Tissue fluidification promotes a cGAS-STING cytosolic DNA response in invasive breast cancer.

The process in which locally confined epithelial malignancies progressively evolve into invasive cancers is often promoted by unjamming, a phase transition from a solid-like to a liquid-like state, which occurs in various tissues. Whether this tissue-level mechanical transition impacts phenotypes during carcinoma progression remains unclear. Here we report that the large fluctuations in cell density that accompany unjamming result in repeated mechanical deformations of cells and nuclei. This triggers a cellular mechano-protective mechanism involving an increase in nuclear size and rigidity, heterochromatin redistribution and remodelling of the perinuclear actin architecture into actin rings. The chronic strains and stresses associated with unjamming together with the reduction of Lamin B1 levels eventually result in DNA damage and nuclear envelope ruptures, with the release of cytosolic DNA that activates a cGAS-STING (cyclic GMP-AMP synthase-signalling adaptor stimulator of interferon genes)-dependent cytosolic DNA response gene program. This mechanically driven transcriptional rewiring ultimately alters the cell state, with the emergence of malignant traits, including epithelial-to-mesenchymal plasticity phenotypes and chemoresistance in invasive breast carcinoma.

Pediatric Solid Cancers: Dissecting the Tumor Microenvironment to Improve the Results of Clinical Immunotherapy.

Despite advances in their diagnosis and treatment, pediatric cancers remain among the leading causes of death in childhood. The development of immunotherapies and other forms of targeted therapies has significantly changed the prognosis of some previously incurable cancers in the adult population. However, so far, the results in pediatric cohorts are disappointing, which is mainly due to differences in tumor biology, including extreme heterogeneity and a generally low tumor mutational burden. A central role in the limited efficacy of immunotherapeutic approaches is played by the peculiar characteristics of the tumor microenvironment (TME) in pediatric cancer, with the scarcity of tumor infiltration by T cells and the abundance of stromal cells endowed with lymphocyte suppressor and tumor-growth-promoting activity. Thus, progress in the treatment of pediatric solid tumors will likely be influenced by the ability to modify the TME while delivering novel, more effective therapeutic agents. In this review, we will describe the TME composition in pediatric solid tumors and illustrate recent advances in treatment for the modulation of immune cells belonging to the TME.

SARS-CoV-2 omicron (B.1.1.529)-related COVID-19 sequelae in vaccinated and unvaccinated patients with cancer: results from the OnCovid registry.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 sequelae can affect about 15% of patients with cancer who survive the acute phase of SARS-CoV-2 infection and can substantially impair their survival and continuity of oncological care. We aimed to investigate whether previous immunisation affects long-term sequelae in the context of evolving variants of concern of SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: OnCovid is an active registry that includes patients aged 18 years or older from 37 institutions across Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK with a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 and a history of solid or haematological malignancy, either active or in remission, followed up from COVID-19 diagnosis until death. We evaluated the prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae in patients who survived COVID-19 and underwent a formal clinical reassessment, categorising infection according to the date of diagnosis as the omicron (B.1.1.529) phase from Dec 15, 2021, to Jan 31, 2022; the alpha (B.1.1.7)-delta (B.1.617.2) phase from Dec 1, 2020, to Dec 14, 2021; and the pre-vaccination phase from Feb 27 to Nov 30, 2020. The prevalence of overall COVID-19 sequelae was compared according to SARS-CoV-2 immunisation status and in relation to post-COVID-19 survival and resumption of systemic anticancer therapy. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04393974. FINDINGS: At the follow-up update on June 20, 2022, 1909 eligible patients, evaluated after a median of 39 days (IQR 24-68) from COVID-19 diagnosis, were included (964 [50·7%] of 1902 patients with sex data were female and 938 [49·3%] were male). Overall, 317 (16·6%; 95% CI 14·8-18·5) of 1909 patients had at least one sequela from COVID-19 at the first oncological reassessment. The prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae was highest in the pre-vaccination phase (191 [19·1%; 95% CI 16·4-22·0] of 1000 patients). The prevalence was similar in the alpha-delta phase (110 [16·8%; 13·8-20·3] of 653 patients, p=0·24), but significantly lower in the omicron phase (16 [6·2%; 3·5-10·2] of 256 patients, p<0·0001). In the alpha-delta phase, 84 (18·3%; 95% CI 14·6-22·7) of 458 unvaccinated patients and three (9·4%; 1·9-27·3) of 32 unvaccinated patients in the omicron phase had sequelae. Patients who received a booster and those who received two vaccine doses had a significantly lower prevalence of overall COVID-19 sequelae than unvaccinated or partially vaccinated patients (ten [7·4%; 95% CI 3·5-13·5] of 136 boosted patients, 18 [9·8%; 5·8-15·5] of 183 patients who had two vaccine doses vs 277 [18·5%; 16·5-20·9] of 1489 unvaccinated patients, p=0·0001), respiratory sequelae (six [4·4%; 1·6-9·6], 11 [6·0%; 3·0-10·7] vs 148 [9·9%; 8·4-11·6], p=0·030), and prolonged fatigue (three [2·2%; 0·1-6·4], ten [5·4%; 2·6-10·0] vs 115 [7·7%; 6·3-9·3], p=0·037). INTERPRETATION: Unvaccinated patients with cancer remain highly vulnerable to COVID-19 sequelae irrespective of viral strain. This study confirms the role of previous SARS-CoV-2 immunisation as an effective measure to protect patients from COVID-19 sequelae, disruption of therapy, and ensuing mortality. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health and Care Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre and the Cancer Treatment and Research Trust.

