Effectiveness of Immunotherapy in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients with a Diagnosis of COPD: Is This a Hidden Prognosticator for Survival and a Risk Factor for Immune-Related Adverse Events?

The interplay between the immune system and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is complex and multifaceted. In COPD, chronic inflammation and oxidative stress can lead to immune dysfunction that can exacerbate lung damage, further worsening the respiratory symptoms. In NSCLC, immune cells can recognise and attack the cancer cells, which, however, can evade or suppress the immune response by various mechanisms, such as expressing immune checkpoint proteins or secreting immunosuppressive cytokines, thus creating an immunosuppressive tumour microenvironment that promotes cancer progression and metastasis. The interaction between COPD and NSCLC further complicates the immune response. In patients with both diseases, COPD can impair the immune response against cancer cells by reducing or suppressing the activity of immune cells, or altering their cytokine profile. Moreover, anti-cancer treatments can also affect the immune system and worsen COPD symptoms by causing lung inflammation and fibrosis. Immunotherapy itself can also cause immune-related adverse events that could worsen the respiratory symptoms in patients with COPD-compromised lungs. In the present review, we tried to understand the interplay between the two pathologies and how the efficacy of immunotherapy in NSCLC patients with COPD is affected in these patients.

Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Irinotecan Plus Cetuximab Versus Cetuximab as Maintenance Therapy in First-Line Therapy for RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Phase III ERMES Study.

PURPOSE: The intensity of anti-EGFR-based first-line therapy for RAS/BRAF wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), once disease control is achieved, is controversial. A de-escalation strategy with anti-EGFR monotherapy represents a potential option to maintain efficacy while reducing cytotoxicity. METHODS: In this multicenter, open-label, phase III trial, patients with untreated RAS/BRAF wt mCRC were randomly assigned to receive either fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan/cetuximab (FOLFIRI/Cet) until disease progression (arm A) or FOLFIRI/Cet for eight cycles followed by Cet alone (arm B). The coprimary end points were a noninferior progression-free survival (PFS) in the modified per-protocol (mPP) population (>eight cycles) and a lower incidence of grade (G) 3-4 adverse events (AEs) for arm B compared with arm A. RESULTS: Overall, 606 patients were randomly assigned, with 300 assigned to arm A and 306 to arm B. The median follow-up was 22.3 months. In the mPP population, 291 events occurred with a PFS of 10 versus 12.2 months for arms B and A, respectively (P of noninferiority = .43). In the intention-to-treatment (ITT, ≥one cycle) population, 503 events occurred with a PFS of 9 versus 10.7 months (P = .39). The overall survival was 35.7 versus 30.7 months (P = .119) and 31.0 versus 25.2 months (P = .32) in the mPP and ITT population, respectively. Arm B had lower G3-4 AEs during the maintenance period than arm A (20.2% v 35.1%). CONCLUSION: The ERMES study did not demonstrate noninferiority of maintenance with Cet alone. Despite a more favorable safety profile, maintenance with single-agent Cet after induction with FOLFIRI/Cet cannot be recommended for all patients but could represent an option in selected cases.