Search

Background: 18 F-fluoroestradiol (FES) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) is considered an accurate diagnostic tool to determine whole-body endocrine responsiveness. In the endocrine therapy (ET)-FES trial, we evaluated 18 F-FES PET/CT as a predictive tool in estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC)., Patients and Methods: Eligible patients underwent an 18 F-FES PET/CT at baseline. Patients with standardized uptake value (SUV) ≥ 2 received single-agent ET until progressive disease; patients with SUV < 2 were randomized to single-agent ET (arm A) or chemotherapy (ChT) (arm B). The primary objective was to compare the activity of first-line ET versus ChT in patients with 18 F-FES SUV < 2., Results: Overall, 147 patients were enrolled; 117 presented with 18 F-FES SUV ≥ 2 and received ET; 30 patients with SUV < 2 were randomized to ET or ChT. After a median follow-up of 62.4 months, 104 patients (73.2%) had disease progression and 53 died (37.3%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.4 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.1-59.6 months] in patients with SUV < 2 randomized to arm A versus 23.0 months (95% CI 7.7-30.0 months) in arm B, [hazard (HR) = 0.71, 95% CI 0.3-1.7 months]; median PFS was 18.0 months (95% CI 11.2-23.1 months) in patients with SUV ≥ 2 treated with ET. Median overall survival (OS) was 28.2 months (95% CI 14.2 months-not estimable) in patients with SUV < 2 randomized to ET (arm A) versus 52.8 months (95% CI 16.2 months-not estimable) in arm B (ChT). Median OS was not reached in patients with SUV ≥ 2. 60-month OS rate was 41.6% (95% CI 10.4% to 71.1%) in arm A, 42.0% (95% CI 14.0% to 68.2%) in arm B, and 59.6% (95% CI 48.6% to 69.0%) in patients with SUV ≥ 2. In patients with SUV ≥ 2, 60-month OS rate was 72.6% if treated with aromatase inhibitors (AIs) versus 40.6% in case of fulvestrant or tamoxifen (P < 0.005)., Conclusions: The ET-FES trial demonstrated that ER+/HER2- MBC patients are a heterogeneous population, with different levels of endocrine responsiveness based on 18 F-FES CT/PET SUV., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Objectives: To date, studies have not provided definitive answers regarding whether previous immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment alters outcomes for cancer patients with COVID-19., Methods: The OnCovid registry (NCT04393974) was searched from February 27, 2020, to January 31, 2022, for patients who received systemic anti-cancer therapy in the 4 weeks before laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis. Propensity-score matching using country, vaccination status, primary tumor type, sex, age, comorbidity burden, tumor stage, and remission status investigated differences in predefined clinical outcomes comparing those who had or had not received ICIs., Results: Of 3523 patients screened, 137 ICI-only and 1378 non-ICI met inclusion criteria. Before matching, ICI patients were older, male, enrolled at centers in Italy, and had histories of smoking, thoracic cancers, advanced cancer stages, and active malignancies (P ≤0.02). After matching, there were 120 ICI and 322 non-ICI patients. ICI patients had no differences (odds ratio: 95% CI) in presenting COVID-19 symptoms (0.69: 0.37-1.28), receipt of COVID-specific therapy (0.88: 0.54-1.41), 14-day (0.95: 0.56-1.61), or 28-day (0.79: 0.48-1.29) mortalities. However, ICI patients required less COVID-19-related hospitalization (0.37: 0.21-0.67) and oxygen therapy (0.51: 0.31-0.83) and developed fewer complications (0.57: 0.36-0.92)., Conclusion: In this propensity-score matched analysis, previous ICI therapy did not worsen and potentially improved COVID-19 outcomes in patients with cancer., Competing Interests: Declarations of competing interest Alessio Cortellini received consulting fees from MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca, Roche; and speakers’ fees from AstraZeneca, MSD, Novartis, and Eisai. Matteo Lambertini acted as a consultant for Roche, Novartis, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Exact Sciences, MSD, Pfizer, and Seagen and received speaker honoraria from Roche, Novartis, Lilly, Pfizer, Takeda, Ipsen and Sandoz outside the submitted work. Alessandra Gennari has declared consulting/advisory role for Roche, MSD, Eli Lilly, Pierre Fabre, Eisai, and Daichii Sankyo; speakers bureau for Eisai, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Roche, Teva, Gentili, Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, Celgene, and Daichii Sankyo; research funds: Eisai, Eli Lilly, and Roche. CMV has received travel grants and other honoraria from BMS, MSD, Novartis, and Roche. Joan Brunet has declared consulting/advisory role for MSD and Astra Zenec, and