The COVID-19 pandemic precipitated the implementation of extended interval immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in an effort to limit hospital visits, but few studies have examined their safety. This study aimed to compare in oncology outpatients, immune-mediated adverse events (IMAEs) in terms of total number, incidence, severity, and time to occurrence, based on exposure to standard or extended interval ICIs. A retrospective cohort study was conducted in patients who received at least one dose of an ICI between 2015 and 2021. Data were collected from patient records and pharmacy software. Adjusted logistic, Poisson, and Cox regression models were estimated. A total of 310 patients with a mean age of 67.1 years were included, 130 of whom had the extended interval. No statistically significant differences were observed between the groups. With the standard and extended intervals, the mean total number of IMAE per participant was 1.02 and 1.18, respectively; the incidence of an IMAE was 62% and 64%. Of the 147 IMAE episodes in the standard interval group, 14 (9.5%) were grade 3 or higher, while there were 15 (12.4%) among the 121 IMAE episodes in the extended interval group. Compared with standard interval, the use of extended interval did not increase the risk of having a first IMAE (adjusted hazard ratio 0.92 (95% CI 0.67-1.26)). This study suggests that the administration of an ICI according to extended interval is as safe as the administration according to standard interval in oncology outpatients.
Keywords: Extended interval; Immune checkpoint inhibitors; Immune-mediated adverse events; Immunotherapy; Safety; Standard interval.
© 2024. Crown.