Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Cancers (Basel) ; 16(12)2024 Jun 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38927928

ABSTRACT

Regulatory approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) was based on results of large, randomized clinical trials, resulting in limited outcomes data in patient cohorts typically underrepresented in such trials. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ICIs in these unique patient cohorts. This is a multicenter, retrospective analysis of real-world data at six academic and community clinics in the United States from 1 January 2011 to 1 April 2018. Patients were included if they had received at least one cycle of ICI treatment. Unique patient cohorts included age > 75 years, non-White race, positive smoking history, ECOG performance status (PS) ≥ 2, BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2, autoimmune diseases (AIDs), chronic viral infections (CVI), extensive prior lines of therapy (LOTs), or >three metastatic sites. Immune-related adverse events (irAEs), overall survival (OS), and time to treatment failure were evaluated in the entire cohort and in NSCLC patients treated with PD-(L)1 monotherapy. Outcomes and their association with unique patient cohorts were compared on univariate analysis and multivariate analysis to those without a particular characteristic in the entire NSCLC PD-(L)1 monotherapy cohorts. In total, 1453 patients were included: 56.5%-smokers, 30.4%-non-White, 22.8%-elderly, 20.8%-ECOG PS ≥ 2, 15.7%-history of AIDs, and 4.7%-history of CVI. The common ICIs were nivolumab (37.1%) and pembrolizumab (22.2%). Black patients, compared to White patients, experienced fewer irAEs (OR 0.54, p < 0.001). An ECOG PS of ≥2 (HR = 2.01, p < 0.001) and an increased number of previous LOTs were associated with poor OS (the median OS of 26.2 vs. 16.2 vs. 9.6 months for one vs. two vs. three prior LOTs, p < 0.001). The above results were confirmed in anti-PD-(L)1 monotherapy non-small cell lung cancer patients (n = 384). Overall, ICIs were safe and efficacious in these typically underrepresented patient cohorts. We noted ECOG PS ≥ 2 and an increased prior LOTs were associated with poor ICI efficacy, and Black patients, compared to White patients, experienced fewer irAEs.

2.
J Immunother ; 43(9): 286-290, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32815894

ABSTRACT

Epithelioid sarcoma, in the relapse-refractory setting, has limited expected survival. SMARCB1 inactivation, common in epithelioid sarcoma, causes loss of INI1 protein expression and overexpression of the cancer cell growth promoting methyltransferase enzyme, EZH2. We treated a 19-year-old male with stage IV SMARCB1 inactivated epithelioid sarcoma presenting with recurrent end stage (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status 4) rapidly progressing bulky disease with combination ipilimumab and nivolumab. He failed standard therapy and an EZH2 inhibitor (tazemetostat). He presented (May 13, 2019) with a large (16.1×18.6 cm) soft tissue back mass extending from T10 to L3. Complete clinical regression of the back mass occurred within 2 weeks (May 28, 2019) of cycle 1 of combined checkpoint inhibition therapy followed by a positron emission tomography-negative complete remission (October 11, 2019). After a second negative positron emission tomography/computed tomography scan (January 13, 2020), checkpoint inhibition therapy was discontinued. He has returned to normal activities with a normal physical examination and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status of 0 at his last visit (June 29, 2020). In conclusion, combined checkpoint inhibition therapy warrants further study in the salvage setting in patients with epithelioid and other INI1 protein-deficient sarcomas seemingly regardless of prior therapy, extent of disease, and performance status.


Subject(s)
Biomarkers, Tumor , CTLA-4 Antigen/antagonists & inhibitors , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor/antagonists & inhibitors , Sarcoma/diagnosis , Sarcoma/drug therapy , Enhancer of Zeste Homolog 2 Protein/antagonists & inhibitors , Enhancer of Zeste Homolog 2 Protein/metabolism , Humans , Male , Neoplasm Staging , SMARCB1 Protein/genetics , SMARCB1 Protein/metabolism , Sarcoma/etiology , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
3.
J Adv Pract Oncol ; 10(4): 367-386, 2019.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33343985

ABSTRACT

A number of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as immuno-oncology (IO) monotherapy for multiple solid and hematologic tumor types across various lines of therapy. Furthermore, evidence shows some patients may derive additional benefit from IO combination therapy. Three IO combination regimens, nivolumab plus ipilimumab, and pembrolizumab or atezolizumab plus chemotherapy, are approved by the FDA as of April 2019. Because peripheral immune surveillance via T-cell activity is increased to attack malignant cells, the antitumor effects of ICIs may be accompanied by immune-mediated adverse reactions (IMARs). Although potentially more efficacious than monotherapy, IO combination therapies are associated with increased incidences of IMARs vs. IO monotherapy. Advanced practice providers (APPs) are uniquely placed within the multidisciplinary team to counsel patients with cancer on their IO treatment and educate them about identifying manifestations of IMARs. Advanced practice providers should be aware of the presentation and time to onset of IMARs, appropriate management to reduce risk of organ dysfunction, and guidelines for treating these patients. This article reviews IO/IO and IO/chemotherapy combination regimens with respect to clinical efficacy and safety, and discusses the role of the APP in managing IMARs associated with IO combination therapy.

4.
Clin J Oncol Nurs ; 16(4): 343-5, 2012 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22842684

ABSTRACT

Systematic incorporation of toxicity assessment and grading during cancer treatment and subsequent provision of evidence-based patient interventions according to national standards for excellence are daunting tasks. To accomplish those goals, the authors' institution developed evidence-based supportive therapy guidelines for symptom management. This article describes how the guidelines provided concise, user-friendly standardization of toxicity grading and immediate clinical application of evidence-based care.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/nursing , Evidence-Based Medicine/organization & administration , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoplasms/nursing , Nurse-Patient Relations , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/diagnosis , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/therapy , Humans , Male , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Program Development , Program Evaluation , Quality Control , Severity of Illness Index
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...