Immune response against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in cancer patients after COVID-19 vaccination during the Omicron wave: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients often have weakened immune systems, resulting in a lower response to vaccines, especially those receiving immunosuppressive oncological treatment (OT). We aimed to assess the impact of OT on the humoral and T-cell response to the B.1 lineage and Omicron variant following COVID-19 vaccination in patients with solid and hematological neoplasms. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study on cancer patients, stratified into OT and non-OT groups, who received a two-dose series of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine and a booster six months later. The outcomes measured were the humoral (anti-SARS-CoV-2 S IgG titers and ACE2-S interaction inhibition capacity) and cellular (SARS-CoV-2 S-specific T-cell spots per million PBMCs) responses against the B.1 lineage and Omicron variant. These responses were evaluated four weeks after the second dose (n = 98) and eight weeks after the booster dose (n = 71). RESULTS: The humoral response after the second vaccine dose against the B.1 lineage and Omicron variant was significantly weaker in the OT group compared to the non-OT group (q-value<0.05). A booster dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine significantly improved the humoral response in the OT group, making it comparable to the non-OT group. The mRNA-1273 vaccine, designed for the original Wuhan strain, elicited a weaker humoral response against the Omicron variant compared to the B.1 lineage, regardless of oncological treatment or vaccine dose. In contrast, T-cell responses against SARS-CoV-2, including the Omicron variant, were already present after the second vaccine dose and were not significantly affected by oncological treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer patients, particularly those receiving immunosuppressive oncological treatments, should require booster doses and adapted COVID-19 vaccines for new SARS-CoV-2 variants like Omicron. Future studies should evaluate the durability of the immune response and the efficacy of individualized regimens.

Correlation between breast cancer subtypes determined by immunohistochemistry and n-COUNTER PAM50 assay: a real-world study.

PURPOSE: Molecular subtyping based on gene expression profiling (i.e., PAM50 assay) aids in determining the prognosis and treatment of breast cancer (BC), particularly in hormone receptor (HR)-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative tumors, where luminal A and B subtypes have different prognoses and treatments. Several surrogate classifications have been proposed for distinguishing between the luminal A and B subtypes. This study determines the accuracy of local immunohistochemistry (IHC) techniques for classifying HR-positive/HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) tumors according to intrinsic subtypes using the nCOUNTER PAM50 assay as reference and the HR status definition according the ASCO/CAP recommendations. METHODS: Molecular subtypes resulting from nCOUNTER PAM50 performed in our laboratory between 2014 and 2020 were correlated with three different proxy surrogates proposed in the literature based on ER, PR, HER2, and Ki67 expression with different cut-off values. Concordance was measured using the level of agreement and kappa statistics. RESULTS: From 1049 samples with the nCOUNTER test, 679 and 350 were luminal A and B subtypes, respectively. Only a poor-to-fair correlation was observed between the three proxy surrogates and real genomic subtypes as determined by nCOUNTER PAM50. Moreover, 5-11% and 18-36% of the nCOUNTER PAM50 luminal B and A tumors were classified as luminal A and B, respectively, by these surrogates. CONCLUSION: The concordance between luminal subtypes determined by three different IHC-based classifiers and the nCOUNTER PAM50 assay was suboptimal. Thus, a significant proportion of luminal A and B tumors as determined by the surrogate classifiers could be undertreated or over-treated.

COVID-19 mortality in cancer patients in a Madrid hospital during the first 3 weeks of the epidemic.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The Covid-19 pandemic especially affects cancer patients with higher incidence and mortality according to published series of original pandemic foci. The study aims to determine the mortality in our center due to covid-19 in cancer patients during the first 3 weeks of the epidemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The cancer patients who died of covid-19 during the analysis period have been reviewed describing the oncological and the covid-19 infection characteristics and the treatments established. RESULTS: Confirmed cases covid-19: 1069 with 132 deaths (12.3%). With cancer 36 patients (3.4%), 15 deceased (41.6%). Of the deceased, only 6 patients (40%) were in active treatment. The most frequent associated tumor was lung (8/15 patients, 53.3%), 11 with metastatic disease (11/15, 73.3%). No specific treatment was established in 40 % (6/15) of the patients. The rest of them received treatments with the active protocols. CONCLUSION: Covid-19 mortality in cancer patients is almost four times higher than that of the general population. Until we have effective treatments or an effective vaccine, the only possibility to protect our patients is to prevent the infection with the appropriate measures.

ANTECEDENTES Y OBJETIVO: La pandemia por Covid-19 afecta especialmente a pacientes con cáncer con mayor incidencia y mortalidad según series publicadas de focos originales de pandemia. El estudio pretende conocer la mortalidad en nuestro centro por covid-19 en pacientes con cáncer durante las primeras 3 semanas de epidemia. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Se han revisado los pacientes con cáncer fallecidos por covid-19 durante el periodo de análisis describiendo las características oncológicas, de la infección por covid-19 y de los tratamientos instaurados. RESULTADOS: Casos confirmados covid-19: 1069 con 132 fallecimientos (12,3%). Con cáncer 36 pacientes (3.4%), 15 fallecidos (41,6%). De los fallecidos solo 6 pacientes (40%) se encontraban en tratamiento activo. El tumor más frecuente asociado fue pulmón (8/15 pacientes, 53,3%), 11 con enfermedad metastásica (11/15, 73,3%). El 40% (6/15) no recibió tratamiento específico contra covid-19, el resto fue tratado con los protocolos activos. CONCLUSIÓN: La mortalidad por covid-19 en pacientes con cáncer casi cuadriplica la de la población general. Hasta disponer de tratamientos eficaces o una vacuna efectiva la única posibilidad de proteger a nuestros pacientes es impedir el contagio con las medidas adecuadas.

[COVID-19 mortality in cancer patients in a Madrid hospital during the first 3 weeks of the epidemic]. / Mortalidad por COVID-19 en pacientes con cáncer en un hospital de Madrid durante las primeras 3 semanas de epidemia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The covid-19 pandemic especially affects cancer patients with higher incidence and mortality according to published series of original pandemic foci. The study aims to determine the mortality in our center due to covid-19 in cancer patients during the first 3 weeks of the epidemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The cancer patients who died of covid-19 during the analysis period have been reviewed describing the oncological and the covid-19 infection characteristics and the treatments established. RESULTS: Confirmed cases covid-19: 1069 with 132 deaths (12.3%). With cancer 36 patients (3.4%), 15 deceased (41.6%). Of the deceased, only 6 patients (40%) were in active treatment. The most frequent associated tumor was lung (8/15 patients, 53.3%), 11 with metastatic disease (11/15, 73.3%). No specific treatment was established in 40% (6/15) of the patients. The rest of them received treatments with the active protocols. CONCLUSION: Covid-19 mortality in cancer patients is almost four times higher than that of the general population. Until we have effective treatments or an effective vaccine, the only possibility to protect our patients is to prevent the infection with the appropriate measures.

Colonic anastomosis and colonic polyp mucosal metastasis of signet ring cell gastric adenocarcinoma.

The mucosal metastasis of adenocarcinomas located in colonic mucosa is not infrequent. We present a clinical report of a patient diagnosed with a gastric multifocal signet ring cell adenocarcinoma without any evidence of visceral dissemination with the exception of mucosal infiltration of signet ring cell adenocarcinoma in a colonic polyp and in the mucosa of previous colonic anastomosis. The histopathological study of suspect lesions in the colonic mucosa is necessary to correctly approach the treatment of these patients.