BRAF-Mutated Melanoma Journey in Latin America: Expert Recommendations From Diagnosis to Treatment.

OBJECTIVES: • Gather a panel of Latin American experts in testing and treating BRAF-melanoma. • Describe the current landscape of BRAF-mutated melanoma in Latin America. • Outline the current gaps in testing and recommend improvements for testing and treating BRAF-mutated melanoma in the region. INTRODUCTION: Melanoma prevalence in Latin America is lower than in high- and middle-income countries. However, recent data indicate that the region's incidence and mortality are rising, with more stage IV patients being diagnosed. According to international clinical practice guidelines, conducting BRAF-mutation testing in patients with stage III or stage IV melanoma and high-risk resected disease is imperative. Still, BRAF-mutation testing and targeted therapies are inconsistently available in the region. METHODS: Americas Health Foundation convened a meeting of Latin American experts on BRAF-mutated melanoma to develop guidelines and recommendations for diagnosis through treatment. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Some recommendations for improving diagnostics through improving access and reducing the cost of BRAF-mutation testing, enhancing efficiency in pathology laboratories, and creating country-specific local guidelines. The panel also gave treatment recommendations for neo-adjuvant therapy, adjuvant therapy, and therapy for patients with metastatic disease in Latin America.

The Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on the Castile and Leon Addiction Treatment Network: A Real-Word Experience.

Background: Patients suffering from addiction are a vulnerable group in the midst of COVID-19, so their healthcare is considered essential. In this paper, the measures and responses of the Drug Addiction Assistance Network of Castile and Leon (DAACYL) in Spain during the first 6 weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic are explained. The aim is that this experience could be useful in places where this problem will continue and could help future interventions. Methods: A telephone survey was carried out as the main methodology, to collect information for the subsequent organization and repercussion on professionals and patients. This was carried out by the heads of the 18 DAACYL units. Among the interventions applied, the following stand out: implantation of telemedicine techniques, restriction of daily methadone dispensing, suspension of urine controls and initiation of care programs for the homeless. Results: As a result of these interventions, the professionals observed that patients are less demanding and mostly stable, with a low percentage of relapses. An increase in the consumption of alcohol and benzodiazepines have been reported as more common among people who relapse. Furthermore, the prevalence of COVID-19 infection in the sample is minimal; therefore, different hypotheses should be considered as an explanation (infra-diagnosis, immune system used to aggression, possible anti-inflammatory effect of some psychotropic drugs and a greater perception of danger against infection than the general population). Conclusions: The rapid adaptation and successful implementation of DAACYL have had satisfactory results. On the other hand, the prevention of the possible increase in the development of behavioral addictions and the use of homemade drugs should be considered.

Immunotherapy at any line of treatment improves survival in patients with advanced metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) compared with chemotherapy (Quijote-CLICaP).

BACKGROUND: To compare survival outcomes of patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who received immunotherapy as first-, second- or beyond line, versus matched patients receiving standard chemotherapy with special characterization of hyperprogressors. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 296 patients with unresectable/metastatic NSCLC treated with either, first-, second-, third- or fourth-line of immunotherapy was conducted. A matched comparison with a historical cohort of first-line chemotherapy and a random forest tree analysis to characterize hyperprogressors was conducted. RESULTS: Median age was 64 years (range 34-90), 40.2% of patients were female. A total of 91.2% of patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score ≤ 1. Immunotherapy as first-line was given to 39 patients (13.7%), second-line to 140 (48.8%), and as third-line and beyond to 108 (37.6%). Median overall survival was 12.7 months (95% CI 9.67-14 months) and progression-free survival (PFS) of 4.27 months (95% CI 3.97-5.0). Factors associated with increased survival included treatment with immunotherapy as first-line (P < 0.001), type of response (P < 0.001) and PD-L1 status (P = 0.0039). Compared with the historical cohort, immunotherapy proved to be superior in terms of OS (P = 0.05) but not PFS (P = 0.2). A total of 44 hyperprogressors were documented (19.8%, [95% CI 14.5-25.1%]). Leukocyte count over 5.300 cells/dL was present in both hyperprogressors and long-term responders. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who receive immune-checkpoint inhibitors as part of their treatment for NSCLC have better overall survival (OS) compared with matched patients treated with standard chemotherapy, regardless of the line of treatment.