Suppr超能文献

临床前脓毒症模型中的检查点抑制剂疗法:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。

Checkpoint inhibitor therapy in preclinical sepsis models: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Busch Lindsay M, Sun Junfeng, Cui Xizhong, Eichacker Peter Q, Torabi-Parizi Parizad

机构信息

Critical Care Medicine Department, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, USA.

出版信息

Intensive Care Med Exp. 2020 Feb 4;8(1):7. doi: 10.1186/s40635-019-0290-x.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Animal studies reporting immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) improved host defense and survival during bacterial sepsis provided one basis for phase I CPI sepsis trials. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the benefit of CPI therapy in preclinical studies, and whether variables potentially altering this clinical benefit were investigated. Studies were analyzed that compared survival following bacteria or lipopolysaccharide challenge in animals treated with inhibitors to programmed death-1 (PD-1), PD-ligand1 (PD-L1), cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein-4 (CTLA-4), or B- and T-lymphocyte attenuator (BTLA) versus control.

RESULTS

Nineteen experiments from 11 studies (n = 709) were included. All experiments were in mice, and 10 of the 19 were published from a single research group. Sample size calculations and randomization were not reported in any studies, and blinding procedures were reported in just 1. Across all 19 experiments, CPIs increased the odds ratio for survival (OR, 95% CI) [3.37(1. 55, 7.31)] but with heterogeneity (I = 59%, p < 0.01). After stratification by checkpoint molecule targeted, challenge site or type, or concurrent antibacterial treatment, CPIs had consistent effects over most experiments in the 9 that included antibacterial treatment [OR = 2.82 (1.60, 4.98), I = 6%, p = 0.39 with versus 4.01 (0.89, 18.05), I = 74%, p < 0.01 without]. All 9 antibiotic experiments employed cecal-ligation and puncture (CLP) bacterial challenge while 6 also included a Candida albicans challenge 3-4 days after CLP. In these six experiments (n = 322), CPIs were directed at the fungal challenge when CLP lethality had resolved, and were consistently beneficial [2.91 (2.41, 3.50), I = 0%, p = 0.99]. In the three experiments (n = 66) providing antibiotics without fungal challenge, CPIs were administered within 1 day of CLP and had variable and non-significant effects [0.05 (0.00, 1.03); 7.86 (0.28, 217.11); and 8.50 (0.90, 80.03)]. No experiment examined pneumonia.

CONCLUSIONS

Preclinical studies showing that CPIs add benefit to antibiotic therapy for the common bacterial infections causing sepsis clinically are needed to support this therapeutic approach. Studies should be reproducible across multiple laboratories and include procedures to reduce the risk of bias.

摘要

背景

动物研究报告称免疫检查点抑制剂(CPI)可改善宿主防御能力并提高细菌感染性败血症期间的生存率,这为I期CPI败血症试验提供了依据。我们进行了一项系统评价和荟萃分析,以研究在临床前研究中CPI治疗的益处,以及是否对可能改变这种临床益处的变量进行了研究。分析了比较用程序性死亡1(PD-1)、程序性死亡配体1(PD-L1)、细胞毒性T淋巴细胞相关蛋白4(CTLA-4)或B和T淋巴细胞衰减器(BTLA)抑制剂治疗的动物与对照组在细菌或脂多糖攻击后的生存情况的研究。

结果

纳入了11项研究中的19个实验(n = 709)。所有实验均在小鼠中进行,19个实验中有10个来自单一研究组。所有研究均未报告样本量计算和随机化情况,只有1项研究报告了盲法程序。在所有19个实验中,CPI增加了生存优势比(OR,95%CI)[3.37(1.55,7.31)],但存在异质性(I² = 59%,p < 0.01)。按靶向检查点分子、攻击部位或类型或同时进行的抗菌治疗进行分层后,在包括抗菌治疗的9个实验中的大多数实验中,CPI具有一致的效果[OR = 2.82(1.60,4.98),I² = 6%,p = 0.39],而在没有抗菌治疗的情况下为4.01(0.89,18.05),I² = 74%,p < 0.01。所有9项抗生素实验均采用盲肠结扎和穿刺(CLP)细菌攻击,其中6项还包括在CLP后3 - 4天进行白色念珠菌攻击。在这6个实验(n = 322)中,当CLP致死率消退时,CPI针对真菌攻击,且始终有益[2.91(2.41,3.50),I² = 0%,p = 0.99]。在3个未进行真菌攻击但提供抗生素的实验(n = 66)中,CPI在CLP后1天内给药,效果各异且无统计学意义[0.05(0.00,1.03);7.86(0.28,217.11);8.50(0.90,80.03)]。没有实验研究肺炎。

