Early morning immune checkpoint blockade and overall survival of patients with metastatic cancer: An In-depth chronotherapeutic study.

Recent retrospective studies suggest potential large patient's benefit through proper timing of immune checkpoint blockers (ICB). The association between ICB treatment timing and patient survival, neoplastic response and toxicities was investigated, together with interactions with performance status (PS) and sex. A cohort of patients with metastatic or locally advanced solid tumors, who received pembrolizumab, nivolumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, or avelumab, alone or with concomitant chemotherapy, between November 2015 and March 2021, at the Centre Leon Bérard (France), was retrospectively studied. 361 patients were investigated (80% non-small cell lung cancer patients, mean [SD] age: 63 [11] years, 39% of women, 83% PS0-1 at first infusion, 19% received concomitant chemotherapy). ICB were administered from 07:25 to 17:21 and optimal morning/afternoon cut-off was 11:37. Morning infusions were associated with increased OS as compared to afternoon (median 30.3 vs 15.9 months, p = 0.0024; HR 1.56 [1.17-2.1], p = 0.003). A strong PS-timing interaction was found (PS0-1 patients, HR=1.53 [1.10-2.12], p = 0.011; PS2-3 patients, HR=0.50 [0.25-0.97], p = 0.042). Morning PS0-1 patients displayed increased OS (median 36.7 vs 21.3 months, p = 0.023), partial/complete response rate (58% vs 41%, p = 0.027), and grade1-3 toxicities (49% vs 34%, p = 0.028). Mortality risk ratio between infusions at worst time-of-day, estimated at 13:36 [12:48-14:23], and in early morning was equal to 4.8 ([2.3-10.1], p = 0.008). Timing differences in toxicities resulted significant only in female patients (women vs men: p < 0.001 vs 0.4). Early morning ICB infusion was associated with increased OS, response, and toxicities in patients with PS0-1 as compared to later infusions within the day. Prospective randomized trials are needed to confirm this retrospective study.

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Pierre Heudel reported grants from AstraZeneca and personal fees from LILLY, ASTRAZENECA, PFIZER, NOVARTIS, SEAGEN, PIERRE FABRE, MSD, GILEAD outside the submitted work. Hugo Crochet reported grants from Daichi, Nutricia and Freisenius. The other authors declare no conflict of interest.