support for attending meetings and/or travel for GSK. Josep Tabernero reports personal financial interest in the form of scientific consultancy role for Array Biopharma, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Genentech Inc, HalioDX SAS, Hutchison MediPharma International, Ikena Oncology, Inspirna Inc, IQVIA, Lilly, Menarini, Merck Serono, Merus, MSD, Mirati, Neophore, Novartis, Ona Therapeutics, Orion Biotechnology, Peptomyc, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi, Scandion Oncology, Scorpion Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Servier, Sotio Biotech, Taiho, Tessa Therapeutics and TheraMyc. Stocks: Oniria Therapeutics and also educational collaboration with Imedex/HMP, Medscape Education, MJH Life Sciences, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, and Physicians Education Resource (PER). Lorenza Rimassa reports receiving consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bayer, BMS, Eisai, Exelixis, Genenta, Hengrui, Incyte, Ipsen, IQVIA, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Servier, Taiho Oncology, Zymeworks; lecture fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Eisai, Gilead, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi, Servier; travel expenses from AstraZeneca; and institutional research funding from Agios, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Eisai, Exelixis, Fibrogen, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Zymeworks. David J Pinato received lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare, Bayer Healthcare, BMS, Roche, Eisai, Falk Foundation, travel expenses from BMS and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, Eisai, Roche, DaVolterra, and Astra Zeneca; research funding (to institution) from MSD and BMS. All remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Multiple complex intracellular cascades contributing to Hunter syndrome (mucopolysaccharidosis type II) pathogenesis have been recognized and documented in the past years. However, the hierarchy of early cellular abnormalities leading to irreversible neuronal damage is far from being completely understood. To tackle this issue, we have generated two novel iduronate-2-sulfatase (IDS) loss of function human neuronal cell lines by means of genome editing. We show that both neuronal cell lines exhibit no enzymatic activity and increased GAG storage despite a completely different genotype. At a cellular level, they display reduced differentiation, significantly decreased LAMP1 and RAB7 protein levels, impaired lysosomal acidification and increased lipid storage. Moreover, one of the two clones is characterized by a marked decrease of the autophagic marker p62, while none of the two mutants exhibit marked oxidative stress and mitochondrial morphological changes. Based on our preliminary findings, we hypothesize that neuronal differentiation might be significantly affected by IDS functional impairment., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Although representing the majority of newly diagnosed cancers, patients with breast cancer appear less vulnerable to COVID-19 mortality compared with other malignancies. In the absence of patients on active cancer therapy included in vaccination trials, a contemporary real-world evaluation of outcomes during the various pandemic phases, as well as of the impact of vaccination, is needed to better inform clinical practice., Methods: We compared COVID-19 morbidity and mortality among patients with breast cancer across prevaccination (February 27, 2020-November 30, 2020), Alpha-Delta (December 1, 2020-December 14, 2021), and Omicron (December 15, 2021-January 31, 2022) phases using OnCovid registry participants (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04393974). Twenty-eight-day case fatality rate (CFR 28 ) and COVID-19 severity were compared in unvaccinated versus double-dosed/boosted patients (vaccinated) with inverse probability of treatment weighting models adjusted for country of origin, age, number of comorbidities, tumor stage, and receipt of systemic anticancer therapy within 1 month of COVID-19 diagnosis., Results: By the data lock of February 4, 2022, the registry counted 613 eligible patients with breast cancer: 60.1% (n = 312) hormone receptor-positive, 25.2% (n = 131) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, and 14.6% (n = 76) triple-negative. The majority (61%; n = 374) had localized/locally advanced disease. Median age was 62 years (interquartile range, 51-74 years). A total of 193 patients (31.5%) presented ≥ 2 comorbidities and 69% (n = 330) were never smokers. In total, 392 (63.9%), 164 (26.8%), and 57 (9.3%) were diagnosed during the prevaccination, Alpha-Delta, and Omicron phases, respectively. Analysis