Search

The main aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between the effectiveness of olaparib in the maintenance setting and the number of previous chemotherapy lines received for the treatment of BRCA-mutated platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer (OC). This was a regional, multicentric, retrospective, and observational study, designed to collect data from medical charts of patients treated between June 2015 and October 2018. At data lock, 43 patients were evaluated for the study. Patients with 1-2 previous lines of platinum-based chemotherapy showed a higher response rate to olaparib, compared to those with 3-4 or more previous lines. No difference in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) was observed between the two groups; 40.5% of patients experienced a G3-4 adverse event, while no significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of G3-4 toxicities. This is the first Italian study evaluating the use of olaparib in the "real-world" treatment of OC patients, offering a preliminary but useful picture of current clinical practice in Puglia region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The landscape of the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has changed dramatically in the last two years. The most promising agents developed and tested were small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors, mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies. Indeed, when compared to IFN-alpha, first-line therapy with Sunitinib, Bevacizumab and Temsirolimus showed an improvement of both progression free survival (PFS) and survival.The occurrence and severity of side effects differ between these agents and may define the choice of the best drug to use in the first line therapy with a model of tailoring therapy.The adverse events considered to be most important in routine clinical practice are dermatological toxicities, gastro-intestinal symptoms, stomatitis, hypertension and other cardiovascular toxicities, haematological toxicity, fatigue and fatigue-causing side effects including metabolic changes.We have analyzed and compared the most frequently observed toxicities of these novel agents in the attempt to obtain an help in the decision making of the best therapy.Altogether, side effects of targeted agents appear manageable and reversible. Discontinuation of treatment due to toxicity is rare. Despite side effects, these novel agents signify an important step forward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Endometrial carcinosarcoma is a rare, aggressive high-grade endometrial cancer, accounting for about 5% of all uterine cancers and 15% of deaths from uterine cancers. The treatment can be complex, and the prognosis is poor. Its increasing incidence underscores the urgent requirement for personalized approaches in managing such challenging diseases., Method: In this work, we designed an explainable machine learning approach to predict recurrence-free survival in patients affected by endometrial carcinosarcoma. For this purpose, we exploited the predictive power of clinical and histopathological data, as well as chemotherapy and surgical information collected for a cohort of 80 patients monitored over time. Among these patients, 32.5% have experienced the appearance of a recurrence., Results: The designed model was able to well describe the observed sequence of events, providing a reliable ranking of the survival times based on the individual risk scores, and achieving a C-index equals to 70.00% (95% CI, 59.38-84.74)., Conclusion: Accordingly, machine learning methods could support clinicians in discriminating between endometrial carcinosarcoma patients at low-risk or high-risk of recurrence, in a non-invasive and inexpensive way. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study proposing a preliminary approach addressing this task., Competing Interests: The 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 © 2024 Bove, Arezzo, Cormio, Silvestris, Cafforio, Comes, Fanizzi, Accogli, Cazzato, De Nunzio, Maiorano, Naglieri, Lupo, Vitale, Loizzi and Massafra.)

