Although decision making strategy based on clinico-histopathological criteria is well established, renal cell carcinoma (RCC) represents a spectrum of biological ecosystems characterized by distinct genetic and molecular alterations, diverse clinical courses and potential specific therapeutic vulnerabilities. Given the plethora of drugs available, the subtype-tailored treatment to RCC subtype holds the potential to improve patient outcome, shrinking treatment-related morbidity and cost. The emerging knowledge of the molecular taxonomy of RCC is evolving, whilst the antiangiogenic and immunotherapy landscape maintains and reinforces their potential. Although several prognostic factors of survival in patients with RCC have been described, no reliable predictive biomarkers of treatment individual sensitivity or resistance have been identified. In this review, we summarize the available evidence able to prompt more precise and individualized patient selection in well-designed clinical trials, covering the unmet need of medical choices in the era of next-generation anti-angiogenesis and immunotherapy.

Lupus vasculitis (LV) is one of the secondary vasculitides occurring in the setting of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in approximately 50% of patients. It is most commonly associated with small vessels, but medium-sized vessels can also be affected, whereas large vessel involvement is very rare. LV may involve different organ systems and present in a wide variety of clinical manifestations according to the size and site of the vessels involved. LV usually portends a poor prognosis, and a prompt diagnosis is fundamental for a good outcome. The spectrum of involvement ranges from a relatively mild disease affecting small vessels or a single organ to a multiorgan system disease with life-threatening manifestations, such as mesenteric vasculitis, pulmonary hemorrhage, or mononeuritis multiplex. Treatment depends upon the organs involved and the severity of the vasculitis process. In this review, we provide an overview of the different forms of LV, describing their clinical impact and focusing on the available treatment strategies.

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and its ligand heparin-binding EGF-like growth factor (HB-EGF) sustain endothelial cell proliferation and angiogenesis in solid tumors, but little is known about the role of HB-EGF–EGFR signaling in bone marrow angiogenesis and multiple myeloma (MM) progression. We found that bone marrow endothelial cells from patients with MM express high levels of EGFR and HB-EGF, compared with cells from patients with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance, and that overexpressed HB-EGF stimulates EGFR expression in an autocrine loop. We also found that levels of EGFR and HB-EGF parallel MM plasma cell number, and that HB-EGF is a potent inducer of angiogenesis in vitro and in vivo. Moreover, blockade of HB-EGF–EGFR signaling, by an anti-HB-EGF neutralizing antibody or the EGFR inhibitor erlotinib, limited the angiogenic potential of bone marrow endothelial cells and hampered tumor growth in an MM xenograft mouse model. These results identify HB-EGF–EGFR signaling as a potential target of anti-angiogenic therapy, and encourage the clinical investigation of EGFR inhibitors in combination with conventional cytotoxic drugs as a new therapeutic strategy for MM.

Background: Timely assessment of COVID-19 severity is crucial for the rapid provision of appropriate treatments. Definitive criteria for the early identification of severe COVID-19 cases that require intensive care unit admission are lacking.Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective case-control study of 95 consecutive adults admitted to the intensive care unit (cases) or a medical ward (controls) for laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. Clinical data were collected and changes in laboratory test results were calculated between presentation at the emergency department and admission. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression was performed to calculate odds ratios for intensive care unit admission according to changes in laboratory variables.Results: Of the 95 adults with COVID-19, 25 were admitted to intensive care and 70 to a medical ward after a median 6 h stay in the emergency department. During this interval, neutrophil counts increased in cases and decreased in controls (median, 934 vs. −295 × 106/L; P = 0.006), while lymphocyte counts decreased in cases and increased in controls (median, −184 vs. 109 × 106/L; P < 0.001). In cases, the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio increased 6-fold and the urea-to-creatinine ratio increased 20-fold during the emergency department stay, but these ratios did not change in controls (P < 0.001 for both comparisons). By multivariable logistic regression, short-term increases in the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (OR = 1.43; 95% CI, 1.16–1.76) and urea-to-creatinine ratio (OR = 1.72; 95% CI, 1.20–2.66) were independent predictors of intensive care unit admission.Conclusion: Short-time changes in neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and urea-to-creatinine ratio emerged as stand-alone parameters able to identify patients with aggressive disease at an early stage.

