A single experience in the conduction of clinical trial during COronaVIrusDisease-2019 pandemic.

Aim: From the start of the pandemic, several aspects of healthcare policies changed, not least the clinical trials management from recruiting capabilities to the protocol compliance in terms of schedule of procedures, follow-up visits, staff constraints and monitoring. This study aims to assess the impact of the COronaVIrusDisease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the conduction of clinical trials at the site of clinical oncology, Ancona (Italy), to identify the strengths and weaknesses upfront the past emergency, and to select better strategies for future similar situations. Methods: Data from February to July of the years 2019, 2020 and 2021 were collected and three practical parameters of the trial unit were investigated: milestones, performance, and impact. Results: The trials mean numbers were 18, 24, and 23, in 2019, 2020, and 2021 respectively. The pre-Site Initiation Visit (PRE-SIV) rate grew from 66.6% in 2019 to 95.5% in 2021 with a deflection in 2020. Protocol deviations were 40 in the period February-July 2019, in the same period of 2020 the number of deviations increased due to COVID related ones, then there was a significant total decrease in February-July 2021. In 2020 and 2021, all the investigator meetings were online. Conclusions: The growing number of remote Site Initiation Visit (SIV) and meetings over the last 3 years suggests the feasibility of the on-line processes. The significant reduction in protocol deviations during 2021 is probably due to an under check of data during a pandemic. But that is also a possible key indicator of the coping strategy made out by clinical oncology to guarantee the continuity of care in clinical trials and to offer new opportunities of cancer care in a bad scenario such as a pandemic one.

Impact of coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on good clinical practice trials in oncology.

Aim: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) became pandemic on 11th March 2020 and it deeply stressed the healthcare system. Cancer patients represent a vulnerable population, so many recommendations have been approved to ensure optimal management. Clinical research was notably impacted by COVID too. This review aims to analyze the challenges occurred during a pandemic for the management of enrolled patients (enrollment, use of telemedicine visits, study procedures) and for the clinical trials system (from feasibility to selection visit, site initiation visit, monitorings, use of e-signature, deviations and discontinuations). Methods: The studies included in the present review were selected from PubMed/Google Scholar/ScienceDirect databases. Results: During the first phase of pandemic many clinical trials were suspended in accrual and, as the pandemic progressed, recommendations were established to guarantee the safety and the continuity of care of enrolled patients. In addition, lot of new strategies was found during the pandemic to reduce the negative consequences on clinical trial performance and to guarantee new opportunities of care in the respect of good clinical practice (GCP) in a bad scenario. Conclusions: Among all modifiers, investigators would prefer to maintain the positive ones such as pragmatic and simplified trial designs and protocols, reducing in-person visits when not necessary and to minimizing sponsor and contract research organizations (CROs) visits.

STYLE (NCT03449173): A Phase 2 Trial of Sunitinib in Patients With Type B3 Thymoma or Thymic Carcinoma in Second and Further Lines.

INTRODUCTION: Thymic malignancies are rare tumors with few therapeutic options. The STYLE trial was aimed to evaluate activity and safety of sunitinib in advanced or recurrent type B3 thymoma (T) and thymic carcinoma (TC). METHODS: In this multicenter, Simon 2 stages, phase 2 trial, patients with pretreated T or TC were enrolled in two cohorts and assessed separately. Sunitinib was administered 50 mg daily for 4 weeks, followed by a 2-week rest period (schedule 4/2), until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Progression-free survival, overall survival, disease control rate and safety were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: From March 2017 to January 2022, 12 patients with T and 32 patients with TC were enrolled. At stage 1, ORR was 0% (90% confidence interval [CI]: 0.0-22.1) in T and 16.7% (90% CI: 3.1-43.8) in TC, so the T cohort was closed. At stage 2, the primary endpoint was met for TC with ORR of 21.7% (90% CI: 9.0%-40.4%). In the intention-to-treat analysis, disease control rate was 91.7% (95% CI: 61.5%-99.8%) in Ts and 89.3% (95% CI: 71.8%-97.7%) in TCs. Median progression-free survival was 7.7 months (95% CI: 2.4-45.5) in Ts and 8.8 months (95% CI: 5.3-11.1) in TCs; median overall survival was 47.9 months (95% CI: 4.5-not reached) in Ts and 27.8 months (95% CI: 13.2-53.2) in TCs. Adverse events occurred in 91.7% Ts and 93.5% TCs. Grade 3 or greater treatment-related adverse events were reported in 25.0% Ts and 51.6% TCs. CONCLUSIONS: This trial confirms the activity of sunitinib in patients with TC, supporting its use as a second-line treatment, albeit with potential toxicity that requires dose adjustment.

Acute Peripheral Motor Neuropathy Induced by Oxaliplatin-Correlated Hypokalaemia.

Neurotoxicity is one of the most common side effects of oxaliplatin-based therapy. Most patients who receive at least 3-4 months of treatment suffer from peripheral sensory neurotoxicity (PSN), characterised by the loss or impairment of tactile and proprioceptive sensory function. Motor impairment, such as muscle weakness or palsy, has been rarely described, and the physiopathology of PSN, as well as the motor symptoms due to oxaliplatin-based treatment, are not adequately understood. Here we report the case of a patient who experienced severe acute peripheral motor neuropathy as a side effect of oxaliplatin-based treatment. We also review other cases of PSN published in the literature and suggest a novel hypothesis on the physiopathology of this particular event. Take-away lessons: Not all of the neurological symptoms observed during oxaliplatin-based treatment can be traced back directly to the oxaliplatin itself, and other factors, such as electrolyte imbalances, may contribute to the symptoms. Patients with gastro-intestinal malignancies are the patients most affected by neurotoxicity due to the side effects of chemotherapy and the disease itself.

Incidence and risk of cardiotoxicity in cancer patients treated with targeted therapies.

BACKGROUND: Cardiotoxicityis a serious side effect of molecularly targeted agents. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence and Relative Risk (RR) of developing all-grade and high-grade cardiotoxicity in patients with solid tumors receiving targeted agents through a revised meta-analysis of available clinical trials. METHODS: The scientific literature regarding cardiotoxicity was extensively analyzed using MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Eligible studies were selected according to PRISMA statement. Summary incidence, RR, and 95% CIs were calculated using random-effects or fixed-effects models based on the heterogeneity of selected studies. RESULTS: Our search yielded a total of 4998 clinical studies; of them, 31 trials were finally considered for this meta-analysis. A total of 28,538 patients were included; 7995 of these patients had breast cancer (28%), 6151 (22%) prostate cancer and 14,392 (50%) were treated for other malignancies. The highest RR of high-grade events was observed with Vandetanib (RR=7.71, 95% CI 1.04-56.99), followed by Ramucirumab (RR=5.0) and Aflibercept (RR=4.1). Grouping by drug category, the highest incidence of high-grade cardiotoxicity was shown by anti-VEGFR-TKIs (RR 5.62, 95% CI 1.49-21.24) and anti-VEGF mAbs/VEGF-trap (RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.24-2.69). Grouping by tumor type, the highest incidence of cardiotoxicity was observed in thyroid cancer (8%), followed by gastric cancer (4%). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with targeted agents in cancer patients is correlated with a significant increase in the risk of cardiotoxicity. Frequent clinical monitoring should be emphasized when using these and newer biological agents.