of CFR 28 demonstrates comparable estimates of mortality across the three pandemic phases (13.9%, 12.2%, 5.3%, respectively; P = .182). Nevertheless, a significant improvement in outcome measures of COVID-19 severity across the three pandemic time periods was observed. Importantly, when reported separately, unvaccinated patients from the Alpha-Delta and Omicron phases achieved comparable outcomes to those from the prevaccination phase. Of 566 patients eligible for the vaccination analysis, 72 (12.7%) were fully vaccinated and 494 (87.3%) were unvaccinated. We confirmed with inverse probability of treatment weighting multivariable analysis and following a clustered robust correction for participating center that vaccinated patients achieved improved CFR 28 (odds ratio [OR], 0.19; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.40), hospitalization (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.69), COVID-19 complications (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.45), and reduced requirement of COVID-19-specific therapy (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.63) and oxygen therapy (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.67) compared with unvaccinated controls., Conclusion: Our findings highlight a consistent reduction of COVID-19 severity in patients with breast cancer during the Omicron outbreak in Europe. We also demonstrate that even in this population, a complete severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination course is a strong determinant of improved morbidity and mortality from COVID-19.

Background: COVID-19 sequelae can affect about 15% of patients with cancer who survive the acute phase of SARS-CoV-2 infection and can substantially impair their survival and continuity of oncological care. We aimed to investigate whether previous immunisation affects long-term sequelae in the context of evolving variants of concern of SARS-CoV-2., Methods: OnCovid is an active registry that includes patients aged 18 years or older from 37 institutions across Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK with a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 and a history of solid or haematological malignancy, either active or in remission, followed up from COVID-19 diagnosis until death. We evaluated the prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae in patients who survived COVID-19 and underwent a formal clinical reassessment, categorising infection according to the date of diagnosis as the omicron (B.1.1.529) phase from Dec 15, 2021, to Jan 31, 2022; the alpha (B.1.1.7)-delta (B.1.617.2) phase from Dec 1, 2020, to Dec 14, 2021; and the pre-vaccination phase from Feb 27 to Nov 30, 2020. The prevalence of overall COVID-19 sequelae was compared according to SARS-CoV-2 immunisation status and in relation to post-COVID-19 survival and resumption of systemic anticancer therapy. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04393974., Findings: At the follow-up update on June 20, 2022, 1909 eligible patients, evaluated after a median of 39 days (IQR 24-68) from COVID-19 diagnosis, were included (964 [50·7%] of 1902 patients with sex data were female and 938 [49·3%] were male). Overall, 317 (16·6%; 95% CI 14·8-18·5) of 1909 patients had at least one sequela from COVID-19 at the first oncological reassessment. The prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae was highest in the pre-vaccination phase (191 [19·1%; 95% CI 16·4-22·0] of 1000 patients). The prevalence was similar in the alpha-delta phase (110 [16·8%; 13·8-20·3] of 653 patients, p=0·24), but significantly lower in the omicron phase (16 [6·2%; 3·5-10·2] of 256 patients, p<0·0001). In the alpha-delta phase, 84 (18·3%; 95% CI 14·6-22·7) of 458 unvaccinated patients and three (9·4%; 1·9-27·3) of 32 unvaccinated patients in the omicron phase had sequelae. Patients who received a booster and those who received two vaccine doses had a significantly lower prevalence of overall COVID-19 sequelae than unvaccinated or partially vaccinated patients (ten [7·4%; 95% CI 3·5-13·5] of 136 boosted patients, 18 [9·8%; 5·8-15·5] of 183 patients who had two vaccine doses vs 277 [18·5%; 16·5-20·9] of 1489 unvaccinated patients, p=0·0001), respiratory sequelae (six [4·4%; 1·6-9·6], 11 [6·0%; 3·0-10·7] vs 148 [9·9%; 8·4-11·6], p=0·030), and prolonged fatigue (three [2·2%; 0·1-6·4], ten [5·4%; 2·6-10·0] vs 115 [7·7%; 6·3-9·3], p=0·037)., Interpretation: Unvaccinated patients with cancer remain highly vulnerable to COVID-19 sequelae irrespective of viral strain. This study confirms the role of previous SARS-CoV-2 immunisation as an effective measure to protect patients from COVID-19 sequelae, disruption of therapy, and ensuing mortality., Funding: UK National