Managing cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: an ESMO multidisciplinary expert consensus

Teleconsultation use and satisfaction among cancerologists during the COVID-19 pandemic in Morocco

Introduction

health care benefits have undergone major changes during the COVID-19 pandemic. This has led to an explosive growth in teleconsultation services mainly for cancer patients. The purpose of this study was to assess the perception and experience of Moroccan oncologists with the use of teleconsultation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

a 17-question anonymous cross-sectional survey was conducted on Google forms and emailed to all Moroccan oncologists. Statistical analysis was performed using the statistical software Jamovi (version 2.2).

Results

out of a total of 500 oncologists who received the questionnaire, 126 responded, with a response rate of 25%. During the pandemic, only 59.5% of oncologists used teleconsultation, with no significant differences among the three groups (radiation oncologists, medical oncologists and cancer surgeons (p=0.294)). Most participants were satisfied with being able to explain medical diagnosis, provide assessment results, and provide treatment recommendations during teleconsultation. Finally, 47.2% of participants were willing to continue conducting teleconsultations after the COVID-19 pandemic, with no significant differences among the three groups.

Conclusion

oncology physicians were satisfied with their experiences with teleconsultation and agreed that it is likely to be part of their long-term practice. Future studies are needed to assess patient satisfaction with teleconsultation and to improve patient care through this virtual technology.

Impact of Covid-19 on the management of patients with metastatic melanoma

The Covid-19 pandemic created new uncertainties in the management of metastatic melanoma patients. In particular, the impact of immunotherapy, targeted therapy, or chemotherapy on the risk of Sars-CoV-2 infection and severity was debated. In this study, we analyzed all patients with metastatic melanoma receiving therapy who developed Covid-19 between February 2020 and February 2022. We retrospectively collected demographic data, cancer-specific parameters, melanoma treatment regimen, comorbidities and Covid-19-specific parameters in these patients. Of the 350 patients with metastatic melanoma, 25 had Covid-19. The median age at the time of Covid-19 diagnosis was 66 years (range 36-86), 10 patients were female, and 15 patients were male. The treatment regimen during infection was immunotherapy in 12 cases, followed by targeted therapy (n = 8), chemotherapy (n = 2), and TVEC injections, follow-up and palliative therapy in 1 case each. The severity was mild in 17 patients and 8 had a moderate to critical course. Patients with a severe Covid-19 course were often older and had more comorbidities than patients with a mild infection. Many of the patients had a mild Covid-19 course despite having metastatic melanoma and systemic therapy. We therefore recommend continuing systemic therapy whenever possible, even in such exceptional situations as the Covid-19 pandemic.

Challenges faced in the cancer diagnosis and management-COVID-19 pandemic and beyond-Lessons for future

The COVID-19 pandemic with multiple waves of infection has caused panic and distress globally. Cancer patients being immuno-compromised are more susceptible to infection leading to increased morbidity and unpredictability of their survival. There has been a halt in the diagnosis and treatment of patients suffering from cancer because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Oncologists have the tedious task of assessing the urgency of managing cancer patients against the risk of Coronavirus infection. Timely diagnostic services along with the treatment strategy are needed for the proper management of cancer patients. Since the laboratories are already overwhelmed with the investigations related to the COVID-19 management, there has been a compromise and delay in the diagnosis, thus leading to an overall lag in the management of cancer patients.

Decreased febrile neutropenia during inpatient chemotherapy for urologic cancer during coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

Since 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has led to the widespread practice of hand hygiene and wearing face masks, not only among medical personnel, but also among the general population. Thus, the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on the incidence of febrile neutropenia should be verified. This study aimed to examine the incidence of febrile neutropenia in hospitalized patients receiving chemotherapy at Kanazawa University Hospital. Among inpatients at the Department of Urology receiving chemotherapy, we compared the incidence of febrile neutropenia between 317 cases in 2018-2019 and 276 cases in 2020. We retrospectively analyzed the factors of febrile neutropenia via binomial logistic regression analysis based on patient characteristics and the characteristics of primary diseases, with statistical significance set at p < 0.05. Febrile neutropenia occurred in 20/317 cases in 2018-2019 and 1/276 cases in 2020, with a significant decrease in the latter (p = 0.005). In a multivariate analysis, we identified the following independent risk factors for febrile neutropenia: non-coronavirus disease 2019 era (p = 0.005), first course of therapy (p = 0.005), malnutrition (p = 0.032), and past history of febrile neutropenia (p = 0.018). Due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, hygiene policies for medical personnel and quarantine measures for patients were thoroughly implemented. Therefore, the incidence of febrile neutropenia in 2020 decreased to 1/15 of the previous incidence. Thus, the hygiene for medical personnel and patients during the expected period of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia is important for febrile neutropenia prevention.

Teleoncology: A Solution for Everyone? A Single-Center Experience with Telemedicine during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of telehealth was rapidly implemented without previous evidence. The ONCOTELEMD study aimed to evaluate the opinion of patients attended via telemedicine during this period and to study factors that condition patient preferences on its use. Included patients had a confirmed cancer diagnosis and were contacted by telephone between 13 March and 30 April 2020, in the Medical Oncology Service of Hospital Parc Taulí, Sabadell. A 12-question survey was presented to them between 4 February and 19 April 2021. Statistical analysis was carried out using chi-square and multivariable logistic regression tests. Six hundred forty-six patients were included; 487 responded to the survey. The median age was 68 years (27-90), 55.2% were female. Most patients had a surveillance visit (65.3%) and were diagnosed with colorectal or breast cancer (43% and 26.5%, respectively); 91.8% of patients were satisfied, and 60% would accept the use of telemedicine beyond the pandemic. Patients aged more than 50 years (OR 0.40; 95% CI, 0.19-0.81; p = 0.01) and diagnosed with breast cancer (OR 0.45; 95% CI, 0.26-0.69; p < 0.001) were less predisposed to adopt telehealth in the future. Patients agreed to be informed via telehealth of scan or lab results (62% and 84%, respectively) but not of new oral or endovenous treatments (52% and 33.5%, respectively). Additionally, 75% of patients had a medium or low-null technologic ability, and 51.3% would only use the telephone or video call to contact health professionals. However, differences were found according to age groups (p < 0.0001). In total, patients surveyed were satisfied with telemedicine and believed telehealth could have a role following the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, our results remark on the importance of individualizing the use of telehealth, showing relevant data on patient preferences and digital literacy.

Gesundheitsökonomischer Vergleich von onkologischen und COVID-19-Patienten

Zielsetzung Ziel der Studie ist es die Auswirkungen der COVID-19 Pandemie auf die stationär behandelten Patienten eines universitären Maximalversorgers mit einer Krebs- und/oder COVID-19-Erkrankung zu untersuchen. Unterscheiden sich die Patientenkollektive gesundheitsökonomisch und ergeben sich aus den Resultaten administrative Konsequenzen für eine proaktive Steuerung der regionalen Krebsversorgung.

Methodik Es wurde eine retrospektive, deskriptive Datenanalyse klinischer und gesundheitsökonomischer Parameter aller am Universitätsklinikum Marburg stationär aufgenommenen onkologischen und COVID-19-postiven Patienten sowie der Kombination von onkologischen Patienten mit einer COVID-19-Erkrankung innerhalb des Beobachtungszeitraums von 2017 bis 2021 durchgeführt.

Ergebnisse Es wurde ein Rückgang onkologisch behandelter Patienten über den gesamten Zeitraum der COVID-19-Pandemie beobachtet. Onkologische Patienten mit einer COVID-19-Erkrankung stellen das Patientenkollektiv mit dem höchsten Schweregrad der Erkrankung dar, gefolgt von der COVID-19- und rein onkologischen Patienten. Dies spiegelt sich gleichsam in den ökonomischen Leistungskennzahlen wider. Die chronologischen Verläufe des DRG-Erlöses und Case Mix Index pro COVID-19-Patienten weisen Unterschiede für Zeitabschnitte des Pandemiegeschehens in Deutschland auf.

