ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The incidence of multiple primary cancers (MPC), especially involving primary lung cancer (PLC) and primary hematologic malignancies (PHM), is rising. This study aims to analyze clinicopathological features, gene abnormalities, and prognostic outcomes in individuals diagnosed with PLC-PHM MPC. METHODS: A retrospective analysis included 89 patients diagnosed with PLC-PHM MPC at the Respiratory or Hematology Departments of Ruijin Hospital from 2003 to 2022 (a total of 842,047 people). Next-generation sequencing (NGS) assessed lung cancer specimens, while Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) and NGS were used for hematologic malignancy specimens. Statistical analysis involved survival analysis and Cox regression. RESULTS: PLC-PHM MPC incidence surged from 1.67 per year (2011-2013) to 16.3 per year (2020-2022). The primary demographic for PLC-PHM MPC consists predominantly of elderly (average age 66 years) males (59.6%), with a high prevalence of metachronous MPC (89.9%). The prevailing histological types were lung adenocarcinoma (70.8%) in lung cancer (LC) and mature B-cell lymphomas (50.6%) in hematologic malignancies (HM). Notably, in a molecular testing cohort of 38 LC patients, 84.2% of lung cancer cases exhibited driver mutations, in which EGFR mutations frequence prevalent was 74.2%. In total group of 85 cases achieved a median overall survival (mOS) of 46.2 months, with a 5-year survival rate of 37.9% and advanced LC patients with LC gene mutations achieved a mOS was 52.6 months, with a 5-year OS rate of 30.6%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) following first-line treatment of 11 advanced patients with lung cancer-associated driver gene mutations is 26.6 months. Multivariate Cox regression revealed a favorable OS associated with surgery for LC, favorable PS score, adenocarcinoma pathology of LC, and the presence of genetic abnormalities associated with HM. CONCLUSION: PLC-PHM MPC incidence is rising, characterized by a significant proportion of lung adenocarcinoma and a high prevalence of positive driver genes, especially in EGFR. Despite suffering from two primary tumors, the PLC-PHM MPC patients had superior data of both PFS and OS, suggesting an inherently intricate background of genetic abnormalities between the two kinds of tumors.
ABSTRACT
Background: The rechallenge of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) is now an optional strategy for patients who discontinued ICI due to immune-related adverse events (irAEs) or disease progression. However, little data is available for the prognosis and prognostic factors of patients receiving ICI rechallenge treatment in advanced lung cancer patients. Our study aimed to explore the efficacy, prognosis and safety of patients who received anti-programmed cell death-1/programmed cell death ligand 1 (anti-PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitor rechallenge. Methods: In our retrospective cohort study, data of advanced lung cancer patients who received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor and discontinued due to irAEs or disease progression were collected from December 2016 to August 2021. Enrolled patients were categorized into two groups: rechallenge group (R group) and non-rechallenge group (NR group). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), disease control rate (DCR) and safety data were analyzed. Cox model and subgroup analysis were analyzed according to baseline characteristics, ICI type, the reason for discontinuing ICI, etc. According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1), evaluation was performed routinely every 6-8 weeks after initiating treatment with the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor. The last follow-up in the study was on September 20, 2021. Results: Eighty-one patients who met our inclusion criteria were enrolled. In the whole cohort, the R group achieved better OS than the NR group [hazard ratio (HR) =0.176; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.065-0.477; P=0.001). In the irAEs group, the survival analyses showed a trend toward improved OS in the rechallenge subgroup (HR =0.287; 95% CI: 0.081-1.025; P=0.055), and a promising DCR of 75% after an ICI rechallenge. Additionally, the exploration of safety outcomes indicated an acceptable recurrence rate (22.5%) of irAEs and an early onset of irAEs after an ICI rechallenge. In the disease progression group, the rechallenge subgroup did not improve OS (HR =0.214; 95% CI: 0.027-1.695; P=0.144), and the DCR of the rechallenge subgroup was 40% after ICI rechallenge. Conclusions: ICI rechallenge might be an attractive option for patients who discontinue treatment due to irAEs. For patients with disease progression, further research should be conducted. The recurrence of irAEs and their early onset during the second round of ICI should be considered.
