Family history of cancer and DNA damage response genes: Two sides of the same coin?

Cortellini, Alessio; Bersanelli, Melissa; Ficorella, Corrado; Buti, Sebastiano

doi:10.1111/1759-7714.12926

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 4 publications

(7 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…13 Our first hypothesis has been that the underlying mechanisms to our findings might be DNA damage repair (DDR) gene alterations. 14 Here, we present the updated results of the FAMI-L1 study, implemented in the study population, in order to confirm our preliminary findings. 13 1.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 59%

Evaluating the role of FAMIly history of cancer and diagnosis of multiple neoplasms in cancer patients receiving PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors: the multicenter FAMI-L1 study

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: We investigate the role of family history of cancer (FHC) and diagnosis of metachronous and/or synchronous multiple neoplasms (MN), during anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy. Design: This was a multicenter retrospective study of advanced cancer patients treated with anti-PD-1/ PD-L1 immunotherapy. FHC was collected in lineal and collateral lines, and patients were categorized as follows: FHC-high (in case of cancer diagnoses in both the lineal and collateral family lines), FHC-low (in case of cancer diagnoses in only one family line), and FHC-negative. Patients were also categorized according to the diagnosis of MN as follows: MN-high (>2 malignancies), MN-low (two malignancies), and MN-negative. Objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) of any grade were evaluated. Results: 822 consecutive patients were evaluated. 458 patients (55.7%) were FHC-negative, 289 (35.2%) were FHC-low, and 75 (9.1%) FHC-high, respectively. 29 (3.5%) had a diagnosis of synchronous MN and 94 (11.4%) of metachronous MN. 108 (13.2%) and 15 (1.8%) patients were MN-low and MN-high, respectively. The median follow-up was 15.6 months. No significant differences were found regarding ORR among subgroups. FHC-high patients had a significantly longer PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.69 [95% CI: 0.48-0.97], p = .0379) and OS (HR = 0.61 [95% CI: 0.39-0.93], p = .0210), when compared to FHCnegative patients. FHC-high was confirmed as an independent predictor for PFS and OS at multivariate analysis. No significant differences were found according to MN categories. FHC-high patients had a significantly higher incidence of irAEs of any grade, compared to FHC-negative patients (p = .0012). Conclusions: FHC-high patients seem to benefit more than FHC-negative patients from anti-PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 59%