Introduction: The International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) score is the most important prognostic score to stratify patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), helping to guide treatment choice in first line. We hypothesized that IMDC change may also exert a prognostic role in subsequent lines of mRCC therapy., Methods: Meet-URO 15 is a multicenter Italian study of patients with mRCC receiving nivolumab as a second or subsequent line of therapy. This posthoc analysis aimed to evaluate the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) from nivolumab start as primary endpoints, overall response rate (ORR) and disease-control rate (DCR) as secondary endpoints, according to the change in the IMDC category from the first-line setting (baseline) to nivolumab start. Patients with available prognostic IMDC category information at baseline and before nivolumab were included., Results: 492 patients were included in the analysis. At baseline, 165 (33.5%), 287 (58.3%), and 40 patients (8.2%) had favorable, intermediate, and poor IMDC categories, respectively. Before nivolumab, 364 patients (73.9%) remained in the same prognostic category as at baseline, 27 (5.5%) improved, and 101 (20.5%) deteriorated. Significantly longer mPFS (P = .01) and mOS (P < .01) were reached by patients with a stable favorable group compared to those worsening to intermediate/poor. A longer mOS was also achieved from intermediate/poor patients who improved their IMDC category before nivolumab compared to those remaining stable/worsening (P < .01 and P = .04, respectively). Maintaining IMDC category stability from baseline to nivolumab determined a more consistent DCR in favorable patients (P = .03). Overall, patients who improved their IMDC risk score reached better survival outcomes than those who remained stable/deteriorated., Conclusions: In our sub-analysis, the shift in the IMDC risk category appears to be a helpful prognostic tool for assessing the outcomes of patients with mRCC treated with ≥2nd line nivolumab., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have significantly improved metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) prognosis, although their efficacy in patients with bone metastases (BMs) remains poorly understood. We investigated the prognostic role of natremia in pretreated RCC patients with BMs receiving immunotherapy., Materials and Methods: This retrospective multicenter study included RCC patients with BMs receiving nivolumab as second-line therapy or beyond. Inclusion criteria involved baseline sodium levels (pre-ICI) and sodium levels after 4 weeks of nivolumab initiation (post-ICI). The population was divided into two groups based on the median value, and response rates, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were assessed., Results: Among 120 eligible patients, those with pre-treatment sodium levels ≥140 mEq/L showed longer OS (18.7 vs. 12.0 months, p=0.04). Pre-treatment sodium levels ≥140 mEq/L were associated with better OS compared to levels <140 mE/L (18.7 vs. 12.0, p=0.04). Post-treatment sodium levels ≥140 mEq/L were associated with improved PFS (9.6 vs . 3.2 months) and OS (25.1 vs. 8.8 months) (p=0.05 and p<0.01, respectively). Patients with consistent sodium levels ≥140 mEq/L at both time points exhibited the best outcomes compared to those with lower values (PFS 11.5 vs. 3.3 months and OS 42.2 vs. 9.0 months, respectively, p<0.01). Disease control rate was significantly higher in the latter group (p<0.01). Multivariate analysis confirmed the prognostic significance of sodium levels., Conclusion: Elevated sodium levels (≥140 mEq/L) pre- and post-ICI treatment correlate with better survival outcomes in mRCC patients with BMs. This finding suggests sodium level assessment as a potential prognostic factor in these patients and warrants further investigation, particularly in combination immunotherapy settings., Competing Interests: GB: Speaker bureau: Astellas, Astrazeneca, Amgen. Patents: n. 4 patents with ST Microelectronics. Travel, Accommodations for scientific conferences: Merck, Janssen. UG: services as advisory/board member of Astellas, Bayer, BMS, IPSEN, Janssen, Merck, Pfizer, Sanofi, received research grant/funding to the institution from AstraZeneca, Roche, Sanofi and travel/accommodations/expenses from BMS BMS, IPSEN, Janssen, Pfizer. LC: has received honoraria for advisory boards, speaker engagements and scientific consultancy for educational purposes from AstraZeneca, EISAI, MSD, Ipsen, BMS, A.A.A.; past MSD employee in Medical Affairs. MS: honoraria as consultant or advisory role from Janssen; grant for participation at scientific events: Astellas Pharma, Sanofi, Roche Novartis, Ipsen, Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer; research funding: Roche, Merck, Janssen. 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 © 2024 Catalano, Rebuzzi, Maruzzo, De Giorgi, Buti, Galli, Fornarini, Zucali, Claps, Chiellino, Zampiva, Pipitone, Ricotta, Sorarù, Mollica, Tudini, Fratino, Prati, Caffo, Atzori, Morelli, Prati, Nolè, Vignani, Cavo, Di Napoli, Malgeri, Naglieri, Signori, Banna, Rescigno, Cerbone, Antonuzzo and Roviello.)

