Timeliness and Modality of Treatment for New Cancer Diagnoses During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Canada

Measuring the impact of COVID-19 on time to treatment for individuals diagnosed with cancer in Manitoba, Canada using an interrupted time series analysis

BACKGROUND

Delays in treatment can lead to increases in cancer morbidity and mortality. There were many concerns that the COVID-19 pandemic led to delays in cancer treatment. Several studies have examined this issue but with serious limitations. We conducted a study that addressed many of these limitations and evaluated changes in first treatment, surgery, systemic therapy, and radiation therapy (RT) during the pandemic for individuals diagnosed with cancer in Manitoba, Canada.

METHODS

A population-based, quasi-experimental cross-sectional study with an interrupted time series analysis was used to examine time to first treatment (expressed as treatment rates accounting for the competing risk of death) before (January 2015-September 2019) and after (April 2020-December 2022) the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

When compared to the counterfactual scenario without COVID-19, first treatments were not received significantly later during the COVID-19 period for any cancer site. Individuals diagnosed with breast, colon, endocrine, or head and neck cancer had their first treatment within 90 days of diagnosis significantly sooner when comparing the COVID-19 period to the counterfactual. When examining type of treatment within one year of diagnosis, individuals diagnosed with breast cancer had surgery significantly later from April to June 2020 and systemic therapy significantly sooner from April 2020 to September 2021. Individuals diagnosed with colon cancer had surgery significantly sooner from April 2020 to June 2021 and individuals diagnosed with rectal cancer had RT significantly later from January to June 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

Although significantly impacted by COVID-19, the cancer care system in Manitoba was able to prioritize individuals diagnosed with cancer and modify treatment modalities resulting in no significant delays in first treatment between April 2020 and December 2022.

POLICY SUMMARY

It will be important to assess long-term survival and if unaltered, the ongoing use of strategies first used in the pandemic might be justified.

Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown on cancer stage distribution and time to treatment initiation using cancer registry data of the Swiss cantons of Zurich and Zug from 2018 to 2021

PURPOSE

Swiss healthcare institutions conducted only urgent procedures during the COVID-19 lockdown, potentially leading to a lack of care for other severe diseases, such as cancer. We examined the effects of the pandemic on cancer stage distribution and time between cancer diagnosis and treatment initiation using population-based cancer registry data.

METHODS

The study was based on data of the cancer registry of the cantons of Zurich and Zug from 2018 to 2021. Cancer stage distribution was analysed descriptively and with a Pearson's Chi-squared test. Time between cancer diagnosis and treatment initiation was determined in days and analysed descriptively and by fitting Quasipoisson regression models.

RESULTS

For all-cancer and colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer statistically significant evidence for a difference in cancer stages distribution among the incidence years was observed. Based on the all-cancer regression models, longer time to treatment initiation (TTI) was observed for patients diagnosed in 2021 and receiving surgery (Rate Ratio = 1.08 [95% confidence interval 1.03, 1.14]) or hormone therapy (1.20 [1.03, 1.40]) compared to those diagnosed in 2018/19 receiving those therapies. We observed no difference in TTI between cancer patients diagnosed in 2020 compared to 2018/19 for any of the therapies investigated, except for chemotherapy with shorter TTI (0.92 [0.86, 0.98]).

CONCLUSION

The observed effects on cancer outcomes in 2020 and 2021 compared to 2018/19 coincided with the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland in 2020 onwards. Short- and long-term effects of the pandemic on cancer outcomes and the public healthcare system were observed. However, we cannot exclude that the implementation of the new Swiss law on cancer registration in 2020 explains part of our observations.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Time to Treatment in Surgical Oncology: A National Registry Study in The Netherlands

To avoid delay in oncological treatment, a 6-weeks norm for time to treatment has been agreed on in The Netherlands. However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health systems resulted in reduced capacity for regular surgical care. In this study, we investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on time to treatment in surgical oncology in The Netherlands.

