Characterisation and Outcomes of Patients with Solid Organ Malignancies Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit: Mortality and Impact on Functional Status and Oncological Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing number of ICU admissions among patients with solid tumours, there is a lack of tools with which to identify patients who may benefit from critical support. We aim to characterize the clinical profile and outcomes of patients with solid malignancies admitted to the ICU. METHODS: Retrospective observational study of patients with cancer non-electively admitted to the ICU of the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona (Spain) between January 2019 and December 2019. Data regarding patient and neoplasm characteristics, ICU admission features and outcomes were collected from medical records. RESULTS: 97 ICU admissions of 84 patients were analysed. Lung cancer (22.6%) was the most frequent neoplasm. Most of the patients had metastatic disease (79.5%) and were receiving oncological treatment (75%). The main reason for ICU admission was respiratory failure (38%). Intra-ICU and in-hospital mortality rates were 9.4% and 24%, respectively. Mortality rates at 1, 3 and 6 months were 19.6%, 36.1% and 53.6%. Liver metastasis, gastrointestinal cancer, hypoalbuminemia, elevated basal C-reactive protein, ECOG-PS greater than 2 at ICU admission, admission from ward and an APACHE II score over 14 were related to higher mortality. Functional status was severely affected at discharge, and oncological treatment was definitively discontinued in 40% of the patients. CONCLUSION: Medium-term mortality and functional deterioration of patients with solid cancers non-electively admitted to the ICU are high. Surrogate markers of cachexia, liver metastasis and poor ECOG-PS at ICU admission are risk factors for mortality.

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.

Epidemiology and risk factors for recurrence in biliary source bloodstream infection episodes in oncological patients.

We aimed to describe the characteristics and outcomes of biliary source bloodstream infections (BSIs) in oncological patients. Secondarily, we analyzed risk factors for recurrent BSI episodes. All episodes of biliary source BSIs in oncological patients were prospectively collected (2008-2019) and retrospectively analyzed. Logistic regression analyses were performed. A rule to stratify patients into risk groups for recurrent biliary source BSI was conducted. Four hundred biliary source BSIs were documented in 291 oncological patients. The most frequent causative agents were Escherichia coli (42%) and Klebsiella spp. (27%), and 86 (21.5%) episodes were caused by multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacilli (MDR-GNB). The rates of MDR-GNB increased over time. Overall, 73 patients developed 118 recurrent BSI episodes. Independent risk factors for recurrent BSI episodes were prior antibiotic therapy (OR 3.781, 95% CI 1.906-7.503), biliary prosthesis (OR 2.232, 95% CI 1.157-4.305), prior admission due to suspected biliary source infection (OR 4.409, 95% CI 2.338-8.311), and BSI episode caused by an MDR-GNB (OR 2.857, 95% CI 1.389-5.874). With these variables, a score was generated that predicted recurrent biliary source BSI with an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.819. Inappropriate empirical antibiotic treatment (IEAT) was administered in 23.8% of patients, and 30-d mortality was 19.5%. As a conclusion, biliary source BSI in oncological patients is mainly caused by GNB, with high and increasing MDR rates, frequent IEAT, and high mortality. Recurrent BSI episodes are frequent. A simple score to identify recurrent episodes was developed to potentially establish prophylactic strategies. IMPORTANCE This study shows that biliary source bloodstream infections (BSIs) in oncological patients are mainly caused by Gram-negative bacilli (GNB), with high and increasing rates of multidrug resistance. Importantly, recurrent biliary source BSI episodes were very frequent and associated with delays in chemotherapy, high rates of inappropriate empirical antibiotic therapy, and high 30-d mortality (19.5%). Using the variable independently associated with recurrent BSI episodes, a score was generated that predicted recurrent biliary source BSI with high accuracy. This score could be used to establish prophylactic strategies and lower the risk of relapsing episodes and the associated morbidity and mortality.

HOPE (SOLTI-1903) breast cancer study: real-world, patient-centric, clinical practice study to assess the impact of genomic data on next treatment decision-choice in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer.

