Search

Introduction Although several combination therapies for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have emerged recently, there has been a lack of published surveys and educational projects focused on these important treatment options. We aimed to improve the oncology team members’ knowledge and awareness of several FDA approved combination therapies for AML, including glasdegib (DAURISMO®), venetoclax (VENCLEXTA®), GO (MYOLOTARG®),CPX-351 (VYXEOS®), and midostaurin (RYDAPT®). Additionally, we aimed to examine these teams’ perspectives, views, and attitudes towards these topics and finally identify barriers to the implementationof such therapies in clinical practice. Method Initially, we developed booklets and then distributed them to each participating oncology and hematology office. Subsequently, all participating oncology and hematology team members were asked to complete an anonymous online survey to test their knowledge of and attitudes toward the subjects. Main results There was a total of 52 survey respondents. The correct answer regarding various combination therapies for AML was identified by nearly 70% or more of survey takers. The level of awareness of project subjects significantly improved after reading our printing materials. Many survey respondents were motivated to learn more about combination therapies for AML as well as discuss these topics with others. Conclusions Our booklets effectively improved understanding and awareness of combination therapies for AML. Future studies should explore awareness, knowledge, and perception of other new and emerging combination therapies for AML among oncology and hematology team members in other areas.

Molecular characterization of radical prostatectomy specimens after systemic therapy may identify a gene expression profile for resistance to therapy. This study assessed tumor cells from patients with prostate cancer participating in a phase II neoadjuvant docetaxel and androgen deprivation trial to identify mediators of resistance. Transcriptional level of 93 genes from a docetaxel-resistant prostate cancer cell lines microarray study was analyzed by TaqMan low-density arrays in tumors from patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer (36 surgically treated, 28 with neoadjuvant docetaxel + androgen deprivation). Gene expression was compared between groups and correlated with clinical outcome. VIM, AR and RELA were validated by immunohistochemistry. CD44 and ZEB1 expression was tested by immunofluorescence in cells and tumor samples. Parental and docetaxel-resistant castration-resistant prostate cancer cell lines were tested for epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) markers before and after docetaxel exposure. Reversion of EMT phenotype was investigated as a docetaxel resistance reversion strategy. Expression of 63 (67.7%) genes differed between groups (P < 0.05), including genes related to androgen receptor, NF-κB transcription factor, and EMT. Increased expression of EMT markers correlated with radiologic relapse. Docetaxel-resistant cells had increased EMT and stem-like cell markers expression. ZEB1 siRNA transfection reverted docetaxel resistance and reduced CD44 expression in DU-145R and PC-3R. Before docetaxel exposure, a selected CD44+ subpopulation of PC-3 cells exhibited EMT phenotype and intrinsic docetaxel resistance; ZEB1/CD44+ subpopulations were found in tumor cell lines and primary tumors; this correlated with aggressive clinical behavior. This study identifies genes potentially related to chemotherapy resistance and supports evidence of the EMT role in docetaxel resistance and adverse clinical behavior in early prostate cancer. Mol Cancer Ther; 13(5); 1270–84. ©2014 AACR.

PDF - 265K, Biochemical-relapse analysis according to gene expression levels of markers differentially expressed in treated vs non-treated patients.

PDF - 72K, Genes expression values by qRT-PCR in treated patients vs non-treated patients; TLDA: TaqMan Low Density Arrays; FDR: False Discovery Rate.

PDF - 475K, Radiological-progression analysis according to gene expression levels of markers differentially expressed in treated vs non-treated patients.

PDF - 35K, Legends for Supplementary Figures 1 and 2.

Metastasis is the main cause of death from solid tumours and, therefore, identifying the mechanisms that govern metastatic growth poses a major biomedical challenge. We and others have contributed to demonstrate that tumour microenvironment (TME) signals regulate the fate and survival of disseminated tumour cells (DTCs) in secondary organs. However, very little is known about the role of the nervous system mediators in this process. We have previously described that neuropilin-2 (NRP2) expression in breast cancer correlates with bad prognosis. Here we describe that NRP2 positively regulates breast and head and neck cancer cells proliferation, invasion and survival in vitro. NRP2 deletion in tumour cells inhibits tumour growth in vivo and decreases the number and size of lung metastases by promoting p27-mediated lung DTCs quiescence. Moreover, we show that several abundant stromal cells of the lung, such as fibroblasts and macrophages, induce NRP2 upregulation in DTCs, through secretion of TGFβ1. Therefore, we conclude that the TGFβ1-NRP2 axis is a new key dormancy awakening inducer, promoting DTCs proliferation and lung metastases development, positioning NRP2 expression as a central biomarker to predict metastatic recurrences and as a potential candidate for advanced therapies.

Biosimilars offer the potential to expand patient access and reduce healthcare costs. Therefore, it is of importance that clinicians and patients are reassured about their efficacy and safety in practice. In 2007, Binocrit® (HX575; Sandoz GmbH, Kundl, Austria) was the first epoetin alfa biosimilar approved for use in chemotherapy induced anaemia (CIA), chronic renal failure (CRF), and more recently myelodysplastic (MDS) anaemia. Since its approval, there has been a plethora of data demonstrating the well-tolerated safety profile of HX575. This review will outline the safety results collected from key studies that have added to the extensive HX575 (Binocrit® unless otherwise stated) clinical experience. With a focus on all approved indications, we will review the safety data collected across a range of study types, to further consolidate the reassurance for the use of HX575 in these indications.

Background ABTL0812 is an autophagy inducer that promotes cancer cell death by activation of cytotoxic autophagy selectively in tumour cells. ABTL0812 induces endoplasmic reticulum stress and blocks the Akt-mTOR axis; both actions converge to activate a robust and sustained autophagy leading to cancer cell death. Preclinical data supported the initiation of clinical trials in patients with cancer. Patients and methods This first-in-human trial consisted of an escalation phase (3 + 3 design), followed by an expansion phase, to assess safety and tolerability of ABTL0812. Secondary objectives were determining the recommended phase II dose (RP2D), clinical antitumour activity, pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD). Results A total of 29 patients were enrolled and treated; fifteen patients were treated in four escalation dosing cohorts (ranging from 500 mg once a day to 2000 mg twice a day) and fourteen in the expansion phase (dosed with 1300 mg three times a day). No maximum tolerated dose was attained, and RP2D was determined by PK/PD modelling. Most drug-related adverse events were gastrointestinal grade I–II. Correlation between drug levels and pAkt/Akt ratio was found. Two cases of long-term (>1 year) stable disease were observed. Conclusions ABTL0812 is safe and has an acceptable tolerability profile, allowing a long-term oral dosing. RP2D of 1300 mg three times a day was determined according to PK/PD modelling, and preliminary antitumour efficacy was observed. Clinical trial registration number NCT02201823.

