5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Impact of COVID-19 vaccination on the use of PD-1 inhibitor in treating patients with cancer: a real-world study

      editorial

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Anti-COVID-19 vaccination may have functional implications for immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment in patients with cancer. This study was undertaken to determine whether the safety or efficacy of anti-PD-1 therapy is reduced in patients with cancer during COVID-19 vaccination. A large multicenter observational study was conducted in 83 Chinese hospitals between January 28, 2021 and September 30, 2021. A total of 3552 patients were screened and 2048 eligible patients with cancer receiving PD-1 inhibitor treatment were recruited. All enrolled patients had received camrelizumab treatment alone or in conjunction with other cancer therapies. Among these, 1518 (74.1%) patients received the BBIBP-CorV vaccine and were defined as the vaccinated subgroup. The remaining 530 (25.9%) patients did not receive anti-COVID-19 vaccination and were defined as the non-vaccinated subgroup. For all participants, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events criteria were used to evaluate the efficacy and safety of camrelizumab treatment, respectively. Propensity score match analysis with the optimal pair matching was used to compare these criteria between the vaccinated and non-vaccinated subgroups. A total of 2048 eligible patients with cancer were included (median age 59 years, 27.6% female). Most patients (98.8%) had metastatic cancer of the lung, liver or intestinal tract. Aside from the PD-1 inhibitor treatment, 55.9% of patients received additional cancer therapies. 1518 (74.1%) patients received the BBIBP-CorV vaccine with only mild side effects reported. The remaining patients did not receive COVID-19 vaccination and had a statistically greater percentage of comorbidities. After matching for age, gender, cancer stage/types, comorbidity and performance status, 1060 patients (530 pairs) were selected for propensity score match analysis. This analysis showed no significant differences in overall response rate (25.3% vs 28.9%, p=0.213) and disease control rate (64.6% vs 67.0%, p=0.437) between vaccinated and non-vaccinated subgroups. Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were reported in both subgroups after camrelizumab treatment. Among vaccinated patients who experienced irAEs, the median interval between the first dose of camrelizumab treatment and the first vaccine shot was ≤16 days. Compared with the non-vaccinated subgroup, irAEs in vaccinated patients were more frequently reported as mild (grade 1 or 2 irAEs; 33.8% vs 19.8%, p<0.001) and these patients were less likely to discontinue the PD-1 inhibitor treatment (4.2% vs 20.4%, p<0.001). Severe irAEs (grade 3 irAE or higher) related to camrelizumab treatment were reported, however no significant differences in the frequency of such events were observed between the vaccinated and non-vaccinated subgroups. The COVID-19 vaccine, BBIBP-CorV, did not increase severe anti-PD-1-related adverse events nor did it reduce the clinical efficacy of camrelizumab in patients with cancer. Thus, we conclude that patients with cancer need not suspend anti-PD-1 treatment during COVID-19 vaccination.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).

          Assessment of the change in tumour burden is an important feature of the clinical evaluation of cancer therapeutics: both tumour shrinkage (objective response) and disease progression are useful endpoints in clinical trials. Since RECIST was published in 2000, many investigators, cooperative groups, industry and government authorities have adopted these criteria in the assessment of treatment outcomes. However, a number of questions and issues have arisen which have led to the development of a revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Evidence for changes, summarised in separate papers in this special issue, has come from assessment of a large data warehouse (>6500 patients), simulation studies and literature reviews. HIGHLIGHTS OF REVISED RECIST 1.1: Major changes include: Number of lesions to be assessed: based on evidence from numerous trial databases merged into a data warehouse for analysis purposes, the number of lesions required to assess tumour burden for response determination has been reduced from a maximum of 10 to a maximum of five total (and from five to two per organ, maximum). Assessment of pathological lymph nodes is now incorporated: nodes with a short axis of 15 mm are considered measurable and assessable as target lesions. The short axis measurement should be included in the sum of lesions in calculation of tumour response. Nodes that shrink to <10mm short axis are considered normal. Confirmation of response is required for trials with response primary endpoint but is no longer required in randomised studies since the control arm serves as appropriate means of interpretation of data. Disease progression is clarified in several aspects: in addition to the previous definition of progression in target disease of 20% increase in sum, a 5mm absolute increase is now required as well to guard against over calling PD when the total sum is very small. Furthermore, there is guidance offered on what constitutes 'unequivocal progression' of non-measurable/non-target disease, a source of confusion in the original RECIST guideline. Finally, a section on detection of new lesions, including the interpretation of FDG-PET scan assessment is included. Imaging guidance: the revised RECIST includes a new imaging appendix with updated recommendations on the optimal anatomical assessment of lesions. A key question considered by the RECIST Working Group in developing RECIST 1.1 was whether it was appropriate to move from anatomic unidimensional assessment of tumour burden to either volumetric anatomical assessment or to functional assessment with PET or MRI. It was concluded that, at present, there is not sufficient standardisation or evidence to abandon anatomical assessment of tumour burden. The only exception to this is in the use of FDG-PET imaging as an adjunct to determination of progression. As is detailed in the final paper in this special issue, the use of these promising newer approaches requires appropriate clinical validation studies.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, BBIBP-CorV: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1/2 trial

