Antibody response to three-dose anti-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-vaccination in treated solid cancer patients.

Solid cancer patients are at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe complications. Moreover, vaccine-induced antibody response is impaired in patients on anticancer treatment. In this retrospective, observational, hypothesis-generating, cohort study, we assessed the antibody response to the third dose of mRNA vaccine in a convenience sample of patients on anticancer treatment, comparing it to that of the primary two-dose cycle. Among 99 patients included, 62.6% were ≥60 years old, 32.3% males, 67.7% with advanced disease. Exactly 40.4% were receiving biological therapy, 16.2% chemotherapy only and 7.1% both treatments. After the third dose, seroconversion rate seems to increase significantly, especially in non-responders to two doses. Heterologous vaccine-type regimen (two-dose mRNA-1273 and subsequent tozinameran or vice versa) results in higher antibody levels. This explorative study suggests that repeated doses of mRNA-vaccines could be associated with a better antibody response in this population. Furthermore, heterologous vaccine-type three-dose vaccination seems more effective in this population. Since this is a hypothesis-generating study, adequately statistically powered studies should validate these results.

Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy in Early Breast Cancer: Results of a Prospective Observational Multicenter BRIDE Study.

To evaluate the rate of early breast cancer (EBC) patients treated with neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAT) in Italy, criteria of patient selection and types of therapies delivered, an analysis of 1276 patients with stage I-II-III was conducted out of 1633 patients enrolled in the multicenter prospective observational BRIDE study. A total of 177 patients (13.9%) were treated with NAT and 1099 (85.9%) with surgery; in multivariate analysis, menopausal status, cT, cN, grade, HER2-positive and Triple negative (TN) subgroups were significantly associated with the decision to administer NAT. The type of NAT delivered was influenced by EBC subtype. NAT was administered to 53.2% of HER2+/HR-negative, 27.9% of HER2+/HR+, 7.1% of HER2-negative/HR+ and 30.3% of TN EBC patients. The pCR rates were similar to the ones reported in the literature: 74.2% in HER2+/HR-negative, 52.3% in HER2+/HR+, 17.2% in HER2-negative/HR+ and 37.9% in TN. In clinical practice, patient and tumor characteristics influenced oncologists in the decision to administer NAT in EBC and in the choice of the type of systemic therapy, according to ESMO and AIOM Guidelines. Currently, it is recommended always to evaluate the use of NAT in EBC, mainly in HER2+ and TN patients, considering that pCR is associated with significantly better survival of the patient and that effective therapies are now available for residual disease.

MesenchymAl stromal cells for Traumatic bRain Injury (MATRIx): a study protocol for a multicenter, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a significant cause of death and disability, with no effective neuroprotective drugs currently available for its treatment. Mesenchymal stromal cell (MSC)-based therapy shows promise as MSCs release various soluble factors that can enhance the injury microenvironment through processes, such as immunomodulation, neuroprotection, and brain repair. Preclinical studies across different TBI models and severities have demonstrated that MSCs can improve functional and structural outcomes. Moreover, clinical evidence supports the safety of third-party donor bank-stored MSCs in adult subjects. Building on this preclinical and clinical data, we present the protocol for an academic, investigator-initiated, multicenter, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, adaptive phase II dose-finding study aiming to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous administration of allogeneic bone marrow-derived MSCs to severe TBI patients within 48 h of injury. METHODS/DESIGN: The study will be conducted in two steps. Step 1 will enrol 42 patients, randomised in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive 80 million MSCs, 160 million MSCs or a placebo to establish safety and identify the most promising dose. Step 2 will enrol an additional 36 patients, randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive the selected dose of MSCs or placebo. The activity of MSCs will be assessed by quantifying the plasmatic levels of neurofilament light (NfL) at 14 days as a biomarker of neuronal damage. It could be a significant breakthrough if the study demonstrates the safety and efficacy of MSC-based therapy for severe TBI patients. The results of this trial could inform the design of a phase III clinical trial aimed at establishing the efficacy of the first neurorestorative therapy for TBI. DISCUSSION: Overall, the MATRIx trial is a critical step towards developing an effective treatment for TBI, which could significantly improve the lives of millions worldwide affected by this debilitating condition. Trial Registration EudraCT: 2022-000680-49.