Efficacy and safety of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab vs sunitinib in the East Asian subset of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma from the CLEAR trial.

In the CLEAR trial, lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab met study endpoints of superiority vs sunitinib in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. We report the efficacy and safety results of the East Asian subset (ie, patients in Japan and the Republic of Korea) from the CLEAR trial. Of 1069 patients randomly assigned to receive either lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab, lenvatinib plus everolimus or sunitinib, 213 (20.0%) were from East Asia. Baseline characteristics of patients in the East Asian subset were generally comparable with those of the global trial population. In the East Asian subset, progression-free survival was considerably longer with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab vs sunitinib (median 22.1 vs 11.1 months; HR 0.38; 95% CI: 0.23-0.62). The HR for overall survival comparing lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab vs sunitinib was 0.71; 95% CI: 0.30-1.71. The objective response rate was higher with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab vs sunitinib (65.3% vs 49.2%; odds ratio 2.14; 95% CI: 1.07-4.28). Dose reductions due to treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) commonly associated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors occurred more frequently than in the global population. Hand-foot syndrome was the most frequent any-grade TEAE with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (66.7%) and sunitinib (57.8%), a higher incidence compared to the global population (28.7% and 37.4%, respectively). The most common grade 3 to 5 TEAEs were hypertension with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (20%) and decreased platelet count with sunitinib (21.9%). Efficacy and safety for patients in the East Asian subset were generally similar to those of the global population, except as noted.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors and Carbon iON radiotherapy In solid Cancers with stable disease (ICONIC).

ICONIC is a multicenter, open-label, nonrandomized phase II clinical trial aiming to assess the feasibility and clinical activity of the addition of carbon ion radiotherapy to immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients who have obtained disease stability with pembrolizumab administered as per standard-of-care. The primary end point is objective response rate, and the secondary end points are safety, survival and disease control rate. Translational research is an exploratory aim. The planned sample size is 27 patients. The study combination will be considered worth investigating if at least four objective responses are observed. If the null hypothesis is rejected, ICONIC will be the first proof of concept of the feasibility and clinical activity of the addition of carbon ion radiotherapy to immune checkpoint inhibitors in oncology.

ICONIC is a multicenter, open-label, nonrandomized, phase II clinical trial aiming to evaluate the feasibility and clinical activity of the addition of carbon ion radiotherapy to immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients who have obtained disease stability with pembrolizumab administered as per standard-of-care. Considering that no clinical trials have been conducted thus far to assess the safety of the association between immune checkpoint inhibitors and carbon ion radiotherapy, the current clinical study will provide controlled data about the safety of this unprecedented therapeutic combination. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05229614 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Spermatocytic Tumor: A Review.

Spermatocytic tumor (ST) is a very rare disease, accounting for approximately 1% of testicular cancers. Previously classified as spermatocytic seminoma, it is currently classified within the non-germ neoplasia in-situ-derived tumors and has different clinical-pathologic features when compared with other forms of germ cell tumors (GCTs). A web-based search of MEDLINE/PubMed library data was performed in order to identify pertinent articles. In the vast majority of cases, STs are diagnosed at stage I and carry a very good prognosis. The treatment of choice is orchiectomy alone. Nevertheless, there are two rare variants of STs having very aggressive behavior, namely anaplastic ST and ST with sarcomatous transformation, that are resistant to systemic treatments and their prognosis is very poor. We have summarized all the epidemiological, pathological and clinical features available in the literature regarding STs that have to be considered as a specific entity compared to other germ GCTs, including seminoma. With the aim of improving the knowledge of this rare disease, an international registry is required.

Persistence of Immune Response Elicited by Three Doses of mRNA Vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 in a Cohort of Patients with Solid Tumors: A One-Year Follow-Up.

The role and durability of the immunogenicity of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against severe acute respiratory virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), in cancer patients one year after receiving the third dose have to be elucidated. We have prospectively evaluated the long-term immunogenicity of the third dose of the SARS-CoV-2 BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in 55 patients undergoing active treatment. Neutralizing antibody (NT Ab) titers against Omicron variants and total anti-trimeric S IgG levels were measured one year after the third dose. Heparinized whole-blood samples were used for the assessment of the SARS-CoV-2 interferon-γ release assay (IGRA). Thirty-seven patients (67.3%) showed positive total anti-trimeric S IgG one year after the third dose. Looking at the T-cell response against the spike protein, the frequency of responder patients did not decrease significantly between six and twelve months after the third dose. Finally, less than 20% of cancer patients showed an undetectable NT Ab titer against BA.1 and BA.5 variants of concern (VOCs). Underlying therapies seem to not affect the magnitude or frequency of the immune response. Our work underlines the persistence of humoral and cellular immune responses against BNT162b2 in a cohort of cancer patients one year after receiving the third dose, regardless of the type of underlying therapy.

Outcomes of the SARS-CoV-2 omicron (B.1.1.529) variant outbreak among vaccinated and unvaccinated patients with cancer in Europe: results from the retrospective, multicentre, OnCovid registry study.

BACKGROUND: The omicron (B.1.1.529) variant of SARS-CoV-2 is highly transmissible and escapes vaccine-induced immunity. We aimed to describe outcomes due to COVID-19 during the omicron outbreak compared with the prevaccination period and alpha (B.1.1.7) and delta (B.1.617.2) waves in patients with cancer in Europe. METHODS: In this retrospective analysis of the multicentre OnCovid Registry study, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, who had a history of solid or haematological malignancy that was either active or in remission. Patient were recruited from 37 oncology centres from UK, Italy, Spain, France, Belgium, and Germany. Participants were followed up from COVID-19 diagnosis until death or loss to follow-up, while being treated as per standard of care. For this analysis, we excluded data from centres that did not actively enter new data after March 1, 2021 (in France, Germany, and Belgium). We compared measures of COVID-19 morbidity, which were complications from COVID-19, hospitalisation due to COVID-19, and requirement of supplemental oxygen and COVID-19-specific therapies, and COVID-19 mortality across three time periods designated as the prevaccination (Feb 27 to Nov 30, 2020), alpha-delta (Dec 1, 2020, to Dec 14, 2021), and omicron (Dec 15, 2021, to Jan 31, 2022) phases. We assessed all-cause case-fatality rates at 14 days and 28 days after diagnosis of COVID-19 overall and in unvaccinated and fully vaccinated patients and in those who received a booster dose, after adjusting for country of origin, sex, age, comorbidities, tumour type, stage, and status, and receipt of systemic anti-cancer therapy. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04393974, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: As of Feb 4, 2022 (database lock), the registry included 3820 patients who had been diagnosed with COVID-19 between Feb 27, 2020, and Jan 31, 2022. 3473 patients were eligible for inclusion (1640 [47·4%] were women and 1822 [52·6%] were men, with a median age of 68 years [IQR 57-77]). 2033 (58·5%) of 3473 were diagnosed during the prevaccination phase, 1075 (31·0%) during the alpha-delta phase, and 365 (10·5%) during the omicron phase. Among patients diagnosed during the omicron phase, 113 (33·3%) of 339 were fully vaccinated and 165 (48·7%) were boosted, whereas among those diagnosed during the alpha-delta phase, 152 (16·6%) of 915 were fully vaccinated and 21 (2·3%) were boosted. Compared with patients diagnosed during the prevaccination period, those who were diagnosed during the omicron phase had lower case-fatality rates at 14 days (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0·32 [95% CI 0·19-0·61) and 28 days (0·34 [0·16-0·79]), complications due to COVID-19 (0·26 [0·17-0·46]), and hospitalisation due to COVID-19 (0·17 [0·09-0·32]), and had less requirements for COVID-19-specific therapy (0·22 [0·15-0·34]) and oxygen therapy (0·24 [0·14-0·43]) than did those diagnosed during the alpha-delta phase. Unvaccinated patients diagnosed during the omicron phase had similar crude case-fatality rates at 14 days (ten [25%] of 40 patients vs 114 [17%] of 656) and at 28 days (11 [27%] of 40 vs 184 [28%] of 656) and similar rates of hospitalisation due to COVID-19 (18 [43%] of 42 vs 266 [41%] of 652) and complications from COVID-19 (13 [31%] of 42 vs 237 [36%] of 659) as those diagnosed during the alpha-delta phase. INTERPRETATION: Despite time-dependent improvements in outcomes reported in the omicron phase compared with the earlier phases of the pandemic, patients with cancer remain highly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 if they are not vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Our findings support universal vaccination of patients with cancer as a protective measure against morbidity and mortality from COVID-19. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre and the Cancer Treatment and Research Trust.

