Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 26, 2025
Assessing Therapeutic Angiogenesis in a Murine Model of Hindlimb Ischemia
Published on: June 8, 2019
Assessing hemorrhagic risks in combination therapy: implications of angiogenesis inhibitors and immune checkpoint
Yuhui Yang1,2,3, Pingping Long2,3, Ying Tuo2,3
1Department of Pharmacy, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Peking Union Medical College, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Objective:
This study aims to evaluate the hemorrhage risk in solid tumor patients receiving angiogenesis inhibitors (AGIs), immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), and their combination using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database.
Methods:
Data from Q1 2011 to Q4 2023 were extracted from the FAERS database for solid tumor patients treated with AGIs, ICIs, or their combination. A disproportionality analysis was conducted by calculating the reporting odds ratio (ROR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI), as well as the Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR), to identify potential safety signals. To assess whether the hemorrhage risk is higher with combination therapy compared to monotherapy, additive and multiplicative models were employed to evaluate the interactions between combination and single-agent treatments.
Results:
The combination of AGIs and ICIs significantly increased the risk of hemorrhagic adverse events, particularly tumor and pulmonary hemorrhage. Hemorrhagic events were common in females (50.97%) and older patients (aged 64+), frequently occurring within the first 30 days of treatment (38.11%). Gingival hemorrhage (ROR 3, PRR 418.9) and tumor hemorrhage (ROR 9.65, PRR 1893.36) were most common in the AGI group, while tumor hemorrhage (ROR 9.49, PRR 1350.78) and pulmonary hemorrhage (ROR 2.6, PRR 98.97) were prominent in the ICI group. In the combination group, esophageal variceal hemorrhage (ROR 40.72, PRR 2344.72) and tumor hemorrhage (ROR 19.31, PRR 1056.63) exhibited significantly increased risks Additive and multiplicative models indicated that the excess risk (RDAB = 0.01025, P<0.001) and relative risk (RRAB = 1.99277, P<0.001) of combination therapy were significantly higher than those of monotherapy, suggesting a positive interaction between the drugs that further increases the risk of hemorrhage.
Conclusion:
Our study demonstrates that the combination of AGIs and ICIs significantly raises the risk of hemorrhage, underscoring the urgent need for enhanced monitoring protocols in clinical practice to improve treatment efficacy and safety.
More Related Videos
15:24Testing Cancer Immunotherapeutics in a Humanized Mouse Model Bearing Human Tumors
Published on: December 16, 2022
00:06An Oncogenic Hepatocyte-Induced Orthotopic Mouse Model of Hepatocellular Cancer Arising in the Setting of Hepatic Inflammation and Fibrosis
Published on: September 12, 2019
Related Concept Videos
01:27Tumor Immunotherapy
02:50Combination Therapies and Personalized Medicine
The combination of the drug acetazolamide and sulforaphane is a good example of combination therapy to treat cancer. The cells in the interior of a large tumor often die due to the hypoxic and...
02:49Cancer Therapies
However, cancer treatments can pose several challenges, as therapies used to kill cancer cells are generally also toxic to normal cells. Moreover, cancer cells mutate rapidly and can develop resistance to chemical agents or radiation therapy. Besides, all types of cancer cells may not respond to the same therapy. Some cancer cells respond to one...
01:24Regulation of Angiogenesis and Blood Supply
01:26Heart Failure Drugs: Inhibitors of Renin-Angiotensin System