Search

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 (CFR28) 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 CFR28 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 CFR28 (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.

Purpose: No evidence exists as to whether type 2 diabetes (T2DM) impairs clinical outcome from Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICI) in patients with solid tumors. Experimental Design: In a large cohort of ICI recipients treated at 21 institutions from June 2014 to June 2020, we studied whether patients on glucose lowering medications (GLM) for T2DM had shorter OS and PFS. We used targeted transcriptomics in a subset of patients to explore differences in the tumor microenvironment of patients with/without diabetes. Results: A total of 1395 patients were included. Primary tumors included NSCLC (54.7%), melanoma (24.7%), renal cell (15.0%) and other carcinomas (5.6%). Following multivariable analysis, patients on GLM (n=226, 16.2%) displayed an increased risk of death (HR 1.29, 95%CI:1.07-1.56) and disease progression/death (HR 1.21, 95%CI:1.03-1.43) independent of number of GLM received. We matched 92 metformin exposed with 363 controls and 78 patients on other oral GLM or insulin with 299 control patients. Exposure to metformin, but not other GLM was associated with an increased risk of death (HR 1.53, 95%CI:1.16-2.03) and disease progression/death (HR 1.34, 95%CI:1.04-1.72). T2DM patients with higher pre-treatment glycaemia had higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (p=0.04), while exploratory tumoral transcriptomic profiling in a subset of patients (n=22) revealed differential regulation of innate and adaptive immune pathways in T2DM patients. Conclusions: In this study patients on GLM experienced worse outcomes from immunotherapy, independent of baseline features. Prospective studies are warranted to clarify the relative impact of metformin over a pre-existing diagnosis of T2DM in influencing poorer outcomes in this population.

Purpose Single-agent immune checkpoint inhibitor (IO) therapy is the standard of care for non-oncogene addicted advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) with PD-L1 ≥ 50%. High tumor mutation burden (H-TMB) is a notable biomarker for IO response. Smoking-induced harm generates H-TMB in smoking aNSCLC patients (S-pts), whereas never-smoking patients (NS-pts) usually have low TMB and are IO-unresponsive. However, NS-pts with H-TMB have not been well molecularly characterized. Experimental design Clinical data of 142 aNSCLC patients with PD-L1 ≥ 50% treated with first-line pembrolizumab were retrospectively collected. Next-generation sequencing was performed using the FoundationOne®CDx assay to correlate genomic alterations with clinical characteristics and response outcomes. Detected mutations were classified into eleven main pathways: cell cycle, Hippo, Myc, Notch, oxidative stress/Nrf2, PI3K, RTK/RAS/MAP, TGF-b, p53, b-catenin/Wnt, and DDR. Enrichment analysis was performed on pathways with at least one mutation per patient to characterize patient subgroups based on mutated pathways. Moreover, to further investigate the molecular characterization of patients’ subgroups, we built and analyzed the patient similarity network exploiting the mutational profile to compute the pairwise similarity between patients. Results There were 111 S-pts and 31 NS-pts; S-pts had higher TMB (median TMB: 8 vs. 4 Mut/Mb). However, 11 NS-pts had high TMB (median TMB: 16.39 Mut/Mb) and were significantly enriched in b-catenin/Wnt and DDR pathway mutations (p-values=0.0027 and 0.0014, respectively) compared to others and H-TMB/S-pts. Using publicly available molecular characterization data (of 853 NSCLC patients from 2 randomized controlled trials), DDR pathway mutations were confirmed to be enriched in NS-pts with H-TMB. In the real world cohort the subgroup of H-TMB/NS-pts with DDR pathway mutation showed better IO response and survival. Moreover, the similarity network analysis of the NS-pts revealed the presence of one subgroup characterized by high TMB, improved OS and a prevalence of DDR pathway mutations. Conclusions DDR signature has a potential role as additional generator of H-TMB in NS-pts. This subgroup of IO-responsive NS-pts may have better prognosis.

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 center dot 7%] of 1902 patients with sex data were female and 938 [49 center dot 3%] were male). Overall, 317 (16 center dot 6%; 95% CI 14 center dot 8-18 center dot 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 prevaccination phase (191 [19 center dot 1%; 95% CI 16 center dot 4-22 center dot 0] of 1000 patients). The prevalence was similar in the alpha-delta phase (110 [16 center dot 8%; 13 center dot 8- 20 center dot 3] of 653 patients, p=0 center dot 24), but significantly lower in the omicron phase (16 [6 center dot 2%; 3 center dot 5-10 center dot 2] of 256 patients, p

Despite advances in supportive care, cancer-related symptoms tend to be persistent regardless of cancer type, stage of disease, or treatment received. There is an increasing prescription for complementary and alternative medicines, such as medical cannabis (MC). Knowledge and attitudes of Italian medical oncologists and palliative care physicians toward medical cannabis in cancer care remain unknown. We conducted a cross-sectional study to investigate the knowledge and attitude toward MC prescription among cancer care professionals in Italy. All invited participants received an email with the electronic questionnaire accessible through a direct link. Among the 2616 members who received the invitation, 475 replied to the questionnaire and were considered for the survey analysis. The most prescribed formulations among those available in Italy were cannabis FM2. The most frequent clinical indications for the use of MC were pain, gastrointestinal, and mood disorders. Only 9 responders reported MC-related side effects like anxiety insomnia and muscle spasms. The question regarding the normative references for MC prescription and use in Italy had conflicting results: only 14% indicated the exact legislative reference. Our study highlights a significant discrepancy between personal attitudes, prescription levels, and actual knowledge on MC. This represent a critical issue that should be systemically faced, building educational programs and national guidelines that sublimate personal physicians’ beliefs and predispositions, resulting in a robust science-based MC practice. Only through coordinated interventions on science and health policy of MC, there will be success of safety and efficacy, ensuring the best knowledge for the best outcomes.

