Risk of Serious Immune-Related Adverse Events with Various PD1 and PD-L1 Inhibitors: A Single-Institution, Real-Life, Comparative Study.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management Pub Date : 2025-03-05 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/TCRM.S479686
Tiphaine Boucheron, Laurent Chiche, Guillaume Penaranda, Maxime Souquet, Hervé Pegliasco, Julien Deturmeny, Véronique Brunel, Nicolas Barrière, Chloé Arbault-Bitton, Emilie Coquet, Laetitia Diaz, Thomas Escoda
{"title":"Risk of Serious Immune-Related Adverse Events with Various PD1 and PD-L1 Inhibitors: A Single-Institution, Real-Life, Comparative Study.","authors":"Tiphaine Boucheron, Laurent Chiche, Guillaume Penaranda, Maxime Souquet, Hervé Pegliasco, Julien Deturmeny, Véronique Brunel, Nicolas Barrière, Chloé Arbault-Bitton, Emilie Coquet, Laetitia Diaz, Thomas Escoda","doi":"10.2147/TCRM.S479686","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are responsible for causing immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The frequency and severity of irAEs depend on various factors, but the role of the molecule used remains unclear. Our aim was to assess the comparative safety profile of different programmed cell death-1 inhibitors (anti-PD1) and programmed cell death ligand-1 inhibitors (anti-PD-L1) in a real-life setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The occurrence of severe irAEs (grade ≥3) and their characteristics were recorded for all patients treated with anti-PD1 or anti-PD-L1, alone or in combination, at our center. Potential predictive factors for the occurrence of irAEs, particularly concerning the type of molecule, were identified by statistical analysis. Factors related to overall survival were also analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 406 patients who received at least one dose of anti-PD1 (68.5%) or anti-PD-L1 (31.5%) were included, among which 60% had lung cancer. The overall frequency of the different ICIs was 51%, 17.5%, 14.3%, 12.8%, and 4.4% for pembrolizumab, nivolumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, and avelumab, respectively. Fifty-three (13%) patients experienced severe irAEs (grade 3 or 4). While there were no significant differences with regard to ICI categories (13.7% for anti-PD1 vs 11.7% for anti-PD-L1; p = 0.5878), the rates of severe irAEs were significantly different between ICIs (29.6% for nivolumab, 22.2% for avelumab, 13.8% for atezolizumab, 8.2% for pembrolizumab, and 5.8% for durvalumab; p < 0.0001). Multivariate analyses showed that treatments with nivolumab and low polymorphonuclear neutrophil level were significant risk factors for severe irAEs. The risk of early death was lower in patients who reported severe irAEs and the risk of cancer progression was greater with one of the least toxic molecules (atezolizumab).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This study highlights the differences in toxicity profile of various ICIs targeting the PD1/PD-L1 axis in real-life use, as well as the identification of possible predictive biomarkers.</p>","PeriodicalId":22977,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management","volume":"21 ","pages":"273-282"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11890422/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S479686","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are responsible for causing immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The frequency and severity of irAEs depend on various factors, but the role of the molecule used remains unclear. Our aim was to assess the comparative safety profile of different programmed cell death-1 inhibitors (anti-PD1) and programmed cell death ligand-1 inhibitors (anti-PD-L1) in a real-life setting.

Methods: The occurrence of severe irAEs (grade ≥3) and their characteristics were recorded for all patients treated with anti-PD1 or anti-PD-L1, alone or in combination, at our center. Potential predictive factors for the occurrence of irAEs, particularly concerning the type of molecule, were identified by statistical analysis. Factors related to overall survival were also analyzed.

Results: A total of 406 patients who received at least one dose of anti-PD1 (68.5%) or anti-PD-L1 (31.5%) were included, among which 60% had lung cancer. The overall frequency of the different ICIs was 51%, 17.5%, 14.3%, 12.8%, and 4.4% for pembrolizumab, nivolumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, and avelumab, respectively. Fifty-three (13%) patients experienced severe irAEs (grade 3 or 4). While there were no significant differences with regard to ICI categories (13.7% for anti-PD1 vs 11.7% for anti-PD-L1; p = 0.5878), the rates of severe irAEs were significantly different between ICIs (29.6% for nivolumab, 22.2% for avelumab, 13.8% for atezolizumab, 8.2% for pembrolizumab, and 5.8% for durvalumab; p < 0.0001). Multivariate analyses showed that treatments with nivolumab and low polymorphonuclear neutrophil level were significant risk factors for severe irAEs. The risk of early death was lower in patients who reported severe irAEs and the risk of cancer progression was greater with one of the least toxic molecules (atezolizumab).

Discussion: This study highlights the differences in toxicity profile of various ICIs targeting the PD1/PD-L1 axis in real-life use, as well as the identification of possible predictive biomarkers.

各种PD1和PD-L1抑制剂严重免疫相关不良事件的风险:一项单机构、现实生活的比较研究
背景:免疫检查点抑制剂(ICIs)是引起免疫相关不良事件(irAEs)的原因。irae的频率和严重程度取决于各种因素,但所使用的分子的作用尚不清楚。我们的目的是在现实生活中评估不同的程序性细胞死亡-1抑制剂(抗pd1)和程序性细胞死亡配体-1抑制剂(抗pd - l1)的比较安全性。方法:记录所有在本中心单独或联合使用抗pd - 1或抗pd - l1治疗的患者发生严重irAEs(≥3级)的情况及其特征。通过统计分析确定了irAEs发生的潜在预测因素,特别是分子类型。同时分析了与总生存率相关的因素。结果:共纳入406例接受至少一剂抗pd - 1(68.5%)或抗pd - l1(31.5%)治疗的患者,其中60%为肺癌患者。pembrolizumab, nivolumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab和avelumab的不同ici的总频率分别为51%,17.5%,14.3%,12.8%和4.4%。53例(13%)患者经历了严重的irae(3级或4级)。尽管ICI类别没有显著差异(抗pd1为13.7%,抗pd - l1为11.7%;p = 0.5878),重症irae发生率在不同的ICIs组有显著差异(纳武单抗为29.6%,阿韦单抗为22.2%,阿特唑单抗为13.8%,派姆单抗为8.2%,杜伐单抗为5.8%;P < 0.0001)。多因素分析显示,纳武单抗治疗和低多形核中性粒细胞水平是严重irae的重要危险因素。报告严重irae的患者早期死亡风险较低,使用毒性最小的分子之一(atezolizumab)的癌症进展风险较高。讨论:本研究强调了在实际使用中针对PD1/PD-L1轴的各种ICIs的毒性特征差异,以及可能的预测性生物标志物的鉴定。
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
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.60%
发文量
139
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management is an international, peer-reviewed journal of clinical therapeutics and risk management, focusing on concise rapid reporting of clinical studies in all therapeutic areas, outcomes, safety, and programs for the effective, safe, and sustained use of medicines, therapeutic and surgical interventions in all clinical areas. The journal welcomes submissions covering original research, clinical and epidemiological studies, reviews, guidelines, expert opinion and commentary. The journal will consider case reports but only if they make a valuable and original contribution to the literature. As of 18th March 2019, Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management will no longer consider meta-analyses for publication. The journal does not accept study protocols, animal-based or cell line-based studies.
×
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