A Practical Approach to the Management of Cancer Patients During the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: An International Collaborative Group

Management and Thinking on the Treatment of Cancer Patients During the COVID-19

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) has spread rapidly around the world and has become a public health emergency of international concern. The weekly epidemiological report issued by the WHO pointed out that new coronavirus variants have appeared in 131 countries and regions, which demonstrates that the current epidemic situation is still severe. As of now, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has been widespread worldwide for more than one year and poses a serious threat to the health of vulnerable groups such as those with malignancies, the elderly, and the immunocompromised. Compared with the general population, cancer patients with COVID-19 infection are more likely to have serious clinical adverse events, leading to higher mortality. There is no doubt that during the COVID-19 epidemic, whether it is with regards to how to prevent infection or how to continue anti-tumor treatment, cancer patients are in a difficult situation. Meanwhile, an international patient with malignant Hodgkin's lymphoma who was cured after being infected with the new coronavirus surprised us, and it inspires more scientists to explore the relationship between infection, immunity, and tumors. Relevantly, through multi-disciplinary discussion, scientists put forward more new perspectives on the treatment of future tumors and the management of SARS-CoV-2 diseases. In this review, the impact of COVID-19 on cancer patients is discussed in detail and the recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment and management of cancer patients will be put forward under the challenge of the COVID-19 epidemic. Furthermore, the safety and effectiveness of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine will be discussed, and we will also put forward our insights on cancer immunity.

Impact of nationwide lockdown on cancer care during COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective analysis from western India

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

COVID-19 has impacted healthcare system worldwide including cancer case. Aim of this study was to describe the experience of lockdown on cancer care concerning patient's visit and reception of treatment in western India.

METHODS

This is a retrospective observational study conducted in patients with cancer attending a tertiary care center pre-lockdown and during lockdown (from January to May 2020). Data related to demographic parameters, type of tumor, type of treatment received and functional status of patients were retrieved from hospital medical records of patients.

RESULTS

Of the 5258 patients included, 4363 visited hospital pre-lockdown (median age, 50 years) and 895 visited during the lockdown period (median age, 47 years). A total of 1168 and 106 patients visiting hospital before and during lockdown, respectively, had comorbidities. Breast cancer (25.6% and 29.7%), head and neck cancer (21.3% and 16.9%) were the most common type of solid tumors; leukemia (58.0% and 73.0%), lymphoma (18.8% and 13.5%) and multiple myeloma (18.6% and 12.2%) were the most common type of hematological malignancies observed in patients visiting pre-lockdown and during lockdown, respectively. Chemotherapy was most commonly received treatment (pre-lockdown, 71.8%; during lockdown, 45.9%). Other therapies reported includes supportive/palliative, targeted, hormonal, and immunotherapy. The majority of patients who visited the hospital pre-lockdown (68.4%) and during lockdown (62.8%) had 0 or 1 Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score.

CONCLUSION

Overall observations highlight a substantial impact of an imposed nationwide lockdown during COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care of patients in terms of reduced patient visits and number of treatments received.

Coronavirus disease 2019 in patients with neuroendocrine neoplasms: Preliminary results of the INTENSIVE study

Background

Specific data regarding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are lacking. The aim of this study is to describe the characteristics of patients with NENs who tested severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) positive.

Material and methods

This is a worldwide study collecting cases of patients with NENs along with a positive nasopharyngeal swab reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test for SARS-CoV-2 between June 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021. Centres treating patients with NENs were directly contacted by the principal investigator. Patients with NENs of any primary site, grade and stage were included, excluding small-cell lung carcinoma and mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinoma.

Results

Among 81 centres directly contacted, 88.8% responded and 48.6% of them declined due to lack of cases or interest. On March 31^st, 2021, eight recruiting centres enrolled 89 patients. The median age was 64 years at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis. Most patients had metastatic, non-functioning, low-/intermediate-grade gastroenteropancreatic NENs on treatment with somatostatin analogues and radioligand therapy. Most of them had comorbidities. Only 8% of patients had high-grade NENs and 12% were receiving chemotherapy. Most patients had symptoms or signs of COVID-19, mainly fever and cough. Only 3 patients underwent sub-intensive treatment, whereas most of them received medical therapies, mostly antibiotics. In two third of cases, no changes occurred for the anti-NEN therapy. More than 80% of patients completely recovered without sequelae, whereas 7.8% patients died due to COVID-19.

Conclusions

Patients included in this study reflect the typical NEN population regardless of SARS-CoV-2. In most cases, they overcome COVID-19 without need of intensive care, short-term sequelae and discontinuation of systemic oncological therapy.

Delay in breast cancer diagnosis and its clinical consequences during the coronavirus disease pandemic

Objective

At the end of 1 year of the coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) pandemic, we aimed to reveal the changes in breast cancer cases in the context of cause and effect based on the data of surgically treated patients in our institution.

Patients and Methods

Patients with breast cancer were divided into two groups. Group 1 consisted of patients who were operated in the year before the COVID‐19 pandemic, and Group 2 consisted of patients who were operated within the first year of the pandemic. Tumor size, axillary lymph node positivity, distant organ metastasis status, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and type of surgery performed were compared between the two groups.

Results

The tumor size, axillary lymph node positivity, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy were higher in Group 2 than in Group 1 (p = .005, p = .012, p = .042, respectively). In addition, the number of breast‐conserving surgery + sentinel lymph node biopsy were lower, while the number of mastectomy and modified radical mastectomy were higher in Group 2 than in Group 1 (p = .034).

Conclusion

Patients presented with larger breast tumors and increased axillary involvement during the pandemic. Moreover, distant organ metastases may increase in the future.

Informed consent and a risk-based approach to oncologic surgery in a cancer center during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients configure a risk group for complications or death by COVID-19. For many of them, postponing or replacing their surgical treatments is not recommended. During this pandemic, surgeons must discuss the risks and benefits of treatment, and patients should sign a specific comprehensive Informed consent (IC).

OBJECTIVES

To report an IC and an algorithm developed for oncologic surgery during the COVID-19 outbreak.

METHODS

We developed an IC and a process flowchart containing a preoperative symptoms questionnaire and a PCR SARS-CoV-2 test and described all perioperative steps of this program.

RESULTS

Patients with negative questionnaires and tests go to surgery, those with positive ones must wait 21 days and undergo a second test before surgery is scheduled. The IC focused both on risks and benefits inherent each surgery and on the risks of perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infections or related complications. Also, the IC discusses the possibility of sudden replacement of medical staff member(s) due to the pandemic; the possibility of unexpected complications demanding emergency procedures that cannot be specifically discussed in advance is addressed.

CONCLUSIONS

During the pandemic, specific tools must be developed to ensure safe experiences for surgical patients and prevent them from having misunderstandings concerning their care.

Mucormycosis in patients with COVID-19: A cross-sectional descriptive multicentre study from Iran

Purpose

The aim of the study was to report clinical features, contributing factors and outcome of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19)‐associated mucormycosis (CAM).

Methods

A cross‐sectional descriptive multicentre study was conducted on patients with biopsy‐proven mucormycosis with RT‐PCR‐confirmed COVID‐19 from April to September 2020. Demographics, the time interval between COVID‐19 and mucormycosis, underlying systemic diseases, clinical features, course of disease and outcomes were collected and analysed.

Results

Fifteen patients with COVID‐19 and rhino‐orbital mucormycosis were observed. The median age of patients was 52 years (range 14–71), and 66% were male. The median interval time between COVID‐19 disease and diagnosis of mucormycosis was seven (range: 1–37) days. Among all, 13 patients (86%) had diabetes mellitus, while 7 (46.6%) previously received intravenous corticosteroid therapy. Five patients (33%) underwent orbital exenteration, while seven (47%) patients died from mucormycosis. Six patients (40%) received combined antifungal therapy and none that received combined antifungal therapy died.

Conclusion

Clinicians should be aware that mucormycosis may be complication of COVID‐19 in high‐risk patients. Poor control of diabetes mellitus is an important predisposing factor for CAM. Systematic surveillance for control of diabetes mellitus and educating physician about the early diagnosis of CAM are suggested.

SARS-CoV-2 nosocomial infection: Real-world results of environmental surface testing from a large tertiary cancer center

BACKGROUND

Despite consensus guidelines, concern about severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission has dissuaded patients with cancer from seeking medical care. Studies have shown that contaminated surfaces may contain viable virus for up to 72 hours in laboratory settings. The purpose of this study was to investigate contamination of SARS-CoV-2 on commonly used environmental surfaces in a tertiary cancer care center.

