Concomitant Proton Pump Inhibitors Research Articles

Proton pump inhibitors may reduce the efficacy of ribociclib and palbociclib in metastatic breast cancer patients based on an observational study

IntroductionApproximately 20–33% of all cancer patients are treated with acid-reducing agents (ARAs), most commonly proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), to reduce gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms. Palbociclib and ribociclib are weak bases so their solubility depends on different pH. The solubility of palbociclib dramatically decreases to < 0.5 mg/ml when pH is above 4,5 but ribociclibs’ solubility decreases when pH increases above 6,5. In the current study, we aimed to investigate the effects of concurrent PPIs on palbociclib and ribociclib efficacy in terms of progression-free survival in metastatic breast cancer (mBC) patients.Patients and methodsWe enrolled hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative mBC patients treated with endocrine treatment (letrozole or fulvestrant) combined palbociclib or ribociclib alone or with PPI accompanying our observational study. During palbociclib/ribociclib therapy, patients should be treated with "concurrent PPIs" defined as all or more than half of treatment with palbociclib/ribociclib, If no PPI was applied, it was defined as ‘no concurrent PPI’, those who used PPI but less than half were excluded from the study. All data was collected from real-life retrospectively.ResultsOur study included 217 patients, 105 of whom received palbociclib and 112 received ribociclib treatment. In the study population CDK inhibitor treatment was added to fulvestrant 102 patients ( 47%), to letrozole 115 patients (53%). In the Palbociclib arm fulvestrant/letrozole ratio was 53.3/46.7%, in the ribociclib arm it was 41.07/58.93%. Of 105 patients who received palbociclib, 65 were on concomitant PPI therapy, 40 were not. Of the 112 patients who received ribociclib, 61 were on concomitant PPI therapy, 51 were not. In the palbociclib group, the PFS of the patients using PPIs was shorter than the PFS of the patients not using (13.04 months vs. unreachable, p < 0.001). It was determined that taking PPIs was an independent predictor of shortening PFS (p < 0.001) in the multivariate analysis, In the ribociclib group, the PFS of the patients using PPIs was shorter than the PFS of the patients not using (12.64 months vs. unreachable, p = 0.003). It was determined that taking PPIs was single statistically independent predictor of shortening PFS (p = 0.003, univariate analysis).ConclusionsOur study demonstrated that concomitant usage of PPIs was associated with shorter PFS in mBC treated with both ribociclib and especially palbociclib. If it needs to be used, PPI selection should be made carefully and low-strength PPI or other ARAs (eg H2 antagonists, antacids) should be preferred.

Impact of proton pump inhibitors on sustained virologic response in veterans treated with sofosbuvir/velpatasvir for chronic hepatitis C virus: A retrospective cohort study.

The objective of this study was to determine the clinical relationship between proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use and sustained virologic response (SVR) in patients treated with sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study. Data was collected on patients from 128 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers throughout the United States. This study included veterans aged 18-89 years with viremic HCV who received a full course of SOF/VEL treatment from June 2016 - July 2017. Sustained viral response was compared in patients taking SOF/VEL with or without concurrent PPI prescriptions. Analysis of the primary outcome was completed utilizing logistic regression. The relationship between SVR and PPI use was adjusted for African-American race, presence of cirrhosis, prior treatment, BMI greater than 30 kg/m2, and HCV genotype. The final analysis included 4,008 veterans, 830 with concomitant PPI use and 3,178 without PPI use. After adjustment for other variables in the logistic model, there was no statistically significant association between PPI use and lower SVR (odds ratio 0.67; 95%CI: 0.42, 1.06; p=0.087). Concomitant PPI treatment adjusted for other variables did not significantly impact success or failure of SOF/VEL treatment of chronic HCV. Despite the lack of significant association identified in this study, in efforts to provide the best care possible, it remains prudent to proceed with caution in patients desiring to use PPI therapy while receiving SOF/VEL, and ensure prescribing instructions are closely followed in regard to concomitant PPI use, especially in patients with other risk factors for decreased SVR.

