Dataset Information

Cardiovascular Toxicity With PD-1/PD-L1 Inhibitors in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors have significantly improved the outcomes of those patients with various malignancies. However, the incidence of adverse events also increased. This meta-analysis aims to systematically evaluate the risk of cardiovascular toxicity in patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors.

Materials and methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library databases for all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing all-grade and grade 3-5 cardiovascular toxicity of single-agent PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors to placebo/chemotherapy, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy to chemotherapy, or PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors combined with CTLA-4 inhibitors to single-agent immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and pooled our data in a meta-analysis stratified by tumor types and PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors. The Mantel-Haenszel method calculated the odds ratio (OR) and its corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

A total of 50 trials were included in the analysis. Single-agent PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors increased the risk of all-grade cardiotoxicity compared with placebo (OR=2.11, 95%CI 1.02-4.36, P=0.04). Compared with chemotherapy, patients receiving PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy had a significant higher risk of all-grade (OR=1.53, 95%CI 1.18-1.99, P=0.001) and grade 3-5 cardiotoxicity (OR=1.63, 95%CI 1.11-2.39, P=0.01) cardiotoxicity, especially patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [all-grade cardiotoxicity (OR=1.97, 95%CI 1.14-3.41, P=0.02) and grade 3-5 cardiotoxicity (OR=2.15, 95%CI 1.08-4.27, P=0.03)]. Subgroup analysis showed that PD-1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy were associated with a higher risk of grade 3-5 cardiotoxicity (OR=2.08, 95%CI 1.18-3.66, P=0.01). Compared with placebo or chemotherapy, single-agent PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors did not increase the risk of all-grade of myocarditis, arrhythmia and hypertension. However, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy increased the risk of all-grade arrhythmia (OR=1.63, 95%CI 1.07-2.46, P=0.02) [PD-L1 inhibitor-containing treatment (OR=1.75, 95%CI 1.09-2.80, P=0.02)], and the risk of all-grade hypertension (OR=1.34, 95%CI 1.02-1.77, P=0.04) and grade 3-5 hypertension (OR=1.54, 95%CI 1.10-2.15, P=0.01).

Conclusions

Our results suggest that single-agent PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors increase the risk of all-grade cardiotoxicity, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy increase the risk of all-grade and grade 3-5 cardiotoxicity, especially in those patients treated with PD-1 inhibitor-containing treatment and those with NSCLC. In addition, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy increase the risk of arrhythmia and hypertension. Therefore, this evidence should be considered when assessing the benefits and risks of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in treating malignancies.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022303115.

SUBMITTER: Liu S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9307961 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSystematic assessment of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor-related neurological toxicities is important for guiding anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to reveal the relationship between PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors and neurological toxicities among cancer patients.MethodsClinical trials investigating PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in cancer patients were identified by a systematic search of PubMed. The random-effect model was used to synthesize individual studies. Neurological toxicities, including all-grades and grades 3-5, were taken into account for the final comprehensive meta-analysis. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of included trials.ResultsThirty-one clinical trials containing data of neurological toxicities were included. Compared with chemotherapy, the risk of all-grade neurological toxicities caused by PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors was much lower in terms of peripheral neuropathy [OR = 0.07, 95%CI:(0.04, 0.13)], peripheral sensory neuropathy [OR = 0.07, 95%CI(0.04, 0.12)], dysgeusia [OR = 0.26, 95%CI:(0.19, 0.35)], paraesthesia [OR = 0.23, 95%CI:(0.14, 0.36)], and polyneuropathy [OR = 0.12, 95%CI:(0.01, 0.94)]. However, for grades 3-5, the statistically significant results were only seen in peripheral neuropathy [OR = 0.15, 95%CI:(0.07, 0.34)] and peripheral sensory neuropathy [OR = 0.13, 95%CI:(0.04, 0.40)]. No statistically significant difference regarding the risk of headache, dizziness, and Guillain-Barré syndrome was found between PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors and chemotherapy. For PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy, the risk trends of the above-mentioned neurological toxicities, especially grades 3-5 peripheral neuropathy [OR = 1.76, 95%CI:(1.10, 2.82)] was increased compared to chemotherapy alone.ConclusionOur comprehensive analysis showed that PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors alone exhibited lower neurological toxicities than chemotherapy. However, the risk of headache, dizziness, and Guillain-Barré syndrome was similar between PD-1/PD-L1 and chemotherapy. For PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy, the incidence trend of neurological toxicities would be increased, especially for peripheral neuropathy of grades 3-5.

