Humans ; Prognosis ; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use* ; Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute/genetics*

Lung cancer has the highest risk of brain metastasis (BM) among all solid carcinomas. The emergence of BM has a significant impact on the selection of oncologic treatment for patients. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are the most promising treatment option for patients without druggable mutations and have been shown to improve survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) BM in clinical trials with good safety. Moreover, ICI has shown certain effects in NSCLC BM, and the overall intracranial efficacy is comparable to extracranial efficacy. However, a proportion of patients showed discordant responses in primary and metastatic lesions, suggesting that multiple mechanisms may exist underlying ICI activity in BM. According to studies pertaining to tumor immune microenvironments, ICIs may be capable of provoking immunity in situ . Meanwhile, systematic immune cells activated by ICIs can migrate into the central nervous system and exert antitumor effects. This review summarizes the present evidence for ICI treatment efficacy in NSCLC BM and proposes the possible mechanisms of ICI treatment for NSCLC BMs based on existing evidence.
Humans ; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy* ; Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy* ; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use* ; Brain Neoplasms/drug therapy* ; Carcinoma ; Tumor Microenvironment

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are increasingly used as first-line therapy for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring no actionable mutations; however, data on their efficacy among patients presenting with intracranial lesions are limited. This study aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of ICIs combined with chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC patients with measurable brain metastasis at initial diagnosis. METHODS: Our study retrospectively analyzed clinical data of a total of 211 patients diagnosed with driver gene mutation-negative advanced NSCLC with measurable, asymptomatic brain metastasis at baseline from Hunan Cancer Hospital between January 1, 2019 and September 30, 2021. The patients were stratified into two groups according to the first-line treatment regimen received: ICI combined with chemotherapy ( n = 102) or chemotherapy ( n = 109). Systemic and intracranial objective response rates (ORRs) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed. Adverse events were also compared between the groups. RESULTS: Compared with the chemotherapy-based regimen, the ICI-containing regimen was associated with a significantly higher intracranial (44.1% [45/102] vs . 28.4% [31/109], χ2 = 5.620, P = 0.013) and systemic (49.0% [50/102] vs . 33.9% [37/109], χ2 = 4.942, P = 0.019) ORRs and longer intracranial (11.0 months vs . 7.0 months, P <0.001) and systemic (9.0 months vs . 5.0 months, P <0.001) PFS. Multivariable analysis consistently revealed an independent association between receiving ICI plus platinum-based chemotherapy as a first-line regimen and prolonged intracranial PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.37-0.73, P <0.001) and systemic PFS (HR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.35-0.66, P <0.001). No unexpected serious adverse effects were observed. CONCLUSION: Our study provides real-world clinical evidence that ICI combined with chemotherapy is a promising first-line treatment option for driver gene mutation-negative advanced NSCLC patients who present with brain metastasis at initial diagnosis. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ , OMESIA, NCT05129202.
Humans ; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/genetics* ; Lung Neoplasms/genetics* ; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use* ; Retrospective Studies ; Brain Neoplasms/genetics*

BACKGROUND: As the efficacy of programmed cell death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy in curing breast cancer is still controversial, this meta-analysis compares the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy and chemotherapy alone in the treatment of breast cancer, which provides guidance for the clinical treatment. METHODS: Relevant studies published as of April 2022 in the various databases including EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Library were selected. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which control patients underwent chemotherapy alone and experimental group patients underwent combination chemotherapy and PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor treatment were included in this investigation. Investigations without complete information, researches from which information could not be extracted, duplicate articles, animal studies, review articles, and systematic reviews were excluded. STATA 15.1 was employed for all statistical analyses. RESULTS: In total, eight eligible studies were identified, revealing that combination chemotherapy and PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor treatment was linked to significant increases in progression-free survival (PFS) relative to chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70-0.99, P = 0.032) but not overall survival (HR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.80-1.06, P = 0.273). Pooled adverse event rates were also increased within the group of combination treatment relative to the chemotherapy group (risk ratio [RR] = 1.08, 95% CI: 1.03-1.14, P = 0.002). Specifically, nausea rates were lesser within the group of combination treatment relative to the group of chemotherapy (RR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.25-0.92, P = 0.026). Subgroup analyses indicated that the PFS of patients who underwent combination atezolizumab or pembrolizumab and chemotherapy treatment were substantially longer than those of patients who underwent chemotherapy alone (HR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.69-0.89, P ≤0.001; HR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.67-0.92, P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS The pooled results suggest that combination chemotherapy and PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor treatment approaches help prolong PFS in breast cancer patients, but have no statistically significant effect on overall survival (OS). Additionally, combination therapy can significantly improve complete response rate (CRR) compared with chemotherapy alone. However, combination therapy was associated with greater rates of adverse events.
Humans ; B7-H1 Antigen/antagonists & inhibitors* ; Drug Therapy, Combination ; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use* ; Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor/antagonists & inhibitors* ; Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy*

Malignant tumors are diseases that seriously threaten human health and social development. Traditional tumor therapies such as surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy and targeted therapy cannot fully meet the needs of clinical treatment, and emerging immunotherapy has become a research hotspot in the field of tumor treatment. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been approved as a tumor immunotherapy method for the treatment of various tumors, such as lung cancer, liver cancer, stomach cancer and colorectal cancer, etc. However, during the clinical use of ICIs, only a small number of patients experienced durable responses, which also led to drug resistance and adverse reactions. Therefore, the identification and development of predictive biomarkers is crucial to improve the therapeutic efficacy of ICIs. The predictive biomarkers of tumor ICIs mainly include tumor biomarkers, tumor microenvironment biomarkers, circulation-related biomarkers, host environmental biomarkers and combinatorial biomarkers. They are of great significance for screening, individualized treatment and prognosis evaluation of tumor patients. This article reviews the advances of predictive markers for tumor ICIs therapy.
Humans ; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use* ; Lung Neoplasms ; Biomarkers ; Immunotherapy/methods* ; Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics* ; Prognosis ; Tumor Microenvironment

BACKGROUND: Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are commonly occurred in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. However, evidence of irAEs derived from the Chinese population is relatively lacking. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and outcomes of irAEs in Chinese patients with lung cancer after receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). METHODS: Clinical and follow-up data from lung cancer patients who received at least one time of ICIs from January 2018 to September 2021 at Huadong Hospital, Fudan University were included. Statistical descriptions and Kaplan-Meier method were used to analyze the overall incidence of irAEs, as well as the incidence and outcomes of each type of irAEs. RESULTS: 135 patients were included in the study. 106 patients (78.5%) presented at least one type of irAEs, and the median time to first irAEs onset was 28 d. Most irAEs occurred at early time after treatment, and most irAEs were mild-moderate and reversible. 57 patients (42.2%) died at the study cutoff. The mortality rate of severe irAEs was 12.6% (n=17), and among them 7 patients (41.2%) died of pneumonitis. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) time of the total population was 505 d (95%CI: 352-658) and 625 d (95%CI: 491-759), respectively. Patients who presented any irAEs achieved a longer PFS than those who did not (median PFS: 533 d vs 179 d, P=0.037, HR=0.57), while patients who presented skin toxicities achieved a longer OS than patients who did not (median OS: 797 d vs 469 d, P=0.006, HR=0.70). CONCLUSIONS In real-world settings, irAEs in lung cancer patients were commonly observed, with pneumonitis as the most common fatal irAEs. In addition, patients who presented any irAEs may tend to achieve a longer PFS.
Humans ; Lung Neoplasms ; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy* ; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use* ; Incidence ; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/therapeutic use* ; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/drug therapy* ; Retrospective Studies

Humans ; Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell/drug therapy* ; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use* ; Lymphoma, Large B-Cell, Diffuse ; Disease Progression ; T-Lymphocytes ; Cell Transformation, Neoplastic

In recent years, immunotherapy represented by immune checkpoint inhibitors programmed death 1 (PD-1) has made great progress in the treatment of esophageal cancer and is rewriting the global paradigm for the treatment of esophageal cancer. According to current data, only a small number of patients with esophageal cancer could benefit from immunotherapy. Therefore, it is a challenge to screen the potential beneficiaries of PD-1 inhibitors. Studies have shown that the expression level of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) in esophageal cancer is closely associated with the efficacy of PD-1 inhibitors, and PD-L1 is the most important predictive biomarker of the efficacy of PD-1 inhibitors. With the clinical application of different PD-1 inhibitors and PD-L1 protein expression detection platforms, clarifying the clinical significance and timing of detection of PD-L1 protein expression in esophageal cancer, and establishing a standardized PD-L1 testing procedure, are of great significance to improve the accuracy of detection and reduce the difference between laboratories, so as to maximize the therapeutic benefits for patients. This consensus was finally reached, based on the combination of literature, expert experience, and internal discussion and voting of committee members, to provide an accurate and reliable evidence for clinicians to make decisions.
Humans ; B7-H1 Antigen/metabolism* ; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use* ; Consensus ; Esophageal Neoplasms/drug therapy* ; Immunotherapy/methods* ; Lung Neoplasms/pathology*

Objective: To observe the present situation, efficacy and safety of immunotherapy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Methods: The data of 39 patients with MPM in two centers from 2016 to 2021 were collected and the efficacy and safety were evaluated. According to the application of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), these patients, whose median clinical follow-up amounting to 18.97 months, were divided into immunotherapy group (19 cases) and control group (20 cases). Kaplan-Meier method and Log-rank test were used for the survival analysis. Results: The objective response rate (ORR) and the disease control rate (DCR) in the immunotherapy group is 21.05% and 79.0% respectively, compared with 10.0% and 55.0% in the control group; and the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). The median overall survival (OS) in the immunotherapy group was significantly longer than that in the control group (14.53 months vs 7.07 months, P=0.015), but there was no significant difference in the median progression free survival (PFS) between two groups (4.80 months vs 2.03 months, P=0.062). Single factor survival analysis showed that the nature of pleural effusion, pathological subtype and the efficacy of immunotherapy were related to both PFS and OS of the patients with MPM (P<0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in immunotherapy group was 89.5% (17 out of 19 cases), and the most common adverse event was hematological toxicity (9 cases), followed by nausea and vomiting (7 cases), fatigue (6 cases) and skin damage (6 cases). Five patients had immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) related adverse reactions with grade 1-2. Conclusions: Patients with MPM have begun to receive immunotherapy in more than 2-line mainly combined chemotherapy in the real world, and the median treatment line is 2-line. Either combined with chemotherapy or anti-angiogenesis therapy, ICI inhibitors have significant efficacy, controllable adverse events and good clinical value.
Humans ; Mesothelioma, Malignant/drug therapy* ; Mesothelioma/drug therapy* ; Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy* ; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use* ; Immunotherapy/adverse effects*

Humans ; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy* ; Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy* ; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use* ; Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use* ; Acute Kidney Injury