Leveraging G-CSF prescribing in the outpatient setting: considerations beyond clinical factors-a questionnaire study.

PURPOSE: This study aims to delineate G-CSF treatment practices, assess decision criteria, and measure their implementation in ambulatory settings for patients with breast (BC), lung (LC), or gastrointestinal cancers (GIC), beyond standard recommendations. METHODS: In this non-interventional, cross-sectional, multicenter study, clinical cases were presented using conversational interfaces (chatbots), simulating a conversation with one or more virtual interlocutors through voice or text exchange. The clinical simulations were configured by four parameters: types of cancer, risk of FN related to chemotherapy and comorbidities, access to care, and therapy setting (adjuvant/neoadjuvant/metastatic). RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 102 physicians. Most practitioners (84.5%) reported prescribing G-CSF, regardless of tumor type. G-CSF was prescribed more frequently for adjuvant/neoadjuvant therapy than for metastatic cases. The type of chemotherapy was cited as the first reason for prescribing G-CSF, with access to care being the second. Regarding the type of chemotherapy, physicians do not consider this factor alone, but combined with comorbidities and age (56.7% of cases). Pegfilgrastim long-acting was prescribed in most cases of BC and LC (70.1% and 86%, respectively), while filgrastim short-acting was named in the majority of cases of GIC (61.7%); 76.3% of physicians prescribed G-CSF as primary prophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that recommended practices are broadly followed. In the majority of cases, G-CSF is prescribed as primary prophylaxis. In addition, physicians seem more inclined to prescribe G-CSF to adjuvant/neoadjuvant patients rather than metastatic patients. Finally, the type of chemotherapy tends to be a more significant determining factor than the patient's background.

MASCC 2023 Patient-Centered Antiemetic Guidelines and Education Statements: an evidence-based and consensus resource for patients.

PURPOSE: The Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC)/European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) Patient Antiemetic Guideline Committee aimed to (1) adapt the updated evidence-based, clinical guidelines to patient-centered antiemetic guidelines and (2) develop patient education materials and statements. METHODS: The MASCC 2023 Patient Antiemetic Guidelines were created and reviewed by antiemetic experts and patient advocates by incorporating the 2023 MASCC/ESMO antiemetic guidelines into patient-friendly language. Patient Education Statements were developed based on current literature and by utilizing an expert modified Delphi consensus (≥ 75% agreement). Patient advocate/focus group input and patient survey results were further integrated into Patient-Centered Antiemetic Guidelines and Education Statements. RESULTS: Patient-Centered Antiemetic Guidelines were created using patient-friendly language and visual slides. Patient-friendly language was also utilized to communicate the Educational Statements. Key content categories identified for the Educational Statements included the following: nausea/vomiting definitions, causes, risk factors, categories, complications, accompanying symptoms, prophylactic antiemetic treatment, general management, when to call/what to ask the healthcare team, what caregivers can do, and available resources. All identified content met the ≥ 75% expert agreement threshold. Fifteen (15) items demonstrated 100% agreement, 11 items achieved ≥ 90% agreement, and three content items demonstrated 80 ~ 82% agreement. CONCLUSIONS: The inaugural MASCC 2023 Patient Antiemetic Guidelines can help patients and caregivers understand the prevention of nausea and vomiting related to their cancer treatment. Educational Statements provide further patient information. Educating patients on how to utilize guideline antiemetics and the education statements can contribute improvements in the control of anticancer treatment-related nausea and vomiting.

Motivation of patients with chronic cancer during COVID-19: a qualitative analysis.

