A systematic review and meta-analysis: the effect of active cancer treatment on severity of COVID-19

Factors influencing in-hospital mortality in cancer patients with COVID-19: A retrospective survival analysis

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate survival in patients with COVID-19 and cancer, and to find factors associated with early mortality.

Methods

Retrospective cohort derived from a registry of a referral center in Bogotá. Survival was analyzed according to the type of neoplasm using Kaplan-Meier method. A cox regression was performed to look for factors associated to higher risk of death.

Results

Two hundred fifty-four patients were included with cancer and COVID-19, most of whom were women (median age 68 years; range 19-97). Cardiovascular comorbidities were frequent. Patients with hematologic neoplasms had higher survival than those with solid neoplasms (log-rank test, p = 0.024). C-reactive protein levels (hazard ratio 1.02; 95% confidence interval 1.00-1.03, p = 0.025), Charlson's comorbidity index (hazard ratio 1.15; 95% confidence interval 1.06-1.26, p = 0.004) and respiratory failure (hazard ratio 4.83; 95% confidence interval 2.47-9.44, p = <0.001) were significantly associated with higher mortality. No interaction between active anticancer therapy and mortality was observed.

Conclusion

In contrast to other reports, survival was worse in patients with solid tumors than in those with hematologic neoplasms. Increased C-reactive protein, Charlson's comorbidity index and respiratory failure were associated with higher in-hospital mortality. This study reveals the complex impact of cancer and its treatment on COVID-19 outcomes, highlighting the persistent risks to cancer patients. It emphasizes monitoring C-reactive protein levels, comorbidities, and respiratory failure as key indicators of poor prognosis. Furthermore, we provide new insights into the differential impact of COVID-19 on cancer patients with solid organ versus hematologic neoplasms.

Risk of COVID-19 infection in patients with NSCLC receiving EGFR-TKI targeted therapy during the first wave in China

OBJECTIVE

We examined the factors influencing hospitalization and prognosis among patients with non-small cell lung cancer receiving epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) targeted therapy during the first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

METHODS

In total, 267 patients diagnosed with NSCLC who were receiving treatment with third-generation EGFR-TKIs were included in our retrospective study. Data on patients' demographics, clinical characteristics, and survival were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Over a mean follow-up of 18 months, 80.5% (215/267) of the patients contracted COVID-19, and 12.6% (27/215) of these patients were hospitalized for COVID-19 treatment. Vaccinated patients, those with body mass index (BMI) ≥22.3 kg/m2, and those with no comorbidities had lower rates of infection and hospitalization than unvaccinated patients, those with BMI <22.3 kg/m2, and those with comorbidities, respectively. Continued NSCLC treatment in patients with COVID-19 was identified as a risk factor for patient survival.

CONCLUSIONS

NSCLC treatment can be continued for patients who received COVID-19 vaccines, those with higher BMI, and those without comorbidities during the COVID-19 epidemic, but treatment interruption might be required for patients during the active phase of infection.

Successful treatment and remission of advanced testicular cancer after COVID-19 infection during induction chemotherapy

Introduction

We report a case of advanced testicular cancer cured by early and appropriate resumption of chemotherapy even after COVID-19 infection during induction chemotherapy.

Case presentation

The patient was a healthy 36-year-old male. The diagnosis was a stage IIIB nonseminoma (pT2N2M1a). On day 14 of the first chemotherapy cycle, the patient was diagnosed with mild COVID-19. The second chemotherapy cycle was initiated with a 1-day delay (on day 10 after the COVID-19 diagnosis). The patient achieved remission with minimal postponement of chemotherapy.

Conclusion

Only a few case reports have described the resumption of anticancer chemotherapy in patients with COVID-19. In deciding when to resume chemotherapy after COVID-19 infection, it is essential to consider factors such as cancer type, progression, and severity of COVID-19 and should be tailored to individual patient needs.

Completion rates and myelosuppression degrees of cancer patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy unchanged regardless of delay duration after Omicron infection

This study aimed to investigate impacts of Omicron infection on cancer patients in China. A retrospective study was conducted, including 347 cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy between July 2022 and March 2023. Three groups involved: 108 patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection (non-COVID-19 group), 102 patients beginning treatment 10 days after first SARS-CoV-2 infection (≥ 10 days COVID-19 group), and 137 patients beginning treatment less than 10 days after first SARS-CoV-2 infection (< 10 days COVID-19 group). SAA, hsCRP, ALT, etc., were used to assess COVID-19 infection. Serum levels of SAA, hsCRP and IL-6 were all raised in two COVID-19-infected groups (SAA < 0.01, hsCRP < 0.01, IL-6 < 0.05), but PCT, ALT, LDH and HBDH levels were only elevated in ≥ 10 days COVID-19 group (PCT = 0.0478, ALT = 0.0022, LDH = 0.0313, HBDH = 0.0077). Moreover, moderate and severe infected cases were higher in ≥ 10 days COVID-19 group than < 10 days COVID-19 group (12/102 vs 5/137, p = 0.0211), but no significance in myelosuppression and completion rates among three groups. Omicron infection led to inflammation, liver and cardiovascular injury on cancer patients, but delay duration of radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy after infection did not affect the completion rates and myelosuppression of current therapy. Besides, severity of Omicron infection was even worse among cancer patients who received delayed treatment.

Association of immune checkpoint inhibitors with SARS-CoV-2 infection rate and prognosis in patients with solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The rate and prognosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in patients with solid cancer tumors actively treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have not been fully determined. The goal of this meta-analysis was to explore this issue, which can be helpful to clinicians in their decision-making concerning patient treatment. We conducted a thorough search for relevant cohort studies in the databases PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Mortality and infection rate were the primary endpoints, and the incidence of severe or critical disease was the secondary result. A total of 6,267 cases (individual patients) were represented in 15 studies. Prior exposure to ICIs was not correlated with an elevated risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (relative risk (RR) 1.04, 95% CI 0.57-1.88, z = 0.12, P = 0.905) or mortality (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.99-1.50, z = 1.90, P = 0.057). However, the results of the meta-analysis revealed that taking ICIs before SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis increased the chance of developing severe or critical disease (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.09-2.10, z = 2.46, P = 0.014). No significant inter-study heterogeneity was observed. The infection and mortality rates of SARS-CoV-2 in patients with solid tumors who previously received ICIs or other antitumor therapies did not differ significantly. However, secondary outcomes showed that ICIs treatment before the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection was significantly associated with the probability of severe or critical illness.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails PROSPERO, identifier CRD42023393511.

Impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on cancer care: How the pandemic has changed cancer utilization and expenditures

PURPOSE

Since identified in December 2019, the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a global impact on medical resource use and costs for patients with cancer in South Korea. This study aimed to identify the medical use and costs among patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic, to predict these patterns in South Korea in the future.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary claims data analysis using the National Health Insurance Service database for the calendar period of 2019-2020. Monthly relative percent changes in cancer incidence, medical use, and billing costs for medical care utilization by cancer type were calculated. Then, the medical use and costs after January 2020 were predicted using a time series model with data before the COVID-19 outbreak (2014-2019).

RESULTS

The incidence of cancer diagnoses has seen a notable decline since the outbreak of the COVID-19 in 2020 as compared to 2019. Despite the impact of COVID-19, there hasn't been a distinct decline in outpatient utilization when compared to inpatient utilization. While medical expenses for both inpatient and outpatient visits have slightly increased, the number of patients treated for cancer has decreased significantly compared to the previous year. In June 2020, overall outpatient costs experienced the highest increase (21.1%), while individual costs showed the most significant decrease (-4.9%) in June 2020. Finally, the number of hospitalisations and outpatient visits increased slightly from June-July in 2020, reducing the difference between the actual and predicted values. The decrease in the number of inpatient hospitalisations (-22~-6%) in 2020 was also high.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall use of medical services by patients with cancer decreased in 2020 compared with that in the pre-COVID-19 pandemic period. In the future, the government should consider how to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic, and establish permanent health policies for patients with cancer.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes among critically ill patients with cancer and COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected individuals worldwide, and patients with cancer are particularly vulnerable to COVID-19-related severe illness, respiratory failure, and mortality. The relationship between COVID-19 and cancer remains a critical concern, and a comprehensive investigation of the factors affecting survival among patients with cancer who develop COVID-19-related respiratory failure is warranted. We aim to compare the characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure in patients with and without underlying cancer, while analyzing factors affecting in-hospital survival among cancer patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational study at Taipei Veterans General Hospital in Taiwan from May to September 2022, a period during which the omicron variant of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 was circulating. Eligible patients had COVID-19 and acute respiratory failure. Clinical data, demographic information, disease severity markers, treatment details, and outcomes were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 215 enrolled critically ill patients with COVID-19, 65 had cancer. The patients with cancer were younger and had lower absolute lymphocyte counts, higher ferritin and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) concentrations, and increased vasopressor use compared with those without cancer. The patients with cancer also received more COVID-19 specific treatments but had higher in-hospital mortality rate (61.5% vs 36%, P = 0.002) and longer viral shedding (13 vs 10 days, P = 0.007) than those without cancer did. Smoking [odds ratio (OR): 5.804, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.847-39.746], elevated LDH (OR: 1.004, 95% CI: 1.001-1.012), vasopressor use (OR: 5.437, 95% CI: 1.202-24.593), and new renal replacement therapy (OR: 3.523, 95% CI: 1.203-61.108) were independent predictors of in-hospital mortality among patients with cancer and respiratory failure.

