Real-world analysis of immune checkpoint inhibitor efficacy and response predictors in patients treated at the CCCMunichLMU outpatient clinic

Prediction of response to checkpoint inhibition (ICI) and immune related adverse events (irAEs) remain a challenge in the immunotherapy of solid tumors. To better understand the real-world clinical courses under ICI and identify possible predictive markers for response and irAEs, we retrospectively collected and analysed data from our interdisciplinary CCCMunich<sup>LMU</sup> outpatient clinic. We analysed the clinical course, standard laboratory parameters and staging results of 342 patients who received ICI therapy in the interdisciplinary outpatient clinic of the CCCMunich<sup>LMU</sup> between January 2015 and November 2020. Initial response to ICI was defined as complete response, partial response, stable disease or mixed response with treatment continuation in the second radiologic staging after start of therapy. Median age of the included patients was 67 years (25-89). More male patients received ICI on our outpatient ward than female patients (67.8% vs. 32.2%). The most common entities were urothelial carcinoma (21.3%) and bronchial carcinoma (19.6%), followed by renal cell carcinoma (18.7%), and head and neck tumors (10.8%). 24.6% of patients were initial responders. Patients who did not respond to ICI therapy had lower leukocyte, lymphocyte, monocyte, and neutrophil counts before treatment start compared to initial responders. The consolidation of these laboratory parameters into a score could not accurately predict initial response or progression-free survival (PFS). IrAEs occurred in approximately one-third of all included patients. The main side effects in patients expierencing irAEs were thyroiditis (20.5%), pneumonitis (16.4%), hepatitis (15.8%), and dermatological side effects (11.0%). Patients experiencing irAEs had a significantly longer PFS than patients without irAEs. Side effects were more frequent and severe in patients treated with combined ICI. Autoimmune disorders were not associated with more frequent occurrence of irAEs. This retrospective analysis illustrates the real-world use of ICI in clinical practice. With only 24.6% of patients responding to ICI, the clinical need for predictive markers is obvious and standard laboratory parameters such as white blood cell counts may become part of a comprehensive score to predict response and adverse events.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-12-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-30220-0
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.05
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Real-world analysis of immune checkpoint inhibitor efficacy and response predictors in patients treated at the CCCMunichLMU outpatient clinic

Clemens Gießen-Jung, Lena Weiss, Michael von Bergwelt‐Baildon, Volker Heinemann et al.
1 citations
Scientific Reports
Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
1.05
article

Real-world analysis of immune checkpoint inhibitor efficacy and response predictors in patients treated at the CCCMunichLMU outpatient clinic

Clemens Gießen-Jung, Lena Weiss, Michael von Bergwelt‐Baildon, Volker Heinemann, Michael Haas, Stefan Boeck, Karin Berger, Julian Walter Holch, Anna Reischer, Roman Hornung, C. Benedikt Westphalen, Danmei Zhang, Jozefina Casuscelli, Wolfgang G. Kunz, Kathrin Heinrich, Klara Dorman, Victoria Probst, Timotheus Landfarth, Laura Fischer, Kilian Breitenwieser
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Prediction of response to checkpoint inhibition (ICI) and immune related adverse events (irAEs) remain a challenge in the immunotherapy of solid tumors. To better understand the real-world clinical courses under ICI and identify possible predictive markers for response and irAEs, we retrospectively collected and analysed data from our interdisciplinary CCCMunich<sup>LMU</sup> outpatient clinic. We analysed the clinical course, standard laboratory parameters and staging results of 342 patients who received ICI therapy in the interdisciplinary outpatient clinic of the CCCMunich<sup>LMU</sup> between January 2015 and November 2020. Initial response to ICI was defined as complete response, partial response, stable disease or mixed response with treatment continuation in the second radiologic staging after start of therapy. Median age of the included patients was 67 years (25-89). More male patients received ICI on our outpatient ward than female patients (67.8% vs. 32.2%). The most common entities were urothelial carcinoma (21.3%) and bronchial carcinoma (19.6%), followed by renal cell carcinoma (18.7%), and head and neck tumors (10.8%). 24.6% of patients were initial responders. Patients who did not respond to ICI therapy had lower leukocyte, lymphocyte, monocyte, and neutrophil counts before treatment start compared to initial responders. The consolidation of these laboratory parameters into a score could not accurately predict initial response or progression-free survival (PFS). IrAEs occurred in approximately one-third of all included patients. The main side effects in patients expierencing irAEs were thyroiditis (20.5%), pneumonitis (16.4%), hepatitis (15.8%), and dermatological side effects (11.0%). Patients experiencing irAEs had a significantly longer PFS than patients without irAEs. Side effects were more frequent and severe in patients treated with combined ICI. Autoimmune disorders were not associated with more frequent occurrence of irAEs. This retrospective analysis illustrates the real-world use of ICI in clinical practice. With only 24.6% of patients responding to ICI, the clinical need for predictive markers is obvious and standard laboratory parameters such as white blood cell counts may become part of a comprehensive score to predict response and adverse events.

Scientific ReportsVol. 15(1)
LMU Klinikum (DE), Zimmer Biomet (Germany) (DE), German Cancer Society (DE), Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry (DE), München Klinik Neuperlach (DE), Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DE), Munich Center for Machine Learning, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
1.05
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.