RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Cabozantinib has been approved by the European Medicine Agency (EMA) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) previously treated with sorafenib. Cabozantinib is also being tested in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors in the frontline setting. Real-life clinical data of cabozantinib for HCC are still lacking. Moreover, the prognostic factors for HCC treated with cabozantinib have not been investigated. METHODS: We evaluated clinical data and outcome of HCC patients who received cabozantinib in the legal context of named patient use in Italy. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients from 15 centres received cabozantinib. All patients had preserved liver function (Child-Pugh A), mostly with an advanced HCC (77.1%) in a third-line setting (75.0%). The prevalence of performance status (PS) > 0, macrovascular invasion (MVI), extrahepatic spread, and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) >400 ng/mL was 50.0, 30.2, 67.7, and 44.8%, respectively. Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were 12.1 (95% confidence interval 9.4-14.8) and 5.1 (3.3-6.9) months, respectively. Most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (67.7%), diarrhoea (54.2%), anorexia (45.8%), HFSR (43.8%), weight loss (24.0%), and hypertension (24.0%). Most common treatment-related Grade 3-4 AEs were fatigue (6.3%), HFSR (6.3%), and increased aminotransferases (6.3%). MVI, ECOG-PS > 0, and AFP >400 ng/mL predicted a worse OS. Discontinuation for intolerance and no new extrahepatic lesions at the progression were associated with better outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In a real-life Western scenario (mostly in a third-line setting), cabozantinib efficacy and safety data were comparable with those reported in its registration trial. Data regarding the prognostic factors might help in patient selection and design of clinical trials.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The indications and timing for tracheostomy in patients with SARS CoV2-related are controversial. PURPOSE: In a recent issue published in the European Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, Mattioli et al. published a short communication about tracheostomy timing in patients with COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 2019); they reported that the tracheostomy could allow early Intensive Care Units discharge and, in the context of prolonged Invasive Mechanical Ventilation, should be suggested within 7 and 14 days to avoid potential tracheal damages. In this Letter to the Editor we would like to present our experience with tracheostomy in a Hub Covid Hospital. METHODS: 8 patients underwent open tracheostomy in case of intubation prolonged over 14 days, bronchopulmonary overlap infections, and patients undergoing weaning. They were followed up and the number and timing of death were recorded. RESULTS: Two patients died after tracheostomy; the median time between tracheostomy and death was 3 days. A negative prognostic trend was observed for a shorter duration of intubation. CONCLUSION: In our experience, tracheostomy does not seem to influence the clinical course and prognosis of the disease, in the face of possible risks of contagion for healthcare workers. The indication for tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients should be carefully evaluated and reserved for selected patients. Although it is not possible to define an optimal timing, it is our opinion that tracheostomy in a stable or clinically improved COVID-19 patient should not be proposed before the 20th day after orotracheal intubation.