Vaccination of Adults With Cancer: ASCO Guideline

Respiratory syncytial virus vaccination in older adults and patients with chronic disorders: A position paper from the Portuguese Society of Pulmonology, the Portuguese Association of General and Family Medicine, the Portuguese Society of Cardiology, the Portuguese Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, the Portuguese Society of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, and the Portuguese Society of Internal Medicine

BACKGROUND

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is an important cause of lower respiratory tract infection, hospitalisation and death in adults.

METHODS

Based on evidence regarding the impact of RSV on adult populations at risk for severe infection and the efficacy and safety of RSV vaccines, the Portuguese Society of Pulmonology, the Portuguese Association of General and Family Medicine, the Portuguese Society of Cardiology, the Portuguese Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, the Portuguese Society of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, and the Portuguese Society of Internal Medicine endorses this position paper with recommendations to prevent RSV-associated disease and its complications in adults through vaccination.

CONCLUSION

The RSV vaccine is recommended for people aged ≥50 years with risk factors (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, heart failure, coronary artery disease, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, chronic liver disease, immunocompromise, frailty, dementia, and residence in a nursing home) and all persons aged ≥60 years. If it cannot be made available to this population, then the vaccine should be prioritised for individuals aged ≥75 years and those aged ≥50 years with risk factors. The vaccine should preferably be given between September and November and can be co-administered with the influenza vaccine. Ongoing studies on RSV vaccines may justify extending these recommendations in the future.

Prevention of herpes zoster in acquired immunocompromised conditions: Review of updates and perspectives from Hong Kong

Patients with acquired immunocompromising conditions face considerable risk of developing herpes zoster (HZ). Based on the underlying medical conditions and degree of immune dysfunction, these patients require tailored strategies for HZ prevention. In Hong Kong, there is currently a lack of guidelines addressing the unique needs of this vulnerable population, including the use of prophylactic measures such as antivirals and vaccines. An expert panel comprising clinical immunologists, nephrologists, infectious diseases specialists, rheumatologists, hematologists and oncologists in Hong Kong met to review current literature and international guidelines to propose a locally adapted decision-making framework for HZ prophylaxis, in patients with acquired immunocompromised conditions. This article summarizes the consensus and presents a guiding criteria for clinicians to navigate the complexities associated with HZ prevention, in the context of acquired immunodeficiency.

Periodic Boosters of COVID-19 Vaccines Do Not Affect the Safety and Efficacy of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Longitudinal Analysis of the Vax-On-Third Study

BACKGROUND

Increasing evidence suggests that the immunogenicity of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines might influence the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Current studies have not considered the impact of additional vaccinations, which are now recommended as a preventive strategy against SARS-CoV-2 infection for cancer patients receiving active treatments. Consequently, we leveraged the prospective monitoring from the Vax-On-Third study to explore whether periodic mRNA vaccine boosters administered around the start of ICIs could influence the rates of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and survival outcomes in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Our study included patients with a histological diagnosis of metastatic NSCLC and available PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS), who had undergone at least two cycles of upfront treatment with pembrolizumab, cemiplimab, or their combination with platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients who received any additional mRNA-based vaccine doses within 60 days before to 30 days after starting ICIs accounted for the exposed cohort. Those who declined further boosters formed the reference cohort. We analyzed differences in irAE frequencies, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) using univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Between 27 November 2021 and 31 March 2024, we enrolled 226 eligible patients. The exposed cohort consisted of 112 patients who had received either a third or fourth dose of tozinameran or a bivalent booster. Based on PD-L1 expression levels, 93 (41%) and 133 (59%) patients received single-agent ICIs (PD-L1 TPS ≥ 50%) or combination regimens (PD-L1 TPS < 50%), respectively. Propensity-score matching using comprehensive criteria resulted in two cohorts of 102 patients each, with an optimal balance of prognostic factors. A thorough analysis of any grade irAEs showed no significant differences between the cohorts. A longitudinal survival assessment with a median follow-up of 22.8 (95% CI 19.2-26.0) months showed no difference between the cohorts. The median PFS for the reference and exposed cohorts was 7.5 (95% CI 5.9-9.1) and 8.2 (95% CI 6.2-10.2) months, respectively (p = 0.408; HR 0.88 [95% CI 0.66-1.18]). The median OS for the reference and exposed cohorts was 10.5 (95% CI 7.9-13.0) and 13.8 (95% CI 12.0-15.5) months, respectively (p = 0.170; HR 0.81 [95% CI 0.59-1.09]). Multivariate analysis confirmed that receiving additional mRNA vaccine boosters did not significantly affect the risk of disease progression or mortality. Univariate analysis within the subgroup of patients with high PD-L1 TPS who received single-agent ICIs showed a significant OS advantage for patients in the exposed cohort (9.7 [95% CI 8.1-11.2] vs. 18.6 [95% CI 13.5-23.6] months; p = 0.034; HR 0.59 [95% CI 0.36-0.96]).

CONCLUSION

After optimally balancing prognostic factors, regular mRNA vaccine boosters at the onset of ICIs did not impact the safety and survival of patients with advanced NSCLC. The improved outcome observed in patients with high PD-L1 expression levels aligns with previous findings and warrants further investigation.

