Neurologic autoimmunity and immune checkpoint inhibitors
Autoantibody profiles and outcomes
Citation Manager Formats
Make Comment
See Comments

Abstract
Objective To describe neural autoantibody profiles and outcomes in patients with neurologic autoimmunity associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) cancer immunotherapy.
Methods In this retrospective descriptive study, 63 patients with ICI-related neurologic autoimmunity were included: 39 seen at the Mayo Clinic Neurology Department (clinical cohort) and 24 whose serum/CSF was referred to the Mayo Clinic Neuroimmunology Laboratory for autoantibody testing. Serum/CSF samples were tested for neural-specific autoantibodies. Predictors of unfavorable outcome (residual adverse event severity grade ≥3) were explored (logistic regression).
Results Median age at neurologic symptom onset was 65 years (range 31–86); 40% were female. Neurologic manifestations were CNS-restricted (n = 26), neuromuscular (n = 30), combined (n = 5), or isolated retinopathy (n = 2). Neural-specific autoantibodies were common in patients with CNS involvement (7/13 [54%] in the unbiased clinical cohort) and included known or unidentified neural-restricted specificities. Only 11/31 patients with CNS manifestations had neuroendocrine malignancies typically associated with paraneoplastic autoimmunity. Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC)–predictive antibodies were seen in 3 patients with non-neuroendocrine tumors (neuronal intermediate filament immunoglobulin G [IgG] and antineuronal nuclear antibody 1 with melanoma; amphiphysin IgG with non-SCLC). A median of 10 months from onset (range, 0.5–46), 14/39 in the clinical cohort (36%) had unfavorable outcomes; their characteristics were age ≥70 years, female, CNS involvement, lung cancer, higher initial severity grade, and lack of systemic autoimmunity. By multivariate analysis, only age remained independently associated with poor outcome (p = 0.01). Four of 5 patients with preexistent neurologic autoimmunity experienced irreversible worsening after ICI.
Conclusions Neural-specific autoantibodies are not uncommon in patients with ICI-related CNS neurologic autoimmunity. Outcomes mostly depend on the pre-ICI treatment characteristics and clinical phenotype.
Glossary
- AChR=
- acetylcholine receptor;
- ANNA=
- antineuronal nuclear antibody;
- BDUMP=
- bilateral diffuse uveal melanocytic proliferation;
- CRMP5=
- collapsin response-mediator protein 5;
- CTLA4=
- cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–associated antigen-4;
- GAD65=
- glutamic acid decarboxylase 65;
- GFAP=
- glial fibrillary acidic protein;
- HMGCR=
- β-hydroxy-β-methylglutaryl coenzyme-A reductase;
- ICI=
- immune checkpoint inhibitor;
- IgG=
- immunoglobulin G;
- IVIg=
- IV immunoglobulin;
- LGI1=
- leucine-rich glioma-inactivated 1;
- MG=
- myasthenia gravis;
- NIF=
- neuronal intermediate filament;
- NMDAR=
- NMDA receptor;
- PCA=
- Purkinje cell antibody;
- PD1=
- programmed death-1;
- PDL1=
- programmed death-1 ligand;
- PRES=
- posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome;
- SCLC=
- small-cell lung carcinoma;
- SRP=
- signal recognition particle;
- STR=
- striational autoantibodies;
- UNA=
- autoantibodies as yet unidentified molecularly;
- VGCC=
- voltage-gated calcium channels;
- VGKC=
- voltage-gated potassium channel
Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized cancer therapy.1,2 By targeting negative regulatory steps of T-cell activation, namely the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–associated antigen-4 (CTLA4) and programmed death-1 (PD1) or its ligand (PDL1), they enhance endogenous immune responses including antitumor immunity.1,–,3 An undesired outcome is autoimmunity that can potentially affect any organ (dermatologic, gastrointestinal, endocrine, and pulmonary autoimmunity are most common), with an overall frequency of 15%–90% for all severity grades in single-agent trials.4 Neurologic autoimmunity of all grades is estimated to occur in 4.2% of patients receiving monotherapy and up to 14% of patients treated with a combination of CTLA4 and PD1/PDL1 inhibitors.5,6 Neuromuscular manifestations are the most common, accounting for approximately two-thirds of patients, while CNS involvement is less frequent and often extends beyond the classic paraneoplastic phenotypes, making diagnosis and management challenging.7,–,11 In particular, otherwise extremely rare neural autoantibodies seem to occur more frequently in patients with cancer treated with ICI and not always with their typical cancer association.10 In addition, novel neural autoantibodies are increasingly recognized in these patients.12,13 A systematic investigation of the neural autoantibody profiles accompanying the different neurologic phenotypes and underlying cancers is lacking. In this study, we report the neural autoantibody profiles and outcome predictors in a large cohort of ICI-treated patients with autoimmune neurologic complications.
Methods
Standard protocol approvals, registrations, and patient consents
The study was approved by the Mayo Foundation Institutional Review Board. Patients consented to the use of their medical records for research.
Patients
Two patient cohorts were retrospectively identified through August 31, 2019: a clinical cohort and a laboratory cohort.
The clinical cohort comprises patients seen in the Mayo Clinic Neurology Department with a diagnosis of ICI-related neurologic autoimmunity and neurologic adverse event severity grade ≥2. Medical records were reviewed and patients with other plausible explanations for their neurologic symptoms were excluded (e.g., brain metastasis, recent exposure to chemotherapeutic agents known to be potentially neurotoxic). Neurologic adverse event severity grades for specific manifestations were as previously defined (grade 1, asymptomatic or mild; grade 2, minimal, noninvasive intervention indicated; grade 3, severe, not immediately life-threatening; grade 4, life-threatening, urgent intervention indicated; grade 5, death).14 Severity grades were independently assessed (A.Z., E.S.) at presentation of neurologic autoimmunity and last clinical follow-up; consensus was reached after discussion in case of disagreement. Twenty patients were reported previously.5,12,15,–,19
The laboratory cohort includes patients whose serum or CSF were referred to the Mayo Clinic Neuroimmunology Laboratory for neural autoantibody testing. Clinical information was obtained from physicians on notification of antibody positivity and in providing antibody profile interpretation.
Neural autoantibody testing
Autoantibody screening evaluations were performed by clinically validated methods in the Mayo Clinic Neuroimmunology Laboratory and were based on patients' presenting phenotype.20 Patients with neuromuscular junction disorders or myopathy underwent autoantibody testing for muscle acetylcholine receptor (AChR) and sarcomeric protein specificities (striational autoantibodies [STR; titer <1:7,680 were excluded]). A minority of patients with myopathy had antibody testing for β-hydroxy-β-methylglutaryl coenzyme-A reductase (HMGCR) and signal recognition particle (SRP) antibodies (outside laboratory).
Patients with CNS or peripheral nerve involvement underwent a paraneoplastic evaluation (serum or CSF) that includes autoantibodies specific for muscle and ganglionic AChR, STR, voltage-gated potassium channel (VGKC) complex, glutamic acid decarboxylase 65 (GAD65; serum titer >20 nmol/L or CSF titer >0.02 nmol/L were included), voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs, P/Q-type or N-type), and screening by indirect immunofluorescence assay on a composite of mouse tissues that detects classic autoantibodies (antineuronal nuclear antibody [ANNA] 1, ANNA2, ANNA3, Purkinje cell antibody [PCA] 1, PCA2/MAP1B, PCA-Tr, amphiphysin, collapsin response-mediator protein 5 [CRMP5], and anti-glial nuclear antibody 1/SOX1), recently described neural autoantibodies (specific for phosphodiesterase 10A [PDE10A], neuronal intermediated filaments [NIF]) plus additional neural-specific autoantibodies as yet unidentified molecularly (UNA).20 In patients with encephalopathy, autoantibodies specific for leucine-rich glioma-inactivated 1 (LGI1), contactin-associated protein (CASPR) 2, NMDA receptor (NMDAR), α‐amino‐3‐hydroxy‐5‐methyl‐4‐isoxazolepropionic acid receptor (AMPAR), γ‐aminobutyric acid B receptor, and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) α were also tested.
Statistical analysis and outcome
Continuous and categorical variables were reported as median (range) and number (percentage), respectively. Univariate logistic regression analysis was used to investigate variables associated with unfavorable outcome in the clinical cohort, defined as a residual adverse event severity grade ≥3 at last follow-up. The simultaneous effect of variables found to be significantly associated with unfavorable outcome was explored by multivariate logistic regression (JMP Pro 14.1.0). Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were reported; p values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
Data availability
Anonymized data used for this study are available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author.
Results
Sixty-three patients were included: clinical cohort, 39; laboratory cohort, 24. Their demographics, oncologic characteristics, specific ICI treatment received, and neurologic phenotypes are summarized in table 1. In 5 patients (clinical cohort, 4; laboratory cohort, 1), the autoimmune neurologic manifestations were already present at the time of ICI treatment. In the clinical cohort, the majority of symptoms in patients without preexisting neurologic autoimmunity occurred within the first 3 months of ICI treatment (25/35; 71%).
