Marie Perier-Muzet1,2,3,4, Elodie Gatt5, Julien Péron2,3,4,5, Claire Falandry4,5,6,7, Mona Amini-Adlé1,4, Luc Thomas1,2,3,4, Stephane Dalle1,2,3,4, Amelie Boespflug1,2,3,4. 1. Dermatology Unit, Lyon Sud University Hospital, Pierre Bénite, France. 2. Cancer Research Center of Lyon, Claude Bernard Lyon-1 University, INSERM 1052, CNRS 5286, Centre Leon Berard, Lyon, France. 3. Medical Oncology Department, Lyon Sud University Hospital, Pierre Bénite, France. 4. ImmuCare (Immunology Cancer Research) Institut de Cancérologie des Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France. 5. Evolutionary Biology and Biometry Laboratory, Université Lyon 1, CNRS UMR 5558, Villeurbanne, France. 6. Geriatrics Unit, Lyon Sud University Hospital, Pierre Bénite, France. 7. Laboratoire CarMeN INSERM U.1060/Université Lyon1/INRA 1397/INSA Lyon/Hospices Civils de Lyon, Faculté de Médecine Lyon Sud, Oullins, France.
Abstract
Importance: Melanoma treatment has been revolutionized with the development of immune-based therapies that offer durable clinical responses in a subset of patients. Clinical outcomes after treatment by immunotherapy can be influenced by the host's immune system. The immune system is modified with age by age-related immune dysfunction. Objective: To evaluate if age influences clinical outcome and immune adverse events in patients treated by immunotherapy for metastatic melanoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a single-center cohort analysis in patients treated with immunotherapy for metastatic melanoma between January 2007 and February 2016, in the Lyon Sud Hospital, France. A total of 92 patients with metastatic melanoma treated with ipilimumab, nivolumab, or pembrolizumab were retrospectively analyzed. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival, progression-free survival, and immune-related adverse events were evaluated for each treatment line according to the patients' age. Results: A total of 92 patients were eligible and included in this study for a total of 120 lines of treatment. Fifty-four patients were included in the cohort that was 65 years or younger (24 [44%] were female; mean [SD] age, 48.1 [12.5] years), and 38 patients were included in the cohort that was older than 65 years (12 [34%] were female; mean [SD] age, 74.8 [6.9] years). Mean follow-up duration starting at treatment initiation was 12.5 months. Patients older than 65 years treated with immunotherapy had a better mean progression-free survival (4.8 vs 3.4 months; P = .04) and overall survival (not reached vs 10.1 months; P = .009) than younger patients in univariate analysis, and after adjusting on prognosis covariates. This was particularly true with patients treated with anti-programmed cell death protein 1. Common immune-related adverse effects were similar in both cohorts. Conclusions and Relevance: Age might be associated with a better clinical outcome after treatment with immunotherapy in the real-life setting. In our cohort, older patients did not have more immune-related adverse events. Further studies are warranted to confirm our results and describe the underlying mechanisms involved.
Importance: Melanoma treatment has been revolutionized with the development of immune-based therapies that offer durable clinical responses in a subset of patients. Clinical outcomes after treatment by immunotherapy can be influenced by the host's immune system. The immune system is modified with age by age-related immune dysfunction. Objective: To evaluate if age influences clinical outcome and immune adverse events in patients treated by immunotherapy for metastatic melanoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a single-center cohort analysis in patients treated with immunotherapy for metastatic melanoma between January 2007 and February 2016, in the Lyon Sud Hospital, France. A total of 92 patients with metastatic melanoma treated with ipilimumab, nivolumab, or pembrolizumab were retrospectively analyzed. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival, progression-free survival, and immune-related adverse events were evaluated for each treatment line according to the patients' age. Results: A total of 92 patients were eligible and included in this study for a total of 120 lines of treatment. Fifty-four patients were included in the cohort that was 65 years or younger (24 [44%] were female; mean [SD] age, 48.1 [12.5] years), and 38 patients were included in the cohort that was older than 65 years (12 [34%] were female; mean [SD] age, 74.8 [6.9] years). Mean follow-up duration starting at treatment initiation was 12.5 months. Patients older than 65 years treated with immunotherapy had a better mean progression-free survival (4.8 vs 3.4 months; P = .04) and overall survival (not reached vs 10.1 months; P = .009) than younger patients in univariate analysis, and after adjusting on prognosis covariates. This was particularly true with patients treated with anti-programmed cell death protein 1. Common immune-related adverse effects were similar in both cohorts. Conclusions and Relevance: Age might be associated with a better clinical outcome after treatment with immunotherapy in the real-life setting. In our cohort, older patients did not have more immune-related adverse events. Further studies are warranted to confirm our results and describe the underlying mechanisms involved.
Authors: Caroline Robert; Georgina V Long; Benjamin Brady; Caroline Dutriaux; Michele Maio; Laurent Mortier; Jessica C Hassel; Piotr Rutkowski; Catriona McNeil; Ewa Kalinka-Warzocha; Kerry J Savage; Micaela M Hernberg; Celeste Lebbé; Julie Charles; Catalin Mihalcioiu; Vanna Chiarion-Sileni; Cornelia Mauch; Francesco Cognetti; Ana Arance; Henrik Schmidt; Dirk Schadendorf; Helen Gogas; Lotta Lundgren-Eriksson; Christine Horak; Brian Sharkey; Ian M Waxman; Victoria Atkinson; Paolo A Ascierto Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-11-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Martin Reck; Delvys Rodríguez-Abreu; Andrew G Robinson; Rina Hui; Tibor Csőszi; Andrea Fülöp; Maya Gottfried; Nir Peled; Ali Tafreshi; Sinead Cuffe; Mary O'Brien; Suman Rao; Katsuyuki Hotta; Melanie A Leiby; Gregory M Lubiniecki; Yue Shentu; Reshma Rangwala; Julie R Brahmer Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-10-08 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Hossein Borghaei; Luis Paz-Ares; Leora Horn; David R Spigel; Martin Steins; Neal E Ready; Laura Q Chow; Everett E Vokes; Enriqueta Felip; Esther Holgado; Fabrice Barlesi; Martin Kohlhäufl; Oscar Arrieta; Marco Angelo Burgio; Jérôme Fayette; Hervé Lena; Elena Poddubskaya; David E Gerber; Scott N Gettinger; Charles M Rudin; Naiyer Rizvi; Lucio Crinò; George R Blumenschein; Scott J Antonia; Cécile Dorange; Christopher T Harbison; Friedrich Graf Finckenstein; Julie R Brahmer Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-09-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Tengfei Zhang; Jing Xie; Seiji Arai; Liping Wang; Xuezhong Shi; Ni Shi; Fen Ma; Sen Chen; Lan Huang; Li Yang; Wang Ma; Bin Zhang; Weidong Han; Jianchuan Xia; Hu Chen; Yi Zhang Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2016-11-08
Authors: Varsha Jain; Wei-Ting Hwang; Sriram Venigalla; Kevin T Nead; John N Lukens; Tara C Mitchell; Jacob E Shabason Journal: Oncologist Date: 2019-10-29
Authors: B Fox; M de Toro Carmena; R Álvarez Álvarez; A Calles Blanco; C López López; S Pérez Ramírez; J Á Arranz; M Martín; I Márquez-Rodas Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2019-06-29 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Varsha Jain; Wei-Ting Hwang; Sriram Venigalla; Kevin T Nead; John N Lukens; Tara C Mitchell; Jacob E Shabason Journal: Oncologist Date: 2019-10-29
Authors: Konstantinos Christofyllakis; Claudia Pföhler; Moritz Bewarder; Cornelia S L Müller; Lorenz Thurner; Torben Rixecker; Thomas Vogt; Stephan Stilgenbauer; Krista Yordanova; Dominic Kaddu-Mulindwa Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-02-18 Impact factor: 6.244