Background: Newer personalized medicine including targeted therapies such as PARP inhibitors and CDK 4/6 inhibitors have shown to improve survival of breast and gynaecological cancer patients. However, efficacy outcomes may be hampered by treatment discontinuation due to targeted therapy-related adverse drug reactions or resistance. Studies suggest that add-on mistletoe (Viscum album L., VA) improves quality of life and ameliorates cytotoxic side effects of standard oncological therapy in cancer patients. The primary objective of this real-world data study was to determine the safety profile of targeted therapy in combination with add-on Helixor® VA therapy in breast and gynecological cancer patients. Methods: The present study is a real-world data study utilizing demographic and treatment data from the accredited national Network Oncology (NO) registry. The study has received ethics approval. The safety profile of targeted with or without Helixor® VA therapy as well as safety - associated variables were evaluated by univariate and adjusted multivariable regression analyses. Results: All stage breast or gynecological cancer patients (n = 242) were on average 54.5±14.2 years old. One hundred and sixty patients (66.1%) were in the control (CTRL, targeted therapy) and 82 patients (33.9%) in the combinational (COMB, targeted plus Helixor® VA therapy) group. The addition of Helixor® VA did not hamper the safety profile (χ2 = 0.107, p-value = 0.99) of targeted therapy. Furthermore, no adverse events and a trend towards an improved targeted therapy adherence were observed in the COMB group. Conclusions: The present study is the first of its kind showing the applicability of Helixor® VA in combination with targeted therapies. The results indicate that add-on Helixor® VA does not negatively alter the safety profile of targeted therapies in breast and gynaecological cancer patients.

Real-world evidence (RWE) is increasingly involved in the early benefit assessment of medicinal drugs. It is expected that RWE will help to speed up approval processes comparable to RWE developments in vaccine research during the COVID-19 pandemic. Definitions of RWE are diverse marking the highly fluid status in this field. So far, RWE comprises information produced from data routinely collected on patient’s health status and/or delivery of health care from various sources other than traditional clinical trials. These sources can include electronic health records, claims, patient-generated data including in home-use settings, data from mobile devices as well as patient, product and disease registries. The aim of the present update was to review the current RWE developments and guidelines mainly in the U.S., the UK, Europe and Germany field during the last decade. RWE has already been included in various approval procedures of regulatory authorities reflecting its actual acceptance and growing importance in evaluating and accelerating new therapies. However, since the RWE research is still in a transition process and since a number of gaps in this field have been explored, more guidance and a consented definition are necessary to increase the implementation of real-world data.

Background: The fulminant course of COVID-19, triggered by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) presents with a high mortality rate and still lacks a causative treatment. C-reactive protein (CRP) has been shown to increase dramatically during the disease progression and correlates with deleterious outcomes. Selective CRP apheresis can reduce circulating CRP levels fast and effective. Methods: Seven hospitalized patients with documented severe COVID-19 progression, elevated CRP plasma levels (> 100 mg/L) and signs of respiratory failure were treated with CRP apheresis. 2-12 CRP apheresis sessions were performed generally in 24 h time intervals and depending on CRP plasma levels. Results: CRP apheresis reduced CRP plasma levels by up to 84% within a few hours, without exhibiting side effects in any patient. Despite signs of severe lung infiltration in all patients, only one patient died. The other patients showed improvements within the chest x-ray after CRP apheresis and were able to recover regardless of intubation and/or ECMO (4 patients). All remaining six patients were discharged from the hospital in good clinical condition. All patients had comorbidities. Conclusions: This case series presents a mortality rate of only 14%, which is dramatically lower than expected from the presented CRP levels as well as comorbidities and ventilation require-ments. Our clinical observations regarding the here presented seven patients support the hypoth-esis that CRP is a candidate to be therapeutically targeted in the early stage of severe COVID-19.