Vaccination for seasonal influenza, pneumococcal infection and SARS-CoV-2 in patients with solid tumors: recommendations of the Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica (AIOM).

Patients with cancer have a well-known and higher risk of vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs). VPDs may cause severe complications in this setting due to immune system impairment, malnutrition and oncological treatments. Despite this evidence, vaccination rates are inadequate. The Italian Association of Medical Oncology [Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica (AIOM)] has been involved in vaccination awareness since 2014. Based on a careful review of the available data about the immunogenicity, effectiveness and safety of flu, pneumococcal and anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines, we report the recommendations of the AIOM about these vaccinations in adult patients with solid tumors. The AIOM recommends comprehensive education on the issue of VPDs. We believe that a multidisciplinary care model may improve the vaccination coverage in immunocompromised patients. Continued surveillance, implementation of preventive practices and future well-designed immunological prospective studies are essential for better management of our patients with cancer.

Six-month humoral and cellular immune response to the third dose of BNT162b2 anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with solid tumors: a longitudinal cohort study with a focus on the variants of concern.

BACKGROUND: The role and the durability of the immunogenicity of the third dose of vaccine against COVID-19 variants of concern in cancer patients have to be elucidated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We have prospectively evaluated the immunogenicity of the third dose of the SARS-CoV-2 BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine in triggering both humoral and cell-mediated immune response in patients with solid tumors undergoing active treatment 6 months after the booster. Neutralizing antibody (NT Ab) titers and total anti-spike immunoglobulin G concentrations were measured in serum. Heparinized whole blood samples were used for the SARS-CoV-2 interferon-γ release assay (IGRA). RESULTS: Six months after the third dose only two patients (2.4%) showed negative spike-specific immunoglobulin G antibody levels (<33.8 BAU/ml). The median level of SARS-CoV-2 NT Abs decreased and only 39/83 (47%) subjects showed maximum levels of NT Abs. T-cellular positive response was observed in 38/61 (62.3%) patients; the highest median level of response was observed 21 days after the third dose (354 mIU/ml, interquartile range 83.3-846.3 mIU/ml). The lowest median level of NT Ab response was observed against the Omicron variant (1 : 10, interquartile range 1 : 10-1 : 40) with a significant reduced rate of responder subjects with respect to the wild-type strain (77.5% versus 95%; P = 0.0022) and Delta variant (77.5% versus 93.7%; P = 0.0053). During the follow-up period, seven patients (8%) had a confirmed post-vaccination infection, but none of them required hospitalization or oxygen therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Our work highlights a significant humoral and cellular immune response among patients with solid tumors 6 months after the third BNT162b2 vaccine dose, although a reduction in neutralizing activity against Omicron was observed.

Vaccination for herpes zoster in patients with solid tumors: a position paper on the behalf of the Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica (AIOM).

Herpes zoster (HZ) is the infectious reactivation of the varicella-zoster virus. HZ is more frequent in immunocompromised subjects, including patients with cancer. HZ complications can even last for years with a consequent delay in treatment of the underlying malignancy and with an unfavorable impact on quality of life. Nowadays, HZ is a vaccine-preventable disease: the recent approval of adjuvanted glycoprotein E-based recombinant zoster vaccine has changed preventive perspectives in immunocompromised subjects. Recombinant zoster vaccine induced both strong humoral and cellular immune responses also in immunocompromised patients. The question is, therefore, to which categories of cancer patients we should recommend HZ vaccination. Based on a careful review of the available data present in the literature, including recommendations and expert opinions, we report the position of the Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica on HZ vaccination in adult patients with solid tumors, thus providing clinical practice advice in a field where clear-cut information is missing.

Immunogenicity and safety after the third dose of BNT162b2 anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with solid tumors on active treatment: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although a full course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine is effective in cancer patients, the duration of the protection and the efficacy of a booster dose against the new variants remain unknown. We prospectively evaluated the immunogenicity of the third dose of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine in cancer patients undergoing active treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with solid cancer, vaccinated with a booster dose during active treatment, were enrolled in this study. Patients were classified into SARS-CoV-2 naïve (without previous COVID-19 infection) and SARS-CoV-2 experienced (with previous COVID-19 infection). Neutralizing antibody (NT Ab) titer and total anti-Spike immunoglobulin G (IgG) concentration were quantified in serum. Heparinized whole blood samples were used for SARS-CoV-2 Interferon Gamma Release Assay (IGRA). The primary endpoint was to assess the increase of IgG antibody level between baseline and 3 weeks after the booster. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-two consecutive patients were recruited. In SARS-CoV-2-naïve subjects, the median level of IgG was 157 BAU/ml [interquartile range (IQR) 62-423 BAU/ml] at T0 and reached a median of 2080 BAU/ml (IQR 2080-2080 BAU/ml) at 3 weeks after booster administration (T1; P < 0.0001). A median 16-fold increase of SARS-CoV-2 NT Ab titer (IQR 4-32) was observed in naïve subjects (from median 20, IQR 10-40, to median 640, IQR 160-640; P < 0.0001). Median interferon-γ level at T1 was significantly higher than that measured at T0 in SARS-CoV-2-naïve subjects (P = 0.0049) but not in SARS-CoV-2-experienced patients. The median level of SARS-CoV-2 NT Abs was 32-fold lower against Omicron compared to the wild-type strain (P = 0.0004) and 12-fold lower compared to the Delta strain (P = 0.0110). CONCLUSIONS: The third dose is able to trigger both the humoral and the cell-mediated immune response in cancer patients on active treatment. Our preliminary data about the neutralization of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine against variants of concern seem to confirm the lower vaccine activity.

