct.Confirmed., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

PD-1 inhibitors, as one of commonly used immune checkpoint inhibitors, enable T-cell activation and prevent immune escape by blocking the PD-1/PD-L1 signaling pathway. They have transformed the treatment landscape for cancer in recent years, due to the advantages of significantly prolonging patients' survival and improving their life quality. However, the ensuing unpredictable immune-related adverse effects (irAEs) plague clinicians, such as colitis and even potentially fatal events like intestinal perforation and obstruction. Therefore, understanding the clinical manifestations and grading criteria, underlying mechanisms, available diverse therapies, accessible biomarkers, and basis for risk stratification is of great importance for the management. Current evidence suggests that irAEs may be a marker of clinical benefit to immunotherapy in patients, so whether to discontinue PD-1 inhibitors after the onset of irAEs and rechallenge after remission of irAEs requires further evaluation of potential risk-reward ratios as well as more data from large-scale prospective studies to fully validate. At the end, the rare gastrointestinal toxicity events caused by PD-1 inhibitors are also sorted out. This review provides a summary of available data on the gastrointestinal toxicity profile caused by PD-1 inhibitors, with the aim of raising clinicians' awareness in daily practice, so that patients can safely benefit from therapy., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Cheng, Ling, Li, Chen, Xu, Li and Zhu.)

During the past decade, there has been a revolution in cancer therapeutics by the emergence of antibody-based immunotherapies that modulate immune responses against tumors. These therapies have offered treatment options to patients who are no longer responding to classic anti-cancer therapies. By blocking inhibitory signals mediated by surface receptors that are naturally upregulated during activation of antigen-presenting cells (APC) and T cells, predominantly PD-1 and its ligand PD-L1, as well as CTLA-4, such blocking agents have revolutionized cancer treatment. However, breaking these inhibitory signals cannot be selectively targeted to the tumor microenvironment (TME). Since the physiologic role of these inhibitory receptors, known as immune checkpoints (IC) is to maintain peripheral tolerance by preventing the activation of autoreactive immune cells, IC inhibitors (ICI) induce multiple types of immune-related adverse effects (irAEs). These irAEs, together with the natural properties of ICs as gatekeepers of self-tolerance, have precluded the use of ICI in patients with pre-existing autoimmune diseases (ADs). However, currently accumulating data indicates that ICI might be safely administered to such patients. In this review, we discuss mechanisms of well established and newly recognized irAEs and evolving knowledge from the application of ICI therapies in patients with cancer and pre-existing ADs., Competing Interests: VB has patents on the PD-1 pathway licensed by Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Merck, EMD-Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Novartis and Dako. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Ibis, Aliazis, Cao, Yenyuwadee and Boussiotis.)

There have been significant advances in the treatment of cancer in the past decade. However, patients continue to suffer from significant side effects of antineoplastic agents that greatly affect their quality of life (QOL), including chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN), and chemotherapy-induced alopecia (CIA). This review aims to provide an updated overview of emerging strategies for the management and prevention of these immediate and long-lasting side effects. The use of integrative medicine including cannabis continues to evolve in the realm of CINV and cancer-related anorexia. Although no pharmaceutical agent has been approved for the prevention of CIPN, cryotherapy, compression therapy and, more recently, cryocompression therapy have shown benefit in small trials, but there are concerns with tolerability especially related to cryotherapy. More data are necessary to determine an effective and tolerable option to prevent CIPN in large, randomized studies. Scalp cooling (SC), which has a similar mechanism to cryotherapy and compression therapy for CIPN prevention, has proven to be an effective and tolerable approach in randomized studies and has significantly limited CIA, an entity that definitively affects the QOL of patients living with cancer. Taken together, cannabis, cryotherapy, compression and cryocompression therapy, and SC all strive to improve the QOL of patients living with cancer by minimizing the side effects of chemotherapeutic agents.

Talazoparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of advanced breast and prostate cancers in Western populations. This open-label, phase 1 study investigated the pharmacokinetics, safety, and antitumor activity of talazoparib monotherapy in Chinese patients with advanced solid tumors. Molecularly unselected patients (≥18 years) with advanced solid tumors resistant to standard therapy received talazoparib (oral, 1 mg once daily). Primary endpoint was characterization of single-dose and steady-state pharmacokinetics. Secondary endpoints evaluated safety, unconfirmed objective response rate (ORR), and duration of response. The safety population comprised 15 Chinese patients (median [range] age 53.0 [31.0-72.0] years). Single-dose median time to first occurrence of maximum observed concentration was 1.9 h; concentrations then declined with a mean terminal half-life (t 1/2 ) of 67 h. Following multiple dosing, median T max was approximately 1.85 h with steady state generally achieved by Day 21. Treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 86.7% (13/15) of patients (grade 3, 20.0%; grade 4, 13.3%). Two patients (13.3%) experienced serious treatment-related TEAEs. ORR (investigator-assessed) was 6.7% (95% CI: 0.2-31.9); one patient (6.7%) had a partial response. In patients with measurable disease at baseline, the ORR was 9.1% (1/11; 95% CI: 0.2-41.3; duration of response: 114 days); stable disease was achieved by 36.4% (4/11) of patients, and 54.5% (6/11) progressed by data cut-off. In Chinese patients with advanced solid tumors, the pharmacokinetic profile of talazoparib monotherapy (1 mg/day) was consistent with other patient populations. TEAEs were generally manageable with no unexpected safety findings. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04635631 [prospectively registered November 19, 2020])., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Immunotherapy has reshaped the prognoses for many cancers and is increasingly used in both metastatic and adjuvant settings. There is a high prevalence of immunotherapy side effects, or immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which can affect any organ. Some irAEs can cause permanent or prolonged morbidity and, in rare cases, may be fatal. irAEs can present with mild, non-specific symptoms, resulting in delays to identification and management., Objective: We aim to provide a general overview of immunotherapy and irAEs, highlighting common clinical scenarios and general principles of management., Discussion: Cancer immunotherapy toxicity is an important clinical problem that is increasingly relevant to general practice, where patients with adverse events may first present. Early diagnosis and timely intervention are important in limiting the severity and morbidity of these toxicities. The management of irAEs should follow treatment guidelines, in consultation with patients' treating oncology teams.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors are used more and more to treat several types of cancer, significantly extending cancer-free survival. However, concerns are growing about their toxic effects, which are many and varied. Endocrinopathies are some of the most frequently reported adverse effects, and thyroid dysfunction is the most common of these. Here, we review the incidence and severity of each immune checkpoint inhibitor-related endocrinopathy, possible factors related to toxicity risk, and principles of management., (Copyright © 2023 The Cleveland Clinic Foundation. All Rights Reserved.)