Background: Metastatic breast cancer (mBC) causes nearly all BC-related deaths. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies allow for the application of personalized medicine using targeted therapies that could improve patients' outcomes. However, NGS is not routinely used in the clinical practice and its cost induces access-inequity among patients. We hypothesized that promoting active patient participation in the management of their disease offering access to NGS testing and to the subsequent medical interpretation and recommendations provided by a multidisciplinary molecular advisory board (MAB) could contribute to progressively overcome this challenge. We designed HOPE (SOLTI-1903) breast cancer trial, a study where patients voluntarily lead their inclusion through a digital tool (DT). The main objectives of HOPE study are to empower mBC patients, gather real-world data on the use of molecular information in the management of mBC and to generate evidence to assess the clinical utility for healthcare systems. Trial design: After self-registration through the DT, the study team validates eligibility criteria and assists patients with mBC in the subsequent steps. Patients get access to the information sheet and sign the informed consent form through an advanced digital signature. Afterwards, they provide the most recent (preferably) metastatic archival tumor sample for DNA-sequencing and a blood sample obtained at the time of disease progression for ctDNA analysis. Paired results are reviewed by the MAB, considering patient's medical history. The MAB provides a further interpretation of molecular results and potential treatment recommendations, including ongoing clinical trials and further (germline) genetic testing. Participants self-document their treatment and disease evolution for the next 2 years. Patients are encouraged to involve their physicians in the study. HOPE also includes a patient empowerment program with educational workshops and videos about mBC and precision medicine in oncology. The primary endpoint of the study was to describe the feasibility of a patient-centric precision oncology program in mBC patients when a comprehensive genomic profile is available to decide on a subsequent line of treatment. Clinical trial registration: www.soltihope.com, identifier NCT04497285.

Intrinsic subtypes and therapeutic decision-making in hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer with visceral crisis: A case report.

Background: CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDKi), namely, palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib, combined with either an aromatase inhibitor (AI) or fulvestrant are the standard first/second line for hormone receptor-positive(HR+)/HER2-negative(neg) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, the choice of one specific CDKi is arbitrary and based on the physician's experience with the drug, toxicity profile, and patient's preferences, whereas biomarkers for optimal patient selection have not been established so far. Moreover, upfront chemotherapy is still recommended in case of clinical presentation with visceral crisis, despite no evidence of superior benefit for chemotherapy regimens against CDKi-based regimens. Recent correlative biomarker analyses from pivotal trials of palbociclib and ribociclib showed that HR+/HER2-neg MBC might respond differently according to the molecular intrinsic subtype, with Luminal A and B tumors being sensitive to both CDKi, Basal-like being insensitive to endocrine therapy, irrespective of CDKi, and HER2-enriched tumors showing a benefit only with ribociclib-based therapy. Clinical case: We hereby present a paradigmatic clinical case of a woman affected by a relapsed HR+/HER2-neg MBC with bone and nodal lesions, presenting with a visceral crisis in the form of lymphangitis carcinomatosis and diagnosed with a molecularly HER2-enriched tumor, successfully treated with upfront ribociclib + fulvestrant. The patient experienced a complete symptomatic and radiologic remission of the lymphangitis with a partial response as best response, according to RECIST 1.1 criteria. The progression-free survival (PFS) was of 20 months, in line with the median PFS observed in the ribociclib + fulvestrant pivotal trial, where, however, patients with visceral crisis had been excluded. Conclusions: This clinical case confirms in the real-world setting that non-luminal subtypes can be found in HR+/HER2-neg disease and may have potential therapeutic implications in the metastatic setting. It also questions the recommendation of upfront chemotherapy in the case of a visceral crisis in the era of CDKi-based regimens. These issues merit further evaluation in prospective and larger studies.

Updated Neoadjuvant Treatment Landscape for Early Triple Negative Breast Cancer: Immunotherapy, Potential Predictive Biomarkers, and Novel Agents.

