切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华结直肠疾病电子杂志 ›› 2024, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (01) : 54 -62. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3224.2024.01.009

论著

肌苷联合免疫检查点抑制剂在转移性结直肠癌患者中的临床疗效观察
赵海清1, 张威1, 李琴1,()   
  1. 1. 100050 首都医科大学附属北京友谊医院肿瘤内科
  • 收稿日期:2024-01-12 出版日期:2024-02-25
  • 通信作者: 李琴

Clinical efficacy of inosine combined with immune checkpoint inhibitor in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Haiqing Zhao1, Wei Zhang1, Qin Li1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Oncology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China
  • Received:2024-01-12 Published:2024-02-25
  • Corresponding author: Qin Li
引用本文:

赵海清, 张威, 李琴. 肌苷联合免疫检查点抑制剂在转移性结直肠癌患者中的临床疗效观察[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(01): 54-62.

Haiqing Zhao, Wei Zhang, Qin Li. Clinical efficacy of inosine combined with immune checkpoint inhibitor in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Colorectal Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2024, 13(01): 54-62.

目的

评估临床应用中肌苷是否可以增强转移性结直肠癌中免疫治疗的疗效。

方法

回顾2020年12月至2023年1月在首都医科大学附属北京友谊医院就诊且治疗方案为呋喹替尼/瑞戈非尼+卡瑞利珠单抗的微卫星稳定型/无错配修复缺陷(MSS/pMMR)的转移性结直肠癌患者的资料,根据是否合并应用肌苷,将患者分为肌苷组和非肌苷组。主要观察终点为客观缓解率(ORR),次要观察终点为总生存期(OS)、无进展生存期(PFS)和疾病控制率(DCR)。

结果

共纳入患者36例,肌苷组18例,非肌苷组18例,肌苷组中位PFS 3.10个月(95%CI:2.823~3.377),非肌苷组中位PFS 2.00个月(95%CI:1.030~2.970),两组比较差异具有统计学意义(χ2=4.539,P=0.033;HR=0.49,95%CI:0.246~0.965);肌苷组中位OS 17.47个月(95%CI:3.046~31.887),非肌苷组中位OS11.23个月(95%CI:8.889~13.577),两组比较差异具有统计学意义(χ2=10.025,P=0.002;HR=0.27,95%CI:0.111~0.638)。肌苷组ORR和DCR较非肌苷组有升高趋势,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。在亚组分析中,<65岁组中,肌苷组中位OS延长7.24个月,DCR提高50.0%;≥65岁组中,肌苷组中位PFS延长2.33个月,中位OS延长8.13个月;在血小板/淋巴细胞比值(PLR)<229组中,肌苷组中位OS延长10.87个月;在PLR≥229组中,肌苷组中位PFS延长2.03个月,中位OS延长3.77个月;差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。

结论

本试验中肌苷组较非肌苷组中位PFS和OS均有延长,肌苷可以增强微卫星稳定型/无错配修复缺陷的转移性结直肠癌免疫治疗效果。

Objective

To evaluate whether inosine can enhance the efficacy of immunotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer in clinical treatment.

Methods

This study reviewed the data of patients with microsatellite-stabilized/proficient mismatch repair with metastatic colorectal cancer who were seen at Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University from December 2020 to January 2023 and whose treatment regimen was fruquintinib/regorafenib +camrelizumab for injection. Patients were categorized into the inosine and the non-inosine groups according to whether they were combined with the application of inosine or not. The primary observational endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), and the secondary observational endpoints were overall survival (OS)and progression-free survival (PFS), and disease control rate (DCR).

Results

A total of 36 patients were included, eighteen in the inosine group and eighteen in the non-inosine group. The median PFS in the inosine group was 3.10 months (95%CI: 2.823~3.377), and was 2.00 months (95%CI: 1.030~2.970) in the non-inosine group, there were significant differences between the two groups(χ2=4.539, P=0.033; HR=0.49, 95%CI: 0.246~0.965); the median OS was 17.47 months (95%CI: 3.046~31.887) in the inosine group, and was 11.23 months (95%CI:8.889~13.577)in the non-inosine group, there were significant differences between the two groups (χ2=10.025, P=0.002; HR=0.27, 95%CI: 0.111~0.638). The ORR and the DCR tended to be higher in the inosine group than in the non-inosine group, but with no statistical difference(P>0.05).In the subgroup analysis, in the <65-year-old group, the median OS in the inosine group was prolonged by 7.24 months, and the DCR was increased 50.0% in the inosine group; in the ≥65-year-old group, the median PFS in the inosine group was prolonged by 2.33 months, and the median OS in the inosine group was prolonged by 8.13 months; in the group with a platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio(PLR) <229, the median OS in the inosine group was prolonged by 10.87 months; in the group with a PLR ≥229, the median PFS in the inosine group was prolonged by 2.03 months and the median OS was prolonged by 3.77 months; the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05).

