Long-term control and partial remission after initial pseudoprogression of glioblastoma by anti–PD-1 treatment with nivolumab
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Immunotherapy has long been considered a promising treatment approach without, however, making significant overall progress over several decades. Only with the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors and advanced vaccines have these drugs gained widespread use in oncology. The role of immune checkpoint inhibitors such as antibodies blocking programmed cell death (PD)-1 signaling against primary brain tumors remains to be determined, since data from randomized trials are lacking so far.1,2 Still, it has already been recognized that various immunotherapeutic strategies may result in imaging changes which represent a challenge in differentiating true tumor progression from immune-related pseudoprogression. We report on a 60-year-old patient in whom glioblastoma was diagnosed in 2014. Molecular profiling revealed no isocitrate dehydrogenase mutation and an unmethylated O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase promoter status. The patient underwent standard treatment consisting of radiotherapy with concomitant temozolomide chemotherapy followed by 6 cycles of maintenance temozolomide. MRI after completion of 6 cycles of temozolomide demonstrated increased contrast enhancement indicating tumor progression, which was further corroborated by perfusion imaging. A decision was made to initiate treatment with the PD-1 inhibitor nivolumab within a clinical trial. Clinically, the patient presented in overall good performance status but had episodes with pronounced aphasia that required transient treatment with steroids. MRI after 3 months of PD-1 inhibitor therapy demonstrated increased edema and contrast enhancement (Fig. 1). Because of the clinically stable situation, a decision was made to continue nivolumab therapy. Subsequent MR imaging revealed a continuous shrinking of the tumor, and the patient has now been on nivolumab treatment for almost 2 years (Fig. 1). Treatment with nivolumab was tolerated without relevant toxicity and the patient has been clinically stable without needing further steroid medication. T1-weighted contrast-enhanced MRI showing stable disease during (9/2014) and tumor progression after 6 cycles of maintenance temozolomide (11/2014). Tumor progression was confirmed by MR perfusion (bottom). The MRI scan 3 months after initiation of nivolumab treatment (3/2015) demonstrates increased contrast enhancement and pronounced edema. Subsequent MRI scans during ongoing nivolumab treatment indicate partial remission and durable tumor control. The clinical and imaging course of this patient highlights the potential therapeutic activity, but also the challenges associated with the use of PD-1 inhibitors in glioblastoma patients. First, it must be assumed that the therapeutic effects following PD-1 inhibition may only occur after several months of treatment, most likely because of the delayed reinvigoration of the immune system. Furthermore, antitumor immune responses may be associated with increased edema and contrast enhancement due to immune cell infiltration and inflammation. The corresponding MR findings need to be interpreted with caution, since the differentiation of immune-related pseudoprogression and true progression can be challenging. This has been addressed by the recently developed immunotherapy Response Assessment for Neuro-Oncology (iRANO) criteria.3 Hence, premature cessation of PD-1 inhibitor therapy should be avoided in order to allow these drugs to fully exert their therapeutic potential. In summary, this is one of the first reports supporting the idea that PD-1 inhibition can exert strong therapeutic activity against glioblastoma. Furthermore, the clinical course over almost 2 years as well as the MRI findings suggest that PD-1 inhibition may result in long-lasting tumor control following initial pseudoprogression. This work was supported by a grant from the Canton of Zurich (HSM-2). Conflict of interest statement. Patrick Roth has received honoraria from MSD, Roche, Novartis, and Molecular Partners for advisory board participation or lectures. Antonios Valavanis reports no disclosures. Michael Weller has received research grants from Acceleron, Actelion, Bayer, Isarna, MSD, Merck & Co, Novocure, PIQUR, and Roche and honoraria for lectures or advisory board participation or consulting from Celldex, Immunocellular Therapeutics, Isarna, Magforce, MSD, Merck & Co, Northwest Biotherapeutics, Novocure, Pfizer, Roche, and Teva.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».