Phase 1a dose escalation study of ivonescimab (AK112/SMT112), an anti-PD-1/VEGF-A bispecific antibody, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Studies showed that vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors could improve therapeutic efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies by transforming the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME) into an immunoresponsive TME. Ivonescimab is a first-in-class, humanized tetravalent bispecific antibody targeting PD-1 and VEGF-A simultaneously. Here, we report the first-in-human, phase 1a study of ivonescimab in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumors were treated with ivonescimab 0.3, 1, 3, 10, 20 or 30 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks using a 3+3+3 dose escalation design. Dose expansion occurred at 10 and 20 mg/kg in selected tumor types. The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability, and to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). The secondary objectives included pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and preliminary antitumor activity based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1. RESULTS: Between October 2, 2019 and January 14, 2021, a total of 51 patients were enrolled and received ivonescimab. Two dose-limiting toxicities were reported at 30 mg/kg. The MTD of ivonescimab was 20 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Grade≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 14 patients (27.5%). The most common TRAEs of any grade were rash (29.4%), arthralgia (19.6%), hypertension (19.6%), fatigue (17.6%), diarrhea (15.7%) and pruritus (11.8%). The most common grade≥3 TRAEs were hypertension (7/51, 13.7%), alanine aminotransferase increased (3/51, 5.2%), aspartate aminotransferase increased (2/51, 3.9%) and colitis (2/51, 3.9%). Of 47 patients who had at least one postbaseline assessment, the confirmed objective response rate was 25.5% (12/47) and disease control rate was 63.8% (30/47). Among 19 patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, 5 patients (26.3%) achieved partial response (PR). Efficacy signals were also observed in patients with mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) colorectal cancer, non-small cell lung cancer, and both MMR deficient and pMMR endometrial cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Ivonescimab demonstrated manageable safety profiles and promising efficacy signals in multiple solid tumors. Exploration of alternative dosing regimens of ivonescimab monotherapy and combination therapies is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04047290.

A gut microbial signature for combination immune checkpoint blockade across cancer types.

Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) targeting programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte protein 4 (CTLA-4) can induce remarkable, yet unpredictable, responses across a variety of cancers. Studies suggest that there is a relationship between a cancer patient's gut microbiota composition and clinical response to ICB; however, defining microbiome-based biomarkers that generalize across cohorts has been challenging. This may relate to previous efforts quantifying microbiota to species (or higher taxonomic rank) abundances, whereas microbial functions are often strain specific. Here, we performed deep shotgun metagenomic sequencing of baseline fecal samples from a unique, richly annotated phase 2 trial cohort of patients with diverse rare cancers treated with combination ICB (n = 106 discovery cohort). We demonstrate that strain-resolved microbial abundances improve machine learning predictions of ICB response and 12-month progression-free survival relative to models built using species-rank quantifications or comprehensive pretreatment clinical factors. Through a meta-analysis of gut metagenomes from a further six comparable studies (n = 364 validation cohort), we found cross-cancer (and cross-country) validity of strain-response signatures, but only when the training and test cohorts used concordant ICB regimens (anti-PD-1 monotherapy or combination anti-PD-1 plus anti-CTLA-4). This suggests that future development of gut microbiome diagnostics or therapeutics should be tailored according to ICB treatment regimen rather than according to cancer type.

Decentralized Clinical Trials as a New Paradigm of Trial Delivery to Improve Equity of Access.

Importance: The need to maintain clinical trial recruitment during the COVID-19 pandemic has precipitated the rapid uptake of digital health for the conduct of clinical trials. Different terms are used in different jurisdictions and clinical contexts, including digital trials, networked trials, teletrials (TT), and decentralized clinical trials (DCT) with a need to agree to terms. Observations: This clinical care review summarized publications and gray literature, including government policies for the safe conduct of clinical trials using digital health. It compares 2 frequently used methodologies, DCT and TT, first developed before the COVID-19 pandemic by trialists and stakeholders in Australia to improve access to cancer clinical trials for geographically dispersed populations. TT uses a networked approach to implement clinical trials to share care between facilities and uses an agreement between sites or a supervision plan to improve governance and safety. Government regulators have adapted existing regulations and invested in the rollout of the TT model. The term DCT emerged in the northern hemisphere and has been the subject of guidance from regulatory agencies. DCT uses digital health to deliver care in nontraditional sites, such as participants' homes, but does not mandate a networked approach between health facilities or require a supervision plan to be in place. Conclusions and Relevance: TT can be considered as a specific type of DCT with several potential advantages, including upskilling across a network. DCT is a new paradigm for the use of digital health in the safe conduct of clinical trials and is a transformative issue in cancer care, addressing disparities in access to clinical trials and improving clinical outcomes.

A phase II trial of nivolumab followed by ipilimumab and nivolumab in advanced non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of sequential treatment with ipilimumab and nivolumab following progression on nivolumab monotherapy in individuals with advanced, non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: UNISoN (ANZUP1602; NCT03177239) was an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 clinical trial that recruited adults with immunotherapy-naïve, advanced nccRCC. Participants received nivolumab 240 mg i.v. two-weekly for up to 12 months (Part 1), followed by sequential addition of ipilimumab 1 mg/kg three-weekly for four doses to nivolumab if disease progression occurred during treatment (Part 2). The primary endpoint was objective tumour response rate (OTRR) and secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and toxicity (treatment-related adverse events). RESULTS: A total of 83 participants were eligible for Part 1, including people with papillary (37/83, 45%), chromophobe (15/83, 18%) and other nccRCC subtypes (31/83, 37%); 41 participants enrolled in Part 2. The median (range) follow-up was 22 (16-30) months. In Part 1, the OTRR was 16.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.5-26.7), the median DOR was 20.7 months (95% CI 3.7-not reached) and the median PFS was 4.0 months (95% CI 3.6-7.4). Treatment-related adverse events were reported in 71% of participants; 19% were grade 3 or 4. For participants who enrolled in Part 2, the OTRR was 10%; the median DOR was 13.5 months (95% CI 4.8-19.7) and the median PFS 2.6 months (95% CI 2.2-3.8). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 80% of these participants; 49% had grade 3, 4 or 5. The median OS was 24 months (95% CI 16-28) from time of enrolment in Part 1. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab monotherapy had a modest effect overall, with a few participants experiencing a long DOR. Sequential combination immunotherapy by addition of ipilimumab in the context of disease progression to nivolumab in nccRCC is not supported by this study, with only a minority of participants benefiting from this strategy.

A Population-Based Family Case-Control Study of Sun Exposure and Follicular Lymphoma Risk.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiologic evidence suggests an inverse association between sun exposure and follicular lymphoma risk. METHODS: We conducted an Australian population-based family case-control study based on 666 cases and 459 controls (288 related, 171 unrelated). Participants completed a lifetime residence and work calendar and recalled outdoor hours on weekdays, weekends, and holidays in the warmer and cooler months at ages 10, 20, 30, and 40 years, and clothing types worn in the warmer months. We used a group-based trajectory modeling approach to identify outdoor hour trajectories over time and examined associations with follicular lymphoma risk using logistic regression. RESULTS: We observed an inverse association between follicular lymphoma risk and several measures of high lifetime sun exposure, particularly intermittent exposure (weekends, holidays). Associations included reduced risk with increasing time outdoors on holidays in the warmer months [highest category OR = 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.42-0.76; Ptrend < 0.01], high outdoor hours on weekends in the warmer months (highest category OR = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.52-0.96), and increasing time outdoors in the warmer and cooler months combined (highest category OR = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.50-0.91; Ptrend 0.01). Risk was reduced for high outdoor hour maintainers in the warmer months across the decade years (OR = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53-0.96). CONCLUSIONS: High total and intermittent sun exposure, particularly in the warmer months, may be protective against the development of follicular lymphoma. IMPACT: Although sun exposure is not recommended as a cancer control policy, confirming this association may provide insights regarding the future control of this intractable malignancy.

Telehealth in oncology: a cost analysis to evaluate the financial impact of implementing regional trial hubs within a phase 3 cancer clinical trial.

This cost analysis, from a societal perspective, compared the cost difference of a networked teletrial model (NTTM) with four regional hubs versus conventional trial operation at a single metropolitan specialist centre. The Australian phase 3 cancer interventional randomised controlled trial included 152 of 328 regional participants (patient enrolment 2018-2021; 6-month primary end point). The NTTM significantly reduced (AU$2155 per patient) patient travel cost and time and lost productivity.

Patient and healthcare professional acceptability of pharmacogenetic screening for DPYD and UGT1A1: A cross sectional survey.

This study explored the acceptability of a novel pharmacist-led pharmacogenetics (PGx) screening program among patients with cancer and healthcare professionals (HCPs) taking part in a multicenter clinical trial of PGx testing (PACIFIC-PGx ANZCTR:12621000251820). Medical oncologists, oncology pharmacists, and patients with cancer from across four sites (metropolitan/regional), took part in an observational, cross-sectional survey. Participants were recruited from the multicenter trial. Two study-specific surveys were developed to inform implementation strategies for scaled and sustainable translation into routine clinical care: one consisting of 21 questions targeting HCPs and one consisting of 17 questions targeting patients. Responses were collected from 24 HCPs and 288 patients. The 5-to-7-day PGx results turnaround time was acceptable to HCP (100%) and patients (69%). Most HCPs (92%) indicated that it was appropriate for the PGx clinical pharmacist to provide results to patients. Patients reported equal preference for receiving PGx results from a doctor/pharmacist. Patients and HCPs highly rated the pharmacist-led PGx service. HCPs were overall accepting of the program, with the majority (96%) willing to offer PGx testing to their patients beyond the trial. HCPs identified that lack of financial reimbursements (62%) and lack of infrastructure (38%) were the main reasons likely to prevent/slow the implementation of PGx screening program into routine clinical care. Survey data have shown overall acceptability from patients and HCPs participating in the PGx Program. Barriers to implementation of PGx testing in routine care have been identified, providing opportunity to develop targeted implementation strategies for scaled translation into routine practice.

Occupational exposure to extremely low-frequency magnetic fields and follicular lymphoma risk: a family case-control study.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to examine the relationship between occupational exposure to extremely low-frequency magnetic fields (ELF-MFs) and follicular lymphoma (FL) risk. METHODS: We conducted a family case-control study between 2011 and 2016 in Australia and included 681 cases. Controls were either a family member of cases (related (n=294), unrelated (n=179)) or were unrelated recruited for a similarly designed Australian multiple myeloma study (n=711). We obtained detailed job histories using lifetime work calendars. We assigned exposure to ELF-MFs using an enhanced job exposure matrix, with a lag period of 10 years. We examined associations with FL risk using logistic regression accounting for relatedness between cases and controls. We performed sensitivity analyses including by control type, by sex, complete case analyses, ELF-MF exposure percentiles in addition to quartiles, ELF-MF exposure in the maximum exposed job, a shorter lag period (1 year) and the cumulative exposure in the most recent time period (1-9 years). RESULTS: We observed no association with the average intensity, duration or lifetime cumulative exposure to occupational ELF-MF exposure in the primary or sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings do not support an association between occupational ELF-MF exposure and FL risk. Although the inclusion of family members as part of the larger control group may have biased our risk estimates towards the null, findings were similar in sensitivity analyses restricted to cases and unrelated controls. Further research incorporating enhanced exposure assessment to ELF-MF is warranted to inform occupational safety regulations and any potential role in lymphomagenesis.

Risk-Directed Ambulatory Thromboprophylaxis in Lung and Gastrointestinal Cancers: The TARGET-TP Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Thromboprophylaxis for individuals receiving systemic anticancer therapies has proven to be effective. Potential to maximize benefits relies on improved risk-directed strategies, but existing risk models underperform in cohorts with lung and gastrointestinal cancers. Objective: To assess clinical benefits and safety of biomarker-driven thromboprophylaxis and to externally validate a biomarker thrombosis risk assessment model for individuals with lung and gastrointestinal cancers. Design, Setting, and Participants: This open-label, phase 3 randomized clinical trial (Targeted Thromboprophylaxis in Ambulatory Patients Receiving Anticancer Therapies [TARGET-TP]) conducted from June 2018 to July 2021 (with 6-month primary follow-up) included adults aged 18 years or older commencing systemic anticancer therapies for lung or gastrointestinal cancers at 1 metropolitan and 4 regional hospitals in Australia. Thromboembolism risk assessment based on fibrinogen and d-dimer levels stratified individuals into low-risk (observation) and high-risk (randomized) cohorts. Interventions: High-risk patients were randomized 1:1 to receive enoxaparin, 40 mg, subcutaneously daily for 90 days (extending up to 180 days according to ongoing risk) or no thromboprophylaxis (control). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was objectively confirmed thromboembolism at 180 days. Key secondary outcomes included bleeding, survival, and risk model validation. Results: Of 782 eligible adults, 328 (42%) were enrolled in the trial (median age, 65 years [range, 30-88 years]; 176 male [54%]). Of these participants, 201 (61%) had gastrointestinal cancer, 127 (39%) had lung cancer, and 132 (40%) had metastatic disease; 200 (61%) were high risk (100 in each group), and 128 (39%) were low risk. In the high-risk cohort, thromboembolism occurred in 8 individuals randomized to enoxaparin (8%) and 23 control individuals (23%) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.31; 95% CI, 0.15-0.70; P = .005; number needed to treat, 6.7). Thromboembolism occurred in 10 low-risk individuals (8%) (high-risk control vs low risk: HR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.58-6.99; P = .002). Risk model sensitivity was 70%, and specificity was 61%. The rate of major bleeding was low, occurring in 1 participant randomized to enoxaparin (1%), 2 in the high-risk control group (2%), and 3 in the low-risk group (2%) (P = .88). Six-month mortality was 13% in the enoxaparin group vs 26% in the high-risk control group (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.24-0.93; P = .03) and 7% in the low-risk group (vs high-risk control: HR, 4.71; 95% CI, 2.13-10.42; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of individuals with lung and gastrointestinal cancers who were stratified by risk score according to thrombosis risk, risk-directed thromboprophylaxis reduced thromboembolism with a desirable number needed to treat, without safety concerns, and with reduced mortality. Individuals at low risk avoided unnecessary intervention. The findings suggest that biomarker-driven, risk-directed primary thromboprophylaxis is an appropriate approach in this population. Trial Registration: ANZCTR Identifier: ACTRN12618000811202.

Patterns of care for people with small cell lung cancer in Victoria, 2011-19: a retrospective, population-based registry data study.

OBJECTIVES: To report stage-specific patterns of treatment and the influence of management and treatment type on survival rates for people newly diagnosed with small cell lung cancer (SCLC). DESIGN: Cross-sectional patterns of care study; analysis of data prospectively collected for the Victorian Lung Cancer Registry (VLCR). SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: All people diagnosed with SCLC in Victoria during 1 April 2011 - 18 December 2019. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Stage-specific management and treatment of people with SCLC; median survival time. RESULTS: During 2011-19, 1006 people were diagnosed with SCLC (10.5% of all lung cancer diagnoses in Victoria); their median age was 69 years (interquartile range [IQR], 62-77 years), 429 were women (43%), and 921 were current or former smokers (92%). Clinical stage was defined for 896 people (89%; TNM stages I-III, 268 [30%]; TNM stage IV, 628 [70%]) and ECOG performance status at diagnosis for 663 (66%; 0 or 1, 489 [49%]; 2-4, 174 [17%]). The cases of 552 patients had been discussed at multidisciplinary meetings (55%), 377 people had received supportive care screening (37%), and 388 had been referred for palliative care (39%). Active treatment was received by 891 people (89%): chemotherapy, 843 (84%); radiotherapy, 460 (46%); chemotherapy and radiotherapy, 419 (42%); surgery, 23 (2%). Treatment had commenced within fourteen days of diagnosis for 632 of 875 patients (72%). Overall median survival time from diagnosis was 8.9 months (IQR, 4.2-16 months; stage I-III: 16.3 [IQR, 9.3-30] months; stage IV: 7.2 [IQR, 3.3-12] months). Multidisciplinary meeting presentation (hazard ratio [HR], 0.66; 95% CI, 0.58-0.77), multimodality treatment (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.36-0.49), and chemotherapy within fourteen days of diagnosis (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48-0.94) were each associated with lower mortality during follow-up. CONCLUSION: Rates of supportive care screening, multidisciplinary meeting evaluation, and palliative care referral for people with SCLC could be improved. A national registry of SCLC-specific management and outcomes data could improve the quality and safety of care.

SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence in a Cohort of International Travellers Returning to Rural Australia: Enablers and Barriers to Containment of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the effectiveness of the public health response to COVID-19 in our local region by documenting detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection by nucleic acid testing (NAT) positivity and seroprevalence. METHODS: In this prospective study (ACTRN12620000487910), symptomatic adult international travellers returning to regional Australia in March 2020 underwent SARS-CoV-2 NAT and SARS-CoV-2-specific serology. RESULTS: Ninety-nine eligible participants were included. Nine participants had laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2, all returning between 16-20 March 2020. Eight (89%) had a positive NAT and seven (78%) had a positive serology test. The majority returned from New Zealand. Participants most frequently presented with cough (100%), headache (66.7%) and sore throat (44.4%). No community cases were detected from 1 March to 30 June 2020. CONCLUSIONS: The study cohort of international travellers returning to regional Australia in March 2020 returned eight positive SARS-CoV-2 NAT results over a five-day window. Serology identified one additional case and was negative in two cases who were PCR positive. Longitudinal data confirmed an absence of local community transmission to 30 June 2020. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: A combination of local, national and environmental factors were necessary to prevent the establishment of community transmission in our local region.

Workforce challenges across Victorian medical oncology services.

BACKGROUND: Cancer incidence is growing, with increasing treatment options and durations. This has led to an increase workload on the current oncology workforce. The global pandemic has increased this pressure further. AIMS: To determine the current medical oncology workforce in Victoria, current shortfalls and future anticipated shortfalls beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A self-reported, cross-sectional observational study of all current adult Victorian cancer services in June 2020 examining workforce, workload and early effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: The current average workload of 242 new patients per full-time equivalent consultant in medical oncology across Victoria. This is higher than optimal to deliver a safe and efficient cancer service. The significant variation in workforce between sites highlights the areas in need of most urgent resource allocation. Use of safe prescribing practises such as electronic chemotherapy prescribing are not universal but urgently needed. CONCLUSIONS: The medical oncology workforce in Victoria is inadequate to meet current and future demands. This needs to be addressed urgently to avoid an adverse impact on cancer measures and quality standards. Better, standardised data collection is needed to allow for ongoing measures of workforce activity. Novel workforce solutions will also need to be implemented in the short and medium term in the face of global workforce shortages.

Telehealth in cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The Victorian COVID-19 Cancer Network (VCCN) Telehealth Expert Working Group aimed to evaluate the telehealth (TH) experience for cancer patients, carers and clinicians with the rapid uptake of TH in early 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a prospective multi-centre cross-sectional survey involving eight Victorian regional and metropolitan cancer services and three consumer advocacy groups. Patients or their carers and clinicians who had TH consultations between 1 July 2020 and 31 December 2020 were invited to participate in patient and clinician surveys, respectively. These surveys were opened from September to December 2020. RESULTS: The acceptability of TH via both video (82.9%) and phone (70.4%) were high though acceptability appeared to decrease in older phone TH users. Video was associated with higher satisfaction compared to phone (87.1% vs 79.7%) even though phone was more commonly used. Various themes from the qualitative surveys highlighted barriers and enablers to rapid TH implementation. DISCUSSION: The high TH acceptability supports this as a safe and effective strategy for continued care and should persist beyond the pandemic environment, where patient preferences are considered and clinically appropriate. Ongoing support to health services for infrastructure and resources, as well as expansion of reimbursement eligibility criteria for patients and health professionals, including allied health and nursing, are crucial for sustainability.

Associations between early-life growth pattern and body size and follicular lymphoma risk and survival: a family-based case-control study.

BACKGROUND: The influence of early-life growth pattern and body size on follicular lymphoma (FL) risk and survival is unclear. In this study, we aimed to investigate the association between gestational age, growth during childhood, body size, changes in body shape over time, and FL risk and survival. METHODS: We conducted a population-based family case-control study and included 706 cases and 490 controls. We ascertained gestational age, growth during childhood, body size and body shape using questionnaires and followed-up cases (median=83 months) using record linkage with national death records. We used a group-based trajectory modeling approach to identify body shape trajectories from ages 5-70. We examined associations with FL risk using unconditional logistic regression and used Cox regression to assess the association between body mass index (BMI) and all-cause and FL-specific mortality among cases. RESULTS: We found no association between gestational age, childhood height and FL risk. We observed a modest increase in FL risk with being obese 5 years prior to enrolment (OR=1.43, 95 %CI=0.99-2.06; BMI ≥30 kg/m2) and per 5-kg/m2 increase in BMI 5 years prior to enrolment (OR=1.14, 95 %CI=0.99-1.31). The excess risk for obesity 5 years prior to enrolment was higher for ever-smokers (OR=2.00, 95 %CI=1.08-3.69) than never-smokers (OR=1.14, 95 %CI=0.71-1.84). We found no association between FL risk and BMI at enrolment, BMI for heaviest lifetime weight, the highest categories of adult weight or height, trouser size, body shape at different ages or body shape trajectory. We also observed no association between all-cause or FL-specific mortality and excess adiposity at or prior to enrolment. CONCLUSION: We observed a weak association between elevated BMI and FL risk, and no association with all-cause or FL-specific mortality, consistent with previous studies. Future studies incorporating biomarkers are needed to elucidate possible mechanisms underlying the role of body composition in FL etiology.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Australian Patients with Solid Organ Cancers.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination is the cornerstone of the global public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Excess morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 infection is seen in people with cancer. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has been observed in this medically vulnerable population, although associated attitudes and beliefs remain poorly understood. METHODS: An online cross-sectional survey of people with solid organ cancers was conducted through nine health services across Australia. Demographics, cancer-related characteristics and vaccine uptake were collected. Perceptions and beliefs regarding COVID-19 vaccination were assessed using the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale and the Disease Influenced Vaccine Acceptance Scale-6. RESULTS: Between June and October 2021, 2691 people with solid organ cancers completed the survey. The median age was 62.5 years (SD = 11.8; range 19-95), 40.9% were male, 71.3% lived in metropolitan areas and 90.3% spoke English as their first language. The commonest cancer diagnoses were breast (36.6%), genitourinary (18.6%) and gastrointestinal (18.3%); 59.2% had localized disease and 56.0% were receiving anti-cancer therapy. Most participants (79.7%) had at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Vaccine uptake was higher in people who were older, male, metropolitan, spoke English as a first language and had a cancer diagnosis for more than six months. Vaccine hesitancy was higher in people who were younger, female, spoke English as a non-dominant language and lived in a regional location, and lower in people with genitourinary cancer. Vaccinated respondents were more concerned about being infected with COVID-19 and less concerned about vaccine safety and efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: People with cancer have concerns about acquiring COVID-19, which they balance against vaccine-related concerns about the potential impact on their disease progress and/or treatment. Detailed exploration of concerns in cancer patients provides valuable insights, both for discussions with individual patients and public health messaging for this vulnerable population.

Serious Underlying Medical Conditions and COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: A Large Cross-Sectional Analysis from Australia.

As COVID-19 vaccinations became available and were proven effective in preventing serious infection, uptake amongst individuals varied, including in medically vulnerable populations. This cross-sectional multi-site study examined vaccine uptake, hesitancy, and explanatory factors amongst people with serious and/or chronic health conditions, including the impact of underlying disease on attitudes to vaccination. A 42-item survey was distributed to people with cancer, diabetes, or multiple sclerosis across ten Australian health services from 30 June to 5 October 2021. The survey evaluated sociodemographic and disease-related characteristics and incorporated three validated scales measuring vaccine hesitancy and vaccine-related beliefs generally and specific to their disease: the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale and the Disease Influenced Vaccine Acceptance Scale-Six. Among 4683 participants (2548 [54.4%] female, 2108 [45.0%] male, 27 [0.6%] other; mean [SD] age, 60.6 [13.3] years; 3560 [76.0%] cancer, 842 [18.0%] diabetes, and 281 [6.0%] multiple sclerosis), 3813 (81.5%) self-reported having at least one COVID-19 vaccine. Unvaccinated status was associated with younger age, female sex, lower education and income, English as a second language, and residence in regional areas. Unvaccinated participants were more likely to report greater vaccine hesitancy and more negative perceptions toward vaccines. Disease-related vaccine concerns were associated with unvaccinated status and hesitancy, including greater complacency about COVID-19 infection, and concerns relating to vaccine efficacy and impact on their disease and/or treatment. This highlights the need to develop targeted strategies and education about COVID-19 vaccination to support medically vulnerable populations and health professionals.