Longitudinal changes of SARA scale in Friedreich ataxia: Strong influence of baseline score and age at onset.

BACKGROUND: The Scale for Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA) is widely used in different types of ataxias and has been chosen as the primary outcome measure in the European natural history study for Friedreich ataxia (FA). METHODS: To assess distribution and longitudinal changes of SARA scores and its single items, we analyzed SARA scores of 502 patients with typical-onset FA (<25 years) participating in the 4-year prospective European FA Consortium for Translational Studies (EFACTS). Pattern of disease progression was determined using linear mixed-effects regression models. The chosen statistical model was re-fitted in order to estimate parameters and predict disease progression. Median time-to-change and rate of score progression were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and weighted linear regression models, respectively. RESULTS: SARA score at study enrollment and age at onset were the major predictive factors of total score progression during the 4-year follow-up. To a less extent, age at evaluation also influenced the speed of SARA progression, while disease duration did not improve the prediction of the statistical model. Temporal dynamics of total SARA and items showed a great variability in the speed of score increase during disease progression. Gait item had the highest annual progression rate, with median time for one-point score increase of 1 to 2 years. INTERPRETATION: Analyses of statistical properties of SARA suggest a variable sensitivity of the scale at different disease stages, and provide important information for population selection and result interpretation in future clinical trials.

Observed intervention effects for mortality in randomised clinical trials: a methodological study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: It is essential to choose a realistic anticipated intervention effect when calculating a sample size for a randomised clinical trial. Unfortunately, anticipated intervention effects are often inflated, when compared with the 'true' intervention effects. This is documented for mortality in critical care trials. A similar pattern might exist across different medical specialties. This study aims to estimate the range of observed intervention effects for all-cause mortality in trials included in Cochrane Reviews, within each Cochrane Review Group. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will include randomised clinical trials assessing all-cause mortality as an outcome. Trials will be identified from Cochrane Reviews published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Cochrane Reviews will be clustered according to the registered Cochrane Review Group (eg, Anaesthesia, Emergency and Critical Care) and the statistical analyses will be conducted for each Cochrane Review Group and overall. The median relative risk and IQR for all-cause mortality and the proportion of trials with a relative all-cause mortality risk within seven different ranges will be reported (relative risk below 0.70, 0.70-0.79, 0.80-0.89, 0.90-1.09, 1.10-1.19, 1.20-1.30 and above 1.30). Subgroup analyses will explore the effects of original design, sample size, risk of bias, disease, intervention type, follow-up length, participating centres, funding type, information size and outcome hierarchy. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Since we will use summary data from trials already approved by relevant ethical committees, this study does not require ethical approval. Regardless of our findings, the results will be published in an international peer-reviewed journal.

Clinical efficacy of the first two doses of anti-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in solid cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer patients are frail individuals, thus the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection is essential. To date, vaccination is the most effective tool to prevent COVID-19. In a previous study, we evaluated the immunogenicity of two doses of mRNA-based vaccines (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) in solid cancer patients. We found that seroconversion rate in cancer patients without a previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 was lower than in healthy controls (66.7% vs. 95%, p = 0.0020). The present study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the vaccination in the same population. METHODS: This is a single-institution, prospective observational study. Data were collected through a predefined questionnaire through phone call in the period between the second and third vaccine dose. The primary objective was to describe the clinical efficacy of the vaccination, defined as the percentage of vaccinated subjects who did not develop symptomatic COVID-19 within 6 months after the second dose. The secondary objective was to describe the clinical features of patients who developed COVID-19. RESULTS: From January to June 2021, 195 cancer patients were enrolled. Considering that 7 (3.59%) patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and 5 developed symptomatic disease, the clinical efficacy of the vaccination was 97.4%. COVID-19 disease in most patients was mild and managed at home; only one hospitalization was recorded and no patient required hospitalization in the intensive care unit. DISCUSSION: Our study suggests that increasing vaccination coverage, including booster doses, could improve the prevention of infection, hospitalization, serious illness, and death in the frail population of cancer patients.