Analysis of the humoral and cellular immune response after a full course of BNT162b2 anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in cancer patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors with or without chemotherapy: an update after 6 months of follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The durability of immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in cancer patients remains to be elucidated. We prospectively evaluated the immunogenicity of the vaccine in triggering both the humoral and the cell-mediated immune response in cancer patients treated with anti-programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 with or without chemotherapy 6 months after BNT162b2 vaccine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the previous study, 88 patients were enrolled, whereas the analyses below refer to the 60 patients still on immunotherapy at the time of the follow-up. According to previous SARS-CoV-2 exposure, patients were classified as SARS-CoV-2-naive (without previous SARS-CoV-2 exposure) and SARS-CoV-2-experienced (with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection). Neutralizing antibody (NT Ab) titer against the B.1.1 strain and total anti-spike immunoglobulin G concentration were quantified in serum samples. The enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot assay was used for quantification of anti-spike interferon-γ (IFN-γ)-producing cells/106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Fifty patients (83.0%) were on immunotherapy alone, whereas 10 patients (7%) were on chemo-immunotherapy. We analyzed separately patients on immunotherapy and patients on chemo-immunotherapy. RESULTS: The median T-cell response at 6 months was significantly lower than that measured at 3 weeks after vaccination [50 interquartile range (IQR) 20-118.8 versus 175 IQR 67.5-371.3 IFN-γ-producing cells/106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells; P < 0.0001]. The median reduction of immunoglobulin G concentration was 88% in SARS-CoV-2-naive subjects and 2.1% in SARS-CoV-2-experienced subjects. SARS-CoV-2 NT Ab titer was maintained in SARS-CoV-2-experienced subjects, whereas a significant decrease was observed in SARS-CoV-2-naive subjects (from median 1 : 160, IQR 1 : 40-1 : 640 to median 1 : 20, IQR 1 : 10-1 : 40; P < 0.0001). A weak correlation was observed between SARS-CoV-2 NT Ab titer and spike-specific IFN-γ-producing cells at both 6 months and 3 weeks after vaccination (r = 0.467; P = 0.0002 and r = 0.428; P = 0.0006, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our work highlights a reduction in the immune response in cancer patients, particularly in SARS-CoV-2-naive subjects. Our data support administering a third dose of COVID-19 vaccine to cancer patients treated with programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors.

International Tailored Chemotherapy Adjuvant (ITACA) trial, a phase III multicenter randomized trial comparing adjuvant pharmacogenomic-driven chemotherapy versus standard adjuvant chemotherapy in completely resected stage II-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Several strategies have been investigated to improve the 4% survival advantage of adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this investigator-initiated study we aimed to evaluate the predictive utility of the messenger RNA (mRNA) expression levels of excision repair cross complementation group 1 (ERCC1) and thymidylate synthase (TS) as assessed in resected tumor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seven hundred and seventy-three completely resected stage II-III NSCLC patients were enrolled and randomly assigned in each of the four genomic subgroups to investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy (C, n = 389) or tailored chemotherapy (T, n = 384). All anticancer drugs were administered according to standard doses and schedules. Stratification factors included stage and smoking status. The primary endpoint of the study was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Six hundred and ninety patients were included in the primary analysis. At a median follow-up of 45.9 months, 85 (24.6%) and 70 (20.3%) patients died in arms C and T, respectively. Five-year survival for patients in arms C and T was of 65.4% (95% CI (confidence interval): 58.5% to 71.4%) and 72.9% (95% CI: 66.5% to 78.3%), respectively. The estimated hazard ratio (HR) was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.56-1.06, P value: 0.109) for arm T versus arm C. HR for recurrence-free survival was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.69-1.14, P value: 0.341) for arm T versus arm C. Grade 3-5 toxicities were more frequently reported in arm C than in arm T. CONCLUSION: In completely resected stage II-III NSCLC tailoring adjuvant chemotherapy conferred a non-statistically significant trend for OS favoring the T arm. In terms of safety, the T arm was associated with better efficacy/toxicity ratio related to the different therapeutic choices in the experimental arm.