PURPOSE: Motivation to treat cancer and prevent its negative impact has been largely explored in a non-pandemic context. However, little is known about the motivation to comply with the treatment, especially during a pandemic. To fill this gap, we have explored the individual and contextual factors impacting patients' motivation during the COVID-19 period using the integrated model. METHODS: We have conducted two qualitative studies before (study 1) and during the COVID-19 (study 2) period in a cancer centre. We respectively interviewed 30 and 22 patients with various chronic cancers in study 1 and also with COVID-19 in study 2. Data analysis was based on content analysis and grounded theory approach identifying the factors affecting patient motivations during both periods, and then comparing them. RESULTS: Our results show the mechanisms that allow patients to maintain their motivation despite the threats related to COVID-19. They underline the importance of respecting the rules and laws for patients' motivation. CONCLUSION: Compliance with legislation fuels the psychological need of protection in patients, which is a key determinant of motivation in the context of the pandemic. Considering patients' self-regulatory activities to assess motivational factors, going beyond clinical aspects, to include organisational and quality-of-life-related aspects throughout their care pathway is crucial.

2023 MASCC/ESMO consensus antiemetic guidelines related to integrative and non-pharmacological therapies.

PURPOSE: Review the literature to propose suggestions or recommendations for controlling nausea and vomiting through integrative and non-pharmacological treatments for the MASCC/ESMO 2023 update of its antiemetic guidelines. METHODS: The authors identified available systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses for 12 integrative therapies, including acupressure, acupuncture, auricular therapy, electrical stimulation of point PC6, ginger use (i.e., Zingiber officinale), guided imagery, hypnosis, inhalation aromatherapy, music therapy, food-based interventions, progressive muscle relaxation, and reflexology. Reviews were assessed for quality through the AMSTAR2 tool. A consensus committee reviewed recommendations as per MASCC/ESMO established processes. RESULTS: Thirty-nine systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses were used. There were major methodological flaws for many of the trials used as the bases for the reviews. No recommendation for ingested ginger could be made because of conflicting evidence. Recommendations were possible for acupuncture/electroacupuncture treatments, food-based interventions, and progressive muscle relaxation training alone or combined with guided imagery. No recommendations could be reached for a number of food-based approaches, inhalation aromatherapy, hypnosis in adults, music therapy, and reflexology. CONCLUSION: While a limited number of suggestions are provided, there is a need for significantly higher quality trials in many of the therapeutic approaches assessed, before stronger recommendations and a wider range of approaches are made.

Contribution of collegial support meetings (CSM) in the management of complex situations of patients with advanced cancer.

PURPOSE: Collegial support meetings (CSM) have been set up in the Gustave Roussy Cancer Center for inpatients whose complex care requires a multi-professional approach involving many participants: oncologists but also health-caregivers, a member of the palliative care team, an intensivist, and a psychologist. This study is aimed at describing the role of this newly multidisciplinary meeting implemented in a French Comprehensive Cancer Center. METHODS: Each week, the health-caregivers decide which situations should be examined, depending on the difficulty of a case. The discussion goes on to include the goal of treatment, the intensity of care, ethical and psychosocial issues, and the patient's life plan. Finally, to obtain feedback from the teams, a survey has been distributed to assess the interest in the CSM. RESULTS: In 2020, 114 inpatients were involved, and 91% were in an advanced palliative situation. During the CSMs, 55% of the discussions focused on whether to continue specific cancer treatment-29% about whether to continue invasive medical care-50% about optimizing supportive care. We estimate that between 65 and 75% of CSMs influenced further decisions. Death occurred during the hospitalization for 35% of the patients that were discussed. The lapse of time between last chemotherapy and death was 24 days (IQR, 28.5). CSMs were well received, since 80% of the teams find these meetings useful. CONCLUSIONS: CSMs reach conclusions for medical and nursing staff involved, in order to improve the management of inpatients with cancer in advanced palliative situation and to define the better goals of care.

2023 updated MASCC/ESMO Consensus recommendations: Prevention of nausea and vomiting following moderately emetic risk antineoplastic agents.

PURPOSE: Review the literature to update the MASCC guidelines from 2015 for controlling nausea and vomiting with systemic cancer treatment of moderate emetic potential. METHODS: A systematic literature review was completed using Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases. The literature search was done from June 2015 to January 2023 of the management of antiemetic prophylaxis for anticancer therapy of moderate emetic potential. RESULTS: Of 342 papers identified, 19 were relevant to update recommendations about managing antiemetic prophylaxis for systemic cancer treatment regimens of moderate emetic potential. Important practice changing updates include the use of emetic prophylaxis based on a triple combination of neurokinin (NK)1 receptor antagonist, 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, and steroids for patients undergoing carboplatin (AUC ≥ 5) and women < 50 years of age receiving oxaliplatin-based treatment. A double combination of 5-HT3 receptor antagonist and steroids remains the recommended prophylaxis for other MEC. Based on the data in the literature, it is recommended that the administration of steroids should be limited to day 1 in moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens, due to the demonstration of non-inferiority between the different regimens. More data is needed on the emetogenicity of new agents at moderate emetogenic risk. Of particular interest would be antiemetic studies with the agents sacituzumab-govitecan and trastuzumab-deruxtecan. Experience to date with these agents indicate an emetogenic potential comparable to carboplatin > AUC 5. Future studies should systematically include patient-related risk assessment in order to define the risk of emesis with MEC beyond the emetogenicity of the chemotherapy and improve the guidelines for new drugs. CONCLUSION: This antiemetic MASCC-ESMO guideline update includes new recommendations considering individual risk factors and the optimization of supportive anti-emetic treatments.

The role of dermocosmetics in the management of cancer-related skin toxicities: international expert consensus.

Skin toxicities are very common in patients undergoing cancer treatment and have been found to occur with all types of cancer therapeutic interventions (cytotoxic chemotherapy, targeted therapies, immunotherapy, and radiotherapy). Further, skin toxicities can lead to interruption or even discontinuation of anticancer treatment in some patients, translating to suboptimal outcomes. Dermocosmetics (or cosmeceuticals)-defined as skincare solutions incorporating dermatologically active ingredients (beyond vehicle effects) that directly improve symptoms of various skin conditions-are increasingly being used in cancer care to prevent and manage skin toxicities. The active ingredients in these products have a measurable biological action in skin; they typically improve skin integrity (barrier function/hydration and other factors) while relieving skin symptoms. The Association Francophone des Soins Oncologiques de Support (AFSOS) and Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) partnered to select a multidisciplinary group of healthcare professionals involved in the management of patients with cancer and skin toxicities. The group reviewed existing literature and created a summary of recommendations for managing these toxicities through online meetings and communication. In this publication, the group (1) reviews new skin toxicities seen with oncology drugs and (2) evaluates the role of dermocosmetics in improving patient outcomes and minimizing cancer treatment interruptions. We provide general recommendations for initiation and selection of skin care in all oncology patients as well as recommendations for what factors should be considered when using dermocosmetics in specific types of skin toxicities.

Retacrit®, Biosimilar of Epoetin Alfa, in Chemotherapy-Induced Anemia in Routine Practice: Impact of Iron Supplementation.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to evaluate in real-life conditions the effectiveness and safety of a biosimilar of epoetin alfa (Retacrit®) in chemotherapy-induced anemia and the impact of iron supplementation. METHODS: This was a longitudinal, observational, prospective study of 12-16 weeks conducted in 195 French centers. The primary endpoint was the achievement of target Hb (with an increase of Hb ≥1 g/dL) or an increase of Hb ≥2 g/dL, in the absence of transfusion in the previous 3 weeks. RESULTS: 2,076 patients (women, 50.6%; mean age, 67.0 years) with malignant diseases (solid tumors, 79.8%; lymphomas, 12.7%; multiple myeloma, 6.6%) were analyzed. A total of 655 patients received oral iron (40.5%), intravenous iron (58.9%), or both (0.6%). At inclusion, 10.0% and 18.2% of patients without and with iron supplementation had serum ferritin <100 µg/L, respectively. Transferrin saturation (TSAT) ≤20% was more frequent in patients with supplementation (76.6%) than without supplementation (33.9%). The mean weekly doses of epoetin alfa biosimilar and planned duration of treatment were comparable regardless of iron supplementation. The primary endpoint was achieved in 70.5% and 70.2% of patients without and with iron supplementation, respectively. Three (0.1%) serious thromboembolic events related to treatment with epoetin alfa biosimilar were reported. CONCLUSION: Epoetin alfa biosimilar was effective and well tolerated for treating chemotherapy-induced anemia. Patients in subgroup with iron supplementation had lower TSAT at inclusion compared to subgroup without supplementation. Comparable mean Hb levels were achieved in both subgroups. The rate of patients with iron supplementation through the intravenous route was however insufficient.

