Clinical portrait of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in European cancer patients

Mortality in adult patients with solid or hematological malignancies and SARS-CoV-2 infection with a specific focus on lung and breast cancers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to estimate mortality in adult patients with solid or hematological malignancies and SARS-CoV-2 infection.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, up to 31 January 2021, identified publications reporting the case-fatality rate (CFR) among adult patients with solid or hematological malignancies and SARS-CoV-2 infection. The CFR, defined as the rate of death in this population, was assessed with a random effect model; 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

Among 135 selected studies (N = 33,879 patients), the CFR was 25.4% (95% CI 22.9%-28.2%). At a sensitivity analysis including studies with at least 100 patients, the CFR was 21.9% (95% CI 19.1%-25.1%). Among COVID-19 patients with lung (N = 1,135) and breast (N = 1,296) cancers, CFR were 32.4% (95% CI 26.5%-39.6%) and 14.2% (95% CI 9.3%-21.8%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with solid or hematological malignancies and SARS-CoV-2 infection have a high probability of mortality, with comparatively higher and lower CFRs in patients with lung and breast cancers, respectively.

COVID-19 in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: a Review of the Current Literature

Purpose of review

The approach to ongoing organ transplantation and management of COVID-19 in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTR) has evolved tremendously since the pandemic's beginning. We summarize the current literature surrounding the virology of SARS-CoV-2, epidemiology of COVID-19 in transplant recipients, review the clinical features and complications of COVID-19 in SOTR, and discuss the safety and efficacy of current therapies and candidate vaccines in this population.

Recent findings

Despite initial suspensions in organ transplantation during early 2020, routine donor testing and de-crowding of hospitals have allowed transplant activity to resume at pre-pandemic rates. COVID-19-associated mortality in SOTR is similar to that of the general population, and lower than that of patients with end-organ disease awaiting transplant. The optimal approach to immunosuppression in SOTR with COVID-19 is unknown and disease severity may influence management decisions. Many vaccines in development are likely to be safe for immunocompromised hosts, though post-marketing investigations will be required to determine the efficacy in the SOTR.

Summary

Though there are multiple unique considerations in the care of SOTR with COVID-19, immunosuppression does not appear to have a detrimental impact on overall outcome. Organ transplantation remains a lifesaving intervention and can be safely performed despite a global pandemic.

Does immune checkpoint inhibitor increase the risks of poor outcomes in COVID-19-infected cancer patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The association between immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) and outcomes of cancer patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection has yet to be systematically evaluated. This meta-analysis aims to investigate the effects of ICI treatment on COVID-19 prognosis, including mortality, severity, and any other prognosis-related outcomes.

Methods

Eligible studies published up to 27 February 2021 were included and assessed for risk of bias using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the pooled effect size along with its 95% confidence intervals. The quality of body evidence was evaluated using the modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework.

Results

Eleven studies involving a total of 2826 COVID-19-infected cancer patients were included in the systematic review. We discovered a moderate-to-high quality of evidence that ICI was not associated with a higher mortality risk, while the other outcomes yielded a very low-to-low-evidence quality. Although our findings indicated that ICI did not result in a higher risk of severity and hospitalization, further evidence is required to confirm our findings. In addition, we discovered that prior exposure to chemoimmunotherapy may be linked with a higher risk of COVID-19 severity (OR 8.19 [95% CI: 2.67–25.08]; I² = 0%), albeit with small sample size.

Conclusion

Our findings indicated that ICI treatment should not be adjourned nor terminated during the current pandemic. Rather, COVID-19 vigilance should be increased in such patients. Further studies with larger cohorts and higher quality of evidence are required to substantiate our findings.

Trial registration number

This project has been prospectively registered at PROSPERO (registration ID: CRD42020202142) on 4 August 2020.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00262-021-02990-9.

Diagnostic, Clinical and Post-SARS-CoV-2 Scenarios in Cancer Patients with SARS-CoV-2: Retrospective Analysis in Three German Cancer Centers

Simple Summary

The study investigated diagnostic, clinical and post-SARS-CoV-2 scenarios in cancer patients with SARS-CoV-2 aiming to improve management of SARS-CoV-2 infections and cancer afterwards. Around half of patients were initially asymptomatic and were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 during routine or contact tracing screening. Of them, 33% developed COVID-19 lately. Eventually, predominant part of patients had asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 or mild COVID-19 course. Lymphocytopenia preceding SARS-CoV-2 was associated with a significantly increased risk for severe or critical COVID-19 course. Commonly patients experienced a treatment delay post-SARS-CoV-2; one fifth developed progressive disease (PD) within that time and/or had to undergo therapy modifications following deterioration of the performance status or PD post-COVID-19. This study provides knowledge of real-life clinical courses of SARS-CoV-2 in oncology and contributes to improving therapeutic strategies for cancer patients in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Abstract

Oncologists face challenges in the management of SARS-CoV-2 infections and post-SARS-CoV-2 cancer treatment. We analyzed diagnostic, clinical and post-SARS-CoV-2 scenarios in patients from three German cancer centers with RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Sixty-three patients with SARS-CoV-2 and hematologic or solid neoplasms were included. Thirty patients were initially asymptomatic, 10 of whom developed COVID-19 symptoms subsequently. Altogether 20 (32%) patients were asymptomatic, 18 (29%) had mild, 12 (19%) severe and 13 (20%) critical courses. Lymphocytopenia increased risk of severe/critical COVID-19 three-fold (p = 0.015). Asymptomatic course was not associated with age, remission status, therapies or co-morbidities. Secondary bacterial infection accompanied more than one third of critical COVID-19 cases. Treatment was delayed post-SARS-CoV-2 in 46 patients, 9 of whom developed progressive disease (PD). Cancer therapy was modified in 8 SARS-CoV-2 survivors because of deteriorating performance or PD. At the last follow-up, 17 patients had died from COVID-19 (n = 8) or PD (n = 9) giving an estimated 73% four-month overall survival rate. SARS-CoV-2 infection has a heterogenous course in cancer patients. Lymphocytopenia carries a significant risk of severe/critical COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 disruption of therapy is as serious as SARS-CoV-2 infection itself. Careful surveillance will allow early restart of the anti-cancer treatment.

Determinants of enhanced vulnerability to coronavirus disease 2019 in UK patients with cancer: a European study

BACKGROUND

Despite high contagiousness and rapid spread, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to heterogeneous outcomes across affected nations. Within Europe (EU), the United Kingdom (UK) is the most severely affected country, with a death toll in excess of 100,000 as of January 2021. We aimed to compare the national impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the risk of death in UK patients with cancer versus those in continental EU.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of the OnCovid study database, a European registry of patients with cancer consecutively diagnosed with COVID-19 in 27 centres from 27th February to 10th September 2020. We analysed case fatality rates and risk of death at 30 days and 6 months stratified by region of origin (UK versus EU). We compared patient characteristics at baseline including oncological and COVID-19-specific therapy across UK and EU cohorts and evaluated the association of these factors with the risk of adverse outcomes in multivariable Cox regression models.

FINDINGS

Compared with EU (n = 924), UK patients (n = 468) were characterised by higher case fatality rates (40.38% versus 26.5%, p < 0.0001) and higher risk of death at 30 days (hazard ratio [HR], 1.64 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.36-1.99]) and 6 months after COVID-19 diagnosis (47.64% versus 33.33%; p < 0.0001; HR, 1.59 [95% CI, 1.33-1.88]). UK patients were more often men, were of older age and have more comorbidities than EU counterparts (p < 0.01). Receipt of anticancer therapy was lower in UK than in EU patients (p < 0.001). Despite equal proportions of complicated COVID-19, rates of intensive care admission and use of mechanical ventilation, UK patients with cancer were less likely to receive anti-COVID-19 therapies including corticosteroids, antivirals and interleukin-6 antagonists (p < 0.0001). Multivariable analyses adjusted for imbalanced prognostic factors confirmed the UK cohort to be characterised by worse risk of death at 30 days and 6 months, independent of the patient's age, gender, tumour stage and status; number of comorbidities; COVID-19 severity and receipt of anticancer and anti-COVID-19 therapy. Rates of permanent cessation of anticancer therapy after COVID-19 were similar in the UK and EU cohorts.

INTERPRETATION

UK patients with cancer have been more severely impacted by the unfolding of the COVID-19 pandemic despite societal risk mitigation factors and rapid deferral of anticancer therapy. The increased frailty of UK patients with cancer highlights high-risk groups that should be prioritised for anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Continued evaluation of long-term outcomes is warranted.

Association of clinical factors and recent anticancer therapy with COVID-19 severity among patients with cancer: a report from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer may be at high risk of adverse outcomes from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We analyzed a cohort of patients with cancer and coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) to identify prognostic clinical factors, including laboratory measurements and anticancer therapies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with active or historical cancer and a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis recorded between 17 March and 18 November 2020 were included. The primary outcome was COVID-19 severity measured on an ordinal scale (uncomplicated, hospitalized, admitted to intensive care unit, mechanically ventilated, died within 30 days). Multivariable regression models included demographics, cancer status, anticancer therapy and timing, COVID-19-directed therapies, and laboratory measurements (among hospitalized patients).

RESULTS

A total of 4966 patients were included (median age 66 years, 51% female, 50% non-Hispanic white); 2872 (58%) were hospitalized and 695 (14%) died; 61% had cancer that was present, diagnosed, or treated within the year prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Older age, male sex, obesity, cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities, renal disease, diabetes mellitus, non-Hispanic black race, Hispanic ethnicity, worse Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, recent cytotoxic chemotherapy, and hematologic malignancy were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Among hospitalized patients, low or high absolute lymphocyte count; high absolute neutrophil count; low platelet count; abnormal creatinine; troponin; lactate dehydrogenase; and C-reactive protein were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Patients diagnosed early in the COVID-19 pandemic (January-April 2020) had worse outcomes than those diagnosed later. Specific anticancer therapies (e.g. R-CHOP, platinum combined with etoposide, and DNA methyltransferase inhibitors) were associated with high 30-day all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical factors (e.g. older age, hematological malignancy, recent chemotherapy) and laboratory measurements were associated with poor outcomes among patients with cancer and COVID-19. Although further studies are needed, caution may be required in utilizing particular anticancer therapies.

CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER

NCT04354701.

Medical Oncology Group of Australia position statement: COVID-19 vaccination in patients with solid tumours

People with cancer are vulnerable to increased morbidity and mortality from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). COVID-19 vaccination is key to protecting the population of people with cancer from adverse outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The Medical Oncology Group of Australia aimed to address the considerations around COVID-19 vaccination in people with cancer, in particular, safety and efficacy of vaccination. The assessment of patients with generalised allergic reaction to anti-cancer therapy containing vaccine components and practical implementation of vaccination of people on active anti-cancer therapy are also discussed.

Assessing the impact of COVID-19 on liver cancer management (CERO-19)

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems and it may have heavily impacted patients with liver cancer (LC). Herein, we evaluated whether the schedule of LC screening or procedures has been interrupted or delayed because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

An international survey evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical practice and clinical trials from March 2020 to June 2020, as the first phase of a multicentre, international, and observational project. The focus was on patients with hepatocellular carcinoma or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, cared for around the world during the first COVID-19 pandemic wave.

RESULTS

Ninety-one centres expressed interest to participate and 76 were included in the analysis, from Europe, South America, North America, Asia, and Africa (73.7%, 17.1%, 5.3%, 2.6%, and 1.3% per continent, respectively). Eighty-seven percent of the centres modified their clinical practice: 40.8% the diagnostic procedures, 80.9% the screening programme, 50% cancelled curative and/or palliative treatments for LC, and 41.7% modified the liver transplantation programme. Forty-five out of 69 (65.2%) centres in which clinical trials were running modified their treatments in that setting, but 58.1% were able to recruit new patients. The phone call service was modified in 51.4% of centres which had this service before the COVID-19 pandemic (n = 19/37).

CONCLUSIONS

The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had a tremendous impact on the routine care of patients with liver cancer. Modifications in screening, diagnostic, and treatment algorithms may have significantly impaired the outcome of patients. Ongoing data collection and future analyses will report the benefits and disadvantages of the strategies implemented, aiding future decision-making.

LAY SUMMARY

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems globally. Herein, we assessed the impact of the first wave pandemic on patients with liver cancer and found that routine care for these patients has been majorly disrupted, which could have a significant impact on outcomes.

The systemic pro-inflammatory response: targeting the dangerous liaison between COVID-19 and cancer

Inflammation is an established driver of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection and a mechanism linked to the increased susceptibility to fatal COVID-19 demonstrated by patients with cancer. As patients with cancer exhibit a higher level of inflammation compared with the general patient population, patients with cancer and COVID-19 may uniquely benefit from strategies targeted at overcoming the unrestrained pro-inflammatory response. Targeted and non-targeted anti-inflammatory therapies may prevent end-organ damage in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer and decrease mortality. Here, we review the clinical role of selective inhibition of pro-inflammatory interleukins, tyrosine kinase modulation, anti-tumor necrosis factor agents, and other non-targeted approaches including corticosteroids in their roles as disease-modulating agents in patients with COVID-19 and cancer. Investigation of these therapeutics in this highly vulnerable patient group is posited to facilitate the development of tailored therapeutics for this patient population, aiding the transition of systemic inflammation from a prognostic domain to a source of therapeutic targets.

The intersection of COVID-19 and cancer: signaling pathways and treatment implications

The outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has emerged as a serious public health concern. Patients with cancer have been disproportionately affected by this pandemic. Increasing evidence has documented that patients with malignancies are highly susceptible to severe infections and mortality from COVID-19. Recent studies have also elucidated the molecular relationship between the two diseases, which may not only help optimize cancer care during the pandemic but also expand the treatment for COVID-19. In this review, we highlight the clinical and molecular similarities between cancer and COVID-19 and summarize the four major signaling pathways at the intersection of COVID-19 and cancer, namely, cytokine, type I interferon (IFN-I), androgen receptor (AR), and immune checkpoint signaling. In addition, we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of repurposing anticancer treatment for the treatment of COVID-19.

COVID-19 and cancer registries: learning from the first peak of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

The SARS-Cov-2 pandemic in 2020 has caused oncology teams around the world to adapt their practice in the aim of protecting patients. Early evidence from China indicated that patients with cancer, and particularly those who had recently received chemotherapy or surgery, were at increased risk of adverse outcomes following SARS-Cov-2 infection. Many registries of cancer patients infected with SARS-Cov-2 emerged during the first wave. We collate the evidence from these national and international studies and focus on the risk factors for patients with solid cancers and the contribution of systemic anti-cancer treatments (SACT-chemotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted and hormone therapy) to outcomes following SARS-Cov-2 infection. Patients with cancer infected with SARS-Cov-2 have a higher probability of death compared with patients without cancer. Common risk factors for mortality following COVID-19 include age, male sex, smoking history, number of comorbidities and poor performance status. Oncological features that may predict for worse outcomes include tumour stage, disease trajectory and lung cancer. Most studies did not identify an association between SACT and adverse outcomes. Recent data suggest that the timing of receipt of SACT may be associated with risk of mortality. Ongoing recruitment to these registries will enable us to provide evidence-based care.

A Statewide Multi-Institutional Study of Asymptomatic Pretreatment Testing of Radiation Therapy Patients for SARS-CoV-2 in a High-Incidence Region of the United States

Purpose

Our purpose was to establish the prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in asymptomatic patients scheduled to receive radiation therapy and its effect on management decisions.

Methods and Materials

Between April 2020 and July 2020, patients without influenza-like illness symptoms at four radiation oncology departments (two academic university hospitals and two community hospitals) underwent polymerase chain reaction testing for SARS-CoV-2 before the initiation of treatment. Patients were tested either before radiation therapy simulation or after simulation but before treatment initiation. Patients tested for indications of influenza-like illness symptoms were excluded from this analysis. Management of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients was individualized based on disease site and acuity.

Results

Over a 3-month period, a total of 385 tests were performed in 336 asymptomatic patients either before simulation (n = 75), post-simulation, before treatment (n = 230), or on-treatment (n = 49). A total of five patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, for a pretreatment prevalence of 1.3% (2.6% in north/central New Jersey and 0.4% in southern New Jersey/southeast Pennsylvania). The median age of positive patients was 58 years (range, 38-78 years). All positive patients were white and were relatively equally distributed with regard to sex (2 male, 3 female) and ethnicity (2 Hispanic and 3 non-Hispanic). The median Charlson comorbidity score among positive patients was five. All five patients were treated for different primary tumor sites, the large majority had advanced disease (80%), and all were treated for curative intent. The majority of positive patients were being treated with either sequential or concurrent immunosuppressive systemic therapy (80%). Initiation of treatment was delayed for 14 days with the addition of retesting for four patients, and one patient was treated without delay but with additional infectious-disease precautions.

Conclusions

Broad-based pretreatment asymptomatic testing of radiation oncology patients for SARS-CoV-2 is of limited value, even in a high-incidence region. Future strategies may include focused risk-stratified asymptomatic testing.

Treatment Decisions for Patients with Cancer during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Patients with cancer have been disproportionally affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, with high rates of severe outcomes and death. Similarly, treatment decisions in this vulnerable population have been altered to a major degree during the past year, with significant disruption of care reported. Although complex, therapeutic choices in patients with cancer in times of COVID-19 are critical, as they may save thousands of lives. A mounting body of evidence, in addition to clear recommendations by multiple international societies, can help oncologists decide appropriately the necessity to administer antineoplastic regimens, helping to avoid a surge in cancer-related deaths in the upcoming months.

Prevalence and Clinical Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Silent Carriers Among Actively Treated Patients with Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic

INTRODUCTION

In Europe, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic had its first epicenter in Italy. Despite a significant mortality rate, the severity of most cases of COVID-19 infection ranges from asymptomatic to mildly symptomatic, and silent infection affects a still-unknown proportion of the general population. No information is available on the prevalence and clinical impact of SARS-CoV-2 silent infection among patients with cancer receiving anticancer treatment during the pandemic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From April 1, 2020, to the end of the same month, 560 consecutive patients with cancer, asymptomatic for COVID-19 and on anticancer treatment at Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital in Bergamo, were evaluated and tested for SARS-CoV-2. We implemented a two-step diagnostics, including the rapid serological immunoassay for anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin (Ig) G/IgM and the nasopharyngeal swab reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test in case of seropositivity to identify SARS-CoV-2 silent carriers.

RESULTS

In 560 patients, 172 (31%) resulted positive for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG antibodies, regardless of different type of cancer, stage, and treatment. The Ig-seropositive patients were then tested with RT-PCR nasopharyngeal swabs, and 38% proved to be SARS-CoV-2 silent carriers. At an early follow-up, in the 97 SARS-CoV-2-seropositive/RT-PCR-negative patients who continued their anticancer therapies, only one developed symptomatic COVID-19 illness.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with cancer, the two-step diagnostics is feasible and effective for SARS-CoV-2 silent carriers detection and might support optimal cancer treatment strategies at both the individual and the population level. The early safety profile of the different anticancer therapies, in patients previously exposed to SARS-CoV-2, supports the recommendation to continue the active treatment, at least in cases of RT-PCR-negative patients.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This is the first study evaluating the prevalence and clinical impact of SARS-CoV-2 silent infection in actively treated patients with cancer, during the epidemic peak in one of the worst areas of the COVID-19 pandemic. Lacking national and international recommendations for the detection of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, a pragmatic and effective two-step diagnostics was implemented to ascertain SARS-CoV-2 silent carriers. In this series, consisting of consecutive and unselected patients with cancer, the prevalence of both SARS-CoV-2-seropositive patients and silent carriers is substantial (31% and 10%, respectively). The early safety profile of the different anticancer therapies, in patients previously exposed to SARS-CoV-2, supports the recommendation to continue the active treatment, at least in case of RT-PCR-negative patients.

Endocrine complications of immunotherapies: a review

Use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer treatment has increased vastly over the past decade, as both single and combination agent therapies. While having a positive impact on survival rates, adverse effects have been noted, with endocrine effects in around 10% of patients. Thyroid disease and hypophysitis are the most commonly encountered, with diabetes mellitus and primary adrenal insufficiency also reported, as well as more rare endocrinopathies. Patient and clinician education to raise awareness of these effects, as well as regular monitoring to enable early recognition, diagnosis and prompt treatment of the immune side effects, are key. In this review, we discuss the aetiology, presentation and management of the endocrine complications of immunotherapies that are relevant to the general physician, as well as highlighting important areas where further research is still needed.

Evaluating the impact of COVID-19 on supportive care needs, psychological distress and quality of life in UK cancer survivors and their support network

Objectives

The COVID‐19 pandemic is having considerable impact on cancer care, including restricted access to hospital‐based care, treatment and psychosocial support. We investigated the impact on unmet needs and psychosocial well‐being.

Methods

One hundred and forty four participants (77% female), including people with cancer and their support networks, were recruited. The most prevalent diagnosis was breast cancer. Forty‐one participants recruited pre‐pandemic were compared with 103 participants recruited during the COVID‐19 pandemic. We measured participants' unmet supportive care needs, psychological distress and quality of life.

Results

Half of our patient respondents reported unexpected changes to treatment following pandemic onset, with widespread confusion about their longer‐term consequences. Although overall need levels have not increased, specific needs have changed in prominence. People with cancer reported significantly reduced anxiety (p = 0.049) and improved quality of life (p = 0.032) following pandemic onset, but support network participants reported reduced quality of life (p = 0.009), and non‐significantly elevated anxiety, stress and depression.

Conclusion

Psychological well‐being of people with cancer has not been detrimentally affected by pandemic onset. Reliance on home‐based support to compensate for the lost availability of structured healthcare pathways may, however, explain significant and detrimental effects on the well‐being and quality of life of people in their support and informal care networks.

The COVID-19 pandemic: An opportunity to rethink and harmonise the frequency of follow-up visits for patients with early stage breast cancer

PURPOSE

While routine, in-person follow-up of early-stage breast cancer patients (EBC) after completion of initial treatment is common, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in unprecedented changes in clinical practice. A systematic review was performed to evaluate the evidence supporting different frequencies of routine follow-up.

METHODS

MEDLINE and the Cochrane Collaboration Library were searched from database inception to July 16, 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies (PCS) evaluating different frequencies of routine follow-up. Citations were assessed by pairs of independent reviewers. Risk of Bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB tool for RCTs and the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for Cohort Studies. Findings were summarized narratively.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 3316 studies, of which 7 (6 RCTs and 1 PCS) were eligible. Study endpoints included; quality of life (QoL; 5 RCTs and 1 PCS), disease free survival (DFS) (1 RCT), overall survival (OS) (1 RCT) and cost-effectiveness (1 RCT). The results showed reduction in follow-up frequency had no adverse effect on: QoL (6 studies, n = 920), DFS (1 trial, n = 472) or OS (1 trial, n = 472), but improved cost-effectiveness (1 trial, n = 472). Four RCTs specifically examined follow-up on-demand versus scheduled follow-up visits and found no statistically significant differences in QoL (n = 544).

CONCLUSION

While no evidence-based guidelines suggest that follow-up of EBC patients improves DFS or OS, routinely scheduled in-person assessment is common. RCT data suggests that reduced frequency of follow-up has no adverse effects.

Systemic pro-inflammatory response identifies patients with cancer with adverse outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection: the OnCovid Inflammatory Score

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer are particularly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The systemic inflammatory response is a pathogenic mechanism shared by cancer progression and COVID-19. We investigated systemic inflammation as a driver of severity and mortality from COVID-19, evaluating the prognostic role of commonly used inflammatory indices in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer accrued to the OnCovid study.

METHODS

In a multicenter cohort of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer in Europe, we evaluated dynamic changes in neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio (NLR); platelet:lymphocyte ratio (PLR); Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), renamed the OnCovid Inflammatory Score (OIS); modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS); and Prognostic Index (PI) in relation to oncological and COVID-19 infection features, testing their prognostic potential in independent training (n=529) and validation (n=542) sets.

RESULTS

We evaluated 1071 eligible patients, of which 625 (58.3%) were men, and 420 were patients with malignancy in advanced stage (39.2%), most commonly genitourinary (n=216, 20.2%). 844 (78.8%) had ≥1 comorbidity and 754 (70.4%) had ≥1 COVID-19 complication. NLR, OIS, and mGPS worsened at COVID-19 diagnosis compared with pre-COVID-19 measurement (p<0.01), recovering in survivors to pre-COVID-19 levels. Patients in poorer risk categories for each index except the PLR exhibited higher mortality rates (p<0.001) and shorter median overall survival in the training and validation sets (p<0.01). Multivariable analyses revealed the OIS to be most independently predictive of survival (validation set HR 2.48, 95% CI 1.47 to 4.20, p=0.001; adjusted concordance index score 0.611).

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic inflammation is a validated prognostic domain in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer and can be used as a bedside predictor of adverse outcome. Lymphocytopenia and hypoalbuminemia as computed by the OIS are independently predictive of severe COVID-19, supporting their use for risk stratification. Reversal of the COVID-19-induced proinflammatory state is a putative therapeutic strategy in patients with cancer.

At the Crossroads: COVID-19 and Immune-Checkpoint Blockade for Cancer

The immunomodulatory effects of immune-checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapy for cancer may act at the crossroads between the need to increase antiviral immune responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and to decrease the inflammatory responses in severe cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). There is evidence from preclinical models that blocking programmed death receptor 1 (PD1) protects against RNA virus infections, which suggests that patients with cancer receiving ICB may have lower rates of viral infection. However, given the heterogeneity of patient characteristics, this would be difficult to demonstrate using population-based registries or in clinical trials. Most studies of the impact of ICB therapy on the course of COVID-19 have centered on studying its potential detrimental impact on the course of the COVID-19 infection, in particular on the development of the most severe inflammatory complications. This is a logical concern as it is becoming clear that complications of COVID-19 such as severe respiratory distress syndrome are related to interferon signaling, which is the pathway that leads to expression of the PD1 ligand PD-L1. Therefore, PD1/PD-L1 ICB could potentially increase inflammatory processes, worsening the disease course for patients. However, review of the current evidence does not support the notion that ICB therapy worsens complications from COVID-19, and we conclude that it supports the continued use of ICB therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic provided that we now collect data on the effects of such therapy on COVID-19 vaccination.

Management of digestive cancers during the COVID-19 second wave: A French intergroup point of view (SNFGE, FFCD, GERCOR, UNICANCER, SFCD, SFED, SFRO, ACHBT, SFR)

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has major impact of healthcare systems, including cancer care pathways. The aim of this work is to discuss in a multidisciplinary approach the therapeutic and/or strategies adaptations for patients treated for a digestive cancer during the European second wave of COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A collaborative work was performed by several French societies to answer how to preserve digestive cancer care with no loss of chance during the second wave of COVID-19. In this context, all recommendations are graded as expert's agreement according to level evidence found in literature until October 2020 and the experience of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

As far as possible, no therapeutic modification should be carried out. If necessary, therapeutic adjustments may be considered if they do not constitute a loss of chance for patients. Considering the level of evidence all therapeutic modifications need to be discussed in multidisciplinary tumor board meeting and with patient consent. By contrast to first wave cancer prevention, cancer screening, supportive care and clinical trials should be continued.

CONCLUSION

Recommendations proposed could limit cancer excess mortality due to the COVID-19 pandemic but should be adapted according to the situation in each hospital.

Acute Immune Signatures and Their Legacies in Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 Infected Cancer Patients

Given the immune system's importance for cancer surveillance and treatment, we have investigated how it may be affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection of cancer patients. Across some heterogeneity in tumor type, stage, and treatment, virus-exposed solid cancer patients display a dominant impact of SARS-CoV-2, apparent from the resemblance of their immune signatures to those for COVID-19+ non-cancer patients. This is not the case for hematological malignancies, with virus-exposed patients collectively displaying heterogeneous humoral responses, an exhausted T cell phenotype and a high prevalence of prolonged virus shedding. Furthermore, while recovered solid cancer patients' immunophenotypes resemble those of non-virus-exposed cancer patients, recovered hematological cancer patients display distinct, lingering immunological legacies. Thus, while solid cancer patients, including those with advanced disease, seem no more at risk of SARS-CoV-2-associated immune dysregulation than the general population, hematological cancer patients show complex immunological consequences of SARS-CoV-2 exposure that might usefully inform their care.

Epidemiology and clinical course of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection in cancer patients in the Veneto Oncology Network: The Rete Oncologica Veneta covID19 study

Introduction

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic started in Italy with clusters identified in Northern Italy. The Veneto Oncology Network (Rete Oncologica Veneta) licenced dedicated guidelines to ensure proper care minimising the risk of infection in patients with cancer. Rete Oncologica Veneta covID19 (ROVID) is a regional registry aimed at describing epidemiology and clinical course of Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in patients with cancer.

Materials and methods

Patients with cancer diagnosis and documented SARS-CoV-2 infection are eligible. Data on cancer diagnosis, comorbidities, anticancer treatments, as well as details on SARS-CoV-2 infection (hospitalisation, treatments, fate of the infection), have been recorded. Logistic regression analysis was applied to calculate the association between clinical/laboratory variables and death from any cause.

Results

One hundred seventy patients have been enrolled. The median age at time of the SARS-CoV infection was 70 years (25–92). The most common cancer type was breast cancer (n = 40). The majority of the patients had stage IV disease. Half of the patients had two or more comorbidities. The majority of the patients (78%) presented with COVID-19 symptoms. More than 77% of the patients were hospitalized and 6% were admitted to intensive care units. Overall, 104 patients have documented resolution of the infection. Fifty-seven patients (33%) have died. In 29 cases (17%), the cause of death was directly correlated to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Factors significantly correlated with the risk of death were the following: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS), age, presence of two or more comorbidities, presence of dyspnoea, COVID-19 phenotype ≥ 3, hospitalisation, intensive care unit admission, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio and thrombocytopenia.

Conclusions

The mortality rate reported in this confirms the frailty of this population. These data reinforce the need to protect patients with cancer from SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Priority COVID-19 Vaccination for Patients with Cancer while Vaccine Supply Is Limited

Published series on COVID-19 support the notion that patients with cancer are a particularly vulnerable population. There is a confluence of risk factors between cancer and COVID-19, and cancer care and treatments increase exposure to the virus and may dampen natural immune responses. The available evidence supports the conclusion that patients with cancer, in particular with hematologic malignancies, should be considered among the very high-risk groups for priority COVID-19 vaccination.

Haematological malignancy and nosocomial transmission are associated with an increased risk of death from COVID-19: results of a multi-center UK cohort

The COVID-19 pandemic has been a disruptive event for cancer patients, especially those with haematological malignancies (HM). They may experience a more severe clinical course due to impaired immune responses. This multi-center retrospective UK audit identified cancer patients who had SARS-CoV-2 infection between 1 March and 10 June 2020 and collected data pertaining to cancer history, COVID-19 presentation and outcomes. In total, 179 patients were identified with a median age of 72 (IQR 61, 81) and follow-up of 44 days (IQR 42, 45). Forty-one percent were female and the overall mortality was 37%. Twenty-nine percent had HM and of these, those treated with chemotherapy in the preceding 28 days to COVID-19 diagnosis had worse outcome compared with solid malignancy (SM): 62% versus 19% died [HR 8.33 (95% CI, 2.56-25), p < 0.001]. Definite or probable nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission accounted for 16% of cases and was associated with increased risk of death (HR 2.47, 95% CI 1.43-4.29, p = 0.001). Patients with haematological malignancies and those who acquire nosocomial transmission are at increased risk of death. Therefore, there is an urgent need to reassess shielding advice, reinforce stringent infection control, and ensure regular patient and staff testing to prevent nosocomial transmission.

The Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Molecular Diagnostic Testing

BACKGROUND

Accurate molecular diagnostic tests are necessary for confirming a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Direct detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleic acids in respiratory tract specimens informs patient, healthcare institution and public health level decision-making. The numbers of available SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection tests are rapidly increasing, as is the COVID-19 diagnostic literature. Thus, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) recognized a significant need for frequently updated systematic reviews of the literature to inform evidence-based best practice guidance.

OBJECTIVE

The IDSA's goal was to develop an evidence-based diagnostic guideline to assist clinicians, clinical laboratorians, patients and policymakers in decisions related to the optimal use of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification tests. In addition, we provide a conceptual framework for understanding molecular diagnostic test performance, discuss the nuance of test result interpretation in a variety of practice settings and highlight important unmet research needs in the COVID-19 diagnostic testing space.

METHODS

IDSA convened a multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists, and experts in systematic literature review to identify and prioritize clinical questions and outcomes related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostics. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 17 diagnostic recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Universal access to accurate SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing is critical for patient care, hospital infection prevention and the public response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Information on the clinical performance of available tests is rapidly emerging, but the quality of evidence of the current literature is considered moderate to very low. Recognizing these limitations, the IDSA panel weighed available diagnostic evidence and recommends nucleic acid testing for all symptomatic individuals suspected of having COVID-19. In addition, testing is recommended for asymptomatic individuals with known or suspected contact with a COVID-19 case. Testing asymptomatic individuals without known exposure is suggested when the results will impact isolation/quarantine/personal protective equipment (PPE) usage decisions, dictate eligibility for surgery, or inform solid organ or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation timing. Ultimately, prioritization of testing will depend on institutional-specific resources and the needs of different patient populations.

COVID-19 and Its Impact on Upper Gastrointestinal (GI) Cancer Management

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the novel, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, has left dramatic footprints on human health and economy. Cancer, whilst not an infective disease, is prevalent in epidemic proportions and cannot be pretermitted due to the impact of COVID-19. As we emanate from the second national lockdown in the UK with mixed feelings of hope and despair-due to vaccination and new COVID-19 variant, respectively-we reflect on the impact of the first wave on the provision on diagnosis and management of with upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancers. This review provides a critical analysis of available literature on COVID-19 and its impact on cancer management in general and that of UGI cancers in particular.

COVID-19 mortality in cancer patients: a report from a tertiary cancer centre in India

Background

Cancer patients, especially those receiving cytotoxic therapy, are assumed to have a higher probability of death from COVID-19. We have conducted this study to identify the Case Fatality Rate (CFR) in cancer patients with COVID-19 and have explored the relationship of various clinical factors to mortality in our patient cohort.

Methods

All confirmed cancer cases presented to the hospital from June 8 to August 20, 2020, and developed symptoms/radiological features suspicious of COVID-19 were tested by Real-time polymerase chain reaction assay and/or cartridge-based nucleic acid amplification test from a combination of naso-oropharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2. Clinical data, treatment details, and outcomes were assessed from the medical records.

