Search

Abstract This study aimed to identify the clinico-pathological variables predictive of radiologic complete response (rCR) to first-line anti-HER2 therapy in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Patients were selected from the database of the GIM14 study and classified according to the best radiologic response obtained to first-line anti-HER2 therapy and upon time-to-treatment-discontinuation (TTD). A total of 545 patients were included in the analysis. Eighty patients experienced a rCR to first-line anti-HER2 therapy with a TTD > 3 months and HER2 Immunohistochemistry score 3+, presence of non-visceral metastases and 1 metastatic site were significantly associated with higher odds of obtaining a CR. Of the 80 patients achieving a rCR, 56 experienced a CR with a TTD > 18 months, with anti-HER2 therapy being the only variable significantly associated with a higher probability of achieving such sustained CR.

Background: For patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), after a single or multi-modality treatment, a specific follow-up strategy is needed, but there is no agreement between the main international societies on the proper methods and timing of follow-up. Methods: We performed a descriptive review to evaluate the available data and compare the main guidelines, giving some practical guidance to perform effective personalized follow-up strategies. Results and Conclusions: While clinical and endoscopic follow-up alone seems to be appropriate for early-stage HNSCCs, the addition of close radiologic follow-up in locally advanced HNSCCs is still debated, as there are no data indicating that an earlier detection of recurrence correlates with increased survival, while it is mandatory in the first three-six months to define the response to treatment. For patients who have undergone conservative surgery or have major pathological risk factors, the incidence of locoregional recurrence is higher, and locoregional radiologic follow-up (magnetic resonance imaging is preferred to computed tomography) should be considered. Positron emission tomography may be useful in cases of suspected locoregional persistence of disease, differentiating it from post-irradiation outcomes. Distant radiological follow-up can be considered in the detection of the second primary in cases of specific risk factors and for virus-related tumors. For the latter, the use of circulating DNA should always be considered. A brain scan is not recommended without specific symptoms. For all patients who do not fall into the above categories, clinical and endoscopic follow-up should be proposed, reserving radiological investigations only at the onset of symptoms.

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common malignancy among women. Among 5%–10% of diagnoses are correlated with hereditary cancer syndromes, while the remaining cases are sporadic and linked to multiple factors. When a pathogenetic variant in one of the genes commonly associated with BC is detected, the patient is referred to a tailored surveillance program; otherwise, the standard follow-up guidelines are applied. We present a unique case of BC diagnosed in two monozygotic twins at the same age apparently unrelated to a hereditary syndrome known to date. Notably, despite comparable clinical–pathological features, the two neoplasms behaved differently to neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy, showing different outcomes and toxicities. Very little is known about the predictive mechanisms of response and toxicity to immunotherapy and this clinical case might be a starting point for further investigations.

Background: The combination of cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) with endocrine therapy (ET) is the standard of care for patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (aBC). While the efficacy and safety profiles of CDK4/6i and ET have been extensively evaluated in phase II and III trials worldwide, it remains unclear whether the response to CDK4/6i and toxicity profile vary among Asian and non-Asian patients. Therefore, we aimed to assess the treatment efficacy of ET with and without CDK4/6i by comparing outcomes in Asian and non-Asian subgroups included in these clinical trials. In addition, we evaluated the toxicity profiles of the treatments by estimating the risk of treatment-related adverse events (AEs). Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis including the most recent randomized trial data systematically searched from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL (from inception to May 31st, 2024) or presented in abstracts or oral presentations at the ESMO, ASCO, and SABCS international congresses. We included studies comparing CDK4/6i (palbociclib, ribociclib, abemaciclib, dalpiciclib) + ET versus placebo + ET. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), hazard ratios (HR), and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were extracted for the two subgroups of interest. To evaluate the treatment-related toxicity profiles, we extracted the number of side effects to estimate the risk of treatment-emergent AEs. Results: Eleven studies (n = 5129) were included in this meta-analysis. The addition of CDK4/6i to ET consistently improved PFS in both Asian (HR = 0.52, 95 % CI 0.47–0.60; p

Background: Most premenopausal patients with early breast cancer (eBC) are diagnosed with hormone receptor-positive disease and therefore candidate for adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET). Patients and methods: The Gruppo Italiano Mammella (GIM) 23-POSTER (GIM23) is a multicenter, prospective, observational study conducted in 26 Italian institutions, aiming to evaluate ET choices for premenopausal patients affected by hormone receptor-positive eBC in a real-world setting. Here we report also the results in terms of type of ET prescribed according to the definition of high-risk patients by monarchE and NATALEE trials. Results: Between October 2019 and June 2022, 600 premenopausal patients were included, with a median age of 46 years. Almost half (271, 45.2 %) of the patients had stage I disease, while 254 (42.3 %) and 60 (10.0 %) patients had stage II and III, respectively. Overall, 149 (25.1 %) patients received tamoxifen alone, 83 (14.0 %) tamoxifen with ovarian function suppression (OFS), while 361 (60.9 %) received aromatase inhibitor (AI) with OFS. Patients treated with AI and OFS had higher number of metastatic axillary nodes, higher grade and more often received chemotherapy (all p

Abstract 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.

Introduction: Advancements in monoclonal antibodies, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) have notably enhanced outcomes for metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer patients. Despite the expanding treatment options and clinical complexities, determining the optimal sequence of HER2-targeted therapies remains partly uncertain, influenced by various factors. Methods: To refine HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer management, particularly regarding tucatinib's position, a Steering Committee of leading oncologists in breast cancer care devised a panel of statements via a Delphi approach, focusing on five key topics: general clinical management, therapeutic approaches for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer and brain metastases, treatment sequence, and tucatinib's safety and efficacy. Results: A total of 29 statements were deliberated, with strong consensus achieved for most. However, no consensus emerged regarding the management of brain progression alongside stable extracranial disease: 48 % advocated for switching to tucatinib, while 53 % favored a stereotactic brain radiotherapy (SBRT) approach if feasible. Conclusion: The unanimous consensus attained in this Delphi panel, particularly regarding tucatinib's efficacy and safety, underscores oncologists' recognition of its clinical significance based on existing trial data. These findings align closely with current literature, shedding light on areas necessitating further investigation, not thoroughly explored in prior studies. Moreover, the results underscore the scarcity of data on managing brain progression alongside stable extracranial disease, emphasizing the imperative for dedicated research to address these gaps and yield definitive insights.