METHODS

A population-based analysis of data derived from five surgical audits, including patients who underwent surgery for lung cancer, colorectal cancer, upper gastro-intestinal, and hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) malignancies, was performed. The COVID-19 cohort of 2020 was compared to the historic cohorts of 2018 and 2019. Primary endpoints were time to treatment initiation and the proportion of patients whose treatment started within 6 weeks. The secondary objective was to evaluate the differences in characteristics and tumour stage distribution between patients treated before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

A total of 14,567 surgical cancer patients were included in this study, of these 3292 treatments were started during the COVID-19 pandemic. The median time to treatment decreased during the pandemic (26 vs. 27 days, p < 0.001) and the proportion of patients whose treatment started within 6 weeks increased (76% vs. 73%, p < 0.001). In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, adjusting for patient characteristics, no significant difference in post-operative outcomes between patients who started treatment before or after 6 weeks was found. Overall, the number of procedures performed per week decreased by 8.1% during the pandemic. This reduction was most profound for patients with stage I lung carcinoma and colorectal carcinoma. There were fewer patients with pulmonary comorbidities in the pandemic cohort (11% vs. 13%, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite pressure on the capacity of the healthcare system during the COVID-19 pandemic, a larger proportion of surgical oncological patients started treatment within six weeks, possibly due to prioritisation of cancer care and reductions in elective procedures. However, during the pandemic, a decrease in the number of surgical oncological procedures performed in The Netherlands was observed, especially for patients with stage I disease.

The Impact of the Pandemic on the Quality of Colorectal and Anal Cancer Care, and 2-Year Clinical Outcomes

We undertook a retrospective study to compare the quality of care delivered to a cohort of newly diagnosed adults with colon, rectal or anal cancer during the early phase of COVID-19 (02/20-12/20) relative to the same period in the year prior (the comparator cohort), and examine the impact of the pandemic on 2-year disease progression and all-cause mortality. We observed poorer performance on a number of quality measures, such as approximately three times as many patients in the COVID-19 cohort experienced 30-day post-surgical readmission (10.5% vs. 3.6%; SD:0.27). Despite these differences, we observed no statistically significant adjusted associations between COVID-19 and time to either all-cause mortality (HR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.61-1.27, p = 0.50) or disease progression (HR: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.82-1.64, p = 0.41). However, there was a substantial reduction in new patient consults during the early phase of COVID-19 (12.2% decrease), which appeared to disproportionally impact patients who traditionally experience sociodemographic disparities in access to care, given that the COVID-19 cohort skewed younger and there were fewer patients from neighborhoods with the highest Housing and Dwelling, ands Age and Labour Force marginalization quintiles. Future work is needed to understand the more downstream effects of COVID-19 related changes on cancer care to inform planning for future disruptions in care.

Prevalence and drivers of nurse and physician distress in cardiovascular and oncology programmes at a Canadian quaternary hospital network during the COVID-19 pandemic: a quality improvement initiative

OBJECTIVES

To assess the prevalence and drivers of distress, a composite of burnout, decreased meaning in work, severe fatigue, poor work-life integration and quality of life, and suicidal ideation, among nurses and physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional design to evaluate distress levels of nurses and physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic between June and August 2021.

SETTING

Cardiovascular and oncology care settings at a Canadian quaternary hospital network.

PARTICIPANTS

261 nurses and 167 physicians working in cardiovascular or oncology care. Response rate was 29% (428 of 1480).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Survey tool to measure clinician distress using the Well-Being Index (WBI) and additional questions about workplace-related and COVID-19 pandemic-related factors.

RESULTS

Among 428 respondents, nurses (82%, 214 of 261) and physicians (62%, 104 of 167) reported high distress on the WBI survey. Higher WBI scores (≥2) in nurses were associated with perceived inadequate staffing (174 (86%) vs 28 (64%), p=0.003), unfair treatment, (105 (52%) vs 11 (25%), p=0.005), and pandemic-related impact at work (162 (80%) vs 22 (50%), p<0.001) and in their personal life (135 (67%) vs 11 (25%), p<0.001), interfering with job performance. Higher WBI scores (≥3) in physicians were associated with perceived inadequate staffing (81 (79%) vs 32 (52%), p=0.001), unfair treatment (44 (43%) vs 13 (21%), p=0.02), professional dissatisfaction (29 (28%) vs 5 (8%), p=0.008), and pandemic-related impact at work (84 (82%) vs 35 (56%), p=0.001) and in their personal life (56 (54%) vs 24 (39%), p=0.014), interfering with job performance.