Results

Of the total 3,101 cancer patients admitted to the hospital, 1,088 patients were tested and 186 patients were positive for SARS-CoV-2. The CFR in the cohort was 27/186 (14.52%). Univariate analysis showed that the risk of death was significantly associated with the presence of any comorbidity (OR: 2.68; (95% CI [1.13-6.32]); P = 0.025), multiple comorbidities (OR: 3.01; (95% CI [1.02-9.07]); P = 0.047 for multiple vs. single), and the severity of COVID-19 presentation (OR: 27.48; (95% CI [5.34-141.49]); P < 0.001 for severe vs. not severe symptoms). Among all comorbidities, diabetes (OR: 3.31; (95% CI [1.35-8.09]); P = 0.009) and cardiovascular diseases (OR: 3.77; (95% CI [1.02-13.91]); P = 0.046) were significant risk factors for death. Anticancer treatments including chemotherapy, surgery, radiotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy administered within a month before the onset of COVID-19 symptoms had no significant effect on mortality.

Conclusion

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study from India reporting the CFR, clinical associations, and risk factors for mortality in SARS-CoV-2 infected cancer patients. Our study shows that the frequency of COVID-19 in cancer patients is high. Recent anticancer therapies are not associated with mortality. Pre-existing comorbidities, especially diabetes, multiple comorbidities, and severe symptoms at presentation are significantly linked with COVID-19 related death in the cohort.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes in Patients With Lung Cancer with Coronavirus Disease 2019

Cancer is considered to be an independent risk factor for severe illness and higher mortality in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). These adverse outcomes have been suspected to be more severe in patients with lung cancer. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to outline patient characteristics, challenges in diagnosis and treatment, and outcomes of patients with lung cancer with COVID-19. A comprehensive search was conducted using EMBASE and PubMed databases using the terms “COVID” and “cancer.” Studies that reported clinical characteristics or outcomes of patients with lung cancer with COVID-19 were then systematically identified. Meta-analysis for COVID-19 related mortality associated with lung cancer compared with other cancer types was conducted. The results were reported as OR and confidence intervals using the mixed-effects logistic regression model. The most frequently reported clinical findings in patients with lung cancer with COVID-19 were fever and cough, with 68% and 61%, respectively. Laboratory and radiographic findings were consistent with broadly reported data. The meta-analysis noted a statistically significant increase in mortality rate in patients with lung cancer compared with other patients with cancer, with an OR of 1.62 (95% confidence interval: 1.06–2.48). Patients with lung cancer with COVID-19 also reflected greater severity of illness and higher rates of intensive care unit admissions and mechanical ventilation. COVID-19 in patients with lung cancer is associated with severe disease and increased mortality relative to patients with other malignancies and the general population. There is conflicting evidence on the effect of specific lung cancer treatments on outcomes. Until more definitive data is available, lung cancer–directed treatment should be continued or restarted as early as possible in mild to moderate cases to prevent worsening and cancer-related mortality.

•

Patients with lung cancer and coronavirus disease 2019 infection have higher mortality rates compared with patients with other cancer types.

•

Rates of severe illness, intensive care unit admissions, and mechanical ventilation are also higher in patients with lung cancer.

•

Clinical, laboratory, and radiographic characteristics are similar to reports in the general population.

•

There is conflicting data regarding the effect of specific lung cancer treatments on outcomes.

Association of active oncologic treatment and risk of death in cancer patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of patient data

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients suffer from worse coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) outcomes. Whether active oncologic treatment is an additional risk factor in this population remains unclear. Therefore, here we have conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the existing evidence for the effect of active oncologic treatment on COVID-19 outcomes.

METHODS

Systematic search of databases (PubMed, Embase) was conducted for studies published from inception to July 1, 2020, with a subsequent search update conducted on 10 October 2020. In addition, abstracts and presentations from major conference proceedings (ASCO, ESMO, AACR) as well as pre-print databases (medxriv, bioxriv) were searched. Retrospective and prospective studies reporting clinical outcomes in cancer patients with laboratory confirmation or clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 and details of active or recent oncologic treatment were selected. Random-effects model was applied throughout meta-analyses. Summary outcome measure was the pooled odds ratio (OR) of death for active cancer therapy versus no active cancer therapy for each of the following modalities: recent surgery, chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, or chemoimmunotherapy.

RESULTS

Sixteen retrospective and prospective studies (3558 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Active chemotherapy was associated with higher risk of death compared to no active chemotherapy (OR, 1.60, 95% CI, 1.14-2.23). No significant association with risk of death was identified for active targeted therapy, immunotherapy, chemoimmunotherapy, or recent surgery. Meta-analysis of multivariate adjusted OR of death for active chemotherapy was consistently associated with higher risk of death compared to no active chemotherapy (OR, 1.42, 95% CI, 1.01-2.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Active chemotherapy appears to be associated with higher risk of death in cancer patients with COVID-19. Further research is necessary to characterize the complex interactions between active cancer treatment and COVID-19.

Covid-19 Pandemic Impact on Breast Cancer Detection-The Major Effects Over an Early Diagnosis

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted medical care systems, by decreasing patient addressability to outpatient care. The main objective of this study was to compare the patient’s addressability to breast imaging techniques for diagnosis, and follow-up in the Clinical Emergency County Hospital of Craiova, Romania. We selected the mammographies performed over a period of 4 years (2018-2021) in our clinic. We divided the patients into four groups, one for each year (2018, 2019, 2020, 2021). Furtherly, we merged the data into two groups, one group for the pre-pandemic years (2018 and 2019) and one for the pandemic years (2020 and 2021). In our clinic, the number of mammographies plummeted to 0 during the month of April 2020 due to the lockdown and closure of non-urgent outpatient services in hospitals treating COVID-19 patients, and slowly creeped to 11 in the month of May and peaked to 160 in July (for the rest of the year). There was a huge difference regarding the patient’s addressability to mammography immediately after the lockdown, with a 95.2% less addressability compared to the pre-pandemic period (May 2020 compared to May 2018). As an overall, by comparing both pre-pandemic years included in the study with the pandemic years, we obtained an addressability reduced with 37.3% suggesting the possible future delays in diagnosing breast tumors.

Natural history of COVID-19 and therapeutic options

Introduction: COVID-19 presents benign forms in young patients who frequently present with anosmia. Infants are rarely infected, while severe forms occur in patients over 65 years of age with comorbidities, including hypertension and diabetes. Lymphopenia, eosinopenia, thrombopenia, increased lactate dehydrogenase, troponin, C-reactive protein, D-dimers and low zinc levels are associated with severity.Areas covered: The authors review the literature and provide an overview of the current state of knowledge regarding the natural history of and therapeutic options for COVID-19. Expert opinion: Diagnosis should rely on PCR and not on clinical presumption. Because of discrepancies between clinical symptoms, oxygen saturation or radiological signs on CT scans, pulse oximetry, and radiological investigation should be systematic. The disease evolves in successive phases: an acute virological phase, and, in some patients, a cytokine storm phase; an uncontrolled coagulopathy; and an acute respiratory distress syndrome. Therapeutic options include antivirals, oxygen therapy, immunomodulators, anticoagulants and prolonged mechanical treatment. Early diagnosis, care, and implementation of an antiviral treatment; the use of immunomodulators at a later stage; and the quality of intensive care are critical regarding mortality rates. The higher mortality observed in Western countries remains unexplained. Pulmonary fibrosis may occur in some patients. Its future is unpredictable.

