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.
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.