How do we deal with the tumour treatment?

How do we deal with the adverse effects of tumour therapy?While we often experience the efficacy of the programme, we are forced to stop the treatment because of the adverse effects, but we are reluctant to say “byes” to the immune route, and we are distraught by the problems and anxiety.So, can these patients get immunisation again?1 Patients who have been stopped with adverse effects can try to restart immunization if they are well controlled and still have clinical benefitsThe selection of high-security drugs, timely monitoring and early response to adverse effects can effectively reduce the risk of interruption of treatment due to adverse effectsIt is important to understand that, in the case of adverse effects, when people weigh the re-challenge of immunisation, there are two things to worry: whether one will repeat the previous negative response; and whether re-treatment will be ineffective.With regard to this concern, we can speak directly with data: in a large retrospective study on the assessment of immuno-related malfeasance events (irAEs) published by JAMA Online, experts followed up on some of the patients with immuno-revalence challenges and found that less than 30 per cent of patients with immunotherapy re-challenges using PD-1 inhibitors were re-emerging with the same adverse effects as before, and the overall incidence of adverse effects was only around one third [1].In other words, a patient’s friend who has been drugged off due to a bad reaction, has been activated on a well-controlled basis.So, as we can see from this, even if the immunotherapy was interrupted, it could still be good for the patient after the re-launch. So there’s really no need to say goodbye to immunisation because of a bad reaction. After all, there’s not so many scalable treatments for us to pick and choose, and every hope in this is that our fellow patients actually have a “active” chance. The PD-1 inhibitor has become a safer immunotherapy option compared to drugs such as CTLA-4 in general.If we focus more on the PD-1 inhibitor category, the safety of the various PD-1 inhibitors will be found to be different, mainly due to structural differences.It is believed to be a problem for many immunological patients:The programme has been very effective, but has been forced to stop the treatment because of its adverse effects, but has been reluctant to say “goodbye” to the immunotherapy route and to be in a state of discomfort and anxiety.So, can these patients get immunisation again?The two retrospective studies[2] included 482 advanced NSCLC patients receiving treatment with immunosuppressants, and some patients reached full or partial relief after recommenced.As we can see from this, even after the immunization treatment has been discontinued, there is a risk that it will be effective after the re-establishment. So there’s really no need to say good-bye to immunotherapy because of a bad reaction. After all, there’s not a lot of scalable treatment for us to pick and choose, and every hope has to be grasped! Reducing the risk of a negative response would not be a high risk of a negative response from the reimmunisation challenge, which would relieve the affected friends. However, protection against the risk of adverse effects remains an important topic – For more immunization patients, what is at stake is not a post-disposal re-entry, but rather: how do we reduce the risk of adverse reactions and avoid a stoppage?In conclusion, we must be aware that, in this regard, there is a real “active” opportunity for our fellow victims. In general, the choice of drugs with a low probability of adverse effects is already a safer immune treatment option for PD-1 inhibitors than for drugs such as CTLA-4 and is believed in the general control and judgement of the clinical practitioner over the disease.