4.7 Review

ICPis-Induced Autoimmune Polyendocrine Syndrome Type 2: A Review of the Literature and a Protocol for Optimal Management

Journal

Publisher

ENDOCRINE SOC
DOI: 10.1210/clinem/dgaa553

Keywords

immune checkpoint inhibitors; immune-related adverse events; autoimmune polyendocrine syndrome

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81700689]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Context: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPis) targeting cytotoxic T-Iymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4), programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), and its ligand (PD-L1) are now approved to treat a variety of cancers. However, ICPis therapy is associated with a risk of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Autoimmune polyendocrine syndrome type 2 (APS-2) is a rare endocrine irAE. Evidence Acquisition: Several databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Registry of ControlledTrials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Scopus) were searched up to February 18, 2020, for case reports on endocrine irAEs and ICPis. The reported side effects and adverse events of the ICPis therapy in the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) adverse events pharmacovigilance registries are also included. Evidence Synthesis: Here, we provide an overview of all published and reported cases (n = 30) of ICPis-induced APS-2. We summarize the clinical characteristics, autoantibodies, human leukocyte antigen (HLA) genotypes, and therapies and propose an APS-2 screening strategy. Conclusions: Given the life-threatening risks of endocrine dysfunction if it is not promptly recognized (such as diabetic ketoacidosis and acute adrenal crisis), physicians (especially endocrinologists and oncologists) should be familiar with APS-2. After diagnosis of an autoimmune disease induced by ICPis (especially PD-1 inhibitors), patients with a high-risk HLA allele (HLA-DR4) require close monitoring for the development of APS-2.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available