METHODS

This study evaluated the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA in high-touch outpatient and inpatient cancer center spaces. Surfaces were tested over a 2-week period after patient or staff exposure but before scheduled disinfection services according to the World Health Organization protocols for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) surface sampling. Samples were analyzed via reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA.

RESULTS

Two hundred four environmental samples were obtained from inpatient and outpatient oncology clinics and infusion suites, and they were categorized as 1) public areas, 2) staff areas, or 3) medical equipment. One hundred thirty surfaces from 2 outpatient hematology and oncology clinics and 36 surfaces from an inpatient leukemia/lymphoma/chimeric antigen receptor T-cell unit were examined, and all 166 samples were negative for SARS-CoV-2. One of 38 samples (2.6%) from COVID-19+ inpatient units was positive. Altogether, the positive test rate for SARS-CoV-2 RNA across all surfaces was 0.5% (1 of 204).

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective, systematic quality assurance investigation of real-world environmental surfaces, performed in inpatient and outpatient hematology/oncology units, revealed overall negligible detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA when strict mitigation strategies against COVID-19 transmission were instituted.

LAY SUMMARY

The potential risks of nosocomial infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have deterred patients with cancer from seeking timely care despite consensus guidelines. This study has found negligible rates of environmental contamination with SARS-CoV-2 across a multitude of commonly used surfaces in outpatient and inpatient hematology/oncology settings with adherence to strict infection control protocols.

A retrospective evaluation of the value of COVID-19 screening and testing in patients with cancer: Aiming at a moving target

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of COVID-19 infection in cancer patients is critical to co-manage their underlying disease and infection appropriately. Our study aimed at evaluating the sensitivity and specificity of screening patients with cancer for COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

All oncology patients receiving care at Department of Oncology at King Abdulaziz Medical City in Riyadh were screened using the acute respiratory infection (ARI) survey. Nasopharyngeal and throat swap for polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) was performed on patients who have high ARI score (i.e. ≥ 4), or any patient requiring elective/emergency hospitalization, undergoing a procedure as well as screening asymptomatic patients receiving chemotherapy between April 1st and July 30, 2020. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained. Descriptive and inferential analyses were done and sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) were calculated considering the COVID-19 PCR as the gold standard.

RESULTS

During the study period, a total of 473 patients were included with a median age was 56 years (14-104), 51% were female, 73% had solid tumors, and 66% received treatment within the last 3 months. These patients underwent 688 PCR tests along with ARI survey screening. Testing was done in the outpatient, inpatient, and emergency department setting in 41%, 40% and 19% of the patients, respectively. Majority of tests were screening of asymptomatic patients and only 23% were tested for suspected infections with ARI ≥ 4. A total of 54 patients (8%) had positive PCR for COVID-19 infection. The prevalence of infection varied from month to month ranging from 1.09% in April up to 19.70% in June and correlated with the average daily and active case load at a national level. The diagnostic yield of the ARI score also correlated with infection burden nationally. The PPV and NPV of the ARI as a screening tool was 18.24% (0-31.8) and 95.6% (86.36-98.86%) with the PPN fluctuating considerably in parallel with the prevalence of COVID-19 result. Similarly, the sensitivity and specificity of the ARI were 55.77% (0-70.59) and 79.4 (69.19-92), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The yield of screening asymptomatic patients with cancer varies based on the community burden of COVID-19 infection. As universal screening can cause delays to patient care, it should be tailored based on the individual patient risks and infection burden in the region.

Alectinib continuation during COVID 19 'antiviral' treatment: Risk or benefit?

INTRODUCTION

Serious Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARSCoV2) has led to COVID 19 pandemic a year ago and it has not been globally taken under control yet. COVID 19 tends to have poorer prognosis in cancer patients. Additionally, we have no well-established guidelines for management of these patients during pandemic, in terms of treatment of 'cancer' and treatment of 'COVID 19'. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are given without any break in cancer patients to have better survival outcomes in daily routine. However, there is no well-established data to continue or delay ALK inhibitors in lung cancer patients infected with SARS-CoV2. Concomittant use of ALK inhibitors and COVID 19 antiviral treatment is a dilemma because of the lack of data in this area.

CASE REPORT

A 47-year old female metastatic ALK positive nonsquamous cell lung cancer patient on alectinib, a second generation ALK inhibitor was diagnosed with symptomatic COVID 19. She was given favipiravir for COVID 19 while continuing alectinib.Management and outcome: The patient continued alectinib during COVID 19 antiviral treatment without any break. She tolerated 'concomittant' alectinib & favipiravir. She had partial remission after three months of alectinib without any dose adjustment despite active COVID 19 medication.

DISCUSSION

To best of our knowledge, this is the first case who continued alectinib without dose adjustment during antiviral COVID-19 medication without clinically worsening. There is limited data about 'concomittant' use of TKIs and antiviral COVID 19 medication in the literature. There are some case reports, but they generally tended to delay or suspend TKIs during COVID 19 antiviral medication. Our case differs from them in terms of continuation of alectinib without any break or additional side effects during favipiravir for symptomatic COVID 19. We consider that our case might contribute to the literature in terms of management of cancer patients on targeted therapy during COVID 19 antiviral treatment. However, clinical trials are needed in this area.

Challenge of treating skeletal muscle metastasis during the COVID-19 pandemic in a low-resource setting

Background

The authors report on an extremely rare case of skeletal muscle metastasis from primary lung cancer that involved the radial nerve and humerus, which was ‘over-treated’ with wide tumour resection and frozen autograft reconstruction upon misdiagnosis of sarcoma by intraoperative frozen section, amid pressure of expediting hospital care in a low-resource setting during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.

Case presentation

A 61-year-old male living outside Metro Manila presented with painful mass in his left distal arm during the enhanced community quarantine, and requested admission upon testing negative for COVID-19. Imaging studies suggested a diagnosis of soft tissue sarcoma involving the radial nerve and humerus, and intending to prevent nosocomial severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2infection of patient, treatment was expedited by foregoing biopsy and opting for intraoperative frozen section prior to resection. Frozen section findings suggested malignancy intraoperatively, and surgical team proceeded with wide tumour resection and frozen autograft reconstruction of the humerus using plates and screws. However, permanent sections revealed metastatic carcinoma from primary non-small cell lung cancer, with positron emission tomography (PET) scan confirming lung mass in the right apical lobe.

Conclusion

The report concludes that establishment of a definite tumour diagnosis by final histopathological analysis is indispensable, even when planning for emergent surgery in the time of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Lung cancer patients with COVID-19 in Spain: GRAVID study

INTRODUCTION

Patients with cancer may be at increased risk of more severe COVID-19 disease; however, prognostic factors are not yet clearly identified. The GRAVID study aimed to describe clinical characteristics, outcomes, and predictors of poor outcome in patients with lung cancer and COVID-19.

METHODS

Prospective observational study that included medical records of patients with lung cancer and PCR-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis across 65 Spanish hospitals. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality; secondary endpoints were hospitalization and admission to intensive care units (ICU).

RESULTS

A total of 447 patients with a mean age of 67.1 ± 9.8 years were analysed. The majority were men (74.3 %) and current/former smokers (85.7 %). NSCLC was the most frequent type of cancer (84.5 %), mainly as adenocarcinoma (51.0 %), and stage III metastatic or unresectable disease (79.2 %). Nearly 60 % of patients were receiving anticancer treatment, mostly first-line chemotherapy. Overall, 350 (78.3 %) patients were hospitalized for a mean of 13.4 ± 11.4 days, 9 (2.0 %) were admitted to ICU and 146 (32.7 %) died. Advanced disease and the use of corticosteroids to treat COVID-19 during hospitalization were predictors of mortality. Hospitalized, non-end-of-life stage patients with lymphocytopenia and high LDH had an increased risk of death. Severity of COVID-19 correlated to higher mortality, ICU admission, and mechanical ventilation rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality rate was higher among patients treated with corticosteroids during hospitalization, while anticancer therapy was not associated with an increased risk of hospitalization or death. Tailored approaches are warranted to ensure effective cancer management while minimizing the risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2.

COVID-19 in Patients with Cancer

With more than 5 million cases and 333,212 deaths, COVID-19 (or SARS-CoV-2) continues to spread. General symptoms of this disease are similar to that of many other viral respiratory diseases, including fever, cough, dyspnea, and fatigue, with a chance of progression to more severe complications. However, the virus does not affect all people equally, and cases with comorbidities such as malignancies, cardiovascular diseases, respiratory diseases, and kidney diseases are at higher risk of developing severe events, including requiring intensive ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and death. Patients with cancer are more likely to be infected with COVID-19, which is possibly due to their immunological dysfunction or frequent clinic visits. Also, there is a higher chance that these patients experience severe events because of the medication they receive. In this chapter, we will review the main clinical manifestations of COVID-19 in patients with cancer. Recommendations and challenges for managing resources, organizing cancer centers, treatment of COVID-19-infected cancer patients, and performing cancer research during this pandemic will also be discussed.

