Oncology patients' perceptions of and experiences with COVID-19

Risk factors and health behaviors associated with loneliness among cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic

Loneliness may exacerbate poor health outcomes particularly among cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Little is known about the risk factors of loneliness among cancer survivors. We evaluated the risk factors of loneliness in the context of COVID-19 pandemic-related prevention behaviors and lifestyle/psychosocial factors among cancer survivors. Cancer survivors (n = 1471) seen at Huntsman Cancer Institute completed a survey between August-September 2020 evaluating health behaviors, medical care, and psychosocial factors including loneliness during COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were classified into two groups: 'lonely' (sometimes, usually, or always felt lonely in past month) and 'non-lonely' (never or rarely felt lonely in past month). 33% of cancer survivors reported feeling lonely in the past month. Multivariable logistic regression showed female sex, not living with a spouse/partner, poor health status, COVID-19 pandemic-associated lifestyle factors including increased alcohol consumption and marijuana/CBD oil use, and psychosocial stressors such as disruptions in daily life, less social interaction, and higher perceived stress and financial stress were associated with feeling lonely as compared to being non-lonely (all p < 0.05). A significant proportion of participants reported loneliness, which is a serious health risk among vulnerable populations, particularly cancer survivors. Modifiable risk factors such as unhealthy lifestyle behaviors and psychosocial stress were associated with loneliness. These results highlight the need to screen for unhealthy lifestyle factors and psychosocial stressors to identify cancer survivors at increased risk of loneliness and to develop effective management strategies.

Impact of Emergency Situations on the Level of Fear and Anxiety in Oncology Patients During Radiotherapy in a Developing Country

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the level of fear and anxiety related to radiotherapy in oncology patients treated before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as to examine whether the advancement of radiotherapy centers leads to any reduction in the patient's fear in emergency situations.

METHODS

Two cross-sectional studies were conducted in two time frames (2016 and 2022) based on the analysis of the intensity of anxiety and fear of radiotherapy in oncology patients with assistance. A questionnaire for assessing fear of radiotherapy in oncology patients and Zung's and Beck's self-reported anxiety scales were used. The first part of the research integrated all data of research interest obtained from patients treated with radiotherapy during 2016, and the second cross-sectional study included all patients treated in 2022 during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study was prepared according to the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) checklist.

RESULTS

The first cross-sectional study had 154 participants who had been treated with radiotherapy, while in the second study, there were 159 patients. Patients treated in 2022 show significantly higher levels of fear and anxiety. External beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy simultaneously used in both studies increased the level of fear and anxiety.

CONCLUSION

 The conducted research showed exceptional differences in the intensity of fear and anxiety in patients treated with radiotherapy in different health situations, as was the case during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a significant impact on the stability of the health system and the challenges to providing standard services.

Losing a part of life: experiences of cancer survivors accessing treatment and sheltering in place during the COVID-19 pandemic

PURPOSE

To explore experiences of sheltering in place and accessing treatment during the initial stages of the COVID-19 pandemic among survivors with cancer receiving tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy.

METHODS

Participants from two pilot studies evaluating TKI therapy use in the Southeastern United States during the start of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020) were interviewed. Identical interview guides were used across both studies to assess participants' experiences accessing cancer treatment, sheltering in place, and coping during the COVID-19 pandemic. Digitally recorded sessions were transcribed professionally and checked for accuracy. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize participant sociodemographics, and a six-step thematic approach was used to analyze interview data and identify salient themes. Dedoose qualitative research software was used to manage and organize qualitative codes, themes, and memos.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 15) ranged from 43 to 84 years of age, and were mostly female (53.3%), married (60%), and survivors with hematologic malignancies (86.7%). The research team identified five salient themes: Participants followed pandemic guidelines, Variable impact on well-being, Common feelings of fear, anxiety and anger, No barriers to accessing therapy and medical care, and Faith and God as powerful forces for coping.

CONCLUSIONS

The conclusions of the study provide several implications for survivorship programs or clinics for supporting survivors who are taking chronic TKI therapy during COVID-19, including enhancement of current psychosocial support efforts for cancer survivors or development of new programs tailored to the unique needs of a survivor during a pandemic, such as focused coping strategies, modified physical activity programs, family/professional role changes, and access to safe public spaces.

Psychological and psychosocial determinants of COVID Health Related Behaviours (COHeRe): An evidence and gap map

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, has resulted in illness, deaths and societal disruption on a global scale. Societies have implemented various control measures to reduce transmission of the virus and mitigate its impact. Individual behavioural changes are crucial to the successful implementation of these measures. Common recommended measures to limit risk of infection include frequent handwashing, reducing the frequency of social interactions and the use of face coverings. It is important to identify those factors that can predict the uptake and maintenance of these protective behaviours.

Objectives

We aimed to identify and map the existing evidence (published and unpublished) on psychological and psychosocial factors that determine uptake and adherence to behaviours aimed at reducing the risk of infection or transmission of COVID-19.

Search Methods

Our extensive search included electronic databases (n = 12), web searches, conference proceedings, government reports, other repositories including both published peer reviewed, pre-prints and grey literature. The search strategy was built around three concepts of interest including (1) context (terms relating to COVID-19), (2) behaviours of interest and (3) terms related to psychological and psychosocial determinants of COVID Health-Related Behaviours and adherence or compliance with recommended behaviours, to capture both malleable and non-malleable determinants (i.e. determinants that could be changed and those that could not).

Selection Criteria

This Evidence and Gap Map (EGM) includes all types of studies examining determinants of common recommended behaviours aimed at mitigating human-to-human spread of COVID-19. All potential malleable and non-malleable determinants of one or more behaviours are included in the map. As part of the mapping process, categories are used to group determinants. The mapping categories were based on a previous rapid review by Hanratty 2021. These include: 'behaviour', 'cognition', 'demographics', 'disease', 'emotions', 'health status', 'information', 'intervention', and 'knowledge'. Those not suitable for categorisation in any of these groups are included in the map as 'other' determinants.

Data Collection and Analysis

Results were imported to a bibliographic reference manager where duplications of identical studies gathered from multiple sources were removed. Data extraction procedures were managed in EPPI-Reviewer software. Information on study type, population, behaviours measured and determinants measured were extracted. We appraised the methodological quality of systematic reviews with AMSTAR-2. We did not appraise the quality of primary studies in this map.

Main Results

As of 1 June 2022 the EGM includes 1034 records reporting on 860 cross-sectional, 68 longitudinal, 78 qualitative, 25 reviews, 62 interventional, and 39 other studies (e.g., mixed-methods approaches). The map includes studies that measured social distancing (n = 487), masks and face coverings (n = 382), handwashing (n = 308), physical distancing (n = 177), isolation/quarantine (n = 157), respiratory hygiene/etiquette (n = 75), cleaning surfaces (n = 59), and avoiding touching the T-zone (n = 48). There were 333 studies that assessed composite measures of two or more behaviours. The largest cluster of determinants was 'demographics' (n = 730 studies), followed by 'cognition' (n = 496 studies) and determinants categorised as 'other' (n = 447). These included factors such as 'beliefs', 'culture' and 'access to resources'. Less evidence is available for some determinants such as 'interventions' (n = 99 studies), 'information' (n = 101 studies), and 'behaviour' (149 studies).

Authors' Conclusions

This EGM provides a valuable resource for researchers, policy-makers and the public to access the available evidence on the determinants of various COVID-19 health-related behaviours. The map can also be used to help guide research commissioning, by evidence synthesis teams and evidence intermediaries to inform policy during the ongoing pandemic and potential future outbreaks of COVID-19 or other respiratory infections. Evidence included in the map will be explored further through a series of systematic reviews examining the strength of the associations between malleable determinants and the uptake and maintenance of individual protective behaviours.