Background: Although nivolumab prolongs overall survival (OS) in pretreated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), underlining clinical and biological features of long-term responses are still to be determined. This study aims to investigate clinical and pathological characteristics of mRCC patients who achieved long-term responses during nivolumab treatment., Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on mRCC patients receiving nivolumab as second or further therapy line between May 2016 and January 2019 in 34 Italian Oncology Centres. Outcome assessments and logistic regression were performed to evaluate factors influencing long-term responses., Results: A total of 571 patients with a median age of 61 years (range 17-85) were included in the analysis. With a median follow-up of 22.1 (1.0-89.0) months, 23.1% of patients were 2-year progression-free on treatment with nivolumab, hence they were categorized as long-term responders. Baseline characteristics, including age, gender, and histology, were similar between long- and short-term responders. Karnofsky Performance Status ≥ 80% was significantly associated with long-term response (p = 0.02), while bone metastases (p = 0.03), International mRCC Database Consortium intermediate-poor risk (p < 0.01) and Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio ≥ 3.2 (p = 0.02) were associate with short-term responses. Long-term responders exhibited a median progression-free survival of 55.0 months versus 4.0 months of the short-term responders. The median OS was not reached in long-term responders while it was 17.0 months for short*term responders., Conclusion: This retrospective analysis sheds light on factors associated with long-term response to nivolumab in mRCC. Understanding these clinical features will be essential for selecting patients who may mostly benefit from immunotherapy., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Nowadays, different therapeutic options are available for the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Immuno-combinations are the standard first-line therapy in all mRCC patients regardless of the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk category, even though TKI monotherapy is still a therapeutic option in selected patients. However, comparisons between the different first-line treatment strategies are lacking and few real-world data are available in this setting. For this reason, the regimen choice represents an important issue in clinical practice and the optimal treatment sequence remains unclear., Methods: The REGAL study is a multicentric prospective observational study enrolling mRCC patients treated with first-line systemic therapy according to clinical practice in a real-world setting. A retrospective cohort of mRCC patients who received first-line systemic therapy from the 1st of January 2021 will also be included. The primary objective is to identify potential prognostic and predictive factors that could help guide the treatment choice; secondary objectives included the assessment of the prognostic performance of the novel prognostic Meet-URO score (IMDC score + neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio + bone metastases) compared with the IMDC score and the comparison between treatment strategies according to response and survival outcomes and toxicity profile., Discussion: Considering the high number of therapeutic first-line strategies available for mRCC, the identification of clinical prognostic and predictive factors to candidate patients to a preferable systemic therapy is still an unmet clinical need. The Meet-URO 33 study aims to provide a large-scale real-world database on mRCC patients, to identify the clinical predictive and prognostic factors and the different performances between the ICI-based combinations according to response, survival and toxicity., Trial Registration: CESC IOV 2023-78., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Accurate characterization of newly diagnosed a solid adnexal lesion is a key step in defining the most appropriate therapeutic approach. Despite guidance from the International Ovarian Tumor Analyzes Panel, the evaluation of these lesions can be challenging. Recent studies have