马上注册,结交更多好友,享用更多功能,让你轻松玩转社区。
您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有账号?立即注册
x
以ICI为代表的免疫治疗单药有效率太低,尤其是对所谓冷肿瘤;联合做增敏增效治疗是主要出路。
( r% A3 c/ A0 G& `但人的免疫系统是个整体,那些免疫细胞相关的因素也并非只管肿瘤,增敏增效治疗有可能增加全身炎症;即便是直奔肿瘤去的,过于放飞自我的免疫细胞掀起的免疫活动的强度,患者也未必能耐受得了;ICI治疗本身就风险巨大,再叠加这些风险因素,有时候就表现为“怕你死得不够快”了。
1 W! g3 ?: D- B! k* e, x# t9 \比如下面这例:
+ v) X# i! s( I+ p3 j1 B) }5 [《Anti-PD-1 Immunotherapy Combined With Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy and GM-CSF as Salvage Therapy in a PD-L1-Negative Patient With Refractory Metastatic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Case Report and Literature Review》5 m b5 q$ } u6 | h4 ?
这篇论文讲了一个很时髦的疗法,“布拉格疗法”---ici+放疗+特尔立(gm-csf),治疗一位食管癌患者。
' n% \& l0 X; I$ Z8 b增敏增效的疗效肯定是有的,因为这位患者pd-l1是阴性的,布拉格治疗也起效了。0 G1 G. Y8 L# I1 \$ G5 M: o) R
但是患者第三次治疗的时候就因为严重的肺炎死了。
! W! ?1 ^: K6 c直接对肺病灶放疗,肺炎本身就不可避免;会急剧加重炎症的pd-1i、gm-csf再联着用;再配上只会用激素的一言难尽的治疗措施.........- d; @! O! k2 F8 y# H- f4 F
“This study aimed to report a case of a patient about advanced unresectable ESCC negative expression of PD-L1, who experienced tumor progression after chemoradiotherapy and targeted therapy.A significant systemic effect was seen after PD-1 inhibitor combined with GM-CSF and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for metastatic lesions, however, severe pneumonia occurred after the triple-combination therapy. ”
& P4 \% ^8 F/ h
, F9 r! }$ K. |2 Z& }# s所以一切给免疫增敏增效的治疗,“减毒”要与“增效”并重,甚至“减毒”要在“增效”之前。* }3 Y9 D( l9 q$ G' K
这里的“减毒”,主要指的是 1、尽量不增加不可控的炎症风险 2、最好能对那些不利的促炎细胞因子、趋化因子之类的有所抑制。
9 u! H; H, Q+ c8 v* g
; L) f+ ?( z% J: l6 G8 j简化的办法就是从消炎药中去找增敏增效药。当然消炎药也要看其具体作用机制,如果是增加treg等四座大山来消炎的,那也有免疫抑制促肿瘤发展的风险,那也不能用。$ Z: q' H8 {7 K/ @ A
. D+ @' }7 k& |$ O% w0 p0 I
从今天开始陆续介绍一些给免疫治疗“减毒”“增效”的辅助用药。/ `2 R& R w: W
( m. K! S2 Z4 N4 @( x
* Z! k$ [- @/ f; d0 pH1受体拮抗剂抗组胺药
9 \! v8 `2 z# O D+ _3 o0 k, v) S
' O6 s0 E K, m一、几个回顾性的研究, G, b, e8 t# {# t& p6 [
1 X* `# E4 N3 D
1、《Efficacy of cationic amphiphilic antihistamines on outcomes of patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors》' W: x4 v2 U! d
+ V4 u6 K5 _1 v. X
ICI+地氯雷他定或者赛庚啶或者依巴斯汀这三种H1受体拮抗剂抗组胺药的患者与只用ICI患者相比,中位总生存期显著延长(24.8个月对10.4个月;Log-rank,p = 0.018),无进展生存期显著延长(10.6对4.93个月;对数秩,p = 0.004);全因死亡率降低了约50%(HR,0.55 [95% CI: 0.34-0.91])。
3 w# r, v- Z9 t# t+ d“Compared with non-cationic amphiphilic antihistamine users, patients who received cationic amphiphilic antihistamines had a significantly longer median overall survival (24.8 versus 10.4 months; Log-rank, p = 0.018) and progression-free survival (10.6 versus 4.93 months; Log-rank, p = 0.004). The use of cationic amphiphilic antihistamines was associated with an approximately 50% lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR, 0.55 [95% CI: 0.34-0.91]). Survival benefits were not seen in patients who received cationic amphiphilic antihistamines before immune checkpoint blockade.”
0 V# @* L# m, S" p! c/ z $ [+ H& D6 D1 g) ?" W" V. W4 X+ E
1 b0 Z( u3 e: @5 a0 T2、《Impact of antihistamines use on immune checkpoint inhibitors response in advanced cancer, N& Y- C$ x: ]7 k3 V% m
patients》
- C1 |8 M6 q, `# u' \/ n$ L + s' v' x( q8 ^) f$ L3 T
一共纳入133名已经发生转移并使用ici治疗的肿瘤患者,其中黑色素瘤(33.1%)患者最多。最常见的ICI是nivolumab (63.2%)。55名(38.4%)患者在接受ICIs的同时接受了抗组胺药。最常见的抗组胺药是pheniramine(85.5%)。同时接受抗组胺药和ICIs的患者,中位无进展生存期(PFS) (8.2比5.1个月,log-rank p = 0.016)和总生存期(OS) (16.2比7.7个月,log-rank p = 0.002)更长。在多变量分析中,在校正混杂因素(如表现状态、骨或肝转移和同步化疗)后,这些患者的PFS(风险比(HR) = 0.63,95% CI:0.40–0.98,p = 0.042)和OS (HR = 0.49,95% CI:0.29–0.81,p = 0.006)也更好。
( n/ M3 m; _6 j! I* ^
3 @) H1 z( p- Z/ y( g7 }! u“A total of 133 patients receiving ICIs in the metastatic setting were included. Melanoma (33.1%) was the most common tumor type. The most common ICI was nivolumab (63.2%). Fifty-fi ve (38.4%) patients received antihistamines concomitantly with ICIs. The most common antihistamine was pheniramine (85.5%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) (8.2 vs. 5.1 months, log-rank p = 0.016) and overall survival (OS) (16.2 vs. 7.7 months, log-rank p = 0.002) were longer in patients receiving antihistamines concomitantly with ICIs. In multivariate analysis, PFS (Hazard Ratio (HR) = 0.63, 95% CI:0.40–0.98, p = 0.042) and OS (HR = 0.49, 95% CI:0.29–0.81, p = 0.006) were also better in those patients after adjusting for confounding factors, such as performance status, bone or liver metastasis, and concurrent chemotherapy”1 ~3 e* Z# K' e8 p4 m1 \
2 |/ M" V5 P7 h* G9 ~( p$ n
`. r# Q1 V9 j8 s7 k/ \3、《Concomitant medication of cetirizine in advanced melanoma could enhance anti-PD-1 efficacy by promoting M1 macrophages polarization》
. }" M# X+ ^) w1 A4 D# i. H+ c 0 ^) F+ f3 H# S3 K
接受西替利嗪联合抗PD-1药物治疗的患者无进展生存期显著延长(PFS平均无病生存期:28个月对15个月,风险比0.46,95%可信区间:0.28-0.76;p = 0.0023)和OS(平均OS为36比23个月,HR为0.48,95% CI为0.29-0.78;p = 0.0032)。伴随治疗与ORR和DCR显著相关 (p < 0.05).
g x9 x) ]) v. ^4 a- j1 C% G h " M) U2 _$ g0 a: P
“atients treated with cetirizine concomitantly with an anti-PD-1 agent had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS; mean PFS: 28 vs 15 months, HR 0.46, 95% CI: 0.28-0.76; p = 0.0023) and OS (mean OS was 36 vs 23 months, HR 0.48, 95% CI: 0.29-0.78; p = 0.0032) in comparison with those not receiving cetirizine. The concomitant treatment was significantly associated with ORR and DCR (p < 0.05). ”( @# b9 n+ Y3 N( G& ~5 e, M+ u
0 j/ o f6 z9 U6 E) g
3 h4 u C( y- Y: X s& F& Q
4、《The allergy mediator histamine confers resistance to immunotherapy in cancer patients via activation of the macrophage histamine receptor H1》
7 d4 R; m0 `+ G6 h; I5 {; I9 z
2 d; Y# I+ v6 f/ i# A' x血浆组胺水平低的癌症患者对抗PD-1治疗的客观缓解率是血浆组胺水平高的患者的三倍以上。
* V5 h- j0 n" l+ |6 E6 |9 r3 Q
/ T# u4 o, I1 R4 t4 i" v: G“cancer patients with low plasma histamine levels had a more than tripled objective response rate to anti-PD-1 treatment compared with patients with high plasma histamine.”
