Background: During COVID-19 outbreak, oncological care has been reorganized. Patients with cancer have been reported to experience a more severe COVID-19 syndrome; moreover, there are concerns of a potential interference between immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis. Materials and methods: Between 6 and 16 May 2020, a 22-item survey was sent to Italian physicians involved in administering ICIs. It aimed at exploring the perception about SARS-CoV-2-related risks in cancer patients receiving ICIs, and the attitudes towards their management. Results: The 104 respondents had a median age of 35.5 years, 58.7% were females and 71.2% worked in Northern Italy. 47.1% of respondents argued a synergism between ICIs and SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis leading to worse outcomes, but 97.1% would not deny an ICI only for the risk of infection. During COVID-19 outbreak, to reduce hospital visits, 55.8% and 30.8% opted for the highest labelled dose of each ICI and/or, among different ICIs for the same indication, for the one with the longer interval between cycles, respectively. 53.8% of respondents suggested testing for SARS-CoV-2 every cancer patient candidate to ICIs. 71.2% declared to manage patients with onset of dyspnoea and cough as infected by SARS-CoV-2 until otherwise proven; however, 96.2% did not reduce the use of steroids to manage immune-related toxicities. The administration of ICIs in specific situations for different cancer types has not been drastically conditioned. Conclusions: These results highlight the uncertainties around the perception of a potential interference between ICIs and COVID-19, supporting the need of focused studies on this topic.
BackgroundOffering ovarian function and/or fertility preservation strategies in premenopausal women with newly diagnosed breast cancer candidates to undergo chemotherapy is standard of care. However, few data are available on uptake and main reasons for refusing these options.MethodsThe PREFER study (NCT02895165) is an observational, prospective study enrolling premenopausal women with early breast cancer, aged between 18 and 45 years, candidates to receive (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy. Primary objective is to collect information on acceptance rates and reasons for refusal of the proposed strategies for ovarian function and/or fertility preservation available in Italy.ResultsAt the study coordinating center, 223 patients were recruited between November 2012 and December 2020. Median age was 38 years (range 24 – 45 years) with 159 patients (71.3%) diagnosed at ≤40 years. Temporary ovarian suppression with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) was accepted by 58 out of 64 (90.6%) patients aged 41-45 years and by 151 out of 159 (95.0%) of those aged ≤40 years. Among patients aged ≤40 years, 57 (35.8%) accepted to access the fertility unit to receive a complete oncofertility counseling and 29 (18.2%) accepted to undergo a cryopreservation technique. Main reasons for refusal were fear of delaying the initiation of antineoplastic treatments and contraindications to the procedure or lack of interest in future childbearing. Patients with hormone-receptor positive breast cancer had a tendency for a higher acceptance rates of ovarian function and/or fertility preservation strategies than those with hormone-receptor negative disease.ConclusionsMore than 90% of premenopausal women with early breast cancer, and particularly those with hormone receptor-positive disease, were concerned about the potential risk of chemotherapy-induced premature ovarian insufficiency and/or infertility and accepted GnRHa administration. Less than 1 out of 5 women aged ≤40 years accepted to undergo cryopreservation strategies.
A significant number of women receive a cancer diagnosis before their age of natural menopause. Among these patients, the most frequent neoplasms are breast cancer, gynecological, and hematological malignancies. Premature ovarian insufficiency and infertility are among the most feared short- to long-term consequences of anticancer treatments in premenopausal patients. Both patient- and treatment-related characteristics are key factors in influencing the risk of gonadotoxicity with the use of chemotherapy. The cryopreservation of oocytes/embryos is a standard strategy for fertility preservations offered to young women interested in future family planning, but it does not allow gonadal function protection during chemotherapy. Ovarian suppression with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) during chemotherapy is now recommended as an option to reduce the risk of gonadotoxicity in order to avoid the negative consequences of premature ovarian insufficiency in premenopausal women receiving cytotoxic therapy, including those not interested in fertility preservation. This review summarizes the risk of treatment-induced gonadotoxicity in premenopausal patients and the evidence available on the protective role of administering GnRHa during chemotherapy to preserve ovarian function.
Over the last several decades, improvements in breast cancer treatment have contributed to increased cure rates for women diagnosed with this malignancy. Consequently, great importance should be paid to the long-term side effects of systemic therapies. For young women (defined as per guideline ≤40 years at diagnosis) who undergo chemotherapy, one of the most impactful side effects on their quality of life is premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) leading to fertility-related problems and the side effects of early menopause. Regimens, type, and doses of chemotherapy, as well as the age of patients and their ovarian reserve at the time of treatment are major risk factors for treatment-induced POI. For these reasons, childbearing desire and preservation of ovarian function and/or fertility should be discussed with all premenopausal patients before planning the treatments. This manuscript summarizes the available fertility preservation techniques in breast cancer patients, the risk of treatment-induced POI with different anticancer treatments, and the possible procedures to prevent it. A special focus is paid to the role of oncofertility counseling, as a central part of the visit in this setting, during which the patient should receive all the information about the potential consequences of the disease and of the proposed treatment on her future life.
