Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
Tumori ; 108(4 Supplement):112-113, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-2114183

ABSTRACT

Background: The Omicron (B.1.1.529) SARS-CoV-2 variant is highly transmissible and escapes vaccinal immunity. Evidence is lacking as to the impact of Omicron in oncological patients. Method(s): Capitalizing on OnCovid study data (NCT04393974), we analysed COVID-19 morbidity and case fatality rate at 28 days (CFR28) of unvaccinated patients across 3 phases defined following the evolution of the pandemic in Europe, according to date of COVID-19 diagnosis: "Pre-vaccination" phase (27/02/2020-30/11/2020), "Alpha- Delta variant" phase (01/12/2020-14/12/2021), "Omicron variant" phase (15/12/2021-31/01/2022). Finding(s): By the data lock of 04/02/2022, 3820 patients from 37 institutions across 6 countries were entered. Out of 3473 eligible patients, 2033 (58.6%), 1075 (30.9%) and 365 (10.5%) were diagnosed during the Pre-vaccination, Alpha-Delta and Omicron phases. In total 659 (61.3%) and 42 (11.5%) were unvaccinated in the Alpha-Delta and Omicron. Unvaccinated patients across the Omicron, Alpha-Delta and Pre-vaccination phases experienced similar CFR28 (27.5%, 28%, 29%, respectively). Following propensity score matching, 42 unvaccinated Omicron patients were matched with 122 and 121 patients from the Pre-vaccination and Alpha-Delta phases respectively, based on country of origin, sex, age, comorbidity burden, primary tumour, cancer stage and status, and the receipt of systemic anticancer therapy at COVID-19. Unvaccinated Omicron patients experienced improved COVID-19 outcomes in comparison to patients diagnosed during the Prevaccination phase. Morbidity and mortality were comparable to those of unvaccinated patients diagnosed during the Alpha-Delta phase. Interpretation(s): Despite time-dependent improvements in outcomes reported in the Omicron phase, patients with cancer remain highly vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 in absence of vaccinal protection. This study provides unequivocal evidence in support of universal vaccination of patients with cancer as a protective measure against morbidity and mortality from COVID-19.

2.
Clinical Cancer Research ; 27(6 SUPPL 1), 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1816914

ABSTRACT

We sought to determine parameters of the acute phase response, a feature of innate immunity activated by infectious noxae and cancer, deranged by Covid-19 and establish oncological indices' prognostic potential for patients with concomitant cancer and Covid-19. Between 27/02 and 23/06/2020, OnCovid retrospectively accrued 1,318 consecutive referrals of patients with cancer and Covid-19 aged 18 from the U.K., Spain, Italy, Belgium, and Germany. Patients with myeloma, leukemia, or insufficient data were excluded. The neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), prognostic nutritional index (PNI), modified Glasgow prognostic score (mGPS), and prognostic index (PI) were evaluated for their prognostic potential, with the NLR, PLR, and PNI risk stratifications dichotomized around median values and the pre-established risk categorizations from literature utilized for the mGPS and PI. 1,071 eligible patients were randomly assorted into a training set (TS, n=529) and validation set (VS, n=542) matched for age (67.9±13.3 TS, 68.5±13.5 VS), presence of 1 comorbidity (52.1% TS, 49.8% VS), development of 1 Covid-19 complication (27% TS, 25.9% VS), and active malignancy at Covid-19 diagnosis (66.7% TS, 61.6% VS). Among all 1,071 patients, deceased patients tended to categorize into poor risk groups for the NLR, PNI, mGPS, and PI (P<0.0001) with a return to pre-Covid-19 diagnosis NLR, PNI, and mGPS categorizations following recovery (P<0.01). In the TS, higher mortality rates were associated with NLR>6 (44.6% vs 28%, P<0.0001), PNI<40 (46.6% vs 20.9%, P<0.0001), mGPS (50.6% for mGPS2 vs 30.4% and 11.4% for mGPS1 and 0, P<0.0001), and PI (50% for PI2 vs 40% for PI1 and 9.1% for PI0, P<0.0001). Findings were confirmed in the VS (P<0.001 for all comparisons). Patients in poor risk categories had shorter median overall survival [OS], (NLR>6 30 days 95%CI 1-63, PNI<40 23 days 95%CI 10-35, mGPS2 20 days 95%CI 8-32, PI2 23 days 95%CI 1-56) compared to patients in good risk categories, for whom median OS was not reached (P<0.001 for all comparisons). The PLR was not associated with survival. Analyses of survival in the VS confirmed the NLR (P<0.0001), PNI (P<0.0001), PI (P<0.01), and mGPS (P<0.001) as predictors of survival. In a multivariable Cox regression model including all inflammatory indices and pre-established prognostic factors for severe Covid-19 including sex, age, comorbid burden, malignancy status, and receipt of anti-cancer therapy at Covid-19 diagnosis, the PNI was the only factor to emerge with a significant hazard ratio [HR] in both TS and VS analysis (TS HR 1.97, 95%CI 1.19-3.26, P=0.008;VS HR 2.48, 95%CI 1.47- 4.20, P=0.001). We conclude that systemic inflammation drives mortality from Covid-19 through hypoalbuminemia and lymphocytopenia as measured by the PNI and propose the PNI as the OnCovid Inflammatory Score (OIS) in this context.

