Rohita, Dipesh

e20551 Background: Lung cancer is leading cause of cancer related mortality globally, with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) comprising approximately 80% of all cases. The combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) or its ligand (PD-L1), specifically Durvalumab, and anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors, such as Tremelimumab has demonstrated clinical efficacy in both adjuvant and neoadjuvant settings. However, a comprehensive systematic review of the available data is currently lacking. This study aims to assess the therapeutic efficacy of Durvalumab combined with Tremelimumab in NSCLC focusing on key end points including progression-free survival, overall survival, overall response rate, and safety, with particular attention to any adverse events and mortality. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed to identify relevant studies published until March 2024 across PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embase databases. Outcomes were pooled using the random effects DerSimonian-Laird model and reported as hazard ratio (HR) with a 95% confidence interval. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 1600 patients with NSCLC were included in the analysis, with 825 patients receiving Durvalumab plus Tremelimumab, and 775 patient receiving Standard chemotherapy across four studies. For Efficacy, following parameters were statistically significant: Progression Free Survival HR 0.75, 95%CI: 0.59, 0.92; Overall Survival HR 0.8, 95%CI: 0.58, 0.99; Overall Response Rate HR: 0.68, 95%CI: 0.47, 0.88, Mean Duration of Response was 12.23 month. Safety outcomes revealed that Durvalumab plus Tremelimumab versus Standard chemotherapy were comparable in mean percentage in terms of following parameters: Any Adverse Event (85.1% vs 92.8%), Any Serious Adverse Event (28.9% vs 17.75%), any mortality (6.35% vs 3.4%), Adverse Event leading to discontinuation (11.6% vs 10.13%), Any treatment related adverse event (69.96% vs 85.6%) and Any Treatment Related Death (0.9% vs 0.3%). Conclusions: Efficacy outcomes in patients treated with Durvalumab plus Tremelimumab demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements while the safety profile was comparable to that of Standard chemotherapy. Given the increasing use of this combination therapy as adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment for NSCLC, further clinical trials are warranted to confirm and validate these findings.

e24010 Background: Cancer increases the risk of atrial fibrillation (AF), particularly in patients over 65 or those with pre-existing cardiovascular disease. Patients with active cancer are at a higher risk of arterial and venous thrombosis. Oral anticoagulation (OAC) is recommended in most patients with comorbidities, based on the CHA2DS2-VASc score. However, because OAC raises the risk of bleeding, it might not be appropriate for patients who have significant or frequent bleeding episodes, vascular malformations, or other contraindications. Anticoagulation in cancer patients is challenging due to thrombocytopenia, bleeding risks, and interactions with chemotherapy. Left atrial appendage Closure (LAAC) offers an alternative to anticoagulation for mitigating stroke risk in nonvalvular AF patients. However, this procedure has been offered less frequently as concerns regarding its prognosis among cancer patients remain unclear. This article aims to find the prognosis of cancer patients with LAAC. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in electronic databases from inception until June 2024 using appropriate Mesh terms. Pooled risk ratios (RR) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random effects models. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 5 studies with a population of 1,20,502 (Cancer Patients: 3803 and Non- Cancer patients: 116699) were included which met all the inclusion criteria. An increased risk of in-hospital mortality among cancer patients with LAAC (RR=1.90; 95% CI=1.05–3.45, P=0.03) with statistically significant was observed. However, other parameters were comparable including, 30 days readmission (RR=1.12; 95% CI=0.95–1.032), all-cause mortality (RR=1.33; 95% CI=0.72–1.95), any bleeding complication (RR=1.04; 95% CI=0.37–1.70), Cardiovascular complication (RR=1.44; 95% CI=0.51–4.06), thromboembolism (RR= 2.28; 95% CI=0.57–9.06), and neurological complication (RR=0.81; 95% CI=0.17–1.46). Conclusions: There were increased chances of in-hospital mortality among cancer patients than in non-cancer patients with LAAC procedures. However, other parameters like cardiovascular complications, any bleeding complications, thromboembolism, and neurological complications were not significantly associated. Further studies are warranted to validate these findings.