CONCLUSION

Critically ill patients with cancer experiencing COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure present unique clinical features and worse clinical outcomes compared with those without cancer. Smoking, elevated LDH, vasopressor use, and new renal replacement therapy were risk factors for in-hospital mortality in these patients.

Strict self-isolation did not protect Swedish cancer patients on active treatment from the risk of becoming seropositive for SARS-CoV-2

BACKGROUND

Swedish recommendations to reduce the risk of COVID-19 relied on each citizen's own sense of responsibility rather than mandatory lockdowns. We studied how COVID-19-related self-isolation and anxiety correlated to SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity and PCR-positivity in patients with active cancer treatment.

METHODS

In a longitudinal cohort study at Uppsala University Hospital patients and cancer personnel were included between April 1st 2020 to August 1st 2020. Serological testing for SARS-CoV-2 was done every 8-12-weeks until 30 March 2021. Patients completed a survey at inclusion regarding self-reported COVID-19-related anxiety and self-isolation.

RESULTS

A total of 622 patients [n = 475 with solid malignancies (SM), n = 147 with haematological malignancies (HM)], and 358 healthcare personnel were included. The seropositivity rate was lower for patients than for personnel; 10.5% for SM patients, 6.8% for HM patients, and 16.2% for personnel (p = 0.005). Strict adherence to self-isolation guidelines was reported by 54% of patients but was not associated with a lower risk of becoming seropositive [OR = 1.4 (0.8-2.5), p = 0.2]. High anxiety was expressed by 32% of patients, more often by SM patients than HM patients (34% vs 25% [OR = 1.6 (1.1-2.5, p = 0.03)]). Female gender [OR = 3.5 (2.4-5.2), p < 0.001] and being born outside of Europe [OR = 2.9 (1.4-6.4), p = 0.007] were both associated with high anxiety. Patients reporting high anxiety became seropositive to a similar degree as those with low anxiety [OR = 0.7 (0.3-1.2), p = 0.2]. HM patients with PCR-positive COVID-19 were more likely than SM patients to require oxygen therapy, including non-invasive ventilation/intubation (69% vs. 26%, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

For Swedish patients on active cancer treatment, high self-assessed COVID-19-related anxiety or strict adherence to self-isolation guidelines were not associated with a lower risk of COVID-19. Patients with HM were less likely to develop serological antibody response after COVID-19 and were more likely to require advanced hospital care, but expressed less COVID-19-related anxiety than patients with SM.

Mortality of COVID-19 in patients with hematological malignancies versus solid tumors: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Cancer patients are more vulnerable to COVID-19 compared to the general population, but it remains unclear which types of cancer have the highest risk of COVID-19-related mortality. This study examines mortality rates for those with hematological malignancies (Hem) versus solid tumors (Tumor). PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for relevant articles using Nested Knowledge software (Nested Knowledge, St Paul, MN). Articles were eligible for inclusion if they reported mortality for Hem or Tumor patients with COVID-19. Articles were excluded if they were not published in English, non-clinical studies, had insufficient population/outcomes reporting, or were irrelevant. Baseline characteristics collected included age, sex, and comorbidities. Primary outcomes were all-cause and COVID-19-related in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included rates of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Effect sizes from each study were computed as logarithmically transformed odds ratios (ORs) with random-effects, Mantel-Haenszel weighting. The between-study variance component of random-effects models was computed using restricted effects maximum likelihood estimation, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) around pooled effect sizes were calculated using Hartung-Knapp adjustments. In total, 12,057 patients were included in the analysis, with 2,714 (22.5%) patients in the Hem group and 9,343 (77.5%) patients in the Tumor group. The overall unadjusted odds of all-cause mortality were 1.64 times higher in the Hem group compared to the Tumor group (95% CI: 1.30-2.09). This finding was consistent with multivariable models presented in moderate- and high-quality cohort studies, suggestive of a causal effect of cancer type on in-hospital mortality. Additionally, the Hem group had increased odds of COVID-19-related mortality compared to the Tumor group (OR = 1.86 [95% CI: 1.38-2.49]). There was no significant difference in odds of IMV or ICU admission between cancer groups (OR = 1.13 [95% CI: 0.64-2.00] and OR = 1.59 [95% CI: 0.95-2.66], respectively). Cancer is a serious comorbidity associated with severe outcomes in COVID-19 patients, with especially alarming mortality rates in patients with hematological malignancies, which are typically higher compared to patients with solid tumors. A meta-analysis of individual patient data is needed to better assess the impact of specific cancer types on patient outcomes and to identify optimal treatment strategies.

Pharmacotherapy and pulmonary fibrosis risk after SARS-CoV-2 infection: a prospective nationwide cohort study in the United States

Background

Pulmonary fibrosis is characterized by lung parenchymal destruction and can increase morbidity and mortality. Pulmonary fibrosis commonly occurs following hospitalization for SARS-CoV-2 infection. As there are medications that modify pulmonary fibrosis risk, we investigated whether distinct pharmacotherapies (amiodarone, cancer chemotherapy, corticosteroids, and rituximab) are associated with differences in post-COVID-19 pulmonary fibrosis incidence.

Methods

We used the National COVID-19 Cohort Collaboration (N3C) Data Enclave, which aggregates and harmonizes COVID-19 data across the United States, to assess pulmonary fibrosis incidence documented at least 60 days after COVID-19 diagnosis among adults hospitalized between January 1st, 2020 and July 6th, 2022 without pre-existing pulmonary fibrosis. We used propensity scores to match pre-COVID-19 drug-exposed and unexposed cohorts (1:1) based on covariates with known influence on pulmonary fibrosis incidence, and estimated the association of drug exposure with risk for post-COVID-19 pulmonary fibrosis. Sensitivity analyses considered pulmonary fibrosis incidence documented at least 30- or 90-days post-hospitalization and pulmonary fibrosis incidence in the COVID-19-negative N3C population.

Findings

Among 5,923,394 patients with COVID-19, we analyzed 452,951 hospitalized adults, among whom pulmonary fibrosis incidence was 1.1 per 100-person-years. 277,984 hospitalized adults with COVID-19 were included in our primary analysis, among whom all drug exposed cohorts were well-matched to unexposed cohorts (standardized mean differences <0.1). The post-COVID-19 pulmonary fibrosis incidence rate ratio (IRR) was 2.5 (95% CI 1.2-5.1, P = 0.01) for rituximab, 1.6 (95% CI 1.3-2.0, P < 0.0001) for chemotherapy, and 1.2 (95% CI 1.0-1.3, P = 0.02) for corticosteroids. Amiodarone exposure had no significant association with post-COVID-19 pulmonary fibrosis (IRR = 0.8, 95% CI 0.6-1.1, P = 0.24). In sensitivity analyses, pre-COVID-19 corticosteroid use was not consistently associated with post-COVID-19 pulmonary fibrosis. In the COVID-19 negative hospitalized population (n = 1,240,461), pulmonary fibrosis incidence was lower overall (0.6 per 100-person-years) and for patients exposed to all four drugs.

Interpretation

Recent rituximab or cancer chemotherapy before COVID-19 infection in hospitalized patients is associated with increased risk for post-COVID-19 pulmonary fibrosis.

Funding

The analyses described in this publication were conducted with data or tools accessed through the NCATS N3C Data Enclave https://covid.cd2h.org and N3C Attribution & Publication Policy v1.2-2020-08-25b supported by NIHK23HL146942, NIHK08HL150291, NIHK23HL148387, NIHUL1TR002389, NCATSU24 TR002306, and a SECURED grant from the Walder Foundation/Center for Healthcare Delivery Science and Innovation, University of Chicago. WFP received a grant from the Greenwall Foundation. This research was possible because of the patients whose information is included within the data and the organizations (https://ncats.nih.gov/n3c/resources/data-contribution/data-transfer-agreement-signatories) and scientists who have contributed to the on-going development of this community resource (https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaa196).

The impact of immunocompromise on outcomes of COVID-19 in children and young people-a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Despite children and young people (CYP) having a low risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes, there is still a degree of uncertainty related to their risk in the context of immunodeficiency or immunosuppression, primarily due to significant reporting bias in most studies, as CYP characteristically experience milder or asymptomatic COVID-19 infection and the severe outcomes tend to be overestimated.

Methods

A comprehensive systematic review to identify globally relevant studies in immunosuppressed CYP and CYP in general population (defined as younger than 25 years of age) up to 31 October 2021 (to exclude vaccinated populations) was performed. Studies were included if they reported the two primary outcomes of our study, admission to intensive therapy unit (ITU) and mortality, while data on other outcomes, such as hospitalization and need for mechanical ventilation were also collected. A meta-analysis estimated the pooled proportion for each severe COVID-19 outcome, using the inverse variance method. Random effects models were used to account for interstudy heterogeneity.

Findings

The systematic review identified 30 eligible studies for each of the two populations investigated: immunosuppressed CYP (n = 793) and CYP in general population (n = 102,022). Our meta-analysis found higher estimated prevalence for hospitalization (46% vs. 16%), ITU admission (12% vs. 2%), mechanical ventilation (8% vs. 1%), and increased mortality due to severe COVID-19 infection (6.5% vs. 0.2%) in immunocompromised CYP compared with CYP in general population. This shows an overall trend for more severe outcomes of COVID-19 infection in immunocompromised CYP, similar to adult studies.

Interpretation

This is the only up-to-date meta-analysis in immunocompromised CYP with high global relevance, which excluded reports from hospitalized cohorts alone and included 35% studies from low- and middle-income countries. Future research is required to characterize individual subgroups of immunocompromised patients, as well as impact of vaccination on severe COVID-19 outcomes.

Systematic Review Registration

PROSPERO identifier, CRD42021278598.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal cancers

Gastrointestinal (GI) cancer is one of the leading causes of death that affect many patients around the world. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic significantly impacted our healthcare system in large that diagnosis and management of GI cancer have suffered with a reduction in cancer screening. This review will describe the current practices of cancer screening during COVID-19 pandemic and summarize how each GI cancer (esophageal, gastric, colorectal, and hepatocellular cancers) has been affected by COVID-19. World widely there has been a decreasing trend in screening, diagnosis, and management of GI cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many healthcare institutions are now observing the effect of this change and implementing practice variations to adapt to the pandemic.

Epidemiological study of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 and its impact on COVID-19 progression in a cohort of patients in gran Canaria

Objectives. We analyzed the impact of age, sex, vaccination against COVID-19, immunosuppressive treatment, and comorbidities on patients' risk of requiring hospital admission or of death. Methods. Population-based observational retrospective study conducted on a cohort of 19,850 patients aged 12 years or more, who were diagnosed with COVID-19 between June 1st and December 31st, 2021, in the island of Gran Canaria. Results. Hypertension (18.5%), asthma (12.8%) and diabetes (7.2%) were the most frequent comorbidities; 147 patients died (0.7%). The combination of advanced age, male sex, cancer, coronary heart disease, immunosuppressive treatment, hospital admission, admission to the intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation and lack of complete COVID-19 vaccination or booster dose was strongly predictive of mortality (p < 0.05); 831 patients required hospital admission and it was more frequent in men, older age groups, and patients with cancer, diabetes, arterial hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure or immunosuppressive treatment. The COVID-19 vaccine booster dose was associated with a lower risk of death ([OR] 0.11, 95% CI 0.06-0.21, p < 0.05) or hospital admission ([OR] 0.36, 95% CI 0.29-0.46, p < 0.05). Conclusions. Cancer, coronary heart disease, and immunosuppressive treatment were associated with increased COVID-19 mortality. More complete vaccination was associated with lower risk of hospital admission or death. Three doses of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine were highly associated with the prevention of death and hospital admission in all age groups. These findings suggest that COVID-19 vaccination can help bring the pandemic under control.

Association between the COVID-19 pandemic and first cancer treatment modality: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Physicians were directed to prioritize using nonsurgical cancer treatment at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to quantify the impact of this policy on the modality of first cancer treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy or no treatment).

METHODS

In this population-based study using Ontario data from linked administrative databases, we identified adults diagnosed with cancer from January 2016 to November 2020 and their first cancer treatment received within 1 year postdiagnosis. Segmented Poisson regressions were applied to each modality to estimate the change in mean 1-year recipient volume per thousand patients (rate) at the start of the pandemic (the week of Mar. 15, 2020) and change in the weekly trend in rate during the pandemic (Mar. 15, 2020, to Nov. 7, 2020) relative to before the pandemic (Jan. 3, 2016, to Mar. 14, 2020).

RESULTS

We included 321 535 people diagnosed with cancer. During the first week of the COVID-19 pandemic, the mean rate of receiving upfront surgery over the next year declined by 9% (rate ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88-0.95), and chemotherapy and radiotherapy rates rose by 30% (rate ratio 1.30, 95% CI 1.23-1.36) and 13% (rate ratio 1.13, 95% CI 1.07-1.19), respectively. Subsequently, the 1-year rate of upfront surgery increased at 0.4% for each week (rate ratio 1.004, 95% CI 1.002-1.006), and chemotherapy and radiotherapy rates decreased by 0.9% (rate ratio 0.991, 95% CI 0.989-0.994) and 0.4% (rate ratio 0.996, 95% CI 0.994-0.998), respectively, per week. Rates of each modality resumed to prepandemic levels at 24-31 weeks into the pandemic.

INTERPRETATION

An immediate and sustained increase in use of nonsurgical therapy as the first cancer treatment occurred during the first 8 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario. Further research is needed to understand the consequences.

Comparison of mortality in patients on chemotherapy or immunotherapy during and before COVID-19 pandemic. Multicenter matched cohort study in Argentina

OBJECTIVES.

Motivation for the study. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the risk of death in cancer patients on chemotherapy and immunotherapy is controversial. Published studies mainly compared patients on anti-cancer therapy to those off treatment or COVID-19 positive cancer patients to COVID-19 negative ones. Few studies were conducted in developing countries. Main findings. Mortality didn't increase in unvaccinated outpatients on active intravenous oncology treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. Implications. This is the first propensity score-matched cohort study evaluating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the population of unvaccinated oncology patients receiving intravenous anticancer therapy. . To compare all-cause mortality of unvaccinated oncology patients who received chemotherapy or immunotherapy during the pandemic with those treated before the pandemic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS.

We conducted a cohort study in four tertiary hospitals in Argentina. Outpatients with a solid neoplasm of any stage under-going cytotoxic or intravenous immunotherapy were eligible. The pandemic cohort was enrolled during the initial phase of the outbreak and compared with a pre-pandemic cohort using propensity score matching (PSM). Subjects were matched for age, sex, health insurance, risk factors for severe COVID-19 complications, performance status, cancer type and treatment, line of treatment, and body mass index. All-cause mortality was estimated for both cohorts after 6 months of follow-up.

RESULTS.

A total of 169 patients were recruited between April and August 2020 for the pandemic cohort and 377 for the pre-pandemic cohort in the same months of 2019; 168 patients were matched. After PSM, all-cause mortality was 17.9% in the pandemic cohort and 18.5% in the pre-pandemic cohort; the Relative Risk was 0.97 (95 % confidence interval: 0.61-1.52; p=0.888). In the pandemic cohort, 30/168 patients died, but none from COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS.

Our findings show that the mortality rate of unvaccinated ambulatory patients on active intravenous oncology treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic did not increase.

Early survival for patients newly diagnosed with cancer during COVID-19 in Ontario, Canada: A population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the association between the COVID-19 pandemic and early survival among newly diagnosed cancer patients.

METHODS

This retrospective population-based cohort study used linked administrative datasets from Ontario, Canada. Adults (≥18 years) who received a cancer diagnosis between March 15 and December 31, 2020, were included in a pandemic cohort, while those diagnosed during the same dates in 2018/2019 were included in a pre-pandemic cohort. All patients were followed for one full year after the date of diagnosis. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to assess survival in relation to the pandemic, patient characteristics at diagnosis, and the modality of first cancer treatment as a time-varying covariate. Interaction terms were explored to measure the pandemic association with survival for each cancer type.

RESULTS

Among 179,746 patients, 53,387 (29.7%) were in the pandemic cohort and 37,741 (21.0%) died over the first post-diagnosis year. No association between the pandemic and survival was found when adjusting for patient characteristics at diagnosis (HR 0.99 [95% CI 0.96-1.01]), while marginally better survival was found for the pandemic cohort when the modality of treatment was additionally considered (HR 0.97 [95% CI 0.95-0.99]). When examining each cancer type, only a new melanoma diagnosis was associated with a worse survival in the pandemic cohort (HR 1.25 [95% CI 1.05-1.49]).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients able to receive a cancer diagnosis during the pandemic, one-year overall survival was not different than those diagnosed in the previous 2 years. This study highlights the complex nature of the COVID-19 pandemic impact on cancer care.

Cancer, more than a “COVID-19 co-morbidity”

Patients with cancer represent a particularly vulnerable population at risk of adverse outcomes related to COVID-19. Collectively, the initial studies, including patients with and without cancer, confirmed that patients with cancer had a higher risk of complications and death related to COVID-19. Subsequent studies on patients with COVID-19 and cancer investigated patient and disease-related factors associated with COVID-19 severity and morality. Multiple interconnected factors include demographics, comorbidities, cancer-associated variables, treatment side effects, and other parameters. However, there is a lack of clarity on the contributions of any one factor. In this commentary, we deconvolute the data of specific risk factors associated with worse outcomes due to COVID-19 in cancer patients and focus on understanding the recommended guidelines to mitigate COVID-19 risk in this vulnerable population. In the first section, we highlight the key parameters, including age and race, cancer status, type of malignancy, cancer therapy, smoking status and comorbidities that impact outcomes for cancer patients with COVID-19. Next, we discuss efforts made at the patient, health system, and population levels to mitigate the effects of the ongoing outbreak for patients with cancer, including (1) screening, barrier and isolation strategies (2), Masking/PPE (3), vaccination, and (4) systemic therapies (e.g., evusheld) to prevent disease onset in patients. In the last section, we discuss optimal treatment strategies for COVID-19, including additional therapies for patients with COVID-19 and cancer. Overall, this commentary focuses on articles with high yield and impact on understanding the evolving evidence of risk factors and management guidelines in detail. We also emphasize the ongoing collaboration between clinicians, researchers, health system administrators and policymakers and how its role will be important in optimizing care delivery strategies for patients with cancer. Creative patient-centered solutions will be critical in the coming years, post the pandemic.

