Search

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome is responsible for approximately 10% of breast cancers (BCs). The HBOC gene panel includes both high-risk genes, i.e., a four times higher risk of BC ( BRCA1 , BRCA2 , PALB2 , CDH1 , PTEN , STK11 and TP53 ), and moderate-risk genes, i.e., a two to four times higher risk of BC ( BARD1 , CHEK2 , RAD51C , RAD51D and ATM ). Pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) in HBOC genes confer an absolute risk of BC that changes according to the gene considered. We illustrate and compare different BC risk estimation models, also describing their limitations. These models allow us to identify women eligible for genetic testing and possibly to offer surgical strategies for primary prevention, i.e., risk-reducing mastectomies and salpingo-oophorectomies.

Molecular tumor boards (MTBs) are multidisciplinary groups that combine molecular and clinical data from cancer patients in order to formulate treatment recommendations for precision medicine. To date, there is insufficient data to support the use of singleplex or next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies to select first-line therapy for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), but considering the high number of level II alterations, according to the ESMO scale for clinical actionability of molecular targets (ESCAT), it is suggested to include patients in molecular screening programs in order to be able to offer targeted therapies for specific genomic alterations. This article aims at reviewing the most recent literature related to the most used methodologies/approaches for molecular diagnostics and variants' classification, summarizing the internationally published molecular screening studies in support of MTB activity and, in the end, discussing MTBs' current position and role in Italy, the number of which is increasing, also thanks to the thrust of institutions.

HER2 is considered one of the most traditional prognostic and predictive biomarkers in breast cancer. Literature data confirmed that the addition of pertuzumab to a standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy backbone (either with or without anthracyclines), in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive early breast cancer (EBC), leads to a higher pathological complete response (pCR) rate, which is known to correlate with a better prognosis. In this retrospective analysis, 47 consecutive patients with HER2-positive EBC received sequential anthracyclines and taxanes plus trastuzumab (ATH) or pertuzumab, trastuzumab and docetaxel (THP). Despite the limited sample size, this monocentric experience highlights the efficacy (in terms of pCR) and safety of THP in the neoadjuvant setting of HER2-positive EBC as an anthracycline-free approach. Given the role of PIK3CA as a prognostic and therapeutic target in breast cancer, tumors were also analyzed to assess the PIK3CA mutational status. Thirty-eight out of forty-seven patients were evaluated, and PIK3CA variants were identified in 21% of tumor samples: overall, one mutation was detected in exon 4 (2.6%), two in exon 9 (5.3%) and four in exon 20 (10.5%). Of note, one sample showed concurrent mutations in exons 9 (codon 545) and 20 (codon 1047). Among patients reaching pCR (n = 13), 38.5% were PIK3CA mutants; on the other hand, among those lacking pCR (n = 25), just 12% showed PIK3CA variants. Regarding THP-treated mutant patients (n = 5), 80% reached pCR (three hormone-receptor-negative, one hormone-receptor-positive). Interestingly, the only patient not achieving pCR had a tumor with two co-occurring PIK3CA mutations. In conclusion, this study provides new evidence about the efficacy and good safety profile of THP, compared to the ATH regimen, as an anthracycline-free neoadjuvant treatment of HER2-positive EBC. Further studies on larger/multicentric cohorts are planned for more in-depth analysis to confirm our molecular and clinical results.