Conclusions

The median PFS and OS were prolonged in the inosine group compared with the non-inosine group in this trial, and inosine could enhance the immune checkpoint inhibitor effect of microsatellite stability/proficient mismatch repair metastatic colorectal cancer.

表1 两组患者基本资料比较[例(%)]
表2 肌苷与非肌苷组疗效指标对比[例(%)]
图1 Kaplan-Meier法绘制的肌苷组和非肌苷组生存曲线图。1A:PFS,1B:OS
图2 Kaplan-Meier法绘制生存曲线图。年龄<65岁组肌苷组和非肌苷组生存曲线图,2A:PFS,2B:OS;年龄≥65岁组肌苷组和非肌苷组生存曲线图,2C:PFS,2D:OS
表3 <65岁和≥65岁组肌苷组与非肌苷组疗效指标对比
图3 Kaplan-Meier法绘制生存曲线图。PLR<229组肌苷组和非肌苷组生存曲线图,3A:PFS,3B:OS;PLR≥229组肌苷组和非肌苷组生存曲线图,3C:PFS,3D:OS
表4 PLR<229和PLR≥229组肌苷组与非肌苷组疗效指标对比
表5 两组所有不良反应汇总[例(%)]
[13]
Haskó G, Kuhel DG, Németh ZH, et al. Inosine inhibits inflammatory cytokine production by a posttranscriptional mechanism and protects against endotoxin-induced shock [J]. J Immunol, 2000, 164(2): 1013-1019.
[14]
Srinivasan S, Torres AG, Ribas de Pouplana L. Inosine in biology and disease [J]. Genes (Basel), 2021, 12(4): 600.
[15]
Samami E, Aleebrahim-Dehkordi E, Mohebalizadeh M, et al. Inosine, gut microbiota, and cancer immunometabolism [J]. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab, 2023, 324(1): E1-E8.
[16]
Kather H, Wieland E, Waas W. Chemiluminescent determination of adenosine, inosine, and hypoxanthine/xanthine [J]. Anal Biochem, 1987, 163(1): 45-51.
[17]
Bird L. Microbial metabolite boosts immunotherapy [J]. Nat Rev Immunol, 2020, 20(11): 648-649.
[18]
Lu Y, Yuan X, Wang M, et al. Gut microbiota influence immunotherapy responses: mechanisms and therapeutic strategies [J]. J Hematol Oncol, 2022, 15(1): 47.
[19]
Harjes U. Tumour-reactive T cells work remotely using IFNγ [J]. Nat Rev Cancer, 2020, 20(5): 261.
[20]
Zhang L, Jiang L, Yu L, et al. Inhibition of UBA6 by inosine augments tumour immunogenicity and responses [J]. Nat Commun, 2022, 13(1): 5413.
[21]
Wang T, Gnanaprakasam JNR, Chen X, et al. Inosine is an alternative carbon source for CD8(+)-T-cell function under glucose restriction [J]. Nat Metab, 2020, 2(7): 635-647.
[22]
National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 5.0[EB/OL]. [2017-11-27].