A snapshot of the immunogenicity, efficacy and safety of a full course of BNT162b2 anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in cancer patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors: a longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Very few cancer patients were enrolled in coronavirus disease-2019 vaccine studies. In order to address this gap of knowledge, real-world studies are mandatory. The aim of this study was to assess both humoral and cellular response after a messenger RNA vaccination schedule. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty-eight consecutive cancer patients treated with programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors were enrolled from the beginning of the vaccination campaign for frail patients. Blood samples for humoral and cell-mediated immune response evaluation were obtained before vaccination (T0), before the second administration (T1) and 21 days after the second dose (T2). The primary endpoint was the evaluation of the percentage of participants showing a significant increase in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific T cells, measured by an enzyme-linked immunospot assay, after the second dose of BNT162b2 vaccine. The proportion of patients who reached the primary endpoint is computed together with its exact binomial 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: In SARS-CoV-2-naïve subjects, spike-specific T-cell response was almost undetectable at T0 [median 0.0 interferon-γ (IFN-γ) spot forming units (SFU)/million peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) interquartile range (IQR) 0-7.5] and significantly increased at T1 and T2 (median 15.0 IFN-γ SFU/million PBMC, 25th-75th 0-40 versus 90 IFN-γ SFU/million PBMC, 25th-75th 32.5-224, respectively) (P < 0.001). Focusing on naïve and experienced SARS-CoV-2 subjects, no differences were reported both in terms of CD4- and CD8-specific T-cell response, suggesting that BNT162b2 is able to elicit both adaptive responses after complete vaccination schedule, regardless of previous SARS-CoV-2 exposure. The level of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies was low at T1 in SARS-CoV-2-naïve subjects [median 1 : 5 (IQR 1 : 5-1 : 20)] but reached a significantly higher median of 1 : 80 (25th-75th 1 : 20-1 : 160) at T2 (P < 0.0001). Moreover, no COVID-19 cases were documented throughout the period of study. CONCLUSIONS: Our data have demonstrated that the administration of a full course of BNT162b2 vaccine elicited a sustained immune response against SARS-CoV-2 regardless of the type of cancer and/or the type of immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Treatment Following Progression in Metastatic Melanoma: the State of the Art from Scientific Literature to Clinical Need.

INTRODUCTION: In the last few years, the advent of targeted therapy and immunotherapy has improved the management and the prognosis of metastatic melanoma, but the spread of resistance mechanisms can lead to disease progression. The clinical management in this setting can be challenging because the oncologist has to decide what is the best treatment strategy among therapy beyond progression (TBP), therapy change, and the rechallenge approach. This review of the relevant scientific literature is intended to clarify which patients with progressing metastatic melanoma will benefit from continuation of ongoing therapy and which ones will not. The data are based on a total of about 4300 patients coming from the main retrospective studies in the chosen field. The article body is divided into four sections which analyze respectively the targeted therapy beyond progression, the immunotherapy beyond progression, the possible treatment sequences, and finally the rechallenge strategy. RECENT FINDINGS: Despite the possible approaches of TBP or rechallenge, the patient may not have an optimal response and may need new therapy, which is currently missing. To broaden the pharmacological offer in the fight against melanoma, cancer research is studying new disease targets, like the NRAS, PI3K, and cKIT pathways or combination treatment of targeted therapy plus immunotherapy. Despite the limitations of this work, mainly due to the limited number of studies, their retrospective nature and the lack of comparative studies, the analysis performed allows us to draw some important conclusions: therapy beyond progression, both targeted therapy and immunotherapy, represents a valid treatment option with positive effects on disease control and survival outcomes for patients with low clinical risk, expressed as low disease burden, normal LDH levels, and good performance status; moreover, the prognosis and quality of life of these patients improve when TBP is associated with locoregional treatments. In patients with progressive metastatic melanoma and high clinical risk (high disease burden, high LDH levels, and poor performance status), it is recommended to change therapy, without ever forgetting the possibility of enrolling the patient in a clinical trial. Finally, an efficacious treatment alternative is the rechallenge strategy; this approach consists in a re-treatment with the same drug after a variable interval of discontinuation. Preliminary studies seem to have demonstrated that patients retreated with targeted therapy achieved a greater benefit if they had a low clinical risk and if the drug doublet (BRAF + MEK inhibitors) was used. On the side of immunotherapy, the rechallenge strategy produced a major benefit in patients who prior experienced a severe toxic episode.

Development of adaptive immune effector therapies in solid tumors.

