Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
Ther Adv Urol ; 13: 17562872211054302, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34707691


Background: Considering the growing genitourinary (GU) cancer population undergoing systemic treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we planned a clinical audit in 24 Italian institutions treating GU malignancies. Objective: The primary objective was investigating the clinical impact of COVID-19 in GU cancer patients undergoing ICI-based therapy during the first outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 contagion in Italy. Design setting and participants: The included centers were 24 Oncology Departments. Two online forms were completed by the responsible Oncology Consultants, respectively, for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) patients receiving at least one administration of ICIs between 31 January 2020 and 30 June 2020. Results and limitation: In total, 287 mRCC patients and 130 mUC patients were included. The COVID-19 incidence was, respectively, 3.5%, with mortality 1%, in mRCC patients and 7.7%, with mortality 3.1%, in mUC patients. In both groups, 40% of patients developing COVID-19 permanently discontinued anticancer treatment. The pre-test SARS-CoV-2 probability in the subgroup of patients who underwent nasal/pharyngeal swab ranged from 14% in mRCC to 26% in mUC. The main limitation of the work was its nature of audit: data were not recorded at the single-patient level. Conclusion: GU cancer patients undergoing active treatment with ICIs have meaningful risk factors for developing severe events from COVID-19 and permanent discontinuation of therapy after the infection. Treatment delays due to organizational issues during the pandemic were unlikely to affect the treatment outcome in this population.

Breast ; 57: 104-112, 2021 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33812267


BACKGROUND: Endocrine therapy (ET) plus cyclin-dependent-kinases 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) represents the standard treatment for luminal-metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, prospective head-to-head comparisons are still lacking for 1st line (L) options, and it is still crucial to define the best strategy between 1st and 2nd L. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 717 consecutive luminal-MBC pts treated between 2008 and 2020 were analyzed at the Oncology Department of Aviano and Udine, Italy. Differences about survival outcomes (OS, PFS and PPS) were tested by log-rank test. The attrition rate (AR) between 1st and 2ndL was calculated. RESULTS: At 1stL, pts were treated with ET (49%), chemotherapy (CT) (31%) and ET-CDKi (20%) while, at 2ndL, 33% received ET, 33% CT and 8% ET-CDKi. Overall AR was 10%, 7% for CT, 8% for ET and 17% for ET-CDKi. By multivariate analysis, 1stL ET-CDK4/6i showed a better mPFS1 and OS. Moreover, 2ndL ET-CDK4/6i demonstrated better mPFS2 compared to ET and CT. Notably, 1stL ET-CDKi resulted in higher mPFS than 2ndL ET-CDKi. Intriguingly, 1stL ET-CDK4/6i was associated with worse mPPS compared to CT and ET. Secondarily, 1stL ET-CDK4/6i followed by CT had worse OS compared to 1stL ET-CDK4/6i followed by ET. Notably, none of baseline characteristics at 2ndL influenced 2ndL treatment choice (ET vs. CT) after ET-CDKi. CONCLUSION: Our real-world data demonstrated that ET-CDKi represents the best option for 1stL luminal-MBC compared to ET and CT. Also, the present study pointed out that 2ndL ET, potentially combined with other molecules, could be a feasible option after CDK4/6i failure, postponing CT on later lines.

Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Neoplasias da Mama/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Idoso , Quinase 4 Dependente de Ciclina/uso terapêutico , Quinase 6 Dependente de Ciclina/uso terapêutico , Feminino , Hormônios/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Metástase Neoplásica , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento
Oncologist ; 26(4): e694-e703, 2021 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33539583


BACKGROUND: Triage procedures have been implemented to limit hospital access and minimize infection risk among patients with cancer during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak. In the absence of prospective evidence, we aimed to evaluate the predictive performance of a triage system in the oncological setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analyzes hospital admissions to the oncology and hematology department of Udine, Italy, during the COVID-19 pandemic (March 30 to April 30, 2020). A total of 3,923 triage procedures were performed, and data of 1,363 individual patients were reviewed. RESULTS: A self-report triage questionnaire identified 6% of triage-positive procedures, with a sensitivity of 66.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 43.0%-85.4%), a specificity of 94.3% (95% CI, 93.5%-95.0%), and a positive predictive value of 5.9% (95% CI, 4.3%-8.0%) for the identification of patients who were not admitted to the hospital after medical review. Patients with thoracic cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.69; 95% CI, 1.13-2.53, p = .01), younger age (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.15-2.01, p < .01), and body temperature at admission ≥37°C (OR, 9.52; 95% CI, 5.44-16.6, p < .0001) had increased risk of positive triage. Direct hospital access was warranted to 93.5% of cases, a further 6% was accepted after medical evaluation, whereas 0.5% was refused at admission. CONCLUSION: A self-report questionnaire has a low positive predictive value to triage patients with cancer and suspected severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) symptoms. Differential diagnosis with tumor- or treatment-related symptoms is always required to avoid unnecessary treatment delays. Body temperature measurement improves the triage process's overall sensitivity, and widespread SARS-CoV-2 testing should be implemented to identify asymptomatic carriers. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This is the first study to provide data on the predictive performance of a triage system in the oncological setting during the coronavirus disease outbreak. A questionnaire-based triage has a low positive predictive value to triage patients with cancer and suspected severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) symptoms, and a differential diagnosis with tumor- or treatment-related symptoms is mandatory to avoid unnecessary treatment delays. Consequently, adequate recourses should be reallocated for a triage implementation in the oncological setting. Of note, body temperature measurement improves the overall sensitivity of the triage process, and widespread testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection should be implemented to identify asymptomatic carriers.

COVID-19/diagnóstico , Neoplasias/complicações , Triagem/métodos , Idoso , Infecções Assintomáticas , Temperatura Corporal , Teste para COVID-19 , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Estudos de Viabilidade , Feminino , Humanos , Itália/epidemiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Estudos Retrospectivos , Autorrelato , Inquéritos e Questionários
Ther Adv Med Oncol ; 12: 1758835920968463, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33224275


Background: This prospective, multicentre, observational INVIDIa-2 study is investigating the clinical efficacy of influenza vaccination in advanced-cancer patients receiving immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), enrolled in 82 Italian centres, from October 2019 to January 2020. The primary endpoint was the incidence of influenza-like illness (ILI) until 30 April 2020. All the ILI episodes, laboratory tests, complications, hospitalizations and pneumonitis were recorded. Therefore, the study prospectively recorded all the COVID-19 ILI events. Patients and methods: Patients were included in this non-prespecified COVID-19 analysis, if alive on 31 January 2020, when the Italian government declared the national emergency. The prevalence of confirmed COVID-19 cases was detected as ILI episode with laboratory confirmation of SARS-CoV-2. Cases with clinical-radiological diagnosis of COVID-19 (COVID-like ILIs), were also reported. Results: Out of 1257 enrolled patients, 955 matched the inclusion criteria for this unplanned analysis. From 31 January to 30 April 2020, 66 patients had ILI: 9 of 955 cases were confirmed COVID-19 ILIs, with prevalence of 0.9% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.3-2.4], a hospitalization rate of 100% and a mortality rate of 77.8%. Including 5 COVID-like ILIs, the overall COVID-19 prevalence was 1.5% (95% CI: 0.5-3.1), with 100% hospitalization and 64% mortality. The presence of elderly, males and comorbidities was significantly higher among patients vaccinated against influenza versus unvaccinated (p = 0.009, p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001). Overall COVID-19 prevalence was 1.2% for vaccinated (six of 482 cases, all confirmed) and 1.7% for unvaccinated (8 of 473, 3 confirmed COVID-19 and 5 COVID-like), p = 0.52. The difference remained non-significant, considering confirmed COVID-19 only (p = 0.33). Conclusion: COVID-19 has a meaningful clinical impact on the cancer-patient population receiving ICIs, with high prevalence, hospitalization and an alarming mortality rate among symptomatic cases. Influenza vaccination does not protect from SARS-CoV-2 infection.