Prognostic factors in elderly patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma: results of a multicenter survey.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) in elderly patients is increasing. There are no specific guidelines for their management. METHODS: The clinical records of elderly patients (⩾70 years old) with MPM referred from January 2005 to November 2011 to six Italian Centres were reviewed. Age, gender, histology, International Mesothelioma Interest Group (IMIG) stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and treatment modalities were analysed and correlated to overall survival (OS). RESULTS: In total, 241 patients were identified. Charlson Comorbidity Index was ⩾1 in 92 patients (38%). Treatment was multimodality therapy including surgery in 18, chemotherapy alone in 180 (75%) and best supportive care in 43 cases (18%). Chemotherapy was mainly pemetrexed based. Median OS was 11.4 months. Non-epithelioid histology (HR 2.32; 95% CI 1.66-3.23, P<0.001), age ⩾75 years (HR 1.44; 95% CI 1.08-1.93, P=0.014), advanced (III-IV) stage (HR 1.47; 95% CI 1.09-1.98, P=0.011) and CCI⩾1 (HR 1.38; 95% CI 1.02-1.85, P=0.034) were associated to a shorter OS. Treatment with pemetrexed was associated with improved OS (HR 0.40; 95% CI 0.28-0.56, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Non-epithelioid histology, age ⩾75 years, advanced IMIG stage and presence of comorbidities according to CCI were significant prognostic factors in elderly patients with MPM. Treatment with pemetrexed-based chemotherapy was feasible in this setting. Prospective dedicated trials in MPM elderly patients selected according to prognostic factors including comorbidity scales are warranted.

Cancer care in transgender and gender-diverse persons: results from two national surveys among providers and health service users by the Italian Association of Medical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) population represents an underserved group across the cancer care continuum. To assess the perspective of both oncology health care providers (OHPs) and TGD individuals in Italy, we conducted two national surveys: one among 2407 OHPs about their attitudes, knowledge and behavior toward TGD patients, and one among TGD persons about their health needs, experiences and barriers encountered in the use of health services across the cancer continuum. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The surveys were self-compiled web-based computer-aided web interview, conducted in Italy within the 'OncoGender-Promoting Inclusion in Oncology' project, led by the Italian national cancer society [Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica (AIOM)]-associated researchers. All members of AIOM were invited by e-mail to participate in the OHP survey. TGD persons were reached through advocacy groups and consumers' panel. The recruitment was completed on a voluntary basis. Survey data were collected and managed using an online platform managed by ELMA Research, an independent pharmaceutical marketing agency. RESULTS: A total of 305 OHPs (13% of AIOM members) and 190 TGD individuals participated in the surveys. Only 19% of OHPs felt competent in providing care to TGD patients and 21% declared not to feel comfortable in treating TGD patients. Seventy-one percent of TGD persons reported that they had never joined any cancer screening program; 32% reported one or more acts of discrimination by health care providers. Seventy-two percent of OHPs recognized the lack of specific education on cancer care for TGD patients and deemed it necessary to receive adequate training. CONCLUSIONS: A general lack of knowledge among OHPs about TGD health issues seems to be the main driver of difficulties in providing assistance and of discriminatory attitudes against TGD individuals. Ultimately, this whole issue generates access barriers and contributes to lack of trust in health care services. Educational interventions and an implementation of person-centric cancer policies are urgently needed.

Vaccination for seasonal influenza, pneumococcal infection and SARS-CoV-2 in patients with solid tumors: recommendations of the Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica (AIOM).

Patients with cancer have a well-known and higher risk of vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs). VPDs may cause severe complications in this setting due to immune system impairment, malnutrition and oncological treatments. Despite this evidence, vaccination rates are inadequate. The Italian Association of Medical Oncology [Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica (AIOM)] has been involved in vaccination awareness since 2014. Based on a careful review of the available data about the immunogenicity, effectiveness and safety of flu, pneumococcal and anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines, we report the recommendations of the AIOM about these vaccinations in adult patients with solid tumors. The AIOM recommends comprehensive education on the issue of VPDs. We believe that a multidisciplinary care model may improve the vaccination coverage in immunocompromised patients. Continued surveillance, implementation of preventive practices and future well-designed immunological prospective studies are essential for better management of our patients with cancer.

Position paper of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology on the impact of COVID-19 on Italian oncology and the path forward: the 2021 Matera statement.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has severely affected cancer care and research by disrupting the prevention and treatment paths as well as the preclinical, clinical, and translational research ecosystem. In Italy, this has been particularly significant given the severity of the pandemic's impact and the intrinsic vulnerabilities of the national health system. However, whilst detrimental, disruption can also be constructive and may stimulate innovation and progress. The Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) has recognized the impact of COVID-19 on cancer care continuum and research and proposes the '2021 Matera statement' which aims at providing pragmatic guidance for policymakers and health care institutions to mitigate the impact of the global health crisis on Italian oncology and design the recovery plan for the post-pandemic scenario. The interventions are addressed both to the pillars (prevention, diagnosis, treatment, follow-up, health care professionals) and foundations of cancer care (communication and care relationship, system organization, resources, research, networking). The priorities to be implemented can be summarized in the MATERA acronym: Multidisciplinarity; Access to cancer care; Telemedicine and Territoriality; Equity, ethics, education; Research and resources; Alliance between stakeholders and patients.

Intermittent versus continuous chemotherapy in advanced colorectal cancer: a randomised 'GISCAD' trial.

BACKGROUND: In advanced colorectal cancer, chemotherapy is usually administered without pauses and until progression but patients can experience cumulative toxicity and cannot tolerate a heavy therapeutic charge. AIM: The aim of the present trial was to evaluate whether an intermittent chemotherapy with levo-leucovorin + 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) + irinotecan (CPT-11) was at least as effective as the same regimen given continuously, both administered until progression, in patients affected with advanced colorectal cancer and not previously exposed to chemotherapy for metastatic disease. PATIENTS, MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 337 patients from 27 institutions were randomised between levo-leucovorin, 100/mg/m(2) i.v. + 5-FU; 400 mg/m(2) i.v. bolus + 5-FU; 600 mg/m(2) 22-h continuous infusion, days 1 and 2 + CPT-11; 180 mg/m(2) day 1, administered every 2 weeks 2 months on and 2 months off (arm A) and the same regimen administered continuously (arm B), until progression in both arms. The main end point was overall survival (OS), the secondary progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 41 months, OS was 18 months in arm A and 17 months in arm B [hazard ratio (HR), 0.88]. Also PFS was comparable in the two groups (6 months in both, with HR, 1.03), and even grades 3-4 toxicity (mainly myelosuppression, fever and diarrhoea) was similar. Second-line oxaliplatin-based treatment was administered in a similar percentage (66%) in the two arms. The median chemotherapy-free period (drug holiday) in arm A was 3.5 months. CONCLUSION: Reducing the charge of therapy in this population did not diminish the efficacy of treatment. Further studies with this strategy, including biologicals, are warranted.

COVID-19 infection in cancer patients: what has been the contribution of Associazione Italiana Oncologia Medica (AIOM) to oncological care since the beginning of the first pandemic wave?

High mortality rates in elderly patients or in those with underlying chronic illnesses and/or a compromised immune system is a peculiar feature of COVID-19 infection. The possible coexistence of a cancer and COVID-19 infection in the same individual prompted concerns regarding their synergistic effect on prognosis. In order to balance patients' needs with the risks related to the infection, the question oncologists have asked from the beginning of the first wave of the pandemic has been: 'how can we deal with COVID-19 infection in cancer patients?' In pursuing its mission, the Associazione Italiana Oncologia Medica (AIOM) has made every possible effort to support cancer patients, health care professionals and institutions in the decision-making processes the pandemic has engendered within this scenario. The relevant documents as well as the educational and institutional initiatives the AIOM has taken are reported in this article.

Antineoplastic dosing in overweight and obese cancer patients: an Associazione Italiana Oncologia Medica (AIOM)/Associazione Medici Diabetologi (AMD)/Società Italiana Endocrinologia (SIE)/Società Italiana Farmacologia (SIF) multidisciplinary consensus position paper.

Most anticancer molecules are administered in body-size-based dosing schedules, bringing up unsolved issues regarding pharmacokinetic data in heavy patients. The worldwide spread of obesity has not been matched by improved methods and strategies for tailored drug dosage in this population. The weight or body surface area (BSA)-based approaches may fail to fully reflect the complexity of the anthropometric features besides obesity in cancer patients suffering from sarcopenia. Likewise, there is a lack of pharmacokinetic data on obese patients for the majority of chemotherapeutic agents as well as for new target drugs and immunotherapy. Therefore, although the available findings point to the role of dose intensity in cancer treatment, and support full weight-based dosing, empirical dose capping often occurs in clinical practice in order to avoid toxicity. Thus a panel of experts of the Associazione Italiana Oncologia Medica (AIOM), Associazione Medici Diabetologi (AMD), Società Italiana Endocrinologia (SIE), and Società Italiana Farmacologia (SIF), provides here a consensus statement for appropriate cytotoxic chemotherapy and new biological cancer drug dosing in obese patients.

