Loading…

Impact of radiotherapy to the primary tumor on the efficacy of pembrolizumab for patients with advanced urothelial cancer: A preliminary study

Radiotherapy plus immune checkpoint inhibitors can potentially induce synergistic antitumor immune responses. However, little clinical evidence is established regarding their combination therapy. Here, we aimed to assess whether radiotherapy to the primary tumor impacts on the efficacy of pembrolizu...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Cancer medicine (Malden, MA) MA), 2020-11, Vol.9 (22), p.8355-8363
Main Authors: Fukushima, Hiroshi, Kijima, Toshiki, Fukuda, Shohei, Moriyama, Shingo, Uehara, Sho, Yasuda, Yosuke, Tanaka, Hajime, Yoshida, Soichiro, Yokoyama, Minato, Matsuoka, Yoh, Saito, Kazutaka, Matsubara, Nobuaki, Numao, Noboru, Sakai, Yasuyuki, Yuasa, Takeshi, Masuda, Hitoshi, Yonese, Junji, Kageyama, Yukio, Fujii, Yasuhisa
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Radiotherapy plus immune checkpoint inhibitors can potentially induce synergistic antitumor immune responses. However, little clinical evidence is established regarding their combination therapy. Here, we aimed to assess whether radiotherapy to the primary tumor impacts on the efficacy of pembrolizumab in advanced urothelial cancer. We retrospectively reviewed 98 advanced urothelial cancer patients receiving pembrolizumab in a second‐ or later‐line setting using our multicenter cohort. Patients were categorized according to a history of radiotherapy to the primary tumor: patients previously exposed to radiotherapy to the primary tumor (Radiotherapy group, 17 patients [17%]) and those not (Nonradiotherapy group, 81 patients [83%]). The associations of radiotherapy to the primary tumor with objective response and survival were evaluated. The Radiotherapy group showed a significantly higher objective response ratio than did the Non‐radiotherapy group (65% vs 19%; P 
ISSN:2045-7634
2045-7634
DOI:10.1002/cam4.3445