Risk Factors of Severe COVID-19: A Review of Host, Viral and Environmental Factors

The clinical course and outcome of COVID-19 are highly variable, ranging from asymptomatic infections to severe disease and death. Understanding the risk factors of severe COVID-19 is relevant both in the clinical setting and at the epidemiological level. Here, we provide an overview of host, viral and environmental factors that have been shown or (in some cases) hypothesized to be associated with severe clinical outcomes. The factors considered in detail include the age and frailty, genetic polymorphisms, biological sex (and pregnancy), co- and superinfections, non-communicable comorbidities, immunological history, microbiota, and lifestyle of the patient; viral genetic variation and infecting dose; socioeconomic factors; and air pollution. For each category, we compile (sometimes conflicting) evidence for the association of the factor with COVID-19 outcomes (including the strength of the effect) and outline possible action mechanisms. We also discuss the complex interactions between the various risk factors.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Care

We assessed the impact of COVID-19 on healthcare visits, timing of stage IV NSCLC diagnosis and immunotherapy initiation, and rates of switching to extended dosing schedules of immunotherapies among patients with stage IV NSCLC. This retrospective study examined electronic health record data of adult patients receiving treatment for stage IV NSCLC within The US Oncology Network and Onmark. Endpoints were compared for February-July 2019 (before COVID) vs. February-July 2020 (during COVID). The study found rapid decreases in numbers of patients with clinic/vital visits, immunotherapy initiations, and new diagnoses of stage IV NSCLC during April-May 2020 vs. April-May 2019. The rate of delays of immunotherapy administrations and proportions of patients with such delays increased from February to March of 2020. These patterns may have resulted from the increase in COVID-19 cases during this period and the corresponding quarantine and lockdowns. However, when comparing pre COVID-19 and during COVID-19 for May and after, the differences in delay of immuno-oncology administrations became less marked, likely due to lifting of lockdowns. The rate of switching from shorter to longer dosing schedules increased from May-July 2020. This was mainly attributed to pembrolizumab, likely due to FDA approval of the pembrolizumab 6W dosing schedule in April 2020.

Add fuel to the fire: Inflammation and immune response in lung cancer combined with COVID-19

The corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic has had an unprecedented and persistent impact on oncological practice, especially for patients with lung cancer, who are more vulnerable to the virus than the normal population. Indeed, the onset, progression, and prognosis of the two diseases may in some cases influence each other, and inflammation is an important link between them. The original chronic inflammatory environment of lung cancer patients may increase the risk of infection with COVID-19 and exacerbate secondary damage. Meanwhile, the acute inflammation caused by COVID-19 may induce tumour progression or cause immune activation. In this article, from the perspective of the immune microenvironment, the pathophysiological changes in the lungs and whole body of these special patients will be summarised and analysed to explore the possible immunological storm, immunosuppression, and immune escape phenomenon caused by chronic inflammation complicated by acute inflammation. The effects of COVID-19 on immune cells, inflammatory factors, chemokines, and related target proteins in the immune microenvironment of tumours are also discussed, as well as the potential role of the COVID-19 vaccine and immune checkpoint inhibitors in this setting. Finally, we provide recommendations for the treatment of lung cancer combined with COVID-19 in this special group.

Real world outcomes in cancer patients with COVID-19 infection: Northern Ireland experience

Background

Cancer has been assumed to be associated with a high-risk of morbidity and mortality from COVID-19. Protective measures have incorporated modifications in cancer treatments. There are conflicting data about the impact of COVID-19 infection and outcomes in cancer patients. We aim to describe the impact of demographic and clinical characteristics on COVID-19 outcomes in patients with cancer in Northern Ireland reported within the UK Coronavirus Cancer Monitoring Project (UKCCMP).

Method

Prospective data collection including demographics, cancer stage and type, treatment and outcomes occurred for all Northern Irish patients enrolled in the UKCCMP. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analysis were performed using SPSSv25.

Results

Between March 2020 and March 2021, 110 cases were registered. Median age was 63 years (range 27 to 87). Seventy patients (63.6%) were >60 years and 59 (53.8%) were females. Co-morbidities were reported in 83 patients (72.7%). Most patients had metastatic disease (64, 58.2%). Sixty-seven patients (60.9%) received anticancer treatment in the 4 weeks prior to COVID-19 infection. Of those patients, 35 (52.2%) received chemotherapy. Thirty-nine patients (58.2%) continued treatment as planned; 24 (36.9%) stopped treatment due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The majority of patients were asymptomatic or experienced mild symptoms (67, 60.9%). Fifty-one (46.3%%) were admitted to hospital for COVID-19. Risk of severe/critical COVID-19 disease was significantly associated with age (OR 1.07 [95% CI 1.03-1.11); p=0.004), pre-existing hypertension (OR 3.29 [95% CI 1.42-7.62]; p=0.02) and thoracic primary malignancy (OR 4.41 [95% CI 1.52-12.74]; p=0.042). Twenty-nine patients (26.3%) died of whom 15 (57.7%) died of COVID-19 and 13 (44.8%) died due to cancer. Risk of death was significantly associated with age (OR 1.05 [95% CI 1.01-1.09]; p=0.014), male sex (OR 3.76 [95% CI 1.51-9.34]; p=0.008) and thoracic primary malignancy (OR 5.35 [95% CI 1.88-15.25]; p=0.014). When corrected for age, gender and co-morbidities, chemotherapy within the past 4 weeks was not significantly associated with mortality (OR 0.65 [95% CI 0.20-2.11]; p=0.476).

Conclusion

Age and thoracic cancer diagnosis correlated with survival. Comparison of performance during the pandemic with national benchmarks can inform how regional services should be adapted in preparation for future healthcare crises.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Impact of Covid-19 on the management of patients with metastatic melanoma

The Covid-19 pandemic created new uncertainties in the management of metastatic melanoma patients. In particular, the impact of immunotherapy, targeted therapy, or chemotherapy on the risk of Sars-CoV-2 infection and severity was debated. In this study, we analyzed all patients with metastatic melanoma receiving therapy who developed Covid-19 between February 2020 and February 2022. We retrospectively collected demographic data, cancer-specific parameters, melanoma treatment regimen, comorbidities and Covid-19-specific parameters in these patients. Of the 350 patients with metastatic melanoma, 25 had Covid-19. The median age at the time of Covid-19 diagnosis was 66 years (range 36-86), 10 patients were female, and 15 patients were male. The treatment regimen during infection was immunotherapy in 12 cases, followed by targeted therapy (n = 8), chemotherapy (n = 2), and TVEC injections, follow-up and palliative therapy in 1 case each. The severity was mild in 17 patients and 8 had a moderate to critical course. Patients with a severe Covid-19 course were often older and had more comorbidities than patients with a mild infection. Many of the patients had a mild Covid-19 course despite having metastatic melanoma and systemic therapy. We therefore recommend continuing systemic therapy whenever possible, even in such exceptional situations as the Covid-19 pandemic.

Antibody response to a third booster dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in adults with haematological and solid cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patients living with cancer are at a significantly increased risk of morbidity and mortality after infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). This systematic review aims to investigate the current available evidence about the immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccines in patients living with cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search was undertaken for studies published until March 1, 2022. A systematic narrative review was undertaken to include all studies that evaluated the efficacy of booster vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with cancer.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies encompassing 1205 patients with cancer were included. We found that a booster vaccine dose induced a higher response in patients with solid cancer as compared to haematological malignancies. Recent systemic anticancer therapy does not appear to affect seroconversion in solid organ malignancies, however, there is an association between B-cell depleting therapies and poor seroconversion in haematological patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Third booster vaccination induces an improved antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 in adults with haematological and solid cancer, relative to patients who only receive two doses. Access to vaccination boosters should be made available to patients at risk of poor immunological responses, and the provision of fourth doses may be of benefit to this vulnerable population.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO number CRD42021270420.

Intracranial drainage versus extracranial shunt in the treatment of intracranial arachnoid cysts: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature and analyze the efficacy and safety of two surgery procedures, intracranial drainage and extracranial shunt, for intracranial arachnoid cysts.

METHODS

We searched the online Medlars, PubMed, and Cochrane Central electronic databases and collected studies of patients with intracranial arachnoid cysts treated with two surgical methods.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis results shows that there were not statistically significant in clinical symptoms improvement, cyst reduction, the improvement of epilepsy, epidural hematoma, cerebrospinal fluid leak, and recurrence rate (P > 0.05, with RR values are 0.99, 0.94, 1.00, 0.94, 1.21, and 0.75 respectively). There was statistically significant in the occurrence rate of intracranial infection (P = 0.0004, RR = 0.28). The intracranial drainage group was lower than extracranial shunt group.

CONCLUSION

The results indicated that the efficacy and safety of two surgery procedures are similar in the treatment of intracranial arachnoid cysts, but the intracranial drainage was better than extracranial shunt in reducing the risk of intracranial infection.

Immunogenicity of two doses of inactive COVID-19 vaccine and third booster dose mRNA vaccine in patients with cancer receiving active systemic therapy

We aimed to evaluate the seroconversion rates after two doses of inactive COVID-19 vaccine (CoronaVac) and the benefit of a third dose mRNA vaccine booster in patients with cancer receiving active treatment. Patients with solid tumors receiving active treatment (n = 101) and patients with no-cancer (n = 48) as the control group were included in the study. All the patients and controls had received two doses of CoronaVac and a third booster dose of the mRNA vaccine (Bnt162b2). Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Spike Receptor Binding Domain IgG antibody levels after the second and third dose were measured with quantitative ELISA. The median age of the patients was 66 (IQR 60-71). 79% of the patients were receiving chemotherapy, and 21% were receiving immunotherapy at the time of vaccination. Antibody levels measured after two doses of CoronaVac were significantly lower in patients with cancer than in the control group (median 0 μg/ml [IQR 0-1.17 μg/ml] vs median 0.91 μg/ml [IQR 0-2.24 μg/ml], respectively, P = .002). Seropositivity rates were 46.5% in patients with cancer and 72.9% in the control group (P = .002). Antibody measurement was performed in 26 patients after the third dose. Seroconversion rate increased from 46.5% to 88.5% (P < .001), and the antibody titers significantly increased with the third-dose booster (median 0 μg/ml [IQR 0-1.17 μg/ml] after two doses vs 12.6 μg/ml [IQR 1.8-69.1 μg/ml] after third booster dose, P < .001). Immunogenicity of CoronaVac is low in patients with cancer receiving active treatment, and administering a third dose of an mRNA vaccine is effective in terms of improving seroconversion rates.

