3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Cumulative Antibiotic Use Significantly Decreases Efficacy of Checkpoint Inhibitors in Patients with Advanced Cancer

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      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

          With the advent of immunotherapy, substantial progress has been made in improving outcomes for patients with advanced cancer. However, not all patients benefit equally from treatment, and confounding immune-related issues may have an impact. Several studies suggest that antibiotic use (which alters the gut microbiome) may result in poorer outcomes for patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI).

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Mechanisms of resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors

          Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) targeting CTLA-4 and the PD-1/PD-L1 axis have shown unprecedented clinical activity in several types of cancer and are rapidly transforming the practice of medical oncology. Whereas cytotoxic chemotherapy and small molecule inhibitors (‘targeted therapies’) largely act on cancer cells directly, immune checkpoint inhibitors reinvigorate anti-tumour immune responses by disrupting co-inhibitory T-cell signalling. While resistance routinely develops in patients treated with conventional cancer therapies and targeted therapies, durable responses suggestive of long-lasting immunologic memory are commonly seen in large subsets of patients treated with ICI. However, initial response appears to be a binary event, with most non-responders to single-agent ICI therapy progressing at a rate consistent with the natural history of disease. In addition, late relapses are now emerging with longer follow-up of clinical trial populations, suggesting the emergence of acquired resistance. As robust biomarkers to predict clinical response and/or resistance remain elusive, the mechanisms underlying innate (primary) and acquired (secondary) resistance are largely inferred from pre-clinical studies and correlative clinical data. Improved understanding of molecular and immunologic mechanisms of ICI response (and resistance) may not only identify novel predictive and/or prognostic biomarkers, but also ultimately guide optimal combination/sequencing of ICI therapy in the clinic. Here we review the emerging clinical and pre-clinical data identifying novel mechanisms of innate and acquired resistance to immune checkpoint inhibition.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Baseline gut microbiota predicts clinical response and colitis in metastatic melanoma patients treated with ipilimumab

            Ipilimumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor targeting CTLA-4, prolongs survival in a subset of patients with metastatic melanoma (MM) but can induce immune-related adverse events, including enterocolitis. We hypothesized that baseline gut microbiota could predict ipilimumab anti-tumor response and/or intestinal toxicity.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              CANCER IMMUNOLOGY. The "cancer immunogram".

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                The Oncologist
                The Oncol
                Alphamed Press
                1083-7159
                1549-490X
                December 13 2019
                January 2020
                July 10 2019
                January 2020
                : 25
                : 1
                : 55-63
                Affiliations
                [1 ]The Christie NHS Foundation Trust Manchester United Kingdom
                [2 ]Cancer Research UK Manchester Institute Manchester United Kingdom
                [3 ]Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester Manchester United Kingdom
                Article
                10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0160
                6964118
                31292268
                3f2325b6-ff8a-4e55-adfb-cf55c1cb63e8
                © 2020

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article