$ S- j3 h! A& A! v
$ t1 c* q; c! X- i1 F二、增效的作用机制
- m/ n1 _6 v& y9 T0 y6 ~ & t2 ~: a( ^( _" e
1、2021年的《Allergic Mediator Histamine Confers Immunotherapy Resistance in Cancer Patients via Histamine Receptor 1 on Macrophage》这篇论文讲,组胺受体H1 (HRH1)在肿瘤微环境里的TAM肿瘤相关巨噬细胞上表达,这种表达会诱导TAM极化成促癌的M2表型,抑制CD8+T细胞的功能。3 [8 I. M& Y8 Y7 g b9 w) i4 {
$ x# b% q9 E) k D, L2、2022年的《Concomitant medication of cetirizine in advanced melanoma could enhance anti-PD-1 efficacy by promoting M1 macrophages polarization》这篇论文验证了上述观点。用了H1抗组胺药cetirizine后,与接受西替利嗪的患者的血液样品中的基线相比,巨噬细胞的特异性标记物FCGR1A/CD64的表达在治疗后增加,但在仅接受抗PD1的患者中没有增加,并且与干扰素途径相关的基因如CCL8的表达正相关(rho = 0.32p = 0.0111),ifit 1(rho = 0.29;p = 0.0229),ifit 3(rho = 0.57;p %3C 0.0001),ifi 27(ρ= 0.42;p = 0.008),MX1(ρ= 0.26;p = 0.0383)和RSA D2(ρ= 0.43;p = 0.0005)。“he expression of FCGR1A/CD64, a specific marker of macrophages, was increased after the treatment in comparison with baseline in blood samples from patients receiving cetirizine, but not in those receiving only the anti-PD1, and positively correlated with the expression of genes linked to the interferon pathway such as CCL8 (rho = 0.32; p = 0.0111), IFIT1 (rho = 0.29; p = 0.0229), IFIT3 (rho = 0.57; p < 0.0001), IFI27 (rho = 0.42; p = 0.008), MX1 (rho = 0.26; p = 0.0383) and RSAD2 (rho = 0.43; p = 0.0005).” FCGR1A/CD64是M1型巨噬细胞的特异性标志物。(https://www.uniprot.org/uniprot/ UniProtP12314)# m( }/ p0 t K5 t9 n( l# v" Z* w
2 {# u6 q' `) m O9 G2 j8 I. M& GTAM是肿瘤微环境中免疫抑制的四座大山之一,属于普遍共性问题。
* J; Q- ^# p# b1 E
/ G4 B5 M3 J F% _' q) v5 Z
2 i) ~2 x+ }' J0 G0 i8 r2 D三、减毒的作用机制( t' A |9 j8 \- K$ N
0 t4 E9 H3 l7 b, J% G
1、抑制IL-1β、 IL6、IL8等促炎细胞因子。5 A. H) G3 ~& ?- {& u, L9 f) J
6 H! Z+ l5 ?+ [+ L- r, U# l3 {3 i
例如 “Both H1 antihistamines reduce all symptoms of allergic rhinitis, including nasal congestion and the plasmatic level of IL-1β, IL-6, IL-8 and TNF-α, after 4 weeks of treatment. ” (《In Vivo Anti-Inflammatory Effect of H1 Antihistamines in Allergic Rhinitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial》)
& R* @- D5 B4 p4 X % e) x3 p3 D% E1 R6 b6 o5 p/ L
2、抑制 NF-KB
) D( g, a2 b& i4 O7 ^9 U4 W
8 C8 v h# H, ]+ X& f1 O“H1 antihistamines reduced basal NF-kappaB activity (rank order of potency: desloratadine > pyrilamine > cetirizine > loratadine > fexofenadine).” (《Desloratadine inhibits constitutive and histamine-stimulated nuclear factor-kappaB activity consistent with inverse agonism at the histamine H1 Receptor》)- x) ~. Q; y$ R/ i% I8 i
|