3.8 Review

Toxicity of radiation and immunotherapy combinations

期刊

ADVANCES IN RADIATION ONCOLOGY
卷 3, 期 4, 页码 506-511

出版社

ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2018.08.003

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Although immunotherapy is a rapidly emerging modality for cancer care, there have been multiple reports of fatal toxicities. There have also been cases of treatment-related deaths with combined non-immunotherapeutic biologic compounds with radiation therapy. Thus, provision of summative information appraising the safety of combinatorial immunotherapy and radiation therapy (iRT) is imperative. Because this has not been well characterized, this review summarizes the available evidence to date. Methods and materials: Owing to the heterogeneity and relatively low quantity of published reports, this review was conducted in a narrative rather than systematic format. Results: The results of combined iRT, both concurrent and sequential, are discussed for oncologic therapy of the brain, lung, liver, and prostate. Most evidence is from small samples and shorter follow-up but does consist of multiple prospective publications. Most data exist for ipilimumab, with programmed cell death -1 inhibitors emerging in more recent years. With 2 large phase 3 trials as exceptions, there were no instances of iRT-related deaths across all discussed studies. Altogether, grade 3 to 4 toxicities were relatively low in frequency; of the studies that compared iRT with an immunotherapy only or RT only cohort, none documented a clear increase in high-grade adverse events with combined-modality management. Conclusions: Despite the low quantity of data, combined iRT offers encouraging safety profiles. There is no evidence that iRT produces an overt increase in high-grade toxicities. Further data, especially on concurrent iRT, are anticipated from numerous iRT trials that are currently ongoing worldwide. (C) 2018 The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Published by Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据