No abstract

Background Early Kinetics of SARS‐CoV‐2 viral load (VL) in plasma determined by quantitative RT‐PCR was evaluated as a predictor of poor clinical outcome in a prospective study and assessed in a retrospective validation cohort. Methods Prospective observational single‐centre study including consecutive adult patients hospitalised with COVID‐19 between November 2020 and January 2021. Serial plasma samples were obtained until discharge. Quantitative RT‐PCR was performed to assess SARS‐CoV‐2 VL. The main outcomes were in‐hospital mortality, admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and their combination (Poor Outcome). Relevant Viremia (RV), established in the prospective study, was assessed in a retrospective cohort including hospitalised COVID‐19 patients from April 2021‐May 2022, in which plasma samples were collected according to clinical criteria. Results Prospective cohort: 57 patients were included. RV was defined as at least a two‐fold increase in VL within ≤2 days or a VL>300 copies/mL, in the first week. Patients with RV (N=14; 24.6%) were more likely to die than those without RV (35.7% vs 0%), needed ICU admission (57% vs 0%) or had Poor Outcome (71.4% vs 0%), (p<0.001 for the three variables) Retrospective cohort: 326 patients were included, 18.7% presented RV. Patients with RV compared with patients without RV had higher rates of ICU‐admission [OR 5.6 (95%CI,2.1‐15.1); p=0.001], mortality [OR 13.5 (95%CI,6.3‐28.7); p<0.0001] and Poor Outcome [OR 11.2 (95%CI,5.8‐22); p<0.0001] Conclusion Relevant SARS‐CoV‐2 viremia in the first week of hospitalisation was associated with higher in‐hospital mortality, ICU admission, and Poor Outcome. Findings observed in the prospective cohort were confirmed in a larger validation cohort. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused mental health problems worldwide. The psychopathological implications of COVID-19 in cancer patients have rarely been addressed. Considering the increased vulnerability of oncology patients, this issue needs to be addressed to improve the long-term mental health status of these patients.Methods: We conducted a prospective study in outpatients under active cancer treatment during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. A semi-structured 24-question survey was designed to measure baseline sociodemographic, psychosocial and COVID-19 exposure characteristics. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale was used to measure psychological symptoms. A descriptive and analytical univariate analysis of the variables studied was performed. We used the Z-score to compare different populations (experimental and historical control cohort).Results: 104 patients were included, the majority of which were women (64.4%), were above 65 years of age (57.7%), had either lung and breast cancer (56.7%), had advanced disease (64%) and were undergoing chemotherapy (63.5%). 51% of them expressed greater fear of cancer than of COVID-19 infection or both.In relation to HADS, 52.8% of emotional distress, 42.3% of anxiety and 58.6% of depression rates were detected. The main factors related with higher rates of psychological symptomatology were history of previous psychotropic drug consumption and the adoption of additional infection prevention measures because they considered themselves at risk of severe COVID-19 infection (p = 0.008; p = 0.003 for emotional distress, p = 0.026; p = 0.004 for anxiety, and p = 0.013; p = 0.008 for depression). Tumor type, stage, oncologic treatment or rescheduling of cancer treatments were not related to higher levels of psychological symptomatology.Comparison of our results with another population of similar characteristics was not significant (Z score = −1.88; p = 0.060).Conclusions: We detected high rates of emotional distress during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic among cancer patients in active treatment (52.8%). This was higher and clinically relevant than observed in a comparable population (42.5%), although not significant. Cancer itself is the main factor of concern for cancer patients, above and beyond the emotional distress generated by COVID-19 pandemic.

Eribulin is active and safe in heavily pre‐treated metastatic breast cancer patients. Few safety data have been published in third line. We aimed to report the specific safety profile on third line beyond taxanes and anthracyclines in advanced breast cancer (ABC). A multicenter phase II, prospective study was conducted in anthracyclines and taxanes pre‐treated HER2‐negative ABC, programmed to receive eribulin as third‐line chemotherapy. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed and classified according to CTCAE. In addition, efficacy, in terms of overall survival (OS) and progression‐free survival (PFS), and the dynamics of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) during treatment were assessed. 59 patients fulfilled the criteria. All but one showed AEs with a cumulative number of 598 AEs. The most frequent grade 3/4 drug‐related AEs were neutropenia (1.7%), febrile neutropenia (0.5%), leukopenia (0.5%), alopecia (0.5%), asthenia (0.3%), elevated gamma glutamyl transferase levels (0.2%), and respiratory tract infection (0.2%). Median PFS was 4 months (95% CI 3.1‐5.9) and median OS was 13.6 months (11.8‐not reached). The mean number of CTCs in peripheral blood was significantly reduced from baseline to cycle 2 (16.8 vs 5.4 CTCs; P < 0.001). Median OS was significantly longer in <5 baseline CTC patients compared to ≥5 baseline CTC patients (13.1 months [95% CI: 11.8‐not reached] vs 12.5 months [95% CI: 7.6‐not reached]; P = 0.045). A significant correlation (P = 0.0129) was observed between CTC levels at cycle 2 and death when CTCs were analyzed using cox regression. Eribulin chemotherapy is effective and safe as third line in advanced HER2‐negative breast cancer. CTC levels correlate with overall survival.

IntroductionAlpelisib is an orally selective PI3K alpha inhibitor recently available for the treatment of advanced breast cancer. PI3K pathway is an intracellular signaling pathway that plays an important role in regulating glucose metabolism. Hyperglycemia is the most common adverse event associated.MethodsWe describe the case of a severe hyperglycemia associated with alpelisib treatment in a patient with metastatic breast cancer and previously near-normal glycemia. We analyze the clinical presentation, PI3K inhibitor pharmacodynamic aspects, its influence in glycemic control and the required treatment approach.ResultsAn important impairment of glycemic control was observed after initiation of alpelisib. In addition to insulin sensitizers drugs, intensive insulin regimen was necessary. Flash glucose monitoring (FGM) information has been helpful in understanding the pharmacodynamic aspects of alpelisib and insulin titration. Development of hyperglycemia is fast, already observed 24 hours after initiation of therapy. FGM shows severe and persistent hyperglycemia during most of the day, with a significant downward effect in the 4 hours after each daily intake, which evidences the strong but transitory effect of the drug enzyme blockade. C-peptide level is remarkable in accordance with drug pharmacodynamics, consistent with a significant insulin resistance.ConclusionsGlucose monitoring should always be performed in patients treated with alpelisib, especially in patients with diabetes and prediabetes. It is crucial to anticipate in these patients. Any delay can lead to a worsening in metabolic control resulting in the discontinuation or reduction of alpelisib, which would lead to a decrease in its effectiveness, and consequently would deny patients an effective treatment with an impact on survival.