Uptake of Recommendations for Posttreatment Cancer-Related Fatigue Among Breast Cancer Survivors.

BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) and psychosocial interventions are recommended management strategies for cancer-related fatigue (CRF). Randomized trials support the use of mind-body techniques, whereas no data show benefit for homeopathy or naturopathy. METHODS: We used data from CANTO (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01993498), a multicenter, prospective study of stage I-III breast cancer (BC). CRF, evaluated after primary treatment completion using the EORTC QLQ-C30 (global CRF) and QLQ-FA12 (physical, emotional, and cognitive dimensions), served as the independent variable (severe [score of ≥40/100] vs nonsevere). Outcomes of interest were adherence to PA recommendations (≥10 metabolic equivalent of task [MET] h/week [GPAQ-16]) and participation in consultations with a psychologist, psychiatrist, acupuncturist, or other complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) practitioner (homeopath and/or naturopath) after CRF assessment. Multivariable logistic regression examined associations between CRF and outcomes, adjusting for sociodemographic, psychologic, tumor, and treatment characteristics. RESULTS: Among 7,902 women diagnosed from 2012 through 2017, 36.4% reported severe global CRF, and 35.8%, 22.6%, and 14.1% reported severe physical, emotional, and cognitive CRF, respectively. Patients reporting severe global CRF were less likely to adhere to PA recommendations (60.4% vs 66.7%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71-0.94; P=.004), and slightly more likely to see a psychologist (13.8% vs 7.5%; aOR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.05-1.58; P=.014), psychiatrist (10.4% vs 5.0%; aOR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.10-1.76; P=.0064), acupuncturist (9.8% vs 6.5%; aOR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.17-1.82; P=.0008), or CAM practitioner (12.5% vs 8.2%; aOR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.23-1.82; P<.0001). There were differences in recommendation uptake by CRF dimension, including that severe physical CRF was associated with lower adherence to PA (aOR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.63-0.86; P=.0001) and severe emotional CRF was associated with higher likelihood of psychologic consultations (aOR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.06-1.79; P=.017). CONCLUSIONS: Uptake of recommendations to improve CRF, including adequate PA and use of psychosocial services, seemed suboptimal among patients with early-stage BC, whereas there was a nonnegligible interest in homeopathy and naturopathy. Findings of this large study indicate the need to implement recommendations for managing CRF in clinical practice.

Evaluation of supportive care needs, sexuality and quality of life in phase 1 trials: a prospective monocentric study.

PURPOSE: Patients enrolled in oncology phase 1 trials (ph1) usually have advanced heavily pre-treated cancers with few therapeutic options. Quality of life (QoL) is one of the key cancer-treatment outcome measures, especially in ph1, and sexuality is an important part of Qol but rarely explored. This prospective study aims to assess supportive care needs, QoL and sexuality in ph1. METHODS: Between September 2020 and June 2021, we prospectively recruited patients enrolled in ph1 at Gustave Roussy in France. Supportive care needs, QoL (EORTC QLQ-C30) and sexuality (female sexual function index for women, male sexual health questionnaire [MSHQ] for men) were assessed at baseline, one, three and 5 months. We performed multivariate analyses to identify associations between clinical characteristics, QoL and quality of sexual life over time. RESULTS: At baseline, we analyzed 187 patients (45% women (n = 84) and 55% men (n = 103)). Patients expressed the need for consultations in pain management, nutrition, psychology and sexology in 28%, 26%, 19% and 9%, respectively. Lower global QoL was independently associated with Royal Marsden Hospital score (p = 0.012), urogenital location tumor (p = 0.021), elevated CRP levels (p = 0.014) and pain intensity (p = 0.005). Ninety-two percent of women had sexual dysfunction. In men, a lower MSHQ score was independently associated with urogenital location tumor (p = 0.021), ECOG Performance Status (p = 0.006), comorbidity at risk (p = 0.024) and pain intensity (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: There are significant needs for supportive care in ph1, especially in some subgroups of patients. New models of care should be developed to improve early phase pathways.

Safety of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with advanced solid tumors receiving anti-VEGF agents: a retrospective study.

PURPOSE: Kinase inhibitors (KI) and antibodies targeting the VEGF pathway are approved in a broad spectrum of cancers and associated with an increased risk of bleeding and thromboembolic events (TE). The use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) apixaban and rivaroxaban is increasing in cancer patients, but limited data are available for patients receiving anti-VEGF agents. METHODS: To assess safety of DOAC with concomitant anti-VEGF agents, a retrospective chart review of all patients receiving concomitantly DOAC and anti-VEGF agents was performed from 2013 to 2020 in our center. Data on demographics, safety, and time on treatment were collected. Main outcome was safety (bleeding and thromboembolic events). RESULTS: Of 92 patients (median age 66 years (IQR: 59-72)), 40 were treated with KI and 52 with bevacizumab. The most frequent primary tumor sites were colon/rectum (24%), kidney (21%), ovary (13%), lung (11%), soft tissue sarcoma (10%), and thyroid (9%); 2% had brain metastases. Apixaban 5 mg bid (n = 41) or rivaroxaban 20 mg daily (n = 51) were given for TE (65%), atrial fibrillation (32%), or other indications (3%). The median duration of concomitant treatment was 4.8 months (95%CI: 0.7-50.0) with bevacizumab and 11.7 months (95%CI: 0.1-53.8) with KI. Grade ≥ 3 bleeding events occurred in 5 patients (5%): 4 patients receiving bevacizumab (one grade 5 upper digestive tract bleeding and three grade 3 rectal or vaginal hemorrhages) and 1 patient under cabozantinib for kidney cancer with endobronchial metastasis (grade 3 hemoptysis). Grade ≥ 3 TE occurred in 8 patients (9%): 7 patients receiving bevacizumab (including one grade 5 pulmonary embolism), and one patient receiving sunitinib (grade 3 pulmonary embolism). Median time-to-event (bleeding or thrombotic event) was not reached (NR) (95%CI: 76.9-NR) for KI and 86.9 months (95%CI: 42.9-148.0) for bevacizumab. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In our experience, the use of DOAC was safe in selected patients treated with KI, but unclear with bevacizumab. More data are needed to endorse guidelines in this specific group of patients.

Decisions about treatment with targeted therapies in a palliative care unit: A case series.

BACKGROUND: Early palliative care integration into the oncologic treatment pattern is recognized and strongly recommended to anticipate end-of-life issues and avoid disproportionate care. Targeted therapies (TTs), with their very rapid onset of action and relatively good tolerance, may have an effect on cancer-related symptoms, which could be beneficial in the context of palliative care. METHODS: Data were extracted from a cohort of all patients hospitalized in an acute palliative care unit between 03.04.2019 and 07.04.2020. Data for all consecutive patients for which a decision on a TT was made during hospitalization were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: Forty-two patients were identified. Thirty-one patients were currently receiving TT on admission. For 19/31 (61.3%) patients, the treatment was discontinued. The remaining 12 patients had TT after discharge from the palliative care unit (continuation of the same TT or modification of the TT during the stay), with an average duration of 208 days and an average of 46 days between the last TT and death. TT was introduced or reintroduced in 7 patients of the 11 patients hospitalized without treatment at admission. In this group, the average duration of treatment was 28 days, with an average of 28 days between the last TT and death. Five of the patients who received re-challenged TT experienced a subjective improvement of their symptom. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: TT was discontinued in the majority of our patients. However, in some cases, the treatment was maintained because it was effective on cancer-related symptoms even at the end of life. However, this should not overshadow the palliative process. The continuation or introduction of a specific oncological treatment requires close cooperation between oncologists and palliative care physicians and an honest and clear explanation to patients and their families.

[The place of support care]. / La place des soins de support.

