Dataset Information

Immune checkpoint inhibitors in sarcomas: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT: Sarcomas are tumors that originate from mesenchymal cells. The variety of sarcomas' response to chemotherapy and the wide range of prognosis reflect their heterogeneity. In order to improve the rates of response, the research has been orientated toward other forms of therapy, such as targeted therapies and immunotherapy or toward combinations of them. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been the highlight of immunotherapy in the last decade. Although ICIs are already included in the guidelines of different malignancies, their clinical benefit in sarcomas is still under study. Alveolar soft part sarcomas, undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcomas and other subtypes of sarcoma with high presence of tertiary lymphoid structures tend to respond to ICIs, but further investigation is still needed. Furthermore, the search of predictive biomarkers to determine the type of sarcomas that are sensitive to ICIs is still very challenging. This review will focus on the results of clinical trials, which examine the effect of ICIs and their combination with chemotherapy, targeted therapies and other forms of immunotherapy in sarcomas.

SUBMITTER: Anastasiou M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10772240 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Immune checkpoint inhibitors in sarcomas: a systematic review.

Anastasiou M M Kyriazoglou A A Kotsantis I I Economopoulou P P Kyrkasiadou M M Giannopoulou A A Kosmidou A A Smerdi D D Moutafi M M Gavrielatou N N Psyrri A A

Immuno-oncology technology 20230928

Sarcomas are tumors that originate from mesenchymal cells. The variety of sarcomas' response to chemotherapy and the wide range of prognosis reflect their heterogeneity. In order to improve the rates of response, the research has been orientated toward other forms of therapy, such as targeted therapies and immunotherapy or toward combinations of them. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been the highlight of immunotherapy in the last decade. Although ICIs are already included in the guideli ...[more]

PMID: 38192615

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAcral melanoma (AM) has different biological characteristics from cutaneous melanoma. Although systemic therapeutic strategies for advanced AM resemble those for advanced cutaneous melanoma, the evidence of the clinical use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for AM is still inadequate. We aimed to systematically analyze the therapeutic effects and safety profile of ICI treatments in advanced AM.MethodsThis systematic review was conducted in line with a previously registered protocol. Three electronic databases, conference abstracts, clinical trial registers, and reference lists of included articles were searched for eligible studies. The primary outcomes were therapeutic effects, and the secondary outcomes were the safety profiles.ResultsThis systematic review included six studies investigating anti-CTLA-4 immunotherapy, 12 studies investigating anti-PD-1 immunotherapy, one study investigating the combination therapy of anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1, and one study investigating anti-PD-1 immunotherapy in combination with radiotherapy. In most studies investigating ipilimumab, the anti-CTLA-4 antibody, the objective response rate ranged from 11.4 to 25%, the median progression-free survival ranged from 2.1 to 6.7 months, and the median overall survival was more than 7.16 months. For studies discussing anti-PD-1 immunotherapy with nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or JS001, the objective response rate ranged from 14 to 42.9%, the median progression-free survival ranged from 3.2 to 9.2 months, and the median overall survival was more than 14 months. The combination therapy of anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 immunotherapy showed better efficacy with an objective response rate of 42.9% than single-agent therapy. The retrospective study investigating the combination therapy of anti-PD-1 immunotherapy and radiation showed no overall response. Few outcomes regarding safety were reported in the included studies.ConclusionsICIs, especially anti-CTLA-4 monoclonal antibodies combined with anti-PD-1 antibodies, are effective systematic treatments in advanced AM. However, there remains a lack of high-level evidence to verify their efficacy and safety and support their clinical application.

Project description:BackgroundA large proportion of patients eventually experience disease progression despite treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), but subsequent treatment options are limited for this population. Retreatment with the same or different types of ICIs is a possible strategy, but the clinical efficacy and safety data are limited. This systematic review aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ICIs retreatment in patients with solid tumors after disease progression to previous ICIs.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and major meeting libraries for prospective studies. The primary outcomes included the objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), median overall survival (mOS), and the incidence of grade ⩾3 immune-related adverse events (irAEs).ResultsWe identified 22 prospective studies including 1865 patients. For disease progression after CTLA-4 inhibitors, three studies evaluated anti-CTLA-4 retreatment. The ORR was 12-23%, the DCR was 48.4-67.7%, and the mOS was 12 months. The incidence of grade ⩾3 irAEs was 5.9-25%. Four studies evaluated anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) retreatment. The ORR was 22-36%, the DCR was 40-64%, and the mOS was 13.4-20.6 months. The incidence of grade ⩾3 irAEs was <10%. For disease progression after PD-(L)1 inhibitors, 13 studies evaluated anti-PD-(L)1 retreatment. The ORR was 5-53%, the DCR was 38-83%, and the mOS was 13.9 months. The incidence of grade ⩾3 irAEs was 0-15% for patients retreated with single anti-PD-(L)1 agent, but was higher (0-64%) for those retreated with ICIs combined with other agents. Two studies evaluated anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) retreatment. The ORR was 0-22.4%, the DCR was 50-72%, and the mOS was 4-21 months. The incidence of grade ⩾3 irAEs was 26-61%.ConclusionRetreatment with ICIs is feasible for cancer patients considering its encouraging efficacy and tolerable safety. Further prospective trials are needed to explore more promising strategies and identify suitable populations for retreatment.

