Search

Abstract Most anti-cancer modalities are designed to directly kill cancer cells deploying mechanisms of action (MOAs) centered on the presence of a precise target on cancer cells. The efficacy of these approaches is limited because the rapidly evolving genetics of neoplasia swiftly circumvents the MOA generating therapy-resistant cancer cell clones. Other modalities engage endogenous anti-cancer mechanisms by activating the multi-cellular network (MCN) surrounding neoplastic cells in the tumor microenvironment (TME). These modalities hold a better chance of success because they activate numerous types of immune effector cells that deploy distinct cytotoxic MOAs. This in turn decreases the chance of developing treatment-resistance. Engagement of the MCN can be attained through activation of immune effector cells that in turn kill cancer cells or when direct cancer killing is complemented by the production of proinflammatory factors that secondarily recruit and activate immune effector cells. For instance, adoptive cell therapy (ACT) supplements cancer cell killing with the release of homeostatic and pro-inflammatory cytokines by the immune cells and damage associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) by dying cancer cells. The latter phenomenon, referred to as immunogenic cell death (ICD), results in an exponential escalation of anti-cancer MOAs at the tumor site. Other approaches can also induce exponential cancer killing by engaging the MCN of the TME through the release of DAMPs and additional pro-inflammatory factors by dying cancer cells. In this commentary, we will review the basic principles that support emerging paradigms likely to significantly improve the efficacy of anti-cancer therapy.

Abstract Background The easy access to a quick diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a key point to improve the management of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and to contain its spread. Up to now, laboratory real-time PCR is the standard of care, but requires a fully equipped laboratory and significant infrastructure. Consequently, new diagnostic tools are required. Methods In the present work, the diagnostic accuracy of the point-of-care rapid test "bKIT Virus Finder COVID-19" (Hyris Ltd) is evaluated by a retrospective and a prospective analysis on SARS CoV-2 samples previously assessed with an FDA “authorized for the emergency use—EUA” reference method. Descriptive statistics were used for the present study. Results Results obtained with the Hyris Kit are the same as that of standard laboratory-based real time PCR methods for all the analyzed samples. In addition, the Hyris Kit provides the test results in less than 2 h, a significantly shorter time compared to the reference methods, without the need of a fully equipped laboratory. Conclusions To conclude, the Hyris kit represents a promising tool to improve the health surveillance and to increase the capacity of SARS-CoV-2 testing.

Melanoma is the most aggressive type of all skin cancers. In Italy the incidence is increasing both in men and in women with 13,800 new cases expected in 2016. The advanced melanoma therapy has changed in recent years with the use of immunotherapy and targeted therapies. In particular, treatment with BRAF inhibitors in patients with advanced BRAF V600 mutated melanoma has shown high rates of rapid response and survival. Due to development of acquired resistance with disease progression the rapid response observed with BRAF inhibitor therapy is not long lasting. Combining a BRAF inhibitor with a MEK inhibitor may help to delay the development of resistance and to enhance the antitumor activities with a further increase in the response and survival rate. Trametinib, an inhibitor of MEK kinases, and dabrafenib, an inhibitor of BRAF kinase, have authorizations as monotherapies and in combination with each other for treating adults with unresectable or metastatic melanoma with BRAF V600 mutation. Purpose of this report is to describe the combination in terms of clinical efficacy, safety, and economic impact. In particular, a cost-effectiveness analysis and a budget impact analysis were performed in order to evaluate the combination versus monotherapy and the financial sustainability of trametinib + dabrafenib on the Italian market. [In Italian]

AimThe aim of the present study was to assess the estimated "per patient" total cost for a single Oncologic Italian Cancer Center participating in a multicenter clinical trial with new anticancer biological agents using the activity-based costing (ABC) methodology.MethodologyNine randomized phase 3 clinical trials employing biological agents at the National Cancer Institute of Napoli, Italy, were analyzed to indentify "per patient" costs of each trial, according to the ABC methodology. The average consumption of resources for a patient completing the entire planned treatment was estimated for each trial. Through interviews of the personnel (doctors, nurses and technicians) and by analyses of the clinical trials protocols, the main activities of the 9 clinical trials were identified and, for each trial, the complete health care pathway of the patients and the treatment programmes were minutely reconstructed. Drug costs were not included because provided by Sponsors.Principal findingsThe average costs of the pre-study, treatment, monitoring, follow-up, audit, and administrative activities accounted for 2.357, 4.783, 700, 372, 1.263, and 9 Euro, respectively. The average total cost estimated for all "per patient" activities, including overhead costs, was 11.379 Euro. Staff costs accounted for € 5.988, while costs of diagnostic test accounted for 3.494 Euro. Clinical trials with immunotherapeutic drugs accounted for higher costs (+601 Euro as oncological staff costs, +1.318 Euro as intermediate services cost and +384 Euro as overheads).ConclusionsThe average total cost estimated for all "per patient" activities of a clinical trial with new anticancer biological agents was 11.379 Euro using the ABC methodology.