The tumor-promoting fibrotic stroma rich in tumor-associated fibroblasts (TAF) is drawing increased therapeutic attention. Intriguingly, a trial with the antifibrotic drug nintedanib in non–small cell lung cancer reported clinical benefits in adenocarcinoma (ADC) but not squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), even though the stroma is fibrotic in both histotypes. Likewise, we reported that nintedanib inhibited the tumor-promoting fibrotic phenotype of TAFs selectively in ADC. Here we show that tumor fibrosis is actually higher in ADC-TAFs than SCC-TAFs in vitro and patient samples. Mechanistically, the reduced fibrosis and nintedanib response of SCC-TAFs was associated with increased promoter methylation of the profibrotic TGFβ transcription factor SMAD3 compared with ADC-TAFs, which elicited a compensatory increase in TGFβ1/SMAD2 activation. Consistently, forcing global DNA demethylation of SCC-TAFs with 5-AZA rescued TGFβ1/SMAD3 activation, whereas genetic downregulation of SMAD3 in ADC-TAFs and control fibroblasts increased TGFβ1/SMAD2 activation, and reduced their fibrotic phenotype and antitumor responses to nintedanib in vitro and in vivo. Our results also support that smoking and/or the anatomic location of SCC in the proximal airways, which are more exposed to cigarette smoke particles, may prime SCC-TAFs to stronger SMAD3 epigenetic repression, because cigarette smoke condensate selectively increased SMAD3 promoter methylation. Our results unveil that the histotype-specific regulation of tumor fibrosis in lung cancer is mediated through differential SMAD3 promoter methylation in TAFs and provide new mechanistic insights on the selective poor response of SCC-TAFs to nintedanib. Moreover, our findings support that patients with ADC may be more responsive to antifibrotic drugs targeting their stromal TGFβ1/SMAD3 activation. Significance: This study implicates the selective epigenetic repression of SMAD3 in SCC-TAFs in the clinical failure of nintedanib in SCC and supports that patients with ADC may benefit from antifibrotic drugs targeting stromal TGFβ1/SMAD3.

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a serious complication of chemotherapy, which can cause significant morbidity and mortality, result in dose delays and reductions and, ultimately, reduce cancer survival. Over the past decade, the availability of biosimilar filgrastim (short-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor [G-CSF]) has transformed patient access, with clear evidence of clinical benefit at preventing FN at reduced costs. In 2019, seven biosimilar pegfilgrastims (long-acting G-CSFs) were licensed, creating optimal market conditions and choice for prescribers. FN affects up to 117 per 1000 cancer patients, with mortality rates in the range of 2–21%. By reducing FN incidence and improving chemotherapy relative dose intensity (RDI), G-CSF has been associated with a 3.2% absolute survival benefit. Guidelines recommend primary prophylaxis and that filgrastim be administered for 10–14 days, while pegfilgrastim is administered once per cycle. When taken according to the guidelines, pegfilgrastim and filgrastim are equally effective. However, in routine clinical practice, filgrastim is often under-dosed (

Introduction: Opioid-Induced Constipation (OIC) is a common distressing symptom associated with cancer pain treatment. Consensus guidelines for management of OIC are limited and little is known about the decision making of Health Care Professionals (HCP) for the management of OIC. The aim of this study was to learn about the diagnostic and treatment criteria of OIC management in clinical practice in patients with cancer.

Purpose: The objective of the study was to analyses how Opioid-Induced Constipation (OIC) is managed in cancer patients in clinical practice for comparison against the current recommendations for the management of patients with OIC.

Biosimilar filgrastim (Sandoz) was approved in Europe in 2009 and, in 2015, was the first biosimilar approved in the USA. These authorizations were based on the "totality of evidence" concept, an approach that considers data from structural and functional characterization and comparability analysis and non-clinical and clinical studies. For biosimilar filgrastim, phase III confirmatory clinical studies were performed in the most sensitive population, patients with breast cancer undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy. In Europe and the USA, approval was granted for all indications of the reference biologic. Hence, stem cell mobilization and severe chronic neutropenia indications were approved on the basis of extrapolation, with no clinical data available at the time of market authorization in the EU. Although extrapolation is well-accepted in biologic development and regulatory contexts, it remains a misunderstood part of the biosimilarity concept in the medical community. Since approval, more than a decade of obtained clinical experience supports the totality of evidence and reassures clinicians regarding the efficacy and safety of biosimilar filgrastim. This includes real-world data from MONITOR-GCSF, a multicenter, prospective, observational study describing treatment patterns and clinical outcomes of patients with cancer (n = 1447) receiving biosimilar filgrastim for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in solid tumors and hematological malignancies. Evidence is also available from unrelated healthy donors and those with severe chronic neutropenia. Together, the experience from a decade of use of biosimilar filgrastim includes over 24 million patient-days of exposure, which can help reassure oncologists that extrapolation is based on strong scientific evidence and works in practice.

Purpose There is a lack of standards for the diagnosis, assessment and management of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP). La Fundacion ECO (the Foundation for Excellence and Quality in Oncology) commissioned a study to establish a consensus and lay the foundations for the appropriate management of BTcP in oncology patients. Patients and methods A modified Delphi survey comprising two rounds was used to gather and analyze data, which was conducted over the Internet. Each statement that reached a consensus with the respondents was defined as a median consensus score (MED) of ≥7, and agreement among panelists as an interquartile range (IQR) of ≤3. Results In total, 69 medical oncologists responded, with a broad consensus that BTcP implied exacerbations of high-intensity pain, as opposed to moderate pain. Furthermore, they concurred that appropriate diagnostic equipment is needed, and that rapid-onset fentanyl formulations should be the preferred treatment for BTcP management. The panelists agreed that a lack of appropriate information and training to attend to patients, as well as limited patient visitation rights, were barriers to effective BTcP management. Regarding gaps in detected knowledge, the panelists were unsure of the measures necessary to assess the burden of the disease on the patient's quality of life and associated medication costs. Alongside this, there was a lack of awareness of the technical specifics of the different formulations of rapid-onset fentanyl. Conclusion These results represent the current status of BTcP management. They may inform recommendations and provide a framework for future research.

