Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are the most effective treatments nowadays. Nivolumab was the second ICI used for treating solid tumors with amazing results. Patients treated with Nivolumab may react differently to this treatment. Some people tolerate this treatment very well without experiencing any adverse reactions, whilst some may have mild symptoms and a part of them can present severe reactions. In our research, we sought to identify the answers to four questions: 1. what type of cancer has more severe hypersensitivity reactions to Nivolumab, 2. what is the time frame for developing these severe reactions to Nivolumab, 3. whether it is best to continue or stop the treatment after a severe hypersensitivity reaction to Nivolumab and 4. what severe hypersensitivity reactions are the most frequent reported along Nivolumab treatment. This review also highlights another problem with regard to the usage of concomitant and prior medications or other methods of treatment (e.g., radiation therapy), which can also lead to severe reactions. Treatment with Nivolumab is very well tolerated, but patients should also be warned of the possibility of severe hypersensitivity reactions for which they should urgently see a doctor for a personalized evaluation. There are some options for individuals with severe hypersensitivity reactions, for eg. switching the medication or applying a desensitization protocol.
BackgroundThe neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) at baseline treatment is an important marker of systemic inflammation, which is correlated with survival benefits in lung, breast, ovarian, bladder, and colorectal cancer. Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression is a biomarker with discording results regarding survival benefits in lung cancer. In our research, we studied the relationship between these two markers in patients with lung cancer. MethodsPatients with stage I, II, III, and IV lung cancer (n = 80) were included in this retrospective study. The NLR baseline was recorded before the initiation of treatment. The NLR cut-off value was 4. PD-L1 expression was determined by immunohistochemical staining. Univariate and multivariate survival analyses were conducted to test their prognostic value. ResultsNLR proved to be a significant prognostic factor for progression-free survival (PFS) (p=0.002, Log Rank) with a mean PFS of 27.7 months for low NLR patients and 12.8 months for high NLR patients. It was also significant for overall survival (OS) (p=0.007, Log Rank) with a mean OS of 52 months for low NLR patients and 41.6 months for high NLR patients. The prognostic impact of PD-L1 expression on PFS and OS was not statistically significant with a mean PFS of 23.1 months for PD-L1-negative patients and 15.8 months for PD-L1-positive patients (p=0.422, Log Rank). Mean OS was 49 months for PD-L1-negative patients while for PD-L1-positive patients, it was 43.3 months (p=0.550 Log Rank). Regarding the correlation between PD-L1 expression and NLR value, PFS mean survival times were 13.1 months for PD-L1(+)/NLR>4, 15.1 months for PD-L1(-)/NLR>4, 16.4 months for PD-L1(+)/NLR<4 and 27.8 months for PD-L1(-)/NLR<4. This correlation between PFS and the combined PD-L1 and NLR prognostic factor was statistically relevant (p=0.04). For OS, the PD-L1/NLR combined prognostic factor was not statistically relevant (p=0.055). A mean PFS time of 27.8 months was reported for PD-L1(-)/NLR<4 group patients while for the other groups, the mean PFS was 14.9 months (p=0.045). In univariate analysis, the elevated NLR was significantly associated with a decreased PFS time (HR=2.31, 95% CI =1.323-4.051, p=0.03) as well as OS (HR=3.555, 95% CI=1.310-9.652, p=0.013). In multivariate analysis, NLR remained statistically significant for PFS (HR=2.160, 95% CI=1.148-4.062, p=0.013) and OS (HR=4.364, 95% CI=1.474-12.921, p=0.008) after adjusting for the factors of age, gender, tumor stage, lymph node stage, clinical stage, histology, and PD-L1 expression. PD-L1 expression was not a valid prognostic factor for progression or death in either univariate or multivariate analysis. We also stratified the disease control rate (DCR) depending on PD-L1/NLR combined factor expression. In the PD-L1(-)/NLR<4 group, we had the highest number of partial responses (PRs) and only one complete response (CR) compared to the other groups (p=0.006). ConclusionsAs the number of patients is limited in the present analysis, it is hypothesized that these two markers ...
Background: Lung cancer (LC) is the first and most lethal cancer in the world; identifying new methods to treat it, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), is needed. ICIs treatment is very effective, but it comes bundled with a series of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Restricted mean survival time (RMST) is an alternative tool for assessing the patients’ survival when the proportional hazard assumption (PH) fails. Methods: We included in this analytical cross-sectional observational survey patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), treated for at least 6 months with ICIs in the first- and second-line settings. Using RMST, we estimated the overall survival (OS) of patients by dividing them into two groups. A multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to determine the impact of the prognostic factors on OS. Results: Seventy-nine patients were included (68.4% men, mean age 63.8), and 34/79 (43%) presented irAEs. The OS RMST of the entire group was 30.91 months, with a survival median of 22 months. Thirty-two out of seventy-nine (40.5%) died before we ended our study. The OS RMST and death percentage favored the patients who presented irAEs (long-rank test, p = 0.036). The OS RMST of patients with irAEs was 35.7 months, with a number of deaths of 12/34 (35.29%), while the OS RMST of the patients without irAEs was 17 months, with a number of deaths of 20/45 (44.44%). The OS RMST by the line of treatment favored the first line of treatment. In this group, the presence of irAEs significantly impacted the survival of these patients (p = 0.0083). Moreover, patients that experienced low-grade irAEs had a better OS RMST. This result has to be cautiously regarded because of the small number of patients stratified according to the grades of irAEs. The prognostic factors for the survival were: the presence of irAEs, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status and the number of organs affected by metastasis. The risk of dying was 2.13 times higher for patients without irAEs than for the patients who presented irAEs, (CI) 95% of 1.03 to 4.39. Moreover, by increasing the ECOG performance status by one point, the risk of death increased by 2.28 times, with a CI 95% of 1.46 to 3.58, while the involvement of more metastatic organs was associated with a 1.60 times increase in the death risk, with a CI 95% of 1.09 to 2.36. Age and the type of tumor were not predictive for this analysis. Conclusions: The RMST is a new tool that helps researchers to better address the survival in studies with ICIs treatment where the PH fails, and the long-rank test is less efficient due to the existence of the long-term responses and delayed treatment effects. Patients with irAEs have a better prognosis than those without irAEs in the first-line settings. The ECOG performance status and the number of organs affected by metastasis must be considered when selecting patients for ICIs treatment.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.