URL    
[23]
Modest DP, Pant S, Sartore-Bianchi A. Treatment sequencing in metastatic colorectal cancer [J]. Eur J Cancer, 2019, 109: 70-83.
[24]
Nie C, Lv H, Chen B, et al. Microsatellite stable metastatic colorectal cancer without liver metastasis may be preferred population for regorafenib or fruquintinib plus sintilimab as third-line or above therapy:A real-world study [J]. Front Oncol, 2022, 12: 917353.
[25]
Wang F, He MM, Yao YC, et al. Regorafenib plus toripalimab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a phase Ib/II clinical trial and gut microbiome analysis [J]. Cell Rep Med, 2021, 2(9): 100383.
[1]
Cao W, Chen HD, Yu YW, et al. Changing profiles of cancer burden worldwide and in China: A secondary analysis of the global cancer statistics 2020 [J]. Chin Med J (Engl), 2021, 134(7): 783-791.
[2]
Leowattana W, Leowattana P, Leowattana T. Systemic treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer [J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2023, 29(10): 1569-1588.
[3]
Diaz LA Jr, Shiu KK, Kim TW, et al. Pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for microsatellite instability-high or mismatch repair-deficient metastatic colorectal cancer (KEYNOTE-177): final analysis of a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study [J]. Lancet Oncol, 2022, 23(5): 659-670.
[4]
Wrobel P, Ahmed S. Current status of immunotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer [J]. Int J Colorectal Dis, 2019, 34(1): 13-25.
[5]
Hou X, Zheng Z, Wei J, et al. Effects of gut microbiota on immune responses and immunotherapy in colorectal cancer[J]. Front Immunol, 2022, 13: 1030745.
[6]
Matson V, Fessler J, Bao R, et al. The commensal microbiome is associated with anti-PD-1 efficacy in metastatic melanoma patients [J]. Science, 2018, 359(6371): 104-108.
[7]
Routy B, Le Chatelier E, Derosa L, et al. Gut microbiome influences efficacy of PD-1-based immunotherapy against epithelial tumors [J]. Science, 2018, 359(6371): 91-97.
[8]
Gopalakrishnan V, Spencer CN, Nezi L, et al. Gut microbiome modulates response to anti-PD-1 immunotherapy in melanoma patients [J]. Science, 2018, 359(6371): 97-103.
[9]
Sivan A, Corrales L, Hubert N, et al. Commensal Bifidobacterium promotes antitumor immunity and facilitates anti-PD-L1 efficacy [J]. Science, 2015, 350(6264): 1084-1089.
[10]
Vetizou M, Pitt JM, Daillere R, et al. Anticancer immunotherapy by CTLA-4 blockade relies on the gut microbiota [J]. Science, 2015, 350(6264): 1079-1084.
[11]
Mager LF, Burkhard R, Pett N, et al. Microbiome-derived inosine modulates response to checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy [J]. Science, 2020, 369(6510): 1481-1489.
[12]
Haskó G, Sitkovsky MV, Szabó C. Immunomodulatory and neuroprotective effects of inosine [J]. Trends Pharmacol Sci, 2004, 25(3): 152-157.
[1] 康夏, 田浩, 钱进, 高源, 缪洪明, 齐晓伟. 骨织素抑制破骨细胞分化改善肿瘤骨转移中骨溶解的机制研究[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 329-339.
[2] 中华医学会肿瘤学分会早诊早治学组. 中国结直肠癌早诊早治专家共识(2023版)[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 1-13.
[3] 杨立胜, 刘梦鸾, 任维聃, 姜国胜, 刘桂伟. 基于血清肿瘤标志物预测结直肠癌肝转移模型价值分析[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 39-43.
[4] 代莉, 邓恢伟, 郭华静, 黄芙蓉. 术中持续输注艾司氯胺酮对腹腔镜结直肠癌手术患者术后睡眠质量的影响[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 408-412.
[5] 王得晨, 杨康, 杨自杰, 归明彬, 屈莲平, 张小凤, 高峰. 结直肠癌微卫星稳定状态和程序性死亡、吲哚胺2,3-双加氧酶关系的研究进展[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 462-465.
[6] 唐旭, 韩冰, 刘威, 陈茹星. 结直肠癌根治术后隐匿性肝转移危险因素分析及预测模型构建[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 16-20.
[7] 张生军, 赵阿静, 李守博, 郝祥宏, 刘敏丽. 高糖通过HGF/c-met通路促进结直肠癌侵袭和迁移的实验研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 21-24.
[8] 李婷, 张琳. 血清脂肪酸代谢物及维生素D水平与结直肠癌发生的关系研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 661-665.
[9] 朱迎, 赵征, 许达, 陆录, 殷保兵. 免疫检查点抑制剂治疗肝细胞癌的进展与展望[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(01): 5-10.
[10] 陈园园, 颜宏利. 遗传性结直肠癌的基因阻断[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(01): 1-5.
[11] 蔡依依, 楼国春, 徐栋, 袁瑛. 遗传性大肠癌的筛查与随访策略优化[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(01): 14-20.
[12] 卓长华, 叶韵斌, 陈昌江, 简锦亮, 王志纬. 林奇综合征相关性异时性结直肠癌的治疗[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(01): 32-37.
[13] 梁文龙, 曹杰, 黄庆, 林泳, 黄红丽, 杨平, 李冠炜, 胡鹤. 信迪利单抗联合瑞戈非尼治疗晚期结直肠癌的疗效与安全性分析[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 409-413.
[14] 王飞飞, 王光林, 孟泽松, 李保坤, 曹龙飞, 张娟, 周超熙, 丁源一, 王贵英. 敲低IMPDH1对结肠癌SW480、HT29细胞生物功能的影响[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(08): 884-890.
[15] 吕泉龙, 史文杰, 孙文国. 免疫检查点抑制剂在治疗转移性去势抵抗性前列腺癌中的研究进展[J]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2024, 12(01): 69-72.
阅读次数
全文


摘要