Clinical efficacy and long-term immunogenicity of an early triple dose regimen of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in cancer patients

INTRODUCTION@#Three doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines have been recommended for cancer patients to reduce the risk of severe disease. Anti-neoplastic treatment, such as chemotherapy, may affect long-term vaccine immunogenicity.@*METHOD@#Patients with solid or haematological cancer were recruited from 2 hospitals between July 2021 and March 2022. Humoral response was evaluated using GenScript cPASS surrogate virus neutralisation assays. Clinical outcomes were obtained from medical records and national mandatory-reporting databases.@*RESULTS@#A total of 273 patients were recruited, with 40 having haematological malignancies and the rest solid tumours. Among the participants, 204 (74.7%) were receiving active cancer therapy, including 98 (35.9%) undergoing systemic chemotherapy and the rest targeted therapy or immunotherapy. All patients were seronegative at baseline. Seroconversion rates after receiving 1, 2 and 3 doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination were 35.2%, 79.4% and 92.4%, respectively. After 3 doses, patients on active treatment for haematological malignancies had lower antibodies (57.3%±46.2) when compared to patients on immunotherapy (94.1%±9.56, P<0.05) and chemotherapy (92.8%±18.1, P<0.05). SARS-CoV-2 infection was reported in 77 (28.2%) patients, of which 18 were severe. No patient receiving a third dose within 90 days of the second dose experienced severe infection.@*CONCLUSION@#This study demonstrates the benefit of early administration of the third dose among cancer patients.

Non-directive genetic counselling - respect for autonomy or unprofessional practice?

Historically, genetic counselling was developed in the West and in the field of neonatal medicine, and a non-directive approach has been its central ethos since the 1950s to 60s. In today's changing world, the question of whether non-directive genetic counselling with its emphasis on patient autonomy may in some occasions be perceived as unprofessional practice. Through these 4 case studies in cancer genetic counselling, we seek to highlight the conundrums, dilemmas and various other considerations of patients and their families faced during the genetic counselling process. We also address the pitfalls of a 'one-size fi ts all' approach of non-directive counselling and how we could best practice cancer genetic counselling in the Singapore context, taking into consideration respect for patient autonomy and healthcare professionalism.

Inter-ethnic differences--how important is it in cancer treatment?

It is now well recognised that there are inter-ethnic differences accounting for variations in both pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of drugs, resulting in differences in drug responses. Treating physicians should be aware of pharmacogenetic differences that may exist between the races while extrapolating data generated from other populations to their own patients in order to ensure optimal treatment response and minimise toxicity. This is especially crucial in the practice of oncology where many anti-cancer drugs have narrow therapeutic indices. This paper discusses some commonly used drugs in cancer treatment where inter-ethnic differences in drug safety and efficacy are known to exist that are relevant to the Asian physician.

Complementary and alternative medicine among Singapore cancer patients

<p><b>INTRODUCTION</b>This study evaluates determinants, expectations, association with quality of life (QOL) and doctor's awareness of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) use in Singapore cancer patients.</p><p><b>MATERIAL AND METHODS</b>We interviewed 316 patients visiting the Cancer Centre of the National University Hospital on behaviour, attitudes and expectations towards CAM and assessed QOL via Euroqol Questionnaire (EQ-5D). Medical information was obtained from oncologists.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>One hundred and seventy-three patients (55%) reported CAM use after cancer diagnosis. Chinese ethnicity, tertiary education, age <65 years and previous CAM use were independent predictors of CAM use. Fifty-one per cent of CAM users informed their doctors about their use and 15% of doctors reported to be aware of CAM use in these patients. Thirty-seven per cent believed CAM to be equally or more effective than conventional cancer therapies and 78% expected at least basic knowledge about CAM from their oncologists. Twenty-fi ve per cent of patients reported concurrent use of oral CAM and chemotherapy, of which oncologists were unaware in 86% of cases. CAM users had higher EuroQol utility scores than non-CAM users (0.79 versus 0.73, respectively, P = 0.03), in particularly those aged >or=65 years and those with stage IV disease.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>Singapore cancer patients show high prevalence of CAM use, high expectations regarding its effectiveness and doctors' knowledge on CAM and many use it concurrently with chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Since oncologists are generally unaware of CAM use in their patients, doctor-patient communication on CAM use needs to be improved. The association of CAM use and higher QOL scores in some subgroups deserves further exploration.</p>