MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409921856 · doi:10.3390/curroncol32050259

Does Pre-Existing Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Increase the Risk of Checkpoint Inhibitor Pneumonitis in Advanced/Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors?

2025· article· en· W4409921856 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
David Spillane, Carmela Pepe, Goulnar Kasymjanova, Diane Cruiziat, Sara Cohen, Jeremy Naimer, Jason Agulnik

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePneumonitisLung cancerCancerPulmonary diseaseLungImmune checkpointNivolumabDiseaseCancer researchImmunotherapyImmunologyOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are front-line treatment options for NSCLC. ICI therapy is associated with a risk of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Checkpoint inhibitor pneumonitis (CIP) is a potentially life-threatening irAE. Previous studies have demonstrated that asthma and interstitial lung disease are associated with an increased risk of CIP. We sought to determine whether chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with CIP. Methods: This retrospective study examines a cohort of ICI-treated NSCLC patients either with or without chemotherapy at the Anna and Peter Brojde Lung Cancer Centre, Jewish General Hospital in Montreal, Canada between 2014 and 2023. We explored associations between risk factors and CIP using the Mann–Whitney U test or Fisher’s exact test. Analysis of prognostic factors was performed using a logistic regression model. All statistical analyses were carried out using SPSS software, version 24.0 (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA). p-values of 0.05 or less were considered significant. Results: Of the 327 selected patients on ICIs, 23 experienced an acute respiratory deterioration that was attributed to CIP, 87/327(26.6%) patients had a pre-existing diagnosis of COPD, and 11/87 (12.6%) COPD patients experienced CIP compared to 13/240 (5.5%) non-COPD patients (p = 0.061). There was no statistical or clinically meaningful correlation between COPD severity and CIP. The only variable significantly associated with CIP was a poor ECOG performance status. Among ECOG 1 patients, 18/91 (19.8%) experienced CIP compared to 5/226 (2.2%) of those with an ECOG of 0. A multivariate assessment involving all 327 patients revealed no significant factors affecting CIP development. Conclusions: Our single-institution study revealed that although there was a trend, the presence of COPD was not statistically associated with an increased risk of CIP. Additionally, neither FEV1 nor DLCO had a meaningful impact on the development of CIP in COPD patients. Given these findings, we emphasize the need for larger prospective studies to confirm these observations before drawing definitive clinical recommendations.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Oncology→Same topicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers→French-language works237,207→