Measuring symptom burden in patients with cancer during a pandemic: the MD Anderson symptom inventory for COVID-19 (MDASI-COVID)

BACKGROUND

Symptom expression in SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) may affect patients already symptomatic with cancer. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can describe symptom burden during the acute and postacute stages of COVID-19 and support risk stratification for levels of care. At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, our purpose was to rapidly develop, launch through an electronic patient portal, and provide initial validation for a PRO measure of COVID-19 symptom burden in patients with cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a CDC/WHO web-based scan for COVID-19 symptoms and a relevance review of symptoms by an expert panel of clinicians treating cancer patients with COVID-19 to create a provisional MD Anderson Symptom Inventory for COVID-19 (MDASI-COVID). English-speaking adults with cancer who tested positive for COVID-19 participated in the psychometric testing phase. Patients completed longitudinal assessments of the MDASI-COVID and the EuroQOL 5 Dimensions 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) utility index and visual analog scale, which were presented through an electronic health record patient portal. To test the validity of the MDASI-COVID to distinguish between known groups of patients, we hypothesized that patients hospitalized, including having a hospitalization extended, for COVID-19 versus those not hospitalized would experience higher symptom burden. Correlation of mean symptom severity and interference scores with relevant EQ-5D-5L scores tested concurrent validity. The reliability of the MDASI-COVID was evaluated by calculating Cronbach alpha coefficients and test-retest reliability was evaluated by calculating Pearson correlation coefficients between the initial assessment and a second assessment no more than 14 days later.

RESULTS

The web-based scan found 31 COVID-19-related symptoms; rankings of a 14-clinician expert panel reduced this list to 11 COVID-specific items to be added to the core MDASI. Time from literature scan start in March 2020 to instrument launch in May 2020 was 2 months. Psychometric analysis established the MDASI-COVID's reliability, known-group validity, and concurrent validity.

CONCLUSIONS

We were able to rapidly develop and electronically launch a PRO measure of COVID-19 symptom burden in patients with cancer. Additional research is needed to confirm the content domain and predictive validity of the MDASI-COVID and define the symptom burden trajectory of COVID-19.

Exploring key-stakeholder perceptions on non-communicable disease care during the COVID-19 pandemic in Kenya

Introduction

over one third of total Disability-Adjusted-Life-Years lost in Kenya are due to non-communicable diseases (NCD). In response, the Government declared significant commitment towards improving NCD care. The COVID-19 pandemic increased the burden on the already overstretched health systems in Kenya. The aims of this study are to assess whether health care providers perceived NCD care to be optimal during the pandemic and explore how to improve responses to future emergencies.

Methods

this cross-sectional online survey included healthcare personnel with non-clinical roles (public health workers and policy-makers) and those delivering health care (doctors and nurses). Respondents were recruited between May and September 2021 by random sampling, completed by snowball sampling.

Results

among 236 participants (42% in clinical, 58% in non-clinical roles) there was an overall consensus between respondents on NCD care being disrupted and compromised during the pandemic in Kenya. Detracted supplies, funding, and technical resources affected the continuity of NCDs' response, despite government efforts. Respondents agreed that the enhanced personnel capacity and competencies to manage COVID-19 patients were positive, but noted a lack of guidance for redirecting care for chronic diseases, and advocated for digital innovation as a solution.

Conclusion

this paper explores the perceptions of key stakeholders involved in the management of NCDs in Kenya to improve planning for future emergency responses. Gaps were identified in health system response and preparedness capacity during the pandemic including the perceived need to strengthen NCD services, with solutions offered to guide resilience efforts to protect the health system from disruption.

Experiences of cancer care in COVID-19: A longitudinal qualitative study

Purpose

This study aimed to explore the cancer care experiences of people living with and beyond cancer during COVID-19 in Ireland.

Methods

The study adopted a longitudinal qualitative design using semi-structured interviews with sixteen participants. Interviews were undertaken on three occasions over six months (January–June 2021). The National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer (NCCN DT), and Connor-Davidson-Resilience Scale (CD-RISC2) were also used as part of the interviews to measure distress and resilience. Thematic analysis of interview data was conducted and participants' self-rating for distress and resilience was analysed using descriptive statistics.

Results

Sixteen patients participated. The findings revealed participants' constant fear of COVID-19 over time and efforts to stay safe by following the ‘rules’. Isolation was a common experience as COVID-19 restrictions resulted in being alone when attending the hospital for treatment and limited support from family and friends. Telephone follow-up was limited in terms of support and patients' opportunity to ask questions. For a minority, COVID-19 restrictions meant they were ‘not missing out’. On average, participants reported moderate to high levels of resilience at all time points. Distress scores were low but trended upwards from T1 to T2.