            Background The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic warrants accelerated efforts to test vaccine candidates. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine candidate, BBIBP-CorV, in humans. Methods We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1/2 trial at Shangqiu City Liangyuan District Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Henan Province, China. In phase 1, healthy people aged 18–80 years, who were negative for serum-specific IgM/IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 at the time of screening, were separated into two age groups (18–59 years and ≥60 years) and randomly assigned to receive vaccine or placebo in a two-dose schedule of 2 μg, 4 μg, or 8 μg on days 0 and 28. In phase 2, healthy adults (aged 18–59 years) were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive vaccine or placebo on a single-dose schedule of 8 μg on day 0 or on a two-dose schedule of 4 μg on days 0 and 14, 0 and 21, or 0 and 28. Participants within each cohort were randomly assigned by stratified block randomisation (block size eight) and allocated (3:1) to receive vaccine or placebo. Group allocation was concealed from participants, investigators, and outcome assessors. The primary outcomes were safety and tolerability. The secondary outcome was immunogenicity, assessed as the neutralising antibody responses against infectious SARS-CoV-2. This study is registered with www.chictr.org.cn, ChiCTR2000032459. Findings In phase 1, 192 participants were enrolled (mean age 53·7 years [SD 15·6]) and were randomly assigned to receive vaccine (2 μg [n=24], 4 μg [n=24], or 8 μg [n=24] for both age groups [18–59 years and ≥60 years]) or placebo (n=24). At least one adverse reaction was reported within the first 7 days of inoculation in 42 (29%) of 144 vaccine recipients. The most common systematic adverse reaction was fever (18–59 years, one [4%] in the 2 μg group, one [4%] in the 4 μg group, and two [8%] in the 8 μg group; ≥60 years, one [4%] in the 8 μg group). All adverse reactions were mild or moderate in severity. No serious adverse event was reported within 28 days post vaccination. Neutralising antibody geometric mean titres were higher at day 42 in the group aged 18–59 years (87·7 [95% CI 64·9–118·6], 2 μg group; 211·2 [158·9–280·6], 4 μg group; and 228·7 [186·1–281·1], 8 μg group) and the group aged 60 years and older (80·7 [65·4–99·6], 2 μg group; 131·5 [108·2–159·7], 4 μg group; and 170·87 [133·0–219·5], 8 μg group) compared with the placebo group (2·0 [2·0–2·0]). In phase 2, 448 participants were enrolled (mean age 41·7 years [SD 9·9]) and were randomly assigned to receive the vaccine (8 μg on day 0 [n=84] or 4 μg on days 0 and 14 [n=84], days 0 and 21 [n=84], or days 0 and 28 [n=84]) or placebo on the same schedules (n=112). At least one adverse reaction within the first 7 days was reported in 76 (23%) of 336 vaccine recipients (33 [39%], 8 μg day 0; 18 [21%], 4 μg days 0 and 14; 15 [18%], 4 μg days 0 and 21; and ten [12%], 4 μg days 0 and 28). One placebo recipient in the 4 μg days 0 and 21 group reported grade 3 fever, but was self-limited and recovered. All other adverse reactions were mild or moderate in severity. The most common systematic adverse reaction was fever (one [1%], 8 μg day 0; one [1%], 4 μg days 0 and 14; three [4%], 4 μg days 0 and 21; two [2%], 4 μg days 0 and 28). The vaccine-elicited neutralising antibody titres on day 28 were significantly greater in the 4 μg days 0 and 14 (169·5, 95% CI 132·2–217·1), days 0 and 21 (282·7, 221·2–361·4), and days 0 and 28 (218·0, 181·8–261·3) schedules than the 8 μg day 0 schedule (14·7, 11·6–18·8; all p<0·001). Interpretation The inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, BBIBP-CorV, is safe and well tolerated at all tested doses in two age groups. Humoral responses against SARS-CoV-2 were induced in all vaccine recipients on day 42. Two-dose immunisation with 4 μg vaccine on days 0 and 21 or days 0 and 28 achieved higher neutralising antibody titres than the single 8 μg dose or 4 μg dose on days 0 and 14. Funding National Program on Key Research Project of China, National Mega projects of China for Major Infectious Diseases, National Mega Projects of China for New Drug Creation, and Beijing Science and Technology Plan.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              COVID-19 vaccines: modes of immune activation and future challenges

              The new vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 are novel in terms of specificity, their wide dissemination across the global population and the inclusion of newly licensed mRNA platforms. We discuss here how the approved vaccines trigger innate immunity to promote durable immunological memory and consider the future implications of protecting populations with these vaccines.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Immunother Cancer
                J Immunother Cancer
                jitc
                jitc
                Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2051-1426
                2022
                9 March 2022
                : 10
                : 3
                : e004157
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentDepartment of Oncology , Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology , Wuhan, Hubei, China
                [2 ]departmentDepartment of Ophthalmology , Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University , Wuhan, Hubei, China
                [3 ]departmentInstitute of Molecular Medicine and Experimental Immunology , University Clinic of Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-University , Bonn, Germany
                [4 ]departmentDepartment of Oncology , Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital , Wuhan, Hubei, China
                [5 ]departmentDepartment of Oncology , The First College of Clinical Medical Science , Yichang, Hubei, China
                [6 ]departmentDepartment of Oncology , Jingzhou Central Hospital , Jingzhou, Hubei, China
                [7 ]departmentDepartment of Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy , Idaho State University , Meridian, Idaho, USA
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Xianglin Yuan; xlyuan1020@ 123456163.com ; Professor Christian Kurts; ckurts@ 123456uni-bonn.de
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6388-3179
                Article
                jitc-2021-004157
                10.1136/jitc-2021-004157
                8915379
                35264438
                23a2190c-113c-4d36-bc9e-5af0026fbcb4
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 30 January 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: Sino-German Center for Research Promotion;
                Award ID: C-0065
                Categories
                Commentary
                1506
                2520
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                immunotherapy,vaccination,covid-19
                immunotherapy, vaccination, covid-19

                Comments

                Comment on this article