Search

Luigino Dal Maso,1 Armando Santoro,2,3 Elisabetta Iannelli,4,5 Paolo De Paoli,6 Carla Minoia,7 Monica Pinto,8 Alexia Francesca Bertuzzi,3 Diego Serraino,1 Roberta De Angelis,9 Annalisa Trama,10 Riccardo Haupt,11 Gabriella Pravettoni,12,13 Maria Perrone,14 Francesco De Lorenzo,4,5 Paolo Tralongo15 On behalf of the Alliance Against Cancer (ACC) Survivorship Care and Nutritional Support Working Group1Cancer Epidemiology Unit, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano (CRO) IRCCS, Aviano, Italy; 2Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy; 3IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Humanitas Cancer Center, Milan, Italy; 4Italian Federation of Cancer Patients Organisations (FAVO), Rome, Italy; 5Italian Association of Cancer Patients (Aimac), Rome, Italy; 6Alleanza Contro il Cancro, Rome, Italy; 7SC Haematology, IRCCS Istituto Tumori “Giovanni Paolo II”, Bari, Italy; 8Rehabilitation Medicine Unit, Strategic Health Services Department, Istituto Nazionale Tumori-IRCCS Fondazione G. Pascale, Naples, Italy; 9Department of Oncology and Molecular Medicine, Italian National Institute of Health (ISS), Rome, Italy; 10Evaluative Epidemiology Unit, Department of Research, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milano, Italy; 11DOPO Clinic, Department of Pediatric Haematology/Oncology, IRCCS Istituto Giannina Gaslini, Genoa, Italy; 12Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; 13Applied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; 14Psychology Unit, IRCCS Regina Elena Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy; 15Medical Oncology Unit, Umberto I Hospital, Department of Oncology, RAO, Siracusa, ItalyCorrespondence: Luigino Dal Maso, Epidemiologia Oncologica, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano (CRO) IRCCS, Via Franco Gallini 2, Aviano (PN), 33081, Italy, Tel +39 0434 659354, Email epidemiology@cro.it Paolo Tralongo, Medical Oncology Unit, Umberto I Hospital, Department of Oncology, RAO, Via Giuseppe Testaferrata 1, Siracusa, 96100, Italy, Tel +39 0931 724 464, Email paolo.tralongo@asp.sr.itAbstract: A multidisciplinary panel of experts and cancer patients developed a position paper to highlight recent evidence on “cancer cure” (ie, the possibility of achieving the same life expectancy as the general population) and discuss the consequences of this concept on follow-up and rehabilitation strategies. The aim is to inform clinicians, patients, and health-care policy makers about strategies of survivorship care for cured cancer patients and consequences impacting patient lives, spurring public health authorities and research organizations to implement resources to the purpose. Two identifiable, measurable, and reproducible indicators of cancer cure are presented. Cure fraction (CF) is > 60% for breast and prostate cancer patients, > 50% for colorectal cancer patients, and > 70% for patients with melanoma, Hodgkin lymphoma, and cancers of corpus uteri, testis (> 90%), and thyroid. CF was > 65% for patients diagnosed at ages 15– 44 years and 30% for those aged 65– 74 years. Time-to-cure was consistently < 1 year for thyroid and testicular cancer patients and < 10 years for patients with colorectal and cervical cancers, melanoma, and Hodgkin lymphoma. The working group agrees that the evidence allows risk stratification of cancer patients and implementation of personalized care models for timely diagnosis, as well as treatment of possible cancer relapses or related long-term complications, and preventive measures aimed at maintaining health status of cured patients. These aspects should be integrated to produce an appropriate follow-up program and survivorship care plan(s), avoiding stigma and supporting return to work, to a reproductive life, and full rehabilitation. The “right to be forgotten” law, adopted to date only in a few European countries, may contribute to these efforts for cured patients.Keywords: cancer cure, survivorship, time-to-cure, personalized care models, right to be forgotten