The objective of this study was to understand global caregiver concerns about SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for children with cancer and to provide healthcare providers with guidance to support parental decision-making. A co-designed cross-sectional mixed-methods survey was distributed to primary caregivers of children with cancer globally between April and May 2021 via several media. Caregivers were asked to rate the importance of vaccine-related questions and the median scores were ranked. Principal Component Analysis was conducted to identify underlying dimensions of caregiver concerns by World Bank income groups. Content analysis of free-text responses was conducted and triangulated with the quantitative findings. 627 caregivers from 22 countries responded to the survey with 5.3% ( n  = 67) responses from low-and-middle-income countries (LMIC). 184 caregivers (29%) provided free-text responses. Side effects and vaccine safety were caregivers' primary concerns in all countries. Questions related to logistics were of concern for caregivers in LMIC. A small minority of caregivers ( n  = 17) did not consider the survey questions important; free-text analysis identified these parents as vaccine hesitant, some of them quoting safety and side effects as main reasons for hesitancy. Healthcare providers and other community organizations globally need to provide tailored information about vaccine safety and effectiveness in pediatric oncology settings. Importantly, continued efforts are imperative to reduce global inequities in logistical access to vaccines, particularly in LMIC.

Chemotherapy is one of the widely used anticancer treatments that involves the use of powerful cytotoxic drugs to stop tumor growth by targeting rapidly dividing cells through various mechanisms, which will be elucidated in this review. Introduced during the early twentieth century, chemotherapy has since lengthened the longevity of innumerable cancer patients. However, the increase in lifespan is at the expense of quality of life as patients are at risk of developing short-term and long-term side effects following chemotherapy, such as alopecia (hair loss), chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, cardiotoxicity, diarrhea, infertility, and chemo brain. Currently, a number of these chemotherapy-induced adverse effects are managed through supportive care and approved treatments, while the rest of the side effects are unavoidable. Hence, chemotherapeutic drugs associated with inevitable side effects are only administered when their therapeutic role outweighs their chemotoxicity, thus severely limiting the potency of chemotherapy in treating malignancy. Therein, the potential approaches to alleviating side effects of chemotherapy ranging from pharmaceutical drugs to alternative therapies will be discussed in this review in hopes of increasing the tolerance and effectiveness of future chemotherapeutic treatments., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Accumulating interest has emerged in exploring the toxicity profiles of the combination strategy of radiotherapy (RT) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Much remains unknown regarding safety and the potential increased risk of toxicity of a combined treatment. ICI prolongs survival but can induce immune-related adverse events as well. To increase awareness of adverse effect and support immediate and successful management, we go over the literature on the safety of RT combined immunotherapy strategy. Representative evidence relevant to RT combined with ICI in the brain, lung, head and neck, and pelvic malignance was reviewed respectively. Given radiation doses and fractionation, the irradiated volume, the timing of RT, and ICI would significantly affect the safety and efficiency of ICI+RT combination therapy, and no consensus had been reached about how to arrange RT delivery in the combined contexture, we went over the available literature and tried to address these challenges including the timing of RT, optimal dose and fractionations, RT target and target volume, and potential biomarkers to predict toxicity. We found even though RT+ICI combination therapy might augment toxicities, the majority of patients experienced grade 4 or 5 AE are relatively rare and no significant difference could be found between combination group and monotherapy group. Sometimes the acute toxicity with ICI is much less predictable and often life threatening and in some can give rise to permanent effects. Clinicians across disciplines should be aware of these uncommon lethal complications induced by ICI+RT. Early recognition is the key to successful treatment, reversibility of organ dysfunction, and in some cases even prevention of fatal outcome. If recognized early, managed properly, and no fatal AE occurs, the development of irAE indicates a good prognosis. It should be noted that nothing is known about potential late effects because very few studies have 5-year follow-up. The nature of irAE is the attack of activated immune cells on normal tissues. The nature of RT-induced AE is the DNA damage on normal tissue, which is related with the dose delivered and volume irradiated and the tolerance of surrounding normal tissues. The immune-modulating effect of SBRT may augment the damage on normal tissues. To maximize the antitumor immune response, 8-12 Gy/fraction is preferred when conducting RT. The available clinical evidence suggest RT of this dose/fractionated strategy combined with ICI have a tolerable AE profile, which need further validation by more clinical trials in the future. The combination strategy of RT with anti-PD1/PDL1 anti-body is supposed to be concurrent or RT followed by anti-PD1/PDL1 antibody. Although RT and ipilimumab combination sequence is controversial, ipilimumab prior to or concurrent with RT might be proper, which need more clinical validation. Under the concept of immunological dose painting, SBRT work as a trigger of immune response. It has been observed that SBRT of partially radiated tumors combined with ICI could induce similar tumor control compared with total tumor irradiation. The side effects of RT may be mitigated potentially due to the reduction of irradiated volume. The antitumor efficiency and safety profile of immunological RT dose painting+ICI deserve further investigation. Clinical predictive factors for irAE risk remain unclear, and more investigation deserves to be conducted about the irAE prediction., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have changed how we think about tumor management. Combinations of anti-programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) immunotherapy have become the standard of care in many advanced-stage cancers, including as a first-line therapy. Aside from improved anti-tumor immunity, the mechanism of action of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) exposes a new toxicity profile known as immune-related adverse effects (irAEs). This novel toxicity can damage any organ, but the skin, digestive and endocrine systems are the most frequently afflicted. Most ICI-attributed toxicity symptoms are mild, but some are severe and necessitate multidisciplinary side effect management. Obtaining knowledge on the various forms of immune-related toxicities and swiftly changing treatment techniques to lower the probability of experiencing severe irAEs has become a priority in oncological care. In recent years, there has been a growing understanding of an intriguing link between the gut microbiome and ICI outcomes. Multiple studies have demonstrated a connection between microbial metagenomic and metatranscriptomic patterns and ICI efficacy in malignant melanoma, lung and colorectal cancer. The immunomodulatory effect of the gut microbiome can have a real effect on the biological background of irAEs as well. Furthermore, specific microbial signatures and metabolites might be associated with the onset and severity of toxicity symptoms. By identifying these biological factors, novel biomarkers can be used in clinical practice to predict and manage potential irAEs. This comprehensive review aims to summarize the clinical aspects and biological background of ICI-related irAEs and their potential association with the gut microbiome and metabolome. We aim to explore the current state of knowledge on the most important and reliable irAE-related biomarkers of microbial origin and discuss the intriguing connection between ICI efficacy and toxicity.