No abstract

Although decision making strategy based on clinico-histopathological criteria is well established, renal cell carcinoma (RCC) represents a spectrum of biological ecosystems characterized by distinct genetic and molecular alterations, diverse clinical courses and potential specific therapeutic vulnerabilities. Given the plethora of drugs available, the subtype-tailored treatment to RCC subtype holds the potential to improve patient outcome, shrinking treatment-related morbidity and cost. The emerging knowledge of the molecular taxonomy of RCC is evolving, whilst the antiangiogenic and immunotherapy landscape maintained and reinforced their potential. Although several prognostic factors of survival in patients with RCC have been described, no reliable predictive biomarkers of treatment individual sensitivity or resistance have been identified. In this review, we summarize the available evidence able to prompt more precise and individualized patient selection in well-designed clinical trials, covering the unmet need of medical choices in the era of next-generation anti-angiogenesis and immunotherapy.

Background & Aims A plethora of second-line therapies have been recently introduced for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treatment with promising results. A meta-analysis of second-line treatments for HCC has been performed to better tailor their use based on improved patient stratification and to identify the best available option. Methods Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating second-line treatment for advanced HCC in patients already treated with sorafenib. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and drug withdrawal due to adverse events. Network meta-analyses were performed considering placebo as the basis for comparison in efficacy and safety analyses. Subgroup stratification considered gender, age, sorafenib-responsiveness and drug tolerability, viral infection, macrovascular invasion, HCC extrahepatic spread, performance status, and alpha-fetoprotein levels. Results Fourteen phase II or III randomized controlled trials, involving 5,488 patients and 12 regimens, were included in the analysis. Regorafenib (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.50–0.79), cabozantinib (HR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.63–0.92), and ramucirumab (HR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.70–0.76) significantly prolonged OS compared with placebo. Cabozantinib (HR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.36–0.52), regorafenib (HR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.37–0.56), ramucirumab (HR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.43–0.68), brivanib (HR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.42–0.76), S-1 (HR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.46–0.77), axitinib (HR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.44–0.87), and pembrolizumab (HR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.57–0.90) significantly improved PFS compared with placebo. None of the compared drugs deemed undoubtedly superior after having performed a patients’ stratification. Conclusions The results of this network meta-analysis suggest the use of regorafenib and cabozantinib as second-line treatments in HCC.

BackgroundThe rapid and global spread of COVID-19 posed a massive challenge to healthcare systems, which came across the need to provide high-intensity assistance to thousands of patients suffering from SARS-CoV-2 infection while assuring continuous care for all other diseases. This has been of particular importance in the oncology field. This study explores how oncology centers responded to the pandemic at a single center level by assessing surveys addressing different aspects of cancer care after the pandemic outbreak.MethodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the cancer care surveys published until December 11th, 2020. Data were analyzed according to three main areas of interest, namely health care organization, including cancellation/delay and/or modification of scheduled treatments, cancellation/delay of outpatient visits, and reduction of overall cancer care activities; routine use of preventive measures, such as personal protective equipment (PPE) by both patients and health care workers, and systematic SARS-CoV-2 screening by nasopharyngeal swabs; and implementation of telemedicine through remote consultations.FindingsFifty surveys reporting data on 9150 providers from 121 countries on 5 continents were included. Cancellation/delay of treatment occurred in 58% of centers; delay of outpatient visits in 75%; changes in treatment plans in 65%; and a general reduction in clinical activity in 58%. Routine use of PPE by patients and healthcare personnel was reported by 81% and 80% of centers, respectively; systematic SARS-CoV-2 screening by nasopharyngeal swabs was reported by only 41% of centers. Virtual visits were implemented by the majority (72%) of centers.InterpretationThese results describe the negative impact of COVID-19 on cancer care, the rapid response of cancer centers in terms of preventive measures and alternative treatment approaches such as telemedicine, and confirm that surveys can provide the valuable, low-cost and immediate information that critical situations require.