Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on outpatient visit volume in cancer patients: Results of COMETA multicenter retrospective observational study.

Objective: To evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on first and follow-up visits for cancer outpatients. Methods: This is a multicenter retrospective observational study involving three Comprehensive Cancer Care Centers (CCCCs): IFO, including IRE and ISG in Rome, AUSL-IRCCS of Reggio Emilia, and IRCCS Giovanni Paolo II in Bari) and one oncology department in a Community Hospital (Saint'Andrea Hospital, Rome). From 1 January 2020 and 31 December 2021, we evaluated the volume of outpatient consultations (first visits and follow-up), comparing them with the pre-pandemic year (2019). Results were analyzed by quarter according to the Rt (real-time indicator used to assess the evolution of the pandemic). IFO and IRCCS Giovanni Paolo II were "COVID-free" while AUSL-IRCCS RE was a "COVID-mixed" Institute. Depending on the Rt, Sain't Andrea Hospital experienced a "swinging" organizational pathway (COVID-free/ COVID-mixed). Results: Regarding the "first appointments", in 2020 the healthcare facilities operating in the North and Center of Italy showed a downward trend. In 2021, only AUSL-IRCCS RE showed an upward trend. Regarding the "follow-up", only AUSL IRCCS RE showed a slight up-trend in 2020. In 2021, IFO showed an increasing trend, while S. Andrea Hospital showed a negative plateau. Surprisingly, IRCCS Giovanni Paolo II in Bari showed an uptrend for both first appointment and follow-ups during pandemic and late pandemic except for the fourth quarter of 2021. Conclusions: During the first pandemic wave, no significant difference was observed amongst COVID-free and COVID-mixed Institutes and between CCCCs and a Community Hospital. In 2021 ("late pandemic year"), it has been more convenient to organize COVID-mixed pathway in the CCCCs rather than to keep the Institutions COVID-free. A swinging modality in the Community Hospital did not offer positive results in term of visit volumes. Our study about the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on visit volume in cancer outpatients may help health systems to optimize the post-pandemic use of resources and improve healthcare policies.

Prognostic Role of Blood Eosinophil Count in Patients with Sorafenib-Treated Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Inflammation is a long-established hallmark of liver fibrosis and carcinogenesis. Eosinophils are emerging as crucial components of the inflammatory process influencing cancer development. The role of blood eosinophils in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma receiving systemic treatment is an unexplored field. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to analyse the prognostic role of the baseline eosinophil count in patients with sorafenib-treated hepatocellular carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A training cohort of 92 patients with advanced- or intermediate-stage sorafenib-treated hepatocellular carcinoma and two validation cohorts of 65 and 180 patients were analysed. Overall survival and progression-free survival in relation to baseline eosinophil counts were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: A negative prognostic impact of low baseline eosinophil counts (< 50*109/L) was demonstrated in all cohorts (training cohort: hazard ratio = 50.1, 95% confidence interval 11.6-216.5, p < 0.0001 for low vs high eosinophil counts; first validation cohort: hazard ratio = 4.55, 95% confidence interval 1.24-16.65, p = 0.022; second validation cohort: hazard ratio = 3.21, 95% confidence interval 1.83-5.64, p < 0.0001). Moreover, low eosinophil counts had a negative prognostic role in patients progressing on or intolerant to sorafenib who received second-line regorafenib, but not capecitabine or best supportive care. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis identified baseline blood eosinophil counts as a new prognostic factor in patients with sorafenib-treated hepatocellular carcinoma. Concerning second-line therapies, eosinophil counts were associated with survival outcomes only in regorafenib-treated patients, suggesting a possible predictive role in this setting.

Emerging role of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most common primary liver cancer and the fourth leading cause of cancer death worldwide. A total of 70-80% of patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage with a dismal prognosis. Sorafenib had been the standardcare for almost a decade until 2018 when the Food and Drug Administration approved an alternative first-line agent namely lenvatinib. Cabozantinib, regorafenib, and ramucirumab also displayed promising results in second line settings. FOLFOX4, however, results inan alternative first-line treatment for the Chineseclinical oncology guidelines. Moreover,nivolumab and pembrolizumab,two therapeutics against the Programmed death (PD)-ligand 1 (PD-L1)/PD1 axis have been recently approvedfor subsequent-line therapy. However, similar to other solid tumors, the response rate of single agent targeting PD-L1/PD1 axis is low. Therefore, a lot of combinatory approaches are under investigation, including the combination of different immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), the addition of ICIs after resection or during loco-regional therapy, ICIs in addition to kinase inhibitors, anti-angiogenic therapeutics, and others. This review focuses on the use of ICIs for the hepatocellular carcinoma with a careful assessmentof new ICIs-based combinatory approaches.