Background: Patient quality care is a discipline that has acquired enormous relevance in today’s healthcare. The Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) is a referral worldwide in terms of quality for oncology practices. The ECO Foundation is a foundation of experts representing the major Spanish hospitals involved in the treatment of cancer patients. ECO reached an agreement with ASCO to involve Spanish hospitals in the QOPI program. Methods: 6 rounds of data collection have taken place (Fall 2015 to Round 1 2018). Practices had to register online and submit data into the QOPI platform, and the ECO Foundation offered all centers the necessary support. 17 Spanish hospitals have participated in the 6 rounds, and 7 of them have repeated participation. Core and lung cancer modules were completed. Results: During the 6 rounds, 1,877 charts were submitted by the Spanish practices. In most of the rounds, the highest scores were: pathology report confirming malignancy; number of chemotherapy cycles documented; patient consent for chemotherapy; and 5 measures of the lung cancer module. The lowest scores were: chemotherapy treatment summary provided to patient within 3 months of chemotherapy end; chemotherapy treatment summary provided or communicated to practitioner(s) within 3 months of chemotherapy end; smoking/tobacco use cessation counselling recommended to smokers/tobacco users in past year; and tobacco cessation counselling administered or patient referred in past year. The percentage of participating practices that presented results higher than 70% was successively 64%, 50%, 75%, and 100% in the last 3 rounds. For the 7 hospitals that repeated participation, 3 reported an improvement of their global scores. Regarding QOPI Certification, 3 Spanish hospitals received this accreditation in September 2017 and one in June 2018. Conclusions: These preliminary results are a good starting point for the continued implementation of the QOPI program in Spain, thus providing a well-structured approach to analyze cancer care. The ECO Foundation will continue pursuing excellence and quality with further activities like the QOPI Certification program and Quality Training Program, these being performed for the first time in Spain in 2017 and 2018, respectively.

Aim: This study aimed to report patterns of biosimilar filgrastim prophylaxis and outcomes of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN)/febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients with hematological malignancies or solid tumors. Patients & methods: MONITOR-GCSF is a real-world study of 1447 cancer patients receiving CIN/FN prophylaxis with biosimilar filgrastim (solid tumors: 77.2%; hematological malignancies: 22.8%). Results: Differences in prophylaxis intensity and day of initiation relative to guideline recommendations were observed. In hematology patients, higher rates of CIN and FN occurred at cycle level, and rate of FN was higher at patient level (9.1 vs 5.0% in solid tumor patients). Conclusion: Adequate GCSF support in hematology and solid tumor patients is important to prevent CIN/FN and related hospitalizations and chemotherapy disturbances.

Large cell carcinoma (LCC) is a rare and aggressive lung cancer subtype with poor prognosis and no targeted therapies. Tumor-associated fibroblasts (TAFs) derived from LCC tumors exhibit premature senescence, and coculture of pulmonary fibroblasts with LCC cell lines selectively induces fibroblast senescence, which in turn drives LCC cell growth and invasion. Here we identify MMP1 as overexpressed specifically in LCC cell lines, and we show that expression of MMP1 by LCC cells is necessary for induction of fibroblast senescence and consequent tumor promotion in both cell culture and mouse models. We also show that MMP1, in combination with TGF-β1, is sufficient to induce fibroblast senescence and consequent LCC promotion. Furthermore, we implicate PAR-1 and oxidative stress in MMP1/TGF-β1-induced TAF senescence. Our results establish an entirely new role for MMP1 in cancer, and support a novel therapeutic strategy in LCC based on targeting senescent TAFs., This work was further supported by grants from the Agencia Estatal de Investigaci´on (AEI/FEDER) (PI13/02368, SAF2016-79527-R and PID2019-110944RB-I00 (AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033) to JA, PI16/ 00890 to NR), Fundaci´o Privada Cellex (to JA), National Institutes of Health (grant R01 GM132100 to ER), Generalitat de Catalunya (AGAUR SGR661 and CERCA Programme to JA), Junta Provincial de Barcelona de l’Associaci´o Espanyola Contra el C`ancer (AECC-B16-917 to JA), Italian Ministry of Health (RF-2016-02362946 to LR), Italian Association for Cancer Research (AIRC-IG21431 to LR), Sociedad Espa˜nola de Neumología y Cirugía Tor´acica – SEPAR (SEPAR 437 to NR), COST Action (PROTEOSTASIS BM1307), and by fellowships from Ciˆencia sem Fronteiras CNPq (to RI), and Universitat de Barcelona/beca APIF (to PD).

PURPOSE: Measuring and tracking quality of care is highly relevant in today's health care. The Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) program is a referral for evaluating oncology practices worldwide. Excellence and Quality in Oncology Foundation, a collaboration of oncology experts from major Spanish hospitals involved in cancer treatment, reached an agreement with QOPI to include Spanish hospitals in this program. METHODS: We analyzed the results of the QOPI Core module measures from 19 Spanish hospitals over nine rounds (from fall 2015 to fall 2019). RESULTS: Of the 19 hospitals, 15 completed more than one round; none participated in all nine (two hospitals participated in eight rounds). The highest scores were for pathology report confirming malignancy, documenting a plan of care for moderate or severe pain and chemotherapy dose, and chemotherapy administered to patients with metastatic solid tumor with performance status undocumented. Measures regarding a summary of chemotherapy treatment, tobacco use cessation counseling, and assessment of patient emotional well-being were among the lowest scored measures. Six of the 15 practices that participated repeatedly achieved a better score in their last round compared with their first. Overall, scores of Spanish hospitals improved from 67.79% in fall 2015 to 68.91% in fall 2019. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate QOPI scores in Spain. There was high variability in scores, with quality of care improving with repeated participation in some hospitals, but worsening in others. Excellence and Quality in Oncology Foundation will support practices to increase their participation to improve oncology care and implement strategies that address the areas for improvement.