Background: Despite the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), adverse events including hepatotoxicity limit their ongoing use. We investigated the outcomes and management of patients with immune-mediated hepatitis (IMH) and clinical predictors of toxicity resolution., Methods: Patients referred to our multidisciplinary immunotherapy-related toxicity group from August 2017 to December 2020 for IMH were evaluated. Toxicity was defined according to CTCAEv4.0. IMH resolution was defined as liver enzyme normalization after steroid initiation., Results: Thirty-three patients were included in the study, 62% female, and 71% Caucasian. The most common ICI used was PD-1/PD-L1 (76%). Peak IMH occurred at a median of 89 [45,193] days, for which most patients received 1-2 mg/kg/day prednisone equivalent with 35% requiring MMF. Median follow-up was 123 [33,472] days with IMH resolution seen in 48% of patients at a median of 111 [41,214] days. While high-dose steroid use was not associated with IMH resolution, liver enzyme improvement one week after steroids predicted resolution in univariate analysis (p = 0.041). All 11 patients without IMH resolution died from cancer progression or complications with three patients having acute liver failure. Available liver biopsies showed bile duct injury, with varying degrees of portal and lobular inflammation., Conclusion: IMH improvement one week after steroid initiation may predict ultimate IMH resolution., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

The use of cancer immunotherapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has been a paradigm shift in harnessing the immune system to act against cancer cells, and transformed the treatment of several solid and haematological malignancies. Cancer immunotherapies have a unique toxicity profile dependent on their mechanism of action, related to upregulation of immune activity. These can be severe and lead to life-threatening organ toxicity, and therefore identification of at-risk patient groups, early detection and prompt initiation of steroids and other immune-modulating agents is imperative. Acute presentations with toxicity related to these agents comprise a significant proportion of primary and secondary care presentations related to treatment toxicity in oncology. This article will focus on the diagnosis and management of common toxicities associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors, the most commonly utilised cancer immunotherapies., (© Royal College of Physicians 2023. All rights reserved.)

The immune-related adverse events associated with treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors result in significant morbidity for patients as well as considerable cost to the health-care system, and can limit the use of these beneficial drugs. Understanding the mechanisms of these side effects and how they can be separated from the antitumour effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors, as well as identifying biomarkers that predict the development of immune-related toxicities, will facilitate the conduct of trials to limit their onset and improve patient outcomes. In this Review, we discuss the different types of immune-related adverse events and how their treatment and identification of possible predictive biomarkers may shed light on their mechanisms, and describe possible strategies and targets for prophylactic and therapeutic intervention to mitigate them., (© 2021. Springer Nature Limited.)

Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are a revolutionary form of immunotherapy in cancer. However, the percentage of patients responding to therapy is relatively low, while adverse effects occur in a large number of patients. In addition, the therapeutic mechanisms of ICIs are not yet completely described., Areas Covered: The initial view (articles published in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, etc.) was that ICIs increase tumor-specific immunity. Recent data (collected from the same databases) suggest that the ICIs pharmacotherapy actually extends beyond the topic of immune reactivity, including additional immune pathways, such as disrupting immunosuppression and increasing tumor-specific autoimmunity. Unfortunately, there is no clear delimitation between these specific autoimmune reactions that are therapeutically beneficial, and nonspecific autoimmune reactions/toxicity that can be extremely severe side effects., Expert Opinion: Immune checkpoint mechanisms perform a non-selective immune regulation, maintaining a dynamic balance between immunosuppression and autoimmunity. By blocking these mechanisms, ICIs actually perform an immunological reset, decreasing immunosuppression and increasing tumor-specific immunity and predisposition to autoimmunity. The predisposition to autoimmunity induces both side effects and beneficial autoimmunity. Consequently, further studies are necessary to maximize the beneficial tumor-specific autoimmunity, while reducing the counterproductive effect of associated autoimmune toxicity.