State-of-the-art treatment strategies have drastically ameliorated the outcome of patients affected by cancer. However, resistant and recurrent solid tumors are generally nonresponsive to conventional therapies. A central factor in the sequence of events that lead to cancer is an alteration in antitumor immune surveillance, which results in failure to recognize and eliminate the transformed tumor cell. A greater understanding of the dysregulation and evasion of the immune system in the evolution and progression of cancer provides the basis for improved therapies. Targeted strategies, such as T-cell therapy, not only generally spare normal tissues, but also use alternative antineoplastic mechanisms that synergize with other therapeutics. Despite encouraging success in hematologic malignancies, adaptive cellular therapies for solid tumors face unique challenges because of the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment, and the hurdle of T-cell trafficking within scarcely accessible tumor sites. This review provides a brief overview of current cellular therapeutic strategies for solid tumors, research carried out to increase efficacy and safety, and results from ongoing clinical trials.

Multimodal Approach of Pulmonary Artery Intimal Sarcoma: A Single-Institution Experience.

INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary artery sarcoma (PAS) is a rare tumor, whose therapeutic approach is mainly based on surgery, either pneumonectomy or pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA). The prognosis reported in published series is very poor, with survival of 1.5 months without any kind of treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 2010 to January 2016, 1027 patients were referred to our hospital for symptoms of acute or chronic pulmonary thromboembolic disease. Twelve patients having a confirmed diagnosis of PAS underwent PEA. Median age was 64.5 years. Most patients had a long history of symptoms, having a median time of 7.5 months from onset of symptoms to surgery. RESULTS: Following PEA and cardiopulmonary rehabilitation, 10 patients received conventional chemotherapy with doxorubicin and ifosfamide, starting at a median of 42 days from surgery. Four patients also received radiotherapy. Four patients have died due to disease progression, while 7 are still alive, with 5 being disease-free at 4-55+ months from diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PAS, a multimodal approach including PEA, CT, and RT is feasible but it should be evaluated individually, according to the tumor extension and the patient's clinical condition. Apart from improving quality of life mainly by reducing or delaying symptoms due to PH, it may improve life expectancy.

Simultaneous detection of circulating immunological parameters and tumor biomarkers in early stage breast cancer patients during adjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced immune suppression has mainly been studied in patients with advanced cancer, but the influence of chemotherapy on the immune system in early stage cancer patients has so far not been studied systematically. The aim of the present study was to monitor the immune system during anthracycline- and taxane-based adjuvant chemotherapy in early stage breast cancer patients, to assess the impact of circulating tumor cells on selected immune parameters and to reveal putative angiogenic effects of circulating endothelial cells. METHODS: Peripheral blood samples from 20 early stage breast cancer patients were analyzed using a flow cytometric multi-color of antibodies to enumerate lymphocyte and dendritic cell subsets, as well as endothelial and tumor cells. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was used to measure the levels of various serological factors. RESULTS: During chemotherapy, all immunological parameters and angiogenesis surrogate biomarkers showed significant decreases. The numbers of circulating tumor cells showed significant inverse correlations with the numbers of T helper cells, a lymphocyte subset directly related to effective anti-tumor responses. Reduced T helper cell numbers may contribute to systemic immunosuppression and, as such, the activation of dormant tumor cells. CONCLUSIONS: From our results we conclude that adjuvant chemotherapy suppresses immune function in early stage breast cancer patients. In addition, we conclude that the presence of circulating tumor cells, defined as pan-cytokeratin(+), CD326(+), CD45(-) cells, may serve as an important indicator of a patient's immune status. Further investigations are needed to firmly define circulating tumor cells as a predictor for the success of breast cancer adjuvant chemotherapy.

Prognostic impact of progression to induction chemotherapy and prior paclitaxel therapy in patients with germ cell tumors receiving salvage high-dose chemotherapy in the last 10 years: a study of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation Solid Tumors Working Party.

Little is known about the prognostic impact of prior paclitaxel therapy and response to induction chemotherapy defined as the regimen preceding high-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) for the salvage therapy of advanced germ cell tumors. Twenty European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation centers contributed data on patients treated between 2002 and 2012. Paclitaxel used in either prior lines of therapy or in induction-mobilization regimens was considered. Multivariable Cox analyses of prespecified factors were undertaken on PFS and overall survival (OS). As of October 2013, data for 324 patients had been contributed to this study. One hundred and ninety-two patients (59.3%) had received paclitaxel. Sixty-one patients (19%) had a progression to induction chemotherapy, 234 (72%) a response (29 (9%) missing or granulocyte colony-stimulating factor without chemotherapy). Both progression to induction chemotherapy and prior paclitaxel were significantly associated with shorter OS univariably (P<0.001 and P=0.032). On multivariable analysis from the model with fully available data (N=216) progression to induction was significantly prognostic for PFS and OS (P=0.003), but prior paclitaxel was not (P=0.674 and P=0.739). These results were confirmed after multiple imputation of missing data. Progression to induction chemotherapy could be demonstrated as an independent prognostic factor, in contrast to prior paclitaxel.