Search

Introduction: To date, for all non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases, it is recommended to test for driver alterations to identify actionable therapeutic targets. In this light, comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) with next generation sequencing (NGS) has progressively gained increasing importance in clinical practice. Here, with the aim of assessing the distribution and the real-world frequency of gene alterations and their correlation with patient characteristics, we present the outcomes obtained using FoundationOne (F1CDx) and FoundationLiquid CDx (F1L/F1LCDx) NGS-based profiling in a nationwide initiative for advanced NSCLC patients., Methods: F1CDx (324 genes) was used for tissue samples, and F1L (70 genes) or F1LCDx (324 genes) for liquid biopsy, aiming to explore the real-world occurrence of molecular alterations in aNSCLC and their relationship with patients' characteristics., Results: Overall, 232 advanced NSCLC patients from 11 Institutions were gathered [median age 63 years; never/former or current smokers 29.3/65.9%; adenocarcinoma/squamous 79.3/12.5%; F1CDx/F1L+F1LCDx 59.5/40.5%]. Alterations were found in 170 different genes. Median number of mutated genes per sample was 4 (IQR 3-6) and 2 (IQR 1-3) in the F1CDx and F1L/F1LCDx cohorts, respectively. TP53 (58%), KRAS (22%), CDKN2A/B (19%), and STK11 (17%) alterations were the most frequently detected. Actionability rates (tier I and II) were comparable: 36.2% F1CDx vs. 34% ctDNA NGS assays (29.5% and 40.9% F1L and F1LCDx, respectively). Alterations in KEAP1 were significantly associated with STK11 and KRAS , so as TP53 with RB1 . Median tumor mutational burden was 6 (IQR 3-10) and was significantly higher in smokers. Median OS from metastatic diagnosis was 23 months (IQR 18.5-19.5) and significantly lower in patients harboring ≥3 gene mutations. Conditional three-year survival probabilities increased over time for patients profiled at initial diagnosis and exceeded those of individuals tested later in their clinical history after 12 months., Conclusion: This study confirms that NGS-based molecular profiling of aNSCLC on tissue or blood samples offers valuable predictive and prognostic insights., Competing Interests: MaS declares travel fees from Roche and Sanofi unrelated to the current work. LB declares travel fees from Eli Lilly, Sanofi and Takeda, Advisory Board role from AMGEN, Roche and Takeda, Speaker Honoraria from Amgen and BMS, Research funding from BMS, unrelated to the current work. HS declares advisory board role for BMS, MSD, Roche, Pfizer, Takeda, AstraZeneca, Merck unrelated to the current work. MO declares travel accommodation from Eli Lilly and Advisory Board role/Speaker Honoraria from Astra Zeneca, BMS and MSD, outside the submitted work. ES and SC are employed at Roche. LP is the co-owner and an employee of AdRes, which has received project funding from Roche; outside the submitted work, received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational event from Fresenius Kabi, Janssen Cilag, SINPE; AdRes received grants or contracts from Janssen Cilag, Roche, Novartis, Sanofi, Astellas, Diasorin, Nestlè, Shionogi, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, and others, outside the submitted work. CP is employee of Adres. The funder had no role in the data collection and no access to patient level data. UM has received personal fees as consultant and/or speaker bureau from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, MSD, Amgen, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Eli Lilly, Diaceutics, GSK, Merck and AstraZeneca, Janssen, Diatech, Novartis and Hedera unrelated to the current work. SN reports personal fees as speaker bureau or advisor from Eli Lilly, MSD, Roche, BMS, Takeda, Pfizer, Astra Zeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim, unrelated to the current work. EB received speakers’ and travel fees from MSD, Astra-Zeneca, Celgene, Pfizer, Helsinn, Eli-Lilly, BMS, Novartis, and Roche, institutional research grants from Astra-Zeneca and Roche. SP received honoraria or speakers’ fees from Astra-Zeneca, Eli-Lilly, BMS, MSD, Takeda, Amgen, Novartis, and Roche, unrelated to the current work. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision., (Copyright © 2024 Sposito, Belluomini, Nocini, Insolda, Scaglione, Menis, Simbolo, Lugini, Buzzacchino, Verderame, Spinnato, Aprile, Calvetti, Occhipinti, Marinelli, Veccia, Lombardo, Soto Parra, Ferraù, Savastano, Porta, Pradelli, Sicari, Castellani, Malapelle, Novello, Bria, Pilotto and Milella.)

Molecular biomarker testing is increasingly becoming standard of care for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Tissue and liquid biopsy-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) is now highly recommended and has become an integral part of the routine management of advanced NSCLC patients. This highly sensitive approach can simultaneously and efficiently detect multiple biomarkers even in scant samples. However full optimization of NGS in clinical practice requires accurate reporting and interpretation of NGS findings. Indeed, as the number of NSCLC biomarkers continues to grow, clinical reporting of NGS data is becoming increasingly complex. In this scenario, achieving standardization, simplification, and improved readability of NGS reports is key to ensuring timely and appropriate treatment decisions. In an effort to address the complexity and lengthy reporting of NGS mutation results, an Italian group of 14 healthcare professionals involved in NSCLC management convened in 2023 to address the content, structure, and ease-of-use of NGS reporting practices and proposed a standard report template for clinical use This article presents the key discussion points addressed by the Italian working group and describes the essential elements of the report template., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Umberto Malapelle has received personal fees (as consultant and/or speaker bureau) from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, MSD, Amgen, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Eli Lilly, Diaceutics, GSK, Merck and AstraZeneca, Janssen, Diatech, Novartis and Hedera unrelated to the current work. Fabio Pagni received personal fees (as consultant and/or speaker bureau) from, MSD, GSK, Merck and AstraZeneca, unrelated to the current work. Elena Guerini Rocco has relevant relationship (advisory fees, honoraria, travel accommodation and expenses, grants and non-financial support) with AstraZeneca, Exact Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Novartis, Roche, Thermo Fisher Scientific unrelated to the current work. Giulia Pasello has received personal fees (as consultant and/or speaker bureau) from Amgen; Astrazeneca; BMS; Lilly; MSD; Roche; Jansenn Research support: Astrazeneca; Roche unrelated to the current work. Giuseppe Perrone has received personal fees (as consultant and/or speaker bureau) from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Diatech Pharmacogenomics, Eli Lilly, Incyte, GSK, Janssen, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Roche unrelated to the current work. Francesco Pepe has received personal fees (as consultant and/or speaker bureau) from Menarini Stemline unrelated to the current work. Giancarlo Pruneri has received personal fees (as consultant and/or speaker bureau) from Lilly, Roche Foundation One, Bayer, Novartis unrelated to the current work. Giancarlo Troncone reports personal fees (as speaker bureau or advisor) from Roche, MSD, Pfizer and Bayer, unrelated to the current work. Silvia Novello reports personal fees (as speaker bureau or advisor) from Eli Lilly, MSD, Roche, BMS, Takeda, Pfizer, Astra Zeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim, unrelated to the current work. No relevant conflict of interest declared by Alessandro Delle Donne, Filippo Fraggetta, Simona Vatrano, Sandro Pignata, Carmine Pinto, Antonio Russo, Hector J Soto Parra, Stefania Vallone, Antonio Marchetti related to the current work. No relevant conflict of interest declared by Alessandro Delle Donne, Filippo Fraggetta, Simona Vatrano, Sandro Pignata, Carmine Pinto, Antonio Russo, Hector J Soto Parra, Stefania Vallone, Antonio Marchetti related to the current work., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare and challenging cancer associated with asbestos fiber exposure, which offers limited treatment options. Historically, platinum-based chemotherapy has been the primary approach, but recent developments have introduced immunotherapy as a promising alternative for the treatment of this disease. Nevertheless, the unique growth patterns and occasionally ambiguous progressive characteristics of MPM make the interpretation of radiological assessments complex. Immunotherapy further complicates matters by introducing unconventional treatment response patterns such as hyperprogression and pseudoprogression. Consequently, there is a growing imperative to integrate the standard RECIST criteria with the mesothelioma-specific mRECIST criteria (version 1.1), as outlined in iRECIST. This comprehensive review is driven by the intent to provide a valuable resource for radiologists and clinicians engaged in the diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring of MPM in the era of immunotherapy. Specifically, the current imaging methods employed for staging and follow-up will be exposed and discussed, with a focus on the technical specificities and the mRECIST 1.1 methodology. Furthermore, we will provide a discussion about major clinical trials related to the use of immunotherapy in MPM patients. Finally, the latest advancements in radiomics, the applications of artificial intelligence in MPM, and their potential impact on clinical practice for prognosis and therapy, are discussed., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Merkel cell polyomavirus (MCPyV) prevalence in Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) cases is controversial. The detection and quantification of MCPyV DNA is mainly performed by PCR techniques using formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues. The aim of this study is to compare the performance of two different molecular techniques, specifically the quantitative Real-Time PCR (qPCR) and digital PCR (dPCR). Samples from 31 cases of MCC excisional surgical biopsies were analyzed. DNA extraction and purification from clinical samples were performed using the QIAcube Qiagen automated nucleic acid extractor. After the extraction, MCPyV was detected by qPCR and dPCR using specially designed primers and probes. Of the 31 MCC samples under study, the MCPyV genome was detected in 11 samples (35%) by qPCR compared with 20 samples (65%) detected by dPCR. Notably, 65% of primary tumors were positive for MCPyV (15/23). The viral genome was detected in 75% of tumors located at UV-exposed sites (6/8), 55% of tumors at partially UV-protected sites (5/9), and 67% of tumors at UV-protected sites (4/6). Our results showed a better sensitivity of dPCR in detecting the MCPyV genome in MCC samples compared with traditional qPCR techniques.

Background: Nephrectomy is considered the backbone of managing patients with localized and selected metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The prognostic role of nephrectomy has been widely investigated with cytokines and targeted therapy, but it is still unclear in the immunotherapy era., Methods: We investigated the Meet-URO-15 study dataset of 571 pretreated mRCC patients receiving nivolumab as second or further lines about the prognostic role of the previous nephrectomy (received in either the localized or metastatic setting) in the overall population and according to the Meet-URO score groups., Results: Patients who underwent nephrectomy showed a significantly reduced risk of death (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32-0.60, p < 0.001) with a longer median overall survival (OS) (35.9 months vs 12.1 months), 1-year OS of 71.6% vs 50.5% and 2-years OS of 56.5% vs 22.0% compared to those who did not. No significant interaction between nephrectomy and the overall five Meet-URO score risk groups was observed (p = 0.17). It was statistically significant when merging group 1 with 2 and 3 and group 4 with 5 (p = 0.038) and associated with a longer OS for the first three prognostic groups (p < 0.001), but not for groups 4 and 5 (p = 0.54)., Conclusions: Our study suggests an overall positive impact of the previous nephrectomy on the outcome of pretreated mRCC patients receiving immunotherapy. The clinical relevance of cytoreductive nephrectomy, optimal timing and patient selection deserves further investigation, especially for patients with Meet-URO scores of 1 to 3, who are the once deriving benefit in our analyses. However, that benefit is not evident for IMDC poor-risk patients (including the Meet-URO score groups 4 and 5) and a subgroup of IMDC intermediate-risk patients defined as group 4 by the Meet-URO score., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Treatment choice for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients is still based on baseline clinical and laboratory factors., Methods: By a pre-specified analysis of the Meet-URO 15 multicentric retrospective study enrolling 571 pretreated mRCC patients receiving nivolumab, baseline and early dynamic variations (Δ) of neutrophil, lymphocyte, and platelet absolute cell counts (ACC) and their inflammatory ratios (IR) were evaluated alongside their association with the best disease response and overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Multivariable analyses on OS and PFS between baseline and Δ ACC and IR values were investigated with receiving operating curves-based cut-offs., Results: The analysis included 422 mRCC patients. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) increased over time due to consistent neutrophil increase (p < 0.001). Higher baseline platelets (p = 0.044) and lower lymphocytes (p = 0.018), increasing neutrophil Δ (p for time-group interaction <0.001), higher baseline IR values (NLR: p = 0.012, SII: p = 0.003, PLR: p = 0.003), increasing NLR and systemic immune-inflammatory index (SII) (i.e., NLR x platelets) Δ (p for interaction time-group = 0.0053 and 0.0435, respectively) were associated with disease progression. OS and PFS were significantly shorter in patients with baseline lower lymphocytes (p < 0.001 for both) and higher platelets (p = 0.004 and p < 0.001, respectively) alongside early neutrophils Δ (p = 0.046 and p = 0.033, respectively). Early neutrophils and NLR Δ were independent prognostic factors for both OS (p = 0.014 and p = 0.011, respectively) and PFS (p = 0.023 and p = 0.001, respectively), alongside baseline NLR (p < 0.001 for both) and other known prognostic variables., Conclusions: Early neutrophils and NLR Δ may represent new dynamic prognostic factors with clinical utility for on-treatment decisions., Competing Interests: SR received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events and travel accommodation from Amgen, GSK, BMS, and MSD. GB reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Janssen-Cilag, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, and non-financial support from BMS, AstraZeneca, MedImmune, Pierre Fabre, and IPSEN. GF services advisory boards for Astellas, Janssen, Pfizer, Bayer, MSD, and Merck and received travel accommodation from Astellas, Janssen, and Bayer. SB received honoraria as speaker at scientific events and advisory role by BMS, Pfizer, MSD, Ipsen, Roche, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Pierre-Fabre, and Novartis. DS received honoraria for the advisory board from Amgen, Jansen, MSD, BMS, Bayer, Astra Zeneca, Ipsen, Novartis, and Merck. UG serves as advisory/board member of Astellas, Bayer, BMS, IPSEN, Janssen, Merck, Pfizer, and Sanofi, and received research grant/funding to the institution from AstraZeneca, Roche, Sanofi and travel/accommodations/expenses from BMS, IPSEN, Janssen, and Pfizer. PZ services advisory boards/consulting for Pfizer, BMS, MSD, IPSEN, Novartis, Roche, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Janssen, and Astellas. GPro received a personal fee for consulting or advisory role AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Eisai, Janssen, Ipsen, Merck, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer and a research grant from Astellas, Ipsen, Novartis. MSo received honoraria as consultant or advisory role from Janssen; grants for participation at scientific events from Ipsen, Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Astellas Pharma, Sanofi, Roche, and Novartis; and research funding from Roche, Merck, Janssen. ACo receives speaker fees/grant consultancies from Astrazeneca, BMS, MSD, Roche, Novartis, and Astellas. FMo received grants from MSD and Pfizer. GR received honoraria for advisory boards or invited speaker fees from BMS, Astellas, Bayer, Ipsen, Novartis, Roche, and AstraZeneca. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Rebuzzi, Signori, Stellato, Santini, Maruzzo, De Giorgi, Pedrazzoli, Galli, Zucali, Fantinel, Carella, Procopio, Milella, Boccardo, Fratino, Sabbatini, Ricotta, Panni, Massari, Sorarù, Santoni, Cortellini, Prati, Soto Parra, Atzori, Di Napoli, Caffo, Messina, Morelli, Prati, Nolè, Vignani, Cavo, Roviello, Llaja Obispo, Porta, Buti, Fornarini and Banna.)

Background/aim: Malignant melanoma is a skin cancer originating from the oncogenic transformation of melanocytes located in the epidermal layers. Usually, the patient's prognosis depends on timing of disease detection and molecular and genetic profiling, which may all significantly influence mortality rates. Genetic analyses often detect somatic BRAF, NRAS and cKIT mutations, germline substitutions in CDKN2A, and alterations of the PI3K-AKT-PTEN pathway. A peculiar molecular future of melanoma is its high immunogenicity, making this tumor targetable by programmed cell death protein 1-specific antibodies., Materials and Methods: Ten formalin-fixed paraffin embedded samples derived from melanoma patients were subjected to next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis using the FDA-approved FoundationOne CDx™ test. The molecular features of each case were then analyzed employing several in silico prediction tools., Results: We analyzed the mutational landscape of patients with metastatic or relapsed cutaneous melanoma to define enriched pathways and protein-protein interactions. The analysis showed that both known genetic alterations and variants of unknown significance rely on redundant signaling converging on similar gene ontology biological processes. Complex informatics analyses of NGS-based genetic results identified pivotal signaling pathways that could provide additional targets for cancer treatment., Conclusion: Our data suggest an additional role for NGS in melanoma, as analysis of comprehensive genetic findings using innovative informatic tools may lengthen the list of druggable molecular targets that impact patient outcome., (Copyright© 2022, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite the survival advantage, not all metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients achieve a long-term benefit from immunotherapy. Moreover, the identification of prognostic biomarkers is still an unmet clinical need., Methods: This multicenter retrospective study investigated the prognostic role of peripheral-blood inflammatory indices and clinical factors to develop a novel prognostic score in mRCC patients receiving at least second-line nivolumab. The complete blood count before the first cycle of therapy was assessed by calculating neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), derived NLR (dNLR), lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), systemic inflammation index (SII), and systemic inflammation response index (SIRI). Clinical factors included pre-treatment International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) score, line of therapy, and metastatic sites., Results: From October 2015 to November 2019, 571 mRCC patients received nivolumab as second- and further-line treatment in 69% and 31% of cases. In univariable and multivariable analyses all inflammatory indices, IMDC score, and bone metastases significantly correlated with overall survival (OS). The multivariable model with NLR, IMDC score, and bone metastases had the highest c-index (0.697) and was chosen for the developing of the score (Schneeweiss scoring system). After internal validation (bootstrap re-sampling), the final index (Meet-URO score) composed by NLR, IMDC score, and bone metastases had a c-index of 0.691. It identified five categories with distinctive OSs: group 1 (median OS - mOS = not reached), group 2 (mOS = 43.9 months), group 3 (mOS = 22.4 months), group 4 (mOS = 10.3 months), and group 5 (mOS = 3.2 months). Moreover, the Meet-URO score allowed for a fine risk-stratification across all three IMDC groups., Conclusion: The Meet-URO score allowed for the accurate stratification of pretreated mRCC patients receiving nivolumab and is easily applicable for clinical practice at no additional cost. Future steps include its external validation, the assessment of its predictivity, and its application to first-line combinations., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: Dr Fornarini services advisory boards for Astellas, Janssen, Pfizer, Bayer, MSD, and Merck, and received travel accommodation from Astellas, Janssen, and Bayer. Dr Buti received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events and in an advisory role by BMS, Pfizer; MSD, Ipsen, Roche, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Pierre-Fabre, Novartis. Dr Banna reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Janssen-Cilag, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, and non-financial support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, MedImmune, Pierre Fabre, IPSEN, outside the submitted work. Dr De Giorgi services as an advisory/board member of Astellas, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, IPSEN, Janssen, Merck, Pfizer, and Sanofi, received research grant/funding to the institution from AstraZeneca, Roche, Sanofi, and travel/accommodations/expenses from Bristol-Myers Squibb, IPSEN, Janssen, and Pfizer. Dr Zucali services advisory boards/consulting for Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, IPSEN, Novartis, Roche, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Janssen, and Astellas. Dr Masini received personal fees as a speaker from Astellas, as a consultant from IPSEN, MSD, and Janssen, and for travel accommodation from BMS, Pfizer, Astellas, Janssen, and IPSEN. Dr Procopio services advisory boards/consulting for Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, IPSEN, Merk, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer. Dr Cortellini receives speaker fees/grant consultancies from Astrazeneca, BMS, MSD, Roche, Novartis, and Astellas. Dr Morelli received grants from MSD and Pfizer. Dr Bersanelli received research funding to the institution from Roche, Pfizer, Seqirus UK, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Sanofi, and received personal fees for advisory role, copyright transfer, consultancies, and as speaker at scientific events from Sciclone Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Pierre-Fabre, Novartis, and Pfizer. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (© The Author(s), 2021.)

Background: No predictive markers for chemotherapy activity have been validated in gastric cancer (GC). The potential value of class III β-tubulin (TUBB3) as biomarker for prognosis and resistance to taxane-based therapy was reported., Methods: We analyzed GC samples of patients enrolled in the Intergroup Trial of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Adenocarcinoma of the Stomach (ITACA-S), a randomized adjuvant study comparing 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) and docetaxel-based sequential chemotherapy. TUBB3 was quantitated by selected reaction monitoring mass spectrometry and patients were stratified using a threshold of 750 attomoles per microgram (amol/µg). Cox proportional modeling and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were used to assess the impact of TUBB3 expression on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival., Results: Patients with TUBB3 protein levels >750 and <750 amol/µg were 21.9% and 78.1%, respectively, and were well-balanced between treatment arms. TUBB3 protein levels were not prognostic. Whereas no survival differences according to the 2 arms were observed in the subgroup with low TUBB3 expression (5-year OS 47% vs 40%; p = 0.44), patients with high TUBB3 had a clinically meaningful poorer OS when receiving docetaxel-based versus 5-FU/LV chemotherapy (5-year OS 31% vs 54%; p = 0.09), with a statistically significant interaction between TUBB3 and treatment ( p = 0.049)., Conclusions: The quantification of TUBB3 might be considered as a negative predictive biomarker of benefit from taxane-based therapy in GC. Studies are needed to evaluate its role in the neoadjuvant setting.

