No abstract

SummaryBackgroundViral meningitis is increasingly recognised, but little is known about the frequency with which it occurs, or the causes and outcomes in the UK. We aimed to determine the incidence, causes, and sequelae in UK adults to improve the management of patients and assist in health service planning.MethodsWe did a multicentre prospective observational cohort study of adults with suspected meningitis at 42 hospitals across England. Nested within this study, in the National Health Service (NHS) northwest region (now part of NHS England North), was an epidemiological study. Patients were eligible if they were aged 16 years or older, had clinically suspected meningitis, and either underwent a lumbar puncture or, if lumbar puncture was contraindicated, had clinically suspected meningitis and an appropriate pathogen identified either in blood culture or on blood PCR. Individuals with ventricular devices were excluded. We calculated the incidence of viral meningitis using data from patients from the northwest region only and used these data to estimate the population-standardised number of cases in the UK. Patients self-reported quality-of-life and neuropsychological outcomes, using the EuroQol EQ-5D-3L, the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and the Aldenkamp and Baker neuropsychological assessment schedule, for 1 year after admission.Findings1126 patients were enrolled between Sept 30, 2011, and Sept 30, 2014. 638 (57%) patients had meningitis: 231 (36%) cases were viral, 99 (16%) were bacterial, and 267 (42%) had an unknown cause. 41 (6%) cases had other causes. The estimated annual incidence of viral meningitis was 2·73 per 100 000 and that of bacterial meningitis was 1·24 per 100 000. The median length of hospital stay for patients with viral meningitis was 4 days (IQR 3–7), increasing to 9 days (6–12) in those treated with antivirals. Earlier lumbar puncture resulted in more patients having a specific cause identified than did those who had a delayed lumbar puncture. Compared with the age-matched UK population, patients with viral meningitis had a mean loss of 0·2 quality-adjusted life-years (SD 0·04) in that first year.InterpretationViruses are the most commonly identified cause of meningitis in UK adults, and lead to substantial long-term morbidity. Delays in getting a lumbar puncture and unnecessary treatment with antivirals were associated with longer hospital stays. Rapid diagnostics and rationalising treatments might reduce the burden of meningitis on health services.FundingMeningitis Research Foundation and UK National Institute for Health Research.

Introduction: DLL3, an atypical Notch ligand, is expressed in SCLC tumors but is not detectable in normal adult tissues. Rovalpituzumab tesirine (Rova-T) is an antibody-drug conjugate containing a DLL3targeting antibody tethered to a cytotoxic agent pyrrolobenzodiazepine by means of a protease-cleavable linker. The efficacy and safety of Rova-T compared with topotecan as second-line therapy in patients with SCLC expressing high levels of DLL3 (DLL3-high) was evaluated.Methods: The TAHOE study was an open-label, two-to-one randomized, phase 3 study comparing Rova-T with topotecan as second-line therapy in DLL3-high advanced or metastatic SCLC. Rova-T (0.3 mg/kg) was administered intravenously on day 1 of a 42-day cycle for two cycles, with two additional cycles available to patients who met protocol-defined criteria for continued dosing. Topotecan (1.5 mg/m 2 ) was administered intravenously on days 1 to 5 of a 21-day cycle. The primary end point was overall survival (OS).Results: Patients randomized to Rova-T (n ¼ 296) and topotecan (n ¼ 148) were included in the efficacy analyses. The median age was 64 years, and 77% had the extensive disease at initial diagnosis. The median OS (95% confidence interval) was 6.3 months (5.6-7.3) in the Rova-T arm and 8.6 months (7.7-10.1) in the topotecan arm (hazard ratio, 1.46 [95% confidence interval: 1.17-1.82]). An independent data monitoring committee recommended that enrollment be discontinued because of the shorter OS observed with Rova-T compared with topotecan. Safety profiles for both drugs were consistent with previous reports.Conclusions: Compared with topotecan, which is the current standard second-line chemotherapy, Rova-T exhibited an inferior OS and higher rates of serosal effusions, photosensitivity reaction, and peripheral edema in patients with SCLC. A considerable unmet therapeutic need remains in this population.

Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer‐related deaths worldwide. However, significant progress has been made individualizing therapy based on molecular aberrations (e.g., EGFR, ALK) and pathologic subtype. KRAS is one of the most frequently mutated genes in non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), found in approximately 30% of lung adenocarcinomas, and is thus an appealing target for new therapies. Although no targeted therapy has yet been approved for the treatment of KRAS‐mutant NSCLC, there are multiple potential therapeutic approaches. These may include direct inhibition of KRAS protein, inhibition of KRAS regulators, alteration of KRAS membrane localization, and inhibition of effector molecules downstream of mutant KRAS. This article provides an overview of the KRAS pathway in lung cancer and related therapeutic strategies under investigation. Implications for Practice: The identification of oncogene‐addicted cancers and specific inhibitors has revolutionized non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment and outcomes. One of the most commonly mutated genes in adenocarcinoma is KRAS, found in approximately 30% of lung adenocarcinomas, and thus it is an appealing target for new therapies. This review provides an overview of the KRAS pathway and related targeted therapies under investigation in NSCLC. Some of these agents may play a key role in KRAS‐mutant NSCLC treatment in the future.

Introduction Studies suggest that patients with cancer are more likely to experience severe outcomes from COVID-19. Therefore, cancer centers have undertaken efforts to care for patients with cancer in COVID-free units. Nevertheless, the frequency and relevance of nosocomial transmission of COVID-19 in patients with cancer remain unknown. The goal of this study was to determine the incidence and impact of hospital-acquired COVID-19 in this population and identify predictive factors for COVID-19 severity in patients with cancer. Methods Patients with cancer and a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 were prospectively identified using provincial registries and hospital databases between March 3 rd and May 23 rd , 2020 in the provinces of Quebec and British Columbia in Canada. Patient’s baseline characteristics including age, sex, comorbidities, cancer type, and type of anti-cancer treatment were collected. The exposure of interest was incidence of hospital-acquired infection defined by diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 ≥ 5 days after hospital admission for COVID-unrelated cause. Co-primary outcomes were death or composite outcomes of severe illness from COVID-19 such as hospitalization, supplemental oxygen, intensive-care unit (ICU) admission and/or mechanical ventilation. Results A total of 252 patients (N=249 adult, and N=3 pediatric) with COVID-19 and cancer were identified, and the majority were residents of Quebec (N=233). One-hundred-and-six patients (42.1%) received active anti-cancer treatment in the last 3 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. During a median follow-up of 25 days, 33 (13.1%) required admission to the ICU, and 71 (28.2%) died. Forty-seven (19.1%) had a diagnosis of hospital-acquired COVID-19. Median overall survival was shorter in those with hospital-acquired infection, compared to a contemporary community-acquired population (27 days vs unreached, HR 2.3, 95% CI 1.2-4.4, p=0.0006). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that hospital-acquired COVID-19, age, ECOG status, and advanced stage of cancer were independently associated with death. Interpretation Our study demonstrates a high rate of nosocomial transmission of COVID-19, associated with increased mortality in both univariate and multivariate analysis in the cancer population, reinforcing the importance of treating patients with cancer in COVID-free units. We also validated that age and advanced cancer were negative predictive factors for COVID-19 severity in patients with cancer.

No abstract

No abstract

Among 157 patients treated with ICIs, 65 (41.4%) experienced at least one irAE. Median time to the first irAE onset was 28 days (IQR:15-56). Baseline clinicopathologic characteristics were well balanced between patients who developed irAEs and those who did not. Median tumor mutational burden (TMB) was significantly higher among patients with irAEs compared to those without (14.4 vs 8.4 mutations/megabase [mut/Mb], P <0.01). Patients who developed at least one irAE had a significantly higher objective response rate (26.3% versus 3.3%, P <0.001), and significantly longer median progressionfree survival (mPFS, 4.1 vs 1.3 months, HR: 0.30 [0.20-0.43, P <0.001]) and median overall survival (mOS, 14.1 vs 2.9 months, HR: 0.32 [0.21-0.48], P <0.001). The proportion of patients who were progression-free at 6, 9, and 12 weeks was significantly higher in patients who developed early irAEs compared to those who did not develop early irAEs (6 weeks: 89.5% vs 69.5%, P ¼0.01; 9 weeks: 71.1% vs 40%, P ¼0.001; 12 weeks: 65.8% vs. 31.6%, P <0.001). The median TMB was also significantly higher in patients who developed early irAEs (14.5 vs 8.7 mut/Mb, P <0.01). Conclusion: Patients with SCLC treated with ICIs who developed early irAEs had a higher TMB and enhanced antitumor responses compared to those who did not develop irAEs. Whether a higher TMB is associated with the development of irAEs remains to be determined mechanistically.