scholarly journals The effect of antibiotics on the clinical outcomes of patients with solid cancers undergoing immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment: a retrospective study

BMC Cancer ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyunho Kim ◽  
Ji Eun Lee ◽  
Sook Hee Hong ◽  
Myung Ah. Lee ◽  
Jin Hyoung Kang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Small Cell Lung Carcinoma ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Solid Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Carcinoma ◽  
Antibiotics Use

Abstract Background This study aimed to assess the effect of antibiotics on the clinical outcomes of patients with solid cancers undergoing treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Methods The medical records of 234 patients treated with ICIs for any type of solid cancer between February 2012 and May 2018 at the Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital were retrospectively reviewed. The data of patients who received antibiotics within 60 days before the initiation of ICI treatment were analyzed. The patients’ responses to ICI treatment and their survival were evaluated. Results Non-small-cell lung carcinoma was the most common type of cancer. About half of the patients were treated with nivolumab (51.9%), and cephalosporin (35.2%) was the most commonly used class of antibiotics. The total objective response rate was 21%. Antibiotics use was associated with a decreased objective response (odds ratio 0.466, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.225–0.968, p = 0.040). The antibiotics group exhibited shorter progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) than the no antibiotics group (median PFS: 2 months vs. 4 months, p < 0.001; median OS: 5 months vs. 17 months, p < 0.001). In the multivariate analysis, antibiotics use was a significant predictor of patient survival (PFS: hazard ratio [HR] 1.715, 95% CI 1.264–2.326, p = 0.001; OS: HR 1.785, 95% CI 1.265–2.519, p = 0.001). Conclusions The use of antibiotics may affect the clinical outcomes of patients with solid cancers treated with ICIs. Careful prescription of antibiotics is warranted in candidates who are scheduled for ICI treatment. Trial registration Not applicable (retrospective study).

scholarly journals Impact of Antibiotics and Proton Pump Inhibitors on Efficacy and Tolerance of Anti-PD-1 Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Quentin Giordan ◽  
Julia Salleron ◽  
Catherine Vallance ◽  
Clothilde Moriana ◽  
Christelle Clement-Duchene
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Proton Pump Inhibitors ◽  
Proton Pump ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Small Cell Lung Carcinoma ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Cell Lung Carcinoma ◽  
The Impact

BackgroundThe use of antibiotics (ATB) and proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) alters the composition and diversity of the gut microbiota, which can influence the immune system, consequently interfering with response to anti-PD1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). We assessed the impact of ATB and/or PPI use on the efficacy and safety of ICI.MethodsTwo hundred twelve patients treated with anti-PD1 ICI for non-small cell lung carcinoma, melanoma, upper airway &amp; digestive tract carcinoma or renal cell carcinoma were retrospectively included. Patients having received ATB within 60 days before ICI initiation were included in the ATB+ group. Patients having received PPI within 30 days before ICI initiation were included in the PPI+ group. Four groups were thus considered: ATB-/PPI-, ATB+/PPI-, ATB-/PPI+, ATB+/PPI+. Response rate was assessed by RECIST v1.1. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events, recorded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 5, were compared using inverse probability of treatment weighting to account for selection bias.ResultsPFS at 6 months was 56.7 %, 95%CI (49.6%; 63.2%) and 47.2 %, 95%CI (39.8%;54.1%) at 12 months. OS was 81.6%, 95%CI (75.6%; 86.2%) at 6 months, and 69.4%, 95%CI (61.9%;75.7%) at 12 months. Compared to ATB-/PPI- group, PFS was lower for the ATB+/PPI- group [Hazard ratio (HR) 1.90, 95%CI (1.41;2.57)] and the ATB-/PPI+ group [HR 1.51, 95%CI (1.11;2.05)], and lowest in the ATB+/PPI+ group [HR 3.65, 95%CI (2.75;4.84)]. For OS, the use of ATB alone or PPI alone or in combination was a risk factor for death, with each increasing HR values by a similar magnitude, and the combination of ATB and PPI did not increase risk further. AEs were observed in 78 cases (36.8%) with no significant impact of ATB or PPI use.ConclusionsThis study reveals that ATB and/or PPI use can alter response to anti-PD1 ICI, and the prognosis of cancer patients. The microbiota mechanisms involved in the response to ICI should be investigated to optimize patient management.

scholarly journals Treatment with therapeutic anticoagulation is not associated with immunotherapy response in advanced cancer patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Johannet ◽  
Amelia Sawyers ◽  
Nicholas Gulati ◽  
Douglas Donnelly ◽  
Samuel Kozloff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Blockade ◽  
Coagulation Cascade ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
Clinical Endpoints