Giuliana Cangemi,1 Giorgio Reggiardo,2 Sebastiano Barco,1 Laura Barbagallo,1 Massimo Conte,3 Paolo D'Angelo,4,# Maurizio Bianchi,5,# Claudio Favre,6,# Barbara Galleni,3 Giovanni Melioli,1 Riccardo Haupt,7 Alberto Garaventa,3 Maria V Corrias81Clinical Pathology Laboratory Unit, Giannina Gaslini Institute, Genoa, Italy; 2Data Management and Biostatistics Unit, Medi Service, Genoa, Italy; 3Department of Hematology-Oncology, Giannina Gaslini Institute, Genoa, Italy; 4Pediatric Oncology Unit, Azienda Civico, Di Cristina e Benfratelli, Palermo, Italy; 5Pediatric Onco-Hematology, Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy Division, Regina Margherita Children's Hospital, Turin, Italy; 6Department of Hematology-Oncology, Pisana University Hospital, Pisa, Italy; 7Epidemiology and Biostatistics Unit, Giannina Gaslini Institute, Genoa, Italy; 8Laboratory of Oncology, Giannina Gaslini Institute, Genoa, Italy#On behalf of the Italian Association of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology (AIEOP)Abstract: Different plasma and urinary parameters have been tested as valuable prognostic markers for children with neuroblastoma (NB), but conclusive results from multivariate analyses are still lacking. Samples collected at diagnosis from 505 patients diagnosed in Italy between June 1994 and November 2010 were analyzed at the Italian reference laboratory according to standard methodologies. Patient clinical data were retrieved from the Italian NB Registry. For statistical analysis, patients were grouped according to stage, age, MYCN status, and outcome. Cumulative survival was calculated by the Kaplan–Meier procedure using the first quartile of the marker distribution as a cut-off value to stratify the patients. Multivariate analysis was performed by the Cox regression model by considering only the significant variables. When the entire cohort of patients was considered, none of the different parameters had an independent prognostic value. However, in patients with localized disease without MYCN amplification the significant positive associations between urinary and plasmatic vanillylmandelic acid (VMA)/homovanillic acid (HVA) ratio and a better prognosis remained significant (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively), as well as, the positive association between high lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) values and a worse prognosis (P < 0.001). Moreover, in stage 4 patients without MYCN amplification, neuron-specific enolase levels above 200 ng/mL and LDH levels above 2500 IU/mL maintained their significant association with a worse outcome (P = 0.01 and P = 0.0001, respectively). In conclusion, LDH had an independent prognostic value in patients of all stages without MYCN amplification. Moreover, the urinary and plasmatic VMA/HVA ratio was an independent predictor of prognosis in patients with localized disease without MYCN amplification. Since LDH and catecholamine metabolites are measured in all patients at diagnosis, these findings may be helpful for an easy, cost-effective, patient risk stratification.Keywords: neuroblastoma, markers, prognosis

Vitamin E secretion is induced by a beta-adrenergic stimulus in situ and in vitro by type II pneumocytes. It was proved that alveolar surfactant have lipophilic antioxidants. A study was conducted to examine the hypothesis that, in the lung, the lipophilic antioxidants are secreted simultaneously with the surfactant to inhibit the peroxidation of surfactant constituents.

Study Question: Which chemotherapeutic agents and body site-specific radiation fields are dose-dependently associated with an increased risk of fertility impairment in long-term female childhood, adolescent and young adulthood (CAYA) cancer survivors?Summary Answer: Busulfan, lower abdominal radiotherapy (RT) and total body irradiation (TBI) seem to be associated with fertility impairment at any dose, whereas gonadotoxicity of melphalan and procarbazine is suggested at medium/high (>140 mg/m2) or high dose (>5600 mg/m2) therapy, respectively.What Is Known Already: Several treatment-related fertility deficits, as assessed by both self-reported outcomes and hormonal markers are known to occur following treatment of CAYA cancer. However, knowledge regarding precise dose-related estimates of these treatment-related risks are scarce.Study Design, Size, Duration: The current case-control study was nested within the PanCareLIFE cohort study. In total, 1332 CAYA survivors from 8 countries, 9 institutions and 11 cohorts, participated in and contributed data to the study.Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: All participants were female 5-year CAYA cancer survivors. In total, 450 cases (fertility impaired survivors) and 882 matched controls (not fertility impaired survivors) were included. Fertility impairment was defined using both questionnaire data (primary or secondary amenorrhea; use of artificial reproductive techniques; unfulfilled wish to conceive) and hormonal data (FSH and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH)). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to investigate the effect of (i) alkylating agent exposure, and (ii) dose categories for individual chemotherapeutic agents and for RT-exposed body sites.Main Results and the Role Of Chance: A positive dose-effect relationship between cyclophosphamide equivalent dose (CED) score and fertility impairment was found, with survivors with a CED score > 7121 mg/m2 being at a significantly increased risk of fertility impairment (odds ratio (95% CI) = 2.6 (1.9-3.6) P < 0.001). Moreover, cumulative dose variables of the following treatments were significantly associated with fertility impairment: busulfan, carmustine, cyclophosphamide, melphalan, procarbazine, lower abdominal RT and TBI. Busulfan, lower abdominal RT and TBI seem to be associated with fertility impairment at any dose, whereas gonadotoxicity of melphalan and procarbazine is suggested at medium/high (>140 mg/m2) or high dose (>5600 mg/m2) therapy, respectively.Limitations, Reasons For Caution: Our study may have been subject to selection bias since data from about half of the original base cohorts were available for the current study. This could impact the generalizability of our study results.Wider Implications Of the Findings: We identified survivors at high risk for fertility impairment and, consequently, for a reduced or even absent reproductive life span. Both girls and young women who are about to start anti-cancer treatment, as well as adult female survivors, should be counselled about future parenthood and referred to a reproductive specialist for fertility preservation, if desired.Study Funding/competing Interest(s): This study has received funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no. 602030. There are no competing interests.Trial Registration Number: n/a. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]