demonstrated how machine learning techniques can be applied to clinical data to solve this diagnostic problem. However, ML models can often consider as black-boxes due to the difficulty of understanding the decision-making process used by the algorithm to obtain a specific result., Aims: For this purpose, we propose an Explainable Artificial Intelligence model trained on clinical characteristics and qualitative ultrasound indicators to predict solid adnexal masses diagnosis., Materials & Methods: Since the diagnostic task was a three-class problem (benign tumor, invasive cancer, or ovarian metastasis), we proposed a waterfall classification model: a first model was trained and validated to discriminate benign versus malignant, a second model was trained to distinguish nonmetastatic versus metastatic malignant lesion which occurs when a patient is predicted to be malignant by the first model. Firstly, a stepwise feature selection procedure was implemented. The classification performances were validated on Leave One Out scheme., Results: The accuracy of the three-class model reaches an overall accuracy of 86.36%, and the precision per-class of the benign, nonmetastatic malignant, and metastatic malignant classes were 86.96%, 87.27%, and 77.78%, respectively., Discussion: SHapley Additive exPlanations were performed to visually show how the machine learning model made a specific decision. For each patient, the SHAP values expressed how each characteristic contributed to the classification result. Such information represents an added value for the clinical usability of a diagnostic system., Conclusions: This is the first work that attempts to design an explainable machine-learning tool for the histological diagnosis of solid masses of the ovary., (© 2024 The Author(s). Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: Recurrent gynecological tumors (e.g., endometrial, and ovarian cancers) are incurable diseases; therefore, new treatment options are urgently needed. The PTEN-AKT-PI3K pathway is frequently altered in these tumors, representing a potential treatment target. Alpelisib is an α-specific PI3K inhibitor approved in PIK3CA-mutated advanced breast cancer. We report outcomes from a large series of patients with PIK3CA-mutated gynecological cancers prospectively treated with alpelisib within a controlled program., Methods: From April 2021 to December 2022, 36 patients with PIK3CA-mutated advanced gynecological cancers received alpelisib 300 mg orally once daily. Objective response (ORR) and disease control (DCR) rates provided measure of the antitumor activity of alpelisib, the primary objective of the study., Results: Included patients had endometrial (17/36 [47%]), ovarian (10/36 [28%]), or other gynecological cancers (9/36 [25%]). Most patients had received 2-3 prior systemic treatments (endometrial, 47·2%; ovarian, 60%; other, 56%), and presented with visceral metastases at baseline (82%, 70%, and 56%, respectively). Overall, 17 different PIK3CA mutations were found, including 53% in the kinase domain (most commonly H1047R) and 36% in the helical domain (most commonly E545K). Overall, the ORR was 28% and DCR was 61%, with the greatest benefit observed in patients with endometrial cancer (35% and 71%, respectively)., Conclusion: Alpelisib represents an active treatment option in patients with recurrent gynecological cancers harboring a PIK3CA mutation. These findings support the need of biomarker-driven randomized trials of PI3K inhibitors in gynecological cancers., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Immunotherapies exhibit peculiar cancer response patterns in contrast to chemotherapy and targeted therapy. Some patients experience disease response after initial progression or durable responses after treatment interruption. In clinical practice, immune checkpoint inhibitors may be continued after radiological progression if clinical benefit is observed. As a result, estimating progression-free survival (PFS) based on the first disease progression may not accurately reflect the actual benefit of immunotherapy., Methods: The Meet-URO 15 study was a multicenter retrospective analysis of 571 pretreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients receiving