Introduction Coronavirus disease 2019 (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 impacted on access to cancer diagnosis and treatment for LC pts compared to 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 to the same period in 2019. Differences between the two years were analyzed using chi-square test for categorical variables and 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 vs 1637, p=0.09). Newly LC pts in 2020 were more likely to be diagnosed with stage IV disease (p<0.01) and to be current smokers (p<0.01). The drop in terms of new diagnoses was greater in the lockdown period (percentage drop -12% vs -3.2%) compared to the other months included. More LC pts referred to low/medium volume hospital in 2020 compared to 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), 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.

No abstract

The potent, RET-selective tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) pralsetinib and selpercatinib, are effective against the RET V804L/M gatekeeper mutants, however, adaptive mutations that cause resistance at the solvent front RET G810 residue have been found, pointing to the need for the development of the next-generation of RET-specific TKIs. Also, as seen in EGFR- and ALK-driven NSCLC, the rising of the co-occurring amplifications of KRAS and MET could represent other escaping mechanisms from direct inhibition. In this review, we summarize actual knowledge on RET fusions, focusing on those involved in NSCLC, the results of main clinical trials of approved RET-inhibition drugs, with particular attention on recent published results of selective TKIs, and finally, pre-clinical evidence regarding resistance mechanisms and suggestion on hypothetical and feasible drugs combinations and strategies viable in the near future.

Background: Immunotherapy has completely changed the treatment of solid tumors. Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) seem to be an appealing alternative to chemotherapy, especially in elderly patients, due to a more tolerable toxicity profile, they can lead to a peculiar variety of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). However, data on tolerability and outcome of ICIs in the elderly are lacking due to poor accrual in clinical trials of these patients. Methods: We performed a retro-prospective analysis on patients treated with single agent anti-PD-L1/PD-1 at the Clinical Oncology Unit, Careggi University Hospital, from March 2016 to March 2020. Data on the treatment responses, type and severity of irAEs, as well as the corticosteroids (CCS) dosage used for irAEs and the discontinuation rate, were described per each patient, according to two different age-based cohorts of patients (< or ≥70 years). Results: We reported a lower incidence of all-grade toxicity in elderly compared to younger patients (64.9% vs. 44.9%, p = 0.018). The two age-cohorts showed a different profile of irAEs. Endocrine irAEs were significantly higher in younger patients (39.7% vs. 21.7%, p = 0.002), while dermatologic toxicities were more common in the older group (35.0% vs. 11.3%, p = 0.047). Use of CCS and treatment discontinuation rate do not differ significantly between the two age groups. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that treatment with ICIs in elderly populations is safe and feasible. Patients over 70 years are more prone to develop skin irAEs, while younger patients are more subject to experience endocrine toxicities.