Lepir Tanja, Zaghouani Mehdi, Roche Stéphane P, Li Ying-Ying, Suarez Miguel, Irias Maria Jose, Savaraj Niramol
Department of Veteran Affairs, Bruce W. Carter VA Medical Center, Miami, FL.
Florida Atlantic University, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Boca Raton, FL.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Jan;98(2):e13804. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000013804.
While checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized the treatment of melanoma, it is not known whether switching from one monoclonal antibody drug to another one would be justified in the case of a treatment failure. Herein, we report a case illustrating a durable response to pembrolizumab after a failure with nivolumab.
A 76-year-old white male noticed an enlarging papular lesion on his neck.
Malignant melanoma.
The patient underwent surgery in December 2013 and was found to have a B-Rapidly Accelerated Fibrosarcoma (BRAF) V600E mutated melanoma. Treatment with BRAF and MAPK/Erk kinase (MEK) inhibitors along with radiation was initiated. After 1 year, the disease progressed, and the treatment was switched to the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) blocking antibody, ipilimumab. As the tumor did not respond, the treatment was changed to programmed cell death receptor-1 (PD-1) blockers: nivolumab followed by pembrolizumab. Since the initial diagnosis, the tumor response was monitored by computed tomography (CT) scans. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) was also used for the assessment of programmed death ligand 1 PD-L1) expression in the neck, lung, and spleen lesions.
The patient had an initial mixed response to nivolumab, but the disease ultimately progressed as evidenced by new metastases to the spleen, thus the treatment was switched to pembrolizumab. After 46 cycles of treatment, all sites of metastases disappeared, including a substantial shrinkage of the splenic metastasis. To gain understanding about the pharmacological differences between nivolumab and pembrolizumab, the PD-1-ligands interactions and conformational dynamics responsible for the PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint blockade were investigated. The higher affinity of pembrolizumab might likely arise from a unique and large patch of interactions engaging the C'D loop of PD-1, thus forcing an important motion across the PD-1 immunoreceptor.
In this case report, we described the tolerance and response of a melanoma patient to a sequence of various agents, including ipilimumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first clinical report highlighting differences between PD-1 blockers, as shown by the unexpected and durable response of the tumor to pembrolizumab, after a treatment failure with nivolumab.
虽然检查点抑制剂彻底改变了黑色素瘤的治疗方式,但对于治疗失败的情况,从一种单克隆抗体药物换用另一种药物是否合理尚不清楚。在此,我们报告一例病例,显示在纳武单抗治疗失败后,帕博利珠单抗产生了持久疗效。
一名76岁白人男性注意到其颈部有一丘疹样病变在增大。
恶性黑色素瘤。
患者于2013年12月接受手术,被发现患有B-Raf快速进展性纤维肉瘤(BRAF)V600E突变型黑色素瘤。开始使用BRAF和丝裂原活化蛋白激酶/细胞外信号调节激酶(MAPK/Erk)抑制剂并联合放疗。1年后,疾病进展,治疗改为细胞毒性T淋巴细胞相关抗原4(CTLA-4)阻断抗体伊匹单抗。由于肿瘤无反应,治疗改为程序性细胞死亡受体1(PD-1)阻滞剂:先使用纳武单抗,后使用帕博利珠单抗。自初次诊断以来,通过计算机断层扫描(CT)监测肿瘤反应。免疫组织化学(IHC)也用于评估颈部、肺部和脾脏病变中程序性死亡配体1(PD-L1)的表达。
患者对纳武单抗最初有混合反应,但疾病最终进展,出现脾脏新转移灶,因此治疗改为帕博利珠单抗。经过46个周期的治疗,所有转移部位均消失,包括脾脏转移灶显著缩小。为了解纳武单抗和帕博利珠单抗之间的药理学差异,研究了负责PD-1/PD-L1检查点阻断的PD-1-配体相互作用和构象动力学。帕博利珠单抗更高的亲和力可能源于与PD-1的C'D环发生独特且广泛的相互作用,从而促使PD-1免疫受体发生重要运动。
在本病例报告中,我们描述了一名黑色素瘤患者对包括伊匹单抗、纳武单抗和帕博利珠单抗在内的一系列不同药物的耐受性和反应。据我们所知,这是第一份突出显示PD-1阻滞剂之间差异的临床报告,如在纳武单抗治疗失败后,肿瘤对帕博利珠单抗出现意外且持久的反应所示。