Search

Cancer and cardiovascular diseases are the two major causes of mortality, morbidity, and disability worldwide. The improvement in effective therapeutic options for the management of breast cancer (BC) has led to an increased number of BC survivors, who can experience longterm toxicities from cancer treatments. Adverse events including cardiovascular toxicities must be considered in light of effectiveness of recently approved drugs for BC treatment, including elacestrant, tucatinib, neratinib, olaparib, the immune checkpoint inhibitors, trastuzumab deruxtecan, or sacituzumab govitecan. Many cancer drugs affect the cardiovascular system with a range of clinical manifestations. Prompt diagnosis and treatment as well as a multidisciplinary approach involving a cardio-oncologist is optimal for management of these cardiovascular events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Baseline tumor size (BTS) has been associated with outcomes in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy. However, the prognostic impact of BTS on patients receiving targeted therapies (TTs) remains undetermined. Methods We reviewed data of patients with advanced solid tumors consecutively treated within early-phase clinical trials at our institution from 01/2014 to 04/2021. Treatments were categorized as immunotherapy-based or TT-based (biomarker-matched or not). BTS was calculated as the sum of RECIST1.1 baseline target lesions. Results A total of 444 patients were eligible; the median BTS was 69 mm (IQR 40-100). OS was significantly longer for patients with BTS lower versus higher than the median (16.6 vs. 8.2 months, P <.001), including among those receiving immunotherapy (12 vs. 7.5 months, P =.005). Among patients receiving TT, lower BTS was associated with longer PFS (4.7 vs. 3.1 months, P =.002) and OS (20.5 vs. 9.9 months, P <.001) as compared to high BTS. However, such association was only significant among patients receiving biomarker-matched TT, with longer PFS (6.2 vs. 3.3 months, P <.001) and OS (21.2 vs. 6.7 months, P <.001) in the low-BTS subgroup, despite a similar ORR (28% vs. 22%, P =.57). BTS was not prognostic among patients receiving unmatched TT, with similar PFS (3.7 vs. 4.4 months, P =.30), OS (19.3 vs. 11.8 months, P =.20), and ORR (33% vs. 28%, P =.78) in the 2 BTS groups. Multivariate analysis confirmed that BTS was independently associated with PFS (P =.03) and OS (P <.001) but not with ORR (P =.11). Conclusions Higher BTS is associated with worse survival outcomes among patients receiving biomarker-matched, but not biomarker-unmatched TT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE To evaluate the clinical patterns of utilization of OncotypeDX Recurrence Score (RS) in early-stage, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer (BC) at an academic center with previously established internal reflex testing guidelines. METHODS RS testing in accordance with preexisting reflex criteria and predictors of utilization outside of reflex criteria were retrospectively analyzed for the years 2019- 2021 in a quality improvement evaluation. Patients were grouped according to OncotypeDX testing within (cohort A) or outside (cohort B) of predefined criteria which included a cap at age older than 65 years. RESULTS Of 1,687 patients whose tumors had RS testing, 1,087 were in cohort A and 600 in cohort B. In cohort B, nearly half of patients were older than 65 years (n = 279; IQR, 67-72 years). For patients older than 65 years, those with RS testing were younger (median age: 69 v 73 years), with higher grade cancers (G2-3: 84.9% v 54.7%) and were more likely to be treated with chemotherapy (15.4% v 4.1%). Issues for implementation of RS testing in older patients were identified, including potential structural barriers related to the current policy on the reimbursements of genomic tests. CONCLUSION Internal guidelines may facilitate standardized utilization of the RS in early-BC. Our data suggest that clinicians preferred broader utilization of RS across the age spectrum, with therapeutically important consequences. Modifying the current policy for reimbursement of RS testing and in internal reflexive testing criteria for those older than 65 years is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) are immune cells that can be involved in the anti-tumor response and are presently viewed as a promising, inexpensive biomarker with prognostic and predictive potential. It has been demonstrated that patients with early triple-negative breast cancer and high TILs report higher responses to treatments with improved survival outcomes. Moreover, TIL expression may have a prognostic role in non-triple-negative subtypes and predict the response to immuno-oncology agents. However, the use of TILs as biomarkers in clinical practice is still limited by the lack of rigorous, prospective validation. This review summarizes the most important current issues and future challenges to assessing and validating TILs as predictive and prognostic biomarkers in patients with breast cancer. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) represent a surrogate biomarker of anti-tumor, lymphocyte-mediated immunity. In early, triple-negative breast cancer, TILs have level 1B of evidence to predict clinical outcomes. TILs represent a promising biomarker to select patients who can experience a better prognosis with de-intensified cancer treatments and derive larger benefits from immune checkpoint inhibitors. However, the assessment and the validation of TILs as a biomarker require a prospective and rigorous demonstration of its clinical validity and utility, provided reproducible analytical performance. With pending data about the prospective validation of TILs' clinical validity to modulate treatments in early breast cancer, this review summarizes the most important current issues and future challenges related to the implementation of TILs assessments across all breast cancer subtypes and their potential integration into clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The occurrence of cardiovascular events is a major cause of death in patients with cancer. Small studies have documented a connection between specific brain alterations and autonomic cardiac dysfunctions, possibly resulting in a worse prognosis. We aimed to refine the knowledge of fatal cardiac events in patients with brain metastasis (BM). Methods: We performed a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results SEER registry‐based investigation (timeline: 2010–2016) and extracted all the advanced patients who had experienced fatal cardiac outcomes. Populations were compared according to the presence or not BM. Kaplan–Meier (KM) methodology was used for survival analysis and a multivariate model was developed by adjusting for multiple possible confounders. Results: Most related BM and cardiac death were observed at the site of lung cancer (81.4%). We extracted 3187 patients with lung cancer site, including 417 patients who had experienced fatal heart‐specific with a history of BM, which is considered a BM group. The second group of heart‐specific death included 2770 patients was stated as a non‐BM group. Patients who had experienced heart‐specific death in the BM group were predominately male, right side, upper site, and non‐small type (62.11%, 54.92%, 51.56%, 69.78%), respectively. The survival outcomes between BM and the non‐ BM was significantly prominent (p = 0.003; median: 2 months vs. 3 months).The negative prognostic independent significance of heart‐fatal events was confirmed after adjusting for multiple variables (HR = 0.76, CI = 0.68–84, p < 0.0001). The metastatic liver site was significantly associated with poorer survival rates (HR = 0.68; CI = 0.52–0.88, p = 0.005). We revealed a possible connection between the brain and heart functions. Conclusions: The prognosis of heart‐specific death patients in BM is unfavorable compared to non‐BM settings in lung cancer. We may be at the gates of a new field of neurocardiooncology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The outbreak of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)–related disease (coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]) has spread rapidly to a pandemic proportion, increasing the demands on health systems for the containment and management of COVID-19. Cancer has been reported as a major risk factor for adverse outcomes of and death from COVID-19. We extracted data from the World Health Organization's progress reports and from the Italian Council of Medicine. In addition, we retrieved clinical data on patients with cancer and with confirmed COVID-19 in our institution. As of 2nd April 2020, 110,574 COVID-19 cases and 13,157 deaths have been reported in Italy, representing a global share of 5.1% and 28.9% for incidence and mortality, respectively. In Italy, we report the analysis of the Italian Medical Council on 909 patients who died from COVID-19; of whom, 16.5% were patients with cancer. The population was enriched with subjects with multiple comorbid non-communicable diseases, with less than 1% of the population presenting no comorbid conditions. At the patient level, we identified nine patients referred to our department in the last two months who were receiving standard-of-care or experimental medications in the curative and palliative settings. The median age was 68 years (range = 42–79 years), and patients carried a median of one comorbid condition (0–2); two of nine patients presented with severe COVID-19 and were receiving inpatient care. None of the patients receiving immunotherapy experienced severe adverse outcomes, and four patients were discharged with complete reversal of