Systemic pro-inflammatory response identifies patients with cancer with adverse outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection: the OnCovid Inflammatory Score

Background: Patients with cancer are particularly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The systemic inflammatory response is a pathogenic mechanism shared by cancer progression and COVID-19. We investigated systemic inflammation as a driver of severity and mortality from COVID-19, evaluating the prognostic role of commonly used inflammatory indices in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer accrued to the OnCovid study. Methods: In a multicenter cohort of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer in Europe, we evaluated dynamic changes in neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio (NLR); platelet:lymphocyte ratio (PLR); Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), renamed the OnCovid Inflammatory Score (OIS); modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS); and Prognostic Index (PI) in relation to oncological and COVID-19 infection features, testing their prognostic potential in independent training (n=529) and validation (n=542) sets. Results: We evaluated 1071 eligible patients, of which 625 (58.3%) were men, and 420 were patients with malignancy in advanced stage (39.2%), most commonly genitourinary (n=216, 20.2%). 844 (78.8%) had ≥1 comorbidity and 754 (70.4%) had ≥1 COVID-19 complication. NLR, OIS, and mGPS worsened at COVID-19 diagnosis compared with pre-COVID-19 measurement (p<0.01), recovering in survivors to pre-COVID-19 levels. Patients in poorer risk categories for each index except the PLR exhibited higher mortality rates (p<0.001) and shorter median overall survival in the training and validation sets (p<0.01). Multivariable analyses revealed the OIS to be most independently predictive of survival (validation set HR 2.48, 95% CI 1.47 to 4.20, p=0.001; adjusted concordance index score 0.611). Conclusions: Systemic inflammation is a validated prognostic domain in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer and can be used as a bedside predictor of adverse outcome. Lymphocytopenia and hypoalbuminemia as computed by the OIS are independently predictive of severe COVID-19, supporting their use for risk stratification. Reversal of the COVID-19-induced proinflammatory state is a putative therapeutic strategy in patients with cancer

Determinants of enhanced vulnerability to coronavirus disease 2019 in UK patients with cancer: a European study

Despite high contagiousness and rapid spread, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to heterogeneous outcomes across affected nations. Within Europe (EU), the United Kingdom (UK) is the most severely affected country, with a death toll in excess of 100,000 as of January 2021. We aimed to compare the national impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the risk of death in UK patients with cancer versus those in continental EU. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the OnCovid study database, a European registry of patients with cancer consecutively diagnosed with COVID-19 in 27 centres from 27th February to 10th September 2020. We analysed case fatality rates and risk of death at 30 days and 6 months stratified by region of origin (UK versus EU). We compared patient characteristics at baseline including oncological and COVID-19-specific therapy across UK and EU cohorts and evaluated the association of these factors with the risk of adverse outcomes in multivariable Cox regression models. Findings: Compared with EU (n = 924), UK patients (n = 468) were characterised by higher case fatality rates (40.38% versus 26.5%, p < 0.0001) and higher risk of death at 30 days (hazard ratio [HR], 1.64 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.36-1.99]) and 6 months after COVID-19 diagnosis (47.64% versus 33.33%; p < 0.0001; HR, 1.59 [95% CI, 1.33-1.88]). UK patients were more often men, were of older age and have more comorbidities than EU counterparts (p < 0.01). Receipt of anticancer therapy was lower in UK than in EU patients (p < 0.001). Despite equal proportions of complicated COVID-19, rates of intensive care admission and use of mechanical ventilation, UK patients with cancer were less likely to receive anti-COVID-19 therapies including corticosteroids, antivirals and interleukin-6 antagonists (p < 0.0001). Multivariable analyses adjusted for imbalanced prognostic factors confirmed the UK cohort to be characterised by worse risk of death at 30 days and 6 months, independent of the patient's age, gender, tumour stage and status; number of comorbidities; COVID-19 severity and receipt of anticancer and anti-COVID-19 therapy. Rates of permanent cessation of anticancer therapy after COVID-19 were similar in the UK and EU cohorts. Interpretation: UK patients with cancer have been more severely impacted by the unfolding of the COVID-19 pandemic despite societal risk mitigation factors and rapid deferral of anticancer therapy. The increased frailty of UK patients with cancer highlights high-risk groups that should be prioritised for anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Continued evaluation of long-term outcomes is warranted