Psychological distress imposed by the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak particularly affects patients with pre-existing medical conditions, and the progression of their diseases. Patients who fail to keep scheduled medical appointments experience a negative impact on care. The aim of this study is to investigate the psychosocial factors contributing to the cancellation of medical appointments during the pandemic by patients with pre-existing health conditions. Data were collected in eleven Italian hospitals during the last week of lockdown, and one month later. In order to assess the emotional impact of the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak and the subject's degree of psychological flexibility, we developed an ad hoc questionnaire (ImpACT), referring to the Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) model. The Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS) and the Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire (CFQ) were also used. Pervasive dysfunctional use of experiential avoidance behaviours (used with the function to avoid thought, emotions, sensations), feelings of loneliness and high post-traumatic stress scores were found to correlate with the fear of COVID-19, increasing the likelihood of cancelling medical appointments. Responding promptly to the information and psychological needs of patients who cancel medical appointments can have positive effects in terms of psychological and physical health.

The ALK gene (anaplastic lymphoma kinase) encodes a highly conserved tyrosine kinase receptor whose physiological function has not yet been fully established; in particular the fusion of ALK (mainly EML4-ALK) is the gene alteration that most frequently involves 3-7% of all non-small cell lung cancers. Neuroblastoma in adults (NB) is a rare tumor that can present somatic activating mutations in the ALK gene in 8-9% of patients (and up to 14% of high-risk NBs); these mutations occur in the tyrosine kinase domain in three key positions (F1174, F1245 and R1275), which account for approximately 85% of all ALK mutations in NB. In this article, we report the case of an adult patient with advanced mutation-positive NB treated with an ALK inhibitor ceritinib showing a therapeutic opportunity due to the molecular diagnostic techniques now available.

Background: We hypothesized that non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with a tumor positive for single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of the Excision Repair Cross Complementation Group 1 (ERCC-1) gene could be more genetically instable and consequently more responsive to a programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) blockade. Methods: We evaluated the T19007C and C8092A ERCC-1 SNPs by pyrosequencing assay, on tumor specimens from two independent cohorts of patients who relapsed after one or more prior systemic treatments for advanced NSCLC and who received nivolumab (3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks) as part of the Italian Expanded Access Program. We aimed to assess the outcome of enrolled subjects according to the ERCC-1 SNPs status , to evaluate the role of these polymorphisms as putative biomarkers associated with a response/clinical benefit to anti-PD-1 therapies. Results: Of the 45 patients included in the final analysis, 21 (47%) and 16 (36%) were positive for the T19007C and C8092A polymorphic genotype (PG), respectively. In univariate analyses, overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) were shorter in patients with the T19007C PG, but neither difference achieved statistical significance ( P = 0.131 and P = 0.717, respectively). The presence of the C8092A PG was associated with a longer OS and PFS, although statistical significance was only reached for PFS ( P = 0.112 and P = 0.025, respectively). These results were confirmed by multivariate analyses. The response rate was only significantly higher in patients with the C8092A PG vs. wild type ERCC-1 (62 vs. 7%, P < 0.001). Conclusions: Results from this hypothesis generating pilot study, provided suggestive evidence that a subgroup of NSCLC patients could benefit differently from nivolumab according to the C8092A ERCC-1 SNP status . However, these data warrant further investigation., (Copyright © 2020 Aiello, Solinas, Santoni, Battelli, Restuccia, Latteri, Paratore, Verderame, Albanese, Bruzzi and Soto Parra.)

Due to its low incidence, liposarcoma displays a limited number of therapeutic options. However, eribulin recently received approval for the treatment of advanced liposarcoma patients, progressing to at least two chemotherapy lines. We report herein the case of a man initially diagnosed with a leyomiosarcoma, subsequently reclassified as a dedifferentiated liposarcoma, who received eribulin after he failed several therapy lines. Eribulin provided our patient an 8-month disease control and a substantial clinical benefit with no relevant adverse effects, showing a good efficacy and safety profile despite its delayed employ. Additionally, this case strengthens the pivotal importance of molecular profiling in the management of soft tissue sarcomas.

Background: In real-world practice, eribulin mesylate provides significant survival benefit, with a manageable safety profile in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC)., Methods: In this prospective, open-label, multicentre, observational study we evaluated the effectiveness and tolerability of eribulin as third-line treatment in a homogeneous population. The primary endpoints were the safety profile and response in metastatic sites; secondary endpoints included the response in different subtypes, overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)., Results: From 2013 to 2016, 118 women were treated in 21 Sicilian institutions; the median age was 58 years (range 29-79), with 69% of patients under 65. The median cycles of eribulin were 5.5 (range 1-26). The most common adverse event was neutropenia (9.3%, 3 cases of grade 3, 4 of grade 4); only 1 case of QT prolongation was reported. Eribulin was effective in controlling metastatic disease in all sites, and it achieved the highest ORR in brain (16%) and liver (14.9%). Median OS was 31.8 months (95% CI 27.9-34.4) and median PFS 5.5 months (95% CI 4.2-6.6). PFS was 5.2 months (95% CI 2.8-8.4) in patients with triple-negative subtype. Median PFS was longer in patients over 65 years (6.1 months, 95% CI 4.4-8.3). In patients who had visceral metastases PFS was 5.5 months (95% CI 95% 3.5-6.6) and OS 33.9 months (95% CI 29.8-40.8)., Conclusions: Eribulin as third-line treatment shows an acceptable safety profile and a substantial antitumour activity in the treatment of MBC, even in elderly patients and in those with visceral disease., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: The author(s) declare that there are no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s), 2019.)

Background: Malignant pleural mesothelioma is a problematic condition due to poor prognosis and difficulties in management. We evaluated the treatment and outcome of 378 mesothelioma patients referred to 6 Italian Oncology Departments., Methods: Demographic and clinical data were collected. Treatment was assessed in terms of chemotherapy (line of treatment, pemetrexed-based regimen, other therapies), surgery, and radiotherapy. Response to therapy, progression-free survival, and overall survival were evaluated., Results: 36 and 342 patients received best supportive care and active treatment, respectively; 86 patients underwent surgery, and 26 received trimodal therapy. Disease control after first-line chemotherapy was achieved in 74.2% of patients (75.7% in patients treated with pemetrexed combined with other drugs and 69% with pemetrexed as monotherapy). The disease control rate was 82.6% in pemetrexed re-challenged individuals. Median survival time was 11.6 months with supportive care, 16.2 months with chemotherapy only, 32.4 months with surgery plus chemotherapy, and 47.2 months with trimodal therapy. A more favorable prognosis was observed in responders to first-line therapy who were then actively treated with second-line (24.8 vs. 11.8 months in non-responders, p < 0.001) and third-line chemotherapy (28.9 vs. 17.8 months in non-responders, p = 0.005)., Conclusion: Mesothelioma patients benefited from chemotherapy alone only when retreated in the second line after response to first-line therapy., (© 2017 S. Karger GmbH, Freiburg.)

Background: [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-PET is being evaluated as a tool for the early detection of response to various targeted agents in solid tumors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictive value of PET response after 2 days of erlotinib in unselected pretreated patients with stage IV NSCLC., Patients and Methods: FDG-PET/CT scans were conducted at baseline and after 2 days of erlotinib, with a CT evaluation performed at baseline and after 45-60 days of therapy. PET responses were evaluated by quantitative changes on SUVmax tumor/non-tumor ratio and classified according to EORTC criteria. PET responses were compared with RECIST responses and related to progression-free (PFS) and overall (OS) survival. Erlotinib effects on glucose uptake were also studied in a panel of NSCLC cell lines., Results: Fifty-three patients were enrolled. At 2 days of erlotinib, 20 (38 %) patients showed partial metabolic response (PMR), 25 (47 %) had stable metabolic disease (SMD) and 8 (15 %) had progressive metabolic disease (PMD). All patients with PMD had confirmed RECIST progression at 45-60 days. Patients with early PMR and SMD had significantly longer PFS (p < 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively) and OS (p = 0.001 for both) than PMD patients., Conclusions: FDG-PET assessment after 2 days of erlotinib could be useful to identify early resistant patients and to predict survival in unselected NSCLC pretreated population.

Background: Pemetrexed-cisplatin chemotherapy is the standard of care in the first-line treatment of unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Second-line cytotoxic therapy is considered for a growing group of patients, but the optimal treatment has not been defined to date. Gemcitabine and vinorelbine have shown activity in the first-line setting. The objective of this study was to evaluate the activity and toxicity of the gemcitabine-vinorelbine combination in pemetrexed-pretreated patients with MPM., Methods: From January 2004 to September 2006, 30 consecutive patients who were pretreated with pemetrexed with or without a platinum-derivative were enrolled. Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) and vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) were administered intravenously on Days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks. Treatment was repeated for a maximum of 6 cycles or until progression or unacceptable toxicity., Results: A partial response was observed in 3 patients (10%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-26.5%), and 10 patients (33.3%; 95% CI, 17.3-52.8%) had stable disease after treatment. Overall, 13 patients (43.3%; 95% CI, 25.5-62.6%) achieved disease control. The median time to progression was 2.8 months (range, 0.6-12.1 months), and the median survival was 10.9 months (range, 0.8-25.3 months). Hematologic toxicity was acceptable, with grade 3 or 4 neutropenia occurring in 11% of patients and thrombocytopenia occurring in 4% of patients; no case of febrile neutropenia was observed. Nonhematologic toxicity generally was mild., Conclusions: The gemcitabine and vinorelbine combination was moderately active and had an acceptable toxicity profile in pemetrexed-pretreated patients with MPM. The role of second-line treatment in MPM needs to be evaluated in prospective trials in large series of patients who are stratified according to previous treatment and prognostic factors.

Cisplatin-based chemotherapy is the standard treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Several platinum-based doublets have been tested in phase II/III trials with equivalent results in terms of tumour response and survival. Our study was designed to evaluate activity, tolerability and convenience of alternating intravenous (i.v.) and oral vinorelbine in combination with cisplatin in advanced NSCLC. Forty chemo-naive patients with stage IV or relapsed unresectable disease and good performance status were enrolled to receive i.v. cisplatin 40 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 2 plus i.v. vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) on day 1, every 3 weeks. Oral vinorelbine 60 mg/m(2) was given at home on day 5, without checking of blood cell count. A total of 175 treatment cycles were delivered. The overall response rate was 30% (one complete, 11 partial responses). Median time to progression and overall survival were 5 and 10 months, respectively. The main toxicity was haematological, with grade 3-4 neutropenia observed in 75% of patients, without febrile neutropenia. Non-haematological toxicity was mild. This schedule of cisplatin and vinorelbine treatment showed a good toxicity profile and an efficacy similar to other standard regimens. Oral vinorelbine could be administered safely at home on day 5.

Objectives: A dose-finding study of a new cisplatin/vinorelbine schedule was done to increase activity of the combination, and improve compliance of non-small-cell lung cancer PATIENTS., Methods: Beginning with cisplatin 40 mg/m(2) on days 1, 2 and vinorelbine 20 mg/m(2) on days 1, 3, increasing dose levels up to the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) were tested in a series of 6-patient cohorts. If 3 of 6 patients experienced dose-limiting toxicity in the first 3 cycles, the previous dose was considered the recommended dose (RD). Once the MTD was reached, granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor was prophylactically added to the treatment of a new patient cohort to improve the therapeutic ratio., Results: We enrolled 35 stage IIIA/B or IV patients between August 2001 and February 2002. The RD was cisplatin 45 mg/m(2) and vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2), with relative dose intensities (RDIs) of 95 and 97%, respectively, and an actual received dose intensity (ARDI) of 28.62 and 16.07 mg/m(2)/week, respectively. Overall grade 3-4 toxicities were: neutropenia (71%), febrile neutropenia (25%), anemia (8%), and constipation (17%). The overall response rate was 64.3% (CI: 44.1-81.4%)., Conclusions: ARDI and RDI of our modified cisplatin/vinorelbine regimen were not inferior to those of conventional weekly schedules; its acceptable toxicity profile and manageability may justify its use in clinical practice.

Background: Gefitinib (Iressa(TM), ZD1839) is an orally active, selective epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Phase I studies showed that it is well tolerated, with evidence of tumor regression in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Therefore, we aimed to assess the antitumor activity and tolerability of gefitinib in a series of patients with previously treated, advanced NSCLC, as a part of a compassionate use program., Patients and Methods: To be eligible, all patients were required to have histologically or cytologically proven advanced or metastatic NSCLC, prior chemotherapy with at least one cisplatin-containing chemotherapy regimen or contraindication to cytotoxic drugs, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status < or =2, and adequate hematological, renal and hepatic parameters. All patients provided signed informed consent. Patient re-evaluation was performed every 4-6 weeks., Results: Seventy-three consecutive patients were enrolled. Response rate, including complete and partial response, was 9.6%; an additional 43.8% of patients achieved stable disease, for an overall disease control of 53.4%. EGFR1 status was evaluated by immunocytochemistry in 25 patients. According to EGFR1 immunoreactivity all responses were observed with medium/strong imunoreactivity while three out of four responses were observed in high expressive patients. Median survival for all patients was 4 months while it reached 6 months for patients with disease control. The 1-year survival rate was 13.1% for the entire series and 23.2% for patients with disease control. Non-hematological toxicity was generally mild., Conclusion: Gefitinib has promising activity with a good toxicity profile in patients with progressive NSCLC who have received one or two prior chemotherapy regimens. A possible relationship within response and EGFR1 expression is suggested.