Relevance of the Bruton Tyrosine Kinase as a Target for COVID-19 Therapy

The outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has emerged as one of the biggest global health threats worldwide. As of October 2020, more than 44 million confirmed cases and more than 1,160,000 deaths have been reported globally, and the toll is likely to be much higher before the pandemic is over. There are currently little therapeutic options available and new potential targets are intensively investigated. Recently, Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) has emerged as an interesting candidate. Elevated levels of BTK activity have been reported in blood monocytes from patients with severe COVID-19, compared with those from healthy volunteers. Importantly, various studies confirmed empirically that administration of BTK inhibitors (acalabrutinib and ibrutinib) decreased the duration of mechanical ventilation and mortality rate for hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. Herein, we review the current information regarding the role of BTK in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infections and the suitability of its inhibitors as drugs to treat COVID-19. The use of BTK inhibitors in the management of COVID-19 shows promise in reducing the severity of the immune response to the infection and thus mortality. However, BTK inhibition may be contributing in other ways to inhibit the effects of the virus and this will need to be carefully studied.

Cancer treatment in the coronavirus disease pandemic

•

COVID-19 patients with cancer had increased risk of death and severe outcomes compared to those without cancer.

•

There is no conclusive evidence indicating that antineoplastic treatment aggravates COVID-19 disease

•

There was no significant difference in COVID-19 severity regardless of PD-1 blockade exposure.

Half a year after its emergence, severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has resulted in a pandemic, with cases continuing to increase in nearly every country. Surges in coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) cases have clearly had profound effects on current cancer treatment paradigms. Considering the effect of antineoplastic treatment and the immunosuppressive properties of cancer itself, cancer patients are deemed to be more vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2. Hence, the specific risk of SARS-CoV-2 must be carefully weighed against the benefit of antineoplastic treatment for cancer patients in the COVID-19 era. In this review, we discuss the current evidence in this important field, and in particular, the effect of SARS-CoV-2 on antineoplastic treatment.

The effect of clinical decision making for initiation of systemic anticancer treatments in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in England: a retrospective analysis

Background

Cancer services worldwide had to adapt in response to the COVID-19 pandemic to minimise risk to patients and staff. We aimed to assess the national impact of COVID-19 on the prescribing of systemic anticancer treatment in England, immediately after lockdown and after the introduction of new treatments to reduce patient risk.

Methods

We did a retrospective analysis using data from a central National Health Service England web database mandated for clinicians to register intention to start all new systemic anticancer treatments approved for use in England since 2016. We analysed the monthly number of treatment registrations in April, 2020, after the implementation of societal lockdown on March 23, 2020, and after implementation of treatment options to reduce patient risk such as oral or less immunosuppressive drugs, in May and June, 2020. We compared the number of registrations in April–June, 2020, with the mean number of registrations and SD during the previous 6 months of unaffected cancer care (September, 2019, to February, 2020). We calculated the percentage change and absolute difference in SD units for the number of registrations overall, by tumour type, and by type and line of therapy.

Findings

In April, 2020, 2969 registrations were recorded, representing 1417 fewer registrations than in the control period (monthly mean 4386; 32% reduction, absolute difference 4·2 SDs, p<0·0001). In May, 2020, total registrations increased to 3950, representing a 10% reduction compared with the control period (absolute difference 1·3 SDs, p<0·0001). In June, 2020, 5022 registrations were recorded, representing a 15% increase compared with the control period (absolute difference 1·9 SDs; p<0·0001]).

Interpretation

After the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a reduction in systemic anticancer treatment initiation in England. However, following introduction of treatment options to reduce patient risk, registrations began to increase in May, 2020, and reached higher numbers than the pre-pandemic mean in June, 2020, when other clinical and societal risk mitigation factors (such as telephone consultations, facemasks and physical distancing) are likely to have contributed. However, outcomes of providing less treatment or delaying treatment initiation, particularly for advanced cancers and neoadjuvant therapies, require continued assessment.

Funding

None.

Professional Assessment of the Impact of COVID-19 on Handling NET Patients

The treatment and monitoring of patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NET) has been a major challenge during the COVID-19 pandemic. In a survey, we investigated the influence of COVID-19 on the care of NET patients in the German speaking countries Germany, Austria and Switzerland. The multidisciplinarity of all treating physicians in the outpatient and inpatient sector was reflected in our survey. Furthermore, we were able to present findings pertaining to the university and non-university medical care. Overall, only a minority of appointments were cancelled, mostly as a result of medical prioritization and less for fear of infection by patients. In the university sector, longer delays for diagnostic measures were observed in comparison to non-university care. During the COVID-19 crisis, NET patients rarely changed their current therapy, but the pandemic impacted the assessment of the different treatment modalities at risk of developing severe COVID-19 disease. This survey provides the first real-world data on the treatment of NET patients from the physicians’ perspective during the COVID-19 crisis. Despite delays in diagnostic procedures and outpatient appointments, only a minority of physicians foresee a major impact of COVID-19 on NET patient care.

COVID-19 and Cancer: Current Challenges and Perspectives

Patients with cancer have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This effect has included the adverse outcomes in patients with cancer who develop COVID-19, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the delivery of cancer care, and the severe disruption to cancer research. However, patients with cancer are a heterogeneous population, and recent studies have now documented factors that allow risk stratification of patients with cancer in order to optimize care. In this review, we highlight data at the intersection of COVID-19 and cancer, including the biological interplay between the two diseases and practical recommendations for the treatment of patients with cancer during the pandemic. We additionally discuss the potential long-lasting impact of the pandemic on cancer care due to its deleterious effect on cancer research, as well as biological insights from the cancer research community that could help develop novel therapies for all patients with COVID-19.

Clinical risk factors for mortality in patients with cancer and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of recent observational studies

INTRODUCTION

Patients with cancer are more vulnerable to COVID-19 than the general population. Accordingly, it is necessary to identify the risk factors for death in patients with cancer and COVID-19.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase Ovid databases were searched for relevant articles published before July 31^st, 2020. Studies that explored the risk factors for mortality were included. The effect size was relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

We included 17 observational studies involving 3268 patients. The pooled mortality was 24.8%. Male gender, age above 65 years, and comorbidities (especially hypertension and COPD) were risk factors for death (RR 1.16, 1.27, 1.12; 95% CI 0.7-1.95, 1.08-1.49, 1.04-1.2; P = 0.006, 0.004, and 0.002, respectively). Recent anti-cancer treatments did not increase mortality (P > 0.05). Dyspnea, cough, and sputum canused an elevated risk of death (P < 0.05). Antibiotics, glucocorticoids, interferons, invasive ventilation, and complications were associated with a high probability of death (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Various demographic and clinical characteristics, such as male gender, advanced age, comorbidities, and symptoms, were risk factors for mortality in patients with cancer and COVID-19. Our findings suggest recent anti-cancer treatments do not increase mortality.

Don't Compromise Myeloma Care Due to COVID-19 Pandemic!

Patients with active myeloma, especially with earlier stages of the disease, are susceptible to COVID-19 infection and can have adverse outcomes, even in those on first-line treatment. Importantly, myeloma therapy can be safely administered, and optimal control of myeloma is associated with improved outcome. See related video: https://vimeo.com/486246183/559a80cfae See related article by Hultcrantz et al., p. 234.

COVID-19 in cancer patients on systemic anti-cancer therapies: outcomes from the CAPITOL (COVID-19 Cancer PatIenT Outcomes in North London) cohort study

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer are hypothesised to be at increased risk of contracting COVID-19, leading to changes in treatment pathways in those treated with systemic anti-cancer treatments (SACT). This study investigated the outcomes of patients receiving SACT to assess whether they were at greater risk of contracting COVID-19 or having more severe outcomes.

METHODS

Data was collected from all patients receiving SACT in two cancer centres as part of CAPITOL (COVID-19 Cancer PatIenT Outcomes in North London). The primary outcome was the effect of clinical characteristics on the incidence and severity of COVID-19 infection in patients on SACT. We used univariable and multivariable models to analyse outcomes, adjusting for age, gender and comorbidities.

RESULTS

A total of 2871 patients receiving SACT from 2 March to 31 May 2020 were analysed; 68 (2.4%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. Cancer patients receiving SACT were more likely to die if they contracted COVID-19 than those who did not [adjusted (adj.) odds ratio (OR) 9.84; 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.73-16.9]. Receiving chemotherapy increased the risk of developing COVID-19 (adj. OR 2.99; 95% CI = 1.72-5.21), with high dose chemotherapy significantly increasing risk (adj. OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.35-6.48), as did the presence of comorbidities (adj. OR 2.29; 95% CI 1.19-4.38), and having a respiratory or intrathoracic neoplasm (adj. OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.04-4.36). Receiving targeted treatment had a protective effect (adj. OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.30-0.95). Treatment intent (curative versus palliative), hormonal- or immunotherapy and solid versus haematological cancers had no significant effect on risk.

CONCLUSION

Patients on SACT are more likely to die if they contract COVID-19. Those on chemotherapy, particularly high dose chemotherapy, are more likely to contract COVID-19, while targeted treatment appears to be protective.

Seroconversion in patients with cancer and oncology health care workers infected by SARS-CoV-2

Background

Patients with cancer have high risk for severe complications and poor outcome to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-related disease [coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)]. Almost all subjects with COVID-19 develop anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) within 3 weeks after infection. No data are available on the seroconversion rates of cancer patients and COVID-19.

Patients and methods

We conducted a multicenter, observational, prospective study that enrolled (i) patients and oncology health professionals with SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by real-time RT-PCR assays on nasal/pharyngeal swab specimens; (ii) patients and oncology health professionals with clinical or radiological suspicious of infection by SARS-CoV-2; and (iii) patients with cancer who are considered at high risk for infection and eligible for active therapy and/or major surgery. All enrolled subjects were tested with the 2019-nCoV IgG/IgM Rapid Test Cassette, which is a qualitative membrane-based immunoassay for the detection of IgG and IgM antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. The aim of the study was to evaluate anti-SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion rate in patients with cancer and oncology health care professionals with confirmed or clinically suspected COVID-19.

Results

From 30 March 2020 to 11 May 2020, 166 subjects were enrolled in the study. Among them, cancer patients and health workers were 61 (36.7%) and 105 (63.3%), respectively. Overall, 86 subjects (51.8%) had confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis by RT-PCR testing on nasopharyngeal swab specimen, and 60 (36.2%) had a clinical suspicious of COVID-19. Median time from symptom onset (for cases not confirmed by RT-PCR) or RT-PCR confirmation to serum antibody test was 17 days (interquartile range 26). In the population with confirmed RT-PCR, 83.8% of cases were IgG positive. No difference in IgG positivity was observed between cancer patients and health workers (87.9% versus 80.5%; P = 0.39).

Conclusions

Our data indicate that SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG antibody detection do not differ between cancer patients and healthy subjects.

A systematic review and meta-analysis: the effect of active cancer treatment on severity of COVID-19

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic hit all over the world, and cancer patients are more vulnerable for COVID-19. The mortality rate may increase up to 25% in solid malignancies. In parallel to increased mortality rates among cancer patients, safety concerns regarding cancer treatment has increased over time. However, there were contradictory results for the cancer treatment during pandemic. In this study, we assessed the effect of cancer treatment on the severity of COVID-19.

Methods

The MEDLINE database was searched on September 01, 2020. Primary end-points were severe disease and death in the cancer patients treated within the last 30 days before COVID-19 diagnosis. Quality of included studies was assessed by Newcastle–Ottawa scale. The generic inverse-variance method was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) for each outcome.

Results

Sixteen studies were included for this meta-analysis. Chemotherapy within the last thirty days before COVID-19 diagnosis increased the risk of death in cancer patients after adjusting for confounding variables (OR: 1.85; 95% confidence interval: 1.26–2.71). However, severe COVID-19 risk did not increase. Furthermore, targeted therapies, immunotherapy, surgery and radiotherapy did not increase the severe disease and death risk in cancer patients with COVID-19.

Conclusion

Chemotherapy increased the risk of death from COVID-19 in cancer patients. However, there was no safety concern for immunotherapy, targeted therapies, surgery and radiotherapy.

Impact of solid cancer on in-hospital mortality overall and among different subgroups of patients with COVID-19: a nationwide, population-based analysis

BACKGROUND

Cancer seems to have an independent adverse prognostic effect on COVID-19-related mortality, but uncertainty exists regarding its effect across different patient subgroups. We report a population-based analysis of patients hospitalised with COVID-19 with prior or current solid cancer versus those without cancer.

METHODS

We analysed data of adult patients registered until 24 May 2020 in the Belgian nationwide database of Sciensano. The primary objective was in-hospital mortality within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis among patients with solid cancer versus patients without cancer. Severe event occurrence, a composite of intensive care unit admission, invasive ventilation and/or death, was a secondary objective. These endpoints were analysed across different patient subgroups. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to analyse the association between cancer and clinical characteristics (baseline analysis) and the effect of cancer on in-hospital mortality and on severe event occurrence, adjusting for clinical characteristics (in-hospital analysis).

RESULTS

A total of 13 594 patients (of whom 1187 with solid cancer (8.7%)) were evaluable for the baseline analysis and 10 486 (892 with solid cancer (8.5%)) for the in-hospital analysis. Patients with cancer were older and presented with less symptoms/signs and lung imaging alterations. The 30-day in-hospital mortality was higher in patients with solid cancer compared with patients without cancer (31.7% vs 20.0%, respectively; adjusted OR (aOR) 1.34; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.58). The aOR was 3.84 (95% CI 1.94 to 7.59) among younger patients (<60 years) and 2.27 (95% CI 1.41 to 3.64) among patients without other comorbidities. Severe event occurrence was similar in both groups (36.7% vs 28.8%; aOR 1.10; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.29).

CONCLUSIONS

This population-based analysis demonstrates that solid cancer is an independent adverse prognostic factor for in-hospital mortality among patients with COVID-19. This adverse effect was more pronounced among younger patients and those without other comorbidities. Patients with solid cancer should be prioritised in vaccination campaigns and in tailored containment measurements.