Background: The last years have seen unprecedented improvement in breast cancer (BC) survival rates. However, this entirely apply to female BC patients, since gender minorities (male, transgender/gender-diverse) are neglected in BC phase III registration clinical trials. Methods: We conducted a scoping review of phase III clinical trials of agents with a current positioning within the therapeutic algorithms of BC. Results: We selected 51 phase III trials. Men enrollment was allowed in 35.3% of trials. In none of the trial inclusion/exclusion criteria referred to transgender/gender-diverse people. A numerical higher rate of enrolled men was observed in the contemporary as compared to historical group.We found a statistically significant association between the drug class and the possibility of including men: 100%, 80%, 50%, 33.3%, 25%, 10% and 9.1% of trials testing ICI/PARP-i, ADCs, PI3K/AKT/mTOR-i, anti-HER2 therapy, CDK4/6-i, ET alone, and CT alone.Overall, 77409 patients were enrolled, including 112 men (0.2%). None of the trial reported transgender/gender-diverse people proportion. Studies investigating PARP-i were significantly associated with the highest rate of enrolled men (1.42%), while the lowest rates were observed for trials of CT (0.13%), ET alone (0.10%), and CDK 4/6-I (0.08%), p

Abstract Adjuvant chemotherapy recommendations for ER+/HER2− early-stage breast cancers (eBC) involve integrating prognostic and predictive information which rely on physician judgment; this can lead to discordant recommendations. In this study we aim to evaluate whether Oncotype DX improves confidence and agreement among oncologists in adjuvant chemotherapy recommendations. We randomly select 30 patients with ER+/HER2− eBC and recurrence score (RS) available from an institutional database. We ask 16 breast oncologists with varying years of clinical practice in Italy and the US to provide recommendation for the addition of chemotherapy to endocrine therapy and their degree of confidence in the recommendation twice; first, based on clinicopathologic features only (pre-RS), and then with RS result (post-RS). Pre-RS, the average rate of chemotherapy recommendation is 50.8% and is higher among junior (62% vs 44%; p

Background: Molecular characterization is pivotal for managing non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), although this process is often time-consuming and patients’ conditions might worsen while molecular analyses are processed.Our primary aim was to evaluate the performance of “up-front” next-generation sequencing (NGS) through liquid biopsy (LB) of hospitalized patients with newly detected lung neoplasm in parallel with conventional diagnosis. The secondary aim included longitudinal monitoring through LB of patients with oncogenic alterations at baseline. Methods: We enrolled 47 consecutive patients immediately after hospitalization and radiological detection of symptomatic lung neoplasm. LB from peripheral blood was performed at baseline, in parallel with conventional biopsy (CB), when feasible. Additionally, LBs were repeated during treatment in patients with actionable gene alterations at baseline. Oncomine™ Lung cfTNA Research Assay panel was employed for processing plasma samples in NGS. Results: 47 hospitalized patients were enrolled. LB identified 28 patients with gene alterations, including mutations of EGFR (n = 7), KRAS (n = 12), ERBB2 (n = 1), TP53 (n = 2), BRAF (n = 1), one ALK rearrangement, and 4 patients with combined mutations involving EGFR, KRAS and PIK3CA.LB and CB were consistent, except for two patients. Three patients with positive LB for oncogenic drivers did not undergo CB due to contraindications.Median time to molecular results after LB was significantly lower compared to time to molecular report after CB (11 versus 22 days, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Despite limited numbers, our study supports the role of front-line LB for improving management of symptomatic patients with lung cancer, potentially leading to early targeted therapy initiation.

Background: Treatment for HER2-positive (+) metastatic breast cancer has improved in the last decade. We analyzed treatment changes over time and their impact on patients outcomes in a real-world dataset. Methods: Data from 637 HER2+ patients with metastatic breast cancer enrolled in the multicenter Italian GIM14/BIOMETA study were retrieved. Progression-free survival (PFS) over time was evaluated according to the type of anti-HER2 therapy, disease onset (de novo vs. relapsing), metastatic site, and year of treatment (2000–2013 vs. 2014–2020). Results: Median follow-up was 64.4 months. Overall, for first-line therapies, mPFS was 16.5 vs 19.5 months for patients treated in 2000–2013 vs 2014–2020 (HR: 0.78, 95% CI:0.65–0.94, P = 0.008). mPFS improved over time in all patients except for those with brain metastasis. Interestingly mPFS was 17.4 vs13.4 months (HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.13–1.98, P = 0.005) in 2000–2013 and 24.4 vs 20.9 months (HR 1.04; 95% CI 0.78–1.40 p = 0.77) in 2014–2020 in pts without vs with liver metastases. For second line therapies, the overall median PFS was 9.6 months (95% CI, 8.31–10.97) and did not change over time. Conclusion: Median first-line PFS improved since 2014, mainly due to the introduction of pertuzumab. The outcome of patients with liver metastases appears to have improved in recent years. Patients with brain metastases had the worst PFS, which also did not improve over time.

