Covid-19 and radiotherapy: a systematic review after 2 years of pandemic

Lessons learned from the experiences of newly qualified therapeutic radiography students who transitioned to work during the Covid-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

The Covid-19 pandemic raised profound questions regarding healthcare values and responsibility for managing collective and individual needs. This context presents a unique opportunity to explore the experiences of newly qualified therapeutic radiographers transitioning to work.

METHOD

An interpretivist qualitative design used one-to-one, semi-structured interviews. Questions based on previous findings and person-environment congruence theory focussed on how the reality of transition compared to expectations and the feelings and attitudes this transition generated. Data analysis used a thematic framework approach.

RESULTS

Eleven participants had worked as new Band 5 therapeutic radiographers for at least 12 months in English and Welsh departments. Three related themes were: the transitional state (the psychological nature of transition); professional socialisation (integration was co-constructed by the individual and department, with some conflict evident between the needs of the two parties); motivation (data described a u-shaped arc in level of motivation towards learning, encompassing early aspiration, turning to apathy and then anticipation of new beginnings.) CONCLUSION: Whilst a person's motivation relates to the extent that their expectations are met regarding the pace of professional development, preceptorship packages should support the psychological aspect of transition as much as external indicators such as competencies. Recognition of new registrants' individual skills and aptitudes at an organisational level is key to supporting integration.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The pandemic could be seen as an extreme way to reduce a complex multifactorial transitional event to its constituent parts. Personalised one-to-one mentorship is likely to be the optimal way to support psychological aspects of transition for all preceptees. Senior teams can foster compassionate leadership that enables the sense of having a contributing role within the organisation, which recognises individual skills and aptitudes.

Treatment of oropharyngeal cancer during the COVID-19 lockdown - outcomes for patients treated during the pandemic

Background

The onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak caused major interruptions to the entire healthcare network affecting referral, diagnosis and treatment pathways with the potential to affect cancer treatment outcomes. In Ireland a national lockdown was initiated in March 2020 involving a stay-at-home order with a limitation on travel, social interactions and closure of schools, universities and childcare facilities. We designed a retrospective study comparing treatment outcomes for patients with oropharyngeal cancer treated before and during the COVID pandemic.

Materials and methods

All patients receiving radical radiotherapy for oropharyngeal cancer pre-COVID (July 17 - July 18) and during COVID (Mar 20 - Mar 21) were included. Patient and disease characteristics, diagnostic timelines, treatment delays and disease outcomes were extracted from the patient record. Disease free survival and overall survival were calculated for both groups.

Results

159 oropharynx patients were included, 76 in the pre-COVID group (Group 1) and 83 in the pandemic group (Group 2). When comparing Group 1 and 2, respectively: There were no differences in human papilloma virus (HPV) status (74% vs. 71% p = 0.795) or Tumour-Node-Metastasis (TNM) overall stage [American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) ed. 8]: (Stage 1: 25% vs. 45.8%, Stage 2: 28.9% vs. 18.1%, Stage 3: 21% vs. 15.7%, Stage 4: 25% vs. 20.5%, p = 0.268). Use of moderate hypofractionated regime increased during the pandemic (2.6% to 10.8%) and one patient omitted chemotherapy due to COVID-related reasons. There was no change in overall treatment times between groups with COVID-related sepsis accounting for one significant delay and one death during treatment. Overall survival at 2 years via Kaplan-Meier analysis; Group 1 cumulative proportion surviving at 2 years was 77% [95% confidence interval (CI): 67-86%] vs. 85% in Group 2 (95% CI: 77-93%, p = 0.35). The disease free survival at 2 years was 69% in Group 1 (95% CI: 59-80%) vs. 76% in Group 2 (95% CI: 67-85%, p = 0.567).

Conclusion

In spite of challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic, we have demonstrated that oropharyngeal cancer patients treatment standards and outcomes were maintained. We did not demonstrate any significant difference in overall survival and disease free survival at 2 years when compared to a similar group prior to the pandemic.

Time Reveals the Truth! What Treatments for COVID-19 Were Quickly Abandoned, and Which Methods, Contrary to Popular Belief, Are Still Flourishing?