The Influence of Radioligand Therapy on Immunogenicity Against SARS-CoV-2-A Retrospective Single-Arm Cohort Study of Metastatic Prostate Cancer Patients Receiving PSMA Radioligand Therapy

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has become a rising threat for immunocompromised cancer patients. The reduced immune defense may be a result of the malignancy itself or a side effect of therapy. While many chemotherapies can severely diminish the effect of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, the effect of radioligand therapy has not yet been studied so far. Methods: In our database, 64 patient records of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer that were treated with PSMA-directed radioligand therapy (PRLT) were randomly selected and checked for specific information (vaccination status, past corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infections, the period between PRLT and vaccination, and antibody titers). A total of 30 patient records had sufficient information to examine the interference between PRLT and the vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. Results: In the analyzed cohort, 96.7% of the patients achieved seroconversion after receiving-on average-the third (booster) vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 and two PRLT cycles with average administered activities of 16.1 ± 7.2 GBq (435.1 ± 194.6 mCi) of lutetium-177 and 13.7 ± 6.6 MBq (0.37 ± 0.18 mCi) of actinium-225 (as part of 'TANDEM therapies') per patient. Conclusions: In the reviewed population, neither the initial response nor the maintenance of a positive immune response against the SARS-CoV-2 virus was undesirably affected by PRLT. The seroconversion rate and the absolute immune titers (in many cases >25,000 BAU/mL) are comparable to the normal population. This result implies the clinically important conclusion that neither an initial nor a booster vaccination against COVID-19 must be postponed if a PRLT is planned (and vice versa).

SOHO State of the Art Updates and Next Questions | Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in Older Adults: A Comprehensive Review

Older adults (OA) with DLBCL are a heterogenous population with suboptimal outcomes. In this review, we identify and address the unique challenges encountered in the care of OA with DLBCL. We elaborate on the role and limitations of current geriatric assessment (GA) tools and ways to incorporate fitness in therapeutic decision making. We suggest best practices to implement GA in routine practice and clinical trials. The most widely used tool is simplified GA (sGA) which categorizes patients into fit, unfit and frail groups. Patients who are fit benefit from full dose/curative approach, whereas consideration should be made to reduce the intensity of chemotherapy for unfit patients. Frail patients with DLBCL are a major unmet need without any satisfactory treatment options. Ongoing investigations combining novel therapies into chemotherapy-free regimens are underway with promising early results. In the relapsed/refractory (R/R) setting, anti-CD19 CAR-T cell therapy (CART) is now the standard of care for primary refractory disease or relapse within 12 months of completing therapy. Autologous stem cell transplant is still a consideration for fit OA with relapse >12 months after completing therapy. The recent approval of bispecific antibodies is a welcome advance that will greatly benefit OA not eligible for CART. Other regimens available for patients ineligible for CART or for those who experience progression post-CART include polatuzumab-rituximab±bendamustine, tafasitamab-lenalidomide, loncastuximab or chemotherapy-based approaches such as rituximab-gemcitabine-oxaliplatin. We discuss the changing paradigm in R/R DLBCL and spotlight emerging data from recent congresses that can improve outcomes in this vulnerable population.

Vaccines for preventing infections in adults with haematological malignancies

BACKGROUND

Vaccination aims to prevent infections. People who are immunocompromised, such as those with haematological malignancies, often experience higher immunosuppression, increasing their vulnerability to infections compared to individuals with solid tumours or healthy individuals.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review is to summarise and evaluate the benefits and risks of vaccines for preventing infections in adults with haematological malignancies.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive systematic search in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and Web of Science on 2 December 2024 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and for controlled non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs). We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO (World Health Organization) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs and controlled NRSIs evaluating the preventive effect of vaccines on outcomes prioritised by clinical experts, patients, and patient representatives. The prioritised outcomes for adults (≥ 18 years) with haematological malignancies (excluding those receiving cellular therapies) were infection incidence, all-cause mortality, quality of life, adverse events of any grade, serious adverse events, and adverse events of special interest. We looked for studies that evaluated a broad range of vaccine types (e.g. COVID-19, diphtheria, Haemophilus influenzae type b, hepatitis B, herpes zoster, influenza, Neisseria meningitidis, pertussis, polio, Streptococcus pneumoniae, or tetanus), but we excluded live-attenuated vaccines.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed current Cochrane methodological standards in the conduct of this review. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool (RoB 2) for RCTs and Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) for controlled NRSIs.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six studies (four RCTs, two controlled NRSIs) with a total of 25,886 participants. We present the RCT results here and the NRSI findings from NRSIs in the full review. We judged one RCT on herpes zoster to be at low risk of bias overall, and we had 'some concerns' about bias in the other RCT on herpes zoster. We had 'some concerns' about bias in the RCTs on COVID-19 and influenza vaccines. Herpes zoster vaccines Two RCTs, involving 3067 participants with a range of haematological malignancies, evaluated vaccines for preventing herpes zoster compared to placebo or no vaccine. Vaccines may reduce herpes zoster incidence up to 21 months post-vaccination, although the 95% CI includes the possibility of no effect (4% versus 6%; RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.07 to 2.23; 2 RCTs, 3067 participants; low-certainty evidence). Vaccines probably have little to no effect on all-cause mortality up to 28 days post-vaccination (2.7% versus 2.6%; RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.64; 2548 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Vaccines slightly increase any-grade adverse events within 30 days (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.18; 3110 participants; high-certainty evidence), but probably do not increase serious adverse events within 12 months (23% versus 29%; RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.05; 562 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) after vaccination. Vaccines increase injection site adverse events substantially (40% versus 13%; RR 3.07, 95% CI 2.62 to 3.59; high-certainty evidence) and also increase systemic adverse events (10% versus 6%; RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.40; high-certainty evidence), as measured in 2548 participants within 28 days post-vaccination. Neither RCT reported quality of life. COVID-19 vaccines One RCT, involving 95 participants with lymphoma, leukaemia or myeloma, evaluated the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine compared to placebo or no vaccine. Evidence about the effect of BNT162b2 vaccine on the incidence of COVID-19 up to six months after the second dose compared to placebo or no vaccine remains very uncertain (2.2% versus 2%; RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.07 to 17.25; 1 RCT, 95 participants; very low certainty evidence). Regarding safety data (mixed population including both solid tumours and haematological malignancies), BNT162b2 vaccine probably increases the number of participants with any grade adverse events (35% versus 17.5%; RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.71 to 2.30; 1 RCT, 2328 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and there may be little to no difference concerning the number of participants experiencing serious adverse events (2.4% versus 1.7%; RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.54; 1 RCT, 2328 participants; low-certainty evidence). The RCT did not report all-cause mortality, quality of life, injection site adverse events or systemic adverse events. Influenza vaccines No RCTs evaluated an influenza vaccine versus placebo or no vaccine. One RCT, involving 122 participants with plasma cell disorders, evaluated different dosing regimens for an influenza vaccine on the incidence of influenza infection. Evidence is very uncertain regarding the effect of two doses of high-dose trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine compared to one dose (with strength based on age) of influenza vaccination on the incidence of infection within the 2015 to 2016 flu season (4% versus 8%; RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.08; very low-certainty evidence). The RCT did not report all-cause mortality, quality of life, any-grade or serious adverse events, or injection site or systemic adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence on vaccines for preventing infections in adults with haematological malignancies is limited and uncertain. Herpes zoster vaccines may reduce infection risk for up to 21 months, but the certainty of the evidence is low. While there is a considerable increase in short-term adverse events (high-certainty evidence), no increase in serious adverse events was observed at up to 12 months (moderate-certainty evidence). Data on long-term impacts on other outcomes are lacking. For COVID-19 and influenza vaccines, the evidence is very uncertain. We found no studies that could be included in the review of vaccines for our other infectious diseases of interest: diphtheria, Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), hepatitis B, Neisseria meningitidis, pertussis, polio, Streptococcus pneumoniae, or tetanus. Our review underscores the need for high-quality RCTs and controlled NRSIs with better reporting, larger samples, longer follow-ups, and a focus on patient-relevant outcomes, such as quality of life and long-term safety. A robust and continuously updated evidence base is essential to guide clinical and public health decisions.

Sepsis in patients who are immunocompromised: diagnostic challenges and future therapies

Sepsis is a life-threatening, dysregulated host response to infection. Immunosuppression is a risk factor for infections and sepsis. However, the specific immune derangements elevating the risk for infections and sepsis remain unclear in the individual patient, raising the question of whether a general state of immunosuppression exists. In this Review, we explore the relationship between immunosuppression and sepsis, detailing the definitions, causes, and clinical implications. We address the effect of primary immunodeficiencies, acquired conditions, and drugs on the risk of infection and the development of sepsis. Patients with sepsis who are immunocompromised often present with atypical symptoms and diagnostic test results can differ, making early recognition difficult. Future perspectives entail novel biomarkers to improve early sepsis detection and tailored treatments to modulate immune function. Including patients who are immunocompromised in clinical trials is crucial to enhance the relevance of research findings and improve treatment strategies for this vulnerable population.

Managing Rheumatoid Arthritis in Older Adults with Cancer

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune condition disproportionately affecting older adults (> 60 years), who often experience increased disease severity and comorbidities, including cancer. A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted, examining the prevalence of malignancy in patients with RA, associated risk factors, and treatment challenges, including management considerations such as psychological distress and lifestyle modifications. Clinical guidelines and consensus statements were summarized to provide practical insights for optimizing care. Older adults with RA are at an elevated risk for developing cancer due to chronic inflammation, immunosenescence from aging, and shared risk factors such as smoking. Patients with RA tend to have poorer cancer survival rates than individuals without RA, particularly for lung cancer and lymphoma. Immunosuppressive therapies used to treat RA may modestly increase cancer risks but are critical for disease control. Current guidelines emphasize discontinuation or adjustment of RA therapies upon cancer diagnosis, with tailored approaches based on cancer type and stage. Non-pharmacologic interventions, including lifestyle modifications and psychological support, play a vital role in improving quality of life and mitigating disease flares during cancer treatment. The management of RA in older adults with a history of cancer requires a personalized, multidisciplinary approach that balances the need for RA symptom control without affecting cancer outcomes. Shared decision-making, incorporating patient preferences and comorbidities, is critical for optimizing care. Further research is needed to strengthen evidence-based guidelines for this population and address gaps in understanding treatment safety and efficacy.

