Immune checkpoint inhibitors in liver transplant: a case series

• Published in: Journal of gastrointestinal oncology Vol. 14; no. 2; pp. 1141 - 1148
• Main Authors: Rudolph, Mark, Shah, Shimul A, Quillin, Ralph, Lemon, Kristina, Olowokure, Olugbenga, Latif, Tahir, Sohal, Davendra
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: China AME Publishing Company 29-04-2023
• Subjects: Case Series; hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); Liver transplant (LT); immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs); case series; cholangiocarcinoma
• ISSN: 2078-6891; 2219-679X
• DOI: 10.21037/jgo-22-922

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the setting of liver transplant (LT) pose a risk of rejection and hold unclear benefit in both the neoadjuvant (pre-transplant) and post-transplant salvage setting. In the pre-transplant setting, neoadjuvant ICIs may serve as a bridge to LT by downstaging disease burden to fit within transplant criteria. Outcomes in this setting include patients who had successful transplants without complications to patients who suffered severe complications, including fatal hepatic necrosis and graft failure requiring re-transplant. Some authors suggest having a period of three months between checkpoint inhibition and transplant may help mitigate adverse effects. In the post-LT setting, there are few treatment options if there is a recurrence of disease, which forces treatment teams to reconsider checkpoint inhibitors. Again, a longer period of time between transplant and checkpoint inhibition may reduce risk of rejection. Case reports of patients treated with ICIs post-transplant utilized either nivolumab or pembrolizumab. As combination atezolizumab/bevacizumab is a relatively new treatment option for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), there are only three reported cases using this combination in the post-LT setting. While there were no cases of rejection, all three cases had progression of disease. As immunotherapy joins transplantation as a mainstay of treatment for HCC, it remains unclear how to best navigate when the treatment course involves both immune activation and immunosuppression.
Patients who had an LT and were treated with ICIs (pre or post LT) at the University of Cincinnati were included in this retrospective chart review.
Fatal rejection remains a significant risk even 4 years after LT. Neoadjuvant ICIs also pose a risk for acute cellular rejection; however, this may not always be clinically significant. Graft versus host disease (GVHD) may be an additional, previously unreported risk of ICIs in the setting of LT. Prospective studies are needed to understand benefits and risks of checkpoint inhibitors in the LT setting.