Background: We previously demonstrated the cumulative poor prognostic role of concomitant medications on the clinical outcome of patients with advanced cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors, creating and validating a drug-based prognostic score to be calculated before immunotherapy initiation in patients with advanced solid tumours. This ‘drug score’ was calculated assigning score 1 for each between proton-pump inhibitor and antibiotic administration until a month before cancer therapy initiation and score 2 in case of corticosteroid intake. The good risk group included patients with score 0, intermediate risk with score 1–2 and poor risk with score 3–4. Methods: Aiming at validating the prognostic and putative predictive ability depending on the anticancer therapy, we performed the present comparative analysis in two cohorts of advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), respectively, receiving first-line pembrolizumab or chemotherapy through a random case-control matching and through a pooled multivariable analysis including the interaction between the computed score and the therapeutic modality (pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy). Results: Nine hundred fifty and 595 patients were included in the pembrolizumab and chemotherapy cohorts, respectively. After the case-control random matching, 589 patients from the pembrolizumab cohort and 589 from the chemotherapy cohort were paired, with no statistically significant differences between the characteristics of the matched subjects. Among the pembrolizumab-treated group, good, intermediate and poor risk evaluable patients achieved an objective response rate (ORR) of 50.0%, 37.7% and 23.4%, respectively, (p < 0.0001), whereas among the chemotherapy-treated group, patients achieved an ORR of 37.0%, 40.0% and 32.4%, respectively (p = 0.4346). The median progression-free survival (PFS) of good, intermediate and poor risk groups was 13.9 months, 6.3 months and 2.8 months, respectively, within the pembrolizumab cohort (p < 0.0001), and 6.2 months, 6.2 months and 4.3 months, respectively, within the chemotherapy cohort (p = 0.0280). Among the pembrolizumab-treated patients, the median overall survival (OS) for good, intermediate and poor risk patients was 31.4 months, 14.5 months and 5.8 months, respectively, (p < 0.0001), whereas among the chemotherapy-treated patients, it was 18.3 months, 16.8 months and 10.6 months, respectively (p = 0.0003). A similar trend was reported considering the two entire populations. At the pooled analysis, the interaction term between the score and the therapeutic modality was statistically significant with respect to ORR (p = 0.0052), PFS (p = 0.0003) and OS (p < 0.0001), confirming the significantly different effect of the score within the two cohorts. Conclusion: Our ‘drug score’ showed a predictive ability with respect to ORR in the immunotherapy cohort only, suggesting it might be a useful tool for identifying patients unlikely to benefit from first-line single-agent pembrolizumab. In addition, the prognostic stratification in terms of PFS and OS was significantly more pronounced among the pembrolizumab-treated patients.

In light of the establishment of a permanent technical work table to address issues relating to cannabis for medical use, it is necessary to reflect free from ideological conditioning on the effectiveness and perception of the use of these "products" on the populations indicated in the regulatory note current. Taking a cue from two recently published works, which photograph a poor level of knowledge on medical cannabis by patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals, we believe it is necessary to overcome ideological preconceptions by building educational programs and national guidelines that offer therapeutic opportunities based on solid scientific evidence.