Simple Summary Breast cancer is a major public health problem with a large impact on the life of patients and their families. It is a highly curable disease when detected early, and an inevitably mortal disease when discovered too late. Therapy resistance and metastases are the most critical clinical issues faced by breast cancer oncologists nowadays. It has become evident that interactions between carcinoma cells and tumor microenvironment are an essential part of tumor growth and progression. Cells that support the function of epithelial cells, like cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs), contribute to therapy resistance and metastasis via the production of several secreted factors and direct interaction with cancer cells. Here we review the role of CAFs in radiotherapy, chemotherapy, endocrine and targeted therapies resistance. We also highlight the role of CAFs and fibroblasts from metastatic sites in metastasis progression. Finally, we discuss advances and potential therapeutic strategies to target CAFs for overcoming resistance and preventing metastases. Abstract Breast cancer (BrCa) is the leading cause of death among women worldwide, with about one million new cases diagnosed each year. In spite of the improvements in diagnosis, early detection and treatment, there is still a high incidence of mortality and failure to respond to current therapies. With the use of several well-established biomarkers, such as hormone receptors and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2), as well as genetic analysis, BrCa patients can be categorized into multiple subgroups: Luminal A, Luminal B, HER2-enriched, and Basal-like, with specific treatment strategies. Although chemotherapy and targeted therapies have greatly improved the survival of patients with BrCa, there is still a large number of patients who relapse or who fail to respond. The role of the tumor microenvironment in BrCa progression is becoming increasingly understood. Cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) are the principal population of stromal cells in breast tumors. In this review, we discuss the current understanding of CAFs’ role in altering the tumor response to therapeutic agents as well as in fostering metastasis in BrCa. In addition, we also review the available CAFs-directed molecular therapies and their potential implications for BrCa management.

espanolIntroduccion: El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar la percepcion de los oncologos sobre la adherencia al tratamiento con opioides para el dolor irruptivo oncologico (DIO) en la practica clinica real. El estudio tambien incluyo una evaluacion de otros aspectos del manejo del DIO, como las razones de la no adherencia, la adecuacion del tratamiento, o las posibles intervenciones necesarias para mejorar la adherencia. Metodos: Este estudio observacional multicentrico se realizo en 84 hospitales de toda Espana. Los oncologos fueron encuestados por medio de un cuestionario online sobre su manejo del dolor oncologico basal y del DIO, y su percepcion de la adherencia a los tratamientos. Resultados: Los oncologos (n = 97) indicaron que su primera opcion para el DIO fue el fentanilo (varias formulaciones), con alta tolerancia (> 76 % de los pacientes). La mayoria de los oncologos (96,8 %) evaluaron la adherencia en sus pacientes, pero solo el 69,1 % siempre prescribio medicamentos para prevenir los efectos adversos de los opioides, y solo el 74,2 % siempre titulo la dosis minima. La mayoria de los oncologos (51 %) percibieron que el 25-50 % de los pacientes no mostraban buena adherencia al tratamiento para DIO. La adherencia a los tratamientos de dolor basal fue alta, aunque muchos oncologos consideraron que los pacientes generalmente dejaban de tomar el medicamento cuando se sentian mejor. Las principales razones para la no adherencia fueron la sensacion de que el tratamiento era innecesario, la ineficacia percibida del tratamiento, la preocupacion por los posibles efectos adversos y la falta de apoyo familiar. Conclusiones: Los oncologos percibieron que la adherencia al tratamiento para el DIO puede mejorarse y recomendaron el tratamiento de los efectos adversos de la medicacion, una mejor educacion sobre el manejo del dolor a los pacientes y familiares, instrucciones escritas de prescripcion y simplificacion de los regimenes de medicamentos. EnglishObjectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the perception of oncologists on adherence to opioid treatment for breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) in current clinical practice. Our study also included an assessment of other aspects of the management of BTcP, such as the reasons for non-adherence, the adequacy of the treatment, or the possible interventions required to improve adherence. Methods: This observational, multicentric study was carried out in 84 hospitals throughout Spain. Oncologists were surveyed by means of an online questionnaire on their management of background cancer pain and BTcP, and their perception of adherence to the treatments. Results: Oncologists (N = 97) reported that their first choice for BTcP was fentanyl (various formulations), with high perceived tolerance (> 76 % of patients). Most oncologists (96.8 %) evaluated adherence in their patients but only 69. 1% always prescribed medication to prevent adverse effects of opioids and only 74.2 % always titrated the minimum dose. Most oncologists (51.0 %) perceived that 25-50 % of the patients did not adhere to the treatment for BTcP. Adherence to background pain treatments was high, although many oncologists considered that patients usually stopped taking the medication when feeling better. The main reported reasons for non-adherence were the self-perceived feeling that treatment was unnecessary, perceived inefficacy of the treatment, concerns about potential adverse effects, and lack of family support. Conclusions: Oncologists perceived that adherenceto BTcP treatment can be improved and recommended treatment of adverse effects, better education about pain management to patients and relatives, written prescription instructions, and simplification of drug regimens.

Cancer care has been profoundly impacted by the global pandemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 disease (coronavirus disease 2019, COVID-19), resulting in unprecedented challenges. Supportive care is an essential component of cancer treatment, seeking to prevent and manage chemotherapy complications such as febrile neutropenia, anaemia, thrombocytopenia/bleeding, thromboembolic events and nausea/vomiting, all of which are common causes of hospitalisation. These adverse events are an essential consideration under routine patient management, but particularly so during a pandemic, a setting in which clinicians aim to minimise patients' risk of infection and need for hospital visits. Professional medical oncology societies have been providing updated guidelines to support health care professionals with the management, treatment and supportive care needs of their patients with cancer under the threat of COVID-19. This paper aims to review the recommendations made by the most prominent medical oncology societies for devising and modifying supportive care strategies during the pandemic., Highlights • Cancer care has been profoundly impacted by the global pandemic of COVID-19, resulting in unprecedented challenges. • Oncology societies have updated guidelines for the supportive care needs of patients with cancer under the threat of COVID-19. • This paper reviews recommendations from prominent oncology societies for providing supportive care during the pandemic.

The majority of women with HER2-positive breast cancer will initially respond to trastuzumab and/or other HER2-targeted therapies such as pertuzumab, lapatinib, neratinib and trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1). However [...].

Purpose:Despite the therapeutic success of existing HER2-targeted therapies, tumors invariably relapse. This study aimed at identifying new mechanisms responsible for HER2-targeted therapy resistance.Experimental Design:We have used a platform of HER2-targeted therapy–resistant cell lines and primary cultures of healthy and tumor-associated fibroblasts (TAF) to identify new potential targets related to tumor escape from anti-HER2 therapies.Results:We have shown that TAFs promote resistance to HER2-targeted therapies. TAFs produce and secrete high levels of FGF5, which induces FGFR2 activation in the surrounding breast cancer cells. FGFR2 transactivates HER2 via c-Src, leading to resistance to HER2-targeted therapies. In vivo, coinoculating nonresistant cell lines with TAFs results in more aggressive and resistant tumors. Resistant cells activate fibroblasts and secrete FGFR ligands, creating a positive feedback loop that fuels resistance. FGFR2 inhibition not only inhibits HER2 activation, but also induces apoptosis in cells resistant to HER2-targeted therapies. In vivo, inhibitors of FGFR2 reverse resistance and resensitize resistant cells to HER2-targeted therapies. In HER2 patients' samples, α-SMA, FGF5, and FGFR2 contribute to poor outcome and correlate with c-Src activation. Importantly, expression of FGF5 and phospho-HER2 correlated with a reduced pathologic complete response rate in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant trastuzumab, which highlights the significant role of TAFs/FGF5 in HER2 breast cancer progression and resistance.Conclusions:We have identified the TAF/FGF5/FGFR2/c-Src/HER2 axis as an escape pathway responsible for HER2-targeted therapy resistance in breast cancer, which can be reversed by FGFR inhibitors.

The article "Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Short-versus Long-Acting Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factors for Reduction of Chemotherapy-Induced Febrile Neutropenia", written by Paul Cornes, Pere Gascon, Stephen Chan, Khalid Hameed, Catherine R. Mitchell, Polly Field, Mark Latymer, Luiz H. Arantes Jr was originally published electronically on the publisher's internet portal (currently SpringerLink) on October 8, 2018 without open access.

Background Digital health provides solutions that capture patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and allows symptom monitoring and patient management. Digital therapeutics is the provision to patients of evidence-based therapeutic interventions through software applications aimed at prevention, monitoring, management, and treatment of symptoms and diseases or for treatment optimization. The digital health solutions collecting PROs address many unmet needs, including access to care and reassurance, increase in adherence and treatment efficacy, and decrease in hospitalizations. With current developments in oncology including increased availability of oral drugs and reduced availability of healthcare professionals, these solutions offer an innovative approach to optimize healthcare resource utilization. Design This scoping review clarifies the role and impact of the digital health solutions in oncology supportive care, with a view of the current segmentation according to their technical features (connection to sensors, PRO collection, remote monitoring, self-management in real time…), and identifies evidence from clinical studies published about their benefits and limitations and drivers and barriers to adoption. A qualitative summary is presented. Results Sixty-six studies were identified and included in the qualitative synthesis. Studies supported the use of 38 digital health solutions collecting ePROs and allowing remote monitoring, with benefits to patients regarding symptom reporting and management, reduction in symptom distress, decrease in unplanned hospitalizations and related costs and improved quality of life and survival. Among those 38 solutions 21 provided patient self-management with impactful symptom support, improvement of QoL, usefulness and reassurance. Principal challenges are in developing and implementing digital solutions to suit most patients, while ensuring patient compliance and adaptability for use in different healthcare systems and living environments. Conclusions There is growing evidence that digital health collecting ePROs provide benefits to patients related to clinical and health economic endpoints. These digital solutions can be integrated into routine supportive care in oncology practice to provide improved patient-centered care.

High-quality, safe, and effective biosimilars have the potential to increase access to biological therapies worldwide and to reduce cancer care costs. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) was the first regulatory authority to establish legislative procedures for the approval of biosimilars when they published their guidelines on similar biological medicinal products in 2005. Biosimilar epoetins were first approved in 2007, and a wealth of data has been collected over the last decade. Two biosimilar epoetins (under five commercial names) have been approved by the EMA so far. The availability of epoetin biosimilars generated discussion among the oncology community regarding prescribing these products, their efficacy, and their safety. These agents are approved only if they are shown in extensive analytical and clinical testing to have comparable quality, safety, and efficacy to the reference medicine, and real-world studies provide further data that biosimilar epoetins are an effective and well-tolerated option for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anemia in patients with cancer. Other countries have adopted similar regulatory pathways to those in Europe and have approved epoetin biosimilars. The now extensive European experience with biosimilar epoetins should reassure regulators from other territories.

Background: Biosimilars are highly similar to a biological reference product with no clinically meaningful differences in terms of efficacy and safety. Here we present the pooled analysis of two randomized trials (PROTECT1 and 2) comparing the efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of proposed biosimilar pegfilgrastim (LA-EP2006) with reference pegfilgrastim (Neulasta®*). Methods: Two multinational, independent, prospective, double-blind, phase III studies (EudraCT: 2011-004532-58; 2012-002039-28) enrolled adult chemotherapy-naïve women with breast cancer scheduled to receive ≤6 cycles of (neo)-adjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel 75 mg/m2, doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 (TAC). Patients were randomized to receive a single 6 mg injection of LA-EP2006 or reference on Day 2 of each cycle. Primary endpoint was duration of severe neutropenia (DSN) (number of consecutive days with ANC Results: A total of 624 patients were randomized (LA-EP2006: n=314; reference: n=310). Baseline demographics were well balanced (mean age: LA-EP2006: 49.3 years, reference: 49.8; median duration (months) since initial diagnosis: LA-EP2006: 1.33 [0.1−76.0], reference: 1.35 [0.2−11.2]; ECOG status 0: LA-EP2006: 78%, reference: 75%). Mean DSN difference in Cycle 1 was -0.04 days (95% CI: -0.19, 0.11), showing statistical equivalence. FN was reported in 5.7% of patients with LA-EP2006 vs. 8.4% with reference in Cycle 1 (all cycles: 8.0% vs. 10.3%). Across all cycles, frequency of fever (LA-EP2006: 18.5%; reference: 19.7%) and infections (LA-EP2006: 15.6%; reference: 18.1%) were similar in both groups. Mean ANC time courses were almost superimposable in the two groups, with similar time and depth of ANC nadir and median time to ANC recovery was 2 days in both groups in Cycle 1. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were similar across groups (LA-EP2006: 92%; reference: 89%), and TEAEs with a suspected relationship to pegfilgrastim were reported in 22.6% of patients with LA-EP2006 and 21.3% with reference across all cycles, with the most frequent being musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders (LA-EP2006: 10.2%; reference: 9.7%). Serious TEAEs were reported in 14.3% (LA-EP2006) vs. 17.1% (reference) across all cycles. No neutralizing or clinically relevant anti-pegfilgrastim antibodies were identified. Conclusions: LA-EP2006 demonstrated similar clinical efficacy and safety to reference pegfilgrastim in patients with breast cancer receiving myelotoxic chemotherapy. *Neulasta® is a registered trademark of Amgen Inc. Citation Format: Blackwell K, Gascon P, Jones CM, Nixon A, Nakov R, Mo M, Krendyukov A, Nadia H. Safety, immunogenicity and efficacy of proposed biosimilar pegfilgrastim (LA-EP2006) compared with reference pegfilgrastim in breast cancer: Pooled analysis of two randomized, double-blind, phase III trials [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-11-05.

Purpose In the MONITOR-GCSF study of chemotherapy-induced (febrile) neutropenia with biosimilar filgrastim, 56.6% of patients were prophylacted according to amended EORTC guidelines, but 17.4% were prophylacted below and 26.0% above guideline recommendations. Methods MONITOR-GCSF is a prospective, observational study of 1447 evaluable patients from 140 cancers centers in 12 European countries treated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy for up to 6 cycles receiving biosimilar GCSF prophylaxis. Patients were classified as under-, correctly-, or over-prophylacted with GCSF relative to guideline recommendations based on their chemotherapy risk, individual risk factors, and type of GCSF prophylaxis (primary versus secondary). Results Differences between under- (17.4%), correctly- (56.6%), or over-prophylacted (26.0%) groups were found in terms of patient risk factors (age, performance status, history of FN, comorbid conditions) as well as prophylaxis patterns (type of prophylaxis, day of GCSF initiation, and GCSF duration). Rates of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) (all grades), FN, and CIN-related hospitalizations were consistently lower in over-prophylacted patients relative to under- and correctly-prophylacted patients. No differences were observed between under- and correctly-prophylacted patients except for CIN/FN-related chemotherapy disturbances. No GCSF safety differences were found between groups (except for headaches). Conclusions The real-world evidence provided by the MONITOR-GCSF study indicates that providing GCSF support may yield better CIN, FN, and CIN/FN-related hospitalization outcomes if patients are prophylacted at levels above guideline recommendations. Patients who are under-prophylacted are at higher risk for disturbances to their chemotherapy regimens. Our findings support the guideline recommendation that CIN/FN risk be assessed at the beginning of each chemotherapy cycle.

Aim: We aimed to improve oncology patients’ knowledge and awareness of biosimilars. Subsequently, we conducted an assessment of this knowledge by use of an anonymous online survey. Patients & methods: Printed materials discussing major topics related to biosimilars were developed during Phase I of our educational initiative. The brochures contained a link to the online survey. Results: A total of 79 patients responded to our survey. More than 70% of survey participants selected the correct definition of biosimilars and nearly 80% did so on questions focused on regulation, adverse reactions reporting and cost issues related to biosimilars. Conclusion: Our results indicate a good level of both knowledge and awareness of major topics concerning biosimilars among our survey participants.

This study evaluated noninferiority of darbepoetin alfa versus placebo for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in anemic patients with NSCLC treated to a 12.0-g/dL hemoglobin (Hb) ceiling.Adults with stage IV NSCLC expected to receive two or more cycles of myelosuppressive chemotherapy and Hb less than or equal to 11.0 g/dL were randomized 2:1 to blinded 500 μg darbepoetin alfa or placebo every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was OS; a stratified Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate noninferiority (upper confidence limit for hazard ratio [HR]1.15). Secondary endpoints were PFS and incidence of transfusions or Hb less than or equal to 8.0 g/dL from week 5 to end of the efficacy treatment period.The primary analysis set included 2516 patients: 1680 were randomized to darbepoetin alfa; 836 to placebo. The study was stopped early per independent Data Monitoring Committee recommendation after the primary endpoint was met with no new safety concerns. Darbepoetin alfa was noninferior to placebo for OS (stratified HR = 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.83‒1.01) and PFS (stratified HR = 0.95; 95% CI: 0.87‒1.04). Darbepoetin alfa was superior to placebo for transfusion or Hb less than or equal to 8.0 g/dL from week 5 to end of the efficacy treatment period (stratified odds ratio = 0.70; 95% CI: 0.57‒0.86; p0.001). Objective tumor response was similar between the groups (darbepoetin alfa, 36.4%; placebo, 32.6%). Incidence of serious adverse events was 31.1% in both groups. No unexpected adverse events were observed.Darbepoetin alfa dosed to a 12.0-g/dL Hb ceiling was noninferior to placebo for OS and PFS and significantly reduced odds of transfusion or Hb less than or equal to 8.0 g/dL in anemic patients with NSCLC receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy.