Immunotherapy-related adverse events (irAEs) associated with immune-checkpoint inhibitors can affect nearly any organ system including commonly the luminal gastrointestinal tract, hepatobiliary system, lungs, endocrine glands, and skin, many of which have described imaging manifestations. In patients without clinically suspected irAEs, imaging findings may be the first indication of an abnormality that prompts further workup to facilitate early detection and initiation of appropriate treatment, such as therapy discontinuation or corticosteroid therapy. While some irAEs have well described imaging correlates, such as pneumonitis, hypophysitis, and colitis, others are not well described, such as nephritis. We report 2 cases of irAE nephritis associated with PD-1 inhibitor therapy and their imaging features., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Immune-oncologic (IO) therapy has revolutionized the treatment and management of oncologic disease. Immunotherapy functions by enhancing the host immune-systems ability to endogenously clear malignant cells, however, this activation can also lead to immune-mediated damage to healthy native tissues. These side effects are known as immune-related adverse events or irAEs and can even present with phenotypes similar to autoimmune diseases. IrAEs are the major consequence of checkpoint inhibitors and can have a significant impact on a patient's cancer treatment and long-term quality of life. The management of these irAEs follows a similar approach to autoimmune diseases. More specifically, the management is akin to that of autoimmune disease exacerbations. While there is an array of immune-suppressing agents that can be used, steroids, immunomodulators and IO discontinuation are cornerstones of irAE management. The exact approach and dosing are based on the severity and subtype of irAE presented. Within recent years, there has been a push to better prevent and manage irAEs when they arise. There has been an additional effort to increase the number of steroid-sparing agents available for irAE treatment given the consequences of long-term steroid therapy as well as patient contraindications to steroids. The goals of this review are to summarize irAE management, highlight significant advances made in recent years and emphasize the future directions that will optimize the use of IO therapy in oncology., Competing Interests: MB has acted as a paid consultant for and/or as a member of the advisory boards of Exelixis, Bayer, BMS, Eisai, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Genomic Health, Nektar, and Sanofi and has received grants to his institution from Xencor, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech/Roche, Seattle Genetics, Incyte, Nektar, AstraZeneca, Tricon Pharmaceuticals, Peleton Therapeutics, and Pfizer for work performed as outside of the current study. BN has acted as a paid member of the advisory board of Exelixis. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Olsen, Zhuang, Caulfield, Martini, Brown, Carthon, Kucuk, Harris, Bilen and Nazha.)

Background: Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) is widely used around the world to treat adverse effects derived from cancer treatment among children and young adults. Parents often seek CAM to restore and maintain the child's physical and emotional condition during and after cancer treatment., Objectives: The objectives of this review were (i) to identify literature that investigates CAM use for treating adverse effects of conventional cancer treatment, (ii) to investigate the safety of the included CAM modalities, and (iii) to evaluate the quality of included studies., Methods: Five scientific research databases were used to identify observational, quasi-experimental, and qualitative studies from January 1990 to May 2021. Included studies investigated the use of CAM to treat adverse effects of cancer treatment in childhood cancer., Results: Fifteen studies were included in this review. Ten quasi-experimental, 3 observational studies (longitudinal/prospective), 2 qualitative studies, and 1 study with a quasi-experimental and qualitative arm were identified. Less than half (n = 6; 40%) of the studies included reported adverse effects for the CAM modality being studied. Among the studies that reported adverse effects, they were mostly considered as direct risk, as 13% reported mainly bleeding and bruising upon acupuncture treatment, and dizziness with yoga treatment. All adverse effects were assessed as minor and transient. CAM modalities identified for treating adverse effects of cancer treatment were alternative medical systems, manipulative and body-based therapies, biologically-based therapies, and mind-body therapies. CAM modalities were used to alleviate anxiety, pain, toxicity, prevent trauma, and improve health-related quality of life, functional mobility, and physical activity levels. All studies assessed scored 70% or above according to the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal for study quality checklists., Conclusion: Most of the studies (58.3%) included in this review did not report adverse effects from CAM modalities used to treat adverse effects of cancer treatment in children and young adults. This lack of safety information is of concern because parents need to know whether the modality represents an extra burden or harm to the child. To improve awareness about safety in the field, a universal and uniform reporting system for adverse effects in CAM research is needed.

