Explore the vast range of titles available.

Breast cancer is currently classified by immunohistochemistry. However, technological advances in the detection of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) have made new options available for diagnosis, classification, biological knowledge, and treatment selection. Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease and ctDNA can accurately reflect this heterogeneity, allowing us to detect, monitor, and understand the evolution of the disease. Breast cancer patients have higher levels of circulating DNA than healthy subjects, and ctDNA can be used for different objectives at different timepoints of the disease, ranging from screening and early detection to monitoring for resistance mutations in advanced disease. In early breast cancer, ctDNA clearance has been associated with higher rates of complete pathological response after neoadjuvant treatment and with fewer recurrences after radical treatments. In metastatic disease, ctDNA can help select the optimal sequencing of treatments. In the future, thanks to new bioinformatics tools, the use of ctDNA in breast cancer will become more frequent, enhancing our knowledge of the biology of tumors. Moreover, deep learning algorithms may also be able to predict breast cancer evolution or treatment sensitivity. In the coming years, continued research and the improvement of liquid biopsy techniques will be key to the implementation of ctDNA analysis in routine clinical practice.

Digital counting methods were developed to decrease the high intra- and inter-observer variability of immunohistochemical markers such as Ki67, with most presenting a good correlation coefficient (CC). Since Ki67 is one of the major contributors to Oncotype DX, it is conceivable that Ki67 expression and the recurrence score (RS) obtained by the multigene panel are positively correlated. We decided first to test to what extent conventional and digital Ki67 quantification methods correlate in daily practice and, second, to determine which of these methods correlates better with the prognostic capacity of the Oncotype DX test. Both Ki67 evaluations were performed in 89 core biopsies with a diagnosis of estrogen receptor (ER) positive HER2-negative breast cancer (BC). Cases were, thus, classified twice for surrogate subtype: first by conventional analysis and then by digital evaluation. The Oncotype RS was obtained in 55 cases that were subsequently correlated to Ki67 evaluation by both methods. Conventional and digital Ki67 evaluation showed good concordance and correlation (CC = 0.81 (95% CI 0.73–0.89)). The correlation of Oncotype DX risk groups and surrogate derived subtypes was slightly higher for the digital technique (r s  = 0.46, p < 0.01) compared to the conventional method (r s  = 0.39, p < 0.01), even though both were statistically significant. In conclusion, we show that digital evaluation could be an alternative to conventional counting, and also has advantages for predicting the risk established by the Oncotype DX test in ER-positive BC. This study also supports the importance of an accurate Ki67 analysis which can influence the decision to submit ER-positive HER2-negative BC to prognostic molecular platforms.

Patients with solid tumors have been a risk group since the beginning of the SARS‐CoV‐2 pandemic due to more significant complications, hospitalizations or deaths. The immunosuppressive state of cancer treatments or the tumor itself could influence the development of post‐vaccination antibodies. This study prospectively analyzed 89 patients under chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy, who received two doses of the mRNA‐1237 vaccine, and were compared with a group of 26 non‐cancer individuals. Information on adverse events and neutralizing antibodies against the ancestral strain of SARS‐CoV‐2 (WH1) have been analyzed. Local reactions accounted for 65%, while systemic reactions accounted for 46% of oncologic individuals/cancer patients. Regarding the response to vaccination, 6.7% of cancer patients developed low neutralizing antibody levels. Lower levels of neutralizing antibodies between cancer and non‐cancer groups were significant in individuals without previous SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, but not in previously infected individuals. We also observed that patients receiving chemotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy have significantly lower levels of neutralizing antibodies than non‐cancer individuals. In conclusion, our study confirms the importance of prioritizing cancer patients receiving anticancer treatment in SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccination programs. Cancer patients are a risk group for SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. We determined the levels of anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 plasma neutralizing antibodies post mRNA‐1273 vaccination and observed that cancer patients exhibit lower titers compared to non‐cancer individuals, particularly in individuals not previously infected by SARS‐CoV‐2. Additionally, we found an association between low levels of neutralizing antibodies and chemotherapy‐containing treatments, highlighting their prioritization in SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccination programs.