Around 40% of newly diagnosed lung cancer patients are Stage IV, where the improvement of survival and reduction of disease-related adverse events is the main goal for oncologists. In this scenario, we present preclinical evidence supporting the use of ABTL0812 in combination with chemotherapy for treating advanced and metastatic Nonsmall cell lung adenocarcinomas (NSCLC) and squamous carcinomas. ABTL0812 is a new chemical entity, currently in Phase 1b/2a clinical trial for advanced squamous NSCLC in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin (P/C), after successfully completing the first-in-human trial where it showed an excellent safety profile and signs of efficacy. We show here that ABTL0812 inhibits Akt/mTOR axis by inducing the overexpression of TRIB3 and activating autophagy in lung squamous carcinoma cell lines. Furthermore, treatment with ABTL0812 also induces AMPK activation and ROS accumulation. Moreover, combination of ABTL0812 with chemotherapy markedly increases the therapeutic effect of chemotherapy without increasing toxicity. We further show that combination of ABTL0812 and chemotherapy induces nonapoptotic cell death mediated by TRIB3 activation and autophagy induction. We also present preliminary clinical data indicating that TRIB3 could serve as a potential novel pharmacodynamic biomarker to monitor ABTL0812 activity administered alone or in combination with chemotherapy in squamous NSCLC patients. The safety profile of ABTL0812 and its good synergy with chemotherapy potentiate the therapeutic potential of current lines of treatment based on chemotherapy regimens, arising as a promising option for improving these patients therapeutic expectancy.

Purpose There is a lack of standards for the diagnosis, assessment and management of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP). La Fundación ECO (the Foundation for Excellence and Quality in Oncology) commissioned a study to establish a consensus and lay the foundations for the appropriate management of BTcP in oncology patients. Patients and methods A modified Delphi survey comprising two rounds was used to gather and analyze data, which was conducted over the Internet. Each statement that reached a consensus with the respondents was defined as a median consensus score (MED) of ≥7, and agreement among panelists as an interquartile range (IQR) of ≤3. Results In total, 69 medical oncologists responded, with a broad consensus that BTcP implied exacerbations of high-intensity pain, as opposed to moderate pain. Furthermore, they concurred that appropriate diagnostic equipment is needed, and that rapid-onset fentanyl formulations should be the preferred treatment for BTcP management. The panelists agreed that a lack of appropriate information and training to attend to patients, as well as limited patient visitation rights, were barriers to effective BTcP management. Regarding gaps in detected knowledge, the panelists were unsure of the measures necessary to assess the burden of the disease on the patient’s quality of life and associated medication costs. Alongside this, there was a lack of awareness of the technical specifics of the different formulations of rapid-onset fentanyl. Conclusion These results represent the current status of BTcP management. They may inform recommendations and provide a framework for future research.

Immunotherapy (IT) agents and BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) are effective treatments for patients with advanced BRAF-mutant melanoma although the optimal sequence remains to be elucidated. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of two different cohorts of patients treated with BRAFi first, then IT or the reverse sequence.This is a retrospective study on two groups of patients: a cohort was treated first with BRAFi followed by immunotherapy (BRAFi-IT) and the other cohort with the reverse sequence (IT-BRAFi). Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared between the two cohorts.A total of 25 patients were included in the study. Sixteen patients were given BRAFi-IT sequence and nine received IT-BRAFi sequence. No differences were observed in the characteristics of patients prior to each treatment between cohorts. Objective response rate (ORR) achieved by BRAFi were not different among groups. ORR achieved by IT was higher when administered after BRAFi (43.8 vs 0 %). Survival rates at 1-2 years were similar in both cohorts and median overall survival was not different for BRAFi-IT and IT-BRAFi (log rank test p = 0.97).No differences were observed in OS between the two cohorts. These results support the indistinct use of IT or BRAFi as initial treatment in patients with metastatic BRAF-mutant melanoma, although higher rate of response to IT was observed when administered after BRAFi. Prospective randomized clinical trials are needed on this issue.

PROTECT-2 compared biosimilar LA-EP2006 with reference pegfilgrastim for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in 308 early-stage breast cancer patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. The two treatments were found to be therapeutically equivalent and comparable regarding efficacy and safety., Background. Pegfilgrastim is widely used for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. In highly regulated markets, there are currently no approved biosimilars of pegfilgrastim. Pegfilgrastim Randomized Oncology (Supportive Care) Trial to Evaluate Comparative Treatment (PROTECT-2) was a confirmatory efficacy and safety study designed to compare proposed biosimilar LA-EP2006 with reference pegfilgrastim (Neulasta, Amgen) in early-stage breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant or neoadjuvant myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Methods. A total of 308 patients were randomized to LA-EP2006 or reference pegfilgrastim. Each patient received TAC (intravenous docetaxel 75 mg/m2, doxorubicin 50 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2) on day 1 of each cycle, for six or more cycles. Pegfilgrastim (LA-EP2006 or reference) was given subcutaneously (6 mg in 0.6 mL) on day 2 of each cycle. The primary endpoint was duration of severe neutropenia (DSN) during cycle 1 (number of consecutive days with an absolute neutrophil count

Current evidences state clear that both normal development of breast tissue as well as its malignant progression need many-sided local and systemic communications between epithelial cells and stromal components. During development, the stroma, through remarkably regulated contextual signals, affects the fate of the different mammary cells regarding their specification and differentiation. Likewise, the stroma can generate tumour environments that facilitate the neoplastic growth of the breast carcinoma. Mammographic density has been described as a risk factor in the development of breast cancer and is ascribed to modifications in the composition of breast tissue, including both stromal and glandular compartments. Thus, stroma composition can dramatically affect the progression of breast cancer but also its early detection since it is mainly responsible for the differences in mammographic density among individuals. This review highlights both the pathological and biological evidences for a pivotal role of the breast stroma in mammographic density, with particular emphasis on dense and malignant stromas, their clinical meaning and potential therapeutic implications for breast cancer patients.

Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are characterized by ineffective hematopoiesis, leading to hematopoietic precursor cell apoptosis and peripheral blood cytopenias. Anemia is the most frequently experienced cytopenia and is the main cause of MDS symptoms, with fatigue and dyspnea contributing to reduced quality of life and increased morbidity. As MDS disease course and prognosis is influenced by disease factors, prognostic scoring systems have been developed for MDS to aid clinical and therapeutic decisions following diagnosis. Erythropoiesis- stimulating agents (ESAs) have been used for many years to treat anemia in patients with lower-risk MDS without chromosomal abnormalities. The use of ESAs is recommended by international clinical practice guidelines, due to the large body of evidence demonstrating their effectiveness in lower-risk MDS. In March 2017, the European Medicines Agency approved epoetin alfa for the treatment of anemia in lower-risk MDS patients, based on the results from a Phase 3 clinical trial and three European registry studies. The effectiveness of biosimilar epoetin alfa (Binocrit®, Sandoz) to correct anemia in lower-risk MDS patients has also been demonstrated in a retrospective, single-center, observational study. The recent approval of epoetin alfa by the EMA in this setting will provide clinicians with a welcome, approved treatment option for lower-risk MDS.