Colorectal cancer in patients with SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) are more likely to develop severe course of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and experience increased risk of mortality compared to SARS-CoV-2 patients without CRC.

Objectives

To estimate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in CRC patients and analyse the demographic parameters, clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes in CRC patients with COVID-19 illness.

Methods

For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched Proquest, Medline, Embase, Pubmed, CINAHL, Wiley online library, Scopus and Nature for studies on the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in CRC patients, published from December 1, 2019 to December 31, 2021, with English language restriction. Effect sizes of prevalence were pooled with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Sub-group analyses were performed to minimize heterogeneity. Binary logistic regression model was used to explore the effect of various demographic and clinical characteristics on patient’s final treatment outcome (survival or death).

Results

Of the 472 papers that were identified, 69 articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis (41 cohort, 16 case-report, 9 case-series, 2 cross-sectional, and 1 case-control studies). Studies involving 3362 CRC patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 (all patients were adults) were analyzed. The overall pooled proportions of CRC patients who had laboratory-confirmed community-acquired and hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infections were 8.1% (95% CI 6.1 to 10.1, n = 1308, 24 studies, I² 98%, p = 0.66), and 1.5% (95% CI 1.1 to 1.9, n = 472, 27 studies, I² 94%, p < 0.01). The median patient age ranged from 51.6 years to 80 years across studies. The majority of the patients were male (n = 2243, 66.7%) and belonged to White (Caucasian) (n = 262, 7.8%), Hispanic (n = 156, 4.6%) and Asian (n = 153, 4.4%) ethnicity. The main source of SARS-CoV-2 infection in CRC patients was community-acquired (n = 2882, 85.7%; p = 0.014). Most of those SARS-CoV-2 patients had stage III CRC (n = 725, 21.6%; p = 0.036) and were treated mainly with surgical resections (n = 304, 9%) and chemotherapies (n = 187, 5.6%), p = 0.008. The odd ratios of death were significantly high in patients with old age (≥ 60 years) (OR 1.96, 95% CI 0.94–0.96; p < 0.001), male gender (OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.41–0.47; p < 0.001) CRC stage III (OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.02–1.05; p = 0.041), CRC stage IV (OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.17–1.2; p = 0.009), recent active treatment with chemotherapies (OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.5–0.66; p = 0.023) or surgical resections (OR 1.4, 95% CI 0.8–0.73; p = 0.016) and admission to ICU (OR 1.88, 95% CI 0.85–1.12; p < 0.001) compared to those who survived.

Conclusion

SARS-CoV-2 infection in CRC patient is not uncommon and results in a mortality rate of 26.2%. Key determinants that lead to increased mortality in CRC patients infected with COVID-19 include older age (≥ 60 years old); male gender; Asian and Hispanic ethnicity; if SARS-CoV-2 was acquired from hospital source; advanced CRC (stage III and IV); if patient received chemotherapies or surgical treatment; and if patient was admitted to ICU, ventilated or experienced ARDS.

SARS-CoV-2 Virus in Cancer Patients: A New Unknown in an Unsolved Equation

INTRODUCTION

Cancer patients are more susceptible to infections, and infection can be more severe than in patients without cancer diagnosis. We conducted this retrospective study in patients admitted for SARS-CoV-2 infection in order to find differences in inflammatory markers and mortality in cancer patients compared to others.

METHODS

We reviewed the electronic records of patients admitted for SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by PCR from March to September 2020. Data on socio-demographics, comorbidities, inflammatory makers, and cancer-related features were analyzed.

RESULTS

2,772 patients were admitted for SARS-CoV-2, to the Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal in Madrid during this period. Of these, 2,527 (91%) had no history of neoplastic disease, 164 (5.9%) patients had a prior history of cancer but were not undergoing oncological treatment at the time of infection, and 81 (2.9%) were in active treatment. Mortality in patients without a history of cancer was 19.5%, 28.6% for patients with a prior history of cancer, and 34% in patients with active cancer treatment. Patients in active oncology treatment with the highest mortality rate were those diagnosed with lung cancer (OR 5.6 95% CI: 2.2-14.1). In the multivariate study, active oncological treatment (OR 2.259 95% CI: 1.35-3.77) and chemotherapy treatment (OR 3.624 95% CI: 1.17-11.17), were statistically significant factors for the risk of death for the whole group and for the group with active oncological treatment, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Cancer patients on active systemic treatment have an increased risk of mortality after SARS-CoV-2 infection, especially with lung cancer or chemotherapy treatment.

Comprehensive adjusted outcome data are needed to assess the impact of immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients with COVID-19: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Determining how prior immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy influences outcomes in cancer patients presenting with COVID-19 is essential for patient management but must account for confounding variables.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting adjusted effects of ICIs on survival, severe events, or hospitalisation in cancer patients with COVID-19 based on variables including age, gender, diabetes mellitus, hypertension (HTN), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and other comorbidities. When adjusted effects were unavailable, unadjusted data were analysed.

RESULTS

Of 42 observational studies (38 retrospective), 7 reported adjusted outcomes for ICIs and 2 provided sufficient individual patient data to calculate adjusted outcomes. In eight studies, adjusted outcomes were based on ≤7 variables. Over all studies, only one included >100 ICI patients while 26 included <10. ICIs did not alter the odds ratio (95%CI) (OR) of death significantly (random effects model), across adjusted (n = 8) [1.31 (0.58-2.95) p = 0.46; I2  = 42%, p = 0.10], unadjusted (n = 30) [1.06 (0.85-1.32) p = 0.58; I2  = 0%, p = 0.76] or combined [1.09 (0.88;1.36) p = 0.41; I2  = 0%, p = 0.5)] studies. Similarly, ICIs did not alter severe events significantly across adjusted (n = 5) [1.20 (0.30-4.74) p = 0.73; I2  = 52%, p = 0.08], unadjusted (n = 19) [(1.23 (0.87-1.75) p = 0.23; I2  = 16%, p = 0.26] or combined [1.26 (0.90-1.77) p = 0.16; I2  = 25%, p = 0.14] studies. Two studies provided adjusted hospitalisation data and when combined with 13 unadjusted studies, ICIs did not alter hospitalisation significantly [1.19 (0.85-1.68) p = 029; I2  = 5%, p = 0.40]. Results of sensitivity analyses examining ICI effects based on 5 variables were inconclusive. Certainty of evidence was very low.

CONCLUSIONS

Across studies with adjusted and unadjusted results, ICIs did not alter outcomes significantly. But studies with comprehensive adjusted outcome data controlling for confounding variables are necessary to determine whether ICIs impact COVID-19 outcomes in cancer patients.

Alarming Drop in Early Stage Colorectal Cancer Diagnoses After COVID-19 Outbreak: A Real-World Analysis from the Italian COVID-DELAY Study

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has triggered the disruption of health care on a global scale. With Italy tangled up in the pandemic response, oncology care has been largely diverted and cancer screenings suspended. Our multicenter Italian study aimed to evaluate whether COVID-19 has impacted access to diagnosis, staging, and treatment for patients newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC), compared with pre-pandemic time.

METHODS

All consecutive new CRC patients referred to 8 Italian oncology institutions between March and December 2020 were included. Access rate and temporal intervals between date of symptoms onset, radiological and cytohistological diagnosis, treatment start and first radiological evaluation were analyzed and compared with the same months of 2019.

RESULTS

A reduction (29%) in newly diagnosed CRC cases was seen when compared with 2019 (360 vs 506). New CRC patients in 2020 were less likely to be diagnosed with early stage (stages I-II-III) CRC (63% vs 78%, P < .01). Gender and sidedness were similar regardless of the year. The percentage of tumors with any mutation among BRAF, NRAS, and KRAS genes were significantly different between the 2 years (61% in 2020 vs 50% in 2019, P = .04). Timing of access to cancer diagnosis, staging, and treatment for patients with CRC has not been negatively affected by the pandemic. Significantly shorter temporal intervals were observed between symptom onset and first oncological appointment (69 vs 79 days, P = .01) and between histological diagnosis and first oncological appointment (34 vs 42 days, P < .01) during 2020 compared with 2019. Fewer CRC cases were discussed in multidisciplinary meetings during 2020 (38% vs 50%, P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data highlight a significant drop in CRC diagnosis after COVID-19, especially for early stage disease. The study also reveals a remarkable setback in the multidisciplinary management of patients with CRC. Despite this, Italian oncologists were able to ensure diagnostic-therapeutic pathways proper operation after March 2020.

Milano Policlinico ONCOVID modified Score for risk evaluation in oncology during the COVID-19 pandemic: a prospective monocentric study

PURPOSE

Due to their immunosuppressed status, patients with cancer have been reported to be at increased risk of COVID-19 infection. We aimed to assess the prevalence of COVID-19 in patients with cancer and to identify its risk factors.

METHODS

A prospective study was conducted at the Department of Medical oncology of Sfax from November 2020 to February 2021. We analyzed data of 226 patients treated for solid cancer. We used the Milano Policlinico ONCOVID modified Score to quantify the risk of infection in patients with cancer.