Multicentre, randomised, open-label, parallel-group, clinical phase II study to evaluate immunonutrition in improving efficacy of immunotherapy in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer, undergoing systematic nutritional counseling.

BACKGROUND: Nutritional support, including nutritional counseling and oral nutritional supplements (ONS), has been recommended as a first-line strategy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Evidence on the efficacy of immunonutrition during immunotherapy in these patients is positive, but still limited some secondary endpoints, such as treatment toxicity and tolerance. We hypothesize that early systematic provision of ONS with a high-protein-high calorie mixture containing immunonutrients (Impact®) in addition to nutritional counseling, compared to nutritional counseling alone, is beneficial to patients with NSCLC receiving immunotherapy with or without chemotherapy. We designed the present study to evaluate the efficacy of early systematic provision of ONS enriched with immunonutrients compared to nutritional counseling alone, in patients with NSCLC undergoing immunotherapy. Study endpoints were: treatment response (primary endpoint: progression-free survival), treatment tolerance and toxicity, body weight, body composition, protein-calorie intake, quality of life, fatigue, muscle strength and immunological profile. METHODS: This is a pragmatic, multicentre, randomized (1:1), parallel-group, open label, controlled, pilot clinical trial (N = 180). DISCUSSION: The improvement of efficacy of nutritional support in oncology still deserves many efforts. Immunonutrition represents a promising approach also in patients with NSCLC, but evidence on its efficacy on clinical outcomes during immunotherapy is still inconclusive. The present pilot study, which guarantees early high-quality nutritional care (assessment and treatment) to all patients in agreement with current guidelines and recommendations, could represent one of the first proofs of efficacy of early oral immunonutrition in patients with cancer undergoing immunotherapy. Further large randomized trials addressing the improvement of supportive care could be hypothesized, accordingly. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05384873.

Clinical and economic value of oral nutrition supplements in patients with cancer: a position paper from the Survivorship Care and Nutritional Support Working Group of Alliance Against Cancer.

