Cancer patients treated with sunitinib or sorafenib have sufficient antibody and cellular immune responses to warrant influenza vaccination

Improving Influenza Vaccination Coverage in Patients with Cancer: A Position Paper from a Multidisciplinary Expert Group

Patients with cancer can be immunocompromised because of their disease and/or due to anticancer therapy. In this population, severe influenza virus infections are associated with an elevated risk of morbidity and mortality. Influenza vaccination is therefore highly recommended in cancer patients, including those receiving anticancer therapy. However, vaccination coverage remains far below the recommended target for vulnerable subjects. Six specialists in oncology, hematology, immunology, and public health/vaccinology convened with the objective of developing strategies, based on evidence and clinical experience, for improving influenza vaccination coverage in cancer patients. This viewpoint provides an overview of current influenza vaccination recommendations in cancer patients, discusses barriers to vaccination coverage, and presents strategies for overcoming said barriers. New immunization issues raised by the COVID-19 pandemic are also addressed. Future directions include improving public education on influenza vaccination, providing the media with accurate information, improving knowledge among healthcare professionals, improving access to vaccines for cancer patients, co-administration of the influenza and COVID-19 vaccines, increased collaboration between oncologists and other health professionals, increased accessibility of digital vaccination registries to specialists, shared information platforms, and promoting immunization campaigns by healthcare systems with the support of scientific societies.

Twelve-Month Follow-up of the Immune Response After COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Genitourinary Cancers: A Prospective Cohort Analysis

BACKGROUND

Vaccinations against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have had a transformative impact on morbidity and mortality. However, the long-term impact of vaccination on patients with genitourinary cancers is currently unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study aimed to assess seroconversion rates in patients with genitourinary cancers receiving COVID-19 vaccination. Patients with prostate cancer, renal cell carcinoma, or urothelial cancer who had not been vaccinated for COVID-19 were included. Blood samples were obtained at baseline and after 2, 6, and 12 months of one dose of an FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccine. Antibody titer analysis was performed using the SCoV-2 Detect IgG ELISA assay, and the results were reported as immune status ratio (ISR). A paired t-test was used for comparison of ISR values between timepoints. In addition, T-cell receptor (TCR) sequencing was performed to assess for differences in TCR repertoire 2 months after vaccination.

RESULTS

Out of 133 patients enrolled, 98 baseline blood samples were collected. At 2-, 6-, and 12-month time points 98, 70, and 50 samples were collected, respectively. Median age was 67 (IQR, 62-75), with the majority of patients diagnosed with prostate (55.1%) or renal cell carcinoma (41.8%). Compared to baseline (0.24 [95% CI, 0.19-0.31]) a significant increase in the geometric mean ISR values was observed at the 2-month timepoint (5.59 [4.76-6.55]) (P < .001). However, at the 6-month timepoint, a significant decrease in the ISR values was observed (4.66 [95% CI, 4.04-5.38]; P < .0001). Notably, at the 12-month timepoint, the addition of a booster dose resulted in an absolute increase in the ISR values compared to those who did not receive a booster dose (P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Only a minority of patients with genitourinary cancers did not ultimately achieve satisfactory seroconversion after receiving commercial COVID-19 vaccination. Cancer type or treatment rendered did not appear to affect the immune response mounted after vaccination.

Active surveillance for adverse events of influenza vaccine safety in elderly cancer patients using self-controlled tree-temporal scan statistic analysis

Both cancer patients and the elderly are at high risk of developing flu complications, so influenza vaccination is recommended. We aimed to evaluate potential adverse events (AEs) following influenza vaccination in elderly cancer patients using the self-controlled tree-temporal scan statistic method. From a large linked database of Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency vaccination data and the National Health Insurance Service claims data, we identified cancer patients aged over 65 who received flu vaccines during the 2016/2017 and 2017/2018 seasons. We included all the outcomes occurring on 1-84 days post-vaccination and evaluated all temporal risk windows, which started 1-28 days and ended 2-42 days. Patients who were diagnosed with the same disease during a year prior to vaccination were excluded. We used the hierarchy of ICD-10 to identify statistically significant clustering. This study included 431,276 doses of flu vaccine. We detected signals for 1 set: other dorsopathies on 1-15 days (attributable risk 16.5 per 100,000, P = 0.017). Dorsopathy is a known AE of influenza vaccine. No statistically significant clusters were found when analyzed by flu season. Therefore, influenza vaccination is more recommended for elderly patients with cancer and weakened immune systems.

