SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with thymic epithelial tumours with and without active or pre-existing autoimmune disorders: Brief report of a TYME network safety analysis.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine for patients with cancer. A substantial risk of developing vaccine-related autoimmune toxicities could be hypothesised for patients with thymic epithelial tumours (TETs) due to their high risk of autoimmune disorders (ADs). Moreover, a cross-reaction between SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies and various tissue proteins has been shown, and antibodies against nucleoproteins showed overlaps in the autoimmune cross-reaction with antibodies to spike protein. Due to the rarity of TETs, no data addressing this hypothesis are available. METHODS: Patients with TETs who received SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, treated in 4 referral centres of the Italian Collaborative Group for ThYmic MalignanciEs (TYME) network between February 2021 and September 2021, were interviewed through a standardised 15-items questionnaire in order to describe the safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients affected by TETs. RESULTS: Data from 245 doses of vaccine administered to 126 patients (41 = thymic carcinoma, 85 = thymoma; 38 with AD, of which 26 with active AD) were collected. Nine patients had a previous COVID-19-positive swab. No cases of AD reactivation or worsening of a pre-existing AD were seen in the study population. A new diagnosis of myasthenia gravis likely unrelated to the vaccine was made in two patients after the vaccination. Sixty-four patients (51%) experienced a total of 103 adverse events, all G1/G2, most commonly fatigue, new or worsening muscle pain and chills. None AE required patients' hospitalisation. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines appear to be safe in patients with TET, even in case of active or pre-existing AD.

Cancer patient perspective in the arena of COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has been declared a global pandemic of unprecedented proportions. Italy is a country which has been heavily affected. Cancer patients are at a higher risk owing to their intrinsic fragility related to their underlying disease and oncologic treatment. Against this backdrop, we conducted a survey to investigate how patients perceived their condition, clinical management and availability of information during the pandemic. METHODS: Between 15 April and 1 May 2020 a survey was submitted to cancer patients at oncology departments in the Marche region. Questions regarding the perception of personal safety, continuity of cancer care, information quality and psychological distress. RESULTS: Seven hundred patients participated in the survey; 59% were female and 40% were aged between 46 and 65. The majority of the participants perceived compliance with appropriate safety standards by cancer care providers and 80% were reassured about their concerns during the medical interview. 40% were worried of being at a higher risk of infection and 71% felt they were at a greater risk because of chemotherapy. 55% felt that postponing cancer treatment could reduce its efficacy, however 76% declared they did not feel abandoned at the time of treatment postponement. Patients between 46 and 65 years declared a significant reduction in sleep (p < 0.01) and in concentration (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The emergency care offered to cancer patients has been deemed satisfactory in terms of both safety standards and care management. However, the majority of participants perceived the mutual negative influence between their oncologic disease and the risk of infection highlighting the need for special measures to ensure safe continuity of care.

Scientia Potentia Est: How the Italian World of Oncology Changes in the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: After coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic by the WHO, a response from the Italian Health System to react to an unprecedented condition became necessary and sudden. The COVID-19 pandemic has required oncologists to redefine clinical organization and patient management. The purpose of our study was to document the difficulties emerging during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Italian oncology. METHODS: We broadcasted an electronic survey to oncologic health care professionals. It consisted of 45 questions ranging from individual perception of pandemic management by hospital centers to physicians' and nurses' psychological distress and patient care. RESULTS: A total of 383 oncology health workers participated in the survey. The majority were female (71.8%) and from central Italy (46.2%). Impressively, a total of 357 (93%) participants declared the oncologic department reorganized routine clinical activity, but only 40.5% were adequately trained about the required procedures; 20% of the survey respondents think they have not received adequate and timely protective devices. CONCLUSION: Our survey demonstrated the flexibility of oncologic teams. However, the emergency response quality has been heterogeneous, and several drawbacks have emerged from the first analyses investigating how the world of oncology changes in the COVID-19 pandemic. Information, protection, testing, and training of health care professionals are key words that should be kept in mind to encourage recovery after this tragedy and to be ready to face a similar emergency in the future.