Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
Front Oncol ; 12: 880008, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1896725

ABSTRACT

Background: Endometrial cancer (EC) therapeutic and diagnostic approaches have been changed by the development of a new prognostic molecular classification, the introduction of dostarlimab in microsatellite instability (MSI) high pre-treated advanced EC patients with further expected innovation deriving from lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab regardless MSI status. How this is and will be translated and embedded in the clinical setting in Italy is not known; this is why we developed Multicentre Italian Trials in Ovarian cancer and gynaecologic malignancies (MITO) survey on the current practice and expected future changes in EC. Methods: We designed a self-administered, multiple-choice online questionnaire available only for MITO members for one month, starting in April 2021. Results: 75.6% of the respondents were oncologists with a specific focus on gynaecologic malignancies and 73.3% of the respondents declared the availability of clinical trials in second line treatment for advanced EC. The therapeutic algorithm in second line was heterogeneous, being the most frequent choice administering anthracyclines followed by endocrine therapy or enrolling in clinical trials. While more than half of the clinicians declared that they performed the molecular classification, only six/45 respondents (13.3%) ran all the tests needed for it. On the other hand, 80% of them declared regular assessment of MSI status with IHC as recommended. The therapeutic approach in MSI high advanced EC patients has changed since dostarlimab approval. Indeed the most frequent choice in second line has been chemotherapy (53.3%) before its availability, while dostarlimab has been preferred in more than three-fourths of the cases (75.6%) after its approval. As for MSS patients, 77.8% of clinicians would choose lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab for them in second line once approved. Conclusions: Despite the selected sample of respondents from Italian MITO centres showing good knowledge of diagnostic and therapeutic innovations in EC, these are not fully implemented in everyday clinics, except for MSI status assessment.

2.
JCO Oncol Pract ; 17(12): e1887-e1894, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1714673

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: COVID-19 cancer patients (C19-CP) represent a population at high risk for mortality, whose clinical characteristics are still unknown in the second SARS-CoV-2 wave. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare epidemiology and clinical presentation of C19-CP referring to the emergency department (ED) of our institution (San Luigi Gonzaga University Hospital, Orbassano, Turin, Italy), in a 3-week observation period of the first and second COVID-19 waves, starting from the introduction of the corresponding national lockdowns. METHODS: We retrieved ED admissions from March 9 to 29, 2020, for the first wave, and from October 24 to November 13, 2020, for the second wave. We collected clinical characteristics of consecutive patients with molecularly confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. We also considered untested or SARS-CoV-2-negative cancer patients referring to the ED in the reference time frames. RESULTS: C19-CP in the second wave exceeded those in the first wave despite the nonsignificant difference (39 of 576 v 8 of 163; P = .5). Compared with nononcological patients, C19-CP were older (median age 70 years [interquartile range 61-77] v 60 years [interquartile range 45-73]; P = .02) and presented more often with ≥ 2 comorbidities (40.4% v 24.3%; P = .02). Compared with nononcological patients, in C19-CP, respiratory failure (29 of 47 v 321 of 692; P = .049) and hospitalization (37 of 47 v 363 of 692; P = .0004) were higher, with comparable frequencies across the waves. Five of 24 and 10 of 27 hospitalized cancer patients in the first and second waves developed SARS-CoV-2 infection during hospitalization. CONCLUSION: C19-CP were a vulnerable population, irrespective of the COVID-19 waves. This highlights the need to prioritize vaccinations in oncological patients to safeguard and guarantee optimal anticancer care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Aged , Communicable Disease Control , Emergency Service, Hospital , Hospitals, University , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Cancers (Basel) ; 13(6)2021 Mar 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1136460

ABSTRACT

Cancer patients may be at high risk of infection and poor outcomes related to SARS-CoV-2. Analyzing their prognosis, examining the effects of baseline characteristics and systemic anti-cancer active therapy (SACT) are critical to their management through the evolving COVID-19 pandemic. The AIOM-L CORONA was a multicenter, observational, ambispective, cohort study, with the intended participation of 26 centers in the Lombardy region (Italy). A total of 231 cases were included between March and September 2020. The median age was 68 years; 151 patients (62.2%) were receiving SACT, mostly chemotherapy. During a median follow-up of 138 days (range 12-218), 93 events occurred. Age ≥60 years, metastatic dissemination, dyspnea, desaturation, and interstitial pneumonia were all independent mortality predictors. Overall SACT had a neutral effect (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.83, 95%Confidence Interval [95%CI] 0.32-2.15); however, metastatic patients receiving SACT were less likely to die as compared to untreated counterparts, after adjusting for other confounding variables (OR 0.23, 95%CI 0.11-0.51, p < 0.001). Among cancer patients infected by SARS-CoV-2, those with metastases were most at risk of death, especially in the absence of SACT. During the ongoing pandemic, these vulnerable patients should avoid exposure to SARS-CoV-2, while treatment adjustments and prioritizing vaccination are being considered according to international recommendations.

