Development and Validation of a Carbohydrate Metabolism-Related Model for Predicting Prognosis and Immune Landscape in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients.

OBJECTIVE: The activities and products of carbohydrate metabolism are involved in key processes of cancer. However, its relationship with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is unclear. METHODS: The cancer genome atlas (TCGA)-HCC and ICGC-LIRI-JP datasets were acquired via public databases. Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between HCC and control samples in the TCGA-HCC dataset were identified and overlapped with 355 carbohydrate metabolism-related genes (CRGs) to obtain differentially expressed CRGs (DE-CRGs). Then, univariate Cox and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) analyses were applied to identify risk model genes, and HCC samples were divided into high/low-risk groups according to the median risk score. Next, gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) was performed on the risk model genes. The sensitivity of the risk model to immunotherapy and chemotherapy was also explored. RESULTS: A total of 8 risk model genes, namely, G6PD, PFKFB4, ACAT1, ALDH2, ACYP1, OGDHL, ACADS, and TKTL1, were identified. Moreover, the risk score, cancer status, age, and pathologic T stage were strongly associated with the prognosis of HCC patients. Both the stromal score and immune score had significant negative/positive correlations with the risk score, reflecting the important role of the risk model in immunotherapy sensitivity. Furthermore, the stromal and immune scores had significant negative/positive correlations with risk scores, reflecting the important role of the risk model in immunotherapy sensitivity. Eventually, we found that high-/low-risk patients were more sensitive to 102 drugs, suggesting that the risk model exhibited sensitivity to chemotherapy drugs. The results of the experiments in HCC tissue samples validated the expression of the risk model genes. CONCLUSION: Through bioinformatic analysis, we constructed a carbohydrate metabolism-related risk model for HCC, contributing to the prognosis prediction and treatment of HCC patients.

Immunotherapy combined with rh-endostatin improved clinical outcomes over immunotherapy plus chemotherapy for second-line treatment of advanced NSCLC.

Background: Despite the fact that numerous clinical and preclinical studies have demonstrated the synergistic effects of combining antiangiogenic or chemotherapy with immunotherapy, no data have been found to indicate that combination therapy is more effective and safer as second-line therapy. Methods: We retrospectively compared the effectiveness and safety of ICIs plus rh-endostatin to ICIs plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The evaluation indicators of this study were progression-free survival (PFS), safety profile, objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and 1-year overall survival (OS). Results: The median PFS with immunotherapy plus rh-endostatin (IE) was 7.10 months (95% CI, 4.64 to 9.56) versus 5.13 months (95% CI, 4.29 to 5.97) with immunotherapy plus chemotherapy (IC) (HR, 0.56; 95%CI, 0.33 to 0.95). Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 7.5% of the IE group versus 25.0% of the IC group. The ORR in the IE group was 35.0% versus 20.8% in the IC group (P = 0.137), and the DCR in the IE group was 92.5% versus 77.1% in the IC group (P = 0.049). The 1-year OS rate for the IE group was 69.4%, which was higher than the 61.4% of the IC group. Conclusion: Our study showed that ICI therapy combined with endostatin therapy exhibits high efficacy and safety, suggesting that such a combination might be a viable treatment option for patients with pre-treated NSCLC in the future.

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with recombinant human endostatin and chemotherapy as the first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Aim: To assess the efficacy and safety of combination of PD-1 inhibitors, recombinant human endostatin (Rh-endostatin) and chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: A total of 100 patients with advanced NSCLC were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed (58 in the group receiving PD-1 inhibitors plus Rh-endostatin and chemotherapy; 42 in the group receiving Rh-endostatin and chemotherapy). The primary end point was progression-free survival. Results: Patients in the group receiving PD-1 inhibitors plus Rh-endostatin and chemotherapy had significantly improved progression-free survival (10.2 vs 6.5 months; p < 0.001) and objective response rate (67.2 vs 42.9%; p = 0.015), with acceptable toxicity. Conclusion: Our study showed the superiority of combination therapy of PD-1 inhibitors and Rh-endostatin as first-line treatment for advanced NSCLC.

This study retrospectively analyzed the effectiveness and safety of PD-1 inhibitors combined with recombinant human endostatin (Rh-endostatin) and chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Among them, 58 patients received a PD-1 inhibitor combined with Rh-endostatin and chemotherapy (treatment group), and 42 patients received Rh-endostatin combined with chemotherapy (control group). Patients in the treatment group had a significantly improved objective response rate (67.2 vs 42.9%; p = 0.015) and prolonged survival without their disease getting worse (10.2 vs 6.5 months; p < 0.001). No significant differences were found in the adverse events between the two groups.