Search

Background We evaluated the relevance of PD-1+CD8+ T-cells in gastric cancer (GC) including prognostic significance, association with chemotherapy and immunotherapy sensitivity and correlations with the tumor microenvironment (TME). Methods Discovery cohort: GC samples were evaluated for AE1/3, CD8, PD-1, Ki-67 and Granzyme-B expression with fluorescence-based multiplex immunohistochemistry (mIHC). Validation cohorts: we analyzed bulk RNAseq GC datasets from TCGA, the “3G” chemotherapy trial and an immunotherapy phase 2 trial. The cox proportional hazards model was used to identify factors that influenced overall survival (OS). To study the TME, we analyzed single-cell RNAseq performed on GCs. Results In the discovery cohort of 350 GCs, increased PD-1 expression of CD8 T-cells was prognostic for OS (HR 0.822, p = 0.042). PD-1 expression in CD8 T-cells highly correlated with cytolytic [Granzyme-B+] (r = 0.714, p +] (r = 0.798, p PD-1 and CD8A expression levels had improved OS when treated with immunotherapy (HR 0.117, p = 0.036) and chemotherapy (HR 0.475, p = 0.017). Analysis of an scRNAseq dataset of 152,423 cells from 40 GCs revealed that T-cell and NK-cell proportions were higher (24% vs 18% and 19% vs 15%, p p high compared to CD8PD-1low tumors. Conclusion This is one of the largest GC cohorts of mIHC combined with analysis of multiple datasets providing orthogonal validation of the clinical relevance of PD-1+CD8+ T-cells being associated with improved OS. CD8PD-1high tumors have distinct features of an immunologically active, T-cell inflamed TME.

Introduction: Three doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines have been recommended for cancer patients to reduce the risk of severe disease. Anti-neoplastic treatment, such as chemotherapy, may affect long-term vaccine immunogenicity. Method: Patients with solid or haematological cancer were recruited from 2 hospitals between July 2021 and March 2022. Humoral response was evaluated using GenScript cPASS surrogate virus neutralisation assays. Clinical outcomes were obtained from medical records and national mandatory-reporting databases. Results: A total of 273 patients were recruited, with 40 having haematological malignancies and the rest solid tumours. Among the participants, 204 (74.7%) were receiving active cancer therapy, including 98 (35.9%) undergoing systemic chemotherapy and the rest targeted therapy or immunotherapy. All patients were seronegative at baseline. Seroconversion rates after receiving 1, 2 and 3 doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination were 35.2%, 79.4% and 92.4%, respectively. After 3 doses, patients on active treatment for haematological malignancies had lower antibodies (57.3%±46.2) when compared to patients on immunotherapy (94.1%±9.56, P

PURPOSE The US Food and Drug Administration has granted regulatory approval for the use of nivolumab—an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)—in the first-line treatment of advanced gastric or esophageal adenocarcinoma (GEAC), regardless of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. However, the efficacy of ICIs in low PD-L1–expressing tumors remains unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS This study aims to reconstruct unreported Kaplan-Meier (KM) plots of PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) subgroups of randomized phase III trials comparing the addition of ICIs with conventional chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of GEAC. A graphical reconstructive algorithm was adopted to estimate time-to-event outcomes from reported overall survival and progression-free survival (OS and PFS) KM plots describing overall or subgroup cohorts. Using reconstructed time-to-event outcomes, KMSubtraction conducts bipartite matching of patients from the reported subgroup among the overall cohort. By excluding matched patients, KM plots and survival analyses of the unreported subgroups were retrieved. RESULTS CheckMate-649, KEYNOTE-062, and KEYNOTE-590 were included. Two PD-L1 subgroups were identified with data unreported in the primary manuscripts: PD-L1 CPS 1-4 from CheckMate-649 and PD-L1 CPS 1-9 from KEYNOTE-062. No significant differences in OS and PFS were demonstrated in ICI-chemotherapy combinations when compared with chemotherapy among CheckMate-649 PD-L1 CPS 1-4 (OS: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.950, 95% CI, 0.747 to 1.209, P = .678; PFS: HR = 0.958, 95% CI, 0.743 to 1.236, P = .743) and KEYNOTE-062 PD-L1 CPS 1-9 subgroups. In the KEYNOTE-062 PD-L1 CPS 1-9 subgroup, patients treated with pembrolizumab had an increased hazard of tumor progression (HR = 2.092, 95% CI, 1.661 to 2.635, P < .001). CONCLUSION Using KMSubtraction, data of PD-L1 subgroups previously unreported by primary manuscripts of pivotal clinical trials were retrieved. These data suggest the lack of benefit in the addition of ICI to chemotherapy in low PD-L1–expressing GEAC tumors.

Background Preoperative hyponatremia is prevalent in patients undergoing surgical procedures, but it is uncertain if hyponatremia will lead to increased risk of surgical mortality and morbidity. Methods A systematic search of Medline (PubMed), Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception through July 2, 2021, was performed. Full-length articles that reported on the association between surgical outcomes among adults aged ≥18 years with documented preoperative hyponatremia were included. Findings We identified 32 observational studies comprising 1 301 346 participants. All studies had low risk of bias. When adjusted for covariates, patients with hyponatremia had significantly higher odds of developing major complications (defined as a composite measure of 9 major complications) compared with patients with normal sodium concentrations (adjusted odds ratio = 1.37; 95% CI, 1.23-1.53; I2 = 78%; N = 10). Additionally, patients with preoperative hyponatremia also significantly higher hazards of early mortality ( Interpretation Our meta-analysis suggests that preoperative hyponatremia is associated with poorer early mortality and major morbidity outcomes in surgical patients. Hyponatremia is also a specific prognosticator for major complications in surgical patients, reiterating its potential use as a clinical indicator of poor outcomes.

BACKGROUNDData from certain subgroups of clinical interest may not be presented in primary manuscripts or conference abstract presentations. In an effort to enable secondary data analyses, we propose a workflow to retrieve unreported subgroup survival data from published Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves.METHODSWe developed KMSubtraction, an R-package that retrieves patients from unreported subgroups by matching participants on KM curves of the overall cohort to participants on KM curves of a known subgroup with follow-up time. By excluding matched patients, the opposing unreported subgroup may be retrieved. Reproducibility and limits of error of the KMSubtraction workflow were assessed by comparing unmatched patients against the original survival data of subgroups from published datasets and simulations. Monte Carlo simulations were utilized to evaluate the effect of the reported subgroup proportion, missing data, censorship proportion in the overall and subgroup cohort, sample size and number-at-risk table intervals on the limits of error of KMSubtraction. 3 matching algorithms were explored – minimal cost bipartite matching, Mahalanobis distance matching, and nearest neighbor matching by logistic regression.RESULTSThe validation exercise found no material systematic error and demonstrates the robustness of KMSubtraction in deriving unreported subgroup survival data. Limits of error were small and negligible on marginal Cox proportional hazard models comparing reconstructed and original survival data of unreported subgroups. Extensive Monte Carlo simulations demonstrate that datasets with high reported subgroup proportion (r=0.467, pCONCLUSIONWhile KMSubtraction demonstrates robustness in deriving survival data from unreported subgroups, the implementation of KMSubtraction should take into consideration the aforementioned limitations. The limits of error of KMSubtraction, as reflected by the mean |ln(HR)| from converged Monte Carlo simulations may guide the interpretation of reconstructed survival data of unreported subgroups.

Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is a common presenting symptom of COVID-19 infection. Radiological imaging of the olfactory structures in patients with COVID-19 and OD can potentially shed light on its pathogenesis, and guide clinicians in prognostication and intervention.PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, SCOPUS were searched from inception to August 1, 2021. Three reviewers selected observational studies, case series, and case reports reporting radiological changes in the olfactory structures, detected on magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, or other imaging modalities, in patients aged ≥18 years with COVID-19 infection and OD, following preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines and a PROSPERO-registered protocol (CRD42021275211). We described the proportion of radiological outcomes, and used random-effects meta-analyses to pool the prevalence of olfactory cleft opacification, olfactory bulb signal abnormalities, and olfactory mucosa abnormalities in patients with and without COVID-19-associated OD.We included 7 case-control studies (N = 353), 11 case series (N = 154), and 12 case reports (N = 12). The pooled prevalence of olfactory cleft opacification in patients with COVID-19 infection and OD (63%, 95% CI = 0.38-0.82) was significantly higher than that in controls (4%, 95% CI = 0.01-0.13). Conversely, similar proportions of cases and controls demonstrated olfactory bulb signal abnormalities (88% and 94%) and olfactory mucosa abnormalities (2% and 0%). Descriptive analysis found that 55.6% and 43.5% of patients with COVID-19 infection and OD had morphological abnormalities of the olfactory bulb and olfactory nerve, respectively, while 60.0% had abnormal olfactory bulb volumes.Our findings implicate a conductive mechanism of OD, localized to the olfactory cleft, in approximately half of the affected COVID-19 patients. Laryngoscope, 132:1260-1274, 2022.

