Low-Dose Anti-PD(L)1 for the Treatment of Solid Malignancies.

IF 3.2 Q2 ONCOLOGY
JCO Global Oncology Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-21 DOI:10.1200/GO.24.00122
Iza Andrade de A Souza, Beatriz de M Dobbert, Barbara G Sao Jose, Joao Pedro Homse-Netto, Larissa L Furlan, Maira S Abreu, Camila Ferrari, Bruno Uchoa, Kathia Abdallah, Stephano N Lucio, Joao A Soler, Fabio L C Fernandez, Luiza Ferreira, Joao D Guedes, Aline F Fares, Daniel V Araujo
{"title":"Low-Dose Anti-PD(L)1 for the Treatment of Solid Malignancies.","authors":"Iza Andrade de A Souza, Beatriz de M Dobbert, Barbara G Sao Jose, Joao Pedro Homse-Netto, Larissa L Furlan, Maira S Abreu, Camila Ferrari, Bruno Uchoa, Kathia Abdallah, Stephano N Lucio, Joao A Soler, Fabio L C Fernandez, Luiza Ferreira, Joao D Guedes, Aline F Fares, Daniel V Araujo","doi":"10.1200/GO.24.00122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Mounting data suggest that lower doses of anti-PD(L)1 agents can be as efficacious as label-approved doses at a fraction of its cost. We compare the outcomes of patients treated with low-dose (LD) and with conventional-dose (CD) anti-PD(L)1 agents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This observational study evaluates the outcomes of patients with solid malignancies treated with anti-PD(L)1 agents (LD or CD) at Hospital de Base, Brazil. Patients were classified as receiving LD if the dose administered in the first cycle was below the label-approved dose. Efficacy outcomes, including best clinical overall response rate (cORR), clinical progression-free survival (cPFS), and overall survival (OS), were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From January 2020 to May 2023, 71 patients were included: 49 (69%) with LD and 22 (31%) with CD agents. The most frequent tumor sites were the lung (41% LD, 22.9% CD) and skin (melanoma; 24.6% LD, 50% CD). Most of the patients were treated with pembrolizumab (65% LD and 72% CD). The mean dose of pembrolizumab was 95.3 mg (1.5 mg/kg) in LD and 168.7 mg (2.12 mg/kg) in CD groups, once a day, q21d (every 21 days). After a median follow-up of 10.9 months, there were no significant differences between LD versus CD in cORR (38.1% <i>v</i> 35.2%, <i>P</i> = .31), cPFS (5.3 m <i>v</i> 7 m, <i>P</i> = .36), and OS (12.8 m <i>v</i> not reached, <i>P</i> = .17). A subgroup analysis with patients receiving pembrolizumab was performed, and similar results were obtained.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study found no differences in cORR, cPFS, and OS between patients treated with LD and CD anti-PD(L)1. LD anti-PD(L)1 could be an alternative to promote accessibility, which warrants further investigation in randomized trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":14806,"journal":{"name":"JCO Global Oncology","volume":"10 ","pages":"e2400122"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO Global Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/GO.24.00122","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Mounting data suggest that lower doses of anti-PD(L)1 agents can be as efficacious as label-approved doses at a fraction of its cost. We compare the outcomes of patients treated with low-dose (LD) and with conventional-dose (CD) anti-PD(L)1 agents.

Methods: This observational study evaluates the outcomes of patients with solid malignancies treated with anti-PD(L)1 agents (LD or CD) at Hospital de Base, Brazil. Patients were classified as receiving LD if the dose administered in the first cycle was below the label-approved dose. Efficacy outcomes, including best clinical overall response rate (cORR), clinical progression-free survival (cPFS), and overall survival (OS), were evaluated.

Results: From January 2020 to May 2023, 71 patients were included: 49 (69%) with LD and 22 (31%) with CD agents. The most frequent tumor sites were the lung (41% LD, 22.9% CD) and skin (melanoma; 24.6% LD, 50% CD). Most of the patients were treated with pembrolizumab (65% LD and 72% CD). The mean dose of pembrolizumab was 95.3 mg (1.5 mg/kg) in LD and 168.7 mg (2.12 mg/kg) in CD groups, once a day, q21d (every 21 days). After a median follow-up of 10.9 months, there were no significant differences between LD versus CD in cORR (38.1% v 35.2%, P = .31), cPFS (5.3 m v 7 m, P = .36), and OS (12.8 m v not reached, P = .17). A subgroup analysis with patients receiving pembrolizumab was performed, and similar results were obtained.

Conclusion: Our study found no differences in cORR, cPFS, and OS between patients treated with LD and CD anti-PD(L)1. LD anti-PD(L)1 could be an alternative to promote accessibility, which warrants further investigation in randomized trials.

治疗实体恶性肿瘤的低剂量抗-PD(L)1。
目的:越来越多的数据表明,低剂量抗PD(L)1药物的疗效可与标签批准的剂量相媲美,而成本仅为标签批准剂量的一小部分。我们比较了接受低剂量(LD)和常规剂量(CD)抗 PD(L)1 药物治疗的患者的疗效:这项观察性研究评估了巴西基地医院使用抗PD(L)1药物(低剂量或常规剂量)治疗实体恶性肿瘤患者的疗效。如果患者第一周期的用药剂量低于标签批准的剂量,则将其归类为接受LD治疗的患者。疗效结果包括最佳临床总反应率(cORR)、临床无进展生存期(cPFS)和总生存期(OS):结果:2020 年 1 月至 2023 年 5 月,共纳入 71 例患者:49人(69%)使用LD药物,22人(31%)使用CD药物。最常见的肿瘤部位是肺部(41%为LD,22.9%为CD)和皮肤(黑色素瘤;24.6%为LD,50%为CD)。大多数患者接受了pembrolizumab治疗(65%为LD,72%为CD)。LD 组和 CD 组的 pembrolizumab 平均剂量分别为 95.3 毫克(1.5 毫克/千克)和 168.7 毫克(2.12 毫克/千克),每天一次,q21d(每 21 天一次)。中位随访 10.9 个月后,LD 组与 CD 组在 cORR(38.1% 对 35.2%,P = .31)、cPFS(5.3 m 对 7 m,P = .36)和 OS(12.8 m 对未达到,P = .17)方面无显著差异。对接受pembrolizumab治疗的患者进行了亚组分析,结果相似:我们的研究发现,接受LD抗PD(L)1和CD抗PD(L)1治疗的患者在cORR、cPFS和OS方面没有差异。LD anti-PD(L)1 可能是促进可及性的一种替代方法,值得在随机试验中进一步研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JCO Global Oncology
JCO Global Oncology Medicine-Oncology
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
310
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信