Supportive care, in the context of breast cancer in the elderly, is part of standard oncogeriatric care. Nevertheless, the multidisciplinary reinforcement of the different transversal teams can support the global approach, that is essential to the quality of care and the life course. Evaluation is the basis of this management. As a result of this evaluation, the approach to sexual health is a novelty that is often insufficiently considered with elderly patients suffering from breast malignancy.

Practice Patterns for Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting and Antiemetic Guideline Adherence Based on Real-World Prescribing Data.

BACKGROUND: Guideline-recommended antiemetic prophylaxis improves nausea and vomiting control in most patients undergoing chemotherapy. Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/European Society for Medical Oncology (MASCC/ESMO) antiemetic guidelines recommend prophylaxis with a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1 RA), a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3 RA), and dexamethasone for patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC), including anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC)- and carboplatin (considered moderately emetogenic chemotherapy)-based chemotherapy. Here, we analyze the use of NK1 RA-5-HT3 RA-dexamethasone for antiemetic prophylaxis associated with HEC and carboplatin. METHODS: The data source was the Global Oncology Monitor (Ipsos Healthcare). Geographically representative physicians from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the U.K. were screened for treatment involvement and number of patients treated per month. Patients' data from January to December 2018 were collected from medical charts and extrapolated on the basis of the total number of physicians who prescribe chemotherapy. The emetic risk of chemotherapy was classified per MASCC/ESMO guidelines. RESULTS: Data from 45,324 chemotherapy-treated patients were collected, representing a total extrapolated prevalence of 1,394,848 chemotherapy treatments included in the analysis. NK1 RAs were used in 45%, 42%, and 19% of patients receiving cisplatin-, AC-, and carboplatin-based chemotherapy, respectively; 18%, 24%, and 7% received the guideline-recommended NK1 RA-5-HT3 RA-dexamethasone combination; no antiemetics were prescribed for 12% of the treatments. Often, physicians' perception of the emetic risk of chemotherapy did not follow MASCC/ESMO guideline classification. CONCLUSION: Low adherence to antiemetic guidelines was revealed in clinical practice in five European countries, with 15% of all HEC-/carboplatin-based treatments receiving guideline-recommended NK1 RA-5-HT3 RA-dexamethasone prophylaxis and 12% of them receiving no antiemetics. New strategies for improving guideline adherence are urgently needed. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Despite recent advances in antiemetic therapy, a substantial proportion of patients experience nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy in daily clinical practice. Antiemetic guidelines aim at prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), and guideline-consistent antiemetic therapy can effectively prevent vomiting and, to a lesser extent, nausea in most patients with cancer. This study reports low adherence to antiemetic guidelines in the highly emetogenic chemotherapy setting in daily clinical practice across five European countries. Opportunity exists to increase adherence to antiemetic guideline recommendations. Implementation of strategies to facilitate guideline adherence can potentially improve CINV control.

