Exercise provides significant health benefits to patients diagnosed with cancer including improved survival outcomes, quality of life and reduced cancer recurrence. Across multiple murine cancer models, aerobic exercise and resistance training has exhibited anti-tumour properties illustrated by inhibited tumour growth, reduced metastatic potential and modulation of the tumour microenvironment to allow the recognition and destruction of cancer cells. Clinical studies have demonstrated the rapid mobilisation and circulatory release of mature lymphoid populations, myokines and cytokines that occurs with exercise along with tumour vasculature normalisation. Tumour microenvironments enriched with immune cells with anti-cancer potential, such as CD8+ T cells, are termed ‘hot’, whilst those favouring an immunosuppressive environment and lacking in effector immune cells are classed as ‘cold’. Pre-clinical evidence suggests exercise training has the potential to reprogramme cold tumours to become hot, although this requires validation in clinical studies. This hot environment could potentiate immunotherapy responsiveness, improving survival outcomes of patients undergoing cancer immunotherapy and allow those with typically cold tumours to benefit from immunotherapy. This review discusses the complex interactions between exercise and cancer, including exercise-induced alterations within the tumour microenvironment and systemic immunity. The potential role exercise may play in improving cancer immunotherapy responsiveness is explored. This review also highlights the need for translational studies exploring the role of exercise in patients with cancer with the potential to widen the spectrum of tumours that derive significant benefit from immunotherapy.
Targeted therapies are the state of the art in oncology today, and every year new Tumor-associated antigens (TAAs) are developed for preclinical research and clinical trials, but few of them really change the therapeutic scenario. Difficulties, either to find antigens that are solely expressed in tumors or the generation of good binders to these antigens, represent a major bottleneck. Specialized cellular mechanisms, such as differential splicing and glycosylation processes, are a good source of neo-antigen expression. Changes in these processes generate surface proteins that, instead of showing decreased or increased antigen expression driven by enhanced mRNA processing, are aberrant in nature and therefore more specific targets to elicit a precise anti-tumor therapy. Here, we present promising TAAs demonstrated to be potential targets for cancer monitoring, targeted therapy and the generation of new immunotherapy tools, such as recombinant antibodies and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell (CAR-T) or Chimeric Antigen Receptor-Engineered Natural Killer (CAR-NK) for specific tumor killing, in a wide variety of tumor types. Specifically, this review is a detailed update on TAAs CD44v6, STn and O-GD2, describing their origin as well as their current and potential use as disease biomarker and therapeutic target in a diversity of tumor types.
Background: Adebrelimab showed excellent efficacy in the first-line treatment for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). However, whether adebrelimab is superior to durvalumab and atezolizumab remains unclear. Therefore, we, in this study, aimed to compare the survival data of adebrelimab (CAPSTONE-1 trial) with durvalumab (CASPIAN trial) and atezolizumab (IMpower133 trial) in the first-line setting of ES-SCLC patients.
Methods: Online databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL, were systematically searched on December 2, 2022. The metaSurvival and IPDfromKM methods were used to analyze the summary survival curves and the reconstructed patient-level data. The main endpoints were median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).
Results: In this analysis, survival data in the CASPIAN, IMpower133, and CAPSTONE-1 trials were collected from five published studies. The pooled median OS and PFS were 14.0 months (95% CI 11.2-16.6) and 5.6 months (95% CI 4.7-6.7) when ES-SCLC patients received chemotherapy (etoposide and cisplatin/carboplatin) and anti-PD-L1 therapy. Based on the reconstructed patient-level data, adebrelimab significantly prolonged survival outcomes against atezolizumab (OS: Hazard ratio [HR]0.76, 95% CI 0.60-0.95; PFS: HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.54-0.83) and durvalumab (OS: HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.60-0.92).
Conclusion: For previously untreated ES-SCLC patients, longer survival time might be benefited from adding adebrelimab to etoposide-platinum chemotherapy. In future studies, further real-world evidence or head-to-head clinical trials are warranted to confirm the differences between the PD-L1 inhibitors.