Search

IntroductionOn March 11th, COVID-19 was categorized as a pandemic. Risk factors for poor outcome in COVID-19 disease include personal history of cancer. The purpose of this research is to explore what do cancer patients know about COVID-19 and their perception of infection risk.MethodsA pilot questionnaire was initiated in hospitalized cancer patients at a large academic medical center to explore fears and other issues related with COVID-19 disease and cancer patients. A stratified analysis by age, sex, marital status, educational background, number of previous systemic treatments received and hospitalization cause was carried out. χ² test, Fisher’s exact test, Spearman's rank correlation coefficient and Kendall rank correlation coefficient were performed when indicated on each category.Results33 patients were included. 66.7% of patients were male and 33.3% female, with a median age of 57 years old. Natural origin hypothesis of novel coronavirus and high educational levels (tau-c = 0.260, p = 0.040) had a positive moderate correlation. Young cancer patients are more afraid of a SARS-CoV-2 infection than elderly people (p=0.034). Thinking there are differences in COVID-19 symptoms due to cancer treatments had a positive moderate correlation with the number of treatments received (tau-b = 0.342, p = 0.005).ConclusionCancer patients need more information about coronavirus and how can affect them. Some of them are not aware of how can cancer increase their risk of infection. However, they agree with measures that hospitals have implemented and don’t feel they affect the quality of care they receive when admitted.

BACKGROUND. Reference centers (RCs) are a key point for improving the survival of patients with soft‐tissue sarcomas (STS). The aim of this study was to evaluate selected items in the management of patients with STS, comparing results between RC and local hospitals (LHs). MATERIALS AND METHODS. Diagnostic and therapeutic data from patients diagnosed between January 2004 and December 2011 were collected. Correlation with outcome was performed. RESULTS. A total of 622 sarcomas were analyzed, with a median follow‐up of 40 months. Imaging of primary tumor preoperatively (yes vs. no) correlated with a higher probability of free surgical margins (77.4% versus 53.7%; p = .006). The provenance of the biopsy (RC vs. LH) significantly affected relapse‐free survival (RFS; 3‐year RFS 66% vs. 46%, respectively; p = .019). Likewise, 3‐year RFS was significantly worse in cases with infiltrated (55.6%) or unknown (43.4%) microscopic surgical margins compared with free margins (63.6%; p < .001). Patients managed by RCs had a better 3‐year overall survival compared with those managed by LHs (82% vs. 70.4%, respectively; p = .003). Perioperative chemotherapy in high‐risk STS, more frequently administered in RCs than in LHs, resulted in significantly better 3‐year RFS (66% vs. 44%; p = .011). In addition, patients with stage IV disease treated in RCs survived significantly longer compared with those in LHs (30.4 months vs. 18.5 months; p = .036). CONCLUSION. Our series indicate that selected quality‐of‐care items were accomplished better by RCs over LHs, all with significant prognostic value in patients with STS. Early referral to an RC should be mandatory if the aim is to improve the survival of patients with STS. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE. This prospective study in patients diagnosed with soft‐tissue sarcoma shows the prognostic impact of reference centers in the management of these patients. The magnitude of this impact encompasses all steps of the process, from the initial management (performing diagnostic biopsy) to the advanced disease setting. This is the first prospective evidence showing improvement in outcomes of patients with metastatic disease when they are managed in centers with expertise. This study provides extra data supporting referral of patients with sarcoma to reference centers.

Background Oncogenic KIT/PDGFRA signaling inhibition with imatinib achieves disease control in most patients with advanced/metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST), but resistance eventually develops after 20-24 months. Notably, a small subset of these patients obtain durable benefit from imatinib therapy. Methods We analyzed clinical, pathological, and molecular characteristics and long-term outcomes in patients with metastatic GIST treated with continuous daily dosing of frontline imatinib in a cohort of patients benefiting for >= 5 years. A control group was obtained from the national Spanish Group for Sarcoma Research database and used as comparator. Results Sixty-four imatinib long-term responders (LTRs) and 70 control cases were identified. Compared with controls, LTRs at baseline had better performance status (PS) 0-1 (100% vs. 81%), lower mitotic count (median, 8 vs. 15), and tumor burden (number of metastases, 3 vs. 7). KIT exon 11 was the only region found mutated in LTRs. LTRs achieved 34% complete responses and a median progression-free survival of 11 years, compared with 4% and 2 years, respectively, in the control cohort. Prognostic factors that independently predicted long-term benefit with imatinib were PS, number of metastases prior to imatinib, and response to imatinib. Fifteen LTR patients developed new side effects attributable to imatinib after >= 5 years of continuous treatment. No resistance mutations were found in metastatic samples from three patients progressing on imatinib. Conclusion GISTs in LTRs are a distinctive entity with less aggressive behavior and marked sensitivity to KIT inhibition. Patients reaching 5 or more years on imatinib have a higher chance of remaining progression free over time. Implications for Practice This work demonstrates that clinical and inherent tumor characteristics define a subset of patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) with increased likelihood to achieve durable response to first-line imatinib therapy. Patients reaching >= 5 years on imatinib have a greater chance of remaining progression free over time, although the disease is unlikely to be cured. Imatinib is well tolerated for >5 years, and emergent toxicities are overall manageable. Resistance to imatinib emerging in patients with GISTs after long-term imatinib treatment does not involve polyclonal expansion of KIT secondary mutations.