Predictive and Prognostic Factors in HCC Patients Treated with Sorafenib.

Sorafenib is an oral kinase inhibitor that enhances survival in patients affected by advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). According to the results of two registrative trials, this drug represents a gold quality standard in the first line treatment of advanced HCC. Recently, lenvatinib showed similar results in terms of survival in a non-inferiority randomized trial study considering the same subset of patients. Unlike other targeted therapies, predictive and prognostic markers in HCC patients treated with sorafenib are lacking. Their identification could help clinicians in the daily management of these patients, mostly in light of the new therapeutic options available in the first.

Multicenter prospective study of angiogenesis polymorphism validation in HCC patients treated with sorafenib. An INNOVATE study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Although sorafenib is the upfront standard of care for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), molecular predictors of efficacy have not been identified yet. In the ALICE-1 study, rs2010963 of VEGF-A and VEGF-C proved to be independent predictive factors for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in multivariate analysis. The ALICE-1 study results were confirmed in the ALICE-2 study, in which VEGF and VEGFR SNPs were analyzed. In the ePHAS study we analyzed the SNPs of eNOS. In univariate analysis, patients homozygous for an eNOS haplotype (HT1: T-4b at eNOS-786/eNOS VNTR) had significantly shorter median PFS and OS than those with other haplotypes. These data were confirmed in the validation set. METHODS: This nonpharmacological, interventional, prospective multicenter study aims to determine whether eNOS, HIF-1, VEGF, Ang2 and VEGFR polymorphisms play a role in predicting the objective response rate, PFS, and OS of advanced HCC patients treated with sorafenib. The study will involve 160 advanced HCC patients with Child-Pugh class A disease. The primary aim is to validate the prognostic or predictive roles of eNOS, Ang2, HIF-1, VEGF and VEGFR polymorphisms in relation to the clinical outcome (PFS) of HCC patients treated with sorafenib. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our data may suggest that polymorphism analysis of the VEGF, VEGFR-2, HIF and eNOS genes can identify HCC patients who are more likely to benefit from sorafenib.

Metformin and insulin impact on clinical outcome in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma receiving sorafenib: Validation study and biological rationale.

PURPOSE: In 2015, we published a study on a small series of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated chronically with metformin for type II diabetes mellitus (DM2) who showed a poorer response to sorafenib. The aim of the present study was to validate the prognostic significance of metformin in HCC patients treated with sorafenib, providing a biological rationale for the mechanism of resistance to sorafenib in patients on chronic metformin therapy, and to clarify the role of sirtuin-3 (SIRT-3), a protein involved in metabolic diseases and acknowledged as a tumour suppressor in HCC, in this resistance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analysed 279 patients consecutively treated with sorafenib for the clinical analysis. Of the 86 (30%) patients with DM2, 52 (19%) were on chronic treatment with metformin and 34 (12%) with insulin. We included 43 patients with HCC for the biological study: 19 (44.1%) were diabetic and 14 (73.7%) of these received metformin for DM2. SIRT-3 expression was investigated by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples. RESULTS: In HCC patients undergoing chronic treatment with metformin, the use of sorafenib was associated with poor progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) (1.9 and 6.6 months, respectively) compared to 3.7 months and 10.8 months, respectively, for patients without DM2 and 8.4 months and 16.6 months, respectively, for patients on insulin (P < .0001). We also observed that SIRT-3 protein expression was significantly higher in patients treated with metformin than in those not taking this medication (65% versus 25%, respectively) (P = .013). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings could be attributed to increased tumour aggressiveness and resistance to sorafenib caused by chronic treatment with metformin.

Validation of a Simple Scoring System to Predict Sorafenib Effectiveness in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib is recommended for the treatment of advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Nonetheless, it is expensive, effective in few patients, and may cause significant adverse effects. Therefore, accurate selection of patients is needed. In a previous study, we constructed a simple scoring system to predict patients' outcomes based on the occurrence of sorafenib adverse effects. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to validate this scoring system in a real-life cohort of HCC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical records of 279 outpatients treated with sorafenib in eight Italian centers were retrospectively analyzed. Adverse effects considered to calculate the score were skin toxicity, diarrhea, and arterial hypertension, occurring during the first month of therapy. For each adverse effect, 1 point was assigned if present; and 0 points if absent (resulting in a total score between 0 and 3). RESULTS: Median overall survival (OS) was 10.8 months and median time to progression (TTP) was 5.1 months. At multivariate analysis, performance status, α-fetoprotein (AFP), and Child-Pugh score were independently associated with TTP and OS. A progressive increase of OS and TTP was observed in patients with scores from 0 to 3 (p < 0.001). Six-, 12-, and 24-month survival probabilities were 55.1, 24.5, and 7.9% in score 0 patients, and 100, 80.9, and 46.2% in score 3 patients, respectively. Complete response was observed in one patient (0.4%), partial responses in 41 (15.2%), and stable disease in 117 (43.5%). The disease control rate in patients with scores of 0, 1, 2, and 3 was 34.3, 51.6, 80.9, and 96.3%, respectively (p < 0.001). Complete or partial responses were not observed in score 0 patients. CONCLUSIONS: We have validated a useful scoring system to predict outcomes in sorafenib-treated HCC patients. This score is easy to calculate and suitable for implementation in daily clinical practice.

Targeting Angiogenesis in Biliary Tract Cancers: An Open Option.

Biliary tract cancers (BTCs) are characterized by a bad prognosis and the armamentarium of drugs for their treatment is very poor. Although the inflammatory status of biliary tract represents the first step in the cancerogenesis, the microenvironment also plays a key role in the pathogenesis of BTCs, promoting tumor angiogenesis, invasion and metastasis. Several molecules, such as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and fibroblast growth factor (FGF), are involved in the angiogenesis process and their expression on tumor samples has been explored as prognostic marker in both cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder cancer. Recent studies evaluated the genomic landscape of BTCs and evidenced that aberrations in several genes enrolled in the pro-angiogenic signaling, such as FGF receptor-2 (FGFR-2), are characteristic of BTCs. New drugs targeting the signaling pathways involved in angiogenesis have been tested in preclinical studies both in vitro and in vivo with promising results. Moreover, several clinical studies tested monoclonal antibodies against VEGF and tyrosine kinase inhibitors targeting the VEGF and the MEK/ERK pathways. Herein, we evaluate both the pathogenic mechanisms of BTCs focused on angiogenesis and the preclinical and clinical data available regarding the use of new anti-angiogenic drugs in these malignancies.

Effects of metformin on clinical outcome in diabetic patients with advanced HCC receiving sorafenib.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Several studies have reported an association between type 2 diabetes mellitus and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Data from several retrospective studies and meta-analyses have highlighted a reduction of about 50% in the risk of developing HCC in cirrhotic patients treated with metformin for diabetes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the different outcomes of patients who received or did not receive metformin during treatment with sorafenib. METHODS: We analyzed 93 patients consecutively treated with sorafenib. Forty-two (45.2%) patients were diabetic, of whom 31 were on metformin. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. RESULTS: The concomitant use of sorafenib and metformin was associated with a median PFS of 2.6 months (95% CI 1.9-3.3) compared to 5.0 months (95% CI 2.5-8.2) for patients receiving sorafenib alone (p = 0.029). The median OS of patients treated with the combination was 10.4 months (95% CI 3.9-14.4) compared to 15.1 months (95% CI 11.7-17.8) for those who were not given metformin (p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings could be the result of increased tumor aggressiveness and resistance to sorafenib in metformin-treated patients.

Hepatocellular carcinoma treatment over sorafenib: epigenetics, microRNAs and microenvironment. Is there a light at the end of the tunnel?

INTRODUCTION: Sorafenib is currently the only approved therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Alternative first- and second-line treatments are a significant unmet medical need, and several biologic agents have been tested in recent years, with poor results. Therefore, angiogenic pathways and the cytokine cascade remain possible targets in HCC. Recent studies suggest a role of epigenetic processes, associated with the initiation and development of HCC. In this field, DNA methylation, micro-RNAs (miRNAs) and tumor microenvironment cells became a possible new target for HCC treatment. AREAS COVERED: This review explains the possible role of DNA methylation and histone deacetylase inhibitors as predictive biomarkers and target therapy, the extensive world of the promising miRNA blockade strategy, and the recent strong evidence of correlation between HCC tumors and peritumoral stroma cells. The literature and preclinic/clinic data were obtained through an electronic search. EXPERT OPINION: Future research should aim to understand how best to identify patient groups that would benefit most from the prescribed therapy. To overcome the 'therapeutic stranding' of HCC, a possible way out from the current therapeutic tunnel might be to evaluate the major epigenetic and genetic processes involved in HCC carcinogenesis, not underestimating the tumor microenvironment and its 'actors' (angiogenesis, immune system, platelets). We are only at the start of a long journey towards the elucidation of HCC molecular pathways as therapeutic targets. Yet, currently this path appears to be the only one to cast some light at the end of the tunnel.