Schlussfolgerung Der Vergleich der Patientenkollektive bestätigt das hohes Gefährdungspotential von onkologischen Patienten, welches sich in einer gesundheitsökonomisch aufwendigen Behandlung widerspiegelt. Nationale Maßnahmen, Kontaktbeschränkungen oder pandemische Ereignisse lassen sich am chronologischen Verlauf der klinischen und wirtschaftlichen Parameter nachvollziehen. Trotz des internationalen Rückgangs an ambulanten und stationären onkologischen Patienten ist die „state-of-the-art“ Krebsversorgung in pandemischen Zeiten realisierbar. Aufgrund dessen besteht die Handlungsnotwendigkeit für einen stationären Maximalversorger durch Kommunikation und Versorgungsmodellierung die onkologische Versorgung proaktiver zu steuern.

Experiences of patients and providers while using telemedicine in cancer care during COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative literature

Purpose

The objective of this meta-synthesis was to identify, appraise, and synthesize patients and provider’s experiences while using telemedicine in cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

The databases Medline, Embase, Cinahl, PsycInfo, Web of Science, and other related databases were searched. Reviewers followed the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) meta-aggregation method to identify categories and synthesized findings and to assign a level of confidence to synthesized findings. The listed quotations and the original author interpretations were synthesized using MAXQDA software.

Results

Nineteen studies were included in the meta-synthesis. Three synthesized findings emerged from 243 primary findings: telemedicine assists but cannot be a substitute for face-to-face appointments in a health care crisis and in the provision of routine care to stable patients with cancer, infrastructural drivers and healthcare provider’s support and attention affect patients’ experiences and feelings about telemedicine, and patients who use telemedicine expect their health care providers to devote enough time and consider emotional needs, the lack of which can develop a negative response. The methodological quality of the studies ranged between 4 and 10, and the overall level of confidence of the synthesized findings was determined to be low and medium.

Conclusion

The findings from this meta-synthesis gave a new insight to promoting the safe and evidence-based use of telemedicine during the current pandemic and future emergencies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-07415-6.

Consequences of the Corona crisis on outpatient oncological care - a qualitative study among nurses and medical assistants

Introduction

The Covid-19 pandemic has caused great personal stress for medical staff. To ensure adequate outpatient care for cancer patients, extensive safety and hygiene measures must be taken. This interview-based study examines the effects–both personal and professional–of the pandemic on the work routine of outpatient hematology/oncology nurses and medical assistants.

Patients, materials and methods

Half a year after the outbreak of Covid-19 and the introduction of infection control regulations in three outpatient hematological/oncological centers, the affected medical staff (n = 15) were surveyed about the consequences for patient care and clinical work using audio-recorded telephone interviews. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using a qualitative content analysis.

Results

The Covid-19 pandemic has complicated the medical care of cancer patients, but only a slight deterioration of medical and psycho-oncological care was observed. The level of stress experienced by medical staff is moderate, with hygiene and safety measures at the workplace helping to reduce stress.

Conclusion

From the point of view of medical staff, the Covid-19 pandemic has had a moderate impact on the outpatient care of cancer patients. Safety measures against Covid-19 are decisive for ensuring the continuation of therapy and for motivating employees.

Predictors of Adherence to Cancer-Related mHealth Apps in Cancer Patients Undergoing Oncological or Follow-Up Treatment-A Scoping Review

mHealth interventions in cancer care are being increasingly applied in various settings. Nevertheless, there is a phenomenon wherein individuals show different usage patterns, which could affect the effectiveness of the intervention. In general, it is important to know the predictors of app adherence and usage patterns to improve the design and content (i.e., tailoring). The aim of this scoping review was to provide an overview of predictors of adherence to cancer-related mHealth apps in cancer patients. A systematic literature search was conducted in March 2021 in the electronic databases PubMed, CINAHL, and PsychINFO without limitation in year, focusing on cancer patients undergoing oncological or follow-up treatment using mHealth apps. The initial database search yielded a total of N = 8035 records. After title, abstract, and full-text screening, 10 articles met inclusion criteria. Studies were published between 2013 and 2020. Studies focused on children and adolescents (2/10) as well as adults (8/10). The predictors identified could be categorized into sociodemographic variables, cancer-related factors and others. This study provides an initial insight into relevant predictors of app adherence in cancer patients. However, no clear predictor of increased app adherence was found. Further research of usage patterns is therefore needed so that mHealth interventions can be tailored during development.

The case against censoring of progression-free survival in cancer clinical trials - A pandemic shutdown as an illustration

Background

Missing data may lead to loss of statistical power and introduce bias in clinical trials. The Covid-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on patient health care and on the conduct of cancer clinical trials. Although several endpoints may be affected, progression-free survival (PFS) is of major concern, given its frequent use as primary endpoint in advanced cancer and the fact that missed radiographic assessments are to be expected. The recent introduction of the estimand framework creates an opportunity to define more precisely the target of estimation and ensure alignment between the scientific question and the statistical analysis.

Methods

We used simulations to investigate the impact of two basic approaches for handling missing tumor scans due to the pandemic: a “treatment policy” strategy, which consisted in ascribing events to the time they are observed, and a “hypothetical” approach of censoring patients with events during the shutdown period at the last assessment prior to that period. We computed the power of the logrank test, estimated hazard ratios (HR) using Cox models, and estimated median PFS times without and with a hypothetical 6-month shutdown period with no patient enrollment or tumor scans being performed, varying the shutdown starting times.

Results

Compared with the results in the absence of shutdown, the “treatment policy” strategy slightly overestimated median PFS proportionally to the timing of the shutdown period, but power was not affected. Except for one specific scenario, there was no impact on the estimated HR. In general, the pandemic had a greater impact on the analyses using the “hypothetical” strategy, which led to decreased power and overestimated median PFS times to a greater extent than the “treatment policy” strategy.

Conclusion

As a rule, we suggest that the treatment policy approach, which conforms with the intent-to-treat principle, should be the primary analysis to avoid unnecessary loss of power and minimize bias in median PFS estimates.

Rising incidence of late stage breast cancer after COVID-19 outbreak. Real-world data from the Italian COVID-DELAY study

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

•

COVID-19 impacted on breast cancer (BC) diagnoses with a reduction of 25% in 2020.

•

Fewer early-stage BC and more symptomatic patients were diagnosed during 2020.

•

Timing of access to BC diagnosis, staging and treatment has not been affected by COVID-19.

•

Less BC cases were reviewed in multidisciplinary tumor meetings during 2020.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on diagnosis and treatment of patients with soft tissue and bone sarcomas or aggressive benign musculoskeletal diseases: A single-center retrospective study (SarCorD study)

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic led to a rapid reorganization of healthcare activities, leading to reduced access to clinics, interruption of screenings, and treatment schedule modifications in several cancer types. Few data are available on sarcomas. We analyzed COVID-19-related diagnostic delay in a sarcoma referral center in Italy.

Methods

We retrospectively enrolled in this study patients with histological diagnosis of soft tissue or bone sarcoma and aggressive benign musculoskeletal diseases obtained during the first year of the pandemic (Covid group) or the year before (Control group) and followed at the Regina Elena National Cancer Institute in Rome. The primary endpoint was the time from the first symptom to histological diagnosis.

Results

We evaluated 372 patients, 185 of whom were eligible for primary endpoint analysis (92 patients in the Control group and 93 patients in the Covid group). The patients were affected by soft tissue sarcoma in most cases (63.0% and 66.7% in Covid and Control groups, respectively). We observed a diagnostic delay in the Covid group with a median time from the first symptom to the definitive histological diagnosis of 103.00 days (95% CI 92.77–113.23) vs. 90.00 days (95% CI 69.49–110.51) in the Control group (p = 0.024), but not a delay in treatment beginning (151 days, 95% CI 132.9–169.1 vs. 144 days, 95% CI 120.3–167.7, respectively, p = 0.208). No differences in stage at diagnosis were observed (12% vs. 16.5% of patients with metastatic disease at diagnosis in the Covid and Control groups, respectively, p = 0.380). Progression-free survival (p = 0.897) and overall survival (p = 0.725) were comparable in the subgroup of patients affected by soft tissue sarcoma.

Conclusions

A delay in sarcoma diagnosis but not in starting treatment has been observed during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, no difference in stage at diagnosis or in terms of survival has been observed.

Perspectives in Melanoma: meeting report from the Melanoma Bridge (December 2nd - 4th, 2021, Italy)

Advances in immune checkpoint and combination therapy have led to improvement in overall survival for patients with advanced melanoma. Improved understanding of the tumor, tumor microenvironment and tumor immune-evasion mechanisms has resulted in new approaches to targeting and harnessing the host immune response. Combination modalities with other immunotherapy agents, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, electrochemotherapy are also being explored to overcome resistance and to potentiate the immune response. In addition, novel approaches such as adoptive cell therapy, oncogenic viruses, vaccines and different strategies of drug administration including sequential, or combination treatment are being tested. Despite the progress in diagnosis of melanocytic lesions, correct classification of patients, selection of appropriate adjuvant and systemic theràapies, and prediction of response to therapy remain real challenges in melanoma. Improved understanding of the tumor microenvironment, tumor immunity and response to therapy has prompted extensive translational and clinical research in melanoma. There is a growing evidence that genomic and immune features of pre-treatment tumor biopsies may correlate with response in patients with melanoma and other cancers, but they have yet to be fully characterized and implemented clinically. Development of novel biomarker platforms may help to improve diagnostics and predictive accuracy for selection of patients for specific treatment. Overall, the future research efforts in melanoma therapeutics and translational research should focus on several aspects including: (a) developing robust biomarkers to predict efficacy of therapeutic modalities to guide clinical decision-making and optimize treatment regimens, (b) identifying mechanisms of therapeutic resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors that are potentially actionable, (c) identifying biomarkers to predict therapy-induced adverse events, and (d) studying mechanism of actions of therapeutic agents and developing algorithms to optimize combination treatments. During the Melanoma Bridge meeting (December 2nd-4th, 2021, Naples, Italy) discussions focused on the currently approved systemic and local therapies for advanced melanoma and discussed novel biomarker strategies and advances in precision medicine as well as the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on management of melanoma patients.

The evolving scenario of cancer care provision across the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Over the past 2 years, the COVID-19 pandemic has had short-term and long-term effects on the delivery of cancer care. Some European countries faced an unprecedented widespread crisis during the first year of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, only being able afterwards to gradually recover, thanks to the improvement in preventive measures, changes in public health and reactive processes in cancer care and a better understanding of the ongoing heath emergency.

RECENT FINDINGS

The development of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and COVID-19 specific treatments, the growing testing and tracking capability to limit virus diffusion, and research efforts to better define areas of action have all greatly limited the negative impact of the health emergency on routine cancer care.The need to protect those more vulnerable and to ensure continuity of care for oncology patients has been balanced across the pandemic, with the aim to guarantee an optimal standard of care.

SUMMARY

This article aims to provide an overview on the evolving scenario of cancer care throughout the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe, focusing on the particular features that characterized the pandemic course as well as the main differences that were observed across it.

COVID-19 and lung cancer: update on the latest screening, diagnosis, management and challenges

Lung cancer, considered one of the most common causes of cancer deaths worldwide, is a complex disease with its own challenges. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), compounded these challenges and forced the medical healthcare system to alter its approach to lung cancer. This narrative review aims to identify the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on lung cancer screening, diagnosis and management. During this public health crisis, various medical societies have worked on developing guidelines to protect patients with lung cancer from the deleterious effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection, as well as from the complications imposed by treatment delays. The different therapeutic approaches, such as surgery, radiation oncology and immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, along with the latest international recommendations, will be discussed. Protecting patients with lung cancer from COVID-19 complications, while avoiding barriers in treatment delays, has brought unique challenges to healthcare facilities. Prompt modifications to guidelines, and constant evaluation of their efficacy, are thus needed.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care: A cross-sectional study of Egyptian patients' perspectives and concerns

Background

Worldwide, COVID-19 greatly reduced healthcare accessibility and utilization by non-COVID patients including cancer. This study aimed to quantify and characterize cancer care adjustments experienced by cancer patients/survivors; and to explore their concerns, beliefs, and knowledge regarding COVID-19.

Methods

A cross‐sectional study was conducted using a questionnaire distributed through social media patients’ groups (June–December 2020). Questionnaire included basic information, care adjustments (in “care provision” and in “treatment plan”), and patients’ concerns, beliefs, and knowledge. Data description and analysis were done.

Results

Out of 300 participants, there were 68.0% on-treatment and 32.0% in follow-up stage. Care adjustments were reported by 29.7%; mostly in care provision (27.3%) rather than treatment plan (4.9%). Adjustments were less likely to occur when healthcare facility was in governorate other than that of residence (OR:0.53, 95%CI:0.30–0.96, P = 0.037) and more likely with long-standing diagnosis (≥12 months) compared with recent (<3 months) (adjusted-OR:4.13, 95%CI:1.19–14.34, P = 0.026). Lower proportion of on-treatment patients used remote consultation than patients in follow-up [4.4% versus 17.7%, P < 0.001].

Patients were concerned about fulfilling their care visits more than the probable COVID-19 infection (72.3%). It was uncommon to feel that the risk of COVID-19 infection is higher in care places than in the community (27.3%) or to feel safe with remote consultations (34.3%). However, patients increased their infection control practice (64.0%) and the majority were aware of their increased susceptibility to complications (86.0%). Somewhat, they were also concerned about the care quality (57.3%). Many had adequate access to COVID-19 information (69.0%) and their main sources were the Ministry of Health webpage and ordinary media (radio/TV).

Conclusion

Cancer patients were primarily concerned about fulfilling their planned care and COVID-19 infection was less appreciated.

Policy summary

Launching of a policy for enhancement of telemedicine experience through more patients’ engagement—as essential stakeholders—may be required. To heighten pandemic resilience for cancer care in Egypt, more investment in establishing specialized end-to-end cancer care facilities that ensure continuity of care may be justified.

Conceptual Framework for Cancer Care During a Pandemic Incorporating Evidence From the COVID-19 Pandemic

PURPOSE

With successive infection waves and the spread of more infectious variants, the COVID-19 pandemic continues to have major impacts on health care. To achieve best outcomes for patients with cancer during a pandemic, efforts to minimize the increased risk of severe pandemic infection must be carefully balanced against unintended adverse impacts of the pandemic on cancer care, with consideration to available health system capacity. Cancer Australia's conceptual framework for cancer care during a pandemic provides a planning resource for health services and policy-makers that can be broadly applied globally and to similar pandemics.

METHODS

Evidence on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care and health system capacity to June 2021 was reviewed, and the conceptual framework was developed and updated.

RESULTS

Components of health system capacity vary during a pandemic, and capacity relative to pandemic numbers and severity affects resources available for cancer care delivery. The challenges of successive pandemic waves and high numbers of pandemic cases necessitate consideration of changing health system capacity in decision making about cancer care. Cancer Australia’s conceptual framework provides guidance on continuation of care across the cancer pathway, in the face of challenges to health systems, while minimizing infection risk for patients with cancer and unintended consequences of delays in screening, diagnosis, and cancer treatment and backlogs because of service interruption.

CONCLUSION

Evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic supports continuation of cancer care wherever possible during similar pandemics. Cancer Australia's conceptual framework, underpinned by principles for optimal cancer care, informs decision making across the cancer care continuum. It incorporates consideration of changes in health system capacity and capacity for cancer care, in relation to pandemic progression, enabling broad applicability to different global settings.

A pyramid model to describe changing decision making under high uncertainty during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic put healthcare systems, hospitals and medical personal under great pressure. Based on observations in Germany, we theorise a general model of rapid decision-making that makes sense of the growing complexity, risks and impact of missing evidence. While adapting decision-making algorithms, management, physicians, nurses and other healthcare professionals had to move into uncharted territory while addressing practical challenges and resolving normative (legal and ethical) conflicts. During the pandemic, this resulted in decisional uncertainties for healthcare professionals. We propose an idealised risk-based model that anticipates these shifts in decision-making procedures and underlying value frameworks. The double pyramid model visualises foreseeable procedural adaptations. This does not only help practitioners to secure operational continuity in a crisis but also contributes to improving the conceptual underpinnings of the resilience of healthcare during the next pandemic or similar future crises situations.

Surgical site infections in patients undergoing breast oncological surgery during the lockdown: An unexpected lesson from the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

The present study aims to evaluate how the measures to contain the SARS-CoV-2 spreading affected the surgical site infections (SSIs) rate in patients who underwent nondeferrable breast cancer surgery (BCS).

Methods

This study is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from a consecutive series of patients underwent nondeferrable BCS in a regional Italian Covid-free hub during two different period: March to April 2020 (pandemic cohort [PC]) and March till April 2019 (control cohort [CC]). SSIs were defined according to the criteria established by the Center for disease control and prevention (CDC) and additional treatment, serous discharge, erythema, purulent exudate, separation of deep tissues, isolation of bacteria, and stay (ASEPSIS) scoring systems.

Results

One hundred ninety-nine patients were included in the present study: 100 and 99 patients who underwent nondeferrable BCS from March to April 2020 (PC) and from March to April 2019 (CC), respectively. The overall SSIs rate in this series was 9.1% according to CDC criteria and 6.5% according to ASEPSIS criteria. The SSIs incidence decreased during the pandemic period. Moreover, the SSIs rate according to ASEPSIS criteria was statistically lower in the PC than in the CC. We observed significant evidence of higher SSIs, both in terms of CDC and ASEPSIS score, in patients having undergone breast reconstruction compared with patients not undergoing immediate reconstruction.

Conclusions

The restrictive measures issued during the lockdown period seemed to lower the SSIs rates in patients undergoing nondeferrable BCS.

Safety and efficacy of pembrolizumab for advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer: before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

Purpose

The COVID-19 pandemic changed diagnostic and treatment pathways in oncology. We compared the safety and efficacy of pembrolizumab amongst advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with a PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥ 50% before and during the pandemic.

Methods

Advanced NSCLC patients initiating pembrolizumab between June 2015 and December 2019 (“pre-pandemic cohort”) and between March 2020 and March 2021 (“pandemic cohort”) at BC Cancer were identified retrospectively. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated risk factors for immune-related adverse events (irAE) ≥ grade 3 at the 6 week, 3 month, and 6 month landmarks. Cox regression models of overall survival (OS) were constructed.

Results

The study population comprised 417 patients in the pre-pandemic cohort and 111 patients in the pandemic cohort. Between March and May 2020, 48% fewer advanced NSCLC cases with PD-L1 TPS ≥ 50% were diagnosed compared to similar intervals in 2018–2019. Telemedicine assessment [new patient consultations (p < 0.001) and follow-up (p < 0.001)] and extended interval pembrolizumab dosing (p < 0.001) were more common in the pandemic cohort. Patients initiating pembrolizumab after February 2020 (vs. before January 2020) experienced similar odds of developing severe irAE. 2/111 (1.8%) patients receiving pembrolizumab during the pandemic tested positive for COVID-19. On multivariable analysis, no association between pembrolizumab treatment period (before vs. during the COVID-19 pandemic) and OS was observed (p = 0.18).

Conclusion

Significant changes in healthcare delivery in response to the pandemic did not result in increased high grade toxicity or lower survival outcomes in patients with advanced NSCLC treated with pembrolizumab.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00432-022-04181-0.

Telehealth Adoption in an Outpatient Oncology Ward: A Best Practice Implementation Project

Telehealth is increasingly taking place to support the transition of care and self-management of people living with cancer in outpatient oncology settings. Despite its recognised value, the scientific evidence points to disparities with regard to implementation of telehealth that might compromise the equity of access. Following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) implementation approach, this project aims to promote the implementation of best practice recommendations for telehealth adoption in an outpatient oncology setting. Assisted by the Practical Application of Clinical Evidence System (PACES), the implementation process comprises three phases of (i) a baseline audit, (ii) feedback to the healthcare team and establishment of implementation strategies with the Getting Research into Practice (GRiP) tool, and (iii) a follow-up audit. The project is expected to allow the identification of barriers and facilitators for the implementation of telehealth in outpatient oncology and develop a strategy plan for its adoption, with the involvement of end-users and stakeholders. The successful adoption of telehealth according to the best available evidence will likely enhance equity of access to healthcare and quality of care at a distance.

Experiences of Newly Diagnosed Oral Cancer Patients during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study from Pakistan

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in the scaling back or postponement of non-emergency hospital services, including care of cancer patients. The present qualitative study explored the experiences of newly diagnosed oral cancer patients during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Pakistan. Patients who attended the Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Khyber College of Dentistry in July 2020 were selected using a maximum variation purposive sampling method. Seventeen semi-structured interviews were conducted in Pashto, the local language of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. All interviews were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim, and translated into English. Thematic content analysis yielded eight major themes: pain and generalised physical weakness, shock at diagnosis, psychological distress of the COVID-19 pandemic, faith and religion, double hit loss of employment, social isolation, social support from caregivers, and lack of support from health care professionals. In conclusion, the COVID-19 pandemic has a clear impact on the life experiences of newly diagnosed oral cancer patients. Distress due to delay in accessing health care and lack of support from health care providers are a matter of great concern. Appropriate interventions should be introduced to ensure psychological and social support strategies are in place for patients during interruptions of health care services.

Alarming Drop in Early Stage Colorectal Cancer Diagnoses After COVID-19 Outbreak: A Real-World Analysis from the Italian COVID-DELAY Study

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has triggered the disruption of health care on a global scale. With Italy tangled up in the pandemic response, oncology care has been largely diverted and cancer screenings suspended. Our multicenter Italian study aimed to evaluate whether COVID-19 has impacted access to diagnosis, staging, and treatment for patients newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC), compared with pre-pandemic time.

METHODS

All consecutive new CRC patients referred to 8 Italian oncology institutions between March and December 2020 were included. Access rate and temporal intervals between date of symptoms onset, radiological and cytohistological diagnosis, treatment start and first radiological evaluation were analyzed and compared with the same months of 2019.

RESULTS

A reduction (29%) in newly diagnosed CRC cases was seen when compared with 2019 (360 vs 506). New CRC patients in 2020 were less likely to be diagnosed with early stage (stages I-II-III) CRC (63% vs 78%, P < .01). Gender and sidedness were similar regardless of the year. The percentage of tumors with any mutation among BRAF, NRAS, and KRAS genes were significantly different between the 2 years (61% in 2020 vs 50% in 2019, P = .04). Timing of access to cancer diagnosis, staging, and treatment for patients with CRC has not been negatively affected by the pandemic. Significantly shorter temporal intervals were observed between symptom onset and first oncological appointment (69 vs 79 days, P = .01) and between histological diagnosis and first oncological appointment (34 vs 42 days, P < .01) during 2020 compared with 2019. Fewer CRC cases were discussed in multidisciplinary meetings during 2020 (38% vs 50%, P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data highlight a significant drop in CRC diagnosis after COVID-19, especially for early stage disease. The study also reveals a remarkable setback in the multidisciplinary management of patients with CRC. Despite this, Italian oncologists were able to ensure diagnostic-therapeutic pathways proper operation after March 2020.

Changes in the quality of cancer care as assessed through performance indicators during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Cancer comprises a high burden on health systems. Performance indicators monitoring cancer outcomes are routinely used in OECD countries. However, the development of process and cancer-pathway based information is essential to guide health care delivery, allowing for better monitoring of changes in the quality of care provided. Assessing the changes in the quality of cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic requires a structured approach considering the high volume of publications. This study aims to summarize performance indicators used in the literature to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care (January-June 2020) in OECD countries and to assess changes in the quality of care as reported via selected indicators.

