Comparative biological activity of palbociclib and ribociclib in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

This study examines the biological effects of palbociclib and ribociclib in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, pivotal to the HARMONIA prospective phase III clinical trial. We explore the downstream impacts of these CDK4/6 inhibitors, focusing on cell lines and patient-derived tumor samples. We treated HR+ breast cancer cell lines (T47D, MCF7, and BT474) with palbociclib or ribociclib (100 nM or 500 nM), alone or combined with fulvestrant (1 nM), over periods of 24, 72, or 144 h. Our assessments included PAM50 gene expression, RB1 phosphorylation, Lamin-B1 protein levels, and senescence-associated ß-galactosidase activity. We further analyzed PAM50 gene signatures from the CORALLEEN and NeoPalAna phase II trials. Both CDK4/6 inhibitors similarly inhibited proliferation across the cell lines. At 100 nM, both drugs partially reduced p-RB1, with further decreases at 500 nM over 144 h. Treatment led to reduced Lamin-B1 expression and increased senescence-associated ß-galactosidase activity. Both drugs enhanced Luminal A and reduced Luminal B and proliferation signatures at both doses. However, the HER2-enriched signature significantly diminished only at the higher dose of 500 nM. Corresponding changes were observed in tumor samples from the CORALLEEN and NeoPalAna studies. At 2 weeks of treatment, both drugs significantly reduced the HER2-enriched signature, but at surgery, this reduction was consistent only with ribociclib. Our findings suggest that while both CDK4/6 inhibitors effectively modulate key biological pathways in HR+/HER2- breast cancer, nuances in their impact, particularly on the HER2-enriched signature, are dose-dependent, influenced by the addition of fulvestrant and warrant further investigation.

A 14-gene B-cell immune signature in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC): a pooled analysis of seven studies.

BACKGROUND: Early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) displays clinical and biological diversity. From a biological standpoint, immune infiltration plays a crucial role in TNBC prognosis. Currently, there is a lack of genomic tools aiding in treatment decisions for TNBC. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of a B-cell/immunoglobulin signature (IGG) alone, or in combination with tumor burden, in predicting prognosis and treatment response in patients with TNBC. METHODS: Genomic and clinical data were retrieved from 7 cohorts: SCAN-B (N = 874), BrighTNess (n = 482), CALGB-40603 (n = 389), METABRIC (n = 267), TCGA (n = 118), GSE58812 (n = 107), GSE21653 (n = 67). IGG and a risk score integrating IGG with tumor/nodal staging (IGG-Clin) were assessed for event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) in each cohort. Random effects model was used to derive pooled effect sizes. Association of IGG with pathological complete response (pCR) was assessed in CALGB-40603 and BrighTNess. Immune significance of IGG was estimated through CIBERSORTx and EcoTyper. FINDINGS: IGG was associated with improved EFS (pooled HR = 0.77, [95% CI = 0.70-0.85], I2 = 18%) and OS (pooled HR = 0.79, [0.73-0.85], I2 = 0%) across cohorts, and was predictive of pCR in CALGB-40603 (OR 1.25, [1.10-1.50]) and BrighTNess (OR 1.57 [1.25-1.98]). IGG-Clin was predictive of recurrence (pooled HR = 2.11, [1.75-2.55], I2 = 0%) and death (pooled HR = 1.99, 95% [0.84-4.73], I2 = 79%) across cohorts. IGG was associated with adaptive immune response at CIBERSORTx and EcoTyper analysis. INTERPRETATION: IGG is linked to improved prognosis and pCR in early-stage TNBC. The integration of IGG alongside tumor and nodal staging holds promise as an approach to identify patients benefitting from intensified or de-intensified treatments. FUNDING: This study received funding from: Associació Beca Marta Santamaria, European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation and Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions programs, Fundación FERO, Fundación CRIS contra el cáncer, Agència de Gestó d'Ajuts Universitaris i de Recerca, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Fundación Contigo, Asociación Cáncer de Mama Metastásico IV, Breast Cancer Research Foundation, RESCUER, Fundación científica AECC and FSEOM.

Integrating new oral selective oestrogen receptor degraders in the breast cancer treatment.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Oral SERDs are under extensive development to overcome fulvestrant main limitations, including intramuscular-only formulation and poor performance in early-stage hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/HER2-negative breast cancer. This review summarizes the most relevant evidence published so far and envisions the potential integration of oral SERDs in the therapeutic algorithm of HR+/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). RECENT FINDINGS: Amcenestrant and giredestrant, two of the most promising oral SERDs, recently failed to show a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) in pivotal trials. Conversely, elacestrant demonstrated significant PFS superiority over standard-of-care endocrine therapy (aromatase inhibitors or fulvestrant) in MBC. Additionally, it did not show unusual side effects observed with other oral SERDs, like bradycardia, hematotoxicity and vision impairment, and proved to be effective also in case of ESR1 -mutant endocrine-resistant breast cancer. Combination trials of oral SERDs with target agents, such as CDK4/6-inhibitors, are ongoing. Finally, some window-of-opportunity trials showed promising on-target activity in early-stage for this drug class. SUMMARY: Promising results from early-phase trials are not translating into sufficient clinical benefit in pivotal trials of main oral SERDs in monotherapy, except for elacestrant. Whether oral SERDs might become the backbone for combination strategies in MBC or the preferred (neo)adjuvant endocrine agents is under evaluation.