nivolumab. Time to strategy failure (TSF) was defined as the interval from the start of immunotherapy to definitive disease progression or death. This post-hoc analysis compared TSF to PFS and assess the response and survival outcomes between patients treatated beyond progression (TBP) and non-TBP. Moreover, we evaluated the prognostic accuracy of the Meet-URO score versus the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) score based on TSF and PFS., Results: Overall, 571 mRCC patients were included in the analysis. Median TSF was 8.6 months (95% CI: 7.0 - 10.1), while mPFS was 7.0 months (95% CI: 5.7 - 8.5). TBP patients (N = 93) had significantly longer TSF (16.3 vs 5.5 months; p < 0.001) and overall survival (OS) (34.8 vs 17.9 months; p < 0.001) but similar PFS compared to non-TBP patients. In TBP patients, a median delay of 9.6 months (range: 6.7-16.3) from the first to the definitive disease progression was observed, whereas non-TBP patients had overlapped median TSF and PFS (5.5 months). Moreover, TBP patients had a trend toward a higher overall response rate (33.3% vs 24.3%; p = 0.075) and disease control rate (61.3% vs 55.5%; p = 0.31). Finally, in the whole population the Meet-URO score outperformed the IMDC score in predicting both TSF (c-index: 0.63 vs 0.59) and PFS (0.62 vs 0.59)., Conclusion: We found a 2-month difference between mTSF and mPFS in mRCC patients receiving nivolumab. However, TBP patients had better outcomes, including significantly longer TSF and OS than non-TBP patients. The Meet-URO score is a reliable predictor of TSF and PFS., Competing Interests: Dr. SB received honoraria as speaker at scientific events and advisory role by BMS, Pfizer, MSD, Ipsen, Roche, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Pierre-Fabre, Novartis, Merck, Gentili, Astellas. Dr. SR received honoraria as speaker at scientific events and travel accommodation from BMS, Amgen, GSK, Ipsen, Astellas, Janssen, MSD. Dr. DB received honoraria as advisory role by Ipsen, Astellas, Janssen, Novartis, BMS, MSD, Pfizer, Merck and travel accommodation from Ipsen, Janssen, MSD, Merck. Dr. UD services as advisory/board member of Astellas, Bayer, BMS, IPSEN, Janssen, Merck, Pfizer, Sanofi, received research grant/funding to the institution from AstraZeneca, Roche, Sanofi and travel/accommodations/expenses from BMS BMS, IPSEN, Janssen, Pfizer. Dr. SC received honoraria as speaker at scientific events/advisory boards and travel accommodation from BMS, Ipsen, MSD, Pierre-Fabre, Bayer, Gentili. Dr. PZ reports outside the submitted work personal fees for advisory role, speaker engagements and travel and accommodation expenses from Merck Sharp & Dohme MSD, Astellas, Janssen, Sanofi, Ipsen, Pfizer, Novartis, Bristol Meyer Squibb, Amgen, Astrazeneca, Roche and Bayer. Dr. GPro services advisory boards/consulting for Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Janssen, IPSEN, Merk, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer. Dr. CB received honoraria from advisory board/clinical trials/conference speaking/travel grant with Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Clovis, Exelixis, GSK, Ipsen, Janssen, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi. Dr. MSo services advisory boards/consulting for Janssen, received research funding from Janssen, Roche and Merck and received travel accomodation from Ipsen, BMS, Janssen, Pfizer, Novartis, Astellas, Sanofi, Roche. Dr. FM services advisory boards for Pfizer and MSD. Dr. PR services advisory boards for MSD, AstraZeneca and Janssen. Dr. GF services advisory boards for Astellas, Janssen, Pfizer, Bayer, MSD, Merck and received travel accomodation from Astellas, Janssen, Bayer. Dr. GB reports personal fees from AstraZeneca and Astellas for speaker bureau. 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. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision., (Copyright © 2024 Murianni, Signori, Buti, Rebuzzi, Bimbatti, De Giorgi, Chiellino, Galli, Zucali, Masini, Naglieri, Procopio, Milella, Fratino, Baldessari, Ricotta, Mollica, Sorarù, Tudini, Prati, Malgeri, Atzori, Di Napoli, Caffo, Spada, Morelli, Prati, Nolè, Vignani, Cavo, Lipari, Roviello, Catalano, Damassi, Cremante, Rescigno, Fornarini and Banna.)