Background: Approximately 5–10% of unselected breast cancer (BC) patients retain a hereditary predisposition related to a germline mutation in BRCA1/2 genes. The poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP)-inhibitors olaparib and talazoparib have been granted marketing authorization by both FDA and EMA for adults with BRCA1/2 germline mutations and HER2-negative (HER2-) advanced BC based on the results from the phase III OlympiAd and EMBRACA trials. Methods: The panel of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) Clinical Practice Guidelines on Breast Cancer addressed two critical clinical questions, adopting the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and the Evidence to Decision framework (EtD), to develop recommendations on the use of PARP-inhibitors, with respect to single-agent chemotherapy, in patients with BRCA-related triple-negative (clinical question 1) and hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/HER2- (clinical question 2) advanced BC. Results: Two studies were eligible (OlympiAd and EMBRACA). For both clinical questions, the Panel judged the benefit/harm balance probably in favor of the intervention, given the favorable impact in terms of PFS, ORR, and QoL at an acceptable cost in terms of toxicity; the overall certainty of the evidence was low. The panel's final recommendations were conditional in favor of PARP-inhibitors over single-agent chemotherapy in both HR+/HER2-and triple-negative BC. Finally, the Panel identified and discussed areas of uncertainty calling for further exploration. Conclusions: The Panel of AIOM BC Clinical Practice Guideline provided clinical recommendations on the use of PARP-inhibitors, with respect to single-agent chemotherapy, in patients with BRCA-related HER2-advanced BC by adopting the GRADE methodology.

Background: Lung cancer patients diagnosed following emergency admission often present with advanced disease and poor performance status, leading to suboptimal treatment options and outcomes. This study aimed to investigate the clinical and molecular characteristics, treatment initiation, and survival outcomes of these patients. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 124 patients diagnosed with lung cancer following emergency admission at a single institution. Clinical characteristics, results of molecular analyses for therapeutic purpose, systemic treatment initiation, and survival outcomes were assessed. Correlations between patients’ characteristics and treatment initiation were analyzed. Results: Median age at admission was 73 years, and 79.0 % had at least one comorbidity. Most patients (87.1 %) were admitted due to cancer-related symptoms. Molecular analyses were performed in 89.5 % of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases. In this subgroup, two-thirds (66.2 %) received first-line therapy. Median overall survival (OS) was 3.9 months for the entire cohort, and 2.9 months for patients with metastatic lung cancer. Among patients with advanced NSCLC, OS was significantly longer for those with actionable oncogenic drivers and those who received first-line therapy. Improvement of performance status during hospitalization resulted in increased probability of receiving first-line systemic therapy. Discussion: Patients diagnosed with lung cancer following emergency admission demonstrated poor survival outcomes. Treatment initiation, particularly for patients with actionable oncogenic drivers, was associated with longer OS. These findings highlight the need for proactive medical approaches, including improving access to molecular diagnostics and targeted treatments, to optimize outcomes in this patient population.

Summary: Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) represent a novel and evolving class of antineoplastic agents, constituted by monoclonal antibody linked to biologically active drugs, delivering cytotoxic compounds at the tumor site, reducing the likelihood of systemic exposure and toxicity. They are generally well tolerated, nevertheless some predictable adverse reactions need careful monitoring and timely approach. These include neutropenia, nausea and vomiting, alopecia, diarrhea, left ventricular dysfunction, ILD/pneumonitis. The mechanisms leading to drug-associated toxicities are summarized, and prophylaxis protocols and appropriate management strategies are proposed, based on current literature. This review aims to collect the most updated evidence on toxicities potentially occurring during breast cancer treatment with approved or under clinical investigation (advanced stage) ADCs. A focus is dedicated to monitoring protocols and clinical management, aimed at preventing and/or promptly address relevant problems, in order to avoid premature discontinuation or improper dose reduction.

Abstract The prognostic performance of PREDICT in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer (EBC) treated in the modern era with effective chemotherapy and anti-HER2 targeted therapies is unclear. Therefore, we investigated its prognostic performance using data extracted from ALTTO, a phase III trial evaluating adjuvant lapatinib ± trastuzumab vs. trastuzumab alone in patients with HER2-positive EBC. Our analysis included 2794 patients. After a median follow-up of 6.0 years (IQR, 5.8–6.7), 182 deaths were observed. Overall, PREDICT underestimated 5-year OS by 6.7% (95% CI, 5.8–7.6): observed 5-year OS was 94.7% vs. predicted 88.0%. The underestimation was consistent across all subgroups, including those according to the type of anti HER2-therapy. The highest absolute differences were observed for patients with hormone receptor negative-disease, nodal involvement, and large tumor size (13.0%, 15.8%, and 15.3%, respectively). AUC under the ROC curve was 73.7% (95% CI 69.7–77.8) in the overall population, ranging between 61.7% and 77.7% across the analyzed subgroups. In conclusion, our analysis showed that PREDICT highly underestimated OS in HER2-positive EBC. Hence, it should be used with caution to give prognostic estimation to HER2-positive EBC patients treated in the modern era with effective chemotherapy and anti-HER2 targeted therapies.

Abstract The crosstalk between estrogen and HER2 receptors and cell-cycle regulation sustains resistance to endocrine therapy of HER2- and hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. We earlier reported that women with HER2 and ER-positive breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant dual HER2-block and palbociclib in the NA-PHER2 trial had Ki67 decrease and 27% pathological complete responses (pCR). We extended NA-PHER2 to Cohort B using dual HER2-block and palbociclib without fulvestrant and report here Ki67 drops at week-2 (mean change −25.7), at surgery (after 16 weeks, mean change −9.5), high objective response (88.5%) and pCR (19.2%). In Cohort C [Ki67 > 20% and HER2low (IHC 1+/2+ without gene amplification)], women also received fulvestrant, had dramatic Ki67 drop at week 2 (−29.5) persisting at surgery (−19.3), and objective responses in 78.3%. In view of the favorable tolerability and of the efficacy-predictive value of Ki67 drop at week-2, the chemotherapy-free approach of NA-PHER2 deserves further investigation in HER2 and ER-positive breast cancer. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02530424.