Specialist palliative and end-of-life care for patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 infection: a European perspective.

BACKGROUND: Specialist palliative care team (SPCT) involvement has been shown to improve symptom control and end-of-life care for patients with cancer, but little is known as to how these have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Here, we report SPCT involvement during the first wave of the pandemic and compare outcomes for patients with cancer who received and did not receive SPCT input from multiple European cancer centres. METHODS: From the OnCovid repository (N = 1318), we analysed cancer patients aged ⩾18 diagnosed with COVID-19 between 26 February and 22 June 2020 who had complete specialist palliative care team data (SPCT+ referred; SPCT- not referred). RESULTS: Of 555 eligible patients, 317 were male (57.1%), with a median age of 70 years (IQR 20). At COVID-19 diagnosis, 44.7% were on anti-cancer therapy and 53.3% had ⩾1 co-morbidity. Two hundred and six patients received SPCT input for symptom control (80.1%), psychological support (54.4%) and/or advance care planning (51%). SPCT+ patients had more 'Do not attempt cardio-pulmonary resuscitation' orders completed prior to (12.6% versus 3.7%) and during admission (50% versus 22.1%, p < 0.001), with more SPCT+ patients deemed suitable for treatment escalation (50% versus 22.1%, p < 0.001). SPCT involvement was associated with higher discharge rates from hospital for end-of-life care (9.7% versus 0%, p < 0.001). End-of-life anticipatory prescribing was higher in SPCT+ patients, with opioids (96.3% versus 47.1%) and benzodiazepines (82.9% versus 41.2%) being used frequently for symptom control. CONCLUSION: SPCT referral facilitated symptom control, emergency care and discharge planning, as well as high rates of referral for psychological support than previously reported. Our study highlighted the critical need of SPCTs for patients with cancer during the pandemic and should inform service planning for this population.

Doege-Potter syndrome in a facial solitary fibrous tumor: Diagnose and clinical management discussion.

Doege-Potter syndrome is a rare hypoglycemic paraneoplastic disorder. This case describes that severe and symptomatic hypoglycemia can occasionally be due to a rare malignant neoplasm, and the differential diagnosis of malignancy should not be overlooked in this setting.

Clinical portrait of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in European cancer patients.

The SARS-Cov-2 pandemic significantly impacted on oncology practice across the globe. There is uncertainty as to the contribution of patients' demographics and oncological features on severity and mortality from Covid-19 and little guidance as to the role of anti-cancer and anti-Covid-19 therapy in this population. In a multi-center study of 890 cancer patients with confirmed Covid-19 we demonstrated a worsening gradient of mortality from breast cancer to haematological malignancies and showed that male gender, older age, and number of co-morbidities identifies a subset of patients with significantly worse mortality rates from Covid-19. Provision of chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy did not worsen mortality. Exposure to antimalarials was associated with improved mortality rates independent of baseline prognostic factors. This study highlights the clinical utility of demographic factors for individualized risk-stratification of patients and support further research into emerging anti-Covid-19 therapeutics in SARS-Cov-2 infected cancer patients.

Presenting Features and Early Mortality from SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Cancer Patients during the Initial Stage of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Europe.

We describe the outcomes in cancer patients during the initial outbreak of the COVID-19 in Europe from the retrospective, multi-center observational OnCovid study. We identified 204 cancer patients from eight centers in the United Kingdom, Italy, and Spain aged > 18 (mean = 69) and diagnosed with COVID-19 between February 26th and April 1st, 2020. A total of 127 (62%) were male, 184 (91%) had a diagnosis of solid malignancy, and 103 (51%) had non-metastatic disease. A total of 161 (79%) had > 1 co-morbidity. A total of 141 (69%) patients had > 1 COVID-19 complication. A total of 36 (19%) were escalated to high-dependency or intensive care. A total of 59 (29%) died, 53 (26%) were discharged, and 92 (45%) were in-hospital survivors. Mortality was higher in patients aged > 65 (36% versus 16%), in those with > 2 co-morbidities (40% versus 18%) and developing > 1 complication from COVID-19 (38% versus 4%, p = 0.004). Multi-variable analyses confirmed age > 65 and > 2 co-morbidities to predict for patient mortality independent of tumor stage, active malignancy, or anticancer therapy. During the early outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Europe co-morbid burden and advancing age predicted for adverse disease course in cancer patients. The ongoing OnCovid study will allow us to compare risks and outcomes in cancer patients between the initial and later stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.