A global collaboRAtive study of CIC-rearranged, BCOR::CCNB3-rearranged and other ultra-rare unclassified undifferentiated small round cell sarcomas (GRACefUl)

[Background] Undifferentiated small round cell sarcomas (URCSs) represent a diagnostic challenge, and their optimal treatment is unknown. We aimed to define the clinical characteristics, treatment, and outcome of URCS patients.[Methods] URCS patients treated from 1983 to 2019 at 21 worldwide sarcoma reference centres were retrospectively identified. Based on molecular assessment, cases were classified as follows: (1) CIC-rearranged round cell sarcomas, (2) BCOR::CCNB3-rearranged round cell sarcomas, (3) unclassified URCSs. Treatment, prognostic factors and outcome were reviewed.[Results] In total, 148 patients were identified [88/148 (60%) CIC-rearranged sarcoma (median age 32 years, range 7–78), 33/148 (22%) BCOR::CCNB3-rearranged (median age 17 years, range 5–91), and 27/148 (18%) unclassified URCSs (median age 37 years, range 4–70)]. One hundred-one (68.2%) cases presented with localised disease; 47 (31.8%) had metastases at diagnosis. Male prevalence, younger age, bone primary site, and a low rate of synchronous metastases were observed in BCOR::CCNB3-rearranged cases. Local treatment was surgery in 67/148 (45%) patients, and surgery + radiotherapy in 52/148 (35%). Chemotherapy was given to 122/148 (82%) patients. At a 42.7-month median follow-up, the 3-year overall survival (OS) was 92.2% (95% CI 71.5–98.0) in BCOR::CCNB3 patients, 39.6% (95% CI 27.7–51.3) in CIC-rearranged sarcomas, and 78.7% in unclassified URCSs (95% CI 56.1–90.6; p < 0.0001).[Conclusions] This study is the largest conducted in URCS and confirms major differences in outcomes between URCS subtypes. A full molecular assessment should be undertaken when a diagnosis of URCS is suspected. Prospective studies are needed to better define the optimal treatment strategy in each URCS subtype.This work was supported by the Carisbo Foundation Call for Translational and Clinical Medical Research.Peer reviewe

SARS-CoV-2 omicron (B.1.1.529)-related COVID-19 sequelae in vaccinated and unvaccinated patients with cancer: results from the OnCovid registry

Background COVID-19 sequelae can affect about 15% of patients with cancer who survive the acute phase of SARS-CoV-2 infection and can substantially impair their survival and continuity of oncological care. We aimed to investigate whether previous immunisation affects long-term sequelae in the context of evolving variants of concern of SARS-CoV-2. Methods OnCovid is an active registry that includes patients aged 18 years or older from 37 institutions across Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK with a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 and a history of solid or haematological malignancy, either active or in remission, followed up from COVID-19 diagnosis until death. We evaluated the prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae in patients who survived COVID-19 and underwent a formal clinical reassessment, categorising infection according to the date of diagnosis as the omicron (B.1.1.529) phase from Dec 15, 2021, to Jan 31, 2022; the alpha (B.1.1.7)-delta (B.1.617.2) phase from Dec 1, 2020, to Dec 14, 2021; and the pre-vaccination phase from Feb 27 to Nov 30, 2020. The prevalence of overall COVID-19 sequelae was compared according to SARS-CoV-2 immunisation status and in relation to post-COVID-19 survival and resumption of systemic anticancer therapy. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04393974. Findings At the follow-up update on June 20, 2022, 1909 eligible patients, evaluated after a median of 39 days (IQR 24-68) from COVID-19 diagnosis, were included (964 [ 50 center dot 7%] of 1902 patients with sex data were female and 938 [49 center dot 3%] were male). Overall, 317 (16 center dot 6%; 95% CI 14 center dot 8-18 center dot 5) of 1909 patients had at least one sequela from COVID-19 at the first oncological reassessment. The prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae was highest in the prevaccination phase (191 [19 center dot 1%; 95% CI 16 center dot 4-22 center dot 0] of 1000 patients). The prevalence was similar in the alpha-delta phase (110 [16 center dot 8%; 13 center dot 8- 20 center dot 3] of 653 patients, p=0 center dot 24), but significantly lower in the omicron phase (16 [6 center dot 2%; 3 center dot 5-10 center dot 2] of 256 patients, p<0 center dot 0001). In the alpha- delta phase, 84 (18 center dot 3%; 95% CI 14 center dot 6-22 center dot 7) of 458 unvaccinated patients and three (9 center dot 4%; 1 center dot 9- 27 center dot 3) of 32 unvaccinated patients in the omicron phase had sequelae. Patients who received a booster and those who received two vaccine doses had a significantly lower prevalence of overall COVID-19 sequelae than unvaccinated or partially vaccinated patients (ten [7 center dot 4%; 95% CI 3 center dot 5-13 center dot 5] of 136 boosted patients, 18 [9 center dot 8%; 5 center dot 8-15 center dot 5] of 183 patients who had two vaccine doses vs 277 [ 18 center dot 5%; 16 center dot 5-20 center dot 9] of 1489 unvaccinated patients, p=0 center dot 0001), respiratory sequelae (six [4 center dot 4%; 1 center dot 6-9 center dot 6], 11 [6 center dot 0%; 3 center dot 0-10 center dot 7] vs 148 [9 center dot 9%; 8 center dot 4- 11 center dot 6], p= 0 center dot 030), and prolonged fatigue (three [2 center dot 2%; 0 center dot 1-6 center dot 4], ten [5 center dot 4%; 2 center dot 6-10 center dot 0] vs 115 [7 center dot 7%; 6 center dot 3-9 center dot 3], p=0 center dot 037)

Adamantinoma-like Ewing sarcoma of the salivary glands: a case report and systematic literature review

Adamantinoma-like Ewing sarcoma (ALES) of the salivary glands is an exceedingly rare malignancy defined by the t(11,22) EWSR1::FLI1 fusion, with complex epithelial differentiation. To identify features that can allow for better recognition of this disease entity, we reviewed all published reports of molecularly confirmed ALES of the salivary glands and explored epidemiological, clinical, radiological, pathological, and therapeutic characteristics of a population of 21 patients including a single newly reported patient from our group. We searched the English-language literature indexed in PubMed, Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science using the keyword ‘Adamantinoma-like Ewing sarcoma’ published up to June 2022. The median age at diagnosis was 46 years, and a slight female sex predilection was observed. Most tumors originated in the parotid gland (86%) and presented as a painless palpable mass with a median diameter of 3.6 cm. Metastatic dissemination was reported only in one patient (5%), and after a median follow-up of 13 months the 1-year overall survival rate was 92%. Salivary gland ALES were frequently misdiagnosed at presentation (62% of cases) and were pathologically characterized by the presence of highly monomorphic small round blue cells with infiltrative pattern and positive immunostaining for CD99 and high- and low-molecular weight cytokeratins. Epidemiological and clinical features of salivary gland ALES raise questions on the incorporation of this malignancy in the Ewing sarcoma family tumor group

Response to Controlled Ovarian Stimulation Is Not Impaired in Young Patients with a Sarcoma: Results from a Monocentric Case–Control Study

Sarcomas are relatively common in the young and their treatment can impair fertility. Fertility preservation can be achieved via the cryopreservation of gametes after controlled ovarian stimulation before cancer treatment. A reduced response to hormonal stimulation in patients suffering from certain types of malignancy is reported. The purpose of this study was to assess the performance of oocyte cryopreservation in patients with sarcoma by comparing their outcomes with those of a population without cancer. Patients were matched by age with control women undergoing hormonal stimulation for isolated male factor infertility. The population included 84 women with a sarcoma and 355 controls. In the final analysis, 37 patients with sarcoma were matched in a 1:3 ratio with 109 healthy controls. Patients with sarcoma were generally younger and were stimulated with lower FSH doses. They did not perform worse than controls during stimulation, with an average retrieval of 10.6 oocytes vs. 8.1 in the controls. Linear regression on the number of retrieved mature oocytes confirmed that patients with sarcoma performed comparably to controls. In conclusion, patients with sarcoma can expect retrieval outcomes comparable to those of patients without cancer