Variation in blubber cortisol levels in a recovering humpback whale population inhabiting a rapidly changing environment.

Glucocorticoids are regularly used as biomarkers of relative health for individuals and populations. Around the Western Antarctic Peninsula (WAP), baleen whales have and continue to experience threats, including commercial harvest, prey limitations and habitat change driven by rapid warming, and increased human presence via ecotourism. Here, we measured demographic variation and differences across the foraging season in blubber cortisol levels of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) over two years around the WAP. Cortisol concentrations were determined from 305 biopsy samples of unique individuals. We found no significant difference in the cortisol concentration between male and female whales. However, we observed significant differences across demographic groups of females and a significant decrease in the population across the feeding season. We also assessed whether COVID-19-related reductions in tourism in 2021 along the WAP correlated with lower cortisol levels across the population. The decline in vessel presence in 2021 was associated with a significant decrease in humpback whale blubber cortisol concentrations at the population level. Our findings provide critical contextual data on how these hormones vary naturally in a population over time, show direct associations between cortisol levels and human presence, and will enable comparisons among species experiencing different levels of human disturbance.

Digital patient-reported outcomes and serological response to SARS-COV-2 vaccines in patients with cancer

Background: SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have changed the course of the current global pandemic. Cancer patients were identified as highrisk of adverse infection outcomes. We have previously characterised the serological response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in 220 cancer patients treated at our institution. In addition these patients were given the possibility to report their symptoms (patient-reported outcomes, PROs) weekly using a digital platform (ePROs). We sought to determine if, in cancer patients, the prospectively recorded post-vaccination ePROs could predict the serological response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Methods: We used a pre-existing digital platform that allows monitoring of PROs using weekly questionnaires sent to patients and available on their desktop computers, tablets or smartphones. Serial serologies were performed at 28, 50 and 115 days after vaccination. Results: We observed that at day 50 after the first vaccination dose, coinciding with three weeks after the second dose, patients could be divided into two groups according to their serological response (low - below 1500 U/ml and high - above or equal 1500 U/ml). A peak in symptom burden could be observed after the second dose, as previously described. Omitting ePRO features decreased prediction performance of all models, whereas omitting baseline symptom scores had inconsistent effects. Among all models and feature constructions, the top performance metrics were given by the nearest centroid model7 with baseline symptoms omitted and 20 features chosen with the aforementioned procedure. The model achieved an accuracy of 0.704, an F1-score of 0.759 and an MCC of 0.398. Conclusions: we were able to identify the patients who achieved higher antibody levels against SARS-COV-2 based on the symptom burden reported through ePROs. This represents the first model showing that symptoms, assessed through ePRO can be predictive of response to vaccines. Our results could also be useful information for patients, as they could assuage their fears about adverse -effects, through the knowledge that toxicity could predict better protection against SARS-COV-2. The same toxicity-based prediction of efficacy has been identified with immunotherapy in cancer and is now a routine part of clinical discussions with patients.

Risk of SARS-CoV2-related mortality in non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with first-line immune-oncology alone or in combination with chemotherapy

Background: To explore the risk of SARS-CoV-2-related mortality in NSCLC patients treated with first-line immune-oncology (IO) alone or with chemotherapy (CT). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed clinical outcomes of 63 patients, with high or any PD-L1 tumour expression, undergoing first-line IO (n=39) or CT+IO (n=24), aiming to describe the mortality rate, death-related causes and dead patients’ clinical characteristics. Results: The risk of SARS-CoV-2-related mortality was significantly higher in CT+IO compared to IO-treated patients (HR 4.05, p=0015), with SARS-CoV-2 as cause of death in a 37.5% of cases vs. 0% (p=0.06) between the two groups, respectively (Table). Patients who died from SARS-CoV-2 had higher age and performance status (PS), smoking history, higher baseline values of both neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and systemic inflammatory index (SII). [Formula presented] Conclusions: In our limited series, IO had a scarce impact on the risk of SARS-CoV-2-related mortality, whilst CT, older age, PS 1 and a baseline pro-inflammatory systemic profile could be associated with a higher risk. Legal entity responsible for the study: The authors. Funding: Has not received any funding. Disclosure: All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Cancer and COVID-19: Unmasking their ties.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) and its clinical manifestation, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID19) have rapidly spread across the globe, leading to the declaration of a pandemic. While most present mild symptoms, it appears as though nearly 20% of confirmed patients develop significant complications. These include acute respiratory distress syndrome, septic shock and multi-organ failure, with a 3-6% mortality. A plethora of treatments has been or is being assessed, but to date, none has been proven effective. Management is mainly symptomatic, with organ support for the critically ill. Several reports, mainly case series, from across the world have concluded that patients with malignancy appear more susceptible to severe infection and mortality from COVID-19. This could be attributed to immunosuppression, co-existing medical conditions and underlying pulmonary compromise which is often the case in lung malignancy. Patients with haematological cancer and those who are receiving active chemotherapy treatment may be at greatest risk due to increased immunosuppression. This pandemic tested the resilience of worldwide health-care systems in an unprecedented manner. It has forced oncologists to rethink the entire diagnostic and therapeutic process, based on the local prevalence and impact of COVID-19. In this review we will discuss the impact of COVID-19 on patients affected by cancer, their diagnosis and management, as well as the pathophysiology of COVID-19 induced acute respiratory distress symptoms and currently investigated treatment approaches.