Patterns of care at the end of life: a retrospective study of Italian patients with advanced breast cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To better understand the type of care offered to Italian patients with advanced breast cancer at the End-of-Life (EoL), we conducted a retrospective observational study. EoL was defined as the period of six months before death. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-one patients with advanced breast cancer (ABC) treated at IRCCS San Martino Policlinic Hospital who died between 2017 and 2021 were included. Data about patient, disease, and treatment characteristics from breast cancer diagnosis to death, along with information about comorbidities, medications, imaging, specialist evaluations, hospitalization, palliative care and home care, hospice admissions, and site of death were collected. RESULTS: 98.3% of the patients received at least one line of active treatment at EoL; 52.8% were hospitalized during the selected period. Palliative (13.9%), psychological (7.4%), and nutritional evaluations (8.2%) were underutilized. Palliative home care was provided to 52% of the patients. Most of the patients died at home (66.1%) and fewer than one out of five (18.2%) died at the hospital. Among the patients who died at home, 27.3% had no palliative support. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that palliative care in EoL breast cancer patients is still inadequate. Only a minority of patients had psychological and nutritional support While low nutritional support may be explained by the fact that typical symptoms of ABC do not involve the gastrointestinal tract, the lack of psychological support suggests that significant barriers still exist. Data on the site of death are encouraging, indicating that EoL management is increasingly home centered in Italy.

Impact of Anti-HER2 Therapy Alone and With Weekly Paclitaxel on the Ovarian Reserve of Young Women With HER2-Positive Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The potential gonadotoxicity of anti-HER2 agents remains largely unknown, and limited, conflicting evidence exists for taxanes. Antimüllerian hormone (AMH) is an established biomarker of ovarian reserve that may aid in quantifying anticancer treatment-induced gonadotoxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The present biomarker analysis of the randomized phase III neoadjuvant NeoALTTO trial included premenopausal women aged ≤45 years at diagnosis of HER2-positive early breast cancer with available frozen serum samples at baseline (ie, before anticancer treatments), at week 2 (ie, the "biological window" of anti-HER2 therapy alone), and/or at the time of surgery (ie, after completing paclitaxel + anti-HER2 therapy, before starting adjuvant chemotherapy). RESULTS: The present analysis included 130 patients with a median age of 38 years (interquartile ratio [IQR], age 33-42 years). AMH values at the 3 time points differed significantly (P<.001). At baseline, median AMH levels were 1.29 ng/mL (IQR, 0.56-2.62 ng/mL). At week 2, a small but significant reduction in AMH levels was observed (median, 1.10 ng/mL; IQR, 0.45-2.09 ng/mL; P<.001). At surgery, a larger significant decline in AMH levels was observed (median, 0.01 ng/mL; IQR, 0.01-0.03 ng/mL; P<.001). Although the type of anti-HER2 treatment (trastuzumab and/or lapatinib) did not seem to impact the results, age and pretreatment ovarian reserve had a major influence on treatment-induced gonadotoxicity risk. CONCLUSIONS: This NeoALTTO biomarker analysis showed that anti-HER2 therapies alone had limited gonadotoxicity but that the addition of weekly paclitaxel resulted in marked AMH decline with possible negative implications for subsequent ovarian function and fertility.

Choosing the appropriate pharmacotherapy for breast cancer during pregnancy: what needs to be considered?

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed malignancy during pregnancy. Breast cancer during pregnancy is a challenging clinical condition requiring proper and timely multidisciplinary management. AREAS COVERED: This review focuses on the management of breast cancer during pregnancy with a focus about the current state-of-the-art on the feasibility and safety of pharmacotherapy approaches in this setting. EXPERT OPINION: Multidisciplinary care is key for a proper diagnostic-therapeutic management of breast cancer during pregnancy. Engaging patients and their caregivers in the decision-making process is essential and psychological support should be provided. The treatment of patients with breast cancer during pregnancy should follow the same recommendations as those for breast cancer in young women outside pregnancy but taking into account the gestational age at the time of treatment.Anthracycline-, cyclophosphamide-, and taxane-based regimens can be safely administered during the second and third trimesters with standard protocols, preferring weekly regimens whenever possible. Endocrine therapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and targeted agents are contraindicated throughout pregnancy, also due to the very limited data available to guide their administration in this setting. During treatment, careful fetal growth monitoring is mandatory, and even after delivery proper health monitoring for the children exposed in utero to chemotherapy should be continued.