Challenges of Cellular Therapy During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Currently, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread worldwide and continues to rise. There remains a significant unmet need for patients with hematological malignancies requiring specialized procedures and treatments, like cellular therapy to treat or cure their disease. For instance, chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy is approved for relapsed/refractory (after two or more lines of therapy) diffuse large B cell lymphoma and B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia that is refractory or in the second relapse in patients younger than 25 years of age. Similarly, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) can be a lifesaving procedure for many patients, such as those with acute myeloid leukemia with high-risk cytogenetics. Unfortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic has thrust upon the hematologists and transplant specialists' unique challenges with the implementation and management of cellular therapy. One of the significant concerns regarding this immunocompromised patient population is the significant risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection due to its highly contagious nature. Experts have recommended that if medically indicated, especially in high-risk disease (where chemotherapy is unlikely to work), these lifesaving procedures should not be delayed even during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, proceeding with CAR-T cell therapy and HSCT during the pandemic is a considerable task and requires dedication from the transplant team and buy-in from the patients and their family or support system. Open conversations should be held with the patients about the risks involved in undergoing cellular therapies during current times and the associated future uncertainties.

Patient and Physician Attitudes Toward Telemedicine in Cancer Clinics Following the COVID-19 Pandemic

PURPOSE

COVID-19 has infected more than 94 million people worldwide and caused more than 2 million deaths. Patients with cancer are at significantly increased risk compared with the general population. Telemedicine represents a common strategy to prevent viral spread. We sought to evaluate patient with cancer and physician perceptions of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A 16-question survey was e-mailed to 1,843 active e-mails of patients presenting to one of the six cancer clinics at a comprehensive cancer care center from January 1, 2020, to June 1, 2020. A six-question survey was e-mailed to attending physicians of those clinics. Specialties included Medical Oncology, Hematology-Oncology, Surgical Oncology, Urological Oncology, and Gynecologic Oncology.

RESULTS

Three hundred seventy-four patients (20.3%) and 14 physicians (66.7%) responded. Most (68.2%) currently prefer in-person visits, and 80.4% prefer in-person visits following pandemic resolution. More than half (52.2%) of patients preferring virtual visits do so because of convenience. Most (63.1%) patients with cancer are comfortable with a complete physical examination. Surgical patients are more likely to prefer a complete examination (P = .0476). Physicians prefer in-person visits (64.2%) and believe that virtual visits maybe or probably do not provide comparable care (64.2%). 71.4% believe that virtual visits help prevent the spread of infectious disease.

CONCLUSION

Given preferences for in-person visits, cancer care teams should be prepared to continue providing in-person visits for many of their patients. The discrepancy between patient and provider concern for spread of infectious disease represents an area where patients may benefit from increased education. Providers should feel comfortable performing physical examinations at their own discretion.

How dermatology has changed in the COVID-19 pandemic

The emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has led to a change in the whole world order. The key actors and occupational groups most at risk during this period have been health care professionals. In this pandemic, we, as dermatologists, also have many responsibilities regarding patients, ourselves, and society. Dermatologists have to protect themselves, their families, and their patients while working in pandemic services and outpatient clinics, as well as in their practices. One of their roles is to inform the public about protective measures for cutaneous side effects associated with the intensive use of disinfectants and long-term use of masks. In hospitals, only emergency patients had been admitted for treatment in all units during the pandemic, and elective operations and procedures were delayed. In this context, it is very important to determine what procedures will be carried out during this period in the follow up and treatment of chronic dermatologic diseases, as well as what interventional and cosmetic procedures may performed. Guidelines issued by various medical societies have made valuable contributions. The benefits and associated issues of teledermatology have pros and cons. Finally, one of the issues to ponder in the long term seems to be how we should pursue online education.

Adapting Management of Sarcomas in COVID-19: An Evidence-Based Review

With the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) being declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization, the Indian healthcare sector is at the forefront to deliver optimal care. Patients with cancer especially are at serious risk for increased chances of morbidity and mortality due to their immunocompromised state. Currently there is a paucity of definitive guidelines for the management of sarcomas during the pandemic in a resource-constrained and diverse population setting like India. Health care professionals from various specialties involved in the management of sarcomas have collaborated to discuss various aspects of evidence-based sarcoma management during the COVID-19 pandemic. This article provides structured recommendations for HCP to adapt to the situation, optimize treatment protocols with judicious use of all resources while providing evidence-based treatment for sarcoma patients.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Adults and Healthcare Workers in Southern Italy

BACKGROUND

This study was carried out to estimate the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in a Southern Italian population.

METHODS

The study was performed among students and workers of the University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" and the relative Teaching Hospital. Participants were invited to undergo a blood sampling, an interview or to complete a self-administered questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 140 participants (5.8%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Positive SARS-CoV-2 test results increased significantly during the months of testing, and those who had had at least one symptom among fever, cough, dyspnea, loss of taste or smell and who had had contact with a family member/cohabitant with confirmed COVID-19 were more likely to test positive. Faculty members were less likely to have a positive test result compared to the healthcare workers (HCWs). Among HCWs, physicians showed the lowest rate of seroconversion (5.2%) compared to nurses (8.9%) and other categories (10%). Nurses and other HCWs compared to the physicians, those who had had at least one symptom among fever, cough, dyspnea, loss of taste or smell, and who had had contact with a family member/cohabitant with confirmed COVID-19 were more likely to test positive.

CONCLUSIONS

The results have demonstrated that SARS-CoV-2 infection is rapidly spreading even in Southern Italy and confirm the substantial role of seroprevalence studies for the assessment of SARS-CoV-2 infection circulation and potential for further spreading.

Advanced cancer and COVID-19 comorbidity: medical oncology-palliative medicine ethics meetings in a comprehensive cancer centre

OBJECTIVES

In managing patients with cancer in the COVID-19 era, clinical oncologists and palliative care practitioners had to face new, disrupting and complex medical situations, challenging the quality of the shared decision-making process. During the first lockdown in France, we developed an onco-palliative ethics meeting to enhance the quality of the decision-making process for patients with advanced cancer treated for COVID-19.

METHODS

A least one of the institutional ethics committee members was present along with oncologists, palliative care teams, psycho-oncologists, radiologists and intensive care specialists. Specific medical parameters were systematically collected to form a standardised framework for the discussions.

RESULTS

The main raised issues were the definition of new criteria for the implementation of invasive resuscitation techniques, optimal ways to adapt or delay anticancer treatment and best procedures to address terminal respiratory failure and end-of-life care. The main clinical and ethical guidelines that emerged during these debates are presented. The palliative care team played a major role in assessing and reporting patients' awareness of cancer-related prognosis and their wishes concerning invasive therapies or transfer to intensive care units, enabling an individualised benefit-risk balance assessment. The ethics committee members ensured continuous monitoring during the discussions. Their function was to recall the main ethical principles including dignity, which is conferred on people when there are treated as having equal status.

CONCLUSIONS

The onco-palliative ethics meeting provided a powerful avenue for improvement of collegiality and reinforcement of teamwork, which could be a major protection against burnout for healthcare professionals facing an epidemic onslaught.

Prostate cancer management in the era of COVID-19: Recommendations from the Hong Kong Urological Association and Hong Kong Society of Uro-oncology

Aim

In response to the fast‐developing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic, special arrangement and coordination are urgently required in the interdisciplinary care of patients across different medical specialties. This article provides recommendations on the management of different stages of localized or metastatic prostate cancer (PC) amid this pandemic.

Methods

The Hong Kong Urological Association and Hong Kong Society of Uro‐oncology formed a joint discussion panel, which consisted of six urologists and six clinical oncologists with extensive experience in the public and private sectors. Following an evidence‐based approach, the latest relevant publications were searched and reviewed, before proceeding to a structured discussion of relevant clinical issues.

Results

The joint panel provided recommendations for PC management during the pandemic, in terms of general considerations, diagnostic procedures, different disease stages, treatment modules, patient support, and interdisciplinary collaboration. The overall goal was to minimize the risk of infection while avoiding unnecessary delays and compromises in management outcomes. Practical issues during the pandemic were addressed such as the use of invasive diagnostic procedures, robotic‐assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy, hypofractionated radiotherapy, and prolonged androgen deprivation therapy. The recommendations were explicated in the context of Hong Kong, a highly populated international city, in relation to the latest international guidelines and evidence.

