Brief report: High incidence of peridiagnosis thromboembolic events in patients with BRAF-mutant lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to determine if advanced BRAF-mutant NSCLC has a higher thromboembolic events (TEE) rate than the expected. METHODS: Between 2008 and 2021, 182 patients with BRAF-mutant advanced NSCLC (BRAF V600E, n = 70; BRAF non-V600E, n = 112) were retrospectively identified from 18 centers in Spain. Patients received chemotherapy (n = 147), immunotherapy (n = 69), targeted therapy (n = 42), and immunotherapy + chemotherapy (n = 26). RESULTS: Incidence rate of TEE was 26.4 % (95%CI: 19.9 %-32.9 %). A total of 72 TEE were documented among 48 patients, as 18 patients (37.5 %) developed more than one event. Median time to TEE onset was 2 months, 69 % of TEE occurred in the peridiagnostic period (+/- 90 days from cancer diagnosis), and in 16 pts. (33 %) TEE was the form of lung cancer presentation. Although most TEE were only venous (82 %; PE, n = 33; DVT, n = 16), arterial events were reported in 31 % and occurred earlier, or TEE presented in atypical locations (13.9 %). TEE were related to high hospitalization rate (59 %), recurrence (23 %), and mortality (10.4 %) despite appropriate anticoagulant/antiaggregant treatment. Median OS in patients without-TEE was 19.4 months (95%CI: 4.6-34.1), and significantly shorter in patients with arterial-TEE vs venous-TEE vs both of them: 9.9 months (95%CI: 0-23.5) vs 41.7 months (95%CI: 11.3-72.2 m) vs 2.7 months (95%CI: 2.1-3.3), p = 0.001. Neither clinical or molecular features (BRAF V600E/non-V600E), nor cancer treatment was associated to TEE occurrence. Khorana score underperformed to predict thrombosis at cancer diagnosis, as only 19.2 % of patients were classified as high-risk. CONCLUSIONS: Thrombotic events represent a new clinical feature of BRAF-mutant lung cancer. Patients with almost a 30 % incidence of TEE should be offered systematic anticoagulation.

Immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in lung cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with lung cancer are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe complications from COVID-19, but information on the efficacy of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in these patients is scarce. We aimed at evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The prospective, nationwide SOLID substudy, enrolled adults with lung cancer who were fully vaccinated against COVID-19. Serum anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels were quantitatively assessed two weeks and six months after receipt of the last dose using a chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay. Multivariate odds ratios for the association between demographic and clinical factors and seronegativity after vaccination were estimated. RESULTS: 1973 lung cancer patients were enrolled. Most patients had stage IV disease (66%) and were receiving active cancer treatment (82.7%). No significant differences were found in the probability of being seronegative for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies after full vaccination between patients who were receiving active cancer treatment and those who were not (p = 0.396). The administration of immunotherapy or oral targeted therapy and immunization with mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine were factors independently associated with increased odds of being seropositive after vaccination. From all patients, 1405 received the second dose of vaccine and high levels of antibody titers were observed in 93.6% of patients two weeks after second dose. At six months, multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that performance status ≥ 2 was independently associated with a higher probability of being seronegative after full vaccination with an OR 4.15. On the other hand, received chemotherapy or oral target therapy and vaccination with mRNA-1273 were a factor independently associated with lower odds of being seronegative after full vaccination with an OR 0.52, 0.37 and 0.34, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Lung cancer patients can safely achieve a strong immune response against SARS-CoV-2 after full vaccination, regardless of the cancer treatment received. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04407143.

Randomized pharmacokinetic study comparing subcutaneous and intravenous palonosetron in cancer patients treated with platinum based chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Palonosetron is a potent second generation 5- hydroxytryptamine-3 selective antagonist which can be administered by either intravenous (IV) or oral routes, but subcutaneous (SC) administration of palonosetron has never been studied, even though it could have useful clinical applications. In this study, we evaluate the bioavailability of SC palonosetron. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized to receive SC or IV palonosetron, followed by the alternative route in a crossover manner, during the first two cycles of chemotherapy. Blood samples were collected at baseline and 10, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 minutes and 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 24 h after palonosetron administration. Urine was collected during 12 hours following palonosetron. We compared pharmacokinetic parameters including AUC0-24h, t1/2, and Cmax observed with each route of administration by analysis of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: From October 2009 to July 2010, 25 evaluable patients were included. AUC0-24h for IV and SC palonosetron were respectively 14.1 and 12.7 ng × h/ml (p=0.160). Bioavalability of SC palonosetron was 118% (95% IC: 69-168). Cmax was lower with SC than with IV route and was reached 15 minutes following SC administration. CONCLUSIONS: Palonosetron bioavailability was similar when administered by either SC or IV route. This new route of administration might be specially useful for outpatient management of emesis and for administration of oral chemotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01046240.

Assessment of epidermal growth factor receptor and K-ras mutation status in cytological stained smears of non-small cell lung cancer patients: correlation with clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and K-ras mutations guide treatment selection in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Although mutation status is routinely assessed in biopsies, cytological specimens are frequently the only samples available. We determined EGFR and K-ras mutations in cytological samples. METHODS: DNA was extracted from 150 consecutive samples, including 120 Papanicolau smears (80%), 10 cell blocks (7%), nine fresh samples (6%), six ThinPrep® tests (4%), and five body cavity fluids (3.3%). Papanicolau smears were analyzed when they had >50% malignant cells. Polymerase chain reaction and direct sequencing of exons 18-21 of EGFR and exon 2 of K-ras were performed. EGFR mutations were simultaneously determined in biopsies and cytological samples from 20 patients. Activity of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) was assessed. RESULTS: The cytological diagnosis was adenocarcinoma in 110 samples (73%) and nonadenocarcinoma in 40 (27%) samples. EGFR mutations were identified in 26 samples (17%) and K-ras mutations were identified in 18 (12%) samples. EGFR and K-ras mutations were mutually exclusive. In EGFR-mutated cases, DNA was obtained from stained smears in 24 cases (92%), pleural fluid in one case (4%), and cell block in one case (4%). The response rate to EGFR TKIs in patients harboring mutations was 75%. The mutation status was identical in patients who had both biopsies and cytological samples analyzed. CONCLUSION: Assessment of EGFR and K-ras mutations in cytological samples is feasible and comparable with biopsy results, making individualized treatment selection possible for NSCLC patients from whom tumor biopsies are not available.