A retrospective study was conducted among Italian cancer healthcare workers (HCWs) to describe how influenza vaccination attitudes have changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis was conducted on the last three influenza seasons (2018/19, 2019/20 and 2020/21). To account for different relationships and proximity with patients, the study population was grouped into three main professional categories: health personnel, administrative staff and technicians. Moreover, to explore the factors affecting the coverage of influenza vaccine, a multinomial regression analysis was performed.Over the years, the influenza vaccination uptake showed a gradual increase across the overall staff, the highest coverage (53.8%) was observed in the season 2020/21, in particular, for health personnel (57.7%). In general, males resulted in more adherent to vaccination campaigns; nevertheless, this gap decreased in the last season. A total of 28.6% workers were always vaccinated throughout the past three seasons, a remarkable 25.2% (mainly young and females) received for the first time the influenza vaccination in 2020/21.In this dramatic health crisis, the attitudes of HCWs toward flu vaccination have changed. The COVID-19 outbreak increased adherence to flu vaccination, reaching the highest coverage in the campaign 2020/21. However, further efforts should be made to achieve greater vaccination coverage.

Background: This study provides insights into the treatment use and outcomes of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients in a real-world setting prior to and after the availability of immuno-oncology (IO) regimens in the first line (1L). Methods: Metastatic NSCLC patients, who initiated systemic 1L anticancer treatment from 2014 to 2020, were identified from health records. Patients were grouped into Pre-1L IO and Post-1L IO, according to the availability of pembrolizumab 1L monotherapy at the date of initiating 1L systemic anticancer treatment. Patient characteristics, treatment patterns and outcomes were assessed by the cohort. Overall survival (OS) and real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: The most common 1L treatment was platinum-based chemotherapy regimens in both groups (≥46%), followed by single-agent chemotherapy (27.0%) in Pre-1L IO and pembrolizumab (26.0%) in Post-1L IO. Median OS was 6.2 (95% CI 5.5–7.4) in Pre- and 8.9 months (95% CI 7.5–10.6) in Post-1L IO, while rwPFS was 3.7 (95% CI 3.3–4.2) and 4.7 months (95% CI 3.9–5.7), respectively. Conclusions: Even if a small proportion of patients received a 1L IO, the data showed an improved survival outcomes in the Post-1L IO group.

Background Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into oncology, offering opportunities to improve diagnostics, treatment planning, and operational efficiency. However, patient perspectives on AI, especially regarding data protection and ethical implications, remain underexplored. Objective The objective of this study is to investigate cancer patients' attitudes toward the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in healthcare, focusing on their awareness of data protection, perceived risks and benefits, and the conditions under which AI is considered acceptable. Additionally, the study aims to examine how demographic and educational factors influence patients' views within the context of an Italian comprehensive cancer center. Methods A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 117 cancer patients who completed a 28-item online questionnaire. The survey evaluated levels of AI knowledge, perceptions of data privacy, concerns about AI in medical contexts, and willingness to share health data for research. Results Most participants demonstrated moderate awareness of AI (70.1%) and its medical applications (85.5%), with higher familiarity observed among younger and more educated individuals. While data protection understanding varied, 76.9% were willing to share personal health data for research aimed at improving cancer care. Concerns included reduced physician autonomy (52.1%) and diminished physician-patient interaction (63.3%). However, 82.9% of respondents found AI acceptable when clinical decisions remained under physician control. AI was most favorably viewed for administrative support and care process optimization. Conclusion Cancer patients generally view AI in healthcare positively, especially when it maintains physician oversight and safeguards data privacy. To ensure equitable and informed adoption, targeted educational initiatives and transparent communication strategies should address generational, educational, and digital literacy differences.