Proton Pump Inhibitors Ameliorate Capecitabine-induced Hand-Foot Syndrome in Patients With Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Study

Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is the most common adverse event associated with capecitabine, and its pathogenesis is known to be associated with inflammation. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) reportedly exert anti-inflammatory effects; however, the impact of PPIs on capecitabine-induced HFS needs to be clarified in the clinical setting. In the present study, we retrospectively investigated the efficacy and safety of PPIs in patients with breast cancer receiving capecitabine. We analyzed the effects of PPIs on the development of severe HFS (grade ≥2), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) in 195 patients who received capecitabine chemotherapy for breast cancer. In total, 50 patients (26%) were treated with PPIs, while 145 patients (74%) did not receive PPIs. The incidence of severe HFS was significantly lower in patients who received PPIs (18%) than in patients who did not receive PPIs (43%, p=0.001), and the discontinuation rate of capecitabine therapy due to HFS was also lower in patients receiving PPIs than in those who did not receive PPIs (p=0.003). Multivariate analysis revealed that concomitant PPIs use was an independent factor that significantly contributed to the prevention of severe HFS (odds ratio (OR)=0.265, p=0.003). Meanwhile, no significant difference in median PFS and OS values was observed between patients treated with and without PPIs. Concomitant use of PPIs could ameliorate capecitabine-induced HFS in patients with breast cancer.

Population pharmacokinetics of rucaparib in patients with advanced ovarian cancer or other solid tumors.

To develop a population pharmacokinetics (PPK) model for rucaparib, an oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor. The PPK analysis used PK data from patients in Study 1014 (NCT01009190, n = 35), Study 10 (NCT01482715, n = 123), and ARIEL2 (NCT01891344, n = 300), including intensive intravenous data (12-40mg), intensive and sparse oral data (12-360mg single-dose, 40-500mg once daily, and 240-840mg twice daily [BID]), and intensive single-dose oral data under fasted conditions and after a high-fat meal (40, 300, and 600mg). Rucaparib PK was well described by a two-compartment model with sequential zero-order release and first-order absorption and first-order elimination. A high-fat meal slightly increased bioavailability at 600mg but not at lower doses; this is not considered clinically significant, and rucaparib can be taken with or without food. Covariate effects of baseline creatinine clearance and albumin on rucaparib clearance were identified. Despite numerical increases in exposure with renal impairment, no dose adjustment is recommended for patients with mild or moderate renal impairment. No statistically significant relationships were detected for demographics, hepatic function (normal versus mild impairment), CYP1A2 and CYP2D6 phenotypes, or strong CYP1A2 or CYP2D6 inhibitors. Concomitant proton pump inhibitors showed no clinically significant effect on absorption. External validation of the model with data from ARIEL3 (NCT01968213) and TRITON2 (NCT02952534) studies showed no clinically meaningful PK differences across indications or sex. The PPK model adequately described rucaparib PK, and none of the covariates evaluated had a clinically relevant effect. GOV: Study 1014 (NCT01009190), Study 10 (NCT01482715), ARIEL2 (NCT01891344), ARIEL3 (NCT01968213), and TRITON2 (NCT02952534).