Conclusions

The findings highlight the need to avoid restrictions on carers accompanying their close relatives to the hospital for treatment. An evaluation of the effects of the rapid introduction of telephone follow-up on patient outcomes is warranted.

The effect of COVID-19 on breast cancer care and treatment in North America: A scoping review

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

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.

The needs of cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic-psychosocial, ethical and spiritual aspects-systematic review

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in unprecedented changes in the functioning of the health care system, which were connected with the occurrence of new challenges for both the health care system's employees and for the patients. The purpose of the present article is to analyze the needs of persons with oncological diseases. Taking into account the multiple aspects of the term health, psychological, social, and existential needs of the patients were analyzed. This article is directed mainly at persons who remain in a direct therapeutic relation with a patient. It is to facilitate recognizing the needs of ill people and to increase sensitivity to the issue of maintaining or improving the well-being of patients which requires paying special attention to their psychological, social, and existential needs during the period of hindered access to the health care system. This systematic review takes advantage of quantitative and qualitative methods of text analysis with phenomenological analysis factored in. The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in the appearance of new problems in the population of oncological patients or it made the existing problems more severe. As a consequence, it made it significantly more difficult to meet their needs on various levels and sometimes it even made it impossible. It seems necessary to determine and introduce strategies to ensure that patients with oncological diseases have access to psychological and spiritual support in the period of the pandemic.

Pandemic impact on patients with advanced non-COVID-19 illness and their family carers receiving specialised palliative home care: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the experiential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with non-COVID, life-threatening disease and their family carers.

DESIGN

An interpretative qualitative design informed by phenomenological hermeneutics and based on data from in-depth interviews, performed between June and September 2020.

SETTING

Patients receiving specialised palliative home care and their family carers living in Sweden.

PARTICIPANTS

22 patients (male/female 11/11) and 17 carers (male/female 5/12) aged 50 years and older. All the patients received specialised palliative home care and most were diagnosed with cancer.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

aged 18 years or older, diagnosed with an incurable life-threatening, non-COVID disease, sufficient strength to participate and capacity to provide informed consent. Participants were selected through a combination of convenient and consecutive sampling.

RESULTS

The significance of the pandemic for both patients and carers showed a continuum from being minimally affected in comparison to the severe underlying disease to living in isolation with constant fear of becoming infected and falling ill with COVID-19, which some likened to torture.The imposed restrictions on social contact due to the pandemic were particularly palpable for this group of people with a non-COVID-19, life-limiting condition, as it was said to steal valuable moments of time that had already been measured.Most patients and carers found access to specialised palliative home care was maintained despite the pandemic. This care was of paramount importance for their sense of security and was often their sole visiting social contact.

CONCLUSIONS

In the pandemic situation, highly accessible support from healthcare and social care at home is particularly important to create security for both patients and carers. Thus, to provide appropriate support, it is important for healthcare and social care personnel to be aware of the great diversity of reactions patients in palliative care and their carers may have to a pandemic threat.

Patient knowledge, personal experience, and impact of the first wave of the COVD-19 pandemic in an Irish oncology cohort

Background

Oncology patients have had to make many changes to minimise their exposure to COVID-19, causing stress. Despite education, some patients still do not recognise potential COVID symptoms.

Aims

We assessed patient knowledge of COVID, and its impact on their behaviours, concerns, and healthcare experience.

Methods

A 16-page questionnaire was distributed to 120 oncology patients attending the day unit of a tertiary Irish cancer centre for systemic anti-cancer therapy (May/June 2020). The Irish 7-day COVID incidence during this period ranged from 2 to 11 cases/100,000 people.

Results

One hundred and one responses were received, 1% had tested positive for COVID, and 31% had undergone testing. Participant insight into their knowledge about COVID and their own behaviour was limited in some cases. Seventy-five percent reported total compliance with restrictions, but many were not fully compliant. Self-reported confidence in knowledge was high, but did not predict demonstrated knowledge. Sixty percent did not recognise two or more symptoms; 40% did not self-identify as high-risk. Patients reported more health-related worry (72%), loneliness (51%), and lower mood (42%) since the pandemic began. Financial toxicity worsened, with increased financial worry (78%), reductions in household income (40%), and increased costs due to lockdown (62%). Use of facemasks introduced new communications barriers for 67% of those with hearing loss.