Background: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-low has emerged as a potential new entity in breast cancer (BC). Data on this subset are limited, and prognostic results are controversial, evidencing the need of further data in a BC real-world cohort. Methods: Patients with HER2-negative stage I–III BC diagnosed between 2006 and 2016 were retrospectively reviewed in a single cohort from the Catalan Institute of Oncology Badalona. Demographics and clinicopathological characteristics were examined via medical charts/electronic health records. We aim to describe and compare HER2-0/HER2-low populations through Chi-square or Fisher test, and explore its prognostic impact using Kaplan–Meier curves and Cox regression models. Results: From a cohort of 1755 BC patients, 1401 invasive HER2-negative, stage I–III cases were evaluated. 87% were hormone receptor (HR)-positive versus 13% triple negative (TNBC). Overall, 43% were HER2-0 and 57% HER2-low (61% immunohistochemistry (IHC) 1+ and 39% IHC 2+). Comparing HER2-low versus HER2-0, HER2-low showed higher proportion of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive (91.6% vs 79.9%, p ⩽ 0.001) and progesterone receptor (PR)-positive (79.8% vs 68.9%, p ⩽ 0.001) cases. HER2-0 exhibited higher proportion of TNBC (20.1% vs 8.4%, p = 0.001), grade III tumors (28.8% vs 23.5%, p = 0.039), and higher Ki67 median value (26.47% vs 23.88%, p = 0.041). HER2-low was associated with longer time to distant recurrence (TTDR) compared to HER2-0 (67.8 vs 54.1 months; p = 0.015) and better BC-related survival (19.2 vs 16.3 years; p = 0.033). In the multivariable analysis, HER2-low was not an independent prognostic factor for TTDR and BC-related survival. ER expression showed a strong association with longer TTDR (Hazard Ratio: 0.425, p ⩽ 0.001) and improved BC-related survival (Hazard Ratio: 0.380, p ⩽ 0.001). PR expression was also associated with longer TTDR (Hazard Ratio: 0.496, p ⩽ 0.001), and improved BC-related survival (Hazard Ratio: 0.488, p ⩽ 0.001). Histological grade III was significantly associated with shorter TTDR (Hazard Ratio: 1.737, p = 0.002). Positive nodal status was the strongest factor correlated with worse BC-related survival (Hazard Ratio: 2.747, p ⩽ 0.001). Conclusion: HER2-low was significantly associated with HR-positive disease, whereas HER2-0 group had higher incidence of TNBC, histological grade III and higher Ki67%. Although HER2-low group was associated with longer TTDR and improved BC-related survival, these findings could be explained by the greater proportion of favorable prognostic features in this subgroup compared to HER2-0.

SAMHD1 is a deoxynucleotide triphosphate (dNTP) triphosphohydrolase which has been proposed as a putative prognostic factor in haematological cancers and certain solid tumours, although with controversial data. Here, we evaluate SAMHD1 function in ovarian cancer, both and in ovarian cancer patients. SAMHD1 expression was downregulated in ovarian cancer cell lines OVCAR3 and SKOV3 by RNA interference. Gene and protein expression changes in immune signalling pathways were assessed. SAMHD1 expression in ovarian cancer patients was evaluated by immunohistochemistry and survival analysis was performed according to SAMHD1 expression. SAMHD1 knockdown induced a significant upregulation of proinflammatory cytokines concomitant to increased expression of the main RNA-sensors, MDA5 and RIG-I, and interferon-stimulated genes, supporting the idea that the absence of SAMHD1 promotes innate immune activation . To assess the contribution of SAMHD1 in ovarian cancer patients, tumours were stratified in SAMHD1-low and SAMHD1-high expressing tumours, resulting in significantly shorter progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in SAMHD1-high expression subgroup ( =0.01 and 0.04, respectively). SAMHD1 depletion correlates with increased innate immune cell signalling in ovarian cancer cells. In clinical samples, SAMHD1-low expressing tumors showed increased progression free survival and overall survival irrespective of BRCA mutation status. These results point towards SAMHD1 modulation as a new therapeutic strategy, able to enhance innate immune activation directly in tumour cells, leading to improved prognosis in ovarian cancer.

