The Risk of Diarrhea and Colitis in Patients with Lung Cancer Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (icis), including inhibitors of PD-1, PD-L1, and ctla-4, are relatively novel therapies for lung cancer, although their use might be limited by gastrointestinal toxicity. The aim of the present study was to determine the risk of diarrhea and colitis associated with icis in lung cancer and the rates of discontinuation because of those toxicities. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for prospective trials reporting the risk of diarrhea and colitis in patients with lung cancer treated with PD-1, PD-L1, and ctla-4 inhibitors. The incidences of diarrhea and colitis and their grades were assessed clinically using standardized reporting criteria. Pooled incidence and weighted relative risk estimates for diarrhea and colitis with 95% confidence intervals (cis) were estimated using a random effects model. The incidence of discontinuations for gi toxicity was also calculated. Results: Twenty-seven studies were included: sixteen studies with PD-1 inhibitors, nine studies with PD-L1 inhibitors, and four studies combining PD-based strategies with ctla-4 inhibitors. The incidence of all-grade diarrhea was 9.1% (95% ci: 7.8% to 10.5%) for anti-PD-1 therapy and 11.0% (95% ci: 7.5% to 14.5%) for anti-PD-L1 therapy. The incidence of all-grade colitis was 0.9% (95% ci: 0.4% to 1.3%) for anti-PD-1 therapy and 0.4% (95% ci: 0.0% to 0.8%) for anti-PD-L1 therapy. The relative risk for all-grade diarrhea was higher with combination anti-PD-1 and anti-ctla-4 than with anti-PD-1 monotherapy (relative risk: 1.61; 95% ci: 1.14 to 2.29). Anti-PD-1 therapy was discontinued in 4.1% of patients with diarrhea (95% ci: 0.7% to 7.4%) and in 35.7% of those with colitis (95% ci: 0.0% to 81.1%); combination therapy was discontinued in 10.1% of patients with diarrhea (95% ci: 4.8% to 15.4%) and in 39.9% of those with colitis (95% ci: 3.9% to 75.9%). Conclusions: Diarrhea is a relatively frequently encountered gi toxicity when ici therapy is used in lung cancer treatment. Colitis is less frequently encountered, although when it does occur, it often results in therapy discontinuation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.039 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".