Hyo Jung Park1, Kyung Won Kim1, Sang Eun Won1, Shinkyo Yoon2, Young Kwang Chae3, Sree Harsha Tirumani4, Nikhil H Ramaiya4. 1. Asan Image Metrics, Asan Medical Center, Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 2. Asan Medical Center, Department of Oncology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 3. Feinberg School of Medicine, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois. 4. University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Department of Radiology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio.
Abstract
Importance: Hyperprogressive disease (HPD) is a recognized pattern of rapid tumor progression during immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment. Definitions of HPD have not been standardized, posing the risk of capturing different tumoral behaviors. Objectives: To provide a systematic summary of definitions and the incidence of HPD in patients undergoing ICI treatment and discuss the challenges of current assessment of HPD. Data Sources: Articles that evaluated HPD published before March 3, 2020, were identified from MEDLINE and EMBASE. Study Selection: Clinical trials and observational studies providing the incidence and definition of HPD from patients with cancer treated with ICIs. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Factors included in the analysis comprised authors, year of publication, cancer type, ICI type, number of previous treatment lines, definition of HPD, time frame used to assess HPD, number of patients with HPD, onset of HPD, and prognosis of patients with HPD. Quantitative and qualitative syntheses for the incidence of HPD were performed. Main Outcomes and Measures: Definitions of HPD were categorized and the range of incidence of HPD was evaluated. Subgroup analysis on the incidence of HPD according to the category was performed and the challenges associated with current HPD assessment were evaluated. Results: Twenty-four studies with 3109 patients were analyzed. The incidence of HPD varied from 5.9% to 43.1%. The definitions were divided into 4 categories based on the calculation of tumor growth acceleration: tumor growth rate ratio (pooled incidence of HPD, 9.4%; 95% CI, 6.9%-12.0%), tumor growth kinetics ratio (pooled incidence, 15.8%; 95% CI, 8.0%-23.7%), early tumor burden increase (pooled incidence, 20.6%; 95% CI, 9.3%-31.8%), and combinations of the above (pooled incidence, 12.4%; 95% CI, 7.3%-17.5%). Hyperprogressive disease could be overestimated or underestimated if the assessment was limited to tumor growth rate or tumor growth kinetics ratio, target lesions, or response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST)-defined progressors, or if the assessment time frame conformed to RECIST. Study results on clinical outcome were heterogeneous on discriminating patients with HPD from those with natural progressive disease. Conclusions and Relevance: Definitions of HPD appear to be diverse, with the incidence of HPD varying from 5.9% to 43.1% across studies examined in this meta-analysis. Varying incidence and definitions of HPD indicate the need for establishing its uniform and clinically relevant criteria based on currently available evidence.
Importance: Hyperprogressive disease (HPD) is a recognized pattern of rapid tumor progression during immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment. Definitions of HPD have not been standardized, posing the risk of capturing different tumoral behaviors. Objectives: To provide a systematic summary of definitions and the incidence of HPD in patients undergoing ICI treatment and discuss the challenges of current assessment of HPD. Data Sources: Articles that evaluated HPD published before March 3, 2020, were identified from MEDLINE and EMBASE. Study Selection: Clinical trials and observational studies providing the incidence and definition of HPD from patients with cancer treated with ICIs. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Factors included in the analysis comprised authors, year of publication, cancer type, ICI type, number of previous treatment lines, definition of HPD, time frame used to assess HPD, number of patients with HPD, onset of HPD, and prognosis of patients with HPD. Quantitative and qualitative syntheses for the incidence of HPD were performed. Main Outcomes and Measures: Definitions of HPD were categorized and the range of incidence of HPD was evaluated. Subgroup analysis on the incidence of HPD according to the category was performed and the challenges associated with current HPD assessment were evaluated. Results: Twenty-four studies with 3109 patients were analyzed. The incidence of HPD varied from 5.9% to 43.1%. The definitions were divided into 4 categories based on the calculation of tumor growth acceleration: tumor growth rate ratio (pooled incidence of HPD, 9.4%; 95% CI, 6.9%-12.0%), tumor growth kinetics ratio (pooled incidence, 15.8%; 95% CI, 8.0%-23.7%), early tumor burden increase (pooled incidence, 20.6%; 95% CI, 9.3%-31.8%), and combinations of the above (pooled incidence, 12.4%; 95% CI, 7.3%-17.5%). Hyperprogressive disease could be overestimated or underestimated if the assessment was limited to tumor growth rate or tumor growth kinetics ratio, target lesions, or response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST)-defined progressors, or if the assessment time frame conformed to RECIST. Study results on clinical outcome were heterogeneous on discriminating patients with HPD from those with natural progressive disease. Conclusions and Relevance: Definitions of HPD appear to be diverse, with the incidence of HPD varying from 5.9% to 43.1% across studies examined in this meta-analysis. Varying incidence and definitions of HPD indicate the need for establishing its uniform and clinically relevant criteria based on currently available evidence.
Authors: Carlos Gomez-Roca; Serge Koscielny; Vincent Ribrag; Clarisse Dromain; Inès Marzouk; François Bidault; Ratislav Bahleda; Charles Ferté; Christophe Massard; Jean-Charles Soria Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2011-07-15 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Bernhard Scheiner; Martha M Kirstein; Florian Hucke; Fabian Finkelmeier; Kornelius Schulze; Johann von Felden; Sandra Koch; Philipp Schwabl; Jan B Hinrichs; Fredrik Waneck; Oliver Waidmann; Thomas Reiberger; Christian Müller; Wolfgang Sieghart; Michael Trauner; Arndt Weinmann; Henning Wege; Jörg Trojan; Markus Peck-Radosavljevic; Arndt Vogel; Matthias Pinter Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2019-04-12 Impact factor: 8.171
Authors: Deirdre M H J Ten Berge; Daniel P Hurkmans; Ilse den Besten; Jeroen S Kloover; Ron H J Mathijssen; Reno Debets; Egbert F Smit; Joachim G J V Aerts Journal: ERJ Open Res Date: 2019-12-16
Authors: Andrea Forschner; Franz-Joachim Hilke; Irina Bonzheim; Axel Gschwind; German Demidov; Teresa Amaral; Stephan Ossowski; Olaf Riess; Christopher Schroeder; Peter Martus; Bernhard Klumpp; Irene Gonzalez-Menendez; Claus Garbe; Heike Niessner; Tobias Sinnberg Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2020-02-26 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Alejandro Ruiz-Patiño; Oscar Arrieta; Andrés F Cardona; Claudio Martín; Luis E Raez; Zyanya L Zatarain-Barrón; Feliciano Barrón; Luisa Ricaurte; María A Bravo-Garzón; Luis Mas; Luis Corrales; Leonardo Rojas; Lorena Lupinacci; Florencia Perazzo; Carlos Bas; Omar Carranza; Carmen Puparelli; Manglio Rizzo; Rossana Ruiz; Christian Rolfo; Pilar Archila; July Rodríguez; Carolina Sotelo; Carlos Vargas; Hernán Carranza; Jorge Otero; Luis E Pino; Carlos Ortíz; Paola Laguado; Rafael Rosell Journal: Thorac Cancer Date: 2019-12-12 Impact factor: 3.500
Authors: Yong Da; Ge Shen; Ming Zhou; Tao Wang; Dapeng Dong; Lina Bu; Yun Shao; Qiyun Sun; Ruoying Yu Journal: J Int Med Res Date: 2022-04 Impact factor: 1.573