Search

Purpose: The response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) often differs between genders in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but metanalyses results are controversial, and no clear mechanisms are defined. We aim at clarifying the molecular circuitries explaining the differential gender-related response to anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 agents in NSCLC., Experimental Design: We prospectively analyzed a cohort of patients with NSCLC treated with ICI as a first-line approach, and we identified the molecular mechanisms determining the differential efficacy of ICI in 29 NSCLC cell lines of both genders, recapitulating patients' phenotype. We validated new immunotherapy strategies in mice bearing NSCLC patient-derived xenografts and human reconstituted immune system ("immune-PDXs")., Results: In patients, we found that estrogen receptor α (ERα) was a predictive factor of response to pembrolizumab, stronger than gender and PD-L1 levels, and was directly correlated with PD-L1 expression, particularly in female patients. ERα transcriptionally upregulated CD274/PD-L1 gene, more in females than in males. This axis was activated by 17-β-estradiol, autocrinely produced by intratumor aromatase, and by the EGFR-downstream effectors Akt and ERK1/2 that activated ERα. The efficacy of pembrolizumab in immune-PDXs was significantly improved by the aromatase inhibitor letrozole, which reduced PD-L1 and increased the percentage of antitumor CD8+T-lymphocytes, NK cells, and Vγ9Vδ2 T-lymphocytes, producing durable control and even tumor regression after continuous administration, with maximal benefit in 17-β-estradiol/ERα highfemale immune-xenografts., Conclusions: Our work unveils that 17-β-estradiol/ERα status predicts the response to pembrolizumab in patients with NSCLC. Second, we propose aromatase inhibitors as new gender-tailored immune-adjuvants in NSCLC. See related commentary by Valencia et al., p. 3832., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Introduction: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are usually considered the highest level of evidence for clinical practice. Patients assigned to control arm in RCTs should always receive the best available treatments to protect participants while also allowing for proper interpretation and applicability of study results. Here we analysed RCTs published in oncology between 2017 and 2021 to describe the frequency of suboptimal control arms., Methods: We identified phase III studies testing active treatments in patients with solid tumours among 11 major oncology journals. Each control arm was analysed, and the standard of care was determined according to international guidelines and scientific evidence at accrual beginning and until accrual completion. We identified studies with suboptimal control arm from the beginning (type 1) and studies with an initially optimal control arm which became outdated during the accrual period (type 2)., Results: This analysis included 387 studies. Forty-three (11.1%) control arms were judged as suboptimal: 24 (6.2%) type 1 and 19 (4.9%) type 2. These rates were higher in industry-sponsored compared to academic trials: 9.3% versus 1.9% for type 1 (p = 0.003); 7.9% versus 0.6% for type 2 (p = 0.001). Rates of suboptimal control arms were higher in studies with positive results: 8.1% versus 4.0% for type 1 (p = 0.09); 7.6% versus 1.7% for type 2 (p = 0.007)., Conclusions: Many trials have suboptimal control arms, even in journals with high-impact factors, leading to suboptimal treatment of control patients and biased evaluation of trial results., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper, RDL reports honoraria from Astellas Pharma and Janssen. LM reports honoraria from Gilead and Merck; research grant from AstraZeneca; travel expenses from Janssen. CP reports support for attending meetings and/or travel from Eli Lilly and Takeda; institutional research grant from IQVIA. MLR reports honoraria from Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca and Janssen. AF reports honoraria from Roche, Pfizer, Novartis, Dompè , Astra Zeneca, Seagen, Gilead, Exact Science, Eli Lilly; support for attending meetings and/or travel from Roche, Pfizer, Novartis, Dompè , Astra Zeneca, Seagen, Gilead, Exact Science, Eli Lilly; participation on advisory boards for Roche, Pfizer, Novartis, Astra Zeneca, Seagen, Gilead, Eli Lilly. FP reports honoraria from Bayer, Pierre Fabre, AstraZeneca, Incyte, Ipsen, Clovis, Astellas, Sanofi, Roche, Pfizer; institutional funding for work in clinical trials/contracted research from Roche, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Incyte, Tesaro/GlaxoSmithKline and Merck. MDM reports honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda for consultancy or participation to advisory boards institutional research funding from Tesaro/GlaxoSmithKline, institutional funding for work in clinical trials/contracted research from Beigene, Exelixis, MSD, Pfizer and Roche. Other authors declare no relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Our study aims to identify baseline prognostic factors in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients treated with radium-223., Methods: Data about demographics, ECOG performance status, lymph node (LN) involvement, local treatment for prostate cancer, previous systemic treatments, cells blood count, PSA, ALP, albumin, LDH, bone protecting agents use (BPA), analgesic use and survival were collected. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed., Results: Seventy-five men received radium-223 between September 2013 and December 2019. Median age was 73 years. Thirty-four (45.3%) had ECOG PS 0, 41 (54.7%) PS 1-2. In univariable analysis, LN involvement (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.01-2.80, P=0.047), absence of local treatment on primary tumor (HR 1.93, 95% CI 1.13-3.29, P=0.016), baseline strong opioidsuse (HR 1.82, 95% CI 1.08-3.06, P=0.024), high platelets to lymphocyte ratio (PLR) (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.06-3.45, P=0.03), high baseline ALP (HR 1.81, 95% CI 1.10-2.99, P=0.019) and high baseline LDH (HR 3.86,95% CI 2.01-7.41, P<0.001) were significantly associated with worst OS. At multivariable analysis, LN involvement, strong opioids use, baseline ALP, LDH and PLR levels were significantly associated with outcome., Conclusions: In mCRPC patients treated with Radium-223, baseline ALP, LDH, strong opioid use, PLR, LN involvement and treatment on primary site are associated with different OS.

Opinion Statement: KRASp.G12C mutation occurs in 12% of newly diagnosed advanced NSCLC and has recently emerged as a positive predictive biomarker for the selection of advanced NSCLC patients who may respond to novel KRASp.G12C inhibitors. The recent discovery of a new binding pocket under the effector region of KRAS G12C oncoprotein has made direct pharmacological inhibition of the KRASp.G12 mutation possible, leading to the clinical development of a new series of direct selective inhibitors, with a potential major impact on patients' survival and quality of life. Promising efficacy and tolerability data emerging from the early phase CodeBreak trial have already supported the regulatory approval of sotorasib as first in class targeted treatment for the second-line treatment of KRASp.G12C-positive NSCLC population, following immunotherapy-based first-line therapies, while the randomized phase III CodeBreak 200 clinical study has recently confirmed a significant superiority of sotorasib over docetaxel in terms of progression-free survival and quality of life. However, KRAS mutant NSCLC is a high heterogeneous disease characterized by a high rate of co-mutations, most frequently involving P53, STK11, and KEAP1 genes, which significantly modulate the composition of the tumor microenvironment and consequently affect clinical responses to both immunotherapy and targeted inhibitors now available in clinical practice. Both pre-clinical and clinical translational series have recently revealed a wide spectrum of resistance mechanisms occurring under selective KRASG12C inhibitors, including both on-target and off-target molecular alterations as well as morphological switching, negatively affecting the antitumor activity of these drugs when used as single agent therapies. The understanding of such biological background along with the emergence of pre-clinical data provided a strong rational to investigate different combination strategies, including the inhibition of SHP2, SOS1, and KRAS G12C downstream effectors, as well as the addition of immunotherapy and/or chemotherapy to targeted therapy. The preliminary results of these trials have recently suggested a promising activity of SHP2 inhibitors in the front-line setting, while toxicity issues limited the concurrent administration of immune-checkpoint inhibitors and sotorasib. The identification of predictive genomic/immunological biomarkers will be crucial to understand how to optimally sequencing/combining different drugs and ultimately personalize treatment strategies under clinical investigation, to definitively increase the survival outcomes of KRASp.G12C mutant advanced NSCLC patients., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Lung cancer (LC) tissue for immunological characterization is often scarce. We explored and compared T cell characteristics between broncho-alveolar lavage from tumor affected (t-BAL) and contralateral lung (cl-BAL), with matched peripheral blood (PB)., Methods: BAL and PB were collected during bronchoscopy for diagnostic and/or therapeutic purposes in patients with monolateral primary lesion., Results: Of 33 patients undergoing BAL and PB sampling, 21 had histologically-confirmed LC. Most cases were locally-advanced or metastatic non-small cell LC. T cell characteristics were not significantly different in t-BAL vs. cl-BAL. Compared to PB, CD8 T cells in BAL presented features of immune activation and exhaustion (high PD-1, low IFN-g production). Accordingly, regulatory CD4 T cells were also higher in BAL vs. PB. When dichotomizing T cell density in t-BAL in high and low, we found that PD-L1 expression in LC was associated with T cell density in t-BAL. T-BAL with high T cell density had higher %IFN-g+CD8 T cells and lower %T-regs., Conclusion: In BAL from advanced LC patients, T cells present features of exhaustion. T cells in t-BAL could be the best surrogate of tumor-infiltrating T cell, and future studies should evaluate T cell phenotype and density as potential biomarkers for cancer immunotherapy outcome.

