Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 breakthrough infections in patients with cancer (UKCCEP): a population-based test-negative case-control study.

BACKGROUND: People with cancer are at increased risk of hospitalisation and death following infection with SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, we aimed to conduct one of the first evaluations of vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections in patients with cancer at a population level. METHODS: In this population-based test-negative case-control study of the UK Coronavirus Cancer Evaluation Project (UKCCEP), we extracted data from the UKCCEP registry on all SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results (from the Second Generation Surveillance System), vaccination records (from the National Immunisation Management Service), patient demographics, and cancer records from England, UK, from Dec 8, 2020, to Oct 15, 2021. Adults (aged ≥18 years) with cancer in the UKCCEP registry were identified via Public Health England's Rapid Cancer Registration Dataset between Jan 1, 2018, and April 30, 2021, and comprised the cancer cohort. We constructed a control population cohort from adults with PCR tests in the UKCCEP registry who were not contained within the Rapid Cancer Registration Dataset. The coprimary endpoints were overall vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough infections after the second dose (positive PCR COVID-19 test) and vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough infections at 3-6 months after the second dose in the cancer cohort and control population. FINDINGS: The cancer cohort comprised 377 194 individuals, of whom 42 882 had breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections. The control population consisted of 28 010 955 individuals, of whom 5 748 708 had SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections. Overall vaccine effectiveness was 69·8% (95% CI 69·8-69·9) in the control population and 65·5% (65·1-65·9) in the cancer cohort. Vaccine effectiveness at 3-6 months was lower in the cancer cohort (47·0%, 46·3-47·6) than in the control population (61·4%, 61·4-61·5). INTERPRETATION: COVID-19 vaccination is effective for individuals with cancer, conferring varying levels of protection against breakthrough infections. However, vaccine effectiveness is lower in patients with cancer than in the general population. COVID-19 vaccination for patients with cancer should be used in conjunction with non-pharmacological strategies and community-based antiviral treatment programmes to reduce the risk that COVID-19 poses to patients with cancer. FUNDING: University of Oxford, University of Southampton, University of Birmingham, Department of Health and Social Care, and Blood Cancer UK.

Survival and disease characteristics of de novo versus recurrent metastatic breast cancer in a cohort of young patients.

BACKGROUND: It is not clear how the pathology, presentation and outcome for patients who present with de novo metastatic breast cancer (dnMBC) compare with those who later develop distant metastases. DnMBC is uncommon in younger patients. We describe these differences within a cohort of young patients in the United Kingdom. METHODS: Women aged 40 years or younger with a first invasive breast cancer were recruited to the prospective POSH national cohort study. Baseline clinicopathological data were collected, with annual follow-up. Overall survival (OS) and post-distant relapse-free survival (PDRS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves. RESULTS: In total, 862 patients were diagnosed with metastatic disease. DnMBC prevalence was 2.6% (76/2977). Of those with initially localised disease, 27.1% (786/2901) subsequently developed a distant recurrence. Median follow-up was 11.00 years (95% CI 10.79-11.59). Patients who developed metastatic disease within 12 months had worse OS than dnMBC patients (HR 2.64; 1.84-3.77). For PDRS, dnMBC was better than all groups, including those who relapsed after 5 years. Of dnMBC patients, 1.3% had a gBRCA1, and 11.8% a gBRCA2 mutation. CONCLUSIONS: Young women with dnMBC have better PDRS than those who develop relapsed metastatic breast cancer. A gBRCA2 mutation was overrepresented in dnMBC.

Short duration immunochemotherapy followed by radioimmunotherapy consolidation is effective and well tolerated in relapsed follicular lymphoma: 5-year results from a UK National Cancer Research Institute Lymphoma Group study.