Background Improved outcome in tobacco smoking patients with non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) following immunotherapy has previously been reported. However, little is known regarding this association during first‐line immunotherapy in patients with high PD‐L1 expression. In this study we compared clinical outcomes according to the smoking status of two large multicenter cohorts. Methods We compared clinical outcomes according to the smoking status (never smokers vs. current/former smokers) of two retrospective multicenter cohorts of metastatic NSCLC patients, treated with first‐line pembrolizumab and platinum‐based chemotherapy. Results A total of 962 NSCLC patients with PD‐L1 expression ≥50% who received first‐line pembrolizumab and 462 NSCLC patients who received first‐line platinum‐based chemotherapy were included in the study. Never smokers were confirmed to have a significantly higher risk of disease progression (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.49 [95% CI: 1.15–1.92], p = 0.0022) and death (HR = 1.38 [95% CI: 1.02–1.87], p = 0.0348) within the pembrolizumab cohort. On the contrary, a nonsignificant trend towards a reduced risk of disease progression (HR = 0.74 [95% CI: 0.52–1.05], p = 0.1003) and death (HR = 0.67 [95% CI: 0.45–1.01], p = 0.0593) were reported for never smokers within the chemotherapy cohort. After a random case–control matching, 424 patients from both cohorts were paired. Within the matched pembrolizumab cohort, never smokers had a significantly shorter progression‐free survival (PFS) (HR = 1.68 [95% CI: 1.17–2.40], p = 0.0045) and a nonsignificant trend towards a shortened overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.32 [95% CI: 0.84–2.07], p = 0.2205). On the contrary, never smokers had a significantly longer PFS (HR = 0.68 [95% CI: 0.49–0.95], p = 0.0255) and OS (HR = 0.66 [95% CI: 0.45–0.97], p = 0,0356) compared to current/former smoker patients within the matched chemotherapy cohort. On pooled multivariable analysis, the interaction term between smoking status and treatment modality was concordantly statistically significant with respect to ORR (p = 0.0074), PFS (p = 0.0001) and OS (p = 0.0020), confirming the significantly different impact of smoking status across the two cohorts. Conclusions Among metastatic NSCLC patients with PD‐L1 expression ≥50% receiving first‐line pembrolizumab, current/former smokers experienced improved PFS and OS. On the contrary, worse outcomes were reported among current/former smokers receiving first‐line chemotherapy., Improved outcome in tobacco smoking NSCLC patients following treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has previously been reported. Little is known regarding this association during first‐line immunotherapy in patients with high PD‐L1 expression. Clinical outcomes according to the smoking status of two large multicenter cohorts were compared in this study. Smokers with high PD‐L1 expression ≥ 50% experienced improved progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with first‐line pembrolizumab. The opposite trend was found in NSCLC patients treated with first‐line platinum‐based chemotherapy.

Trophoblast cell surface antigen-2 (Trop-2) is a glycoprotein that was first described as a membrane marker of trophoblast cells and was associated with regenerative abilities. Trop-2 overexpression was also described in several tumour types. Nevertheless, the therapeutic potential of Trop-2 was widely recognized and clinical studies with drug–antibody conjugates have been initiated in various cancer types. Recently, these efforts have been rewarded with the approval of sacituzumab govitecan from both the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA), for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer patients. In our work, we briefly summarize the various characteristics of cancer cells overexpressing Trop-2, the pre-clinical activities of specific inhibitors, and the role of anti-Trop-2 therapy in current clinical practice. We also review the ongoing clinical trials to provide a snapshot of the future developments of these therapies.

Although SARS-CoV-2 vaccines immunogenicity in patients with cancer has been investigated, whether they can significantly improve the severity of COVID-19 in this specific population is undefined.Capitalizing on OnCovid (NCT04393974) registry data we reported COVID-19 mortality and proxies of COVID-19 morbidity, including post-COVID-19 outcomes, according to the vaccination status of the included patients.2090 eligible patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between 02/2020 and 11/2021 were included, of whom 1930 (92.3%) unvaccinated, 91 (4.4%) fully vaccinated and 69 (3.3%) partially vaccinated. With the exception of a higher prevalence of patients from the UK (p = 0.0003) and receiving systemic anticancer therapy at COVID-19 diagnosis (p = 0.0082) among fully vaccinated patients, no demographics/oncological features were associated with vaccination status. The 14-days case fatality rate (CFR) (5.5% vs 20.7%, p = 0.0004) and the 28-days CFR (13.2% vs 27.4%, p = 0.0028) demonstrated a significant improvement for fully vaccinated patients in comparison with unvaccinated patients. The receipt of prior full vaccination was also associated with reduced symptomatic COVID-19 (79.1% vs 88.5%, p = 0.0070), need of COVID-19 oriented therapy (34.9% vs 63.2%, p 0.0001), complications from COVID-19 (28.6% vs 39.4%, p = 0.0379), hospitalizations due to COVID-19 (42.2% vs 52.5%, p = 0.0007) and oxygen therapy requirement (35.7% vs 52%, p = 0.0036). Following Inverse Probability Treatment Weighting (IPTW) procedure no statistically significant difference according to the vaccination status was confirmed; however, all COVID-19 related outcomes were concordantly in favour of full vaccination. Among the 1228 (58.8%) patients who underwent a formal reassessment at participating centres after COVID-19 resolution, fully vaccinated patients experienced less sequelae than unvaccinated patients (6.7% vs 17.2%, p = 0.0320).This analysis provides initial evidence in support of the beneficial effect of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines against morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 in patients with cancer.

