ABSTRACT
In recent years， the incidence of pulmonary nodules has kept rising. To give full play to the advantages of traditional Chinese medicine （TCM） in the treatment of pulmonary nodules and identify the breakthrough points of integrating TCM with Western medicine， the China Association of Chinese Medicine organized medical experts in TCM and western medicine to carry out in-depth discussion regarding this disease. The discussion encompassed the modern medical advances， TCM theories of etiology and pathogenesis， the role and advantages of TCM in the whole course management of pulmonary nodules， contents and methods of research on pulmonary nodules， and science popularization work， aiming to provide a reference for clinical practice and scientific research. After discussion， the experts concluded that the occurrence of pulmonary nodules was rooted in the deficiency of the lung and spleen and triggered by phlegm dampness， blood stasis， and Qi stagnation. TCM can treat pulmonary nodules by controlling and reducing nodules， improving physical constitution， ameliorating multi-system nodular diseases， reducing anxiety and avoiding excessive diagnosis and treatment， and serving as an alternative for patients who are unwilling or unfit for surgical treatment. At present， the optimal diagnosis and treatment strategy for pulmonary nodules has not been formed， which needs to be further studied from multiple perspectives such as clinical epidemiology， biology， and evidence-based medicine. The primary task of current research is to find out the advantages， effective prescriptions， and target populations and determine the effective outcomes of TCM in the treatment of pulmonary nodules. At the same time， basic research should be carried out to explore the etiology and biological behaviors of pulmonary nodules. The expert consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary nodules with integrated TCM and Western medicine needs to be continuously revised to guide clinicians to conduct standardized， scientific， and accurate effective diagnosis and treatment.
ABSTRACT
Objective:To investigate the clinical characteristics of patients with malignant tumors and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) related multisystem adverse events as well as therapeutic efficacy of ICI.Methods:The general data, immune-related adverse events (irAE) type, onset time, severity and ICI efficacy of patients with malignant tumors who developed irAE after receiving ICI in China-Japan Friendship Hospital between January 2019 and November 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. All patients were divided into multisystem irAE group and single system irAE group according to whether patients with more than 1 organ or system developed irAE for once. The occurrence of irAE was summarized, and the clinical characteristics of patients were compared. Progression-free survival analysis was not performed owing to the pause of immunotherapy caused by some irAE, so the efficacy of ICI was evaluated by using ICI treatment duration (TD).Results:A total of 47 patients with malignant tumors and irAE were included in this study, with 70 times of irAE in total. The median onset time was 90 d (35 d, 196 d). Among them, 12 patients (25.53%) developed multisystem irAE (32 times of irAE in total); the other 35 patients (74.47%) developed single system irAE (38 times of irAE in total). Cutaneous toxicity for 7 times, thyroid toxicity for 7 times and pulmonary toxicity for 5 times were the most frequent among multisystem irAE group; pulmonary toxicity for 13 times, thyroid toxicity for 12 times and cutaneous toxicity for 5 times were the most frequent among single system irAE group. There were no statistically significant differences in the proportion of patients stratified by age, gender, the combination of other treatments and different body mass between the two groups (all P > 0.05). The median follow-up time was 20 months (9-40 months). The median TD of ICI was 16.00 months (95% CI 3.62-31.22 months) in multisystem irAE group and 4.60 months (95% CI 4.12-11.30 months) in single system irAE group; TD in multisystem irAE group was longer than that in single system irAE group, and the difference was statistically significant ( HR = 0.413, 95% CI 0.202-0.844, P = 0.038). Conclusions:The efficacy of ICI in patients with malignant tumors and multisystem irAE is better than that in those with single system irAE. It suggests that the better efficacy of ICI may be associated with greater risk of irAE. There is no significant difference in the clinical features between multisystem irAE and single system irAE.