Fallara Giuseppe, Belladelli Federico, Robesti Daniele, Malavaud Bernard, Tholomier Côme, Mokkapati Sharada, Montorsi Francesco, Dinney Colin P, Msaouel Pavlos, Martini Alberto
Department of Urology, IRCCS European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy.
URI - Urological Research Institute, Department of Urology, Division of Experimental Oncology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.
Urol Oncol. 2025 Mar;43(3):188.e9-188.e17. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2024.12.267. Epub 2025 Jan 9.
Survival outcomes of patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) are still suboptimal and strategies to enhance response to immune-oncology (IO) compounds are under scrutiny. In preclinical studies, it has been demonstrated that antihistamines may reverse macrophage immunosuppression, reactivate T cell cytotoxicity, and enhance the immunotherapy response. We aimed to evaluate the role of concomitant antihistamines administration on oncological outcomes among patients with mUC.
We relied on individual patient data from IMvigor210 (phase II single-arm trial on second line atezolizumab for mUC) and IMvigor211 trials (phase III randomized trial on second line atezolizumab vs chemotherapy for mUC). Among individuals treated with IO we identified patients who did and did not receive antihistamines. Multivariable Cox or competing-risks regression models were used to predict progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS). The impact of antihistamines on the outcomes was assessed after adjusting for potential confounders.
Among 896 patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer who had progressed after first-line chemotherapy, 155 (17 %) received antihistamines during the delivery of IO. Patients receiving antihistamines had longer OS (Hazard Ratio [HR]:0.59; 95 % Confidence interval [CI]: 0.47-0.74; P < 0.001), PFS (HR:0.70; 95 %CI: 0.57-0.87; P = 0.001) and CSS [sHR:0.58; 95 %CI:0.45-0.75; P < 0.001)] relative to those who had not used antihistamine drugs. A sensitivity analysis, after the exclusion of patients who experienced adverse events and received antihistamines, yielded similar findings of prolonged CSS (sHR 0.78; 95 %CI: 0.59-0.98, P = 0.031) and OS (HR 0.71; 95 %CI: 0.52-0.94, P = 0.021).
Concomitant antihistamines administration was associated with improved OS, CSS, and PFS in patients receiving atezolizumab as second line treatment for mUC. Further mechanistic and clinical investigation is warranted to elucidate the role of antihistamines in IO.
转移性尿路上皮癌(mUC)患者的生存结局仍不尽人意,提高对免疫肿瘤学(IO)化合物反应的策略正在研究中。临床前研究表明,抗组胺药可能逆转巨噬细胞免疫抑制、重新激活T细胞细胞毒性并增强免疫治疗反应。我们旨在评估联用抗组胺药对mUC患者肿瘤学结局的作用。
我们依据IMvigor210(mUC二线阿替利珠单抗的II期单臂试验)和IMvigor211试验(mUC二线阿替利珠单抗与化疗对比的III期随机试验)的个体患者数据。在接受IO治疗的个体中,我们确定了接受和未接受抗组胺药的患者。使用多变量Cox或竞争风险回归模型预测无进展生存期(PFS)、总生存期(OS)和癌症特异性生存期(CSS)。在调整潜在混杂因素后评估抗组胺药对结局的影响。
在896例一线化疗后进展的局部晚期或转移性尿路上皮癌患者中,155例(17%)在接受IO治疗期间接受了抗组胺药。与未使用抗组胺药的患者相比,接受抗组胺药的患者OS更长(风险比[HR]:0.59;95%置信区间[CI]:0.47-0.74;P<0.001)、PFS更长(HR:0.70;95%CI:0.57-0.87;P=0.001)和CSS更长[sHR:0.58;95%CI:0.45-0.75;P<0.001)]。排除经历不良事件并接受抗组胺药的患者后的敏感性分析得出了类似的结果,即CSS延长(sHR 0.78;95%CI:0.59-0.98,P=0.031)和OS延长(HR 0.71;95%CI:0.52-0.94,P=0.021)。
联用抗组胺药与接受阿替利珠单抗作为mUC二线治疗的患者的OS、CSS和PFS改善相关。有必要进行进一步的机制和临床研究以阐明抗组胺药在IO中的作用。