Search

• There are differences among patients with thoracic tumors under and over 80 years. • In the older age group, are performed less molecular determinations. • There are no differences in biomarker alterations between age groups, except for EGFR. • Biomarker status should be tested in older patients to select the best-targeted therapy. Cancer is a disease of old age; however, most studies usually included minority of patients fit elderly. The purpose is to investigate the clinical characteristics and genetic information of patients with thoracic tumors who are 80 years old or older compared to those under 80 years old. The Thoracic Tumor Registry (TTR) is a Spanish observational, prospective cohort study that included patients diagnosed with thoracic tumors. Data were collected from medical records related to sociodemographic, epidemiological, clinical, molecular/genetic, and treatment outcome variables. The total number of patients, recruited from August 2016 to April 2023, was 26.193 (93,1 % were younger than 80 years and 6,9 % were 80 years or older). In the group of older patients: the male ratio increased (72,9 % vs. 80 %); the number of elderly people who had never smoked or were ex-smokers increased (9,9 % vs. 21,1 % and 44,8 % vs. 61,3 %, respectively) and the number of current smokers decreased (43,3 % vs. 17,5 %); had higher ECOG performance status at diagnosis (for ECOG ≥ 2, 15 % vs. 32,9 %), and there were more patients with previous cancer (17,3 % vs. 28 %). The proportion of men is higher than that of women (73 % vs. 27 % in <80 years and 80 % vs. 20 % in ≥80 years). For all biomarkers, the proportion of patients who had a molecular determination was lower in older patients. There were no differences in terms of alterations in the biomarkers tested; except for EGFR, for which the positivity rate was higher in patients aged 80 years and older (25 % vs. 15,3 %). The proportion of older patients with targeted mutations is higher. So, at least at diagnosis, it should be proceeded in a standard way. Then, when it comes to treatment, comorbidities and patient's baseline situation should be considered. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02941458. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Lung cancer in patients with a family history of cancer is more common in women. • Young lung cancer patients have two or more relatives with cancer. • Family history of cancer as a potential risk factor. • Family history of cancer should be considered in any lung cancer prevention strategy. Lung Cancer (LC) is a multifactorial disease for which the role of genetic susceptibility has become increasingly relevant. Our aim was to use artificial intelligence (AI) to analyze differences between patients with LC based on family history of cancer (FHC). From August 2016 to June 2020 clinical information was obtained from Thoracic Tumors Registry (TTR), a nationwide database sponsored by the Spanish Lung Cancer Group. In addition to descriptive statistical analysis, an AI-assisted analysis was performed. The German Technical Information Library supported the merging of data from the electronic medical records and database of the TTR. The results of the AI-assisted analysis were reported using Knowledge Graph, Unified Schema and descriptive and predictive analyses. Analyses were performed in two phases: first, conventional statistical analysis including 11,684 patients of those 5,806 had FHC. Median overall survival (OS) for the global population was 23 months (CI 95 %: 21.39–24.61) in patients with FHC versus 21 months (CI 95 %: 19.53–22.48) in patients without FHC (NFHC), p < 0.001. The second AI-assisted analysis included 5,788 patients of those 939 had FHC. 58.48 % of women with FHC had LC. 9.53 % of patients had an EGFR or HER2 mutation or ALK translocation and at least one relative with cancer. A family history of LC was associated with an increased risk of smoking-related LC. Non-smokers with a family history of LC were more likely to have an EGFR mutation in NSCLC. In Bayesian network analysis, 55 % of patients with a family history of LC and never-smokers had an EGFR mutation. In our population, the incidence of LC in patients with a FHC is higher in women and younger patients. FHC is a risk factor and predictor of LC development, especially in people ≤ 50 years. These results were confirmed by conventional statistics and AI-assisted analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• A phase II randomized study of gefitinib versus gefitinib plus olaparib in 182 EGFR-mutation positive NSCLC patients. • The study included patients from Spain and Mexico. • Median progression-free survival was 10.9 months in the gefitinib compared to 12.8 months in the gefitinib plus olaparib arm. Progression-free survival (PFS) and response rate to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) varies in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) driven by EGFR mutations, suggesting that other genetic alterations may influence oncogene addiction. Low BRCA1 mRNA levels correlate with longer PFS in erlotinib-treated EGFR -mutant NSCLC patients. Since the poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, olaparib, may attenuate and/or prevent BRCA1 expression, the addition of olaparib to gefitinib could improve outcome in EGFR -mutant advanced NSCLC. GOAL was a multicenter, randomized phase IB/II study performed in two countries, Spain and Mexico. Eligible patients were 18 years or older, treatment-naïve, pathologically confirmed stage IV NSCLC, with centrally confirmed EGFR mutations and measurable disease. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive gefitinib 250 mg daily or gefitinib 250 mg daily plus olaparib 200 mg three times daily in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was PFS. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), response rate, safety and tolerability. Between September 2013, and July 2016, 182 patients underwent randomization, 91 received gefitinib and 91 received gefitinib plus olaparib. There were no differences in gender, age, smoking status, performance status, presence of bone and brain metastases or type of EGFR mutation. Median PFS was 10.9 months (95 % CI 9.3–13.3) in the gefitinib arm and 12.8 months (95 % CI 9.1–14.7) in the gefitinib plus olaparib arm (HR 1.38, 95 % CI 1.00–1.92; p = 0.124). The most common adverse events were anemia, 78 % in gefitinib plus olaparib group, 38 % in gefitinib arm, diarrhea, 65 % and 60 %, and fatigue, 40 % and 32 %, respectively. The gefitinib plus olaparib combination did not provide significant benefit over gefitinib alone. The combination's safety profile showed an increase in hematological and gastrointestinal toxicity, compared to gefitinib alone, however, no relevant adverse events were noted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for the vast majority of all diagnosed lung cancers. According to their histology, most NSCLCs are considered non-squamous cell carcinoma (NSCC), and up to 85% of the latter may lack either one of the two main actionable oncogenic drivers (i.e., EGFR mutations and ALK rearrangements)., Objective: Our analysis aimed to describe the clinical and epidemiological characteristics of Spanish patients suffering from NSCC with no actionable oncogenic driver in daily clinical practice., Design: A retrospective, cross-sectional, descriptive analysis., Methods: We analyzed the records of all Spanish patients with advanced NSCC diagnosed between January 2011 and January 2020 and included in the Spanish Thoracic Tumor Registry database. We evaluated the presence of metastasis and molecular profiling at the time of diagnosis and treatments received. We also assessed overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) according to first-line treatment., Results: One thousand seven hundred ninety-seven Spanish patients with NSCC were included. They were mainly men (73.2%), smokers (current [44.4%] and former [44.4%]) and presented adenocarcinoma histology (97.6%). Most patients had at least one comorbidity (80.4%) and one metastatic site (96.8%), and a non-negligible number of those tested were PD-L1 positive (35.2%). Notably, the presence of liver metastasis indicated a shorter median OS and PFS than metastasis in other locations (p < 0.001). Chemotherapy was more often prescribed than immunotherapy as first-, second-, and third-line treatment in that period. In first-line, the OS rates were similar in patients receiving either regimen, but PFS rates significantly better in patients treated with immunotherapy (p = 0.026). Also, a high number of patients did not reach second- and third-line treatment, suggesting the failure of current early diagnostic measures and therapies., Conclusions: This analysis of the most lethal tumor in Spain could highlight the strengths and the weaknesses of its clinical management and set the ground for further advances and research., Competing Interests: Declarations Conflict of interest All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/and declare: EC has served as an advisor or consultant for AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, MSD, Novartis, Roche, and Takeda; he has served as a speaker for AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda; he has received grant support from MSD and has received honoraria from BMS, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda. DR-A has served as an advisor for MSD, Regeneron, BMS, GSK & Lilly has received honoraria for lectures from MSD, Roche, BMS, Novartis, Takeda, Lilly, and AstraZeneca; he has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from Roche, MSD, Novartis and Sanofi. RL has received consulting fees from Roche, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, and BMS; He has received payment or honoraria for lectures from Kyowa Kirin, Pierre-Fabre, Takeda, AstraZeneca, BMS, Novartis, Roche, and Pfizer; he has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from MSD. BM has served as an advisor for Roche, BMS, MSD, Boehringer Ingelheim, Takeda, and Abbvie; he has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from Roche, Pfizer, Merck Serono, Boehringer-Ingelheim, and AstraZeneca. GS has received honoraria from Sanofi and has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from Gilead and MSD. MAS has received honoraria from Takeda and Roche and has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from Roche and PharmaMar. PC has received honoraria from Roche, Janssen, Pfizer, Takeda, and BMS and has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from Roche, Janssen, Pfizer, Takeda, and BMS. RB has served as an advisor for AstraZeneca, Roche, Amgen, and MSD; he has received honoraria from BMS, Roche, AstraZeneca, Lilly, MSD, and Pfizer; he has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from AstraZeneca and Roche. JLGL has served as an advisor for MSD, Janssen-Cilag, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Amgen; he has received payment as an expert testimony from MSD, Janssen-Cilag, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Amgen; he has received honoraria from MSD, AstraZeneca, Roche, Pfizer, Janssen-Cilag, Novartis, Astellas, and BMS; he has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from MSD, Takeda, BMS, Roche, Pfizer, and Janssen-Cilag. JBB has received grants from Pfizer and Roche; he has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, MSD, BMS, Roche, and Sanofi; he has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from MSD, Takeda, and Roche. AP has served as an advisor for AstraZeneca; he has received payment as an expert testimony from AstraZeneca, Takeda, Roche, BMS, MSD, and Merck; he has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Takeda, Roche, BMS, MSD, and Merck; he has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from Takeda, AstraZeneca & Merck. MP has been awarded research grants from AstraZeneca, Roche, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, and Takeda; he has served as a consultant for AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, MSD, Roche, Takeda, and Thermo-Fisher. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest. Ethical approval and consent to participate Not required as this study only used anonymised and aggregated data. Consent for publication Not applicable. Informed consent The study was approved by Clinical Research Ethical Comitte from Puerta de Hierro Hospital, and patients alive in the moment their inclusion signed a informed consent., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Federación de Sociedades Españolas de Oncología (FESEO).)

