MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408099016 · doi:10.1136/jitc-2024-009364

Safety and efficacy of immune checkpoint therapy for the treatment of patients with cardiac metastasis: a multicenter international retrospective study

2025· article· en· W4408099016 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Abou Alaiwi, Talal El Zarif, Ryan Denu, Walid Macaron, Noha Abdel‐Wahab, Dory Freeman, Alexi Vasbinder, Salim Hayeck, Élizabeth Anderson, Rachel Goodman, Douglas B. Johnson, Shirly Grynberg, Ronnie Shapira, Jennifer M. Kwan, Rachel Woodford, Georgina V. Long, Tarek Haykal, Susan Dent, Yuki Kojima, Kan Yonemor, Ankita Tandon, Alexandra Trevino, Nausheen Akhter, Eric H. Yang, Gavin Hui, Alexandra Drakaki, Edward El‐Am, Elie Kozaily, Ahmad Al‐Hader, Elias Bou Farhat, P. Narendra Babu, Arjun Mittra, Mingjia Li, N. Jones, Javier Baena Preysler, M. Herrera, Simone Foderaro, Frank Aboubakar Nana, Chul Kim, Paul Sackstein, Kaushal Parikh, Aakash Desai, Caleb J. Smith, Alessio Cortellini, David J. Pinato, James Korolewicz, Nerea Lopetegui‐Lia, Pauline Funchain, Arrush Choudhary, Aarti Asnani, Vishal Navani, Daniel E. Meyers, Igor Stukalin, Jesús Antonio Ocejo Gallegos, Jonathan C. Trent, Sanober Nusrat, Carmel Malvar, Rana R. McKay, Tomas G. Neilan, Toni K. Choueiri, Abdul Rafeh Naqash

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicineCommon Terminology Criteria for Adverse EventsInternal medicineMetastasisAdverse effectRetrospective cohort studyOncologyCancerCardiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Data on the safety profiles and clinical outcomes of patients with solid tumors and cardiac metastasis treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are limited. METHODS: This is an international multicenter retrospective study of patients with cancer and cardiac metastasis at baseline. Patients who had received ≥1 dose of ICI were included. Treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) were graded per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event V.5.0. Objective response rates (ORR) were evaluated by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1 when available. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Among 110 pts, median age at ICI initiation was 65 (IQR: 59-75). Median follow-up time since ICI initiation was 36 (95% CI: 26 to 51) months. Melanoma (38%, n=42) and non-small cell lung cancer (24%, n=26) were the most common. 68 (62%) patients received ICIs as first-line, and 29 (26%) patients were treated with combination anti-programmed death-1 and anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4. The most common location of cardiac metastasis was in the atria (37%, n=41) and ventricles (35%, n=39). 15 patients (13.6%) had bilateral cardiac/pericardial metastasis, 44 (40%) had left-sided, and 43 (39.8%) had right-sided. At ICI initiation, 21% (n=23) had a cardiac thrombus. Cardiology referrals and cardiac MRIs at the time of cancer diagnosis were completed on 58 (53%) and 52 (47%) patients, respectively. Cardiac events occurred in 40 (36%) patients, including arrhythmias (n=14, 13%), arterial/venous emboli (n=4, 3.6%), and cardiac tamponade (n=3, 2.7%). 53 (47%) patients developed trAEs; most common were colitis/diarrhea (n=16, 15%), dermatitis (n=13, 12%), and hepatitis (n=9, 8.2%). ICI-related major cardiac trAEs occurred in 2 (1.8%) patients. 22 patients (20%) developed grade ≥3 trAE. Patients with multiple cardiac metastases had significantly lower responses to ICI-based regimens compared with patients with single cardiac metastasis (11% vs 63%, p=0.02). For melanoma, ORR, median PFS, and median OS were 38%, 9.0 months, and 28.9 months, respectively. 83% of patients with melanoma had concordant responses in overall disease burden and cardiac disease. 91 patients discontinued ICIs, and the main reason was progression or death in 55 (49%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with pre-existing cardiac metastasis, ICIs demonstrated meaningful clinical efficacy with no increase in safety signals. Most patients had concordant responses in the overall disease burden and cardiac mass. Multidisciplinary teams are crucial for the appropriate management of patients with cardiac metastasis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal for ImmunoTherapy of CancerSame topicCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersFrench-language works237,207