Infusion-related reactions from immune checkpoint inhibitors: A proportional and network meta-analysis.

38 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become the standard of care for the treatment of patients with solid tumors. Infusion-related reactions (IRRs) to ICIs have been reported in up to 20%, but the incidence varies among ICIs. Therefore, we aimed to report and compare the incidence of IRRs to each ICI therapy. Methods: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science to identify phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating ICIs (CTLA-4, PD-1, PD-L1, and LAG-3 inhibitors) in solid tumors. We performed a random-effects model network meta-analysis to compare the odds ratio (OR) of IRRs by using RCTs comparing dual ICIs, ICI monotherapy, and placebo/observation. For a proportional meta-analysis, treatment arms evaluating ICI monotherapy, or dual ICIs, were selected to pool the incidence of IRRs. Results: A total of 25,250 patients from 47 phase 3 RCTs were included in the analysis. A network meta-analysis of treatment-related IRRs included 10 RCTs and showed that avelumab (OR 70.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.32-1140) and atezolizumab (40.72, 2.47-671.4) had a significantly higher risk of treatment-related IRRs compared with placebo/observation. Network ranking revealed that avelumab, atezolizumab, and relatlimab plus nivolumab were the top three therapies with risk of treatment-related IRRs. Proportional meta-analyses revealed that the pooled incidence of treatment-related IRRs was 5.39% for PD-1 plus CTLA-4 inhibitors, 8.25% for PD-L1 (avelumab: 13.1%, non-avelumab: 1.93%), 1.97% for CTLA-4, and 1.95% for PD-1 inhibitors. Results of immune-related IRRs were relatively consistent with those of treatment-related IRRs (Table). Conclusions: Avelumab has the highest risk of IRRs followed by atezolizumab and dual ICIs. This comparative study provides insight into the incidence of IRRs with ICI regimens. These results are useful in assessing which systemic therapies are responsible for IRRs, particularly when ICIs are combined with other agents. [Table: see text]

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2024-08-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2024.42.23_suppl.38
Primary Topic
Immune Cell Function and Interaction
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Infusion-related reactions from immune checkpoint inhibitors: A proportional and network meta-analysis.

Kensuke Takaoka, Yoshito Nishimura, Mako Koseki, Evelyn Elias et al.
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Immune Cell Function and Interaction
article

Infusion-related reactions from immune checkpoint inhibitors: A proportional and network meta-analysis.

Kensuke Takaoka, Yoshito Nishimura, Mako Koseki, Evelyn Elias, Igor Puzanov, Dharmesh Gopalakrishnan, Yu Fujiwara, Fnu Chesta, Jonathan Estaris, K Tsuchiya
article en

Abstract

38 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become the standard of care for the treatment of patients with solid tumors. Infusion-related reactions (IRRs) to ICIs have been reported in up to 20%, but the incidence varies among ICIs. Therefore, we aimed to report and compare the incidence of IRRs to each ICI therapy. Methods: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science to identify phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating ICIs (CTLA-4, PD-1, PD-L1, and LAG-3 inhibitors) in solid tumors. We performed a random-effects model network meta-analysis to compare the odds ratio (OR) of IRRs by using RCTs comparing dual ICIs, ICI monotherapy, and placebo/observation. For a proportional meta-analysis, treatment arms evaluating ICI monotherapy, or dual ICIs, were selected to pool the incidence of IRRs. Results: A total of 25,250 patients from 47 phase 3 RCTs were included in the analysis. A network meta-analysis of treatment-related IRRs included 10 RCTs and showed that avelumab (OR 70.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.32-1140) and atezolizumab (40.72, 2.47-671.4) had a significantly higher risk of treatment-related IRRs compared with placebo/observation. Network ranking revealed that avelumab, atezolizumab, and relatlimab plus nivolumab were the top three therapies with risk of treatment-related IRRs. Proportional meta-analyses revealed that the pooled incidence of treatment-related IRRs was 5.39% for PD-1 plus CTLA-4 inhibitors, 8.25% for PD-L1 (avelumab: 13.1%, non-avelumab: 1.93%), 1.97% for CTLA-4, and 1.95% for PD-1 inhibitors. Results of immune-related IRRs were relatively consistent with those of treatment-related IRRs (Table). Conclusions: Avelumab has the highest risk of IRRs followed by atezolizumab and dual ICIs. This comparative study provides insight into the incidence of IRRs with ICI regimens. These results are useful in assessing which systemic therapies are responsible for IRRs, particularly when ICIs are combined with other agents. [Table: see text]

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 42(23_suppl)
University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US), Mount Sinai Beth Israel (US), Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center (US), United States Air Force (US), Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 84%
Immune Cell Function and Interaction
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.