Background: The survival of patients with lung cancer has substantially increased in the last decade by about 15%. This increase is, basically, due to targeted therapies available for advanced stages and the emergence of immunotherapy itself. This work aims to study the situation of biomarker testing in Spain., Patients and Methods: The Thoracic Tumours Registry (TTR) is an observational, prospective, registry-based study that included patients diagnosed with lung cancer and other thoracic tumours, from September 2016 to 2020. This TTR study was sponsored by the Spanish Lung Cancer Group (GECP) Foundation, an independent, scientific, multidisciplinary oncology society that coordinates more than 550 experts and 182 hospitals across the Spanish territory., Results: Nine thousand two hundred thirty-nine patients diagnosed with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) between 2106 and 2020 were analysed. 7,467 (80.8%) were non-squamous and 1,772 (19.2%) were squamous. Tumour marker testing was performed in 85.0% of patients with non-squamous tumours vs 56.3% in those with squamous tumours (p-value < 0.001). The global testing of EGFR, ALK, and ROS1 was 78.9, 64.7, 35.6% respectively, in non-squamous histology. PDL1 was determined globally in the same period (46.9%), although if we focus on the last 3 years it exceeds 85%. There has been a significant increase in the last few years of all determinations and there are even close to 10% of molecular determinations that do not yet have targeted drug approval but will have it in the near future. 4,115 cases had a positive result (44.5%) for either EGFR, ALK, KRAS, BRAF, ROS1, or high PDL1., Conclusions: Despite the lack of a national project and standard protocol in Spain that regulates the determination of biomarkers, the situation is similar to other European countries. Given the growing number of different determinations and their high positivity, national strategies are urgently needed to implement next-generation sequencing (NGS) in an integrated and cost-effective way in lung cancer., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

The new Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) coronavirus has generated a pandemic, in which there are population groups at higher risk and who are potentially fatal victims of the disease. Cancer patients have been considered a group with special susceptibility, particularly patients with lung tumour involvement and haematological neoplasms. The Spanish Lymphoma Oncology Group (GOTEL) carried out a multicenter study of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in patients with lymphoma. Results: A total of 150 patients were included between 22 May and 11 June 2020. The mean age was 65 years (range 17-89), 70 women (46.5%) and 80 men (53, 5%). At the time of diagnosis of lymphoma, 13 cases were stage I (9%), 27 (18%) stage II, 37 (24.5%) stage III, and 73 (48.5%) stage IV, while 6.6% had a primary extranodal origin. A total of 10 cases with positive serology for SARS-CoV-2 were identified, which is a prevalence of 6% in this population. None of the patients required intensive care unit management and all fully recovered from the infection. Conclusion: IgG antibody seroprevalence in lymphoma patients appears similar to that of the general population and does not show greater aggressiveness.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is associated with some B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B cell-NHLs). Patients with HCV infection frequently show co-infections with GB virus C (GBV-C, formerly known as hepatitis G virus), and some studies have suggested a higher incidence of GBV-C infection in patients with B cell-NHLs. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the association between HCV and/or GBV-C infection and B cell-NHLs in different geographic areas. One hundred thirty-seven lymphoma cases and 125 non-lymphoma matched controls were enrolled in an international case-control study conducted in Switzerland (Bellinzona), Spain (Barcelona) and England (Southampton) on samples collected from 2001 to 2002. In Bellinzona (41 cases and 81 controls), the overall prevalence of HCV was 3.3% (4.9% in NHLs), and the overall prevalence of GBV-C was 24% (22% in NHLs). In Barcelona (46 cases and 44 controls), the prevalence of HCV was 10% (8.7% in NHLs) and the prevalence of GBV-C 20% (13% in NHLs). There was no statistically significant difference in the frequency of both infections between patients with NHL and controls. In Southampton, 50 NHL cases were analysed, none of them was found to be HCV-positive; therefore, no control group was analysed and GBV-C analysis was not performed, too. Both in Bellinzona and in Barcelona, the seropositivity rate was significantly lower for HCV than for GBV-C, suggesting that their transmission can be independent. The incidence of HCV was significantly higher in Barcelona than that in Bellinzona. This study confirmed the existence of marked geographic differences in the prevalence of HCV in NHL but cannot provide any significant evidence for an association between HCV and/or GBV-C and B-cell NHLs., (Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)