An Up-To-Date Investigation Into the Correlation Between Proton Pump Inhibitor Use and the Clinical Efficacy of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Advanced Solid Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BackgroundAlthough immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the current anticancer therapies, a considerable proportion of patients are found to hardly benefit from these drugs. Accumulating studies have demonstrated that concomitant proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use may affect the clinical efficacy of ICIs; however, their results are inconsistent. In this study, based on updated evidence, we aimed to perform a meta-analysis to clarify the prognostic significance of PPI use in advanced solid cancer patients receiving ICI therapy.MethodsEligible literature was searched using PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EMBASE, and other network resources before July 2021. Clinical outcome was evaluated using overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The correlation of PPI use with OS or PFS was determined based on hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsA total of 17 studies enrolling 9,978 ICI-treated cancer patients were included in our meta-analysis. The global analysis demonstrated that PPI use was significantly correlated with worse OS [HR = 1.29 (1.10–1.50)] instead of PFS [HR = 1.19 (0.98–1.44)] in solid cancer patients receiving ICI therapy. In a subgroup analysis, the negative correlation of PPI use with ICI efficacy was significant in patients with non-small cell lung cancer [PFS, HR = 1.27 (1.10–1.47)] and urothelial carcinoma [OS, HR = 1.55 (1.31–1.84), PFS, HR = 1.52 (1.13–2.06)] and mixed cohorts containing multiple cancer types [OS, HR = 1.40 (1.16–1.69)], while an opposite result was observed in the PFS of patients with melanoma [HR = 0.48 (0.25–0.90)]. Moreover, the unfavorable prognostic impact of PPI use was also significant in patients over 65 years old [OS, HR = 1.28 (1.05–1.55), PFS, HR = 1.32 (1.12–1.56)] or those receiving anti-PD-1 [OS, HR = 1.37 (1.04–1.79)] or anti-PD-L1 therapies (OS, HR = 1.49 (1.30–1.69), PFS, HR = 1.34 (1.20–1.50). Finally, PPI use was significantly correlated with a worse prognosis in patients receiving PPIs 30 days before and/or after ICI initiation (OS, HR = 1.38 (1.18–1.62), PFS, HR = 1.23 (1.06–1.43)).ConclusionAlthough our global analysis revealed PPI use was not correlated with the PFS of ICI-treated patients, considering the results of our subgroup analysis, PPIs should be still cautiously used shortly before or during ICI therapy. Furthermore, more clinical validations and related mechanism investigations are of great necessity to clarify the clinical correlation of PPI use with ICI efficacy.Systematic Review Registration[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], PROSPERO [No. CRD42021243707].

Impact of Drug-Drug Interaction between CDK4/6 Inhibitors and Proton Pump Inhibitors on Survival Outcomes in the Treatment of Metastatic Breast Cancer—Real World Data from a Portuguese Center

Introduction: Proton pump inhibitors (PPi) are widely prescribed, including in patients undergoing treatment for advanced breast cancer (ABC). Due to the pharmacokinetic characteristics of the CDK4/6 inhibitor (Ci) palbociclib a drug interaction with PPi was hypothesized. It was shown in a retrospective study that this association was an independent predictive factor for worse progression-free survival (PFS). Objective: To verify the impact of concomitant administration of PPi with Ci on overall survival (OS) and PFS. Material and Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients treated with Ci for HR+HER2-ABC in the period from Feb/2017 to Aug/2020. SPSS software was used for data processing. Univariate analysis was done by the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test, and multivariate analysis by COX regression. P-value - 75). Treatment with Ci was 1st line for ABC in 68.8%. Choice of Ci was palbociclib in 73.8% (n = 59) and ribociclib in 26.3% (n = 21). The hormone partner was a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor in 45.0%, and fulvestrant in 55.0% of cases. 37.5% of patients were on PPi, and 70.0% of them were during the entire treatment (23.3% omeprazole, 73.4% pantoprazole, 3.3% others). Patients taking concomitant PPi and Ci had lower OS (OS-3 years 42.6% vs. 63.4%, p = 0.254) and PFS (PFS med 15 m. vs. 21 m., p = 0.733), although with no statistically significant difference. Discussion: In the sample, there was a numerical difference, without the statistical significance in the use of PPi in the survival of patients under Ci. This difference could be more evident with a longer follow-up and a larger sample size. This study intends to alert to the growing importance of checking for drug interactions. Polymedication, advanced age and the presence of several comorbidities are real problems in patients with ABC. Conclusion: Real-world data from this center demonstrate a negative, non-statistically significant impact of PPi treatment on survival outcomes, in patients treated with Ci for HR+HER2-ABC.

Association of proton pump inhibitor use with survival outcomes in cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background:Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have been shown to regulate the gut microbiome and affect the response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Contradictory results on survival have been observed in patients concomitantly treated with ICIs and PPIs. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the association between PPI use and survival outcomes in ICI-treated cancer patients.Methods:EMBASE, MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library databases, and major oncology conference proceedings were searched. Studies comparing overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) between PPI-treated and PPI-free groups of ICI-treated cancer patients were included. Data regarding study and patient characteristics, ICI and PPI treatments, and survival outcomes were extracted. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were pooled using random effects models. Subgroup meta-analyses and meta-regressions were performed to explore possible factors of heterogeneity among the studies.Results:A total of 33 studies were included, comprising 7383 ICI- and PPI-treated patients and 8574 ICI-treated and PPI-free patients. The pooled HR was 1.31 (95% CI, 1.19–1.44; p < 0.001) for OS and 1.30 (95% CI, 1.17–1.46; p < 0.001) for PFS, indicating a significant negative association between PPI use and survival in ICI-treated patients. Subgroup meta-analyses by factors including cancer type, ICI type, and time window of PPI use revealed that ICI and PPI use impacted survival in patients with non-small cell lung or urothelial cancer, patients treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies, and patients receiving PPI as baseline treatment or 60 days before ICI treatment initiation.Conclusions:PPI use in patients treated with ICIs was associated with shorter OS and PFS, especially in several specific subgroups of cancer patients. PPIs should be strictly controlled and appear to not impact survival if given temporarily after ICI initiation. These observations could provide the basis for clinical guidelines for concomitant PPI and ICI use.

