Search

Objective: To capture and monitor flu-like symptoms in relation to the clinical characteristics and the oncologic treatment of a large head and neck cancer (HNC) patient cohort during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods: Patients were monitored through by 2 rounds of interviews. Clinical characteristics of patients with no symptoms (group 0) and of those reporting ⩾1 (group A), ⩾3 (group B), or ⩾5 symptoms (group C) were analyzed. Patients with ⩾1 symptom at both interviews were defined as group A2. Results: Five hundred patients with HNC were analyzed. A higher frequency of patients with the following characteristics was observed in group A vs group 0: active treatment (40% vs 24%, p = 0.0002), gastrostomy (6% vs 2%, p = 0.027), recent active treatment (48% vs 29%, p < 0.0001), and higher number of concomitant medications ( p = 0.01). A lower median age was observed in group B vs group no-B (patients with fewer than three symptoms) (59 vs 63.55 years, p = 0.016) and in group A2 vs group no-A2 (patients without at least one symptom at both interviews) (56 vs 63 years, p = 0.021); patients in group B received more recent active treatment than those in group no-B and in group A2 vs those in group no-A2 ( p = 0.024 and 0.043, respectively); patients in group B had a lower body mass index than those in group no-B (22.4 vs 23.93 kg/m2, p = 0.0066). Conclusions: This work is based on patient-reported symptoms and signs independently of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing. In the future, these results might serve as a a benchmark for clinicians triaging and managing patients with HNC during infectious outbreaks involving flu-like symptoms.

In a time of uncertainties such the present days, we all look for guiding principles. When no guidelines are available, principles shape our actions. Above all, do no harm has been ours as we are facing the largely unknown challenge of the global COVID-19 epidemic. This mentality guided our efforts to strike the balance between reducing exposure of patients and health care providers to risk of infection on the one hand, and on the other, meeting our daily goal of providing optimal oncologic treatment in a tertiary center of national relevance.

Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are associated with different immune‐related adverse events (irAEs), the potential effect on the skeleton is poorly defined albeit biologically plausible and assessable through pharmacovigilance. We described a case series of patients experiencing skeletal fractures while on ICIs at the National Cancer Institute of Milan. To better characterize the clinical features of skeletal irAEs reported with ICIs, we queried the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) and performed disproportionality analysis by means of reporting odds ratios (RORs), deemed significant by a lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (LL95% CI) > 1. Bone AEs emerging as significant were scrutinized in terms of demographic and clinical data, including concomitant irAEs or drugs affecting bone resorption or causing bone damage. Four patients with skeletal events while on ICIs were included in our case series, of which three exhibited vertebral fractures. In FAERS, 650 patients with bone and joint injuries and treated with ICIs were retrieved, accounting for 822 drug‐event pairs. Statistically significant ROR was found for eight, two and one bone AEs respectively with PD‐1, PD‐L1 and CTLA‐4 inhibitors, being pathological fracture (N = 46; ROR = 3.17; LL95%CI = 2.37), spinal compression fracture (42; 2.51; 1.91), and femoral neck fracture (26; 2.38; 1.62) the most common. Concomitant irAEs or drugs affecting bone metabolism were poorly reported. The increased reporting of serious vertebral fractures in patients without concomitant irAEs and no apparent preexisting risk factors could suggest a possible cause‐effect relationship and calls for close clinical monitoring and implementation of dedicated guidelines., What's new? Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), while potentially improving cancer patient survival, are associated with sometimes severe immune‐related adverse events. While these events affect all host tissues, little is known about their impact on bone in particular. Here, the authors investigated accounts of bone and joint injuries among patients taking ICIs, using clinical data and reports submitted to a pharmacovigilance database. Analyses show that ICIs may precipitate adverse skeletal events and reveal an increased reporting of serious vertebral fractures in patients lacking pre‐existing risk factors. The findings suggest that risk stratification and monitoring for skeletal lesions in patients taking ICIs is warranted.