3.
Tumori ; 107(2 SUPPL):72-73, 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1571636

ABSTRACT

Background: The long-term impact of COVID-19 in cancer patients (pts) is undefined. Methods: Among 2795 consecutive pts with COVID-19 and cancer registered to OnCovid between 01/2020 and 02/2021, we examined clinical outcomes of pts reassessed post COVID-19 recovery. Results: Among 1557 COVID-19 survivors, 234 (15%) reported sequelae including respiratory symptoms (49.6%), fatigue (41%) and cognitive/psychological dysfunction (4.3%). Persisting COVID-19 sequelae were more likely found in males (p=0.0407) aged ≥65 years (p=0.0489) with ≥2 comorbidities (p=0.0006) and positive smoking history (p=0.0004). Sequelae were associated with history of prior hospitalisation (p<0.0001), complicated disease (p<0.0001) and COVID-19 therapy (p=0.0002). With a median post-COVID-19 follow up of 128 days (95%CI 113-148), multivariable analysis of survival revealed COVID-19 sequelae to be associated with an increased risk of death (HR 1.76, 95%CI 1.16-2.66) after adjusting for sex, age, comorbidities, tumour characteristics, anticancer therapy and COVID-19 severity. Out of 473 patients who were on systemic anticancer therapy (SACT) at COVID-19 diagnosis;62 (13.1%) permanently discontinued therapy and 75 (15.8%) received SACT adjustments, respectively. Discontinuations were due to worsening performance status (45.1%), disease progression (16.1%) and residual organ disfunction (6.3%). SACT adjustments were pursued to avoid hospital attendance (40%), prevent immunosuppression (57.3%) or adverse events (20.3%). Multivariable analyses showed permanent discontinuation to be associated with an increased risk of death (HR 4.2, 95%CI: 1.62-10.7), whereas SACT adjustments did not adversely affect survival. Conclusions: Sequelae post-COVID-19 affect up to 15% of patients with cancer and adversely influence survival and oncological outcomes after recovery. SACT adjustments can be safely pursued to preserve oncological outcomes in patients who remain eligible to treatment.

