| Literature DB >> 34239594 |
Yujin Choi1, Ojin Kwon1, Chang-Min Choi2, Mi-Kyung Jeong1.
Abstract
The cold-heat syndrome type (ZHENG) is one of the essential elements of syndrome differentiation in East Asian Medicine. This pilot study aimed to explore the characteristics of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) based on the cold-heat syndrome type. Twenty NSCLC patients treated with ICI monotherapy were included in the study and completed the cold-heat syndrome differentiation questionnaire. Demographic and clinical characteristics of the included patients were obtained through electronic medical records. Additionally, blood samples of 10 patients were analyzed with cytokine level and immune profiling. Patients were divided into two groups of cold type (n = 9) and non-cold type (n = 11), according to the cold symptoms questionnaire's cutoff point. No significant difference between the two groups was observed in clinical response to ICIs (p=0.668). Progression-free survival (PFS) seemed to be longer in patients with non-cold type than cold type (p=0.332). In patients with adenocarcinoma, the non-cold type showed longer PFS than the cold type (p=0.036). Also, there were more patients with PD-L1 negative in the cold type compared to the non-cold type (p=0.050). In immune profiling, the proportion of effector memory CD8 T-cells was higher in patients with cold type than with non-cold type (p=0.015), and the proportion of terminal effector CD8 T-cells was lower in patients with cold type than with non-cold type (p=0.005). This pilot study has shown the potential for differences in prognosis and immune status between patients with cold and non-cold types. Hopefully, it provides essential information and insight into NSCLC patients' characteristics from the perspective of syndrome differentiation. Further large-scale observational studies and intervention studies are required.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34239594 PMCID: PMC8241512 DOI: 10.1155/2021/9920469
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Demographic and clinical characteristics of 20 patients with non-cold or cold type.
| Total ( | Adenocarcinoma ( | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-cold ( | Cold ( |
| Non-cold ( | Cold ( |
| |
| Age (year) | 61.4 ± 12.1 | 61.1 ± 8.9 | 0.959 | 58.1 ± 13.2 | 59.3 ± 7.5 | 0.846 |
|
| ||||||
| Sex | — | — | 0.148 | — | — | 0.193 |
| Female | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (33.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (42.9%) | ||
| Male | 11 (100.0%) | 6 (66.7%) | 7 (100.0%) | 4 (57.1%) | ||
|
| ||||||
| Smoking status | — | — | 0.141 | — | — | 0.214 |
| Current | 8 (72.7%) | 3 (33.3%) | 5 (71.4%) | 2 (28.6%) | ||
| Ex-smoker | 2 (18.2%) | 2 (22.2%) | 1 (14.3%) | 1 (14.3%) | ||
| Nonsmoker | 1 (9.1%) | 4 (44.4%) | 1 (14.3%) | 4 (57.1%) | ||
|
| ||||||
| Histologic type | — | — | 0.844 | — | — | |
| Adenocarcinoma | 7 (63.6%) | 7 (77.8%) | 7 (100.0%) | 7 (100.0%) | ||
| Squamous | 4 (36.4%) | 2 (22.2%) | — | — | ||
|
| ||||||
| Drug | — | — | 0.047 | — | — | 0.091 |
| Pembrolizumab | 4 (36.4%) | 2 (22.2%) | 4 (57.1%) | 1 (14.3%) | ||
| Nivolumab | 4 (36.4%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (14.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | ||
| Atezolizumab | 3 (27.3%) | 7 (77.8%) | 2 (28.6%) | 6 (85.7%) | ||
|
| ||||||
| Line of therapy | — | — | 0.059 | — | — | 0.013 |
| 2nd line therapy | 9 (81.8%) | 2 (22.2%) | 6 (85.7%) | 0 (0.0%) | ||
| 3rd line therapy | 1 (9.1%) | 2 (22.2%) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (28.6%) | ||
| 4th line therapy | 1 (9.1%) | 4 (44.4%) | 1 (14.3%) | 4 (57.1%) | ||