Background: Few data regarding post-induction management following first-line anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-based doublet regimens in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are available., Methods: This multicenter, retrospective study aimed at evaluating clinicians' attitude, and the safety and effectiveness of post-induction strategies in consecutive patients affected by left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated with doublet chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR as first-line regimen, who did not experience disease progression within 6 months from induction initiation, at 21 Italian and 1 Spanish Institutions. The measured clinical outcomes were: progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), adverse events, and objective response rate (ORR)., Results: At the data cutoff, among 686 consecutive patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated with doublet plus anti-EGFR as first-line regimen from March 2012 to October 2020, 355 eligible patients have been included in the present analysis. Among these, 118 (33.2%), 66 (18.6%), and 11 (3.1%) received a maintenance with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5FU/LV)+anti-EGFR, anti-EGFR, and 5FU/LV, respectively, while 160 (45.1%) patients continued induction treatment (non-maintenance) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, patient decision, or completion of planned treatment. The median period of follow-up for the overall population was 33.7 months (95%CI = 28.9-35.6). The median PFS values of the 5FU/LV+anti-EGFR, anti-EGFR, 5FU/LV, and non-maintenance cohorts were 16.0 (95%CI = 14.3-17.7, 86 events), 13.0 (95%CI = 11.4-14.5, 56 events), 14.0 (95%CI = 8.1-20.0, 8 events), and 10.1 months (95%CI = 9.0-11.2, 136 events), respectively ( p < 0.001). The median OS values were 39.6 (95%CI = 31.5-47.7, 43 events), 36.1 (95%CI = 31.6-40.7, 36 events), 39.5 (95%CI = 28.2-50.8, 4 events), and 25.1 months (95%CI = 22.6-27.6, 99 events), respectively ( p < 0.001). After adjusting for key covariates, a statistically significant improvement in PFS in favor of 5FU/LV+anti-EGFR (HR = 0.59, 95%CI = 0.44-0.77, p < 0.001) and anti-EGFR (HR = 0.71, 95%CI = 0.51-0.98, p = 0.039) compared to the non-maintenance cohort was found. Compared to the non-maintenance cohort, OS was improved by 5FU/LV+anti-EGFR (HR = 0.55, 95%CI = 0.38-0.81, p = 0.002) and, with marginal significance, by anti-EGFR (HR = 0.67, 95%CI = 0.51-0.98, p = 0.051). No difference was found in ORR. Any grade non-hematological and hematological events were generally higher in the non-maintenance compared to the maintenance cohorts., Conclusion: Among the treatment strategies following an anti-EGFR-based doublet first-line induction regimen in patients affected by left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated in a "real-life" setting, 5FU/LV+anti-EGFR resulted the most adopted, effective, and relatively safe regimen., Competing Interests: AlP reported receiving advisory board fees from GSK. AC reported receiving consulting/advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, MSD, Roche, and BMS and speakers’ fee from Novartis, Astellas, MSD, and AstraZeneca. AnP reported receiving fees from Eli-Lilly, MSD, and Servier. RG reported receiving fees from Amgen and Servier and advisory board fees from Amgen, Servier, Bayer, and Merck-Serono. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Parisi, Cortellini, Venditti, Filippi, Salvatore, Tortora, Ghidini, Nigro, Gelsomino, Zurlo, Fulgenzi, Lombardi, Roselló Keränen, Depetris, Giampieri, Morelli, Di Marino, Di Pietro, Zanaletti, Vitale, Garajova, Spinelli, Zoratto, Roberto, Petrillo, Aimar, Patruno, D’Orazio, Ficorella, Ferri and Porzio.)

Background: Concomitant medications are known to impact on clinical outcomes of patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We aimed weighing the role of different concomitant baseline medications to create a drug-based prognostic score., Methods: We evaluated concomitant baseline medications at immunotherapy initiation for their impact on objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in a single-institution cohort of patients with advanced cancer treated with ICIs (training cohort, N = 217), and a drug-based prognostic score with the drugs resulting significantly impacting the OS was computed. Secondly, we externally validated the score in a large multicenter external cohort (n = 1012)., Results: In the training cohort (n = 217), the median age was 69 years (range: 32-89), and the primary tumours were non-small-cell lung cancer (70%), melanoma (14.7%), renal cell carcinoma (9.2%) and others (6%). Among baseline medications, corticosteroids (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.60-3.30), systemic antibiotics (HR = 2.07; 95% CI: 1.31-3.25) and proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) (HR = 1.57; 95% CI: 1.13-2.18) were significantly associated with OS. The prognostic score was calculated using these three drug classes, defining good, intermediate and poor prognosis patients. Within the training cohort, OS (p < 0.0001), PFS (p < 0.0001) and ORR (p = 0.0297) were significantly distinguished by the score stratification. The prognostic value of the score was also demonstrated in terms of OS (p < 0.0001), PFS (p < 0.0001) and ORR (p = 0.0006) within the external cohort., Conclusion: Cumulative exposure to corticosteroids, antibiotics and PPIs (three likely microbiota-modulating drugs) leads to progressively worse outcomes after ICI therapy. We propose a simple score that can help stratifying patients in routine practice and clinical trials of ICIs., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement M.B. reports receiving research funding by Roche, Seqirus, Pfizer and Novartis and personal fees as a speaker/consultant from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Pfizer and BMS. M.T. reports receiving speaker fees and grant consultancies from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Eli-Lilly, BMS, Novartis, Roche, MSD, Boehringer Ingelheim, Otsuka, Takeda and Pierre Fabre. A.C. reports receiving speaker fees and grant consultancies from Roche, MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca, Novartis and Astellas. R.G. reports receiving speaker fees and grant consultancies from AstraZeneca and Roche. M.G.V. reports receiving speaker fees, grant consultancies and travel support from BMS, Ipsen, Novartis, Pfizer, Astellas, Jansen and Pierre-Fabre. A.R. reports receiving grant consultancies from AstraZeneca and MSD. F.S. reports receiving speaker fees and grant consultancies from Roche, Novartis, BMS, MSD, Pierre-Fabre, Sanofi, Merck and Sunpharma. D.J.P. reports receiving lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare and Bayer Healthcare; travel expenses from BMS and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, EISAI, Roche and AstraZeneca and research funding (to institution) from MSD and BMS. P.A.A. reports receiving speaker fees and grant consultancies from BMS, Roche-Genentech, MSD, Dohme, Array, Novartis, Merck-Serono, Pierre-Fabre, Incyte, New Link Genetics, Genmab, Medimmune, AstraZeneca, Syndax, SunPharma, Sanofi, Idera, Ultimovacs, Sandoz, Immunocore, 4SC, Alkermes, Italfarmaco, Nektar and Boehringer-Ingelheim and research funds from BMS, Roche-Genentech and Array. All other authors declared no competing interests., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Sarcopenia represents one of the hallmarks of all chronic diseases, including cancer, and was already investigated as a prognostic marker in the pre-immunotherapy era. Sarcopenia can be evaluated using cross-sectional image analysis of CT-scans, at the level of the third lumbar vertebra (L3), to estimate the skeletal muscle index (SMI), a surrogate of skeletal muscle mass, and to evaluate the skeletal muscle density (SMD). We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive advanced cancer patient treated with PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors. Baseline SMI and SMD were evaluated and optimal cut-offs for survival, according to sex and BMI (+/-25) were computed. The evaluated clinical outcomes were: objective response rate (ORR), immune-related adverse events (irAEs), progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). From April 2015 to April 2019, 100 consecutive advanced cancer patients were evaluated. 50 (50%) patients had a baseline low SMI, while 51 (51%) had a baseline low SMD according to the established cut offs. We found a significant association between SMI and ECOG-PS (p = 0.0324), while no correlations were found regarding SMD and baseline clinical factors. The median follow-up was 20.3 months. Patients with low SMI had a significantly shorter PFS (HR = 1.66 [95% CI: 1.05-2.61]; p = 0.0291) at univariate analysis, but not at the multivariate analysis. They also had a significantly shorter OS (HR = 2.19 [95% CI: 1.31-3.64]; p = 0.0026). The multivariate analysis confirmed baseline SMI as an independent predictor for OS (HR = 2.19 [1.31-3.67]; p = 0.0027). We did not find significant relationships between baseline SMD and clinical outcomes, nor between ORR, irAEs and baseline SMI (data not shown). Low SMI is associated with shortened survival in advanced cancer patients treated with PD1/PDL1 checkpoint inhibitors. However, the lack of an association between SMI and clinical response suggests that sarcopenia may be generally prognostic in this setting rather than specifically predictive of response to immunotherapy.