Breast cancer (BC) patients’ (pts) management was affected by a global reorganization after Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Our multicenter study aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19 on access to diagnosis, staging and treatment for BC pts compared to pre-pandemic. Medical records of all consecutive newly diagnosed BC pts referred to 6 Italian Institutions between March and December 2020 were assessed. Monthly access rate and temporal intervals between date of symptoms onset, radiological, cytohistological diagnosis and treatment start were analyzed and compared with 2019. A reduction (25%) in newly diagnosed BC was observed compared to 2019 (666 vs 890). New BC pts in 2020 were less likely to be diagnosed with early stage BC (77% vs 83%, p < 0.01), had a worse performance status according to the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG PS) (19.8% had PS > 0 in 2020 vs 16.5% in 2019, p < 0.01) and fewer pts were asymptomatic at diagnosis in 2020 (54% vs 71%,p < 0.01). COVID-19 did not negatively impact in terms of access to diagnosis, staging and treatment. Time intervals between symptom onset and radiological diagnosis, symptom onset and cytohistological diagnosis, cytohistological diagnosis and treatment start were maintained or improved. However, less cases were discussed in multidisciplinary tumor meetings during 2020 (60% vs 73%, p < 0.01). Our data proved an alarming reduction of early stage BC associated with the COVID-19 crisis in 2020. Despite the upheaval generated by the pandemic, our study shed light on the effective performance delivered by Italian Oncology Departments to guarantee diagnostic-therapeutic pathways.

Previous studies on the immunogenicity of SARS‐CoV‐2 mRNA vaccines showed a reduced seroconversion in cancer patients. The aim of our study is to evaluate the immunogenicity of two doses of mRNA vaccines in solid cancer patients with or without a previous exposure to the virus. This is a single‐institution, prospective, nonrandomized study. Patients in active treatment and a control cohort of healthy people received two doses of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, BioNTech/Pfizer, The United States) or mRNA‐1273 (Spikevax, Moderna). Vaccine was administered before starting anticancer therapy or on the first day of the treatment cycle. SARS‐CoV‐2 antibody levels against S1, RBD (to evaluate vaccine response) and N proteins (to evaluate previous infection) were measured in plasma before the first dose and 30 days after the second one. From January to June 2021, 195 consecutive cancer patients and 20 healthy controls were enrolled. Thirty‐one cancer patients had a previous exposure to SARS‐CoV‐2. Cancer patients previously exposed to the virus had significantly higher median levels of anti‐S1 and anti‐RBD IgG, compared to healthy controls (P = .0349) and to cancer patients without a previous infection (P < .001). Vaccine type (anti‐S1: P < .0001; anti‐RBD: P = .0045), comorbidities (anti‐S1: P = .0274; anti‐RBD: P = .0048) and the use of G‐CSF (anti‐S1: P = .0151) negatively affected the antibody response. Conversely, previous exposure to SARS‐CoV‐2 significantly enhanced the response to vaccination (anti‐S1: P < .0001; anti‐RBD: P = .0026). Vaccine immunogenicity in cancer patients with a previous exposure to SARS‐CoV‐2 seems comparable to that of healthy subjects. On the other hand, clinical variables of immune frailty negatively affect humoral immune response to vaccination.

A significant proportion of patients treated for early breast cancer develop medium-term and late distant recurrence. The delayed manifestation of metastatic disease is defined as “dormancy”. This model describes the aspects of the clinical latency of isolated metastatic cancer cells. Dormancy is regulated by extremely complex interactions between disseminated cancer cells and the microenvironment where they reside, the latter in turn influenced directly by the host. Among these entangled mechanisms, inflammation and immunity may play leading roles. This review is divided into two parts: the first describes the biological underpinnings of cancer dormancy and the role of the immune response, in particular, for breast cancer; the second provides an overview of the host-related factors that may influence systemic inflammation and immune response, subsequently impacting the dynamics of breast cancer dormancy. The aim of this review is to provide physicians and medical oncologists a useful tool to understand the clinical implications of this relevant topic.

Background: Single-agent capecitabine (C) is a moderately effective chemotherapeutic compound in the treatment of patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC). The capecitabine-vinorelbine (CV) combination is also used due to a good tolerability profile, but no studies have demonstrated its superiority over single-agent C. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis to compare overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and incidence of adverse events (AEs) in patients with HER2-negative mBC treated with CV vs. single-agent C. Results: Out of 290 patients included in this study, 127 (43.8%) received single-agent C, while 163 (56.2%) patients were treated with CV. Median PFS was similar in patients treated with single-agent C or CV, while CV was associated with significantly longer OS in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) BC. This OS advantage was confirmed at multivariable analysis also after propensity score-based matching of patients according to relevant clinical or tumor characteristics. When compared with single-agent C, CV was associated with higher incidence of G3/G4 and any-grade nausea/vomiting, diarrhea and increased transaminases. Conclusions: While prospective studies are needed to confirm our findings, the potential OS advantage of CV over single-agent C in HR+ mBC patients must be weighed against a significantly higher incidence of AEs.

In recent years, awareness regarding micro-nanoplastics’ (MNPs) potential effects on human health has progressively increased. Despite a large body of evidence regarding the origin and distribution of MNPs in the environment, their impact on human health remains to be determined. In this context, there is a major need to address their potential carcinogenic risks, since MNPs could hypothetically mediate direct and indirect carcinogenic effects, the latter mediated by particle-linked chemical carcinogens. Currently, evidence in this field is scarce and heterogeneous, but the reported increased incidence of malignant tumors among younger populations, together with the ubiquitous environmental abundance of MNPs, are rising a global concern regarding the possible role of MNPs in the development and progression of cancer. In this review, we provide an overview of the currently available evidence in eco-toxicology, as well as methods for the identification and characterization of environmental MNP particulates and their health-associated risks, with a focus on cancer. In addition, we suggest possible routes for future research in order to unravel the carcinogenetic potential of MNP exposure and to understand prognostic and preventive implications of intratumoral MNPs.