Explore the vast range of titles available.

Molecular characterization of tumors could be important for clinical management. Plasma DNA obtained noninvasively as a liquid biopsy could be widely applicable for clinical implementation in biomarker-based treatment strategies. Prostate cancer is a disease with variable clinical outcomes and molecular features and therefore presents multiple opportunities for biomarker-based treatment optimization. Tissue analysis may not be representative of the lethal clone in localized disease or of intrapatient, intermetastases heterogeneity; fresh tissue is often challenging to obtain by biopsy of metastasis, whereas archival samples may not represent current disease and may be of insufficient quality. Plasma DNA is of variable tumor-to-normal fraction that requires accurate estimation using sensitively measured genomic events. In plasma with sufficient tumor content, the spectrum of genomic aberrations closely resembles tissue and could be used to molecularly characterize patients in real time. In this review we discuss the opportunities for improving clinical management by using plasma DNA analysis in different clinical scenarios across the disease spectrum, from detection of prostate cancer and disease relapse to treatment response prediction, response assessment, and interrogation of treatment resistance in metastatic prostate cancer. Combinational strategies may incorporate other modalities, including circulating tumor cells, circulating microRNA, and extracellular vesicles analysis, which could help to achieve more accurate characterization. There are many opportunities for plasma DNA analyses to change clinical management. However, there are challenges that need to be addressed to clinically implement a test, including the development of accurate, fit for purpose, and technically reproducible assay, followed by prospective validation in a large cohort of patients.

Liquid biopsy has been established as a powerful, minimally invasive, tool to detect clinically actionable aberrations across numerous cancer types in real-time. With the development of new therapeutic agents in prostate cancer (PC) including DNA repair targeted therapies, this is especially attractive. However, there is unclarity on how best to screen for PC, improve risk stratification and ultimately how to treat advanced disease. Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop better biomarkers to help guide oncologists’ decisions in these settings. Circulating tumour cells (CTCs), exosomes and cell-free DNA/RNA (cfDNA/cfRNA) analysis, including epigenetic features such as methylation, have all shown potential in prognostication, treatment response assessment and detection of emerging mechanisms of resistance. However, there are still challenges to overcome prior to implementing liquid biopsies in routine clinical practice such as preanalytical considerations including blood collection and storage, the cost of CTC isolation and enrichment, low-circulating tumour content as a limitation for genomic analysis and how to better interpret the sequencing data generated. In this review, we describe an overview of the up-to-date clinical opportunities in the management of PC through blood-based liquid biopsies and the next steps for its implementation in personalised treatment guidance.

Tumor DNA circulates in the plasma of cancer patients admixed with DNA from noncancerous cells. The genomic landscape of plasma DNA has been characterized in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) but the plasma methylome has not been extensively explored. Here, we performed next-generation sequencing (NGS) on plasma DNA with and without bisulfite treatment from mCRPC patients receiving either abiraterone or enzalutamide in the pre- or post-chemotherapy setting. Principal component analysis on the mCRPC plasma methylome indicated that the main contributor to methylation variance (principal component one, or PC1) was strongly correlated with genomically determined tumor fraction (r = -0.96; P < 10-8) and characterized by hypermethylation of targets of the polycomb repressor complex 2 components. Further deconvolution of the PC1 top-correlated segments revealed that these segments are comprised of methylation patterns specific to either prostate cancer or prostate normal epithelium. To extract information specific to an individual's cancer, we then focused on an orthogonal methylation signature, which revealed enrichment for androgen receptor binding sequences and hypomethylation of these segments associated with AR copy number gain. Individuals harboring this methylation pattern had a more aggressive clinical course. Plasma methylome analysis can accurately quantitate tumor fraction and identify distinct biologically relevant mCRPC phenotypes.

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.

The high-risk types of human papillomavirus (HPV) have been found to be associated with most cervical cancers and play an essential role in the pathogenesis of the disease. Despite recent advances in preventive HPV vaccine development, such preventive vaccines are unlikely to reduce the prevalence of HPV infections within the next few years, due to their cost and limited availability in developing countries. Furthermore, preventive HPV vaccines may not be capable of treating established HPV infections and HPV-associated lesions, which account for high morbidity and mortality worldwide. Thus, it is important to develop therapeutic HPV vaccines for the control of existing HPV infection and associated malignancies. Therapeutic vaccines are quite different from preventive vaccines in that they require the generation of cell-mediated immunity, particularly T cell-mediated immunity, instead of the generation of neutralizing antibodies. The HPV-encoded early proteins, the E6 and E7 oncoproteins, form ideal targets for therapeutic HPV vaccines, since they are consistently expressed in HPV-associated cervical cancer and its precursor lesions and thus play crucial roles in the generation and maintenance of HPV-associated disease. Our review covers the various therapeutic HPV vaccines for cervical cancer, including live vector-based, peptide or protein-based, nucleic acid-based, and cell-based vaccines targeting the HPV E6 and/or E7 antigens. Furthermore, we review the studies using therapeutic HPV vaccines in combination with other therapeutic modalities and review the latest clinical trials on therapeutic HPV vaccines.

An increased mortality risk was observed in patients with cancer during the first wave of COVID-19. Here, we describe determinants of mortality in patients with solid cancer comparing the first and second waves of COVID-19. A retrospective analysis encompassing two waves of COVID-19 (March–May 2020; December 2020–February 2021) was performed. 207 patients with cancer were matched to 452 patients without cancer. Patient demographics and oncological variables such as cancer subtype, staging and anti-cancer treatment were evaluated for association with COVID-19 mortality. Overall mortality was lower in wave two compared to wave one, HR 0.41 (95% CI: 0.30–0.56). In patients with cancer, mortality was 43.6% in wave one and 15.9% in wave two. In hospitalized patients, after adjusting for age, ethnicity and co-morbidities, a history of cancer was associated with increased mortality in wave one but not wave two. In summary, the second UK wave of COVID-19 is associated with lower mortality in hospitalized patients. A history of solid cancer was not associated with increased mortality despite the dominance of the more transmissible B.1.1.7 SARS-CoV-2 variant. In both waves, metastatic disease and systemic anti-cancer treatment appeared to be independent risk factors for death within the combined cancer cohort.

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.