Prognostic and predictive factors of eribulin efficacy in heavily pretreated patients affected by metastatic breast cancer: correlation with tumor biology and previous therapies

Abstract Background: Eribulin mesylate is currently approved in the United States and Europe for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Scope: The objective of this retrospective study is to find specific predictive criteria related to patient or tumor characteristics in order to select patients that might benefit the most from eribulin and define the correct treatment sequence. Findings: Forty-four patients with MBC who received eribulin in third or subsequent lines of therapy in a single Italian center were considered eligible. Patients were stratified by body mass index, hormonal/HER2 status, and previous therapies. Primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS), whereas secondary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR). A longer PFS was found in patients with hormone-positive tumors (p=0.0051), in HER2-negative cases (p=0.037), and in overweight patients (p=0.0015). No difference in efficacy was observed when eribulin was administered in third or subsequent lines of therapy. Significantly longer PFS (p<0.0001) and higher DCR (p=0.035) were achieved by patients previously treated with paclitaxel-bevacizumab in comparison to those pretreated with other drug combinations or with anthracyclines. Prior treatment with nab-paclitaxel seems to have a detrimental effect on PFS (p=0.0008). Conclusion: Hormone and HER2 status seems a good predictive and prognostic indicator of response to eribulin. Efficacy seems independent from the number of prior therapies, and it is not influenced by prior endocrine treatments and anthracyclines-containing regimens. On the other hand, sensitivity to a prior treatment with paclitaxel-bevacizumab might be predictive of response to eribulin

Facial Papulopustular Eruption during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Patients Treated with EGFR Inhibitors

Papulopustular rash (PPR) is the most frequent cutaneous adverse event during treatment with epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRis). Although often mild in severity, it can impair patients’ quality of life and may also be a reason for discontinuing or changing the dose of the antineoplastic treatment. During COVID-19 pandemics, the use of surgical masks drastically increased and it had an impact on the face skin microenvironment, favoring the worsening of dermatological pathologies. We reported the relapse of PPR in patients treated with EGFR inhibitors who consistently wore face masks (>6 hours/day). All the patients developed the PPR within 6 months of starting mask use. Compared to the PPR occurred previously, after mask use, the skin eruption was more severe and affected mainly those regions of the face which came into contact with the mask. Patients received topical or systemic treatment, obtaining complete response in 65.7% of the cases. The establishment of an early treatment for the PPR allows continuing the oncologic treatment, without any suspension which could result in a decreased oncologic outcome. In conclusion, when using these devices, it is recommended to use special precautions, particularly in oncologic patients, by using a daily prophylactic skincare and replacing masks regularly with regular and frequent breaks

Clinical Stage III NSCLC Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant Therapy and Surgery: The Prognostic Role of Nodal Characteristics

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to analyze the prognostic factors in patients that underwent induction therapy and surgery for clinical stage III NSCLC. METHODS: Clinical and pathological characteristics of stage III NSCLC patients for N2 involvement that underwent neoadjuvant treatment (NAD) and surgery from 1/01/1998 to 31/12/2017 were collected and retrospectively analyzed. Tumor characteristics, yClinical, yPathological stage and lymph node characteristics were correlated to Overall Survival (OS). RESULTS: The analysis was conducted on 180 patients. Five-year OS (5YOS) was 50.9%. Univariable analysis results revealed old age (p = 0.003), clinical N2 post-NAD (p = 0.01), pneumonectomy (0.005), persistent pathological N2 (p = 0.039, HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.09-2.68) and adjuvant therapy absence (p = 0.049) as significant negative prognostic factors. Multivariable analysis confirmed pN0N1 (p = 0.02, HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.13-0.62) as a favorable independent prognostic factor and adjuvant therapy absence (p = 0.012, HR 2.61, 95% CI 1.23-5.50) as a negative prognostic factor. Patients with persistent N2 presented a 5YOS of 35.3% vs. 55.8% in pN0N1 patients. Regarding lymph node parameters, the lymph node ratio (NR) significantly correlated with OS: 5YOS of 67.6% in patients with NR &lt; 50% vs. 29.5% in NR &gt; 50% (p = 0.029). CONCLUSION: Clinical response aided the stratification of prognosis in patients that underwent multimodal treatment for stage III NSCLC. Adjuvant therapy seemed to be an important option in these patients, while node ratio was a strong prognosticator in patients with persistent nodal involvement

Listening Understanding and acting (lung): focus on communicational issue in thoracic oncology

Background: In the field of oncological assistance, nowadays we have to deal with a complex scenario where patients got used to obtain a huge amount of information through internet or social media and to apply them in performing their health-related decisions. This landscape requires that clinicians become able to handle therapeutical approaches and adequate skills in communication tools to satisfy the current needs. Our project aimed to build a communication model based on clinical oncologists’ real experiences in order to find a simple way to share with patients all the innovative therapeutical opportunities today available in lung cancer. The final goal is to design a flexible and personalized model adaptable to clinician’s personal characteristics and to the specific patient he is facing. We applied both traditional educational tools and innovative techniques in order to make the results effective and applicable to support peer learning. Methods: The first step consisted in a Board synthesized the definition of the diagnostic process, the identification of treatment strategies and any potential communication barrier clinicians may face dealing with patients. The second step consisted in teamwork including a theoretical part and a training part. In the third step we produce five training videos and video interviews regarding communication praxis and a “Small communication manual”. The last step consisted in the publication of the produced material on website and its diffusion through the social media. Results: In medicine, the universal application of a single model of communication does not represent the optimal solution. By contrary, the availability of simple and practical suggestions to improve the communicative style could allow clinicians to abandon stereotyped formulas identically repurposed to all patients. The “from bottom to top” training, starting from real-life to take advantage of the clinician’s experience, give the clinicians the possibility to meditate about their own communicative style and to train in the context of a protected environment. Applying these rules, we design an effective communication model, based on healthcare humanization, which could represent a fundamental support for the patient in order to be gently driven by the clinician to the most appropriate therapeutical choice, balancing efficacy and quality of life. The relational training may improve the quality of clinician-patient communication and could be widespread to other clinicians through the media. Conclusions: Considering the innovative therapeutical options available, particularly for lung cancer patients, and the increasing access of health-related information through internet or social media the clinician-patient communication has become crucial to support the achievement of the most appropriate therapeutical choice for the patient, facing the intricate illness experience. Building a shareable and easy-toapply communication model represents a challenge aimed to help clinicians and including technology not as a threat, but as a positive tool