Abstract Background Recent preclinical data suggest that there may be therapeutic synergy between immune checkpoint blockade and inhibition of the coagulation cascade. Here, we investigate whether patients who received immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and were on concomitant anticoagulation (AC) experienced better treatment outcomes than individuals not on AC.Affiliation: Kindly confirm if corresponding authors affiliation is identified correctly.The corresponding author's affiliation is correct. Methods We studied a cohort of 728 advanced cancer patients who received 948 lines of ICI at NYU (2010–2020). Patients were classified based on whether they did (n = 120) or did not (n = 828) receive therapeutic AC at any point during their treatment with ICI. We investigated the relationship between AC status and multiple clinical endpoints including best overall response (BOR), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and the incidence of bleeding complications.Affiliations: Journal instruction requires a country for affiliations; however, this is missing in affiliations 1 to 5. Please verify if the provided country is correct and amend if necessary.The country is correct for all affiliations (1 - 5). Results Treatment with AC was not associated with significantly different BOR (P = 0.80), ORR (P =0.60), DCR (P =0.77), PFS (P = 0.59), or OS (P =0.64). Patients who received AC were significantly more likely to suffer a major or clinically relevant minor bleed (P = 0.05). Conclusion AC does not appear to impact the activity or efficacy of ICI in advanced cancer patients. On the basis of our findings, we caution that there is insufficient evidence to support prospectively evaluating the combination of AC and immunotherapy.

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors versus other systemic therapies in advanced head and neck cancer: a network meta-analysis

Immunotherapy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 541-555
Author(s):  
Lingrong Tang ◽  
Tingting Liu ◽  
Jun Chen ◽  
Jun Dang ◽  
Guang Li
Keyword(s):  
Head And Neck Cancer ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Neck Cancer ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Systemic Therapies

Aim: We assessed the efficiency of immune checkpoint inhibitors relative to other systemic therapies in previously treated recurrent/metastatic head and neck cancer. Materials & methods: Relative treatment effects were assessed from eligible randomized controlled trials using Bayesian network meta-analyses. Results: Among 15 trials evaluating 14 treatments, nivolumab achieved the best overall survival (OS) benefit; zalutumumab and buparlisib + paclitaxel provided the best progression-free survival benefit and objective response rate. Buparlisib + paclitaxel and zalutumumab were associated with the best OS rate at 6 and 12 months, respectively; nivolumab yielded the best OS rate at 18–24 months. Conclusion: Nivolumab was the most favorable treatment. Zalutumumab and buparlisib + paclitaxel had better efficiency, and might be a better selection for patients with programmed death-ligand 1-low/negative tumors than other treatments.

scholarly journals Salvage Ipilimumab and Nivolumab in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma After Prior Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (27) ◽  
pp. 3088-3094 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anita Gul ◽  
Tyler F. Stewart ◽  
Charlene M. Mantia ◽  
Neil J. Shah ◽  
Emily Stern Gatof ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Targeted Therapy ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Metastatic Rcc

PURPOSE Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are standard therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The safety and activity of the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab in patients who have received prior ICI targeting the programmed death 1 (PD-1) pathway remains unknown. We evaluated ipilimumab and nivolumab in patients with metastatic RCC after prior treatment with anti–PD-1 pathway–targeted therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with metastatic RCC who received prior anti–PD-1 pathway-targeted therapy and subsequently received ipilimumab and nivolumab were reviewed. Objective response rate and progression-free survival per investigator assessment were recorded. Toxicity of ipilimumab and nivolumab was also assessed. RESULTS Forty-five patients with metastatic RCC were included. All patients (100%) received prior ICIs targeting the PD-1 pathway. The median age was 62 years (range, 21-82 years). At a median follow-up of 12 months, the objective response rate to ipilimumab and nivolumab was 20%. The median progression-free survival while on ipilimumab and nivolumab was 4 months (range, 0.8-19 months). Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) of any grade with ipilimumab and nivolumab were recorded in 29 (64%) of the 45 patients; grade 3 irAEs were recorded in 6 (13%) of the 45 patients. CONCLUSION Ipilimumab and nivolumab demonstrated antitumor activity with acceptable toxicity in patients with metastatic RCC who had prior treatment with checkpoint inhibition.

The effect and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge in non-small cell lung cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (8) ◽  
pp. 762-765 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiromi Watanabe ◽  
Toshio Kubo ◽  
Kiichiro Ninomiya ◽  
Kenichiro Kudo ◽  
Daisuke Minami ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Careful Consideration ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung

Abstract Introduction Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated long survival for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the effect and safety of ICI rechallenge have not been fully evaluated. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of ICI rechallenge in NSCLC patients. Methods We defined ‘rechallenge’ as re-administration of ICIs for patients who were previously treated with ICIs and discontinued treatment for any reason, and received subsequent chemotherapy. We retrospectively analyzed the histories of 434 patients with advanced NSCLC who received ICIs from December 2015 to December 2017 at seven centers. Results A total of 317 patients discontinued the ICI treatment, and 14 patients (4.4%) received ICI rechallenge. All 14 patients discontinued the first ICI due to disease progression. Eight patients received the same kind of ICIs, and six patients received different ICIs. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 1.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.8–2.6] and 6.5 months [95% CI: 1.4–19.0], respectively. The objective response rate was 7.1%, and the disease control rate was 21.4%. Two of three patients who achieved at least a stable disease, received radiotherapy between the first and second ICIs. Adverse events were not significantly different compared with the first ICIs. Conclusions In this study, the effect of ICI rechallenge was limited. Careful consideration of the administration of ICI rechallenge is necessary. This report involved a small number of cases, so further large prospective studies are warranted to confirm the efficacy of ICI rechallenge and to investigate predictive markers to identify a patient population in which ICI rechallenge is effective.

Efficacy of first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with sarcomatoid and/or rhabdoid (S/R) metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (8_suppl) ◽  
pp. 66-66
Author(s):  
Ziad Bakouny ◽  
Sarah Abou Alaiwi ◽  
Amin Nassar ◽  
John A. Steinharter ◽  
Xiao X. Wei ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Logistic Regressions

66 Background: Patients with mRCC with S/R components tend to have a poor prognosis with few therapeutic options available. Recent data suggest that immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapies may be especially effective for these patients. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of ICI-based therapies in patients with S/R mRCC. Methods: We retrospectively assessed objective response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS) & overall survival (OS) of patients with S/R mRCC treated at our institution with first-line ICI-based therapies and compared these to those of patients treated with first-line non-ICI-based therapies. Univariable and multivariable (adjusted for IMDC group) Cox and logistic regressions were performed. Results: 92 patients (70 S, 9 R, and 13 S&R) patients were included, of which 74 with a clear-cell component. For all patients (regardless of therapy), 74 (80.4%) patients experienced a PFS event (progression or death) and 52 (56.5%) died at 25.3 months (m) median follow-up. Overall median PFS was 5.3 m (95% CI= 3.4–7.2) and 24 m OS rate was 39.5% (27.4–51.7). Out of 78 patients in whom response was evaluable, ORR was 30.8% (20.4–41.2). Patients treated with ICI-based therapies had significantly better ORR, PFS, and OS on multivariable analysis (table). Conclusions: mRCC patients with S/R components have significantly better ORR, PFS, and OS with first-line ICI-based compared to non-ICI-based therapies. These data support the use of ICI-based therapies for patients with S/R mRCC. [Table: see text]

Impact of SWI/SNF complex mutations in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: Immuno-oncology biomarker study in LC-SCRUM-Japan (LC-SCRUM-IBIS).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9530-9530
Author(s):  
Kiyotaka Yoh ◽  
Shingo Matsumoto ◽  
Naoki Furuya ◽  
Kazumi Nishino ◽  
Shingo Miyamoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Nsclc Patients

9530 Background: The SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling complex is reported to be involved in sensitivity and resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI). However, their role in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains unclear. We examined the relationship between SWI/SNF complex mutations and clinical outcomes of ICI in patients with NSCLC. Methods: Of 1017 lung cancer patients enrolled in LC-SCRUM-IBIS, 350 patients were analyzable for whole-exome sequencing (WES). WES data were used to analyze the presence of mutations in 29 major subunits of the SWI/SNF complexes. ARID1A and SMARCA4 mutations were also evaluated in a targeted NGS panel (Oncomine comprehensive assay, OCA). PD-L1 expression by 22C3, tissue tumor mutational burden (tTMB) by WES, STK11 and KEAP1 mutations by WES or OCA were also assessed. Durable clinical benefit (DCB) including CR, PR and SD > 6 mos to ICI, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared in status of each of SWI/SNF complex mutations and other factors. Results: At least one mutation in any subunits of the SWI/SNF complex was present in 28% of NSCLC patients. The most common mutated subcomplexes were SMARCA4 (12%), BAF (7%: ARID1A, 4%), non-canonical BAF (3%), PBAF (3%), and SMARCA2 (2%). Of 101 NSCLC patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, SMARCA4 mutations tended to be associated with lower DCB (16 vs 31%) and shorter median PFS (1.9 vs 3.6 m) and OS (7.4 vs 18.1m). Patients with ARID1A mutations tended to have better clinical outcomes (DCB, 40 vs 28%) compared to those without mutations. No significant associations were found between PD-L1 expression and SMARCA4 or ARID1A mutations. Patients with STK11/KEAP1 mutations had lower rate of PD-L1 expression (TPS > 50%) (18% vs 48%, P = 0.03) and worse clinical outcomes (DCB, 6 vs 33%) compared to those without mutations. There was no significant association between a tTMB status and clinical outcome. Conclusions: SMARCA4 and ARID1A mutations appear to affect clinical outcomes of ICI in NSCLC patients. These findings indicate that SWI/SNF complex mutations may serve as a predictive biomarker for ICI in NSCLC patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document