4.
Annals of Oncology ; 32:S1132, 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1432859

ABSTRACT

Background: Early reports from registry studies demonstrated high vulnerability of cancer patients from COVID-19, with case-fatality rates (CFR) >30% at the onset of the pandemic. With advances in disease management and increased testing capacity, the lethality of COVID-19 in cancer patients may have improved over time. Methods: The OnCovid registry lists European cancer patients consecutively diagnosed with COVID-19 in 35 centres from Jan 2020 to Feb 2021. We analysed clinical characteristics and outcomes stratified in 5 trimesters (Jan-Mar, Apr-Jun, Jul-Sep, Oct-Dec 2020 and Jan-Feb 2021) and studied predictors of mortality across 2 semesters (Jan-Jun 2020 and Jul 2020-Feb 2021). Results: At data cut-off, the 2634 eligible patients demonstrated significant time-dependant improvement in 14-days CFR with trimestral estimates of 29.8%, 20.3%, 12.5%, 17.2% and 14.5% (p<0.0001). Compared to the 2nd semester, patients diagnosed in the Jan-Jun 2020 time period were ≥65 (60.3% vs 56.1%, p=0.031) had ≥2 comorbidities (48.8% vs 42.4%, p=0.001) and non-advanced tumours (46.4% vs 56.1%, p<0.001). COVID-19 was more likely to be complicated in Jan-Jun 2020 (45.4% vs 33.9%, p<0.001), requiring hospitalization (59.8% vs 42.1%, p<0.001) and anti-COVID-19 therapy (61.7% vs 49.7%, p<0.001). The 14-days CFR for the 1st and 2nd semester was 25.6% vs 16.2% (p<0.0001), respectively. After adjusting for gender, age, comorbidities, tumour features, COVID-19 and anti-cancer therapy and COVID-19 complications, patients diagnosed in the 1st semester had an increased risk of death at 14 days (HR 1.68 [95%CI: 1.35-2.09]), but not at 3 months (HR 1.10 [95%CI: 0.94-1.29]) compared to those from the 2nd semester. Conclusions: We report a time-dependent improvement in the mortality from COVID-19 in European cancer patients. This may be explained by expanding testing capacity, improved healthcare resources and dynamic changes in community transmission over time. These findings are informative for clinical practice and policy making in the context of an unresolved pandemic. Clinical trial identification: NCT04393974. Legal entity responsible for the study: Imperial College London. Funding: Has not received any funding. Disclosure: D.J. Pinato: Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: ViiV Healthcare;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Bayer;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: EISAI;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Roche;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: AstraZeneca. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

5.
Annals of Oncology ; 31:S1366-S1366, 2020.
Article in English | PMC | ID: covidwho-1384958

ABSTRACT

Background: There is uncertainty as to the contribution of cancer patients' features on severity and mortality from Covid-19 and little guidance as to the role of anti-cancer and anti-Covid-19 therapy in this population. Method(s): OnCovid is a retrospective observational study conducted across 19 European centers that recruited cancer patients aged >18 and diagnosed with Covid-19 between 26/02 and 01/04/2020. Uni- and multivariable regression models were used to evaluate predictors of Covid-19 severity and mortality. Result(s): We identified 890 patients from UK (n=218, 24%), Italy (n=343, 37%), Spain (n=323, 36%) and Germany (n=6, 1%). Most patients were male (n=503, 56%) had a diagnosis of solid malignancy (n=753, 84%) and 556 (62%) had active disease. Mean (+/-SD) patient age was 68+/-13 years, and 670 (75%) had >1 co-morbidity, most commonly hypertension (n=386, 43%). Commonest presenting symptoms were fever (n=569, 63%) and cough (n=448, 50%), beginning 6.3 (+/-9.5 SD) days before diagnosis. Most patients (n=565, 63%) had >1 complication from Covid-19, including respiratory failure (n=527, 59%) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (n=127, 22%). In total, 110 patients (14%) were escalated to high-dependency or intensive care. At time of analysis, 299 patients had died (33%). Multi-variate logistic regression identified male gender, age>65 (p<0.0001) presence of >2 comorbidities (p=0.001) active malignancy (p=0.07) as predictors of complicated Covid-19. Mortality was associated with active malignancy (p<0.0001), age>65 and co-morbid burden (p=0.002). Provision of chemotherapy, targeted therapy or immunotherapy was not associated with higher mortality. Exposure to anti-malarials alone (chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, n=182, p<0.001) or in combination with anti-virals (n=195, p<0.001) or tocilizumab (n=51, p=0.004) was associated with improved mortality compared to patients who did not receive any of these therapies (n=446) independent of patients' gender, age, tumour stage and severity of Covid-19. Conclusion(s): This study highlights the clinical utility of demographic factors for individualized risk-stratification of patients and supports further research into emerging anti Covid-19 therapeutics in SARS-Cov-2 infected cancer patients. Clinical trial identification: NCT04393974. Legal entity responsible for the study: Imperial College London. Funding(s): Has not received any funding. Disclosure: D.J. Pinato: Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: ViiV Healthcare;Advisory/Consultancy, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Bayer;Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony, Research grant/Funding (institution), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: BMS;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: MiNa Therapeutics;Advisory/Consultancy: Eisai;Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Roche;Advisory/Consultancy: AstraZeneca;Research grant/Funding (institution): MSD. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.Copyright © 2020 European Society for Medical Oncology