The omicron (B.1.1.529) variant of SARS-CoV-2 is highly transmissible and escapes vaccine-induced immunity. We aimed to describe outcomes due to COVID-19 during the omicron outbreak compared with the prevaccination period and alpha (B.1.1.7) and delta (B.1.617.2) waves in patients with cancer in Europe.In this retrospective analysis of the multicentre OnCovid Registry study, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, who had a history of solid or haematological malignancy that was either active or in remission. Patient were recruited from 37 oncology centres from UK, Italy, Spain, France, Belgium, and Germany. Participants were followed up from COVID-19 diagnosis until death or loss to follow-up, while being treated as per standard of care. For this analysis, we excluded data from centres that did not actively enter new data after March 1, 2021 (in France, Germany, and Belgium). We compared measures of COVID-19 morbidity, which were complications from COVID-19, hospitalisation due to COVID-19, and requirement of supplemental oxygen and COVID-19-specific therapies, and COVID-19 mortality across three time periods designated as the prevaccination (Feb 27 to Nov 30, 2020), alpha-delta (Dec 1, 2020, to Dec 14, 2021), and omicron (Dec 15, 2021, to Jan 31, 2022) phases. We assessed all-cause case-fatality rates at 14 days and 28 days after diagnosis of COVID-19 overall and in unvaccinated and fully vaccinated patients and in those who received a booster dose, after adjusting for country of origin, sex, age, comorbidities, tumour type, stage, and status, and receipt of systemic anti-cancer therapy. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04393974, and is ongoing.As of Feb 4, 2022 (database lock), the registry included 3820 patients who had been diagnosed with COVID-19 between Feb 27, 2020, and Jan 31, 2022. 3473 patients were eligible for inclusion (1640 [47·4%] were women and 1822 [52·6%] were men, with a median age of 68 years [IQR 57-77]). 2033 (58·5%) of 3473 were diagnosed during the prevaccination phase, 1075 (31·0%) during the alpha-delta phase, and 365 (10·5%) during the omicron phase. Among patients diagnosed during the omicron phase, 113 (33·3%) of 339 were fully vaccinated and 165 (48·7%) were boosted, whereas among those diagnosed during the alpha-delta phase, 152 (16·6%) of 915 were fully vaccinated and 21 (2·3%) were boosted. Compared with patients diagnosed during the prevaccination period, those who were diagnosed during the omicron phase had lower case-fatality rates at 14 days (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0·32 [95% CI 0·19-0·61) and 28 days (0·34 [0·16-0·79]), complications due to COVID-19 (0·26 [0·17-0·46]), and hospitalisation due to COVID-19 (0·17 [0·09-0·32]), and had less requirements for COVID-19-specific therapy (0·22 [0·15-0·34]) and oxygen therapy (0·24 [0·14-0·43]) than did those diagnosed during the alpha-delta phase. Unvaccinated patients diagnosed during the omicron phase had similar crude case-fatality rates at 14 days (ten [25%] of 40 patients vs 114 [17%] of 656) and at 28 days (11 [27%] of 40 vs 184 [28%] of 656) and similar rates of hospitalisation due to COVID-19 (18 [43%] of 42 vs 266 [41%] of 652) and complications from COVID-19 (13 [31%] of 42 vs 237 [36%] of 659) as those diagnosed during the alpha-delta phase.Despite time-dependent improvements in outcomes reported in the omicron phase compared with the earlier phases of the pandemic, patients with cancer remain highly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 if they are not vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Our findings support universal vaccination of patients with cancer as a protective measure against morbidity and mortality from COVID-19.National Institute for Health and Care Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre and the Cancer Treatment and Research Trust.

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene fusions represent an extremely rare aberration, occurring in approximately 0.05–0.13% non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. RAD51 is the most frequently involved partner gene in EGFR fusions, but other fusion partner genes have been described. To date, a considerable number of next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels still cannot detect these alterations due to the position of the breakpoint site, mainly involving intron 24 of EGFR. Current evidences show that such gene alteration is more likely to occur in lung adenocarcinomas of young, female, non-smoker patients. Also, brain metastases are frequently reported in these patients. Only very few cases in literature described clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients harboring EGFR gene fusions, reporting responses to 1st generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Herein, we report the case of two young non-smoker females with metastatic NSCLC harboring EGFR-RAD51 gene fusion, detected by FoundationOne DX1 assay, who responded to EGFR TKIs. The first patient initially received erlotinib, then switched to osimertinib for renal toxicity, while the second was treated with gefitinib. This is, to our knowledge, the first report describing response to the 3rd EGFR TKI osimertinib. Our experience highlights the need of a broader molecular profiling in young or never smoker NSCLC patients without detectable molecular aberration using standard NGS panels. Finally, further studies to assess the real prevalence of EGFR gene fusions and their spectrum of sensitivity to different EGFR TKIs are needed.

Data on spectrum and grade of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in long-term responders to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are lacking.We performed a retrospective multicenter study to characterized irAEs occurring after a 12-months minimum treatment period with PD-(L)1 ICIs in advanced cancer patients. IrAEs were categorized into “early” (≤12 months) and “late” (>12 months).From September 2013 to October 2019, 436 consecutive patients were evaluated. 223 experienced any grade early-irAEs (51.1%), while 132 experienced any grade late-irAEs (30.3%) (p < 0.0001). Among the latter, 29 (22%) experienced a recurrence of an early-irAEs, while 103 (78%) experienced de novo late-irAEs involving different system/organ. Among patients with late-irAEs, 21 experienced G3/G4 irAEs (4.8%). Median time to onset of early-irAEs was 3.4 months (95%CI: 2.8-4.2), while the median time to onset of late-irAEs was 16.6 months (95%CI: 15.8-17.6). Cumulative time-adjusted risk of disease progression according to both the early-irAEs (HR = 0.63 [95%CI: 0.30-1.29], p = 0.204) and late-irAEs occurrence revealed no statistically significant differences (HR = 0.75 [95%CI: 0.37-1.56], p = 0.452). Also the time-adjusted cumulative risk of death according to both early-irAEs (HR = 0.79 [95%CI: 0.34-1.86], p = 0.598) and late-irAEs (HR = 0.92 [95%CI: 0.49-1.74], p = 0.811) did not show statistically significant differences.Although less frequent than early-irAEs, late-irAEs are quite common in long responders to PD-(L)1 ICIs, and are different in terms of spectrum and grade. Time-adjusted analysis revealed that the cumulative risk of disease progression and death were not significantly reduced in patients who experienced late-irAEs.