Characteristics of 63 patients with neurologic immune-related adverse events associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy
CNS manifestations
CNS manifestations, observed in 31 patients (clinical cohort, 13; laboratory cohort, 18; table 2), included encephalopathy with or without seizures (n = 21), cerebellar ataxia (n = 11), hyperkinetic movement disorders (n = 3), optic neuropathy (n = 4), myelopathy (n = 3), or combinations thereof. Only 11/31 patients with CNS manifestations had neuroendocrine tumors, while the rest had malignancies not typically associated with paraneoplastic autoimmunity. Encephalitis manifestations were either localized (e.g., limbic or basal ganglia restricted) or diffuse. Concomitant posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES) and fasciculations developed in an LGI1 immunoglobulin G (IgG) seropositive patient. Two patients with CSF positivity for GFAPα IgG had, as anticipated, a steroid-responsive meningoencephalitis.21 In a patient with high GAD65 IgG levels, limbic encephalitis appeared after new onset of type 1 diabetes.
Clinical, radiologic, and laboratory characteristics of 31 immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)–recipient patients with CNS complications: clinical cohort (cases 1–13) and laboratory cohort (cases 14–31)
Among 20 patients with available CSF data, 19 (95%) had abnormalities: lymphocytic pleocytosis, 14 (median cell count, 25; range, 8–76); CSF-restricted oligoclonal bands, 9.
MRI abnormalities, noted in 11/18 (61%) with available information, included localized T2 hyperintensities (e.g., mesiotemporal, basal ganglia, spinal cord), parenchymal/meningeal enhancement, or focal atrophy (e.g., cerebellum). MRI findings were consistent with the patients' clinical syndromes (figure, A–D). 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose PET revealed diffuse or focal areas of hypometabolism or hypermetabolism in 2 patients with limbic encephalitis; 2 additional patients (both lacking CSF biomarkers for Alzheimer disease) had diffuse and frontotemporal hypometabolism, respectively (table 2).
(A–D) Brain MRI. (A) Axial image shows basal ganglia fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) hyperintensities, affecting the putamen and caudate head bilaterally, in a patient with phosphodiesterase 10A antibodies and hyperkinetic movements. (B) Sagittal T1-weighted image shows atrophy of the superior cerebellar vermis in a patient with seronegative autoimmune ataxia. (C) Axial imaging shows bilateral mesial temporal pole FLAIR hyperintensities, more prominent on the left, in a patient with limbic encephalitis and autoantibodies as yet unidentified molecularly. (D) 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose PET axial images show hypometabolism of the temporal poles in a patient with limbic encephalitis, ataxia, optic neuritis, and antineuronal nuclear antibody 1 antibodies. (E) Nerve biopsy of the left sural nerve of a patient with ICI-related vasculitic neuropathy demonstrates a large perivascular epineurial inflammatory collection with infiltration and disruption of the blood vessel wall: hematoxylin & eosin (H&E) (E.a) and CD45 (E.b) stain. (F) Muscle biopsy of a patient with ICI-related myopathy: H&E-stained section (F.a) shows regenerating (arrowhead) and necrotic fibers invaded by macrophages (arrows). Macrophages appear red on acid phosphatase-stained section (F.b).
Neuromuscular manifestations
Thirty-four patients had neuromuscular symptoms. Peripheral neuropathy was most common (n = 22; clinical cohort, 19; laboratory cohort, 3), in isolation (n = 14) or accompanied by myopathy (n = 4) or CNS manifestations (n = 4). Isolated neuralgic amyotrophy developed in 4 patients (unilateral brachial plexopathy, 2; bilateral phrenic nerve palsy presenting with acute dyspnea, 2). Five patients had a subacute length-dependent polyradiculoneuropathy (both axonal and demyelinating, 4; pure axonal, 1). Two patients had diffuse acute inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy with facial nerve involvement. Two patients had biopsy-proven vasculitic neuropathy (figure, E) and improved minimally or not at all after ICI discontinuation or immunosuppression/immunomodulation. Other neuropathy phenotypes included isolated cranial neuropathy (excluding optic neuritis; n = 5) or other nonspecified neuropathies (n = 4).
Three patients had clinical generalized myasthenia gravis (MG): clinical cohort, 1; laboratory cohort, 2. In one of these patients, the disease was known before ICI treatment initiation and this was the only patient with MG who tested positive for muscle AChR IgG.