The use of an aromatase inhibitor (AI) in combination with ovarian function suppression (OFS) has become the mainstay of adjuvant endocrine therapy in high-risk premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Although five years of such therapy effectively reduces recurrence rates, a substantial risk of late recurrence remains in this setting. Multiple trials have shown that extending AI treatment beyond five years could offer further protection. However, as these studies comprised only postmenopausal patients, no direct evidence currently exists to inform about the potential benefits and/or side effects of extended AI + OFS therapies in premenopausal women. Given these grey areas, we conducted a Delphi survey to report on the opinion of experts in breast cancer treatment and summarize a consensus on the discussed topics. A total of 44 items were identified, all centred around two main themes: 1) defining reliable prognostic factors to pinpoint premenopausal patients eligible for endocrine therapy extension; 2) designing how such therapy should optimally be administered in terms of treatment combinations and duration based on patients’ menopausal status. Each item was separately discussed and anonymously voted by 12 experts representing oncological institutes spread across Italy. The consensus threshold was reached in 36 out of 44 items (82%). Herein, we discuss the levels of agreement/disagreement achieved by each item in relation to the current body of literature. In the absence of randomized trials to guide the tailoring of extended AI treatment in premenopausal women, conclusions from our study provide a framework to assist routine clinical practice.

The treatment of HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer with cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitors combined with endocrine therapy has recently emerged as the most relevant therapeutic strategy. However, in routine clinical practice, the best therapeutic approach in patients with comorbidities at early relapsing or ab initio metastatic disease, PI3KCA mutation, is still debated among oncologists. Given these areas of uncertainty, we conducted a Delphi survey to describe and confront the level of agreement or disagreement between clinicians working in referral vs local spoke oncological hospitals and summarize a consensus on these debated topics. In total, 56 items were drafted using the Nominal Group Technique and used for the Delphi Survey. A total of 46 clinicians participated in the survey. Overall, the consensus threshold among all participants was reached in 46/56 items (82%), and Delphi Survey results showed a high level of consensus. For the 10 items (18%) that did not reach the consensus threshold, possible explanations considering differences in clinical practice and recent findings from literature are provided in the Discussion. Outcomes from the present survey may help guide treatment in multiple comorbidities, early recurring and ab initio metastatic disease, and PI3KCA mutation, where evidence from randomized trials and level 1 evidence is currently missing.

Abstract The GIM2 phase III trial demonstrated the benefit of dose-dense chemotherapy in node-positive early breast cancer (eBC). To better define the dose-dense effect in the hormone receptor-positive subgroup, we evaluated its benefit through a composite measure of recurrence risk. We conducted an ancillary analysis of the GIM2 trial evaluating the absolute treatment effect through a composite measure of recurrence risk (CPRS) in patients with hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative eBC. CPRS was estimated through Cox proportional hazards models applied to the different clinicopathological features. The treatment effect was compared to the values of CPRS by using the Sub-population Treatment Effect Pattern Plot (STEPP) process. The Disease-Free Survival (DFS)-oriented STEPP analysis showed distinct patterns of relative treatment effect with respect to CPRS. Overall, 5-year DFS differed across CPRS quartiles ranging from 95.2 to 66.4%. Each CPRS quartile was characterized by a different patients’ composition, especially for age, lymph node involvement, tumor size, estrogen and progesterone receptor expression, and Ki-67. A number needed to treat of 154 and 6 was associated with the lowest and the highest CPRS quartile, respectively. Dose-dense adjuvant chemotherapy showed a consistent benefit in node-positive eBC patients with hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative disease, but its effect varied according to CPRS.

Abstract Young breast cancer (BC) patients carrying a germline BRCA pathogenic variant (mBRCA) have similar outcomes as non-carriers. However, the impact of the type of gene (BRCA1 vs. BRCA2) and hormone receptor status (positive [HR+] vs. negative [HR−]) on clinical behavior and outcomes of mBRCA BC remains largely unknown. This is an international, multicenter, hospital-based, retrospective cohort study that included mBRCA patients diagnosed, between January 2000 and December 2012, with stage I–III invasive early BC at age ≤40 years. From 30 centers worldwide, 1236 young mBRCA BC patients were included. Among 808 and 428 patients with mBRCA1 or mBRCA2, 191 (23.6%) and 356 (83.2%) had HR+tumors, respectively (P

Background: Evidence on how weight loss correlates to health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) among obese breast cancer (BC) patients is limited. We aimed to evaluate associations between weight changes and HRQOL. Methods: We included 993 obese women with stage I-II-III BC from CANTO, a multicenter, prospective cohort collecting longitudinal, objectively-assessed anthropometric measures and HRQOL data (NCT01993498). Associations between weight changes (±5% between diagnosis and post-treatment [shortly after completion of surgery, adjuvant chemo- or radiation-therapy]) and patient-reported HRQOL (EORTC QLQ-C30/B23) were comprehensively evaluated. Changes in HRQOL and odds of severely impaired HRQOL were assessed using multivariable generalized estimating equations and logistic regression, respectively. Results: 14.1% women gained weight, 67.3% remained stable and 18.6% lost weight. Significant decreases in functional status and exacerbation of symptoms were observed overall post-treatment. Compared to gaining weight or remaining stable, obese women who lost weight experienced less of a decline in HRQOL, reporting better physical function (mean change [95%CI] for gain, stability and loss: −12.9 [-16.5,-9.3], −6.9 [-8.2,-5.5] and −6.2 [-8.7,-3.7]; pinteraction[weight-change-by-time] = 0.006), less dyspnea (+18.9 [+12.3,+25.6], +9.2 [+6.5,+11.9] and +3.2 [-1.0,+7.3]; pinteraction = 0.0003), and fewer breast symptoms (+22.1 [+16.8,+27.3], +18.0 [+15.7,+20.3] and +13.4 [+9.0,+17.2]; pinteraction = 0.044). Weight loss was also significantly associated with reduced odds of severe pain compared with weight gain (OR [95%CI] = 0.51 [0.31–0.86], p = 0.011) or stability (OR [95%CI] = 0.62 [0.41–0.95], p = 0.029). No associations between weight loss and worsening of other physical or psychosocial parameters were found. Conclusions: This large contemporary study suggests that weight loss among obese BC patients during early survivorship was associated with better patient-reported outcomes, without evidence of worsened functionality or symptomatology in any domain of HRQOL.