Several studies have found an association between higher body mass index (BMI) and improved clinical outcomes in cancer patients receiving programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) checkpoint inhibitors. In a previous study, we found that overweight/obese patients were significantly more likely to experience any grade immune-related adverse events (irAEs) compared to non-overweight patients.We conducted a 'real-life', multi centre, retrospective observational study aimed at comparing the incidence of irAEs among cancer patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors according to baseline BMI.One thousand and seventy advanced cancer patients were evaluated. The median age was 68 years (range: 21-92), male/female ratio was 724/346. Primary tumours were: non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) (653 patients), melanoma (233 patients), renal cell carcinoma (RCC) (152 patients) and others (29 patients). Median BMI was 25 (13.6-46.6); according to World Health Organisation (WHO) classification, 44 patients (4.1%) were defined as underweight, 480 patients (44.9%) as having a normal weight, 416 patients (38.9%) as overweight and 130 patients (12.1%) as obese. Higher BMI was significantly related to higher occurrence of any grade immune-related adverse events [irAEs] (p 0.0001), G3/G4 irAEs (p 0.0001) and irAEs leading to discontinuation (LTD) (p 0.0001). Overweight and obesity were confirmed predictors for irAEs of any grade at both univariate and multivariate analysis. The adjusted odds ratios (ORs) (compared to normal-weight) were 10.6; 95% confidence interval (95%CI): 7.5-14.9 for overweight, and 16.6 (95%CI: 10.3-26.7) for obese patients. Obesity was the only factor significantly related to a higher incidence of G3/G4 irAEs (OR = 11.9 [95%CI: 6.4-22.3], p 0.0001) and LTD irAEs (OR = 8.8 [95%CI: 4.3-18.2], p 0.0001). Overweight and obese patients experienced a significantly higher occurrence of cutaneous, endocrine, gastro-intestinal (GI), hepatic and 'others' irAEs, compared to normal-weight patients. Only obese patients experienced a significantly higher occurrence of pulmonary and rheumatic irAEs, compared to normal-weight patients.Considering the previously evidenced association between higher BMI and better outcome, the current finding about the relationship between BMI and irAEs occurrence can contribute to consideration of these findings as the upside of the downside, which underlies an 'immunogenic phenotype'.

The role of immune-related adverse events (irAEs), as a surrogate predictor of the efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors, has not yet been described in the setting of first-line, single-agent pembrolizumab for patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung-cancer (NSCLC) with a programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression of ≥ 50%.We previously conducted a multicenter retrospective analysis in patients with treatment-naive metastatic NSCLC and a PD-L1 expression of ≥ 50% receiving first-line pembrolizumab. Here, we report the results of the irAE analysis and the potential correlation between irAEs and clinical outcomes.A total of 1010 patients were included in this analysis; after a 6-week landmark selection, 877 (86.8%) patients were included in the efficacy analysis. Any grade irAEs (P .0001), grade 3/4 irAEs (P = .0025), leading to discontinuation irAEs (P = .0144), multiple-site and single-site irAEs (P .0001), cutaneous irAEs (P = .0001), endocrine irAEs (P = .0227), pulmonary irAEs (P = .0479), and rheumatologic irAEs (P = .0018) were significantly related to a higher objective response rate. Any grade irAEs (P .0001), single-site irAEs (P .0001), multiple-site irAEs (P = .0005), cutaneous irAEs (P = .0042), endocrine irAEs (P .0001), gastrointestinal irAEs (P = .0391), and rheumatologic irAEs (P = .0086) were significantly related to progression-free survival. Any grade irAEs (P .0001), single-site irAEs (P .0001), multiple-site irAEs (P = .0003), cutaneous irAEs (P = .0002), endocrine irAEs (P = .0001), and rheumatologic irAEs (P = .0214) were significantly related to overall survival.This study confirms the feasibility and the safety of first-line, single-agent pembrolizumab, in a large, real-world cohort of patients with NSCLC with PD-L1 expression ≥ 50%. The occurrence of irAEs may be a surrogate of clinical activity and improved outcomes in this setting.