During the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, low dose radiation therapy (LDRT) was proposed as a potentially effective treatment method. To minimize potential toxicity, the initial treatment approach involved a few mGy of adapting radiation followed by a single 250 mGy whole lung challenging dose. However, antiviral drugs were also introduced as a promising treatment option, which were thought to have the potential to revolutionize the management of the crisis. Despite early warnings, many physicians did not fully consider the key point that, in contrast with LDRT, antiviral drug treatments can result in strong selective pressure on the virus. This can lead to the emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants, a phenomenon that can have serious global consequences. After more than two years, the truth has been revealed the WHO Guideline Development Group has advised against the use of remdesivir, a widely used antiviral medication, for COVID-19. Meanwhile, a growing body of evidence suggests that LDRT can be a promising, low-risk approach for avoiding or delaying invasive respiratory support in COVID-19 patients. Although there is substantial supporting documentation, more high-quality, controlled, and randomized double-blind clinical trials are needed to further investigate the efficacy and potential therapeutic mechanisms of LDRT for COVID-19.

The continuous improvement of digital assistance in the radiation oncologist's work: from web-based nomograms to the adoption of large-language models (LLMs). A systematic review by the young group of the Italian association of radiotherapy and clinical oncology (AIRO)

PURPOSE

Recently, the availability of online medical resources for radiation oncologists and trainees has significantly expanded, alongside the development of numerous artificial intelligence (AI)-based tools. This review evaluates the impact of web-based clinical decision-making tools in the clinical practice of radiation oncology.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We searched databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus, using keywords related to web-based clinical decision-making tools and radiation oncology, adhering to PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Out of 2161 identified manuscripts, 70 were ultimately included in our study. These papers all supported the evidence that web-based tools can be transversally integrated into multiple radiation oncology fields, with online applications available for dose and clinical calculations, staging and other multipurpose intents. Specifically, the possible benefit of web-based nomograms for educational purposes was investigated in 35 of the evaluated manuscripts. As regards to the applications of digital and AI-based tools to treatment planning, diagnosis, treatment strategy selection and follow-up adoption, a total of 35 articles were selected. More specifically, 19 articles investigated the role of these tools in heterogeneous cancer types, while nine and seven articles were related to breast and head & neck cancers, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis suggests that employing web-based and AI tools offers promising potential to enhance the personalization of cancer treatment.

Hypofractionated versus standard chemoradiotherapy in the definitive treatment of uterine cervix cancer: interim results of a randomized controlled clinical trial

PURPOSE

Concurrent chemoradiation has been the mainstay of treatment for cervix cancer. We aimed to evaluate the non-inferiority of hypofractionated chemoradiation.

METHODS

This study was designed as a phase 2, 1:1 randomized, investigator-blinded, controlled, non-inferiority trial and we report the interim results after 50% accrual. Cervical cancer patients with FIGO stages IIA-IIIC were recruited from April 2021 to September 2022. The intervention consisted of 40 Gy of 3D-conformal radiation therapy (RT) in 15 fractions over 3 weeks. In the control group, patients received standard chemoradiation of 45 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks. Both groups received concurrent weekly cisplatin (40 mg/m2). Intravaginal brachytherapy of 28 Gy in 4 weekly fractions was delivered starting 1 week after the end of chemoradiation. The primary outcome was complete clinical response(CCR) at 3 months. Secondary outcomes included acute gastrointestinal (GI), genitourinary(GU), skin, and hematologic toxicities. A p value less than 0.05 was considered significant for analyses.

RESULTS

59 patients were randomized; 30 in the control group and 29 in the intervention group. 20/30 (66.7%) of the patients in the control group and 19/29 (65.5%) in the intervention group achieved a CCR (absolute difference of 0.011, 95% CI - 0.23 to 0.25, p value: 0.13). There was a significantly higher rate of acute grade ≥ 3 GI toxicity in the intervention group (27.6%) compared with the control group (6.7%) (p value 0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite an absolute difference of 1.1% in the 3-month CCR, our interim analysis failed to show the non-inferiority of the hypofractionated chemoradiation. Due to the higher GI toxicities, we will continue this trial using intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

REGISTRATION NUMBER AND DATE

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04831437, 2021.4.1.

Radiotherapy for non-cancer diseases: benefits and long-term risks

PURPOSE

The discovery of X-rays was followed by a variety of attempts to treat infectious diseases and various other non-cancer diseases with ionizing radiation, in addition to cancer. There has been a recent resurgence of interest in the use of such radiotherapy for non-cancer diseases. Non-cancer diseases for which use of radiotherapy has currently been proposed include refractory ventricular tachycardia, neurodegenerative diseases (e.g. Alzheimer's disease and dementia), and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia, all with ongoing clinical studies that deliver radiation doses of 0.5-25 Gy in a single fraction or in multiple daily fractions. In addition to such non-cancer effects, historical indications predominantly used in some countries (e.g. Germany) include osteoarthritis and degenerative diseases of the bones and joints. This narrative review gives an overview of the biological rationale and ongoing preclinical and clinical studies for radiotherapy proposed for various non-cancer diseases, discusses the plausibility of the proposed biological rationale, and considers the long-term radiation risks of cancer and non-cancer diseases.

