Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
1.
JAMA Oncol ; 9(1): 51-60, 2023 01 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36394839

RESUMO

Importance: Currently, predictive biomarkers for response to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy in lung cancer are limited. Identifying such biomarkers would be useful to refine patient selection and guide precision therapy. Objective: To develop a machine-learning (ML)-based tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) scoring approach, and to evaluate TIL association with clinical outcomes in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter retrospective discovery-validation cohort study included 685 ICI-treated patients with NSCLC with median follow-up of 38.1 and 43.3 months for the discovery (n = 446) and validation (n = 239) cohorts, respectively. Patients were treated between February 2014 and September 2021. We developed an ML automated method to count tumor, stroma, and TIL cells in whole-slide hematoxylin-eosin-stained images of NSCLC tumors. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) and programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression were assessed separately, and clinical response to ICI therapy was determined by medical record review. Data analysis was performed from June 2021 to April 2022. Exposures: All patients received anti-PD-(L)1 monotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were determined by blinded medical record review. The area under curve (AUC) of TIL levels, TMB, and PD-L1 in predicting ICI response were calculated using ORR. Results: Overall, there were 248 (56%) women in the discovery cohort and 97 (41%) in the validation cohort. In a multivariable analysis, high TIL level (≥250 cells/mm2) was independently associated with ICI response in both the discovery (PFS: HR, 0.71; P = .006; OS: HR, 0.74; P = .03) and validation (PFS: HR = 0.80; P = .01; OS: HR = 0.75; P = .001) cohorts. Survival benefit was seen in both first- and subsequent-line ICI treatments in patients with NSCLC. In the discovery cohort, the combined models of TILs/PD-L1 or TMB/PD-L1 had additional specificity in differentiating ICI responders compared with PD-L1 alone. In the PD-L1 negative (<1%) subgroup, TIL levels had superior classification accuracy for ICI response (AUC = 0.77) compared with TMB (AUC = 0.65). Conclusions and Relevance: In these cohorts, TIL levels were robustly and independently associated with response to ICI treatment. Patient TIL assessment is relatively easily incorporated into the workflow of pathology laboratories at minimal additional cost, and may enhance precision therapy.


Assuntos
Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Humanos , Feminino , Masculino , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/tratamento farmacológico , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/mortalidade , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patologia , Antígeno B7-H1/imunologia , Inibidores de Checkpoint Imunológico/farmacologia , Inibidores de Checkpoint Imunológico/uso terapêutico , Linfócitos do Interstício Tumoral/imunologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estudos de Coortes , Imunoterapia/métodos , Biomarcadores Tumorais/análise , Algoritmos
2.
Thorac Cancer ; 13(3): 483-488, 2022 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34939342

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Patients with programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) ≥50% metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) and ECOG performance status (PS) of 2 treated with first-line immunotherapy have heterogeneous clinical assessment and outcomes. METHODS: To explore the role of immune-inflammatory surrogates by the validated lung immuno-oncology prognostic score (LIPS) score, including the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and the pretreatment use of steroids, alongside other prognostic variables. A retrospective analysis of 128 patients with PS2 and PD-L1 ≥50% mNSCLC treated between April 2018 and September 2019 with first-line pembrolizumab in a real-world setting was performed. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 15.3 months, the 1-year overall survival (OS) and median progression-free survival (PFS) were 32.3% (95% CI: 30.9-33.9) and 3.3 months (95% CI: 1.8-4.7), respectively. The NLR, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and pretreatment steroids results were the only significant prognostic factors on the univariate analysis and independent prognostic factors by the multivariate analysis on both OS and PFS. The LIPS score, including the NLR and pretreatment steroids, identified 29 (23%) favourable-risk patients, with 0 factors, 1-year OS of 67.6% and median PFS of 8.2 months; 57 (45%) intermediate-risk patients, with 1 factor, 1-year OS 32.1% and median PFS 2.7 months; 42 (33%) poor-risk patients, with both factors, 1-year OS of 10.7% and median PFS of 1.2 months. CONCLUSIONS: The assessment of pre-existing imbalance of the host immune response by combined blood and clinical immune-inflammatory markers may represent a way to unravel the heterogeneous outcome and assessment of patients with mNSCLC and poor PS in the immune-oncology setting.


Assuntos
Antígeno B7-H1 , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Antígeno B7-H1/imunologia , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/patologia , Humanos , Imunoterapia/métodos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/imunologia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patologia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/terapia , Prognóstico , Estudos Retrospectivos
3.
Cancer Cell ; 38(5): 602-604, 2020 11 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33091381

RESUMO

To understand the real impact of COVID-19 on cancer patients, an entirely new data collection effort was initiated within the Thoracic Cancers International COVID-19 Collaboration (TERAVOLT). TERAVOLT reported high mortality related to COVID-19 infection in thoracic cancer patients and identified several negative prognostic factors. In this commentary, we discuss the importance and limits of patient registries to support decision-making in thoracic cancer during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus/isolamento & purificação , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Infecções por Coronavirus/complicações , Carga Global da Doença/normas , Pneumonia Viral/complicações , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto/normas , Neoplasias Torácicas/terapia , COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Humanos , Cooperação Internacional , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Sistema de Registros , SARS-CoV-2 , Neoplasias Torácicas/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Torácicas/virologia
4.
Cancer Cell ; 37(6): 742-745, 2020 06 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32425702