The persistence of latent HIV reservoirs allows for viral rebound upon antiretroviral therapy interruption, hindering effective HIV-1 cure. Emerging evidence suggests that modulation of innate immune stimulation could impact viral latency and contribute to the clearing of HIV reservoir. Here, the latency reactivation capacity of a subclass of selective JAK2 inhibitors was characterized as a potential novel therapeutic strategy for HIV-1 cure. Notably, JAK2 inhibitors reversed HIV-1 latency in non-clonal lymphoid and myeloid in vitro models of HIV-1 latency and also ex vivo in CD4+ T cells from ART+ PWH, albeit its function was not dependent on JAK2 expression. Immunophenotypic characterization and whole transcriptomic profiling supported reactivation data, showing common gene expression signatures between latency reactivating agents (LRA; JAK2i fedratinib and PMA) in contrast to other JAK inhibitors, but with significantly fewer affected gene sets in the pathway analysis. In depth evaluation of differentially expressed genes, identified a significant upregulation of IRF7 expression despite the blockade of the JAK-STAT pathway and downregulation of proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines. Moreover, IRF7 expression levels positively correlated with HIV latency reactivation capacity of JAK2 inhibitors and also other common LRAs. Collectively, these results represent a promising step towards HIV eradication by demonstrating the potential of innate immune modulation for reducing the viral reservoir through a novel pathway driven by IRF7.

BackgroundPatients with cancer are particularly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The systemic inflammatory response is a pathogenic mechanism shared by cancer progression and COVID-19. We investigated systemic inflammation as a driver of severity and mortality from COVID-19, evaluating the prognostic role of commonly used inflammatory indices in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer accrued to the OnCovid study.MethodsIn a multicenter cohort of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer in Europe, we evaluated dynamic changes in neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio (NLR); platelet:lymphocyte ratio (PLR); Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), renamed the OnCovid Inflammatory Score (OIS); modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS); and Prognostic Index (PI) in relation to oncological and COVID-19 infection features, testing their prognostic potential in independent training (n=529) and validation (n=542) sets.ResultsWe evaluated 1071 eligible patients, of which 625 (58.3%) were men, and 420 were patients with malignancy in advanced stage (39.2%), most commonly genitourinary (n=216, 20.2%). 844 (78.8%) had ≥1 comorbidity and 754 (70.4%) had ≥1 COVID-19 complication. NLR, OIS, and mGPS worsened at COVID-19 diagnosis compared with pre-COVID-19 measurement (p<0.01), recovering in survivors to pre-COVID-19 levels. Patients in poorer risk categories for each index except the PLR exhibited higher mortality rates (p<0.001) and shorter median overall survival in the training and validation sets (p<0.01). Multivariable analyses revealed the OIS to be most independently predictive of survival (validation set HR 2.48, 95% CI 1.47 to 4.20, p=0.001; adjusted concordance index score 0.611).ConclusionsSystemic inflammation is a validated prognostic domain in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer and can be used as a bedside predictor of adverse outcome. Lymphocytopenia and hypoalbuminemia as computed by the OIS are independently predictive of severe COVID-19, supporting their use for risk stratification. Reversal of the COVID-19-induced proinflammatory state is a putative therapeutic strategy in patients with cancer.

