Background Data on patients with COVID-19 who have cancer are lacking. Here we characterise the outcomes of a cohort of patients with cancer and COVID-19 and identify potential prognostic factors for mortality and severe illness.Methods In this cohort study, we collected de-identified data on patients with active or previous malignancy, aged 18 years and older, with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection from the USA, Canada, and Spain from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) database for whom baseline data were added between March 17 and April 16, 2020. We collected data on baseline clinical conditions, medications, cancer diagnosis and treatment, and COVID-19 disease course. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality within 30 days of diagnosis of COVID-19. We assessed the association between the outcome and potential prognostic variables using logistic regression analyses, partially adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, and obesity. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04354701, and is ongoing. FindingsOf 1035 records entered into the CCC19 database during the study period, 928 patients met inclusion criteria for our analysis. Median age was 66 years (IQR 57-76), 279 (30%) were aged 75 years or older, and 468 (50%) patients were male. The most prevalent malignancies were breast (191 [21%]) and prostate (152 [16%]). 366 (39%) patients were on active anticancer treatment, and 396 (43%) had active (measurable) cancer. At analysis (May 7, 2020), 121 (13%) patients had died. In logistic regression analysis, independent factors associated with increased 30-day mortality, after partial adjustment, were: increased age (per 10 years; partially adjusted odds ratio 1•84, 95% CI 1•53-2•21), male sex (1•63, 1•07-2•48), smoking status (former smoker vs never smoked: 1•60, 1•03-2•47), number of comorbidities (two vs none: 4•50, 1•33-15•28), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or higher (status of 2 vs 0 or 1: 3•89, 2•11-7•18), active cancer (progressing vs remission: 5•20, 2•77-9•77), and receipt of azithromycin plus hydroxychloroquine (vs treatment with neither: 2•93, 1•79-4•79; confounding by indication cannot be excluded). Compared with residence in the US-Northeast, residence in Canada (0•24, 0•07-0•84) or the US-Midwest (0•50, 0•28-0•90) were associated with decreased 30-day all-cause mortality. Race and ethnicity, obesity status, cancer type, type of anticancer therapy, and recent surgery were not associated with mortality. Interpretation Among patients with cancer and COVID-19, 30-day all-cause mortality was high and associated with general risk factors and risk factors unique to patients with cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to better understand the effect of COVID-19 on outcomes in patients with cancer, including the ability to continue specific cancer treatments.

Background: A multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test used to complement existing screening could increase the number of cancers detected through population screening, potentially improving clinical outcomes. The Circulating Cell-free Genome Atlas study (CCGA; NCT02889978) was a prospective, case-controlled, observational study and demonstrated that a blood-based MCED test utilizing cell-free DNA (cfDNA) sequencing in combination with machine learning could detect cancer signals across multiple cancer types and predict cancer signal origin (CSO) with high accuracy. The objective of this third and final CCGA substudy was to validate an MCED test version further refined for use as a screening tool. Patients and methods: This pre-specified substudy included 4077 participants in an independent validation set (cancer: n ¼ 2823; non-cancer: n ¼ 1254, non-cancer status confirmed at year-one follow-up). Specificity, sensitivity, and CSO prediction accuracy were measured. Results: Specificity for cancer signal detection was 99.5% [95% confidence interval (CI): 99.0% to 99.8%]. Overall sensitivity for cancer signal detection was 51.5% (49.6% to 53.3%); sensitivity increased with stage [stage I: 16.8% (14.5% to 19.5%), stage II: 40.4% (36.8% to 44.1%), stage III: 77.0% (73.4% to 80.3%), stage IV: 90.1% (87.5% to 92.2%)]. Stage I-III sensitivity was 67.6% (64.4% to 70.6%) in 12 pre-specified cancers that account for approximately two-thirds of annual USA cancer deaths and was 40.7% (38.7% to 42.9%) in all cancers. Cancer signals were detected across >50 cancer types. Overall accuracy of CSO prediction in true positives was 88.7% (87.0% to 90.2%). Conclusion:In this pre-specified, large-scale, clinical validation substudy, the MCED test demonstrated high specificity and accuracy of CSO prediction and detected cancer signals across a wide diversity of cancers. These results support the feasibility of this blood-based MCED test as a complement to existing single-cancer screening tests. Clinical trial number: NCT02889978.

No abstract

IMPORTANCE COVID-19 is a life-threatening illness for many patients. Prior studies have established hematologic cancers as a risk factor associated with particularly poor outcomes from COVID-19. To our knowledge, no studies have established a beneficial role for anti-COVID-19 interventions in this at-risk population. Convalescent plasma therapy may benefit immunocompromised individuals with COVID-19, including those with hematologic cancers.OBJECTIVE To evaluate the association of convalescent plasma treatment with 30-day mortality in hospitalized adults with hematologic cancers and COVID-19 from a multi-institutional cohort. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis retrospective cohort study using data from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry with propensity score matching evaluated patients with hematologic cancers who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Data were collected between

These results suggest a potential opportunity exists to maximize oral chemotherapy treatment outcomes with the addition of a formalized monitoring program directed by an oncology pharmacist.

No abstract

No abstract

Study Type – Symptom prevalence (case series)
Level of Evidence 4 OBJECTIVE To assess the effectiveness, safety, and treatment patterns of anti‐angiogenic agents in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in tertiary clinical practice settings. PATIENTS AND METHODS We retrospectively reviewed the medical records in two tertiary oncology centres in the USA for all patients treated while off clinical trials from April 2003 to June 2008 who met the entry criteria and received one or more prescriptions for sunitinib or sorafenib, or one or more intravenous administrations of bevacizumab (off‐label) as first‐line anti‐angiogenic treatment. The objective response rate (ORR) reviewed by independent physicians, adverse events (AEs), and treatment modifications were assessed. RESULTS Among 144 patients receiving sunitinib (57), sorafenib (62) and bevacizumab (25), the median treatment duration was 10.5, 8.1 and 7.9 months, and the ORR was 37%, 9% and 13%, respectively. The ORR was lower for patients with metastases to bone, brain, lungs or lymph nodes. Common AEs (all grades) for sunitinib were fatigue (53%), diarrhoea (37%); for sorafenib, diarrhoea (50%), fatigue (40%); for bevacizumab, fatigue (40%), nausea (24%). In all, 34 (60%), 51 (82%) and 20 (80%) patients receiving sunitinib, sorafenib and bevacizumab, respectively, discontinued treatment; 10 (18%), 11 (18%) and four (16%) discontinued due to AEs; 21%, 40% and 12% had a dose interruption, and 30%, 35% and 0% had a dose reduction. CONCLUSIONS Currently available anti‐angiogenic agents had considerable effectiveness in clinical practice. However, the response rates appeared to be low in certain subgroups, but sample sizes were small. Patients had significant rates of AEs, many of which led to treatment modifications. The findings from this retrospective study suggest that there is a need for better‐tolerated therapies for mRCC.