Purpose Neutropenic diet (ND) has historically been recommended to reduce infectious complications in patients with cancer. Although its use has declined over the past decade, recent studies, particularly in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT), have renewed concern regarding the safety of a liberalized diet (LD). We performed a meta-analysis of studies comparing ND with LD in patients with cancer. Methods We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases from inception through January 2026. Comparative studies evaluating ND versus LD in adults or children with cancer were included. Primary outcomes were major infections and bacteremia/fungemia; secondary outcomes were pneumonia, diarrhea, and mortality. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to calculate pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs. Results Fifteen studies including 4,320 patients met criteria for analysis. ND was not associated with significant differences in major infections (RR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.18]; P = .795), bacteremia/fungemia (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.22]; P = .805), pneumonia (RR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.59 to 1.63]; P = .933), diarrhea (RR, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.96 to 1.31]; P = .159), or mortality (RR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.15]; P = .632). Sensitivity analyses restricted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were consistent. In hematologic malignancy/HSCT studies (9 studies; 1,769 patients), no differences were observed across outcomes. In RCTs limited to these patients (6 studies; 855 patients), ND was associated with lower bacteremia/fungemia risk (RR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.47 to 0.95]; P = .023), with no differences in other outcomes. Conclusion ND was not associated with reductions in major infections, pneumonia, diarrhea, or mortality compared with LD. These findings do not support routine implementation of ND for patients with short-term neutropenia or lower-risk cancer populations although selected high-risk patients, particularly those undergoing HSCT or experiencing prolonged neutropenia related to hematologic malignancies, may still warrant cautious dietary practices.
Letter to the Editor: Observational Data on Vitamin D Do Not Justify Routine Screening or Supplementation to Improve Breast Cancer Outcomes
Clinical outcomes after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy in patients with chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract Background Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is a well-established therapeutic option associated with decreased mortality in patients with ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathies. However, the indications for patients with chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy (CCC) are not well established since these patients were underrepresented in the trials validating ICD use. Purpose This systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis aims to synthetize the available evidence in the literature on the role and outcomes of ICD in CCC. Methods A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and LILACS registries was performed following PRISMA guidelines. Studies evaluating the response to ICD in CCC were included. There were no language restrictions. Data were collected and synthesized using a meta-analysis of proportions with Freeman-Tukey double-arcsine transformation as needed. Results We included 14 observational studies and 1 randomized clinical trial (RCT), comprising 1315 patients with CCC. Mean age at ICD implantation was 58.2 ± 11.8, 65% were male, and 77% received an ICD for secondary prevention. During a mean follow up of 37.3 ± 37.0 months, the all-cause death rate was 22% (95% CI 15 to 29%; Figure 1A), the cardiovascular death rate was 16% (95% CI 11 to 22%; Figure 1B), the sudden cardiac death rate was 3% (95% CI 2 to 5%), and the non-cardiovascular death rate was 7% (95% CI 2 to 5%). In addition, 55% (95% CI 43 to 67%; Figure 1C) of patients received ≥1 appropriate ICD therapy (shocks or antitachycardia pacing), 8% (95% CI 5 to 12%) received inappropriate ICD shocks, and 23% (95% CI 11 to 37%) experienced electrical storms. Conclusion Despite ICD, the mortality rate in patients with CCC remains unacceptably high, primarily driven by cardiovascular causes, with frequent appropriate ICD therapies and electrical storms. Further studies are needed to better delineate the benefits and risks of ICD therapy in patients with CCC.Figure 1
Assessment of the prevalence of germline pathogenic variants (GPV) in neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs): A systematic review and meta-analysis.
629 Background: NENs are a heterogeneous group of tumors with variable clinical behavior. While most NENs occur sporadically, a subset arises in the context of germline cancer predisposition syndromes. The prevalence of GPVs in NENs is increasingly recognized, but the reported frequency and spectrum of genes involved remain inconsistent across studies. Therefore, systematic review and meta-analysis is helpful to clarify the prevalence and clinical significance of PGVs in pts with NENs. Methods: A systematic review with meta-analysis of prospective and retrospective studies reporting germline testing in pts with NENs was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. The primary outcome was the prevalence of GPVs. Random-effects models (GLMM) with logit transformation were applied to estimate pooled prevalence with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Nine studies comprising 1304 patients with NENs were included. The median age was 53.8 (10-88.5) years, 52% were female (n=678/1304), and 56% (n=736/1304) were unselected cohorts (all-comers) and 44% (568/1304) were selected cohorts (testing based on clinical suspicion and high-risk features defined by each study). Across all cohorts, the pooled prevalence of PGVs was 19.6% (95% CI: 10.68–33.15%), with high heterogeneity (I² ≈ 96%). Subgroup analyses demonstrated comparable GPV prevalence between selected (13.2%, 95% CI 6.3–25.8) and unselected cohorts (23.0%, 95% CI 12.0–39.6) (p=0.25). GPV prevalence stratified by pancreatic NENs (17.8%, 95% CI 12.6–24.5) and other NENs (10.6%, 95% CI 6.5–17.0) was also not statistically different (p=0.08). The most altered genes involved DNA repair and cellular signaling pathways, including APC, ATM, BRCA1/2, BAP1, CHEK2, MEN1, MUTYH, VHL, RET, and TSC1/2. Germline variants in mismatch repair (MMR) genes were reported in approximately 2.5% of cases. Conclusions: This study represents the first systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the prevalence of germline mutations in NENs. Approximately 20% of pts with NENs harbor a germline pathogenic variant, underscoring the importance of genetic counseling and germline testing. The wide variability across studies highlights the need for standardized genetic testing approaches. These findings support routine referral for genetic counseling and panel testing in patients with NENs to guide management and familial risk assessment.
Neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for localized dMMR/MSI-h gastroesophageal cancers (GEC): A systematic review with meta-analysis.
373 Background: Recent studies have demonstrated encouraging outcomes with neoadjuvant ICIs in pts with localized deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) and/or microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) GEC, prompting discussions around the feasibility of nonoperative management (NOM). However, current evidence is largely from phase 1 and 2 clinical trials with limited sample sizes. Thus, the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant ICI in this pt population remain subject to ongoing debate. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective and retrospective studies evaluating neoadjuvant ICIs in pts with localized dMMR/MSI-H GEC according to the PRISMA guidelines. The primary outcomes were pathological complete response (pCR) and complete clinical response (cCR) rates. cCR was defined as no evidence of residual disease on tumor-specific imaging and on endoscopy with biopsy. Secondary outcomes included major pathologic response (MPR) rates and the incidence of grade 3–4 immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Proportions with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to pool event rates for occurrence of cCR, pCR, MPR and grade 3-4 irAEs. The DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model was used. NOM was assessed as part of the qualitative analysis. Results: 20 studies comprising 396 pts treated with neoadjuvant ICIs were included. Three studies utilized double ICI blockade (PD-1/ PD-L1 inhibitor plus CTLA-4 inhibitor), while the remaining studies primarily utilized monotherapy with a PD-1 inhibitor, with or without chemotherapy. Overall, 320 (81.0%) underwent surgical resection. The pooled pCR rate was 41.6% (95% CI, 33.1%–50.8%), cCR 63.8% (95% CI, 45.6%–78.8%), and MPR 64.2% (95% CI, 49.1%–76.9%). The pooled incidence of grade 3–4 irAEs was 5.1% (95% CI, 0.6%–12.2%). Subgroup analysis showed higher pCR with ≥3 months versus <3 months of ICI (50.2% [95% CI 42.2–58.3] vs 28.4% [18.9–40.2]; χ²=8.69, p=0.003). Forty-four pts were managed with NOM, two experienced early local regrowth over median follow-up ranging from 11.5 to 28 months. Conclusions: Neoadjuvant ICI therapy appears to be a safe and effective therapeutic strategy for pts with localized dMMR/MSI-H GEC. Neoadjuvant ICI exposure for ≥3 months seems to yield higher pCR rates than <3 months. The high and prolonged cCR rates support the nonoperative strategy in selected patients with dMMR/MSI-H GEC.
Premature Deaths and Life-Years Lost From Lack of Amivantamab in Brazil's Unified Health System
PURPOSE Lung cancer remains a leading cause of cancer mortality in Brazil, with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounting for 85% of cases, with 1.6% carrying epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 20 mutations. In the phase I CHRYSALIS trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02609776 ), amivantamab demonstrated a median overall survival (OS) of 22.8 months versus 8.3 months with docetaxel, the standard second-line Brazil's Unified Health System (SUS) therapy. Although the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency approved amivantamab, the National Commission for the Incorporation of Technologies’ cost-effectiveness reviews result in an average 10-year delay before SUS incorporation. We aimed to estimate premature deaths and life-years lost attributable to this access gap. METHODS Using National Institute of Cancer (INCA) data, we estimated SUS-eligible patients, NSCLC prevalence, and EGFR exon 20 frequency. Stage distribution and 5-year recurrence rates identify candidates for amivantamab. A hazard ratio (HR) was derived from the inverse exponential method (ln(2)/OS ratio). Preventable deaths were calculated as: eligible patients × (1 – HR). Life-years gained per patient were estimated as OS difference. RESULTS Of the 26,548 new patients with lung cancer, 18,973 are SUS-eligible, 16,127 have NSCLC, and 258 have EGFR exon 20 mutations. Metastatic disease accounts for 114, whereas recurrences occur in 60 (stage III), eight (II), and four (I), totaling 186 candidates annually. With an HR of 0.364, the annual preventable death in the base-case scenario is equal to 186 × (1 – 0.364) × 95% = 112 patients. Over 10 years, 1,120 premature deaths and 1,353 life-years could be avoided. CONCLUSION Delayed SUS incorporation of amivantamab may result in over a 1,000 preventable deaths and life-years lost among Brazilian EGFR exon 20–mutated NSCLC. Urgent real-world studies and cost-effectiveness analyses are needed.