Early prediction of pancreatic cancer from new-onset diabetes: an Associazione Italiana Oncologia Medica (AIOM)/Associazione Medici Diabetologi (AMD)/Società Italiana Endocrinologia (SIE)/Società Italiana Farmacologia (SIF) multidisciplinary consensus position paper.

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a common cause of cancer-related death, due to difficulties in detecting early-stage disease, to its aggressive behaviour, and to poor response to systemic therapy. Therefore, developing strategies for early diagnosis of resectable PC is critical for improving survival. Diabetes mellitus is another major public health problem worldwide. Furthermore, diabetes can represent both a risk factor and a consequence of PC: nowadays, the relationship between these two diseases is considered a high priority for research. New-onset diabetes can be an early manifestation of PC, especially in a thin adult without a family history of diabetes. However, even if targeted screening for patients at higher risk of PC could be a promising approach, this is not recommended in asymptomatic adults with new-onset diabetes, due to the much higher incidence of hyperglycaemia than PC and to the lack of a safe and affordable PC screening test. Prompted by a well-established and productive multidisciplinary cooperation, the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM), the Italian Medical Diabetologists Association (AMD), the Italian Society of Endocrinology (SIE), and the Italian Society of Pharmacology (SIF) here review available evidence on the mechanisms linking diabetes and PC, addressing the feasibility of screening for early PC in patients with diabetes, and sharing a set of update statements with the aim of providing a state-of-the-art overview and a decision aid tool for daily clinical practice.

The molecular profiling of solid tumors by liquid biopsy: a position paper of the AIOM-SIAPEC-IAP-SIBioC-SIC-SIF Italian Scientific Societies.

The term liquid biopsy (LB) refers to the use of various biological fluids as a surrogate for neoplastic tissue to achieve information for diagnostic, prognostic and predictive purposes. In the current clinical practice, LB is used for the identification of driver mutations in circulating tumor DNA derived from both tumor tissue and circulating neoplastic cells. As suggested by a growing body of evidence, however, there are several clinical settings where biological samples other than tissue could be used in the routine practice to identify potentially predictive biomarkers of either response or resistance to targeted treatments. New applications are emerging as useful clinical tools, and other blood derivatives, such as circulating tumor cells, circulating tumor RNA, microRNAs, platelets, extracellular vesicles, as well as other biofluids such as urine and cerebrospinal fluid, may be adopted in the near future. Despite the evident advantages compared with tissue biopsy, LB still presents some limitations due to both biological and technological issues. In this context, the absence of harmonized procedures corresponds to an unmet clinical need, ultimately affecting the rapid implementation of LB in clinical practice. In this position paper, based on experts' opinions, the AIOM-SIAPEC-IAP-SIBIOC-SIF Italian Scientific Societies critically discuss the most relevant technical issues of LB, the current and emerging evidences, with the aim to optimizing the applications of LB in the clinical setting.

The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in colon cancer.

Surgical resection of the primary and regional lymph nodes is still, at this time, the standard treatment of colon cancer. However, the risk of recurrence is still high in many patients. Efforts of the past decades have proved the role of systemic chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting in improving the curative rates. The combination of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)and leucovorin (LV) remains the cornestorne of colon cancer chemotherapy worldwide. The addition of Oxaliplatin to infusional 5FU/LV has been shown to prolong significantly disease-free survival and capecitabine may be considered as an alternative to 5-FU/LV in the adjuvant therapy of stage III colon cancer. Novel molecular and biological-oriented agents are being studied, with promising date.

Disease management considerations: disease management considerations.