Although low vitamin D levels are associated with statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS), it remains unclear if vitamin D supplementation leads to symptom improvement.We performed a systematic review to evaluate the association of vitamin D supplementation with resolution of SAMS.We searched Medline (PubMed), Embase and Cochrane Library till 12 December 2021. Full length articles that reported on the association between vitamin D supplementation in adult patients with SAMS were included.We identified 8 interventional studies comprising 669 participants. Majority of the participants were of Caucasian ethnicity and the mean age of participants ranged from 59.5 to 64.8 years old. The studies recruited patients with initial mean pre-treatment vitamin D levels ranging from 17.8 to 22.0ng/mL. Follow up duration ranged from 2 to 24 months and mean post-treatment vitamin D levels ranged from 34.3 to 56.0ng/mL. We found that vitamin D supplementation was associated with improved statin tolerance in 509 out of 606 (83.9%) patients across the 7 studies which reported patient numbers after supplementation (95% CI = 0.81-0.87, I2 = 72% n = 7). None of the studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and hence placebo effect of vitamin D could not be ruled out. Nocebo effect of statin was also not assessed by any of the studies.Vitamin D supplementation in patients with mild-moderate vitamin D insufficiency was associated with improvement of SAMS. However, quantitative efficacy analysis was not possible and this observed association is likely confounded by nocebo and placebo effects. RCTs are required to conclusively assess the utility of vitamin D supplementation in improving SAMS.

4026 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are now standard-of-care treatment for patients with metastatic gastric cancer (GC). To guide patient selection for ICI therapy, programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) biomarker expression is routinely assessed via immunohistochemistry (IHC). Regulatory approval for ICIs is granted based on PD-L1 expression status, scored using metrics such as the combined positive score (CPS). However, with an increasing number of approved ICIs, each paired with a different PD-L1 antibody IHC assay used in their respective landmark trials, there is an unmet clinical and logistical need for harmonization. We thus investigated the interchangeability between the Dako 22C3, Dako 28-8 and Ventana SP-142 assays in GC PD-L1 IHC. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, samples were obtained via biopsy or resection of gastric cancer at the National University Hospital, Singapore. We scored 362 GC samples for PD-L1 CPS, tumor proportion score (TPS) and immune cells (IC) using a multiplex immunohistochemistry/immunofluorescence technique. 344 samples were developed into a tissue microarray (TMA), while 18 samples were used as whole slides for orthogonal validation. The samples selected for whole slide analysis were obtained from GC patients treated with ICI therapy. Results: The percentage of PD-L1 positive samples at clinically relevant CPS ≥1, ≥5 and ≥10 cut-offs (Table) for the 28-8 assay were approximately two-fold higher than that of the 22C3 (CPS≥1: 70.3% vs 49.4%, p

BackgroundSerum electrolyte imbalances are highly prevalent in COVID-19 patients. However, their associations with COVID-19 outcomes are inconsistent, and of unknown prognostic value.ObjectivesTo systematically clarify the associations and prognostic accuracy of electrolyte imbalances (sodium, calcium, potassium, magnesium, chloride and phosphate) in predicting poor COVID-19 clinical outcome.MethodsPubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched. Odds of poor clinical outcome (a composite of mortality, intensive-care unit (ICU) admission, need for respiratory support and acute respiratory distress syndrome) were pooled using mixed-effects models. The associated prognostic sensitivity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+, LR-) and predictive values (PPV, NPV; assuming 25% pre-test probability), and area under the curve (AUC) were computed.ResultsWe included 28 observational studies from 953 records with low to moderate risk-of-bias. Hyponatremia (OR=2.08, 95%CI=1.48-2.94, I2=93%, N=8), hypernatremia (OR=4.32, 95%CI=3.17-5.88, I2=45%, N=7) and hypocalcemia (OR=3.31, 95%CI=2.24-4.88, I2=25%, N=6) were associated with poor COVID-19 outcome. These associations remained significant on adjustment for covariates such as demographics and comorbidities. Hypernatremia was 97% specific in predicting poor outcome (LR+ 4.0, PPV=55%, AUC=0.80) despite no differences in CRP and IL-6 levels between hypernatremic and normonatremic patients. Hypocalcemia was 76% sensitive in predicting poor outcome (LR- 0.44, NPV=87%, AUC=0.71). Overall quality of evidence ranged from very low to moderate.ConclusionHyponatremia, hypernatremia and hypocalcemia are associated with poor COVID-19 clinical outcome. Hypernatremia is 97% specific for a poor outcome and the association is independent of inflammatory marker levels. Further studies should evaluate if correcting these imbalances help improve clinical outcome.

ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy of COVID 19 vaccines between those with immunocompromised medical conditions and those who are immunocompetentDesignSystematic review and meta-analysisData sourcesPubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CORD-19 and WHO COVID-19 research databases were searched for eligible comparative studies published between 1 December 2020 and 3 September 2021. ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched in September 2021 to identify registered yet unpublished or ongoing studies.Study selectionProspective observational studies which compared the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination between those with immunocompromising medical conditions and those who were immunocompetent were included. Two reviewers independently screened for potentially eligible studies.Data extractionThe primary outcomes of interest were cumulative incidence of seroconversion after first and second doses of COVID vaccination. Secondary outcomes included SARS-CoV-2 antibody titre level after first and second doses of COVID-19 vaccination. After duplicate data abstraction, a frequentist random effects meta-analysis was conducted. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.ResultsAfter screening 3283 studies, 42 studies that met our inclusion criteria were identified. 18 immunocompromised cohorts from 17 studies reported seroconversion in immunocompromised patients compared to healthy controls after the first dose and 30 immunocompromised cohorts in 28 studies reporting data after the second dose.Among immunocompromised groups, in incremental order, transplant recipients had the lowest pooled risk ratio of 0.06 (95%CI: 0.04 to 0.09, I^2=0%, p=0.81) (GRADE=Moderate) followed by haematological cancer patients at 0.36 (95%CI: 0.21 to 0.62, I^2 = 89%, pAfter the second dose, the lowest pooled risk ratio was again seen in transplant recipients at 0.29 (95%CI: 0.21 to 0.40, I^2=91%, pConclusionSeroconversion rates and serological titres are significantly lower in immunocompromised patients with transplant recipients having the poorest outcomes. Additional strategies on top of the conventional 2-dose regimen will likely be warranted, such as a booster dose of the vaccine.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42021272088

ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy of covid-19 vaccines between immunocompromised and immunocompetent people.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, Central Register of Controlled Trials, COVID-19 Open Research Dataset Challenge (CORD-19), and WHO covid-19 databases for studies published between 1 December 2020 and 5 November 2021. ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched in November 2021 to identify registered but as yet unpublished or ongoing studies.Study selectionProspective observational studies comparing the efficacy of covid-19 vaccination in immunocompromised and immunocompetent participants.MethodsA frequentist random effects meta-analysis was used to separately pool relative and absolute risks of seroconversion after the first and second doses of a covid-19 vaccine. Systematic review without meta-analysis of SARS-CoV-2 antibody titre levels was performed after first, second, and third vaccine doses and the seroconversion rate after a third dose. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed.Results82 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Of these studies, 77 (94%) used mRNA vaccines, 16 (20%) viral vector vaccines, and 4 (5%) inactivated whole virus vaccines. 63 studies were assessed to be at low risk of bias and 19 at moderate risk of bias. After one vaccine dose, seroconversion was about half as likely in patients with haematological cancers (risk ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.32 to 0.50, I2=80%; absolute risk 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.20 to 0.40, I2=89%), immune mediated inflammatory disorders (0.53, 0.39 to 0.71, I2=89%; 0.29, 0.11 to 0.58, I2=97%), and solid cancers (0.55, 0.46 to 0.65, I2=78%; 0.44, 0.36 to 0.53, I2=84%) compared with immunocompetent controls, whereas organ transplant recipients were 16 times less likely to seroconvert (0.06, 0.04 to 0.09, I2=0%; 0.06, 0.04 to 0.08, I2=0%). After a second dose, seroconversion remained least likely in transplant recipients (0.39, 0.32 to 0.46, I2=92%; 0.35, 0.26 to 0.46), with only a third achieving seroconversion. Seroconversion was increasingly likely in patients with haematological cancers (0.63, 0.57 to 0.69, I2=88%; 0.62, 0.54 to 0.70, I2=90%), immune mediated inflammatory disorders (0.75, 0.69 to 0.82, I2=92%; 0.77, 0.66 to 0.85, I2=93%), and solid cancers (0.90, 0.88 to 0.93, I2=51%; 0.89, 0.86 to 0.91, I2=49%). Seroconversion was similar between people with HIV and immunocompetent controls (1.00, 0.98 to 1.01, I2=0%; 0.97, 0.83 to 1.00, I2=89%). Systematic review of 11 studies showed that a third dose of a covid-19 mRNA vaccine was associated with seroconversion among vaccine non-responders with solid cancers, haematological cancers, and immune mediated inflammatory disorders, although response was variable in transplant recipients and inadequately studied in people with HIV and those receiving non-mRNA vaccines.ConclusionSeroconversion rates after covid-19 vaccination were significantly lower in immunocompromised patients, especially organ transplant recipients. A second dose was associated with consistently improved seroconversion across all patient groups, albeit at a lower magnitude for organ transplant recipients. Targeted interventions for immunocompromised patients, including a third (booster) dose, should be performed.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42021272088.