RESULTS

Patients aged less than 70 years represented 85%. The most common primary tumors were breast cancer (37%) and colorectal cancer (22%). Comorbidities were observed in 39% of cases. Among 226 patients with cancer, 19 patients (8.4%) had COVID-19 disease. In 42% of cases, patients were under chemotherapy and 63% of them have a metastatic disease. Fifteen patients (79%) were symptomatic. A severe form of COVID-19 requiring hospitalization was seen in 4 patients (21%). Of 19 patients who tested positive for COVID-19, 47% had an intermediate and high risk of infection. COVID-19 infection was correlated with intermediate or high risk (p = 0.018), age < 70 years (p = 0.035), and chemotherapy treatment (p = 0.032). In multivariable analysis, only the intermediate or high risk were correlated with COVID-19 infection in cancer patient (p = 0.025).

CONCLUSION

This study concluded that using the Milano Policlinico ONCOVID modified Score is very helpful for clinicians to identify vulnerable patients and to make the appropriate decision in the management of cancer patients.

The national COVID-19 vaccination campaign targeting the extremely vulnerable: the Florence Medical Oncology Unit experience in patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

International and national oncology societies had released recommendations in favor of COVID-19 vaccination in cancer patients. In the context of the national vaccination campaign targeting the so called extremely vulnerable, we aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of the mRNA vaccines in a cohort of 623 patients.

METHODS

Between March 26 and April 04, 2021, the Pfizer and BioNTech BNT162b2 mRNA and the Moderna mRNA-1273 vaccines were given as a two-dose prime-boost regimen. Starting on September 25th 2021 a third dose was offered to patients in whom a suboptimal immunogenicity with COVID-19 vaccination could be expected. Safety assessments were performed by phone call 7 days after each dose. Electronic health records were accessed to review demographic information, disease history, treatment detail, and outcome events of participants patients'.

FINDINGS

No toxicities were reported in 63.7%, 54%, and in 48.7% patients with cancer after each dose. Mild-to-moderate pain at the injection site was the most commonly adverse event. After the second dose, 46% of the 610 patients reported toxicity, with more systemic side-effects observed. Fever was reported in 45% of patients, with a temperature ≥ 38 °C in 21.4% of them. Of the 335 patients receiving a third vaccine dose, 51% reported toxicity, with 13% of patients reporting more than one effect. Logistic regression analysis reported mixed results, with limited variables or categories reporting a significant odd ratio. The type of vaccine reported a significant value at first dose (OR = 0.12; CI 0.52, 0.26; p = 0.00). Thirty-four cases of COVID-19 infection were reported with only one patient requiring a short-term hospitalization for monitoring.

INTERPRETATION

The safety profile of the mRNA vaccines does not raise any specific concerns and support prioritization of vaccination for cancer patients.

Development of Approaches and Metrics to Measure the Impact and Improve the Clinical Outcomes of Patients With Frailty in the Era of COVID-19. The COMETA Italian Protocol

The outbreak of the coronavirus 2 disease 2019 (COVID-19) puts an enormous burden on healthcare systems worldwide. This may worsen outcomes in patients with severe chronic diseases such as cancer, autoimmune diseases, and immune deficiencies. In this critical situation, only a few available data exist, which do not allow us to provide practical guides for the treatment of oncological or immunocompromised patients. Therefore, a further step forward is needed, addressing the specific needs and demands of frail patients in the pandemic era. Here we aim to present a protocol of a study approved by an ethical committee named "CO.M.E.TA". CO.M.E.TA protocol is a network project involving six Italian institutions and its goals are: i) to measure and compare the impact of the pandemic on the access of cancer and immunocompromised patients to therapies in three Italian regions; ii) to assess how reorganizational measures put in place in these different institutions have impacted specific metrics of performance; iii) to establish a COVID-19 Biobank of biological samples from SARS-CoV-2 infected patients to be used to study immunological alterations in patients with immune frailty.

COVID-19 and Cancer: Special Considerations for Patients Receiving Immunotherapy and Immunosuppressive Cancer Therapies

Patients with cancer generally have a higher risk of adverse outcomes from COVID-19, with higher age, male sex, poor performance status, cancer type, and uncontrolled malignant disease as the main risk factors. However, the influence of specific cancer therapies varies and raises concerns during the pandemic. In patients undergoing cancer immunotherapy or other immunosuppressive cancer treatments, we summarize the evidence on outcomes from COVID-19; address the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination; and review COVID-19 antiviral therapeutics for the patient with cancer. Despite higher mortality for patients with cancer, treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors does not seem to increase mortality risk based on observational evidence. Inhibitory therapies directed toward B-cell lineages, including monoclonal antibodies against CD20 and CAR T-cell therapies, are associated with poor outcomes in COVID-19; however, the data are sparse. Regarding vaccination in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors, clinical efficacy comparable to that in the general population can be expected. In patients undergoing B-cell-depleting therapy, immunogenicity and clinical efficacy are curtailed, but vaccination is not futile, which is thought to be due to the cellular response. Vaccine reactogenicity and toxicity in all groups of patients with cancer are comparable to that of the general population. Preexposure prophylaxis with monoclonal antibodies directed against the viral spike may provide passive immunity for those not likely to mount an adequate vaccine response. If infected, prompt treatment with monoclonal antibodies or oral small molecule antivirals is beneficial, though with oral antiviral therapies, care must be taken to avoid drug interactions in patients with cancer.

COVID-19 in patients with cancer: first report of the ESMO international, registry-based, cohort study (ESMO-CoCARE)

BACKGROUND

ESMO COVID-19 and CAncer REgistry (ESMO-CoCARE) is an international collaborative registry-based, cohort study gathering real-world data from Europe, Asia/Oceania and Africa on the natural history, management and outcomes of patients with cancer infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

ESMO-CoCARE captures information on patients with solid/haematological malignancies, diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Data collected since June 2020 include demographics, comorbidities, laboratory measurements, cancer characteristics, COVID-19 clinical features, management and outcome. Parameters influencing COVID-19 severity/recovery were investigated as well as factors associated with overall survival (OS) upon SARS-CoV-2 infection.

RESULTS

This analysis includes 1626 patients from 20 countries (87% from 24 European, 7% from 5 North African, 6% from 8 Asian/Oceanian centres), with COVID-19 diagnosis from January 2020 to May 2021. Median age was 64 years, with 52% of female, 57% of cancer stage III/IV and 65% receiving active cancer treatment. Nearly 64% patients required hospitalization due to COVID-19 diagnosis, with 11% receiving intensive care. In multivariable analysis, male sex, older age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≥2, body mass index (BMI) <25 kg/m2, presence of comorbidities, symptomatic disease, as well as haematological malignancies, active/progressive cancer, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) ≥6 and OnCovid Inflammatory Score ≤40 were associated with COVID-19 severity (i.e. severe/moderate disease requiring hospitalization). About 98% of patients with mild COVID-19 recovered, as opposed to 71% with severe/moderate disease. Advanced cancer stage was an additional adverse prognostic factor for recovery. At data cut-off, and with median follow-up of 3 months, the COVID-19-related death rate was 24.5% (297/1212), with 380 deaths recorded in total. Almost all factors associated with COVID-19 severity, except for BMI and NLR, were also predictive of inferior OS, along with smoking and non-Asian ethnicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Selected patient and cancer characteristics related to sex, ethnicity, poor fitness, comorbidities, inflammation and active malignancy predict for severe/moderate disease and adverse outcomes from COVID-19 in patients with cancer.

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.

Outcomes of COVID-19 and risk factors in patients with cancer

Patients with cancer are at higher risk for adverse coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes. Here, we studied 1,253 patients with cancer, who were diagnosed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 at a tertiary referral cancer center in India. Most patients had mild disease; in our settings, recent cancer therapies did not impact COVID-19 outcomes. Advancing age, smoking history, concurrent comorbidities and palliative intent of treatment were independently associated with severe COVID-19 or death. Thus, our study provides useful insights into cancer management during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on disease stage and treatment for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A French comprehensive multicentre ambispective observational cohort study (CAPANCOVID)

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic caused major oncology care pathway disruption. The CAPANCOVID study aimed to evaluate the impact on pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) - from diagnosis to treatment - of the reorganisation of the health care system during the first lockdown.

METHODS

This multicentre ambispective observational study included 833 patients diagnosed with PA between September 1, 2019 and October 31, 2020 from 13 French centres. Data were compared over three periods defined as before the outbreak of COVID-19, during the first lockdown (March 1 to May 11, 2020) and after lockdown.

RESULTS

During the lockdown, mean weekly number of new cases decreased compared with that of pre-pandemic levels (13.2 vs. 10.8, -18.2%; p = 0.63) without rebound in the post-lockdown period (13.2 vs. 12.9, -1.7%; p = 0.97). The number of borderline tumours increased (13.6%-21.7%), whereas the rate of metastatic diseases rate dropped (47.1%-40.3%) (p = 0.046). Time-to-diagnosis and -treatment were not different over periods. Waiting neoadjuvant chemotherapy in resectable tumours was significantly favoured (24.7%-32.6%) compared with upfront surgery (13%-7.8%) (p = 0.013). The use of mFOLFIRINOX preoperative chemotherapy regimen decreased (84.9%-69%; p = 0.044). After lockdown, the number of borderline tumours decreased (21.7%-9.6%) and advanced diseases increased (59.7%-69.8%) (p = 0.046). SARS-CoV-2 infected 39 patients (4.7%) causing 5 deaths (12.8%).

CONCLUSION

This cohort study suggests the existence of missing diagnoses and of a shift in disease stage at diagnosis from resectable to advanced diseases with related therapeutic modifications whose prognostic consequences will be known after the planned follow-up.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04406571.

