Management of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer During The COVID-19 Pandemic: A Necessary Paradigm Change at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

Resilience in Rectal Cancer Treatment: Lessons from the COVID-19 Era in Czech Republic

Introduction

The management of patients with COVID-19 infection has placed great pressure on the healthcare systems around the world. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the treatment outcomes of patients with rectal cancer by comparing them to those of patients with the same diagnosis in the pre-pandemic period.

Methods

Retrospective data analysis of patients undergoing multimodal treatment for rectal cancer at the four university hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2021) and the 2-year pre-pandemic period (2018-2019).

Results

A total of 693 patients (319 in the pre-pandemic period and 374 in the pandemic period) with rectal cancer were included in the study. The demographic and clinical characteristics of patients in both study periods were comparable, as was the spectrum of surgical procedures. Palliative surgery was more common in the pandemic period (18% vs 13%, p=0.084). The proportion of patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery was higher during the COVID-19 pandemic (p=0.025). There were no statistically significant differences between the study periods in the incidence/severity of post-operative complications, 30-day mortality and length of hospital stay. The number of positive resection margins was similar (5% vs 5%). Based on these results, COVID-19 had no effect on the postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing surgery for rectal cancer. Neoadjuvant treatment was more common in the pre-pandemic period (50% vs 45%). Long-course RT was predominantly offered in the pre-pandemic period, short-course RT during the pandemic. Significantly shorter "diagnosis-surgery" intervals were observed during the pandemic (23 days vs 33 days, p=0.0002). The "surgery-adjuvant therapy" interval was similar in both analysed study periods (p=0.219).

Conclusion

Our study showed, that despite concerns about the COVID-19 pandemic, multimodal treatment of rectal cancer was associated with unchanged postoperative morbidity rates, increased frequency of short-course neoadjuvant RT administration and shorter "diagnosis-surgery" intervals.

Colorectal cancer treatment outcomes during the pandemic: Our experience of COVID-19 at a tertiary referral center

BACKGROUNDS

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to major shifts in the management of colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aims to identify the impact and early outcomes of COVID-19 following CRC management at a tertiary referral center in Victoria, Australia.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study, utilizing the Australian Comprehensive Cancer Outcomes and Research Database and inpatient records. Patients presenting for CRC management at our institution were identified coinciding with the first Victorian outbreak of COVID-19 (March 26 to September 26, 2020) (COVID). Management decisions including chemoradiotherapy utilization and surgical outcomes were analyzed within 6 months and compared with the corresponding period in 2019 (pre-COVID).

RESULTS

A total of 276 patients were included in this study (147 pre-COVID period, 129 COVID period). During the COVID period, more patients (47.6% vs. 60.5%; p = 0.033) presented symptomatically and less for surveillance (10.9% vs. 2.3%; p < 0.01). Eighty-four pre-COVID and 69 COVID period patients proceeded to surgery. The average time from diagnosis date to surgery was 15.6 days less during the COVID period. There were no significant differences in postoperative utilization of higher care (p = 0.74), complications (p = 0.93), median hospital length of stay (p = 0.67), 30-day readmission (p = 0.50), or 30-day reoperation (p = 0.74). In 1.6% of cases, pandemic impacts resulted in a change in management.

CONCLUSION

Presentation of patients with CRC varied, with a significant increase in symptomatic presentations and decreased numbers for surveillance. Through flexibility and change in practice, our institution helped improve access to surgical intervention and oncological therapies. Further prospective work is required to identify long-term outcomes and characterize the effects of ongoing disruptions.

Surgical and short-term oncological safety of total neoadjuvant therapy in high-risk locally advanced rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Management for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) conventionally comprises long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCCRT), total mesorectal excision (TME), and adjuvant chemotherapy. However, the RAPIDO study published in 2021 showed that total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) led to better oncological outcomes without increased toxicity. We review the surgical and short-term oncological outcomes of patients with high-risk LARC who underwent TNT or LCCRT before TME.

METHODS

Patients with high-risk LARC who underwent TNT or LCCRT before TME between 2021 and 2022 were reviewed.

RESULTS

Thirty-five patients (66%) had TNT as per RAPIDO whilst 18 underwent LCCRT. Median follow-up was 16 months (range 5-25). Of the patients who had TNT, median age was 65 years old (range 44-79), 34 (97%) had clinical Stage 3 LARC and median height FAV was 5 cm (range 0.5-14). Nine (26%) required a dose delay/reduction due to treatment toxicity. Seven (50%) showed resolution of previously enlarged lateral nodes. Three (9%) had pathological complete response. Postoperative major morbidity was 23%, of which 4 patients required a reoperation. Six (17%) patients had disease-related treatment failure, with two having disease progression during TNT, two developed local recurrence, and two developed distal metastasis following surgery. Median duration to surgery following completion of chemotherapy was significantly shorter with TNT (36 days versus 74 days) (P < 0.001). There were no other significant differences in outcomes.

CONCLUSION

TNT is clinically safe in high-risk LARC patients with no significant difference to surgical and short-term oncological outcomes compared to LCCRT, although a higher incidence of early surgical morbidity was observed.

Patterns of Care for Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Treated with Total Neoadjuvant Therapy at Predominately Academic Centers between 2016-2020: An NCDB Analysis

Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) has emerged as the preferred approach for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), defined as T3/4 or any T with N+ disease. Our objective was to (1) determine the proportion of patients with LARC receiving TNT over time, (2) determine the most common method in which TNT is being delivered, and (3) determine what factors are associated with a greater likelihood of receiving TNT in the United States. Retrospective data was obtained from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients diagnosed with rectal cancer between 2016 and 2020. Patients were excluded if they had M1 disease, T1-2 N0 disease, incomplete staging information, nonadenocarcinoma histology, received RT to a nonrectum site, or received a nondefinitive RT dose. Data were analyzed using linear regression, χ² test, and binary logistic regression. Of the 26,375 patients included, most patients were treated at an academic facility (94.6%). Five thousand three (19.0%) patients received TNT, and 21,372 (81.0%) patients did not receive TNT. The proportion of patients receiving TNT increased significantly over time, from 6.1% in 2016 to 34.6% in 2020 (slope = 7.36, 95% CI 4.58-10.15, R² = 0.96, P = .040). The most common TNT regimen was multiagent chemotherapy followed by long-course chemoradiation (73.2% of cases from 2016-2020). There was a significant increase in utilization of short-course RT as part of TNT from 2.8% in 2016 to 13.7% in 2020 (slope = 2.74, 95% CI 0.37-5.11, R² = 0.82, P = .035). Factors associated with a lower likelihood of TNT usage included age >65, female gender, Black race, and T3 N0 disease. TNT use in the United States has increased significantly from 2016-2020, with approximately 34.6% of patients with LARC receiving TNT in 2020. The observed trend appears to be in line with the recent National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommending TNT as the preferred approach.

Current Practice Patterns in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer at Academic Institutions: A National Survey Among Radiation Oncologists, Medical Oncologists, and Colorectal Surgeons

PURPOSE

To assess the current treatment patterns in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) among radiation oncologists (RO), medical oncologists (MO), and colorectal surgeons (SR) specializing in gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies at academic institutions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An online survey consisting of 7 LARC clinical vignettes was distributed to GI specialists practicing at ACGME accredited academic institutions. Treatment paradigms consisted of long-course chemoradiation (LC-CRT) and short-course (SCRT) radiotherapy, chemotherapy (CHT), and surgery. The survey was open from January to April 2021.

RESULTS

Thirty-six RO, 14 MO and 21 SR (71/508 physicians) replied resulting in a response rate of 14.0%. For low rectal node positive tumors, 88.7% of primary recommendations incorporated TNT (73.1% LC-CRT, 26.9% SCRT). NOM was preferred by 41.3% if a clinical complete response (cCR) was achieved. The presence of high-risk features led 95.8% of physicians to employ TNT (79.4% LC-CRT, 20.6% SCRT). For a cT3N1-2 mid-rectal tumor without high-risk features, 85.9% would primarily recommend TNT (56.6% LC-CRT, 43.4% SCRT). For a cT4bN2a mid-rectal tumor without high-risk features, 97.2% of primary recommendations included TNT (76.9% LC-CRT, 23.1% SCRT).

CONCLUSION

Among academic RO, MO, and SR, the traditional regimen of LC-CRT, surgery, and adjuvant CHT is now infrequently recommended for LARC. TNT has been widely adopted for locally advanced node positive rectal tumors with variable patterns of care with respect to sequencing of CHT and RT. Fractionation with LC-CRT remained the majority. Non-operative management after a cCR in low rectal tumors has gained traction transforming LARC from a once classically perceived surgical disease.

The impact of COVID-19 on a high-volume incident learning system: A retrospective analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this work was to assess how the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic impacted our incident learning system data and communicate the impact of a major exogenous event on radiation oncology clinical practice.

METHODS

Trends in our electronic incident reporting system were analyzed to ascertain the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, including any direct clinical changes. Incident reports submitted in the 18 months prior to the pandemic (September 14, 2018 to March 13, 2020) and reports submitted during the first 18 months of the pandemic (March 14, 2020 to September 13, 2021) were compared. The incident reports include several data elements that were evaluated for trends between the two time periods, and statistical analysis was performed to compare the proportions of reports.

RESULTS

In the 18 months prior to COVID-19, 192 reports were submitted per 1000 planning tasks (n = 832 total). In the first 18 months of the pandemic, 147 reports per 1000 planning tasks were submitted (n = 601 total), a decrease of 23.4%. Statistical analysis revealed that there were no significant changes among the data elements between the pre- and during COVID-19 time periods. An analysis of the free-text narratives in the reports found that phrases related to pretreatment imaging were common before COVID-19 but not during. Conversely, phrases related to intravenous contrast, consent for computed tomography, and adaptive radiotherapy became common during COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

The data elements captured by our incident learning system were stable after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, with no statistically significant findings after correction for multiple comparisons. A trend toward fewer reports submitted for low-risk issues was observed. The methods used in the work can be generalized to events with a large-scale impact on the clinic or to monitor an incident learning system to drive future improvement activities.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on gastrointestinal cancer diagnosis and resection: An observational study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted routine screening for and treatment of gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. We analyzed changes in GI cancer pathology specimens resulting from diagnostic and therapeutic procedures at a single academic center in an epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our aim was to determine which cancer types, procedures, and patients were impacted by the pandemic.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, cohort study of patients identified based on carcinoma containing pathologic specimens reviewed in our institution resulting from diagnostic or resection procedures. Pathology and medical records of patients with GI and liver carcinoma and high-grade dysplasia were reviewed from February 1 to April 30 in 2018, 2019 and 2020. We used March 16, 2020 to delineate the pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 period in 2020. Chi-squared or t-tests, as appropriate, were used to compare these time periods in each year. Mann Kendall test was used to test for trend in volume. ANCOVA was used to compare differences across years.

RESULTS

A total of 1028 pathology samples from 949 unique patients were identified during the study period. There was a 57% drop in samples within 2020 (p = 0.01) that was not present in either 2018 or 2019 (p<0.01). In 2020, there were significantly fewer resections compared to biopsies overall in the COVID-19 period (p = 0.01). There were fewer colorectal cancer specimens (p = 0.04) which were procured from older patients (p<0.01) in the 2020 COVID-19 period compared to pre-COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

In our institution, there was a significant drop in diagnostic and resection specimens of GI cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic, disproportionately affecting older colorectal cancer patients.

Cost-effectiveness of Total Neoadjuvant Therapy With Short-Course Radiotherapy for Resectable Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

IMPORTANCE

Short-course radiotherapy and total neoadjuvant therapy (SCRT-TNT) followed by total mesorectal excision (TME) has emerged as a new treatment paradigm for patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma. However, the economic implication of this treatment strategy has not been compared with that of conventional long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCCRT) followed by TME with adjuvant chemotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of SCRT-TNT vs LCCRT in conjunction with TME for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A decision analytical model with a 5-year time horizon was constructed for patients with biopsy-proven, newly diagnosed, primary locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma treated with SCRT-TNT or LCCRT. Markov modeling was used to model disease progression and patient survival after treatment in 3-month cycles. Data on probabilities and utilities were extracted from the literature. Costs were evaluated from the Medicare payer's perspective in 2020 US dollars. Sensitivity analyses were performed for key variables. Data were collected from October 3, 2020, to January 20, 2021, and analyzed from November 15, 2020, to April 25, 2021.

