We analysed patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who were treated with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) to address the effect of the timeline and reason for corticosteroid administration on survival outcomes. We retrospectively collected clinical data of non-oncogenic driven, advanced NSCLC patients treated with ICIs at Karolinska University Hospital, including the timeline and reason for steroid administration. Steroid administration was defined as > 10 mg prednisolone equivalent for ≥10 days. We subcategorized patients based on the aetiology of steroid administration into three subgroups: a) steroids for supportive reasons but not for cancer palliation; b) steroids for the palliation of cancer-related symptoms; c) steroids for the management of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Furthermore, to analyse the timeline, patients were categorised into two groups; those who received corticosteroids within 2 weeks before until 2 days after ICI initiation and those who received steroids later during their treatment course. Analysed data from 196 patients showed 46.3% of patients received corticosteroids. Steroid administration due to irAEs did not affect overall survival (OS) (p = 0.38) compared with the steroid naïve group. Only steroid administration for the palliation of cancer-related symptoms was an independent predictor for shorter OS (HR = 2.7; 95% CI, 1.5-4.9). The timeline of steroid administration did not affect OS (p = 0.456) in our cohort. Steroids due to irAEs do not appear to hamper ICI efficacy. However, the administration of high-dose steroids to palliate malignancy-associated symptoms might reflect the dismal prognosis of this patient group.

The optimal time interval from neoadjuvant therapy to surgery in the treatment of esophageal cancer is not known. The aim of this study was to investigate if a prolonged interval between completed neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery was associated with improved histological response rates and survival in a population-based national register cohort. The population-based cohort study included patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and esophagectomy due to cancer in the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction. Patients were divided into two groups based on the median time from completed neoadjuvant treatment to surgery. The primary outcome was complete histological response. Secondary outcomes were lymph node tumor response, postoperative complications, R0 resection rate, 90-day mortality, and overall survival. In total, 643 patients were included, 344 (54%) patients underwent surgery within 49 days, and 299 (47%) after 50 days or longer. The groups were similar concerning baseline characteristics except for a higher clinical tumor stage (P = 0.009) in the prolonged time to surgery group. There were no significant differences in complete histological response, R0 resection rate, postoperative complications, 90-day mortality, or overall survival. Adjusted odds ratio for ypT0 in the prolonged time to surgery group was 0.99 (95% confidence interval: 0.64–1.53). Complete histological response in the primary tumor (ypT0) was associated with significantly higher overall survival: adjusted hazard ratio: 0.55 (95% CI 0.41–0.76). If lymph node metastases were present in these patients, the survival was, however, significantly lower: adjusted hazard ratio for ypT0N1: 2.30 (95% CI 1.21–4.35). In this prospectively collected, nationwide cohort study of esophageal and junctional type 1 and 2 cancer patients, there were no associations between time to surgery and histological complete response, postoperative outcomes, or overall survival. The results suggest that it is safe for patients to postpone surgery at least 7 to 10 weeks after completed chemoradiotherapy, but no evidence was seen in favor of recommending a prolonged time to surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer. A definitive answer to this question requires a randomized controlled trial of standard vs. prolonged time to surgery.

The treatment landscape of solid tumors has changed markedly in the last years. Molecularly targeted treatments and immunotherapies have been implemented and have, in many cancers, lowered the risk of relapse and prolonged survival. Patients with tumors harboring specific targetable molecular alterations or mutations are often of a younger age, and hence future fertility and family building can be important concerns in this group. However, there are great uncertainties regarding the effect of the new drugs on reproductive functions, including fertility, pregnancy and lactation and how young patients with cancers, both women and men should be advised. The goal with this review is to gather the current knowledge regarding oncofertility and the different novel therapies, including immune checkpoint inhibitors, antibody-drug conjugates, small molecules and monoclonal antibody targeted therapies. The specific circumstances and reproductive concerns in different patient groups where novel treatments have been broadly introduced are also discussed, including those with melanoma, lung, breast, colorectal and gynecological cancers. It is clear, that more awareness is needed regarding potential drug toxicity on reproductive tissues, and it is of essence that individuals are informed based on current expertise and on available fertility preservation methods.

Aim: To describe I-O Optimise, a multinational program providing real-world insights into lung cancer management. Materials & methods: Real-world data source selection for I-O Optimise followed a structured approach focused on population coverage, key variable capture, continuous/consistent data availability, record duration and data latency, and database expertise. Results: As of 31 October 2018, seven real-world data sources were included in I-O Optimise, providing data on characteristics, treatment patterns and clinical outcomes from more than 45,000 patients/year with non-small-cell lung cancer, small-cell lung cancer and mesothelioma across Denmark, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the UK. Conclusion: The ongoing I-O Optimise initiative has the potential to provide a broad, robust and dynamic research platform to continually address numerous research objectives in the lung cancer arena. Lay abstract This article describes the design and creation of I-O Optimise, a project that will collect real-world evidence about patients with lung cancer across many different countries. A specific structured approach was followed to select real-world data sources for inclusion in I-O Optimise and, as of 31 October 2018, seven real-world data sources were included, providing information on more than 45,000 patients per year with lung cancer in Denmark, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the UK. I-O Optimise is an ongoing project that has the potential to provide information that will be important in improving the care of patients with lung cancer.

The emergence of tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors has paved a new era for the management of non‐small cell lung cancer, which has for many years lacked major clinical breakthroughs. Historically, 5‐year overall survival remained below 5% in individuals with metastatic disease. These novel treatments have led to significant prolongation of survival in the locally advanced and metastatic setting, exceeding 25% in selected populations. However, they present new challenges to clinicians due to their inherently different spectrum of toxicity unique to each specific drug's pharmacodynamic profile. Internists commonly come across these side effects in their daily clinical practice. Their optimal recognition and management are of utmost importance, because it is associated with significant improvements in patient survival outcomes and their quality of life. The aim of this review is to summarize the complications following these novel treatments for non–small cell lung cancer.

There is lack of data addressing the intracranial (IC) efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) on brain metastases (BM) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This patient category is underrepresented in randomized clinical trials. We retrospectively collected clinical data on patients with non-oncogenic driven NSCLC with BM who were treated with ICIs at two medical oncology institutes in Sweden and Greece from 2016 to 2019. IC efficacy was assessed in patients who had not received local treatment for BM less than three months prior to the initiation of ICIs and had adequate radiological evaluation. We screened 280 patients, of which 51 had BM. BM was an independent predictor for inferior PFS (HR = 2.27; 95% CI, 1.53–3.36) but not OS (HR = 1.58; 95% CI, 0.97–2.60) for the whole patient population. IC response assessment was done on 33 patients. IC objective response rate (ORR) was 24.2%. The presence of neurological symptoms related to BM did not affect IC ORR (p = 0.48). High PD-L1 levels from extracranial biopsies were not a predictive factor for IC ORR (p = 0.13). ICIs are active in NSCLC patients with BM regardless of the presence of neurological symptoms and can achieve durable IC disease stabilization in a subgroup of patients.