STYLE (NCT03449173): A Phase 2 Trial of Sunitinib in Patients With Type B3 Thymoma or Thymic Carcinoma in Second and Further Lines.

INTRODUCTION: Thymic malignancies are rare tumors with few therapeutic options. The STYLE trial was aimed to evaluate activity and safety of sunitinib in advanced or recurrent type B3 thymoma (T) and thymic carcinoma (TC). METHODS: In this multicenter, Simon 2 stages, phase 2 trial, patients with pretreated T or TC were enrolled in two cohorts and assessed separately. Sunitinib was administered 50 mg daily for 4 weeks, followed by a 2-week rest period (schedule 4/2), until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Progression-free survival, overall survival, disease control rate and safety were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: From March 2017 to January 2022, 12 patients with T and 32 patients with TC were enrolled. At stage 1, ORR was 0% (90% confidence interval [CI]: 0.0-22.1) in T and 16.7% (90% CI: 3.1-43.8) in TC, so the T cohort was closed. At stage 2, the primary endpoint was met for TC with ORR of 21.7% (90% CI: 9.0%-40.4%). In the intention-to-treat analysis, disease control rate was 91.7% (95% CI: 61.5%-99.8%) in Ts and 89.3% (95% CI: 71.8%-97.7%) in TCs. Median progression-free survival was 7.7 months (95% CI: 2.4-45.5) in Ts and 8.8 months (95% CI: 5.3-11.1) in TCs; median overall survival was 47.9 months (95% CI: 4.5-not reached) in Ts and 27.8 months (95% CI: 13.2-53.2) in TCs. Adverse events occurred in 91.7% Ts and 93.5% TCs. Grade 3 or greater treatment-related adverse events were reported in 25.0% Ts and 51.6% TCs. CONCLUSIONS: This trial confirms the activity of sunitinib in patients with TC, supporting its use as a second-line treatment, albeit with potential toxicity that requires dose adjustment.

Centre for Statistical and Methodological Excellence (CESAME): A Consortium Initiative for Improving Methodology in Randomised Clinical Trials.

When conducting randomised clinical trials, the choice of methodology and statistical analyses will influence the results. If the planned methodology is not of optimal quality and predefined in detail, there is a risk of biased trial results and interpretation. Even though clinical trial methodology is already at a very high standard, there are many trials that deliver biased results due to the implementation of inadequate methodology, poor data quality and erroneous or biased analyses. To increase the internal and external validity of randomised clinical trial results, several international institutions within clinical intervention research have formed The Centre for Statistical and Methodological Excellence (CESAME). Based on international consensus, the CESAME initiative will develop recommendations for the proper methodological planning, conduct and analysis of clinical intervention research. CESAME aims to increase the validity of randomised clinical trial results which will ultimately benefit patients worldwide across medical specialities. The work of CESAME will be performed within 3 closely interconnected pillars: (1) planning randomised clinical trials; (2) conducting randomised clinical trials; and (3) analysing randomised clinical trials.

Immunogenicity of two doses of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines for solid cancer patients on treatment with or without a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Previous studies on the immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines showed a reduced seroconversion in cancer patients. The aim of our study is to evaluate the immunogenicity of two doses of mRNA vaccines in solid cancer patients with or without a previous exposure to the virus. This is a single-institution, prospective, nonrandomized study. Patients in active treatment and a control cohort of healthy people received two doses of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, BioNTech/Pfizer, The United States) or mRNA-1273 (Spikevax, Moderna). Vaccine was administered before starting anticancer therapy or on the first day of the treatment cycle. SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels against S1, RBD (to evaluate vaccine response) and N proteins (to evaluate previous infection) were measured in plasma before the first dose and 30 days after the second one. From January to June 2021, 195 consecutive cancer patients and 20 healthy controls were enrolled. Thirty-one cancer patients had a previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2. Cancer patients previously exposed to the virus had significantly higher median levels of anti-S1 and anti-RBD IgG, compared to healthy controls (P = .0349) and to cancer patients without a previous infection (P < .001). Vaccine type (anti-S1: P < .0001; anti-RBD: P = .0045), comorbidities (anti-S1: P = .0274; anti-RBD: P = .0048) and the use of G-CSF (anti-S1: P = .0151) negatively affected the antibody response. Conversely, previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 significantly enhanced the response to vaccination (anti-S1: P < .0001; anti-RBD: P = .0026). Vaccine immunogenicity in cancer patients with a previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 seems comparable to that of healthy subjects. On the other hand, clinical variables of immune frailty negatively affect humoral immune response to vaccination.

Prophylactic surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC CO2) versus standard surgery for gastric carcinoma at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis: short and long-term outcomes (GOETH STUDY)-a collaborative randomized controlled trial by ACOI, FONDAZIONE AIOM, SIC, SICE, and SICO.

INTRODUCTION: At the time of diagnosis, 15-20% of gastric carcinomas are in stage T4 or T4b. Furthermore, 5-20% of patients undergoing potentially curative surgery suffer from synchronous or metachronous peritoneal metastases. To date, neither surgery nor systemic chemotherapy successfully controls peritoneal dissemination, offering a limited impact on survival. Peritoneal metastases are in fact responsible for death in around 60% of gastric cancer patients. Several Eastern studies in the past have focused on hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) as a prophylactic measure in patients with serosal extension, nodal involvement, and positive peritoneal fluid cytology. Therefore, a new multimodal therapeutic strategy based on aggressive surgery plus new locoregional treatment may prolong survival in this particular clinical scenario. METHODS: This study compares the efficacy of prophylactic surgery (radical gastric resection, appendectomy, resection of the round ligament of the liver, and bilateral adnexectomy) plus hybrid CO2 HIPEC system versus standard surgery in patients with T3-T4 N0-N + gastric adenocarcinoma. Patients will be randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to the experimental arm or standard surgery. The primary endpoint is to establish the difference in disease-free survival between the groups. The secondary objective is to compare the safety and tolerability of prophylactic surgery plus HIPEC CO2 versus standard surgery. DISCUSSION: Considering the poor prognosis of patients with peritoneal dissemination from gastric cancer, a prophylactic strategy to prevent peritoneal metastases may be beneficial. In patients with gastric cancer at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis, we propose aggressive surgical treatment with radical gastrectomy, removal of organs at risk of harbouring tumour cells, and HIPEC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03917173. Registered on 16 April 2019. PROTOCOL VERSION: v1, March 27, 2019. Protocol number: IRFMN-GCC-7813. EudraCT number: 2019-001478-27.

Tolerability of Eribulin and correlation between polymorphisms and neuropathy in an unselected population of female patients with metastatic breast cancer: results of the multicenter, single arm, phase IV PAINTER study.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is an incurable disease and its treatment focuses on prolonging patients' (pts) overall survival (OS) and improving their quality of life. Eribulin is a microtubule inhibitor that increases OS in pre-treated MBC pts. The most common adverse events (AEs) are asthenia, neutropenia and peripheral neuropathy (PN). METHODS: PAINTER is a single arm, phase IV study, aimed at evaluating the tolerability of eribulin in MBC pts. Secondary objectives were the description of treatment efficacy and safety, the assessment of the incidence and severity of PN and its association with genetic polymorphisms. Genomic DNA was isolated from blood samples and 15 Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) were genotyped by Taqman specific assays. The association between PN and SNPs were evaluated by Fisher exact test. RESULTS: Starting from May 2014 until June 2018 180 pts were enrolled in this study by 20 Italian centers. 170 of these pts could be evaluated for efficacy and toxicity and 159 for polymorphisms analysis. The median age of pts was 60 years old and the biological subtypes were luminal type (64.7%), Her2 positive (18.3%) and triple negative (17%). Pts were pretreated with a median of 5 lines for MBC. The median follow up of this study was 15.4 months with a median number of 4.5 cycles administered (minimum-maximum 1-23). The median overall survival was 12 months. 48.8% of pts experienced a dose reduction, mainly for neutropenia (23.9%) and liver toxicity (12%). 65 pts (38.2%) reported at least one severe toxicity. Neutropenia and neurotoxicity were the most frequent severe AEs (15.3% and 14.7%, respectively); other reported toxicities were osteo-muscular, abdominal or tumor site pain (19.4%), liver toxicity (6.6%), pulmonary toxicity (6.5%) and dermatological toxicity (3.6%). Among the 15 evaluated SNPs, an association with PN was found for rs2233335 and rs7214723. CONCLUSIONS: Eribulin is a well-tolerated treatment option in MBC. Schedule and dosage modifications were common, but toxicity rarely led to treatment discontinuation. SNPs rs2233335 (G/T and T/T) in the NDRG1 gene and rs7214723 (CC and CT) in the CAMKK1 gene were associated with PN. These findings, if validated, could allow a tailored treatment with eribulin in cancer patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02864030.

