Dataset Information

Association of proton pump inhibitor use with survival outcomes in cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have been shown to regulate the gut microbiome and affect the response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Contradictory results on survival have been observed in patients concomitantly treated with ICIs and PPIs. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the association between PPI use and survival outcomes in ICI-treated cancer patients.

Methods

EMBASE, MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library databases, and major oncology conference proceedings were searched. Studies comparing overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) between PPI-treated and PPI-free groups of ICI-treated cancer patients were included. Data regarding study and patient characteristics, ICI and PPI treatments, and survival outcomes were extracted. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were pooled using random effects models. Subgroup meta-analyses and meta-regressions were performed to explore possible factors of heterogeneity among the studies.

Results

A total of 33 studies were included, comprising 7383 ICI- and PPI-treated patients and 8574 ICI-treated and PPI-free patients. The pooled HR was 1.31 (95% CI, 1.19-1.44; p < 0.001) for OS and 1.30 (95% CI, 1.17-1.46; p < 0.001) for PFS, indicating a significant negative association between PPI use and survival in ICI-treated patients. Subgroup meta-analyses by factors including cancer type, ICI type, and time window of PPI use revealed that ICI and PPI use impacted survival in patients with non-small cell lung or urothelial cancer, patients treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies, and patients receiving PPI as baseline treatment or 60 days before ICI treatment initiation.

Conclusions

PPI use in patients treated with ICIs was associated with shorter OS and PFS, especially in several specific subgroups of cancer patients. PPIs should be strictly controlled and appear to not impact survival if given temporarily after ICI initiation. These observations could provide the basis for clinical guidelines for concomitant PPI and ICI use.

SUBMITTER: Chen B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9290095 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNowadays, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become one of the essential immunotherapies for cancer patients. However, the impact of antibiotic (ATB) use on cancer patients treated with ICIs remains controversial.MethodsOur research included retrospective studies and a randomized clinical trial (RCT) with cancer patients treated with ICIs and ATB, from the public database of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, clinical trials, and JAMA. The survival outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Meanwhile, hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated, and subgroup analyses were performed to determine the concrete association between ATB use and the prognosis of cancer patients treated in ICIs.ResultsOur results revealed that ATB use was associated with poor survival outcomes, including OS (HR: 1.94, 95% CI: 1.68-2.25, p <0.001) and PFS (HR: 1.83, 95% CI: 1.53-2.19, p <0.001). The subgroup analysis learned about the association between ATB use and the prognosis of cancer patients with ICI treatment, including 5 cancer types, 3 kinds of ICI, 5 different ATP windows, broad-spectrum ATB class, and ECOG score. ATB treatment was associated with poor OS of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), renal cell carcinoma (RCC), esophageal cancer (EC), and melanoma (MEL) in patients treated in ICIs, while non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) were associated with poor PFS. Meanwhile, it was strongly related to the ICI type and ATB window. Furthermore, it is firstly mentioned that the use of broad-spectrum ATB class was strongly associated with poor PFS.ConclusionIn conclusion, our meta-analysis indicated that ATB use was significantly associated with poor OS and PFS of cancer patients treated with ICI immunotherapy, especially for patients with ATB use in the period of (-60 days; +30 days) near the initiation of ICI treatment. Also, different cancer types and the ICI type can also impact the survival outcome. This first reveals the strong relationship between the broad-spectrum ATB class and poor PFS. Still, more studies are needed for further study.