Malnutrition is a common clinical and public health problem that can frequently affect patients in hospital and community settings. In particular, cancer-related malnutrition results from a combination of metabolic dysregulation and anorexia, caused both by the tumor itself and by its treatment. Patients with head-neck cancer, or with gastroesophageal, pancreatic, lung, and colorectal cancer, are particularly at risk of developing malnutrition, with a prevalence varying between 30 and 50% depending on tumor location and anti-cancer treatment complications. Prevention and adequate management of malnutrition is now considered an essential key point of therapeutic pathways of patients with cancer, with the aim to enhance their quality of life, reduce complications, and improve clinical outcomes. Oral nutritional supplements (ONS) are part of the nutritional therapy and represent an effective tool to address cancer-related malnutrition, as supported by growing literature data. However, patients' access to ONS - which is regulated by different national and regional policies in terms of reimbursement - is quite heterogeneous. This narrative review aims to summarize the current knowledge about the role of ONS in terms of cost-effectiveness in the management of actively treated patients with cancer, following surgery and/or radiotherapy/chemotherapy treatment and to present the position on this issue of the Alliance Against Cancer, the Italian National Oncology Network, coming up from a focused virtual roundtable of the Survivorship Care and Nutritional Support Working Group.

Randomized trial of sucrosomial iron supplementation in patients with chemotherapy-related anemia treated with ESA.

BACKGROUND: Iron supplementation improves the erythropoiesis-stimulating agents' (ESAs) response in chemotherapy-related anemia. The primary aim of our study is to assess the efficacy of sucrosomial iron, a new oral iron formulation, in cancer patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia treated with ESAs. The secondary objectives included the efficacy into two subgroups of patients (iron replete and functional iron deficiency) between the two study arms, safety and the effect on transfusion need. METHODS: In this randomized, multicentre, open-label, phase III clinical trial, 60 cancer patients were enrolled. Each patient was randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 12 weeks of oral sucrosomial iron at the dose of 30 mg daily in combination with ESAs or no supplementation to ESA treatment. The endpoint considered for efficacy was the proportion of patients achieving complete hematological response at 12 weeks (increase in Hb > 2 g/dL from baseline, without RBC transfusions in the previous 28 days or achieving Hb ≥ 12 g/dL). RESULTS: There was a statistically significant association between oral sucrosomial iron supplementation in combination with ESAs and the achievement of a complete hematological response. This response was achieved within 12 weeks by 31% of patients in the control group and by 52% of patients supplemented with oral sucrosomial iron. A trend of greater response in sucrosomial iron arm was found in both subgroups. No difference was observed about safety and transfusion need. CONCLUSIONS: Sucrosomial iron is well tolerated and its combination with ESAs improves the hematological response in cancer patients with chemotherapy-related anemia. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND DATE OF REGISTRATION: This study has been reviewed by the Institutional Ethics Committee of the IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo Foundation, Pavia, Italy (28/04/2015; prot. N. 20,150,002,059), and by the Institutional Ethics Committee of the other Italian oncological centers involved in this study.

Gemcitabine with or without ramucirumab as second-line treatment for malignant pleural mesothelioma (RAMES): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a preclinical rationale for inhibiting angiogenesis in mesothelioma. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of the anti-VEGFR-2 antibody ramucirumab combined with gemcitabine in patients with pretreated malignant pleural mesothelioma. METHODS: RAMES was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial done at 26 hospitals in Italy. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, and histologically proven malignant pleural mesothelioma progressing during or after first-line treatment with pemetrexed plus platinum. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks plus either intravenous placebo (gemcitabine plus placebo group) or ramucirumab 10 mg/kg (gemcitabine plus ramucirumab group) on day 1 every 3 weeks, until tumour progression or unacceptable toxicity. Central randomisation was done according to a minimisation algorithm method, associated with a random element using the following stratification factors: ECOG performance status, age, histology, and first-line time-to-progression. The primary endpoint was overall survival, measured from the date of randomisation to the date of death from any cause. Efficacy analyses were assessed in all patients who had been correctly randomised and received their allocated treatment, and safety analyses were assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03560973, and with EudraCT, 2016-001132-36. FINDINGS: Between Dec 22, 2016, and July 30, 2018, of 165 patients enrolled 161 were correctly assigned and received either gemcitabine plus placebo (n=81) or gemcitabine plus ramucirumab (n=80). At database lock (March 8, 2020), with a median follow-up of 21·9 months (IQR 17·7-28·5), overall survival was longer in the ramucirumab group (HR 0·71, 70% CI 0·59-0·85; p=0·028). Median overall survival was 13·8 months (70% CI 12·7-14·4) in the gemcitabine plus ramucirumab group and 7·5 months (6·9-8·9) in the gemcitabine plus placebo group. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 35 (44%) of 80 patients in the gemcitabine plus ramucirumab group and 24 (30%) of 81 in the gemcitabine plus placebo group. The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (16 [20%] for gemcitabine plus ramucirumab vs ten [12%] for gemcitabine plus placebo) and hypertension (five [6%] vs none). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in five (6%) in the gemcitabine plus ramucirumab group and in four (5%) patients in the gemcitabine plus placebo group; the most common was thromboembolism (three [4%] for gemcitabine plus ramucirumab vs two [2%] for gemcitabine plus placebo). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Ramucirumab plus gemcitabine significantly improved overall survival after first-line standard chemotherapy, with a favourable safety profile. This combination could be a new option in this setting. FUNDING: Eli Lilly Italy. TRANSLATION: For the Italian translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Prevalence and impact of COVID-19 sequelae on treatment and survival of patients with cancer who recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection: evidence from the OnCovid retrospective, multicentre registry study.

