No abstract

Introduction: Screening for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) exposure, coupled with engaged decision making to prioritize cancer treatment in parallel with reducing risk of exposure and infection, is crucial in the management of COVID-19 during cancer treatment. After two reported case studies of imaging findings during daily computed tomography (CT)-based image-guided radiotherapy (RT) scans, a call for submission of anonymized case reports was published with the objective of rapidly determining if there was a correlation between the onset of new pulmonary infiltrates found during RT and COVID-19. We hereby report the results of the aggregate analysis.Methods: Data of deidentified case reports for patients who developed biochemically confirmed COVID-19 during RT were submitted through an online portal. Information requested included a patient's sex, age, cancer diagnosis and treatment, and COVID-19 diagnosis and outcome. Coplanar CT-based imaging was requested to reveal the presence or absence of ground-glass opacities or infiltrates.Results: A total of seven reports were submitted from Turkey, Spain, Belgium, Egypt, and the United States.Results and imaging from the patients reported by Suppli et al. and McGinnis et al. were included for a total of nine patients for analysis. All patients were confirmed COVID-19 positive using polymerase chain reaction-based methods or nasopharyngeal swabs. Of the nine patients analyzed, abnormalities consistent with ground-glass opacities or infiltrates were observed in eight patients.Conclusions: This is the largest case series revealing the potential use of CT-based image guidance during RT as a tool for identifying patients who need further workup for COVID-19. Considerations for reviewing image guidance for new pulmonary infiltrates and immediate COVID-19 testing

No abstract

to demonstrated futility vs nab-paclitaxel monotherapy upon completion of a protocol-specified interim analysis. Overall, 161 patients were randomized (nab-paclitaxel+CC-486, 81; nab-paclitaxel, 80). Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms. The median number of cycles was 4 for each arm, and the median nab-paclitaxel cumulative dose was 600 mg/m 2 and 800 mg/m 2 in the nab-paclitaxel+CC-486 and nab-paclitaxel arms, respectively. Rates of grade 3/4 (G3/4) treatmentemergent AEs were 59.5% and 54.4% for the combination and monotherapy arms, respectively. The most frequent hematologic G3/4 AEs were neutropenia (16.5% vs 10.1%) and anemia (1.3% vs 7.6%). G3/4 peripheral neuropathy was reported in 2.5% and 7.6% of patients, respectively. The addition of CC-486 to nab-paclitaxel did not improve ORR, DCR, PFS, or OS (Table). When assessed by Lung Cancer Symptom Scale, nab-paclitaxel monotherapy was associated with improvement in the global QoL, average symptom burden index, and lung cancer symptoms except for hemoptysis. Conclusion: The addition of CC-486 to nab-paclitaxel did not clinically benefit patients with previously treated NSCLC. However, single-agent nab-paclitaxel appears to be a promising therapy based on safety, efficacy, and QoL data. Updated efficacy and safety data will be presented. NCT02250326.