Effect of medical staff training on vaccination coverage in outpatients with cancer: An interventional multicenter before-and-after study

Purpose

Despite widely disseminated guidelines, pneumococcal and influenza vaccination coverage (VC) remains insufficient in patients with cancer receiving cancer treatment. We performed an interventional study to evaluate VC in patients with cancer treated at the medical oncology departments of three North-of-France hospitals and to assess the effect of medical staff training on VC in these patients.

Methods

A standardized questionnaire assessed VC in adult patients with cancer receiving anticancer treatment at three day hospitals during December 2-7, 2019. Subsequently (January 2020), we organized educational training sessions for medical staff from each hospital to discuss the current vaccination guidelines. To assess the impact of training on pneumococcal and influenza VC, we re-administered the same questionnaire in March 2020. Because there are no specific guidelines on Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis (DTP) vaccination and no improvement was expected, DTP VC acted as an internal control.

Results

In total, 272 patients from all three hospitals were enrolled in the "before study"; 156 patients from only two hospitals were enrolled in the "after study" as medical training and data collection at the third were impossible because of administrative reasons and COVID-19 pandemic. The predictors were age for DTP VC; treatment center for pneumococcal VC; and age, sex, and tumor histology (adenocarcinoma vs. others) for influenza VC. Neither influenza VC (42.6% vs. 55.1%, p = 0.08), nor pneumococcal VC were significantly improved post-intervention (11.8% vs. 15.4%, p = 1). There seems to be a small effect in the most fragile for influenza VC.

Conclusion

As expected, VC was very low in patients with cancer, consistent with the literature. There was no impact of the intervention for pneumococcal and influenza VC.

COVID-19 vaccines in patients with cancer: immunogenicity, efficacy and safety

Patients with cancer have a higher risk of severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and associated mortality than the general population. Owing to this increased risk, patients with cancer have been prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination globally, for both primary and booster vaccinations. However, given that these patients were not included in the pivotal clinical trials, considerable uncertainty remains regarding vaccine efficacy, and the extent of humoral and cellular immune responses in these patients, as well as the risks of vaccine-related adverse events. In this Review, we summarize the current knowledge generated in studies conducted since COVID-19 vaccines first became available. We also highlight critical points that might affect vaccine efficacy in patients with cancer in the future.

An Update on the Status of Vaccine Development for SARS-CoV-2 Including Variants. Practical Considerations for COVID-19 Special Populations

The progress in the development of various vaccine platforms against SARS-CoV-2 have been rather remarkable owing to advancement in molecular and biologic sciences. Most of the current vaccines and those in development focus on targeting the viral spike proteins by generating antibodies of varying spectrum. These vaccines represent a variety of platforms including whole virus vaccines, viral vector vaccines, nucleic acid vaccines representing RNA, DNA, and their hybrid forms.The therapeutic efficacy of these vaccines varies owing to their pharmacodynamic individualities. COVID-19 variants are capable of inducing different pathologic responses and some of which may be resistant to antibodies generated by current vaccines. The current clinical use of these vaccines has been through emergency use authorization until recently. Moreover, the efficacy and safety of these vaccines have been tested in substantial numbers of individuals but studies in special populations that better reflect the global population are pending results. These specialized populations include young children, immunocompromised patients, pregnant individuals, and other specialized groups. Combination approaches, molecularly modified vaccination approaches, and vaccines conferring longer periods of immunity are being currently being investigated, as well as pharmacovigilance studies.The continual transformation of SARS-CoV-2 and its variants are of concern along with the breakthrough infections. These considerations pose new challenges for the development of vaccination platforms. For this purpose, booster doses, combination vaccine approaches, and other modalities are being discussed. This review provides an updated account of currently available vaccines and those in advanced development with reference to their composition and mechanisms of action.A discussion on the use of vaccines in special populations including immunocompromised patients, pregnant women and other specialized populations are also included.

