Atherosclerosis and the Bidirectional Relationship between Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease: From Bench to Bedside-Part 1.

Atherosclerosis, a complex metabolic-immune disease characterized by chronic inflammation driven by the buildup of lipid-rich plaques within arterial walls, has emerged as a pivotal factor in the intricate interplay between cancer and cardiovascular disease. This bidirectional relationship, marked by shared risk factors and pathophysiological mechanisms, underscores the need for a comprehensive understanding of how these two formidable health challenges intersect and influence each other. Cancer and its treatments can contribute to the progression of atherosclerosis, while atherosclerosis, with its inflammatory microenvironment, can exert profound effects on cancer development and outcomes. Both cancer and cardiovascular disease involve intricate interactions between general and personal exposomes. In this review, we aim to summarize the state of the art of translational data and try to show how oncologic studies on cardiotoxicity can broaden our knowledge of crucial pathways in cardiovascular biology and exert a positive impact on precision cardiology and cardio-oncology.

Resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors in colorectal cancer with deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability: misdiagnosis, pseudoprogression and/or tumor heterogeneity?

Colorectal carcinoma (CRC) with deficiency of the deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) pathway/microsatellite instability (MSI) is characterized by a high mutation load and infiltration of immune cells in the tumor microenvironment. In agreement with these findings, clinical trials have demonstrated a significant activity of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in dMMR/MSI metastatic CRC (mCRC) patients and, more recently, in CRC patients with early disease undergoing neoadjuvant therapy. However, despite high response rates and durable clinical benefits, a fraction of mCRC patients, up to 30%, showed progressive disease when treated with single agent anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) antibody. This article discusses the three main causes that have been associated with early progression of dMMR/MSI mCRC patients while on treatment with ICIs, i.e., misdiagnosis, pseudoprogression and tumor heterogeneity. While pseudoprogression probably does not play a relevant role, data from clinical studies demonstrate that some dMMR/MSI CRC cases with rapid progression on ICIs may be misdiagnosed, underlining the importance of correct diagnostics. More importantly, evidence suggests that dMMR/MSI mCRC is a heterogeneous group of tumors with different sensitivity to ICIs. Therefore, we propose novel diagnostic and therapeutic strategies to improve the outcome of dMMR/MSI CRC patients.

Advancing early access policies for innovative cancer drugs: a scoping review and explorative analysis in the Italian setting.

Introduction: Considering the clinical impact of innovative cancer therapies, policy makers strive to balance timely access and thorough value-assessment. While some European countries promoted early access schemes, Italy does not yet display a consolidated strategy for innovative drugs or for medicines targeting pathologies with a high unmet need. Methods: To better understand the risks and opportunities of early access strategies that could be applied in the Italian setting, we performed a scoping review, searching the PubMed and Web of Science databases and interviewing two field experts. The review results were complemented with an exemplificative quantitative analysis for a subset of innovative oncology drugs, to assess the clinical and economic impact of the price and reimbursement negotiation. Results: Our study suggests that early access schemes developed in Germany and France, combining a free-pricing period, pay-back mechanism, and arbitration, could serve as a basis for developing a feasible strategy in Italy. The quantitative analysis indicated that timely access to innovative drugs could have potentially prevented many cancer progressions, associated with a significant healthcare expenditure. Conclusion: Albeit not allowing to express a conclusive assessment, this study proposes a potential early access strategy for Italy and highlights the need for opening a debate on the opportunities and risks of such schemes.

The development of an archive of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in oncology: The Italian PRO4All project.