Circulating Fatty Acid Profile as a Biomarker for Immunotherapy in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Lipid metabolism impacts immune cell differentiation, activation, and functions, modulating inflammatory mediators, energy homeostasis, and cell membrane composition. Despite preclinical evidence, data in humans lack concerning tumors and immunotherapy (IO). We aimed at investigating the correlations between circulating lipids and the outcome of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with IO. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified all patients with advanced NSCLC treated with IO at our Institution with available baseline plasma samples. Fatty acids (FAs) were analyzed through gas chromatography. Survival curves were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox multivariate models were constructed through a stepwise procedure, with entry and exit P value set at .2. RESULTS: We identified 112 patients, mostly with performance status 1 (65.2%) and PD-L1≥1% (75.3%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 2.8 and 11.0 months, respectively. Multivariable model for survival identified a positive association of circulating free (FFA) C16:0 (P .005) and esterified (EFA) C16:1 (P .030) with PFS, and a positive association of EFA C16:1 (P .001) and EFA C18:0 (P .020) with OS. EFA C16:0 was negatively associated with PFS (P .008). CONCLUSION: FFA C16:0 and FAs derived from its unsaturation (EFA C16:1) and elongation (EFA C18:0) are associated with a better outcome in NSCLC patients treated with IO. It is conceivable that the ratio among those FAs may modify membrane fluidity and receptor activity, influencing IO efficacy. These data pave the way for the investigation of lipid-modulating strategies in association with IO in NSCLC.

Prophylactic surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC CO2) versus standard surgery in colorectal carcinoma at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis: short-term and long-term outcomes from the CHECK study - protocol for a randomised, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

INTRODUCTION: Up to one-fifth of patients with colorectal cancer will develop peritoneal metastases, frequently without other districts' involvement. Despite the recent unsuccesses of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases treatment, the rationale in the prophylactic setting remains strong. Several clinical and pharmacokinetic data suggest that the efficacy of intraperitoneal chemotherapy is highest when the disease is microscopic. However, robust evidence demonstrating whether the addition of HIPEC for high-risk colorectal cancers offers better control of local recurrence is lacking. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre randomised phase 3 trial comparing prophylactic surgery plus HIPEC CO2 with mitomycin, over standard surgical excision in patients with colorectal cancer at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis; 388 patients will be included in this study. The primary objective is to compare the efficacy of prophylactic surgery (radical colorectal resection, omentectomy, appendectomy, round ligament of the liver resection and bilateral adnexectomy) plus HIPEC CO2 with mitomycin and standard surgery in terms of local recurrence-free survival. The main secondary endpoints are disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. The primary endpoint will be described with a cumulative incidence function and will be analysed with Grey test to take account of the competing risks. DFS and OS will be described with the Kaplan-Meier method. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial has been evaluated by the Italian Medicines Agency, local ethics committees and will be submitted to the Ministry of Health to notify the start of the trial according to the regulation of trials on devices with CE mark/certification.The results will be submitted for presentation at academic meetings and for publication in a peer-reviewed journal, whatever the findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03914820.

Cancer Incidence and Mortality According to Pre-Existing Heart Failure in a Community-Based Cohort.