7.
Journal of Clinical Oncology ; 39(15 SUPPL), 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1339187

ABSTRACT

Background: Despite high contagiousness and rapid spread, SARS-Cov-2 has led to heterogeneous outcomes across affected nations. Within Europe, the United Kingdom is the most severely affected country, with a death toll in excess of 100.000 as of February 2021. We aimed to compare the national impact of Covid19 on the risk of death in UK cancer patients versus those in continental Europe (EU). Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the OnCovid study database, a European registry of cancer patients consecutively diagnosed with Covid-19 in 27 centres from February 27 to September 10, 2020. We analysed case fatality rates and risk of death at 30 days and 6 months stratified by region of origin (UK versus EU). We compared patient characteristics at baseline, oncological and Covid-19 specific therapy across cohorts and tested these in multivariable Cox regression models to identify predictors of adverse outcome in UK versus EU patients. Results: Compared to EU patients (n = 924), UK patients (n = 468) were characterised by higher case fatality rates (40.38% versus 26.5%, p < 0.0001), higher risk of death at 30 days (hazard ratio, HR 1.64 [95%CI 1.36-1.99]) and 6 months after Covid-19 diagnosis (47.64% versus 33.33%, p < 0.0001, HR 1.59 [95%CI 1.33-1.88]). UK patients were more often males, of older age and more co-morbid than EU counterparts (p < 0.01). Receipt of anti-cancer therapy was lower in UK versus EU patients (p < 0.001). Despite equal proportions of complicated Covid-19, rates of intensive care admission and use of mechanical ventilation, UK cancer patients were less likely to receive anti-Covid-19 therapies including corticosteroids, anti-virals and interleukin-6 antagonists (p < 0.0001). Multivariable analyses adjusted for imbalanced prognostic factors confirmed the UK cohort to be characterised by worse risk of death at 30 days and 6 months, independent of patient's age, gender, tumour stage and status, number of co-morbidities, Covid-19 severity, receipt of anti-cancer and anti-Covid-19 therapy. Rates of permanent cessation of anti-cancer therapy post Covid-19 were similar in UK versus EU. Conclusions: UK cancer patients have been more severely impacted by the unfolding of the Covid-19 pandemic despite societal risk mitigation factors and rapid deferral of anti-cancer therapy. The increased frailty of UK cancer patients highlights high-risk groups that should be prioritised for anti-SARS-Cov-2 vaccination. Continued evaluation of long-term outcomes is warranted.

8.
Tumori ; 106(2 SUPPL):74-75, 2020.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1109867

ABSTRACT

Background: The European SARS-CoV-2 pandemic had its first epicentre in Italy, particularly in the area of Bergamo. In spite of a significant mortality rate, in the majority of cases the spectrum of Covid-19 ranges from asymptomatic to mildly symptomatic infection. No information is available on the prevalence and clinical impact of asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic SARSCoV-2 infection among actively treated cancer patients during pandemic. Patients and methods: From April 1st, 2020 to the end of the month, 560 consecutive and unselected patients, scheduled for anticancer treatment at our facility and without clinical suspicious of Covid-19, were evaluated and tested for SARSCoV-2. We implemented a two-step diagnostics, including a rapid serological immunoassay for anti-SARSCoV-2 IgG/IgM and a pharyngeal swab RT-PCR assay in case of IgM seropositivity. Results: In 560 patients, 172 (31%) resulted positive for SARSCoV-2 IgM/IgG antibodies, regardless of type of cancer, stage and treatment. All IgM-seropositives were then tested with RT-PCR pharyngeal swabs and 55/146 (38%) proved to be SARSCoV-2 carriers, with slightly difference between mildly symptomatic vs. asymptomatic patients (38 vs. 17). Therefore, the two-step procedure allowed the identification of 55 (10%) silent carriers in the whole study population and magnified the number needed to test (NNT) with the pharyngeal swab RT-PCR assay to detect a silent virus carrier (NNT: 2.6 vs. 10, with or without serological selection). At a very early follow up (8 wks), in 114 SARSCoV-2-seropostive/RT-PCR-negative patients, who continued their anticancer therapies, none but one developed a symptomatic Covid-19 illness. Conclusions: Among cancer patients, the two-step diagnostics strategy with serology followed by pharyngeal swab for asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic SARSCoV-2 infection is feasible and effective and can help selecting cancer patients on treatment who might be silent carriers of the virus. The early safety outcome of patients previously exposed to SARSCoV-2 supports the recommendation to continue active treatment, at least in the case of negative RT-PCR test.