A Pragmatic Study Evaluating NEPA Versus Aprepitant for Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Receiving Moderately Emetogenic Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Neurokinin (NK) 1 receptor antagonists (RAs), administered in combination with a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3 ) RA and dexamethasone (DEX), have demonstrated clear improvements in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prevention over a 5-HT3 RA plus DEX. However, studies comparing the NK1 RAs in the class are lacking. A fixed combination of a highly selective NK1 RA, netupitant, and the 5-HT3 RA, palonosetron (NEPA), simultaneously targets two critical antiemetic pathways, thereby offering a simple convenient antiemetic with long-lasting protection from CINV. This study is the first head-to-head NK1 RA comparative study in patients receiving anthracycline cyclophosphamide (AC) and non-AC moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized, single-cycle, open-label, prospective study designed to demonstrate noninferiority of single-dose NEPA to a 3-day aprepitant regimen in preventing CINV in chemotherapy-naive patients receiving AC/non-AC MEC in a real-life setting. The primary efficacy endpoint was complete response (no emesis/no rescue) during the overall (0-120 hour) phase. Noninferiority was achieved if the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the difference between NEPA and the aprepitant group was greater than the noninferiority margin set at -10%. RESULTS: Noninferiority of NEPA versus aprepitant was demonstrated (risk difference 9.2%; 95% CI, -2.3% to 20.7%); the overall complete response rate was numerically higher for NEPA (64.9%) than aprepitant (54.1%). Secondary endpoints also revealed numerically higher rates for NEPA than aprepitant. CONCLUSION: This pragmatic study in patients with cancer receiving AC and non-AC MEC revealed that a single dose of oral NEPA plus DEX was at least as effective as a 3-day aprepitant regimen, with indication of a potential efficacy benefit for NEPA. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: In the absence of comparative neurokinin 1 (NK1 ) receptor antagonist (RA) studies, guideline committees and clinicians consider NK1 RA agents to be interchangeable and equivalent. This is the first head-to-head study comparing one NK1 RA (oral netupitant/palonosetron [NEPA]) versus another (aprepitant) in patients receiving anthracycline cyclophosphamide (AC) and non-AC moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Noninferiority of NEPA versus the aprepitant regimen was demonstrated; the overall complete response (no emesis and no rescue use) rate was numerically higher for NEPA (65%) than aprepitant (54%). As a single-dose combination antiemetic, NEPA not only simplifies dosing but may offer a potential efficacy benefit over the current standard-of-care.

Emerging challenges in the evaluation of fever in cancer patients at risk of febrile neutropenia in the era of COVID-19: a MASCC position paper.

Patients with cancer are at higher risk of more severe COVID-19 infection and have more associated complications. The position paper describes the management of cancer patients, especially those receiving anticancer treatment, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Dyspnea is a common emergency presentation in patients with cancer with a wide range of differential diagnoses, including pulmonary embolism, pleural disease, lymphangitis, and infection, of which SARS-CoV-2 is now a pathogen to be considered. Screening interviews to determine whether patients may be infected with COVID-19 are imperative to prevent the spread of infection, especially within healthcare facilities. Cancer patients testing positive with no or minimal symptoms may be monitored from home. Telemedicine is an option to aid in following patients without potential exposure. Management of complications of systemic anticancer treatment, such as febrile neutropenia (FN), is of particular importance during the COVID-19 pandemic where clinicians aim to minimize patients' risk of infection and need for hospital visits. Outpatient management of patients with low-risk FN is a safe and effective strategy. Although the MASCC score has not been validated in patients with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2, it has nevertheless performed well in patients with a range of infective illnesses and, accordingly, it is reasonable to expect efficacy in the clinical setting of COVID-19. Risk stratification of patients presenting with FN is a vital tenet of the evolving sepsis and pandemic strategy, necessitating access to locally formulated services based on MASCC and other national and international guidelines. Innovative oncology services will need to utilize telemedicine, hospital at home, and ambulatory care services approaches not only to limit the number of hospital visits but also to anticipate the complications of the anticancer treatments.

Nurse navigators' telemonitoring for cancer patients with COVID-19: a French case study.

PURPOSE: The Gustave Roussy Cancer Institute implemented a patient-reported outcome platform (CAPRI-COVID) for cancer patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) to quarantine patients at home while ensuring monitoring of COVID-related symptoms and securing the care pathway. In this study, we described the CAPRI-COVID intervention, evaluated its use, and presented results of the tracking indicators with a focus on the nurse navigators' (NNs) activities and the experience of patients. METHODS: Data of 130 cancer patients with COVID-19 diagnosed from March 23 to June 5, 2020, were collected. Six COVID-related symptoms were monitored daily, either by the patient via the CAPRI mobile application (CAPRI App) or by NNs via telemonitoring. In the cases of worsening or new-onset symptoms, an automated alert was sent to the platform, and NNs could immediately consult an emergency physician for future course of action. RESULTS: All 130 patients (median age: 59 years; 59.2% female) were monitored during the study period. There were no deaths or admissions to the intensive care unit attributable to COVID-19; 7.8% of patients were hospitalized (excluding scheduled hospitalization), and 17.1% were admitted to the emergency department at least once during the monitoring period. NNs carried out 1412 regular monitoring calls (average of 10.9 calls per patient), while 55% of the patients downloaded the CAPRI App. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients monitored with CAPRI-COVID were quarantined during the first wave of the pandemic. In addition to the CAPRI App, which helped limit phone calls, NNs played an essential role in patient management.

Immunotherapy in Underrepresented Populations of Patients with Cancer: Do We Have Enough Evidence at Present? A Focus on Patients with Major Viral Infections and Autoimmune Disorders.

The safety and activity of immune checkpoint inhibitors have been characterized in interventional and observational studies. However, only small studies have specifically investigated these agents in patients who are excluded or underrepresented in clinical trials, frequently referred to as "special populations" or "underrepresented populations." These include older adults, those with dysregulated immune activation, patients with a compromised immune function, and those carrying major viral infections, lymphoproliferative diseases, and major organ dysfunctions. Therefore, there remains substantial uncertainty regarding the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in these specific settings. The Network of Italian Supportive Care in Oncology has carried out a multidisciplinary project, with the contribution of oncologists and other specialists, to retrieve the existing evidence on the use of immunotherapy in patients with solid and hematological cancers with the final aim to provide an expert guidance. The results of this effort are presented in this article, which is focused on patients with major viral infections or those with immune dysregulation/autoimmune diseases, and could be useful to guide decisions in clinical practice and to design prospective clinical trials focusing on the use of immunotherapy in these populations. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Substantial uncertainty remains regarding the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in "underrepresented" patients, such as older adults, those with dysregulated immune activation, and patients with a compromised immune function, major viral infections, lymphoproliferative diseases or major organ dysfunctions. The Network of Italian Supportive Care in Oncology has carried out a multidisciplinary project to retrieve the existing evidence on the use of immunotherapy in underrepresented patients with cancer in order provide an expert guidance. The results of this effort, with a focus on patients with major viral infections or those with immune dysregulation/autoimmune diseases, are presented in this article and could be useful to guide decisions both in clinical practice and to design clinical trials.

COVID-19 management in a cancer center: the ICU storm.

A novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, was first reported as a respiratory illness in December 2019 in Wuhan, China. Since then, the World Health Organization (WHO) Emergency Committee declared a global health. COVID-19 has now spread worldwide and is responsible of more than 472,216 persons, out of 9,100,090 officially diagnosed worldwide since 23 of June. In the context of cancer patients, COVID-19 has a severe impact, regarding pulmonary infection but also cancer treatments in this fragile and immunocompromised population, and ICU admission for cancer patients in the context of COVID-19 requires ethical and clinical consideration. In our cancer center, intensivists, oncologists, pharmacists, and hospital administrators had to prepare for a substantial increase in critical care bed capacity (from 10 ICU beds, 6 medical intensive care beds, and 12 surgical intensive care beds, bed capacity was increased to 28 medical intensive care beds with ventilating capacity) and to adapt infrastructure (i.e., ICU beds), supplies (i.e., drugs, ventilators, protective materials), and staff (i.e., nurses and medical staff). Overall, thirty-three COVID-19 patients were admitted in our ICU, 17 cancer-free and 16 with cancer, and 23 required mechanical ventilation, resulting in 4 deaths (of them two patients with cancer). We report here management of a dedicated intensive care unit of a cancer center during the COVID-19 infection pandemic, considering resource allocation and redistribution of healthcare workers.

Side effects of immunotherapy: a constant challenge for oncologists.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Immunotherapeutic strategies have become the new paradigm of cancer care, through their new targeting and safety profile approach, and, de facto, their new monitoring and safety management challenges. RECENT FINDINGS: Generalities and specificities of the toxicity management related to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are highlighted. Predictive factors of safety are issue of research and the challenge of prevention as well as monitoring are huge to alleviate toxicities and enhance safety and efficacy. Particular situations like steroids association and cost-effectiveness approach are summarized. SUMMARY: Patients as well as general practitioners, including health-caregivers, should be informed before ICI initiation of the different alert symptoms which should precede immune-related adverse events.