BACKGROUND: Choosing the most adequate measure of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for a specific medical condition is not straightforward. This study aimed to develop a comprehensive archive of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), observer-reported outcome measures (ObsROMs) and caregiver-reported outcome measures (CROMs) in oncology and identify their main characteristics and target outcome domains. MATERIALS AND METHODS: As part of the Italian PRO4All Project, we retrieved questionnaires through an extensive search of online databases. We developed a data extraction form to collect information on cancer type, questionnaire variant(s), recall period, and scoring system. We performed a content analysis of the questionnaires to assign each item a specific outcome domain according to a predefined 38-item taxonomy. RESULTS: A total of 386 PROMs (n = 356), ObsROMs (n = 13) and CROMs (n = 17) were identified and described; of these, 358 were also analyzed in their content. 47.3 % of the instruments were cancer type-specific, 45.1 % were generic for cancer and 7.9 % were developed for the general population but also recommended in oncology. The great majority (92.2 %) were patient-reported. In 50.3 % the recall period was "last week". The mean number of items per questionnaire was 22.0 (range: 1-130). 7794 items were assigned an outcome domain, the most frequent being emotional functioning/wellbeing (22 %), physical functioning (15.7 %), general outcomes (10.1 %) and delivery of care (8.9 %). CONCLUSIONS: There are a variety of patient and caregiver-reported measures in oncology. This archive can guide researchers and practitioners in selecting the most suitable measures and fostering a patient-centered approach in clinical trials, clinical practice, and regulatory activities.

Corrigendum: Aromatase inhibitors: the journey from the state of the art to clinical open questions.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1249160.].

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Prostate Cancer Diagnosis, Staging, and Treatment: A Population-Based Study in Northern Italy.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused delays in cancer diagnoses and reductions in treatments. The aim of this work is to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on prostate cancer by evaluating whether there has been a shift towards more aggressive (Gleason) and more advanced tumors (stage IV) and a decline in treatments. The study was conducted on 1123 cases of prostate cancer incident in the Province of Reggio Emilia, Northern Italy, in the period of 2018-2021. In 2020, there was a decline in new diagnoses of prostate cancer (-31%), followed by a slight recovery in 2021 (+5%). While Gleason 7 and 8-10 values remained constant, a significant decrease was recorded in stage I (38.7%, 41.6%, 35.5%, and 27.7%) and an increase in stage IV (13.1%, 13%, 15.4%, and 20%) cases in the years 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021, respectively. However, there was no impact on surgical treatment (which remained constant at around 35%) and radiotherapy (around 39%). Our findings underline the profound impact of COVID-19 on prostate cancer management, highlighting the importance of healthcare resilience in the face of unprecedented disruptions.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Colorectal Cancer Patients Cared for by the Multidisciplinary Team in the Reggio Emilia Province, Italy.

Colorectal cancer emerged as the third most prevalent malignancy worldwide, affecting nearly 2 million individuals in the year 2020. This study elucidates the pivotal role of a multidisciplinary team (MDT) in influencing the prognosis, as measured by relative survival rates, depending upon the stage and age. Cases recorded in an Italian Cancer Registry between 2017 and 2018 were included. Relative survival was reported at 1 and 3 years after diagnosis comparing MDT vs. no-MDT approaches. During the study period, 605 CRCs were recorded while 361 (59.7%) were taken care of by an MDT. Compared to no-MDT, MDT patients were younger with earlier stages and received more surgery. One year after diagnosis, survival was 78.7% (90% in MDT vs. 62% in no-MDT); stratifying by stage, in the MDT group there was no survival advantage for stage I (97.2% vs. 89.9%) and II (96.8% vs. 89.4%), but an advantage was observed for stage III (86.4% vs. 56.9%) and stage IV (63.7% vs. 27.4%). Similar values were observed at 3 years where a marked advantage was observed for stages III (69.9% vs. 35.1%) and IV (29.2% vs. 5.1%). The univariable analysis confirmed an excess risk in the no-MDT group (HR 2.6; 95% CI 2.0-3.3), also confirmed in the multivariable regression analysis (HR 2.0; 95% CI 1.5-2.5). Despite the increase in the number of MDT patients in 2018 (from 50% to 69%), this does not correspond to an improvement in outcome.

Corrigendum to "Comparison of baseline patient characteristics in Italian oncology drug monitoring registries and clinical trials: a real-world cross-sectional study" [The Lancet Regional Health - Europe 41 (2024) 100912].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2024.100912.].

