The impact of cancer metastases on COVID-19 outcomes: A COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry-based retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 can have a particularly detrimental effect on patients with cancer, but no studies to date have examined if the presence, or site, of metastatic cancer is related to COVID-19 outcomes. METHODS: Using the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry, the authors identified 10,065 patients with COVID-19 and cancer (2325 with and 7740 without metastasis at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis). The primary ordinal outcome was COVID-19 severity: not hospitalized, hospitalized but did not receive supplemental O2 , hospitalized and received supplemental O2 , admitted to an intensive care unit, received mechanical ventilation, or died from any cause. The authors used ordinal logistic regression models to compare COVID-19 severity by presence and specific site of metastatic cancer. They used logistic regression models to assess 30-day all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Compared to patients without metastasis, patients with metastases have increased hospitalization rates (59% vs. 49%) and higher 30 day mortality (18% vs. 9%). Patients with metastasis to bone, lung, liver, lymph nodes, and brain have significantly higher COVID-19 severity (adjusted odds ratios [ORs], 1.38, 1.59, 1.38, 1.00, and 2.21) compared to patients without metastases at those sites. Patients with metastasis to the lung have significantly higher odds of 30-day mortality (adjusted OR, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-2.00) when adjusting for COVID-19 severity. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with metastatic cancer, especially with metastasis to the brain, are more likely to have severe outcomes after COVID-19 whereas patients with metastasis to the lung, compared to patients with cancer metastasis to other sites, have the highest 30-day mortality after COVID-19.

Systemic Anticancer Therapy and Thromboembolic Outcomes in Hospitalized Patients With Cancer and COVID-19.

Importance: Systematic data on the association between anticancer therapies and thromboembolic events (TEEs) in patients with COVID-19 are lacking. Objective: To assess the association between anticancer therapy exposure within 3 months prior to COVID-19 and TEEs following COVID-19 diagnosis in patients with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This registry-based retrospective cohort study included patients who were hospitalized and had active cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data were accrued from March 2020 to December 2021 and analyzed from December 2021 to October 2022. Exposure: Treatments of interest (TOIs) (endocrine therapy, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors/tyrosine kinase inhibitors [VEGFis/TKIs], immunomodulators [IMiDs], immune checkpoint inhibitors [ICIs], chemotherapy) vs reference (no systemic therapy) in 3 months prior to COVID-19. Main Outcomes and Measures: Main outcomes were (1) venous thromboembolism (VTE) and (2) arterial thromboembolism (ATE). Secondary outcome was severity of COVID-19 (rates of intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, 30-day all-cause mortality following TEEs in TOI vs reference group) at 30-day follow-up. Results: Of 4988 hospitalized patients with cancer (median [IQR] age, 69 [59-78] years; 2608 [52%] male), 1869 had received 1 or more TOIs. Incidence of VTE was higher in all TOI groups: endocrine therapy, 7%; VEGFis/TKIs, 10%; IMiDs, 8%; ICIs, 12%; and chemotherapy, 10%, compared with patients not receiving systemic therapies (6%). In multivariable log-binomial regression analyses, relative risk of VTE (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.33; 95% CI, 1.04-1.69) but not ATE (aRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.56-1.16) was significantly higher in those exposed to all TOIs pooled together vs those with no exposure. Among individual drugs, ICIs were significantly associated with VTE (aRR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.01-2.07). Also noted were significant associations between VTE and active and progressing cancer (aRR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.01-2.03), history of VTE (aRR, 3.10; 95% CI, 2.38-4.04), and high-risk site of cancer (aRR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.14-1.75). Black patients had a higher risk of TEEs (aRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.03-1.50) than White patients. Patients with TEEs had high intensive care unit admission (46%) and mechanical ventilation (31%) rates. Relative risk of death in patients with TEEs was higher in those exposed to TOIs vs not (aRR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.91-1.38) and was significantly associated with poor performance status (aRR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.30-2.40) and active/progressing cancer (aRR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.13-2.13). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, relative risk of developing VTE was high among patients receiving TOIs and varied by the type of therapy, underlying risk factors, and demographics, such as race and ethnicity. These findings highlight the need for close monitoring and perhaps personalized thromboprophylaxis to prevent morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19-related thromboembolism in patients with cancer.

