Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are monoclonal antibodies targeting cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4), programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1), or PD-1 ligand (PD-L1). ICI are approved for the treatment of malign melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, classical Hodgkin lymphoma, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, urothelial carcinoma, and renal cell carcinoma. They can lead to long-term anti-tumor responses by deactivating the brake mechanism in the immune system. Ipilimumab, tremelimumab, pembrolizumab, nivolumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, and avelumab are examples of ICI. CTLA-4 is a brake mechanism in immune response. Ipilimumab and tremelimumab are antibodies against CTLA-4. PD-1 is another important immune checkpoint co-inhibitor receptor that is expressed by activated T cells in the peripheral tissue. As a result of blockage of the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway, local tumor-specific immune response augments, and long-term tumor control can be achieved. In recent years, ICI are approved for the treatment of various malignities. They may be responsible for specific toxicities called immune-related adverse events (irAEs). irAEs are a consequence infiltration of normal tissues by activated T lymphocytes that are responsible for autoimmunity. Corticosteroids and anti-tumor necrosis factor agents, such as infliximab and mycophenolate mofetil, are effective in the treatment of irAEs. Immune checkpoint inhibition with monoclonal antibodies against CTLA-4 and/or PD-1/PD-L1 by single agent or combination treatments became a new option in various solid tumors. However, ICI have unique adverse events, and these adverse events should be considered in any new onset clinical situation and should be managed properly. Future prospective randomized clinical trials will clarify recent questions. Cite this article as: Simsek M, Tekin SB, Bilici M. Immunological Agents Used in Cancer Treatment. Eurasian J Med 2019; 51(1): 90-4.

Aim: To compare the seropositivity rate of cancer patients with noncancer controls after inactive SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and evaluate the factors affecting seropositivity. Method: Spike IgG antibod... Plain language summary Cancer patients are at high risk for infection with SARS-CoV-2 and of developing the associated disease, COVID-19, which therefore puts them in the priority group for vaccina...

Aim: To show the prognostic significance of the glucose-to-lymphocyte ratio (GLR) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Patients & methods: A total of 150 patients with advanced HCC who were treated w...

The prognosis of breast cancer patients with brain metastasis is poor. It was aimed to define the clinicopathological features of breast cancer patients with brain metastases and to determine the risk factors and survival outcomes associated with brain metastasis. This is a single-center, retrospective, cross-sectional study. A total number of 127 patients diagnosed with breast cancer and who developed brain metastasis between January 2011 and March 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. The survival and clinicopathological data of these patients according to 4 biological subtypes were evaluated (luminal A, luminal B, HER-2 overexpressing, and triple-negative). The median overall survival for all patients was 45.6 months. The median time from the diagnosis of breast cancer to the occurrence of brain metastasis was 29.7 months, and the median survival time after brain metastasis was 7.2 months. The time from the diagnosis of breast cancer to brain metastasis development was significantly shorter in HER-2 overexpressing and triple-negative subtypes than in luminal A and B subtypes. The median time from breast cancer diagnosis to brain metastasis was 33.5 months in luminal A, 40.6 months in luminal B, 16.8 months in HER-2 overexpressing, and 22.8 months in the triple-negative groups ( ). We found the worst median survival after brain metastasis in the triple-negative group with 3.5 months. Early and close surveillance of high-risk patients may help early diagnosis of brain metastasis and may provide to perform effective treatments leading to longer overall survival times for this patient population.

Background: Osteosarcoma is a rare but aggressive bone malignancy. Despite advances in multimodal therapy, survival remains suboptimal, highlighting the need for prognostic markers to guide treatment. Methods: This study included 162 osteosarcoma patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery between January 2009 and March 2024. Patients received either double (cisplatin + doxorubicin) or triple (MAP or PEI) chemotherapy. Survival analyses were conducted using Kaplan–Meier curves, log-rank tests, and Cox proportional hazards models. Results: The median age was 20 years (IQR: 18–29), and 53.1% were male. Patients who received triple chemotherapy regimens demonstrated significantly longer overall survival (OS) compared to those on doublet regimens. High tumor necrosis rates (>90%) and negative surgical margins were strongly associated with improved OS, while metastatic disease at diagnosis, elevated alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and male gender were linked to poorer survival. Multivariate analysis identified adjuvant therapy, age under 18, high necrosis rate, negative margins, and normal ALP as significant OS predictors. Conclusions: Triple-agent chemotherapy, necrosis rate ≥90 and negative surgical margins are strongly associated with prolonged survival in osteosarcoma. The key prognostic indicators such as ALP levels, surgical margins and age at diagnosis should guide personalized treatment strategies to improve outcomes in curable patients.

Summary: Microbiota plays an essential role in human development and body homeostasis. Individual and environmental variables influence the diversity of microbiota, which performs crucial biochemical activities in the human body and influences health status and disease in later years. Many diseases in adulthood may be prevented or treated if the relationship between the microbiome, nutrition, especially the immune system, and growth and development could be fully understood. For a healthy gut microbiota, the diet‐related changes in the core microbiota must be long‐lasting, achieving permanence in microbiota change. This process is possible by maintaining a sustainable diet and adhering to this diet for a long time. Therefore, this study reviewed the relationship between nutrition, microbiota, and various life‐threatening diseases.