KRAS mutations occur in approximately 30% of lung adenocarcinomas, mainly in codon 12 (83% of cases), p.G12C being the prevalent one (40%), followed by p.G12V and p.G12D (22 and 16%, respectively). Treatment options for advanced KRAS mutant non-small-cell lung cancer ( KRAS -MT NSCLC) are limited to chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs). However, clinical trials exploring specific targeted agents are expected to change the treatment landscape of this disease. Here, we describe the design and scientific rationale of the randomized, phase II, open label, RAMP-202 study, which will evaluate the efficacy and safety of VS-6766 versus VS-6766 in combination with defactinib in advanced KRAS -MT NSCLC patients after failure of prior platinum-based chemotherapy and CPI.

Introduction: Advanced stage malignant mesothelioma (asMM) patients have poor prognosis. Several trials investigated the role of programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) and its ligand 1 (PD-L1) immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in pre-treated asMM., Methods: A systematic review of the literature of clinical trials testing single-agent anti PD-1/PD-L1 ICIs in pre-treated asMM was performed. Objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) data were extracted. The predictive role of PD-L1 was assessed., Results: We selected 13 studies including 888 patients. ORR and DCR were 18.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 13.9-22.8%) and 55.4% (95% CI: 48.1-62.5%), respectively. Median PFS and OS ranged from 2.1 to 5.9 and from 6.7 to 20.9 months, respectively. ORR according to PD-L1 was 27.0% (95% CI: 18.7-36.2%)., Conclusions: Anti-PD-(L)1 ICIs might be considered a treatment option for chemotherapy-resistant asMM, even if reliable predictive factors are still lacking., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Lung cancer patients have been associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 infection, pulmonary complications, and worse survival outcomes compared to the general population. The world's leading professional organizations provided new recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of lung cancer patients during the pandemic as a guide for prioritizing cancer care issues. Telemedicine was preferred for non-urgent consultations, and screening programs were temporarily suspended, leading to possible diagnostic delays along with an estimated increase in cause-specific mortality. A vaccine campaign has recently emerged as the main weapon to fight the COVID-19 pandemic, inverting this negative trend. This work aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the epidemiology and immune-pathophysiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection in cancer patients, highlighting the most relevant changes in the clinical management of lung cancer patients during the pandemic.

Testicular metastases from renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are extremely rare. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) are the cornerstone of systemic therapy for metastatic RCC. We report a case of testicular metastasis in a 72-year-old patient with RCC that developed 17 years after nephrectomy and response to TKI treatment, a retrospective literature search on testicular metastases from RCC, and the indirect evidence described in the literature on the efficacy of chemotherapy and target therapy on testicular lesions.

Background: Platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) are markers of systemic inflammation associated with poor outcome in several solid tumors. We retrospectively investigated the prognostic role of PLR and, secondly, NLR in mCRPC patients treated with abiraterone acetate (AA) or Enzalutamide (E), both in pre- and postdocetaxel setting., Methods: Two hundred twenty-five mCRPC patients treated with AA or E with basal blood count were divided in three groups according to PLR (PLR1<128; PLR2 128-190; PLR>190) and in two groups according to NLR (<3 vs. ≥3). Outcome measures were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall-survival (OS). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed., Results: One hundred ten patients were in PLR1, 58 in PLR2 and 57 in PLR3. Median OS was 22.0, 20.6 and 21.2 months in PLR1, PLR2 and PLR3 (PLR2 vs. PLR1: HR 0.97, 95%CI 0.62-1.52, P=0.90; PLR3 vs. PLR1: HR 1.37, 95%CI 0.90-2.08, P=0.14). Median PFS was 9.2, 12.7 and 8.5 months in PLR1, PLR2 and PLR3 (PLR2 vs. PLR1: HR 0.87, 95%CI 0.59-1.27, P=0.47; PLR3 vs. PLR1: HR 1.15, 95%CI 0.80-1.66, P=0.45). 142 patients were in NLR<3 and 83 in NLR≥3. Median OS was 26.5 months in NLR<3 and 17.0 months in NLR≥3 (HR 1.75, 95%CI 1.22-2.51, P=0.02). Median PFS was 10.1 months in NLR<3 and 7.6 months in NLR≥3 (HR 1.37, 95%CI 1.00-1.88, P=0.05)., Conclusions: In this retrospective analysis of mCRPC patients treated with AA or E we did not identify a prognostic role of baseline PLR, while we found a significant prognostic role of baseline NLR.

Background: Our retrospective study aims to evaluate the prognostic role of duration of response to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients treated with enzalutamide (E) or abiraterone acetate (AA)., Materials and Methods: Data about ADT start and duration were available in 255 (82%) of 311 patients treated with AA or E. Patients were divided in three groups according to ADT response (group 1 [G1]: <12 months; group 2 [G2]: 12-36 months; group 3 [G3]: >36 months). Outcome measures were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)., Results: Patients with longer ADT response had better OS (median 17.3 months G1, 19.9 months G2, 31.6 months G3; HR G3 vs G1 0.41, 95% CI 0.25-0.64; p = 0.001) and better PFS (median 5.9 months G1, 8.8 months G2, 11.7 months G3; HR G3 vs G1 0.41, 95% CI 0.41-0.27; p < 0001). In docetaxel-naive patients, median OS was 18.8 in G1, 35.2 in G2, and not reached in G3 (HR G3 vs G1 0.33, 95% CI 0.14-0.78; p = 0.038), median PFS was 7 months G1, 9.3 months G2, and 20 months G3 (HR G3 vs G1 0.31, 95% CI 0.15-0.62; p = 0.003). In postdocetaxel patients, median OS was 13.1 months in G1, 17.2 months in G2, and 21.4 months in G3 (HR G3 vs G1 0.52, 95% CI 0.29-0.94; p = 0.082), while median PFS was 5.2 months in G1, 6.8 months in G2, and 8.3 months in G3 (HR G3 vs G1 0.54, 95% CI 0.32-0.91; p = 0.067)., Conclusions: Duration of ADT response is an independent prognostic factor of outcome with AA or E., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited part of Springer Nature.)

Obesity represents a well-known risk factor for renal cell carcinoma development. Several studies evaluated the relationship between obesity and outcome in patients with non-metastatic and metastatic renal cell carcinoma using different parameters such as BMI, visceral fat area and s.c. fat area. These studies suggest that obesity is associated with a better prognosis in renal cell carcinoma patients. This phenomenon is called obesity paradox and it was found in other diseases in which obesity represents an established risk factor such as heart failure, diabetes, atrial fibrillation, hypertension and coronary heart disease. The purpose of this review is to analyze the mechanisms by which obesity increases the risk of renal cell carcinoma development, to describe the evidence available to date about the link obesity-outcome and to evaluate the mechanisms to explain this apparently paradoxical relationship.

Background and Aim: Trial designs using multiple primary endpoints (MPEs) are increasing in phase III cancer trials. Our objectives were to describe the incidence of MPEs in recently published phase III trials testing systemic treatments in patients with advanced cancer; the main characteristics of trials adopting MPEs; the presence of mature results for all endpoints in the primary publication; consistency between results of each endpoint and authors' conclusions., Methods: Articles of randomised phase III trials conducted in patients with advanced cancer, published between 2017 and 2020, were retrieved from PubMed. The main outcome was the proportion of trials with MPEs. In principle, according to regulatory agencies, we considered two distinct cases: (i) MPEs correspond to 'multiple chances' for the success of experimental treatment, needing adjustment for multiplicity, and (ii) a positive result depends on the success in all MPEs ('co-primary' endpoints)., Results: Out of 235 eligible trials, 27 trials (12%) adopted MPE, mostly overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The proportion of trials with MPEs increased over time, from 6% in 2017 to 20% in 2020 (p = 0.025). MPEs were adopted in 16% of for-profit trials versus 4% of non-profit trials (p = 0.006). The proportion of trials adopting MPEs was particularly high with immunotherapy (53%, p < 0.00001). Out of 27 trials with MPEs, 10 (37%) adopted an explicit definition of 'co-primary' endpoints, but only 1/10 declared the positivity of both endpoints critical for interpretation. Most trials (23, 85%) planned correction for multiplicity. Of 21 publications with positive conclusions, only 12 had a statistically significant positive result in both primary endpoints. In four cases (15%), positive conclusions were based on PFS results alone., Conclusions: Adoption of MPEs in randomised trials in oncology is quite common. Only a minority of trials respect recommendations by regulatory agencies about the adoption of MPEs, definition of 'co-primary' endpoints and correction for multiplicity., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships that may be considered as potential competing interests: Maria Lucia Reale had a role as a consultant for Eli-Lilly, outside the submitted work. Francesco Perrone reports grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Bayer, personal fees from Sandoz, grants and personal fees from Incyte, personal fees from Celgene, grants and personal fees from Astra Zeneca, personal fees from Pierre Fabre, personal fees from Janssen Cilag, grants from Roche, grants from Pfizer, outside the submitted work.Massimo Di Maio received honoraria and had roles as consultant or advisor for AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, Roche, Takeda, Eisai, Janssen, Astellas; received institutional research grant by Tesaro – GlaxoSmithKline, outside the submitted work. All remaining authors declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

This study investigated the clinical management of non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients during the first wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in Italy. A 29-questions survey was sent to 95 Italian thoracic oncologists, with 77 % of them declaring significant changes in the outpatients management and treatment. The results of this survey pointed out a significant delay of lung cancer diagnosis along with a relevant reduction of patients' accrual within clinical trials. Telemedicine emerged as a valid support for patient-healthcare interactions. Therapeutic indications followed the guidelines for adjuvant chemotherapy and concurrent chemo-radiation. Clinical indications to first-line therapies were largely confirmed, while major changes regarded the selection of second line treatment options as well as the management of elderly population. This work may represent a valid source of information to improve the clinical management of NSCLC patients during second wave of COVID-19 pandemic., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aim: Since SARS-CoV-2 infection rapidly spread around the world, Italy has quickly become one of the most affected countries. Healthcare systems introduced strict infection control measures to ensure optimal care, especially in frail groups such as cancer patients (pts). This study investigated the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 pre-procedure screening and whether COVID-19 influenced timely diagnosis and therapy., Methods: Data of oncological procedures of pts with confirmed or suspected cancer diagnosis, treated at Oncology Department or coming from Emergency Department of San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital between June 2020 and March 2021 were retrospectively collected. A nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) was performed in outpatients 24/48 h before procedures. Inpatients were tested by NPS before and after hospitalization., Results: Two hundred and twenty-one pts were included in this analysis. Median age was 73 years, males were 58%. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status was 0 or 1 in 88% of pts. The most frequent cancer type was lung cancer (57%). Stages IV were 77%. Two hundred and forty-three scheduled procedures were performed with diagnostic ( n : 142; 58%), therapeutic ( n : 55; 23%), and palliative ( n : 46; 19%) intent. One hundred and four and 139 procedures were performed in out- and in-pts, respectively. Of the 234 NPS performed, 10 (4%) were positive. Two pts were infected during hospitalization, 8 in community. Most of them were asymptomatic, while only 2 had mild symptoms. Eight procedures (3%) were postponed, 1 cancelled, while 2 were performed in positive pts. Median time to resolution of the infection was 17 days (11-36). Median delay in the procedures was 25 days (14-55). Five pts started systemic treatment, after a median time of 37.5 days (13-57)., Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 infection led to the postponement of a small, but not negligible percentage of oncological procedures. However, the low infection rate observed suggests that structured screening for COVID-19 is critical for the best management of scheduled procedures during pandemic., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s) 2021.)

In recent years, many therapeutic advances have been made in the management of castration-resistant prostate cancer, with the development and approval of many new drugs. The androgen receptor (AR) is the main driver in prostate cancer growth and progression and the most effective therapeutic agents are still directed against this pathway. Among these, new generation hormonal agents (NHA) including enzalutamide, abiraterone acetate, apalutamide, and darolutamide have shown to improve overall survival and quality of life of prostate cancer patients. Unfortunately, despite the demonstrated benefit, not all patients respond to treatment and almost all are destined to develop a resistant phenotype. Although the resistance mechanisms are not fully understood, the most studied ones include the activation of both dependent and independent AR signalling pathways. Recent findings about multiple growth-promoting and survival pathways in advanced prostate cancer suggest the presence of alternative mechanisms involved in disease progression, and an interplay between these pathways and AR signalling. In this review we discuss the possible mechanisms of primary and acquired resistance to NHA with a focus on AR independent pathways., Competing Interests: All authors declared that there are no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s) 2020.)

Background: The world, and Italy on the front lines, has experienced a major medical emergency due to the novel coronavirus outbreak. Cancer patients are one of the potentially most vulnerable cohorts of people, but data about their management are still few. Patients and Methods: In this monocentric retrospective study we included all SARS-CoV-2 oncological patients accepted, between March 27th and April 19th 2020, at the Onco-COVID Unit at San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, one of the few Italian oncological-COVID wards. Data were obtained from medical records. Results: Eighteen cancer patients with COVID-19 were included. The mean (±SD) age of patients was 67 ± 14 years, 89% were men. Seven (39%) developed infection in communities and 11 (61%) during hospitalization. Lung cancer was the most frequent type of cancer (10, 56%). Seven patients (39%) were symptomatic for COVID-19 at the time of diagnosis and symptoms began 2 (±2) days before. The most common were shortness of breath and diarrhea. Fever was present in 5 patients (28%). Among the 11 asymptomatic patients, 8 (73%) became symptomatic during the hospitalization (mean time of symptoms onset 4 days ±4). Six patients (33%) were on active anti-tumor treatment: 2 (33%) received anti-tumor therapy within 2 weeks before the infection diagnosis and 2 (33%) continued oncological treatment after SARS-CoV-2 positivity. Eight (44%) patients died within a mean of 12 days (±8) from the infection diagnosis. Conclusions: Our series confirms the high mortality among cancer patients with COVID-19. The presence of asymptomatic cases evidences that typical symptoms and fever are not the only parameters to suspect the infection. The Onco-Covid unit suggests the importance of a tailored and holistic approach, even in this difficult situation., (Copyright © 2020 Reale, Bironzo, Bertaglia, Palesandro, Leone, Tabbò, Bungaro, Audisio, Mariniello, Rapetti, Di Stefano, Artusio, Capelletto, Sperone, Boccuzzi, Calandri, Perboni, Malapelle, Passiglia and Novello.)