Rare Driver Mutations in Advanced, Oncogene-Addicted Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A North Italian, Real-World, Registry Experience.

The real-world, retrospective, NEROnE registry investigated the impact of next-generation sequencing (NGS) in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients (pts) at three oncology units in the north of Italy between January 2020 and December 2022. We focused on the clinical characterization and outcomes of NSCLC with rare molecular alterations: EGFR exon 20 insertion, non-activating EGFR mutations, BRAF V600E and non-V600, ROS1 and RET rearrangements, MET, ErbB2, and FGFR mutations. Overall, these represented 6.4% (62/970) of the pts analysed with NGS in the daily practice. The most heavily represented rare alterations were ROS1 rearrangement (15 pts-24%) and MET exon 14 skipping mutation (11 pts-18%). No associations were found with the demographic and clinical features. Forty-nine pts received targeted therapies, of which 38.8% were first- and 9.8% were second-line. The remaining pts received chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy. In terms of the clinical outcomes, although not statistically significant, a tendency toward shorter OS was seen when therapies other than specific targeted therapies were used (HR: 1.84, 95% CI: 0.79-4.33, p = 0.158). The pts with co-mutations (19.4%) seemed to receive an advantage from the front-line chemotherapy-based regimen. Finally, an NLR score (a well-known inflammatory index) ≥ 4 seemed to be related to shorter OS among the pts treated with immunotherapy alone or in combination with chemotherapy (HR: 2.83, 95% CI: 1.08-7.40, p = 0.033). Prospective evaluations need to be performed to clarify whether these indexes may help to identify patients with oncogene-addicted NSCLC who could benefit from immunotherapy.

Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Irinotecan Plus Cetuximab Versus Cetuximab as Maintenance Therapy in First-Line Therapy for RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Phase III ERMES Study.

PURPOSE: The intensity of anti-EGFR-based first-line therapy for RAS/BRAF wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), once disease control is achieved, is controversial. A de-escalation strategy with anti-EGFR monotherapy represents a potential option to maintain efficacy while reducing cytotoxicity. METHODS: In this multicenter, open-label, phase III trial, patients with untreated RAS/BRAF wt mCRC were randomly assigned to receive either fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan/cetuximab (FOLFIRI/Cet) until disease progression (arm A) or FOLFIRI/Cet for eight cycles followed by Cet alone (arm B). The coprimary end points were a noninferior progression-free survival (PFS) in the modified per-protocol (mPP) population (>eight cycles) and a lower incidence of grade (G) 3-4 adverse events (AEs) for arm B compared with arm A. RESULTS: Overall, 606 patients were randomly assigned, with 300 assigned to arm A and 306 to arm B. The median follow-up was 22.3 months. In the mPP population, 291 events occurred with a PFS of 10 versus 12.2 months for arms B and A, respectively (P of noninferiority = .43). In the intention-to-treatment (ITT, ≥one cycle) population, 503 events occurred with a PFS of 9 versus 10.7 months (P = .39). The overall survival was 35.7 versus 30.7 months (P = .119) and 31.0 versus 25.2 months (P = .32) in the mPP and ITT population, respectively. Arm B had lower G3-4 AEs during the maintenance period than arm A (20.2% v 35.1%). CONCLUSION: The ERMES study did not demonstrate noninferiority of maintenance with Cet alone. Despite a more favorable safety profile, maintenance with single-agent Cet after induction with FOLFIRI/Cet cannot be recommended for all patients but could represent an option in selected cases.

Corrigendum to "Comparison of baseline patient characteristics in Italian oncology drug monitoring registries and clinical trials: a real-world cross-sectional study" [The Lancet Regional Health - Europe 41 (2024) 100912].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2024.100912.].

Comparison of baseline patient characteristics in Italian oncology drug monitoring registries and clinical trials: a real-world cross-sectional study.

