2 research outputs found

    Gender-Dependent Specificities in Cutaneous Melanoma Predisposition, Risk Factors, Somatic Mutations, Prognostic and Predictive Factors: A Systematic Review.

    Get PDF
    Over the last decades, the incidence of melanoma has been steadily growing, with 4.2% of the population worldwide affected by cutaneous melanoma (CM) in 2020 and with a higher incidence and mortality in men than in women. We investigated both the risk factors for CM development and the prognostic and predictive factors for survival, stratifying for both sex and gender. We conducted a systematic review of studies indexed in PUB-MED, EMBASE, and Scopus until 4 February 2021. We included reviews, meta-analyses, and pooled analyses investigating differences between women and men in CM risk factors and in prognostic and predictive factors for CM survival. Twenty-four studies were included, and relevant data extracted. Of these, 13 studies concerned potential risk factors, six concerned predictive factors, and five addressed prognostic factors of melanoma. The systematic review revealed no significant differences in genetic predisposition to CM between males and females, while there appear to be several gender disparities regarding CM risk factors, partly attributable to different lifestyles and behavioral habits between men and women. There is currently no clear evidence of whether the mutational landscapes of CM differ by sex/gender. Prognosis is justified by a complex combination of phenotypes and immune functions, while reported differences between genders in predicting the effectiveness of new treatments are inconsistent. Overall, the results emerging from the literature reveal the importance of considering the sex/gender variable in all studies and pave the way for including it towards precision medicine. Men and women differ genetically, biologically, and by social construct. Our systematic review shows that, although fundamental, the variable sex/gender is not among the ones collected and analyzed

    Predictors of poor seroconversion and adverse events to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine in cancer patients on active treatment

    No full text
    Purpose: Initial findings in patients with cancer suggest a lower seroconversion to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination possibly related to myelo-immunosuppressive therapies. We conducted a prospective study to assess factors predicting poor seroconversion and adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) to the BNT162b2 vaccine in patients on active treatment. Patients and methods: Cancer patients, candidates to two doses of BNT162b2 SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, were enrolled. Patients on active surveillance served as controls. The primary endpoint was poor seroconversion (anti S1/S2 IgG < 25 AU/mL) after 21 days from the second dose. Results: Between March and July 2021, 320 subjects were recruited, and 291 were assessable. The lack of seroconversion at 21 days from the second dose was 1.6% (95% CI, 0.4\u20138.7) on active surveillance, 13.9% (8.2\u201321.6) on chemotherapy, 11.4% (5.1\u201321.3) on hormone therapy, 21.7% (7.5\u201343.7) on targeted therapy and 4.8% (0.12\u201323.8) on immune-checkpoint-inhibitors (ICI). Compared to controls, the risk of no IgG response was greater for chemotherapy (p = 0.033), targeted therapy (0.005) and hormonotherapy (p = 0.051). Lymphocyte count < 1 7 109/L (p = 0.04) and older age (p = 0.03) also significantly predicted poor seroconversion. Overall, 43 patients (14.8%) complained of AEFI, mostly of mild grade. Risk of AEFI was greater in females (p = 0.001) and younger patients (p = 0.009). Conclusion: Chemotherapy, targeted therapy, hormone therapy, lymphocyte count < 1 7 109/L, and increasing age predict poor seroconversion after two doses of BNT162b2 in up to 20% of patients, indicating the need for a third dose and long-term serological testing in non-responders. AEFI occur much more frequently in women and younger subjects who may benefit from preventive medications. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04932863
    corecore