Project description:Background: Pancreatic injury (pancreatitis, amylase/lipase elevation) is a rare adverse event of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). With the high number of clinical studies on ICIs, the incidence and characteristics of associated pancreatic injury (PI) need to be reevaluated. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess the incidence of PI in cancer patients who received ICIs in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). PubMed, Embase, the ASCO, ESMO, and AACR conference proceedings before 1 April 2022, were investigated for relevant research. Results: 50 RCTs involving 35,223 patients were included. The incidence of ICIs-PI was 2.22% (95% CI = 1.94%–2.53%). The incidence of PI was 3.76% (95% CI = 1.84–7.67%) when combining two ICIs, which was higher than single ICIs [2.25% (95% CI = 1.91–2.65%)]. The ICIs were ranked from high to low based on PI incidence: PD-L1 inhibitors 3.01% (95% CI = 1.86–4.87%), CTLA-4 inhibitors 2.92% (95% CI = 0.99–8.65%) and PD-1 Inhibitor 2% (95% CI = 1.67–2.39%). The ICI with the highest rate of PI was pembrolizumab 7.23.% (95% CI = 1.69–30.89%). In addition, the incidence of severe ICIs-PI was 2.08% (95% CI = 1.76–2.46%); and the incidence of severe PI was 2.32% (95% CI = 1.76–3.06%) when combining two ICIs, which was higher than single ICI [1.95% (95% CI = 1.58–2.41%)]. The ICIs were ranked from high to low according to the incidence of severe PI: PD-L1 inhibitors 3.1% (95% CI = 1.7–5.64%), CTLA-4 inhibitors 2.69% (95% CI = 0.76–9.49%), PD-1 inhibitors 1.80% (95% CI = 1.41–2.29%). Conclusion: Treatment with multiple ICIs result in a higher incidence of PI compared to single ICIs, irrespective of the grade of pancreatic injury. The incidence of PI caused by PD-L1 inhibitors is higher than that of CTLA-4 inhibitors and PD-1 Inhibitor, and Pembrolizumab has the highest rate of ICIs-PI. Although the incidence of ICIs-PI is not high, they are usually severe (≥ grade 3 events).

Project description:BackgroundConventional cytotoxic chemotherapy offers minor benefit to patients with mucosal melanoma (MM). Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become the preferred approach in patients with advanced or metastatic cutaneous melanoma, the evidence of their clinical use for MM is still limited. This systematic review aims to summarize the efficacy and safety of ICIs in advanced or metastatic MM.MethodsWe searched electronic databases, conference abstracts, clinical trial registers and reference lists for relevant studies. The primary outcomes included the overall response rate (ORR), median progression-free survival (PFS), median overall survival (OS), one-year PFS rate, and one-year OS rate.ResultsThis review identified 13 studies assessing anti-CTLA-4 monotherapy, 22 studies assessing anti-PD-1 monotherapy, two studies assessing anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 combination therapy, one study assessing anti-PD-1 antibodies combined with axitinib, and three studies assessing anti-PD-1 antibodies combined with radiotherapy. For most patients who received ipilimumab monotherapy, the ORR ranged from 0% to 17%, the median PFS was less than 5 months, and the median OS was less than 10 months. For patients who received nivolumab or pembrolizumab monotherapy, most studies showed an ORR of more than 15% and a median OS of more than 11 months. The combined administration of anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 agents showed benefits over single-agent therapy with an ORR of more than 33.3%. In a phase Ib trial of toripalimab in combination with axitinib, approximately half of patients had complete or partial responses. Three retrospective studies that investigated anti-PD-1 antibodies combined with radiotherapy showed an ORR of more than 50%, which was higher than each single modality treatment.ConclusionsImmune checkpoint inhibitors, especially anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibodies alone and in combination with anti-CTLA-4 monoclonal antibodies or other modalities, are promising treatment options for advanced or metastatic MM. However, high-level evidence is still needed to support the clinical application.

Project description:Background: Immune checkpoint blockade has revolutionized the treatment of multiple malignancies. Currently, however, the effect is not universal, with objective response rates (ORR) of about 15-25%, and even lower for some cancers. Abnormal vasculature is a hallmark of most solid tumors and plays a role in immune evasion. Growing body of evidence suggests that vascular normalization and immune reprogramming could operate synergistic effect, resulting in an enhanced therapeutic efficacy. However, the benefit of antitumor efficacy must be weighed against the risk of added toxicity. In this systematic review, we summarize severe toxicity observed in such a kind of combination regimen. Methods: PubMed and Embase were searched for English references published up to May 31, 2019, with MeSH and keywords search terms of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and antiangiogenic agents approved for using in solid tumors. Studies performing concomitant use of ICIs and antiangiogenic agents, and also reporting severe treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) (≥grade 3), were included for further analysis. Results: A total of 32 studies including a total of 2,324 participants were analyzed. Limited available data suggests that both antiangiogenic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) show potential risk of increasing treatment-related toxicity when combined with ICIs. Overall, the total incidence of severe adverse events (AEs) associated with ICIs plus mAbs (44.5%) is lower than that of ICIs plus TKIs (60.1%). However, the trAEs observed in combination therapy are mostly consistent with the known safety profiles of corresponding monotherapy, and they seem to be largely related to antiangiogenic agents, rather than a true immune-related adverse event (irAE) predominantly due to ICIs. The majority of trAEs are intervened by holding ICI treatment and adding corticosteroids, as well as reducing dose or adjusting administration frequency of the antiangiogenic drugs. Conclusions: Concurrent use of ICIs and antiangiogenic agents shows potential treatment-related toxicity. Further research is required to compare the efficacy and safety of the combination regimen and corresponding monotherapy and identify predictive biomarkers, as well as explore dose, duration, and sequencing schedules of drugs.

Dataset Information

Immune checkpoint inhibitors in sarcomas: a systematic review.

Publications

Immune checkpoint inhibitors in sarcomas: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets