Search

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represent a major breakthrough for cancer treatment. However, evidence regarding the use of ICIs in pancreatic cancer (PC) remained scarce. To assess the efficacy and safety of ICIs plus chemotherapy, patients with advanced PC were retrospectively recruited and were treated with either chemotherapy alone or chemotherapy plus ICIs. Patients previously treated with any agents targeting T-cell co-stimulation or checkpoint pathways were excluded. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). The secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and safety. In total, 58 patients were included (combination, n = 22; chemotherapy, n = 36). The combination group showed a significantly longer OS than the chemotherapy group [median, 18.1 vs 6.1 months, hazard ratio (HR) 0.46 (0.23–0.90), P = 0.021]. The median PFSs were 3.2 months in the combination group and 2.0 months in the chemotherapy group [HR 0.57 (0.32–0.99), P = 0.041]. The combination group and the chemotherapy group had similar ORRs (18.2% vs 19.4%, P = 0.906). All patients who achieved a partial response received a doublet chemotherapy regimen regardless of co-treatment with ICIs. Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 31.8% of the patients in the combination group and in 16.9% of those receiving chemotherapy. Although the incidence of serious treatment-related adverse events was higher in the combination group than in the chemotherapy group, the difference was not significant (P = 0.183). Our findings suggest that the combination of ICIs with chemotherapy is both effective and tolerable for advanced PC. ICIs combined with a doublet chemotherapy regimen might be a preferable choice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Evidence for the efficacy of immunotherapy in biliary tract cancer (BTC) is limited and unsatisfactory. Methods: Chinese BTC patients receiving a PD-1 inhibitor with chemotherapy, PD-1 inhibitor monotherapy or chemotherapy alone were retrospectively analyzed. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). The key secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. Patients previously treated with any agent targeting T cell costimulation or immune checkpoints were excluded. Results: The study included 77 patients (a PD-1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy, n = 38; PD-1 inhibitor monotherapy, n = 20; chemotherapy alone, n = 19). The median OS was 14.9 months with a PD-1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy, significantly longer than the 4.1 months with PD-1 inhibitor monotherapy (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.17–0.80, P = 0.001) and the 6.0 months with chemotherapy alone (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42–0.94, P = 0.011). The median PFS was 5.1 months with a PD-1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy, significantly longer than the 2.2 months with PD-1 inhibitor monotherapy (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.31–1.10, P = 0.014) and the 2.4 months with chemotherapy alone (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45–0.83, P = 0.003). Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were similar between the anti-PD-1 combination group and the chemotherapy alone group (34.2% and 36.8%, respectively). Conclusions: Anti-PD-1 therapy plus chemotherapy is an effective and tolerable approach for advanced BTC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In recent years, immune checkpoint inhibitors have been used with great success in the treatment of various cancers. However, when used in monotherapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors have a poor effect on pancreatic cancer. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.Patients and Methods: We evaluated patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who were treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors from 2015-2017. All the patients received PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors as a monotherapy or in combination with other treatments, such as chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and CTLA-4 inhibitors at the recommended dosages.Results: For the 43 patients enrolled, the objective response rate was 10.5%, the disease control rate was 50%, the median progression-free survival was 2.3 months, and the median overall survival (mOS) was 5.1 months. The mOS was longer for patients receiving combined therapy than for those receiving PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor monotherapy (5.4 vs 2.0 months, P = 0.020). Patients receiving immune therapy as a first-line treatment had prolonged survival compared with those receiving it as a second-line or multiple-line treatment, but the difference was not statistically significant (mOS: 7.0 vs 5.1 vs 2.8 months, P = 0.161). There was a reduction in the serum level of CA19-9 associated with the response to treatment. Adverse events were tolerable and were mainly grade 1 and 2. The immune-related adverse events that occurred were hypothyroidism, diarrhea, and rash.Conclusion: Immune checkpoint inhibitors showed a certain efficacy in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer and could confer long-term survival benefits. Combined therapy was more effective and may serve as an alternative option. Further studies should be performed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Immune checkpoint blockade‐related pneumonitis is a rare but potentially life‐threatening adverse effect, but its risk factors are not completely understood. This case‐control study was conducted to identify pneumonitis risk factors in patients treated with anti‐PD1 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), including all the patients who developed