Conclusions

Despite self-reported confidence in knowledge, some patient’s recognition of COVID symptoms and the preventative strategies they should use are not optimal, highlighting the need for further education in this regard. COVID has been a significant stressor for patients and more practical, financial, and psychological supports are needed.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11845-022-02999-8.

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

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

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on rural and urban cancer patients' experiences, health behaviors, and perceptions

Purpose

The COVID‐19 pandemic has disrupted many facets of life. We evaluated pandemic‐related health care experiences, COVID‐19 prevention behaviors and measures, health behaviors, and psychosocial outcomes among rural and urban cancer patients.

Methods

Among 1,472 adult cancer patients, who visited Huntsman Cancer Institute in the past 4 years and completed a COVID‐19 survey (August‐September 2020), we assessed the impact of the pandemic on medical appointments, prevention/health behaviors, and psychosocial factors, stratified by urbanicity.

Findings

Mean age was 61 years, with 52% female, 97% non‐Hispanic White, and 27% were residing in rural areas. Rural versus urban patients were more likely to be older, not employed, uninsured, former/current smokers, consume alcohol, and have pandemic‐related changes/cancellations in surgery appointments (all P<.05). Changes/cancellations in other health care access (eg, doctor's visits) were also common, particularly among urban patients. Urban versus rural patients were more likely to socially distance, use masks and hand sanitizer, and experience changes in exercise habits and in their daily lives (all P<.05). Less social interaction and financial stress were common among cancer patients but did not differ by urbanicity.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that the COVID‐19 pandemic had a substantial impact on cancer patients, with several challenges specific to rural patients. This comprehensive study provides unique insights into the first 6 months of COVID‐19 pandemic‐related experiences and continuity of care among rural and urban cancer patients predominantly from Utah. Further research is needed to better characterize the pandemic's short‐ and long‐term effects on rural and urban cancer patients and appropriate interventions.

OUP accepted manuscript

CoronaVirus disease-2019 has changed the delivery of health care worldwide and the pandemic has challenged oncologists to reorganize cancer care. Recently, progress has been made in the field of precision medicine to provide to patients with cancer the best therapeutic choice for their individual needs. In this context, the Foundation Medicine (FMI)-Liquid@Home project has emerged as a key weapon to deal with the new pandemic situation. FoundationOne Liquid Assay (F1L) is a next-generation sequences-based liquid biopsy service, able to detect 324 molecular alterations and genomic signatures, from May 2020 available at patients’ home (FMI-Liquid@Home). We analyzed time and costs saving for patients with cancer, their caregivers and National Healthcare System (NHS) with FMI-Liquid@Home versus F1L performed at our Department. Different variables have been evaluated. Between May 2020 and August 2021, 218 FMI-Liquid@Home were performed for patients with cancer in Italy. Among these, our Department performed 153 FMI-Liquid@Home with the success rate of 98% (vs. 95% for F1L in the hospital). Time saving for patients and their caregivers was 494.86 and 427.36 hours, respectively, and costs saving was 13 548.70€. Moreover, for working people these savings were 1084.71 hours and 31 239.65€, respectively. In addition, the total gain for the hospital was 163.5 hours and 6785€, whereas for NHS was 1084.71 hours and 51 573.60€, respectively. FMI-Liquid@Home service appears to be useful and convenient allowing time and costs saving for patients, caregivers, and NHS. Born during the COVID-19 pandemic, it could be integrated in oncological daily routine in the future. Therefore, additional studies are needed to better understand the overall gain and how to integrate this service in different countries.

Thoracic surgery in the COVID-19 era: an Italian university hospital experience

Background

Aims of this study were to assess the results of anti-COVID19 measures applied to maintain thoracic surgery activity at an Italian University institution through a 12-month period and to assess the results as compared with an equivalent non-pandemic time span.

Methods

Data and results of 646 patients operated on at the department of Thoracic Surgery of the Tor Vergata University Policlinic in Rome between February 2019 and March 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided in 2 groups: one operated on during the COVID-19 pandemic (pandemic group) and another during the previous non-pandemic 12 months (non-pandemic group). Primary outcome measure was COVID-19 infection-free rate.

