European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) · 2024
Extracorporeal photopheresis vs. systemic immunosuppression for immune-related adverse events: Interim analysis of a prospective two-arm study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ertl C, Ruf T, Hammann L, Piseddu I, Wang Y, Schmitt C, Garza Vazquez X, Kabakci C, Bonczkowitz P, de Toni E N, David-Rus R, Srour J, Tomsitz D, French L E, Heinzerling L
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Checkpoint inhibitor-induced steroid-refractory (sr) and steroid-dependent (sd) immune-related adverse events (irAE) account for about 11 % of irAE. Although these patients face worse outcomes due to irAE mortality and/or sustained immunosuppression, which impairs anti-tumor response, there is no established second-line treatment based on prospective trial data.
METHODS: This prospective comparative study investigates outcomes of extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP), an immunomodulating therapy, versus second-line immunosuppressants (SLI) in sr/sd-irAE. The primary endpoint was longitudinal change in immunophenotype; secondary endpoints were outcome of irAE and tumor response. Patient demographics, quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30; global health status (GHS/QoL)) and longitudinal blood samples were analyzed at baseline; in weeks 1, 4, 8, and 12.
RESULTS: At interim analysis, 21 patients (11 ECP, 10 SLI) with 7 different sr/sd-irAE were included. Compared with the SLI group, the ECP group demonstrated a higher clinical response rate of irAE (93 % vs. 80 %; 95 % CI 0.83-1.92; P = 0.54) and a better GHS/QoL score throughout all follow-up visits. ECP patients showed a numerically higher overall survival (23 vs. 12 months; 95 % CI 0.02-3.02; P = 0.27) and lower cancer progression rates (33 % vs. 67 %; 95 % CI 0.09-1.60; P = 0.52). Immunophenotyping revealed changes in immune cell populations and the regulation of immune checkpoints. There were no significant safety issues in either treatment group.
CONCLUSION: This prospective comparative study supports the clinical efficacy of ECP in the treatment of sr/sd-irAE in comparison to the SLI cohort. Thus, ECP represents a potential treatment option for this indication, given its good safety profile while maintaining anti-tumor response.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05700565, https://classic.
CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT05700565.
METHODS: This prospective comparative study investigates outcomes of extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP), an immunomodulating therapy, versus second-line immunosuppressants (SLI) in sr/sd-irAE. The primary endpoint was longitudinal change in immunophenotype; secondary endpoints were outcome of irAE and tumor response. Patient demographics, quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30; global health status (GHS/QoL)) and longitudinal blood samples were analyzed at baseline; in weeks 1, 4, 8, and 12.
RESULTS: At interim analysis, 21 patients (11 ECP, 10 SLI) with 7 different sr/sd-irAE were included. Compared with the SLI group, the ECP group demonstrated a higher clinical response rate of irAE (93 % vs. 80 %; 95 % CI 0.83-1.92; P = 0.54) and a better GHS/QoL score throughout all follow-up visits. ECP patients showed a numerically higher overall survival (23 vs. 12 months; 95 % CI 0.02-3.02; P = 0.27) and lower cancer progression rates (33 % vs. 67 %; 95 % CI 0.09-1.60; P = 0.52). Immunophenotyping revealed changes in immune cell populations and the regulation of immune checkpoints. There were no significant safety issues in either treatment group.
CONCLUSION: This prospective comparative study supports the clinical efficacy of ECP in the treatment of sr/sd-irAE in comparison to the SLI cohort. Thus, ECP represents a potential treatment option for this indication, given its good safety profile while maintaining anti-tumor response.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05700565, https://classic.
CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT05700565.