CONCLUSION

High distress was common among nurses and physicians working in cardiovascular and oncology care settings during the pandemic and linked to factors within and beyond the workplace. These results underscore the complex and contextual aspects of clinician distress, and the need to develop targeted approaches to effectively address this problem.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on management of surgically treated laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly impacted the treatment of cancer patients, particularly in terms of treatment choices. This study aimed to assess the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of surgically treated laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC) patients, focusing specifically on changes in treatment modalities. We retrospectively analyzed the data from 102 patients who underwent surgical treatment for LSCC between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2021, at our tertiary medical center. Patient demographics, histological characteristics, and treatment modalities were extracted from electronic medical records and compared between two time periods: pre-COVID-19 and during COVID-19, marked by the introduction of the hospital entry triage. Of the total patients, 53 (52%) were in the pre-COVID-19 group, and 49 (48%) were in the COVID-19 group. No significant differences in patient characteristics at the initial work-up were observed between the two groups. However, a significant shift in treatment modalities was noted. Fewer patients received postoperative adjuvant therapy in the COVID-19 group (70.5%) compared to the pre-COVID-19 group (95.5%). Importantly, this change did not significantly impact the one-year overall survival (OS) rates. The reduction in the use of postoperative adjuvant therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic may be attributed to efforts to minimize hospital visits due to the risk of COVID-19 infection. Further research is warranted to validate these findings and to investigate the potential effects of such changes in treatment modalities on the long-term survival.

COVID-19 pandemic impact on the potential exacerbation of screening mammography disparities: A population-based study in Ontario, Canada

Strategies to ramp up breast cancer screening after COVID-19 require data on the influence of the pandemic on groups of women with historically low screening uptake. Using data from Ontario, Canada, our objectives were to 1) quantify the overall pandemic impact on weekly bilateral screening mammography rates (per 100,000) of average-risk women aged 50-74 and 2) examine if COVID-19 has shifted any mammography inequalities according to age, immigration status, rurality, and access to material resources. Using a segmented negative binomial regression model, we estimated the mean change in rate at the start of the pandemic (the week of March 15, 2020) and changes in weekly trend of rates during the pandemic period (March 15-December 26, 2020) compared to the pre-pandemic period (January 3, 2016-March 14, 2020) for all women and for each subgroup. A 3-way interaction term (COVID-19*week*subgroup variable) was added to the model to detect any pandemic impact on screening disparities. Of the 3,481,283 mammograms, 8.6 % (n = 300,064) occurred during the pandemic period. Overall, the mean weekly rate dropped by 93.4 % (95 % CI 91.7 % - 94.8 %) at the beginning of COVID-19, followed by a weekly increase of 8.4 % (95 % CI 7.4 % - 9.4 %) until December 26, 2020. The pandemic did not shift any disparities (all interactions p > 0.05) and that women who were under 60 or over 70, immigrants, or with a limited access to material resources had persistently low screening rate in both periods. Interventions should proactively target these underserved populations with the goals of reducing advanced-stage breast cancer presentations and mortality.

Patient Perceptions of the Impact of the COVID Pandemic on the Quality of Their Gastrointestinal Cancer Care

We surveyed patients who had a received care for a gastrointestinal cancer between 03/2020 and 05/2021 to understand their perceptions of the impact of the Covid pandemic on cancer care delivery and quality of care. Three-hundred fifty-eight respondents provided evaluable responses (response rate: 17.3%). Approximately half of respondents (46.4%) perceived that they had experienced a pandemic-related cancer care modification; most changes were initiated by a clinician or the cancer center (44.6%). Relative to White patients those from Racialized Groups (OR: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.03-3.54) were more likely to report a cancer treatment change. Additionally, relative to patients in follow-up, those who were newly diagnosed (OR: 2.39; 95% CI: 1.21-4.71) were more likely to report a change. Compared to White patients, patients from Racialized Groups were approximately twice as likely to report perceiving that virtual visits during Covid negatively impacted the quality of their care (OR: 2.21; 95% CI: 0.96-5.08). These findings potentially reflect pre-existing systemic disparities in quality of and access to care, as well as differences in how care is experienced by patients from Racialized Groups.

Association between the COVID-19 pandemic and first cancer treatment modality: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Physicians were directed to prioritize using nonsurgical cancer treatment at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to quantify the impact of this policy on the modality of first cancer treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy or no treatment).

METHODS

In this population-based study using Ontario data from linked administrative databases, we identified adults diagnosed with cancer from January 2016 to November 2020 and their first cancer treatment received within 1 year postdiagnosis. Segmented Poisson regressions were applied to each modality to estimate the change in mean 1-year recipient volume per thousand patients (rate) at the start of the pandemic (the week of Mar. 15, 2020) and change in the weekly trend in rate during the pandemic (Mar. 15, 2020, to Nov. 7, 2020) relative to before the pandemic (Jan. 3, 2016, to Mar. 14, 2020).

RESULTS

We included 321 535 people diagnosed with cancer. During the first week of the COVID-19 pandemic, the mean rate of receiving upfront surgery over the next year declined by 9% (rate ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88-0.95), and chemotherapy and radiotherapy rates rose by 30% (rate ratio 1.30, 95% CI 1.23-1.36) and 13% (rate ratio 1.13, 95% CI 1.07-1.19), respectively. Subsequently, the 1-year rate of upfront surgery increased at 0.4% for each week (rate ratio 1.004, 95% CI 1.002-1.006), and chemotherapy and radiotherapy rates decreased by 0.9% (rate ratio 0.991, 95% CI 0.989-0.994) and 0.4% (rate ratio 0.996, 95% CI 0.994-0.998), respectively, per week. Rates of each modality resumed to prepandemic levels at 24-31 weeks into the pandemic.

INTERPRETATION

An immediate and sustained increase in use of nonsurgical therapy as the first cancer treatment occurred during the first 8 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario. Further research is needed to understand the consequences.

Is cancer stage data missing completely at random? A report from a large population-based cohort of non-small cell lung cancer

Introduction

Population-based datasets are often used to estimate changes in utilization or outcomes of novel therapies. Inclusion or exclusion of unstaged patients may impact on interpretation of these studies.

Methods

A large population-based dataset in Ontario, Canada of non-small cell lung cancer patients was examined to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of unstaged patients compared to staged patients. Multivariable Poisson regression was used to evaluate differences in patient-level characteristics between groups. Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival and log-rank statistics were utilized.

Results

In our Ontario cohort of 51,152 patients with NSCLC, 11.2% (n=5,707) were unstaged, and there was evidence that stage data was not missing completely at random. Those without assigned stage were more likely than staged patients to be older (RR [95%CI]), (70-79 vs. 20-59: 1.51 [1.38-1.66]; 80+ vs. 20-59: 2.87 [2.62-3.15]), have a higher comorbidity index (Score 1-2 vs 0: 1.19 [1.12-1.27]; 3 vs. 0: 1.49 [1.38-1.60]), and have a lower socioeconomic class (4 vs. 1 (lowest): 0.91 [0.84-0.98]; 5 vs. 1 (lowest): 0.89 [0.83-0.97]). Overall survival of unstaged patients suggested a mixture of early and advanced stage, but with a large proportion that are probably stage IV patients with more rapid death than those with reported stage IV disease.

Conclusion

In this case study, evaluation of stage-specific health care utilization and outcomes for staged patients with stage IV disease at the population level may have a bias as a distinct subset of stage IV patients with rapid death are likely among those without a documented stage in administrative data.

Early survival for patients newly diagnosed with cancer during COVID-19 in Ontario, Canada: A population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the association between the COVID-19 pandemic and early survival among newly diagnosed cancer patients.

METHODS

This retrospective population-based cohort study used linked administrative datasets from Ontario, Canada. Adults (≥18 years) who received a cancer diagnosis between March 15 and December 31, 2020, were included in a pandemic cohort, while those diagnosed during the same dates in 2018/2019 were included in a pre-pandemic cohort. All patients were followed for one full year after the date of diagnosis. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to assess survival in relation to the pandemic, patient characteristics at diagnosis, and the modality of first cancer treatment as a time-varying covariate. Interaction terms were explored to measure the pandemic association with survival for each cancer type.

RESULTS

Among 179,746 patients, 53,387 (29.7%) were in the pandemic cohort and 37,741 (21.0%) died over the first post-diagnosis year. No association between the pandemic and survival was found when adjusting for patient characteristics at diagnosis (HR 0.99 [95% CI 0.96-1.01]), while marginally better survival was found for the pandemic cohort when the modality of treatment was additionally considered (HR 0.97 [95% CI 0.95-0.99]). When examining each cancer type, only a new melanoma diagnosis was associated with a worse survival in the pandemic cohort (HR 1.25 [95% CI 1.05-1.49]).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients able to receive a cancer diagnosis during the pandemic, one-year overall survival was not different than those diagnosed in the previous 2 years. This study highlights the complex nature of the COVID-19 pandemic impact on cancer care.