Search

Simple Summary: This study evaluated the effectiveness of salvage pembrolizumab in advanced gastric cancer (AGC) patients based on HER2 expression. Conducted at Samsung Medical Center from November 2017 to March 2023, it involved 113 patients treated with pembrolizumab. Twelve patients (10.6%) were HER2-positive, and 101 were HER2-negative. Results showed no complete responses among 92 evaluable patients. However, 50% of HER2-positive patients had a partial response compared to 4.9% of HER2-negative patients (p < 0.001). Disease control rates were 70% for HER2-positive and 37.8% for HER2-negative patients (p = 0.086). Median progression-free survival was 5.53 months for HER2-positive patients versus 1.81 months for HER2-negative patients (p = 0.037). This indicates that salvage pembrolizumab monotherapy is more effective in HER2-positive AGC patients. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are used as salvage treatments for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) regardless of HER2 status. This study assessed the efficacy of ICIs based on HER2 expression in AGC patients who received pembrolizumab as salvage monotherapy at Samsung Medical Center from November 2017 to March 2023. HER2 status was determined via immunohistochemistry, and tumor response and survival outcomes were compared accordingly. Among the 113 patients analyzed, with a median age of 61 years and 64.6% being male, 12 patients (10.6%) were HER2-positive, and 101 patients (89.4%) were HER2-negative. Of 92 evaluable patients, none had a complete response. However, 50% of HER2-positive patients had a partial response, compared to 4.9% of HER2-negative patients (p < 0.001). The disease control rate was 70% in HER2-positive and 37.8% in HER2-negative patients (p = 0.086). Median progression-free survival was 5.53 months for HER2-positive patients versus 1.81 months for HER2-negative patients (p = 0.037). Pembrolizumab as a salvage chemotherapy for the treatment of AGC demonstrated superior effectiveness in HER2-positive patients compared with HER2-negative patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) or irinotecan-based chemotherapy is frequently used after failure of second-line paclitaxel plus ramucirumab treatment for patients with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic advanced gastric cancer (AGC). This study aimed to compare the efficacy between ICI and irinotecan-based chemotherapy as third-line treatment in patients with AGC. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients with AGC, whose third-line treatment started between July 2019 and June 2021 at 17 institutions in Korea. The ICI group included patients who received nivolumab or pembrolizumab, and the irinotecan-based chemotherapy group included patients who received irinotecan or FOLFIRI (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and irinotecan). Results: A total of 363 patients [n = 129 (ICI) and n = 234 (irinotecan-based chemotherapy)] were analyzed. The median progression-free survival was 2.3 and 2.9 months in ICI and irinotecan-based chemotherapy groups, respectively (p = 0.802). The median overall survival (OS) was 5.5 and 6.0 months in ICI and irinotecan-based chemotherapy groups, respectively (p = 0.786). For all patients included in this study, multivariable analysis showed that weight loss, peritoneal metastasis, low serum sodium or albumin, and short duration of second-line treatment were associated with inferior OS (p < 0.05). ICI showed significantly longer OS than irinotecan-based chemotherapy in patients without peritoneal metastasis. Whereas ICI showed significantly shorter OS in patients without PD-L1 expression than irinotecan-based chemotherapy. Conclusions: No significant difference in survival outcome was observed between ICI and irinotecan-based chemotherapy as third-line treatment for AGC patients. ICI might be preferred for patients without peritoneal metastasis and irinotecan-based chemotherapy for patients with tumors without PD-L1 expression. Trial registration: This study was registered in the Clinical Trial Registry of Korea (https://cris.nih.go.kr: KCT 0007732). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic is changing rapidly and requires different strategies to maintain immunization. In Korea, different COVID-19 vaccines are recommended and available for various populations, including healthcare workers (HCWs) at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We plan to evaluate the adverse events (AEs) and immunogenicity of the BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 vaccines in HCWs at a single center. This cohort study included HCWs fully vaccinated with either BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1. Blood samples were taken eight weeks after the second vaccination with both COVID-19 vaccines and six months after the second vaccination from participants with the BNT162b2 vaccine. The primary endpoint for immunogenicity was the serum neutralizing antibody responses eight weeks after vaccination. The secondary endpoint was the incidence of various AEs within 28 days of each vaccination. Between 16 March and 23 June 2021, 115 participants were enrolled (65 in the ChAdOx1 group and 50 in the BNT162b2 group). Significantly higher surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) inhibition was observed in participants vaccinated with two doses of BNT162b2 (mean (SD) 91.4 (9.68)%) than in those vaccinated with ChAdOx1 (mean (SD) 73.3 (22.57)%). The effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine was maintained across all age and gender categories. At six months after the second dose, serum antibody levels declined significantly in the BNT162b2 group. The main adverse events, including fever, myalgia, fatigue, and headache, were significantly higher in the ChAdOx1 group after the first dose, whereas, after the second dose, those AEs were significantly higher in the BNT162b2 group (p < 0.05). Two doses of either the ChAdOx1 or the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine resulted in very high seropositivity among the HCWs at our center. The quality of the antibody response, measured by sVNT inhibition, was significantly better with the BNT162b2 vaccine than with the ChAdOx1 vaccine. There was no significant association between neutralizing antibody response and AE after each vaccination in our cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]