Older patients represent a subpopulation of concern for immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) toxicity because of changes in the aging immune system and the potentially relevant clinical implications for their quality of life. Current evidence on ICI safety in older patients is conflicting. This study aimed to assess whether older patient age was a risk factor for increased reporting with ICIs as compared to other antineoplastic drugs in VigiBase, the World Health Organization database of suspected adverse drug reactions. Disproportionality analyses computing the reporting odds ratios (RORs) were performed by age subgroups (<18 years, 18–64 years, 65–74 years, 75–84 years and ≥85 years). There were not signals of disproportionate reporting with ICIs specifically detected in older patient age subgroups (≥65 years), which were not present in the disproportionality analysis over the entire dataset. A signal of disproportionate reporting with ICIs emerged for eye disorders only in the age subgroup 18–64 years (ROR 1.13, 95% confidence interval 1.05–1.23). These findings showed that adverse event reporting with ICIs in older patients was comparable to that in the overall patient cohort and prompt for the further investigation of eye disorders with ICIs to elucidating risk factors and defining management strategies.

Noseda R., Bonaldo G., Motola D., Stathis A., Ceschi A. (2021). Adverse event reporting with immune checkpoint inhibitors in older patients: Age subgroup disproportionality analysis in vigibase. CANCERS, 13(5), 1-15 [10.3390/cancers13051131].

Adverse event reporting with immune checkpoint inhibitors in older patients: Age subgroup disproportionality analysis in vigibase

Bonaldo G.;Motola D.;
2021

Abstract

Older patients represent a subpopulation of concern for immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) toxicity because of changes in the aging immune system and the potentially relevant clinical implications for their quality of life. Current evidence on ICI safety in older patients is conflicting. This study aimed to assess whether older patient age was a risk factor for increased reporting with ICIs as compared to other antineoplastic drugs in VigiBase, the World Health Organization database of suspected adverse drug reactions. Disproportionality analyses computing the reporting odds ratios (RORs) were performed by age subgroups (<18 years, 18–64 years, 65–74 years, 75–84 years and ≥85 years). There were not signals of disproportionate reporting with ICIs specifically detected in older patient age subgroups (≥65 years), which were not present in the disproportionality analysis over the entire dataset. A signal of disproportionate reporting with ICIs emerged for eye disorders only in the age subgroup 18–64 years (ROR 1.13, 95% confidence interval 1.05–1.23). These findings showed that adverse event reporting with ICIs in older patients was comparable to that in the overall patient cohort and prompt for the further investigation of eye disorders with ICIs to elucidating risk factors and defining management strategies.
2021
Noseda R., Bonaldo G., Motola D., Stathis A., Ceschi A. (2021). Adverse event reporting with immune checkpoint inhibitors in older patients: Age subgroup disproportionality analysis in vigibase. CANCERS, 13(5), 1-15 [10.3390/cancers13051131].
Noseda R.; Bonaldo G.; Motola D.; Stathis A.; Ceschi A.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Nr_64_Cancers Check point inhibitors.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: Articolo
Tipo: Versione (PDF) editoriale
Licenza: Licenza per Accesso Aperto. Creative Commons Attribuzione (CCBY)
Dimensione 1.64 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.64 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
cancers-13-01131-s001.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipo: File Supplementare
Licenza: Licenza per Accesso Aperto. Altra tipologia di licenza compatibile con Open Access
Dimensione 194.81 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
194.81 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/855385
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 5
  • Scopus 11
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 9
social impact