Background: Survival outcomes of treatments for ABC are documented in real world settings, however, less is known about HRQoL. This study examined patient HRQoL by treatment line in HER2-ABC patients in the US and EU3 (France, Italy, Spain).
Background/Aim: Patients with Stage I-II breast cancer undergoing breast-conserving surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (BCS-NAC) were retrospectively assessed in order to evaluate the extent of a safe excision margin. Materials and Methods: Between 2003 and 2020, 151 patients underwent risk-adapted BCS-NAC; margin involvement was always assessed at definitive histology. Patients with complete pathological response (pCR) were classified as the RX group, whereas those with residual disease and negative margins were stratified as R0 < 1 mm (margin < 1 mm) and R0 > 1 mm (margin > 1 mm). Results: Totals of 29 (19.2%), 64 (42.4%), and 58 patients (38.4%) were included in the R0 < 1 mm, R0 > 1 mm, and RX groups, respectively, and 2 patients with margin involvement had a mastectomy. Ten instances of local recurrence (6.6%) occurred, with no statistically significant difference in local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) between the three groups. A statistically significant advantage of disease-free survival (p = 0.002) and overall survival (p = 0.010) was observed in patients with pCR. Conclusions: BCS-NAC was increased, especially in HER-2-positive and triple-negative tumors; risk-adapted BCS should be preferably pursued to highlight the cosmetic benefit of NAC. The similar rate of LRFS in the three groups of patients suggests a shift toward the “no ink on tumor” paradigm for patients undergoing BCS-NAC.
Background The identification of treatment selection biomarkers for advanced triple negative breast cancer (aTNBC) patients remains an unmet need. The immune system is known to be involved in the microenvironment of triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). Immune ratios like the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), the monocyte-lymphocyte ratio (MLR) and the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) may reflect the immune system functional status in these patients and the involvement of circulating immune cells in cancer progression. In particular MLR showed to predict overall survival (OS) in aTNBC and to contribute to migration of circulating tumor cells [1]. Methods A retrospective-prospective, observational multicenter study from the GIM-14 experience was performed to investigate the association between inflammatory indexes (NLR, MLR, PLR and SII), as measured at baseline and at progression, and clinical and survival aspects in patients with aTNBC in first line setting. The optimal cutoff values between low and high expression of inflammatory indexes were established on the basis of cut-off values determined in a previously conducted study in order to validate them[1], and was used to predict progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. Time-to-event variables (PFS; OS) were calculated using Kaplan-Meier method, while Cox regression model was used to estimate HRs and their 95% CI. Results 105 consecutive patients with a diagnosis of aTNBC were fully evaluated for the final analysis. The median age at diagnosis was 55 years (33-86). Of them, 80 patients received a neo/adjuvant treatment after diagnosis. At first progression the majority of patients (n= 97) received chemotherapy, while only 8 patients were treated with chemo-immunotherapy due to the programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in the immunohistochemical analyses. At a median follow-up of 54 months, median PFS in the whole patients population was 13 months (95% CI 9,4-16,5), while median OS was 17.3 OS (95% CI 13-22,2). All high inflammation based scores evaluated at diagnosis of metastatic disease were significantly associated with lower PFS, in particular high NLR (≥3) and high MLR (≥0.34) (p = 0.0006 and p = 0.011, respectively). Similarly, all high indexes appeared significantly associated with a lower OS, especially NLR (>3), SII (≥836) and MLR (≥0.34) (p < 0.0001, p = 0.0005, p=001 respectively). In particular also NLR and SII evaluated at disease progression after first line treatment were significantly associated with a worse OS (p=0.0006 and p=0.001 respectively). In multivariable analysis for predictors of overall survival, the number of metastatic sites, NLR, SII and MLR remained significant (p< 0.0001, p=0.006, p=0.005 respectively). Conclusions NLR, SII and MLR are predictors of OS in aTNBC. Although our results need validation with larger studies, we suggest that inflammatory ratios could be used as feasible biomarkers of prognosis and treatment efficacy in aTNBC. Further research about HER-2 low categorized patients will be updated and presented at the final meeting. 1. De Giorgi U, Mego M, Scarpi E, Giordano A, Giuliano M, Valero V, Alvarez RH, Ueno NT, Cristofanilli M, Reuben JM. Association between circulating tumor cells and peripheral blood monocytes in metastatic breast cancer. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2019 Aug 14;11:1758835919866065. doi: 10.1177/1758835919866065. PMID: 31452692; PMCID: PMC6696837. Citation Format: Caterina Gianni, Michela Palleschi, Emanuela Scarpi, Filippo Merloni, Eva Blondeaux, Fabio Puglisi, Elena Collovà, Palma Pugliese, Francesco Cognetti, Irene Giannubilo, Tommaso Ruelle, Claudia Bighin, Lucia Del Mastro, Ugo De Giorgi. Inflammatory indexes as prognostic biomarkers in advanced triple negative breast cancer patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-11-19.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.