A case series of non-small cell lung cancer patients with EGFR or HER2 exon 20 insertion in Li Fraumeni syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Germline pathogenic mutations in TP53 gene are associated with a cancer predisposition syndrome known as Li Fraumeni syndrome. Albeit infrequently, non-small cell lung cancer, especially as oncogene-addicted disease, may be diagnosed in young patients with Li Fraumeni syndrome. CASE DESCRIPTION: We report three cases of patients affected by Li Fraumeni syndrome who developed non-small cell lung cancer with EGFR or HER2 exon 20 insertions. The first patient suffered from liposarcoma and, then, brain metastases from HER2-mutated non-small cell lung cancer: after stereotactic radiotherapy, he benefited from enrollment in a clinical trial with a HER2-targeted therapy. The second young patient was a female with personal history of rhabdomyosarcoma, diagnosed with brain metastases from EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer: enrollment in a clinical trial led to a temporary clinical benefit. The last case was a female diagnosed with breast carcinoma, ovarian granulosa cell tumor and advanced EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer at a young age. CONCLUSIONS: Young patients affected by oncogene-addicted non-small cell lung cancer and with a positive familial cancer history should be referred for an accurate genetic counselling to look for Li Fraumeni syndrome. The underlying molecular connection between TP53 and HER family receptor tyrosine kinases remains unclear, but an extensive molecular characterization of tumors from patients with Li Fraumeni syndrome should always be performed, to offer patients a personalized therapeutic approach.

Global real-world experiences with pembrolizumab in advanced urothelial carcinoma after platinum-based chemotherapy: the ARON-2 study.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have changed previous treatment paradigm of advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). The ARON-2 study (NCT05290038) aimed to assess the real-world effectiveness of pembrolizumab in patients recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Medical records of patients with documented metastatic UC treated by pembrolizumab as second-line therapy were retrospectively collected from 88 institutions in 23 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR). Cox proportional hazards models were adopted to explore the presence of prognostic factors. RESULTS: In total, 836 patients were included: 544 patients (65%) received pembrolizumab after progression to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in the metastatic setting (cohort A) and 292 (35%) after recurring within < 12 months since the completion of adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cohort B). The median follow-up time was 15.3 months. The median OS and the ORR were 10.5 months and 31% in the overall study population, 9.1 months and 29% in cohort A and 14.6 months and 37% in cohort B. At multivariate analysis, ECOG-PS ≥ 2, bone metastases, liver metastases and pembrolizumab setting (cohort A vs B) proved to be significantly associated with worst OS and PFS. Stratified by the presence of 0, 1-2 or 3-4 prognostic factors, the median OS was 29.4, 12.5 and 4.1 months (p < 0.001), while the median PFS was 12.2, 6.4 and 2.8 months, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms that pembrolizumab is effective in the advanced UC real-world context, showing outcome differences between patients recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy.

Evaluation of the Effect of Lorlatinib on CYP2B6, CYP2C9, UGT, and P-Glycoprotein Substrates in Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Lorlatinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer. This study assessed the effect of steady-state lorlatinib on the metabolic enzymes cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2B6, CYP2C9, and uridine 5'-diphospho-glucuronosyltransferase (UGT) and the P-glycoprotein (P-gp) transporter. METHODS: Thirty-two patients received a single oral dose of a probe drug on Day - 2 to determine the pharmacokinetics of the probe drug alone. Starting on Day 1, patients received 100 mg oral lorlatinib daily. On Day 15, a single oral dose of the probe drug was administered concurrently with lorlatinib. Pharmacokinetic parameters for these probe substrates were assessed. RESULTS: Plasma exposures of all probe substrates were reduced by lorlatinib compared with the probe alone. The greatest reduction in area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC∞) and maximum (peak) plasma drug concentration (Cmax) (67% and 63% decrease, respectively) was observed with the P-gp probe substrate fexofenadine. Lorlatinib coadministration also decreased the AUC∞ and Cmax of bupropion (CYP2B6 probe substrate) by 25% and 27%, tolbutamide (CYP2C9 probe substrate) by 43% and 15%, and acetaminophen (UGT probe substrate) by 45% and 28%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Lorlatinib is a net moderate inducer of P-gp and a weak inducer of CYP2B6, CYP2C9, and UGT after steady state is achieved with daily dosing. Medications that are P-gp substrates with a narrow therapeutic window should be avoided in patients taking lorlatinib; no dose modifications are needed with substrates of CYP2B6, CYP2C9, or UGT. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT01970865.

Real-world Outcome of Patients with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma and Intermediate- or Poor-risk International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium Criteria Treated by Immune-oncology Combinations: Differential Effectiveness by Risk Group?

BACKGROUND: Renal c carcinoma (RCC) is one of the most common urinary cancers worldwide, with a predicted increase in incidence in the coming years. Immunotherapy, as a single agent, in doublets, or in combination with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), has rapidly become a cornerstone of the RCC therapeutic scenario, but no head-to-head comparisons have been made. In this setting, real-world evidence emerges as a cornerstone to guide clinical decisions. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this retrospective study was to assess the outcome of patients treated with first-line immune combinations or immune oncology (IO)-TKIs for advanced RCC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data from 930 patients, 654 intermediate risk and 276 poor risk, were collected retrospectively from 58 centers in 20 countries. Special data such as sarcomatoid differentiation, body mass index, prior nephrectomy, and metastatic localization, in addition to biochemical data such as hemoglobin, platelets, calcium, lactate dehydrogenase, neutrophils, and radiological response by investigator's criteria, were collected. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The median follow-up was calculated by the inverse Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The median follow-up time was 18.7 mo. In the 654 intermediate-risk patients, the median OS and PFS were significantly longer in patients with the intermediate than in those with the poor International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria (38.9 vs 17.3 mo, 95% confidence interval [CI] p < 0.001, and 17.3 vs 11.6 mo, 95% CI p < 0.001, respectively). In the intermediate-risk subgroup, the OS was 55.7 mo (95% CI 31.4-55.7) and 40.2 mo (95% CI 29.6-51.6) in patients treated with IO + TKI and IO + IO combinations, respectively (p = 0.047). PFS was 30.7 mo (95% CI 16.5-55.7) and 13.2 mo (95% CI 29.6-51.6) in intermediate-risk patients treated with IO + TKI and IO + IO combinations, respectively (p < 0.001). In the poor-risk subgroup, the median OS and PFS did not show a statistically significant difference between IO + IO and IO + TKI. Our study presents several limitations, mainly due to its retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed differences between the IO + TKI and IO + IO combinations in intermediate-risk patients. A clear association with longer PFS and OS in favor of patients who received the IO + TKI combinations compared with the IO-IO combination was observed. Instead, in the poor-risk group, we observed no significant difference in PFS or OS between patients who received different combinations. PATIENT SUMMARY: Renal cancer is one of the most frequent genitourinary tumors. Treatment is currently based on immunotherapy combinations or immunotherapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, but there are no comparisons between these.In this study, we have analyzed the clinical course of 930 patients from 58 centers in 20 countries around the world. We aimed to analyze the differences between the two main treatment strategies, combination of two immunotherapies versus immunotherapy + antiangiogenic therapy, and found in real-life data that intermediate-risk patients (approximately 60% of patients with metastatic renal cancer) seem to benefit more from the combination of immunotherapy + antiangiogenic therapy than from double immunotherapy. No such differences were found in poor-risk patients. This may have important implications in daily practice decision-making for these patients.

Sotorasib in KRASp.G12C mutated advanced NSCLC: Real-world data from the Italian expanded access program.

BACKGROUND: Sotorasib showed a significant improvement of progression free survival (PFS), safety and quality of life over docetaxel in patients with KRASp.G12C-mutated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) within the CodeBreak-200 study. Here we report real-world efficacy and tolerability data from NSCLC patients who received sotorasib within the Italian expanded access program (EAP). METHODS: Sotorasib (960 mg, orally, once daily) was available on physician request for KRASp.G12C mutant advanced NSCLC patients. Clinical-pathological and molecular data were collected from the Italian ATLAS real-world registry. Patients underwent CT-scan and responses were evaluated by RECIST criteria. Efficacy and tolerability outcomes have been assessed. RESULTS: A total of 196 advanced NSCLC patients were treated across 30 Italian centers. Median age was 69 years old (range 33-86). Most patients were male (61 %), former (49 %) or current smokers (43 %), with ECOG-PS 0/1 (84 %) and adenocarcinoma subtype (90 %). 45 % and 32 % of patients received sotorasib in 2nd and 3rd line, respectively. Overall, response rate was 26 % and the median duration of response was 5.7 months (95 % CI: 4.4-7.0). Median PFS and OS were 5.8 months (95 % CI: 5 - 6.5) and 8.2 months (95 % CI: 6.3 - 9.9). Grade 3-4 TRAEs occurred in 16.5 % of patients, with Grade ≥ 3 liver enzyme increase and TRAEs-related discontinuation reported in 12 % and 4.6 % of cases. CONCLUSION: Real-world data from the Italian EAP confirm the tolerability and effectiveness of sotorasib in patients with KRASp.G12C-mutated advanced NSCLC and highlight the value of the national ATLAS network as source of real-world evidence driving the clinical management of NSCLC patients.