9.
Tumori ; 106(2 SUPPL):116-117, 2020.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1109801

ABSTRACT

Background: Endocrine therapy (ET) represents the mainstay of adjuvant treatment for hormone receptor positive (HR+) early breast cancer (EBC). Currently, international guidelines recommend the use of ovarian function suppression (OFS) plus aromatase inhibitors (AIs) as preferred choice in intermediate/high-risk premenopausal patients, according to SOFT and TEXT study results. In the last years, several studies investigated the role of adjuvant ET (AET) extension beyond the first 5 years, globally demonstrating a reduction in the rate of disease relapse, particularly in high-risk patients. However, the vast majority of trials exploring AIs extension included postmenopausal women only. Therefore, compelling evidence supporting the extension of AET with AIs in premenopausal patients is currently missing. The aim of the present study was to reach an Italian expert consensus on the extended AET in premenopausal patients. Material and methods: Firstly, a Steering Committee defined relevant statements on the topic. Subsequently, a panel of 8 Italian oncologists with expertise in breast cancer participated in this Delphi consensus study in January 2020. According to the Delphi method, experts voted anonymously each statement, expressing their level of agreement using a five point Likert scale. For each statement, the consensus was reached if either the sum of negative or positive answers exceeded 66%. Currently, the study has been extended to additional 12 Italian oncologists, using a web-based format, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Altogether, the 20 participants represent oncological institutions distributed over the country. Results: A total of 44 statements were defined and voted to gain consensus. The statements concerned clinical, pathological and genomic factors that could be used to assess the utility, the type (AIs vs. tamoxifen) and the duration (2-2.5 vs. 5 years) of extended AET in premenopausal patients. The consensus reached on each statement will be presented during the congress. Conclusions: Intermediate/high-risk premenopausal EBC patients are likely to benefit from extended AET, although studies specifically designed in premenopausal setting are still missing. In the lack of direct evidence, this methodologically sound expert consensus may guide practicing oncologists in the choice of the best treatment and duration based on clinical, pathological and genomic information.

10.
Annals of Oncology ; 31:S994, 2020.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-806594

ABSTRACT

Background: The European SARS-CoV-2 pandemic had its first epicentre in Italy, particularly in the area of Bergamo. In spite of a significant mortality rate, in the majority of cases the spectrum of COVID-19 ranges from asymptomatic to mildly symptomatic infection. No information is available on the prevalence and clinical impact of asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection among actively treated cancer patients during pandemic. Methods: From April 1st, 2020 to the end of the month, 560 consecutive and unselected patients, scheduled for anticancer treatment at our facility and without clinical suspicious of COVID-19, were evaluated and tested for SARS-CoV-2. We implemented a two-step diagnostics, including a rapid serological immunoassay for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM and a pharyngeal swab RT-PCR assay in case of IgM seropositivity. Results: In 560 patients, 172 (31%) resulted positive for SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG antibodies, regardless of type of cancer, stage and treatment. All IgM-seropositives were then tested with RT-PCR pharyngeal swabs and 55/146 (38%) proved to be SARS-CoV-2 carriers, with slightly difference b/w mildly symptomatic vs. asymptomatic patients (38 vs. 17). Therefore, the two-step procedure allowed the identification of 55 (10%) silent carriers in the whole study population and magnified the number needed to test (NNT) with the pharyngeal swab RT-PCR assay to detect a silent virus carrier (NNT: 2.6 vs. 10, with or without serological selection). At a very early follow up (8 wks), in 114 SARS-CoV-2-seropostive/RT-PCR-negative patients, who continued their anticancer therapies, none but one developed a symptomatic COVID-19 illness. Conclusions: Among cancer patients, the two-step diagnostics strategy with serology followed by pharyngeal swab for asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection is feasible and effective and can help selecting cancer patients on treatment who might be silent carriers of the virus. The early safety outcome of patients previously exposed to SARS-CoV-2 supports the recommendation to continue active treatment, at least in the case of negative RT-PCR test. Legal entity responsible for the study: The authors. Funding: Has not received any funding. Disclosure: All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL