RESUMO
BACKGROUND: High-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) comprise both well-differentiated grade 3 neuroendocrine tumors (G3 NETs) and poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs). Mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasms (MiNENs) nearly always include poorly differentiated NEC as the neuroendocrine component. The efficacy and safety of frontline mFOLFIRINOX chemotherapy has never been investigated in patients with high-grade NENs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a multi-institutional retrospective analysis of patients with advanced high-grade NEN of the gastroenteropancreatic tract or of unknown origin seen between February 2016 and April 2023 who received treatment with frontline mFOLFIRINOX. RESULTS: A total of 35 patients were included (G3 NETs: n=2; NECs: n=25; MiNENs: n=8; stage III: n=5; stage IV: n=30). The objective response rate was 77% (complete response: 3%; partial response: 74%). Median progression-free survival was 12 months (95% CI, 9.2-16.2 months) and median overall survival was 20.6 months (95% CI, 17.2-30.6 months). No significant differences in efficacy were seen according to primary site, histopathology, and Ki-67 proliferative index. All 5 patients with stage III disease who received mFOLFIRINOX obtained an objective response and underwent radical surgery or definitive radiotherapy with curative intent, with a recurrence rate of 40%. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were observed in 43% of patients (mainly neutropenia and diarrhea). Females were at significantly increased risk of developing severe toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: mFOLFIRINOX shows antitumor activity against high-grade NENs. Well-designed, prospective clinical trials are needed to assess the efficacy of mFOLFIRINOX in both the neoadjuvant and metastatic settings.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: On February 23rd, the 1st case of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection was diagnosed at the University Hospital Trust of Verona, Italy. On March 13th, the Oncology Section was converted into a 22-inpatient bed coronavirus disease (COVID) Unit, and we reshaped our organisation to face the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic, while maintaining oncological activities. METHODS: We tracked down (i) volumes of oncological activities (January 1st - March 31st, 2020 versus the same period of 2019), (ii) patients' and caregivers' perception and (iii) SARS-CoV-2 infection rate in oncology health professionals and SARS-CoV-2 infection-related hospital admissions of "active"' oncological patients. RESULTS: As compared with the same trimester in 2019, the overall reduction in total numbers of inpatient admissions, chemotherapy administrations and specialist visits in January-March 2020 was 8%, 6% and 3%, respectively; based on the weekly average of daily accesses, reduction in some of the oncological activities became statistically significant from week 11. The overall acceptance of adopted measures, as measured by targeted questionnaires administered to a sample of 241 outpatients, was high (>70%). Overall, 8 of 85 oncology health professionals tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection (all but one employed in the COVID Unit, no hospital admissions and no treatment required); among 471 patients admitted for SARS-CoV-2 infection, 7 had an "active"' oncological disease (2 died of infection-related complications). CONCLUSIONS: A slight, but statistically significant reduction in oncology activity was registered during the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic peak in Verona, Italy. Organisational and protective measures adopted appear to have contributed to keep infections in both oncological patients and health professionals to a minimum.