COVID-19 in cancer patients may be presented by atypical symptoms and higher mortality rate, a case-controlled study from Iran

COVID-19 vaccination outcomes in patients with a solid malignancy: Insights from extensive real-world data and propensity score matched analyses

OBJECTIVES

This nationwide, multicentric, retrospective analysis of 1,126,946 COVID-19 cases (March 2020-June 2022) aims to elucidate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on mortality in patients with a sole solid malignancy.

METHODS

Using data from the national digital medical record repository, outcomes were compared among fully vaccinated and nonvaccinated cohorts, factoring in gender, virus type, age, vaccination status, vaccine type, and cancer type. Logistic regression calculated odds ratios (OR) and their significance.

RESULTS

Among 6,050 patients with both cancer and comorbidities, 1,797 had only solid malignancy. Vaccinated individuals in this group had reduced mortality rates, especially those >63 years (OR 0.169 [95% confidence interval [CI] 0.090-0.317]; P < .001). Lower deaths were observed in non-ICU (OR 0.193 [95% CI 0.097-0.382]; P < .001) and ICU cases (OR 0.224 [95% CI 0.077-0.646]; P = .003), with both vaccine types. No statistically significant benefits were observed against delta and omicron variants. Intrathoracic malignancies (OR 0.376 [95% CI 0.146-0.971]; P = .043) and palliative treatment (OR 0.384 [95% CI 0.192-0.766]; P = .006) showed vaccination benefits. Logistic regression revealed a higher fatal risk in nonvaccinated males >63. Propensity score matching supported these outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with sole solid malignancies face elevated COVID-19 mortality risk, particularly without active cytostatic therapy, with advanced disease on palliative treatment, or intrathoracic malignancies.

Perceptions and practices of people with a total laryngectomy during COVID-19 pandemic: A mixed methods analysis

PURPOSE

People with a total laryngectomy (PTL) confront safety threats related to altered airway anatomy and risk of adverse events is amplified during healthcare crises, as exemplified by COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding these challenges, how they are navigated by PTL, and what resources can be deployed to alleviate risk can improve interprofessional care by speech-language pathologists (SLPs), otolaryngologists, and other professionals.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An online survey was disseminated to PTL in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic, querying participants about safety concerns and sources of information accessed to address care. Descriptive statistics and Chi-square were used to analyze information sources consumed by tracheoesophageal, esophageal, and electrolaryngeal speakers. Content analysis was completed to identify themes and quantify responses by subtheme.

RESULTS

Among 173 respondent PTL, tracheoesophageal speakers preferentially sought otolaryngologist input, whereas esophageal and electrolaryngeal speakers more often chose SLPs (p < .01). Overall, tracheoesophageal speakers had more SLP or otolaryngologist contact. Many PTL reported stringent handwashing, neck cleaning, and hygienic risk mitigation strategies. Six themes emerged in content analysis involving risk of infection/transmission, heightened vigilance, changes to alaryngeal communication, modified tracheostoma coverage, diagnostic testing, and risk from comorbid conditions. Limited provider contact suggested pandemic barriers to healthcare access.

CONCLUSIONS

PTL have a range of laryngectomy-specific needs and concerns, and type of alaryngeal communication was associated with source of information sought. Collaborations among healthcare professionals need to be optimized to improve patient navigation and overall access to specialized care.

Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 and Cancer History: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study in Southwestern Iran

Background: Cancer patients are more exposed to opportunistic infections, such as COVID-19, due to their poor health status. This study aimed to identify the clinical characteristics of cancer and non-cancer patients with COVID-19 that may lead to death, intubation, and ICU admission. Materials and Methods: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional study was conducted on confirmed COVID-19 adult patients with and without a history of cancer from March 2019 to March 2021. Demographic and clinical features, ICU admission, intubation, and discharge status have been extracted from patients' medical records. Chi-square, odds ratio, Mann-Whitney test, and logistic regression were used to analyze the data. Results: The death rate in 1332 cancer patients was 28% compared to the 91464 noncancer patients which was 9% with an odds ratio of 3.94 and p<0.001. ICU admission rates among the cancer group were 43%, while in the noncancer group, it was 17.9% (p<0.001). Moreover, intubation was done for 20.9% of cancer patients and 7.4% of non-cancer patients (p<0.001). However, no significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of length of stay in the hospital. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that age, level of consciousness, SPO2, and autoimmune disorders were associated with mortality in cancer patients with COVID-19. Conclusion: This study showed that older age, loss of consciousness, low oxygen saturation, and suffering from autoimmune disorders were the predictors of death in cancer patients with COVID-19. These results can have important implications for the management and care of cancer patients with COVID-19.

Antibody response and safety of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in chronic hepatitis B patients with and without cirrhosis

Background

The immune response and safety of inactivated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines among patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB), especially those with cirrhosis, are not clear. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines among CHB patients with and without cirrhosis.

Patients and methods

A total of 643 CHB patients who received two doses of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines (BBIBP-CorV and CoronaVac) were enrolled. Serum samples were collected and tested for SARS-CoV-2 S-receptor-binding domain (S-RBD) immunoglobulin G (IgG) at enrollment. Data on adverse events (AEs) within 7 days after the second dose were obtained using a questionnaire.

Results

A total of 416 non-cirrhotic and 227 cirrhotic patients were included in the analysis. Cirrhotic patients had lower antibody titers than non-cirrhotic patients after adjusting for age, sex, and time interval (2.45 vs. 2.60 ng/ml, p = 0.034). Furthermore, the study revealed that cirrhotic patients demonstrated a slower rate of seropositivity increase, with the highest rate being recorded at week 4 and reaching 94.7%. On the other hand, among non-cirrhotic patients, the seropositivity rate peak was observed at week 2 and reached 96.0%. In addition, cirrhotic patients displayed a more rapid decline in the seropositivity rate, dropping to 54.5% after ≥16 weeks, while non-cirrhotic patients exhibited a decrease to 67.2% after the same time period. The overall incidence of AEs was low (18.4%), and all AEs were mild and self-limiting. In addition, 16.0% of participants had mild liver function abnormalities, and half of them returned to normality within the next 6 months without additional therapy. The participants who experienced liver function abnormalities showed a higher seropositivity rate and antibody titer than those who did not (91.6% vs. 79.5%, p = 0.005; 2.73 vs. 2.41 ng/ml, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Cirrhotic CHB patients had lower antibody titers to inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines than non-cirrhotic patients. The vaccines were generally well tolerated in both non-cirrhotic and cirrhotic CHB patient groups. Patients with abnormal liver function may have a better antibody response than those without.

Antibody responses to second doses of COVID-19 vaccination in lung cancer patients undergoing treatment

BACKGROUND

Several reports have revealed that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection tends to have more severe outcomes in cancer patients. Although vaccination reduces the risk of severe disease, data on antibody titers achieved by vaccination is scarce in cancer patients.

METHODS

We collected 79 blood samples (69 lung cancer patients and 10 control individuals) and conducted an anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody assay to compare the antibody titer achieved with current treatment. Sixty-eight patients (86%) received the BNT162 mRNA vaccine and 11 (14%) received the mRNA-1273 vaccine. They were categorized according to the current treatment: control individuals without cancer (cohort A), lung cancer patients who were treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy (cohort B), immunotherapy (cohort C), combination of cytotoxic chemotherapy and immunotherapy (cohort D), tyrosine kinase inhibitors (cohort E), and radiation therapy (cohort F).

RESULTS

Among 69 lung cancer patients (cohort B-F), 57 (83%) had adenocarcinoma, and 66 (96%) had advanced-stage cancer. In the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody assay, the antibody titer was significantly lower in lung cancer patients than in control individuals (p = 0.01). The median antibody titers were 161 AU/ml in control individuals and 59.9 AU/ml in lung cancer patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Antibody titers after the second vaccination were lower in cancer patients than those in healthy individuals. Our findings provide essential information for understanding the benefits and necessity of additional vaccination to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection in lung cancer patients.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody response after BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm) vaccination in cancer patients: A case-control study

Background

Long-term safety and efficacy of BBIBP-CorV vaccine especially in individuals with chronic diseases, like cancer, is under investigation. In the present prospective study, we aimed to evaluate severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody response with BBIBP-CorV vaccine in Iranian cancer patients.

Methods

All the patients registered to receive BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm) vaccine were divided into two groups of with (cases = 107) and without (controls = 45) history of cancer. Serum levels of SARS-CoV anti-spike recombinant receptor binding domain (anti-sRBD) and anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N) IgG serum levels were measured on days 0 (phase 0), 28-32 (phase I), and 56-64 (phase II) of vaccination. The data were analyzed using SPSS, version 22.

Results

Totally, 152 individuals (67.1% females) with the mean age of 46.71 ± 15.36 years were included. Solid cancers included 87.8% of the cancer cases (46.7% gynecological and 31.8% gastrointestinal cancer). At Phases I and II, positive anti-sRBD IgG and anti-N IgG were significantly lower among the cases in total analysis. Side effects were not significantly different between the cases and controls. The lowest positive anti-sRBD IgG test was observed among the cancer patients who were simultaneously receiving chemotherapy (35.3%). Anti-sRBD IgG and anti-N IgG serum levels significantly increased at phases I and II in total analysis and in each group. In addition, serum anti-sRBD IgG increased during the three phases and it was significantly higher in the control group.

Conclusion

Full vaccination of COVID-19 by BBIBP-CorV in immunocompromised patients such as cancer patients is safe and effective and could induce antibody response but in lower levels compared to healthy people. Probable causes to have minor antibody response found in males, older ages, individuals with BMI ≥ 25, those without past history of COVID-19 and with hematologic cancers. No significant side effects after vaccination were seen.

Antigen rapid diagnostic test monitoring for SARS-CoV-2 in asymptomatic and fully vaccinated cancer patients: Is it cost-effective?

BACKGROUND

Routine testing for cancer patients not presenting COVID-19-related symptoms and fully vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 prior to cancer treatment is controversial.

METHODS

In this retrospective study we evaluated whether antigen-rapid-diagnostic-test (Ag-RDT) monitoring for SARS-CoV-2 in a large cohort of consecutive asymptomatic (absence of SARS-CoV-2-related symptoms such as fever, cough, sore throat or nasal congestion) and fully vaccinated cancer patients enrolled in a short period during cancer treatment has an impact on the therapeutic path of cancer patients.

RESULTS

From December 27, 2021, to February 11, 2022, 2439 cancer patients were screened through Ag-RDT for SARS-CoV-2 before entering the hospital for systemic treatment. Fifty-three patients (2.17%) tested positive, of whom 7 (13.2%) subsequently developed COVID-related symptoms, generally mild. Cancer treatment was discontinued, as a precaution, in 49 patients (92.5%) due to the test positivity.

CONCLUSION

SARS-CoV-2 screening in asymptomatic and fully vaccinated cancer patients during systemic treatment appeared to be not cost-effective: the low rate of SARS-CoV-2 positive patients and the low percentage of overt associated infection do not seem proportional to the direct costs (nursing work for swabs, costs of materials and patient monitoring) and indirect costs (dedicated rooms, extension of waiting times for patients and oncologists in delivering therapy as well as its discontinuation in the positive ones). It can, on the other hand, be detrimental when systemic cancer treatment is suspended as a precaution. Given the small number of patients testing positive and the rapid and favorable trend of the infection, it is recommended to always consider continuing systemic oncological treatment, especially when this impacts patient survival as in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting.

Seroconversion rate after COVID-19 vaccination in patients with solid cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Patients with solid cancer have an increased risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and associated mortality than the general population. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the currently available evidence about the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with solid cancer. We included prospective studies comparing the immunogenicity and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines between patients with solid cancer and healthy individuals. Relative risks of seroconversion after the first and second dose of a COVID-19 vaccine were separately pooled with the use of random effects meta-analysis. Thirty studies with 11,245 subjects met the inclusion criteria. After first vaccine dose, the pooled RR of seroconversion in patients with solid cancer vs healthy individuals was 0.54 (95% CI 0.38-0.78, I² = 94%). After a second dose, the pooled RR of seroconversion in patients with solid cancer vs healthy controls was 0.87 (0.86-0.88, I² = 87%). Our review suggests that, compared with healthy individuals, COVID-19 vaccines show favorable immunogenicity and efficacy in patients with solid cancer. A second dose is associated with significantly improved seroconversion, although it is slightly lower in patients with solid cancer compared with healthy individuals.

COVID-19 vaccination in patients with cancer: Opportunities and challenges

The rapid spread of the SARS-Cov-2 virus, the increase in the number of patients with severe COVID-19, and the high mortality rate created the basis for the production of safe and effective vaccines. Studies have confirmed the increased risk of severe Covid-19 disease and mortality in cancer patients. It is logical that cancer patients should be the first to receive the primary vaccination and the booster vaccine for Covid-19. Since studies related to cancer patients and the effectiveness of existing Covid-19 vaccines have not been widely conducted, there are significant uncertainties about the effectiveness of the vaccine and the level of humoral and cellular immune responses in these patients. As a result, the possible risks and side effects of existing vaccines are not clear for patients with different cancers who are undergoing special treatments. In this study, we will discuss the effectiveness and safety of existing vaccines on cancer patients. In addition, we highlight factors that could affect the effectiveness of vaccines in these patients and finally discuss opportunities and challenges related to vaccination in cancer patients.

Risk factors for heightened COVID-19-Related anxiety among breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted medical care, increased isolation, and exacerbated anxiety in breast cancer patients. Since March 2020, Breastcancer.org experienced a sustained surge in requested pandemic-related information and support. To characterize the pandemic-related experiences of breast cancer patients, we surveyed the Breastcancer.org Community early in the COVID-19 era.

METHODS

Breastcancer.org Community members were invited to complete an online questionnaire regarding their experience during the pandemic. Self-reported data on demographics, comorbidities, care disruptions, anxiety, coping ability, telemedicine use, and satisfaction with care were collected. Results were analyzed using Stata 16.0 (Stata Corp., Inc).

RESULTS

Included were 568 current and previous breast cancer patients, primarily with U.S. residence. Overall, 43.8% reported at least one comorbidity associated with severe COVID-19 illness and 61.9% experienced care delays. Moderate to extreme anxiety about contracting COVID-19 was reported by 36.5%, increasing with number of comorbidities (33.0% vs. 55.4%, p = 0.021), current breast cancer diagnosis (30.4% vs. 42.5%, p = 0.011), and poorer coping ability (15.5% vs. 53.9%, p < 0.0001). Moderate to extreme anxiety about cancer care disruptions was reported by 29.1%, increasing with current breast cancer diagnosis (19.1% vs. 38.9%, p < 0.0001), actual delayed care (18.9% vs. 35.3%, p < 0.0001), and poorer coping ability (13.1% vs. 57.7%, p < 0.0001). Most utilized telehealth and found it helpful, but also expressed increased anxiety and subjectively expressed that these were less preferable.

CONCLUSION

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, anxiety was reported by a large proportion of breast cancer patients, with increased prevalence in those with risk factors. Attention to mental health is critical, as emotional distress not only harms quality of life but may also compromise outcomes.

Prognosis of COVID-19 in the middle eastern population, knowns and unknowns

Since its emergence in China in 2019, the SARS-CoV-2 virus has affected all countries worldwide. The virus is easily transmitted from one person to another via infected aerosols or contaminated surfaces. Unlike its counterparts, the prognosis of COVID-19 ranges from asymptomatic to critical disease or death. Several factors play a role in determining the severity of the disease in infected patients. Among others, is the pre-existence of an underlying medical condition such as diabetes, cancer, and others. Furthermore, although children are less prone to the severe form of the COVID-19 disease, they require attention due to the report of many atypical presentations of the infection, post-asymptomatic exposure. In the Middle East, little is known about the prognosis of the SARS-CoV-2 infection in high-risk categories, notably patients with diabetes, cancer, and pregnant women. The aim of this review is to summarize the current knowledge about this group of population in the middle eastern region as well as to highlight the gap in the literature. We have found that the majority of the papers were from the Gulf countries. Although, few studies were conducted; high-risk patients appear to have an increased risk of morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 compared to their counterparts. Higher levels of inflammatory markers, C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, D-dimer, and ferritin levels were also observed. Children are often asymptomatic or present with atypical presentations. More studies should be conducted to determine the clinical biomarkers of COVID-19 in high-risk categories to help in patient risk stratification and management in the middle eastern population.

Dynamics of the Immune response in Hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 Infected Cancer Patients

Seroconversion rates were compared between oncological and non-oncological patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 during a 14-day hospitalization time. All COVID-19 non-oncological and solid malignancies patients reached 100% seroconversion at day 14, while less than half of the hematological patients were seroconverted at the same time point. Despite the limited number and variability of the patient's cohort, we conclude that there is a delayed seroconversion in the hematological malignancies group, which may be linked to changes in the hematological parameters, immune suppression and/or oncological treatments that are typically associated with these patients.

The Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Oncology Patient Management

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the way cancer patients should be managed. Using published literature on best practices on oncology patient management, we developed checklists to establish which recommendations were followed and differences between healthcare staff and institutions in a local health unit (overseeing two regional hospitals and 14 primary Healthcare Centers) in an interior region in Portugal. Checklists were delivered and completed by 15 physicians, 18 nurses and 5 pharmacists working at the Hospitals, and 29 physicians and 46 nurses from primary healthcare centers. Hospital staff do not show statistically significant differences regarding most proposed recommendations for the oncology clinical pathway, human resources, treatments, patient management and service management. Primary healthcare centers seem to follow a similar trend. As a local health unit, general recommendations for Oncology Patient Management show statistically significantly different values on education of suspected cases, identification, isolation procedures and samples collection; extension of work schedules; and education on cancer patient and COVID-19 positive referral procedures. All the checklists indicated good-to-high internal consistency. Our analysis showed cohesive work between groups regarding control and prevention of sources of infection; therefore, it is considered the highest priority to ensure that all other services, including oncology, continue functioning. Patient management measures such as adjustments in treatments, analysis, patient care, referrals and emergencies were not ranked higher by responders.

Effects of SARS-CoV-2 infections in patients with cancer on mortality, ICU admission and incidence: a systematic review with meta-analysis involving 709,908 participants and 31,732 cancer patients

Background

Cancer patients constitute one of the highest-risk patient groups during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study, it was aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine both the incidence and ICU (Intensive Care Unit) admission rates and mortality in SARS-CoV-2 infected cancer patients.

Methods

The PRISMA guidelines were closely followed during the design, analysis, and reporting of this systematic review and meta-analysis. A comprehensive literature search was performed for the published papers in PubMed/Medline, Scopus, medRxiv, Embase, and Web of Science (WoS) databases. SARS-CoV-2 infection pooled incidence in the cancer populations and the risk ratio (RR) of ICU admission rates/mortality in cancer and non-cancer groups, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were calculated using the random-effects model.

Results

A total of 58 studies, involving 709,908 participants and 31,732 cancer patients, were included in this study. The incidence in cancer patients was calculated as 8% (95% CI: 8–9%). Analysis results showed that mortality and ICU admission rate was significantly higher in patients with cancer (RR = 2.26, 95% CI: 1.94–2.62, P < 0.001; RR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.28–1.64, p < 0.001, respectively).

Conclusion

As a result, cancer was an important comorbidity and risk factor for all SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. This infection could result in severe and even fatal events in cancer patients. Cancer is associated with a poor prognosis in the COVID-19 pandemic. Cancer patients should be assessed more sensitively in the COVID-19 outbreak.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00432-022-04191-y.

COVID-19 vaccines in patients with decompensated cirrhosis: a retrospective cohort on safety data and risk factors associated with unvaccinated status

Background

Safety data reported from the large-scale clinical trials of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine are extremely limited in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. The vaccination campaign in this specific population could be difficult due to uncertainty about the adverse events following vaccination. We aimed to assessed the COVID-19 vaccination rate, factors associated with unvaccinated status, and the adverse events following vaccination in patients with decompensated cirrhosis.

Methods

This is a retrospective study from Ruijin Hospial (Shanghai, China) on an ongoing prospective cohort designed for long-term survival analysis of decompensated cirrhotic patients who recovered from decompensating events or acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) between 2016 and 2018. We assessed the COVID-19 vaccination rate, the number of doses, type of vaccine, safety data, patient-reported reasons for remaining unvaccinated, factors associated with unvaccinated status, and the adverse events of COVID-19 vaccine. Binary logistic regression was used for identifying factors associated with unvaccinated status.

Results

A total of 229 patients with decompensated cirrhosis without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection participated (mean age, 56 ± 12.2 years, 75% male, 65% viral-related cirrhosis). Mode of decompensation were grade II‒III ascites (82.5%), gastroesophageal varices bleeding (7.9%), hepatic encephalopathy (7.9%). Eighty-five participants (37.1%) received at least one dose of vaccination (1 dose: n = 1, 2 doses: n = 65, 3 doses: n = 19) while 62.9% remained unvaccinated. Patient-reported reasons for remaining unvaccinated were mainly fear of adverse events (37.5%) and lack of positive advice from healthcare providers (52.1%). The experience of hepatic encephalopathy (OR = 5.61, 95% CI: 1.24–25.4) or ACLF (OR = 3.13, 95% CI: 1.12–8.69) and post-liver transplantation status (OR = 2.47, 95% CI: 1.06–5.76) were risk factors of remaining unvaccinated independent of residential areas. The safety analysis demonstrated that 75.3% had no adverse events, 23.6% had non-severe reactions (20% injection-site pain, 1.2% fatigue, 2.4% rash) and 1.2% had a severe event (development of acute decompensation requiring hospitalization).

