RESUMO
Background: In the metastatic setting, cancer patients may not benefit from standard care regimes and their diseases undergo drug resistance due to tumour cell heterogeneity and genomic landscape complexity. In recent years, there have been several attempts to personalise the diagnostic-therapeutic path and to propose novel strategies based on not only histological test results but also on each patient's clinical history and molecular biology. Profiling molecular tests allows physicians to investigate the single tumour genomic landscape and to promote targeted approaches. The Molecular Tumour Board (MTB) is a multidisciplinary committee dedicated to selecting individualised and targeted therapeutic strategies appropriate for patients suffering from diseases that present resistance to standard care. Materials and Methods: Our MTB settled in "Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria delle Marche", Ancona (AN), Italy, and includes oncologists, molecular biologists, geneticists, and other specialists. Clinical cases are referred by physicians to the MTB, through the Cancer and Research Centre of the Marche Region (CORM), through a telemedicine platform. Four possible molecular profiles are available: FoundationOne® CDx e FoundationOne®Liquid CDx and two local Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) panels, with 16 DNA genes and 10 RNA genes respectively. The resulting genetic mutations and their analyses are evaluated by all the members of the Board and a report for each patient is provided with medical recommendations. Results: from June 2021 to May 2023, we collected data from 97 referral patients (M: 49, F: 48). The mean age was 60.6 years (range 22-83 years). 90 cases were approved for testing. Only seven patients were not eligible for genomic profiling. In two patients who were eligible, molecular profiling was not performed because a tissue sample was not available. Off-label therapy was recommended for three patients. 5% of cases (5/88) showed addressable driver mutations associated with an existing targeted therapy and were immediately enrolled. Conclusions: MTB presents a powerful tool for offering precise medical goals. Our Department of Clinical Oncology also takes advantage of the important role of multidisciplinary teams, through the establishment of CORM and MTB meetings, within which there is the chance to perform NGS-based analyses. It will be important in the future to implement the use of genomic profiling to improve personalised care and to guide the choice of suitable therapies and more appropriate management of patients.
RESUMO
In recent years, BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) and MEK inhibitors (MEKi), together with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), have changed the therapeutic strategy of cutaneous melanoma, both in adjuvant and metastatic settings. These inhibitors have significantly improved the clinical outcome for patients with melanoma, including in both BRAF-mutated and BRAF-wild type disease. Some preclinical and clinical studies have revealed that BRAFi and MEKi are able to influence T- and B-cell activation, and to modulate immune system activation within the tumor microenvironment. Dabrafenib and trametinib have been shown to enhance the expression of melanoma antigens on BRAF-mutated cells, and to favor both a cytotoxic and immune response against melanoma cells. Thereby, the present study described a case series of five women treated with BRAFi and MEKi, in both adjuvant and metastatic settings, that experienced potential immune-related adverse events. In particular, these patients exhibited sarcoidosis, mesenteric panniculitis, lymphocytic colitis and neuropathy of phrenic nerve. Considering that T and B cells are responsible for immune-related adverse events, as observed in patients treated with ICIs, the present study suggested a possible role of BRAFi and MEKi as triggers of immune system activation and subsequent immune-related toxicities.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has triggered the disruption of health care on a global scale. With Italy tangled up in the pandemic response, oncology care has been largely diverted and cancer screenings suspended. Our multicenter Italian study aimed to evaluate whether COVID-19 has impacted access to diagnosis, staging, and treatment for patients newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC), compared with pre-pandemic time. METHODS: All consecutive new CRC patients referred to 8 Italian oncology institutions between March and December 2020 were included. Access rate and temporal intervals between date of symptoms onset, radiological and cytohistological diagnosis, treatment start and first radiological evaluation were analyzed and compared with the same months of 2019. RESULTS: A reduction (29%) in newly diagnosed CRC cases was seen when compared with 2019 (360 vs 506). New CRC patients in 2020 were less likely to be diagnosed with early stage (stages I-II-III) CRC (63% vs 78%, P < .01). Gender and sidedness were similar regardless of the year. The percentage of tumors with any mutation among BRAF, NRAS, and KRAS genes were significantly different between the 2 years (61% in 2020 vs 50% in 2019, P = .04). Timing of access to cancer diagnosis, staging, and treatment for patients with CRC has not been negatively affected by the pandemic. Significantly shorter temporal intervals were observed between symptom onset and first oncological appointment (69 vs 79 days, P = .01) and between histological diagnosis and first oncological appointment (34 vs 42 days, P < .01) during 2020 compared with 2019. Fewer CRC cases were discussed in multidisciplinary meetings during 2020 (38% vs 50%, P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Our data highlight a significant drop in CRC diagnosis after COVID-19, especially for early stage disease. The study also reveals a remarkable setback in the multidisciplinary management of patients with CRC. Despite this, Italian oncologists were able to ensure diagnostic-therapeutic pathways proper operation after March 2020.