Colorectal cancer is still a majorhealth and social problem. However, many important advances in treatment have been made in the last 4 to 5 years, and more optimism is now justified both among clinicians and patients. In surgically resectable disease, adjuvant chemotherapy has been clearly demonstrated as able to increase overall survival in patients with colon cancer Dukes' stage C, whereas the role of medical treatment in patients with Dukes' stage B colon cancer is still controversial. At present, the standard regimen is bolus fluorouracil (5-FU) modulated by folinic acid (leucovorin) for 6 months. For rectal cancer, the best adjuvant treatment seems to be represented by radiotherapy (better if administered preoperatively) combined with chemotherapy (usually based on modulated or continuously infused 5-FU). In advanced disease, many new drugs have recently emerged: the most active regimens are those combining an optimal modality of 5-FU administration (i.e. continuous infusion) and one of the most active innovative compounds (irinotecan or oxaliplatin). The role of the oral drugs (e.g. tegafur/uracil, capecitabine) is still under investigation as is the combination of agents excluding 5-FU. It is now recognised that first-line treatment must be offered to all suitable pa- tients, even though asymptomatic, and that a second-line therapy (chiefly with irinotecan) is of value in many patients with cancer that progresses during treatment with 5-FU. From a strategic point of view, the best sequence of drugs/regimens has not yet been defined, while the duration and timing of chemotherapy is still a matter for clinical research. Finally, there is an increasing interest in the role of biological prognostic factors as an aid to a patient-tailored therapy, both in the adjuvant setting and in advanced disease. To achieve further progress in knowledge in this field, we strongly recommended that more and more patients are included in clinical trials.

New drugs and combinations in the palliative treatment of colon and rectal cancer.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common disease. The overall survival has improved only marginally in recent decades despite advances in surgery and early detection. Potentially curative resection at disease presentation can be performed only in 70-80% of the patients, and overall survival at 5 years is less than 60%. Advanced disease is associated with a poor prognosis. Treatment for advanced colorectal cancer has nevertheless made progress in the last few years. Systemic chemotherapy doubles the survival of these patients compared to untreated controls. Chemotherapy has demonstrated effective palliation, improvement of quality of life (QoL) and symptom improvement in such patients. For nearly four decades, fluorouracil (5FU) has been the mainstay of treatment. New compounds active against colorectal cancer are now available. Several studies on this topic are ongoing.

The value of oxaliplatin in combination with continuous infusion +/- bolus 5-fluorouracil and levo-folinic acid in metastatic colorectal cancer progressing after 5FU-based chemotherapy: a GISCAD (Italian Group for the Study of Digestive Tract) cancer phase II trial.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: The phase II trial was designed to evaluate the activity of combined oxaliplatin (L-OHP), continuous infusion (CI) +/- bolus 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and levo-folinic acid (I-FA) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer progressing after one or more lines of 5FU-based chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We designed two contemporary studies: in the former we enrolled patients previously treated with 1 line of chemotherapy, and in the latter, patients previously treated with 2, 3 and 4 lines. Seventy-six consecutive patients were enrolled: 45 received L-OHP (85 mg/m2 i.v. 2 h on day 1) + I-FA (100 mg/m2 i.v. 2 h on days 1 and 2) + 5FU i.v. bolus (400 mg/m2 days 1 and 2) + 5FU (600 mg/m2 CI 22 h days 1 and 2 (FOLFOX 4); 31 received L-OHP (100 mg/m2 i.v. 2 h on day 1) + I-FA (250 mg/m2 i.v. 2 h on days 1 and 2), followed by 5FU (1500 mg/m2 Cl 24 h days 1 and 2 (FOLFOX 2). The treatment was recycled every 2 weeks and continued until progression and/or unacceptable toxicity or patient preference. The primary end point was activity (tumor growth control [TGC]: partial response [PR] + stable disease [SD]); the secondary end points were time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS) and toxicity. RESULTS: Forty-five patients in 2nd line (22 FOLFOX 4, 23 FOLFOX 2), 23 (17 FOLFOX 4, 6 FOLFOX 2) in 3rd, 4 in 4th and 1 in 5th line were assessable; 3 were lost to follow-up. In 15 patients (11 FOLFOX 4, 4 FOLFOX 2), disease involved the liver only. A total of 533 courses were administered with a range of 1-14 in FOLFOX4 and 1-12 in FOLFOX2; dose intensity was 92.85%, and the total dose of the administered L-OHP was 98.29%. As a 2nd line treatment, FOLFOX 4 achieved TGC in 72.8% of the patients (PR, 18.2%; SD, 54.6%), with a median TTP of 6 months and a median OS of 7 months, whereas in the FOLFOX 2 group these figures were 78.3% (PR 21.8%, SD 56.5%), and 5 and 9 months. As a 3rd line treatment, FOLFOX 4 produced TGC in 41.1% of patients (PR 23.5%, SD 17.6%), with a median TTP of 5 months and median OS of 7+ months, whereas FOLFOX 2 obtained respective values of 50% (PR 16.7%, SD 33.3%), 7 and 9 months. As a 4th line of treatment, TGC was achieved in 2 patients (1 PR, 1 SD); the patient in 5th line therapy obtained a SD. With "de Gramont" as the first-line regimen, patients assessable were 24 in FOLFOX 4 and 18 in FOLFOX 2. In the former population, TGC was 70.8% (PR 37.5%, SD 33.3%), with a TTP of 6 months and OS of 10 months, whereas with FOLFOX2 these values were 61.1% (PR 5.6%, SD 55.5), 5 and 7 months. In patients with liver involvement only, FOLFOX 4 obtained TGC in 63.6% of cases (with a TTP of 7 months and OS of 6+ months), FOLFOX 2 in 100% (with a TTP of 9.5 months and OS of 13.5+ months). Both schedules exhibited an acceptable toxicity: neurologic, hematologic and hepatic grade 3 side effects occurred in a limited number of patients, with a higher frequency in the FOLFOX 2 group. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with L-OHP, CI +/- bolus 5FU and I-FA was well tolerated. The activity in terms of TGC was interesting and comparable with results reported in the literature for the standard treatment for 2nd line, i.e. irinotecan alone. Treatment was effective in 2nd line and in patients previously treated with more than two chemotherapy lines; in particular, treatment was active in patients with hepatic disease only. Although the two schedules seemed to achieve the same benefit with the same tolerance, we could not define from the study the better regime.