结论

需要临床前研究表明CPI可为临床上导致败血症的常见细菌感染的抗生素治疗带来益处,以支持这种治疗方法。研究应在多个实验室具有可重复性,并包括减少偏倚风险的程序。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c652/7000606/d463f0bfd393/40635_2019_290_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Checkpoint inhibitor therapy in preclinical sepsis models: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Intensive Care Med Exp. 2020 Feb 4;8(1):7. doi: 10.1186/s40635-019-0290-x.
2
Role of Checkpoint Inhibition in Localized Bladder Cancer.
Eur Urol Oncol. 2018 Aug;1(3):190-198. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.05.002. Epub 2018 May 30.
3
Anti-PD-L1 Therapy Does Not Improve Survival in a Murine Model of Lethal Staphylococcus aureus Pneumonia.
J Infect Dis. 2021 Dec 15;224(12):2073-2084. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiab274.
5
Combination Therapy with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors or Alkylating Agents.
Cancer Manag Res. 2024 Jul 22;16:855-869. doi: 10.2147/CMAR.S464245. eCollection 2024.
6
Dermatologic infections in cancer patients treated with checkpoint inhibitors.
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021 Dec;85(6):1528-1536. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2021.03.039. Epub 2021 Mar 17.
7
[Effect of autophagy on expression of neutrophil programmed death ligand-1 in mice with sepsis].
Zhonghua Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue. 2019 Sep;31(9):1091-1096. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-4352.2019.09.007.
9
Immune checkpoint inhibitors for the treatment of sepsis:insights from preclinical and clinical development.
Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2022 Sep;31(9):885-894. doi: 10.1080/13543784.2022.2102477. Epub 2022 Aug 18.

引用本文的文献

1
Anti-PD-L1 therapy altered inflammation but not survival in a lethal murine hepatitis virus-1 pneumonia model.
Front Immunol. 2024 Jan 8;14:1308358. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1308358. eCollection 2023.
3
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Infection: What Is the Interplay?
In Vivo. 2023 Nov-Dec;37(6):2409-2420. doi: 10.21873/invivo.13346.
4
Role of regulation of PD-1 and PD-L1 expression in sepsis.
Front Immunol. 2023 Mar 9;14:1029438. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1029438. eCollection 2023.
6
Oncology Drug Repurposing for Sepsis Treatment.
Biomedicines. 2022 Apr 17;10(4):921. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines10040921.
7
PD-L1 Antibody Pharmacokinetics and Tumor Targeting in Mouse Models for Infectious Diseases.
Front Immunol. 2022 Mar 10;13:837370. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.837370. eCollection 2022.
8
Extract as a Perspective for the Control of Dyslipidemia: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis From Animal Models to Human Studies.
Front Pharmacol. 2022 Feb 14;13:822678. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2022.822678. eCollection 2022.
9
Resolving sticky relationships between platelets and lymphocytes in COVID-19: A role for checkpoint inhibitors?
Br J Haematol. 2022 May;197(3):247-249. doi: 10.1111/bjh.18095. Epub 2022 Mar 4.
10
Mechanisms and modulation of sepsis-induced immune dysfunction in children.
Pediatr Res. 2022 Jan;91(2):447-453. doi: 10.1038/s41390-021-01879-8. Epub 2021 Dec 24.

本文引用的文献

3
Immune therapy in sepsis: Are we ready to try again?
J Intensive Care Soc. 2018 Nov;19(4):326-344. doi: 10.1177/1751143718765407. Epub 2018 Apr 4.
4
Translational Sepsis Research: Spanning the Divide.
Crit Care Med. 2018 Sep;46(9):1497-1505. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000003271.
5
The Circadian Clock Controls Immune Checkpoint Pathway in Sepsis.
Cell Rep. 2018 Jul 10;24(2):366-378. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2018.06.026.
7
Frontline Science: Anti-PD-L1 protects against infection with common bacterial pathogens after burn injury.
J Leukoc Biol. 2018 Jan;103(1):23-33. doi: 10.1002/JLB.5HI0917-360R. Epub 2017 Dec 21.
8
A systematic review of discomfort due to toe or ear clipping in laboratory rodents.
Lab Anim. 2017 Dec;51(6):583-600. doi: 10.1177/0023677217705912. Epub 2017 Apr 21.
9
Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy for infectious diseases: learning from the cancer paradigm.
Int J Infect Dis. 2017 Mar;56:221-228. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2017.01.028. Epub 2017 Feb 2.
10
Anti-PD-L1 peptide improves survival in sepsis.
J Surg Res. 2017 Feb;208:33-39. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.08.099. Epub 2016 Sep 8.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验