CONCLUSIONS

A growing body of evidence has suggested that radiation represents a double-edged sword, not only for cancer, but also for non-cancer diseases. At present, clinical evidence has shown some beneficial effects of radiotherapy for ventricular tachycardia, but there is little or no such evidence of radiotherapy for other newly proposed non-cancer diseases (e.g. Alzheimer's disease, COVID-19 pneumonia). Patients with ventricular tachycardia and COVID-19 pneumonia have thus far been treated with radiotherapy when they are an urgent life threat with no efficient alternative treatment, but some survivors may encounter a paradoxical situation where patients were rescued by radiotherapy but then get harmed by radiotherapy. Further studies are needed to justify the clinical use of radiotherapy for non-cancer diseases, and optimize dose to diseased tissue while minimizing dose to healthy tissue.

Artificial intelligence applied to image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT): a systematic review by the Young Group of the Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (yAIRO)

INTRODUCTION

The advent of image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) has recently changed the workflow of radiation treatments by ensuring highly collimated treatments. Artificial intelligence (AI) and radiomics are tools that have shown promising results for diagnosis, treatment optimization and outcome prediction. This review aims to assess the impact of AI and radiomics on modern IGRT modalities in RT.

METHODS

A PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase systematic review was conducted to investigate the impact of radiomics and AI to modern IGRT modalities. The search strategy was "Radiomics" AND "Cone Beam Computed Tomography"; "Radiomics" AND "Magnetic Resonance guided Radiotherapy"; "Radiomics" AND "on board Magnetic Resonance Radiotherapy"; "Artificial Intelligence" AND "Cone Beam Computed Tomography"; "Artificial Intelligence" AND "Magnetic Resonance guided Radiotherapy"; "Artificial Intelligence" AND "on board Magnetic Resonance Radiotherapy" and only original articles up to 01.11.2022 were considered.

RESULTS

A total of 402 studies were obtained using the previously mentioned search strategy on PubMed and Embase. The analysis was performed on a total of 84 papers obtained following the complete selection process. Radiomics application to IGRT was analyzed in 23 papers, while a total 61 papers were focused on the impact of AI on IGRT techniques.

DISCUSSION

AI and radiomics seem to significantly impact IGRT in all the phases of RT workflow, even if the evidence in the literature is based on retrospective data. Further studies are needed to confirm these tools' potential and provide a stronger correlation with clinical outcomes and gold-standard treatment strategies.

Evaluation and treatment approaches for neurological post-acute sequelae of COVID-19: A consensus statement and scoping review from the global COVID-19 neuro research coalition

Post-acute neurological sequelae of COVID-19 affect millions of people worldwide, yet little data is available to guide treatment strategies for the most common symptoms. We conducted a scoping review of PubMed/Medline from 1/1/2020-4/1/2023 to identify studies addressing diagnosis and treatment of the most common post-acute neurological sequelae of COVID-19 including: cognitive impairment, sleep disorders, headache, dizziness/lightheadedness, fatigue, weakness, numbness/pain, anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder. Utilizing the available literature and international disease-specific society guidelines, we constructed symptom-based differential diagnoses, evaluation and management paradigms. This pragmatic, evidence-based consensus document may serve as a guide for a holistic approach to post-COVID neurological care and will complement future clinical trials by outlining best practices in the evaluation and treatment of post-acute neurological signs/symptoms.

Nursing Care for Metastatic Bone Cancer: Trends for the Future

To effectively treat patients and minimize viral exposure, oncology nurses and radiology departments during COVID-19 had to re-examine the ability to offer palliative radiation treatments to people with metastatic bone cancer. Decreasing potential exposure to the virus resulted in extra measures to keep patients and personnel safe. Limiting radiotherapy treatments, social distancing, and limiting caregivers were a few of the ways that oncology patients were impacted by the pandemic. Hypofractionated radiation therapy (HFRT), or the delivery of fewer higher-dose treatments, was a method of providing care but also limiting exposure to infection for immunocompromised patients as well as healthcare staff. As oncology radiation centers measure the impact of patient care during the pandemic, a trend toward HFRT may occur in treating the painful symptoms of bone cancer. In anticipation that HFRT may be increasingly used in patient treatment plans, oncology nurses should consider patient perspectives and outcomes from the pandemic to further determine how to manage future trends in giving personalized care, and supportive care.