Institute for Health and Care Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre and the Cancer Treatment and Research Trust., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AC has received consulting fees from MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, and Roche, and speakers' fee from AstraZeneca, MSD, Novartis, and Eisai. ML acted as a consultant for Roche, Novartis, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Exact Sciences, MSD, Pfizer, and Seagen, and received speaker honoraria from Roche, Novartis, Lilly, Pfizer, Takeda, Ipsen, and Sandoz outside the submitted work. AG declares consulting or advisory roles for Roche, MSD, Eli Lilly, Pierre Fabre, Eisai, and Daichii Sankyo; speakers' fees for Eisai, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Roche, Teva, Gentili, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Celgene, and Daichii Sankyo; and research funds from Eisai, Eli Lilly, and Roche. CM-V has received travel grants and other honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, Novartis, and Roche. JB has declared consulting or advisory roles for MSD and AstraZeneca, and support for attending meetings and travel from GlaxoSmithKline. OM reports personal fees from Grupo Pacifico, Kyowa Kirin, Roche, and ROVI, and travel support from Almirall, Kyowa Kirin, and Sanofi. JT reports personal financial interest in the form of scientific consultancy roles for Array Biopharma, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, F Hoffmann-La Roche, Genentech, HalioDX SAS, Hutchison MediPharma International, Ikena Oncology, Inspirna, IQVIA, Lilly, Menarini, Merck Serono, Merus, MSD, Mirati, Neophore, Novartis, Ona Therapeutics, Orion Biotechnology, Peptomyc, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi, Scandion Oncology, Scorpion Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Servier, Sotio Biotech, Taiho, Tessa Therapeutics, and TheraMyc; stocks in Oniria Therapeutics; and educational collaboration with Imedex/HMP, Medscape Education, MJH Life Sciences, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, and Physicians Education Resource. LRi reports receiving consulting fees from Amgen, ArQule, AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eisai, Exelixis, Genenta, Hengrui, Incyte, Ipsen, IQVIA, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Taiho Oncology, and Zymeworks; lecture fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, Eisai, Gilead, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi, and Servier; travel expenses from AstraZeneca; and institutional research funding from Agios, ARMO BioSciences, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Eisai, Exelixis, Fibrogen, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, and Zymeworks. AD'A has received educational support for congress attendance and consultancy fees from Roche. DJP has received lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare, Bayer Healthcare, BMS, Roche, Eisai, and the Falk Foundation; travel expenses from Bristol Myers Squibb and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, Eisai, Roche, DaVolterra, and Astra Zeneca; and institutional research funding from MSD and Bristol Myers Squibb. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Impaired glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) catabolism may lead to a cluster of rare metabolic and genetic disorders called mucopolysaccharidoses (MPSs). Each subtype is caused by the deficiency of one of the lysosomal hydrolases normally degrading GAGs. Affected tissues accumulate undegraded GAGs in cell lysosomes and in the extracellular matrix, thus leading to the MPS complex clinical phenotype. Although each MPS may present with recognizable signs and symptoms, these may often overlap between subtypes, rendering the diagnosis difficult and delayed. Here, we performed an exploratory analysis to develop a model that predicts MPS subtypes based on UHPLC-MS/MS measurement of a urine free GAG profile (or GAGome). We analyzed the GAGome of 78 subjects (38 MPS, 37 healthy and 3 with other MPS symptom-overlapping disorders) using a standardized kit in a central-blinded laboratory. We observed several MPS subtype-specific GAGome changes. We developed a multivariable penalized Lasso logistic regression model that attained 91.2% balanced accuracy to distinguish MPS type II vs. III vs. any other subtype vs. not MPS, with sensitivity and specificity ranging from 73.3% to 91.7% and from 98.4% to 100%, depending on the predicted subtype. In conclusion, the urine GAGome was revealed to be useful in accurately discriminating the different MPS subtypes with a single UHPLC-MS/MS run and could serve as a reliable diagnostic test for a more rapid MPS biochemical diagnosis.

Mucopolysaccharidosis type II (Hunter Syndrome) is a rare X-linked inherited lysosomal storage disorder presenting a wide genetic heterogeneity. It is due to pathogenic variants in the IDS gene, causing the deficit of the lysosomal hydrolase iduronate 2-sulfatase, degrading the glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) heparan- and dermatan-sulfate. Based on the presence/absence of neurocognitive signs, commonly two forms are recognized, the severe and the attenuate ones. Here we describe a line of induced pluripotent stem cells, generated from dermal fibroblasts, carrying the mutation c.479C>T, and obtained from a patient showing an attenuated phenotype. The line will be useful to study the disease neuropathogenesis., (Copyright © 2022 Fondazione IRCCS Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Mucopolysaccharidosis type II (MPS II) is a neurometabolic disorder, due to the deficit of the lysosomal hydrolase iduronate 2-sulfatase (IDS). This leads to a severe clinical condition caused by a multi-organ accumulation of the glycosaminoglycans (GAGs/GAG) heparan- and dermatan-sulfate, whose elevated levels can be detected in body fluids. Since 2006, enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) has been clinically applied, showing efficacy in some peripheral districts. In addition to clinical monitoring, GAG dosage has been commonly used to evaluate ERT efficacy. However, a strict long-term monitoring of GAG content and composition in body fluids has been rarely performed. Here, we report the characterization of plasma and urine GAGs in Ids knock-out (Ids-ko) compared to wild-type (WT) mice, and their changes along a 24-week follow-up, with and without ERT. The concentration of heparan-sulfate (HS), chondroitin-sulfate (CS), and dermatan-sulfate (DS), and of the non-sulfated hyaluronic acid (HA), together with their differentially sulfated species, was quantified by capillary electrophoresis with laser-induced fluorescence. In untreated Ids-ko mice, HS and CS + DS were noticeably increased at all time points, while during ERT follow-up, a substantial decrease was evidenced for HS and, to a minor extent, for CS + DS. Moreover, several structural parameters were altered in untreated ko mice and reduced after ERT, however without reaching physiological values. Among these, disaccharide B and HS 2s disaccharide showed to be the most interesting candidates as biomarkers for MPS II. GAG chemical signature here defined provides potential biomarkers useful for an early diagnosis of MPS II, a more accurate follow-up of ERT, and efficacy evaluations of newly proposed therapies. KEY MESSAGES : Plasmatic and urinary GAGs are useful markers for MPS II early diagnosis and prognosis. CE-LIF allows GAG structural analysis and the quantification of 17 different disaccharides. Most GAG species increase and many structural features are altered in MPS II mouse model. GAG alterations tend to restore to wild-type levels following ERT administration. CS+DS/HS ratio, % 2,4dis CS+DS, and % HS 2s are potential markers for MPS II pathology and ERT efficacy., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Mucopolysaccharidoses (MPSs) are a group of lysosomal storage disorders caused by the deficit of lysosomal hydrolases involved in the degradation of glycosaminoglycans (GAGs). The course is chronic and progressive, with multisystemic involvement that often leads to cardiovascular disease. We describe the overall incidence and type of cardiac damage in a cohort of Italian MPS patients, and their progression over time, also with reference to treatment efficacy in patients under Enzyme Replacement Therapy (ERT). Moreover, we report a possible association between genetic variants and cardiac phenotype in homozygous and hemizygous patients to understand whether a more aggressive clinical phenotype would predict a greater cardiac damage., Results: Our findings confirm that cardiac involvement is very common, already at diagnosis, in MPS VI (85.7% of our cohort), and in MPS II (68% of our cohort) followed by MPS I subjects (55% of our cohort). The most frequent heart defect observed in each MPS and at any time-point of evaluation was mitral insufficiency; 37% of our patients had mitral insufficiency already at diagnosis, and 60% at post-ERT follow-up. After at least six years of treatment, we observed in some cases (including 6 MPS II, 2 MPS IV and 2 MPS VI) a total regression or improvement of some signs of the cardiac pathology, including some valve defects, though excluding aortic insufficiency, the only valvulopathy for which no regression was found despite ERT. The general clinical