Conclusion

A range of recommendations on the management of PC patients during the COVID‐19 pandemic was developed. Urologists, oncologists, and physicians treating PC patients may refer to them as practical guidance.

Anti-cancer Therapy Leads to Increased Cardiovascular Susceptibility to COVID-19

Anti-cancer treatment regimens can lead to both acute- and long-term myocardial injury due to off-target effects. Besides, cancer patients and survivors are severely immunocompromised due to the harsh effect of anti-cancer therapy targeting the bone marrow cells. Cancer patients and survivors can therefore be potentially extremely clinically vulnerable and at risk from infectious diseases. The recent global outbreak of the novel coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its infection called coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly become a worldwide health emergency, and on March 11, 2020, COVID-19 was declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). A high fatality rate has been reported in COVID-19 patients suffering from underlying cardiovascular diseases. This highlights the critical and crucial aspect of monitoring cancer patients and survivors for potential cardiovascular complications during this unprecedented health crisis involving the progressive worldwide spread of COVID-19. COVID-19 is primarily a respiratory disease; however, COVID-19 has shown cardiac injury symptoms similar to the cardiotoxicity associated with anti-cancer therapy, including arrhythmia, myocardial injury and infarction, and heart failure. Due to the significant prevalence of micro- and macro-emboli and damaged vessels, clinicians worldwide have begun to consider whether COVID-19 may in fact be as much a vascular disease as a respiratory disease. However, the underlying mechanisms and pathways facilitating the COVID-19-induced cardiac injury in cancer and non-cancer patients remain unclear. Investigations into whether COVID-19 cardiac injury and anti-cancer drug-induced cardiac injury in cancer patients and survivors might synergistically increase the cardiovascular complications and comorbidity risk through a “two-hit” model are needed. Identification of cardiac injury mechanisms and pathways associated with COVID-19 development overlapping with anti-cancer therapy could help clinicians to allow a more optimized prognosis and treatment of cancer survivors suffering from COVID-19. The following review will focus on summarizing the harmful cardiovascular risk of COVID-19 in cancer patients and survivors treated with an anti-cancer drug. This review will improve the knowledge of COVID-19 impact in the field of cardio-oncology and potentially improve the outcome of patients.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the oncologic care continuum: urgent need to restore patients care to pre-COVID-19 era

Background:

Globally, cancer is the second leading cause of death, and it is estimated that over 18·1 million new cases are diagnosed annually. The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted almost every aspect of the provision and management of cancer care worldwide. The time-critical nature of COVID-19 diagnosis and the large number of patients requiring hospitalisation necessitated the rerouting of already limited resources available for cancer services and programmes to the care of COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, the stringent social distancing, restricted in-hospital visits and lockdown measures instituted by various governments resulted in the disruption of the oncologic continuum including screening, diagnostic and prevention programmes, treatments and follow-up services as well as research and clinical trial programmes.

Materials and Methods:

We searched several databases from October 2020 to January 2021 for relevant studies published in English between 2020 and 2021 and reporting on the impact of COVID-19 on the cancer care continuum. This narrative review paper describes the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the cancer patient care continuum from screening and prevention to treatments and ongoing management of patients.

Conclusions:

The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly impacted cancer care and the management of cancer services and patients. Nevertheless, the oncology healthcare communities worldwide have done phenomenal work with joint and collaborative efforts, utilising best available evidence-based guidelines to continue to give safe and effective treatments for cancer patients while maintaining the safety of patients, healthcare professionals and the general population. Nevertheless, several healthcare centres are now faced with significant challenges with the management of the backlog of screening, diagnosis and treatment cases. It is imperative that governments, leaders of healthcare centres and healthcare professionals take all necessary actions and policies focused on minimising further system-level delays to cancer screening, diagnosis, treatment initiation and clearing of all backlogs cases from the COVID-19 pandemic in order to mitigate the negative impact on cancer outcomes.

Cumulative COVID-19 incidence, mortality and prognosis in cancer survivors: A population-based study in Reggio Emilia, Northern Italy

The aim of this population-based study was to evaluate the impact of being a cancer survivor (CS) on COVID-19 risk and prognosis during the first wave of the pandemic (27 February 2020 to 13 May 2020) in Reggio Emilia Province. Prevalent cancer cases diagnosed between 1996 and 2019 were linked with the provincial COVID-19 surveillance system. We compared CS' cumulative incidence of being tested, testing positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), being hospitalized and dying of COVID-19 with that of the general population; we compared COVID-19 prognosis in CS and in patients without cancer. During the study period, 15 391 people (1527 CS) underwent real-time polymerase chain reaction for SARS-CoV-2, of whom 4541 (447 CS) tested positive; 541 (113 CS) died of COVID-19. CS had higher age- and sex-adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRR) of testing (1.28 [95% confidence interval, CI = 1.21-1.35]), of positive test (IRR 1.06 [95% CI = 0.96-1.18]) and of hospitalization and death (IRR 1.27 [95% CI = 1.09-1.48] and 1.39 [95%CI = 1.12-1.71], respectively). CS had worse prognosis when diagnosed with COVID-19, particularly those below age 70 (adjusted odds ratio [OR] of death 5.03; [95% CI = 2.59-9.75]), while the OR decreased after age 70. The OR of death was higher for CS with a recent diagnosis, that is, <2 years (OR = 2.92; 95% CI = 1.64-5.21), or metastases (OR = 2.09; 95% CI = 0.88-4.93). CS showed the same probability of being infected, despite a slightly higher probability of being tested than the general population. Nevertheless, CS were at higher risk of death once infected.

Medical Care Disruptions During the First Six-Months of the COVID19 Pandemic: The Experience of Older Breast Cancer Survivors

Purpose.

Older cancer survivors required medical care during the COVID-19 pandemic despite infection risks, but there are limited data on medical care in this age group.

Methods.

We evaluated care disruptions in a longitudinal cohort of non-metastatic breast cancer survivors ages 60–98 from five US regions (n=321). Survivors completed a web-based or telephone survey from May 27, 2020 to September 11, 2020. Care disruptions included self-reported interruptions in ability to see doctors, receive treatment or supportive therapies, or fill prescriptions. Logistic regression models evaluated bivariate and multivariate associations between care disruptions and education, medical, psychosocial and COVID-19-related factors. Multivariate models included age, county COVID-19 rates, comorbidity and post-diagnosis time.

Results.

There was a high response rate (n=262, 81.6%). Survivors were 32.2 months post-diagnosis (SD 17.5, range 4–73). Nearly half (48%) reported a medical disruption. The unadjusted odds of care disruptions were significantly higher with more education (OR 1.23 per one-year increase, 95% CI 1.09–1.39, p =0.001) and greater depression (OR 1.04 per one-point increase in CES-D score, CI 1.003–1.08, p=0.033); tangible support decreased the odds of disruptions (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97–0.99 per one-point increase, p=0.012). There was a trend for associations between disruptions and comorbidity (unadjusted OR 1.13 per 1 added comorbidity, 95% CI 0.99–1.29, p=0.07). Adjusting for covariates, only higher education (p=0.001) and tangible social support (p=0.006) remained significantly associated with having care disruptions.

Conclusions.

Older breast cancer survivors reported high rates of medical care disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic and psychosocial factors were associated with care disruptions.

The Society for Integrative Oncology Practice Recommendations for online consultation and treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

The Society for Integrative Oncology (SIO) Online Task Force was created in response to the challenges facing continuity of integrative oncology care resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. The Task Force set out to guide integrative oncology practitioners in providing effective and safe online consultations and treatments for quality-of-life-concerns and symptom management. Online treatments include manual, acupuncture, movement, mind-body, herbal, and expressive art therapies.

METHODS

The SIO Online Practice Recommendations employed a four-phase consensus process: (1) literature review and discussion among an international panel of SIO members, identifying key elements essential in an integrative oncology visit; (2) development, testing, and refinement of a questionnaire defining challenges and strategies; (3) refinement input from integrative oncology experts from 19 countries; and (4) SIO Executive Committee review identifying the most high-priority challenges and strategies.

RESULTS

The SIO Online Practice Recommendations address ten challenges, providing practical suggestions for online treatment/consultation. These include overcoming unfamiliarity, addressing resistance among patients and healthcare practitioners to online consultation/treatment, exploring ethical and medical-legal aspects, solving technological issues, preparing the online treatment setting, starting the online treatment session, maintaining effective communication, promoting specific treatment effects, involving the caregiver, concluding the session, and ensuring continuity of care.

CONCLUSIONS

The SIO Online Practice Recommendations are relevant for ensuring continuity of care beyond the present pandemic. They can be implemented for patients with limited accessibility to integrative oncology treatments due to geographic constraints, financial difficulties, physical disability, or an unsupportive caregiver. These recommendations require further study in practice settings.

Patient Satisfaction with Oncological Care during the SARS-CoV-2 Virus Pandemic

Recently, the outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the COVID-19 pandemic significantly affected the health situation of the entire society and necessitated reorganization of health care including oncology. The objective of this study was to examine the perception of medical services by cancer patients during the pandemic and to identify the key elements influencing the level of satisfaction with oncological care. Of note, 394 patients diagnosed with cancer treated in inpatient oncology wards participated in the study (Poland). The diagnostic survey method was used. A survey questionnaire developed by the authors was used and validated the EORTC IN-PATSAT32 questionnaire. The calculations were made in Statistica 10.0 (Statsoft; 2011, Dell Inc., Round Rock, TX, USA). The average general level of satisfaction with oncological care in the study group was 80.77 out of a total score of 100, representing the highest level of satisfaction. Levels of satisfaction varied according to time since diagnosis (longer time-greater satisfaction) and were lower where treatment was delayed or perceived as disorganised. Nearly half of the respondents felt the threat of the SARS-CoV-2 infection, despite the fact that most of them believed that the hospital was well prepared to diagnose and treat cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Convincing patients about the proper preparation of health care for diagnostics and therapy is an important element influencing patient satisfaction with oncological care.

The Deadly Duo of COVID-19 and Cancer!

As of September 19, 2020, about 30 million people have been infected with the novel corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) globally, and the numbers are increasing at an alarming rate. The disease has a tremendous impact on every aspect of life, but one of the biggest, related to human health and medical sciences, is its effect on cancer. Nearly 2% of the total COVID-19 patients prior to May 2020 had cancer, and the statistics are quite frightening as the patient can be referred to as "doubly unfortunate" to suffer from cancer with the added misery of infection with COVID-19. Data regarding the present situation are scarce, so this review will focus on the deadly duo of COVID-19 and cancer. The focus is on molecular links between COVID-19 and cancer as inflammation, immunity, and the role of angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). Complications may arise or severity may increase in cancer patients due to restrictions imposed by respective authorities as an effort to control COVID-19. The impact may vary from patient to patient and factors may include a delay in diagnosis, difficulty managing both cancer therapy and COVID-19 at same time, troubles in routine monitoring of cancer patients, and delays in urgent surgical procedures and patient care. The effect of anti-cancer agents on the condition of cancer patients suffering from COVID-19 and whether these anti-cancer agents can be repurposed for effective COVID-19 treatment are discussed. The review will be helpful in the management of deadly duo of COVID-19 and cancer.

The Sum of Fears in Cancer Patients Inside the Context of the COVID-19

The pandemic resulting from COVID-19 has led to the collapse of the health system in dozens of countries. Parallel to clinical risk, the appearance or intensification of psychiatric symptoms has also been documented. The identification of groups at risk is essential for the establishment of preventive and therapeutic strategies. Cancer patients appear to be especially vulnerable both from a clinical and psychiatric perspective. Problems related to contamination and the cancer treatments themselves are intertwined, causing a sum of patients' fears to arise, which can cause mental effects. This study aims to review and investigate the impact of COVID-19 on the mental health of cancer patients and indicate possible support strategies.

Thyroid Cancer and Telemedicine During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has forced endocrinologists to utilize telemedicine to care for their patients. There is limited information on the experience of endocrinologists in managing patients with thyroid cancer virtually. We sent a 9-item questionnaire to endocrinologists and endocrine surgeons at our institution to better understand the barriers and benefits of caring for patients with thyroid cancer via telemedicine, as well as how we can incorporate telemedicine into our future care of patients with this malignancy. Among the 9 physicians who responded, the majority listed technological issues with the virtual platform as a challenge in caring for patients with thyroid cancer remotely. Additional barriers included difficulty in expressing empathy, decreased ability to coordinate care with the interdisciplinary team, and lack of the physical examination. Benefits included compliance with social distancing measures and convenience for patients with American Thyroid Association (ATA) low-risk thyroid cancer who presented for follow-up visits. Overall, physicians were satisfied or strongly satisfied with caring for patients with thyroid cancer remotely, especially low-risk patients on long-term follow-up. That said, they recommend that some patients be seen in person after the pandemic, including symptomatic patients and ATA high-risk patients. While the COVID-19 pandemic has allowed endocrinologists to manage patients with thyroid cancer remotely, the providers have faced challenges, some of which can be improved upon. Further studies will help determine how telemedicine affects patient outcomes, including satisfaction, disease progression, and survival, which will inform how we may incorporate this practice into our future care of patients with thyroid cancer.

The collateral fallout of COVID19 lockdown on patients with head injury from north-west India

BACKGROUND

The COVID19 lockdown has altered the dynamics of living. Its collateral fallout on head injury care has not been studied in detail, especially from low- and middle-income countries, possibly overwhelmed more than developed nations. Here, we analyze the effects of COVID19 restrictions on head injury patients in a high-volume Indian referral trauma center.

METHODS

From the prospective trauma registry, clinico-epidemiological and radiological parameters of patients managed during 190 days before and 190 days during COVID19 phases were studied. As an indicator of care, the inpatient mortality of patients with severe HI was also compared with appropriate statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Of the total 3372 patients, there were 83 head injury admissions per week before COVID19 restrictions, which decreased to 33 every week (60% drop) during the lock phases and stabilized at 46 per week during the unlock phases. COVID19 restrictions caused a significant increase in the proportion of patients arriving directly without resuscitation at peripheral centers and later than 6 h of injury. Though the most common mechanism was vehicular, a relative increase in the proportion of assaults was noted during COVID19. There was no change in the distribution of mild, moderate, and severe injuries. Despite a decrease in the percentage of patients with systemic illnesses, severe head injury mortality was significantly more during the lock phases than before COVID19 (59% vs. 47%, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

COVID19 restrictions have amplified the already delayed admission among patients of head injury from north-west India. The severe head injury mortality was significantly greater during lock phases than before COVID19, highlighting the collateral fallout of lockdown. Pandemic control measures in the future should not ignore the concerns of trauma emergency care.

COVID-19 outbreak: An experience to reappraise the role of hospital at home in the anti-cancer drug injection

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 outbreak has posed considerable challenges to the health care system worldwide, especially for cancer treatment. We described the activity and the care organisation of the Hospitalisation At Home (HAH) structure during the pandemic for treating patients with anti-cancer injections.

METHODS

We report the established organisation, the eligibility criteria, the patient characteristics, the treatment schemes and the stakeholders' role during two 5-week periods in 2020, before and during the French population's lockdown.

RESULTS

The increase of activity during the lockdown (+32% of treated patients, +156% of new patients and +28% of delivered preparations) concerned solid tumour, mainly breast cancer, even if haematological malignancies remained the most frequent. Thirty different drugs were delivered, including three new drugs administered in HAH versus 19 during the routine period (p < 0.01). For those clinical departments accustomed to using HAH, the usual organisation was kept, but with adjustments. Five clinical departments increased the number of patients treated at home and widened the panel of drugs prescribed. Three oncology departments and one radiotherapy department for the first time solicited HAH for anti-cancer injections, mainly for immunotherapy. We adjusted the HAH organisation with additional human resources and allowed to prescribe drugs with an infusion time of <30 min only for the new prescribers.

CONCLUSION

HAH allowed for the continuation of anti-cancer injections without postponement during the pandemic, and for a decrease in unnecessary patient travel to hospital with its concomitant COVID-19 transmission risk. Often left out of guidelines, the place of HAH in treating cancer patients should be reappraised, even more so during a pandemic.

Impact of COVID-19 on Gynaecological oncology; a global perspective

The coronavirus pandemic caused global devastation with over 2 million deaths and put unprecedented pressure on health care facilities world-wide. The response to the pandemic differed globally as countries faced different challenges. Within Gynaecological oncology, a multitude of guidance was published by various countries and organisations which demonstrated major themes. These consisted of implementations aimed at reducing transmission, managing limited resources, treatment prioritisation whilst continuing urgent oncological surgery where possible and the use of alternative therapies in the management of oncology patients to reduce hospital admission. Due to the novelty of this virus and its global effects, published guidance is currently limited to best practice and small-scale trials. This review aims to summarise the global response to coronavirus with respect to Gynaecological oncology and suggests potential interventions to limit the spread of the virus during resurgence or in the event of a future global pandemic. It also discusses the current trials recruiting relevant to the field of Gynaecological oncology to better inform the specialty on the management of cancer patients during COVID-19.

The Impact of COVID-19 Disease on Urology Practice

The diagnosis and timely treatment of cancer patients should not be compromised during an infectious disease pandemic. The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has serious implications on urology practice and raises particular questions for urologists about the management of different conditions. It was recommended to cancel most of the elective urological surgeries. Urological cancers surgeries that should be prioritized are radical cystectomy for selective tumors, orchiectomy for suspected testicular tumors, nephrectomy for c T3 + , nephroureterectomy for high-grade disease, and radical adrenalectomy for tumors >6 cm or adrenal carcinoma. Most prostatectomies can be delayed without compromising the survival rate of patients. Urological emergencies should be treated adequately even during this pandemic. There is a potential risk of coronavirus diffusion during minimally invasive procedures performed. It is crucial to use specific precautions when urologists performed those type of surgeries. It was also recommended to suspend the kidney transplantation program during the COVID-19 pandemic except for specific cases. In this review, we discussed the triage of urological surgeries, the risk of minimally invasive urological procedure, the kidney transplantation challenges, the systemic therapies, intravesical instillation of Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG), endourology, teleconferencing, and telemedicine application in urology during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Feasibility and Predictive Performance of a Triage System for Patients with Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

Triage procedures have been implemented to limit hospital access and minimize infection risk among patients with cancer during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak. In the absence of prospective evidence, we aimed to evaluate the predictive performance of a triage system in the oncological setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study analyzes hospital admissions to the oncology and hematology department of Udine, Italy, during the COVID-19 pandemic (March 30 to April 30, 2020). A total of 3,923 triage procedures were performed, and data of 1,363 individual patients were reviewed.

RESULTS

A self-report triage questionnaire identified 6% of triage-positive procedures, with a sensitivity of 66.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 43.0%-85.4%), a specificity of 94.3% (95% CI, 93.5%-95.0%), and a positive predictive value of 5.9% (95% CI, 4.3%-8.0%) for the identification of patients who were not admitted to the hospital after medical review. Patients with thoracic cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.69; 95% CI, 1.13-2.53, p = .01), younger age (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.15-2.01, p < .01), and body temperature at admission ≥37°C (OR, 9.52; 95% CI, 5.44-16.6, p < .0001) had increased risk of positive triage. Direct hospital access was warranted to 93.5% of cases, a further 6% was accepted after medical evaluation, whereas 0.5% was refused at admission.

CONCLUSION

A self-report questionnaire has a low positive predictive value to triage patients with cancer and suspected severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) symptoms. Differential diagnosis with tumor- or treatment-related symptoms is always required to avoid unnecessary treatment delays. Body temperature measurement improves the triage process's overall sensitivity, and widespread SARS-CoV-2 testing should be implemented to identify asymptomatic carriers.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This is the first study to provide data on the predictive performance of a triage system in the oncological setting during the coronavirus disease outbreak. A questionnaire-based triage has a low positive predictive value to triage patients with cancer and suspected severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) symptoms, and a differential diagnosis with tumor- or treatment-related symptoms is mandatory to avoid unnecessary treatment delays. Consequently, adequate recourses should be reallocated for a triage implementation in the oncological setting. Of note, body temperature measurement improves the overall sensitivity of the triage process, and widespread testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection should be implemented to identify asymptomatic carriers.

Correlation of Seizure Increase and COVID-19 Outbreak in Adult Patients with Epilepsy: Findings and Suggestions from a Nationwide Multi-centre Survey in China

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on the behaviours, mental health and seizure control of adult patients with epilepsy (PWE) and to identify the correlation of seizure increase and the COVID-19 outbreak to guide the medical care of individuals with epilepsy during a public health crisis.

METHODS

This study was conducted at 28 centres from February 2020 to April 2020. Participants filled out a 62-item online survey including sociodemographic, COVID-19-related, epilepsy-related and psychological variables and were divided into two groups based on whether their seizure frequency increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Chi-square tests and t-tests were used to test differences in significant characteristics. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to identify risk factors for seizure worsening.

RESULTS

A total of 1,237 adult PWE were enrolled for analysis. Of this sample, 31 (8.33%) patients experienced an increase in seizures during the pandemic. Multivariate logistic regression suggested that feeling nervous about the pandemic (P < 0.05), poor quality of life (P = 0.001), drug reduction/withdrawal (P = 0.032), moderate anxiety during the COVID-19 outbreak (P = 0.046) and non-seizure free before the COVID-19 outbreak (P < 0.05) were independently related to seizure increase during the pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

During the COVID-19 pandemic, PWE with poor quality of life and mental status, as well as AED reduction/withdrawal, were more likely to experience seizure increase. This observation highlights the importance of early identification of the population at high risk of seizure worsening and implementation of preventive strategies during the pandemic.

Burnout of health care providers during the COVID-19 pandemic: Focus on Medical Oncologists

The spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) has challenged hard the national health system worldwide. At any level, the role of health care providers has been rapidly revisited and eventually modified to face the pandemic. The search of the balance between the provision of the most appropriate health-related services and safety of both patients and health care providers has become an indisputable necessity. The consequently increased work load, along with a widespread feeling of intellectual isolation, emotional overload, sense of inadequacy for involvement in tasks and disciplines which are not always familiar have all been proposed as factors related to the onset and/or worsening of the burnout phenomenon. This latter is sadly renown among care givers and is particularly common among medical oncologists. We herein share our perspectives on the burnout phenomenon over the course of the Covid-19 pandemic, with a specific focus on medical oncologists. Results from the most recent and inherent studies are presented and commented in light of hints provided by the experience matured by a quite restricted, still potentially representative, number of professionals figures from the medical oncologists' category. Reasons are proposed to explain the sense of inadequacy currently perceived in relation to the limits imposed by the current pandemic. In more detail, we illustrate the nature and extents of some of the most relevant difficulties in the optimal management of cancer patients and constant efforts towards the scientific upgrade which allows for the improvement of the professional performance. The need for a deeper understanding of the roots and consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic on the mental health of medical oncologists is finally stressed.

Socioeconomic Inequalities and Ethnicity Are Associated with a Positive COVID-19 Test among Cancer Patients in the UK Biobank Cohort

We explored the role of socioeconomic inequalities in COVID-19 incidence among cancer patients during the first wave of the pandemic. We conducted a case-control study within the UK Biobank cohort linked to the COVID-19 tests results available from 16 March 2020 until 23 August 2020. The main exposure variable was socioeconomic status, assessed using the Townsend Deprivation Index. Among 18,917 participants with an incident malignancy in the UK Biobank cohort, 89 tested positive for COVID-19. The overall COVID-19 incidence was 4.7 cases per 1000 incident cancer patients (95%CI 3.8-5.8). Compared with the least deprived cancer patients, those living in the most deprived areas had an almost three times higher risk of testing positive (RR 2.6, 95%CI 1.1-5.8). Other independent risk factors were ethnic minority background, obesity, unemployment, smoking, and being diagnosed with a haematological cancer for less than five years. A consistent pattern of socioeconomic inequalities in COVID-19 among incident cancer patients in the UK highlights the need to prioritise the cancer patients living in the most deprived areas in vaccination planning. This socio-demographic profiling of vulnerable cancer patients at increased risk of infection can inform prevention strategies and policy improvements for the coming pandemic waves.