Background: Studies assessing whether heart failure (HF) is associated with cancer and cancer-related mortality have yielded conflicting results. Objectives: This study assessed cancer incidence and mortality according to pre-existing HF in a community-based cohort. Methods: Among individuals ≥50 years of age from the Puglia region in Italy with administrative health data from 2002 to 2018, no cancer within 3 years before the baseline evaluation, and ≥5-year follow-up, the study matched 104,020 subjects with HF at baseline with 104,020 control subjects according to age, sex, drug-derived complexity index, Charlson comorbidity index, and follow-up duration. Cancer incidence and mortality were defined based on International Classification of Diseases-Ninth Revision codes in hospitalization records or death certificates. Results: The incidence rate of cancer in HF patients and control subjects was 21.36 (95% CI: 20.98-21.74) and 12.42 (95% CI: 12.14-12.72) per 1000 person-years, respectively, with the HR being 1.76 (95% CI: 1.71-1.81). Cancer mortality was also higher in HF patients than control subjects (HR: 4.11; 95% CI: 3.86-4.38), especially in those <70 years of age (HR: 7.54; 95% CI: 6.33-8.98 vs HR: 3.80; 95% CI: 3.44-4.19 for 70-79 years of age; and HR: 3.10; 95% CI: 2.81-3.43 for ≥80 years of age). The association between HF and cancer mortality was confirmed in a competing risk analysis (subdistribution HR: 3.48; 95% CI: 3.27-3.72). The HF-related excess risk applied to the majority of cancer types. Among HF patients, prescription of high-dose loop diuretic was associated with higher cancer incidence (HR: 1.11; 95% CI: 1.03-1.21) and mortality (HR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.19-1.53). Conclusions: HF is associated with an increased risk of cancer and cancer-related mortality, which may be heightened in decompensated states.

High-dose ivermectin for early treatment of COVID-19 (COVER study): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase II, dose-finding, proof-of-concept clinical trial.

High concentrations of ivermectin demonstrated antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of high-dose ivermectin in reducing viral load in individuals with early SARS-CoV-2 infection. This was a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase II, dose-finding, proof-of-concept clinical trial. Participants were adults recently diagnosed with asymptomatic/oligosymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Exclusion criteria were: pregnant or lactating women; CNS disease; dialysis; severe medical condition with prognosis <6 months; warfarin treatment; and antiviral/chloroquine phosphate/hydroxychloroquine treatment. Participants were assigned (ratio 1:1:1) according to a randomised permuted block procedure to one of the following arms: placebo (arm A); single-dose ivermectin 600 µg/kg plus placebo for 5 days (arm B); and single-dose ivermectin 1200 µg/kg for 5 days (arm C). Primary outcomes were serious adverse drug reactions (SADRs) and change in viral load at Day 7. From 31 July 2020 to 26 May 2021, 32 participants were randomised to arm A, 29 to arm B and 32 to arm C. Recruitment was stopped on 10 June because of a dramatic drop in cases. The safety analysis included 89 participants and the change in viral load was calculated in 87 participants. No SADRs were registered. Mean (S.D.) log10 viral load reduction was 2.9 (1.6) in arm C, 2.5 (2.2) in arm B and 2.0 (2.1) in arm A, with no significant differences (P = 0.099 and 0.122 for C vs. A and B vs. A, respectively). High-dose ivermectin was safe but did not show efficacy to reduce viral load.