Survival outcomes of patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer concomitantly receiving proton pump inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Recent evidence suggests that gut microbiota dysbiosis adversely affects the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Our objective was to investigate the association between concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and ICIs, and poor prognosis in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We conducted a cohort study using a completely enumerated lung cancer cohort from a nationwide healthcare database in South Korea. We identified 2963 patients treated with ICIs as second-line or later therapy for stage ≥IIIB NSCLC. PPI use was ascertained within 30-days before and on the date of ICI initiation, and nonuse was defined as no prescription of PPIs during this period. Using national vital statistics in South Korea, we assessed the risk of all-cause mortality associated with concomitant PPI use through a propensity score-matched Cox proportional hazard model. Among 1646 patients included after 1:1 propensity score-matching, concomitant PPI use was associated with a 28% increased risk of all-cause mortality, compared to nonuse (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.28; 95% confidence intervals [CIs], 1.13-1.46). We observed an increased risk when we restricted the analysis to new users of PPI (adjusted HR=1.64; 95% CI=1.25-2.17). Subgroup analysis showed that PPI use was associated with high mortality risk among patients with viral hepatitis (adjusted HR=2.72; 95% CI=1.54-4.78; Pinteraction = .048). Our study indicates that PPI use is associated with poor prognosis in NSCLC patients treated with ICIs. Further prospective studies are required to determine the risk-benefit balance of concomitant use of PPIs and ICIs.

Concomitant Proton Pump Inhibitors and Outcome of Patients Treated with Nivolumab Alone or Plus Ipilimumab for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represent the standard of care as first- or second-line treatment in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most prescribed drugs worldwide and are known to affect gut microbiota, which is gaining interest in its association with outcomes for patients on ICIs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of PPIs on outcomes in RCC patients receiving immunotherapy. We retrospectively collected data from patients with metastatic RCC who received the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab for first-line treatment (Cohort 1) or single-agent nivolumab for second-line or third-line treatment (Cohort 2) from five international centers with expertise in the treatment of RCC. Data about clinicopathological characteristics, PPI use, and outcome on ICIs were collected. Endpoints of the study were objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Two hundred and eighteen patients (71% male, median age 61years) were included in the analysis, 62 in Cohort 1 (including 25 patients receiving PPIs) and 156 in Cohort 2 (including 88 patients receiving PPIs), and were followed up for a median of 42months. In Cohort 1, no difference was observed in ORR (48% vs 57%; p=0.203), PFS (12.2 vs 8.5months; p=0.928), or OS (not reached [NR] vs 27.3months; p=0.84). In Cohort 2, no difference was observed in ORR (32% vs 28%; p=0.538), PFS (6.7 vs 9.0months; p=0.799), or OS (16.0 vs 26.0months; p=0.324). In patients with RCC, concomitant PPI use did not seem to affect survival outcomes on ICIs, either as combination therapy or monotherapy.

P020 Proton Pump Inhibitor Therapy: Providing "Acid" Outcomes in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease Under Infliximab Treatment.

A recent meta-analysis has suggested that proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy is associated with lower clinical remission rates and a higher number of hospitalizations in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) under infliximab therapy. We aimed to assess if these differences kept their significance when adjusted for other possible confounders. Cohort study of consecutive patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and Ulcerative Colitis (UC) under infliximab therapy. A minimum follow-up of 54 weeks after introduction of infliximab treatment was required. The analyzed outcomes were deep remission at week 54 and the need of IBD-related hospitalization, corticosteroid treatment or abdominal surgery under infliximab treatment. Collected possible confounders were age, gender, smoking habits, perianal disease, extra-intestinal manifestations, familiar history of IBD and concomitant use of immunomodulators. Our final sample included 104 patients, 56 (53.8%) of them females, with a mean age of 38.2±13.1 years. From these, 77 (74.0%) had CD and 27 (26.0%) had UC. PPI therapy was described in 21 (20.2%) of the patients under infliximab treatment. On univariate analysis, PPI users were found to have significantly lower rates of deep remission at week 54 (7.7 vs 28.3%; p = 0.034) and higher IBD-related hospitalization rates (47.6 vs 21.7%; p = 0.034). No differences were found regarding the need of corticosteroid therapy (4.8 vs 10.8%; p = 0.398) or abdominal surgery (33.7 vs 21.7; p = 0.201). When adjusted for the collected confounders by multivariate analysis, while not significantly influencing deep remission at week 54 (OR = 0.16; 95%CI = 0.02-1.63; p = 0.121), concomitant PPI therapy was a significant independent risk factor for IBD-related hospitalization (OR = 3.22; 95%CI = 1.11-9.34; p = 0.04). Despite not conducting to significantly different deep remission rates, concomitant PPI therapy was associated with a three-fold increase in hospitalization rates in IBD patients under infliximab treatment, even when adjusted for classical risk factors for adverse outcomes in IBD. These findings emphasize the importance of restricting PPI treatment to those with a clear clinical indication, especially in this set of patients.

Proton pump inhibitors and colorectal cancer: A systematic review.

BACKGROUNDThe use of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) is common worldwide, with reports suggesting that they may be overused. Several studies have found that PPI may affect colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. AIMTo summarize current knowledge on the relationship between PPI and CRC from basic research, epidemiological and clinical studies. METHODSThis systematic review was based on the patients, interventions, comparisons, outcome models and performed according to PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception until May 17, 2021. The initial search returned 2591 articles, of which, 28 studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. The studies were categorized as basic research studies (n = 12), epidemiological studies (n = 11), and CRC treatment studies (n = 5). The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale or Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool depending on the study design. RESULTSData from basic research indicates that PPI do not stimulate CRC development via the trophic effect of gastrin but instead may paradoxically inhibit it. These studies also suggest that PPI may have properties beneficial for CRC treatment. PPI appear to have anti-tumor properties (omeprazole, pantoprazole), and are potential T lymphokine-activated killer cell-originated protein kinase inhibitors (pantoprazole, ilaprazole), and chemosensitizing agents (pantoprazole). However, these mechanisms have not been confirmed in human trials. Current epidemiological studies suggest that there is no causal association between PPI use and increased CRC risk. Treatment studies show that concomitant PPI and capecitabine use may reduce the efficacy of chemotherapy resulting in poorer oncological outcomes, while also suggesting that pantoprazole may have a chemosensitizing effect with the fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) regimen.CONCLUSIONAn unexpected inhibitory effect of PPI on CRC carcinogenesis by way of several potential mechanisms is noted. This review identifies that different PPI agents may have differential effects on CRC treatment, with practical implications. Prospective studies are warranted to delineate this relationship and assess the role of individual PPI agents.

239P Drug-drug interactions between palbociclib and proton pump inhibitors may significantly affect clinical outcome of metastatic breast cancer patients

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used in cancer patients to mitigate polypharmacy-associated adverse gastroesophageal events. However, drug-drug interactions (DDIs) at absorption level should be considered as it may affect clinical outcome. Palbociclib is a weak base with pH-dependent solubility that rapidly decreases as pH increases above 4.5 (Clin Pharmacol Drug Dev 2017;6:614-6). The current study was aimed at investigating the effect of concomitant PPIs on palbociclib progression-free survival (PFS) in metastatic breast cancer (mBC) patients.

695P Drug-drug interactions between pazopanib and proton pump inhibitors may significantly affect clinical outcome of patients affected by metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used in cancer patients to mitigate polypharmacy-associated adverse gastroesophageal events. However, pharmacokinetic data showed that concomitant administration of pazopanib and PPIs leads to decreased plasma concentrations and exposure of pazopanib by 40% (Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2013; 71: 1635–1643). The current study aimed at investigating the effect of concomitant PPIs on pazopanib progression-free survival (PFS) in patients affected by metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

Impact of Proton Pump Inhibitor Use on the Effectiveness of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Advanced Cancer Patients.

The gut microbiome plays a critical role in modulating the therapeutic effect of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are commonly used in cancer patients and may affect the gut microbiome by altering gut pH. To evaluate if concurrent use of PPI is associated with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, transitional cell carcinoma, or head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. This was a single-center retrospective cohort study of advanced cancer adult patients who received nivolumab or pembrolizumab between September 1, 2014, and August 31, 2019. Concomitant PPI exposure was defined as PPI use 0 to 30 days before or after initiation of ICIs. Treatment outcome was OS and PFS. A total of 233 patients were included in our study. Concomitant PPI use was not significantly associated with OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.22; 95% CI = 0.80-1.86) or PFS (HR = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.76-1.45) in patients with ICI use. The effect estimates were robust after adjusting for covariates in multivariate analysis and in patients with NSCLC. Concomitant PPI use was not associated with the effectiveness of nivolumab or pembrolizumab. Certain predictors of survival outcomes related to PPI use in patients receiving immunotherapy, such as the time window and indication of PPI exposure and autoimmune disorders, should be explored in the future to better carve out the impact of PPI on the effectiveness of ICI use.

Concomitant Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors With Capecitabine Based Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Is it Safe?

Capecitabine (Cape) is routinely used for the neoadjuvant chemoradiation treatment (NACRT) of locally advanced rectal cancers (LARCs). Previous reports have suggested that the concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may affect the efficacy of Cape, although the true effect of PPIs when used with Cape as a radiosensitizer for neoadjuvant radiation is unclear. The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of concurrent PPI use along with fluorouracil (FU) and Cape based NACRT in terms of pathologic and oncological outcomes, in patients with LARC. LARC patients treated at our center with NACRT from 2010 to 2016 were identified. Postoperative pathology and follow-up outcomes were examined for any differences with relation to the use of PPIs concurrently with FU and Cape based NACRT and adjuvant chemotherapy regimens. Three hundred four and 204 patients received treatment with FU and Cape based NACRT. No difference in pathologic complete response rate was noted between the 2 arms with the concurrent use of PPIs (25.8% and 25%, respectively, P=0.633); or with and without the use of PPIs in the Cape-NACRT arm specifically (20% and 20.7%, P=0.945). At a median follow-up of 5 years, no statistical difference in local or distant control was noted in the Cape-NACRT patients, with and without concomitant PPI use (P=0.411 and 0.264, respectively).Multivariate analysis showed no association of PPI use and NACRT with Cape, in terms of local control (hazard ratio=0.001, P=0.988) or overall survival (hazard ratio=1.179, confidence interval=0.249-5.579, P=0.835). Our study revealed that there was no adverse pathologic or oncological outcome with the concurrent use of PPIs along with Cape-NACRT in the treatment of LARC. We report that it may be safe to use PPIs if essential, in this clinical setting, although it would be wise to exercise caution.

Proton Pump Inhibitor and Clopidogrel Use After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Risk of Major Cardiovascular Events

PurposeDue to shared hepatic metabolism, concomitant medication with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) and clopidogrel might reduce the effectiveness of clopidogrel in the prevention of cardiovascular events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We aimed to examine the risk of major cardiovascular events after PCI comparing patients who used clopidogrel together with PPI with those who used clopidogrel alone.MethodsThis Swedish nationwide cohort study included patients who received clopidogrel after primary PCI in 2005–2019. Patients were followed for up to 12 months after PCI. Data were retrieved from the Swedish Prescribed Drug Registry, Patient Registry, Cancer Registry, and Cause of Death Registry. Multivariable Cox regression provided hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for cardiovascular events comparing PPI users (exposed) with non-users of PPI (non-exposed). The HRs were adjusted for sex, age, comorbidity, calendar period, obesity, diabetes, anti-diabetic medication, tobacco-related diseases, hypertension, and congestive heart failure.ResultsThe cohort included 99,836 patients who received clopidogrel after primary PCI. Among these, 35,772 (35.8%) received concomitant PPI. Compared to non-users, PPI users had increased adjusted HRs of all study outcomes, i.e., the main outcome myocardial infarction (HR = 1.23, 95% CI 1.15–1.32) and the secondary outcomes coronary heart disease (HR = 1.28, 95% CI 1.24–1.33), stroke (HR = 1.21, 95% CI 1.05–1.40), and death due to coronary heart disease (HR = 1.52, 95% CI 1.37–1.69). The results were similar in analyses including both primary and secondary PCIs.ConclusionsIn patients who receive clopidogrel after PCI, concomitant use of PPI seems to increase the risk of major cardiovascular events.

