Anthracycline-related cardiotoxicity in patients with breast cancer harboring mutational signature of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)

BACKGROUND

The BRCA proteins play a key role in the homologous recombination (HR) pathway. Beyond BRCA1/2, other genes are involved in the HR repair (HRR). Due to the prominent role in the cellular repair process, pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants (PV/LPVs) in HRR genes may cause inadequate DNA damage repair in cardiomyocytes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a multicenter, hospital-based, retrospective cohort study to investigate the heart toxicity from anthracycline-containing regimens (ACRs) in the adjuvant setting of breast cancer (BC) patients carrying germline BRCA PV/LPVs and no-BRCA HRR pathway genes. The left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was assessed using cardiac ultrasound before starting ACR therapy and at subsequent time points according to clinical indications.

RESULTS

Five hundred and three BC patients were included in the study. We predefined three groups: (i) BRCA cohort; (ii) no-BRCA cohort; (iii) variant of uncertain significance (VUS)/wild-type (WT) cohort. When baseline (T0) and post-ACR (T1) LVEFs between the three cohorts were compared, pre-treatment LVEF values were not different (BRCA1/2 versus HRR-no-BRCA versus VUS/WT cohort). Notably, during monitoring (T1, median 3.4 months), patients carrying BRCA or HRR no-BRCA germline pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants showed a statistically significant reduction of LVEF compared to baseline (T0). To assess the relevance of HRR on the results, we included the analysis of the subgroup of 20 BC patients carrying PV/LPVs in other genes not involved in HRR, such as mismatch repair genes (MUTYH, PMS2, MSH6). Unlike HRR genes, no significant differences in T0-T1 were found in this subgroup of patients.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that deleterious variants in HRR genes, leading to impaired HR, could increase the sensitivity of cardiomyocytes to ACR in early BC patients. In this subgroup of patients, other measurements, such as the global longitudinal strain, and a more in-depth assessment of risk factors may be proposed in the future to optimize cardiovascular risk management and improve long-term survival.

Evaluation of COVID-19 impact on DELAYing diagnostic-therapeutic pathways of lung cancer patients in Italy (COVID-DELAY study): fewer cases and higher stages from a real-world scenario

Introduction

COVID-19 has disrupted the global health care system since March 2020. Lung cancer (LC) patients (pts) represent a vulnerable population highly affected by the pandemic. This multicenter Italian study aimed to evaluate whether the COVID-19 outbreak had an impact on access to cancer diagnosis and treatment of LC pts compared with pre-pandemic time.

Methods

Consecutive newly diagnosed LC pts referred to 25 Italian Oncology Departments between March and December 2020 were included. Access rate and temporal intervals between date of symptoms onset and diagnostic and therapeutic services were compared with the same period in 2019. Differences between the 2 years were analyzed using the chi-square test for categorical variables and the Mann–Whitney U test for continuous variables.

Results

A slight reduction (−6.9%) in newly diagnosed LC cases was observed in 2020 compared with 2019 (1523 versus 1637, P = 0.09). Newly diagnosed LC pts in 2020 were more likely to be diagnosed with stage IV disease (P < 0.01) and to be current smokers (someone who has smoked more than 100 cigarettes, including hand-rolled cigarettes, cigars, cigarillos, in their lifetime and has smoked in the last 28 days) (P < 0.01). The drop in terms of new diagnoses was greater in the lockdown period (percentage drop −12% versus −3.2%) compared with the other months included. More LC pts were referred to a low/medium volume hospital in 2020 compared with 2019 (P = 0.01). No differences emerged in terms of interval between symptoms onset and radiological diagnosis (P = 0.94), symptoms onset and cytohistological diagnosis (P = 0.92), symptoms onset and treatment start (P = 0.40), and treatment start and first radiological revaluation (P = 0.36).

Conclusions

Our study pointed out a reduction of new diagnoses with a shift towards higher stage at diagnosis for LC pts in 2020. Despite this, the measures adopted by Italian Oncology Departments ensured the maintenance of the diagnostic-therapeutic pathways of LC pts.

•

The COVID-19 outbreak had an impact on access to lung cancer (LC) diagnosis and treatment.

•

A slight reduction (−6.9%) in newly diagnosed LC cases was observed in 2020 compared with 2019.

•

Newly diagnosed LC pts in 2020 were more likely to be diagnosed with stage IV disease.

•

The Italian Oncology Departments ensured the maintenance of the diagnostic-therapeutic pathways of LC pts.

•

A reverse migration from high-volume to low-volume cancer centers was noted during the pandemic.

International Tailored Chemotherapy Adjuvant (ITACA) trial, a phase III multicenter randomized trial comparing adjuvant pharmacogenomic-driven chemotherapy versus standard adjuvant chemotherapy in completely resected stage II-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Several strategies have been investigated to improve the 4% survival advantage of adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this investigator-initiated study we aimed to evaluate the predictive utility of the messenger RNA (mRNA) expression levels of excision repair cross complementation group 1 (ERCC1) and thymidylate synthase (TS) as assessed in resected tumor.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seven hundred and seventy-three completely resected stage II-III NSCLC patients were enrolled and randomly assigned in each of the four genomic subgroups to investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy (C, n = 389) or tailored chemotherapy (T, n = 384). All anticancer drugs were administered according to standard doses and schedules. Stratification factors included stage and smoking status. The primary endpoint of the study was overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Six hundred and ninety patients were included in the primary analysis. At a median follow-up of 45.9 months, 85 (24.6%) and 70 (20.3%) patients died in arms C and T, respectively. Five-year survival for patients in arms C and T was of 65.4% (95% CI (confidence interval): 58.5% to 71.4%) and 72.9% (95% CI: 66.5% to 78.3%), respectively. The estimated hazard ratio (HR) was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.56-1.06, P value: 0.109) for arm T versus arm C. HR for recurrence-free survival was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.69-1.14, P value: 0.341) for arm T versus arm C. Grade 3-5 toxicities were more frequently reported in arm C than in arm T.

CONCLUSION

In completely resected stage II-III NSCLC tailoring adjuvant chemotherapy conferred a non-statistically significant trend for OS favoring the T arm. In terms of safety, the T arm was associated with better efficacy/toxicity ratio related to the different therapeutic choices in the experimental arm.

COVID-19 infection in cancer patients: what has been the contribution of Associazione Italiana Oncologia Medica (AIOM) to oncological care since the beginning of the first pandemic wave?

High mortality rates in elderly patients or in those with underlying chronic illnesses and/or a compromised immune system is a peculiar feature of COVID-19 infection. The possible coexistence of a cancer and COVID-19 infection in the same individual prompted concerns regarding their synergistic effect on prognosis. In order to balance patients’ needs with the risks related to the infection, the question oncologists have asked from the beginning of the first wave of the pandemic has been: ‘how can we deal with COVID-19 infection in cancer patients?’ In pursuing its mission, the Associazione Italiana Oncologia Medica (AIOM) has made every possible effort to support cancer patients, health care professionals and institutions in the decision-making processes the pandemic has engendered within this scenario. The relevant documents as well as the educational and institutional initiatives the AIOM has taken are reported in this article.

•

AIOM made all efforts to support cancer patients, health care professionals and institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

•

ConFederazione degli Oncologi, Cardiologi e Ematologi is the first technical round table in the world bringing together oncologists, cardiologists and hematologists.

•

In November 2020, AIOM, COMU and CIPOMO updated specific COVID-19 recommendations for medical oncology.

•

AIOM has recommended that authorities include cancer patients receiving therapy in the high priority group for vaccination.

The lung immuno-oncology prognostic score (LIPS-3): a prognostic classification of patients receiving first-line pembrolizumab for PD-L1 ≥ 50% advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

Background

To stratify the prognosis of patients with programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) ≥ 50% advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) treated with first-line immunotherapy.

Methods

Baseline clinical prognostic factors, the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), PD-L1 tumour cell expression level, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and their combination were investigated by a retrospective analysis of 784 patients divided between statistically powered training (n = 201) and validation (n = 583) cohorts. Cut-offs were explored by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and a risk model built with validated independent factors by multivariate analysis.

Results

NLR < 4 was a significant prognostic factor in both cohorts (P < 0.001). It represented 53% of patients in the validation cohort, with 1-year overall survival (OS) of 76.6% versus 44.8% with NLR > 4, in the validation series. The addition of PD-L1 ≥ 80% (21% of patients) or LDH < 252 U/l (25%) to NLR < 4 did not result in better 1-year OS (of 72.6% and 74.1%, respectively, in the validation cohort). Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 2 [P < 0.001, hazard ratio (HR) 2.04], pretreatment steroids (P < 0.001, HR 1.67) and NLR < 4 (P < 0.001, HR 2.29) resulted in independent prognostic factors. A risk model with these three factors, namely, the lung immuno-oncology prognostic score (LIPS)-3, accurately stratified three OS risk-validated categories of patients: favourable (0 risk factors, 40%, 1-year OS of 78.2% in the whole series), intermediate (1 or 2 risk factors, 54%, 1-year OS 53.8%) and poor (>2 risk factors, 5%, 1-year OS 10.7%) prognosis.

