The Evolving Landscape of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy in Gastroesophageal Cancer.

Despite advances in treatment strategies and surgical approaches in recent years, improving survival outcomes in esophagogastric cancer (EGC) patients treated with curative intent remains a significant area of unmet need. The recent emergence of adjuvant immunotherapy as the standard of care for resected EGC demonstrates the impact of immunotherapy in improving recurrence-free survival. Neoadjuvant and perioperative immunotherapies represent another promising approach with potential advantages over adjuvant therapy. Despite the promising results of early neoadjuvant immunotherapy studies, there are several challenges and future research needs. The optimal timing, duration and number of doses in relation to surgery and the optimal combination of immunotherapies are still unclear. In addition, rigorous correlative studies need to be performed to identify biomarkers for patient selection and treatment response prediction to maximize the benefits of neoadjuvant immunotherapy. In this review, we provide a concise summary of the current standard of care for resectable EGC and discuss the rationale for the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in this setting and the pre-clinical and early clinical data of these novel therapies. Finally, we will examine the potential role and future direction of immunotherapy in the treatment paradigm and the perceived challenges and opportunities that lay ahead.

The impact of expanded access programs for systemic anticancer therapy in an Irish cancer centre.

BACKGROUND: Expanded access programs (EAPs) allow cancer patients with unmet clinical need to obtain access to pre-authorisation treatments. There is no standardised process for implementing these programs nationally, and real-world data on their impact is lacking. AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of such EAPs and their impact in a cancer centre. METHODS: Data relating to adult cancer patients treated via EAPs from 2011 to 2021 in three Cork university hospitals was collated. Descriptive statistics were employed to get an overview of the impact these programs currently have on cancer care provision. RESULTS: We identified 193 patients who accessed EAPs during the study period, availing of 33 separate drugs for a total of 50 different cancer indications. The prevalence of EAP usage was shown to have been trending upwards in recent years with a total of 189 programs being accessed throughout the period. Drugs provided were from a number of different anti-cancer drug classes, particularly targeted therapies (n = 18) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (n = 17). Cancers from a wide range of both solid and liquid tumour types were treated with EAP drugs, and patients treated were from across a broad spectrum of ages (26-82, SD 11.99). CONCLUSIONS: EAPs have an increasing role in accessing novel cancer therapies in our community and by extension nationally. Equity of EAP access would be facilitated by a national registry of available agents which we have established. Assessment of their benefits and toxicities would be enhanced by the requirement for a real-world database as a condition of EAP approval.

Neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy in resectable non-small cell lung cancer.

Only a minority of lung cancers are resectable at diagnosis, and many of these will eventually relapse. Adjuvant chemotherapy in this setting has a modest survival advantage, and there is significant need for new approaches to improve cure rates. Checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy has transformed the prognosis for advanced lung cancer, and is increasingly being used in the neoadjuvant setting alone, or in combination with cytotoxic chemotherapy. While this has demonstrated convincing improvements in event-free survival and pathologic response, questions remain over optimal duration of therapy, predictive and prognostic biomarkers, response assessment and combination with other modalities. In addition, these results must be considered in the context of recent positive studies of adjuvant immunotherapy. Here, we summarise preclinical context and clinical trials in this space, discuss areas of controversy and pitfalls, and consider future challenges.

Virtual oncology clinics during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in radical changes in the delivery of healthcare worldwide. Our oncology service (at an Irish national cancer centre) rapidly transitioned to the use of telemedicine or virtual clinics (VC) to minimise potential risk of exposure to COVID-19 amongst an immunosuppressed, high-risk population. Our study aimed to evaluate the use of VC in this setting. METHODS: An 18-point questionnaire was designed to investigate the patient experience of VC during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland and compliance with guidelines developed in Ireland to conduct VC and the role of VC in the future. Questionnaires were distributed following the receipt of verbal consent from patients during the VC. Descriptive statistics were utilised for data analysis using SPSS®. RESULTS: One hundred and four patients returned completed surveys (n = 104/164, 63% response rate). Overall satisfaction levels were high with most patients (n = 58/100, 58%; no answer provided (NAP), n = 4) equally satisfied or nearly equally satisfied with VC in comparison to a usual clinic encounter. The majority of patients felt that there should be a role for VC in the future (n = 84/102, 82%; NAP, n = 2). The majority of patients (n = 61/99, 61%; NAP, n = 5) were very relieved to avoid a hospital visit due to perceived risk of potential exposure to COVID-19. CONCLUSION: The majority of oncology patients were satisfied with a VC encounter. VC may have a role in the future of medical care in Ireland post the COVID-19 pandemic.