A combination of gefitinib and FOLFOX-4 as first-line treatment in advanced colorectal cancer patients. A GISCAD multicentre phase II study including a biological analysis of EGFR overexpression, amplification and NF-kB activation.

Interesting activity has been reported by combining chemotherapy with cetuximab. An alternative approach for blocking EGFR function has been the development of small-molecule inhibitors of tyrosine kinase domain such as gefitinib. We designed a multicentre phase II study in advanced colorectal cancer combining gefitinib+FOLFOX in order to determine the activity and to relate EGFR expression and gene amplification and NF-kB activation to therapeutic results. Patients received FOLFOX-4 regimen plus gefitinib as first-line treatment. Tumour samples were analysed for EGFR protein expression by immunohistochemical analysis and for EGFR gene amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH), chromogenic in situ hybridisation (CISH) and NF-kB activation. Forty-three patients were enrolled into this study; 15 patients experienced a partial response (response rate=34.9%), whereas other 12 (27.9%) had a stable disease. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.8 months and median overall survival (OS) was 13.9 months. We did not find any relationship with EGFR overexpression, gene amplification, while NF-kB activation was associated with a resistance to therapy. Gefitinib does not seem to increase the activity of FOLFOX in advanced colorectal cancer even in patients overexpressing EGFR or with EGFR amplification. Furthermore, while NF-kB activation seems to predict resistance to chemotherapy as demonstrated 'in vitro' models, gefitinib does not overcome this mechanism of resistance, as reported for cetuximab.

Agreement between oncology guidelines and clinical practice in Italy: the 'right' program. A project of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM).

BACKGROUND: RIGHT (Research for the Identification of the most effective and hIGhly accepted clinical guidelines for the cancer Treatment) is a project promoted by the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) to measure the concordance between oncology guidelines and clinical practice. The goal of this pilot phase was to develop and test a reliable process to measure this concordance nationwide. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty Italian centers participated to the survey. Breast cancer (BC) and colorectal cancer (CRC): guidelines issued by AIOM in 2003 were selected. A total of 29 indicators linked to the process of care were abstracted. Patients who had their first visit at the oncology center between February 2004 and June 2005, with a diagnosis of invasive BC (stage 1 or 2), colon cancer (stage 3), rectal cancer (stage T3-4 or N1-2) or advanced CRC were enclosed. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: One hundred and sixty-one patients (80%) were analyzed. On average, 93% of BC and 80.3% of colorectal patients received recommended care. These first results indicate that the RIGHT system provides a valid measurement of oncology care to assess agreement with guidelines. A second larger phase of this nationwide monitoring program will enable results to be generalized.