EXPOSURES

Two treatment strategies, SCRT-TNT vs LCCRT with adjuvant chemotherapy, were compared.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and net monetary benefits. Effectiveness was defined as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Both costs and QALYs were discounted at 3% annually. Willingness-to-pay threshold was set at $50 000/QALY.

RESULTS

During the 5-year horizon, the total cost was $41 355 and QALYs were 2.21 for SCRT-TNT; for LCCRT, the total cost was $54 827 and QALYs were 2.12, resulting in a negative incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (-$141 256.77). The net monetary benefit was $69 300 for SCRT-TNT and $51 060 for LCCRT. Sensitivity analyses using willingness to pay at $100 000/QALY and $150 000/QALY demonstrated the same conclusion.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that SCRT-TNT followed by TME incurs lower cost and improved QALYs compared with conventional LCCRT followed by TME and adjuvant chemotherapy. These data offer further rationale to support SCRT-TNT as a novel cost-saving treatment paradigm in the management of locally advanced rectal cancer.

The Validation Study of the Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics-6 Scale Among Patients With Cancer in the COVID-19 Pandemic

INTRODUCTION

The study aimed to explore the psychometric properties of the Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics-6 (SAVE-6) scale among patients with cancer who are in serious situations in the current COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

The survey included questions on the participants' demographic information, clinical history of cancer (including cancer type, stage, current treatment or diagnosis of complete remission), and scores on rating scales, including the SAVE-6 scale, Coronavirus Anxiety Scale (CAS), and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9).

RESULTS

The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) results determined that the model fits the single factor structure of the SAVE-6 scale among patients with cancer. The multi-group CFA showed that SAVE-6 can measure the anxiety response in a similar way across multiple variables, such as sex, presence of clinical depression, being in a state of complete remission, or currently undergoing cancer treatment. The SAVE-6 scale showed good reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.819) and convergent validity with the rating scales, such as CAS [r = 0.348 (95% CI, 0.273-0.419), p < 0.001] and PHQ-9 items score [r = 0.251 (95% CI, 0.172-0.328), p < 0.001].

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms SAVE-6 as a reliable and valid rating scale for measuring the anxiety response of patients with cancer during the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Rectal cancer management during the COVID-19 pandemic (ReCaP): multicentre prospective observational study

Concerns over unacceptable high mortality in patients with rectal cancer undergoing surgery or systemic therapy who contract COVID-19 have led to widespread adoption of alternative treatment strategies.The ReCaP study aimed to study these variations and associated outcomes.

Clinical Complete Response in Patients With Rectal Adenocarcinoma Treated With Short-Course Radiation Therapy and Nonoperative Management

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine the clinical efficacy and safety of nonoperative management (NOM) for patients with rectal cancer with a clinical complete response (cCR) after short-course radiation therapy and consolidation chemotherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with stage I-III rectal adenocarcinoma underwent short-course radiation therapy followed by consolidation chemotherapy between January 2018 and May 2019 (n = 90). Clinical response was assessed by digital rectal examination, pelvic magnetic resonance imaging, and endoscopy. Of the patients with an evaluable initial response, those with a cCR (n = 43) underwent NOM, and those with a non-cCR (n = 43) underwent surgery. The clinical endpoints included local regrowth-free survival, regional control, distant metastasis-free survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival.

RESULTS

Compared with patients with an initial cCR, patients with initial non-cCR had more advanced T and N stage (P = .05), larger primary tumors (P = .002), and more circumferential resection margin involvement on diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging (P < .001). With a median follow-up of 30.1 months, the persistent cCR rate was 79% (30 of 38 patients) in the NOM cohort. The 2-year local regrowth-free survival was 81% (95% confidence interval [CI], 70%-94%) in the initial cCR group, and all patients with local regrowth were successfully salvaged. Compared with those with a non-cCR, patients with a cCR had improved 2-year regional control (98% [95% CI, 93%-100%] vs 85% [95% CI, 74%-97%], P = .02), distant metastasis-free survival (100% [95% CI, 100%-100%] vs 80% [95% CI, 69%-94%], P < .01), disease-free survival (98% [95% CI, 93%-100%] vs 71% [95% CI, 59%-87%], P < .01), and overall survival (100% [95% CI, 100%-100%] vs 88% [95% CI, 79%-98%], P = .02). No late grade 3+ gastrointestinal or genitourinary toxicities were observed in the patients who underwent continued NOM.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-course radiation therapy followed by consolidation chemotherapy may be a feasible organ preservation strategy in rectal cancer. Additional prospective studies are necessary to evaluate the safety and efficacy of this approach.

Functional Impairments in the Mental Health, Depression and Anxiety Related to the Viral Epidemic, and Disruption in Healthcare Service Utilization Among Cancer Patients in the COVID-19 Pandemic Era

Purpose

Literature is scarce regarding cancer care utilization during the massive outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the Republic of Korea. We investigated functional impairments in mental health and their relationships with depression, anxiety regarding the viral epidemic, and disruptions in healthcare service utilization among cancer patients in the COVID-19 pandemic era.

Materials and Methods

We used an online survey with questions related to the disturbances faced by patients with cancer in utilizing healthcare services in the pandemic era. Current mental health status was assessed using the Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS), Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics-6 (SAVE-6) scale, Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), Brief Resilience Scale (BRS), Cancer-Related Dysfunctional Beliefs about Sleep Scale (C-DBS), and Fear of COVID-19 over Cancer (FCC).

Results

Among the 221 responders, 95 (43.0%) reported disruptions in healthcare service utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic. Logistic regression analysis revealed that functional impairment in the mental health of these patients was expected due to disruptions in healthcare service utilization, high levels of depression, anxiety regarding the viral epidemic, fear of COVID over cancer, and low resilience. Mediation analysis showed that patient resilience and cancer-related dysfunctional beliefs about sleep partially mediated the effects of viral anxiety on functional impairment.

Conclusion

In this pandemic era, patients with cancer experience depression, anxiety regarding the viral epidemic, and disruptions in healthcare service utilization, which may influence their functional impairments in mental health.

Lessons Learned in Managing Patients with Colorectal Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic

OPINION STATEMENT

The COVID-19 pandemic forced us to rapidly and dramatically shift our medical priorities and decision making. With little literature or experience to rely on, the initial priority was to minimize patient exposure to the hospital and to others. It remains unclear whether cancer patients are at higher risk of infection or serious complications, or if it is our traditional therapies that place them to be at higher risk. By far, the greatest negative impact was on screening. Routine colonoscopies were considered elective, and as a result, delays in diagnosis will be felt for years to come. The most positive changes were the incorporation of tele-visits, increased use of oral therapies, alterations in treatment schedules of both chemotherapy and radiation, and an increased emphasis on neoadjuvant therapy. These too will be felt for years to come. The colorectal cancer medical community has responded collaboratively and effectively to maintain treatment and to optimize outcomes for our patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Impact of the pandemic on surgical activity in colorectal cancer in Spain. Results of a national survey

INTRODUCTION

The pandemic has had an impact on colorectal cancer surgery in hospitals. In 2020, up to 75% of colorectal cancer patients are estimated to require surgery. No objective data on the impact of the pandemic on the management of surgical waiting lists is available. We conducted a survey in colorectal surgery units to assess the impact on colorectal cancer surgery waiting lists.

