Proton pump inhibitor use (PPI) in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) for advanced cancer: Survival and prior therapy.

Abstract

2633 Background: Emerging data suggest that concomitant medications (CM) influence response to ICI. CM impact the host microbiome which may mitigate tumor-immune responsiveness. PPI use in patients treated with ICI has been associated with worse survival. Few data exist regarding the effects of PPI use in terms of prior chemotherapy or in risk for immune related adverse events (irAE) (e.g., colitis). Methods: This retrospective study of patients with advanced cancer treated with ICI between 2011 and 2019 was conducted at The Ohio State University. Patients who received ICI as either single agent or combination were included. Clinical data was abstracted from chart review, including CM, toxicity, and survival. Overall survival (OS) was evaluated to date of death or last contact. Associations between OS and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use were studied using log-rank tests and Cox regression analyses overall and by the groups of whether prior chemotherapy was administered and timing from chemotherapy to ICI. The associations between PPI and incidence of irAE (overall and colitis) were assessed by chi-square tests. Results: We identified 1,091 patients treated with ICI, of whom 415 (38%) received PPI at time of ICI. Most common cancers were NSCLC and melanoma; most common therapy was PD1/L1 (Table). PPI use was associated with shorter OS in patients treated as first line therapy (HR = 1.46, 95% CI = [1.11, 1.91], p=0.006) and in second line and beyond (HR = 1.30, 95% CI = [1.10, 1.53], p=0.002). PPI use was associated with shorter OS in patients treated with ICI for those without prior chemotherapy (HR = 1.47, 95% CI = [1.17, 1.86], p=0.001). When evaluated by timing from chemotherapy to ICI, PPI use was associated with shorter OS only in patients where last chemotherapy was > 1 year from ICI (HR = 1.99, 95% CI [1.15, 3.45], p=0.014) but not for patients with chemotherapy within 1 year of ICI (HR = 1.01, 95% CI = [0.79, 1.29], p=0.960). The use of PPI was not associated with incidence of irAE (p=0.317) or colitis in particular (p=0.781). Conclusions: PPI use was associated with shorter survival in patients treated with ICI across a broad variety of cancers and in first line of therapy or beyond. In patients with recent chemotherapy (<1 year), PPI use was not associated with survival, which may be due to disruption of the microbiome by chemotherapy. Further study is needed to determine the impact of CM (e.g, PPI), on outcomes of patients treated with ICI.[Table: see text]

Association of proton pump inhibitor use with survival outcomes in cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Finally, 33 studies, of which 24 were peer-reviewed journal publications and 9 were conference abstracts, were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. 12 , 13 , 19 – 49 The flow diagram of identifying the eligible studies is shown in Figure 1 .…”

Pembrolizumab, radiotherapy, and an immunomodulatory five-drug cocktail in pretreated patients with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical or endometrial carcinoma: Results of the phase II PRIMMO study

“…Another explanation is that we cannot exclude a negative impact of the IDC leading to accelerated tumor growth. For instance, recent studies across a broad variety of cancers have suggested that proton pump inhibitors could negatively affect outcomes in ICI-treated patients [ 43 ].…”

An Up-To-Date Investigation Into the Correlation Between Proton Pump Inhibitor Use and the Clinical Efficacy of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Advanced Solid Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…Next, the remaining studies were further screened by excluding reviews or meta-analyses (n = 41), studies with unavailable results (n = 8), studies unrelated with solid tumors (n = 5), and non-clinical studies (n = 6). Finally, a total of 17 articles published between January 2016 and July 2021 were included in our meta-analysis [ (12,15,(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)].…”