Impact of angiotensin blockade on response to PD1/L1 inhibitors for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC).
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
453 Background: The renin-angiotensin system (RAS) is involved in regulation of angiogenesis and cell proliferation. Preclinical data also indicate that angiotensin inhibition may improve drug delivery by enhancing tumor perfusion partly by downregulating transforming growth factor (TGF)-β. Since (TGF)-β appears to be associated with resistance in patients (pts) with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) receiving PD1/L1 inhibitors, we hypothesized that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) may enhance the outcomes of mUC pts receiving PD1/L1 inhibitors. Methods: Data from mUC pts who received PD1/L1 inhibitors as monotherapy were obtained: pts from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI) served as the discovery dataset, while data from Moffitt Cancer Center (MCC) served as the validation dataset. Data for ACEI and ARB administration was collected with concurrent administration defined as ongoing therapy from the time of starting PD1/L1 inhibitor treatment. A logistic regression was used to investigate the impact of concurrent ACEI/ARB on any regression of tumor (ART, any decrease in size of tumor on scan) as the primary endpoint defined as any tumor regression after controlling for known prognostic factors (performance status, sites of metastasis, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, platelet count, hemoglobin). Overall survival (OS), the secondary endpoint, was analyzed using Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: Data was available for 178 pts from DFCI (discovery dataset) with mUC who received a PD1/L1 inhibitor of whom 153 (86%) had received prior platinum and 33 pts (18.5%) received concurrent AECI/ARBs. Multivariable analysis controlling for known prognostic factors revealed that patients who received ACEIs or ARBs had greater ART (HR 3.0 [95% CI 1.25-7.17], p = 0.014) and improved OS, (HR 0.49 [95% CI 0.28-0.88] p = 0.016). In the MCC validation dataset, 101 pts were available of whom 59 (58.4%) had received prior platinum and 22 pts (21.8%) received concurrent ACEI/ARBs. Univariate analysis showed that those patients who were treated with ACEI/ARB had an improved ART (OR 3.32 [95% CI 1.22-9.06] p = 0.019). On multivariable analysis, there was a borderline significant association of ACEI/ARB with ART (OR = 3.03, p = 0.075), but no association was observed with OS. Conclusions: In this hypothesis-generating study, concurrent angiotensin inhibitors including ACEI or ARBs were associated with tumor regression in mUC pts receiving PD-1/L1 inhibitors. The inconsistent association with OS may be partly due to modest sample size and comorbidities associated with the need for ACEI/ARBs. These results require validation in a prospective study.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».