Myopathy developed in 13 patients (clinical cohort, 11; laboratory cohort, 2) and predominantly involved bulbar muscles (n = 5), proximal limb muscles (n = 5), or was confined to the extraocular muscles (n = 1). The 2 remaining patients had diffuse myopathy causing diaphragmatic paralysis with respiratory failure in one. Serum creatine kinase was elevated in 8/12 (67%) with available data (median 680 U/L [range 72–13,000]). Troponin was elevated in 8 patients, with decreased ejection fraction by echocardiography in 4. Muscle biopsy, available for 6 patients, contained multifocal areas with necrotic and regenerating fibers (n = 4; figure, F) or mild inflammation (n = 2).
Other clinical manifestations
Three patients (clinical cohort) had ICI-related hypophysitis before or coinciding with onset of neurologic manifestations; 17 patients (45%) had other preexisting or coinciding nonneurologic autoimmunity (e.g., thyroiditis, myocarditis, pneumonitis, hepatitis, colitis). Two patients had isolated autoimmune retinopathy: (1) bilateral diffuse uveal melanocytic proliferation (BDUMP) in a 60-year-old man with esophageal junction adenocarcinoma treated successfully with IV immunoglobulin (IVIg), high-dose steroids, and plasmapheresis; and (2) preexisting melanoma-associated retinopathy in a 75-year-old woman who worsened after pembrolizumab and improved following IVIg and bevacizumab.
Autoantibody profile
Of 31 patients with CNS involvement, 24 patients (77%) had detectable neural-specific autoantibodies. Neural antibodies with known antigenic specificities were seen in 16/24 (67%) (serum, 4; CSF, 6; both, 6): ANNA1, 3; CRMP5, 3; amphiphysin, 2; GFAP, 2; NIF, 2; PDE10A, 2; SOX1, 1; LGI1, 1; GAD65, 1; NMDAR, 1; with or without coexisting low-titer serum VGKC, 3; P/Q type VGCC, 2; and N type VGCC, 2. In 9 patients (38%), the neural-specific antibodies detected were of yet unidentified molecular specificities (serum, 2; CSF, 6; both, 1), including one with coexisting SOX1 and P/Q-type VGCC autoantibodies. In the unbiased clinical cohort, the frequency of any neural-specific autoantibody among patients with CNS involvement was 54% (7/13 patients; 1/7 had an isolated UNA [CSF of a patient with limbic encephalitis]).
Of 22 patients with peripheral nerve involvement, 9 were positive for the following: ANNA1, 3; LGI1, 1; UNA, 1; muscle AChR, 3; and STR, 3. Of these patients, 7 had concomitant CNS manifestations (all ANNA1 or LGI1-IgG positive) or myopathy (muscle AChR or STR autoantibody positive). One patient (muscle AChR IgG seropositive) had isolated oculomotor neuropathy per the referring provider that could represent an ocular myopathy and an UNA-seropositive patient with limited information had unspecified neuropathy (both patients were from the laboratory cohort).
All patients with MG or myopathy (n = 16) were tested for STR autoantibodies and 9 were positive; 5 of them had coexisting muscle AChR. All seropositive patients had myopathy except for one who had preexisting MG before ICI treatment. In the unbiased clinical cohort, 6/11 (55%) patients with myopathy were seropositive for muscle AChR and/or STR autoantibodies; 4 muscle AChR binding autoantibodies showed modulation. None of 8 patients with myopathy who were tested for SRP or HMGCR autoantibodies was positive.
A “classical” paraneoplastic association (i.e., clinical, oncologic, and autoantibody profiles typical of what is classically recognized as paraneoplastic) was observed in 6 patients: 5 of them had small-cell lung carcinoma (SCLC) and IgGs specific for amphiphysin and P/Q-type VGCC with preexisting cerebellar ataxia (n = 1); SOX1, P/Q-type VGCC, and UNA (n = 1) with limbic encephalitis; ANNA1 and CRMP5 (n = 1) with preexisting cerebellar ataxia, myelitis, and peripheral neuropathy (video 1); CRMP5 (n = 1) with a longitudinally extensive myelopathy; and ANNA1 and STR (n = 1) with limbic encephalitis, cerebellar ataxia, and cranial neuropathy. The sixth patient had Merkel cell carcinoma with NIF IgG and CRMP5 IgG and encephalitis, ataxia, and vision changes.
