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 Patients with cancer may be at high risk of adverse outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection. We analyzed a cohort of patients with cancer and COVID-19 reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) to identify prognostic clinical factors, including laboratory measurements and anti-cancer therapies. Patients and Methods Patients with active or historical cancer and a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis recorded between March 17-November 18, 2020 were included. The primary outcome was COVID-19 severity measured on an ordinal scale (uncomplicated, hospitalized, admitted to intensive care unit, mechanically ventilated, died within 30 days). Multivariable regression models included demographics, cancer status, anti-cancer therapy and timing, COVID-19-directed therapies, and laboratory measurements (among hospitalized patients). Results 4,966 patients were included (median age 66 years, 51% female, 50% non-Hispanic white); 2,872 (58%) were hospitalized and 695 (14%) died; 61% had cancer that was present, diagnosed, or treated within the year prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Older age, male sex, obesity, cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities, renal disease, diabetes mellitus, non-Hispanic Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, worse ECOG performance status, recent cytotoxic chemotherapy, and hematologic malignancy were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Among hospitalized patients, low or high absolute lymphocyte count, high absolute neutrophil count, low platelet count, abnormal creatinine, troponin, LDH, and CRP were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Patients diagnosed early in the COVID-19 pandemic (January-April 2020) had worse outcomes than those diagnosed later. Specific anti-cancer therapies (e.g. R-CHOP, platinum combined with etoposide, and DNA methyltransferase inhibitors) were associated with high 30-day all-cause mortality. Conclusions Clinical factors (e.g. older age, hematological malignancy, recent chemotherapy) and laboratory measurements were associated with poor outcomes among patients with cancer and COVID-19. Although further studies are needed, caution may be required in utilizing particular anti-cancer therapies.

Background: Patients with recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC) progressing on platinum-based chemotherapy have poor prognoses and limited therapeutic options. Programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) and its ligand 1 (PD-L1) are frequently upregulated in HNSCC. The international, multi-institutional, single-arm, phase II HAWK study (NCT02207530) evaluated durvalumab monotherapy, an anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody, in PD-L1-high patients with platinum-refractory R/M HNSCC. Patients and methods: Immunotherapy-naïve patients with confirmed PD-L1-high tumour cell expression (defined as patients with 25% of tumour cells expressing PD-L1 [TC 25%] using the VENTANA PD-L1 [SP263] Assay) received durvalumab 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks for up to 12 months. The primary end-point was objective response rate; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: Among evaluable patients (n Z 111), objective response rate was 16.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.9e24.4); 29.4% (95% CI, 15.1e47.5) for human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive patients and 10.9% (95% CI, 4.5e21.3) for HPV-negative patients. Median PFS and OS for treated patients (n Z 112) was 2.1 months (95% CI, 1.9e3.7) and 7.1 months (95% CI, 4.9e9.9); PFS and OS at 12 months were 14.6% (95% CI, 8.5e22.1) and 33.6% (95% CI, 24.8e42.7). Treatment-related adverse events were 57.1% (any grade) and 8.0% (grade 3); none led to death. At data cut-off, 24.1% of patients remained on treatment or in follow-up. Conclusion: Durvalumab demonstrated antitumour activity with acceptable safety in PD-L1high patients with R/M HNSCC, supporting its ongoing evaluation in phase III trials in firstand second-line settings. In an ad hoc analysis, HPV-positive patients had a numerically higher response rate and survival than HPV-negative patients.

The increased risk of cardiovascular events with AIs relative to tamoxifen is likely the result of cardioprotective effects of the latter. This new evidence should be considered when assessing the benefits and risks of AIs in the treatment of breast cancer.