Project description:BackgroundThe use of antibiotics (ATB) and proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) alters the composition and diversity of the gut microbiota, which can influence the immune system, consequently interfering with response to anti-PD1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). We assessed the impact of ATB and/or PPI use on the efficacy and safety of ICI.MethodsTwo hundred twelve patients treated with anti-PD1 ICI for non-small cell lung carcinoma, melanoma, upper airway & digestive tract carcinoma or renal cell carcinoma were retrospectively included. Patients having received ATB within 60 days before ICI initiation were included in the ATB+ group. Patients having received PPI within 30 days before ICI initiation were included in the PPI+ group. Four groups were thus considered: ATB-/PPI-, ATB+/PPI-, ATB-/PPI+, ATB+/PPI+. Response rate was assessed by RECIST v1.1. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events, recorded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 5, were compared using inverse probability of treatment weighting to account for selection bias.ResultsPFS at 6 months was 56.7 %, 95%CI (49.6%; 63.2%) and 47.2 %, 95%CI (39.8%;54.1%) at 12 months. OS was 81.6%, 95%CI (75.6%; 86.2%) at 6 months, and 69.4%, 95%CI (61.9%;75.7%) at 12 months. Compared to ATB-/PPI- group, PFS was lower for the ATB+/PPI- group [Hazard ratio (HR) 1.90, 95%CI (1.41;2.57)] and the ATB-/PPI+ group [HR 1.51, 95%CI (1.11;2.05)], and lowest in the ATB+/PPI+ group [HR 3.65, 95%CI (2.75;4.84)]. For OS, the use of ATB alone or PPI alone or in combination was a risk factor for death, with each increasing HR values by a similar magnitude, and the combination of ATB and PPI did not increase risk further. AEs were observed in 78 cases (36.8%) with no significant impact of ATB or PPI use.ConclusionsThis study reveals that ATB and/or PPI use can alter response to anti-PD1 ICI, and the prognosis of cancer patients. The microbiota mechanisms involved in the response to ICI should be investigated to optimize patient management.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and clopidogrel are frequently coprescribed, although the benefits and harms of their concurrent use are unclear. OBJECTIVE:To examine the association between concurrent use of PPIs and clopidogrel and the risks for hospitalizations for gastroduodenal bleeding and serious cardiovascular disease. DESIGN:Retrospective cohort study using automated data to identify patients who received clopidogrel between 1999 through 2005 after hospitalization for coronary heart disease. SETTING:Tennessee Medicaid program. PATIENTS:20,596 patients (including 7593 concurrent users of clopidogrel and PPIs) hospitalized for myocardial infarction, coronary artery revascularization, or unstable angina pectoris. MEASUREMENTS:Baseline and follow-up drug use was assessed from automated records of dispensed prescriptions. Primary outcomes were hospitalizations for gastroduodenal bleeding and serious cardiovascular disease (fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction or sudden cardiac death, stroke, or other cardiovascular death). RESULTS:Pantoprazole and omeprazole accounted for 62% and 9% of concurrent PPI use, respectively. Adjusted incidence of hospitalization for gastroduodenal bleeding in concurrent PPI users was 50% lower than that in nonusers (hazard ratio, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.39 to 0.65]). For patients at highest risk for bleeding, PPI use was associated with an absolute reduction of 28.5 (CI, 11.7 to 36.9) hospitalizations for gastroduodenal bleeding per 1000 person-years. The hazard ratio associated with concurrent PPI use for risk for serious cardiovascular disease was 0.99 (CI, 0.82 to 1.19) for the entire cohort and 1.01 (CI, 0.76 to 1.34) for the subgroup of patients who had percutaneous coronary interventions with stenting during the qualifying hospitalization. LIMITATIONS:Unmeasured confounding and misclassification of exposure (no information on adherence or over-the-counter use of drugs) and end points (not confirmed by medical record review) were possible. Because many patients entered the cohort from hospitals with relatively few cohort members, the analysis relied on the assumption that after adjustment for observed covariates, PPI users from one such hospital could be compared with nonusers from a different hospital. CONCLUSION:In patients with serious coronary heart disease treated with clopidogrel, concurrent PPI use was associated with reduced incidence of hospitalizations for gastroduodenal bleeding. The corresponding point estimate for serious cardiovascular disease was not increased; however, the 95% CI included a clinically important increased risk. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE:Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.