| 7th line therapy | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (11.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (14.3%) | ||
|
| ||||||
| No. of cyclea | 7.0 ± 5.7 | 3.3 ± 1.1 | 0.110 | 7.0 ± 4.3 | 3.0 ± 1.2 | 0.106 |
| Ongoing | 3 (27.3%) | 2 (22.2%) | 2 (28.6%) | 2 (28.6%) | ||
|
| ||||||
| Clinical response | — | — | 0.668 | — | — | 0.549 |
| Partial response | 3 (27.3%) | 1 (11.1%) | 2 (28.6%) | 1 (14.3%) | ||
| Stable disease | 4 (36.4%) | 4 (44.4%) | 3 (42.9%) | 2 (28.6%) | ||
| Progressive disease | 4 (36.4%) | 4 (44.4%) | 2 (28.6%) | 4 (57.1%) | ||
|
| ||||||
| PFS (day)a | 102.0 (43.0; 172.5) | 44.0 (42.0; 76.0) | 0.332 | 130.0 (74.0; 166.0) | 43.0 (42.0; 45.0) | 0.036 |
|
| ||||||
| PD-L1 expressionb | — | — | 0.050 | — | — | 0.110 |
| Negative | 1 (9.1%) | 4 (50.0%) | 1 (14.3%) | 4 (57.1%) | ||
| >0%, ≤50% | 3 (27.3%) | 3 (37.5%) | 1 (14.3%) | 1 (14.3%) | ||
| >50% | 7 (63.6%) | 1 (12.5%) | 5 (71.4%) | 1 (14.3%) | ||
|
| ||||||
| EGFR mutation | — | — | 0.115 | — | — | 0.193 |
| Positive | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (33.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (42.9%) | ||
| Negative | 7 (63.6%) | 4 (44.4%) | 7 (100.0%) | 4 (57.1%) | ||
| Not done | 4 (36.4%) | 2 (22.2%) | — | — | ||
|
| ||||||
| ALK mutation | — | — | 0.621 | — | — | 0.368 |
| Positive | 1 (9.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (14.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | ||
| Negative | 6 (54.5%) | 6 (66.7%) | 6 (85.7%) | 6 (85.7%) | ||
| Not done | 4 (36.4%) | 3 (33.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (14.3%) | ||
|
| ||||||
| KRAS mutation | — | — | 0.638 | — | — | 0.247 |
| Positive | 2 (18.2%) | 1 (11.1%) | 2 (28.6%) | 1 (14.3%) | ||
| Negative | 4 (36.4%) | 2 (22.2%) | 4 (57.1%) | 2 (28.6%) | ||
| Not done | 5 (45.5%) | 6 (66.7%) | 1 (14.3%) | 4 (57.1%) | ||
aData of 5 patients whose ICI treatment was not finished (ongoing) were excluded. bMissing data (not done) of one patient were excluded for the analysis.
Figure 1Cold syndrome and heat syndrome scores of 20 non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Ten patients representing cold types and non-cold type were selected for the immune profiling assay (selected). There were patients who were considered to be representative types, but not able to carry out immune profiling assay due to lack of samples (unavailable). In particular, six patients as representatives of cold type or non-cold type are indicated (∗).
Cytokines and immune profiling of 10 patients with non-cold or cold type.
| Non-cold ( | Cold ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | 55.6 ± 12.9 | 68.8 ± 8.3 | 0.091 |
|
| |||
| Sex | — | — | 0.168 |
| Female | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (60.0%) | |
| Male | 5 (100.0%) | 2 (40.0%) | |
|
| |||
| Cytokine (pg/mL) | |||
| IL-6 ( | 3.8 ± 4.0 | 9.1 ± 7.4 | 0.208 |
| IL-8 ( | 10.1 ± 3.4 | 25.9 ± 23.5 | 0.208 |
| IL-10 ( | 0.6 ± 0.3 | 0.8 ± 0.3 | 0.425 |
| IL-22 ( | 1.2 ± 0.5 | 1.3 ± 0.7 | 0.829 |
|
| |||
| Immune profiling (% intact live cells) | |||
| Lymphocytes | 73.1 ± 2.2 | 75.6 ± 5.4 | 0.379 |
| CD3 T-cells | 50.3 ± 4.5 | 46.0 ± 12.4 | 0.480 |
| CD8 T-cells | 21.0 ± 3.5 | 16.8 ± 4.1 | 0.113 |
| Naïve | 3.5 ± 2.7 | 1.9 ± 1.4 | 0.293 |
| Central memory | 0.6 ± 0.9 | 0.8 ± 0.7 | 0.719 |
| Effector memory | 3.8 ± 0.8 | 6.2 ± 1.6 | 0.015 |
| Terminal effector | 13.2 ± 1.9 | 7.9 ± 2.4 | 0.005 |
| CD4 T-cells | 25.8 ± 5.9 | 26.7 ± 9.3 | 0.860 |
| Naïve | 8.3 ± 7.0 | 3.8 ± 1.7 | 0.227 |
| Central memory | 5.4 ± 1.0 | 7.1 ± 3.4 | 0.317 |
| Effector memory | 4.2 ± 1.6 | 6.5 ± 1.9 | 0.081 |
| Terminal effector | 7.9 ± 3.2 | 9.3 ± 4.1 | 0.560 |
| Gamma delta T-cells | 3.1 ± 2.0 | 1.9 ± 0.6 | 0.273 |
| MAIT & NKT CD4 cells | 0.4 ± 0.2 | 0.6 ± 0.6 | 0.543 |