phenotype proved not to be strictly correlated with the cardiac one, in fact in some cases patients with an attenuated phenotype developed more severe heart damage than patients with severe phenotype., Conclusions: In conclusion, our analysis confirms the wide presence of cardiopathies, at different extent, in the MPS population. Since cardiac pathology is the main cause of death in many MPS subtypes, it is necessary to raise awareness among cardiologists about early cardiac morpho-structural abnormalities. The encouraging data regarding the long-term effects of ERT, also on heart damage, underlines the importance of an early diagnosis and timely start of ERT., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Mucopolysaccharidosis type VI, or Maroteaux-Lamy syndrome, is a rare, autosomal recessive genetic disease, mainly affecting the pediatric age group. The disease is due to pathogenic variants of the ARSB gene, coding for the lysosomal hydrolase N-acetylgalactosamine 4-sulfatase (arylsulfatase B, ASB). The enzyme deficit causes a pathological accumulation of the undegraded glycosaminoglycans dermatan-sulphate and chondroitin-sulphate, natural substrates of ASB activity. Intracellular and extracellular deposits progressively take to a pathological scenario, often severe, involving most organ-systems and generally starting from the osteoarticular apparatus. Neurocognitive and behavioral abilities, commonly described as maintained, have been actually investigated by few studies. The disease, first described in 1963, has a reported prevalence between 0.36 and 1.3 per 100,000 live births across the continents. With this paper, we wish to contribute an updated overview of the disease from the clinical, diagnostic, and therapeutic sides. The numerous in vitro and in vivo preclinical studies conducted in the last 10-15 years to dissect the disease pathogenesis, the efficacy of the available therapeutic treatment (enzyme replacement therapy), as well as new therapies under study are here described. This review also highlights the need to identify new disease biomarkers, potentially speeding up the diagnostic process and the monitoring of therapeutic efficacy.

Background: Cancer patients are at higher risk of COVID-19 complications and mortality than the rest of the population. Breast cancer patients seem to have better prognosis when infected by SARS-CoV-2 than other cancer patients., Methods: We report a subanalysis of the OnCovid study providing more detailed information in the breast cancer population., Results: We included 495 breast cancer patients with a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Mean age was 62.6 years; 31.5% presented more than one comorbidity. The most frequent breast cancer subtype was luminal-like ( n  = 245, 49.5%) and 177 (35.8%) had metastatic disease. A total of 332 (67.1%) patients were receiving active treatment, with radical intent in 232 (47.6%) of them. Hospitalization rate was 58.2% and all-cause mortality rate was 20.3%. One hundred twenty-nine (26.1%) patients developed one COVID-19 complication, being acute respiratory failure the most common ( n  = 74, 15.0%). In the multivariable analysis, age older than 70 years, presence of COVID-19 complications, and metastatic disease were factors correlated with worse outcomes, while ongoing anticancer therapy at time of COVID-19 diagnosis appeared to be a protective factor. No particular oncological treatment was related to higher risk of complications. In the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection, 73 (18.3%) patients had some kind of modification on their oncologic treatment. At the first oncological reassessment (median time: 46.9 days ± 36.7), 255 (51.6%) patients reported to be fully recovered from the infection. There were 39 patients (7.9%) with long-term SARS-CoV-2-related complications., Conclusion: In the context of COVID-19, our data confirm that breast cancer patients appear to have lower complications and mortality rate than expected in other cancer populations. Most breast cancer patients can be safely treated for their neoplasm during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Oncological treatment has no impact on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 complications, and, especially in the curative setting, the treatment should be modified as little as possible., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: D.J. Pinato reports personal fees from BMS (travel fees, grant to institution, and lecture fees), Eisai (consultancy, lecture fees, and occasional advisory board), H3B (consultancy and occasional advisory board), Astrazeneca (consultancy and occasional advisory board), MiNa therapeutics (consultancy), Roche (lecture fees), Viiv Healthcare (lecture fees), Bayer Healthcare (lecture fees), and Falk Foundation (lecture fees). A. Zambelli reports personal fees from Lilly (occasional advisory board and travel fees), Novartis (occasional advisory board and travel fees), Pfizer (occasional advisory board), Astrazeneca (occasional advisory board), and Roche (occasional advisory board). M. Bower reports personal fees from Gilead (lecture fees), ViiV (lecture fees), BMS (lecture fees), MSD (lecture fees), and Janssen (lecture fees). M. Lambertini reports personal fees from Roche (consultancy and travel fees), Novartis (consultancy and travel fees), Lilly (consultancy and travel fees), Astrazeneca (consultancy), Pfizer (travel fees), Sandoz (travel fees), and Takeda (travel fees). E. Felip reports personal fees from Pfizer (grant to institution) and Instituto Carlos III (research grant). A. Cortellini reports personal fees from BMS (consultancy), MSD (consultancy), Astrazeneca (consultancy and lecture fees), Roche (consultancy), Astellas (lecture fees), and Novartis (Lecture fees). F. Mazzoni reports personal fees from Roche (lecture fees), Takeda (lecture fees), MSD (lecture fees), BMS (lecture fees), Lilly (lecture fees), and Boehringer (lecture fees). M. Romeo reports personal fees from MSD (consultancy), Pfizer (travel fees), and GSK (occasional advisory board). A. Gennari reports personal fees from Astrazeneca (lecture fees), Lilly (lecture fees), Eisai (lecture fees), Pfizer (lecture fees), Novartis (lecture fees), Teva (lecture fees), and Daiichi Sankyo (lecture fees)., (© The Author(s), 2021.)

Mucopolysaccharidosis IVA (MPS IVA, Morquio A syndrome) is a rare autosomal recessive lysosomal storage disorder caused by mutations in the N-acetylgalactosamine-6-sulfatase (GALNS) gene. We collected, analyzed, and uniformly summarized all published GALNS gene variants, thus updating the previous mutation review (published in 2014). In addition, new variants were communicated by seven reference laboratories in Europe, the Middle East, Latin America, Asia, and the United States. All data were analyzed to determine common alleles, geographic distribution, level of homozygosity, and genotype-phenotype correlation. Moreover, variants were classified according to their pathogenicity as suggested by ACMG. Including those previously published, we assembled 446 unique variants, among which 68 were novel, from 1190 subjects (including newborn screening positive subjects). Variants' distribution was missense (65.0%), followed by nonsense (8.1%), splicing (7.2%), small frameshift deletions(del)/insertions(ins) (7.0%), intronic (4.0%), and large del/ins and complex rearrangements (3.8%). Half (50.4%) of the subjects were homozygous, 37.1% were compound heterozygous, and 10.7% had only one variant detected. The novel variants underwent in silico analysis to evaluate their pathogenicity. All variants were submitted to ClinVar (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/clinvar/) to make them publicly available. Mutation updates are essential for the correct molecular diagnoses, genetic counseling, prenatal and preimplantation diagnosis, and disease management., (© 2021 The Authors. Human Mutation published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Breast cancer (BC) is the most common neoplasm in women. Many clinical and preclinical studies investigated the possible relationship between host metabolism and BC. Significant differences among BC subtypes have been reported for glucose metabolism. Insulin can promote tumorigenesis through a direct effect on epithelial tissues or indirectly by affecting the levels of other modulators, such as the insulin-like growth factor (IGF) family of receptors, sex hormones, and adipokines. The potential anti-cancer activity of metformin is based on two principal effects: first, its capacity for lowering circulating insulin levels with indirect endocrine effects that may impact on tumor cell proliferation; second, its direct influence on many pro-cancer signaling pathways that are key drivers of BC aggressiveness., Methods: In the present review, the interaction between BC, host metabolism, and patients' prognosis has been reviewed across available literature evidence., Conclusions: Obesity, metabolic syndrome, and insulin resistance are all involved in BC growth and could have a relevant impact on prognosis. All these factors act through a pro-inflammatory state, mediated by cytokines originated in fat tissue, and seem to be related to a higher risk of BC development and worse prognosis.

