Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced pancreatic injury (ICI-PI) is a rare immunotoxicity, with limited data on treatment and long-term outcomes. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for studies reporting ICI-PI in patients with solid malignancies. ICI-PI was defined as pancreatic inflammation post-ICI exposure, diagnosed via radiologic changes or elevated lipase/amylase levels without other underlying causes. The CTCAE grading system was used. The primary objectives were to assess the frequency, severity, serum abnormalities, management, and long-term outcomes. We conducted a proportional single-arm meta-analysis with a random effects model. Results: The analysis included 25 retrospective studies involving 48,704 patients. Tumor types included thoracic/head and neck (38%), skin (26%), genitourinary/gynecological (18%), gastrointestinal (12%), and others (6%). The median age ranged from 56 to 73 years, with a follow-up from 2.5 to 45.9 months. ICI-PI occurred in 3.60% (95% CI: 1.64–6.28%) of patients, with grade ≥ 3 toxicity in 59.45% (95% CI: 35.32–81.37%). The frequency rates of ICI-PI were 1.99% for CTLA4 inhibitors, 5.01% for PD(L)1 inhibitors, and 7.44% for combination ICI therapy (p < 0.01). The median time to onset from treatment initiation ranged from 30 to 390 days, and symptom resolution ranged from 55 to 84 days. Management included corticosteroids (30.20%), intravenous fluids (22.82%), and hospitalization (30.46%). Chronic complications affected 63.54% (95% CI: 29.03–91.56%), including primarily diabetes mellitus (DM 89.45%; 95% CI: 61.88–100.0%) and exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI 10.55%; 95%: 0.0–38.12%). ICI-PI recurrence occurred in 27.2% of those resuming ICI therapy. The objective response rate was 61.7% (95% CI: 55.08–68.17%). Conclusions: ICI-PI, though infrequent, is severe and predisposes patients to chronic complications, including DM and EPI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: