Aliyah Pabani

Dr. Aliyah Pabani


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

8Years (2019-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
2 November 2019 in Cancers
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DMDaniel Meyers
Daniel Meyers
ISIgor Stukalin
Igor Stukalin
IVIsabelle A. Vallerand
Isabelle A. Vallerand
RLRyan T. Lewinson
Ryan T. Lewinson
ASAleksi Suo
Aleksi Suo
DMDon G. Morris
Don G. Morris
Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have revolutionized the treatment landscape of several solid tumor types. However, as patient outcomes are heterogeneous, clinical tools to aid in prognostication are needed. The Lung Immune Prognostic Index (LIPI) correlates with outcomes in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with ICI, but its applicability beyond NSCLC is poorly defined. We sought to determine whether LIPI is associated with overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) in a pooled, real-world, retrospective cohort of patients with solid tumors treated with ICI. Of the total pooled cohort (N = 578), 47.2%, 38.2% and 14.5% of patients were stratified into good, intermediate and poor LIPI group, respectively. Median OS were 22.8 (95% CI 17.4–29.5), 7.8 (95% CI 6.6–9.6), and 2.5 months (95% CI 1.4–3.4) (p < 0.0001). Median PFS were 9.9 (95% CI 7.2–11.5), 3.6 (95% CI 2.7–4.3), and 1.4 months (95% CI 1.2–2.2) (p < 0.0001). ORR was also associated with LIPI group (p < 0.001). Intermediate and poor LIPI were independently prognostic of OS compared to good LIPI, with hazard ratios (HR) of 1.8 (95% CI 1.4–2.3, p < 0.001) and 3.6 (95% CI 2.5–5.1, p < 0.001), respectively. These data are the first to suggest that in a real-world setting, the prognostic value of LIPI may be tumor agnostic.

29 August 2024 in Journal of Clinical Investigation
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CKChester J. Kao
Chester J. Kao
SCSoren Charmsaz
Soren Charmsaz
SAStephanie L. Alden
Stephanie L. Alden
MBMadelena Brancati
Madelena Brancati
HLHoward L. Li
Howard L. Li
MYMark Yarchoan
Mark Yarchoan
BACKGROUND. Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and their associated morbidity/mortality are a key concern for patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Prospective evaluation of the drivers of irAEs in a diverse pan-tumor cohort is needed to identify patients at greatest risk and to develop rational treatment and interception strategies. METHODS. In an observational study, we prospectively collected blood samples and performed regular clinical evaluations for irAEs in patients receiving ICI therapy as standard of care for solid tumors. We performed in-parallel analysis of cytokines by Luminex immunoassay and circulating immune cells by cytometry by time-of-flight (CyTOF) at baseline and on treatment to investigate mechanisms of irAEs. RESULTS. We enrolled 111 patients, of whom 40.5% developed a symptomatic irAE (grade ≥ 2). Development of a grade ≥ 2 irAE was positively associated with the use of combination ICI and a history of an autoimmune disorder. Early changes in T helper 17 (Th17) (IL-6, IL-17f), type 2 (IL-5, IL-13, IL-25), and type 1 (TNF-α) cytokine signatures and congruent on-treatment expansions of Th17 and Th2 effector memory (Th2EM) T cell populations in peripheral blood were positively associated with the development of grade ≥2 irAEs. IL-6 levels were also associated with inferior cancer-specific survival and overall survival. CONCLUSIONS. In a diverse, prospective pan-tumor cohort, Th17 and Th2 skewing during early ICI treatment was associated with the development of clinically relevant irAEs but not antitumor responses, providing possible targets for monitoring and therapeutic interventions. FUNDING. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg-Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, the NCI SPORE in Gastrointestinal Cancers (P50 CA062924), NCI grant (R50CA243627 to LD), the NIH Center Core Grant (P30 CA006973), Swim Across America (to MY), NIAMS (K23AR075872 to LC), and imCORE-Genentech grant 137515 (to Johns Hopkins Medicine on behalf of MY).

30 May 2024 in Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HBHannah R Burnette
Hannah R Burnette
APAliyah Pabani
Aliyah Pabani
MIMitchell S von Itzstein
Mitchell S von Itzstein
BSBenjamin Switzer
Benjamin Switzer
RFRun Fan
Run Fan
DJDouglas B Johnson
Douglas B Johnson
Background Artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots have become a major source of general and medical information, though their accuracy and completeness are still being assessed. Their utility to answer questions surrounding immune-related adverse events (irAEs), common and potentially dangerous toxicities from cancer immunotherapy, are not well defined. Methods We developed 50 distinct questions with answers in available guidelines surrounding 10 irAE categories and queried two AI chatbots (ChatGPT and Bard), along with an additional 20 patient-specific scenarios. Experts in irAE management scored answers for accuracy and completion using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (least accurate/complete) to 4 (most accurate/complete). Answers across categories and across engines were compared. Results Overall, both engines scored highly for accuracy (mean scores for ChatGPT and Bard were 3.87 vs 3.5, p<0.01) and completeness (3.83 vs 3.46, p<0.01). Scores of 1–2 (completely or mostly inaccurate or incomplete) were particularly rare for ChatGPT (6/800 answer-ratings, 0.75%). Of the 50 questions, all eight physician raters gave ChatGPT a rating of 4 (fully accurate or complete) for 22 questions (for accuracy) and 16 questions (for completeness). In the 20 patient scenarios, the average accuracy score was 3.725 (median 4) and the average completeness was 3.61 (median 4). Conclusions AI chatbots provided largely accurate and complete information regarding irAEs, and wildly inaccurate information (“hallucinations”) was uncommon. However, until accuracy and completeness increases further, appropriate guidelines remain the gold standard to follow