The recent introduction of viruses as a weapon against cancer can be regarded as one of the most intriguing approaches in the context of precision medicine. The role of immune checkpoint inhibitors has been extensively studied in early and advanced cancer stages, with extraordinary results. Although there is a good tolerability profile, especially when compared with conventional chemotherapy, severe immune-related adverse events have emerged as a potential limitation. Moreover, there are still treatment-resistant cases and thus further treatment options need to be implemented. Several in vitro and in vivo studies have been conducted and are ongoing to develop oncolytic viruses (OVs) as a tool to modulate the immune system response. OVs are attenuated viruses that can kill cancer cells after having infected them, producing microenvironment remodelling and antitumour immune response. The potential of oncolytic virotherapy is to contrast the absence of T cell infiltrates, converting 'cold' tumours into 'hot' ones, thus improving the performance of the immune system. Breast cancer, the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths among women, is considered a 'cold' tumour. In this context, oncolytic virotherapy might well be considered as a promising strategy. This review summarises the current status, clinical applications and future development of OVs, focusing on breast cancer treatment., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (© the authors; licensee ecancermedicalscience.)

We describe the outcomes in cancer patients during the initial outbreak of the COVID-19 in Europe from the retrospective, multi-center observational OnCovid study. We identified 204 cancer patients from eight centers in the United Kingdom, Italy, and Spain aged > 18 (mean = 69) and diagnosed with COVID-19 between February 26th and April 1st, 2020. A total of 127 (62%) were male, 184 (91%) had a diagnosis of solid malignancy, and 103 (51%) had non-metastatic disease. A total of 161 (79%) had > 1 co-morbidity. A total of 141 (69%) patients had > 1 COVID-19 complication. A total of 36 (19%) were escalated to high-dependency or intensive care. A total of 59 (29%) died, 53 (26%) were discharged, and 92 (45%) were in-hospital survivors. Mortality was higher in patients aged > 65 (36% versus 16%), in those with > 2 co-morbidities (40% versus 18%) and developing > 1 complication from COVID-19 (38% versus 4%, p = 0.004). Multi-variable analyses confirmed age > 65 and > 2 co-morbidities to predict for patient mortality independent of tumor stage, active malignancy, or anticancer therapy. During the early outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Europe co-morbid burden and advancing age predicted for adverse disease course in cancer patients. The ongoing OnCovid study will allow us to compare risks and outcomes in cancer patients between the initial and later stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Breast cancer is the most frequent cancer in women: in 2018, almost two million cases have been diagnosed all over the world and it represents the principal cause of death from a neoplastic disease in women. In the past years, breast cancer prognosis has significantly improved over time: currently 5-year survival rates are in the range of 90%, and 10-year survival is about 80%. This improvement has been mostly observed in western countries, due to high coverage and compliance with screening programs, leading to early diagnosis, i.e., when the disease is at a subclinical level, and to an improvement in tumor molecular characterization and innovative systemic treatments. Yet the identification of different biological breast cancer subtypes prompted the development of innovative targeted agents and improved treatment personalization. On the other hand, longer survival rates and increasing proportions of cured patients require dedicated strategies to manage long-term sequelae of breast cancer treatments, with particular attention to quality of life. This review analyzes the most important issues, potentially occurring with cancer treatments, concerning long-term sequelae and quality of life, to define a global approach to breast cancer survivorship., (Copyright © 2020 Nardin, Mora, Varughese, D'Avanzo, Vachanaram, Rossi, Saggia, Rubinelli and Gennari.)