Background: Faced with a trade-off between efficacy and toxicity, oncologists have conventionally administered the maximum tolerated doses in chemotherapy on an assumption that higher doses increase efficacy. However, multiple studies have shown that this method of toxicity-guided dosing may result in more frequent toxicities and potentially suboptimal efficacy. With the advent of artificial intelligence (AI), personalized dosing in chemotherapy may be considered to optimize patient care. CURATE.AI is an efficacy-driven, indication-agnostic and mechanism-independent personalized dosing platform that may offer an optimal solution. In contrast to traditional AI approaches based on massive volumes of population data, CURATE.AI requires only the individual patient's medical profile for dose recommendations. Based on the observation that the relationship between a drug dose and a phenotypic response in a human system can be modelled by a dynamic quadratic surface, CURATE.AI continually guides dosing throughout the treatment duration to optimize efficacy. While CURATE.AI has been used in various clinical settings, there are no prior randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on CURATE.AI-guided chemotherapy dosing for solid tumors. Therefore, we are conducting a pilot study to assess the technical and logistical feasibility of an RCT for CURATE.AI-guided solid tumor chemotherapy dosing. We aim to collect exploratory data on efficacy and toxicity, and on the use of longitudinal blood tumor marker measurements, including ctDNA, to inform dose guidance decision. Methods: PRECISE is an open-label, single-arm, multi-centre, prospective pilot clinical trial on using CURATE.AI to achieve personalized, efficacy-driven and dynamically optimized chemotherapy dosing for solid tumors (NCT04522284). Adults with metastatic solid tumors and raised baseline tumor marker levels who are planned for palliative-intent, capecitabine-based chemotherapy will be recruited. CURATE.AI will guide drug dosing for each participant based only on their own tumor marker levels and drug doses as input data. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants in whom CURATE.AI is successfully applied. Secondary outcomes include the timeliness of dose recommendations, participant and physician adherence to CURATE.AI-recommended doses, and the proportion of clinically significant dose changes. As an exploratory outcome, we will analyze the utility of tumor markers including CEA, CA19-9 and ctDNA in high frequency serial measurements. We aim to initially enroll 10 participants from 2 hospitals in Singapore, perform an interim analysis, and consider either cohort expansion or a RCT based on initial pilot data. Recruitment of patients began in August 2020. As of December 2020, 2 participants have been enrolled with recruitment planned for 1 year. Citation Format: Chong Boon Teo, Benjamin Kye Jyn Tan, Xavier Tadeo, Siyu Peng, Hazel Pei Lin Soh, Sherry De Xuan Du, Vilianty Wen Ya Luo, Aishwarya Bandla, Raghav Sundar, Dean Ho, Theodore Kee, Agata Blasiak. Personalized, rational, efficacy-driven chemotherapy dosing via an artificial intelligence system (PRECISE): A protocol for the PRECISE CURATE.AI pilot clinical trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr CT211.