Mortality and morbidity of curative and palliative anticancer treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multicenter population-based retrospective study

Administration of effective anticancer treatments should continue during pandemics. However, the outcomes of curative and palliative anticancer treatments during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic remain unclear. The present retrospective observational study aimed to determine the 30-day mortality and morbidity of curative and palliative anticancer treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic. Between March 1 and June 30, 2020, all adults (n=2,504) with solid and hematological malignancies irrespective of cancer stage and type of anticancer treatments at five large comprehensive cancer centers in Saudi Arabia were included. The 30-day mortality was 5.1% (n=127) for all patients receiving anticancer treatment, 1.8% (n=24) for curative intent, 8.6% (n=103) for palliative intent and 13.4% (n=12) for COVID-19 cases. The 30-day morbidity was 28.2% (n=705) for all patients, 17.9% (n=234) for curative intent, 39.3% (n=470) for palliative intent and 75% (n=77) for COVID-19 cases. The 30-day mortality was significantly increased with male sex [odds ratio (OR), 2.011; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.141-3.546; P=0.016], body mass index (BMI) <25 (OR, 1.997; 95% CI, 1.292-3.087; P=0.002), hormone therapy (OR, 6.315; 95% CI, 0.074-2.068; P=0.001) and number of cycles (OR, 2.110; 95% CI, 0.830-0.948; P=0.001), but decreased with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS) of 0-1 (OR, 0.157; 95% CI, 0.098-0.256; P=0.001), stage I-II cancer (OR, 0.254; 95% CI, 0.069-0.934; P=0.039) and curative intent (OR, 0.217; 95% CI, 0.106-0.443; P=0.001). Furthermore, the 30-day morbidity significantly increased with age >65 years (OR, 1.420; 95% CI, 1.075-1.877; P=0.014), BMI <25 (OR, 1.484; 95% CI, 1.194-1.845; P=0.001), chemotherapy (OR, 1.397; 95% CI, 1.089-5.438; P=0.032), hormone therapy (OR, 1.527; 95% CI, 0.211-1.322; P=0.038) and immunotherapy (OR, 1.859; 95% CI, 0.648-4.287; P=0.038), but decreased with ECOG-PS of 0-1 (OR, 0.502; 95% CI, 0.399-0.632; P=0.001), breast cancer (OR, 0.569; 95% CI, 0.387-0.836; P=0.004) and curative intent (OR, 0.410; 95% CI, 0.296-0.586; P=0.001). The mortality risk was lowest with curative treatments. Therefore, such treatments should not be delayed. The morbidity risk doubled with palliative treatments and was highest among COVID-19 cases. Mortality appeared to be driven by male sex, BMI <25, hormonal therapy and number of cycles, while morbidity increased with age >65 years, BMI <25, chemotherapy, hormonal therapy and immunotherapy. Therefore, oncologists should select the most effective anticancer treatments based on the aforementioned factors.

Protective measures for patients with advanced cancer during the Sars-CoV-2 pandemic: Quo vadis?

Cancer patients represent a vulnerable cohort during the Sars-CoV-2 pandemic. Oncological societies have generated a plethora of recommendations, but precise instructions about routine oncological procedures remain scarce. Here, we report on local COVID-19 protection measures established in an interdisciplinary approach at a tertiary care center during the first wave of the pandemia in Germany. Following these measures, no additional morbidity or mortality during oncological procedures was observed, and no nosocomial infections were registered. However, Validation of our measures is outstanding and regional SARS-CoV-2 prevalence was low. However, specific oncological measures might be important to ensure optimal oncological results, especially for advanced cancer stages during this and future pandemia. In the future, communication about these measures might be crucial to a cancer patient´s assigned network to reduce the danger of excess mortality within the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Arab region's contribution to global COVID-19 research: Bibliometric and visualization analysis

BACKGROUND

At the global level and in the Arab world, particularly in low-income countries, COVID-19 remains a major public health issue. As demonstrated by an incredible number of COVID-19-related publications, the research science community responded rapidly. Therefore, this study was intended to assess the growing contribution of the Arab world to global research on COVID-19.

METHODS

For the period between December 2019 and March 2021, the search for publications was conducted via the Scopus database using terms linked to COVID-19. VOSviewer 1.6.16 software was applied to generate a network map to assess hot topics in this area and determine the collaboration patterns between different countries. Furthermore, the research output of Arab countries was adjusted in relation to population size and gross domestic product (GDP).

RESULTS

A total of 143,975 publications reflecting the global overall COVID-19 research output were retrieved. By restricting analysis to the publications published by the Arab countries, the research production was 6131 documents, representing 4.26% of the global research output regarding COVID-19. Of all these publications, 3990 (65.08%) were original journal articles, 980 (15.98%) were review articles, 514 (8.38%) were letters and 647 (10.55%) were others, such as editorials or notes. The highest number of COVID-19 publications was published by Saudi Arabia (n = 2186, 35.65%), followed by Egypt (n = 1281, 20.78%) and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), (n = 719, 11.73%). After standardization by population size and GDP, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Lebanon had the highest publication productivity. The collaborations were mostly with researchers from the United States (n = 968), followed by the United Kingdom (n = 661). The main research lines identified in COVID-19 from the Arab world are related to: public health and epidemiology; immunological and pharmaceutical research; signs, symptoms and clinical diagnosis; and virus detection.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel analysis of the latest Arab COVID-19-related studies is discussed in the current study and how these findings are connected to global production. Continuing and improving future collaboration between developing and developed countries will also help to facilitate the sharing of responsibilities for COVID-19 in research results and the implementation of policies for COVID-19.

Digestive Oncology in the COVID-19 Pandemic Era

Introduction

Since the rise of the COVID-19 pandemic there has been widespread concern regarding the possible delay in the diagnosis/treatment of cancer patients. We aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis, treatment, and outcome of patients with digestive cancer.

Methods

This was a retrospective study including patients with an inaugural digestive cancer diagnosis discussed for the first time at our center during the weekly digestive oncology reunion (DOR) meeting. The study group was enlisted from March to August 2020, and a control group was sourced from the equivalent period of 2018. Patients with a previous digestive cancer diagnosis/discussion in the DOR were excluded. The following data were collected: demographics, referral origin, tumor staging, first DOR discussion timing, treatment, and outcome.

Results

A total of 235 patients were included: 107 in the study group (65.4% male, mean age 71.59 years); 128 in the control group (54.7% male, mean age 68.16 years). The mean number of clinical discussions per week was higher in 2018 (13.65 vs. 10.67, p = 0.040), without a difference in the mean number of patients discussed for the first time (inaugural diagnosis) between groups (p = 0.670). In the 2020 study group, more patients were referred to DOR from the emergency room (ER), fewer from the outpatient clinic/hospital wards (p < 0.001), and more were referred after urgent surgery (p = 0.022). There was no difference in the mean waiting time from diagnosis to first DOR discussion (p = 0.087). Tumor staging in colorectal, gastric, and esophageal cancer was not significantly different between the groups (p = 0897, p = 0.168, and p = 0.717). More patients in the study group presented with stage IV pancreatic cancer (p = 0.043). There was no difference in the time span from DOR until the beginning of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.680) or elective surgery (p = 0.198), or from surgery until adjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.396). Also, there was no difference in 30-day mortality from the first DOR date between the groups (p = 0.742).

Conclusion

During the COVID-19 era there was a reduced number of clinical discussions in the DOR, but the number of debated patients with an inaugural digestive cancer diagnosis was similar. In the study group more patients were referred to DOR from the ER, and were referred after urgent surgery, suggesting a delayed demand for clinical attention. Study group patients were not significantly affected by the pandemic regarding timely DOR discussion, beginning of treatment, or 30-day mortality, reflecting the maintenance of the quality of care for digestive cancer patients.

Care Delivery Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Breast Cancer Care

PURPOSE

COVID-19 has altered healthcare delivery. Previous work has focused on patients with cancer and COVID-19, but little has been reported on healthcare system changes among patients without COVID-19.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of patients with breast cancer (BC) in New York City between February 1, 2020, and April 30, 2020. New patients were included as were patients scheduled to receive intravenous or injectable therapy. Patients with COVID-19 were excluded. Demographic and treatment information were obtained by chart review. Delays and/or changes in systemic therapy, surgery, radiation, and radiology related to the pandemic were tracked, along with the reasons for delay and/or change. Univariate and multivariable analysis were used to identify factors associated with delay and/or change.

RESULTS

We identified 350 eligible patients, of whom 149 (42.6%) experienced a delay and/or change, and practice reduction (51.0%) was the most common reason. The patients who identified as Black or African American, Asian, or Other races were more likely to experience a delay and/or change compared with White patients (Black, 44.4%; Asian, 47.1%; Other, 55.6%; White, 31.4%; P = .001). In multivariable analysis, Medicaid compared with commercial insurance (odds ratio [OR], 3.04; 95% CI, 1.32 to 7.27) was associated with increased odds of a delay and/or change, whereas stage II or III BC compared with stage I (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.95; and OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.092, respectively) was associated with decreased odds of a delay and/or change.

CONCLUSION

Almost half of the patients with BC without COVID-19 had a delay and/or change. We found racial and socioeconomic disparities in the likelihood of a delay and/or change. Further studies are needed to determine the impact these care alterations have on BC outcomes.

How did women with breast cancer experience the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic? A qualitative study

Objective

The ongoing COVID-19 global pandemic is a stressful experience that is particularly likely to negatively affect cancer patients. The goal of this qualitative study was to explore how breast cancer patients experienced the first wave of the COVID-19 outbreak.