Purpose: To increase awareness, outline strategies, and offer guidance on the recommended management of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in patients treated with chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy., Methods: A multidisciplinary panel of medical oncology, neurology, hematology, emergency medicine, nursing, trialists, and advocacy experts was convened to develop the guideline. Guideline development involved a systematic literature review and an informal consensus process. The systematic review focused on evidence published from 2017 to 2021., Results: The systematic review identified 35 eligible publications. Because of the paucity of high-quality evidence, recommendations are based on expert consensus., Recommendations: The multidisciplinary team issued recommendations to aid in the recognition, workup, evaluation, and management of the most common CAR T-cell-related toxicities, including cytokine release syndrome, immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome, B-cell aplasia, cytopenias, and infections. Management of short-term toxicities associated with CAR T cells begins with supportive care for most patients, but may require pharmacologic interventions for those without adequate response. Management of patients with prolonged or severe CAR T-cell-associated cytokine release syndrome includes treatment with tocilizumab with or without a corticosteroid. On the basis of the potential for rapid decline, patients with moderate to severe immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome should be managed with corticosteroids and supportive care.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines., Competing Interests: Reprint Requests: Bianca D. SantomassoConsulting or Advisory Role: Celgene, Janssen, Legend Biotech, Incyte, In8BioResearch Funding: ADC Therapeutics (Inst) Loretta J. NastoupilHonoraria: Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Novartis, Bayer, Janssen Oncology, Pfizer, Gamida Cell, TG Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, ADC Therapeutics, Morphosys, Epizyme, GenmabResearch Funding: TG Therapeutics, Janssen Biotech, Celgene, Genentech/Roche, LAM Therapeutics, Epizyme, Novartis, IgM Biosciences, Caribou Biosciences, Gilead Sciences, Allogene Therapeutics, Takeda Sherry AdkinsConsulting or Advisory Role: CelgeneTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Celgene Bryan J. SchneiderResearch Funding: Merck Milan AnadkatStock and Other Ownership Interests: Anthem, Humana, Perrigo, Walgreens Boots Alliance, Abbott Laboratories, Merck, AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, CVS Health, Gilead Sciences, Incyte, Johnson & Johnson, Lilly, Medtronic, Mylan, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, United Health Group, Regeneron, Roche, Moderna Therapeutics, Dexcom, Quest DiagnosticsHonoraria: Adgero Biopharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novocure, AbbVie, UCB, InnovadermConsulting or Advisory Role: Adgero Biopharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novocure, Kintara TherapeuticsResearch Funding: AnaptysBio, Boehringer Ingelheim, Biogen, InflaRx, Lutris, Novartis, OnQuality Pharmaceuticals, Veloce Pharmaceuticals, XBiotech, UCB, AbbVie, Lilly Michael B. AtkinsStock and Other Ownership Interests: Werewolf Pharma, PyxisConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Exelixis, Eisai, Agenus, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Werewolf Pharma, Surface Oncology, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Pyxis, Pneuma Respiratory, Leads Biolabs, Fathom Biotechnology, Aveo, Cota Healthcare, Neoleukin Therapeutics, Adagene, Idera, Ellipses Pharma, AstraZeneca, PACT Pharma, Seattle Genetics, Pfizer, Scholar Rock, Asher Bio, Calithera Biosciences, Takeda, SanofiResearch Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb Kelly J. BrassilEmployment: Pack HealthHonoraria: Oncology Nursing Society, WebMD, M Consulting, i3 HealthResearch Funding: AbbVie, Daiichi Sankyo, Astellas Pharma, Genentech, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKlineTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Pack Health Jeffrey M. CaterinoStock and Other Ownership Interests: Motive Medical IntelligenceConsulting or Advisory Role: Wellstat TherapeuticsResearch Funding: Stago, Entegrion, JDP Therapeutics, AstraZeneca Ian ChauHonoraria: Lilly, Eisai, ServierConsulting or Advisory Role: Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD Oncology, Merck Serono, Roche/Genentech, AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre, Boehringer Ingelheim, Incyte, OncXerna Therapeutics, Astellas Pharma, GlaxoSmithKline, Eisai, SotioResearch Funding: Janssen-Cilag, LillyTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: MSD, Merck Serono, Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai Marianne J. DaviesSpeakers' Bureau: AstraZeneca, Genentech/Roche, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb Marc S. ErnstoffStock and Other Ownership Interests: GE Healthcare, Bristol Myers SquibbResearch Funding: Alkermes, EMD SeronoTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: ImmuNext, AlkermesOther Relationship: Bristol Myers Squibb Leslie FecherConsulting or Advisory Role: Via Oncology, Hoosier Cancer Research Network, ElsevierResearch Funding: Merck, Incyte, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer/EMD Serono, Array BioPharma, Kartos TherapeuticsOther Relationship: Array BioPharmaUncompensated Relationships: NCCN, American Association of Clinical Endocrinology, ASCO Pauline FunchainConsulting or Advisory Role: EisaiResearch Funding: Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Taiho Oncology Jennifer S. MammenStock and Other Ownership Interests: Johnson & Johnson, Bristol Myers SquibbConsulting or Advisory Role: Five Prime Therapeutics Jarushka NaidooHonoraria: Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Merck, Daiichi Sankyo/Lilly, TakedaConsulting or Advisory Role: Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Roche/Genentech, Daiichi Sankyo/Lilly, Takeda, Pfizer, Kaleido BiosciencesResearch Funding: Merck, AstraZeneca, Roche/GenentechTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca/MedImmune Aung NaingConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, CytomX Therapeutics, OncoSec, STCube Pharmaceuticals Inc, Kymab, Takeda (I), CSL Behring (I), Horizon Pharma (I), Genome & CompanyResearch Funding: NCI, EMD Serono, MedImmune, Atterocor, Amplimmune, ARMO BioSciences, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Incyte, Novartis, Regeneron, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, CytomX Therapeutics, Neon Therapeutics, Calithera Biosciences, TopAlliance BioSciences Inc, Healios, Lilly, Kymab, PsiOxus Therapeutics, Immune Deficiency Foundation (I), Arcus Biosciences, NeoImmuneTech, ImmuneOncia, Surface Oncology, Baxalta (I), Jeffrey Modell Foundation (I), Chao Physician-Scientist AwardsTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: ARMO BioSciences Tanyanika PhillipsTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: City of Hope Alexander SpiraLeadership: NEXT Oncology VirginiaStock and Other Ownership Interests: Eli LillyHonoraria: CytomX Therapeutics, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Merck, Takeda, Amgen, Janssen Oncology, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, BayerConsulting or Advisory Role: Array BioPharma (Inst), Incyte, Amgen, Novartis, AstraZeneca/MedImmune (Inst), Mirati Therapeutics, Gritstone Oncology, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Merck (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Takeda, Janssen Research & DevelopmentResearch Funding: Roche (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Boehringer Ingelheim (Inst), Astellas Pharma (Inst), MedImmune (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Newlink Genetics (Inst), Incyte (Inst), AbbVie (Inst), Ignyta (Inst), LAM Therapeutics (Inst), Trovagene (Inst), Takeda (Inst), Macrogenics (Inst), CytomX Therapeutics (Inst), LAM Therapeutics (Inst), Astex Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Loxo (Inst), Arch Therapeutics (Inst), Gritstone (Inst), Plexxikon (Inst), Amgen (Inst), Loxo (Inst), Daiichi Sankyo (Inst), ADCT (Inst), Janssen Oncology (Inst), Mirati Therapeutics (Inst), Rubius (Inst) Maria Suarez-AlmazorConsulting or Advisory Role: Agile Therapeutics, AMAG Pharmaceuticals¸ Abbvie/Genentech, Avenue Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, ChemoCentryx, Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb Umang SwamiConsulting or Advisory Role: Seattle Genetics John A. ThompsonConsulting or Advisory Role: Calithera Biosciences, Clinical Care Options/NCCN, BJ Bioscience, Alpine Immune Sciences, Neoleukin Therapeutics, Academy for Continued Healthcare Learning, Meeting Sites Pro, Regeneron, AVEO, Bristol Myers SquibbResearch Funding: Roche, Pfizer, Agensys, Five Prime Therapeutics, Trillium Therapeutics, Merck, Novartis, Xencor, Five Prime Therapeutics, Incyte Praveen VikasStock and Other Ownership Interests: NovavaxResearch Funding: Sanofi Yinghong WangConsulting or Advisory Role: Tillotts Pharma, Azurrx Pharma Jeffrey S. WeberStock and Other Ownership Interests: CytomX Therapeutics, Biond, Protean Biodiagnostics, NeximmuneHonoraria: Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Genentech, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline, Amgen, Roche, Celldex, CytomX Therapeutics, Novartis, Sellas Life Sciences, WindMIL, Takeda, Moderna Therapeutics, Jounce Therapeutics, Kirin Pharmaceuticals, Regeneron, Idera, OncosecConsulting or Advisory Role: Celldex, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck¸ Genentech, Roche, Amgen, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Daiichi Sankyo, CytomX Therapeutics, Novartis, Sellas Life Sciences, WindMIL, Jounce Therapeutics, Moderna Therapeutics, Kirin Pharmaceuticals, Protean Biodiagnostics, Idera, OncosecResearch Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech, Astellas Pharma, Incyte, Roche, Novartis, NextCure (Inst), Moderna Therapeutics (Inst)Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Named on a patent submitted by Moffitt Cancer Center for an IPILIMUMAB biomarker, named on a patent from Biodesix for a PD-1 antibody biomarker, and named on a patent for 41BB-induced TIL by Moffitt Cancer CenterTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Roche, Celldex, Amgen, Merck, AstraZeneca, Genentech, Novartis Monalisa GhoshResearch Funding: Celgene (Inst)No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose : To report cases of uveitis induced by biological therapy given for cancer. Methods : Retrospective review of medical charts of patients. Results : Included were six patients aged 14-81 years. Three were treated with vemurafenib and one each with nivolumab, ipilimumab, and osimertinib. The oncological diagnoses were metastatic thyroid carcinoma, pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma, metastatic melanoma, adenocarcinoma of the lung, and metastatic breast cancer. Ocular manifestations appeared 4-82 weeks after the biological treatment was initiated. The most common ocular presentation was anterior uveitis. Onset was sudden in all cases. The median duration of uveitis was 70 weeks. Treatment included topical or systemic corticosteroids; one patient received a single intravitreal steroid injection in one eye. Conclusions : Uveitis may rarely be induced by treatment with biological agents for cancer. Both oncologists and ophthalmologists should be aware of this potential side effect. Early detection and management can prevent permanent complications and save the patient's vision.

Background/aim: Recently, the number of patients with cancer receiving outpatient chemotherapy using oral anticancer drugs has increased, but the currently available outpatient cancer chemotherapy is not safer than that available before. The present study aimed to identify risk factors associated with unplanned acute care (UAC) requiring outpatient chemotherapy-related consultation and hospitalisation., Patients and Methods: We conducted a case- control study among 1,674 patients who received oral anticancer drug treatment either alone or in combination with injectable anticancer drugs at National Cancer Center Hospital East, Japan, between December 1, 2014, and November 30, 2015., Results: Body mass index (BMI) was identified as a risk factor for UAC during chemotherapy. Patients with a BMI of <18.5 kg/m 2 , classified as underweight according to the World Health Organization classification of nutritional status, had a significantly higher risk of UAC., Conclusion: A low BMI immediately before the occurrence of chemotherapy-related UAC is a risk factor for adverse effects; therefore, underweight patients need more careful monitoring and supportive care., (Copyright © 2021 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Background: Accumulated evidence supports the existence of sex-associated differences in immune systems. Understanding the role of sex in immune-related adverse events (irAEs) is important for management of irAE in patients receiving immunotherapy., Methods: We performed meta-analysis on published clinical study data and multivariable logistic regression on pharmacovigilance data and applied a propensity algorithm to The Cancer Genome Atlas omics data. We further validated our observations in 2 independent in-house cohorts of 179 and 767 cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors., Results: A meta-analysis using 13 clinical studies that reported on 1096 female patients (36.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 35.0% to 38.5%) and 1886 male patients (63.2%, 95% CI = 61.5% to 65.0%) demonstrated no statistically significant irAE risk difference between the sexes (odds ratio [OR] = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.91 to 1.54, 2-sided P = .21). Multivariable logistic regression analysis of 12 225 patients from the Food and drug administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) and 10 979 patients from VigiBase showed no statistically significant difference in irAEs by sex. A propensity score algorithm used on multi-omics data for 6019 patients from The Cancer Genome Atlas found no statistically significant difference by sex for irAE-related factors or pathways. The retrospective analysis of 2 in-house patient cohorts validated these results (OR = 1.55, 95% CI = 0.98 to 2.47, false discovery rate = 0.13, for cohort 1; OR = 1.16, 95% CI = 0.86 to 1.57, false discovery rate = 0.39, for cohort 2)., Conclusions: We observed minimal sex-associated differences in irAEs among cancer patients who received immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. It may be unnecessary to consider sex effects for irAE management in clinical practice., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The current state of cancer treatment is still far from being satisfactory considering the strong impairment of patients' quality of life and the high lethality of malignant diseases. Therefore, it is critical for innovative approaches to be tested in the near future. In view of the crucial role that is played by tumor immunity, the present review provides essential information on the immune-mediated effects potentially generated by the interplay between ionizing radiation and cytotoxic antitumor agents when interacting with target malignant cells. Therefore, the radiation-dependent abscopal effect (i.e., a biological effect of ionizing radiation that occurs outside the irradiated field), the influence of cancer chemotherapy on the antigenic pattern of target neoplastic cells, and the immunogenic cell death (ICD) caused by anticancer agents are the main topics of this presentation. It is widely accepted that tumor immunity plays a fundamental role in generating an abscopal effect and that anticancer drugs can profoundly influence not only the host immune responses, but also the immunogenic pattern of malignant cells. Remarkably, several anticancer drugs impact both the abscopal effect and ICD. In addition, certain classes of anticancer agents are able to amplify already expressed tumor-associated antigens (TAA). More importantly, other drugs, especially triazenes, induce the appearance of new tumor neoantigens (TNA), a phenomenon that we termed drug-induced xenogenization (DIX). The adoption of the abscopal effect is proposed as a potential therapeutic modality when properly applied concomitantly with drug-induced increase in tumor cell immunogenicity and ICD. Although little to no preclinical or clinical studies are presently available on this subject, we discuss this issue in terms of potential mechanisms and therapeutic benefits. Upcoming investigations are aimed at evaluating how chemical anticancer drugs, radiation, and immunotherapies are interacting and cooperate in evoking the abscopal effect, tumor xenogenization and ICD, paving the way for new and possibly successful approaches in cancer therapy.

Background: Given the widespread use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), newer immune related adverse events (irAEs) have come to light, including flare-ups of preexisting autoimmune disorders (AIDs) and delayed immune-related events. We aimed to identify the frequency and severity of new IRAEs, including AID flares in cancer patients treated with ICIs at our institution. We also studied the tolerability of ICIs upon rechallenge in patients with irAEs and hospital admissions due to irAEs in a community setting in rural Maine., Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review analysis of all patients with cancer who received anti-PDL1/PDL1 inhibitors nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, and durvalumab at our tertiary care center from November 2015 to March 2019. Demographic data, cancer type and stage, irAEs, hospital admissions due to irAEs, and drug treatment information was extracted., Results: We included 465 patients who received ICIs, 115 (out of 465 25%) developed new irAEs. Preexisting AID were identified in 47 (out of 465) (10%), AID flares were observed in 12 patients (25% of 47). 17 (out of 47 36%) were on immunosuppression for underlying AID, 5 (out of 17, 29%) developed flares. Overall, 148 (32% of 465) irAEs occurred, as some patients had multiple toxicities. Majority were treated for Lung cancer (63%), followed by melanoma and genitourinary cancers. Due to irAE severity, treatment was permanently discontinued in 15% (out of 465) patients. Hospital admissions due to irAEs were required for 34 patients (7.3% of 465). ICI rechallenge was performed in 27 patients (6% of 465), and majority tolerated well., Conclusion: Our study shows that ICIs were generally well tolerated and can be used safely even in patients with preexisting AIDs; it is encouraging to see majority tolerated rechallenge with ICIs well., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: This study was designed to investigate the correlation between immune-related adverse events (irAEs) of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and corresponding efficacy, and to explore the potential of predicting the efficacy of ICIs via irAEs., Methods: Electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI and Wanfang were applied to search for relevant studies. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Stratification analyses were conducted according to the type of irAEs and ICIs, region of studies and primary tumors. Furthermore, statistical analyses were realized by means of RevMan 5.3 software., Results: Altogether, 40 studies with 8,641 participants were enrolled, among which the incidence of irAEs ranged from 15.34 to 85.23% and the major sites reached out to skin, endocrine organ, gastrointestinal tract, liver and lung. The ORR, OS and PFS in irAE group were significantly higher than those in non-irAE group as per pooled analyses and stratification analyses. Importantly, patients with irAEs in skin, endocrine organ or gastrointestinal tract rather than in liver and lung were found to obtain survival benefits (p < 0.05)., Conclusion: IrAEs, especially in skin, endocrine organ or gastrointestinal tract, triggered by ICIs indicate significant survival benefits., (© 2021. Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: The differences in the clinical pharmacy services (CPS) provided by oncology and non-oncology pharmacists have not been sufficiently explained., Aim: This study aimed to demonstrate the differences in direct CPS provided by oncology and non-oncology pharmacists for patients and physicians, and to assess the potential impact of these services on medical costs., Methods: We retrospectively examined CPS provided by oncology and non-oncology pharmacists for outpatients who underwent chemotherapy between January and December 2016., Results: In total, 1177 and 1050 CPS provided by oncology and non-oncology pharmacists, respectively, were investigated. The rates of interventions performed by oncology and non-oncology pharmacists for physicians-determined treatment were 18.5% and 11.3%, respectively (p < .001). The rates of oncology and non-oncology pharmacist interventions accepted by physicians were 84.6 and 78.8%, respectively (p = .12). Level 4 and Level 5 interventions accounted for 64.6% of all oncology pharmacist interventions and 53.0% of all non-oncology pharmacist interventions (p = .03). The rates of improvement in symptoms from adverse drug reactions among patients resulting from interventions by oncology and non-oncology pharmacists were 89.4 and 72.1%, respectively (p = .02). Conservative assessments of medical cost impact showed that a single intervention by an oncology and by a non-oncology pharmacist saved ¥6355 and ¥3604, respectively., Conclusion: The results of the present study suggested that CPS by oncology pharmacists enable safer and more effective therapy for patients with cancer and indirectly contribute to reducing health care fees., (© 2021 The Authors. Cancer Reports published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) is a serious and usually fatal CNS infection caused by the John Cunningham virus. CD4 + and CD8 + T-cell lymphopenia, resulting from HIV infection, chemotherapy, or immunosuppressive therapy, are primary risk factors for PML. Following its introduction in 1997, the immunomodulatory anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, rituximab, has received regulatory approval worldwide for treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, rheumatoid arthritis, chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, granulomatosis with polyangiitis, microscopic polyangiitis, and pemphigus vulagris. Rituximab leads to prolonged B-lymphocyte depletion, potentially allowing John Cunningham viral infection to occur. Six unexpected cases of PML infection developing in rituximab-treated patients were first reported in 2002. We review 20 years of information on clinical findings, pathology, epidemiology, proposed pathogenesis, and risk-management issues associated with PML infection developing after rituximab treatment. Since the first case series report of 52 cases of rituximab-associated PML among patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma or chronic lymphocytic leukaemia in 2009, updated and diligent pharmacovigilance efforts have provided reassurance that this fatal toxicity is a rare clinical event with concurring causal factors. International harmonisation of safety warnings around rituximab-associated PML should be considered, with these notifications listing rituximab-associated PML under a section titled warnings and precautions as is the case in most countries, rather than a boxed warning as is the case in the USA., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests JOA reports being a member of and on the board of directors for Cardiff Oncology and consulting for Samus Therapeutics Ascentage. JRB reports grants and personal fees from Biogen and Genentech–Roche; and personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Dr Reddy, Excision Bio, Inhibikase, Merck, Amgen, Serono, Genzyme, Morphic, Encycle, Genzyme, Millennium–Takeda, and Mapi, outside of the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: With the widespread use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), we are facing challenges in the management of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). We aimed to characterize the spectrum of toxicity, management, and outcomes for irAEs., Methods: Patients who were treated with at least one ICI in clinical trials, expanded access programs, or routine clinical practice were included. Clinical and laboratory parameters were collected retrospectively to determine the incidence of irAEs, methods of management, and treatment outcomes., Results: A total of 255 patients were screened retrospectively. Of these, 71 (27.8%) patients developed irAEs. More than 2 different types of irAEs were detected in 16 (6.2%) out of 255 patients. A total of 3177 doses were given to 255 patients. In 93 (2.9%) of the 3177 doses, 1 episode of irAEs was experienced. A total of 22 out of 93 (23.7%) episodes were reported as grade 1, 49 (52.7%) as grade 2, 19 (20.4%) as grade 3, and 3 (3.2%) as grade 4. The most frequently seen irAEs were pneumonitis, hepatitis, and hypothyroidism. With regard to treatment, 39 out of 93 episodes (42%) of any grade irAEs occurred after anti-programmed cell death-1 therapy, 47 (50.5%) occurred following administration of anti-programmed death-ligand 1, and 7 (7.5%) occurred after combination treatments., Conclusion: With the increased use of immunotherapeutic agents, increased awareness and early recognition are required for effective management of irAEs. Our experience as a single institution might be of use for health care providers in oncology.

Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are associated with different immune-related adverse events (irAEs), the potential effect on the skeleton is poorly defined albeit biologically plausible and assessable through pharmacovigilance. We described a case series of patients experiencing skeletal fractures while on ICIs at the National Cancer Institute of Milan. To better characterize the clinical features of skeletal irAEs reported with ICIs, we queried the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) and performed disproportionality analysis by means of reporting odds ratios (RORs), deemed significant by a lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (LL95% CI) > 1. Bone AEs emerging as significant were scrutinized in terms of demographic and clinical data, including concomitant irAEs or drugs affecting bone resorption or causing bone damage. Four patients with skeletal events while on ICIs were included in our case series, of which three exhibited vertebral fractures. In FAERS, 650 patients with bone and joint injuries and treated with ICIs were retrieved, accounting for 822 drug-event pairs. Statistically significant ROR was found for eight, two and one bone AEs respectively with PD-1, PD-L1 and CTLA-4 inhibitors, being pathological fracture (N = 46; ROR = 3.17; LL95%CI = 2.37), spinal compression fracture (42; 2.51; 1.91), and femoral neck fracture (26; 2.38; 1.62) the most common. Concomitant irAEs or drugs affecting bone metabolism were poorly reported. The increased reporting of serious vertebral fractures in patients without concomitant irAEs and no apparent preexisting risk factors could suggest a possible cause-effect relationship and calls for close clinical monitoring and implementation of dedicated guidelines., (© 2021 The Authors. International Journal of Cancer published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Union for International Cancer Control.)

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of cancer, improving outcomes in patients with advanced malignancies. The use of ICIs in clinical practice, and the number of ICI clinical trials, are rapidly increasing. The use of ICIs in combination with other forms of cancer therapy, such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or targeted therapy, is also expanding. However, immune-related adverse events (irAEs) can be serious in up to a third of patients. Critical questions remain surrounding the characteristics and outcomes of irAEs, and how they may affect the overall risk-benefit relationship for combination therapies. This article proposes a framework for irAE classification and reporting, and identifies limitations in the capture and sharing of data on irAEs from current clinical trial and real-world data. We outline key gaps and suggestions for clinicians, clinical investigators, drug sponsors, patients, and other stakeholders to make these critical data more available to researchers for pooled analysis, to advance contemporary understanding of irAEs, and ultimately improve the efficacy of ICIs., Competing Interests: Competing interests: KLR receives support from Teladoc and Project Data Sphere. MR owns shares of Pfizer Inc. ACG has served on advisory boards/consulted with Alexion, RA Pharma (UCB), and Momenta (Jansen). She also receives support from Project Data Sphere. MD has received support from Novartis, Eli Lilly, Moderna, Tillotts Pharma, ORIC Pharmaceuticals, and Partner Therapeutics. He is engaged with Moderna and Neoleukin Therapeutics. LZ has received support from Merck US. DBJ has received support from BMS and Incyte and serves on advisory boards for Array Biopharma, BMS, Catalyst, Iovance, Jansen, Merck, Novartis, and Oncosec. OR has received support from Merck, Celgene, Five Prime, GSK, Bayer, Roche, Puretech, Imvacx, and Sobi, has an immunotherapy patent pending, and serves as CMO of Outcomes4me., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)