KRAS4A and KRAS4B in liquid biopsy of metastatic lung adenocarcinoma patients treated with Pembrolizumab or chemotherapy plus Pembrolizumab.

KRAS is involved in the stability and expression of PD-L1. We investigated the expression of circulating mRNA (cmRNA) of KRAS4A and KRAS4B and the possible impact on progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma treated with immunotherapy. Patients without driver mutations undergoing Pembrolizumab (P) or P plus chemotherapy (PC) were prospectively accrued for liquid biopsy analysis of KRAS4A, KRAS4B, and PD-L1 cmRNA. Both KRAS isoforms were also studied for association with PD-L1 cmRNA. Of 56 patients, 28 received P and 28 PC. Patients with high levels of both KRAS isoforms showed significantly better PFS. The median PFS for KRAS4A was 29 months (95% CI 22-29 months) and KRAS4B 24 months (95% CI 13-29 months), respectively. The median PFS of patients with low levels of both isoforms was 12 months (95% CI 6-15 months for KRAS4A and 95% CI 5-20 months for KRAS4B). High KRAS4A retained a significant positive association with PFS in the multivariate model. An exploratory analysis in treatment subgroups found a positive association between high KRAS4A and KRAS4B with PFS in patients treated with P. PD-L1 cmRNA was significantly higher in patients with high KRAS isoforms levels and this effect was pronounced for high KRAS4A carriers. KRAS4A deserves further investigation as a potential marker for defining patients who may benefit the most from immune checkpoint inhibitors therapy and improving personalized cancer immunotherapeutic strategies.

Use of concomitant proton pump inhibitors, statins or metformin in patients treated with pembrolizumab for metastatic urothelial carcinoma: data from the ARON-2 retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Concomitant medications may potentially affect the outcome of cancer patients. In this sub-analysis of the ARON-2 real-world study (NCT05290038), we aimed to assess the impact of concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors (PPI), statins, or metformin on outcome of patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) receiving second-line pembrolizumab. METHODS: We collected data from the hospital medical records of patients with mUC treated with pembrolizumab as second-line therapy at 87 institutions from 22 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate. We carried out a survival analysis by a Cox regression model. RESULTS: A total of 802 patients were eligible for this retrospective study; the median follow-up time was 15.3 months. PPI users compared to non-users showed inferior PFS (4.5 vs. 7.2 months, p = 0.002) and OS (8.7 vs. 14.1 months, p < 0.001). Concomitant PPI use remained a significant predictor of PFS and OS after multivariate Cox analysis. The use of statins or metformin was not associated with response or survival. CONCLUSIONS: Our study results suggest a significant prognostic impact of concomitant PPI use in mUC patients receiving pembrolizumab in the real-world context. The mechanism of this interaction warrants further elucidation.

Geographical differences in the management of metastatic de novo renal cell carcinoma in the era of immune-combinations.

BACKGROUND: The upfront treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has been revolutionized by the introduction of immune-based combinations. The role of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) in these patients is still debated. The ARON-1 study (NCT05287464) was designed to globally analyze real-world data of mRCC patients receiving first-line immuno-oncology combinations. This sub-analysis is focused on the role of upfront or delayed partial or radical CN in three geographical areas (Western Europe, Eastern Europe, America/Asia). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective observational study in mRCC patients treated with first-line immune combinations from 55 centers in 19 countries. From 1152 patients in the ARON-1 dataset, we selected 651 patients with de novo mRCC. 255 patients (39%) had undergone CN, partial in 14% and radical in 86% of cases; 396 patients (61%) received first-line immune-combinations without previous nephrectomy. RESULTS: Median overall survival (OS) from the diagnosis of de novo mRCC was 41.6 months and not reached (NR) in the CN subgroup and 24.0 months in the no CN subgroup, respectively (P<0.001). Median OS from the start of first-line therapy was NR in patients who underwent CN and 22.4 months in the no CN subgroup (P<0.001). Patients who underwent CN reported longer OS compared to no CN in all the three geographical areas. CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences in terms of patients' outcome seem to clearly emerge, even if the rate CN and the choice of the type of first-line immune-based combination varies across the different Cancer Centers participating in the ARON-1 project.

Global Real-World Outcomes of Patients Receiving Immuno-Oncology Combinations for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: The ARON-1 Study.

BACKGROUND: Immuno-oncology combinations have achieved survival benefits in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). OBJECTIVE: The ARON-1 study (NCT05287464) was designed to globally collect real-world data on the use of immuno-combinations as first-line therapy for mRCC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a cytologically and/or histologically confirmed diagnosis of mRCC treated with first-line immuno-combination therapies were retrospectively included from 47 International Institutions from 16 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall clinical benefit (OCB). RESULTS: A total of 729 patients were included; tumor histology was clear-cell RCC in 86% of cases; 313 patients received dual immuno-oncology (IO + IO) therapy while 416 were treated with IO-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (IO + TKI) combinations. In the overall study population, the median OS and PFS were 36.5 and 15.0 months, respectively. The median OS was longer with IO+TKI compared with IO+IO therapy in the 616 patients with intermediate/poor International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk criteria (55.7 vs 29.7 months; p = 0.045). OCB was 84% for IO+TKI and 72% for IO + IO combination (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study may suggest that immuno-oncology combinations are effective as first-line therapy in the mRCC real-world context, showing outcome differences between IO + IO and IO + TKI combinations in mRCC subpopulations. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05287464.

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Efficacy Outcomes from Immune Checkpoint Blockade in Patients with Cancer.

PURPOSE: No evidence exists as to whether type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) impairs clinical outcome from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in patients with solid tumors. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In a large cohort of ICI recipients treated at 21 institutions from June 2014 to June 2020, we studied whether patients on glucose-lowering medications (GLM) for T2DM had shorter overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). We used targeted transcriptomics in a subset of patients to explore differences in the tumor microenvironment (TME) of patients with or without diabetes. RESULTS: A total of 1,395 patients were included. Primary tumors included non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; 54.7%), melanoma (24.7%), renal cell (15.0%), and other carcinomas (5.6%). After multivariable analysis, patients on GLM (n = 226, 16.2%) displayed an increased risk of death [HR, 1.29; 95% confidence interval (CI),1.07-1.56] and disease progression/death (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03-1.43) independent of number of GLM received. We matched 92 metformin-exposed patients with 363 controls and 78 patients on other oral GLM or insulin with 299 control patients. Exposure to metformin, but not other GLM, was associated with an increased risk of death (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.16-2.03) and disease progression/death (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.04-1.72). Patients with T2DM with higher pretreatment glycemia had higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (P = 0.04), while exploratory tumoral transcriptomic profiling in a subset of patients (n = 22) revealed differential regulation of innate and adaptive immune pathways in patients with T2DM. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, patients on GLM experienced worse outcomes from immunotherapy, independent of baseline features. Prospective studies are warranted to clarify the relative impact of metformin over a preexisting diagnosis of T2DM in influencing poorer outcomes in this population.

Clinico-Pathological Features Influencing the Prognostic Role of Body Mass Index in Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated by Immuno-Oncology Combinations (ARON-1).

