Efficacy of Lipophilic Statins on Outcomes of Patients Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Statins are associated with improved survival outcomes in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), but the impact of lipophilic and hydrophilic statin properties on patient outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVES: We aim to investigate if statins with lipophilic properties are associated with clinical outcomes in patients receiving ICIs. METHOD: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at two tertiary referral centers in Taiwan comprising patients receiving ICIs between January 2015 and December 2021. We compared the comparative effect of lipophilic and hydrophilic statins on patient outcomes. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) and the secondary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Among 734 patients receiving ICIs, there were 51 lipophilic statin users, 25 hydrophilic statin users, and 658 nonusers. Lipophilic statin users had a longer median OS (38.0 [IQR, 16.7-not reached] vs. 15.2 [IQR, 8.2-not reached] months vs. 18.9 [IQR, 5.4 51.6] months) and PFS (13.0 [IQR, 4.7-41.5] vs. 8.2 [IQR, 2.2-14.7] months vs. 5.6 [2.3-18.7] months) than hydrophilic statin users and non-statin users. In Cox proportional hazard analyses, the use of lipophilic statins was associated with a 40-50% lower risk of mortality and disease progression compared with hydrophilic statin or non-statin users. CONCLUSIONS: The use of lipophilic statins seems to be associated with survival benefits in patients undergoing immunotherapy.

The impact of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ activating angiotensin receptor blocker on outcomes of patients receiving immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Certain angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ (PPAR-γ) activation property, which has been associated with improved programmed cell death ligand 1 blockade and cytotoxic T lymphocyte-mediated antitumor activity. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study to investigate the impact of PPAR-γ-activating ARBs on patient survival in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) across all types of cancers. RESULTS: A total of 167 patients receiving both angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) were included. Compared with non-PPAR-γ-ARB users (n = 102), PPAR-γ-ARB users (n = 65) had a longer median overall survival (not reached [IQR, 16.0-not reached] vs. 18.6 [IQR, 6.1-38.6] months) and progression-free survival (17.3 [IQR, 5.1-not reached] vs. 8.2 [IQR, 2.4-18.6] months). In Cox regression analysis, the use of PPAR-γ-activating ARBs had an approximately 50% reduction in all-cause mortality and disease progression. Patients who received PPAR-γ-activating ARBs also had higher clinical benefit rates than non-PPAR-γ-ARB users (82% vs. 61%, p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: The use of ARBs with PPAR-γ-activating property is linked with better survival among patients receiving ICIs.

Effect of metformin on outcomes of patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have transformed the treatment landscape of cancer treatment, but only a fraction of patients responds to treatment, leading to an increasing effort to repurpose clinically approved medications to augment ICI therapy. Metformin has been associated with improved survival outcomes in patients undergoing conventional chemotherapy. However, whether metformin provides survival benefits in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is unknown. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study at two tertiary referral centers in Taiwan. All adult diabetes mellitus patients who were treated with ICIs between January 2015 and December 2021 were included. The primary and secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), respectively. RESULTS: In total, 878 patients were enrolled in our study, of which 86 patients used metformin and 78 patients used non-metformin diabetes medications. Compared with non-users, metformin users had a longer median OS (15.4 [IQR 5.6-not reached] vs. 6.1 [IQR, 0.8-21.0] months, P = 0.003) and PFS (5.1 [IQR 2.0-14.3] vs. 1.9 [IQR 0.7-8.6] months, P = 0.041). In a univariate Cox proportional hazard analysis, the use of metformin was associated with a reduction in the risk of mortality (HR: 0.53 [95% confidence interval: 0.35-0.81], P = 0.004) and disease progression (HR: 0.69 [95% CI 0.49-0.99], P = 0.042). The use of metformin remained associated with a lower risk of mortality after adjusting for baseline variables such as age, cancer stage, and underlying comorbidities (OS, HR: 0.55 [95% CI 0.34-0.87], P = 0.011). Similarly, the use of metformin was associated with a lower risk of disease progression. Importantly, the use of metformin before ICI initiation was not associated with a reduction in mortality (HR: 0.61 [95% CI 0.27-1.42], P = 0.25) or disease progression (HR: 0.69 [95% CI 0.33-1.43], P = 0.32). CONCLUSION: The use of metformin is associated with survival benefits in patients undergoing immunotherapy. Prospective clinical trials are warranted to define the role of metformin in augmenting immunotherapy.

Impact of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors on heart failure and mortality in patients with cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) reduce heart failure (HF) in at-risk patients and may possess antitumour effects. We examined the effect of SGLT2i on HF and mortality among patients with cancer and diabetes. METHODS: This was a retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study involving adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus diagnosed with cancer between January 2010 and December 2021. The primary outcomes were hospitalisation for incident HF and all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes were serious adverse events associated with SGLT2i. RESULTS: From a total of 8640 patients, 878 SGLT2i recipients were matched to non-recipients. During a median follow-up of 18.8 months, SGLT2i recipients had a threefold lower rate of hospitalisation for incident HF compared with non-SGLT2i recipients (2.92 vs 8.95 per 1000 patient-years, p=0.018). In Cox regression and competing regression models, SGLT2i were associated with a 72% reduction in the risk of hospitalisation for HF (HR 0.28 (95% CI: 0.11 to 0.77), p=0.013; subdistribution HR 0.32 (95% CI: 0.12 to 0.84), p=0.021). The use of SGLT2i was also associated with a higher overall survival (85.3% vs 63.0% at 2 years, p<0.001). The risk of serious adverse events such as hypoglycaemia and sepsis was similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of SGLT2i was associated with a lower rate of incident HF and prolonged overall survival in patients with cancer with diabetes mellitus.

Efficacy of cationic amphiphilic antihistamines on outcomes of patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Cationic amphiphilic antihistamines have been shown to improve patient outcomes in immunogenic tumours, but whether they can augment and improve response to immunotherapy is unknown. We aim to evaluate the effect of cationic amphiphilic antihistamines in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study at two tertiary referral centres in Taiwan between January 2015 and December 2021. Patients who received desloratadine, cyproheptadine, and ebastine were classified as cationic amphiphilic antihistamine users. The primary outcome was overall survival, and the secondary outcomes were progression-free survival and clinical benefit rate. Patients treated with cationic amphiphilic antihistamines were matched to patients who received non-cationic amphiphilic antihistamines based on variables including age, cancer type, stage, and history of allergic diseases. RESULTS: A total of 734 ICI-treated patients were included. After matching, 68 cationic amphiphilic antihistamine and non-cationic amphiphilic antihistamine users remained for analysis. 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. These survival benefits were observed regardless of the generation of cationic amphiphilic antihistamines. CONCLUSION: The use of cationic amphiphilic antihistamines was associated with improved survival among patients treated with immunotherapy.

Association of polyunsaturated fatty acids with improved heart rate variability and cardiovascular events in patients with end-stage renal disease receiving maintenance dialysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: Apart from dietary restriction and medical therapy, the benefits of cardiovascular protection offered by polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) supplements in patients with ESRD receiving maintenance dialysis remain unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effects of PUFAs on blood pressure, heart rate (HR), HR variability (HRV), and cardiovascular disease (CVD) prognosis. METHODS: We identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from Embase, PubMed (including MEDLINE), and Web of Science. We included seven RCTs that involved 724 patients with ESRD receiving dialysis and PUFA supplements. RESULTS: The data indicated that compared with the control group, the PUFA group demonstrated decreased cardiovascular events (Peto odds ratio = 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.32 to 0.85, P = 0.009) and HRV (changes in the mean HR [mean difference = -2.59, 95% CI = -4.91 to -0.26, P = 0.03, I2 = 0%]; mean RR interval [MD = 29.03, 95% CI = 5.43 to 52.63, P = 0.02, I2 = 0%]; mean of the standard deviation of all normal RR intervals for all 5 min segments [MD = 2.73, 95% CI = 0.48 to 4.99, P = 0.02, I2 = 0%], and square root of the mean of the sum of the squares of differences between adjacent intervals [MD = 2.03, 95% CI = 0.04 to 4.03, P = 0.05, I2 = 0%]). CONCLUSION: PUFA supplements appeared to improve CVD prognosis in patients receiving dialysis. Additional RCTs with longer follow-up periods need to clarify the benefits of PUFA supplements in this patient population.