BACKGROUND: The medium-term and long-term impact of COVID-19 in patients with cancer is not yet known. In this study, we aimed to describe the prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae and their impact on the survival of patients with cancer. We also aimed to describe patterns of resumption and modifications of systemic anti-cancer therapy following recovery from SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: OnCovid is an active European registry study enrolling consecutive patients aged 18 years or older with a history of solid or haematological malignancy and who had a diagnosis of RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. For this retrospective study, patients were enrolled from 35 institutions across Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK. Patients who were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection between Feb 27, 2020, and Feb 14, 2021, and entered into the registry at the point of data lock (March 1, 2021), were eligible for analysis. The present analysis was focused on COVID-19 survivors who underwent clinical reassessment at each participating institution. We documented prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae and described factors associated with their development and their association with post-COVID-19 survival, which was defined as the interval from post-COVID-19 reassessment to the patients' death or last follow-up. We also evaluated resumption of systemic anti-cancer therapy in patients treated within 4 weeks of COVID-19 diagnosis. The OnCovid study is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04393974. FINDINGS: 2795 patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection between Feb 27, 2020, and Feb 14, 2021, were entered into the study by the time of the data lock on March 1, 2021. After the exclusion of ineligible patients, the final study population consisted of 2634 patients. 1557 COVID-19 survivors underwent a formal clinical reassessment after a median of 22·1 months (IQR 8·4-57·8) from cancer diagnosis and 44 days (28-329) from COVID-19 diagnosis. 234 (15·0%) patients reported COVID-19 sequelae, including respiratory symptoms (116 [49·6%]) and residual fatigue (96 [41·0%]). Sequelae were more common in men (vs women; p=0·041), patients aged 65 years or older (vs other age groups; p=0·048), patients with two or more comorbidities (vs one or none; p=0·0006), and patients with a history of smoking (vs no smoking history; p=0·0004). Sequelae were associated with hospitalisation for COVID-19 (p<0·0001), complicated COVID-19 (p<0·0001), and COVID-19 therapy (p=0·0002). With a median post-COVID-19 follow-up of 128 days (95% CI 113-148), COVID-19 sequelae were associated with an increased risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] 1·80 [95% CI 1·18-2·75]) after adjusting for time to post-COVID-19 reassessment, sex, age, comorbidity burden, tumour characteristics, anticancer therapy, and COVID-19 severity. Among 466 patients on systemic anti-cancer therapy, 70 (15·0%) permanently discontinued therapy, and 178 (38·2%) resumed treatment with a dose or regimen adjustment. Permanent treatment discontinuations were independently associated with an increased risk of death (HR 3·53 [95% CI 1·45-8·59]), but dose or regimen adjustments were not (0·84 [0·35-2·02]). INTERPRETATION: Sequelae post-COVID-19 affect up to 15% of patients with cancer and adversely affect survival and oncological outcomes after recovery. Adjustments to systemic anti-cancer therapy can be safely pursued in treatment-eligible patients. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre and the Cancer Treatment and Research Trust.

The heterogeneity of cancer endothelium: The relevance of angiogenesis and endothelial progenitor cells in cancer microenvironment.

Tumor-associated vessels constitution is the result of angiogenesis, the hallmark of cancer essential for tumor to develop in dimension and to spread throughout the organism. Tumor endothelium is configured as an active functioning organ capable of determine interaction with the immune response and all the other components of the variegate cancer microenvironment, determining reciprocal influence. Angiogenesis is here analyzed in its molecular and cellular mechanisms, multiple mediators and principal players, represented by Endothelial Cells. It is discussed the striking heterogeneity of cancer endothelium, due to morphological and molecular aberrations that it often presents and its multiple origin. Among the cells that participate to the composition of tumor vasculature, Endothelial Progenitor Cells represent an important source for physical sustain and paracrine signaling in the process of angiogenesis. Treatment options are reviewed, with particular focus on novel therapeutic strategies for overcoming tumor resistance to anti-angiogenic agents.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of oral nutritional supplements with nutritional counselling in head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: There is limited evidence regarding the economic effects of nutrition support in cancer patients. This study aims at investigating the cost-effectiveness profile of systematic oral nutritional supplementation (ONS) in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients undergoing radiotherapy (RT) and receiving nutritional counseling. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis based on a RCT was performed to estimate direct medical costs, life years gained (LYG) and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY) for nutritional counseling with or without ONS at 5-month and 6-year follow up time. Value of information analysis was performed to value the expected gain from reducing uncertainty through further data collection. RESULTS: ONS with nutritional counseling produced higher QALY than nutritional counseling alone (0.291 ± 0.087 vs 0.288 ± 0.087), however the difference was not significant (0.0027, P = 0.84). Mean costs were €987.60 vs €996.09, respectively in the treatment and control group (-€8.96, P = 0.98). The Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) was -€3,277/QALY, with 55.4% probabilities of being cost-effective at a cost-effectiveness threshold of €30,000/QALY. The Expected Incremental Benefit was €95.16 and the Population Expected Value of Perfect Information was €8.6 million, implying that additional research is likely to be worthwhile. At a median 6-year follow up, the treatment group had a significantly better survival rate when adjusting for late effect (P = 0.039). CONCLUSION: Our findings provide the first evidence to inform decisions about funding and reimbursement of ONS in combination with nutritional counseling in HNC patients undergoing RT. ONS may improve quality of cancer care at no additional costs, however further research on the cost-effectiveness of nutritional supplementation is recommended. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02055833. Registered 5th February 2014 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02055833.

G-CSF and G-CSF-related vasculitis: a systematic review of the literature and intriguing future research perspectives.

Background: There are several case reports suggesting that G-CSFs may, in rare conditions, produce serious side effects, such as vasculitis. Materials & methods: A systematic search was conducted in Medline via PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library to describe this unusual side effect to raise awareness among clinicians for early recognition and treatment. Results: Fifty-seven patients were analyzed. The most prevalent cancer type was breast cancer (47%). Long-acting G-CSF was used in 38 patients (67%). Only 47% of patients were treated with steroids. Conclusion: Although the benefit of G-CSF treatment outweighs the potential damage, oncologists should consider the possibility of triggering a vascular toxicity and try to identify patients at increased risk for this side effect.

Lay abstract Background: Several case reports suggest that a type of drug called granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSFs) may, in rare cases, produce serious side effects, such as vasculitis. Materials & methods: A systematic search was conducted to describe this unusual side effect. Results: Fifty-seven patients were analyzed. The most prevalent cancer type in which this side effect was observed was breast cancer (47%). Only 47% of patients were treated with steroids. The main symptoms, such as fever, chest/epigastric pain and general malaise, are nonspecific and cannot be used to diagnose the side effect; laboratory findings are suggestive of inflammation. Conclusion: Accurate assessment of what causes this adverse event is extremely important. Although the benefit of G-CSF treatment outweighs the potential damage, oncologists should consider the possibility of triggering vascular toxicity and try to identify patients at increased risk.

Deficient Natural Killer Cell NKp30-Mediated Function and Altered NCR3 Splice Variants in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

The activating natural cytotoxicity receptor NKp30 is critical for natural killer (NK) cell function and tumor immune surveillance. The natural cytotoxicity receptor-3 (NCR3) gene is transcribed into several splice variants whose physiological relevance is still incompletely understood. In this study, we investigated the role of NKp30 and its major ligand B7 homolog 6 (B7-H6) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Peripheral blood NK cell phenotype was skewed toward a defective/exhausted immune profile with decreased frequencies of cells expressing NKp30 and natural killer group 2, member D and an increased proportion of cells expressing T-cell immunoglobulin and mucin-domain containing-3. Moreover, NKp30-positive NK cells had a reduced expression of NCR3 immunostimulatory splice variants and an increased expression of the inhibitory variant in patients with advanced tumor, resulting in deficient NKp30-mediated functionality. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes showed a prevalent inhibitory NKp30 isoform profile, consistent with decreased NKp30-mediated function. Of note, there were significant differences in the cytokine milieu between the neoplastic and the surrounding non-neoplastic tissue, which may have further influenced NKp30 function. Exposure of NK cells to B7-H6-expressing HCC cells significantly down-modulated NKp30, that was prevented by small interfering RNA-mediated knockdown, suggesting a role for this ligand in inhibiting NKp30-mediated responses. Interestingly, B7-H6 expression was reduced in HCC tissue and simultaneously augmented as a soluble form in HCC patients, particularly those with advanced staging or larger nodule size. Conclusion: These findings provide evidence in support of a role of NKp30 and its major ligand in HCC development and evolution.

Providing nutritional care to cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: an Italian perspective.

The COVID-19 outbreak has drastically changed practices inside hospitals, which include oncology routines. In oncology, malnutrition was and certainly still is a frequent problem associated with an increase in treatment-related toxicity, a reduced response to cancer treatment, an impaired quality of life, and a worse overall prognosis. Even in this situation of healthcare crisis, nutritional support in cancer care is an essential element. During the current COVID-19 pandemic, there is a concrete high risk to see a dramatic worsening of cancer patients' nutritional status, who are left without adequate clinical and nutritional support. The consequences are already reasonably foreseeable and will have a severe negative impact after the emergency. Therefore, we believe that it is essential to try to continue, as far as possible, the activity of clinical nutrition in oncology, by revolutionizing the setting and the approach to patients. For this purpose, the Clinical Nutrition and Dietetics Unit and the Medical Oncology Unit of our hospital, one of the largest community hospital in Lombardy that has been involved in the COVID-19 outbreak management since its inception, have reorganized the clinical routine activity in strict collaboration since the very beginning of the emergency, to better face up to the challenge, while preserving cancer patients' needs.

Early 7-day supplemental parenteral nutrition improves body composition and muscle strength in hypophagic cancer patients at nutritional risk.

PURPOSE: The international guidelines recommend the use of supplemental parenteral nutrition (SPN) in cancer patients when they are malnourished and hypophagic and where enteral nutrition is not feasible. However, there are limited data on the short-term effects of SPN in this patient population. METHODS: The aim of this bicentric single-arm clinical trial (NCT02828150) was to evaluate the effects of early 7-day SPN on bioimpedance vectorial analysis (BIVA)-derived body composition, handgrip strength (HG), and serum prealbumin (PAB) in 131 hypophagic, hospitalized cancer patients at nutritional risk, with contraindications for enteral nutrition. RESULTS: One hundred eighteen patients (90.1%) completed the 7-day SPN support regimen and 102 of them (86.4%) were in advanced disease stage. SPN induced a significant improvement of phase angle (PhA, + 0.25 [95% CI 0.11, 0.39]; p = 0.001), standardized phase angle (SPA, + 0.33 [95% CI 0.13, 0.53]; p = 0.002), HG (+ 2.1 kg -95% CI 1.30, 2.81]; p < 0.001), and PAB (+ 3.8 mg/dL [95% CI 2.1, 5.6]; p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, the effects on BIVA parameters were more pronounced in patients (N = 90, 76.3%) in whom estimated protein and calorie requirements were both satisfied (adjusted difference: PhA, + 0.39 [95% CI 0.04, 0.73]; p = 0.030; SPA, + 0.62 [95% CI 0.16, 1.09]; p = 0.009). No significant changes in hydration status were detected and no severe metabolic or other complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Early 7-day SPN resulted in improved body composition, HG and PAB levels in hypophagic, and hospitalized cancer patients at nutritional risk in the absence of any relevant clinical complications. Further trials, aimed at verifying the efficacy of this early nutritional intervention on mid- and long-term primary clinical endpoints in specific cancer types, are warranted.