BACKGROUND: Obesity has been associated with improved response to immunotherapy in cancer patients. We investigated the role of body mass index (BMI) in patients from the ARON-1 study (NCT05287464) treated by dual immuno-oncology agents (IO+IO) or a combination of immuno-oncology drug and a tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) as first-line therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Medical records of patients with documented mRCC treated by immuno-oncology combinations were reviewed at 47 institutions from 16 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (OS), and overall clinical benefit (OCB), defined as the sum of the rate of partial/complete responses and stable disease. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to explore the association of variables of interest with survival. RESULTS: A total of 675 patients were included; BMI was >25 kg/m2 in 345 patients (51%) and was associated with improved OS (55.7 vs. 28.4 months, P < .001). The OCB of patients with BMI >25 kg/m2 versus those with BMI ≤25 kg/m2 was significantly higher only in patients with nonclear cell histology (81% vs. 65%, P = .011), and patients with liver metastases (76% vs. 58%, P = .007), Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio >4 (77% vs 62%, P = .022) or treated by nivolumab plus ipilimumab (77% vs. 64%, P = .044). In the BMI ≤25 kg/m2 subgroup, significant differences were found between patients with NLR >4 versus ≤4 (62% vs. 82%, P = .002) and patients treated by IO+IO versus IO+TKIs combinations (64% vs. 83%, P = .002). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that the prognostic significance and the association of BMI with treatment outcome varies across clinico-pathological mRCC subgroups.

Exploratory analysis of the effect of a dexamethasone-sparing regimen for prophylaxis of cisplatin-induced emesis on food intake (LUNG-NEPA study).

We demonstrated the non-inferiority of a dexamethasone (DEX)-sparing (single-dose) regimen with NEPA, a netupitant/palonosetron fixed combination, for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) caused by cisplatin. This pre-planned exploratory analysis assessed the effect of the DEX-sparing regimen on a patient's food intake. Chemotherapy-naïve patients undergoing cisplatin (≥ 70 mg/m2) were given NEPA and DEX (12 mg) on day 1 and randomized to receive either no further DEX (DEX1), or oral DEX (4 mg BID) on days 2-4 (DEX4). Patient-reported endpoint maintenance of usual daily food intake was assessed during the 5-days post-chemotherapy. The relationship between usual daily food intake and CINV control, pre-chemotherapy self-rated food intake and BMI-adjusted weight loss (WL) were evaluated. One-hundred fifty-two patients (76/group) were assessable. The proportion of patients reporting maintenance of usual daily food intake was similar in both groups: 69.7% (95% CI, 58.6-78.9) for DEX1 vs. 72.4% (95% CI, 61.4-81.2) for DEX4. Only CINV control was significantly associated with maintenance of usual daily food intake (P ≤ 0.001) during the overall phase. The DEX-sparing regimen does not adversely affect patient-reported daily food intake post-chemotherapy. The current analysis adds further insights into antiemetic efficacy of DEX sparing beyond day 1 in the challenging setting of cisplatin.Trial registration: The parent study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04201769).

Challenges in the management of advanced NSCLC among Italian oncologists: a 2019 national survey unfolds regional disparities.

BACKGROUND: Molecular testing is crucial for the implementation of personalized therapy in patients with lung cancer. Whether routine biomarker testing and access to personalized therapies are limited in some Italian regions is unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a national cross-sectional survey between April and June 2019 among Italian oncologists to determine differences in biomarker testing and access to personalized therapies for lung cancer. RESULTS: Based on GIMBE report n. 3/2018, 32 respondents (37.6%) were defined as belonging to budget deficit regions (BDRs) while 53 (62.4%) were from balanced/positive budget regions (BPRs). Diagnostic assays for EGFR/ALK/ROS1 and PD-L1 were reported to be available in 47/53 (88.7%) and 22/32 (68.85%) centers from BPRs and BDRs, respectively (p=0.04).Liquid biopsy accessibility was wider in BPRs than in BDRs (75.5% (40/53) vs. 50% (16/32), respectively; p=0.03). 84/85 (98.8%) oncologists reported that ⩾75% of eligible patients received first-line targeted therapies. Reason for not administering first-line targeted therapies was defined as clinically-unrelated (molecular testing not available or incomplete, pharmacoeconomic issues) by 25/42 (59.5%) of respondents from BPRs and 21/26 (80.6%) from BDRs (p=0.12). Reason for not administering first-line pembrolizumab was defined as clinically-unrelated by 8/43 (18.6%) of respondents from BPRs and 10/22 (45.4%) from BDRs (p=0.039). CONCLUSION: Disparities in access to diagnostic assay and first line immunotherapy exist between BPRs and BDRs.

Evaluating the impact of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting on daily functioning in patients receiving dexamethasone-sparing antiemetic regimens with NEPA (netupitant/palonosetron) in the cisplatin setting: results from a randomized phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The non-inferiority of dexamethasone (DEX) on day 1, with or without low-dose DEX on days 2 and 3, combined with oral NEPA (netupitant/palonosetron), compared with the guideline-consistent use of DEX was demonstrated in cisplatin. Here, we complete the analysis by assessing the impact of emesis on daily lives of patients receiving DEX-sparing regimens using the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE). METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve patients undergoing cisplatin (≥70 mg/m2), were given NEPA and DEX (12 mg) on day 1 and randomized to receive either 1) no further DEX (DEX1), 2) oral DEX (4 mg daily) on days 2-3 (DEX3), or 3) DEX (4 mg twice daily) on days 2-4 (DEX4; control). Patients completed the FLIE questionnaire on day 6 of cycle 1. Endpoints included the FLIE nausea domain, vomiting domain, and overall combined domain scores, as well as the proportion of patients with no impact on daily life (NIDL; overall score > 108). This was a protocol-planned analysis. RESULTS: In the DEX1 group, no significant differences were observed in the FLIE nausea score (48.9 [±1.8; SE] vs. 53.7 [±1.5]), vomiting score (56.6 [±1.4] vs. 58.7 [±0.8]) and overall score (105.6 [±2.8] vs.112.4 [±1.9]) versus DEX4 control; similar results were observed in the DEX3 group for nausea score (49.6 [±1.7]), vomiting score (58.2 [±1]) and overall score (107.8 [±2.4]) versus control. There were no significant between-group differences in the proportion of patients reporting NIDL. CONCLUSION: Reducing DEX, when administered with NEPA, does not seem to adversely impact the daily functioning in patients undergoing cisplatin. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04201769 . Registration date: 17/12/2019 - Retrospectively registered.

Rising incidence of late stage breast cancer after COVID-19 outbreak. Real-world data from the Italian COVID-DELAY study.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer (BC) patients' (pts) management was affected by a global reorganization after Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Our multicenter study aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19 on access to diagnosis, staging and treatment for BC pts compared to pre-pandemic. METHODS: Medical records of all consecutive newly diagnosed BC pts referred to 6 Italian Institutions between March and December 2020 were assessed. Monthly access rate and temporal intervals between date of symptoms onset, radiological, cytohistological diagnosis and treatment start were analyzed and compared with 2019. RESULTS: A reduction (25%) in newly diagnosed BC was observed compared to 2019 (666 vs 890). New BC pts in 2020 were less likely to be diagnosed with early stage BC (77% vs 83%, p < 0.01), had a worse performance status according to the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG PS) (19.8% had PS > 0 in 2020 vs 16.5% in 2019, p < 0.01) and fewer pts were asymptomatic at diagnosis in 2020 (54% vs 71%,p < 0.01). COVID-19 did not negatively impact in terms of access to diagnosis, staging and treatment. Time intervals between symptom onset and radiological diagnosis, symptom onset and cytohistological diagnosis, cytohistological diagnosis and treatment start were maintained or improved. However, less cases were discussed in multidisciplinary tumor meetings during 2020 (60% vs 73%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our data proved an alarming reduction of early stage BC associated with the COVID-19 crisis in 2020. Despite the upheaval generated by the pandemic, our study shed light on the effective performance delivered by Italian Oncology Departments to guarantee diagnostic-therapeutic pathways.

Alarming Drop in Early Stage Colorectal Cancer Diagnoses After COVID-19 Outbreak: A Real-World Analysis from the Italian COVID-DELAY Study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has triggered the disruption of health care on a global scale. With Italy tangled up in the pandemic response, oncology care has been largely diverted and cancer screenings suspended. Our multicenter Italian study aimed to evaluate whether COVID-19 has impacted access to diagnosis, staging, and treatment for patients newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC), compared with pre-pandemic time. METHODS: All consecutive new CRC patients referred to 8 Italian oncology institutions between March and December 2020 were included. Access rate and temporal intervals between date of symptoms onset, radiological and cytohistological diagnosis, treatment start and first radiological evaluation were analyzed and compared with the same months of 2019. RESULTS: A reduction (29%) in newly diagnosed CRC cases was seen when compared with 2019 (360 vs 506). New CRC patients in 2020 were less likely to be diagnosed with early stage (stages I-II-III) CRC (63% vs 78%, P < .01). Gender and sidedness were similar regardless of the year. The percentage of tumors with any mutation among BRAF, NRAS, and KRAS genes were significantly different between the 2 years (61% in 2020 vs 50% in 2019, P = .04). Timing of access to cancer diagnosis, staging, and treatment for patients with CRC has not been negatively affected by the pandemic. Significantly shorter temporal intervals were observed between symptom onset and first oncological appointment (69 vs 79 days, P = .01) and between histological diagnosis and first oncological appointment (34 vs 42 days, P < .01) during 2020 compared with 2019. Fewer CRC cases were discussed in multidisciplinary meetings during 2020 (38% vs 50%, P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Our data highlight a significant drop in CRC diagnosis after COVID-19, especially for early stage disease. The study also reveals a remarkable setback in the multidisciplinary management of patients with CRC. Despite this, Italian oncologists were able to ensure diagnostic-therapeutic pathways proper operation after March 2020.

First-Line Osimertinib in Patients with EGFR-Mutant Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Outcome and Safety in the Real World: FLOWER Study.

BACKGROUND: Osimertinib became the standard treatment for patients with untreated EGFR-mutant advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) following results reported in the phase III randomized FLAURA trial. Because of strict exclusion criteria, patient populations included in pivotal trials are only partially representative of real-world patients. METHODS: We designed an observational, prospective, multicenter study enrolling patients with EGFR-mutant aNSCLC receiving first-line osimertinib to evaluate effectiveness, safety, and progression patterns in the real-world. RESULTS: At data cutoff, 126 White patients from nine oncology centers were included. At diagnosis, 16 patients (12.7%) had a performance status (PS) ≥2 and 38 (30.2%) had brain metastases. Overall response rate (ORR) was 73%, disease control rate (DCR) 96.0%. After a median follow-up of 12.3 months, median time to treatment discontinuation (mTTD) was 25.3 months, median progression-free-survival (mPFS) was 18.9 months and median overall survival (mOS) was not reached (NR). One hundred and ten patients (87%) experienced adverse events (AEs), 42 (33%) of grade 3-4, with venous thromboembolism (VTE) as the most common (n = 10, 7.9%). No difference in rates of VTE was reported according to age, PS, comorbidity, and tumor load. We observed longer mTTD in patients without symptoms (NR vs. 18.8 months) and with fewer than three metastatic sites at diagnosis (NR vs. 21.4 months). Patients without brain metastases experienced longer mPFS (NR vs. 13.3 months). No difference in survival outcome was observed according to age, comorbidity, and type of EGFR mutation. Isolated progression and progression in fewer than three sites were associated with longer time to treatment discontinuation (TTD). CONCLUSION: Osimertinib confirmed effectiveness and safety in the real world, although thromboembolism was more frequent than previously reported.

Clinical profile and mortality of Sars-Cov-2 infection in cancer patients across two pandemic time periods (Feb 2020-Sep 2020; Sep 2020-May 2021) in the Veneto Oncology Network: The ROVID study.

INTRODUCTION: We analyzed a cohort of patients with cancer and Sars-Cov-2 infection from the Veneto Oncology Network registry across two pandemic time periods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 761 patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. RESULTS: 198 patients were diagnosed during the first pandemic time period (TP1; February 2020 September 2020), 494 during TP2 before the vaccination campaign (TP2/pre-vaccination; September 2020-21 February 2021) and 69 in TP2/post-vaccination (22 February 2021-15 May 2021). TP2 vs TP1 patients were younger (p = 0.004), showed more frequently a good performance status (p < 0.001) and <2 comorbidities (p = 0.002), were more likely to be on active anticancer therapy (p = 0.006). Significantly fewer patients in TP2 (3-4%) vs TP1 (22%) had an in-hospital potential source of infection (p < 0.001). TP2 patients were more frequently asymptomatic (p = 0.003). Significantly fewer patients from TP2 were hospitalized (p < 0.001) or admitted to intensive care unit (p = 0.006). All-cause mortality decreased from 30.3% in TP1, to 8.9% and 8.7% in the two TP2 periods (p < 0.001), reflected by a significant reduction in Sars-Cov-2-related mortality (15.2%, 7.5% and 5.8% in the three consecutive time periods, p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Differences in clinical characteristics and features of Sars-Cov-2 infection between TP1 and TP2 reflect the effects of protective measures and increased testing capacity. The lower mortality in TP2 is in line with a less frail population. However, the vast majority of death events in TP2 were related to COVID-19, reinforcing the priority to protect cancer patients.

High familial burden of cancer correlates with improved outcome from immunotherapy in patients with NSCLC independent of somatic DNA damage response gene status.

Family history of cancer (FHC) is a hallmark of cancer risk and an independent predictor of outcome, albeit with uncertain biologic foundations. We previously showed that FHC-high patients experienced prolonged overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) following PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors. To validate our findings in patients with NSCLC, we evaluated two multicenter cohorts of patients with metastatic NSCLC receiving either first-line pembrolizumab or chemotherapy. From each cohort, 607 patients were randomly case-control matched accounting for FHC, age, performance status, and disease burden. Compared to FHC-low/negative, FHC-high patients experienced longer OS (HR 0.67 [95% CI 0.46-0.95], p = 0.0281), PFS (HR 0.65 [95% CI 0.48-0.89]; p = 0.0074) and higher disease control rates (DCR, 86.4% vs 67.5%, p = 0.0096), within the pembrolizumab cohort. No significant associations were found between FHC and OS/PFS/DCR within the chemotherapy cohort. We explored the association between FHC and somatic DNA damage response (DDR) gene alterations as underlying mechanism to our findings in a parallel cohort of 118 NSCLC, 16.9% of whom were FHC-high. The prevalence of ≥ 1 somatic DDR gene mutation was 20% and 24.5% (p = 0.6684) in FHC-high vs. FHC-low/negative, with no differences in tumor mutational burden (6.0 vs. 7.6 Mut/Mb, p = 0.6018) and tumor cell PD-L1 expression. FHC-high status identifies NSCLC patients with improved outcomes from pembrolizumab but not chemotherapy, independent of somatic DDR gene status. Prospective studies evaluating FHC alongside germline genetic testing are warranted.

ASCEND-7: Efficacy and Safety of Ceritinib Treatment in Patients with ALK-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Metastatic to the Brain and/or Leptomeninges.

PURPOSE: Central nervous system metastases are a prominent cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with ALK-positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The phase II ASCEND-7 (NCT02336451) study was specifically designed to assess the efficacy and safety of the ALK inhibitor (ALKi) ceritinib in patients with ALK+ NSCLC metastatic to the brain and/or leptomeninges. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with active brain metastases were allocated to study arms 1 to 4 based on prior exposure to an ALKi and/or prior brain radiation (arm 1: prior radiotherapy/ALKi-pretreated; arm 2: no radiotherapy/ALKi-pretreated; arm 3: prior radiotherapy/ALKi-naïve; arm 4: no radiotherapy/ALKi-naïve). Arm 5 included patients with leptomeningeal carcinomatosis. Patients received ceritinib 750 mg once daily (fasted condition). Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed whole-body overall response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included disease control rate (DCR) and intracranial/extracranial responses. RESULTS: Per investigator assessment, in arms 1 (n = 42), 2 (n = 40), 3 (n = 12), and 4 (n = 44), respectively: whole-body ORRs [95% confidence interval (CI)] were 35.7% (21.6-52.0), 30.0% (16.6-46.5), 50.0% (21.1-78.9), and 59.1% (43.2-73.7); whole-body DCR (95% CI): 66.7% (50.5-80.4), 82.5% (67.2-92.7), 66.7% (34.9-90.1), and 70.5% (54.8-83.2); intracranial ORRs (95% CI): 39.3% (21.5-59.4), 27.6% (12.7-47.2), 28.6% (3.7-71.0), and 51.5% (33.5-69.2). In arm 5 (n = 18), whole-body ORR was 16.7% (95% CI, 3.6-41.4) and DCR was 66.7% (95% CI, 41.0-86.7). Paired cerebrospinal fluid and plasma sampling revealed that ceritinib penetrated the human blood-brain barrier. CONCLUSIONS: Ceritinib showed antitumor activity in patients with ALK+ NSCLC with active brain metastases and/or leptomeningeal disease, and could be considered in the management of intracranial disease. See related commentary by Murciano-Goroff et al., p. 2477.