UNLABELLED: We report a phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of abbreviated immunochemotherapy followed by (90) Y Ibritumomab tiuxetan ((90) Y-IT) in patients with recurrent follicular lymphoma. Of the 52 patients enrolled, 50 were treated with three cycles of R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisolone) or R-CVP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisolone), followed by (90) Y-IT regimen (15 MBq/kg, maximum 1200 MBq) preceded by two infusions of 250 mg/m(2) rituximab. The overall response rate was 98% with complete response (CR) 30% and partial response (PR) 68%. 18 patients with a PR following chemotherapy improved to a CR following (90) Y-IT: a conversion rate of 40%. Seven patients with PR following (90) Y-IT subsequently improved to a CR 12-18 months later, leading to an overall CR rate of 44%. With a median follow-up of 5 years, median progression-free survival was 23·1 months and overall survival was 77·5% at 5 years. High trough serum rituximab levels (median 112 µg/ml; range 52-241) were attained after four doses of rituximab, prior to (90) Y-IT; this was not found to influence response rates. The treatment was well tolerated with few (13·5%) grade 3 or 4 infective episodes and manageable haematological toxicity. Abbreviated immunochemotherapy followed by (90) Y-IT is an effective and well-tolerated treatment in recurrent follicular lymphoma patients previously exposed to rituximab. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00637832.

COVID-19: Third dose booster vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough coronavirus infection, hospitalisations and death in patients with cancer: A population-based study.

PURPOSE: People living with cancer and haematological malignancies are at an increased risk of hospitalisation and death following infection with acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Coronavirus third dose vaccine boosters are proposed to boost waning immune responses in immunocompromised individuals and increase coronavirus protection; however, their effectiveness has not yet been systematically evaluated. METHODS: This study is a population-scale real-world evaluation of the United Kingdom's third dose vaccine booster programme for cancer patients from 8th December 2020 to 7th December 2021. The cancer cohort comprises individuals from Public Health England's national cancer dataset, excluding individuals less than 18 years. A test-negative case-control design was used to assess the third dose booster vaccine effectiveness. Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to compare risk in the cancer cohort relative to the general population. RESULTS: The cancer cohort comprised of 2,258,553 tests from 361,098 individuals. Third dose boosters were evaluated by reference to 87,039,743 polymerase chain reaction coronavirus tests. Vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough infections, symptomatic infections, coronavirus hospitalisation and death in cancer patients were 59.1%, 62.8%, 80.5% and 94.5%, respectively. Lower vaccine effectiveness was associated with a cancer diagnosis within 12 months, lymphoma, recent systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) or radiotherapy. Patients with lymphoma had low levels of protection from symptomatic disease. In spite of third dose boosters, following multivariable adjustment, individuals with cancer remain at an increased risk of coronavirus hospitalisation and death compared to the population control (OR 3.38, 3.01, respectively. p < 0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: Third dose boosters are effective for most individuals with cancer, increasing protection from coronavirus. However, their effectiveness is heterogenous and lower than the general population. Many patients with cancer will remain at the increased risk of coronavirus infections even after 3 doses. In the case of patients with lymphoma, there is a particularly strong disparity of vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough infection and severe disease. Breakthrough infections will disrupt cancer care and treatment with potentially adverse consequences on survival outcomes. The data support the role of vaccine boosters in preventing severe disease, and further pharmacological intervention to prevent transmission and aid viral clearance to limit the disruption of cancer care as the delivery of care continues to evolve during the coronavirus pandemic.

Salvage Chemotherapy With Gemcitabine, Paclitaxel, Ifosfamide, and Cisplatin for Relapsed Germ Cell Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic germ cell tumors remain potentially curable when treated with salvage chemotherapy at first relapse. In the present phase I/II study, we sought to improve on the response rate and duration of the TIP (paclitaxel, ifosfamide, cisplatin) regimen by adding gemcitabine (Gem-TIP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients were recruited after failure of first-line cisplatin-containing chemotherapy. The primary objectives were to determine the maximum tolerated dose of gemcitabine when combined with TIP and to establish the dose intensity of the TIP drugs in this combination. The secondary objectives were the response rates, failure-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: The maximum tolerated dose of gemcitabine was 1200 mg/m2. The mean relative dose intensity was 95% (95% confidence interval [CI], 90.2%-99.2%) for gemcitabine, 96% (95% CI, 92.9%-98.7%) for paclitaxel, 92% (95% CI, 84.5%-98.8%) for ifosfamide, and 94% (95% CI, 89.3%-99.0%) for cisplatin. The overall complete response rate was 50%; another 30% of the patients achieved a partial response. The 1-year failure-free survival and overall survival rates were 68% (95% CI, 43%-84%) and 89.5% (95% CI, 64%-97%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Gemcitabine can be added to TIP chemotherapy at the full dose, with manageable toxicity and no detrimental effect on the dose intensity of the TIP drugs. The response rate and duration were improved compared with those reported from the Medical Research Council TIP trial; further evaluation is warranted.