Marco Mazzotta,1 Marco Filetti,2 Marta Piras,2 Sebastiano Mercadante,3 Paolo Marchetti,2,4 Raffaele Giusti5 1Department of Oncology and Hematology, Medical Oncology Unit, Central Hospital of Belcolle, Viterbo, Italy; 2Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Oncology Unit, “La Sapienza” University of Rome, Azienda Ospedaliera Sant’Andrea, Rome, Italy; 3Anesthesia and Intensive Care & Pain Relief and Supportive Care, La Maddalena, Palermo, Italy; 4Medical Oncology Unit, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy; 5Medical Oncology Unit, Sant’Andrea Hospital of Rome, Rome, ItalyCorrespondence: Raffaele Giusti, Medical Oncology Unit, Sant’Andrea Hospital of Rome, via di Grottarossa, 1035/1039, Rome, 00189, Italy, Email raffaelegiusti@yahoo.itBackground: Cancer pain is one of the most important symptoms for patients. Pharmacological control is central for clinical management and to ensure well-being. In cancer patients, the management of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) is also crucial. This study aims to identify factors that can predict patients’ satisfaction with pain relief for BTcP.Methods: This was a secondary analysis of the IOPS-MS study, a large, observational, multicenter, national study where thirty-two Italian centers were involved to explore BTcP management. Clinical and pathologic features were recorded, as well as the patients’ degree of satisfaction with BTcP medications classified as dissatisfied (not or indifferent satisfied) versus satisfied (or very satisfied). Frequency distributions and the chi-squared test of independence were performed. A multivariate model was carried out by selecting significant variables upon univariate analysis using logistic regression.Results: From the original 4016 patients enrolled, 3840 were available for the study purpose. Seventy-one per cent of patients declared satisfaction with BTcP medications. Young age [odds ratio (OR) 1.29 (95% confidence interval, CI: 1.12– 1.50)], non-metastatic cancer stage [OR 1.53 (95% CI: 1.22– 1.91)], high Karnofsky performance status [OR 1.63 (95% CI:1.33– 1.99)], the absence of anticancer treatment [OR 1.42 (95% CI: 1.19– 1.69)], the NSAIDs/paracetamol use for background pain [OR 1.56 (95% CI: 1.34– 1.82)] and a high BTcP interference in activities of daily living [OR 2.34 (95% CI: 1.81– 3.01)] resulted positively correlated with dissatisfaction in the multivariate analyses. Also, the setting of care was related to difference in BTcP therapy satisfaction.Conclusion: This study proposes several key points to be considered in the pharmacological management of BTcP, useful to ensure patients’ satisfaction and optimal quality of life.Keywords: breakthrough cancer pain, opioids, pain control, patient satisfaction, quality of life

(1) Background: Drug development in oncology is changing rapidly. The aim of the present study was to provide an insight into the features of anti-tumor drugs approved in Europe; (2) Methods: We included all the indications for solid tumors issued by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) between 2015 and 2020. We extracted data from European Public Assessments Reports (EPAR), including drug name, mechanism of action, setting, features of pivotal clinical trials, primary end-points, quality of life (QoL); (3) Results: In the explored period, EMA issued 132 new indications (81 indications’ extensions) for 62 oncology drugs. In about half of indications (47%), the approval was biomarker-based. Immune check point inhibitors (ICIs) and signal transduction inhibitors were the two most representative drug categories (62%). Most of the indications were for the advanced setting (91%) and front-line therapy (66%). The most common tumor types were non-small cell lung cancer (24%), breast (16%), and melanoma (10%). Two thirds of the indications (73%) were approved based on phase III trials. Overall survival (OS) represented the primary end-point only in 39% of indications, mainly limited to advanced setting (98%) and ICI trials (80%). Almost all (94%) cell cycle and DNA repair mechanism inhibitors were approved based on progression free survival (PFS) data. In pivotal trials with signal transduction inhibitors, objective response rate (ORR) was the prevalent (45%) primary end-point. QoL was never considered as primary end-point; (4) Conclusions: In this analysis, we intended to offer an updated picture of the recent drug development in oncology. Most of the efforts led to broadening indications of pre-existing molecules, with signal transduction inhibitor and ICIs contending the leadership. Twenty-seven percent of the indication were approved without a phase III trial. The majority of drugs entered the market without evidence of OS or QoL benefit but based on surrogate outcomes.

Several first-line immune-checkpoints inhibitors (ICI) based combinations have been studied in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) without any direct comparison between the regimens. The objective of this systematic review and network meta-analysis was to provide the most updated evidence about the preferred first line ICI-based regimen for mRCC. We searched various databases, including PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus and the major conference proceedings (ASCO, ESMO). Eligible studies were randomized trial, published before June 2021 that evaluated first-line, ICI-based combinations compared with the standard of care in mRCC. Screening was performed independently by two investigators. A Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess trial quality. Relative effects of competing treatments were assessed by Bayesian network meta-analysis. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline was used. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate, complete response and adverse events. Six trials with 5478 patients comparing 7 treatments were identified. Network meta-analysis showed that lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab had the highest probability to be the best treatment in terms of OS (surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) 80.7%) and PFS (SUCRA 99.6%), while in sarcomatoid patients, nivolumab plus cabozantinib had the highest rank in terms of survival outcomes (SUCRA 85.8% and SUCRA 77.3%, respectively). Although we established a ranking among new first-line mRCC treatment combinations, the absence of direct comparisons between the multiple treatment options represents a major hurdle in establishing optimal therapeutic sequences. Our results could represent a starting point for head-to-head trials between the most promising combinations.

Background: The medium-term and long-term impact of COVID-19 in patients with cancer is not yet known. In this study, we aimed to describe the prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae and their impact on the survival of patients with cancer. We also aimed to describe patterns of resumption and modifications of systemic anti-cancer therapy following recovery from SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: OnCovid is an active European registry study enrolling consecutive patients aged 18 years or older with a history of solid or haematological malignancy and who had a diagnosis of RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. For this retrospective study, patients were enrolled from 35 institutions across Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK. Patients who were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection between Feb 27, 2020, and Feb 14, 2021, and entered into the registry at the point of data lock (March 1, 2021), were eligible for analysis. The present analysis was focused on COVID-19 survivors who underwent clinical reassessment at each participating institution. We documented prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae and described factors associated with their development and their association with post-COVID-19 survival, which was defined as the interval from post-COVID-19 reassessment to the patients’ death or last follow-up. We also evaluated resumption of systemic anti-cancer therapy in patients treated within 4 weeks of COVID-19 diagnosis. The OnCovid study is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04393974. Findings: 2795 patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection between Feb 27, 2020, and Feb 14, 2021, were entered into the study by the time of the data lock on March 1, 2021. After the exclusion of ineligible patients, the final study population consisted of 2634 patients. 1557 COVID-19 survivors underwent a formal clinical reassessment after a median of 22·1 months (IQR 8·4–57·8) from cancer diagnosis and 44 days (28–329) from COVID-19 diagnosis. 234 (15·0%) patients reported COVID-19 sequelae, including respiratory symptoms (116 [49·6%]) and residual fatigue (96 [41·0%]). Sequelae were more common in men (vs women; p=0·041), patients aged 65 years or older (vs other age groups; p=0·048), patients with two or more comorbidities (vs one or none; p=0·0006), and patients with a history of smoking (vs no smoking history; p=0·0004). Sequelae were associated with hospitalisation for COVID-19 (p

BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are approved by the U.S. Food&Drug Administration in over 17 tumor types. Older adult patients make up about a quarter of all cancer patients but are historically understudied in cancer clinical trials. ICIs are associated with immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which may be particularly morbid for older adult patients with underlying comorbidities and impaired functional status. In this study, we provide insight into the real-world safety and efficacy of ICIs among older adult patients (≥80 years) with cancer.MethodsThis is a multicenter, international retrospective study of tumor-agnostic older adult patients with cancer treated with single-agent ICIs between 2010–2019 from 18 academic centers in the U.S. and Europe. A cohort of 928 patients aged ≥80 years during treatment with ICI was assembled and analyzed to evaluate clinical outcomes and irAE patterns in older adult patients treated with single-agent ICIs.ResultsMedian age at ICI initiation was 83.0 years (range 75.8–97.0). Most patients (86.9%) were treated with anti-PD-1 therapy. Among the full cohort, the three most common tumors were non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC, 37.2%,n=345), melanoma (35.5%,n=329), and genitourinary (GU) tumors (16.5%,n=153). Objective response rates for patients with NSCLC, melanoma, and GU tumors were 32.2%, 39.3%, and 26.2%, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.7 months (95%CI, 5.2–8.6) for patients with NSCLC, 11.1 months (95%CI, 8.9–16.0) for patients with melanoma, and 6.0 months (95% CI, 5.0–10.7) for patients with GU malignancy. Median overall survival (OS) was 10.9 months (95%CI, 8.6–13.1) for patients with NSCLC, 30.0 months (95%CI, 23.6–46.4) for patients with melanoma, and 15.0 months (95%CI 9.1–25.4) for GU patients (Figure 1A-C). Within histology-specific cohorts (NSCLC, melanoma and GU), clinical outcomes were similar across age subgroups (90). Among all patients (N=928), 41.3% experienced ≥1 irAE(s), including 12.2% reported to be grade (G)3–4. No irAE-related deaths occurred. The median time to irAE onset was 9.8 weeks; 57% occurred within the first 3 months after ICI initiation. ICI was discontinued due to irAEs in 16.1% patients. There was no significant difference in the rate of irAEs among patients age ConclusionsICIs are effective and generally well-tolerated among older patients with cancer. However, ICI discontinuation due to irAE is more frequent with increasing age.

The prognostic relevance of early immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in patients affected by non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) upon immunotherapy is not fully understood. The Leading to Treatment Discontinuation cohort included 24 patients experiencing severe irAEs after one of two administrations of single anti-PD-1/PD-L1 in any line setting for metastatic NSCLC between November 2015 and June 2019. The control cohort was composed of 526 patients treated with single anti-PD-1/PD-L1 in any line setting with no severe irAE reported. The primary end points were median progression-free survival, overall survival, objective response rate, risk of progression of disease and risk of death. The correlation of clinic pathological features with early severe irAEs represented the secondary end point. Median PFS was 9.3 and 8.4 months, median OS was 12.0 months and 14.2 months at a median follow-up of 18.1 and 22.6 months in the LTD cohort and in the control cohort, respectively. The ORR was 40% (95% CI 17.2–78.8) in the LTD cohort and 32.7% (95% CI 27.8–38.2) in the control cohort. The risk of disease progression was higher in the LTD cohort (HR 2.52 [95% 1.10–5.78], P = .0288). We found no survival benefit in LTD cohort compared to the control cohort. However, early and severe irAEs might underly an immune anti-tumor activation. We identified a significant association with first-line immune checkpoints inhibitors treatment and good PS. Further studies on risk prediction and management of serious and early irAEs in NSCLC patients are needed.