Background: Cancer patients are at higher risk of COVID-19 complications and mortality than the rest of the population. Breast cancer patients seem to have better prognosis when infected by SARS-CoV-2 than other cancer patients. Methods: We report a subanalysis of the OnCovid study providing more detailed information in the breast cancer population. Results: We included 495 breast cancer patients with a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Mean age was 62.6 years; 31.5% presented more than one comorbidity. The most frequent breast cancer subtype was luminal-like ( n = 245, 49.5%) and 177 (35.8%) had metastatic disease. A total of 332 (67.1%) patients were receiving active treatment, with radical intent in 232 (47.6%) of them. Hospitalization rate was 58.2% and all-cause mortality rate was 20.3%. One hundred twenty-nine (26.1%) patients developed one COVID-19 complication, being acute respiratory failure the most common ( n = 74, 15.0%). In the multivariable analysis, age older than 70 years, presence of COVID-19 complications, and metastatic disease were factors correlated with worse outcomes, while ongoing anticancer therapy at time of COVID-19 diagnosis appeared to be a protective factor. No particular oncological treatment was related to higher risk of complications. In the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection, 73 (18.3%) patients had some kind of modification on their oncologic treatment. At the first oncological reassessment (median time: 46.9 days ± 36.7), 255 (51.6%) patients reported to be fully recovered from the infection. There were 39 patients (7.9%) with long-term SARS-CoV-2-related complications. Conclusion: In the context of COVID-19, our data confirm that breast cancer patients appear to have lower complications and mortality rate than expected in other cancer populations. Most breast cancer patients can be safely treated for their neoplasm during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Oncological treatment has no impact on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 complications, and, especially in the curative setting, the treatment should be modified as little as possible.

Background: Women with breast cancer (BC) represent a special population particularly exposed to cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. However, cardiologic assessment in BC is mostly limited to detection of left ventricular dysfunction cardiotoxicity (LVD-CTX) due to anticancer treatments. Our aim was to comprehensively investigate CV profile and events in a contemporary BC cohort.Methods and Results: Records of BC patients referred for a Cardio-Oncologic evaluation before starting anticancer treatments, between 2016 and 2019, were retrospectively reviewed (n = 508). Information regarding prevalence and control of CV risk factors, and novel CVD diagnoses were extracted. Occurrence of LVD-CTX, CV events other than LVD-CTX and mortality was assessed. Mean age of study population was 64 ± 13 years; 287 patients were scheduled to receive anthracycline and 165 anti-HER2 therapy. Overall, 53% of BC women had ≥2 CV risk factors, and 67% had at least one of arterial hypertension, dyslipidaemia or diabetes mellitus not adequately controlled. Eighteen (4%) patients were diagnosed a previously unknown CVD. Over a mean follow-up of 2.5 ± 1 years, 3% of BC patients developed LVD-CTX, 2% suffered from other CV events and 11% died. CV risk factors were not associated with LVD-CTX, except for family history of CAD. On the contrary, patients with other CV events exhibited a worse CV profile. Those who died more commonly experienced CV events other than LVD-CTX (p = 0.02).Conclusions: BC women show a suboptimal CV risk profile and are at risk of CV events not limited to LVD-CTX. A baseline Cardio-Oncologic evaluation was instrumental to implement CV prevention and to optimize CV therapies.

Objectives To measure and explain financial toxicity (FT) of cancer in Italy, where a public healthcare system exists and patients with cancer are not expected (or only marginally) to pay out-of-pocket for healthcare.Setting Ten clinical oncological centres, distributed across Italian macroregions (North, Centre, South and Islands), including hospitals, university hospitals and national research institutes.Participants From 8 October 2019 to 11 December 2019, 184 patients, aged 18 or more, who were receiving or had received within the previous 3 months active anticancer treatment were enrolled, 108 (59%) females and 76 (41%) males.Intervention A 30-item prefinal questionnaire, previously developed within the qualitative tasks of the project, was administered, either electronically (n=115) or by paper sheet (n=69).Primary and secondary outcome measures According to the protocol and the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research methodology, the final questionnaire was developed by mean of explanatory factor analysis and tested for reliability, internal consistency (Cronbach’s α test and item-total correlation) and stability of measurements over time (test–retest reliability by intraclass correlation coefficient and weighted Cohen’s kappa coefficient).Results After exploratory factor analysis, a score measuring FT (FT score) was identified, made by seven items dealing with outcomes of FT. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the FT score was 0.87 and the item-total correlation coefficients ranged from 0.53 to 0.74. Further, nine single items representing possible determinants of FT were also retained in the final instrument. Test–retest analysis revealed a good internal validity of the FT score and of the 16 items retained in the final questionnaire.Conclusions The Patient-Reported Outcome for Fighting FInancial Toxicity (PROFFIT) instrument consists of 16 items and is the first reported instrument to assess FT of cancer developed in a country with a fully public healthcare system.Trial registration number NCT03473379.

BackgroundOffering ovarian function and/or fertility preservation strategies in premenopausal women with newly diagnosed breast cancer candidates to undergo chemotherapy is standard of care. However, few data are available on uptake and main reasons for refusing these options.MethodsThe PREFER study (NCT02895165) is an observational, prospective study enrolling premenopausal women with early breast cancer, aged between 18 and 45 years, candidates to receive (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy. Primary objective is to collect information on acceptance rates and reasons for refusal of the proposed strategies for ovarian function and/or fertility preservation available in Italy.ResultsAt the study coordinating center, 223 patients were recruited between November 2012 and December 2020. Median age was 38 years (range 24 – 45 years) with 159 patients (71.3%) diagnosed at ≤40 years. Temporary ovarian suppression with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) was accepted by 58 out of 64 (90.6%) patients aged 41-45 years and by 151 out of 159 (95.0%) of those aged ≤40 years. Among patients aged ≤40 years, 57 (35.8%) accepted to access the fertility unit to receive a complete oncofertility counseling and 29 (18.2%) accepted to undergo a cryopreservation technique. Main reasons for refusal were fear of delaying the initiation of antineoplastic treatments and contraindications to the procedure or lack of interest in future childbearing. Patients with hormone-receptor positive breast cancer had a tendency for a higher acceptance rates of ovarian function and/or fertility preservation strategies than those with hormone-receptor negative disease.ConclusionsMore than 90% of premenopausal women with early breast cancer, and particularly those with hormone receptor-positive disease, were concerned about the potential risk of chemotherapy-induced premature ovarian insufficiency and/or infertility and accepted GnRHa administration. Less than 1 out of 5 women aged ≤40 years accepted to undergo cryopreservation strategies.

Background Many breast cancer (BC) survivors are employed at diagnosis and are expected to return to work after treatment. Among them, around 50% are overweight or obese. There are limited data about the impact of body weight on their ability to return to work.Methods We used data from CANcer TOxicity (NCT01993498), a prospective, multicentre cohort of women with stage I–III BC. Professionally active women who were ≥5 years younger than retirement age were identified. Multivariable logistic regression models examined associations of body mass index (BMI) at diagnosis and subsequent weight changes with non-return to work 2 years after diagnosis, adjusting for psychosocial, treatment and behavioural characteristics.Results Among 1869 women, 689 were overweight or obese. Overall, 398 patients (21.3%) had not returned to work 2 years after diagnosis. Non-return to work was more likely for overweight or obese than underweight or normal weight patients (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.32; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.75; p=0.045). Weight loss (≥5%) was observed in 15.7% overweight or obese and 8.7% underweight or normal weight patients and was associated with significant increases in physical activity only among overweight or obese patients (mean change, +4.7 metabolic-equivalent-of-task-hour/week; 95% CI +1.9 to +7.5). Overweight or obese patients who lost weight were more likely to return to work compared with those who did not lose weight (aOR of non-return-to-work, 0.48; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.97, p=0.0418), whereas weight loss was associated with increased odds of non-return to work among underweight or normal weight women (aOR 2.07; 95% CI 1.20 to 3.56, p=0.0086) (pinteractionBMI×weight changes=0.0002). The continuous trend of weight gain on non-return to work was significant for overweight or obese patients (aOR for one-percent-unit difference, 1.03; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.06, p=0.030).Conclusions Excess weight may be a barrier to return to work. Among overweight or obese BC survivors, weight loss was associated with higher rates of return to work, whereas further weight gain was associated with lower likelihood of return to work. Employment outcomes should be evaluated in randomised studies of weight management.

Background In HER2-positive breast cancer, time elapsed between completion of (neo)adjuvant trastuzumab and diagnosis of metastatic disease (‘trastuzumab-free interval’, TFI) is crucial to choose the optimal first-line treatment. Nevertheless, there is no clear evidence to support its possible prognostic role.Methods In the Adjuvant Lapatinib and/or Trastuzumab Treatment Optimisation (ALTTO) trial, patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer were randomised to 1 year of either trastuzumab alone, lapatinib alone, their sequence or their combination. This exploratory analysis included only patients in the trastuzumab alone or trastuzumab plus lapatinib arms who developed a distant disease-free survival (DDFS) event. Overall survival (OS) was defined as time between date of DDFS event and death; age at diagnosis, tumour size and hormone receptor status were the variables included in the multivariate models.Results Out of 8381 patients included in ALTTO, 404 patients in the trastuzumab alone and trastuzumab plus lapatinib arms developed a DDFS event, of which 201 occurred 12 months (group B) after completion of adjuvant trastuzumab. No significant difference in location of first DDFS event was observed (p=0.073); a numerically higher number of patients in group A than in group B developed brain metastasis (26% vs 15%). Choice of first-line therapy differed between the two groups (p=0.022): in group A, more patients received lapatinib (25% vs 11%) and less pertuzumab (8% vs 17%). Median OS was 29.3 and 18.4 months in groups B and A, respectively (adjusted HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.54–0.89; p=0.004). The longer OS for patients in group B was observed across the analysed subgroups without interaction according to hormone receptor status (p=0.814) nor type of administered adjuvant anti-HER2 treatment (p=0.233).Conclusions TFI has prognostic value in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer treated with adjuvant trastuzumab-based therapy. TFI is a valid tool to better individualise clinical recommendations and to design future first-line treatment trials for metastatic patients.

Background: The co-administration of letrozole during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) with gonadotropins is used to limit the potentially harmful effects of a supra-physiological rise in estrogen levels on hormone-sensitive cancers. However, the efficacy and safety of adding letrozole to COS remain debated.Methods: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies that compared the efficacy and safety of COS with co-administration of letrozole vs. COS without letrozole in all patient populations. A secondary analysis was done including only the studies in breast cancer patients. The primary efficacy endpoint was the number of retrieved mature Metaphase II (MII) oocytes. Secondary efficacy and safety endpoints were total number of oocytes, maturation rate, fertilization rate, number of cryopreserved embryos, peak estradiol levels, progesterone levels, and total gonadotropin dose. Data for each endpoint were reported and analyzed thorough mean ratio (MR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).Results: A total of 11 records were selected including 2,121 patients (990 patients underwent COS with letrozole and 1,131 COS without letrozole). The addition of letrozole to COS did not have any negative effect on the number of mature oocytes collected (MR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.87–1.16; P = 0.967) and the other efficacy endpoints. COS with letrozole was associated with significantly decreased peak estradiol levels (MR = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.24–0.32; P < 0.001). Similar results were observed in the secondary analysis including only breast cancer patients.Conclusions: These findings are reassuring on the efficacy and safety of COS with gonadotropins and letrozole and are particularly important for fertility preservation in women with hormone-sensitive cancers.