How to Protect Ovarian Function before and during Chemotherapy?

A significant number of women receive a cancer diagnosis before their age of natural menopause. Among these patients, the most frequent neoplasms are breast cancer, gynecological, and hematological malignancies. Premature ovarian insufficiency and infertility are among the most feared short- to long-term consequences of anticancer treatments in premenopausal patients. Both patient- and treatment-related characteristics are key factors in influencing the risk of gonadotoxicity with the use of chemotherapy. The cryopreservation of oocytes/embryos is a standard strategy for fertility preservations offered to young women interested in future family planning, but it does not allow gonadal function protection during chemotherapy. Ovarian suppression with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) during chemotherapy is now recommended as an option to reduce the risk of gonadotoxicity in order to avoid the negative consequences of premature ovarian insufficiency in premenopausal women receiving cytotoxic therapy, including those not interested in fertility preservation. This review summarizes the risk of treatment-induced gonadotoxicity in premenopausal patients and the evidence available on the protective role of administering GnRHa during chemotherapy to preserve ovarian function.

Comparing the Gonadotoxicity of Multiple Breast Cancer Regimens: Important Understanding for Managing Breast Cancer in Pre-Menopausal Women.

Over the last several decades, improvements in breast cancer treatment have contributed to increased cure rates for women diagnosed with this malignancy. Consequently, great importance should be paid to the long-term side effects of systemic therapies. For young women (defined as per guideline ≤40 years at diagnosis) who undergo chemotherapy, one of the most impactful side effects on their quality of life is premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) leading to fertility-related problems and the side effects of early menopause. Regimens, type, and doses of chemotherapy, as well as the age of patients and their ovarian reserve at the time of treatment are major risk factors for treatment-induced POI. For these reasons, childbearing desire and preservation of ovarian function and/or fertility should be discussed with all premenopausal patients before planning the treatments. This manuscript summarizes the available fertility preservation techniques in breast cancer patients, the risk of treatment-induced POI with different anticancer treatments, and the possible procedures to prevent it. A special focus is paid to the role of oncofertility counseling, as a central part of the visit in this setting, during which the patient should receive all the information about the potential consequences of the disease and of the proposed treatment on her future life.

Combination therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Back to the future?

The treatment landscape of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), a chemotherapy-resistant disease, has dramatically changed in the last decade after the introduction of small molecule inhibitors targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and mammalian target of rapamycin kinases. The CheckMate 025 phase III trial in second line mRCC also introduced immunotherapy with immune-checkpoint inhibitors as an option in the management of mRCC. Both small molecules and immunotherapy are used as single agents and they are associated with different toxicities. Recent data demonstrated that the combination of 2 immunotherapies, nivolumab and ipilimumab, is more effective than tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) monotherapy as first line treatment in intermediate and poor risk mRCC. Furthermore, combination of immunotherapies and TKI has been tested in several trials to evaluate if the combo with agents presenting a different mechanism of action is more effective than monotherapy with TKI. During the past several years, combined therapy of cytokines doublets or cytokines and bevacizumab doublets demonstrated little improvement in clinical outcomes and a relevant toxicity profile. Conversely, the combination of new agents has been recently shown to improve survival in patients with metastatic disease, thus changing the treatment landscape of mRCC. This comprehensive review aims at summarizing the recent advances in the treatment of mRCC.

Burning Questions in the Oncofertility Counseling of Young Breast Cancer Patients.

The improved prognosis of breast cancer patients makes survivorship issues an area of crucial importance. In this regard, an increased attention is needed toward the development of potential anticancer treatment-related long-term side-effects, including gonadal failure and infertility in young women. Therefore, fertility preservation and family planning are crucial issues to be addressed in all young women of reproductive age with newly diagnosed cancer. Despite a growing availability of data on the efficacy and safety of fertility preservation options and the fact that conceiving after prior history of breast cancer has become more accepted over time, there are still several gray zones in this field so that many physicians remain uncomfortable to deal with these topics. The purpose of this review is to answer some of the most controversial questions frequently asked by patients during their oncofertility counseling, in order to provide a detailed and up-to-date overview on the evidence available in this field to physicians involved in the care of young women with breast cancer.

Sex Hormones and Hormone Therapy during COVID-19 Pandemic: Implications for Patients with Cancer.

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) shows a wide spectrum of clinical presentations, severity, and fatality rates. The reason older patients and males show increased risk of severe disease and death remains uncertain. Sex hormones, such as estradiol, progesterone, and testosterone, might be implicated in the age-dependent and sex-specific severity of COVID-19. High testosterone levels could upregulate transmembrane serine protease 2 (TMPRSS2), facilitating the entry of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) into host cells via angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). Data from patients with prostate cancer treated with androgen-deprivation therapy seem to confirm this hypothesis. Clinical studies on TMPRSS2 inhibitors, such as camostat, nafamostat, and bromhexine, are ongoing. Antiandrogens, such as bicalutamide and enzalutamide, are also under investigation. Conversely, other studies suggest that the immune modulating properties of androgens could protect from the unfavorable cytokine storm, and that low testosterone levels might be associated with a worse prognosis in patients with COVID-19. Some evidence also supports the notion that estrogens and progesterone might exert a protective effect on females, through direct antiviral activity or immune-mediated mechanisms, thus explaining the higher COVID-19 severity in post-menopausal women. In this perspective, we discuss the available evidence on sex hormones and hormone therapy in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, and we highlight the possible implications for cancer patients, who can receive hormonal therapies during their treatment plans.

Prognostic Variables in Patients With Non-metastatic Small-cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of the Bladder: A Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: Small-cell carcinoma of the bladder (SCCB) is a rare, highly aggressive, neoplasm. We retrospectively analyzed the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to investigate the impact of chemotherapy, surgery, and radiotherapy on overall survival (OS) of patients with non-metastatic SCCB. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The SEER Research Data (2000-2014) were reviewed using the SEER*Stat software. Patients with pure or mixed SCCB, T2-T4, any N, M0, and who received either surgery or radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy (neo-adjuvant, adjuvant, or perioperative treatment) were included. We used the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test for estimating survival. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to evaluate the prognostic variables. RESULTS: A total of 384 cases of SCCB were included in the study (T2, n = 204; T3/4, n = 180), of whom 233 (60.7%) were treated with surgery, whereas 151 (39.3%) received radiotherapy. The median OS was 21.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.7-25.3 months). Age, race, chemotherapy, type of local treatment, and T and N staging were identified as independent prognostic variables (P < .05). In multivariate analysis, chemotherapy (n = 264) was associated with significant better OS (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.56; 95% CI, 0.42-0.74; P < .000). Patients who underwent surgery showed longer outcome compared with those treated with radiotherapy (adjusted HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.47-0.82; P = .001). However, only in the T2 subgroup did surgery (n = 92) retain a significant survival difference compared with radiotherapy (n = 112) (adjusted HR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.24-0.57; P < .000). CONCLUSIONS: Surgery was associated with better outcome compared with radiotherapy in patients with T2 disease. Chemotherapy was associated with a longer survival in patients with non-metastatic SCCB.

To switch or not to switch? A real-life experience using dexamethasone in combination with abiraterone.

The recently published phase II prospective SWITCH trial evaluated whether patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with abiraterone acetate could benefit from a 'steroid switch' from prednisone to dexamethasone. A total of 26 patients, both chemonaïve (14 patients) or pretreated with docetaxel (12 patients), with biochemical and/or limited radiological progression, were enrolled in this trial. Primary endpoint was prostate specific antigen (PSA) 30 defined as the proportion of patients with a PSA level decline 30% or more after 6 weeks of treatment with abiraterone acetate + dexamethasone. Secondary endpoints were: a PSA50 rate (defined as the proportion of patients with PSA decline of 50% or more after 12 weeks on abiraterone acetate + dexamethasone), biochemical and radiological progression-free survival (bPFS and rPFS, respectively), benefit from subsequent treatment and identification of biomarkers of response. Primary endpoint was reached in 46.2% of patients (12 patients), and two patients had an objective partial response on computed tomography scan. Median bPFS and rPFS were 5.3 months and 11.8 months. We present a case series of 11 patients who were consecutively treated with a steroid switch at our institution from January 2016 to August 2018 to investigate if this strategy could be used in a 'real-life' setting. We observed a PSA30 response in two patients (18%), median bPFS was 4.77 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.5-14.6) and median rPFS was 7.2 months (95% CI 3.8-15.5). Seven patients had a radiological stable disease as best response to steroid switch. Three patients were being still treated with abiraterone acetate + dexamethasone at data cut-off time. Our case series confirms that switching from prednisone to dexamethasone during abiraterone acetate treatment produces biochemical and radiological responses in both a predocetaxel and a postdocetaxel setting, providing a clinical benefit in mCRPC patients. However, to date, there is no clear indication as to which patient could benefit most from this kind of strategy.

Overexpression of Periostin in Tumor Biopsy Samples Is Associated With Prostate Cancer Phenotype and Clinical Outcome.

BACKGROUND: Overexpression of periostin (POSTN) is associated with prostate cancer (PCa) aggressiveness. We investigated the prognostic significance of POSTN expression in tumor biopsy samples of patients with PCa. METHODS: We scored POSTN expression by immunohistochemistry analysis on 215 PCa biopsy samples using an anti-POSTN-specific antibody. A total immunoreactive score (T-IRS) was calculated by adding the POSTN staining scores of stromal and epithelial tumor cells. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression/recurrence-free survival (PFS), radiographic progression/recurrence-free survival (rPFS), and overall survival (OS) were the study end points. RESULTS: A total of 143 patients received therapy with radical attempt, whereas 72 had locally advanced or metastatic disease and received hormone therapy alone. Median T-IRS was 9 and 12 (range, 0-20), respectively (P = .001). Overall, we found a weak positive correlation of T-IRS with prebiopsy PSA levels (r = 0.166, P = .016) and Gleason score (r = 0.266, P < .000). T-IRS ≥ 8 independently predicted for shorter PSA-PFS and OS (hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval (CI)] ≥ 8 versus < 8: 1.50 [1.06-2.14], P = .024 and 1.92 [1.20-3.07], P = .007, respectively). In the subgroup analysis, the association between T-IRS and patient outcome was retained in patients who received therapy with radical attempt (HR [95% CI] ≥ 8 vs. < 8: rPFS: 2.06 [1.18-3.58], P = .01; OS: 2.36 [1.24-4.50], P = .009) and in those with low to intermediate Gleason scores (HR [95% CI] ≥ 8 vs. < 8: PSA-PFS: 1.65 [1.06-2.59], P = .028; rPFS: 2.09 [1.14-3.87], P = .018; OS: 2.57 [1.31-5.04], P = .006). CONCLUSION: POSTN T-IRS on PCa biopsy samples independently predicted the risk of recurrence, progression, and death in patients with localized disease and in those with low to intermediate Gleason scores.