Video 1
Gait in a patient with preexisting paraneoplastic autoimmunity before and after immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment (patient 10 in table 2). The patient presented with a complex paraneoplastic neurologic syndrome associated with antineuronal nuclear antibody 1 immunoglobulin G (IgG) and collapsin response-mediator protein 5 IgG and small-cell lung cancer (not shown). After initial treatment with high-dose steroids and cytotoxic chemotherapy (carboplatin and etoposide), he had improved ataxic and paretic gait (first part of the video). At that time, in the patient's chemotherapy regimen, nivolumab was added and subsequently replaced by atezolizumab, leading to a marked deterioration of the patient's ambulatory capacity, requiring the aid of a walker (second part of the video). The neurologic decline was refractory to ICI discontinuation and aggressive immunosuppressive therapy (plasma exchange, steroids, IV immunoglobulin, and cyclophosphamide).Download Supplementary Video 1 via http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/010632_Video_1
Among 9 patients with CNS manifestations and neuroendocrine tumors (without preexisting autoimmunity), only 1 patient was antibody negative, 4 had SCLC-predictive antibody specificities (ANNA1, CRMP5, NIF, P/Q-type VGCC, SOX1), 1 had GAD65 IgG, 1 had NMDAR IgG, and 2 had UNAs only, without other well-described neural antibodies. SCLC-predictive antibody profiles were seen in 2 patients with melanoma and CNS manifestations (NIF IgG and ANNA1) and 1 with non-SCLC (amphiphysin IgG).
Disease course and outcome
Thirty-four patients in the clinical cohort discontinued ICI therapy before or at neurologic symptom onset (87%). Thirty-one patients (79%) received immunosuppression/immunomodulation for their neurologic syndrome: oral corticosteroids, 23; high-dose IV steroids, 18; IVIg, 11; and plasmapheresis, 8. The 5 patients who continued their ICI therapy after neurologic symptom onset had lower adverse event severity grade at onset (median, 2 [range, 2–3]) compared to patients who discontinued ICI (median, 3 [range, 2–4]; p = 0.02; Wilcoxon rank sum test). Their clinical phenotypes were as follows: (1) a 60-year-old man with BDUMP and esophageal junction adenocarcinoma who received monthly IVIg (0.4 g/kg) in concomitance with pembrolizumab for 17 months with improvement of visual symptoms but cancer progression; (2) a 62-year-old man with metastatic melanoma and bilateral hearing loss after one cycle of pembrolizumab who was treated with prednisone 70 mg/d for 7 days with minimal improvement (required hearing aid 4 years later); pembrolizumab was continued for 15 months with cancer remission; (3) a 69-year-old man with melanoma and severe headache and loss of taste and hearing after 5 cycles of nivolumab and ipilimumab, treated with oral prednisone (60 mg daily for 1 week, then slow taper) with symptom resolution; nivolumab was continued for 10 months with cancer remission; (4) a 75-year-old man with recurrent melanoma and brachial plexopathy with right hemidiaphragm palsy after one cycle of nivolumab; no immunosuppression was used but there was mild spontaneous improvement; nivolumab was continued for 8 months with cancer remission; (5) a 63-year-old woman with small cell lung cancer and CRMP5 IgG progressive myelopathy after 3 cycles of atezolizumab treated with IVMP and cyclophosphamide with improvement of neurologic symptoms; an additional dose of atezolizumab was given and the patient is in cancer remission (patient 11 in table 2).
After a median follow-up of 10 months (range, 0.5–46), 14/39 patients (36%) showed unfavorable neurologic outcomes (residual severity grade ≥3) including 2 deaths from neurologic complications; 13 patients (33%) had favorable neurologic outcomes (severity grade = 1). Three patients relapsed after immunosuppressive therapy was tapered or discontinued (encephalitis, 1; CNS demyelination, 1; and proximal myopathy, 1). The patients with unfavorable outcome had encephalitis/ataxia, 8; vasculitic neuropathy, 2; bulbar myopathy, 2; generalized myopathy with diaphragmatic involvement, 1; or generalized MG, 1.
Of all the variables investigated by univariate logistic regression analysis (table 3), the following were found to be significantly associated with unfavorable outcome: onset age ≥70 years, female sex, CNS involvement, lung cancer, higher severity grade at onset, shorter follow-up, and absence of preceding or accompanying non-neurologic ICI-related autoimmunity. By multivariate analysis, only onset age ≥70 years remained independently associated with poor outcome (p = 0.01; table 3).