Background: The association between aromatase inhibitors and cardiovascular outcomes among women with breast cancer is controversial. Given the discrepant findings from randomized controlled trials and observational studies, additional studies are needed to address this safety concern. Methods: We conducted a population-based cohort study using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to the Hospital Episode Statistics and Office for National Statistics databases. The study population consisted of women newly diagnosed with breast cancer initiating hormonal therapy with aromatase inhibitors or tamoxifen between April 1, 1998, and February 29, 2016. We usedCox proportional hazards models with inverse probability of treatment and censoring weighting to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs comparing new users of aromatase inhibitors with new users of tamoxifen for each of the study outcomes (myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, heart failure, and cardiovascular mortality). Results: The study population consisted of 23 525 patients newly diagnosed with breast cancer, of whom 17 922 initiated treatment with either an aromatase inhibitor or tamoxifen (8139 and 9783, respectively). The use of aromatase inhibitors was associated with a significantly increased risk of heart failure (incidence rate, 5.4 versus 1.8 per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.86 [95% CI, 1.14–3.03]) and cardiovascular mortality (incidence rate, 9.5 versus 4.7 per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.11–2.04]) compared with the use of tamoxifen. Aromatase inhibitors were associated with elevated HRs, but with CIs including the null value, for myocardial infarction (incidence rate, 3.9 versus 1.8 per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.37 [95% CI, 0.88–2.13]) and ischemic stroke (incidence rate, 5.6 versus 3.2 per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.82–1.72]). Conclusions: In this population-based study, aromatase inhibitors were associated with increased risks of heart failure and cardiovascular mortality compared with tamoxifen. There were also trends toward increased risks, although nonsignificant, of myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke. The increased risk of cardiovascular events associated with aromatase inhibitors should be balanced with their favorable clinical benefits compared with tamoxifen.

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.

Background:Immunohistological assessment of Ki 67 expression is less expensive than Oncotype Dx, which is currently used to identify patients with lymph node-negative breast cancer, who will benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy.Methods:The relationship of immunohistologically measured Ki 67 to Oncotype DX recurrence score (RS) was examined in 53 cases of T1–2 N0 M0 (oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2/neu negative) breast cancer.Results:There was a strong linear correlation between Ki 67 value and the Oncotype Dx RS. All patients in the low Ki 67 group (Ki 67 of ⩽10%) had Oncotype Dx RSs of low or intermediate risk. The vast majority of patients (93.8%) in the high-Ki 67 group (Ki 67⩾25%) had oncotype RSs of high or intermediate risk.Conclusion:Ki 67 proliferation value is a major, but not the sole determinant of Oncotype Dx score.

Perceptions among women with breast cancer about the relative importance of different potential chemotherapy side effects is not well understood. A survey was performed by women receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer. Grade I/II (mild to moderate) and III/IV (moderate to severe) descriptions of nine common chemotherapy side effects were assigned preference weights using the standard gamble technique. For each hypothetical side effect, patients could choose to stay in the respective side effect state or take a gamble between full health (probability p) or being dead (1 - p). For each side effect, p was varied until the patient was indifferent between these options. The survey also included questions about the importance of survival, slowing cancer growth, and quality of life. This analysis included 69 patients; mean age 54 years (range 35-84), representing all cancer stages. Standard gamble preferences were lowest (i.e., least preferred) for grade III/IV nausea/vomiting (0.621), indicating that patients would, on average, risk a 38 % chance of being dead to avoid having grade III/IV nausea/vomiting for the rest of their lives. The next least preferred side effects were grade III/IV diarrhea (0.677) and grade III/IV sensory neuropathy (0.694). Survival appeared more important than slowing cancer growth and maintaining quality of life across cancer stages. Nevertheless, patients with advanced disease placed less importance on survival (p = 0.09) and higher importance on quality of life (p = 0.05). These standard gamble utilities provide unique insights into chemotherapy toxicities from the patient perspective. Differences in the relative importance of overall survival and quality of life with treatment existed between patients with different stages of disease. These studies should be expanded as the data may also be used to calculate quality-adjusted life expectancy in cost-effectiveness evaluations of breast cancer chemotherapies.