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is characterized by the absence of hormone receptor and HER2 expression, and therefore a lack of therapeutic targets. Anthracyclines and taxane-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy have historically been the cornerstone of treatment of early TNBC. However, genomic and transcriptomic analyses have suggested that TNBCs include various subtypes, characterized by peculiar genomic drivers and potential therapeutic targets. Therefore, several efforts have been made to expand the therapeutic landscape of early TNBC, leading to the introduction of platinum and immunomodulatory agents into the neoadjuvant setting. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the currently available evidence regarding platinum agents and immune-checkpoint-inhibitors for the neoadjuvant treatment of TNBC, as well as the novel target therapies that are currently being evaluated in this setting. Taking into account the economic issues and the side effects of the expanding therapeutic options, we focus on the potential efficacy biomarkers of the emerging therapies, in order to select the best therapeutic strategy for each specific patient.

Severe Immune-Related Adverse Events: A Case Series of Patients Needing Hospital Admission in a Spanish Oncology Referral Center and Review of the Literature.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have revolutionized the landscape of cancer treatment. Although several studies have shown that ICIs have a better safety profile than chemotherapy, some patients develop immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which require specialized and multidisciplinary management. Since ICI indications are rapidly increasing, it is crucial that clinicians involved in cancer care learn to identify irAEs and manage them properly. Here, we report a case series of 23 patients with severe irAEs requiring hospitalization over a period of 12 months and seize the opportunity to review and update different general features related to irAEs along with the management of the most frequent severe irAEs in our series.

COVID-19 Sequelae and the Host Proinflammatory Response: An Analysis From the OnCovid Registry.

BACKGROUND: Fifteen percent of patients with cancer experience symptomatic sequelae, which impair post-COVID-19 outcomes. In this study, we investigated whether a proinflammatory status is associated with the development of COVID-19 sequelae. METHODS: OnCovid recruited 2795 consecutive patients who were diagnosed with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 infection between February 27, 2020, and February 14, 2021. This analysis focused on COVID-19 survivors who underwent a clinical reassessment after the exclusion of patients with hematological malignancies. We evaluated the association of inflammatory markers collected at COVID-19 diagnosis with sequelae, considering the impact of previous systemic anticancer therapy. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Of 1339 eligible patients, 203 experienced at least 1 sequela (15.2%). Median baseline C-reactive protein (CRP; 77.5 mg/L vs 22.2 mg/L, P < .001), lactate dehydrogenase (310 UI/L vs 274 UI/L, P = .03), and the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR; 6.0 vs 4.3, P = .001) were statistically significantly higher among patients who experienced sequelae, whereas no association was reported for the platelet to lymphocyte ratio and the OnCovid Inflammatory Score, which includes albumin and lymphocytes. The widest area under the ROC curve (AUC) was reported for baseline CRP (AUC = 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63 to 0.69), followed by the NLR (AUC = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.61) and lactate dehydrogenase (AUC = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.61). Using a fixed categorical multivariable analysis, high CRP (odds ratio [OR] = 2.56, 95% CI: 1.67 to 3.91) and NLR (OR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.01 to 2.10) were confirmed to be statistically significantly associated with an increased risk of sequelae. Exposure to chemotherapy was associated with a decreased risk of sequelae (OR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.91), whereas no associations with immune checkpoint inhibitors, endocrine therapy, and other types of systemic anticancer therapy were found. CONCLUSIONS: Although the association between inflammatory status, recent chemotherapy and sequelae warrants further investigation, our findings suggest that a deranged proinflammatory reaction at COVID-19 diagnosis may predict for sequelae development.

Prognostic value of cutaneous reinnervation with GAP-43 in oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy (OIN) implies axonal damage of both small and large sensory nerve fibers. We aimed at comparing the neurophysiological changes occurred after treatment and the capability to recovery based on histological marker of re-innervation GAP-43. METHODS: 48 patients with cancer were assessed before and after chemotherapy (at 3 months and 12 months if available). We recorded ulnar and sural sensory nerve action potentials (SNAP), determined quantitative sensory thresholds for warm and cold (WDT, CDT), pain thresholds and collected a distal biopsy of skin to assess the intra-epidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD) with PGP9.5 and GAP-43 markers (in a subgroup of 19 patients). RESULTS: Increased WDT and CDT as well as diminished IENFD at distal leg were already found in 30% of oncologic patients before treatment. After oxaliplatin, there was a significant increase in thermal thresholds in 52% of patients, and a decrease of SNAP amplitude in the sural nerve in 67% patients. IENFD was reduced in 47% and remained unchanged in 37% after oxiplatin. The density of GAP-43 + fibers and GAP-43/PGP 9.5 ratio was similar before and after treatment showing that cutaneous re-innervation is preserved despite no clinical recovery was observed after one year. CONCLUSION: Non-selective axonal loss affects sensory fibers in OIN. However, the presence of intra-epidermal regenerative sprouts detected by GAP-43 may reduce the impact of neurotoxicity in the small fibers with long-term sequelae mostly on myelinated nerve endings. Pre-oxaliplatin GAP-43 failed to identify patients with higher risk of damage or worse recovery after treatment.

Time-Dependent COVID-19 Mortality in Patients With Cancer: An Updated Analysis of the OnCovid Registry.

Importance: Whether the severity and mortality of COVID-19 in patients with cancer have improved in terms of disease management and capacity is yet to be defined. Objective: To test whether severity and mortality from COVID-19 among patients with cancer have improved during the course of the pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: OnCovid is a European registry that collects data on consecutive patients with solid or hematologic cancer and COVID-19. This multicenter case series study included real-world data from 35 institutions across 6 countries (UK, Italy, Spain, France, Belgium, and Germany). This update included patients diagnosed between February 27, 2020, and February, 14, 2021. Inclusion criteria were confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and a history of solid or hematologic cancer. Exposures: SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: Deaths were differentiated at 14 days and 3 months as the 2 landmark end points. Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared by stratifying patients across 5 phases (February to March 2020, April to June 2020, July to September 2020, October to December 2020, and January to February 2021) and across 2 major outbreaks (February to June 2020 and July 2020 to February 2021). Results: At data cutoff, 2795 consecutive patients were included, with 2634 patients eligible for analysis (median [IQR] age, 68 [18-77] years ; 52.8% men). Eligible patients demonstrated significant time-dependent improvement in 14-day case-fatality rate (CFR) with estimates of 29.8% (95% CI, 0.26-0.33) for February to March 2020; 20.3% (95% CI, 0.17-0.23) for April to June 2020; 12.5% (95% CI, 0.06-22.90) for July to September 2020; 17.2% (95% CI, 0.15-0.21) for October to December 2020; and 14.5% (95% CI, 0.09-0.21) for January to February 2021 (all P < .001) across the predefined phases. Compared with the second major outbreak, patients diagnosed in the first outbreak were more likely to be 65 years or older (974 of 1626 [60.3%] vs 564 of 1008 [56.1%]; P = .03), have at least 2 comorbidities (793 of 1626 [48.8%] vs 427 of 1008 [42.4%]; P = .001), and have advanced tumors (708 of 1626 [46.4%] vs 536 of 1008 [56.1%]; P < .001). Complications of COVID-19 were more likely to be seen (738 of 1626 [45.4%] vs 342 of 1008 [33.9%]; P < .001) and require hospitalization (969 of 1626 [59.8%] vs 418 of 1008 [42.1%]; P < .001) and anti-COVID-19 therapy (1004 of 1626 [61.7%] vs 501 of 1008 [49.7%]; P < .001) during the first major outbreak. The 14-day CFRs for the first and second major outbreaks were 25.6% (95% CI, 0.23-0.28) vs 16.2% (95% CI, 0.13-0.19; P < .001), respectively. After adjusting for country, sex, age, comorbidities, tumor stage and status, anti-COVID-19 and anticancer therapy, and COVID-19 complications, patients diagnosed in the first outbreak had an increased risk of death at 14 days (hazard ratio [HR], 1.85; 95% CI, 1.47-2.32) and 3 months (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.08-1.51) compared with those diagnosed in the second outbreak. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this registry-based study suggest that mortality in patients with cancer diagnosed with COVID-19 has improved in Europe; this improvement may be associated with earlier diagnosis, improved management, and dynamic changes in community transmission over time.

COVID-19 in breast cancer patients: a subanalysis of the OnCovid registry.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients are at higher risk of COVID-19 complications and mortality than the rest of the population. Breast cancer patients seem to have better prognosis when infected by SARS-CoV-2 than other cancer patients. METHODS: We report a subanalysis of the OnCovid study providing more detailed information in the breast cancer population. RESULTS: We included 495 breast cancer patients with a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Mean age was 62.6 years; 31.5% presented more than one comorbidity. The most frequent breast cancer subtype was luminal-like (n = 245, 49.5%) and 177 (35.8%) had metastatic disease. A total of 332 (67.1%) patients were receiving active treatment, with radical intent in 232 (47.6%) of them. Hospitalization rate was 58.2% and all-cause mortality rate was 20.3%. One hundred twenty-nine (26.1%) patients developed one COVID-19 complication, being acute respiratory failure the most common (n = 74, 15.0%). In the multivariable analysis, age older than 70 years, presence of COVID-19 complications, and metastatic disease were factors correlated with worse outcomes, while ongoing anticancer therapy at time of COVID-19 diagnosis appeared to be a protective factor. No particular oncological treatment was related to higher risk of complications. In the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection, 73 (18.3%) patients had some kind of modification on their oncologic treatment. At the first oncological reassessment (median time: 46.9 days ± 36.7), 255 (51.6%) patients reported to be fully recovered from the infection. There were 39 patients (7.9%) with long-term SARS-CoV-2-related complications. CONCLUSION: In the context of COVID-19, our data confirm that breast cancer patients appear to have lower complications and mortality rate than expected in other cancer populations. Most breast cancer patients can be safely treated for their neoplasm during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Oncological treatment has no impact on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 complications, and, especially in the curative setting, the treatment should be modified as little as possible.

Prevalence and impact of COVID-19 sequelae on treatment and survival of patients with cancer who recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection: evidence from the OnCovid retrospective, multicentre registry study.

BACKGROUND: The medium-term and long-term impact of COVID-19 in patients with cancer is not yet known. In this study, we aimed to describe the prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae and their impact on the survival of patients with cancer. We also aimed to describe patterns of resumption and modifications of systemic anti-cancer therapy following recovery from SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: OnCovid is an active European registry study enrolling consecutive patients aged 18 years or older with a history of solid or haematological malignancy and who had a diagnosis of RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. For this retrospective study, patients were enrolled from 35 institutions across Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK. Patients who were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection between Feb 27, 2020, and Feb 14, 2021, and entered into the registry at the point of data lock (March 1, 2021), were eligible for analysis. The present analysis was focused on COVID-19 survivors who underwent clinical reassessment at each participating institution. We documented prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae and described factors associated with their development and their association with post-COVID-19 survival, which was defined as the interval from post-COVID-19 reassessment to the patients' death or last follow-up. We also evaluated resumption of systemic anti-cancer therapy in patients treated within 4 weeks of COVID-19 diagnosis. The OnCovid study is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04393974. FINDINGS: 2795 patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection between Feb 27, 2020, and Feb 14, 2021, were entered into the study by the time of the data lock on March 1, 2021. After the exclusion of ineligible patients, the final study population consisted of 2634 patients. 1557 COVID-19 survivors underwent a formal clinical reassessment after a median of 22·1 months (IQR 8·4-57·8) from cancer diagnosis and 44 days (28-329) from COVID-19 diagnosis. 234 (15·0%) patients reported COVID-19 sequelae, including respiratory symptoms (116 [49·6%]) and residual fatigue (96 [41·0%]). Sequelae were more common in men (vs women; p=0·041), patients aged 65 years or older (vs other age groups; p=0·048), patients with two or more comorbidities (vs one or none; p=0·0006), and patients with a history of smoking (vs no smoking history; p=0·0004). Sequelae were associated with hospitalisation for COVID-19 (p<0·0001), complicated COVID-19 (p<0·0001), and COVID-19 therapy (p=0·0002). With a median post-COVID-19 follow-up of 128 days (95% CI 113-148), COVID-19 sequelae were associated with an increased risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] 1·80 [95% CI 1·18-2·75]) after adjusting for time to post-COVID-19 reassessment, sex, age, comorbidity burden, tumour characteristics, anticancer therapy, and COVID-19 severity. Among 466 patients on systemic anti-cancer therapy, 70 (15·0%) permanently discontinued therapy, and 178 (38·2%) resumed treatment with a dose or regimen adjustment. Permanent treatment discontinuations were independently associated with an increased risk of death (HR 3·53 [95% CI 1·45-8·59]), but dose or regimen adjustments were not (0·84 [0·35-2·02]). INTERPRETATION: Sequelae post-COVID-19 affect up to 15% of patients with cancer and adversely affect survival and oncological outcomes after recovery. Adjustments to systemic anti-cancer therapy can be safely pursued in treatment-eligible patients. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre and the Cancer Treatment and Research Trust.

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.

Encephalitis Associated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Treatment in Patients With Melanoma.

Since the approval of immune checkpoint anti-programmed cell death protein 1 antibodies (pembrolizumab and nivolumab) and anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (ipilimumab) in combination or monotherapy, significant advances have been made in the treatment of metastatic melanoma. The nonspecific immune stimulation resulting from these drugs can case a wide range of side effects in many organs including the nervous system, named immune-related adverse events. Few immune-related encephalitis associated with these antibodies have been described in the literature. It is a rare complication (<1% of the total of immune-related adverse events) but it can be fatal if not diagnosed and treated on time. We describe 3 cases of patients with melanoma, which were treated with a combination of ipilimumab-nivolumab (case 1), ipilimumab monotherapy (case 2), and nivolumab monotherapy (case 3), who developed an encephalitis which was related to immune checkpoint therapy.

Determinants of enhanced vulnerability to coronavirus disease 2019 in UK patients with cancer: a European study.

BACKGROUND: Despite high contagiousness and rapid spread, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to heterogeneous outcomes across affected nations. Within Europe (EU), the United Kingdom (UK) is the most severely affected country, with a death toll in excess of 100,000 as of January 2021. We aimed to compare the national impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the risk of death in UK patients with cancer versus those in continental EU. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of the OnCovid study database, a European registry of patients with cancer consecutively diagnosed with COVID-19 in 27 centres from 27th February to 10th September 2020. We analysed case fatality rates and risk of death at 30 days and 6 months stratified by region of origin (UK versus EU). We compared patient characteristics at baseline including oncological and COVID-19-specific therapy across UK and EU cohorts and evaluated the association of these factors with the risk of adverse outcomes in multivariable Cox regression models. FINDINGS: Compared with EU (n = 924), UK patients (n = 468) were characterised by higher case fatality rates (40.38% versus 26.5%, p < 0.0001) and higher risk of death at 30 days (hazard ratio [HR], 1.64 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.36-1.99]) and 6 months after COVID-19 diagnosis (47.64% versus 33.33%; p < 0.0001; HR, 1.59 [95% CI, 1.33-1.88]). UK patients were more often men, were of older age and have more comorbidities than EU counterparts (p < 0.01). Receipt of anticancer therapy was lower in UK than in EU patients (p < 0.001). Despite equal proportions of complicated COVID-19, rates of intensive care admission and use of mechanical ventilation, UK patients with cancer were less likely to receive anti-COVID-19 therapies including corticosteroids, antivirals and interleukin-6 antagonists (p < 0.0001). Multivariable analyses adjusted for imbalanced prognostic factors confirmed the UK cohort to be characterised by worse risk of death at 30 days and 6 months, independent of the patient's age, gender, tumour stage and status; number of comorbidities; COVID-19 severity and receipt of anticancer and anti-COVID-19 therapy. Rates of permanent cessation of anticancer therapy after COVID-19 were similar in the UK and EU cohorts. INTERPRETATION: UK patients with cancer have been more severely impacted by the unfolding of the COVID-19 pandemic despite societal risk mitigation factors and rapid deferral of anticancer therapy. The increased frailty of UK patients with cancer highlights high-risk groups that should be prioritised for anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Continued evaluation of long-term outcomes is warranted.

Systemic pro-inflammatory response identifies patients with cancer with adverse outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection: the OnCovid Inflammatory Score.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer are particularly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The systemic inflammatory response is a pathogenic mechanism shared by cancer progression and COVID-19. We investigated systemic inflammation as a driver of severity and mortality from COVID-19, evaluating the prognostic role of commonly used inflammatory indices in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer accrued to the OnCovid study. METHODS: In a multicenter cohort of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer in Europe, we evaluated dynamic changes in neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio (NLR); platelet:lymphocyte ratio (PLR); Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), renamed the OnCovid Inflammatory Score (OIS); modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS); and Prognostic Index (PI) in relation to oncological and COVID-19 infection features, testing their prognostic potential in independent training (n=529) and validation (n=542) sets. RESULTS: We evaluated 1071 eligible patients, of which 625 (58.3%) were men, and 420 were patients with malignancy in advanced stage (39.2%), most commonly genitourinary (n=216, 20.2%). 844 (78.8%) had ≥1 comorbidity and 754 (70.4%) had ≥1 COVID-19 complication. NLR, OIS, and mGPS worsened at COVID-19 diagnosis compared with pre-COVID-19 measurement (p<0.01), recovering in survivors to pre-COVID-19 levels. Patients in poorer risk categories for each index except the PLR exhibited higher mortality rates (p<0.001) and shorter median overall survival in the training and validation sets (p<0.01). Multivariable analyses revealed the OIS to be most independently predictive of survival (validation set HR 2.48, 95% CI 1.47 to 4.20, p=0.001; adjusted concordance index score 0.611). CONCLUSIONS: Systemic inflammation is a validated prognostic domain in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer and can be used as a bedside predictor of adverse outcome. Lymphocytopenia and hypoalbuminemia as computed by the OIS are independently predictive of severe COVID-19, supporting their use for risk stratification. Reversal of the COVID-19-induced proinflammatory state is a putative therapeutic strategy in patients with cancer.

Development and validation for research assessment of Oncotype DX® Breast Recurrence Score, EndoPredict® and Prosigna®.

Multi-gene prognostic signatures including the Oncotype® DX Recurrence Score (RS), EndoPredict® (EP) and Prosigna® (Risk Of Recurrence, ROR) are widely used to predict the likelihood of distant recurrence in patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive (ER+), HER2-negative breast cancer. Here, we describe the development and validation of methods to recapitulate RS, EP and ROR scores from NanoString expression data. RNA was available from 107 tumours from postmenopausal women with early-stage, ER+, HER2- breast cancer from the translational Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination study (TransATAC) where previously these signatures had been assessed with commercial methodology. Gene expression was measured using NanoString nCounter. For RS and EP, conversion factors to adjust for cross-platform variation were estimated using linear regression. For ROR, the steps to perform subgroup-specific normalisation of the gene expression data and calibration factors to calculate the 46-gene ROR score were assessed and verified. Training with bootstrapping (n = 59) was followed by validation (n = 48) using adjusted, research use only (RUO) NanoString-based algorithms. In the validation set, there was excellent concordance between the RUO scores and their commercial counterparts (rc(RS) = 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.97 with level of agreement (LoA) of -7.69 to 8.12; rc(EP) = 0.97, 95% CI 0.96-0.98 with LoA of -0.64 to 1.26 and rc(ROR) = 0.97 (95% CI 0.94-0.98) with LoA of -8.65 to 10.54). There was also a strong agreement in risk stratification: (RS: κ = 0.86, p < 0.0001; EP: κ = 0.87, p < 0.0001; ROR: κ = 0.92, p < 0.001). In conclusion, the calibrated algorithms recapitulate the commercial RS and EP scores on individual biopsies and ROR scores on samples based on subgroup-centreing method using NanoString expression data.

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.