METHODS

Search conducted in MEDLINE and Embase databases. Performance indicators and their trends were collated according to the cancer care pathway.

RESULTS

This study included 135 articles, from which 1013 indicators were retrieved. Indicators assessing the diagnostic process showed a decreasing trend: from 33 indicators reporting on screening, 30 (91%) signalled a decrease during the pandemic (n = 30 indicators, 91%). A reduction was also observed in the number of diagnostic procedures (n = 64, 58%) and diagnoses (n = 130, 89%). The proportion of diagnoses in the emergency setting and waiting times showed increasing trends (n = 8, 89% and n = 14, 56%, respectively). A decreasing trend in the proportion of earliest stage cancers was reported by 63% of indicators (n = 9), and 70% (n = 43) of indicators showed an increasing trend in the proportion of advanced-stage cancers. Indicators reflecting the treatment process signalled a reduction in the number of procedures: 79%(n = 82) of indicators concerning surgeries, 72%(n = 41) of indicators assessing radiotherapy, and 93%(n = 40) of indicators related to systemic therapies. Modifications in cancer treatment were frequently reported: 64%(n = 195) of indicators revealed changes in treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a summary of performance indicators used in the literature to assess the cancer care pathway from January 2020 to June 2020 in OECD countries, and the changes in the quality of care signalled by these indicators. The trends reported inform on potential bottlenecks of the cancer care pathway. Monitoring this information closely could contribute to identifying moments for intervention during crises.

A comprehensive eHealth implementation guide constructed on a qualitative case study on barriers and facilitators of the digital care platform CMyLife

Background

Substantial proliferation of eHealth has enabled a move in patient-centred cancer care from the traditional in-person care model to real-time, dynamic, and technology supported on-demand care. However, in general, the uptake of these innovations is low. Studies show that eHealth is helpful in providing patient empowerment through e.g. providing high quality and timely information, enabling self-monitoring and shared decision making, but dropout rates are high and guidance for optimal implementation is lacking.

Aim

To explore barriers to and facilitators for nationwide implementation and consolidation of CMyLife, a multi-component, patient-centred, digital care platform, and to construct a comprehensive implementation guide for launching digital care platforms in daily clinical practice.

Methods

The first qualitative case study of a digital care platform like CMyLife was performed including five focus group- and eighteen in-depth interviews with stakeholders. Data were collected using a semi-structured interview guide, based on the frameworks of Grol and Flottorp. Transcripts of the interviews were analysed and barriers and facilitators were identified and categorized according to the frameworks. An iterative process including participation of main stakeholders and using the CFIR-ERIC framework led to creating a comprehensive implementation guide for digital care platforms.

Results

In total, 45 barriers and 41 facilitators were identified. Main barriers were lack of connectivity between information technology systems, changing role for both health care providers and patients, insufficient time and resources, doubts about privacy and security of data, and insufficient digital skills of users. Main facilitators mentioned were motivating patients and health care providers by clarifying the added value of use of a digital care platform, clear business case with vision, demonstrating (cost) effectiveness, using an implementation guide, and educating patients and health care providers about how to use CMyLife. Based on these barriers and facilitators a clear and comprehensive implementation guide was developed for digital care platforms.

Conclusion

Several barriers to and facilitators for implementation were identified, a clear overview was presented, and a unique comprehensive implementation guide was developed for launching future digital care platforms in daily clinical practice. The next step is to validate the implementation guide in other (oncological) diseases.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08020-3.

Emotional Self-Care: Exploring the Influencing Factors Among Individuals With Cancer

Cancer is a leading source of distress and fatality worldwide. Cancer-related aberrant cell proliferation causes excruciating pain and impairment. To cope with pain and manage symptoms and illness, pharmaceutical and non-pharmacological options are available. Self-care behaviors are recognized as a key source in symptom management and improving quality adherence to treatment among the current non-pharmacological strategies. The intervention measures to improve self-care were hardly impacted because of the narrow focus on physical self-care. Bringing in emotional self-care and addressing the individual's emotional health can enhance the effectiveness of interventions on a holistic level. Hence, this study has attempted to explore the factors that influence emotional self-care among individuals with cancer. Following an exploratory research design, the data were collected from 15 participants (4 men and 11 women) using purposive sampling and semi-structured interviews. Through thematic analysis, eight major themes were identified: physiological factors, social factors, family factors, psychological factors, individual factors, socioeconomic factors, cultural factors, and spiritual factors. The findings explained the emotional self-care among patients with cancer and how different identified factors influence their emotional self-care practices.

SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibodies Kinetics Postvaccination in Cancer Patients under Treatment with Immune Checkpoint Inhibition

Simple Summary

Solid tumor patients under active anticancer treatment are peculiarly affected by COVID-19 infection, given not only its ominous outcomes but also the need of disruptions of their rather strict therapeutic scheme. Thus, they have been globally prioritized for both primary and booster vaccinations. The existing data with respect to the seroconversion rate of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) among them, after vaccination, remain nevertheless obscure. Therefore, we prospectively evaluated the long-term humoral immunity dynamics for up to one month after the third dose in patients with solid malignancies receiving immunotherapy. Further research is required to assess the incremental benefit of booster doses and to optimize the vaccination schedule across different types of cancer and diverse systemic therapies.

Abstract

Considering that COVID-19 could adversely affect cancer patients, several countries have prioritized this highly susceptible population for vaccination. Thus, rapidly generating evidence on the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the subset of patients with cancer under active therapy is of paramount importance. From this perspective, we launched the present prospective observational study to comprehensively address the longitudinal dynamics of immunogenicity of both messenger RNA (mRNA) and viral vector-based vaccines in 85 patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for a broad range of solid tumors. Despite the relatively poor humoral responses following the priming vaccine inoculum, the seroconversion rates significantly increased after the second dose. Waning vaccine-based immunity was observed over the following six months, yet the administration of a third booster dose remarkably optimized antibody responses. Larger cohort studies providing real-world data with regard to vaccines effectiveness and durability of their protection among cancer patients receiving immunotherapy are an increasing priority.

Predictors of poor serologic response to COVID-19 vaccine in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Backgrounds

Patients with cancer presented a lower probability to obtain seroconversion after a complete course of COVID-19 vaccination. However, little was known on the factors that predict poor seroconversion in this frail population.

Methods

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases for all articles within a range of published years from 2019 to 2022 on the predictors of response to COVID-19 vaccine in patients with cancer (last search was updated on 2st March 2022). The odds ratio corresponding to the 95% confidence interval was used to assess the outcome. The statistical heterogeneity among studies was assessed with the Q-test and I² statistics. The review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022315687) and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

Results

Twenty cohort studies met the inclusion criteria for this study, with 5,499 patients with cancer. We found that advanced age, male patients, and metastatic disease increased negative seropositivity to COVID-19 vaccine. Immunoglobulin heavy chain variable mutation status, high concentration of Ig G, Ig M, and Ig A were correlated with seropositivity. Relating to cancer treatment strategy, anti-CD20 therapy within recent 12 months and chemotherapy were negatively correlated with seroconversion. Meta-analysis found no significant difference associated with targeted treatment, immunotherapy, and endocrine treatment.

Conclusions

Our meta-analysis assessed the factors that predict poor seroconversion in order to plan better prevention strategies in this frail population. The results proposed that enhanced vaccination strategies would be beneficial for the special patients such as advanced male, or patients receiving active chemotherapy, and carefully prevention should be emphasised even after a complete course of vaccination.

COVID-19 in patients with cancer: first report of the ESMO international, registry-based, cohort study (ESMO-CoCARE)

BACKGROUND

ESMO COVID-19 and CAncer REgistry (ESMO-CoCARE) is an international collaborative registry-based, cohort study gathering real-world data from Europe, Asia/Oceania and Africa on the natural history, management and outcomes of patients with cancer infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

ESMO-CoCARE captures information on patients with solid/haematological malignancies, diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Data collected since June 2020 include demographics, comorbidities, laboratory measurements, cancer characteristics, COVID-19 clinical features, management and outcome. Parameters influencing COVID-19 severity/recovery were investigated as well as factors associated with overall survival (OS) upon SARS-CoV-2 infection.

RESULTS

This analysis includes 1626 patients from 20 countries (87% from 24 European, 7% from 5 North African, 6% from 8 Asian/Oceanian centres), with COVID-19 diagnosis from January 2020 to May 2021. Median age was 64 years, with 52% of female, 57% of cancer stage III/IV and 65% receiving active cancer treatment. Nearly 64% patients required hospitalization due to COVID-19 diagnosis, with 11% receiving intensive care. In multivariable analysis, male sex, older age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≥2, body mass index (BMI) <25 kg/m2, presence of comorbidities, symptomatic disease, as well as haematological malignancies, active/progressive cancer, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) ≥6 and OnCovid Inflammatory Score ≤40 were associated with COVID-19 severity (i.e. severe/moderate disease requiring hospitalization). About 98% of patients with mild COVID-19 recovered, as opposed to 71% with severe/moderate disease. Advanced cancer stage was an additional adverse prognostic factor for recovery. At data cut-off, and with median follow-up of 3 months, the COVID-19-related death rate was 24.5% (297/1212), with 380 deaths recorded in total. Almost all factors associated with COVID-19 severity, except for BMI and NLR, were also predictive of inferior OS, along with smoking and non-Asian ethnicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Selected patient and cancer characteristics related to sex, ethnicity, poor fitness, comorbidities, inflammation and active malignancy predict for severe/moderate disease and adverse outcomes from COVID-19 in patients with cancer.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on clinicopathological features of transplant recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma: A case-control study

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had a significant impact on the management of all diseases. Various diseases such as cancer have a higher risk of COVID-19-related death. Despite this fact, any delay or alteration in treatment of cancer may have fatal consequences. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an aggressive liver cancer that requires multimodality treatment to improve survival.

AIM

To evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on the management of patients with HCC by determining changes in demographic, clinical and histopathological variables.

METHODS

Demographic, clinical and pathological variables of patients with HCC who had undergone liver transplantation between March 2020 and June 2021 (Pandemic group, n = 48) were retrospectively compared with that of the patients with HCC transplanted between November 2018 and March 2020 (Pre-pandemic group, n = 61).

RESULTS

The median age of the patients in the study was 56 (interquartile range = 15). Ninety-seven patients (89%) were male and 12 were female (11%). The most common etiology of liver disease was hepatitis B virus (n = 52, 47.7%). According to our results, there was a 21.3% drop in the number of patients transplanted for HCC. There was no difference in the demographic, clinical and pathological characteristics of the patients except blood alkaline phosphatase levels (P = 0.029), lymphovascular invasion (P = 0.019) and type of the liver graft that was transplanted (P = 0.017).

CONCLUSION

It is important to develop a surveillance strategy for liver transplant centers. The liver transplantation for HCC is justified and safe provided that strict surveillance protocols are applied.

Would the Addition of Immunotherapy Impact the Prognosis of Patients With Malignant Pericardial Effusion?

Pericardial effusion is a common finding in advanced-stage lung cancer. The presence of malignant cells or drainage of exudate effusion in the pericardial space may cause symptoms of dyspnea, pleuritic chest pain, and syncope. In addition to the difficulty physicians face in the detection and diagnosis of malignant pericardial effusion, treatment may be challenging considering the cancer prognosis and cardiovascular stability of the patient. Despite the availability of several treatment modalities for malignant pericardial effusion, including chemotherapy and surgery, patients with lung cancer historically present with poor prognoses. In addition to lung adenocarcinoma with malignant pericardial effusion, this case was complicated by COVID-19 and malignancy-associated obstructive pneumonia. We present a case of a 64-year-old woman with advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) with malignant pericardial effusion who, despite testing positive for COVID-19 and having obstructive pneumonia, had favorable outcomes following systemic therapy with combined chemo-immunotherapy.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on disease stage and treatment for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A French comprehensive multicentre ambispective observational cohort study (CAPANCOVID)

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic caused major oncology care pathway disruption. The CAPANCOVID study aimed to evaluate the impact on pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) - from diagnosis to treatment - of the reorganisation of the health care system during the first lockdown.

METHODS

This multicentre ambispective observational study included 833 patients diagnosed with PA between September 1, 2019 and October 31, 2020 from 13 French centres. Data were compared over three periods defined as before the outbreak of COVID-19, during the first lockdown (March 1 to May 11, 2020) and after lockdown.

RESULTS

During the lockdown, mean weekly number of new cases decreased compared with that of pre-pandemic levels (13.2 vs. 10.8, -18.2%; p = 0.63) without rebound in the post-lockdown period (13.2 vs. 12.9, -1.7%; p = 0.97). The number of borderline tumours increased (13.6%-21.7%), whereas the rate of metastatic diseases rate dropped (47.1%-40.3%) (p = 0.046). Time-to-diagnosis and -treatment were not different over periods. Waiting neoadjuvant chemotherapy in resectable tumours was significantly favoured (24.7%-32.6%) compared with upfront surgery (13%-7.8%) (p = 0.013). The use of mFOLFIRINOX preoperative chemotherapy regimen decreased (84.9%-69%; p = 0.044). After lockdown, the number of borderline tumours decreased (21.7%-9.6%) and advanced diseases increased (59.7%-69.8%) (p = 0.046). SARS-CoV-2 infected 39 patients (4.7%) causing 5 deaths (12.8%).

CONCLUSION

This cohort study suggests the existence of missing diagnoses and of a shift in disease stage at diagnosis from resectable to advanced diseases with related therapeutic modifications whose prognostic consequences will be known after the planned follow-up.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04406571.

SARS-CoV-2-related mortality and treatment delays for cancer patients in Austria : Findings of a multicentric nationwide study

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have an increased risk of mortality. Here, we investigated predictive factors for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) associated mortality in patients with neoplastic diseases treated throughout Austria.

METHODS

In this multicentric nationwide cohort study, data on patients with active or previous malignant diseases and SARS-CoV‑2 infections diagnosed between 13 March 2020 and 06 April 2021 were collected. Collected data included the stage of the malignant disease and outcome parameters 30 days after the diagnosis of SARS-CoV‑2 infection.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 230 individuals of which 75 (32.6%) patients were diagnosed with hematologic malignancies and 155 (67.4%) with solid tumors. At a median follow-up of 31 days after COVID-19 diagnosis, 38 (16.5%) patients had died due to COVID-19. Compared to survivors, patients who died were older (62.4 vs. 71.4 years, p < 0.001) and had a higher ECOG performance status (0.7 vs. 2.43, p < 0.001). Furthermore, higher neutrophil counts (64.9% vs. 73.8%, p = 0.03), lower lymphocyte counts (21.4% vs. 14%, p = 0.006) and lower albumin levels (32.5 g/l vs. 21.6 g/l, p < 0.001) were observed to be independent risk factors for adverse outcomes. No association between mortality and systemic antineoplastic therapy was found (p > 0.05). In 60.6% of the patients, therapy was postponed due to quarantine requirements or hospital admission.

CONCLUSION

Mortality of Austrian cancer patients infected with SARS-CoV‑2 is comparable to that of other countries. Furthermore, risk factors associated with higher mortality were evident and similar to the general population. Treatment delays were frequently observed.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer Care in a Tertiary Hospital in Korea: Possible Collateral Damage to Emergency Care

Objectives

We investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care in a tertiary hospital of South Korea without the specific lockdown measures.

Methods

A retrospective cohort of cancer patients from one of the largest tertiary hospitals in South Korea was used to compare the healthcare utilization in different settings (outpatient clinic, emergency department (ED), and admission) between the period of January 1 and December 31, 2020 and the same time period in 2019. The percent changes in healthcare utilization between two periods were calculated.