Abstract Background Several trials evaluated the role of ovarian function suppression for the adjuvant treatment of premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. Based on the results of the SOFT and TEXT trials, international guidelines recommend the addition of ovarian function suppression to standard adjuvant endocrine therapy for patients at higher risk of relapse. Methods The ERA project (Evaluation of Risk factors in the Adjuvant treatment of breast cancer in premenopausal patients) was devised with the objective of obtaining a consensus on the identification of risk factors and the use of ovarian function suppression in the adjuvant treatment of these women. To this aim, a panel of 31 Italian oncologists with expertise in breast cancer participated in a Delphi consensus study in June 2017. Results A total of 29 statements related to prognostic factors, therapeutic strategies and ovarian function suppression were defined and voted to gain final consensus. For each topic we report data supporting the acquired consensus and the relevant issues discussed. Conclusions The SOFT and TEXT trials have changed the standard adjuvant treatment of premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer, but the available treatment options require a careful risk assessment and toxicities evaluation to ensure the greatest clinical benefit for each patient.

Abstract Background Fertility and pregnancy issues are of key importance for young breast cancer patients. Despite several advances in the field, there are still multiple unmet needs and barriers in discussing and dealing with these concerns. To address the significant challenges related to fertility and pregnancy issues, the PREgnancy and FERtility (PREFER) study was developed as a national comprehensive program aiming to optimize care and improve knowledge around these topics. Methods The PREFER study is a prospective cohort study conducted across several Italian institution affiliated with the Gruppo Italiano Mammella (GIM) group evaluating patterns of care and clinical outcomes of young breast cancer patients dealing with fertility and pregnancy issues. It is composed of two distinctive studies: PREFER-FERTILITY and PREFER-PREGNANCY. The PREFER-FERTILITY study is enrolling premenopausal patients aged 18–45 years, diagnosed with non-metastatic breast cancer, who are candidates to (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy and not previously exposed to anticancer therapies. The primary objective is to obtain and centralize data about patients’ preferences and choices towards the available fertility preserving procedures. The success and safety of these strategies and the hormonal changes during chemotherapy and study follow-up are secondary objectives. The PREFER-PREGNANCY study is enrolling survivors achieving a pregnancy after prior history of breast cancer and patients diagnosed with pregnancy-associated breast cancer (PABC). The primary objectives are to obtain and centralize data about the management and clinical outcomes of these women. Patients’ survival outcomes, and the fetal, obstetrical and paediatric care of their children are secondary objectives. For both studies, the initial planned recruitment period is 5 years and patients will remain in active follow-up for up to 15 years. The PREFER-FERTILITY study was first activated in November 2012, and the PREFER-PREGNANCY study in May 2013. Discussion The PREFER study is expected to support and improve oncofertility counseling in Italy, to explore the real need of fertility preserving procedures, and to acquire prospectively more robust data on the efficacy and safety of the available strategies for fertility preservation, on the management of breast cancer survivors achieving a pregnancy and of women with PABC (including the possible short- and long-term complications in their children). Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02895165 (Retrospectively registered in August 2016).

The use of chemotherapy in premenopausal cancer patients may lead to chemotherapy-induced premature ovarian failure. Pharmacological temporary ovarian suppression obtained with the gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) administered concomitantly with chemotherapy has been investigated as a technique capable to reduce the gonadotoxicity, reducing the risk of developing premature menopause. In recent years, important evidence has become available on the efficacy and safety of this strategy that should now be considered a standard option for ovarian function preservation in premenopausal breast cancer patients. However, in women interested in fertility preservation, this is not an alternative to cryopreservation strategies, which remains the first option to be proposed. The purpose of this review is to summarize the mechanisms of GnRHa in the preservation of fertility in premenopausal cancer patient candidates to receive chemotherapy, highlighting the areas of doubt that require further investigation.

Cyclin-dependent kinases (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors, namely abemaciclib, palbociclib, and ribociclib, interfere with cell cycle progression, induce cell senescence and might promote cancer cell disruption by a cytotoxic T cells-mediated effect. Phase III randomized clinical trials have proven that CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) in combination with several endocrine agents improve treatment efficacy over endocrine agents alone for hormone receptor positive (HR+) HER2 negative (HER2–) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Based on such results, these combinations have been approved for clinical use. Preclinical studies in cell cultures and mouse models proved that CDK4/6i are active against a broad spectrum of solid tumors other than breast cancer, including liposarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, non-small cell lung cancer, glioblastoma multiforme, esophageal cancer, and melanoma. The role of CDK4/6i in monotherapy in several solid tumors is currently under evaluation in phase I, II, and III trials. Nowadays, abemaciclib is the only of the three inhibitors that has received approval as single agent therapy for pretreated HR+ HER2– MBC. Here we review biological, preclinical and clinical data on the role of CDK4/6 inhibitors as single agents in advanced solid tumors.