Cellular Immune Response after Vaccination in Patients with Cancer-Review on Past and Present Experiences

Patients with cancer are at particular risk for infection but also have diminished vaccine responses, usually quantified by the level of specific antibodies. Nonetheless, vaccines are specifically recommended in this vulnerable patient group. Here, we discuss the cellular part of the vaccine response in patients with cancer. We summarize the experience with vaccines prior to and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in different subgroups, and we discuss why, especially in patients with cancer, T cells may be the more reliable correlate of protection. Finally, we provide a brief outlook on options to improve the cellular response to vaccines.

Administration of COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised patients

Since the beginning of vaccination programs against COVID-19 in different countries, several populations such as patients with specific immunological conditions have been considered as the priorities for immunization. In this regard, patients with autoimmune diseases or those receiving immunosuppressive agents and anti-cancer therapies, need special attention. However, no confirmed data is presently available regarding COVID-19 vaccines in these populations due to exclusion from the conducted clinical trials. Given the probable suppression or over-activation of the immune system in such patients, reaching a consensus for their vaccination is critical, besides gathering data and conducting trials, which could probably clarify this matter in the future. In this review, besides a brief on the available COVID-19 vaccines, considerations and available knowledge about administering similar vaccines in patients with cancer, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, solid organ transplantation, multiple sclerosis (MS), inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and rheumatologic and dermatologic autoimmune disorders are summarized to help in decision making. As discussed, live-attenuated viruses, which should be avoided in these groups, are not employed in the present COVID-19 vaccines. Thus, the main concern regarding efficacy could be met using a potent COVID-19 vaccine. Moreover, the vaccination timing for maximum efficacy could be decided according to the patient’s condition, indicated medications, and the guides provided here. Post-vaccination monitoring is also advised to ensure an adequate immune response. Further studies in this area are urgently warranted.

COVID-19 vaccines for patients with cancer: benefits likely outweigh risks

Less than a year since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, ten vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have been approved for at least limited use, with over sixty others in clinical trials. This swift achievement has generated excitement and arrives at a time of great need, as the number of COVID-19 cases worldwide continues to rapidly increase. Two vaccines are currently approved for full use, both built on mRNA and lipid nanotechnology platforms, a success story of mRNA technology 20 years in the making. For patients with cancer, questions arise around the safety and efficacy of these vaccines in the setting of immune alterations engendered by their malignancy and/or therapies. We summarize the current data on leading COVID-19 vaccine candidates and vaccination of patients undergoing immunomodulatory cancer treatments. Most current cancer therapeutics should not prevent the generation of protective immunity. We call for more research in this area and recommend that the majority of patients with cancer receive COVID vaccinations when possible.

COVID-19 vaccines for patients with cancer: benefits likely outweigh risks

Less than a year since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, ten vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have been approved for at least limited use, with over sixty others in clinical trials. This swift achievement has generated excitement and arrives at a time of great need, as the number of COVID-19 cases worldwide continues to rapidly increase. Two vaccines are currently approved for full use, both built on mRNA and lipid nanotechnology platforms, a success story of mRNA technology 20 years in the making. For patients with cancer, questions arise around the safety and efficacy of these vaccines in the setting of immune alterations engendered by their malignancy and/or therapies. We summarize the current data on leading COVID-19 vaccine candidates and vaccination of patients undergoing immunomodulatory cancer treatments. Most current cancer therapeutics should not prevent the generation of protective immunity. We call for more research in this area and recommend that the majority of patients with cancer receive COVID vaccinations when possible.

