COVID-19 has disrupted the global health care system since March 2020. Lung cancer (LC) patients (pts) represent a vulnerable population highly affected by the pandemic. This multicenter Italian study aimed to evaluate whether the COVID-19 outbreak had an impact on access to cancer diagnosis and treatment of LC pts compared with pre-pandemic time.Consecutive newly diagnosed LC pts referred to 25 Italian Oncology Departments between March and December 2020 were included. Access rate and temporal intervals between date of symptoms onset and diagnostic and therapeutic services were compared with the same period in 2019. Differences between the 2 years were analyzed using the chi-square test for categorical variables and the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables.A slight reduction (-6.9%) in newly diagnosed LC cases was observed in 2020 compared with 2019 (1523 versus 1637, P = 0.09). Newly diagnosed LC pts in 2020 were more likely to be diagnosed with stage IV disease (P < 0.01) and to be current smokers (someone who has smoked more than 100 cigarettes, including hand-rolled cigarettes, cigars, cigarillos, in their lifetime and has smoked in the last 28 days) (P < 0.01). The drop in terms of new diagnoses was greater in the lockdown period (percentage drop -12% versus -3.2%) compared with the other months included. More LC pts were referred to a low/medium volume hospital in 2020 compared with 2019 (P = 0.01). No differences emerged in terms of interval between symptoms onset and radiological diagnosis (P = 0.94), symptoms onset and cytohistological diagnosis (P = 0.92), symptoms onset and treatment start (P = 0.40), and treatment start and first radiological revaluation (P = 0.36).Our study pointed out a reduction of new diagnoses with a shift towards higher stage at diagnosis for LC pts in 2020. Despite this, the measures adopted by Italian Oncology Departments ensured the maintenance of the diagnostic-therapeutic pathways of LC pts.
The publisher regrets that at the time the article was published the name of the author N. La Verde was mistakenly abbreviated as N.L. Verde. This has now been corrected. The publisher would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. Evaluation of COVID-19 impact on DELAYing diagnostic-therapeutic pathways of lung cancer patients in Italy (COVID-DELAY study): fewer cases and higher stages from a real-world scenarioESMO OpenVol. 7Issue 2PreviewCOVID-19 has disrupted the global health care system since March 2020. Lung cancer (LC) patients (pts) represent a vulnerable population highly affected by the pandemic. This multicenter Italian study aimed to evaluate whether the COVID-19 outbreak had an impact on access to cancer diagnosis and treatment of LC pts compared with pre-pandemic time. Full-Text PDF Open Access
Abstract Aims Cardiovascular (CV) toxicities related to chemotherapy have been reported with increasing frequency. Thus, latest cardio-oncology guidelines focused on the importance of a baseline CV risk assessment before starting a potentially cardiotoxic regimen, in order to identify individuals at greater risk of developing CV toxicities and to prevent them. Despite these recommendations, there are still no validated systems to predict cardiotoxicity risk in oncological patients. The aim of the present study was to compare the average risk assessed by conventional CV risk scores (SCORE, QRISK2, ASCVD) and two recently developed cardiotoxicity risk scores (Baseline cardiovascular risk stratification proformas, Multivariable prediction model for major adverse cardiovascular events after early stage breast cancer) in a cohort of 41 (100% female; mean age 52.9 ± 11) early breast cancer (EBC) patients treated with epirubicin and to investigate the relationship between CV and cardiotoxicity risk and the rate of CV outcome, defined as biomarkers (high sensibility Troponin I and BNP) increase during the follow-up. Results A baseline CV risk assessment was performed in all patients before starting chemotherapy according to prespecified scores, showing a higher mean CV risk in our cohort compared to general population. Most patients were at low risk of developing cardiotoxicity according to prespecified scores. During the follow-up (mean 221 ± 75 days), the primary outcome occurred in 9.8% (n = 4). The average CV risk scores of patients developing the primary outcome were higher than the controls according to both conventional and cardiotoxicity risk scores (Figure 1). The QRISK2 achieved the best ratio cases average score/controls average score (r = 3) and the ROC curve confirmed QRISK2 as the best CV risk score to predict the outcome in our cohort, reaching the highest sensitivity and specificity (Figure 2). Conclusions In a cohort of young patients affected by EBC the mean CV risk is higher than the general young female population according to traditional CV risk scores. Moreover, patients developing the primary outcome during the Follow-up were those at higher CV risk and high risk of cardio toxicity. Surprisingly the best score to predict the incidence of outcome was the QRISK2, confirming the crucial role of baseline CV risk in cancer patients.
Background Nausea and vomiting are common side effects of Trastuzumab Deruxtecan (T-DXd), but guidelines for optimal management were not initially available. This retrospective single-center study aimed at evaluating the efficacy of two antiemetic regimens in patients receiving T-DXd. Methods Data from metastatic breast cancer patients receiving T-DXd were collected. Two groups were defined: patients treated with 5-HT3 receptor antagonists (RA) ± dexamethasone (5-HT3-group) and patients treated with a fixed oral combination of netupitant (NK1RA) and palonosetron ± dexamethasone (NK1 group). Physicians preferentially offered the NK1 regimen to patients at higher risk of nausea and vomiting based on internal recommendations. Only nausea and vomiting during cycles 1 and 2 were considered. Comparisons of nausea and vomiting by the antiemetic prophylaxis group were assessed using chi-square. Results A total of 53 patients were included in the analysis. At cycle 1, 72% and 28% of patients received the 5-HT3 and NK1 prophylaxis, respectively. Overall, 58% reported nausea, with no differences between groups (58% vs. 60%; p = 0.832), but with a trend for lower grade in the NK1 group (33.3% G1; 26.7% G2) compared to the 5-HT3 group (23.7% G1; 31.6% G2; 2.6% G3). Vomiting was reported by 21% and 0% of patients in the 5-HT3 and the NK1 group, respectively ( p = 0.054). Among the 15 patients in the 5-HT3 group with nausea at cycle 1 who escalated to NK1 at cycle 2, nausea decreased from 100% to 53% ( p = 0.022) and vomiting decreased from 47% to 13% ( p = 0.046). Conclusions The NK1 regimen improved vomiting control at cycle 1 and, when introduced at cycle 2, significantly improved both nausea and vomiting. The biased NK1 selection for higher-risk patients may have dampened the differences between groups at cycle 1. These findings support enhanced control of T-DXd-related nausea and vomiting with NK1RA.
Abstract Background Recent researches suggested that statins, beside their role in inhibiting endogenous cholesterol synthesis and in cardiovascular prevention, could influence several processes in cancer biology. In fact, a recent meta‐analysis demonstrated that statins could positively influence OS in lung cancer patients. Aim There is a lack of large cohort studies that could support a potential antineoplastic role of statins in clinical practice. We collected data from 162 patients treated with immunotherapy for Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) in first‐ and second‐line setting to investigate the impact of these drugs on survival parameters. Methods and Results In our observational study, we enrolled 162 patients who received immunotherapy for lung cancer between October 2015 and April 2020. We used descriptive statistics to analyze patients' baseline features. Tumor response was evaluated using RECIST version 1.1 guidelines. Uni and multivariate analysis were conducted to investigate the relationship between statin use and response to immunotherapy, using the χ 2 ‐test. We used Kaplan‐Meier curves to estimate OS and PFS in statin and nonstatin users. We included 122 patients in the final analysis. Median PFS was 17.57 months in the statin group and 9.57 months in the nonstatin group, with a P = <.001. Moreover, median OS was superior in the statin‐users group, with a statistically significant difference (19.94 vs 10.94 months, P = <.001). Conclusion Although in our study, statin use positively correlates with PFS and OS in lung cancer patient treated with immunotherapy, these results require a further validation with randomized clinical trials.
Dermatomyositis (DM) is an idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (IIM) mainly characterized by subacute muscle weakness and skin rash sometimes associated with malignancy.
In a previous randomized study, we showed that adjuvant immunotherapy with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and recombinant interleukin-2 (rIL-2) significantly improved survival in resected N2-Non Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) patients. The present study assesses feasibility, safety and potential efficacy of combined neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and immunotherapy with peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) and rIL-2 in resectable N2-NSCLC patients. Eighty-two consecutive N2-NSCLC patients underwent neo-adjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin and gemcitabine. Out of the 82 patients, 23 were also subjected to leukapheresis prior to neo-adjuvant chemotherapy while the remaining 59 did not. Collected PBMC were analyzed for viability and phenotype and then stored frozen in liquid nitrogen. Thawed PBMC were infused intravenously, 5 days before surgery. After the infusion, rIL-2 was administered subcutaneously until surgery. Only patients with a partial or complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy underwent surgery: 13 patients in the experimental immunotherapy group (A) and 32 in the reference group (B). The two groups were homogeneous for all major prognostic factors. Median leukapheresis yield was 10 billion PBMC, (range 3–24 billions). Two to six billion PBMC were infused. The phenotypic analysis showed that similar proportions of CD4 and CD8 cells were present in leukapheresis products, and thawed PBMC, as well as in T lymphocytes isolated from the removed tumours. No severe adverse effects were observed following immunotherapy. No significant differences in overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) were seen between the two groups. However, the 5-year OS in group A was almost twice as much compared to group B (59% vs 32%). After adjustment for major prognostic factors, a statistically significant 66% reduction in the hazard of death was seen in patients receiving immunotherapy. The OS benefit was more evident in patients with adenocarcinoma than in those with squamous cell carcinoma. This study supports the favorable toxicity profile and potential efficacy of combining neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and immunotherapy with PBMC and rIL-2 in the treatment of N2-NSCLC patients.
