Evidence Hub

27 Evaluating the impact of age on biomarkers for and efficacy of neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

P. Kaki, Pablo Llerena, Jennifer A Goldfarb, Kathryn L Nunes, Kelly Bridgham, Eric V. Mastrolonardo, Samuel Shing, D. Menezes et al.

Regular and Young Investigator Award Abstracts, 2024

61 participants

Abstract

Background Several recent window-of-opportunity trials (WOT) have demonstrated the feasibility of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in a neoadjuvant setting for early-stage resectable head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Previous research suggests age may influence the efficacy of ICI, reporting comparable or improved responses to ICIs in older patients treated for recurrent/metastatic HNSCC.1 2 We investigate the age-related differences in response to neoadjuvant ICI therapy for HPV+ HNSCC patients. Methods The following single-center randomized clinical WOTs in operable HNSCC were conducted: 1) durvalumab (aPD-L1)±metformin (D/M), 2) nivolumab (aPD-1)±tadalafil, 3) nivolumab±indoleamine-2,3-dioxygenase. Older patients were defined as those ≥60 y/o, which is the median age of cohort. Chi-squared test and Kaplan-Meier analysis with log-rank test were performed to compare response (pathologic treatment effect [pTE]>20%) and overall survival (OS), respectively. Unbiased gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) using the molecular signatures database (MSigD) Hallmark gene set was conducted to compare cross-sectional pre- and post-treatment patterns of gene expression between age cohorts.3 Spatial transcriptomics (Nanostring GeoMx) was performed across CD45+, CD163+, and panCK+ segments for patients who received D/M. Results Of 61 patients with HPV+ HNSCC, 29 (47.5%) were <60 y/o and 31 (52.5%) were ≥60 y/o. pTE was achieved in 16/29 (55.2%) patients <60 y/o and 11/32…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 61 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free