Next-generation sequencing (NGS) diagnostics have shown clinical utility in predicting survival benefits in patients with certain cancer types who are undergoing targeted drug therapies. Currently, there are no guidelines or recommendations for the use of NGS in patients with metastatic cancer from an Asian perspective. In this article, we present the Asia-Pacific Oncology Drug Development Consortium (APODDC) recommendations for the clinical use of NGS in metastatic cancers. The APODDC set up a group of experts in the field of clinical cancer genomics to (i) understand the current NGS landscape for metastatic cancers in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region; (ii) discuss key challenges in the adoption of NGS testing in clinical practice; and (iii) adapt/modify the European Society for Medical Oncology guidelines for local use. Nine cancer types [breast cancer (BC), gastric cancer (GC), nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC), ovarian cancer (OC), prostate cancer, lung cancer, and colorectal cancer (CRC) as well as cholangiocarcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)] were identified, and the applicability of NGS was evaluated in daily practice and/or clinical research. Asian ethnicity, accessibility of NGS testing, reimbursement, and socioeconomic and local practice characteristics were taken into consideration. The APODDC recommends NGS testing in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Routine NGS testing is not recommended in metastatic BC, GC, and NPC as well as cholangiocarcinoma and HCC. The group suggested that patients with epithelial OC may be offered germline and/or somatic genetic testing for BReast CAncer gene 1 (BRCA1), BRCA2, and other OC susceptibility genes. Access to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors is required for NGS to be of clinical utility in prostate cancer. Allele-specific PCR or a small-panel multiplex-gene NGS was suggested to identify key alterations in CRC. This document offers practical guidance on the clinical utility of NGS in specific cancer indications from an Asian perspective.

Introduction: People with cancer are at higher risk of serious illness and death from COVID‐19 infection. We investigated COVID‐19 vaccine uptake among patients with solid organ and blood cancers and explored factors related to hesitancy.Methods: Cross‐sectional online survey of adults with a history of cancer at three health services across metropolitan and regional Victoria. Vaccine hesitancy was measured by the validated Oxford COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy scale.Results: There were 1073 respondents: 56% female; median age 62 years (range 23 ‐ 91). Commonest tumor types included breast 29%, gastrointestinal 19%, hematological 15%, genitourinary 15%, and lung 8%. Thirty‐six percent had metastatic disease, and 54% were receiving active anticancer treatment.Eighty‐four percent of respondents indicated positive intent toward COVID‐19 vaccination, 10% were undecided, and 6% indicated negative attitudes. At least one vaccine dose had been received by 65% of respondents, leaving 35% unvaccinated. Fifty‐eight percent of unvaccinated patients answered that they would “definitely” or “probably” take a vaccine. Higher vaccine uptake was significantly associated with older age, male gender, English as first language, longer time since cancer diagnosis, and not being on current anticancer treatment. Concerns regarding vaccine side effects, particularly thrombosis, and the desire for clear medical advice were prominent among unvaccinated respondents.Conclusion: Despite being eligible for COVID‐19 vaccination since March 2021, a substantial minority of patients with cancer remained unvaccinated as of August 2021. Targeted communication and educational resources addressing vaccine safety in the context of cancer are key to promoting vaccine uptake in this vulnerable population.

Current first-line systemic treatment in most patients with metastatic hormone receptor-positive, HER-2 negative breast cancer is an aromatase inhibitor in combination with a cyclin dependant kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitor. Frequently, these patients require palliative radiotherapy (RT) for symptomatic disease management. There is a paucity of data on the safety of combining a CDK 4/6 inhibitor with palliative RT, with conflicting case reports in the literature. We report on 5 cases at our institution where enhanced radiotherapy toxicity was observed when palliative doses of RT was delivered during or prior to treatment with a CDK 4/6 inhibitor. After review of pre-clinical and mechanistic data, we hypothesise that the effects of CDK4/6 inhibition on normal tissue and the tumour microenvironment may impede tissue recovery and exacerbate acute radiation and radiation recall toxicities. Further studies are required to clarify the potential toxicities of this combination. Clinicians should consider the potential risks when combining CDK 4/6 inhibitors with palliative RT and individualise patient management accordingly.

As COVID-19 vaccinations became available and were proven effective in preventing serious infection, uptake amongst individuals varied, including in medically vulnerable populations. This cross-sectional multi-site study examined vaccine uptake, hesitancy, and explanatory factors amongst people with serious and/or chronic health conditions, including the impact of underlying disease on attitudes to vaccination. A 42-item survey was distributed to people with cancer, diabetes, or multiple sclerosis across ten Australian health services from 30 June to 5 October 2021. The survey evaluated sociodemographic and disease-related characteristics and incorporated three validated scales measuring vaccine hesitancy and vaccine-related beliefs generally and specific to their disease: the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale and the Disease Influenced Vaccine Acceptance Scale-Six. Among 4683 participants (2548 [54.4%] female, 2108 [45.0%] male, 27 [0.6%] other; mean [SD] age, 60.6 [13.3] years; 3560 [76.0%] cancer, 842 [18.0%] diabetes, and 281 [6.0%] multiple sclerosis), 3813 (81.5%) self-reported having at least one COVID-19 vaccine. Unvaccinated status was associated with younger age, female sex, lower education and income, English as a second language, and residence in regional areas. Unvaccinated participants were more likely to report greater vaccine hesitancy and more negative perceptions toward vaccines. Disease-related vaccine concerns were associated with unvaccinated status and hesitancy, including greater complacency about COVID-19 infection, and concerns relating to vaccine efficacy and impact on their disease and/or treatment. This highlights the need to develop targeted strategies and education about COVID-19 vaccination to support medically vulnerable populations and health professionals.

Background: We assessed nofazinlimab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, in solid tumors and combined with regorafenib in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).Methods: This phase 1 study comprised nofazinlimab dose escalation (phase 1a) and expansion (phase 1b), and regorafenib dose escalation (80 or 120 mg QD, days 1–21 of 28-day cycles) combined with 300-mg nofazinlimab Q4W (part 2a) to determine safety, efficacy, and RP2D.Results: In phase 1a (N = 21), no dose-limiting toxicity occurred from 1 to 10 mg/kg Q3W, with 200 mg Q3W determined as the monotherapy RP2D. In phase 1b (N = 87), 400-mg Q6W and 200-mg Q3W regimens were found comparable. In part 2a (N = 14), both regimens were deemed plausible RP2Ds. Fatigue was the most frequent treatment-emergent adverse event (AE) in this study. Any-grade and grade 3/4 nofazinlimab-related AEs were 71.4% and 14.3%, 56.3% and 5.7%, and 57.1% and 21.4% in phases 1a, 1b, and part 2a, respectively. ORRs were 14.3% and 25.3% in phases 1a and 1b, respectively. In part 2a, no patients had radiological responses.Conclusions: Nofazinlimab monotherapy was well tolerated and demonstrated preliminary anti-tumor activity in multiple tumor types. Regorafenib plus nofazinlimab had a manageable safety profile but was not associated with any response in mCRC.Clinical trial registr ation: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03475251).