Preventing pneumococcal infections in patients with hematological malignancies: a review of evidence and recommendations based on modified Delphi consensus

Introduction

Individuals with hematological malignancies (HMs) are at a high risk of invasive pneumococcal disease due to underlying malignancy and subsequent immunosuppressive anticancer therapy. Early management of pneumococcal infections is crucial for reducing morbidity and mortality in this vulnerable patient subgroup. In this study, we aim to review the current evidence and recommendations regarding the use of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) in patients with HMs and develop a consensus document on the optimal timing and patient profiles who can benefit from them.

Methods

The modified Delphi consensus method was used for achieving consensus. The panel comprised a scientific committee of six experts from India. Questions were drafted for discussion around: (i) the risk and consequences of pneumococcal disease in HMs; (ii) barriers to pneumococcal vaccination in the hemato-oncology clinical setting; and (iii) evidence and optimal timing of pneumococcal vaccines in HMs. The questionnaire was shared with the panel through an online survey platform (Delphi round 1). The consensus level was classified as high (≥80%), moderate (60%-79%), and low (< 60%). A Delphi round 2 meeting was conducted to discuss the questions that received near or no consensus to reach an agreement. The final draft of consensus statements was circulated among the experts for approval.

Results

Pneumonia with or without bacteremia and bacteremia without foci of infection are the most frequently reported clinical presentations of pneumococcal infections in patients with HMs. A high risk of pneumococcal disease has been observed in patients with multiple myeloma (MM), acute myeloid leukemia (AML), acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Priming with PCV enhances the response to pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine 23 (PPSV23) in patients with HMs. Experts agreed that PCV is beneficial and can be strongly recommended in patients with CLL, MM, and patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) would benefit from systematic revaccination with PCV after chemotherapy. The evidence is inadequate to consistently recommend pneumococcal vaccination to all patients with lymphoma, AML, and adults with ALL.

Conclusion

This expert consensus will guide clinicians on the recommended approach for administering pneumococcal vaccination to patients with HMs.

Herpes Zoster Vaccination: Insights into Efficacy, Safety, and Guidelines

BACKGROUND

The varicella-zoster virus (VZV) is a human herpesvirus that primarily causes varicella (chickenpox) as an initial infection, characterized by distinctive skin lesions. It can later reactivate, leading to herpes zoster (shingles). Once reactivated, VZV infection may result in serious complications, the most common being postherpetic neuralgia. Fortunately, vaccination can prevent this condition.

OBJECTIVES

In this study, we provide a comprehensive analysis of zoster vaccines, including clinical trials, safety profiles, and reimbursement guidelines across various countries.

RESULTS

Our findings confirm the vaccine's effectiveness and safety across diverse populations, aligning with previous clinical trials and real-world data, and summarize global vaccination guidelines.

COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Hematological Malignances

Patients with hematologic malignancies (HM) represent a population particularly vulnerable to infections due to their cancer-related immune deficiency and the immunosuppressive treatment they are administered. Accordingly, a high hospitalization and mortality rate has been consistently reported in such a frail population during the first COVID-19 pandemic waves. After a brief description of the clinical impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with blood cancers, this narrative review is focused on the protective effect of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with HM. All in all, the results from the literature analysis indicate that booster shots in fully vaccinated HM patients are significantly able to increase seroconversion rates, which represent the best surrogate of vaccine efficacy. Despite these encouraging data, concerns still remain regarding the lower immune responses to COVID-19 vaccines, even to booster doses, in severely immunosuppressed HM patients, such as those receiving anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody therapies and hematopoietic stem cell transplants.

Vaccination of people with solid tumors and diabetes: existing evidence and recommendations. A position statement from a multidisciplinary panel of scientific societies

Diabetes and cancer are two of the most common public health concerns worldwide. The complex interplay of these two conditions is a growing area of research, as patients with diabetes are at increased risk for developing cancer, and vice versa. Furthermore, both patient populations show increased risk of many communicable infectious diseases and their adverse consequences, while vaccination can play a crucial role in their prevention, improving patient outcomes. Vaccination should represent a standard part of care for patients with cancer, diabetes, and both the diseases simultaneously, including people undergoing cancer treatment or in remission. Several international guidelines provide recommendations for vaccinating people with cancer or diabetes, but the two conditions have not been specifically evaluated together. Here we present a multidisciplinary consensus position paper on vaccination in patients with cancer and diabetes. The position paper is the result of a collaborative effort between experts from the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM), Italian Association of Medical Diabetologists (AMD), Italian Society of Diabetology (SID), Italian Society of Endocrinology (SIE), and Italian Society of Pharmacology (SIF). The paper provides a comprehensive overview of the current state-of-the-art knowledge on vaccination in patients with cancer and diabetes. It discusses the importance of vaccination in preventing infections, focuses attention on the need to consider the unique challenges faced by patients with cancer and diabetes when it comes to vaccine administration, and highlights the need for coordinated care to optimize treatment outcomes. Overall, the consensus position paper provides healthcare professionals caring for patients with cancer and diabetes recommendations on the use of various vaccines, including influenza, COVID-19, HZV, and HPV vaccines, as well as guidance on how to address common concerns and challenges related to vaccine administration.

Perspectives on Outpatient Delivery of Bispecific T-Cell Engager Therapies for Multiple Myeloma

In the past few years, a new promising therapy, called bispecific T-cell engager (TCE), has been developed and is now available in many countries for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. T-cell engagers are associated with sustained efficacy and progression-free survival benefits in patients with heavily treated myeloma. However, complications such as cytokine release syndrome (CRS), immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), and infections complicate their administration, particularly in remote centers. This review discusses the key requirements for delivering TCEs therapies, focusing on outpatient delivery. We also outline the primary acute and chronic complications of TCE therapy and their management.

Vaccines for preventing infections in adults with solid tumours

BACKGROUND

Infections are one of the most frequent complications seen in adults with cancer, often arising from the underlying condition or as a result of immunosuppressive treatments. Certain infections (e.g. influenza, pneumococcal disease, and meningococcal disease) may be prevented through vaccination. However, adults with solid tumours may elicit varying immune responses compared to healthy individuals.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and risks of vaccines for the prevention of infectious diseases in adults with solid tumours.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two further databases, and two study registries from inception to 2 December 2024 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs evaluating vaccines against the following infectious diseases in adults (≥ 18 years of age) with any diagnosis of solid tumour cancer compared to placebo or no vaccine: pneumococcal disease, Haemophilus influenzae type b disease, meningococcal disease, pertussis, hepatitis B, tetanus, polio, diphtheria, influenza, herpes zoster, and COVID-19. In cases where RCTs were unavailable, we included prospective controlled NRSIs. We excluded live-attenuated vaccines.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. Two review authors independently screened search results, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias (RoB) in the included studies using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool for RCTs and ROBINS-I for NRSIs. We rated the certainty in the evidence using the GRADE approach for the following prioritised outcomes: incidence of infection concerned, all-cause mortality, quality of life, adverse events (AEs) of any grade, serious adverse events (SAEs), localised events at the injection site, and systemic events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 studies (five RCTs and five NRSIs) involving 81,823 adults with solid tumours receiving vaccines to prevent infections with herpes zoster, influenza, or COVID-19. Six studies included participants with varied solid tumours, while two focused on neck and oesophageal cancer or lung cancer. We assessed the RCTs to be at low or moderate risk of bias, whereas most NRSIs were at critical risk of bias due to concerns about confounding. We identified two ongoing studies: one RCT evaluating an influenza vaccine, and one NRSI evaluating COVID-19 vaccines. Twelve studies are awaiting assessment. We did not identify RCTs or NRSIs of vaccines for preventing pneumococcal disease, Haemophilus influenzae type b disease, meningococcal disease, pertussis, hepatitis B, tetanus, polio, or diphtheria compared to placebo or no vaccine. The results from the RCTs are presented below. The results from the NRSIs are detailed in the main text of the review. No study reported quality of life. Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster compared to placebo or no vaccine Three RCTs (3054 participants) evaluated vaccines to prevent herpes zoster. Herpes zoster vaccines decrease the incidence of herpes zoster up to 29.4 months after the final dose (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.59; 1 RCT, 2678 participants; high-certainty evidence). Herpes zoster vaccines probably make little or no difference to all-cause mortality up to 28 days after the final dose (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.50; 2 RCTs, 2744 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); make little or no difference to any-grade AEs up to 30 days after final dose (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.05; 3 RCTs, 2976 participants; high-certainty evidence), and probably make little or no difference in SAEs up to 30 days (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.24; I² = 0%; 3 RCTs, 2976 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Vaccines to prevent herpes zoster increase the number of participants with localised events at the injection site compared to placebo or no vaccine (RR 6.81, 95% CI 2.52 to 18.40; 3 RCTs, 2966 participants; high-certainty evidence) and may make little or no difference to the number of participants with systemic events up to 30 days after final dose (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.50; 3 RCTs, 2966 participants; low-certainty evidence). Vaccines for preventing influenza compared to placebo or no vaccine One RCT (75 participants) evaluated vaccines to prevent influenza. We are uncertain about the effects of influenza vaccines administered prior to surgery on all-cause mortality (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 15.33; 1 RCT, 66 participants; very low-certainty evidence), any-grade AEs (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.54; 1 RCT, 75 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and SAEs (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.76 to 2.83; 1 RCT, 75 participants; very low-certainty evidence) up to 15 days post-surgery. The RCT did not report the incidence of influenza, localised events at the injection site, or systemic events. Vaccines for preventing COVID-19 compared to placebo or no vaccine One RCT (2256 participants) evaluated vaccines to prevent COVID-19. Participants may have been exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 variants alpha, beta, and gamma. Vaccines to prevent COVID-19 probably decrease the incidence of COVID-19 in participants without previous COVID-19 infection up to six months after the second dose (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.25; 1 RCT, 2100 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The COVID-19 vaccines probably increase any-grade AEs (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.71 to 2.30; 1 RCT, 2328 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). They may have little or no effect on SAEs up to 6 months after the second dose (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.54; 1 RCT, 2328 participants; low-certainty evidence). The RCT did not report localised events at the injection site or systemic events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In adults with solid tumours, herpes zoster vaccines reduced the incidence of herpes zoster (high-certainty evidence), although localised events at the injection site were more likely to occur (high-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of influenza vaccines on all-cause mortality, any-grade AEs, and SAEs (very low-certainty evidence); the incidence of influenza was not measured in the studies. COVID-19 vaccines probably decrease the incidence of COVID-19 in those without prior infection (moderate-certainty evidence) but probably increase any-grade AEs (moderate-certainty evidence). We found no RCTs or NRSIs investigating vaccines for preventing pneumococcal disease, Haemophilus influenzae type b disease, meningococcal disease, pertussis, hepatitis B, tetanus, polio, diphtheria compared to placebo or no vaccine, in adults with solid tumours. Additional research, preferably of RCT design, is necessary to resolve uncertainties.

Venous Thromboembolic Risk Does Not Increase After a Third Dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-BNT162b2 Vaccine in Cancer Patients Receiving Active Systemic Therapies: Updated Results from the Vax-On-Third-Profile Study

(1) Background: Clinical evidence has raised concerns regarding a potential link between COVID-19 mRNA-based vaccines and the occurrence of thromboembolic events. So far, no research has explored the effects of this possible interaction in cancer patients undergoing active treatment. We leveraged prospective monitoring from the Vax-On-Third-Profile study to examine the development of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after the third dose of mRNA-BNT162b2 (tozinameran) and its association with antibody and lymphocyte responses. (2) Methods: Patients who had received a third dose of tozinameran and had not experienced any VTE in the previous 30 days were eligible. A serological evaluation was conducted before the booster vaccination (timepoint-1) and four weeks thereafter (timepoint-2) to measure antibody titers against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, as well as to determine the absolute counts of T-helper cells, T-cytotoxic cells, B cells, and NK cells. Data were acquired from November 2021 to October 2022 and analyzed from November 2022 to October 2023. (3) Results: The present study involved 429 patients who were given a third dose of tozinameran from 26 September to 30 October 2021. Among the active treatments of interest, 109 (25.4%) patients received targeted therapy, 111 (25.9%) received cytotoxic chemotherapy, 39 (9.1%) received immune checkpoint inhibitors, 21 (4.9%) received endocrine therapy, and 30 (7.0%) received a combination of chemotherapy and targeted agents in the eight weeks preceding the booster dosing. In addition, 119 (27.7%) patients who had discontinued any systemic therapy for at least 12 weeks accounted for the reference subgroup. After a median follow-up time of 10.6 (95% CI 8.1-11.7) months, we observed 31 venous thromboembolic events in the general population, for an overall incidence rate of 7.2% (95% CI 5.0-10.1). The median time to VTE development after booster immunization was 99 (95% CI 85-112) days. In a univariate comparison, patients exposed to targeted therapies (11.3% [95% CI 6.0-18.9]; p = 0.030) or immune checkpoint inhibitors (16.2% [95% CI 6.2-32.0]; p = 0.012) had a significantly higher incidence of VTE than the reference cohort (3.4% [95% CI 0.9-8.5]). Univariate analysis of immune responses showed that only dynamic changes pertaining to NK cell distributions correlated significantly with VTE occurrence. Multivariate regression analysis confirmed only a high-level NK cell response (OR 6.10 [9% CI 2.16-17.21]; p = 0.001), a history of thromboembolic events (OR 9.81 [3.99-24.13]; p < 0.001), and the presence of a central venous catheter (OR 5.02 [95% CI 1.84-13.67]; p = 0.002) as independently associated with an increased risk of VTE. (4) Conclusions: This prospective cohort study provides unprecedented evidence that cancer patients have no increased risk of developing VTE after the third dose of tozinameran, regardless of the type of active therapy. The specific pattern of lymphocyte response appears to increase thromboembolic risk, underlying immune dysregulation as a causal cofactor. These findings emphasize the need for additional monitoring after periodic COVID-19 vaccination in cancer patients.

Outcomes and Risk Factors for Influenza and Respiratory Syncytial Virus Lower Respiratory Tract Infections and Mortality in Patients With Lymphoma or Multiple Myeloma: A 7-Year Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Respiratory viral infection (RVI) is a significant complication in patients with hematologic malignancies. While risk factors of lower respiratory tract infections (LRIs) and mortality have been studied in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients, data remain limited for patients with lymphoma and multiple myeloma (MM). We investigated outcomes and risk factors of LRI and mortality secondary to respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) or influenza virus (IFV) infections in these populations.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study in adults with lymphoma or MM with RSV or IFV RVIs between 2016 and 2022. Primary outcomes were LRI and all-cause 30- and 90-day mortality.

Results

We analyzed 440 patients with 490 consecutive viral episodes: 297 (61%) with MM and 193 (39%) with lymphoma, 258 (52%) were IFV-related, and 234 (48%) RSV-related (2 coinfections). At presentation, 62% were diagnosed with upper respiratory tract infection (URI) and 38% with LRI. During follow-up, 57% were hospitalized, 8% required intensive care unit transfer, and 20 (4%) died within 30 days. On multivariable analysis, RSV infection (vs IFV), current/former smoking, steroid exposure, lymphopenia (≤200 cells/mL), and high serum creatinine were associated with LRI. MM (vs lymphoma) diagnosis, current/former smoking, lymphopenia, and nosocomial infection were associated with 30-day mortality, whereas LRI (vs URI), current/former smoking, and lymphopenia were associated with 90-day mortality.

Conclusions

We described a high burden of IFV and RSV infections in patients with lymphoma and MM and found risk factors associated with LRI and mortality. These factors could potentially identify high-risk patients, enabling better and prompt management strategies.

Medication management: supportive care medications in older adults with cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review raises awareness regarding the lack of data available for healthcare professionals caring for older adults with cancer when using supportive care medications.

RECENT FINDINGS

Guidelines for supportive cancer care lack concrete recommendations on the appropriate use of medications in older adults with cancer. Some guidelines, such as the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Older Adult Oncology guideline, contain vital information for prescribers to consider when choosing a supportive care medication. Information at present in most guidelines is generally vague, identifying areas where caution is required in older adults, without specific details.

SUMMARY

Research is needed to assess the efficacy and safety of supportive cancer care medications in older adults.

How Should We Manage the Impact of Antimicrobial Resistance in Patients With Cancer? An Oncological and Infectious Disease Specialist Point of View

Patients with solid tumors present a higher risk of infectious diseases with worse outcomes compared with immunocompetent patients. Prolonged treatment of prophylactic and empirically chosen antibiotics and health care-acquired infections can predispose patients with cancer to infections with antimicrobial-resistant (AMR) organisms. AMR is a global health priority and can affect patients with cancer. The outcome of patients with cancer worsens dramatically if multidrug-resistant (MDR) microorganisms cause infections. Moreover, the emergence of MDR organisms increases health care costs. Antimicrobial stewardship programs can be useful to monitor and improve the use of antibiotics in all oncological settings, including the palliative setting. Awareness of the magnitude of these issues is still low, so it is important to inform and educate oncologists. This narrative review aims to illustrate the main evidence on infections caused by AMR organisms in patients with cancer and the tools that oncologists should have to enhance their multidisciplinary management.

Antibody Therapy for Patients with Lymphoid Malignancies: Past and Present

Antibody therapies are a crucial component of modern lymphoid malignancy treatment and an exciting area of active research. We performed a review of modern antibody therapies used in the treatment of lymphoid malignancies, with an emphasis on landmark studies and current directions. We describe the indications for rituximab, obinutuzumab, ADCs, and bispecific antibody therapies. Finally, we summarize early data from ongoing trials on emerging novel therapy combination regimens and discuss the role of machine learning in future therapy development.

Pertussis Vaccination for Adults: An Updated Guide for Clinicians

Pertussis, or whooping cough, is a highly contagious respiratory infection caused by the Gram-negative bacterium Bordetella pertussis. Although traditionally associated with children, pertussis is increasingly prevalent among adults, particularly those with comorbidities or weakened immune systems, where it can lead to severe complications. Diagnosing pertussis in adults can be challenging due to its nonspecific symptoms, underreporting, and the limited sensitivity of available diagnostic tests. While treatment with macrolides is generally effective, it may not significantly alter the clinical course of the disease, and growing concerns about macrolide resistance are emerging. Vaccination remains the cornerstone of prevention, offering proven immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety. However, vaccination uptake remains low, partly due to limited patient awareness and insufficient prioritization by healthcare professionals. This review aims to provide clinicians with critical insights into pertussis epidemiology, vaccination strategies, and the latest guideline recommendations, empowering them to engage in meaningful discussions with adult patients and advocate for increased vaccination to combat this often-overlooked infection.

Infection prevention in the immunocompromised traveler due to conditions other than transplantation: a review

This narrative review explores the risks related to infection in immunocompromised travelers due to conditions other than transplantation, and evaluates the evidence behind current prophylactic strategies, including immunizations, antimicrobials, and non-pharmacological interventions, to prevent various infection and how the current evidence applies to this special patient population, from the perspective of a US-based traveler.

Longitudinal Study of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccinations and Infections in Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer: Stabilizing Immune Responses and Neutralizing Emerging Variants with Variant-Adapted Antigen Exposures

This longitudinal study examined how active gastrointestinal (GI) cancer types affect immune responses to SARS-CoV-2, focusing on the ability to neutralize the Omicron variants. Patients with GI cancer (n = 168) were categorized into those with hepatocellular carcinoma, hepatic metastatic GI cancer, non-hepatic metastatic GI cancer, and two control groups of patients with and without underlying liver diseases. Humoral and cellular immune responses were evaluated before and after Omicron antigen exposures. In the pre-Omicron era, humoral SARS-CoV-2 immunity decreased after three antigen contacts without further antigen exposure. While Omicron neutralization was significantly lower than wildtype neutralization (p < 0.01), Omicron infections were yet mild to moderate. Additional Omicron exposures improved IgG levels (p < 0.01) and Omicron neutralization (p < 0.01). However, this effect was significantly less intense in patients with active GI cancer, particularly in patients with pancreaticobiliary neoplasms (PBN; p = 0.04), with underlying immunodeficiency (p = 0.05), and/or under conventional chemotherapy (p = 0.05). Pre-Omicron SARS-CoV-2 immunity prevented severe clinical courses of infections with Omicron variants in patients with GI cancer. However, in patients with PBN, with underlying immunodeficiency, and/or under conventional chemotherapy initial contacts with Omicron antigens triggered only reduced immune responses. Thus, subgroups could be identified for whom booster vaccinations are of special clinical significance.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Vaccination: Assessing Safety, Efficacy, and Synergistic Potential

Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become predominant therapies for cancer, the safety and efficacy of combining ICIs with vaccinations remain areas of needed investigation. As ICIs gain broader clinical application, the relevance of current vaccination guidelines for cancer patients-largely developed in the context of cytotoxic therapies-becomes increasingly uncertain. Although data support the safety of combining inactivated influenza and mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines with ICI therapy, comprehensive data on other infectious disease vaccines remain scarce. Notably, the combination of ICIs with infectious disease vaccines does not appear to exacerbate immune-related adverse events, despite the heightened cytokine activity observed. However, the efficacy of vaccines administered alongside ICIs in preventing infectious diseases remains poorly supported by robust evidence. Preliminary findings suggest a potential survival benefit in cancer patients receiving ICI therapy alongside influenza or SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, though the quality of evidence is currently low. Moreover, the synergistic potential of combining therapeutic cancer vaccines, particularly mRNA-based vaccines, with ICIs indicates promise but with a paucity of phase III data to confirm efficacy. This review critically examines the safety and efficacy of combining ICIs with both infectious disease vaccines and therapeutic cancer vaccines. While vaccination appears safe in patients undergoing ICI therapy, the impact on infectious disease prevention and cancer treatment outcomes warrants further rigorous investigation.

Viral infection after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Viral infections are important complications after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. New infections develop such as SARS-CoV-2 with the potential for severe consequences. In this review, newly published information regarding management of viral infections is discussed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Letermovir and maribavir are antiviral agents that have positively impacted the management of cytomegalovirus infections. These should today be included in treatment algorithms. The first antiviral cellular therapy for anti-CD20 refractory EBV-associated lymphoproliferative disease is now licensed and available. Vaccination as well as introduction of antiviral agents, mAbs and possibly the development of different viral strains have reduced mortality in COVID-19 in this patient population. Well designed studies have shown the improved immunogenicity of high-dose influenza vaccines. There is still an unmet medical need for patients infected with human metapneumovirus and parainfluenza viruses.

SUMMARY

Although improvements in patient management for several important posttransplantation viral infections have been reported, an unmet medical need still exists for other viruses occurring in this high-risk population.

Influenza Vaccination in Adults in the United States with COPD before and after the COVID-19 Pandemic (2017-2022): A Multi-Year Cross-Sectional Study

There is limited literature regarding seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV) among those with a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HCOPD) prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and no information on the topic assessing the years following the pandemic. This cross-sectional study used the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey (BRFSS) data from the years 2017 to 2022 (n = 822,783 adults ages 50-79 years; 50.64% males). The exposure was a HCOPD, and the outcome was SIV within the past year. Weighted and adjusted logistic regression models were conducted overall and by the significant effect modifiers: smoking status, sex, and year. Having an HCOPD significantly increases the weighted adjusted odds (WAO) of SIV when compared to not having an HCOPD overall and by smoking status, sex, and year. For 2017 through 2022, among all current, former, and never smokers with an HCOPD, the WAO of SIV were: 1.36 (1.28, 1.45), 1.35 (1.27, 1.43), and 1.18 (1.09, 1.27), respectively. Among males with an HCOPD who were current, former, and never smokers, the WAO of SIV were: 1.35 (1.23, 1.48), 1.45 (1.33, 1.58), and 1.23 (1.05, 1.44), respectively. Among females with an HCOPD who were current, former, and never smokers, the WAO of SIV were: 1.31 (1.20, 1.43), 1.24 (1.15, 1.35), and 1.13 (1.04, 1.23), respectively. Study findings suggest males had significantly greater WAO ratios of receiving SIV than females in 2020 and 2022, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. More specifically, males with an HCOPD who were former smokers had significantly greater WAOR of receiving SIV than females in 2020 and 2022. Understanding the potential barriers to SIV receipt by smoking status and sex, especially during a pandemic, and especially for individuals impacted by an HCOPD, is essential for better health interventions in times of a national crisis such as a pandemic. Additionally, SIV receipt is low among those with an HCOPD, and efforts should be made to improve this.

Unveiling the Role of Human Papillomavirus in Urogenital Carcinogenesis a Comprehensive Review

Human papillomavirus (HPV), an oncogenic DNA virus, is the most common sexually transmitted virus and significant public health concern globally. Despite the substantial prevalence of HPV infection among men, routine testing remains elusive due to the lack of approved HPV tests and the complexity of detection methods. Various studies have explored the link between HPV and genitourinary cancers, revealing different associations influenced by geographic variation, histological subtype and methodological differences. These findings underscore the importance of further research to elucidate the role of HPV in male urogenital cancers. This comprehensive review delves into the intricate relationship between HPV and male genitourinary cancers, shedding light on the virus's oncogenic mechanisms and its reported prevalence. A deeper understanding of HPV's implications for male health is essential for advancing public health initiatives and reducing the burden of urogenital cancers worldwide.