Importance: Low sodium levels have been associated with negative outcomes among patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) receiving therapies other than immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs)., Objective: To investigate the role of natremia in patients with mRCC receiving nivolumab as a second-line or subsequent therapy., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this retrospective cohort study, the clinical and biochemical data of patients with mRCC receiving nivolumab were collected from October 2015 to November 2019 as part of a multicenter Italian study. Data analysis was performed from February to March 2023., Exposure: Nivolumab was administered intravenously at a dose of 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks and, since May 2018, at a fixed dose of 240 mg every 2 weeks or 480 mg every 4 weeks. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to their median serum sodium value (<140 or ≥140 mEq/L)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were the associations of pre-ICI and post-ICI sodium levels with overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and disease control rate (DCR). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate PFS and OS, and differences between groups were compared using the log-rank test., Results: A total of 401 patients with mRCC receiving nivolumab as second-line therapy were evaluated, and 355 eligible patients (median [range] age, 76 [44-84] years; 258 male patients [72.7%]) were included in the final cohort. Among patients with pre-ICI sodium greater than or equal to 140 mEq/L compared with those with sodium less than 140 mEq/L, the median PFS was 9.3 months (95% CI, 6.5-11.5 months) vs 7.4 months (95% CI, 4.6-10.1 months; P = .90), and the median OS was 29.2 months (95% CI, 21.8-35.9 months) vs 20.0 months (95% CI, 14.1-26.8 months; P = .03). Patients with post-ICI sodium values greater than or equal to 140 mEq/L had longer PFS (11.1 months [95% CI, 8.5-1.5 months] vs 5.1 months [95% CI, 4.1-7.5 months]; P = .01) and OS (32.9 months [95% CI, 25.1-42.6 months] vs 17.1 months [95% CI, 12.6-24.5 months]; P = .006) compared with patients with sodium values less than 140 mEq/L. Patients with both pre-ICI and post-ICI sodium values greater than or equal to 140 mEq/L exhibited a significant improvement in clinical outcomes compared with those with a value less than 140 mEq/L (PFS, 11.5 months [95% CI, 8.8-16.4 months] vs 5.8 months [95% CI, 4.4-8.3 months]; P = .008); OS, 37.6 months [95% CI, 29.0-49.9 months] vs 19.4 months [95% CI, 14.1-24.5 months]; P = .01). Moreover, sodium levels greater than or equal to 140 mEq/L were associated with significantly better DCR than lower sodium levels., Conclusions and Relevance: In this retrospective cohort study of patients with mRCC receiving nivolumab, sodium values greater than or equal to 140 mEq/L, both before and/or after ICI, were associated with better OS and PFS, as well as a higher DCR, compared with levels less than 140 mEq/L. These findings suggest that sodium levels may be associated with survival outcomes in patients with mRCC and may have potential use as variables to consider in patients' risk scores.

Background: Nephrectomy is considered the backbone of managing patients with localized and selected metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The prognostic role of nephrectomy has been widely investigated with cytokines and targeted therapy, but it is still unclear in the immunotherapy era., Methods: We investigated the Meet-URO-15 study dataset of 571 pretreated mRCC patients receiving nivolumab as second or further lines about the prognostic role of the previous nephrectomy (received in either the localized or metastatic setting) in the overall population and according to the Meet-URO score groups., Results: Patients who underwent nephrectomy showed a significantly reduced risk of death (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32-0.60, p < 0.001) with a longer median overall survival (OS) (35.9 months vs 12.1 months), 1-year OS of 71.6% vs 50.5% and 2-years OS of 56.5% vs 22.0% compared to those who did not. No significant interaction between nephrectomy and the overall five Meet-URO score risk groups was observed (p = 0.17). It was statistically significant when merging group 1 with 2 and 3 and group 4 with 5 (p = 0.038) and associated with a longer OS for the first three prognostic groups (p < 0.001), but not for groups 4 and 5 (p = 0.54)., Conclusions: Our study suggests an overall positive impact of the previous nephrectomy on the outcome of pretreated mRCC patients receiving immunotherapy. The clinical relevance of cytoreductive nephrectomy, optimal timing and patient selection deserves further investigation, especially for patients with Meet-URO scores of 1 to 3, who are the once deriving benefit in our analyses. However, that benefit is not evident for IMDC poor-risk patients (including the Meet-URO score groups 4 and 5) and a subgroup of IMDC intermediate-risk patients defined as group 4 by the Meet-URO score., (© 2022. The Author(s).)