Pharmacological modulators of epithelial immunity uncovered by synthetic genetic tracing of SARS-CoV-2 infection responses

Epithelial immune responses govern tissue homeostasis and offer drug targets against maladaptation. Here, we report a framework to generate drug discovery-ready reporters of cellular responses to viral infection. We reverse-engineered epithelial cell responses to SARS-CoV-2, the viral agent fueling the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, and designed synthetic transcriptional reporters whose molecular logic comprises interferon-α/β/γ and NF-κB pathways. Such regulatory potential reflected single-cell data from experimental models to severe COVID-19 patient epithelial cells infected by SARS-CoV-2. SARS-CoV-2, type I interferons, and RIG-I drive reporter activation. Live-cell image-based phenotypic drug screens identified JAK inhibitors and DNA damage inducers as antagonistic modulators of epithelial cell response to interferons, RIG-I stimulation, and SARS-CoV-2. Synergistic or antagonistic modulation of the reporter by drugs underscored their mechanism of action and convergence on endogenous transcriptional programs. Our study describes a tool for dissecting antiviral responses to infection and sterile cues and rapidly discovering rational drug combinations for emerging viruses of concern.

Magnetic resonance-guided stereotactic body radiation therapy (MRgSBRT) for oligometastatic patients: a single-center experience

PURPOSE

Stereotactic body radiotherapy is increasingly used for the treatment of oligometastatic disease. Magnetic resonance-guided stereotactic radiotherapy (MRgSBRT) offers the opportunity to perform dose escalation protocols while reducing the unnecessary irradiation of the surrounding organs at risk. The aim of this retrospective, monoinstitutional study is to evaluate the feasibility and clinical benefit (CB) of MRgSBRT in the setting of oligometastatic patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from oligometastatic patients treated with MRgSBRT were collected. The primary objectives were to define the 12-month progression-free survival (PFS) and local progression-free survival (LPFS) and 24-month overall survival (OS) rate. The objective response rate (ORR) included complete response (CR) and partial response (PR). CB was defined as the achievement of ORR and stable disease (SD). Toxicities were also assessed according to the CTCAE version 5.0 scale.

RESULTS

From February 2017 to March 2021, 59 consecutive patients with a total of 80 lesions were treated by MRgSBRT on a 0.35 T hybrid unit. CR and PR as well as SD were observed in 30 (37.5%), 7 (8.75%), and 17 (21.25%) lesions, respectively. Furthermore, CB was evaluated at a rate of 67.5% with an ORR of 46.25%. Median follow-up time was 14 months (range: 3-46 months). The 12-month LPFS and PFS rates were 70% and 23%, while 24-month OS rate was 93%. No acute toxicity was reported, whereas late pulmonary fibrosis G1 was observed in 9 patients (15.25%).

CONCLUSION

MRgSBRT was well tolerated by patients with reported low toxicity levels and a satisfying CB.

An umbrella review of systematic reviews on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer prevention and management, and patient needs

The relocation and reconstruction of health care resources and systems during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may have affected cancer care. An umbrella review was undertaken to summarize the findings from systematic reviews on impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer treatment modification, delays, and cancellations; delays or cancellations in screening and diagnosis; psychosocial well-being, financial distress, and use of telemedicine as well as on other aspects of cancer care. Bibliographic databases were searched for relevant systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis published before November 29th, 2022. Abstract, full- text screening, and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. AMSTAR-2 was used for critical appraisal of included systematic reviews. Fifty-one systematic reviews were included in our analysis. Most reviews were based on observational studies judged to be at medium and high risk of bias. Only two reviews had high or moderate scores based on AMSTAR-2. Findings suggest treatment modifications in cancer care during the pandemic versus the pre-pandemic period were based on low level of evidence. Different degrees of delays and cancellations in cancer treatment, screening, and diagnosis were observed, with low- and- middle- income countries and countries that implemented lockdowns being disproportionally affected. A shift from in-person appointments to telemedicine use was observed, but utility of telemedicine, challenges in implementation and cost-effectiveness in cancer care were little explored. Evidence was consistent in suggesting psychosocial well-being of patients with cancer deteriorated, and cancer patients experienced financial distress, albeit results were in general not compared to pre-pandemic levels. Impact of cancer care disruption during the pandemic on cancer prognosis was little explored. In conclusion, substantial but heterogenous impact of COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care has been observed.

The role transition of radiotherapy for the treatment of liver cancer in the COVID-19 era

The uncontrollable COVID-19 crises in the SARS-CoV-2 high-prevalence areas have greatly disrupted the routine treatment of liver cancer and triggered a role transformation of radiotherapy for liver cancer. The weight of radiotherapy in the treatment algorithm for liver cancer has been enlarged by the COVID-19 pandemic, which is helpful for the optimal risk-benefit profile.