Background
Accumulated evidence supports the existence of sex-associated differences in immune systems. Understanding the role of sex in immune-related adverse events (irAEs) is important for management of irAE in patients receiving immunotherapy.
Methods
We performed meta-analysis on published clinical study data and multivariable logistic regression on pharmacovigilance data and applied a propensity algorithm to The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) omics data. We further validated our observations in two independent in-house cohorts of 179 and 767 cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.
Results
A meta-analysis using 13 clinical studies that reported on 1,096 female patients (36.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 35.0%-38.5%) and 1,886 male patients (63.2%, 95% CI = 61.5%-65.0%) demonstrated no statistically significant irAE risk difference between the sexes (odds ratio [OR] = 1.19; 95% CI = 0.91-1.54; 2-sided P = 0.21). Multivariable logistic regression analysis of 12,225 patients from FAERS and 10,979 patients from VigiBase showed no statistically significant difference in irAEs by sex. A propensity score algorithm used on multi-omics data for 6,019 patients from TCGA found no statistically significant difference by sex for irAE-related factors/pathways. The retrospective analysis of two in-house patient cohorts validated these results (OR = 1.55, 95% CI = 0.98-2.47; FDR = 0.13, for cohort 1; OR = 1.16, 95%CI = 0.86-1.57; FDR = 0.39, for cohort 2).
Conclusion
We observed minimal sex-associated differences in irAEs among cancer patients who received immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. It may be unnecessary to consider gender effects for irAE management in clinical practice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.