Aurora kinases are serine/threonine kinases that play an essential role in cell division. Their aberrant expression and/or function induce severe mitotic abnormalities, resulting in either cell death or aneuploidy. Overexpression of Aurora kinases is often found in several malignancies, among which is anaplastic thyroid carcinoma (ATC). We have previously demonstrated the in vitro efficacy of Aurora kinase inhibitors in restraining cell growth and survival of different ATC cell lines. In this study, we sought to establish which Aurora might represent the preferential drug target for ATC. To this end, the effects of two selective inhibitors of Aurora-A (MLN8237) and Aurora-B (AZD1152) on four human ATC cell lines (CAL-62, BHT-101, 8305C, and 8505C) were analysed. Both inhibitors reduced cell proliferation in a time- and dose-dependent manner, with IC₅₀ ranges of 44.3–134.2 nM for MLN8237 and of 9.2–461.3 nM for AZD1152. Immunofluorescence experiments and time-lapse videomicroscopy yielded evidence that each inhibitor induced distinct mitotic phenotypes, but both of them prevented the completion of cytokinesis. As a result, poliploidy increased in all AZD1152-treated cells, and in two out of four cell lines treated with MLN8237. Apoptosis was induced in all the cells by MLN8237, and in BHT-101, 8305C, and 8505C by AZD1152, while CAL-62 exposed to AZD1152 died through necrosis after multiple rounds of endoreplication. Both inhibitors were capable of blocking anchorage-independent cell growth. In conclusion, we demonstrated that either Aurora-A or Aurora-B might represent therapeutic targets for the ATC treatment, but inhibition of Aurora-A appears more effective for suppressing ATC cell proliferation and for inducing the apoptotic pathway.

Although combination therapy is not recommended in patients with gastro–entero–pancreatic (GEP) neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), this strategy is widely used in clinical practice. This network meta-analysis of randomized trials evaluates targeted therapies and somatostatin analogues in GEP-advanced NETs, either alone or in combination, comparing the efficacy of different, single or combined treatment strategies in terms of progression-free survival (PFS). Interventions were grouped as analogs, everolimus, everolimus plus SSAs, sunitinib and placebo. In a secondary analysis, we also assessed the efficacy of individual-specific pharmacological treatments vs placebo or each other. From 83 studies identified, 8 randomized controlled trials were selected, with a total of 1849 patients with either functioning or non-functioning NETs. The analysis confirmed the superiority of all treatments over placebo (HR ranging from 0.34, 95% CI: 0.24–0.37 with the combination of everolimus plus SSAs to 0.42, 0.31–0.57 with the analogs; moderate quality of evidence). On ranking analysis, the combination of everolimus plus SSA (P score = 0.86) and then everolimus alone (P score = 0.65) ranked highest in increasing PFS. On comparative evaluation of different interventions, pasireotide (P score = 0.96) and everolimus + octreotide (P score = 0.82) ranked as the best pharmacological treatment options. Our findings support the use of combination therapy in the treatment of functioning and non-functioning GEP NETs. The role of pasireotide should be explored in selected subgroups of patients. Lastly, the combination of everolimus and octreotide appears promising and should be more widely considered in clinical practice.

We conducted a retrospective/prospective worldwide study on patients with neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) and a molecularly proven SARS-CoV-2 positivity. Preliminary results regarding 85 patients of the INTENSIVE study have been published in 2021. Now we are reporting the 2-year analysis.Here, we are reporting data from consecutive patients enrolled between 1 June 2020, and 31 May 2022. Among the 118 contacted centers, 25 were active to enroll and 19 actively recruiting at the time of data cut-off for a total of 280 patients enrolled. SARS-CoV-2 positivity occurred in 47.5% of patients in 2020, 35.1% in 2021, and 17.4% in 2022. The median age for COVID-19 diagnosis was 60 years. Well-differentiated tumors, non-functioning, metastatic stage, and gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) primary sites represented most of the NENs. COVID-19-related pneumonia occurred in 22.8% of the total, with 61.3% of them requiring hospitalization; 11 patients (3.9%) needed sub-intensive or intensive care unit therapies and 14 patients died (5%), in 11 cases (3.9%) directly related to COVID-19. Diabetes mellitus and age at COVID-19 diagnosis > 70 years were significantly associated with COVID-19 mortality, whereas thoracic primary site with COVID-19 morbidity. A significant decrease in both hospitalization and pneumonia occurred in 2022 vs 2020. In our largest series of NEN patients with COVID-19, the NEN population is similar to the general population of patients with NEN regardless of COVID-19. However, older age, non-GEP primary sites and diabetes mellitus should be carefully considered for increased COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. Relevant information could be derived by integrating our results with NENs patients included in other cancer patients with COVID-19 registries.

No validated prognostic tool is available for predicting overall survival (OS) of patients with well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (WDNETs). This study, conducted in three independent cohorts of patients from five different European countries, aimed to develop and validate a classification prognostic score for OS in patients with stage IV WDNETs. We retrospectively collected data on 1387 patients: (i) patients treated at the Istituto Nazionale Tumori (Milan, Italy; n = 515); (ii) European cohort of rare NET patients included in the European RARECAREnet database (n = 457); (iii) Italian multicentric cohort of pancreatic NET (pNETs) patients treated at 24 Italian institutions (n = 415). The score was developed using data from patients included in cohort (i) (training set); external validation was performed by applying the score to the data of the two independent cohorts (ii) and (iii) evaluating both calibration and discriminative ability (Harrell C statistic). We used data on age, primary tumor site, metastasis (synchronous vs metachronous), Ki-67, functional status and primary surgery to build the score, which was developed for classifying patients into three groups with differential 10-year OS: (I) favorable risk group: 10-year OS ≥70%; (II) intermediate risk group: 30% ≤ 10-year OS < 70%; (III) poor risk group: 10-year OS <30%. The Harrell C statistic was 0.661 in the training set, and 0.626 and 0.601 in the RARECAREnet and Italian multicentric validation sets, respectively. In conclusion, based on the analysis of three ‘field-practice’ cohorts collected in different settings, we defined and validated a prognostic score to classify patients into three groups with different long-term prognoses.