Univariate logistic regression analysis exploring potential associations with unfavorable outcome (residual adverse event severity grade ≥3) at last clinical follow-up
Preexisting neurologic autoimmunity
Five patients had evidence of neurologic autoimmunity before ICI therapy began. Three had clinically recognized paraneoplastic syndromes affecting the CNS (cerebellar ataxia with amphiphysin IgG, P/Q-type VGCC IgG, and SCLC; encephalomyelitis, cerebellar ataxia, and peripheral neuropathy with ANNA1 IgG and CRMP5 IgGs and SCLC; and limbic encephalitis with UNA IgG and melanoma). All of these patients had irreversible neurologic worsening after ICI initiation and did not improve following immunosuppressive therapy (table 2; video 1). One patient with muscle AChR IgG–positive MG worsened after ICI, requiring bilevel positive airway pressure ventilation despite immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory therapy. The single patient who improved with immunosuppression/immunomodulatory therapy had autoimmune retinopathy and had initially worsened on starting ICI therapy.
Discussion
We provide a comprehensive analysis of patients with cancer with ICI-related neurologic autoimmunity, their associated clinical–autoantibody profiles, and outcomes. Our findings suggest that neural autoantibodies are not infrequent in patients with CNS involvement and represent useful diagnostic tools to confirm neurologic autoimmunity. The main determinants of neurologic outcome relate to the patients' baseline characteristics at ICI initiation and the phenotype of the neurologic complication.
As typically observed in patients with spontaneous paraneoplastic neurologic disorders, ICI-related neurologic complications are heterogeneous, can affect any level of the neuraxis, and can often coexist.3 Despite previous reports suggesting a low frequency of neural autoantibodies in patients with ICI-related neurologic autoimmunity, in our unbiased clinical cohort, 54% had a detectable neural autoantibody.5,6,22,–,26 We found a relatively high proportion of neural autoantibodies that have only recently been characterized (e.g., neuronal intermediate filament, PDE10A) or remain of unknown molecular specificity.12,16 These autoantibodies are not detectable when testing is restricted to antigen-specific molecular assays. This underscores the benefit of including a neural tissue–based immunohistochemical screening assay in testing for suspected neurologic autoimmunity or other unbiased neural autoantibody detection methodologies.
The majority of neural autoantibodies we detected in this study are specific for intracellular antigens and are not directly pathogenic but rather represent biomarkers of a cytotoxic T-cell response of the same specificity. Antibody-mediated neural dysfunction with autoantibodies targeting neural synapse antigens was also noticed, as in the case of LGI1 and NMDAR autoimmunity (table 2). ICIs act by enhancing endogenous immune responses both at the priming and effector phase of the immune response and do not limit their effects only to cytotoxic T cells but also helper, regulatory T cells and B cells among others.1,2 This is consistent with the variety of clinical phenotypes and underlying disease mechanisms that are observed in ICI-treated patients, including direct T-cell or antibody cytotoxicity, granulomatous inflammation, or other not yet completely understood mechanisms (e.g., immune-mediated blood–brain barrier dysfunction in patients who develop PRES).
A classic paraneoplastic association (i.e., clinical, oncologic, and autoantibody profiles typical of what is classically recognized as paraneoplastic) was observed in 6 patients, consistent with an augmented anticancer immune response against onconeural antigens.3 However, the tumors encountered in the majority of seropositive patients are not typically accompanied by paraneoplastic neurologic syndromes (e.g., renal cell cancer, melanoma), suggesting an increased/altered neoantigen expression by the tumor under immune attack.27 In addition, SCLC-predictive antibodies were present in patients with melanoma and non-SCLC. With growing therapeutic indications for ICI administration, we anticipate accelerated discovery of onconeural antigens of immunologic significance beyond the classically recognized paraneoplastic autoantigens (such as Hu proteins in SCLC).
In this study, patients with CNS involvement who were seropositive for recognized neural autoantibodies generally presented with a syndromic manifestation of the autoantibody (e.g., NMDAR/ANNA1 with encephalitis, CRMP5 with progressive myelopathy), although atypical or overlapping presentations were sometimes observed (e.g., LGI1 autoimmunity with typical peripheral involvement and coexisting PRES). Aquaporin-4 IgG has been reported in the context of ICI therapy, but the single patient in our cohort who had relapsing demyelinating disease was seronegative and fulfilled clinical criteria for multiple sclerosis diagnosis.28 Multiple sclerosis has been reported previously as being triggered/worsened by ICI, by potentiation of a preexisting immune response in the CNS that was not paraneoplastic.29 Other CNS manifestations that have been reported with ICI therapy include sarcoidosis/CNS granulomatosis,30 vasculitis,31 mild encephalopathy with reversible splenial lesion,31 and Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada syndrome (table 4).32
Summary of neurologic syndromes reported in the context of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy
The severity and outcome of peripheral nerve and muscle manifestations were generally related to the specific clinical phenotype (e.g., ocular myopathy vs diffuse vasculitic neuropathy).9 In contrast with earlier reports, neuralgic amyotrophy was relatively common in this study.22 Diaphragmatic dysfunction, observed in 4 patients, manifested as severe respiratory impairment due to direct myopathic involvement or phrenic nerve paralysis and sometimes was the sole clinical manifestation. Two patients significantly improved after discontinuing ICI and immunosuppressive therapy (IV high-dose methylprednisolone and IVIg, 1; plasmapheresis, IVIg, and cyclophosphamide, 1), while mild spontaneous improvement was observed in 1 patient who continued ICI and received no immunosuppression over months.
Patients with myopathy had a prominent oculo-bulbar presentation and 4 were seropositive for muscle AChR IgG but lacked electrophysiologic evidence of MG.25 Muscle AChR IgG, even though potentially pathogenic, has been described in patients without clinical MG, including patients who develop myopathy from ICI therapy, and might represent a biomarker of the underlying malignancy expressing muscle AChR under immune attack as an onconeural antigen.33,34 The lack of neurologic disease in the presence of potentially pathogenic antibodies could be due to titer or fine specificity of the antibody present during an evolving humoral immune response.35 P/Q VGCC IgG seropositive Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome has been described as an ICI complication but was not encountered in our cohort (table 4).36
The final neurologic outcome was unfavorable in one-third of patients and associated with a patient's pre–ICI treatment characteristics (older age, female sex, lung cancer, and presence of systemic ICI-related autoimmunity) and clinical phenotype (CNS involvement, severity grade at onset). Patients with preexistent paraneoplastic CNS autoimmunity and neural autoantibody seropositivity had a particularly severe neurologic deterioration after commencing ICI that was generally poorly responsive to protracted immunotherapy. These patients underscore the utility of neural autoantibody screening before ICI initiation in the presence of unexplained neurologic symptoms, and urge caution in using ICIs in patients with preexisting neurologic autoimmunity and onconeural antibodies.3,34 On the contrary, the benefit of neural autoantibody screening in all patients who are initiating ICI treatment (and related costs) needs to be determined. There might be a role for screening in patients with tumors traditionally associated with neural autoantibodies even when neurologically asymptomatic, such as SCLC and thymoma.20,35 To this effect, in a small study of patients with thymoma undergoing ICI treatment, the presence of neural autoantibodies before ICI initiation predicted the development of autoimmune complications.34
This study is limited by its retrospective nature and small sample size that did not allow stratification of patients by clinical phenotype, associated neural antibodies, and treatment modality (most patients were treated nonuniformly with immunosuppression/immunomodulation). Our findings are generalizable to similar populations with moderate to severe neurologic manifestations (we only included patients seen in the neurology department with severity grade ≥2), thus the neural autoantibody frequencies and outcomes could be different outside this context. Future studies will clarify optimal treatment strategies for patients with ICI-related neurologic autoimmunity.
Study funding
No targeted funding reported.
Disclosure
E. Sechi reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. S. Markovic reports a grant from Vavotar Life Sciences. A. McKeon reports research support from Euroimmun. D. Dubey has a patent pending for KLHL11 as a marker of neurologic autoimmunity; received research support from Grifols, Center of Multiple Sclerosis and Autoimmune Neurology, and Center for Clinical and Translational Science; and consulted for UCB and Astellas. All compensation for consulting activities is paid directly to Mayo Clinic. T. Liewluck reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. V. Lennon reports royalty payments from RSR/Kronus. A. Lopez-Chiriboga reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. C. Klein is a consultant for Pfizer and Stealth Pharmaceutical with no personal monies received; and reports Ackea Honorarium for a talk on Fabry disease. M. Mauermann reports research support from IONIS and Alnylam. S. Pittock reports personal fees, nonfinancial support, and other from Alexion and MedImmune. All compensation was paid directly to the Mayo Clinic. He received personal compensation for attending the UCB Advisory Board meeting on September 10, 2019, and reports grant/research support from Alexion, Grifols, MedImmune, and AEA. All compensation is paid to Mayo Clinic. He reports issued patents 8,889,102, NMO Autoantibodies as a Marker for Neoplasia; and 9,891,219B, Methods for Treating NMO by Administration of Eculizumab to an Individual That is AQP4+. E. Flanagan reports research support as a site principal investigator in a randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial of inebilizumab (a CD19 inhibitor) in neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders funded by MedImmune/Viela Bio. A. Zekeridou has a patent pending on PDE10A IgG as a biomarker of neurologic autoimmunity. Go to Neurology.org/N for full disclosures.