METHOD

All personnel in charge of colorectal surgery units nationwide received a survey (from February to April, 2020) with eight questions divided into three sections-cessation date of colorectal cancer surgeries, number of patients waiting for treatment, and use of neoadjuvant therapy to postpone surgery.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven units participated in the study, with 79.1% of units ceasing some type of activity (32.8% total and 46.3% partial cessation) and 20.9% continuing all surgical activity. In addition, 65% of units used or prolonged neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer patients and 40% of units performed at least five emergency colorectal cancer surgeries. It was estimated that at least one month of intense surgical activity will be required to catch up.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, patients from units with a long waiting list must be redistributed, at least within the country. In the future, in the event of a second wave of the pandemic, an effective program to manage each unit's resources should be developed to prevent total collapse.

Nonoperative Rectal Cancer Management With Short-Course Radiation Followed by Chemotherapy: A Nonrandomized Control Trial

PURPOSE

Short-course radiation therapy (SCRT) and nonoperative management are emerging paradigms for rectal cancer treatment. This clinical trial is the first to evaluate SCRT followed by chemotherapy as a nonoperative treatment modality.

METHODS

Patients with nonmetastatic rectal adenocarcinoma were treated on the single-arm, Nonoperative Radiation Management of Adenocarcinoma of the Lower Rectum study of SCRT followed by chemotherapy. Patients received 25 Gy in 5 fractions to the pelvis followed by FOLFOX ×8 or CAPOX ×5 cycles. Patients with clinical complete response (cCR) underwent nonoperative surveillance. The primary end point was cCR at 1 year. Secondary end points included safety profile and anorectal function.

RESULTS

From June 2016 to March 2019, 19 patients were treated (21% stage I, 32% stage II, and 47% stage III disease). At a median follow-up of 27.7 months for living patients, the 1-year cCR rate was 68%. Eighteen of 19 patients are alive without evidence of disease. Patients with cCR versus without had improved 2-year disease-free survival (93% vs 67%; P = .006), distant metastasis-free survival (100% vs 67%; P = .03), and overall survival (100% vs 67%; P = .03). Involved versus uninvolved circumferential resection margin on magnetic resonance imaging was associated with less initial cCR (40% vs 93%; P = .04). Anorectal function by Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal cancer score at 1 year was not different than baseline. There were no severe late effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with SCRT and chemotherapy resulted in high cCR rate, intact anorectal function, and no severe late effects. NCT02641691.

Radiotherapy management of rectal cancer in the backdrop of the COVID pandemic

Background

COVID‐19 outbreak was declared as a pandemic by the World Health Organization in March 2020. Over the last 3 months, the pandemic has challenged the diagnosis and treatment of all cancer, including rectal cancer. Constraints in resources call for a change in the treatment strategy without compromising efficacy.

Recent Findings

Delivery of shorter treatment schedules for radiotherapy offers advantages like short overall treatment time, improved throughput on the machine, improved compliance and reduced risk of transmission of COVID 19. Other strategies include delaying surgery, reducing the intensity of chemotherapy and adoption of organ preservation approach.

Conclusion

The curative treatment of rectal cancer should not be hindered during the COVID pandemic, and modifications in the multi‐modality treatment will help achieve quality care.

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.

Cancer care and COVID-19: tailoring recommendations for the African radiation oncology context

Africa is the second most populous continent after Asia comprising 54 countries. Given the healthcare system deficiencies in Africa, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic was expected to be disastrous. The first case of COVID-19 on the continent was reported in Egypt on 14 February 2020. By 13 May, cases had been reported in all 54 countries. Several practice guidelines specific to radiation oncology departments have been published, including prioritisation criteria for postponing radiotherapy, continuation of treatment, hypofractionation or even omitting radiotherapy. The oncology community in Africa has suddenly needed to protect both patients and caregivers and to ensure continuity of essential clinical services despite several challenges. Considering equipment unavailability, lack of human resources and poor infrastructure, tailoring COVID-19 pandemic management to the African context seems mandatory and a unified approach to guideline development in this context is encouraged. In this article, we discuss contextual issues coming into play, highlighting steps to be taken by radiotherapy centres in Africa to mitigate fallouts from the current pandemic to ensure the safety of our patients and staff as well as the impact on future care.