COVID-19 severity and cardiovascular outcomes in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer and cardiovascular disease.

Background: Data regarding outcomes among patients with cancer and co-morbid cardiovascular disease (CVD)/cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) after SARS-CoV-2 infection are limited. Objectives: To compare Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related complications among cancer patients with and without co-morbid CVD/CVRF. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of patients with cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2, reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from 03/17/2020 to 12/31/2021. CVD/CVRF was defined as established CVD or no established CVD, male ≥ 55 or female ≥ 60 years, and one additional CVRF. The primary endpoint was an ordinal COVID-19 severity outcome including need for hospitalization, supplemental oxygen, intensive care unit (ICU), mechanical ventilation, ICU or mechanical ventilation plus vasopressors, and death. Secondary endpoints included incident adverse CV events. Ordinal logistic regression models estimated associations of CVD/CVRF with COVID-19 severity. Effect modification by recent cancer therapy was evaluated. Results: Among 10,876 SARS-CoV-2 infected patients with cancer (median age 65 [IQR 54-74] years, 53% female, 52% White), 6253 patients (57%) had co-morbid CVD/CVRF. Co-morbid CVD/CVRF was associated with higher COVID-19 severity (adjusted OR: 1.25 [95% CI 1.11-1.40]). Adverse CV events were significantly higher in patients with CVD/CVRF (all p<0.001). CVD/CVRF was associated with worse COVID-19 severity in patients who had not received recent cancer therapy, but not in those undergoing active cancer therapy (OR 1.51 [95% CI 1.31-1.74] vs. OR 1.04 [95% CI 0.90-1.20], pinteraction <0.001). Conclusions: Co-morbid CVD/CVRF is associated with higher COVID-19 severity among patients with cancer, particularly those not receiving active cancer therapy. While infrequent, COVID-19 related CV complications were higher in patients with comorbid CVD/CVRF. (COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium Registry [CCC19]; NCT04354701).

Safety and Activity of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in People Living With HIV and Cancer: A Real-World Report From the Cancer Therapy Using Checkpoint Inhibitors in People Living With HIV-International (CATCH-IT) Consortium.

PURPOSE: Compared with people living without HIV (PWOH), people living with HIV (PWH) and cancer have traditionally been excluded from immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) trials. Furthermore, there is a paucity of real-world data on the use of ICIs in PWH and cancer. METHODS: This retrospective study included PWH treated with anti-PD-1- or anti-PD-L1-based therapies for advanced cancers. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Objective response rates (ORRs) were measured per RECIST 1.1 or other tumor-specific criteria, whenever feasible. Restricted mean survival time (RMST) was used to compare OS and PFS between matched PWH and PWOH with metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC). RESULTS: Among 390 PWH, median age was 58 years, 85% (n = 331) were males, 36% (n = 138) were Black; 70% (n = 274) received anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 monotherapy. Most common cancers were NSCLC (28%, n = 111), hepatocellular carcinoma ([HCC]; 11%, n = 44), and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC; 10%, n = 39). Seventy percent (152/216) had CD4+ T cell counts ≥200 cells/µL, and 94% (179/190) had HIV viral load <400 copies/mL. Twenty percent (79/390) had any grade immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and 7.7% (30/390) had grade ≥3 irAEs. ORRs were 69% (nonmelanoma skin cancer), 31% (NSCLC), 16% (HCC), and 11% (HNSCC). In the matched mNSCLC cohort (61 PWH v 110 PWOH), 20% (12/61) PWH and 22% (24/110) PWOH had irAEs. Adjusted 42-month RMST difference was -0.06 months (95% CI, -5.49 to 5.37; P = .98) for PFS and 2.23 months (95% CI, -4.02 to 8.48; P = .48) for OS. CONCLUSION: Among PWH, ICIs demonstrated differential activity across cancer types with no excess toxicity. Safety and activity of ICIs were similar between matched cohorts of PWH and PWOH with mNSCLC.

Associations Between Intraductal Prostate Cancer and Metastases Following Radical Prostatectomy in Men With Prostate Cancer in the Veterans Affairs Database.

PURPOSE: Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) is a relatively unstudied feature present in some prostate cancer (PC) diagnoses with several studies suggesting associations with higher Gleason scores (GS) and earlier time to biochemical recurrence (BCR) after definitive treatment. We looked to identify cases of IDC-P in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) database and measure associations between IDC-P and pathological stage, BCR, and metastases. METHODS: Patients in the VHA database diagnosed with PC from 2000 to 2017, treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) at the VHA were included in the cohort. BCR was defined as post-RP PSA >0.2 or administration of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Time to event was defined as time from RP to event or censor. Differences in cumulative incidences were assessed through Gray's test. Associations with IDC-P and pathologic features at RP, BCR and metastases were assessed through multivariable logistic and Cox regression models. RESULTS: Of 13,913 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 45 patients had IDC-P. Median follow up was 8.8 years from RP. Multivariable logistic regressions showed patients with IDC-P were more likely to have GS ≥8 (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.14, P = .009) and higher T stages (T3 or 4 vs. T1 or 2 OR 1.14, P < .001). In total, 4,318 patients experienced a BCR, and 1,252 patients developed metastases of whom 26 and 12, respectively, had IDC-P. On multivariable regression IDC-P was associated with higher risk of BCR (IDC-P Hazard Ratio (HR) 1.71, P = .006) and metastases (HR 2.84, P < .001). Cumulative incidence of metastases at 4 years for IDC-P and non-IDC-P were 15.9% and 5.5% (P < .001) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis, IDC-P was associated with higher Gleason score at RP, shorter time to BCR, and higher rates of metastases. Further studies are warranted to investigate the molecular underpinnings of IDC-P to better guide treatment strategies for this aggressive disease entity.

Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections among patients with cancer following two and three doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines: a retrospective observational study from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium.

Background: Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections following vaccination against COVID-19 are of international concern. Patients with cancer have been observed to have worse outcomes associated with COVID-19 during the pandemic. We sought to evaluate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with cancer who developed breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections after 2 or 3 doses of mRNA vaccines. Methods: We evaluated the clinical characteristics of patients with cancer who developed breakthrough infections using data from the multi-institutional COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19; NCT04354701). Analysis was restricted to patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosed in 2021 or 2022, to allow for a contemporary unvaccinated control population; potential differences were evaluated using a multivariable logistic regression model after inverse probability of treatment weighting to adjust for potential baseline confounding variables. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) are reported. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality, with key secondary endpoints of hospitalization and ICU and/or mechanical ventilation (ICU/MV). Findings: The analysis included 2486 patients, of which 564 and 385 had received 2 or 3 doses of an mRNA vaccine prior to infection, respectively. Hematologic malignancies and recent receipt of systemic anti-neoplastic therapy were more frequent among vaccinated patients. Vaccination was associated with improved outcomes: in the primary analysis, 2 doses (aOR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.44-0.88) and 3 doses (aOR: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.11-0.36) were associated with decreased 30-day mortality. There were similar findings for the key secondary endpoints of ICU/MV (aOR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.45-0.82 and 0.37, 95% CI: 0.24-0.58) and hospitalization (aOR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.48-0.75 and 0.35, 95% CI: 0.26-0.46) for 2 and 3 doses, respectively. Importantly, Black patients had higher rates of hospitalization (aOR: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.12-1.92), and Hispanic patients presented with higher rates of ICU/MV (aOR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.06-2.44). Interpretation: Vaccination against COVID-19, especially with additional doses, is a fundamental strategy in the prevention of adverse outcomes including death, among patients with cancer. Funding: This study was partly supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute grant number P30 CA068485 to C-YH, YS, SM, JLW; T32-CA236621 and P30-CA046592 to C.R.F; CTSA 2UL1TR001425-05A1 to TMW-D; ACS/FHI Real-World Data Impact Award, P50 MD017341-01, R21 CA242044-01A1, Susan G. Komen Leadership Grant Hunt to MKA. REDCap is developed and supported by Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research grant support (UL1 TR000445 from NCATS/NIH).

Interplay of Immunosuppression and Immunotherapy Among Patients With Cancer and COVID-19.

Importance: Cytokine storm due to COVID-19 can cause high morbidity and mortality and may be more common in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy (IO) due to immune system activation. Objective: To determine the association of baseline immunosuppression and/or IO-based therapies with COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm in patients with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This registry-based retrospective cohort study included 12 046 patients reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from March 2020 to May 2022. The CCC19 registry is a centralized international multi-institutional registry of patients with COVID-19 with a current or past diagnosis of cancer. Records analyzed included patients with active or previous cancer who had a laboratory-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction and/or serologic findings. Exposures: Immunosuppression due to therapy; systemic anticancer therapy (IO or non-IO). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a 5-level ordinal scale of COVID-19 severity: no complications; hospitalized without requiring oxygen; hospitalized and required oxygen; intensive care unit admission and/or mechanical ventilation; death. The secondary outcome was the occurrence of cytokine storm. Results: The median age of the entire cohort was 65 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-74) years and 6359 patients were female (52.8%) and 6598 (54.8%) were non-Hispanic White. A total of 599 (5.0%) patients received IO, whereas 4327 (35.9%) received non-IO systemic anticancer therapies, and 7120 (59.1%) did not receive any antineoplastic regimen within 3 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Although no difference in COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm was found in the IO group compared with the untreated group in the total cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56-1.13, and aOR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.41-1.93, respectively), patients with baseline immunosuppression treated with IO (vs untreated) had worse COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm (aOR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.38-8.01, and aOR, 4.41; 95% CI, 1.71-11.38, respectively). Patients with immunosuppression receiving non-IO therapies (vs untreated) also had worse COVID-19 severity (aOR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.36-2.35) and cytokine storm (aOR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.42-3.79). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that in patients with cancer and COVID-19, administration of systemic anticancer therapies, especially IO, in the context of baseline immunosuppression was associated with severe clinical outcomes and the development of cytokine storm. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04354701.

The Prognostic Significance of Homologous Recombination Repair Pathway Alterations in Metastatic Hormone Sensitive Prostate Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway is a frequently mutated pathway in advanced prostate cancer. The clinical course of patients with HRR gene alterations who have metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) has not been fully characterized. Here, we examine the outcomes of men with mHSPC with HRR alterations. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective analysis of men with mHSPC who underwent next generation sequencing. The primary objective was to assess the time from diagnosis of mHSPC to metastatic castrate resistance prostate cancer (mCRPC) in patients with pathogenic HRR alterations compared to individuals lacking these alterations. Key secondary objectives included time to mCRPC in prespecified cohorts, PSA response, and overall survival. RESULTS: 151 men with mHSPC were identified for the study. 24% (N = 37) had pathogenic HRR gene alterations detected with the most common alterations found in BRCA2 (n = 15), ATM (n = 10), and CDK12 (n = 7). Time to mCRPC was significantly decreased in patients with HRR gene alterations versus those without such alterations (12.7 vs. 16.1 months, HR 1.95, P = .02). In multivariate analysis, the effect of HRR gene alterations on time to CRPC remained significant when adjusting for age, mHSPC therapy, the volume of disease, the presence of visceral metastases, and PSA (adjusted HR 1.69, P = .02). Stratified by specific HRR gene alteration, patients with BRCA2 or CDK12 had significantly decreased time to mCRPC compared to other HRR alterations. CONCLUSION: HRR gene alterations are associated with the worse outcomes in mHSPC with significantly shorter time to mCRPC. Given the established role of Poly (ADP-ribose) Polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in mCRPC, these data highlight an opportunity to examine PARP inhibitors earlier in the clinical course for prostate cancer patients. Ongoing prospective studies will further validate the role of PARP inhibitors in mHSPC patients.