pneumonitis after anti‐PD‐1 mAbs treatment in the Cancer Center of the Chinese People's Liberation Army from September 2015 to September 2017. Two controls per case were matched according to a propensity‐score matching algorithm to account for confounding effects caused by individual baseline variables. Demographic and clinical information was obtained from medical records. In total, 55 cases and 110 controls were included in the study. No association was observed between smoking status or primary lung cancer and risk of pneumonitis. Significant risk factors for pneumonitis related to anti‐PD‐1 mAbs were prior thoracic radiotherapy, prior lung disease and combination therapy with odds ratios of 3.34 (1.51‐7.39), 2.86 (1.45‐5.64) and 2.73 (1.40‐5.31), respectively. The associations remained significant in the multivariable logistic regression model. The risk of pneumonitis induced by anti‐PD‐1 mAbs is associated with prior thoracic radiotherapy, prior lung disease, and combination therapy. Clinicians should monitor these features in patients receiving anti‐PD‐1 therapy to optimize clinical safety and efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Immunotherapy in combination with platinum-etoposide (EP) chemotherapy has been approved as a first-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). However, real-world (RW) data regarding the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in ES-SCLC are lacking. We aimed to assess the differences between programmed death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors, both in conjunction with EP chemotherapy, as first-line treatment for ES SCLC. Methods: We conducted a real-world, multicenter, retrospective cohort, controlled study to compare the prognosis, efficacy, and safety of PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors in ES-SCLC patients when used along with chemotherapy. Each patient received up to six cycles of etoposide, carboplatin, or cisplatin combined with ICI drugs, including PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors. The primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints were the investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST, version 1.1). Results: Between January 2017 and December 2021, 194 patients with ES-SCLC from three clinical centers in a PLA general hospital were included in our study, including 93 patients in the PD-1 group and 101 patients in the PD-L1 group. At the time of data cutoff, progression-free survival in the PD-1 group (median PFS, 6.8 months; 95% CI, 5.3–8.1) was similar to that in the PD-L1 group (median PFS, 6.4 months; 95% CI, 5.5–7.5); the stratified hazard ratio for PFS was 1.12 (95% CI, 0.83–1.53; P = 0.452). The median OS was similar in the PD-1 and PD-L1 groups (15.8 m vs. 17.7 m, P = 0.566); the hazard ratio was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.62–1.30, P = 0.566). The two groups had comparable investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rates (ORR) (76.3% vs. 76.2%). Adverse effect (AE)-related discontinuation occurred in 4 (4.3%) patients in the PD-1 group and 2 (2.0%) patients in the PD-L1 group. Deaths due to AEs of any cause occurred in 2 (2.2%) patients in the PD-1 inhibitor group and 1 (1.0%) patient in the PD-L1 inhibitor group. Conclusions: Our research revealed that there were no significant differences in efficacy or prognosis between PD-1 inhibitor + EP chemotherapy and PD-L1 inhibitor + EP chemotherapy. The two groups seemed to have comparable safety profiles, but the number of discontinuation or death events was too small to draw a firm conclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Oncogenic alternation in RET is one of the important targets of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Pralsetinib has shown great efficacy in RET fusion-positive NSCLC, but a series of adverse reactions will inevitably occur in the meantime. We aimed to explore the clinical characteristics of patients with pneumonia and recognition it in early stage, so patients could longer benefit from pralsetinib. Methods: This is a multicenter, retrospective study. RET fusion-positive advanced NSCLC patients who developed pneumonia during pralsetinib treatment from January 2020 to December 2022 were included. Clinical data, time to onset of pneumonia, methods of pneumonia diagnosis, treatment with pneumonia, prognosis of pneumonia, and the effect of pneumonia on the efficacy of pralsetinib. Results: A total of 8 patients with pneumonia were included in the study, most of which were non-smoking female patients and the main fusion gene was KIF5B (87.5%), which was consistent with the general characteristics of RET fusion population. The median occurrence time of pralsetinib-associated pneumonia was 2.15 (range 1.1–6.63) months. All patients were infected by opportunistic pathogens, and the most common pathogen was human herpesviruses and pneumospora yerbii. Fever was always the first symptom, and timely anti-infective treatment including antibiotics, antiviral drugs, and antifungal drugs was effective. Until February 28, 2023, the median follow-up time was 18.7 months, the mean PFS of patients was 17.4 months, and the median PFS was not reached. Fortunately, patients who restarted pralsetinib after infection control continued to benefit. Conclusions: Opportunistic infection may be a unique adverse effect of pralsetinib. During the treatment of pralsetinib, we should be vigilant about the occurrence of pneumonia and achieve early recognition and timely treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The gut mycobiome of patients with lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) remains unexplored. This study aimed to characterize the gut mycobiome in patients with LUAD and evaluate the potential of gut fungi as non-invasive biomarkers for early diagnosis. Methods: In total, 299 fecal samples from Beijing, Suzhou, and Hainan were collected prospectively. Using internal transcribed spacer 2 sequencing, we profiled the gut mycobiome. Five supervised machine learning algorithms were trained on fungal signatures to build an optimized prediction model for LUAD in a discovery cohort comprising 105 patients with LUAD and 61 healthy controls (HCs) from Beijing. Validation cohorts from Beijing, Suzhou, and Hainan comprising 44, 17, and 15 patients with LUAD and 26, 19, and 12 HCs, respectively, were used to evaluate efficacy. Results: Fungal biodiversity and richness increased in patients with LUAD. At the phylum level, the abundance of Ascomycota decreased, while that of Basidiomycota increased in patients with LUAD. Candida and Saccharomyces were the dominant genera, with a reduction in Candida and an increase in Saccharomyces, Aspergillus, and Apiotrichum in patients with LUAD. Nineteen operational taxonomic unit markers were selected, and excellent performance in predicting LUAD was achieved (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.9350) using a random forest model with outcomes superior to those of four other algorithms. The AUCs of the Beijing, Suzhou, and Hainan validation cohorts were 0.9538, 0.9628, and 0.8833, respectively. Conclusions: For the first time, the gut fungal profiles of patients with LUAD were shown to represent potential non-invasive biomarkers for early-stage diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Rationale exists for combining immune checkpoint inhibitors and PARP inhibitors (PARPi), and results of clinical trials in ovarian cancer are promising, but data in other cancers are limited. Method: Efficacy and safety of PARPi/anti-PD-1 in advanced solid tumors were retrospectively analyzed. The efficacy measures included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: This retrospective study included data from 40 patients. The ORR was 27.5% (95% CI, 13.0–42.0%), with a DCR of 85.0% (95% CI, 73.4–96.6%). Except four patients in first-line treatment (three with PR and one with SD), the ORR of ≥second-line treatment, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC) was 22.2%, 23.1% and 28.6%, and the DCR was 83.3%, 84.6% and 71.4%, separately. The median PFS of all patients, ≥second-line treatment, NSCLC and SCLC was 4.6 m, 4.2 m, 4.5 m and 3.7 m. The median OS was 9.4 m, 11.4 m, 12.7 m and 5.4 m, respectively. Multivariable analysis revealed that BRCA1/2 mutation was positively correlated with ORR (P = 0.008), and LDH≥250U/L was negatively correlated with lowered DCR (P = 0.018), while lymphocyte number, ECOG and LDH significantly influenced both PFS and OS. We found that the possible resistant mechanisms were sarcomatous degeneration and secondary mutation, including BRCA2 truncation mutation, A2M, JAK1,T790M, KEAP1 and mTOR mutation. 37.5% patients had ≥grade 3 adverse events. Conclusion: PARPi/anti-PD-1 is an effective and tolerable method for patients with advanced solid tumors, and BRCA1/2 is a potential biomarker. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have demonstrated great promise for treating cancers with homologous recombination (HR) defects, such as germline BRCA1/2 mutation. Further studies suggest that PARP inhibitors (PARPi) can also exhibit efficacy in HR-competent cancers, by amplifying the DNA damage and inducing immunogenic cell death, and PARPi lead to increasing tumor neoantigen, upregulation of interferons and PD-L1, and modulation of the tumor microenvironment, which may facilitate a more profound antitumor immune response. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting PD-1/PD-L1 or CTLA-4 have achieved impressive success in the treatment of different malignancies. However, only a subset of populations derive clinical benefit, and the biomarkers and resistance mechanisms are not fully understood. Therefore, given that PARPi could potentiate the therapeutic effect of ICIs, PARPi combined with ICIs are becoming an alternative for patients who cannot benefit from ICI monotherapy. In this review, we focus on the mechanisms and immune role of PARPi and discuss the rationale and clinical studies of this combined regimen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Lung adenocarcinoma in young adults is a rare entity with the oncogenic genetic alterations associated being poorly understood. In the present study, the effect of genetic alterations in lung adenocarcinoma patients diagnosed in young patients is reported. Methods: Twenty young lung adenocarcinoma patients (age years: median: 33.5, range: 24‐36) were enrolled in the current study and 24 patients who were at common age of the disease onset (age years: median: 61.5, range: 52‐79) were selected for comparison. Paraffin sections of lung adenocarcinoma were analyzed using the whole‐exome sequencing platform. Results: Similar number of somatic mutations per tumor were found in the young patients and their older counterparts. Although no age‐related differences were detected in the numbers of lung adenocarcinoma patients harboring well‐known gene variants, mutations in FRG1 and KMT2C were associated with a younger age especially after correcting for tobacco smoking and sex (FRG1: P = 0.027, KMT2C: P = 0.046). Five genetic variants showed higher alteration frequencies in young patients compared to the unclassified East Asian population, suggesting these mutations as disease‐related hereditary germline variants. Conclusions: These results suggest different characteristics of lung adenocarcinoma between the young and the patients at common age of onset. Young patients with lung adenocarcinoma have a distinctly unique prevalence of oncogenic genetic alterations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]