Efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1 inhibitor versus anti-PD-L1 inhibitor in first-line treatment of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: a multicenter retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy targeting PD-1/PD-L1 has revolutionized the treatment of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). However, clinical trials suggest differential efficacy of anti-PD-1 agents and anti-PD-L1 agents in first-line treatment of ES-SCLC. This retrospective multicenter study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1 agents versus anti-PD-L1 agents in first-line treatment of ES-SCLC in real-world practice. METHODS: Patients with pathologically or cytologically confirmed ES-SCLC treated with platinum plus etoposide combined with anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 agents as first-line treatment in different centers of PLA General Hospital between January 2017 and October 2021 were included for this study. Survival outcomes and safety were compared between patients receiving anti-PD-1 and PD-L1 agents. RESULTS: Of the total 154 included patients, 68 received anti-PD-1 agents plus chemotherapy (PD-1 group), and 86 received anti-PD-L1 agents plus chemotherapy (PD-L1 group). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the entire cohort were 7.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.5-8.2 months) and 17.4 months (95% CI: 15.3-19.3 months), respectively. Median PFS and OS were comparable between the PD-1 group and PD-L1 group (PFS: 7.6 months vs. 8.3 months, HR = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.79-1.62, p = 0.415; OS: 26.9 months vs. 25.6 months, HR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.63-1.47, p = 0.859. The objective response rate and disease control rate were comparable between the two groups: 79.4% vs. 79.1% and 92.6% vs. 94.2%, respectively. The 6-month, 12-month, and 18-month PFS and OS rates were slightly higher in the PD-L1 group than in the PD-1 group, while the 24-month PFS rate was slightly higher in the PD-1 group than in the PD-L1 group. Stratified analysis showed that locoregional thoracic radiotherapy and normal lactate dehydrogenase level were independent predictors of better OS in ES-SCLC patients treated with first-line chemotherapy plus ICI. Adverse events were not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Anti-PD-1 agents and anti-PD-L1 agents combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for ES-SCLC are comparably effective and well tolerated.

Formation of marine oil snow by soot particles generated from burning of oils.

This study aims to investigate the interactions between marine oil snow (MOS) formation and soot particles derived from two distinct oils: condensate and heavy oil. Experimental findings demonstrate that the properties of oil droplets and soot particles play a key role in MOS formation. Peak MOS formation is observed within the initial days for condensate, while for heavy oil, peak formation occurs at a later stage. Furthermore, the addition of oils and soot particles influences the final concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in MOS. Remarkably, the ranking order of PAHs with different rings in various MOS samples remains consistent: 4- > 3- > 5- > 2- > 6-ring. Specific diagnostic ratios such as Phe/Ant, Ant/(Ant + Phe), BaA/(Chr + BaA), and LMW/HMW effectively differentiate petrogenic and pyrogenic sources of PAHs in MOS. And stable ratios like Flu/(Pyr + Flu), InP/(InP + BghiP), and BaF/BkF are identified for source analysis of soot MOS.

Nomograms Predict PFS and OS for SCLC Patients After Standardized Treatment: A Real-World Study.

Purpose: This study aims to investigate the process of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients from achieving optimal efficacy to experiencing disease progression until death. It examines the predictive value of the treatment response on progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of SCLC patients. Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis on 136 SCLC patients diagnosed from 1992 to 2018. Important prognostic factors were identified to construct nomogram models. The predictive performance of the models was evaluated using the receiver operating characteristic curves and calibration curves. Survival differences between groups were compared using Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Subsequently, an independent cohort consisting of 106 SCLC patients diagnosed from 2014 to 2021 was used for validation. Results: We constructed two nomograms to predict first-line PFS (PFS1) and OS of SCLC. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves for the PFS1 nomogram predicting PFS at 3-, 6-, and 12-months were 0.919 (95% CI: 0.867-0.970), 0.908 (95% CI: 0.860-0.956) and 0.878 (95% CI: 0.798-0.958), and for the OS nomogram predicting OS at 6-, 12-, and 24-months were 0.814 (95% CI: 0.736-0.892), 0.819 (95% CI: 0.749-0.889) and 0.809 (95% CI: 0.678-0.941), indicating those two models with a high discriminative ability. The calibration curves demonstrated the models had a high degree of consistency between predicted and observed values. According to the risk scores, patients were divided into high-risk and low-risk groups, showing a significant difference in survival rate. And these findings were validated in another independent validation cohort. Conclusion: Based on the patients' treatment response after standardized treatment, we developed and validated two nomogram models to predict PFS1 and OS of SCLC. The models demonstrated good accuracy, reliability and clinical applicability by validating in an independent cohort.

Synergistic effect of additional anlotinib and immunotherapy as second-line or later-line treatment in pancreatic cancer: A retrospective cohort study.

Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is in urgent need of a second-line or later-line treatment strategy. We aimed to analyze the efficacy and safety of additional anlotinib, specifically anlotinib in combination with immunotherapy, in patients with PDAC who have failed first-line therapy. Methods: Patients with pathological diagnosis of PDAC were additionally treated with anlotinib, and some patients were treated with anti-PD-1 agents at the same time, which could be retrospectively analyzed. The efficacy and safety of additional anlotinib were evaluated. Results: A total of 23 patients were included. In patients treated with additional anlotinib, the overall median progression-free survival (PFS) was 1.8 months and the median overall survival (OS) was 6.3 months, regardless of anti-PD-1 agents. Among patients receiving additional anlotinib in combination with anti-PD-1 agents, median PFS and OS were 1.8 and 6.5 months, respectively. Adverse events (AEs) were observed in 16 patients (69.6%). In patients treated with additional anlotinib, the majority of AEs were grade 1-3. Univariate analysis revealed that patients with baseline red blood cell distribution width (RDW) <14% treated with additional anlotinib plus anti-PD-1 agents had significantly longer OS than patients with baseline RDW ≥14% (p = 0.025). Patients with additional anlotinib plus anti-PD-1 agents as second-line therapy had a longer OS than those treated as later-line therapy (p = 0.012). Multivariate analysis showed that baseline RDW was the only independent risk factor for OS (p = 0.042). Conclusion: The combination of anlotinib and immunotherapy represents an effective add-on therapy with tolerable AEs as second- or later-line therapy in patients with PDAC, particularly in patients with baseline RDW <14%.