Conclusions

Patients with decompensated cirrhosis in eastern China are largely remained at unvaccinated status, particularly those with previous episodes of ACLF or hepatic encephalopathy and liver transplantation recipients. Vaccination against COVID-19 in this population is safe.

Graphical Abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40249-022-00982-0.

Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of COVID-19 in 1290 New Cancer Patients: Single-center, Prospective Cohort Study from Iran

OBJECTIVE

To determine the clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 in a large cohort of new cancer patients referred to an oncology clinic in the north of Iran.

METHODS

During the 20-months COVID-19 pandemic, new cancer patients were followed-up. Demographic, pathologic, and clinical variables were collected for each patient. COVID-19 was confirmed based on a positive polymerase chain reaction test. Analyses were performed using the STATA version 14.0 at a significance level of 0.05.

RESULTS

In this study, 1294 new cancer patients were followed for 24 months (mean age: 58.7 years [range 10 to 95]). During the study period, COVID-19 was diagnosed in 9.4% of the patients with hospitalization rate of 3.4%, an ICU admission rate of 0.7%, and COVID-19 mortality rate of 4.9%. Hematological malignancies (OR_U= 2.6, CI95% 1.28- 5.34), receiving palliative treatments (OR_A=3.03, CI95% 1.6-5.45) and receiving radiotherapy (OR_A=2.07, 1.17-3.65) were the most common predictive factors of COVID infection in cancer patients. Also, the COVID mortality was higher in brain cancer patients (P = 0.07), metastatic disease (P = 0.01) and patients receiving palliative treatments (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

In patients suffering from cancer, COVID-19 infection can be predicted by cancer type, palliative care, and radiotherapy in cancer patients. Furthermore, brain cancers, metastasis, and palliative care were all associated with COVID-19 related mortality.

COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients With Malignancy; A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety

Background

Data on the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with malignancy are immature. In this paper, we assessed the literature involving the use of COVID-19 vaccines in cancer patients and reported the seroconversion rates as the main outcome and severity of COVID-19 infection and side effects following COVID-19 vaccination as the secondary outcomes.

Methods

A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. Searches were conducted in electronic websites, databases, and journals, including Scopus, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from January 01, 2019, to November 30, 2021. Studies reporting data on the safety and efficacy of COVID vaccine in cancer patients using any human samples were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the NEWCASTLE-OTTAWA scale in the included studies.

Results

A total of 724 articles were identified from databases, out of which 201 articles were duplicates and were discarded. Subsequently, 454 articles were excluded through initial screening of the titles and abstracts. Moreover, 41 studies did not report the precise seroconversion rate either based on the type of cancer or after injection of a second dose of COVID vaccine. Finally, 28 articles met all the inclusion criteria and were included in this systematic review. The overall seroconversion rates after receiving a second dose of COVID-19 vaccine, based on type of cancer were 88% (95% CI, 81%-92%) and 70% (95% CI, 60%-79%) in patients with solid tumors and hematologic malignancies, respectively.

Conclusion

Overall, we conclude that vaccination against COVID-19 in patients with active malignancies using activated and inactivated vaccines is a safe and tolerable procedure that is also accompanied by a high efficacy.

COVID-19 Infections in Cancer Patients Were Frequently Asymptomatic: Description From a French Prospective Multicenter Cohort (PAPESCO-19)

Background

Cancer patients (CPs) are considered more vulnerable and as a high mortality group regarding COVID-19. In this analysis, we aimed to describe asymptomatic COVID (+) CPs and associated factors.

Methods

We conducted a prospective study in CPs and health care workers (HCWs) in 4 French cancer centers (PAPESCO [PAtients et PErsonnels de Santé des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer pendant l'épidémie de COvid-19] study). This analysis used data recorded between June 17, 2020 and November 30, 2020 in CPs (first 2 waves, no variants). At inclusion and quarterly, CPs reported the presence of predefined COVID-19 symptoms and had a blood rapid diagnostic test; a reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) was done in case of suspected infection.

Results

A total 878 CPs were included; COVID-19 prevalence was similar in both CPs (8%) and HCWs (9.5%); of the 70 CPs (8%) who were COVID (+), 29 (41.4%) were and remained asymptomatic; 241/808 of the COVID (-) (29.8%) were symptomatic. 18 COVID (+) were hospitalized (2% of CPs), 1 in intensive care unit (ICU) and 1 died (0.1% of CPs and 2.4% of symptomatic COVID [+] CPs). Only the inclusion center was associated with clinical presentation (in Nancy, Angers, Nantes, and Clermont-Ferrand: 65.4%, 35%, 28.6%, and 10% CPs were asymptomatic, respectively).

Conclusions

Seroprevalence of COVID-19 in CPs was similar to that observed in HCWs; mortality related to COVID-19 among CPs was 0.1%. More than 40% of COVID (+) CPs were asymptomatic and one third of COVID (-) CPs had symptoms. Only geographic origin was associated with the presence or absence of symptoms. Social distancing and protective measures must be applied in CPs at home and when hospitalized.

Clinical Characteristics and Risk Factors of COVID-19 in 60 Adult Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

During the pandemic of COVID-19, cancer patients have been considered as one high-risk group in the morbidity and mortality of COVID-19. This study aimed to describe the clinical symptoms and risk factors of COVID-19 in cancer patients.

METHOD

In a prospective cross-sectional study, during a year, all cancer patients who underwent chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy in our clinic (Kermanshah, Iran) were followed up in terms of getting COVID-19. We analyzed the effect of tumor features and demographic information on clinical manifestations, survival status, therapeutic outcomes, and severity of the disease COVID-19 in 2 categories of cancer (hematologic and solid cancers).

RESULTS

Most of the patients (68%) were in the solid tumor category, including breast cancer (24.4%), colon cancer (22%), and gastric cancer (9.8%). There was a statistically significant difference between 2 categories of cancer in the clinical manifestations: the stage of cancer and survival status (P < .05). Logistic regression analysis showed that the risk of death in cancer patients with COVID-19 along with symptoms of diarrhea (odds ratio [OR] = 12.8, P = .004), the difficulty of breath (OR = 10.73, P = .034), drop of SO2 (OR = 1.334, P = .003), thrombocytopenia (OR = 1.022, P = .02), anemia (OR = 2.72, P = .011), requiring mechanical ventilation (OR = 9.24, P = .004), pleural infusion (OR = 10.28, P = .02), and intensive care unit (ICU) admission (OR = 7.389, P = .009) increases independent of other variables. The COVID-19 mortality rate in our cancer patients was 23%.

CONCLUSIONS

Thrombocytopenia, anemia, and diarrhea are symptoms that, along with common symptoms such as lung involvement, difficulty breathing, and the need for a ventilator, increase the risk of death in cancer patients with COVID-19.

A Cohort Study on the Immunogenicity and Safety of the Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine (BBIBP-CorV) in Patients With Breast Cancer; Does Trastuzumab Interfere With the Outcome?

AIM

To determine the efficacy and safety of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (BBIBP-CorV) in patients with breast cancer.

METHODS

In this multi- institutional cohort study, a total of 160 breast cancer patients (mean age of 50.01 ± 11.5 years old) were assessed for the SARS-CoV-2 Anti-Spike IgG and SARS-CoV2 Anti RBD IgG by ELISA after two doses of 0.5 mL inactivated, COVID-19 vaccine (BBIBP-CorV). All patients were followed up for three months for clinical COVID-19 infection based on either PCR results or imaging findings. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events were used to assess the side effects.

RESULTS

The presence of SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG, SARS-CoV2 anti-RBD IgG, or either of these antibodies was 85.7%, 87.4%, and 93.3%. The prevalence of COVID-19 infection after vaccination was 0.7%, 0% and 0% for the first, second and third months of the follow-up period. The most common local and systemic side-effects were injection site pain and fever which were presented in 22.3% and 24.3% of patients, respectively.

DISCUSSION

The inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (BBIBP-CorV) is a tolerable and effective method to prevent COVID-19.

Psychosomatic Symptoms in Terminally Ill Cancer Patients and Its Relation With Using Complementary and Alternative Medicines: A Cross-Sectional Study in Southeast Iran

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients face various problems and complications, which they address through various complementary and alternative medicines (CAM). The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between CAM and psychosomatic symptoms in terminally ill cancer patients.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was performed on 221 terminally ill cancer patients (based on metastatic stage and according to the physicin diagnosis) in southeastern Iran. Convenience sampling was used to select terminally ill cancer patients. Using questionnaires like the demographic and clinical information questionnaire, Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), CAM questionnaire and satisfaction with the use of CAM, the researcher was able to compile a comprehensive picture of the population.

RESULTS

The mean age of the participants was 51.66 ± 13.34 years. The majority of the samples were female, married, educated, and unemployed. The mean score for the physical symptoms of the participants according to ESAS was 22.25 ± 17.57 which was less than the midpoint of the scale (the possible score of ESAS was 0-100). Only 2.7% (n = 6) and 0.9% (n = 2) of the participants had mild and moderate anxiety, respectively, and the other participants' anxiety levels were normal. Only 7.7% (n = 17) and 4.1% (n = 9) of the participants had mild and moderate depression, respectively, and the other participants' depression levels were normal. Last year, 87.3% of the participants used at least one type of CAM. Aside from prayer, 42.1% of the participants used at least one type of CAM in the last year. Prayer was used by 83.7% of the participants, medicinal plants by 35.8%, massage by 9.5%, dietary supplements by 3.6%, wet cupping by 3.2%, relaxation and meditation by 2.7%, dry cupping by 2.4%, and acupuncture by 0.5%. The common reason for using CAM was to reduce the stress and anxiety caused by cancer and to treat it. There were no significant differences in physical and psychological symptoms between the CAM-users and non-CAM users.

CONCLUSION

Patients with cancer have a relatively low level of psychosomatic symptoms, and the primary reason for using CAM was to relieve stress and anxiety associated with cancer and treat it. However, psychosomatic symptoms were the same for CAM and non-CAM users. Because so many people with cancer use CAM, future studies should look into why and how CAM is used.

Routine COVID-19 testing may not be necessary for most cancer patients

Cancer patients are at risk for severe complications or death from COVID-19 infection. Therefore, the need for routine COVID-19 testing in this population was evaluated. Between 1st August and 30th October 2020, 150 cancer patients were included. Symptoms of COVID-19 infection were evaluated. All eligible individuals went through RT-PCR and serological tests for COVID-19. At the same time, 920 non-cancer patients were recruited from a random sample of individuals who were subject to routine molecular and anti-body screening tests. Of 150 cancer patients, 7 (4.7%) were RT-PCR positive. Comorbidity made a significant difference in the RT-PCR positivity of cancer patients, 71.4% positive versus 25.8% negative (P-value = 0.02). The average age for negative and positive groups was 53.3 and 58.2 respectively (P-value = 0.01). No significant difference was observed between cancer and non-cancer patients regarding COVID-19 antibody tests. However, cancer patients were 3 times less likely to have a positive RT-PCR test result OR = 0.33 (CI: 0.15–0.73). The probability of cancer patients having a positive routine test was significantly lower than non-cancer patients, and the concept that all cancer patients should be routinely tested for COVID-19 may be incorrect. Nevertheless, there may be a subgroup of patients with comorbidities or older age who may benefit from routine COVID-19 testing. Importantly, these results could not be subjected to multivariate analysis.

Massive pericardial effusion as the first manifestation of childhood non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: A case report

Although one of the serious manifestations of advanced malignancies is pericardial involvement, pericardial involvement of lymphoma is extremely rare. We present a case of a 6-year-old girl arriving at the hospital with dyspnea and pleuritic chest pain, which is eventually diagnosed with massive pericardial effusion due to mediastinal non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Immunogenicity and Safety of the Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine (BBIBP-CorV) in Patients with Malignancy

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of the inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in cancer patients.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

364 cancer patients who received two doses of vaccine were enrolled. The presence of SARS-CoV-2 anti-Spike protein IgG and neutralizing antibody 2 months following vaccination were measured by ELIZA.

RESULTS

Injection site pain and fever were the most common local and systemic side effects. The overall seroconversion rate was 86.9% that was lower in older age, those with hematological malignancies and chemotherapy receivers.

CONCLUSION

The result of study confirmed the safety and short-term efficacy of inactivated vaccine in patients with malignancies.

A case report of mediastinal cavernous hemangioma

When faced with a hypervascular mediastinal tumor, mediastinal hemangioma should be taken into consideration. Although it is uncommon, considering this important diagnosis may avoid a possible extensive surgery that is not necessary.