the clinical syndrome and SARS-CoV-2 clearance. Learning from the experience of countries with a high burden, efforts must be made to assure the access of patients with cancer to treatments, prioritising the cancer health interventions based on their intrinsic value and limiting the exposure to an unacceptable risk of infection for both health providers and patients. Any significant work in the design and implementation of health system actions, including clinical care, must be framed as an initiative under the global response agenda and through a community approach, with the intention of pursuing common goals to tackle COVID-19 and cancer, as 'One Community' working for 'One Health's. • One percent of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the series were reported as patients with cancer; 50% experienced a severe or fatal event. • In Italy, 16.5% of patients dying from COVID-19 are patients with cancer. • In the first Italian series of patients with cancer and COVID-19 receiving active treatment, 22% experienced severe presentation. • Research is emphasised to enhance knowledge on COVID-19 and cancer care, under a global response through community healthcare. • An intersectoral line must be pursued for this public health (PH) emergency, providing prevention and control measures to patients with cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: We investigated for the first time the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines in patients receiving new antineoplastic agents in early-stage clinical trials, including new immuno-regulatory anti-cancer investigational compounds and drug combinations. We found that about three-quarters of the patients under active anticancer treatments experienced mild to moderate adverse effects (AEs) related to COVID-19 vaccines. Patients enrolled in early-phase trials or receiving experimental immunotherapy agents did not experience worse AEs related to the vaccine than patients with cancer not enrolled in these trials, receiving approved drugs. The safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines in patients enrolled in early-phase clinical trials, including those treated with new immune checkpoint inhibitors, does not seem to differ from that of the general population of patients with cancer. Our data support the current vaccine prioritization of all cancer patients with active treatment and calls for data sharing from vaccinated patients enrolled in early-phase clinical trials. Pivotal trials of COVID-19 vaccines did not include cancer patients, with questions remaining about their safety and efficacy in this population. Patients enrolled in early-phase clinical trials receive novel treatments with unknown efficacy and safety profiles. Studies on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in these patients are urgently required. This is a retrospective, real-world, cohort study of patients receiving anticancer treatments and COVID-19 vaccines between 1 February and 25 June 2021 at the Division of New Drugs Development for Innovative Therapies of the European Institute of Oncology. One hundred thirteen patients were enrolled, 40 in early-phase clinical trials, and 20 under novel immunotherapy agents. Nearly three-quarters of the patients experienced at least one adverse event (AE) after the first dose (1D) (74.3%) and second dose (2D) (72.6%). Most of the AEs were local (67.3% 1D and 61.9% after 2D), while 31.8% (1D) and 38.1% (2D) of the patients had systemic AEs. No AEs above grade 2 were observed. Therefore, COVID-19 vaccines appear to be safe in patients enrolled in early-phase clinical trials, including patients receiving novel immunotherapy compounds. All cancer patients should be prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination, regardless of ongoing treatments or enrollment in early-phase trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cancer patients frequently use complementary medicine. Curcumin (CUR) and its derivates (from the extract of Curcuma longa L.) represent some of the most frequently used ones, having a long history in traditional Asian medicine. CUR was demonstrated, both in vitro and in vivo, to have significant anti-inflammatory effects, thus potentially counteracting cancer-promoting inflammation, which is a hallmark of cancer. CUR modulate a plethora of signaling pathways in cancer cells, comprising the NF-κB (nuclear factor k-light-chain-enhancer of activated B cells), the JAK/STAT (Janus-Kinase/Signal Transducers and Activators of Transcription), and the TGF-β (transforming growth factor-β) pathways. Furthermore, CUR confers properties of electron receptors, which destabilize radical oxygen species (ROS), explaining its antioxidant and anti-apopototic effects. Although CUR has a low bioavailability, its role in advanced cancer treatment and supportive care