Background: Because of a lack of large-scale prospective studies there is no clear indication about the management of patients with small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA). This study evaluated clinical outcome of patients diagnosed with SBA at our institution. Methods: Clinicopathologic features, treatments, and clinical outcome of patients diagnosed with SBA between 2006 and 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Median time of survival was calculated and compared using the log-rank test. Multivariate Cox regression was used to test independence of significant factors in univariate analysis. Results: Forty patients were included in the study; the majority (82.5%) had a tumor in the duodenum (including ampulla of Vater) and an early stage disease at the diagnosis. Median overall survival (OS) in the whole study population was 26.5 months. Patients with a tumor of the lower part of the small intestine (jejunum, ileum, and appendix) showed a better OS compared with that of patients with upper SBA (40 months vs 26 months, respectively; P=0.09). Primary tumor site and stage were independent predictors of OS. Conclusions: Our results suggest a prognostic role for the primary tumor site. This finding deserves to be further investigated to ensure better classification as well as more effective management strategies for SBA.

Background The favourable safety profile and the increasing confidence with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) might have boosted their prescription in frail patients with short life expectancies, who usually are not treated with standard chemotherapy. Methods The present analysis aims to describe clinicians’ attitudes towards ICIs administration during late stages of life within a multicenter cohort of advanced cancer patients treated with single agent PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors in Italy. Results Overall, 1149 patients with advanced cancer who received single agent PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors were screened. The final study population consisted of 567 deceased patients. 166 patients (29.3%) had received ICIs within 30 days of death; among them there was a significantly higher proportion of patients with ECOG-PS ≥ 2 (28.3% vs 11.5%, p Conclusion Our results confirmed a trend toward an increasing ICIs prescription in frail patients, during the late stages of life. Caution should be exercised when evaluating an ICI treatment for patients with a poor PS and a high burden of disease.

Background: Treatment sequencing with first-line immunotherapy, followed by second-line chemotherapy, is still a viable option for NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50%. Methods: We evaluated post-progression treatment pathways in a large real-world cohort of metastatic NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 50% treated with first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy. Results: Overall, 974 patients were included. With a median follow-up of 22.7 months (95%CI: 21.6–38.2), the median overall survival (OS) of the entire population was 15.8 months (95%CI: 13.5–17.5; 548 events). At the data cutoff, among the 678 patients who experienced disease progression, 379 (55.9%) had not received any further treatment, and 359 patients (52.9%) had died. Patients who did not receive post-progression therapies were older (p = 0.0011), with a worse ECOG-PS (p < 0.0001) and were on corticosteroids prior to pembrolizumab (p = 0.0024). At disease progression, 198 patients (29.2%) received a switched approach and 101 (14.9%) received pembrolizumab ByPD either alone (64 [9.4%]) or in combination with local ablative treatments (37 [5.5%]) (LATs). After a random-case control matching according to ECOG-PS, CNS metastases, bone metastases, and (previous) best response to pembrolizumab, patients receiving pembrolizumab ByPD plus LATs were confirmed to have a significantly longer post-progression OS compared to patients receiving pembrolizumab ByPD alone 13.9 months versus 7.8 months (p = 0.0179) 241 patients (35.5%) among the 678 who had experienced PD, received a second-line systemic treatment (regardless of previous treatment beyond PD). As compared to first-line treatment commencement, patients’ features at the moment of second-line initiation showed a significantly higher proportion of patients aged under 70 years (p = 0.0244), with a poorer ECOG-PS (p < 0.0001) and having CNS (p = 0.0001), bone (p = 0.0266) and liver metastases (p = 0.0148). Conclusions: In the real-world scenario NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50% treated with first-line single-agent pembrolizumab achieve worse outcomes as compared to the Keynote-024 trial. Poor post-progression outcomes are major determinants of the global results that should be considered when counselling patients for first-line treatment choices.

Background Recent researches suggested that statins, beside their role in inhibiting endogenous cholesterol synthesis and in cardiovascular prevention, could influence several processes in cancer biology. In fact, a recent meta‐analysis demonstrated that statins could positively influence OS in lung cancer patients. Aim There is a lack of large cohort studies that could support a potential antineoplastic role of statins in clinical practice. We collected data from 162 patients treated with immunotherapy for Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) in first‐ and second‐line setting to investigate the impact of these drugs on survival parameters. Methods and Results In our observational study, we enrolled 162 patients who received immunotherapy for lung cancer between October 2015 and April 2020. We used descriptive statistics to analyze patients' baseline features. Tumor response was evaluated using RECIST version 1.1 guidelines. Uni and multivariate analysis were conducted to investigate the relationship between statin use and response to immunotherapy, using the χ2‐test. We used Kaplan‐Meier curves to estimate OS and PFS in statin and nonstatin users. We included 122 patients in the final analysis. Median PFS was 17.57 months in the statin group and 9.57 months in the nonstatin group, with a P =