Influenza vaccination in breast cancer patients during subcutaneous trastuzumab in adjuvant setting

BACKGROUND

Despite the current recommendation for influenza vaccination in cancer patients with active oncological therapy, limited data are available on the efficacy of vaccination in cancer patients receiving targeted therapies. We aimed to investigate the immunogenicity and tolerability of influenza vaccination in breast cancer patients treated with trastuzumab in adjuvant setting.

METHODS

A prospective open-label multicenter study was performed including patients with breast cancer during trastuzumab treatment in adjuvant setting and healthy controls. Blood samples were taken before, 4 weeks after, and 12 weeks after a single dose of trivalent influenza vaccine containing inactivated A/California/7/2009 (H1N1) pdm09, A/Hongkong4801/2014 (H3N2), and B/Brisbane/60/2008. Levels of serum antibody titers to hemagglutinin for H1N1 and influenza B strains were measured.

RESULTS

Twenty breast cancer patients and 37 controls were included in the study. No difference in seroprotection rate between trastuzumab-treated patients and controls was observed for either H1N1 (100% in both groups) or B strain (78.9% vs. 89.2%, p value = 0.423). A statistically significant increase in geometric mean titers from baseline was seen in both groups and was evident both 4 weeks and 12 weeks after vaccination. Adverse events in the trastuzumab-treated group were uncommon and mild with only one serious adverse event not related to vaccination.

CONCLUSION

Breast cancer patients treated with trastuzumab in adjuvant setting seem to benefit from influenza vaccination in terms of immunogenicity without increasing the risk for adverse events. The current data support the recommendation to offer influenza vaccination in breast cancer patients treated with this type of targeted therapy.

Efficacy of influenza vaccine (Fluvax) in cancer patients on treatment: a prospective single arm, open-label study

PURPOSE

Influenza virus infection has significant morbidity and mortality in patients with medical co-morbidities who are also immunosuppressed. The efficacy of the seasonal influenza vaccine has not been well studied in patients receiving chemotherapy. We assessed the efficacy of seasonal influenza vaccine in patients with non-haematological malignancy on active treatment (chemotherapy and targeted therapy).

METHODS

A prospective single arm, open label study with 53 patients with non-haematological cancers recruited during the 2011 and 2012 influenza seasons. Participants had one dose of 2011/2012 trivalent vaccine containing strains A/California/7/2009(H1N1), A/Perth/16/2009 (H3N2) and B/Brisbane/60/2008 (Fluvax) prior to or in-between treatment cycles. Haemagglutination inhibition antibody (HIA) titres in serum were measured at baseline 3, 6 and 24 weeks. Primary endpoint: seroconversion rate (SCR) at 3 weeks. Secondary endpoints: late SCR at 6 weeks. rate of sustained sero-protection titres (SPR) at 24 weeks. Seroconversion was defined as postvaccination ≥ 4-fold increase in HIA titre and sero-protection defined as a HIA ≥ 1:40.

RESULTS

The SCR at 3 weeks were 35%, 30% and 22.5% to the H1N1, H3N2 and B/Bris strains, respectively. There were no new cases of late SC at 6 weeks or 24 weeks. The SPR at 3 weeks were 72.5%, 65% and 40%, respectively, to H1N1, H3N2 and B/Bris. The SPR at 24 weeks to H1N1, H3N2 and B/Bris were 40%, 52.5% and 17.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients on various solid tumour treatments achieve sero-protection rate congruent with the general population. The sero-protection HIA titres were not sustained at 24 weeks postvaccination.

Anti-infective vaccination strategies in patients with hematologic malignancies or solid tumors-Guideline of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society for Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO)

Infectious complications are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with malignancies specifically when receiving anticancer treatments. Prevention of infection through vaccines is an important aspect of clinical care of cancer patients. Immunocompromising effects of the underlying disease as well as of antineoplastic therapies need to be considered when devising vaccination strategies. This guideline provides clinical recommendations on vaccine use in cancer patients including autologous stem cell transplant recipients, while allogeneic stem cell transplantation is subject of a separate guideline. The document was prepared by the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society for Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) by reviewing currently available data and applying evidence-based medicine criteria.

RNAi-based small molecule repositioning reveals clinically approved urea-based kinase inhibitors as broadly active antivirals

Influenza viruses (IVs) tend to rapidly develop resistance to virus-directed vaccines and common antivirals targeting pathogen determinants, but novel host-directed approaches might preclude resistance development. To identify the most promising cellular targets for a host-directed approach against influenza, we performed a comparative small interfering RNA (siRNA) loss-of-function screen of IV replication in A549 cells. Analysis of four different IV strains including a highly pathogenic avian H5N1 strain, an influenza B virus (IBV) and two human influenza A viruses (IAVs) revealed 133 genes required by all four IV strains. According to gene enrichment analyses, these strain-independent host genes were particularly enriched for nucleocytoplasmic trafficking. In addition, 360 strain-specific genes were identified with distinct patterns of usage for IAVs versus IBV and human versus avian IVs. The strain-independent host genes served to define 43 experimental and otherwise clinically approved drugs, targeting reportedly fourteen of the encoded host factors. Amongst the approved drugs, the urea-based kinase inhibitors (UBKIs) regorafenib and sorafenib exhibited a superior therapeutic window of high IV antiviral activity and low cytotoxicity. Both UBKIs appeared to block a cell signaling pathway involved in IV replication after internalization, yet prior to vRNP uncoating. Interestingly, both compounds were active also against unrelated viruses including cowpox virus (CPXV), hantavirus (HTV), herpes simplex virus 1 (HSV1) and vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) and showed antiviral efficacy in human primary respiratory cells. An in vitro resistance development analysis for regorafenib failed to detect IV resistance development against this drug. Taken together, the otherwise clinically approved UBKIs regorafenib and sorafenib possess high and broad-spectrum antiviral activity along with substantial robustness against resistance development and thus constitute attractive host-directed drug candidates against a range of viral infections including influenza.

Conventional medications against influenza infections, including vaccination and antiviral drug therapy, are targeted against viral determinants–an approach collectively referred to as pathogen-directed. However, influenza viruses mutate fast and quickly develop resistance to these pathogen-directed treatments. An alternative, yet not well established, is to block host cellular molecules required by the virus to successfully multiply. Such a host-directed approach is anticipated to be more robust against the development of drug resistance. This notion is founded on the different modes of action of the two principal approaches: Virus-directed therapeutics target the virus itself. Thus, just a single mutation could abrogate sensitivity to a virus-directed therapeutic. In contrast, it is unlikely that viruses can easily circumvent a pharmacological blockage of a cellular factor by means of just a few mutations. Instead, the virus needs to either exploit an immediate parallel cellular pathway or adjust its replication cycle to a different cellular factor–the latter being a process likely to require multiple mutations, if possible at all. To identify the most promising targets for a host-directed therapy, we performed a small interfering RNA (siRNA) screen with four different influenza virus strains using a lung epithelial cell line. Subsequently, we tested a series of drugs, specific for the products of the genes that are required for replication of all four influenza virus strains tested. Regorafenib and sorafenib, two chemically related urea-based kinase inhibitors already clinically approved for cancer treatment, turned out to be effective inhibitors of all influenza viruses and displayed low cytotoxicity. These drugs blocked viral replication at an early stage of the life cycle not only in cell lines but also in human primary respiratory cells. Moreover, these drugs exhibited high efficacy even against unrelated viruses. In addition, no development of resistance was observed against regorafenib, which was used in an in vitro assay representatively of urea-based kinase inhibitors. Our results suggest that regorafenib and sorafenib are promising drug candidates for a host-directed therapy of influenza and other viral infections.