was addressed in numerous clinical trials. After promising results in phase I–II trials, multiple phase III trials in different indications are currently under way to test for direct anti-cancer effects. In addition, CUR exerts beneficial effects on cancer treatment-related neurotoxcity, cardiotoxicity, nephrotoxicity, hemato-toxicity, and others. More efficient galenic formulations are tested to optimze CUR's usability in cancer treatment. This review should provide a comprehensive overview of basic science, and pre-clinical and clinical data on CUR in the field of oncology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Low human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression is emerging as an actionable biomarker for the treatment of breast cancer (BC) with novel anti-HER2 drugs. However, the evolution of this biomarker during the course of disease is still poorly characterised, and controversial data exist on its prognostic implications. We reviewed data of patients with HER2-negative BC according to the latest ASCO/CAP guidelines referred between January 2014 and December 2020. We grouped patients based on the immunohistochemistry (IHC) expression of HER2, HER2-zero (IHC 0) and HER2-low subgroup (IHC 1+ or 2+/ISH-negative) and evaluated the evolution of HER2 expression between the primary tumour and the first biopsy collected in the advanced setting. Disease-free survival, overall survival and progression-free survival were compared between patients with HER2-zero and HER2-low expression on the primary tumour. 232 patients were included in the analysis. Among the overall population, there was a relevant discordance in HER2 expression between the primary tumour and the matched biopsy (K = 0.33, 95%CI 0.21–0.44): 44% of the HER2-zero primary tumour showed an increased HER2 score on biopsy, and 22% of the HER2-low primary tumours turned into HER2-IHC 0. The findings in the sub-populations of hormone-receptors positive (K = 0.32, 95%CI 0.19–0.45) and triple-negative tumours (K = 0.18, 95%CI -0.09-0.46) were consistent with the primary analysis. No difference in survival outcomes was observed between HER2-low and HER2-zero primary tumours. HER2-low expression is dynamic in BC and may be enriched in the advanced-stage setting. No prognostic significance was demonstrated for HER2-low expression. • HER2-low expression is emerging as an actionable biomarker in breast cancer. • HER2 IHC score increased from primary to metastatic tumour in 44% of the patients. • HER2-low to HER2-zero evolution was observed in 22% of the patients. • HER2-low expression is dynamic and may be enriched in the advanced-stage setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The treatment for primary malignant phyllodes tumors of the breast (B-MPT) consists of wide local excision with negative margins (≥1 cm). However, because of their rarity, prognostic factors, type of surgery and adjuvant treatments are still a matter of debate. We conducted a single-center retrospective study to describe outcomes and prognostic factors of patients with primary B-MPT, who underwent breast surgery from January 2000 to December 2021. The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of any recurrence. Secondary endpoints were the cumulative incidences of distant and local recurrences. 131 patients were included, of whom all received surgery, 5 adjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy and 15 radiation therapy. After a median follow-up of 6.4 years, the cumulative incidences at 5-years of any, local and distant recurrences were of 26% (95% Confidence Interval [CI], 4–34%), 16% (95%CI, 10–24%) and 10% (95%CI, 5.3–16%), respectively. Tumor size ≥ 5 cm was associated with higher distant recurrences (p = 0.05); instead, among small tumors (<5 cm), distant recurrences were higher in those with heterologous differentiation and/or multifocal disease (p = 0.06). Type of breast surgery (mastectomy vs. lumpectomy/excision) was not found to be significantly associated with distant (p = 0.32) or local (p = 0.17) recurrence, even after controlling local recurrence incidence for negative pathologic prognostic factors (p = 0.17). The natural history of B-MPT is burdened by local and distant recurrences. Pathologic prognostic factors (i.e., tumor size, heterologous differentiation and multifocal disease) more than the type of wide breast surgery (mastectomy vs. lumpectomy) seem to represent the most significant prognostic factor for recurrences. • Malignant phyllodes tumors of the breast (B-MPT) are rare neoplasm. • 15%/18% of patients experience a distant/loco-regional relapse, respectively. • Tumor size ≥ 5 cm is associated with a higher incidence of distant recurrence. • Wide excision with negative margins (≥1 cm) must be pursued in patients with B-MPT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]