28 October 2021 in JTO Clinical and Research Reports
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
AEAnifat A. Elegbede
Anifat A. Elegbede
Amanda J W GibsonAmanda J W Gibson
Amanda J W Gibson
AFAndrea S. Fung
Andrea S. Fung
WCWinson Cheung
Winson Cheung
MDMichelle L. Dean
Michelle L. Dean
APAliyah Pabani
Aliyah Pabani
The real-world data evaluating treatment outcomes of atezolizumab plus carboplatin-etoposide chemotherapy (atezolizumab) for extensive-stage SCLC (ESCLC) are lacking. Our objective was to evaluate real-world outcomes of ESCLC treated with atezolizumab. A retrospective analysis of provincial patients with ESCLC who started first-line (1L) systemic treatment was conducted. We primarily evaluated the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) outcomes in association with atezolizumab compared with platinum-etoposide chemotherapy (chemotherapy) while adjusting for relevant demographic and clinical factors. Adverse events (AEs) during 1L were evaluated. A total of 67 patients were identified. Of the 34 patients who received atezolizumab, 24% had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status greater than or equal to 2, approximately 50% were more than or equal to 65 years, 21% received cisplatin-etoposide chemotherapy before atezolizumab, and 12% had thoracic radiation (tRT). Within the atezolizumab versus chemotherapy group, the median PFS equals to 6.0 versus 4.3 months (p = 0.03) whereas OS = 12.8 versus 7.1 months (p = 0.01). Relative to chemotherapy, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for PFS was 0.53 (0.28–1.02) and OS was 0.42 (0.20–0.88) with atezolizumab. tRT compared with no tRT receipt correlated with reduced death risk (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] = 0.33 [0.13–0.88]). AE-related treatment withdrawal with atezolizumab was 32% and 15% with chemotherapy (p = 0.02). Within the tRT subgroup, 25% versus 20% in atezolizumab versus chemotherapy group, respectively, discontinued 1L owing to AE. This is the first real-world study revealing comparable survival with that in the IMpower133 trial. Treatment discontinuation from AEs was higher with atezolizumab among Canadian patients with ESCLC. Our data suggest safe use of tRT and chemoimmunotherapy, but its efficacy for ESCLC warrants further study.

18 October 2021 in Current Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HGHeidi Grosjean
Heidi Grosjean
SDSamantha Dolter
Samantha Dolter
DMDaniel Meyers
Daniel Meyers
PDPhilip Q Ding
Philip Q Ding
ISIgor Stukalin
Igor Stukalin
APAliyah Pabani
Aliyah Pabani
The emergence of immunotherapy revolutionized the treatment of non-small-cell-lung cancer (NSCLC), with multiple landmark clinical trials establishing the efficacy of these agents. However, many patients who receive immunotherapy in clinical practice would be considered clinical trial ineligible. One such population that is often under-represented in clinical trials is older adults. In the current study, we evaluated clinical and safety outcomes in this population. Overall, older adults (>70 years of age) and younger adults had comparable clinical outcomes with an equivalent objective response rate (ORR), time to treatment failure (TTF), and median overall survival (p = 0.67, p = 0.98, and p = 0.91, respectively). Furthermore, the safety outcomes were equivalent between the cohorts with similar rates of immune-related adverse events (irAEs), irAE-related hospitalizations, and all-cause hospitalization (p = 0.99, p = 0.63, and p = 0.74, respectively). While older age was not found to impact overall survival, multivariant analysis revealed that a poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) status, low body-mass-index (BMI), and poor/intermediate lung immune prognostic index (LIPI) were all associated with worse survival. In conclusion, age does not impact the efficacy or safety of pembrolizumab in NSCLC, and therefore advanced age should not be a deterrent for treating these patients with pembrolizumab. Physicians and care providers can thus focus on other factors that may influence therapeutic outcomes.

25 May 2023 in Clinical Cancer Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
APAliyah Pabani
Aliyah Pabani
JGJustin F. Gainor
Justin F. Gainor
The clinical development of cytokines as cancer therapeutics has been limited due to significant toxicities generally observed with systemic administration. This narrow therapeutic window, together with relatively modest efficacy, has made natural cytokines unattractive drug candidates. Immunocytokines represent a class of next-generation cytokines designed to overcome the challenges associated with traditional cytokines. These agents seek to improve the therapeutic index of cytokines by using antibodies as vehicles for the targeted delivery of immunomodulatory agents within the local tumor microenvironment (TME). Various molecular formats and cytokine payloads have been studied. In this review, we provide an overview of the rationale, preclinical support, and current clinical development strategies for immunocytokines.