Patients Recently Treated for B-lymphoid Malignancies Show Increased Risk of Severe COVID-19.

Patients with B-lymphoid malignancies have been consistently identified as a population at high risk of severe COVID-19. Whether this is exclusively due to cancer-related deficits in humoral and cellular immunity, or whether risk of severe COVID-19 is increased by anticancer therapy, is uncertain. Using data derived from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19), we show that patients treated for B-lymphoid malignancies have an increased risk of severe COVID-19 compared with control populations of patients with non-B-lymphoid malignancies. Among patients with B-lymphoid malignancies, those who received anticancer therapy within 12 months of COVID-19 diagnosis experienced increased COVID-19 severity compared with patients with non-recently treated B-lymphoid malignancies, after adjustment for cancer status and several other prognostic factors. Our findings suggest that patients recently treated for a B-lymphoid malignancy are at uniquely high risk for severe COVID-19. SIGNIFICANCE: Our study suggests that recent therapy for a B-lymphoid malignancy is an independent risk factor for COVID-19 severity. These findings provide rationale to develop mitigation strategies targeted at the uniquely high-risk population of patients with recently treated B-lymphoid malignancies. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 171.

Coinfections in Patients With Cancer and COVID-19: A COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) Study.

BACKGROUND: The frequency of coinfections and their association with outcomes have not been adequately studied among patients with cancer and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a high-risk group for coinfection. METHODS: We included adult (≥18 years) patients with active or prior hematologic or invasive solid malignancies and laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) infection, using data from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19, NCT04354701). We captured coinfections within ±2 weeks from diagnosis of COVID-19, identified factors cross-sectionally associated with risk of coinfection, and quantified the association of coinfections with 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Among 8765 patients (hospitalized or not; median age, 65 years; 47.4% male), 16.6% developed coinfections: 12.1% bacterial, 2.1% viral, 0.9% fungal. An additional 6.4% only had clinical diagnosis of a coinfection. The adjusted risk of any coinfection was positively associated with age >50 years, male sex, cardiovascular, pulmonary, and renal comorbidities, diabetes, hematologic malignancy, multiple malignancies, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, progressing cancer, recent cytotoxic chemotherapy, and baseline corticosteroids; the adjusted risk of superinfection was positively associated with tocilizumab administration. Among hospitalized patients, high neutrophil count and C-reactive protein were positively associated with bacterial coinfection risk, and high or low neutrophil count with fungal coinfection risk. Adjusted mortality rates were significantly higher among patients with bacterial (odds ratio [OR], 1.61; 95% CI, 1.33-1.95) and fungal (OR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.28-3.76) coinfections. CONCLUSIONS: Viral and fungal coinfections are infrequent among patients with cancer and COVID-19, with the latter associated with very high mortality rates. Clinical and laboratory parameters can be used to guide early empiric antimicrobial therapy, which may improve clinical outcomes.

Analysis of CDK12 alterations in a pan-cancer database.

BACKGROUND: CDK12 inactivation leading to increased neoantigen burden has been hypothesized to sensitize tumors to immune checkpoint inhibition. Pan-cancer data regarding the frequency of CDK12 alterations are limited. We aimed to characterize CDK12 alterations across all cancer types through real-world clinical-grade sequencing. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective analysis of 4994 cancer patients who underwent tissue or blood genomic profiling, including CDK12 assessment, conducted as part of routine care from December 2012 to January 2020. Prevalence, clinical characteristics, and treatment outcomes of patients with tumors with pathogenic CDK12 alterations were described. RESULTS: In all, 39 (0.78%, n = 39/4994) patients had pathogenic CDK12 alterations. Among CDK12-altered tumors, the most common organ site was prostate (n = 9, 23.1%) followed by colorectal (n = 5, 12.8%). Adenocarcinoma was the most common histology (n = 26, 66.7%). Median follow-up from time of diagnosis was 4.02 years. Median overall survival from time of metastasis was 4.43 years (95% CI: 3.11-5.74). Ten patients with CDK12-altered tumors received at least one immune checkpoint inhibitor-containing regimen. The majority of patients (n = 6/10, 60%) experienced an objective response. Progression-free survival for patients who had metastatic disease and received a checkpoint inhibitor-containing regimen was 1.16 years (95% CI: 0.32-2.00). CONCLUSION: CDK12 alterations are rare events across hematologic and solid tumor malignancies. They represent a clinically distinct molecular cancer subtype which may have increased responsiveness to checkpoint inhibition. Prospective studies are warranted to investigate checkpoint inhibition in CDK12-altered tumors.