Project description:BackgroundImmunotherapy for colorectal cancer has developed rapidly in the past decade. Many high-quality clinical trials examining the application of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) have been conducted in recent years. However, the clinical benefits, including the efficacy and safety of these treatments against mCRC, remain controversial. Hence, we conducted this meta-analysis on the clinical benefits of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in patients with mCRC.MethodsWe searched online databases including MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, from inception to January 4, 2021. The outcomes related to efficacy and safety were extracted and analyzed. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to the categories of dMMR-MSI-H (tumors with mismatch repair deficiency and high levels of microsatellite instability) ≥ 5% vs. dMMR-MSI-H < 5%, monotherapy vs. combination therapy, PD-1 inhibitors vs. PD-L1 inhibitors, and nivolumab vs. pembrolizumab.ResultsFourteen studies including 1129 subjects were included in our systematic review. The overall complete response (CR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), and progression of disease (PD) rates were 0.01 (95% CI 0.00-0.04), 0.04 (95% CI 0.05-0.26), 0.27 (95% CI 0.22-0.32), and 0.44 (95% CI 0.30-0.58), respectively. The overall objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were 0.16 (95%CI 0.06-0.31) and 0.50 (95%CI 0.35-0.65), respectively. The overall rate of adverse events (AEs) and severe adverse responses (SAEs) were 0.84 (95% CI 0.72-0.92) and 0.30 (95% CI 0.20-0.41), respectively. The ORRs of the dMMR-MSI-H ≥ 5% and dMMR-MSI-H < 5% subgroups were 0.40 (95% CI 0.30-0.51) and 0.04 (95% CI 0.00-0.09), respectively.ConclusionsPD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors produced encouraging clinical benefits including the response rate in the treatment of dMMR-MSI-H mCRC. They actually have been influenced by the present state of mCRC therapy including pMMR-MSI-L mCRC. Nevertheless, additional multi-center prospective studies are still expected.Trial registrationWe have registered this study in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), and the registration number is CRD42021249601 .

Project description:BackgroundThe combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) has shown significant clinical activity in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the currently available data on adverse events (AEs) were derived from a small subset of patients included in prospective clinical trials or retrospective studies. Thus, we conducted this systematic review to determine the AEs associated with this combination treatment.MethodsAn electronic literature search was performed in databases and conference proceedings of prospective clinical trials assessing the combination of ICIs and TRT for patients with NSCLC. The systematic analysis was conducted to determine the profile and incidence of AEs of combination treatment. We further performed the comparison of AEs between programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors, and sequential and concurrent administration of ICIs and TRT to help identify high risk patients. The systematic analyses were conducted with the Review Manager (version 5.3; The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, United Kingdom) and Stata version 12.0 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA) software.ResultsEleven clinical trials involving 1,113 patients with NSCLC were eligible for analysis. The incidence of all-grade AEs was 95.5%; that of high-grade AEs (grade ≥3) was 30.2%. The most frequent all-grade AE was fatigue (49.7%), while pneumonitis was the most common high-grade AE (3.8%) and grade 5 AE (0.6%). Notably, the toxicity profiles of PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors were similar. Concurrent treatment was associated with a higher incidence of higher-grade AEs (41.6% vs 24.8%, P=0.17) and pneumonitis (7.1% vs 3.9%, P=0.14) compared to sequential treatment, but no significant difference was observed.ConclusionMost AEs of this combination treatment are tolerable; as the most common high-grade AE, pneumonitis deserves the utmost attention of physicians. The toxicity profiles of patients receiving PD-1 or PD-L1 were similar, and no significant difference was observed between concurrent and sequential treatment.

Project description:BackgroundInhibitors of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1(PD-L1) checkpoint have been approved for metastatic triple negative breast cancer (mTNBC) in patients positive for PD-L1 expression. Negative results from the recent phase III trials (IMPassion131 and IMPassion132) have raises questions on the efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors and the predictive value of PD-L1 expression. Here we attempt to systematically analyze the biomarker value of PD-L1 expression for predicting the response of PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors in mTNBC.Materials and methodsPubMed database was searched until Dec 2021 for studies evaluating PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors plus/minus chemotherapy in mTNBC. Outcome of interest included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.4. was used for data-analysis.ResultsIn total, 20 clinical trials comprising 3962 mTNBC patients (ICT: 2665 (67%); CT: 1297 (33%) were included in this study. Overall ORR was 22% (95%CI, 14-30%) and significant improvement was observed for PD-L1+ patients (ORR 1.78 [95%CI, 1.45-2.19], p<0.00001) as compared to PD-L1- cohort. Pooled outcome also indicated a significant 1-year PFS and 2-year OS advantage for patients with PD-L1 expression (1-year PFS: ORR 1.39 [95%CI, 1.04-1.85], p=0.02; I2 = 0%; 2-year OS: (ORR 2.47 [95%CI, 1.30-4.69], p=0.006; I2 = 63%). Subgroup analysis indicated that PD-L1 expression can successfully predict tumor response and 2-year OS benefit in mTNBC patients regardless of the type of investigating agent, line of treatment administration, and to some extent the type of treatment. Biomarker ability of PD-L1 expression to predict 1-year PFS was slightly better with pembrolizumab (p=0.09) than atezolizumab (p=0.18), and significantly better when treatment was administered in the first-line setting (OR 1.38 [95%CI, 1.02-1.87], p=0.04) and chemotherapy was added (OR 1.38 [95%CI, 1.02-1.86], p=0.03). Immune-related toxicity of any grade and grade≥3 was 39% (95%CI, 26%-52%) and 10% (95%CI, 8%-13%), respectively.ConclusionsPD-L1 expression can predict objective response rate and 2-year OS in mTNBC patients receiving PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors. One-year PFS is also predicted in selected patients. PD-L1 expression can be a useful biomarker of efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors in mTNBC.