Results

A total of 448,833 cases from the outpatient cohort, 26,781 cases from the ED cohort, and 14,513 cases from the admission cohort were reviewed for 2019 and 2020. The total number of ED visit cases significantly decreased in 2020 than in 2019 by 18.04%, whereas the proportion of cancer patients maintained. The reduction in ED visits was more prominent in cases with COVID-19 suspicious symptoms, with high acuity, and those who lived in non-capital city area. There were no significant changes in the number of total visits and new cases in the outpatient clinic between two periods. No significant differences in the total number of hospitalizations were observed between two periods.

Conclusion

During the pandemic, the number of ED visits significantly decreased, while the use of outpatient clinic and hospitalizations were not affected. Cancer patients' ED visits decreased after the COVID-19 outbreak, suggesting the potential for collateral damage outside the hospital if the ED could not be reached in a timely manner.

Outcomes of Patients With Active Cancer and COVID-19 in the Intensive-Care Unit: A Multicenter Ambispective Study

Background

Several studies report an increased susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection in cancer patients. However, data in the intensive care unit (ICU) are scarce.

Research Question

We aimed to investigate the association between active cancer and mortality among patients requiring organ support in the ICU.

Study Design and Methods

In this ambispective study encompassing 17 hospitals in France, we included all adult active cancer patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring organ support and admitted in ICU. For each cancer patient, we included 3 non cancer patients as controls. Patients were matched at the same ratio using the inverse probability weighting approach based on a propensity score assessing the probability of cancer at admission. Mortality at day 60 after ICU admission was compared between cancer patients and non-cancer patients using primary logistic regression analysis and secondary multivariable analyses.

Results

Between March 12, 2020 and March 8, 2021, 2608 patients were admitted with SARS-CoV-2 infection in our study, accounting for 2.8% of the total population of patients with SARS-CoV-2 admitted in all French ICUs within the same period. Among them, 105 (n=4%) presented with cancer (51 patients had hematological malignancy and 54 patients had solid tumors). 409 of 420 patients were included in the propensity score matching process, of whom 307 patients in the non-cancer group and 102 patients in the cancer group. 145 patients (35%) died in the ICU at day 60, 59 (56%) with cancer and 86 (27%) without cancer. In the primary logistic regression analysis, the odds ratio for death associated to cancer was 2.3 (95%CI 1.24 - 4.28, p=0.0082) higher for cancer patients than for a non-cancer patient at ICU admission. Exploratory multivariable analyses showed that solid tumor (OR: 2.344 (0.87-6.31), p=0.062) and hematological malignancies (OR: 4.144 (1.24-13.83), p=0.062) were independently associated with mortality.

Interpretation

Patients with cancer and requiring ICU admission for SARS-CoV-2 infection had an increased mortality, hematological malignancy harboring the higher risk in comparison to solid tumors.

The Psychological Distress of Cancer Patients following the COVID-19 Pandemic First Lockdown: Results from a Large French Survey

Cancer patients commonly experience psychological distress that may increase with the current COVID-19 pandemic. This prospective study aimed to measure post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and anxiety in cancer patients following France’s first COVID-19-related lockdown, together with associated factors. Cancer patients receiving outpatient treatment or post-treatment follow-up completed a questionnaire which measured, among other things, PTSD (IES-R), anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory), and fear of cancer recurrence (FCR). Of the 1097 patients included in the study, 14.7% and 30.5% suffered from PTSD and anxiety, respectively. Patients afraid to come to hospital due to the risk of COVID-19 transmission (OR = 3.49, p < 0.001), those with a negative lockdown experience (OR = 0.98, p < 0.001), women (OR = 1.97; p = 0.009), and patients living alone (OR = 1.63, p = 0.045) were all more likely to have PTSD. Older patients (OR = 1.65, p = 0.020), women (OR = 1.62, p = 0.018), those with a higher FCR score (OR = 5.02, p < 0.001), patients unsatisfied with their cancer management (OR = 2.36, p < 0.001), and those afraid to come to hospital due to COVID-19 (OR = 2.43, p < 0.001) all had a higher risk of anxiety. These results provide a greater understanding of the psychological consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic in cancer patients and highlight the need to better integrate psychosocial support in pandemic response measures in order to guide health systems.

Investigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast cancer clinicians’ communication about sexual health

Purpose

We assessed breast cancer clinicians’ perspectives on how the COVID-19 pandemic and increased use of telehealth affected their clinical communication about sexual heath.

Methods

Breast cancer clinicians participating in a sexual health communication intervention study (N = 29; 76% female; 66% oncologists; 34% advanced practice clinicians) completed an online survey. Data analysis consisted of descriptive statistics and thematic analysis.

Results

All clinicians were using telehealth, with most (66%) using it for up to half of their clinic appointments. Although only 14% of clinicians reported having shorter clinic visits, 28% reported having less time to discuss sexual health; 69% reported no change; and 3% said they had more time. Forty-one percent reported sexual health was less of a priority; 55% reported no change; and 3% said it was more of a priority. Thirty-five percent reported telehealth was less conducive to discussing sexual health; 59% reported no change; and 7% reported more conducive. Qualitative analysis revealed key issues underlying the perceived impact of the pandemic on discussions of sexual health including heightened clinician discomfort discussing such issues via telehealth, the less personal nature and privacy issues in telehealth visits, increased concerns about risk of COVID-19 infection and other health concerns (e.g., missing recurrence, mental health) taking priority, and clinician-perceived patient factors (e.g., discomfort, decreased priority) in discussing sexual concerns.

Conclusion

Pandemic-related changes in breast cancer clinicians’ practice could be exacerbating challenges to discussing sexual health. Methods for integrating sexual health into cancer care are needed, regardless of the mode of delivery.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-07003-8.

Association of active immunotherapy with outcomes in cancer patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there are growing concerns about the safety of administering immunotherapy in cancer patients with COVID-19. However, current clinical guidelines provided no clear recommendation.

Methods: Studies were searched and retrieved from electronic databases. The meta-analysis was performed by employing the generic inverse-variance method. A random-effects model was used to calculate the unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) and adjusted ORs with the corresponding 95% CIs.

Results: This meta-analysis included 20 articles with 6,042 cancer patients diagnosed with COVID-19. According to the univariate analysis, the acceptance of immunotherapy within 30 days before COVID-19 diagnosis did not increase the mortality of cancer patients (OR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.68-1.25; P=0.61). Moreover, after adjusting for confounders, the adjusted OR for mortality was 0.51, with borderline significance (95% CI: 0.25-1.01; P=0.053). Similarly, the univariate analysis showed that the acceptance of immunotherapy within 30 days before COVID-19 diagnosis did not increase the risk of severe/critical disease in cancer patients (OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.78-1.47; P=0.66). No significant between-study heterogeneity was found in these analyses.

Conclusions: Accepting immunotherapy within 30 days before the diagnosis of COVID-19 was not significantly associated with a higher risk of mortality or severe/critical disease of infected cancer patients. Further prospectively designed studies with large sample sizes are required to evaluate the present results.

COVID 19 and febrile neutropenia: Case report and systematic review

Objectives

In pandemic conditions, patients with febrile neutropenia are also at risk of COVID-19. Aim of this systematic review is to evaluate COVID-19 cases presented with febrile neutropenia and provide information regarding incidence, clinical course and prognosis.

Methods

We systematically searched on COVID-19 and febrile neutropenia cases in PubMed, SCOPUS and Web of Science.

Results

A total of 19 febrile neutropenic patients were analyzed. A male predominance was noted. Eleven cases had hematological malignancies. Fourteen of the cases were previously received chemotherapy. Five patients had severe neutropenia: 3 had hematologic cancer and none died. 17 (89.5%) cases have pulmonary involvement and seven of them had severe disease with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Three cases with ARDS were died. 12 of them received G-CSF for treatment. Five cases were developed respiratory failure after G-CSF use. Overall mortality was 15.8%, while death was not observed in patients without malignancy and solid organ tumors, the mortality rate was 27% in cases with hematological malignancies.

Conclusion

In ongoing pandemic, febrile neutropenic patients should be precisely evaluated for COVID-19 disease. It should be remembered that there may not be typical signs and symptoms and laboratory findings of COVID-19 disease because of the immunosuppression.