Influenza vaccination in adult patients with solid tumours treated with chemotherapy

Patients with solid tumours receiving chemotherapy are at risk for influenza complications. Yearly influenza vaccination is recommended to patients treated with chemotherapy. However, adherence to vaccination is low, most likely due to lack of data on efficacy, optimal timing and safety of vaccination. There is scarce evidence for the effectiveness of the influenza vaccine in adult patients with solid tumours and chemotherapy on reduction of pneumonia, decreased mortality and fewer interruptions of oncological treatment. A review of 20 non-randomised serological studies in adult patients with different cancer types and chemotherapy provides insight in general trends of response to vaccination. Overall, the magnitude of the antibody response after influenza vaccination (i.e. seroconversion) can be lower than in healthy controls, but the majority of patients with solid tumours is able to mount a timely, protective immunological response (i.e. seroprotection) regardless of chemotherapy schedule, similar to healthy controls. Small sample sizes, patient heterogeneity and lack of comparable study designs limit more specific recommendations related to cancer type and optimal timing of vaccination. The inactivated influenza vaccine is safe to administer to immunosuppressed patients; side-effects are similar to those in healthy individuals. Although vaccination before start of chemotherapy is preferred to ensure optimal protection in adults with solid tumours, also vaccination during chemotherapy can reduce influenza-related complications considering the overall trends in serological response. Given the increased morbidity and mortality of influenza, influenza vaccination should be advocated as an inexpensive and safe preventive measure in patients with solid tumours receiving chemotherapy.

Small-molecule inhibitor sorafenib regulates immunoreactions by inducing survival and differentiation of bone marrow cells

Sorafenib has been used for the treatment of liver cancer. However, its clinical impact on human immunity system remains poorly known. Our previous study has shown that sorafenib modulates immunosuppressive cell populations in murine liver cancer models. Here, we continue to report that low doses of sorafenib promotes the survival of murine bone marrow cells (BMCs) in a dose-dependent manner by up-regulating the anti-apoptotic protein survivin. Sorafenib induces differentiation of BMCs into suppressive dendritic cells that inhibit autologous T-cell proliferation and stimulate CD4+ T cells to express increased IL-1β, IL-2, IL-4, IL-10, IFN-γ and TNF-α, and reduced levels of IL-6 and CD25, which indicates that sorafenib-induced dendritic cells represent a distinct cellular subset with unique properties. Taken together, our findings suggest that in addition to its anticancer effects, sorafenib has an immunoregulatory property that is apparent at low doses.

Humoral and cellular immune responses after influenza vaccination in patients with postcancer fatigue

The aim of this study was to compare humoral and cellular immune responses to influenza vaccination in cancer survivors with and without severe symptoms of fatigue. Severely fatigued (n = 15) and non-fatigued (n = 12) disease-free cancer survivors were vaccinated against seasonal influenza. Humoral immunity was evaluated at baseline and post-vaccination by a hemagglutination inhibition assay. Cellular immunity was evaluated at baseline and post-vaccination by lymphocyte proliferation and activation assays. Regulatory T cells were measured at baseline by flow cytometry and heat-shock protein 90 alpha levels by ELISA. Comparable humoral immune responses were observed in fatigued and non-fatigued patients, both pre- and post-vaccination. At baseline, fatigued patients showed a significantly diminished cellular proliferation upon virus stimulation with strain H3N2 (1414 ± 1201 counts), and a trend in a similar direction with strain H1N1 (3025 ± 2339 counts), compared to non-fatigued patients (3099 ± 2401 and 5877 ± 4604 counts, respectively). The percentage of regulatory T lymphocytes was significantly increased (4.4 ± 2.1% versus 2.4 ± 0.8%) and significantly lower amounts of interleukin 2 were detected prior to vaccination in fatigued compared to non-fatigued patients (36.3 ± 44.3 pg/ml vs. 94.0 ± 45.4 pg/ml with strain H3N2 and 28.4 ± 44.0 pg/ml versus 74.5 ± 56.1 pg/ml with strain H1N1). Pre-vaccination heat-shock protein 90 alpha concentrations, post-vaccination cellular proliferation, and post-vaccination cytokine concentrations did not differ between both groups. In conclusion, influenza vaccination is favorable for severely fatigued cancer survivors and should be recommended when indicated. However, compared to non-fatigued cancer survivors, fatigued cancer survivors showed several significant differences in immunological reactivity at baseline, which warrants further investigation.

Current concepts of immune based treatments for patients with HCC: from basic science to novel treatment approaches

The recent approval of two immune checkpoint inhibitors for the treatment of malignant melanoma has sparked great interest by physicians and basic scientists searching for novel therapeutics for GI cancer. Chronic inflammation is recognised as a major risk factor for the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and makes this type of cancer a potentially ideal target for an immune based treatment approach. Further evidence for a critical role of immune responses in patients with HCC is derived from the fact that immune signatures and profiles predict patients' outcome as well as the fact that tumour-induced spontaneous antitumour immunity can be detected. In addition ablative therapies can lead to changes in the number, phenotype and function of different immune cell subsets, which correlate with patients' survival. Various HCC-specific mouse models have been developed, which improve our understanding of hepatocarcinogenesis and tumour-immune cell interactions, and lead to the development of novel immune based treatment approaches, which are currently being evaluated in preclinical and in early clinical settings. Immune checkpoint blockade along with adoptive immune cell therapy and vaccine approaches are currently being evaluated either alone or in combination with other treatments. Here, we provide an overview for the rationale of immunotherapy in HCC, summarise ongoing studies and provide a perspective for immune based approaches in patients with HCC.

Vaccination for seasonal influenza in patients with cancer: recommendations of the Italian Society of Medical Oncology (AIOM)

Background

Influenza virus causes annual epidemics in the winter–spring season with significant morbidity in the general population and important mortality in high-risk groups, including cancer patients. Opinions on the suitability of patients with malignancies not undergoing active treatment and in different phases of antineoplastic therapy, to receive influenza vaccination, vary considerably among oncologists, sometimes even within one center.

Methods

We reviewed available data, including recommendations by national health authorities, on impact of influenza in patients with cancer and their capacity to mount protective immunological responses to vaccination, thus allowing, on behalf of Italian Association of Medical Oncology, to make suitable recommendations for the prevention and treatment of seasonal influenza.

Results and discussion

Patients with cancer often have disease- or treatment-related immunosuppression, and as a consequence, they may have a suboptimal serologic response to influenza vaccination. The protective effect of the different preparations of influenza vaccines in patients with cancer has not been widely investigated, especially in adult patients harboring solid tumors. The optimal timing for administration of influenza vaccines in patients receiving chemotherapy is also not clearly defined. However, since vaccination is the most effective method, along with antiviral drugs in selected patients, for preventing influenza infection, it has to be recommended for cancer patients. Implementing vaccination of close contacts of oncology patients would be an additional tool for enhancing protection in fragile patient populations.

Human osteosarcoma cells respond to sorafenib chemotherapy by downregulation of the tumor progression factors S100A4, CXCR4 and the oncogene FOS