Acknowledgment
The authors thank the Mayo Clinic Center for Multiple Sclerosis and Autoimmune Neurology, which supported this project with a Research Fellowship assigned to E.S.
Appendix Authors

Footnotes
Go to Neurology.org/N for full disclosures. Funding information and disclosures deemed relevant by the authors, if any, are provided at the end of the article.
- Received February 25, 2020.
- Accepted in final form May 27, 2020.
- © 2020 American Academy of Neurology
References
- 1.↵
- 2.↵
- 3.↵
- Zekeridou A,
- Lennon VA
- 4.↵
- 5.↵
- Kao JC,
- Liao B,
- Markovic SN, et al
- 6.↵
- 7.↵
- 8.↵
- Gill A,
- Perez MA,
- Perrone CM,
- Bae CJ,
- Pruitt AA,
- Lancaster E
- 9.↵
- Johansen A,
- Christensen SJ,
- Scheie D,
- Hojgaard JLS,
- Kondziella D
- 10.↵
- Vogrig A,
- Fouret M,
- Joubert B, et al
- 11.↵
- Williams TJ,
- Benavides DR,
- Patrice KA, et al
- 12.↵
- Zekeridou A,
- Kryzer T,
- Guo Y, et al
- 13.↵
- Titulaer MJ,
- Irani SR,
- Lassmann H
- 14.↵
- 15.↵
- Alhammad RM,
- Dronca RS,
- Kottschade LA, et al
- 16.↵
- Basal E,
- Zalewski N,
- Kryzer TJ, et al
- 17.↵
- 18.↵
- Ruff MW,
- Mauermann ML
- 19.↵
- Kunchok A,
- Zekeridou A,
- Pittock S
- 20.↵
- Zekeridou A,
- Majed M,
- Heliopoulos I,
- Lennon VA
- 21.↵
- Fang B,
- McKeon A,
- Hinson SR, et al
- 22.↵
- Dubey D,
- David WS,
- Amato AA, et al
- 23.↵
- 24.↵
- Mancone S,
- Lycan T,
- Ahmed T, et al
- 25.↵
- Suzuki S,
- Ishikawa N,
- Konoeda F, et al
- 26.↵
- 27.↵
- Schreiber RD,
- Old LJ,
- Smyth MJ
- 28.↵
- Narumi Y,
- Yoshida R,
- Minami Y, et al
- 29.↵
- Gerdes LA,
- Held K,
- Beltran E, et al
- 30.↵
- 31.↵
- 32.↵
- 33.↵
- Touat M,
- Maisonobe T,
- Knauss S, et al
- 34.↵
- Mammen AL,
- Rajan A,
- Pak K, et al
- 35.↵
- Zekeridou A,
- McKeon A,
- Lennon VA
- 36.↵
- Nakatani Y,
- Tanaka N,
- Enami T,
- Minami S,
- Okazaki T,
- Komuta K
Letters: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
You must ensure that your Disclosures have been updated within the previous six months. Please go to our Submission Site to add or update your Disclosure information.
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
You May Also be Interested in
Hastening the Diagnosis of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
Dr. Brian Callaghan and Dr. Kellen Quigg
► Watch
Related Articles
- No related articles found.
Alert Me
Recommended articles
-
Article
Phosphodiesterase 10A IgGA novel biomarker of paraneoplastic neurologic autoimmunityAnastasia Zekeridou, Thomas Kryzer, Yong Guo et al.Neurology, July 17, 2019 -
Article
Immunoadsorption therapy in autoimmune encephalitidesMüjgan Dogan Onugoren, Kristin S. Golombeck, Corinna Bien et al.Neurology - Neuroimmunology Neuroinflammation, February 26, 2016 -
Article
Updated Diagnostic Criteria for Paraneoplastic Neurologic SyndromesFrancesc Graus, Alberto Vogrig, Sergio Muñiz-Castrillo et al.Neurology: Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation, May 18, 2021 -
Article
Immune checkpoint inhibitor-related myositis and myocarditis in patients with cancerMehdi Touat, Thierry Maisonobe, Samuel Knauss et al.Neurology, August 08, 2018