Evaluation of the Effect of Proton Pump Inhibitors on the Efficacy of Dacomitinib and Gefitinib in Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and EGFR-Activating Mutations.

IntroductionDacomitinib and gefitinib are irreversible epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) indicated for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and EGFR-activating mutations. Pharmacokinetic (PK) studies in healthy volunteers suggested that acid-reducing drugs such as proton pump inhibitors (PPI) decreased dacomitinib and gefitinib exposure by limiting the pH-dependent absorption. This analysis retrospectively evaluates the effect of concomitant PPI use on dacomitinib exposure and on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients treated with dacomitinib 45 mg QD or gefitinib 250 mg QD in a 1:1 randomized phase 3 study (ARCHER 1050).MethodsThe analysis grouped all patients (n = 452) treated in each arm of the study as non-PPI users, PPI users, or extensive PPI users. PFS and OS data were presented by Kaplan–Meier plots and analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models. Dacomitinib exposure was compared using a linear mixed-effects model.ResultsResults showed that dacomitinib PFS and OS did not differ significantly when comparing PPI users (N = 59) to non-PPI users (N = 152), while extensive PPI users (N = 24) had shorter PFS [hazard ratio (HR): 1.94, p = 0.011] and OS (HR: 1.77, p = 0.027) when compared to non-PPI users. For patients treated with gefitinib, PFS did not differ significantly when comparing PPI users (N = 51) and extensive PPI users (N = 19) to non-PPI users (N = 159); however, both PPI users (HR: 1.65, p = 0.007) and extensive PPI users (HR: 1.70, p = 0.050) had shorter OS when compared to non-PPI users. Further analysis by adjusting potential confounders indicated no statistically significant differences in PFS or OS between any PPI user vs. non-PPI user groups in the dacomitinib and gefitinib arms. PPI use did not appear to affect dacomitinib exposure.ConclusionIn conclusion, PPI use in patients with NSCLC likely has minimal impact on dacomitinib or gefitinib efficacy despite decreased absorption of these drugs observed in PK studies.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01774721

Association of proton pump inhibitors with survival in Veterans with non-small cell lung cancer receiving immunotherapy.

e18729 Background: Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) can disrupt the gut microbiome and thereby modulate response to immunotherapy in cancer patients. In a recently published post-hoc analysis of 757 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving atezolizumab pooled from two prospective trials, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were significantly lower among the 234 patients receiving PPI. We investigated the impact of PPI in a larger cohort of NSCLC patients treated with ICI within the Veterans Health Administration. Methods: We conducted a nested cohort study of Veterans who were diagnosed with NSCLC between 2010 &amp; 2018 and treated with ICI (immune checkpoint inhibitors). Exposure was defined as receipt of a PPI prescription within 90 days of an ICI infusion. Chi-square tests were used to compare characteristics of exposed versus unexposed Veterans. OS was measured from start of ICI. Cox proportional hazard multivariate (MV) regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) corresponding to variables associated with OS. Results: We identified 3,634 Veterans receiving ICI with non-exclusive exposures to nivolumab (59.3%), pembrolizumab (35.1%), durvalumab (6.9%), and atezolizumab (3.3%). Their median age was 69, and a plurality had male gender (97.0%), white race (73.0%), comorbidity count ≥1 (60.4%), adenocarcinoma (47.8%), and stage IV disease at diagnosis (40.9%). In this nested cohort, 2,159 (59.4%) were exposed to PPI, predominantly omeprazole (1,264 or 85.6% of PPI group). Patients receiving PPI were more likely to be ≤71 years of age, to be white, to reside in rural areas, to have a higher comorbidity burden, to have adenocarcinoma histology, and to receive chemotherapy (all p≤0.04). On MV analysis, PPI use was not significantly associated with detriment in OS (HR 0.96 [0.89-1.04], p= 0.35). In the matched cohort analysis, median survival did not significantly differ between the 1,389 patients taking PPI and the 1,389 without PPI (median 10 versus 10 months, HR 0.98 [0.90-1.06], p= 0.59). Conclusions: In the largest analysis to date of concurrent PPI use in patients with NSCLC receiving ICI, there were no survival differences associated with concomitant PPI use. These results suggest that PPIs do not compromise ICI efficacy.

Proton Pump Inhibitors and Survival in Patients With Colorectal Cancer Receiving Fluoropyrimidine-Based Chemotherapy.

Concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may negatively affect the efficacy of anticancer drugs such as fluoropyrimidines in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). The primary objective of this study was to assess whether there is an association between concomitant PPI use and survival outcomes in patients with CRC treated with a fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. A secondary analysis of 6 randomized controlled clinical trials in patients with advanced CRC was conducted using individual patient data through data-sharing platforms. The outcome measures were progression-free survival and overall survival in PPI users and nonusers. Subgroup analysis included the type of chemotherapy, capecitabine versus 5-FU, line of therapy, and addition of a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor. Overall pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a random effects model. A total of 5,594 patients with advanced CRC across 6 trials and 11 trial arms were included; 902 patients were receiving a PPI at trial entry and initiation of chemotherapy. PPI use was significantly associated with worse overall survival (pooled HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.03-1.40; P=.02; I2 for heterogeneity = 69%) and progression-free survival (overall pooled HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.05-1.37; P=.009; I2 = 65%) after adjusting for clinical covariates. Furthermore, the association between concomitant PPI use and survival outcomes was similar across most treatment subgroups. We speculate that alterations in the gut microbiome, altered immune milieu within the tumor, and interactions through transporters are potential mechanisms behind this association between PPI use and chemotherapy in patients with CRC, which warrant further study. Concomitant use of PPIs is associated with worse survival outcomes in patients with CRC treated with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. Clinicians should cautiously consider the concomitant use of PPIs in such patients.

The Effect of Concomitant Proton Pump Inhibitor and Cabozantinib on the Outcomes of Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Cabozantinib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor that is approved for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Cabozantinib is a weak base that exhibits a pH-dependent solubility profile in vitro which raises concerns about its bioavailability in patients treated with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). The purpose of this study was to investigate whether PPI use has an impact on the efficacy, safety, and residual concentration (Ctrough) of cabozantinib in patients with mRCC. This is a retrospective review of a prospectively collected electronic database of patients with mRCC who received cabozantinib at Gustave Roussy between February 2014 and December 2018. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis and the Cox proportional-hazard model for uni- and multivariate analysis. In parallel, we conducted a pharmacokinetic study of cabozantinib in a distinct cohort of 50 mRCC patients, in which cabozantinib Ctrough was assayed using a validated tandem mass spectrometry-liquid chromatography method. We identified 99 patients treated with cabozantinib, including 43 patients being PPI users. With a median follow-up of 30.3 months, PPI users showed similar progression-free survival and overall survival outcomes compared with PPI nonusers. Similarly, the incidence of adverse events was not significantly different between the PPI users and nonusers, although PPI users required dose reductions more often. In the independent pharmacokinetic cohort, of whom 21 received PPI concomitantly, Ctrough was similar between the two groups. In line with the pharmacologic data, the concomitant use of PPI does not significantly impact the efficacy or safety of cabozantinib in patients with mRCC. Drug interactions, especially between targeted therapies and proton pump inhibitors (PPI), were shown to potentially impact the outcomes of cancer patients. Cabozantinib, a current therapeutic standard in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), exhibits a pH-dependent solubility profile, which raises concerns about its bioavailability in patients treated with proton pump inhibitors (PPI). At the present time, there is no evidence regarding the effect of PPIs on cabozantinib's efficacy and safety in patients with mRCC. This study found that the concomitant use of PPI during cabozantinib treatment in mRCC patients does not appear to impact the residual concentration, efficacy, and safety of cabozantinib in a real-life context.