Background: Generalizability of registrative clinical trials to real-world clinical practice is influenced by comparability of patients in the two settings. We compared characteristics of cancer patients in registrative trials with real-world clinical practice in Italy. Methods: Data on age, sex and performance status (PS) were derived from web-based monitoring registries developed by Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) and corresponding registrative trials reported in the European Public Assessment Reports (EPAR) of European Medicines Agency (EMA). Weighted means were calculated in registries and trials and differences were described. Multivariate analysis was performed using Principal Component Analysis and Cluster Analysis. Findings: From January, 2013 to April, 2023, 419,461 unique pairs of patients and therapeutic indications were recorded in 129 AIFA registries. Within 140 related trials, 87,452 patients had been enrolled. Median age and rate of elderly (≥65 years old) patients were higher in monitoring registries than in clinical trials [mean difference of median age 5.3 years, p < 0.001; mean difference of elderly rate 17.17% (95% CI 1.06, 1.48)]. Overall, rate of female patients was not different between registries and trials [mean difference -0.55% (95% CI -1.06, -0.05)]. Mean rate of patients with deteriorated PS was low both in trials (3.1%) and in registries (4.3%) with a mean difference of 1.27% (95% CI 1.06, 1.48). Two clusters were identified with multivariate analysis: one including more registries (higher median age and elderly rate, lower female rate, higher rate of deteriorated patients), the other more trials (lower median age and elderly rate, higher female rate, lower rate of deteriorated patients). Interpretation: This study supports that cancer patients enrolled in trials do only partially represent those who have been treated in Italy in clinical practice. Inclusiveness of registrative trials should be increased to ensure generalizability of results to real-world population. Funding: Partially supported by Italian Ministry of Health.

Psychometric properties of patient-reported outcomes Common Terminology Criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE®) in breast cancer patients: The prospective observational multicenter VIP study.

Patients' self-reporting is increasingly considered essential to measure quality-of-life and treatment-related side-effects. However, if multiple patient-reported instruments are used, redundancy may represent an overload for patients. Patient-Reported Outcomes Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) are a tool allowing direct patients' reporting of side-effects. We tested psychometric properties of a selected list of PRO-CTCAE items, in a cohort of 303 breast cancer patients, using validated instruments for quality of life assessment as anchors. The analysis of convergent validity with HADS (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) and EORTC BR-23 sub-scales, and the analysis of responsiveness with the PGIC (Patients Global Impression of Change) score supported that a selected list of PRO-CTCAE symptoms might represent a standardized, agile tool for both research and practice settings to reduce patient burden without missing relevant information on patient perceptions. Among patients using digital devices, those with a higher education levels required shorter time to fulfil questionnaires. In conclusion, a selected list of PRO-CTCAE items can be considered as a standardized, agile tool for capturing crucial domains of side-effects and quality of life in patients with breast cancer. The study is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04416672).

Aromatase inhibitors: the journey from the state of the art to clinical open questions.

Breast cancer is a major cause of death among females. Great advances have been made in treating this disease, and aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have been recognized as the cornerstone. They are characterized by high efficacy and low toxicity. The authors reviewed the available literature and defined state-of-the-art AI management. This study was designed to assist clinicians in addressing the need to equally weigh patients' needs and disease control rates in their everyday clinical practice. Today, AIs play a central role in the treatment of hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. In this study, an expert panel reviewed the literature on the use of AIs, discussing the evolution of their use in various aspects of breast cancer, from pre- and postmenopausal early breast cancer to metastatic breast cancer, along with their management regarding efficacy and toxicity. Given the brilliant results that have been achieved in improving survival in everyday clinical practice, clinicians need to address their concerns about therapy duration and the adverse effects they exert on bone health, the cardiovascular system, and metabolism. Currently, in addition to cancer treatment, patient engagement is crucial for improving adherence to therapy and supporting patients' quality of life, especially in a selected subset of patients, such as those receiving an extended adjuvant or combination with targeted therapies. A description of modern technologies that contribute to this important goal is provided.