Background: Specialist palliative care team (SPCT) involvement has been shown to improve symptom control and end-of-life care for patients with cancer, but little is known as to how these have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Here, we report SPCT involvement during the first wave of the pandemic and compare outcomes for patients with cancer who received and did not receive SPCT input from multiple European cancer centres. Methods: From the OnCovid repository (N = 1318), we analysed cancer patients aged ⩾18 diagnosed with COVID-19 between 26 February and 22 June 2020 who had complete specialist palliative care team data (SPCT+ referred; SPCT− not referred). Results: Of 555 eligible patients, 317 were male (57.1%), with a median age of 70 years (IQR 20). At COVID-19 diagnosis, 44.7% were on anti-cancer therapy and 53.3% had ⩾1 co-morbidity. Two hundred and six patients received SPCT input for symptom control (80.1%), psychological support (54.4%) and/or advance care planning (51%). SPCT+ patients had more ‘Do not attempt cardio-pulmonary resuscitation’ orders completed prior to (12.6% versus 3.7%) and during admission (50% versus 22.1%, p < 0.001), with more SPCT+ patients deemed suitable for treatment escalation (50% versus 22.1%, p < 0.001). SPCT involvement was associated with higher discharge rates from hospital for end-of-life care (9.7% versus 0%, p < 0.001). End-of-life anticipatory prescribing was higher in SPCT+ patients, with opioids (96.3% versus 47.1%) and benzodiazepines (82.9% versus 41.2%) being used frequently for symptom control. Conclusion: SPCT referral facilitated symptom control, emergency care and discharge planning, as well as high rates of referral for psychological support than previously reported. Our study highlighted the critical need of SPCTs for patients with cancer during the pandemic and should inform service planning for this population.

The medium-term and long-term impact of COVID-19 in patients with cancer is not yet known. In this study, we aimed to describe the prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae and their impact on the survival of patients with cancer. We also aimed to describe patterns of resumption and modifications of systemic anti-cancer therapy following recovery from SARS-CoV-2 infection. OnCovid is an active European registry study enrolling consecutive patients aged 18 years or older with a history of solid or haematological malignancy and who had a diagnosis of RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. For this retrospective study, patients were enrolled from 35 institutions across Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK. Patients who were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection between Feb 27, 2020, and Feb 14, 2021, and entered into the registry at the point of data lock (March 1, 2021), were eligible for analysis. The present analysis was focused on COVID-19 survivors who underwent clinical reassessment at each participating institution. We documented prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae and described factors associated with their development and their association with post-COVID-19 survival, which was defined as the interval from post-COVID-19 reassessment to the patients’ death or last follow-up. We also evaluated resumption of systemic anti-cancer therapy in patients treated within 4 weeks of COVID-19 diagnosis. The OnCovid study is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04393974. 2795 patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection between Feb 27, 2020, and Feb 14, 2021, were entered into the study by the time of the data lock on March 1, 2021. After the exclusion of ineligible patients, the final study population consisted of 2634 patients. 1557 COVID-19 survivors underwent a formal clinical reassessment after a median of 22·1 months (IQR 8·4–57·8) from cancer diagnosis and 44 days (28–329) from COVID-19 diagnosis. 234 (15·0%) patients reported COVID-19 sequelae, including respiratory symptoms (116 [49·6%]) and residual fatigue (96 [41·0%]). Sequelae were more common in men (vs women; p=0·041), patients aged 65 years or older (vs other age groups; p=0·048), patients with two or more comorbidities (vs one or none; p=0·0006), and patients with a history of smoking (vs no smoking history; p=0·0004). Sequelae were associated with hospitalisation for COVID-19 (p<0·0001), complicated COVID-19 (p<0·0001), and COVID-19 therapy (p=0·0002). With a median post-COVID-19 follow-up of 128 days (95% CI 113–148), COVID-19 sequelae were associated with an increased risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] 1·80 [95% CI 1·18–2·75]) after adjusting for time to post-COVID-19 reassessment, sex, age, comorbidity burden, tumour characteristics, anticancer therapy, and COVID-19 severity. Among 466 patients on systemic anti-cancer therapy, 70 (15·0%) permanently discontinued therapy, and 178 (38·2%) resumed treatment with a dose or regimen adjustment. Permanent treatment discontinuations were independently associated with an increased risk of death (HR 3·53 [95% CI 1·45–8·59]), but dose or regimen adjustments were not (0·84 [0·35–2·02]). Sequelae post-COVID-19 affect up to 15% of patients with cancer and adversely affect survival and oncological outcomes after recovery. Adjustments to systemic anti-cancer therapy can be safely pursued in treatment-eligible patients. National Institute for Health Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre and the Cancer Treatment and Research Trust.