Seroprevalence and immunological memory against SARS-CoV-2 in lung cancer patients: the SOLID study

Background

At present, we did not find any articles that studied seroprevalence and its persistence several months later in lung cancer patients in the setting of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Most patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) go on to develop antibodies (Abs) against viral proteins. However, it is not known how long these Abs last nor whether cancer treatments could affect the duration of immune response.

Methods

This prospective, longitudinal, multicenter serological study in the setting of SARS-CoV-2 infection was carried out in 50 Spanish hospitals. Eligibility criterion was the diagnosis of any lung cancer. The determination of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG Abs was performed by qualitative immuno-enzymatic assay using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kit from NovaLisa whose Abs target the recombinant antigen N of the nucleocapsid of SARS-CoV-2. The first Ab determination was performed between April 21 and June 3, 2020. The second Ab determination was performed in all previously seropositive patients, between September 10 and November 20, 2020. Study objectives were to prospectively determine seroprevalence in unselected lung cancer patients during the first wave of the pandemic; the persistence of immunity; protection or lack thereof against reinfection; and the influence of treatments on maintenance or loss of immunity.

Results

Of 1,500 patients, 128 were seropositive, overall prevalence of 8.5% seropositivity [95% confidence interval (CI): 7.2–10.1%]. Seventy-five percent were in active cancer treatment. Forty-seven point seven percent of IgG positive participants had experienced a symptomatic illness suspected of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 (95% CI: 38.8–56.6%). A second determination was performed on average 4.5 months later [interquartile range (IQR), 4.0–5.0 months] and obtained for 104 of the initially seropositive patients (81%), it could not be obtained in 24 patients, the majority due to death caused by disease progression (73%). In the second determination, IgG was not detected in 30.8% of patients. The severity of the infection, the need for hospitalization (P=0.032) and the presence of symptoms at diagnosis (P=0.02) were associated with persistence of immunity in the second determination. No variables or treatments received were associated with Abs loss.

Conclusions

Immunity against SARS-CoV-2 does not appear to be compromised by treatment and persists beyond 4 months. Neither do mortality rates appear to be particularly high in this unselected population.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04407143.

Comprehensive cross-platform comparison of methods for non-invasive EGFR mutation testing: results of the RING observational trial

Several platforms for noninvasive EGFR testing are currently used in the clinical setting with sensitivities ranging from 30% to 100%. Prospective studies evaluating agreement and sources for discordant results remain lacking. Herein, seven methodologies including two next‐generation sequencing (NGS)‐based methods, three high‐sensitivity PCR‐based platforms, and two FDA‐approved methods were compared using 72 plasma samples, from EGFR‐mutant non‐small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients progressing on a first‐line tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). NGS platforms as well as high‐sensitivity PCR‐based methodologies showed excellent agreement for EGFR‐sensitizing mutations (K = 0.80–0.89) and substantial agreement for T790M testing (K = 0.77 and 0.68, respectively). Mutant allele frequencies (MAFs) obtained by different quantitative methods showed an excellent reproducibility (intraclass correlation coefficients 0.86–0.98). Among other technical factors, discordant calls mostly occurred at mutant allele frequencies (MAFs) ≤ 0.5%. Agreement significantly improved when discarding samples with MAF ≤ 0.5%. EGFR mutations were detected at significantly lower MAFs in patients with brain metastases, suggesting that these patients risk for a false‐positive result. Our results support the use of liquid biopsies for noninvasive EGFR testing and highlight the need to systematically report MAFs.

Rationale, design and methodology of TESEO study: a registry of thrombosis and neoplasia of SEOM (Spanish Society of Medical Oncology)

BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE

Thromboembolic complications are a serious, preventable and common event in cancer patients that contributes to increasing morbidity and mortality. Despite increasing knowledge on cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT), there are still several aspects of diagnosis, clinical management, treatment and prognosis with uncertainties that are under-represented in randomized clinical trials. For this reason, the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) launched in June 2018 a registry of CAT.