Outcome and Prognostic Factors of COVID-19 Infection in Swiss Cancer Patients: Final Results of SAKK 80/20 (CaSA)

Purpose: These are the final results of a national registry on cancer patients with COVID-19 in Switzerland. Methods: We collected data on symptomatic COVID-19-infected cancer patients from 23 Swiss sites over a one-year period starting on 1 March 2020. The main objective was to assess the outcome (i.e., mortality, rate of hospitalization, ICU admission) of COVID-19 infection in cancer patients; the main secondary objective was to define prognostic factors. Results: From 455 patients included, 205 patients (45%) had non-curative disease, 241 patients (53%) were hospitalized for COVID-19, 213 (47%) required oxygen, 43 (9%) invasive ventilation and 62 (14%) were admitted to the ICU. Death from COVID-19 infection occurred in 98 patients, resulting in a mortality rate of 21.5%. Age ≥65 years versus <65 years (OR 3.14, p = 0.003), non-curative versus curative disease (OR 2.42, p = 0.012), ICU admission (OR 4.45, p < 0.001) and oxygen requirement (OR 20.28, p < 0.001) were independently associated with increased mortality. Conclusions: We confirmed high COVID-19 severity and mortality in real-world cancer patients during the first and second wave of the pandemic in a country with a decentralized, high-quality, universal-access health care system. COVID-19-associated mortality was particularly high for those of older age in a non-curative disease setting, requiring oxygen or ICU care.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Delivery of Gynecology and Obstetrics Services at a Maximum Care University Hospital in Germany

Einleitung Die COVID-19-Pandemie bedeutet einschneidende Maßnahmen für das nationale Gesundheitssystem. Dies bot den Anlass, die klinischen und ökonomischen Leistungsindikatoren der gynäkologischen und geburtshilflichen Versorgung des Universitätsklinikums Marburg als regionaler universitärer Maximalversorger zu analysieren. Hierzu wurden die Auswirkungen auf die monatlichen stationären und ambulanten Fallzahlvolumina sowie die entsprechenden ICD- und DRG-Kodierungen ausgewertet, um etwaige Versorgungsdefizite aufzudecken.

Material und Methoden Die Studie basiert auf einer retrospektiven Datenanalyse therapierter stationären und ambulanten Fälle der Jahre 2016 bis 2020. Hierzu wurden über das klinikinterne Leistungscontrolling-Programm QlikView die Daten von 9487 Fällen der Klinik für Gynäkologie und 19597 Fällen der Klinik für Geburtshilfe ausgewertet.

Ergebnisse Es bildet sich eine der nationalen Pandemiedynamik folgende Abnahme der gynäkologischen stationären Fallzahlen um –6% ab, während das geburtshilfliche Fallzahlvolumen um +11% im Jahr 2020 steigt. Insgesamt fallen die Effekte für die ambulante Versorgung geringer aus. Zudem lässt sich eine standortbezogene Abnahme der C50 „Bösartige Neubildungen der Brustdrüse“ und C56 „Bösartige Ovarialtumoren“ Diagnosen um –7,4% bzw. –14% feststellen. Eine Rückkehr zu dem Leistungsniveau des Vorjahres konnte im ambulanten in 3 und im stationären Sektor in 5 Monaten erreicht werden.

Schlussfolgerung Die negativen Auswirkungen der COVID-19-Pandemie treffen vorwiegend die Klinik für Gynäkologie. Durch das Vertrauen in die Sicherheit der universitären Versorgung und das Serviceangebot, werdende Väter nach Schnelltestung am Geburtsprozess teilhaben zu lassen, konnte eine Fallzunahme in der Geburtshilfe erreicht werden. Die Rückkehr zu präpandemischen Leistungsniveaus gestaltet sich weiterhin schleppend, während sich der ohnehin weniger betroffene ambulante Sektor zügiger erholt. Der standortbezogene Rückgang der Diagnosen C50 und C56 ist besorgniserregend und bedarf epidemiologischer Aufarbeitung. Die fallzahlbezogenen Auswirkungen der Pandemie bilden sich gleichsam in den ökonomischen Leistungskennzahlen ab.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes in a cohort of oncologic patients with COVID-19 during the first year of the pandemic in Mexico

BACKGROUND

Literature on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in cancer patients is scarce in Latin America. This population seems to have a higher risk for adverse outcomes. This study aims to correlate clinical characteristics with outcomes in patients with cancer.

METHODS

We included all patients with cancer and confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection from April 19 to December 31, 2020, at the Instituto Nacional de Cancerologia, Mexico. Clinical information was obtained from medical and epidemiological records. For the association between variables and hospitalization, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), and mortality, univariate and multivariate logistic regression were performed; odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated.

RESULTS

Four hundred thirty-three patients were included; 268 (62%) were female, the median age was 55 years. One hundred thirty-five (31%), 131 (30%), and 93 (21%) patients had obesity, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus (DM), respectively. Three hundred forty-one (79%) had solid cancer. One hundred seventy (39%) had advanced cancer. Two hundred (46%) patients were hospitalized. Age (p < 0.01), male gender (p = 0.03), hematological malignancies (HM) (p = 0.04) and advanced cancer (p = 0.03) increased the risk for hospital admission. Forty-five (10%) patients required IMV. Age (p = 0.02); DM (p = 0.04); high C-reactive protein (p < 0.01), and lactate dehydrogenase (p = 0.03) were associated with IMV. Mortality within 30 days after diagnosis was 18% (76 cases). Associated characteristics were age (p = 0.04) and low albumin (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, patients with cancer showed higher mortality, need for hospitalization, and IMV compared with other non-cancer cohorts. We did not find an increased risk in mortality for HM. Although our cohort was younger than others previously reported, age was a strong predictor of adverse outcomes. Variables associated with IMV and death were similar to those previously described in cancer patients with COVID-19.

COVID-19 and Lung Cancer: A Comprehensive Overview from Outbreak to Recovery

Lung cancer patients have been associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 infection, pulmonary complications, and worse survival outcomes compared to the general population. The world's leading professional organizations provided new recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of lung cancer patients during the pandemic as a guide for prioritizing cancer care issues. Telemedicine was preferred for non-urgent consultations, and screening programs were temporarily suspended, leading to possible diagnostic delays along with an estimated increase in cause-specific mortality. A vaccine campaign has recently emerged as the main weapon to fight the COVID-19 pandemic, inverting this negative trend. This work aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the epidemiology and immune-pathophysiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection in cancer patients, highlighting the most relevant changes in the clinical management of lung cancer patients during the pandemic.

Association of active immunotherapy with outcomes in cancer patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there are growing concerns about the safety of administering immunotherapy in cancer patients with COVID-19. However, current clinical guidelines provided no clear recommendation.

Methods: Studies were searched and retrieved from electronic databases. The meta-analysis was performed by employing the generic inverse-variance method. A random-effects model was used to calculate the unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) and adjusted ORs with the corresponding 95% CIs.

Results: This meta-analysis included 20 articles with 6,042 cancer patients diagnosed with COVID-19. According to the univariate analysis, the acceptance of immunotherapy within 30 days before COVID-19 diagnosis did not increase the mortality of cancer patients (OR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.68-1.25; P=0.61). Moreover, after adjusting for confounders, the adjusted OR for mortality was 0.51, with borderline significance (95% CI: 0.25-1.01; P=0.053). Similarly, the univariate analysis showed that the acceptance of immunotherapy within 30 days before COVID-19 diagnosis did not increase the risk of severe/critical disease in cancer patients (OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.78-1.47; P=0.66). No significant between-study heterogeneity was found in these analyses.

Conclusions: Accepting immunotherapy within 30 days before the diagnosis of COVID-19 was not significantly associated with a higher risk of mortality or severe/critical disease of infected cancer patients. Further prospectively designed studies with large sample sizes are required to evaluate the present results.

COVID-19 outcomes in patients with cancer: Findings from the University of California health system database

Background

The interaction between cancer diagnoses and COVID‐19 infection and outcomes is unclear. We leveraged a state‐wide, multi‐institutional database to assess cancer‐related risk factors for poor COVID‐19 outcomes.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the University of California Health COVID Research Dataset, which includes electronic health data of patients tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) at 17 California medical centers. We identified adults tested for SARS‐CoV‐2 from 2/1/2020–12/31/2020 and selected a cohort of patients with cancer. We obtained demographic, clinical, cancer type, and antineoplastic therapy data. The primary outcome was hospitalization within 30d after the first positive SARS‐CoV‐2 test. Secondary outcomes were SARS‐CoV‐2 positivity and severe COVID‐19 (intensive care, mechanical ventilation, or death within 30d after the first positive test). We used multivariable logistic regression to identify cancer‐related factors associated with outcomes.

Results

We identified 409,462 patients undergoing SARS‐CoV‐2 testing. Of 49,918 patients with cancer, 1781 (3.6%) tested positive. Patients with cancer were less likely to test positive (RR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.67–0.74, p < 0.001). Among the 1781 SARS‐CoV‐2‐positive patients with cancer, BCR/ABL‐negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (RR 2.15, 95% CI: 1.25–3.41, p = 0.007), venetoclax (RR 2.96, 95% CI: 1.14–5.66, p = 0.028), and methotrexate (RR 2.72, 95% CI: 1.10–5.19, p = 0.032) were associated with greater hospitalization risk. Cancer and therapy types were not associated with severe COVID‐19.

Conclusions

In this large, diverse cohort, cancer was associated with a decreased risk of SARS‐CoV‐2 positivity. Patients with BCR/ABL‐negative myeloproliferative neoplasm or receiving methotrexate or venetoclax may be at increased risk of hospitalization following SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. Mechanistic and comparative studies are needed to validate findings.

The impact of anti-tumor approaches on the outcomes of cancer patients with COVID-19: a meta-analysis based on 52 cohorts incorporating 9231 participants

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to investigate the impact of anti-tumor approaches (including chemotherapy, targeted therapy, endocrine therapy, immunotherapy, surgery and radiotherapy) on the outcomes of cancer patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched to identify relevant trials. The primary endpoints were severe disease and death of cancer patients treated with anti-tumor therapy before COVID-19 diagnosis. In addition, stratified analyses were implemented towards various types of anti-tumor therapy and other prognostic factors. Furthermore, odds ratios (ORs) were hereby adopted to measure the outcomes with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

As indicated in the study consisting of 9231 individuals from 52 cohorts in total, anti-tumor therapy before COVID-19 diagnosis could elevate the risk of death in cancer patients (OR: 1.21, 95%CI: 1.07-1.36, P = 0.0026) and the incidence of severe COVID-19 (OR: 1.19, 95%CI: 1.01-1.40, P = 0.0412). Among various anti-tumor approaches, chemotherapy distinguished to increase the incidence of death (OR = 1.22, 95%CI: 1.08-1.38, P = 0.0013) and severe COVID-19 (OR = 1.10, 95%CI: 1.02-1.18, P = 0.0165) as to cancer patients with COVID-19. Moreover, for cancer patients with COVID-19, surgery and targeted therapy could add to the risk of death (OR = 1.27, 95%CI: 1.00-1.61, P = 0.0472), and the incidence of severe COVID-19 (OR = 1.14, 95%CI: 1.01-1.30, P = 0.0357) respectively. In the subgroup analysis, the incidence of death (OR = 1.17, 95%CI: 1.03-1.34, P = 0.0158) raised in case of chemotherapy adopted for solid tumor with COVID-19. Besides, age, gender, hypertension, COPD, smoking and lung cancer all served as potential prognostic factors for both death and severe disease of cancer patients with COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-tumor therapy, especially chemotherapy, augmented the risk of severe disease and death for cancer patients with COVID-19, so did surgery for the risk of death and targeted therapy for the incidence of severe COVID-19.

Cancer and the risk of coronavirus disease 2019 diagnosis, hospitalisation and death: A population-based multistate cohort study including 4 618 377 adults in Catalonia, Spain

The relationship between cancer and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and severity remains poorly understood. We conducted a population-based cohort study between 1 March and 6 May 2020 describing the associations between cancer and risk of COVID-19 diagnosis, hospitalisation and COVID-19-related death. Data were obtained from the Information System for Research in Primary Care (SIDIAP) database, including primary care electronic health records from ~80% of the population in Catalonia, Spain. Cancer was defined as any primary invasive malignancy excluding non-melanoma skin cancer. We estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for the risk of COVID-19 (outpatient) clinical diagnosis, hospitalisation (with or without a prior COVID-19 diagnosis) and COVID-19-related death using Cox proportional hazard regressions. Models were estimated for the overall cancer population and by years since cancer diagnosis (<1 year, 1-5 years and ≥5 years), sex, age and cancer type; and adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, deprivation and comorbidities. We included 4 618 377 adults, of which 260 667 (5.6%) had a history of cancer. A total of 98 951 individuals (5.5% with cancer) were diagnosed, and 6355 (16.4% with cancer) were directly hospitalised with COVID-19. Of those diagnosed, 6851 were subsequently hospitalised (10.7% with cancer), and 3227 died without being hospitalised (18.5% with cancer). Among those hospitalised, 1963 (22.5% with cancer) died. Cancer was associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 diagnosis (aHR: 1.08; 95% confidence interval [1.05-1.11]), direct COVID-19 hospitalisation (1.33 [1.24-1.43]) and death following hospitalisation (1.12 [1.01-1.25]). These associations were stronger for patients recently diagnosed with cancer, aged <70 years, and with haematological cancers. These patients should be prioritised in COVID-19 vaccination campaigns and continued non-pharmaceutical interventions.

Clinical profile and mortality of Sars-Cov-2 infection in cancer patients across two pandemic time periods (Feb 2020-Sep 2020; Sep2020- May 2021) in the Veneto Oncology Network: the ROVID study

Introduction

We analyzed a cohort of patients with cancer and Sars-Cov-2 infection from the Veneto Oncology Network registry across two pandemic time periods.

Materials and methods

761 patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 infection were included.

Results

198 patients were diagnosed during the first pandemic time period (TP1; February 2020 September 2020), 494 during TP2 before the vaccination campaign (TP2/pre-vaccination; September 2020-21 February 2021) and 69 in TP2/post-vaccination (22 February 2021-15 May 2021). TP2 vs TP1 patients were younger (p = 0.004), showed more frequently a good performance status (p < 0.001) and <2 comorbidities (p = 0.002), were more likely to be on active anticancer therapy (p = 0.006). Significantly fewer patients in TP2 (3-4%) vs TP1 (22%) had an in-hospital potential source of infection (p < 0.001). TP2 patients were more frequently asymptomatic (p = 0.003). Significantly fewer patients from TP2 were hospitalized (p < 0.001) or admitted to intensive care unit (p = 0.006). All-cause mortality decreased from 30.3% in TP1, to 8.9% and 8.7% in the two TP2 periods (p < 0.001), reflected by a significant reduction in Sars-Cov-2-related mortality (15.2%, 7.5% and 5.8% in the three consecutive time periods, p = 0.004).

Conclusions

Differences in clinical characteristics and features of Sars-Cov-2 infection between TP1 and TP2 reflect the effects of protective measures and increased testing capacity. The lower mortality in TP2 is in line with a less frail population. However, the vast majority of death events in TP2 were related to COVID-19, reinforcing the priority to protect cancer patients.

Breast Cancer Management During the COVID-19 Pandemic: the Radiation Oncology Perspective

Purpose of Review

The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused disruption in healthcare throughout the world. The limitations placed on hospital resources and the need to limit potential exposure to SARS-CoV-2 for both patients and healthcare staff have affected oncologic care for patients with breast cancer (BC), including radiation therapy (RT). This review highlights published guidelines regarding the provision of radiotherapy for BC patients and their adoption by radiation oncology centers.

Recent Findings

Multiple international and national consortiums plus select institutions have published formal recommendations regarding radiation therapy for BC during the COVID-19 pandemic. They embody the principles of limiting in-person visits, proper triage, and the judicious use of delay, abbreviation, or omission of RT as appropriate.

Summary

Since the start of the pandemic, multiple publications have provided guidance regarding RT for BC during this challenging time. The pandemic has led to increased use of telemedicine and abbreviated radiation therapy courses in the setting of BC, which are likely to persist. Future research is needed to establish the effect of these changes on oncologic outcomes.

Impact of cancer diagnoses on the outcomes of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 has caused significant mortality and morbidity across the globe. Patients with cancer are especially vulnerable given their immunocompromised state. We aimed to determine the proportion of COVID-19 patients with cancer, their severity and mortality outcomes through a systematic review and meta-analysis (MA).

METHODS

Systematic review was performed through online databases, PubMed, Medline and Google Scholar, with keywords listed in the Methods section (1 November 2019-31 December 2020). Studies with clinical outcomes of at least 10 COVID-19 patients and at least one with a diagnosis of cancer were included. The studies for MA were assessed with PRISMA guidelines and appraised with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The data were pooled using a random-effects model using STATA software. The main outcomes were planned before data collection, including proportion of patients with cancer among COVID-19 populations, relative risk (RR) of severe outcomes and death of patients with cancer compared with general COVID-19 patients.

RESULTS

We identified 57 case series (63 413 patients), with 230 patients with cancer with individual patient data (IPD). We found that the pooled proportion of cancer among COVID-19 patients was 0.04 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.05, I²=97.69%, p<0.001). The pooled RR of death was 1.44 (95% CI 1.19 to 1.76) between patients with cancer and the general population with COVID-19 infection. The pooled RR of severe outcome was 1.49 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.87) between cancer and general COVID-19 patients. The presence of lung cancer and stage IV cancer did not result in significantly increased RR of severe outcome. Among the available IPD, only age and gender were associated with severe outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Patients with cancer were at a higher risk of severe and death outcomes from COVID-19 infection as compared with general COVID-19 populations. Limitations of this study include publication bias. A collaborative effort is required for a more complete database.

Seroconversion rate after vaccination against COVID-19 in patients with cancer-a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected >210 million people worldwide. An optimal therapeutic approach for COVID-19 remains uncertain, to date. Since the history of cancer was linked to higher mortality rates due to COVID-19, the establishment of a safe and effective vaccine coverage is crucial in these patients. However, patients with cancer (PsC) were mostly excluded from vaccine candidates' clinical trials. This systematic review aims to investigate the current available evidence about the immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in PsC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All prospective studies that evaluated the safety and efficacy of vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) were included, with immunogenicity after the first and the second dose as the primary endpoint, when available.

RESULTS

Vaccination against COVID-19 for PsC seems overall safe and immunogenic after well-conducted vaccination schedules. Yet the seroconversion rate remains lower, lagged or both compared to the general population. Patients with hematologic malignancies, especially those receiving B-cell-depleting agents in the past 12 months, are the most at risk of poor seroconversion.

CONCLUSION

A tailored approach to vaccination may be proposed to PsC, especially on the basis of the type of malignancy and of the specific oncologic treatments received.