O tratamento de alimentos por um tipo de radiação ionizante para promover a segurança microbiológica e a conservação é uma das tecnologias do século XX mais extensivamente estudadas1. O tratamento pela radiação, como todo e qualquer processamento de alimentos, apresenta uma faixa limitada de aplicação. Inúmeros estudos atestam que esse tratamento de produtos alimentícios, nas condições determinadas para o objetivo proposto, pode ser uma ferramenta poderosa contra perdas de alimentos, bem como se constitui no melhor método disponível para controlar doenças transmitidas por alimentos. Também, as pesquisas revelam que certos produtos podem ser beneficiados por algumas ações específicas da interação deste método físico com os componentes dos alimentos. O desconhecimento do grande público em relação ao processo em si e as alterações que podem ocorrer nos produtos assim processados são hoje o fator limitante para sua aplicação em grande escala. As autoridades da área da saúde são os componentes da sociedade com maior credibilidade. Assim, devem ser desenvolvidas maiores oportunidades de intercâmbio de informações entre aquelas e o meio acadêmico que pode esclarecer as dúvidas e propiciar o esclarecimento das vantagens e limitações do processo quando aplicado em produtos alimentícios. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Treatment of food by specific ionizing radiation to improve microbiological safety and storability is one of the most extensively studied technologies of the 20th century. As any other food process, food irradiation presents a limited range of applicability. Innumerable studies have certified that this process, when applied according to the conditions where it should be employed, can be a powerful tool against food losses as well as the best method to control foodborne diseases. Researchers have revealed that some food products can be specially improved through specific actions of radiation acting on certain food components. Lack of information about the process itself and alterations in the irradiated products are the main difficulties that prevent larger-scale application today. Because health authorities are the most credible spokespersons in society on the topic, opportunities for information exchange between health officials and academicians must be developed to highlight the benefits and disadvantages of this method when applied to food.

O tratamento de alimentos por um tipo de radiação ionizante para promover a segurança microbiológica e a conservação é uma das tecnologias do século XX mais extensivamente estudadas1. O tratamento pela radiação, como todo e qualquer processamento de alimentos, apresenta uma faixa limitada de aplicação. Inúmeros estudos atestam que esse tratamento de produtos alimentícios, nas condições determinadas para o objetivo proposto, pode ser uma ferramenta poderosa contra perdas de alimentos, bem como se constitui no melhor método disponível para controlar doenças transmitidas por alimentos. Também, as pesquisas revelam que certos produtos podem ser beneficiados por algumas ações específicas da interação deste método físico com os componentes dos alimentos. O desconhecimento do grande público em relação ao processo em si e as alterações que podem ocorrer nos produtos assim processados são hoje o fator limitante para sua aplicação em grande escala. As autoridades da área da saúde são os componentes da sociedade com maior credibilidade. Assim, devem ser desenvolvidas maiores oportunidades de intercâmbio de informações entre aquelas e o meio acadêmico que pode esclarecer as dúvidas e propiciar o esclarecimento das vantagens e limitações do processo quando aplicado em produtos alimentícios.

O tratamento de alimentos por um tipo de radiação ionizante para promover a segurança microbiológica e a conservação é uma das tecnologias do século XX mais extensivamente estudadas1. O tratamento pela radiação, como todo e qualquer processamento de alimentos, apresenta uma faixa limitada de aplicação. Inúmeros estudos atestam que esse tratamento de produtos alimentícios, nas condições determinadas para o objetivo proposto, pode ser uma ferramenta poderosa contra perdas de alimentos, bem como se constitui no melhor método disponível para controlar doenças transmitidas por alimentos. Também, as pesquisas revelam que certos produtos podem ser beneficiados por algumas ações específicas da interação deste método físico com os componentes dos alimentos. O desconhecimento do grande público em relação ao processo em si e as alterações que podem ocorrer nos produtos assim processados são hoje o fator limitante para sua aplicação em grande escala. As autoridades da área da saúde são os componentes da sociedade com maior credibilidade. Assim, devem ser desenvolvidas maiores oportunidades de intercâmbio de informações entre aquelas e o meio acadêmico que pode esclarecer as dúvidas e propiciar o esclarecimento das vantagens e limitações do processo quando aplicado em produtos alimentícios.

O tratamento de alimentos por um tipo de radiação ionizante para promover a segurança microbiológica e a conservação é uma das tecnologias do século XX mais extensivamente estudadas1. O tratamento pela radiação, como todo e qualquer processamento de alimentos, apresenta uma faixa limitada de aplicação. Inúmeros estudos atestam que esse tratamento de produtos alimentícios, nas condições determinadas para o objetivo proposto, pode ser uma ferramenta poderosa contra perdas de alimentos, bem como se constitui no melhor método disponível para controlar doenças transmitidas por alimentos. Também, as pesquisas revelam que certos produtos podem ser beneficiados por algumas ações específicas da interação deste método físico com os componentes dos alimentos. O desconhecimento do grande público em relação ao processo em si e as alterações que podem ocorrer nos produtos assim processados são hoje o fator limitante para sua aplicação em grande escala. As autoridades da área da saúde são os componentes da sociedade com maior credibilidade. Assim, devem ser desenvolvidas maiores oportunidades de intercâmbio de informações entre aquelas e o meio acadêmico que pode esclarecer as dúvidas e propiciar o esclarecimento das vantagens e limitações do processo quando aplicado em produtos alimentícios.

O tratamento de alimentos por um tipo de radiação ionizante para promover a segurança microbiológica e a conservação é uma das tecnologias do século XX mais extensivamente estudadas1. O tratamento pela radiação, como todo e qualquer processamento de alimentos, apresenta uma faixa limitada de aplicação. Inúmeros estudos atestam que esse tratamento de produtos alimentícios, nas condições determinadas para o objetivo proposto, pode ser uma ferramenta poderosa contra perdas de alimentos, bem como se constitui no melhor método disponível para controlar doenças transmitidas por alimentos. Também, as pesquisas revelam que certos produtos podem ser beneficiados por algumas ações específicas da interação deste método físico com os componentes dos alimentos. O desconhecimento do grande público em relação ao processo em si e as alterações que podem ocorrer nos produtos assim processados são hoje o fator limitante para sua aplicação em grande escala. As autoridades da área da saúde são os componentes da sociedade com maior credibilidade. Assim, devem ser desenvolvidas maiores oportunidades de intercâmbio de informações entre aquelas e o meio acadêmico que pode esclarecer as dúvidas e propiciar o esclarecimento das vantagens e limitações do processo quando aplicado em produtos alimentícios.