FP07.06 Lung Immune Prognostic Index (LIPI) in Advanced NSCLC Patients Treated with Immunotherapy, Chemotherapy and both Combined Upfront.

Blanc‐Durand, Félix; Rubio, X. Mielgo; Auclin, Édouard; Castro, R. López; Nadal, Ernest; Planchard, David; Routy, Bertrand; Hendriks, Lizza; Sullivan, Ivana; Dempsey, Naomi; Pilotto, Sara; Aboubakar, F.; Pinato, David J.; Castonguay, Mathieu; Rodríguez, A.; Amores, A.; Bluthgen, M.V.; Duchemann, Boris; Castellano, Paolo; Rosa, C. Aguado de la; Moyano, M. Sereno; Ruffinelli, J.C.; Lopez, G.; Caramella, Caroline; Besse, Benjamin; Mezquita, Laura

doi:10.1016/j.jtho.2021.01.106

Cited by 3 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the context of combination therapy of chemotherapy accompanied with immunotherapy (and anti-angiogenics), this represents the first study to validate the LIPI in treatment-naïve patients. Our team recently reported similar results in a preliminary analysis of patient cohorts treated with immunotherapy and chemotherapy or an immunotherapy and immunotherapy association in the first-line setting [ 5 ].…”

Section: Lipi Is a Strong Prognostic Factor In Both Patients Treated With Immunotherapy In Combination With Chemotherapy And Also In Treamentioning

confidence: 66%

“…To date, only tumor-related biomarkers are taken into account when choosing the patient’s treatment, with PD-L1 status being the most commonly used marker. As previously shown, the LIPI is independently associated with both survival and response under immunotherapy [ 5 ]. We consider it to be of very great importance to integrate host-related inflammatory markers into the algorithm containing tumor-related biomarkers in order to improve patient selection for immunotherapy therapeutic strategies for both monotherapy and combination therapy in NSCLC.…”

Section: Integrating Host-related Inflammatory Markers In Nsclc Will Improve the Selection Of Candidates For Each Therapymentioning

confidence: 95%

“…We believe that this aspect merits further exploration in the randomized clinical trial setting with different treatment combinations and with a focus on the poor LIPI population as, in fact, we have shown that these patients can respond well to ICI combinations [ 5 ]. The combination of tumor mutational burden (TMB) with circulating inflammatory biomarkers could be an interesting path toward patients’ selection.…”

Section: Does Lipi Offer Additional Guidance For Treatment Selection In Nsclc Patients?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comment on Hopkins et al. Value of the Lung Immune Prognostic Index in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Initiating First-Line Atezolizumab Combination Therapy: Subgroup Analysis of the IMPOWER150 Trial. Cancers 2021, 13, 1176

Auclin

Mezquita

Besse

2021

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Lipi Is a Strong Prognostic Factor In Both Patients Treated With Immunotherapy In Combination With Chemotherapy And Also In Treamentioning

confidence: 66%

Section: Integrating Host-related Inflammatory Markers In Nsclc Will Improve the Selection Of Candidates For Each Therapymentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Does Lipi Offer Additional Guidance For Treatment Selection In Nsclc Patients?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comment on Hopkins et al. Value of the Lung Immune Prognostic Index in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Initiating First-Line Atezolizumab Combination Therapy: Subgroup Analysis of the IMPOWER150 Trial. Cancers 2021, 13, 1176

Auclin

Mezquita

Besse

2021

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In our study, we defined fast progressors as patients with an OS < 3 months after ICI start. This is one of the aggressive progression patterns described in cancer patients under immunotherapy [23,26]. Although the immunological mechanisms have not been well established and this phenomenon remains controversial, some patients experience rapid and aggressive progression and previous reports highlighted inflammation as a key mechanism for the aggressive patterns [26,27].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…This suggested that LIPI could be a useful tool to better identify true responders and, even more relevantly, to identify populations unlikely to respond to immunotherapy, providing additional information on outcome prediction, compared to the restricted vision, when using only tumor-based biomarkers. Similarly, LIPI, as for other host-related biomarkers, has also been explored in ≥50% PD-L1 NSCLC, another favorable population for immunotherapy [23]. In a cohort of 930 patients treated with ICIs, LIPI was an independent prognostic marker regardless of PD-L1 expression.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association of the Lung Immune Prognostic Index with Immunotherapy Outcomes in Mismatch Repair Deficient Tumors

Auclin

Vuagnat

Smolenschi

et al. 2021

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: MSI-H/dMMR is considered the first predictive marker of efficacy for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, around 39% of cases are refractory and additional biomarkers are needed. We explored the prognostic value of pretreatment LIPI in MSI-H/dMMR patients treated with ICIs, including identification of fast-progressors. Methods: A multicenter retrospective study of patients with metastatic MSI-H/dMMR tumors treated with ICIs between April 2014 and May 2019 was performed. LIPI was calculated based on dNLR > 3 and LDH > upper limit of normal. LIPI groups were good (zero factors), intermediate (one factor) and poor (two factors). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), including the fast-progressor rate (OS < 3 months). Results: A total of 151 patients were analyzed, mainly female (59%), with median age 64 years, performance status (PS) 0 (42%), and sporadic dMMR status (68%). ICIs were administered as first or second-line for 59%. The most frequent tumor types were gastrointestinal (66%) and gynecologic (22%). LIPI groups were good (47%), intermediate (43%), and poor (10%). The median follow-up was 32 months. One-year OS rates were 81.0%, 67.1%, and 21.4% for good, intermediate, and poor-risk groups (p <0.0001). After adjustment for tumor site, metastatic sites and PS, LIPI remained independently associated with OS (HR, poor-LIPI: 3.50, 95%CI: 1.46–8.40, p = 0.02. Overall, the fast-progressor rate was 16.0%, and 35.7% with poor-LIPI vs. 7.5% in the good-LIPI group (p = 0.02). Conclusions: LIPI identifies dMMR patients who do not benefit from ICI treatment, particularly fast-progressors. LIPI should be included as a stratification factor for future trials.

show abstract

Correlation of lung immune prognostic index with the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in Chinese patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Zhi,

Zhang,

et al. 2024

Holist Integ Oncol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) improves the prognoses of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) but is ineffective in some patients. The lung immune prognostic index (LIPI) can predict response to ICIs treatment in European patients with NSCLC. This study assessed the correlation of LIPI score with outcomes in Chinese patients with advanced NSCLC receiving ICIs. Methods A total of 305 Chinese patients with advanced NSCLC who received ICIs were ultimately included. LIPI score was determined by a high derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (dNLR > 3) and elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and classified as “good” (0), “intermediate” (1), or “poor” (2). The effects of baseline LIPI on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), and overall response rate (ORR) were analyzed. Results The good LIPI group had better OS (26.0 months, P < 0.0001) and PFS (10.5 months, P < 0.0001) than the other two groups, but the three groups had similar ORR (P = 0.222). DCR was 79%, 65%, and 47% in the good, intermediate, and poor LIPI groups, respectively (P = 0.002). Multivariate analysis indicated that an intermediate LIPI score (HR = 1.56, P = 0.005) and a poor LIPI score (HR = 2.68, P < 0.001) were independent predictors of poor OS. The findings were similar for PFS. DCR had a significant negative correlation with the LIPI score (P = 0.045). Conclusion Our results confirmed that a good LIPI score was related to prolonged survival and better response to ICIs in Chinese patients with advanced NSCLC. The LIPI score might be useful for selecting patients most likely to benefit from ICIs treatment.

show abstract

FP07.06 Lung Immune Prognostic Index (LIPI) in Advanced NSCLC Patients Treated with Immunotherapy, Chemotherapy and both Combined Upfront.

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Comment on Hopkins et al. Value of the Lung Immune Prognostic Index in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Initiating First-Line Atezolizumab Combination Therapy: Subgroup Analysis of the IMPOWER150 Trial. Cancers 2021, 13, 1176

Comment on Hopkins et al. Value of the Lung Immune Prognostic Index in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Initiating First-Line Atezolizumab Combination Therapy: Subgroup Analysis of the IMPOWER150 Trial. Cancers 2021, 13, 1176

Association of the Lung Immune Prognostic Index with Immunotherapy Outcomes in Mismatch Repair Deficient Tumors

Correlation of lung immune prognostic index with the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in Chinese patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About