A narrative review on tumor microenvironment in oligometastatic and oligoprogressive non-small cell lung cancer: a lot remains to be done.

OBJECTIVE: In this review, we aim to collect and discuss available data about the role and composition of tumor microenvironment (TME) in oligometastatic (OMD) and oligoprogressive (OPD) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Furthermore, we aim to summarize the ongoing clinical trials evaluating as exploratory objective the TME composition, through tissue and/or blood samples, in order to clarify whether TME and its components could explain, at least partially, the oligometastatic/oligoprogressive process and could unravel the existence of predictive and/or prognostic factors for local ablative therapy (LAT). BACKGROUND: OMD/OPD NSCLC represent a heterogeneous group of diseases. Several data have shown that TME plays an important role in tumor progression and therefore in treatment response. The crucial role of several types of cells and molecules such as immune cells, cytokines, integrins, protease and adhesion molecules, tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) and mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) has been widely established. Due to the peculiar activation of specific pathways and expression of adhesion molecules, metastatic cells seem to show a tropism for specific anatomic sites (the so-called "seed and soil" hypothesis). Based on this theory, metastases appear as a biologically driven process rather than a random release of cancer cells. Although the role and the function of TME at the time of progression in patients with NSCLC treated with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been investigated, limited data about the role and the biological meaning of TME are available in the specific OMD/OPD setting. METHODS: Through a comprehensive PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov search, we identified available and ongoing studies exploring the role of TME in oligometastatic/oligoprogressive NSCLC. CONCLUSIONS: Deepening the knowledge on TME composition and function in OMD/OPD may provide innovative implications in terms of both prognosis and prediction of outcome in particular from local treatments, paving the way for future investigations of personalized approaches in both advanced and early disease settings.

Infections and Immunotherapy in Lung Cancer: A Bad Relationship?

Infectious diseases represent a relevant issue in lung cancer patients. Bacterial and viral infections might influence the patients' prognosis, both directly affecting the immune system and indirectly impairing the outcome of anticancer treatments, mainly immunotherapy. In this analysis, we aimed to review the current evidence in order to clarify the complex correlation between infections and lung cancer. In detail, we mainly explored the potential impact on immunotherapy outcome/safety of (1) bacterial infections, with a detailed focus on antibiotics; and (2) viral infections, discriminating among (a) human immune-deficiency virus (HIV), (b) hepatitis B/C virus (HBV-HCV), and (c) Sars-Cov-2. A series of studies suggested the prognostic impact of antibiotic therapy administration, timing, and exposure ratio in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors, probably through an antibiotic-related microbiota dysbiosis. Although cancer patients with HIV, HBV, and HCV were usually excluded from clinical trials evaluating immunotherapy, some retrospective and prospective trials performed in these patient subgroups reported similar results compared to those described in not-infected patients, with a favorable safety profile. Moreover, patients with thoracic cancers are particularly at risk of COVID-19 severe outcomes and mortality. Few reports speculated about the prognostic implications of anticancer therapy, including immunotherapy, in lung cancer patients with concomitant Sars-Cov-2 infection, showing, to date, inconsistent results. The correlation between infectious diseases and immunotherapy remains to be further explored and clarified in the context of dedicated trials. In clinical practice, the accurate and prompt multidisciplinary management of lung cancer patients with infections should be encouraged in order to select the best treatment options for these patients, avoiding unexpected toxicities, while maintaining the anticancer effect.

Organisational challenges, volumes of oncological activity and patients' perception during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 epidemic.

BACKGROUND: On February 23rd, the 1st case of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection was diagnosed at the University Hospital Trust of Verona, Italy. On March 13th, the Oncology Section was converted into a 22-inpatient bed coronavirus disease (COVID) Unit, and we reshaped our organisation to face the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic, while maintaining oncological activities. METHODS: We tracked down (i) volumes of oncological activities (January 1st - March 31st, 2020 versus the same period of 2019), (ii) patients' and caregivers' perception and (iii) SARS-CoV-2 infection rate in oncology health professionals and SARS-CoV-2 infection-related hospital admissions of "active"' oncological patients. RESULTS: As compared with the same trimester in 2019, the overall reduction in total numbers of inpatient admissions, chemotherapy administrations and specialist visits in January-March 2020 was 8%, 6% and 3%, respectively; based on the weekly average of daily accesses, reduction in some of the oncological activities became statistically significant from week 11. The overall acceptance of adopted measures, as measured by targeted questionnaires administered to a sample of 241 outpatients, was high (>70%). Overall, 8 of 85 oncology health professionals tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection (all but one employed in the COVID Unit, no hospital admissions and no treatment required); among 471 patients admitted for SARS-CoV-2 infection, 7 had an "active"' oncological disease (2 died of infection-related complications). CONCLUSIONS: A slight, but statistically significant reduction in oncology activity was registered during the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic peak in Verona, Italy. Organisational and protective measures adopted appear to have contributed to keep infections in both oncological patients and health professionals to a minimum.

Evaluation of nutritional status in non-small-cell lung cancer: screening, assessment and correlation with treatment outcome.

BackgroundNutritional derangements are common hallmarks of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Nevertheless, their early detection is overlooked in clinical routine. This study aimed to evaluate nutritional status and its correlation with outcome in NSCLC patients.MethodsData regarding NSCLC patients undergoing nutritional evaluation were prospectively collected (May 2016-October 2018). Nutritional risk was assessed by Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002). Bilateral psoas major muscles were measured at L3 vertebrae level with routine staging-computed tomography and changes were evaluated using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Clinico-pathological and nutritional data were correlated to progression-free/overall survival (PFS/OS) and response rate (ORR) using a Cox and logistic regression model. Kaplan-Meier curves were compared with log-rank test.ResultsThirty-eight patients were included. The majority (65.8%) of them were at nutritional risk (NRS-2002 ≥3). At multivariate analysis for patients with advanced disease, age (HR 2.44, p=0.05), performance status (HR 2.48, p=0.043) and NRS-2002 (HR 1.74, p=0.001) were significant independent predictors for PFS and weight loss (HR 1.07, p=0.008) for OS. Patients with baseline NRS-2002 <3 had significantly longer 1-year PFS (85.7% vs 19.4%, p=0.02) and higher ORR (66.7% vs 21.4%) than those with NRS-2002 ≥3. An explorative evaluation demonstrated that NRS-2002 score significantly decreased after nutritional intervention (p=0.001) for 3 months.ConclusionBaseline nutritional risk represents a prognostic factor in NSCLC. Nutritional counselling should be applied as a fundamental tool to improve nutritional risk in a short period, ameliorating patients' outcome.

Prognostic impact of proliferation for resected early stage 'pure' invasive lobular breast cancer: Cut-off analysis of Ki67 according to histology and clinical validation.

INTRODUCTION: The intent of this analysis was to investigate and validate the prognostic potential of Ki67 in a multi-center series of patients affected by early stage 'pure' invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC). METHODS: Clinical-pathological data of patients affected by ILC were correlated with overall survival and disease-free survival (OS/DFS); data from a parallel invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) patients' cohort were gathered as well. The maximally selected Log-Rank statistics analysis was applied to Ki67 continuous variable to estimate the appropriate cut-off. The Subpopulation Treatment Effect Pattern Plot (STEPP) analysis was performed as well. RESULTS: Data from overall 1097 (457/222 ILC: training/validation set; 418 IDC) patients were gathered. The identified optimal Ki67 cut-offs were 4% and 14% for DFS in ILC and IDC cohort, respectively. In ILC patients, the Ki67 cut-off was an independent OS predictor. Ten-years OS and DFS were 89.9% and 77.2% (p = 0.007) and 79.4% and 69.2% (p = 0.03) for patients with Ki67 ≤ 4% and >4%, respectively. In IDC patients, 10-years OS was 93.8% and 71.7%, p = 0.02, DFS was 84.0% and 52.6%, p = 0.0003, for patients with Ki67 ≤ 14% and >14%, respectively. In the validation set, the optimal Ki67 OS cut-off was 5%. The STEPP analysis showed that in the presence of low Ki67 values, IDC patients have a better DFS than ILC patients, while with the increase of values the prognosis tends to overlap. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the retrospective design of the study, the prognostic relevance of Ki67 (as well as its optimal cut-off) seems to significantly differ according to breast cancer histology.