Asymptomatic detection of SARS-CoV-2 among cancer patients receiving infusional anti-cancer therapy.

BACKGROUND: Little is known regarding the rate and clinical outcomes of asymptomatic carriers of SARS-CoV-2 among patients with cancer. Detection of asymptomatic carriers is important in this population given the use of myelosuppressive and immunomodulating therapies. Understanding the asymptomatic carrier rate will help to develop mitigation strategies in this high-risk cohort. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis of an asymptomatic screening protocol which required patients receiving infusional anti-cancer therapy to undergo a symptom/exposure screen and SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing 24-96 h prior to their infusion. The primary outcome of this analysis was the rate of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Secondary outcomes included the rate of COVID-19-related hospitalization and mortality and delays in oncologic therapy. RESULTS: Among a cohort of 2691 cancer patients who underwent asymptomatic screening, 1.6% (N = 43/2691) of patients were found to be SARS-CoV-2 positive on asymptomatic screening. 11.6% (N = 5/43) of the cohort ultimately developed COVID-19-related symptoms. Four patients required hospitalization for complications of COVID-19 infection. No patient died from COVID-related complications. 97.7% (N = 42/43) had their anti-cancer therapy delayed or deferred with a median delay of 21 days (range: 7-77 days). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, among a cohort of active cancer patients receiving anti-cancer therapy, an asymptomatic SARS-CoV2 PCR-based screening protocol detected a small cohort of asymptomatic carriers. The majority of these patients remained asymptomatic on long-term follow-up and outcomes were much more favorable compared to previously described outcomes of cancer patients with symptomatic COVID-19 infection.

Analysis of the Prognostic Significance of Circulating Tumor DNA in Metastatic Castrate Resistant Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: There has been considerable interest in ctDNA next generation sequencing platforms to assess genomic alterations in mCRPC given its accessibility and identification of temporal genomic data. PATIENTSAND METHODS: In this retrospective analysis, we analyzed 63 patients who underwent ctDNA genomic profiling during their mCRPC disease course using a CLIA-certified commercial assay. The primary objective was to assess the feasibility of commercial ctDNA analysis in a real world mCRPC cohort. Key secondary objectives included assessment of the landscape of pathogenic ctDNA alterations and the prognostic significance of ctDNA detection on overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Among the cohort, at the time of ctDNA collection, median age was 70 years, and 47.6% (N = 30/63) had bone-only metastases. ctDNA was detected in the majority of patients with at least 1 pathogenic alteration detected in 90.5% (N = 57/63) of individuals. The most common alterations detected were in AR, TP53, and PIK3CA. Actionable alterations with FDA-approved therapies were found in 15.8% (N = 10) of the cohort. The presence of ≤ 1 versus > 1 alteration on ctDNA analysis was strongly associated with inferior OS with a median OS of 26.1 versus 8.8 months, respectively (HR = 7.0, 95% CI, 2.2-23.1, P < .001). In multivariate analysis, the number of detected alterations remained a significant predictor for OS. Lastly, there was weak correlation between Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA), and ctDNA characteristics. CONCLUSION: ctDNA is a viable next generation sequencing (NGS) platform in mCRPC and can be utilized to identify actionable alterations. The presence and extent of ctDNA alterations appear to be prognostic of OS in mCRPC.