Thoracic Radiation Therapy During Coronavirus Disease 2019: Provisional Guidelines from a Comprehensive Cancer Center within a Pandemic Epicenter

Coronavirus disease 2019 and lung cancer: where are we?

Oncology patients are more susceptible to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection due to hospital contact and an immunological system that can be compromised by antineoplastic therapy and supportive treatments. Certain similarities have been described in the physiopathology of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and lung cancer (LC) that may explain the higher probability of these patients of developing a more serious disease with more frequent hospitalizations and even death, especially with the addition of smoking, cardiovascular and respiratory comorbidities, old age and corticosteroids use. Pre-existing lesions and cancer therapies change the normal architecture of the lungs, so diagnostic scales such as COVID-19 Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) are of vital importance for a correct diagnosis and patient homogenization, with a high inter-observer correlation. Moreover, anticancer treatments have required an adaptation to reduce the number of visits to the hospital [hypofractionated radiotherapy (RT), larger intervals between chemotherapy cycles, delay in follow-up tests, among others]. In a way, this has also caused a delay in the diagnosis of new cancers. On the other hand, vaccination has had a positive impact on the mortality of these patients, who maintain a similar seroprevalence to the rest of the population, with a similar impact in mortality.

Tailored treatment strategies for cancer patients during COVID-19 pandemic

The global pandemic of respiratory disease caused by the novel human coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has caused indefinite global distress, uncertainty, and disturbance. This pandemic has had direct and indirect impacts for the healthcare systems across the world, but certain subgroups of patients have been particularly affected. Among these groups are patients with cancer, who as a result of their immunosuppressed status either from the disease itself or as a consequence of treatment, are at increased risk of severe COVID-19 infection and complications. The pandemic has also led to limited resources as medical services have been primarily directed to emergency care. In this context, physicians and healthcare providers have had to balance the importance of continuing treatment of cancer patients with the risk of virus infection. In this review, we outline the treatment strategies for cancer patients during this pandemic, focusing on tailored treatment in this challenging situation of varying risks and benefits.

Palliative radiotherapy indications during the COVID-19 pandemic and in future complex logistic settings: the NORMALITY model

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged healthcare systems worldwide over the last few months, and it continues to do so. Although some restrictions are being removed, it is not certain when the pandemic is going to be definitively over. Pandemics can be seen as a highly complex logistic scenario. From this perspective, some of the indications provided for palliative radiotherapy (PRT) during the COVID-19 pandemic could be maintained in the future in settings that limit the possibility of patients achieving symptom relief by radiotherapy.

This paper has two aims: (1) to provide a summary of the indications for PRT during the COVID-19 pandemic; since some indications can differ slightly, and to avoid any possible contradictions, an expert panel composed of the Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) and the Palliative Care and Supportive Therapies Working Group (AIRO-palliative) voted by consensus on the summary; (2) to introduce a clinical care model for PRT [endorsed by AIRO and by a spontaneous Italian collaborative network for PRT named “La Rete del Sollievo” (“The Net of Relief”)]. The proposed model, denoted “No cOmpRoMise on quality of life by pALliative radiotherapy” (NORMALITY), is based on an AIRO-palliative consensus-based list of clinical indications for PRT and on practical suggestions regarding the management of patients potentially suitable for PRT but dealing with highly complex logistics scenarios (similar to the ongoing logistics limits due to COVID-19).

Material and Methods

First, a summary of the available literature guidelines for PRT published during the COVID-19 pandemic was prepared. A systematic literature search based on the PRISMA approach was performed to retrieve the available literature reporting guideline indications fully or partially focused on PRT. Tables reporting each addressed clinical presentation and respective literature indications were prepared and distributed into two main groups: palliative emergencies and palliative non-emergencies. These summaries were voted in by consensus by selected members of the AIRO and AIRO-palliative panels. Second, based on the summary for palliative indications during the COVID-19 pandemic, a clinical care model to facilitate recruitment and delivery of PRT to patients in complex logistic scenarios was proposed. The summary tables were critically integrated and shuffled according to clinical presentations and then voted on in a second consensus round. Along with the adapted guideline indications, some methods of performing the first triage of patients and facilitating a teleconsultation preliminary to the first in-person visit were developed.

Results

After the revision of 161 documents, 13 papers were selected for analysis. From the papers, 19 clinical presentation items were collected; in total, 61 question items were extracted and voted on (i.e., for each presentation, more than one indication was provided from the literature). Two tables summarizing the PRT indications during the COVID-19 pandemic available from the literature (PRT COVID-19 summary tables) were developed: palliative emergencies and palliative non-emergencies. The consensus of the vote by the AIRO panel for the PRT COVID-19 summary was reached. The PRT COVID-19 summary tables for palliative emergencies and palliative non-emergencies were adapted for clinical presentations possibly associated with patients in complex clinical scenarios other than the COVID-19 pandemic. The two new indication tables (i.e., “Normality model of PRT indications”) for both palliative emergencies and palliative non-emergencies were voted on in a second consensus round. The consensus rate was reached and strong. Written forms facilitating two levels of teleconsultation (triage and remote visits) were also developed, both in English and in Italian, to evaluate the patients for possible indications for PRT before scheduling clinical visits.

Conclusion

We provide a comprehensive summary of the literature guideline indications for PRT during COVID-19 pandemic. We also propose a clinical care model including clinical indications and written forms facilitating two levels of teleconsultation (triage and remote visits) to evaluate the patients for indications of PRT before scheduling clinical visits. The normality model could facilitate the provision of PRT to patients in future complex logistic scenarios.

A multi-institutional assessment of COVID-19-related risk in radiation oncology

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic has presented challenges to delivering safe and timely care for cancer patients. The oncology community has undertaken substantial workflow adaptations to reduce transmission risk for patients and providers. While various control measureshave been proposed and implemented, little is known about their impact on safety of the radiation oncology workflow and potential for transmission. The objective of this study was to assess potential safety impacts of control measures employed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A multi-institutional study was undertaken to assess the risks of pandemic-associated workflow adaptations using failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA). Failure modes were identified and scored using FMEA formalism. FMEA scores were used to identify highest-risk aspects of the radiation therapy process. The impact of control measures on overall risk was quantified. Agreement among institutions was evaluated.

RESULTS

Thirty three failure modes and 22 control measures were identified. Control measures resulted in risk score reductions for 22 of the failure modes, with the largest reductions from screening of patients and staff, requiring use of masks, and regular cleaning of patient areas. The median risk score for all failure modes was reduced from 280 to 168. There was high institutional agreement for 90.3% of failure modes but only 47% of control measures.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-related risks are similar across oncology practices in this study. While control measures can reducerisk, their use varied. The effectiveness of control measures on risk may guide selection of the highest-impact workflow adaptions to ensure safe care in oncology.

Discordance of COVID-19 guidelines for patients with cancer: A systematic review

This review was aimed to systematically evaluate the available literature on the impact of COVID-19 on cancer care and to critically analyze the diagnostic and therapeutic strategies suggested by various healthcare providers, societies, and institutions. Majority guidelines for various types of cancers favored a delay in treatment or a nonsurgical approach wherever feasible. These guidelines are based on a low level of evidence and have significant discordance for the role and timing of surgery, especially in early tumors.

GOECP/SEOR clinical recommendations for lung cancer radiotherapy during the COVID-19 pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 crisis has had a major and highly complex impact on the clinical practice of radiation oncology worldwide. Spain is one of the countries hardest hit by the virus, with devastating consequences. There is an urgent need to share experiences and offer guidance on decision-making with regard to the indications and standards for radiation therapy in the treatment of lung cancer. In the present article, the Oncological Group for the Study of Lung Cancer of the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology reviews the literature and establishes a series of consensus-based recommendations for the treatment of patients with lung cancer in different clinical scenarios during the present pandemic.

Disease Site-Specific Guidelines for Curative Radiation Treatment During 'Limited Surgery' and 'Hospital Avoidance': A Radiation Oncology Perspective From the Epicenter of COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in an unprecedented situation where the standard of care (SOC) management for cancers has been altered significantly. Patients with potentially curable cancers are at risk of not receiving timely SOC multidisciplinary treatments, such as surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or combination treatments. Hospital resources are in such high demand for COVID-19 patients that procedures, such as surgery, dentistry, interventional radiology, and other ancillary services, are not available for cancer patients. Our tertiary care center is considered the center of the epicenter in the USA. As a result, all non-emergent surgeries have been suspended in order to provide hospital beds and other resources for COVID-19 patients.

Additionally, ambulatory efforts to avoid treatment-related morbidity are critical for keeping patients out of emergency departments and hospitals. In this review article, we discuss evidence-based radiation therapy approaches for curable cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. We focus on three scenarios of cancer care: 1) radiation therapy as an alternative to surgery when immediate surgery is not possible, 2) radiation therapy as a ‘bridge’ to surgery, and 3) radiation options definitively or postoperatively, given the risk of hospitalization with high-dose chemotherapy.