Methods

As part of a larger study, 23 women accepted to take part in an individual phone interview investigating the psychosocial consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Results

The hybrid inductive-deductive thematic analysis revealed the following themes: (1) increased general psychological distress; (2) concerns about the impact of treatment-related immunosuppression (i.e., increased risk of catching the SARS-CoV-2 and of developing more severe complications); (3) higher risk of catching the SARS-CoV-2 in the hospital; (4) possible impact of changes in cancer care trajectory on prognosis; (5) distress related to going to treatment alone; (6) social isolation and decreased family relationships; (7) increased responsibility at home; (8) variety of coping strategies used (i.e., adherence to public health measures, seeking professional help, avoidance); (9) difficulty receiving professional mental health services and social support; (10) anxiety related to return to work; and (11) uncertainty about the future.

Conclusions

The COVID-19 outbreak is a major medical, psychological, social, and occupational stressor for women undergoing treatment for breast cancer. We offer recommendations to reduce the impact of subsequent waves of COVID-19 and other epidemics in this population.

Simultaneous versus staged resections for bilateral pulmonary metastases

BACKGROUND

For patients with bilateral pulmonary metastases, staged resections have historically been the preferred surgical intervention. During the spring of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic made patient travel to the hospital challenging and necessitated reduction in operative volume so that resources could be conserved. We report our experience with synchronous bilateral metastasectomies for the treatment of disease in both lungs.

METHODS

Patients with bilateral pulmonary metastases who underwent simultaneous bilateral resections were compared with a cohort of patients who underwent staged resections. We used nearest-neighbor propensity score (1:1) matching to adjust for confounders. Perioperative outcomes were compared between groups using paired statistical analysis techniques.

RESULTS

Between 1998 and 2020, 36 patients underwent bilateral simultaneous metastasectomies. We matched 31 pairs of patients. The length of stay was significantly shorter in patients undergoing simultaneous resection (median 3 vs. 8 days, p < .001) and operative time was shorter (156 vs. 235.5 min, p < .001) when compared to the sum of both procedures in the staged group. The groups did not significantly differ with regard to postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

In a carefully selected patient population, simultaneous bilateral metastasectomy is a safe option. A single procedure confers benefits for both the patient as well as the hospital resource system.

COVID-19 engages clinical markers for the management of cancer and cancer-relevant regulators of cell proliferation, death, migration, and immune response

Clinical reports show that the management of cancer patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 requires modifications. Understanding of cancer-relevant mechanisms engaged by the virus is essential for the evidence-based management of cancer. The network of SARS-CoV-2 regulatory mechanisms was used to study potential engagement of oncogenes, tumor suppressors, other regulators of tumorigenesis and clinical markers used in the management of cancer patients. Our network analysis confirms links between COVID-19 and tumorigenesis that were predicted in epidemiological reports. The COVID-19 network shows the involvement of tumorigenesis regulators and clinical markers. Regulators of cell proliferation, death, migration, and the immune system were retrieved. Examples are pathways initiated by EGF, VEGF, TGFβ and FGF. The SARS-CoV-2 network engages markers for diagnosis, prognosis and selection of treatment. Intersection with cancer diagnostic signatures supports a potential impact of the virus on tumorigenesis. Clinical observations show the diversity of symptoms correlating with biological processes and types of cells engaged by the virus, e.g. epithelial, endothelial, smooth muscle, glial and immune system cells. Our results describe an extensive engagement of cancer-relevant mechanisms and clinical markers by COVID-19. Engagement by the virus of clinical markers provides a rationale for clinical decisions based on these markers.

Minimizing the Impact of the COVID-19 Epidemic on Oncology Clinical Trials: Retrospective Study of Beijing Cancer Hospital

Background

In view of repeated COVID-19 outbreaks in most countries, clinical trials will continue to be conducted under outbreak prevention and control measures for the next few years. It is very significant to explore an optimal clinical trial management model during the outbreak period to provide reference and insight for other clinical trial centers worldwide.

Objective

The aim of this study was to explore the management strategies used to minimize the impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on oncology clinical trials.

Methods

We implemented a remote management model to maintain clinical trials conducted at Beijing Cancer Hospital, which realized remote project approval, remote initiation, remote visits, remote administration and remote monitoring to get through two COVID-19 outbreaks in the capital city from February to April and June to July 2020. The effectiveness of measures was evaluated as differences in rates of protocol compliance, participants lost to follow-up, participant withdrawal, disease progression, participant mortality, and detection of monitoring problems.

Results

During the late of the first outbreak, modifications were made in trial processing, participant management and quality control, which allowed the hospital to ensure the smooth conduct of 572 trials, with a protocol compliance rate of 85.24% for 3718 participants across both outbreaks. No COVID-19 infections were recorded among participants or trial staff, and no major procedural errors occurred between February and July 2020. These measures led to significantly higher rates of protocol compliance and significantly lower rates of loss to follow-up or withdrawal after the second outbreak than after the first, without affecting rates of disease progression or mortality. The hospital provided trial sponsors with a remote monitoring system in a timely manner, and 3820 trial issues were identified.

Conclusions

When public health emergencies occur, an optimal clinical trial model combining on-site and remote management could guarantee the health care and treatment needs of clinical trial participants, in which remote management plays a key role.

SARS-CoV-2 Serology Monitoring of a Cancer Center Staff in the Pandemic Most Infected Italian Region

Simple Summary

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, Cancer Centers adopted specific procedures to protect patients as well as to monitor the possible spread of SARS-CoV-2 among healthcare personnel. In April 2020, we implemented a prospective longitudinal study aimed at monitoring the serological response to SARS-Cov-2 in the healthcare personnel of a Comprehensive Cancer Center identified by the Lombardy region (the Italian region most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic) as one of the three oncologic hubs where the Regional Health Authorities referred all the cancer patients in the region. We identified a fraction of healthcare personnel with long-term anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody response, though negative for viral RNA, who could safely approach fragile cancer patients.

Abstract

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, Cancer Centers adopted specific procedures both to protect patients and to monitor the possible spread of SARS-CoV-2 among healthcare personnel (HCP). In April 2020 at Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milano, one of the three oncologic hubs in Lombardy where the Health Regional Authorities referred all the cancer patients of the region, we implemented a prospective longitudinal study aimed at monitoring the serological response to SARS-Cov-2 in HCP. One hundred and ten HCP answered a questionnaire and were screened by nasopharyngeal swabs as well as for IgM/IgG levels; seropositive HCPs were further screened every 40–45 days using SARS-CoV-2-specific serology. We identified a fraction of HCP with long-term anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses, though negative for viral RNA, and thus probably able to safely approach fragile cancer patients. Monitoring asymptomatic HCP might provide useful information to organize the healthcare service in a Cancer Center, while waiting for the effectiveness of the active immunization by SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, which will provide protection from infection.

Clinical characteristics and evolution of pediatric patients with acute leukemia and SARS-COV2 virus infection in a third level hospital in Mexico

Introduction

Reports have revealed that people susceptible to severe forms of COVID-19 are older adults with comorbidities; However, the pediatric population has also been affected, considering children with underlying conditions such as onco-hematological conditions to be high risk. We present a cases series in a third level hospital.

Material and methods

We conducted a retrospective study in children under the age of 16 years with a diagnosis of acute leukemia and infection with the SARS-CoV2 virus. Descriptive statistics with means and percentages were used. To show differences between the groups, Chi-square test, Student t test and Mann-Whitney U test were used depending on the type of variable and its distribution.

Results

SARS-CoV2 virus infection was confirmed in 15 children diagnosed with acute leukemia, at different stages of treatment. The mean age was 7.5 years, 8 male and 7 female, 11 of them diagnosed with acute B-cell lymphoblastic leukemia, one with acute T-cell lymphoblastic leukemia and 3 with acute myeloid leukemia. The mean days of hospital stay at the diagnosis of COVID-19 was 22. Thirteen of the children had fever and neutropenia. 7 patients died. There was a statistically significant correlation with the outcome in patients who presented a prolongation of aPTT, an increase in D-dimer, an increase in liver enzymes and severe respiratory distress with the need for mechanical ventilation.

Conclusion

The risk of death in children with leukemia and COVID-19 was associated with prolonged aPTT, increased D-dimer, increased liver enzymes, respiratory distress, and the need for mechanical ventilation.

Lessons Learned: Patient Communication During the Pandemic

A series of mortalities among musculoskeletal tumour patients secondary to medical illnesses during the first few months of the pandemic highlighted the need to review our methods of communication with patients. Prominent among patients’ concerns had been a fear of consulting at hospitals and a lack of ready access to health care. Recommendations are made for proactive consultation and patient education, identifying at-risk patients for follow-up and probing for possible co-morbidities. Telemedicine use is encouraged bearing in mind its inherent limitations. A network of physicians and pharmaceutical representatives is an added help we can offer our patients who may be isolated by community quarantine.