Background Patients with cancer on active immune checkpoint inhibitors therapy were recommended to seek prophylaxis from COVID-19 by vaccination. There have been few reports to date to discuss the impact of progression cell death-1 blockers (PD-1B) on immune or vaccine-related outcomes, and what risk factors that contribute to the serological status remains to be elucidated. The study aims to find the impact of PD-1B on vaccination outcome and investigate other potential risk factors associated with the risk of seroconversion failure. Methods Patients with active cancer treatment were retrospectively enrolled to investigate the interaction effects between PD-1B and vaccination. Through propensity score matching of demographic and clinical features, the seroconversion rates and immune/vaccination-related adverse events (irAE and vrAE) were compared in a head-to-head manner. Then, a nomogram predicting the failure risk was developed with variables significant in multivariate regression analysis and validated in an independent cohort. Results Patients (n=454) receiving either PD-1B or COVID-19 vaccination, or both, were matched into three cohorts (vac+/PD-1B+, vac+/PD-1B-, and vac-/PD-1B+, respectively), with a non-concer control group of 206 participants. 68.1% (94/138), 71.3% (117/164), and 80.5% (166/206) were seropositive in vac+/PD-1B+cohort, vac+/PD-1B- cohort, and non-cancer control group, respectively. None of irAE or vrAE was observed to be escalated in PD-1B treatment except for low-grade rash.The vaccinated patients with cancer had a significantly lower rate of seroconversion rates than healthy control. A nomogram was thus built that encompassed age, pathology, and chemotherapy status to predict the seroconversion failure risk, which was validated in an independent cancer cohort of 196 patients. Conclusion Although patients with cancer had a generally decreased rate of seroconversion as compared with the healthy population, the COVID-19 vaccine was generally well tolerated, and seroconversion was not affected in patients receiving PD-1B. A nomogram predicting failure risk was developed, including age, chemotherapy status, pathology types, and rheumatic comorbidity.

Cancer-related cognitive decline is a serious problem in long-term survival but no pivotal study has investigated whether checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) may be associated with cognitive adverse events. This propensity score-matched analysis recruited non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients prescribed with or without ICI monotherapy from three Chinese tertiary hospitals. Patients were excluded from study who developed brain metastasis or had disorders severely affecting cognitive abilities. Primary outcomes were changes in neuropsychological battery test (NBT) at baseline, 6- and 12-month sessions, and any NBT score changes that exceeded 3∗SD of baseline scores would be marked as objective cognitive adverse events (CoAE). Secondary endpoint was the 20-item Perceived Cognitive Impairment (PCI) sub-scale score change in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cognitive Function questionnaire, administered at baseline, 3-, 6-, 9-, 12-, and 15-month follow-up session. Per-protocol ICI and control arms were matched with propensity scores that incorporated baseline variables to compare both NBT and PCI assessment results. Patients participating in PCI assessments were analysed in intention-to-treat analysis. Kaplan–Meier survival curves with log-rank tests were adopted to analyse incidence of perceived cognitive decline events (PCDE). Between March 12, 2020, and March 28, 2021, 908 participants were enrolled. Compared to control, 3 of 4 subtest of NBT scores in ICI arm showed significant cognitive decline in 6- and 12-month sessions, in which Trail Making Test score change (13.56 ± 11.73) reached threshold of cognitive deficit diagnosis in the 12-month session. In 1:1 matched 292 pairs from 908 patients, PCI score changes in ICI arms were −4.26 ± 8.54 (3rd month), −4.72 ± 11.83 (6th month), −6.16 ± 15.41 (9th month), −6.07 ± 15.71 (12th month), and −7.96 ± 13.97 (15th month). The scores were significantly lower than control arm in 3-, 6-, and 12-session follow-up. The result was validated after adjusting quality of life scores and in intention-to-treat analysis. Mean PCI change exceeded 1/2 SD of baseline PCI score (5.81) in 9-, 12-, and 15-month sessions in ICI arm, but not in control arm. PCDE incidence/prevalence was significantly higher in ICI arm (incidence 26.4% vs. 5.1%, and prevalence 16.2% vs. 1.7%). Immune-related adverse events related to incidence of PCDE after adjusting for baseline variables. ICI monotherapy seemed to relate to higher cognitive decline represented by score changes and incidence/prevalence rates. The decline deteriorated as treatment progressed, and immune-related adverse events seemed to be associated with higher cognitive adverse events incidence in the ICI treatment. The Fellowship of 10.13039/501100002858 China Postdoctoral Science Foundation and 10.13039/501100001809 National Natural Science Foundation of China Youth Science Fund Project.

Due to the poor and unpredictable prognosis of breast cancer (BC) patients with bone metastasis, it is necessary to find convenient and available prognostic predictors. This study aimed to recognize the clinical and prognostic factors related to clinical laboratory examination and to construct a prognostic nomogram for BC bone metastasis. We retrospectively analyzed 32 candidate indicators from clinical features and laboratory examination data of 276 BC patients with bone metastasis. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify significant prognostic factors related to BC with bone metastasis. Nomogram was constructed and estimated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, and decision curve analysis. Patients were randomly grouped into training (n = 197) and validation cohorts (n = 79). In training cohort, the multivariate regression analysis revealed that age, other organ metastasis sites, serum level of lactate dehydrogenase, globulin, white blood cell count, mean corpuscular volume, mean corpuscular hemoglobin, and monocyte ratio were independent prognostic factors for BC with bone metastasis. The prognostic nomogram in training cohort exhibited areas under the ROC curve (AUCs) of 0.797, 0.782, and 0.794, respectively, for predicting 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival. In validation cohort, the nomogram still showed acceptable discrimination ability (AUCs: 0.723, 0.742, and 0.704) and calibration. This study constructed a novel prognostic nomogram for BC patients with bone metastasis. It could serve as a potential tool of survival assessment to help individual treatment decision-making for clinicians.

Objectives: The current study aims to survey the willingness of parents to vaccinate their children, who are childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia survivors (CALLS), and identify factors associated with vaccine acceptance. Methods: Parents of CALLS on/off treatment, with the general condition of being amendable to vaccination, were recruited for interviews with attending oncologists about COVID-19 vaccination acceptance from July to November 2021 in China. After controlling for socioeconomic factors, the Association of Oncologists’ recommendations and parent–oncologist alliance with acceptance status were investigated. For validation, propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis was used. Results: A total of 424 families were included in the study, with CALLS mean remission age of 5.99 ± 3.40 years. Among them, 91 (21.4%) agreed, 168 (39.6%) hesitated, and 165 (38.9%) parents disagreed with the vaccination. The most common reason that kept parents from vaccinating their children was lack of recommendations from professional personnel (84/165, 50.9%), and massive amounts of internet information (78/175, 44.6%) was the main nonhealthcare resource against vaccination. Logistic regression analysis showed that only the recommendation from the oncologist was associated with parents’ vaccine acceptance (OR = 3.17, 95% CI = 1.93–5.20), as demonstrated by PSM comparison (42 in recommendation group vs. 18 in nonrecommendation group among 114 pairs, p < 0.001). An exploratory analysis revealed that parents with a better patient–oncologist alliance had a significantly higher level of acceptance (65.6% in alliance group vs. 15.6% in nonalliance group among 32 pairs, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Due to a lack of professional recommendation resources and the potential for serious consequences, parents were generally reluctant to vaccinate their CALLS. The recommendation of oncologists, which was influenced by the parent–oncologist alliance, significantly increased acceptance. This study emphasizes the critical role of oncologists in vaccinating cancer survivors and can be used to promote COVID-19 vaccines among vulnerable populations.

Introduction: The response is poorly understood to the third dose in patients with cancer who failed the standard dose of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines (CoronaVac). We aim to assess the immune response to the third dose and identify whether vitamin D deficiency is associated with serial serologic failure in patients with cancer.Methods: Solid cancer patients (SCP-N) and healthy controls (HCs) who were seronegative after the standard-dose vaccines in our previous study were prospectively recruited, from October 2021 to February 2022, to receive the third dose vaccines and anti-SARS-CoV-2S antibodies were measured. SCP-N who failed the third dose (serial seronegative group, SSG) were matched by propensity scores with the historical standard-dose positive cancer patient group (robust response group, RRG). An exploratory analysis was carried out to validate the role of vitamin D on the serology response.Results: The multi-center study recruited 97 SCP-N with 279 positive controls as RRG and 82 negative controls as HC group. The seroconversion rate after third-dose vaccination was higher in SCP-N than in HC (70.6% vs. 29.4%, p < 0.01). The matched comparison showed that patients in SSG had a significantly lower level of vitamin D and consumption rate than RRG or RRG-B (RRG with third-dose positive) (all p < 0.01). None had serious (over grade II) adverse events after the third dose.Conclusion: Solid cancer patients with second-dose vaccine failure may have a relatively poor humoral response to the third dose of COVID-19 vaccines as compared with the seronegative HC group. The consecutively poor humoral response could be associated with poor vitamin D levels and intake. Vitamin D status and cancer-related immune compromise may jointly affect the humoral response following booster vaccination.