METHODS/DESIGN

TESEO is an ongoing prospective, non-interventional, multicentric study in consecutive cancer patients with newly diagnosed of thromboembolic event (TEE). Eligibility criteria include being  > 18 years with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of cancer and a symptomatic or incidental TEE confirmed with an imaging technique in the previous month or any time after the cancer diagnosis and signing of informed consent. The study consists of two types of integrated but independent prospective registries. Regular CAT sub-registry includes information on patient's cancer´s characteristics, anticoagulant treatment provided and outcome data. Special CAT sub-registry includes variables related to special situations of CAT that comprise patients with severe kidney failure, thrombocytopenia, high risk of bleeding related to the cancer or with coexistence of bleeding and patients who receive new treatments such a targeted therapy, antiangiogenics agents and immunotherapy. The registry considers the status of the cancer and the time to assess how the prognosis is changed based on when the thrombus occurs. Some outcomes such as rethrombosis, major bleeding, tumor progression and survival will be valued in various time intervals including 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the even in the first year; and then every 6 months until the patient's death.

RESULTS

After 18 months and with 35 centers and researchers, the registry has 1128 patients.

CONCLUSION

TESEO registry will provide clinical real-world evidence for prevention, treatment and complications of CAT in different scenarios that are under-represented in randomized clinical trials.

Dabrafenib plus trametinib for compassionate use in metastatic melanoma: A STROBE-compliant retrospective observational postauthorization study

The main objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dabrafenib alone or combined with trametinib for compassionate use in patients with metastatic melanoma.This retrospective, observational study involved 135 patients with unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma from an expanded-access program at 30 Spanish centers.Forty-eight patients received dabrafenib monotherapy and 87 received combination dabrafenib and trametinib; 4.4% and 95.6% of the patients had stage IIIC and IV melanoma, respectively. All patients showed BRAF mutations in their primary or metastatic lesions; 3 were positive for V600K while the remainder had V600E or V600+. A positive response to treatment was reported in 89.3% of the patients. Overall survival rates at 12 and 24 months were 59.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 52.5-68.9%) and 36.4% (95% CI, 27.8-45%), respectively. Progression-free survival rates at 12 and 24 months were 39.3% (95% CI, 31.1-47.5%) and 21.6% (95% CI, 14.5-28.7%), respectively. Fifty-seven patients (42.2%) reported cutaneous toxicity of any type, mainly hyperkeratosis (14.8%) and rash (11.9%). The most frequent adverse events were pyrexia (27.4%), asthenia (19.3%), arthralgia (16.9%), and diarrhoea (13.2%).Our results suggest that both dabrafenib alone or in combination with trametinib are effective for compassionate use in terms of response and/or survival rates. However, differences in patients' prognostic features ought to be considered. No new findings were revealed regarding the safety profiles of either regimen. This is the first study to evaluate the efficacy of these 2 selective BRAF and mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase inhibitors in a real-world setting in Spain.

Differences in cerebrospinal fluid inflammatory cell reaction of patients with leptomeningeal involvement by lymphoma and carcinoma

Dissemination of neoplastic cells into the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and leptomeninges is a devastating complication in patients with epithelial cell neoplasia (leptomeningeal carcinomatosis [LC]) and lymphomas (lymphomatous meningitis [LyM]). Information about the surrounding inflammatory cell populations is scarce. In this study, flow cytometry immunophenotyping was used to describe the distribution of the main leukocyte populations in the CSF of 83 patients diagnosed with neoplastic meningitis (LC, n = 65; LyM, n = 18). These data were compared with those obtained in the CSF from 55 patients diagnosed with the same groups of neoplasia without meningeal involvement (solid tumors, n = 36; high-grade lymphoma, n = 19). Median (interquartile) rates of lymphocytes, monocytes, and polymorphonuclear (PMN) cells were 59.7% (range, 35-76.6%), 24% (range, 16-53%), and 1.5% (range, 0-7.6%) in LC, respectively, and 98.5% (range, 70.8-100%), 1.5% (range, 0-29.3%), and 0% in LyM, respectively (P < 0.001). No difference was observed between patients with breast adenocarcinoma (n = 30) and lung adenocarcinoma (n = 21), nor with different rates of malignant CSF involvement. Patients with lymphoma (with or without LyM) had a similar CSF leukocyte distribution, but cancer patients with LC and without LC had a distinctive PMN cell rate (P = 0.002). These data show that CSF samples from patients with LC have a greater number of inflammatory cells and a different leukocyte distribution than seen in the CSF from patients with LyM. Description of PMN cells is a distinctive parameter of patients with LC, compared with the CSF from patients with LyM and patients with cancer but without LC.