Lung cancer and pulmonary tuberculosis are two significant public health problems that continue to take millions of lives each year. They may have similar symptoms and, in some cases, are diagnosed simultaneously or may have a causal relationship. In tuberculosis disease, the chronic inflammation, different produced molecules, genomic changes, and fibrosis are believed to be important factors that may promote carcinogenesis. As a reverse reaction, the development of carcinogenesis and the treatment may induce the reactivation of latent tuberculosis infection. Moreover, the recently used checkpoint inhibitors are a debatable subject since they help treat lung cancer but may lead to the reactivation of pulmonary tuberculosis and checkpoint-induced pneumonitis. Pulmonary rehabilitation is an effective intervention in post-tuberculosis patients and lung cancer patients and should be recommended to improve outcomes in these pathologies.

As the backbone of oncological treatments, systemic chemotherapy is still one of the main pawns in cancer care, alone or in combination with newer targeted agents. All chemotherapy agents can be associated with a type of adverse event called an infusion reaction, which can be characterized as unpredictable, non-dose related, and unexplained by the cytotoxic profile of the drug. For some of these events, a certain immunological mechanism can be identified by blood or skin testing. In this case, we can speak of true hypersensitivity reactions that occur as a response to an antigen/allergen. The current work summarizes the main antineoplastic therapy agents and their susceptibility to induce hypersensitivity reactions and also includes a review of clinical presentation, diagnostic methods in hypersensitivity reactions, and perspectives to overcome these negative events in the treatment of patients suffering from various types of cancer.

Background: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) plays an important role in tumor progression in ovarian cancer, but the complex mechanism and interaction with oxidative stress are not fully understood. Methods: A prospective study included 52 patients with ovarian adenocarcinoma stage IIIA-IV. Serum VEGF and reactive oxygen species (ROS) such as malondialdehyde and ceruloplasmin were measured. Results: VEGF levels were elevated (mean 1014.7 ± 165 pg/mL), especially in patients with macroscopic residual disease (1058 vs. 810 pg/mL, p = 0.0001). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 6 and 40 months in patients with a very high VEGF (over 1200 pg/mL), 11 and 48 months in patients with VEGF between 1000–1200 pg/mL, 18 and 84 months in patients with VEGF between 800–1000 pg/mL, and not reached in patients with normal VEGF. Increased VEGF values were associated with a 2.6-fold increased risk of disease progression (HR = 2.60, 95% CI 1.69–3.99), and a 1.4-fold increased risk of death (HR = 1.4, 95% CI 1.15–1.91, p = 0.002). Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were used to validate VEGF as a prognostic factor and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.814, p = 0.036 for PFS and 0.729, p = 0.043, for OS. There was a positive correlation between VEGF and malondialdehyde, Pearson coefficient of 0.35, p = 0.0001. Conclusions: VEGF and malondialdehyde are important prognostic markers in ovarian cancer, especially in macroscopic residual disease, and there is a positive correlation between angiogenesis and oxidative stress.

(1) Background: Among new anti-angiogenesis agents being developed and ever-changing guidelines indications, the question of the benefits/safety ratio remains unclear. (2) Methods: We performed a systematic review combined with a meta-analysis of 23 randomized controlled trials (12,081 patients), evaluating overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS) and toxicity (grade ≥ 3 toxic effects, type, and number of all adverse effects. (3) Results: The analysis showed improvement of pooled-PFS (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.64–0.78; I2 = 77%; p < 0.00001) in first-line (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.78–0.93; p = 0.0003) or recurrent cancer (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.56–0.70; p < 0.00001) and regardless of the type of anti-angiogenesis drug used (Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors, VEGF-receptors (VEGF-R) inhibitors or angiopoietin inhibitors). Improved OS was also observed (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.90–0.99; p = 0.03). OS benefits were only observed in recurrent neoplasms, both platinum-sensitive and platinum-resistant neoplasms. Grade ≥ 3 adverse effects were increased across all trials. Anti-angiogenetic therapy increased the risk of hypertension, infection, thromboembolic/hemorrhagic events, and gastro-intestinal perforations but not the risk of wound-related issues, anemia or posterior leukoencephalopathy syndrome. (4) Conclusions: Although angiogenesis inhibitors improve PFS, there are little-to-no OS benefits. Given the high risk of severe adverse reactions, a careful selection of patients is required for obtaining the best results possible.

No abstract