| B cells | 6.4 ± 3.1 | 6.9 ± 3.0 | 0.808 |
| Naïve | 5.6 ± 3.1 | 6.1 ± 3.1 | 0.806 |
| Memory | 0.6 ± 0.1 | 0.6 ± 0.2 | 0.985 |
| Plasma blasts | 0.2 ± 0.1 | 0.1 ± 0.1 | 0.832 |
| NK cells | 16.4 ± 1.7 | 22.7 ± 8.1 | 0.156 |
| Early NK | 2.5 ± 0.8 | 3.3 ± 1.2 | 0.264 |
| Late NK | 13.9 ± 1.0 | 19.5 ± 7.4 | 0.169 |
| Monocytes | 15.8 ± 2.9 | 15.2 ± 2.7 | 0.737 |
| Classical | 13.5 ± 2.8 | 13.0 ± 2.5 | 0.760 |
| Transitional | 1.6 ± 0.7 | 1.6 ± 0.6 | 0.851 |
| Nonclassical | 0.6 ± 0.6 | 0.6 ± 0.6 | 0.967 |
| Dendritic cells | 1.3 ± 0.2 | 1.1 ± 0.5 | 0.446 |
| pDC | 0.3 ± 0.1 | 0.3 ± 0.1 | 0.247 |
| mDC | 1.0 ± 0.2 | 0.9 ± 0.4 | 0.585 |
| Granulocytes | 1.0 ± 0.6 | 1.0 ± 1.3 | 0.998 |
| Neutrophils | 0.4 ± 0.4 | 0.2 ± 0.1 | 0.190 |
| Basophils | 0.3 ± 0.3 | 0.6 ± 1.0 | 0.630 |
| Eosinophils | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 0.242 |
| CD66b neutrophils | 0.3 ± 0.1 | 0.3 ± 0.2 | 0.876 |
Figure 2Representative CD8 T-cell region of Cen-se maps in (a) a patient with non-cold type, and (b) a patient with cold type. (c) The mean and standard error of effector memory and terminal effector CD8 T-cell percentage in 10 patients' blood sample. The proportion of effector memory CD8 T-cells (T8 em, the blue region in Figures 2(a) and 2(b)) was higher in patients with cold type than that in patients with non-cold type. Meanwhile, the proportion of terminal effector CD8 T-cells (T8 te, the yellow region in Figures 2(a) and 2(b)) was higher in patients with non-cold type than that in patients with cold type.
Clinical characteristics of 20 patients classified by the cluster analysis.
| Group A ( | Group B ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | 60.5 ± 11.1 | 63.6 ± 9.2 | 0.577 |
|
| |||
| Sex | — | — | 0.011 |
| Female | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (60.0%) | |
| Male | 15 (100.0%) | 2 (40.0%) | |
|
| |||
| Cold syndrome (ZHENG) symptomsa | |||
| I have an aversion to cold | 3.3 ± 1.2 | 5.0 ± 0.0 | <0.001 |
| I need to stay very warm | 3.5 ± 1.0 | 5.0 ± 0.0 | <0.001 |
| I have experienced coldness in the abdomen | 2.5 ± 1.4 | 4.0 ± 1.4 | 0.059 |
| I feel coldness in my hands and feet | 2.8 ± 1.4 | 3.0 ± 1.4 | 0.788 |
| I have had painful cold sensations in my body | 2.7 ± 1.3 | 4.2 ± 1.8 | 0.056 |
| My face looks pale | 1.5 ± 0.6 | 3.6 ± 1.7 | 0.045 |
| I cannot drink cold water | 2.9 ± 1.4 | 5.0 ± 0.0 | <0.001 |
| I urinate colorless urine | 3.2 ± 1.0 | 3.2 ± 1.6 | 0.999 |
|
| |||
| Heat syndrome (ZHENG) symptomsa | |||
| I like a cool feeling | 3.5 ± 1.0 | 1.4 ± 0.5 | <0.001 |
| I do not like hot or warm atmosphere | 2.4 ± 1.0 | 1.4 ± 0.5 | 0.047 |
| I have hot or fever sensation in my body | 2.9 ± 1.3 | 1.8 ± 1.8 | 0.147 |
| I have burning sensation in my body | 1.8 ± 1.1 | 2.2 ± 1.6 | 0.537 |
| My face looks red or eyes are blood shot | 1.8 ± 1.0 | 1.6 ± 0.9 | 0.700 |
| I like to drink cold water | 3.6 ± 1.1 | 1.2 ± 0.4 | <0.001 |
| My breath has been hot | 2.1 ± 1.0 | 1.4 ± 0.9 | 0.160 |
|
| |||
| Non-cold/cold type | — | — | 0.020 |
| Non-cold type | 11 (73.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | |
| Cold type | 4 (26.7%) | 5 (100.0%) | |
|
| |||
| PD-L1b | — | — | 0.051 |
| Negative | 2 (14.3%) | 3 (60.0%) | |
| >0%, ≤50% | 4 (28.6%) | 2 (40.0%) | |
| >50% | 8 (57.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | |
a Each item is measured as a 5-point Likert score ranging (1 to 5).
Figure 3(a) Cluster plot of 20 patients classified by the symptoms of cold-heat syndrome, and (b) radar chart of mean standardized score of each symptom (eight symptoms in cold syndrome (ZHENG) are presented as C1–C8, and seven symptoms in heat syndrome (ZHENG) are presented as (H1–H7) in two cluster groups).