Conclusions

We advocate the use of LIPS-3 as an easy-to-assess and inexpensive adjuvant prognostic tool for patients with PD-L1 ≥ 50% aNSCLC.

•

Immunotherapy/chemoimmunotherapy combinations are currently not superior to immunotherapy alone for high PD-L1 aNSCLC.

•

NLR with a cut-off of 4 was validated as an independent prognostic factor for immunotherapy in high PD-L1 aNSCLC.

•

The addition of either PD-L1 ≥ 80% or LDH < 252 U/l to NLR < 4 did not result in better prognostic stratification.

•

The LIPS-3 is a validated 3-class prognostic classification based on the NLR, ECOG PS and pretreatment steroids.

•

The LIPS-3 is a routinely assessable adjuvant prognostic tool for high PD-L1 aNSCLC patients.

Social distress among medical oncologists and other healthcare professionals during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic in Italy

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly spread to every country around the world taking on pandemic proportions. Since 8 March 2020, the Italian government ordered a nationwide lockdown with unavoidable social isolation. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) represent the most physically and emotionally involved category. The aim of this study is to assess the social distress among HCPs in Italy.

Patients and methods

In this online, totally anonymous survey, 24 multiple choice questions were posed to medical staff employed in the Italian Healthcare System during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data collection was performed from 30 March to 24 April 2020.

Results

A total of 600 HCPs completed the questionnaire. The majority of respondents expressed the fear of being at higher risk of contagion than the general population (83.3%) and the weighty concern of infecting their families (72.5%). An insufficient supply of personal protective equipment (PPE; P = 0.0003) and inadequate training about procedures to follow (P = 0.0092) were seen to significantly coincide with these worries. More than two-thirds declared a change in family organisation, which showed a significant correlation with the concern of infecting their relatives (P < 0.0001).

Conclusions

This is the first Italian survey on social distress among HCPs during the COVID-19 pandemic. The unavailability of PPE, screening procedures and adequate training strongly affected HCPs' emotional status. Although there was a predominance of oncologists (especially from the North of Italy), which impairs the generalisation of our findings, this survey underlined the social impact that this health emergency has had on HCPs.

•

This is the first Italian survey on healthcare professionals’ (HCPs) social distress during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

•

The majority expressed the fear of being at high risk of contagion and the weighty concern of infecting their families.

•

Insufficient supply of personal protective equipment and inadequate training about procedures correlate with these worries.

•

Reducing workers’ psychological distress will certainly yield significant positive benefits for HCPs and health system.

Real-world outcomes according to treatment strategies in ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients: an Italian retrospective study

PURPOSE

Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangement confers sensitivity to ALK inhibitors (ALKis) in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Although several drugs provided an impressive outcome benefit, the most effective sequential strategy is still unknown. We describe outcomes of real-life patients according to the treatment strategy received.

PATIENTS

We retrospectively collected 290 ALK rearranged advanced NSCLC diagnosed between 2011 and 2017 in 23 Italian institutions.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 26 months, PFS for crizotinib and a new generation ALKis were 9.4 [CI 95% 7.9-11.2] and 11.1 months [CI 95% 9.2-13.8], respectively, while TTF were 10.2 [CI 95% 8.5-12.6] and 11.9 months [CI 95% 9.7-17.4], respectively, being consistent across the different settings. The composed outcomes (the sum of PFS or TTF) in patients treated with crizotinib followed by a new generation ALKis were 27.8 months [CI 95% 24.3-33.7] in PFS and 30.4 months [CI 95% 24.7-34.9] in TTF. The median OS from the diagnosis of advanced disease was 39 months [CI 95% 31.8-54.5]. Patients receiving crizotinib followed by a new generation ALKis showed a higher median OS [57 months (CI 95% 42.0-73.8)] compared to those that did not receive crizotinib [38 months (CI 95% 18.6-NR)] and those who performed only crizotinib as target agent [15 months (CI 95% 11.3-34.0)] (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The sequential administration of crizotinib and a new generation ALKis provided a remarkable clinical benefit in this real-life population, being an interesting option to consider in selected patients.