Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36776847›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2023

Do proton pump inhibitors alter the response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients? A meta-analysis.

Sébastien Lopes, Lucile Pabst, Anne Dory, Marion Klotz, Bénédicte Gourieux, Bruno Michel, Céline Mascaux

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
12.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sébastien LopesPharmacy sterilization department, Nouvel Hopital Civil, Strasbourg University Hospital, Strasbourg, France.
Lucile PabstPulmonology department, Nouvel Hopital Civil, Strasbourg University Hospital, Strasbourg, France.
Anne DoryPharmacy sterilization department, Nouvel Hopital Civil, Strasbourg University Hospital, Strasbourg, France.
Marion KlotzPulmonology department, Nouvel Hopital Civil, Strasbourg University Hospital, Strasbourg, France.
Bénédicte GourieuxPharmacy sterilization department, Nouvel Hopital Civil, Strasbourg University Hospital, Strasbourg, France.
Bruno MichelPharmacy sterilization department, Nouvel Hopital Civil, Strasbourg University Hospital, Strasbourg, France.
Céline MascauxPulmonology department, Nouvel Hopital Civil, Strasbourg University Hospital, Strasbourg, France.
Hôpital Civil, Strasbourg · FRUniversité de Strasbourg · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Gut microbiota can significantly affect the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in cancer patients. Recently, antibiotics were shown to decrease survival rate of patients treated by ICIs. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) can indeed modulate microbiota's diversity, therefore altering ICIs response. A meta-analysis was performed based on published data to verify this hypothesis. Methods: In this study, over 41 publications, exploring the impact of concomitant PPI treatment on outcomes of ICI-treated patients, were analyzed. Evaluated endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were reported in ICIs in PPI users versus non-PPI users. Subgroup analyses were performed to minimize the impact of study heterogeneity and to investigate the influence of PPI on the different groups of interest. There was no evidence of publication bias for OS and PFS analysis in subgroup analysis. Results: Forty-one studies were included in the meta-analysis, including a total of 20,042 patients. OS of patients receiving ICIs was negatively correlated in patients concomitantly treated with PPI (HR=1.37; 95%CI, 1.23-1.52). PFS of cancer patients receiving ICIs was also negatively correlated with PPI treatment (HR=1.28; 95%CI, 1.15-1.42). PPI and ICI use was associated with worst OS and PFS not only for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or urothelial cancer patients but also for patients treated with anti PD-1 (OS) and anti PD-L1 (OS and PFS) immunotherapies when administered in non-first line and when PPI was received as baseline treatment or in 60 days before ICI initiation. PPI and ICI use also showed the worst OS and PFS for patients from Europe and Asia. Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that PPI treatment leads to significantly worse outcomes in advanced cancer patients treated by ICIs in terms of PFS and OS.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungLung NeoplasmsUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsHumansImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsProton Pump InhibitorsImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsProton Pump Inhibitorsimmune checkpoint inhibitorsmeta – analysisproton pump inhibitorssolid cancersurvival

Identifiers

PMID36776847
PMCPMC9910608
OpenAlexW4318049653

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.