5.
JCO Oncol Pract ; 16(11): e1304-e1314, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1119446

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To investigate the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on the attitudes and practice of Italian oncologists toward breast cancer care and related research activities. METHODS: A 29-question anonymous online survey was sent by e-mail to members of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology and the Italian Breast Cancer Study Group on April 3, 2020. Only medical oncologists (both those in training and specialists) were invited to complete the questionnaire. RESULTS: Out of 165 responding oncologists, 121 (73.3.%) worked in breast units. In the (neo)adjuvant setting, compared with before the emergency, fewer oncologists adopted weekly paclitaxel (68.5% v 93.9%) and a dose-dense schedule for anthracycline-based chemotherapy (43% v 58.8%) during the COVID-19 outbreak. In the metastatic setting, compared with before the emergency, fewer oncologists adopted first-line weekly paclitaxel for HER2-positive disease (41.8% v 53.9%) or CDK4/6 inhibitors for luminal tumors with less-aggressive characteristics (55.8% v 80.0%) during the COVID-19 outbreak. A significant change was also observed in delaying the timing for monitoring therapy with CDK4/6 inhibitors, assessing treatment response with imaging tests, and flushing central venous devices. Clinical research and scientific activities were reduced in 80.3% and 80.1% of respondents previously implicated in these activities, respectively. CONCLUSION: Medical oncologists face many challenges in providing cancer care during the COVID-19 outbreak. Although most of the changes in their attitudes and practice were reasonable responses to the current health care emergency without expected major negative impact on patient outcomes, some potentially alarming signals of undertreatment were observed.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/therapy , COVID-19/therapy , Pandemics , Telemedicine/trends , Breast/diagnostic imaging , Breast/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/complications , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/virology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Medical Oncology/trends , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Surveys and Questionnaires
6.
Ther Adv Med Oncol ; 12: 1758835920968463, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-913990

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This prospective, multicentre, observational INVIDIa-2 study is investigating the clinical efficacy of influenza vaccination in advanced-cancer patients receiving immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), enrolled in 82 Italian centres, from October 2019 to January 2020. The primary endpoint was the incidence of influenza-like illness (ILI) until 30 April 2020. All the ILI episodes, laboratory tests, complications, hospitalizations and pneumonitis were recorded. Therefore, the study prospectively recorded all the COVID-19 ILI events. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were included in this non-prespecified COVID-19 analysis, if alive on 31 January 2020, when the Italian government declared the national emergency. The prevalence of confirmed COVID-19 cases was detected as ILI episode with laboratory confirmation of SARS-CoV-2. Cases with clinical-radiological diagnosis of COVID-19 (COVID-like ILIs), were also reported. RESULTS: Out of 1257 enrolled patients, 955 matched the inclusion criteria for this unplanned analysis. From 31 January to 30 April 2020, 66 patients had ILI: 9 of 955 cases were confirmed COVID-19 ILIs, with prevalence of 0.9% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.3-2.4], a hospitalization rate of 100% and a mortality rate of 77.8%. Including 5 COVID-like ILIs, the overall COVID-19 prevalence was 1.5% (95% CI: 0.5-3.1), with 100% hospitalization and 64% mortality. The presence of elderly, males and comorbidities was significantly higher among patients vaccinated against influenza versus unvaccinated (p = 0.009, p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001). Overall COVID-19 prevalence was 1.2% for vaccinated (six of 482 cases, all confirmed) and 1.7% for unvaccinated (8 of 473, 3 confirmed COVID-19 and 5 COVID-like), p = 0.52. The difference remained non-significant, considering confirmed COVID-19 only (p = 0.33). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 has a meaningful clinical impact on the cancer-patient population receiving ICIs, with high prevalence, hospitalization and an alarming mortality rate among symptomatic cases. Influenza vaccination does not protect from SARS-CoV-2 infection.

7.
Eur J Clin Invest ; 50(9): e13315, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-597270

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks/statistics & numerical data , Immunologic Factors/administration & dosage , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Adult , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Female , Humans , Immunocompromised Host , Italy , Male , Medical Oncology/methods , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/immunology , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Risk Assessment , Surveys and Questionnaires
8.
Front Oncol ; 10: 648, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-307621

ABSTRACT

Italy is the European country that was hit first and hardest by the COVID-19 epidemic. Since February 2020, the outbreak of the epidemic disease in Italy, with fatal outcomes in up to 10% of cases, made it urgent to implement extraordinary measures to avoid a breakdown of the universal Italian national health system. The update for April 1, 2020, in Italy recorded 102,669 confirmed COVID-19 cases, with a median patient age of 63 years. The deceased patients were older people (median age 80 years) and often had a cancer diagnosis (about 20%). Thus, in the extraordinary epidemiological scenario of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy, older persons in cancer treatment are at particularly high risk of being severely affected by COVID-19. These people face a health- and economics-related emergency that also carries cultural and ethical implications. In accordance with the measures adopted by the Italian government to limit viral transmission, several associations of Italian oncologists have taken action to update Elderly Cancer Care programs. In view of the newly emerging needs, we herein outline practical suggestions aimed at guaranteeing the best continuity to elderly cancer patients.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL