4.4 Review

Toxicity management for patients receiving novel T-cell engaging therapies

期刊

CURRENT OPINION IN PEDIATRICS
卷 26, 期 1, 页码 43-49

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MOP.0000000000000043

关键词

Acute lymphoblastic leukemia; blinatumomab; chimeric antigen receptor; cytokine release syndrome

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01CA116660]
  2. Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, Pennsylvania Department of Health, Cookies for Kids Cancer, Solving Kids Cancer
  3. WW Smith Charitable Trust
  4. Weinberg Funds

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose of reviewRecent clinical trials using T-cell engaging immunotherapies such as bispecific antibodies which target T cells and tumor cells, as well as engineered T cells that express targeting and activation molecules known as chimeric antigen receptors, have demonstrated powerful proof of concept. These therapies result in a significant degree of immune activation in the patient, which has correlated with greatly increased efficacy but also with notable toxicity. These therapies produce nonphysiologic T-cell activation, which is the hallmark of these new, highly active treatments.Recent findingsWe and others have noted cytokine activation profiles that correlate with both toxicity and efficacy in patients receiving T-cell engaging therapies. Effector cytokines such as interferon- are elevated, but so are cytokines that are associated with macrophage activation syndrome/hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, such as interleukin (IL)-10 and IL-6. Although corticosteroids can control some of these toxicities, a targeted approach may produce superior toxicity control without interfering with efficacy. One approach we have developed targets IL-6, a key cytokine in the toxicity response, using the IL-6 receptor antagonist tocilizumab.SummaryDetailed studies of the T-cell activation produced by these novel therapies has led to more targeted approaches that have the potential to control toxicity while maintaining efficacy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据