Results

Three patients developed mild COVID-19 infection early after surgery resulting in an estimated COVID-19 infection-free rate of 98%. At intergroup comparisons (non-pandemic vs. pandemic group), a greater number of patients was operated before the pandemic (352 vs. 294, p = 0.0013). In addition, a significant greater thoracoscopy/thoracotomy procedures rate was found in the pandemic group (97/151 vs. 82/81, p = 0.02) and the total number of chest drainages (104 vs. 131, p = 0.0001) was higher in the same group. At surgery, tumor size was larger (19.5 ± 13 vs. 28.2 ± 21; p < 0.001) and T3-T4/T1-T2 ratio was higher (16/97 vs. 30/56; p < 0.001) during the pandemic with no difference in mortality and morbidity. In addition, the number of patients lost before treatment was higher in the pandemic group (8 vs. 15; p = 0.01). Finally, in 7 patients admitted for COVID-19 pneumonia, incidental lung (N = 5) or mediastinal (N = 2) tumors were discovered at the chest computed tomography.

Conclusions

Estimated COVID-19 infection free rate was 98% in the COVID-19 pandemic group; there were less surgical procedures, and operated lung tumors had larger size and more advanced stages than in the non-pandemic group. Nonetheless, hospital stay was reduced with comparable mortality and morbidity. Our study results may help implement efficacy of the everyday surgical care.

Cancer Treatment During COVID-19: A Qualitative Analysis of Patient-Perceived Risks and Experiences with Virtual Care

During the COVID-19 pandemic, most cancer centers shifted from in-person to virtual cancer care to curb community spread and ensure care continuity. This qualitative descriptive study aimed to understand cancer patient-perceived risks related to COVID-19 and cancer treatment, as well as the patient-perceived and experienced value of virtual care. From June to August 2020, focus groups were conducted with patients under active management or observation for a diagnosed malignancy in Toronto, Canada. A thematic analysis of six focus groups found that most participants worried more about treatment delays than they did about COVID-19 infection. Despite some concern about COVID-19 exposure in the hospital, care delays contributed to increased anxiety among participants who already subscribed to strict safety measures in their everyday lives. Most participants accepted virtual care for some appointment types; however, preference for in-person care was found to sustain the humanistic and therapeutic aspects of cancer care that many participants valued. Nuances in the appropriateness and adequacy of virtual cancer care still need exploration. Preserving the humanistic aspects of care is of paramount importance.

Readdressing the Needs of Cancer Survivors During COVID-19: A Path Forward

The growing number of cancer survivors and the high prevalence of cancer-related physical and psychosocial effects pose important and pressing challenges to health systems. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to further stressors on cancer survivors and health care systems. As the pandemic continues to have substantial impact on the world, it is critical to focus attention on the health care needs of cancer survivors. In this commentary, we propose an adoption of essential steps that should be part of a continuous adaptive approach to promote effective cancer survivorship care during ongoing COVID-19 waves and beyond.

Creating a Blueprint of Well-Being in Oncology: An Approach for Addressing Burnout From ASCO's Clinician Well-Being Taskforce

Optimizing the well-being of the oncology clinician has never been more important. Well-being is a critical priority for the cancer organization because burnout adversely impacts the quality of care, patient satisfaction, the workforce, and overall practice success. To date, 45% of U.S. ASCO member medical oncologists report experiencing burnout symptoms of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization. As the COVID-19 pandemic remains widespread with periods of outbreaks, recovery, and response with substantial personal and professional consequences for the clinician, it is imperative that the oncologist, team, and organization gain direct access to resources addressing burnout. In response, the Clinician Well-Being Task Force was created to improve the quality, safety, and value of cancer care by enhancing oncology clinician well-being and practice sustainability. Well-being is an integrative concept that characterizes quality of life and encompasses an individual's work- and personal health-related environmental, organizational, and psychosocial factors. These resources can be useful for the cancer organization to develop a well-being blueprint: a detailed start plan with recognized strategies and interventions targeting all oncology stakeholders to support a culture of community in oncology.

Experiences of breast cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study

Purpose

This study aimed to explore the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the quality of life of breast cancer survivors.

Methods

This qualitative descriptive study included 18 breast cancer survivors who completed cancer treatment within the last five years in Istanbul, Turkey. A directed content analysis was performed using the quality-of-life domains as guiding themes.

Results

The mean age was 51 ± 5.9, and the average months since active treatment were 26.5 ± 9.8 (9–48). Six themes and associated categories are as follows: Physical functioning; Changes in physical activity and weight, new physical symptoms, Role functioning; Work-life, changes in household chores, Emotional functioning; Emotional changes, fear of having the COVID-19 infection, Cognitive Functioning; Risk Perception about the COVID-19 infection, reactions to the COVID-19 pandemic’ measures, Social Functioning; Familial relationship changes, social interactions, General Health/Utilization of Healthcare services; Changes in routine follow-ups, changes in diet.

Conclusion

Breast cancer survivors had different challenges causing new physical and psychological symptoms such as lymphedema, pain, burnout, and anxiety that may have long-term effects on their quality of life.

Cancer survivors' perceived vulnerability to COVID-19 and impacts on cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses to the pandemic

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Given the uncertainty COVID-19 has caused for individuals with prior medical conditions, we examined the extent to which cancer survivors consider themselves at risk for the global COVID-19 pandemic (henceforth COVID), both in general and due to their cancer history. Additionally, we evaluated whether perceived vulnerability to COVID among cancer survivors predicts their cognitive/affective and behavioral responses to the pandemic.

DESIGN/SAMPLE

Cancer survivors who completed primary cancer treatment (median months since treatment = 33.00) and were enrolled in prior behavioral trials with our research team (N = 146) completed two surveys in May-July 2020 (95.89% retention).

METHODS

Participants rated perceived next-year risk of infection and of dying from COVID. We adapted established scales to assess perceived vulnerability to COVID generally versus as a cancer survivor, catastrophizing about possible COVID symptoms, COVID-related contamination fears, and adherence to COVID prevention behaviors.

FINDINGS

In May 2020, on a 1-100 scale with 0 = no chance and 100 = definitely will occur, cancer survivors reported a chance in the next year of contracting COVID of M = 39.94 (SD = 23.90), and dying from COVID of M = 24.46 (SD = 24.84). Cancer survivors reported somewhat greater vulnerability to COVID compared to same-aged peers, increased contamination fears, and high adherence to COVID prevention measures. Similar findings emerged six weeks later, suggesting stability over time. In simple linear regression models, both general and cancer survivor-specific perceived COVID vulnerability predicted COVID symptom catastrophizing and contamination fears; in multivariable models, only general vulnerability remained a significant predictor. General perceived vulnerability and contamination fears predicted greater adherence to COVID prevention behaviors.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer survivors perceived elevated vulnerability to COVID even years after treatment, which predicted adherence to COVID prevention behaviors. Future research should identify the optimal balance between supporting cancer survivors' concerns and minimizing negative impacts on quality of life.

Satisfaction among Cancer Patients Undergoing Radiotherapy during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Institutional Experience

The COVID-19 pandemic has shifted oncology practices to prioritize patient safety while maintaining necessary treatment delivery. We obtained patient feedback on pandemic-based practices in our radiotherapy department to improve quality of patient care and amend policies as needed. We developed a piloted questionnaire which quantitatively and qualitatively assessed patients’ pandemic-related concerns and satisfaction with specific elements of their care. Adult patients who were treated at our Centre between 23 March and 31 May 2020, had initial consultation via telemedicine, and received at least five outpatient fractions of radiotherapy were invited to complete the survey by telephone or online. Relative frequencies of categorical and ordinal responses were then calculated. Fifty-three (48%) out of 110 eligible patients responded: 32 patients by phone and 21 patients online. Eighteen participants (34%) admitted to feeling anxious about hospital appointments, and only five (9%) reported treatment delays. Forty-eight patients (91%) reported satisfaction with their initial telemedicine appointment. The majority of patients indicated that healthcare workers took appropriate precautions, making them feel safe. Overall, all 53 patients (100%) reported being satisfied with their treatment experience during the pandemic. Patient feedback is needed to provide the highest quality of patient care as we adapt to the current reality.