RESUMO

Prior publications on small subsets of cancer patients infected with SARS CoV-2 have shown an increased risk of mortality compared to the general population. Furthermore, patients with thoracic malignancies are thought to be at particularly high risk given their older age, smoking habits, and pre-existing cardio-pulmonary comorbidities. For this reason, physicians around the world have formed TERAVOLT, a global consortium dedicated to understanding the impact of COVID-19 on patients with thoracic malignancies.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus/isolamento & purificação , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Oncologia/organização & administração , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , Sistema de Registros , Neoplasias Torácicas/terapia , Betacoronavirus/patogenicidade , COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus/complicações , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Carga Global da Doença , Humanos , Cooperação Internacional , Colaboração Intersetorial , Oncologia/normas , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/complicações , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , SARS-CoV-2 , Neoplasias Torácicas/complicações , Neoplasias Torácicas/mortalidade
5.
Recenti Prog Med ; 111(4): 257-258, 2020 Apr.
Artigo em Italiano | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32319448

RESUMO

We report on the protocol adopted by the Oncological Home Care Service of the Tuscany Cancer Association during the CoViD-19 pandemic. Based on the experience in home cancer care gained during the 2009 earthquake, we have developed strategies to ensure continuity of care, non-abandonment and protection of operators. In this context, the double triage protocol plays a central role, aimed at identifying patients at risk for CoViD-19 infection and rationalizing home access. we describe the protocol and present the preliminary data.


Assuntos
Continuidade da Assistência ao Paciente , Infecções por Coronavirus , Planejamento em Desastres , Serviços de Assistência Domiciliar , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral , Alocação de Recursos , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Terremotos , Alocação de Recursos para a Atenção à Saúde , Serviços de Assistência Domiciliar/normas , Serviços de Assistência Domiciliar/provisão & distribuição , Humanos , Itália , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Palliat Support Care ; 18(1): 33-38, 2020 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31434598

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Scientific societies recommend early interaction between oncologic and supportive care, but there is still a lack of systematic evaluations regarding symptoms from the perspective of oncologists. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the PERSONS score, in both "simultaneous care" and "supportive care" settings using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) as a comparator. RESULTS: From November 2017 to April 2018, 67 and 110 consecutive patients were enrolled in outpatient and home care cohorts, respectively. The final study population comprised 163 patients. There were no significant changes over time in the total PERSONS scores and total ESAS scale. The intra-interviewer reliability (ICC2,1) and inter-interviewer reliability (ICC2,k) showed good reproducibility (test-retest) in each group of patients: 0.60 (0.49-0.70) and 0.82 (0.75-0.87), respectively, for the home care patients and 0.73 (0.62-0.81) and 0.89 (0.83-0.93), respectively, for the outpatient cohort. There were high correlations between PERSONS and ESAS, both at the baseline and final assessments. The mean PERSONS and ESAS scores between the home care patients and outpatients were not different at the baseline and final assessments. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve for the PERSONS total score revealed good diagnostic ability. Area under the curve (AUC) was 0.825 and 0.805 for improvement and deterioration, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The PERSONS score is an easy to apply tool for symptom assessment. Importantly, the PERSONS score showed high concordance with the established ESAS scale and, therefore, provides an alternative for everyday use in supportive care assessment.


Assuntos
Serviços de Assistência Domiciliar/tendências , Neoplasias/terapia , Síndrome , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Itália , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neoplasias/complicações , Estudos Prospectivos , Psicometria/instrumentação , Psicometria/métodos , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Inquéritos e Questionários
7.
Palliat Support Care ; 17(1): 82-86, 2019 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29792235

RESUMO

One of the first steps to early integrate palliative care into oncology practice is a timely and efficient evaluation of symptoms (Bakitas et al., 2015; Davis et al., 2015; Temel et al., 2010). In a recent position paper, the Italian Association of Medical Oncology tells oncologists that they "must be able to prevent, recognize, measure, and treat all cancer-related symptoms" (Zagonel et al., 2017). Major international scientific societies such as the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the European Society of Medical Oncology have often defined the key role of symptoms evaluation and management to force the integration of palliative care into oncology (Davis et al., 2015; Ferrel et al., 2017). Nevertheless, a recent survey conducted by the Italian Association of Medical Oncology shows that only 20% of oncologists regularly uses valid tools to evaluate symptoms, 45% exclusively use them in the context of clinical trials, 30% use them only occasionally, and 5% never use them (Zagonel et al., 2016).


Assuntos
Programas de Rastreamento/normas , Avaliação de Sintomas/normas , Humanos , Itália , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Oncologia/métodos , Oncologia/normas , Cuidados Paliativos/métodos , Projetos Piloto , Estudos Prospectivos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Avaliação de Sintomas/classificação , Avaliação de Sintomas/métodos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA