Search

Background: The outcome of patients with metastatic tumors who discontinued immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) not for progressive disease (PD) has been poorly explored. We performed a meta-analysis of all studies reporting the clinical outcome of patients who discontinued ICIs for reasons other than PD. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase and Scopus databases, from the inception of each database to December 2023, for clinical trials (randomized or not) and observational studies assessing PD-(L)1 and CTLA-4 inhibitors in patients with metastatic solid tumors who discontinued treatment for reasons other than PD. Each study had to provide swimmer plots or Kaplan–Meier survival curves enabling the reconstruction of individual patient-level data on progression-free survival (PFS) following the discontinuation of immunotherapy. The primary endpoint was PFS from the date of treatment discontinuation overall and according to tumor histotype, type of treatment and reason of discontinuation. The Combersure's method was used to estimate meta-analytical non-parametric summary survival curves assuming random effects at study level. Findings: Thirty-six studies (2180 patients) were included. The pooled median PFS (mPFS) was 24.7 months (95% CI, 18.8–30.6) and the PFS-rate at 12, 24, and 36 months was respectively 69.8% (95% CI, 63.1–77.3), 51.0% (95% CI, 43.4–59.8) and 34.0% (95% CI, 27.0–42.9). Univariable analysis showed that the mPFS was significantly longer for patients with melanoma (43.0 months), as compared with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC, 13.5 months) and renal cell carcinoma (RCC, 10.0 months; between-strata comparison test p-value < 0.001); for patients treated with anti-PD-(L)1 + anti-CTLA-4 as compared with anti-PD-(L)1 monotherapy (44.6 versus 19.9 months; p-value < 0.001), and in NSCLC when the reason of treatment discontinuation was elective as compared with toxicity onset (19.6 versus 4.8 months; p-value = 0.003). The multivariable analysis confirme

Introduction: To provide evidence explaining the poor association between pCR and patients’ long-term outcome at trial-level in neoadjuvant RCTs for breast cancer (BC), we performed a systematic-review and meta-analysis of all RCTs testing neoadjuvant treatments for early-BC and reporting the hazard ratio of DFS (HRDFS) for the intervention versus control arm stratified by pathological response type (i.e., pCR yes versus no). Methods: The objective was to explore differences of treatment effects on DFS across patients with and without pCR. We calculated the pooled HRDFS in the two strata of pathological response (i.e., pCR yes versus no) using a random-effects model, and assessed the difference between these two estimates using an interaction test. Results: Ten RCTs and 8496 patients were included in the analysis. Patients obtaining pCR in the intervention-arm had a higher, although not statistically significant, risk of DFS-event as compared with patients obtaining pCR in the control-arm: the pooled HRDFS for the experimental versus control arm was 1.23 (95%CI, 0.91–1.65). On the opposite, the risk of DFS-event was higher for control as compared with the intervention-arm in the stratum of patients without pCR: the pooled HRDFS was 0.86 (95%CI, 0.78–0.95). Treatment effect on DFS was significantly different according to pathological response type (interaction test p: 0.014). Conclusion: We reported new evidence that contributes to explaining the poor surrogacy value of pCR at trial-level in neoadjuvant RCTs for early-BC.

Purpose: We previously demonstrated that sex influences response to immune checkpoint inhibitors. In this article, we investigate sex-based differences in the molecular mechanisms of anticancer immune response and immune evasion in patients with NSCLC. Experimental Design: We analyzed (i) transcriptome data of 2,575 early-stage NSCLCs from seven different datasets; (ii) 327 tumor samples extensively characterized at the molecular level from the TRACERx lung study; (iii) two independent cohorts of 329 and 391 patients, respectively, with advanced NSCLC treated with anti–PD-1/anti–PD-L1 drugs. Results: As compared with men, the tumor microenvironment (TME) of women was significantly enriched for a number of innate and adaptive immune cell types, including specific T-cell subpopulations. NSCLCs of men and women exploited different mechanisms of immune evasion. The TME of females was characterized by significantly greater T-cell dysfunction status, higher expression of inhibitory immune checkpoint molecules, and higher abundance of immune-suppressive cells, including cancer-associated fibroblasts, MDSCs, and regulatory T cells. In contrast, the TME of males was significantly enriched for a T-cell–excluded phenotype. We reported data supporting impaired neoantigens presentation to immune system in tumors of men, as molecular mechanism explaining the findings observed. Finally, in line with our results, we showed significant sex-based differences in the association between TMB and outcome of patients with advanced NSCLC treated with anti–PD-1/PD-L1 drugs. Conclusions: We demonstrated meaningful sex-based differences of anticancer immune response and immune evasion mechanisms, that may be exploited to improve immunotherapy efficacy for both women and men.

We previously showed that therapy with anti-checkpoints T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (anti-CTLA-4) or antiprogrammed cell death protein 1 (anti-PD-1) agents was more effective for men as compared with women. However, because the sex-dimorphism of the immune system is complex, involving multiple elements of immune responses, it is possible that women could derive larger benefit than men from strategies other than therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) alone. Here we investigated whether women could derive larger benefit than men from the combination of chemotherapy and anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1. Methods: We performed two meta-analyses. The first included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing anti-PD1 and anti-PD-L1 plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy to assess different efficacy between men and women. The second included all RCTs of first-line systemic treatment in advanced non-small cell lung cancer testing anti-PD-1/PD-L1 given either alone or combined with chemotherapy to assess the different efficacy of these two immunotherapeutic strategies according to patients' sex. For each RCT included in the two meta-analyses, first, a trial-specific ratio of hazard ratios (HRs) was calculated from the ratio of the reported hazard ratios in men and in women; second, these trial-specific ratios of hazard ratios were combined across trials using a random-effects model to obtain a pooled hazard ratios ratio. A pooled HRs ratio estimate lower than 1 indicates a greater treatment effect in men, and higher than 1 a greater effect in women. Results: Eight RCTs were included in the first meta-analysis. The pooled overall survival hazard ratios (OS-HRs) comparing anti-PD-1/PD-L1 plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy was 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.66 to 0.87) for men and 0.48 (95% CI = 0.35 to 0.67) for women. The pooled ratio of the overall survival hazard ratios reported in men vs women was 1.56 (95% CI = 1.21 to 2.01), indicating a statistically signif