HOLA COVID-19 Study: Evaluating the Impact of Caring for Patients With COVID-19 on Cancer Care Delivery in Latin America

PURPOSE

The HOLA COVID-19 study sought to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on oncology practices across Latin America (LATAM), challenges faced by physicians, and how practices and physicians adapted while delivering care to patients with cancer.

METHODS

This international cross-sectional study of oncology physicians in LATAM included a 43-item anonymous online survey to evaluate changes and adaptations to clinical practice. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the association of caring for patients with COVID-19 and changes to clinical practice.

RESULTS

A total of 704 oncology physicians from 19 countries completed the survey. Among respondents, the most common specialty was general oncology (34%) and 56% of physicians had cared for patients with COVID-19. The majority of physicians (70%) noted a decrease in the number of new patients evaluated during the COVID-19 pandemic when compared with prepandemic, and 73% reported adopting the use of telemedicine in their practice. More than half (58%) of physicians reported making changes to the treatments that they offered to patients with cancer. In adjusted models, physicians who had cared for patients with COVID-19 had higher odds of changing the type of chemotherapy or treatments that they offered (adjusted odds ratio 1.81; 95% CI, 1.30 to 2.53) and of delaying chemotherapy start (adjusted odds ratio 2.05; 95% CI, 1.49 to 2.81). Physicians identified significant delays in access to radiation and surgical services, diagnostic tests, and supportive care.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly disrupted global cancer care. Although changes to health care delivery are a necessary response to this global crisis, our study highlights the significant disruption and changes to the treatment plans of patients with cancer in LATAM resulting from the COVID-19 health care crisis.

Reviewing Treatment Options for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: Is There Still a Place for Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor (TKI) Monotherapy?

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) comprises a highly heterogeneous group of kidney tumours built upon distinct genetic- and epigenetic-driven mechanisms and molecular pathways. Therefore, responsiveness to treatment is considerably variable across patients, adding an extra layer of complexity to the already challenging therapeutic decision process. The last decade brought an unprecedented shift in the medical approach to advanced or metastatic RCC; in fact, immunotherapy-based combinations have significantly transformed the therapeutic arsenal and clinical outcomes of these patients. These strategies were quickly adopted by international guidelines committees as the new standards of care. However, this enhanced efficacy comes at the expense of tolerability, with a predictable negative impact on patients’ quality of life. Moreover, subgroup and post hoc analyses of the major clinical trials have shown that not all patients benefit equally from these innovative approaches. In this context, a group of experts on kidney cancer met and discussed the state of the art in the field, with a special emphasis on the appropriateness of using monotherapy with an anti-angiogenesis tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) to treat specific subgroups of patients with RCC. This article reviews the main topics that were considered to be pertinent for that discussion and establishes the profile of patients for whom TKI monotherapy remains a sensible frontline option by avoiding overtreatment and an unnecessary exposure to treatment-related toxicity.

Patient's Perspective on the Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer Treatment in Nigeria

Because of the global COVID-19 pandemic, health care organizations introduced guidelines for modifications to health and cancer medical care delivery to mitigate transmission and ensure quality health outcomes. To examine the extent and impact of these modifications on oncology service disruptions in Nigeria, we surveyed oncology patients across selected public and private cancer treatment centers.

Service interruptions because of the COVID-19 pandemic—Nigerian cancer patients' experience.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence in 860 cancer patients with a combined screening procedure including triage, molecular nasopharyngeal swabs and rapid serological test. A report from the first epidemic wave

INTRODUCTION

Even if now we have available the weapon of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, the patients with cancer remains a very frail population in which frequently the immunologic response to vaccination may be impaired. In this setting, the SARS-CoV-2 infection screening retains a great value. However, there are still limited data on the feasibility and efficacy of combined screening procedures to assess the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection (including asymptomatic cases) in cancer outpatients undergoing antineoplastic therapy.

PATIENTS AND RESULTS

From May 1, 2020, to June 15, 2020, during the first wave of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, 860 consecutive patients, undergoing active anticancer therapy, were evaluated and tested for SARS-CoV-2 with a combined screening procedure, including a self-report questionnaire, a molecular nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and a rapid serological immunoassay (for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM antibodies). The primary endpoint of the study was to estimate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection (including asymptomatic cases) in consecutive and unselected cancer outpatients by a combined screening modality. A total of 2955 SARS-CoV-2 NPS and 860 serological tests, in 475 patients with hematologic cancers and in 386 with solid tumors, were performed. A total of 112 (13%) patients self-reported symptoms potentially COVID-19 related. In 1/860 cases (< 1%) SARS-CoV-2 NPS was positive and in 14 cases (1.62%) the specific serological test was positive (overall prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection 1.62%). Of the 112 cases who declared symptoms potentially COVID-19-related, only 2.7% (3/112) were found SARS-CoV-2 positive.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest study reporting the feasibility of a combined screening procedure (including triage, NPS and serologic test) to evaluate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in cancer patients receiving active therapy, during the first epidemic wave and under the restrictive lockdown measures, in one of the active areas of the SARS-CoV-2 circulation. Lacking specific recommendations for the detection of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 cases, a combined diagnostic screening might be more effective to detect the exact prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in neoplastic patient population. The prevalence can obviously change according to the territorial context, the entity of the restrictive measures adopted and the phase of the epidemic curve. However, its exact and real-time knowledge could be important to balance risks/benefits of oncologic treatments, avoiding (if the prevalence is low) the reduction of dose intensity or the selection of less intensive (but also less effective) anti-cancer therapies.

Evaluation of COVID-19 impact on DELAYing diagnostic-therapeutic pathways of lung cancer patients in Italy (COVID-DELAY study): fewer cases and higher stages from a real-world scenario

Introduction

COVID-19 has disrupted the global health care system since March 2020. Lung cancer (LC) patients (pts) represent a vulnerable population highly affected by the pandemic. This multicenter Italian study aimed to evaluate whether the COVID-19 outbreak had an impact on access to cancer diagnosis and treatment of LC pts compared with pre-pandemic time.

Methods

Consecutive newly diagnosed LC pts referred to 25 Italian Oncology Departments between March and December 2020 were included. Access rate and temporal intervals between date of symptoms onset and diagnostic and therapeutic services were compared with the same period in 2019. Differences between the 2 years were analyzed using the chi-square test for categorical variables and the Mann–Whitney U test for continuous variables.

Results

A slight reduction (−6.9%) in newly diagnosed LC cases was observed in 2020 compared with 2019 (1523 versus 1637, P = 0.09). Newly diagnosed LC pts in 2020 were more likely to be diagnosed with stage IV disease (P < 0.01) and to be current smokers (someone who has smoked more than 100 cigarettes, including hand-rolled cigarettes, cigars, cigarillos, in their lifetime and has smoked in the last 28 days) (P < 0.01). The drop in terms of new diagnoses was greater in the lockdown period (percentage drop −12% versus −3.2%) compared with the other months included. More LC pts were referred to a low/medium volume hospital in 2020 compared with 2019 (P = 0.01). No differences emerged in terms of interval between symptoms onset and radiological diagnosis (P = 0.94), symptoms onset and cytohistological diagnosis (P = 0.92), symptoms onset and treatment start (P = 0.40), and treatment start and first radiological revaluation (P = 0.36).

Conclusions

Our study pointed out a reduction of new diagnoses with a shift towards higher stage at diagnosis for LC pts in 2020. Despite this, the measures adopted by Italian Oncology Departments ensured the maintenance of the diagnostic-therapeutic pathways of LC pts.

•

The COVID-19 outbreak had an impact on access to lung cancer (LC) diagnosis and treatment.

•

A slight reduction (−6.9%) in newly diagnosed LC cases was observed in 2020 compared with 2019.

•

Newly diagnosed LC pts in 2020 were more likely to be diagnosed with stage IV disease.

•

The Italian Oncology Departments ensured the maintenance of the diagnostic-therapeutic pathways of LC pts.

•

A reverse migration from high-volume to low-volume cancer centers was noted during the pandemic.