Randomized phase II trial of weekly paclitaxel vs. cediranib-olaparib (continuous or intermittent schedule) in platinum-resistant high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Previous findings showed that cediranib-olaparib increased PFS in women with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer compared to olaparib alone. METHODS: BAROCCO trial randomized 123 patients: 80mg/m2 paclitaxel weekly up to 24 weeks (control), olaparib 300mg tablets twice daily together with 20mg cediranib daily (continuous schedule) or with 20mg cediranib 5 days/week (intermittent schedule) until progression. The primary objective was the PFS comparison between each experimental arm and the control (alpha one-sided 5%; power 80%; HR 0.5). RESULTS: The median platinum-free interval was 1.9 months, 60% of patients had been pretreated with 3 or more chemotherapy lines. Median PFS for paclitaxel, the continuous, and the intermittent schedules were 3.1, 5.6, and 3.8 months. The HR for PFS in the continuous arm vs control was 0.76 (90% CI: 0.50-1.14, p = 0.265). The HR for PFS in the intermittent arm vs control was 1.03 (90% CI: 0.68-1.55, p = 0.904). Treatment was discontinued due to adverse events in 15%, 20%, and 5% of patients in the control, continuous and intermittent arms. Grade ≥ 3 anemia and diarrhea and hypertension of any grade occurred only in the experimental arms, and peripheral neuropathies and alopecia only in the control arm. Five serious adverse drug reactions occurred and two were fatal: one in the control and one in the continuous arm. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of cediranib-olaparib was not superior to chemotherapy in terms of PFS in heavily pretreated platinum-resistant ovarian cancer patients. However, this oral doublet, is active and may offer a non-chemotherapy option in this difficult to treat population. CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFICATION: IRFMN-OVA-7289, EudraCT: 2016-003964-38, NCT03314740.

Correlation of BRAF mutational status with clinical characteristics and survival outcomes of patients with ameloblastoma: the experience of 11 Italian centres.

AIMS: Ameloblastoma is a rare odontogenic tumour with an aggressive local behaviour. Mutations in the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway, namely BRAF V600E mutations, are a common finding. To date, there is no clear correlation between BRAF V600 mutation and clinical outcome. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent surgery for ameloblastoma between May 1998 and June 2018, at 11 participating Italian centres. BRAF mutational status was evaluated by quantitative PCR/pyrosequencing. The primary end points were to determine BRAF mutational status in primitive and recurrent ameloblastoma, and to assess the relapse-free interval (RFI); the secondary end point was to investigate the correlation of BRAF mutational status with the clinical features of the tumour and survival outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, 74 patients were included: 33 (44.5%) were BRAF wild type and 41 (55.4%) BRAF V600 mutated. BRAF V600 mutated ameloblastomas occurred more frequently in younger patients (p=0.0031), were located at the mandible (p=0.0009) and presented with unicystic variant. After a median follow-up of 60 months, 21 (28.3%) patients relapsed (30.3% and 26.8% in the BRAF wild type and BRAF mutated group, respectively). At univariable Cox models, none of the investigated variables, including microscopic margin involvement, was associated with RFI. CONCLUSIONS: Local recurrence occurs in 30% of patients with ameloblastoma. BRAFV600 mutation is associated with younger age, mandibular localisation and with unicystic ameloblastoma. Neither BRAF mutation nor microscopically positive surgical margins were associated with RFI. Further studies are needed to elucidate outcomes of this rare disease according to clinical, histopathological and comprehensive molecular features.

The emotional impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on cancer outpatients and their caregivers: results of a survey conducted in the midst of the Italian pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The study investigates the emotional discomfort of cancer patients and their caregivers, who need to access the oncology day hospital to receive treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy. METHODS: This is a single-institution, prospective, cross-sectional study. From May to June 2020, the points of view of both patients and caregivers were compared through 2 different multiple-choice questionnaires, enquiring demographic characteristics, changes in emotional status, interpersonal relationships with health professionals (HCPs) and self-perception of treatment outcomes. RESULTS: Six hundred twenty-five patients and 254 caregivers were enrolled. Females were prevalent and patients were generally older than caregivers. Forty percent of patients and 25.6% of caregivers thought they were at a greater risk of contagion because lived together with a cancer patient or accessed the hospital. Both patients (86.3%) and caregivers (85.4%) considered containment measures a valid support to avoid the spread of infection. People with a lower education level were less worried about being infected with SARS-COV-2. Waiting and performing visits/treatments without caregivers had no impact on the emotional status of patients (64.4%), but generated in caregivers greater anxiety (58.8%) and fear (19.8%) of not properly managing patients at home. The majority of patients (54%) and caregivers (39.4%) thought the pandemic does not influence treatment outcomes. The relationship with HCPs was not negatively impacted for majority of patients and caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: Starting from these data, we can better understand the current psychological distress of patients and their families in order to develop potential strategies to support them in this strenuous period of crisis.