Osteosarcoma is a rare but aggressive bone neoplasm in humans, which is commonly treated with surgery, classical chemotherapy and radiation. Sorafenib, an inhibitor of a number of kinases targeting the Raf/MEK/ERK pathway, is a promising new chemotherapeutic agent in human medicine that has been approved since 2006 for the therapy of renal cell carcinoma and since 2007 for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Here, we studied the antimetastatic potential of 4 µM of this multikinase inhibitor in a human osteosarcoma cell line. DNA microarray-based gene expression profiling detected 297 and 232 genes upregulated or downregulated at a threshold of >2-fold expression alteration (P<0.05) in the sorafenib-treated cells. Three genes (CXCR4, FOS and S100A4) that are involved in tumor progression were chosen for validation by quantitative PCR (qPCR) and protein expression analysis. The decrease in RNA expression detected by microarray profiling was confirmed by qPCR for all three genes (P<0.01). On the protein level, sorafenib-induced reduction of S100A4 was verified both by western blotting and immunohistochemistry. For CXCR4 and c-Fos, a reduced protein expression was shown by immunohistochemistry, for c-Fos also by immunoblotting. We conclude that sorafenib could serve as a potent chemotherapeutical agent by which to inhibit the metastatic progression of osteosarcomas.

Protecting pediatric oncology patients from influenza

Influenza is a common respiratory pathogen. Its severity can be unpredictable, but people with chronic illness are at increased risk of severe infection, complications, and death from influenza. This review examines evidence to support various strategies to protect pediatric oncology patients from influenza-related morbidity. Influenza vaccination should be considered standard. Additional evidence-supported measures include antiviral treatment, antiviral prophylaxis, cohorting of patients, and hospital infection control measures. Data from other high-risk populations support the vaccination of family members, double-dose or high-dose vaccination, and the use of barrier methods. These measures have the potential to optimize patient outcomes because there will be fewer treatment interruptions for acute illness. These strategies can also protect patients from prolonged hospitalizations and morbidity related to influenza.

Humoral and cellular immune responses after influenza vaccination in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome

Background

Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is a clinical condition characterized by severe and disabling fatigue that is medically unexplained and lasts longer than 6 months. Although it is possible to effectively treat CFS, the nature of the underlying physiology remains unclear. Various studies have sought evidence for an underlying disturbance in immunity. The aim of this study was to compare the humoral and cellular immune responses upon influenza vaccination in CFS patients and healthy controls.

Results

Identical antibody titers were observed in CFS patients and healthy controls. Patients and controls demonstrated similar seroprotection rates against all three virus-strains of the influenza vaccine, both pre- and post-vaccination. Functional T cell reactivity was observed in both CFS patients and healthy controls. CFS patients showed a non-significant, numerically lower cellular proliferation at baseline compared to controls. Vaccination induced a significant increase in cellular proliferation in CFS patients, but not in healthy controls. Cytokine production and the number of regulatory T cells were comparable in patients and controls.

Conclusions

The humoral and cellular immune responses upon influenza vaccination were comparable in CFS patients and healthy controls. Putative aberrations in immune responses in CFS patients were not evident for immunity towards influenza. Standard seasonal influenza vaccination is thus justified and, when indicated, should be recommended for patients suffering from CFS.

Immunological heterogeneity of the RCC microenvironment: do targeted therapies influence immune response?

The introduction of targeted agents has substantially improved treatment of metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, complete responses are rare and therapy is not curative. Moreover, information on the latest generation of potent and selective vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) suggests that a plateau has been reached in terms of efficacy. Recent data reveal that targeted agents are involved in modulating immune responses in RCC. In addition, current research adds to our understanding of how RCC escapes an effective anti-tumor response with the potential to modulate these processes by drug development. This review provides specific insight into targeted therapy induced changes in the immunological microenvironment of RCC, summarizes the available evidence, and discusses potential therapeutic implications.

Immunotherapy of genitourinary malignancies

Most cancer patients are treated with some combination of surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy. Despite recent advances in local therapy with curative intent, chemotherapeutic treatments for metastatic disease often remain unsatisfying due to severe side effects and incomplete long-term remission. Therefore, the evaluation of novel therapeutic options is of great interest. Conventional, along with newer treatment strategies target the immune system that suppresses genitourinary (GU) malignancies. Metastatic renal cell carcinoma and non-muscle-invasive bladder caner represent the most immune-responsive types of all human cancer. This review examines the rationale and emerging evidence supporting the anticancer activity of immunotherapy, against GU malignancies.