| Literature DB >> 36159812 |
Rebekka Mispelbaum1, Sandra Tessa Hattenhauer1, Peter Brossart1, Annkristin Heine1.
Abstract
Red blood cell (RBC) transfusions have been shown to exert immunosuppressive effects in different diseases. In consequence, RBC transfusions might also negatively influence the response to immunotherapeutic treatment approaches. To address how RBC transfusions impact response rates of antitumor immunotherapy (IT), we conducted a retrolective clinical study of patients with different solid tumors treated with IT (atezolizumab, pembrolizumab, nivolumab and/or ipilimumab). We assessed the number of RBC concentrates received within 30 days before and 60 days after the start of IT. Primary objective was the initial therapy response at first staging, secondary objectives the number of immune related adverse events and infections. 15 of 55 included patients (27.3%) received RBC concentrates. The response rates were 77.5% in the non-transfused (n=40) versus 46.7% in the transfused patient group (n=15) and reached statistical significance (p=0.047). The correlation between therapy response and transfusion was statistically significant (p=0.026) after adjustment for the only identified confounder "line of therapy". In contrast, transfusion in the interval 30 days before IT showed no significant difference for treatment response (p=0.705). Moreover, no correlation was detected between RBC transfusion and irAE rate (p=0.149) or infection rate (p=0.135). In conclusion, we show for the first time that the administration of RBC transfusions during, but not before initiation of IT treatment, negatively influences the response rates to IT. Our findings suggest a restrictive transfusion management in patients undergoing IT to receive optimal response rates.Entities:
Keywords: immunosuppression; immunotherapy; red blood cell transfusion; response; tumor
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36159812 PMCID: PMC9492841 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.976011
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 8.786
Patient characteristics of transfused and non-transfused patients (in the first 60 days after IT start).
| total(N = 55), n (%) | RBC transfusion (N = 15), n (%) | no RBC transfusion (N = 40), n (%) | p-valuea | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Mean | 62 | 56 | 65 | 0.059* |
| Range | 34-90 | 34-82 | 37-90 | |
| Elderly (>70) | 15 (27.3) | 2 (13.3) | 13 (32.5) | 0.192 |
|
| 0.184 | |||
| Male | 39 (70.9) | 13 (86.7) | 26 (65.0) | |
| Female | 16 (29.1) | 2 (13.3) | 14 (35.0) | |
|
| 1.000 | |||
| 0-1 | 35 (63.6) | 9 (60.0) | 26 (65.0) | |
| ≥2 | 17 (30.9) | 5 (33.3) | 12 (30.0) | |
|
| 0.414 | |||
| Lung | 19 (34.5) | 2 (13.3) | 17 (42.5) | |
| Skin | 7 (12.7) | 2 (13.3) | 5 (12.5) | |
| Head neck | 10 (18.2) | 4 (26.7) | 6 (15.0) | |
| Urogenital | 5 (9.1) | 2 (13.3) | 3 (7.5) | |
| CUP | 4 (7.3) | 1 (6.7) | 3 (7.5) | |
| Breast | 3 (5.5) | 1 (6.7) | 2 (5.0) | |
| Others | 7 (12.7) | 3 (20.0) | 4 (10.0) | |
|
| 0.011 | |||
| Atezolizumab | 8 (14.5) | 2 (13.3) | 6 (15.0) | |
| Pembrolizumab/Nivolumab | 34 (61.8) | 6 (40.0) | 28 (70.0) | |
| Ipilimumab | 1 (1.8) | 0 | 1 (2.5) | |
|
| ||||
| Nivolumab+Ipilimumab | 12 (21.8) | 7 (46.7) | 5 (12.5) | |
| Additional chemotherapy | 15 (27.3) | 3 (20.0) | 12 (30.0) | 0.461 |
| Additional radiotheraphy | 11 (20.0) | 3 (20.0) | 8 (20.0) | 1.000 |
|
| 0.016 | |||
| 1 | 14 (25.5) | 0 | 14 (35.0) | |
| 2 | 15 (27.3) | 4 (26.7) | 11 (27.5) | |
| 3 | 13 (23.6) | 7 (46.7) | 6 (15.0) | |
| 4 | 5 (9.1) | 2 (13.3) | 3 (7.5) | |
| ≥5 | 8 (14.5) | 2 (13.3) | 6 (15.0) | |
| Mean | 2.7 | 3.4 | 2.5 | |
|
| 0.912* | |||
| Mean | 1.7 | 1.7 | 1.8 | |
| LDH | 0.441* | |||
| Mean | 317 | 457 | 262 | |
(a) was calculated using Fisher's exact/ (*) Wilcoxon. RBC, red blood cell; CUP, cancer of unkown primary.
Figure 1Response rate in relation to RBC transfusions. (A) The response rate depending on received RBC transfusions within 60 days after start of IT is shown. Complete response, partial response and stable disease were considered as response. Of 40 patients in the non-transfused group 31 patients (77.5%) responded to IT, while of 15 patients in the transfused group only 7 patients (46.7%) responded to IT. The difference was calculated using Fisher’s exact test (p=0.047). (B) Multiple logistic regression analysis of therapy response to IT. (*) between RBC transfusion and line of therapy. After adjustment for the effect of the confounding factor “line of therapy” the correlation between therapy response and transfusion was statistically significant (p=0.026). No other confounding factors could be identified. (C) The probability for response in dependence on the number of transfused packed RBC units within 60 days after start of IT is depicted. (D) The response rate depending on received RBC transfusions within 30 days before start of IT is shown. Of 46 patients in the non-transfused group 31 patients (67.4%) responded to IT, while of 9 patients in the transfused group 7 patients (77.8%) responded to IT. The difference was calculated using Fisher’s exact test (p=0.705). RBC, red blood cell; IT, immunotherapy; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease; PD, progressive disease; NS, not significant.
Figure 2IrAE and infection rate in relation to RBC transfusions. (A) The irAE rate depending on received RBC transfusions within 60 days after start of IT is shown. Of 40 patients in the non-transfused group 6 patients (15.0%) showed an irAE while of 15 patients in the transfused group 5 patients (33.3%) showed an irAE. The difference was calculated using Fisher’s exact test (p=0.149). (B) The infection rate depending on received RBC transfusions within 30 days before start of IT is shown. Of 46 patients in the non-transfused group 13 patients (28.3%) were treated with antibiotic treatment, while of 9 patients in the transfused group 5 patients (55.6%). The difference was calculated using Fisher’s exact test (p=0.135). RBC, red blood cell; irAE, immune-related adverse events; NS, not significant.