| Literature DB >> 32375706 |
Daniel Spakowicz1,2, Rebecca Hoyd, Mitchell Muniak3, Marium Husain3, James S Bassett3, Lei Wang4, Gabriel Tinoco3, Sandip H Patel3, Jarred Burkart3, Abdul Miah3, Mingjia Li5, Andrew Johns3, Madison Grogan3, David P Carbone3, Claire F Verschraegen3, Kari L Kendra3, Gregory A Otterson3, Lang Li4, Carolyn J Presley3, Dwight H Owen3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The microbiome has been shown to affect the response to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs) in a small number of cancers and in preclinical models. Here, we sought to broadly survey cancers to identify those in which the microbiome may play a prognostic role using retrospective analyses of patients with advanced cancer treated with ICIs.Entities:
Keywords: Antibiotics; Cancer; Corticosteroids; Immune checkpoint inhibitors; Immunotherapy; Microbiome
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32375706 PMCID: PMC7201618 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-020-06882-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Fig. 1Causal model for the effect of concomitant medications on Immunotherapy Response and Overall Survival. Numbers along edges refer to references supporting the connection. Hypothesized dominant pathways are shown in heavily-weighted edges [1–3, 9–32].
Cohort characteristics
| Overall n | 689 |
|---|---|
| BMI (mean (sd)) | 27.76 (6.62) |
| Age (mean (sd)) | 62.27 (13.21) |
| Sex = Male (%) | 402 (58.3) |
| ECOG (%) | |
| 0 | 185 (31.0) |
| 1 | 272 (45.6) |
| 2 | 113 (19.0) |
| > 2 | 26 (4.4) |
| CCI = 0–1 (%) | 458 (66.7) |
| Cancer (%) | |
| Bladder Cancer | 32 (4.9) |
| Head and Neck Carcinoma | 42 (6.5) |
| Melanoma | 184 (28.4) |
| Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer | 152 (23.5) |
| Renal Cell Carcinoma | 65 (10.0) |
| Sarcoma | 21 (3.2) |
| Other | 152 (23.5) |
| Staging (%) | |
| 1 | 1 (0.2) |
| 2 | 4 (0.7) |
| 3 | 44 (7.2) |
| 4 | 547 (90.0) |
| Unknown | 12 (2.0) |
| Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (%) | |
| Atezolizumab | 22 (3.2) |
| Durvalumab | 12 (1.7) |
| Durva + Tremelimumab | 6 (0.9) |
| Ipilimumab | 126 (18.3) |
| Nivolumab | 364 (52.8) |
| Nivolumab + Ipilimumab | 37 (5.4) |
| Pembrolizumab | 104 (15.1) |
| Tremelimumab | 3 (0.4) |
| Other | 15 (2.2) |
| ATB within 28 days of ICI (%) | 241 (35.0) |
| CS within 28 days of ICI (%) | 273 (39.6) |
Fig. 2The effect of medications at the start of ICI treatment across all cancers for a Antibiotics, b Corticosteroids, and c other medications. The cell color indicates the p-value of the Kaplan-Meier curve and the “+” or “-”the direction of the HR, in reference to its association with OS (i.e. a “-”indicates an association with decreased OS, therefore a HR > 1)
Fig. 3Associations of ABx and CS over time and by drug class. a Hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals of a Cox Proportional-Hazards model comparing individuals treated with ABx or CS during a 30-day sliding window compared to indivduals who did not receive ABx or CS, respectively. The significance and direction of associations of Cox Proportional Hazards models by (b) ABx or (c) CS class and cancer, using a window 28 days around ICI treatment start
Fig. 4Combined models for ABx and CS and controlling for covariates. a Kaplan-Meier curves for ABx and CS in combination. b Cox Proportional Hazards model incorporating both ABx and CS as well as several covariates. c Cox-LASSO models for each cancer showing the hazard ratios estimated for covariates and the number of times the covariate was included in the model. The regularization parameter was selection by 10-fold cross validation, and then the robustness was assessed by 1000 bootstrap replicates using different random samples of the data
Fig. 5Relating the ABx effect to microbes enriched in responders to ICIs. A dendrogram of the microbes recently shown to be most enriched in responders (black) or non-responders (red), are related to known ABx susceptibilities (references for each cell in Table S1). The ABx are ordered by hazard ratio across all cancers (i.e. β-lactams showed the largest hazard ratio and linezolid the smallest)
Timing of associations between medications and ICI response
| Cancer Type | Drug Type | Timing Window (days) | Sig PFS | Sig OS | N Drug Users | N Total | PFS HR | OS HR | Uni vs Multi Variate | Controlled Covariates | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This study | Melanoma | ABx | +/− 28 | Yes | 48 | 185 | 1.66 | Multi | CS, ECOG, BMI, G, A, CG | ||
| [ | Melanoma | ABx | (−30)-0 | Yes | No | 10 | 74 | 0.32 | 0.52 | Multi (only for PFS) | A, E, G, LT, IR, Serum levels of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), BRAF status |
| This study | NSCLC | ABx | +/− 28 | No | 64 | 152 | 0.81 | Multi | CS, ECOG, BMI, G, A, CG | ||
| [ | NSCLC | ABx | +/− 28 | Yes | Yes | 20 | 109 | 0.29 | 0.35 | Multi | A, G, S, E, His, Mut, LT, IR, CT |
| [ | NSCLC | ABx | (−30)-0 | Yes | Yes | 48 | 239 | 1.3 | 2.5 | Multi | A, His, S, PR, E, C, Hos |
| [ | NSCLC | ABx | (−60)-0 | Yes | Yes | 20 | 109 | 0.29 | 0.35 | Multi | A, G, His, S, E, LT, C, IR Mutation, ABx, PPIs |
| [ | NSCLC | ABx | (− 60)-0 | No | Yes | 68 | 239 | 1.2 | 2 | Multi | A, His, S, PR, E, C, Hos |
| [ | NSCLC | ABx | (−84)-0 | No | Yes | 37 | 140 | 2.31 | Multi | A, G, His, S, PR, E, MS | |
| [ | RCC | ABx | (−30)-0 | Yes | Yes | 16 | 121 | 2.2 | 2.1 | Multi | A, TB, R |
| [ | RCC | ABx | (−60)-0 | Yes | No | 22 | 121 | 2.3 | 1.9 | Multi | A, TB, R |
| [ | RCC | ABx | (−84)-0 | Yes | No | 20 | 67 | 2.16 | Multi | A, G, R, TB | |
| [ | UC | ABx | (−84)-0 | No | No | 12 | 42 | 1.97 | Multi | Hemoglobin levels, KPS, Liver M | |
| [ | Several | Abx | (−30)-0 | Yes | 29 | 167 | 7.4 | Uni | |||
| [ | Several | Abx | 0+ | No | 68 | 128 | 0.9 | Uni | |||
| [ | Several | Abx | (−30)-- | Yes | 29 | 167 | 8.2 | Multi | Cancer, E, CG, TB, A, CS | ||
| This study | Melanoma | CS | +/− 28 | Yes | 66 | 185 | 1.57 | Multi | ABx, ECOG, BMI, G, A, CG | ||
| [ | NSCLC | CS (Cancer-related) | +/− 1 | No | Yes | 66 | 650 | 1.4 | 1.6 | Multi | A, G, S, His, LT, IR, E, Mut, Brain M, PD-L1 TPS, %, Median TMB |
| [ | NSCLC | CS (Cancer-unrelated) | +/− 1 | No | No | 27 | 650 | 0.62 | 0.91 | Multi | A, G, S, His, LT, IR, E, Mut, Brain M, PD-L1 TPS, %, Median TB |
| [ | NSCLC | CS | 0 + 28 | Yes | Yes | 35 | 151 | 1.88 | 2.38 | Multi | A, G, S, His, MS, E, LT, IR, Brain M Bone M, Liver M, PD-L1 expression, CS |
| This study | NSCLC | CS | +/− 28 | Yes | 67 | 152 | 1.85 | Multi | ABx, E, BMI, G, A, CG | ||
| [ | NSCLC | CS | (−30)-0 | Yes | Yes | 90 | 640 | 1.3 | 1.7 | Multi | S, E, Brain M |
| [ | NSCLC | PPIs | +/− 28 | No | No | 40 | 109 | 1.1 | 1.47 | Uni | |
| [ | NSCLC | PPIs | (−84)-0 | No | No | 35 | 140 | Uni | |||
| [ | RCC | PPIs | (−84)-0 | No | No | 20 | 67 | Uni | |||
| [ | UC | PPIs | −84 | No | No | 7 | 42 |
Abbreviations: A Age, G Gender, R IMDC Risk, TB Tumor Burden, His Histology, S Smoking History, PR Number of Prior Regimens, E ECOG Performance Status, C Clinical Trial, Hos Hospitalization, MS Number of Metastatic Sites, LT Line of Therapy, IR ICI Regimen, CS Corticosteroids, ABx Antibiotics, CG Cancer Stage, M Metastases, Mut Mutation