[Impact of the pandemic on surgical activity in colorectal cancer in Spain. Results of a national survey]

INTRODUCTION

The pandemic has had an impact on colorectal cancer surgery in hospitals. In 2020, up to 75% of colorectal cancer patients are estimated to require surgery. No objective data on the impact of the pandemic on the management of surgical waiting lists is available. We conducted a survey in colorectal surgery units to assess the impact on colorectal cancer surgery waiting lists.

METHOD

All personnel in charge of colorectal surgery units nationwide received a survey (from February to April, 2020) with eight questions divided into three sections-cessation date of colorectal cancer surgeries, number of patients waiting for treatment, and use of neoadjuvant therapy to postpone surgery.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven units participated in the study, with 79.1% of units ceasing some type of activity (32.8% total and 46.3% partial cessation) and 20.9% continuing all surgical activity. In addition, 65% of units used or prolonged neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer patients and 40% of units performed at least five emergency colorectal cancer surgeries. It was estimated that at least one month of intense surgical activity will be required to catch up.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, patients from units with a long waiting list must be redistributed, at least within the country. In the future, in the event of a second wave of the pandemic, an effective program to manage each unit's resources should be developed to prevent total collapse.

Potential impact of COVID-19 on colorectal disease management

The current recommendations for management of colorectal diseases are still evolving, due to the limited experience on this issue. As the new coronavirus can be transmitted through breath droplets, by contact and orofecally, there is no consensus of how this fact may affect the investigation and treatment of anorectal diseases. Thus, high-quality multicenter studies are urgently needed to provide better information to both patients and the multiprofessional team, in order to build an effective pandemic response plan in our specialty. As a greater operative risk for infected patients has already been demonstrated, the next step lies on the identification of new therapeutic strategies that could minimize this effect on an individual basis. There is a present understanding that the COVID-19 pandemic should change some traditional practices. Therefore, the surgical treatment of suspected or known COVID-19 case demands specific insights. This article analyses potential influences regarding the treatment of patients with Colorectal Cancer (CRC) and Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD). At present, elective surgery must be avoided, and the colorectal surgeon must carefully evaluate the risks and benefits of such decision. Within this context, a change toward nonsurgical and less aggressive modalities of CRC treatment may help to postpone definitive treatment. We also discuss the concerns regarding the viral infection among the population, the influence on clinical symptoms and the proposed modifications on therapeutic schemes.

Recommendations on Management of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic: an Iranian Consensus

Purpose

Today, the rapid outbreak of COVID-19 is the leading health issue. Patients with cancer are at high risk for the development of morbidities of COVID-19. Hence, oncology centers need to provide organ-based recommendations for optimal management of cancer in the COVID-19 era.

Methods

In this article, we have provided the recommendations on management of locally advanced rectal cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic based on our experience in Shohada-e Tajrish Hospital, Iran.

Results

We recommend that patients with locally advanced rectal cancer should be managed in an individualized manner in combination with local conditions related to COVID-19.

Conclusion

Our recommendation may provide a guide for oncology centers of developing countries for better management of locally advanced rectal cancer.

Management of cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: A comprehensive review

The novel 2019 corona virus disease also called severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has caused a global pandemic and more than 2.5 million people have been affected globally with over 100000 deaths. The disease has caused an escalation in hospitalization with growing need for hospital beds and intensive care unit for severe cases. Recent evidence has shown that a significant proportion of cancer patients affected by the corona virus present with severe respiratory pneumonia-like illness with need for subsequent intensive care unit ventilation and higher mortality risk. This susceptibility may be due to the immunosuppressive state of patients with malignancy confounded by chemotherapy, immunotherapy and targeted therapy. Many solid tumors (lung cancer, pancreatic cancer) as well as hematological malignancies (leukemias) may require prompt diagnosis and treatment based on the disease aggression and progression. Many centers lack clear guideline on the management of cancer during the pandemic. The objective of this review is to synthesize the available literature and provide recommendations on the management of various soft tissue and hematological malignancies. The review will also assess the management guidelines for hospitalized cancer patients; cancer patients in the outpatient setting as well as available modalities for follow-up.

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.