Efficacy and Safety of Chemotherapy after Immunotherapy in Patients with Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Background: There are currently few data about the safety and effectiveness of chemotherapy for patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have progressed from prior immunotherapy. Methods: Data from patients with consecutive stage IIIB-IV, ECOG performance status (PS) 0-2, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with combination or single-agent chemotherapy following progression on an earlier immunotherapy regimen were retrospectively gathered. Recorded were baseline attributes, outcome metrics, and toxicities. The neutrophil/lymphocyte (N/L) ratio's predictive usefulness was examined through an exploratory analysis. Results: The analysis comprised one hundred subjects. The adeno/squamous carcinoma ratio was 77%/23%, the M/F ratio was 66%/34%, the ECOG PS was 0/1/≥2 47%/51%/2%, and the median PD-L1 expression was 50% (range 0-100). The median age was 67 (range 39-81) years. Prior immunotherapy included a single-agent treatment in 83% of cases, with pembrolizumab use being prevalent, and a median N/L ratio of four prior to chemotherapy. The overall median time-to-progression on previous immunotherapy was 6 months. After immunotherapy, just 33% of subjects underwent chemotherapy. A median of 4 (range 1-16) cycles of chemotherapy were administered; platinum doublets (primarily carboplatin) were delivered in only 31% of cases, vinorelbine accounted for 25%, taxanes for 25%, and gemcitabine for 8%. The median clinical benefit was 55%, while the overall response rate was 21%. The median overall survival was 5 months (range 1-22) and the median time to progression was 4 months (range 1-17). Subgroups with low and high N/L ratios were compared, but there was no discernible difference in survival. Conclusions: After immunotherapy, a small percentage of patients with advanced NSCLC had chemotherapy. Following immunotherapy advancement, chemotherapy demonstrated a moderate level of therapeutic effectiveness; no adverse concerns were noted. The effectiveness of chemotherapy following immunotherapy was not predicted by the baseline N/L ratio.

Cardio-oncology rehabilitation: are we ready?

Cardio-oncology rehabilitation (CORE) is not only an essential component of cancer rehabilitation but also a pillar of preventive cardio-oncology. Cardio-oncology rehabilitation is a comprehensive model based on a multitargeted approach and its efficacy has been widely documented; when compared with an 'exercise only' programme, comprehensive CORE demonstrates a better outcome. It involves nutritional counselling, psychological support, and cardiovascular (CV) risk assessment, and it is directed to a very demanding population with a heavy burden of CV diseases driven by physical inactivity, cancer therapy-induced metabolic derangements, and cancer therapy-related CV toxicities. Despite its usefulness, CORE is still underused in cancer patients and we are still at the dawning of remote models of rehabilitation (tele-rehabilitation). Not all CORE is created equally: a careful screening procedure to identify patients who will benefit the most from CORE and a multidisciplinary customized approach are mandatory to achieve a better outcome for cancer survivors throughout their cancer journey. The aim of this paper is to provide an updated review of CORE not only for cardiologists dealing with this peculiar population of patients but also for oncologists, primary care providers, patients, and caregivers. This multidisciplinary team should help cancer patients to maintain a healthy and active life before, during, and after cancer treatment, in order to improve quality of life and to fight health inequities.

[ANMCO Position paper in collaboration with ITACARE-P: Cardio-oncology rehabilitation. Are we ready?] / Position paper ANMCO in collaborazione con ITACARE-P: Riabilitazione cardio-oncologica. "Are we ready?".

Cardio-oncology rehabilitation (CORE) is not only an essential component of cancer rehabilitation, but also a pillar of preventive cardio-oncology. CORE is a comprehensive model based on a multitargeted approach and its efficacy has been widely documented; when compared to an "exercise only" program, comprehensive CORE demonstrates a better outcome. It involves nutritional counseling, psychological support and cardiovascular risk assessment, and it is directed to a very demanding population with a heavy burden of cardiovascular diseases driven by physical inactivity, cancer therapy-induced metabolic derangements and cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicities. Despite its usefulness, CORE is still underused in cancer patients and we are still at the dawning of remote models of rehabilitation (telerehabilitation). Not all cardio-oncology rehabilitation is created equal: a careful screening procedure to identify patients who will benefit the most from CORE and a multidisciplinary customized approach are mandatory to achieve a better outcome for cancer survivors throughout their cancer journey.The aim of this position paper is to provide an updated review of CORE not only for cardiologists dealing with this peculiar patient population, but also for oncologists, primary care providers, patients and caregivers. This multidisciplinary team should help cancer patients to maintain a healthy and active life before, during and after cancer treatment, in order to improve quality of life and to fight health inequities.

Real-world outcomes of Italian patients with advanced non-squamous lung cancer treated with first-line pembrolizumab plus platinum-pemetrexed.

PURPOSE: The aim of this multi-center, retrospective/prospective cohort observational study was to evaluate outcomes in routine clinical practice of first-line chemo-immunotherapy with cis/carboplatin, pemetrexed and pembrolizumab in patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in 33 Italian centers. METHODS: The outcome measure was to evaluate overall survival (OS) in a real-world patient population. Secondary endpoints were: progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DoR) and incidence of treatment-related adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: 1068 patients were enrolled at the time of data cut-off (January 31st, 2023), and 812 (76.0%) belonged to the retrospective cohort. Median age was 66 years (27-85), ECOG PS was ≥ 2 in 91 (8.6%) patients; 254 (23.8%) patients had brain metastases at baseline; 38 (3.6%) patients had tumor with PD-L1 expression ≥ 50%. After a median follow-up of 17.0 months (95% CI, 16.1-17.9), median OS was 16.1 months (95% CI, 14.4-18.8) and PFS was 9.9 months (95% CI, 8.8-11.2). Median DoR (n = 493) was 14.7 months (95% CI, 13.6-17.1). ORR was 43.4% (95% CI, 40.4-46.4). Any-grade AEs occurred in 636 (59.6%) patients and grade ≥ 3 in 253 (23.7%) patients. Most common grade ≥ 3 AEs were neutropenia (6.3%) and anemia (6.3%). CONCLUSIONS: First-line chemo-immunotherapy was effective and tolerable in this large, real-world Italian study of patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC. Our results were in line with the KEYNOTE-189 registration study, also considering the low number of PD-L1 ≥ 50% patients included in our study.