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are man-made forms of erythropoietin used in the treatment of anemia. This quick-scoping review of systematic literature reviews (SLRs) was conducted to define the clinical, economic, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes for short-acting and long-acting ESAs in patients with chronic kidney disease-induced anemia (CKD-IA) and patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA). Embase, Medline, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from their establishment until October 2017. SLRs related to the use of short-acting and long-acting ESAs in the treatment of CIA and CKD-IA were included. Forty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. The evidence suggests little difference in efficacy, HRQoL, and safety outcomes among ESA types. Cost-effectiveness and market price are likely to become determining factors driving the choice of agent. Comparative studies and costing models accounting for the utilization of biosimilars are needed to establish which ESAs are more cost-effective.

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) are indicated for prophylaxis or management of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) and febrile neutropenia (FN). Guidelines recommend G-CSF 24-72 h following chemotherapy; however, some evidence suggests that G-CSF initiated 24 h may benefit some patients.MONITOR-GCSF was a prospective, observational, multicenter, pan-European study of 1447 chemotherapy-treated patients receiving daily biosimilar (standard) filgrastim (Zarzio®/Zarxio®, filgrastim-sndz, Hexal AG, Sandoz Inc.). In this analysis, cycles were classified as same-day, per-guidelines, or late if G-CSF support was initiated 24 h, 24-72 h, and 72 h after chemotherapy. Outcomes included occurrence of CIN of any grade (CIN1/4), grade 3 or 4 (CIN3/4), grade 4 (CIN4), or FN: CIN/FN-related hospitalization or CIN/FN-related chemotherapy disturbance.A total of 5930 chemotherapy cycles from 1423 evaluable patients from MONITOR-GCSF had data for day of G-CSF initiation: 795 cycles (13.4%) classified as same-day, 3320 (56.0%) as per-guidelines, and 1815 (30.6%) as late. Groups did not differ as to CIN1/4 and FN episodes, or CIN/FN-related hospitalizations or chemotherapy disturbances. Patients in the same-day and per-guidelines groups had statistically similar odds of not experiencing any outcomes of interest in any given cycle. Patients in the late group had worse odds of experiencing CIN1/4, CIN3/4, and CIN4 episodes in any given cycle. Proportions of patients reporting clinical events of interest were generally similar.This real-world evidence indicates that CIN/FN prophylaxis initiated with biosimilar filgrastim within 24-72 h post-chemotherapy is effective and safe. Filgrastim administration on the day of chemotherapy may be appropriate in some patients.

Background Evaluation of adverse events (AEs) in pivotal registration trials and ongoing postmarketing surveillance is important for all biologics, including biosimilars. A combined analysis of two pivotal registration studies was performed to strengthen evidence on safety for biosimilar filgrastim EP2006 in patients with breast cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy, a sensitive clinical setting to confirm biosimilarity of filgrastim. Materials and Methods Data were combined from two phase III studies of biosimilar filgrastim EP2006. The U.S. registration study was a randomized, double-blind comparison of biosimilar and reference filgrastim in women aged ≥18 years with breast cancer, receiving (neo)adjuvant treatment with TAC (docetaxel + doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide). The European Union registration study was a single-arm, open-label study of biosimilar filgrastim in women aged ≥18 years with breast cancer receiving doxorubicin + docetaxel. Patients received filgrastim as a subcutaneous injection on day 2 of each cycle for Results A total of 277 patients received biosimilar filgrastim EP2006. Patients had a mean (± standard deviation) age of 51.1 (± 10.8) years, and 78.7% of patients had stage II or III breast cancer. A total of 46 (20.6%) patients receiving biosimilar filgrastim had AEs considered filgrastim-related. The most frequently reported filgrastim-related AEs were musculoskeletal or connective tissue disorders (15.2%), including bone pain (7.2%). One death (due to pulmonary embolism) occurred of a patient receiving biosimilar filgrastim (not considered filgrastim-related). No patient developed antidrug antibodies during the study. Conclusion Biosimilar filgrastim has a safety profile consistent with previous filgrastim studies and is effective in preventing febrile neutropenia in patients with breast cancer. Implications for Practice The biosimilar filgrastim EP2006 (Zarzio, Zarxio, biosimilar filgrastim-sndz) has been approved in Europe since 2009 and in the U.S. since 2015. This combined analysis of two phase III studies provides additional clinical evidence that the biosimilar filgrastim EP2006 has a safety profile consistent with previous studies of reference filgrastim and supports large postmarketing studies of EP2006 in Europe. Strengthening the evidence for biosimilar filgrastim can help improve acceptance of biosimilars and increase patient access to biologics.

The loss of patents covering many biopharmaceutical/biological agents in the mid 1990s led to the introduction of a new generation of drugs: biosimilars. These new agents, produced by living cells just as the originator drugs, are chemically highly similar to endogenous human proteins; characterized by three-dimensionally complex, high molecular weight compounds. Among the first biosimilars used in haematology–oncology were erythropoietin and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor. After five years of use in clinical practice, the efficacy and safety profile of biosimilars approved by the European Medicines Agency is excellent. Over the next year or two, biosimilar monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) will become available; the first will be rituximab and trastuzumab. Not only are MoAbs more complex in terms of molecular weight and number of amino acids than the first biosimilars, but they are also anticancer drugs, not merely supportive treatments like their predecessors. This opens up important questions. How are regulatory agencies to assess their clinical efficacy, immunogenicity and safety? Is the neoadjuvant clinical setting the best to evaluate them? What will regulatory agencies decide in terms of switching an originator molecule for a biosimilar or extrapolating efficacy results from one pathology to another? Once biosimilars of rituximab and trastuzumab are approved, several challenging issues will need to be addressed such as how to maintain appropriate pharmacovigilance, how to extrapolate across indications, and issues concerning automatic substitution. There is currently no consensus in any of these areas. This review addresses all these issues: new challenges that the oncology community will face in the near future.