Timing of Breast Cancer Surgery-How Much Does It Matter?

The influence of treatment intervals on prognosis in young breast cancer patients: Insights from the French National cohort

BACKGROUND

Suboptimal treatment delays is known to impact prognosis of patients with cancer but optimal timing in specific subgroups remains poorly studied. This study aimed to analyze treatment delays in young women treated for a breast cancer (BC) on and its impact on their prognosis using French Nationwide Data.

METHODS

Using the CAREPAT-YBC Cohort based on the French National Healthcare System Database, we analyzed disease-free survival (DFS) in 22,093 young women (18-45 years) who underwent either surgery-chemotherapy-radiotherapy pathway (adjuvant setting, 15,433 patients) or chemotherapy-surgery-radiotherapy pathway (neoadjuvant setting, 6660 patients), according to delays between the different pathways.

RESULTS

For the adjuvant chemotherapy-radiotherapy interval, the best timing was 17-31 days with increased risk above this delay. For the neoadjuvant setting, the optimal neoadjuvant chemotherapy-surgery interval was 17-31 days, while ≤15 days (HR 1.44, 95%CI 1.21-1.71) or ≥62 days (HR 2.07, 95%CI 1.36-3.15) showed poorer prognosis. Combining best timing into an "optimal pathway" was associated with respectively a 1.2-fold decreased risk for recurrence or mortality.

CONCLUSION

Optimizing treatment intervals enhance BC survival in younger age.

The Sequence and Reconstructive Modality of Breast Cancer Treatments Affects Wait Times to Adjunctive Therapies in Patients Undergoing Mastectomy with Immediate Breast Reconstruction

Introduction: Breast cancer care requires both oncologists and plastic surgeons. Coordinating these specialists and combining extirpative and reconstructive procedures before adjunctive therapies can cause delays in care. For patients with less advanced disease, surgery is performed before adjunctive therapies, requiring early specialist coordination and the possibility of surgical complications. We compare these patients to those with more advanced disease requiring adjunctive therapies before surgery. Methods: A retrospective chart review identified 337 post-mastectomy + immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) patients. Patients were divided into surgery first (SF) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC) first groups with reconstructive subgroups. Wait times between care pathway milestones were compiled and compared to national standards. Results: SF experienced longer wait times from consultation to treatment initiation (47 ± 51.5 vs 22 ± 22, P<.001) and from first to second treatment modality (62 ± 35 vs 39 ± 17, P<.001). Furthermore, only 29% of SF met the standard of receiving treatment within 4 weeks from consultation compared to 63% of NC (P<.001). Within subgroups, SF alloplastic reconstructions had shorter wait times compared to SF autologous reconstructions. For SF, only 31% of alloplastic and 24% of autologous reconstruction initiated treatment within 4 weeks of consultation. Conclusion: In this cohort of Canadian breast cancer patients, those receiving surgery first experienced prolonged wait times to treatment, particularly with autologous reconstruction. Patients should be informed of the potential impact on adjunctive therapies when considering reconstructive modality.

Temporal Sequencing of Multimodal Treatment in Immediate Breast Reconstruction and Implications for Wait Times: A Regional Canadian Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction: Treatment of breast cancer requires a multimodal approach with numerous independent specialists. Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) adds another layer of coordination to comprehensive breast cancer care. To optimize health outcomes for patients seeking IBR, it is essential to efficiently coordinate the temporal sequence of care modalities inclusive of reconstruction. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, patients undergoing IBR following complete or partial mastectomy at one health centre from 2015 to 2021 were included. Patients were categorized into two main groups defined by the first treatment modality received, namely surgery first and Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy. Primary outcome measures were wait times for diagnostic investigations, initiation of treatment, and transitions between therapeutic modalities. Results: Of 195 patients, 158 underwent surgery first, and 37 underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Median wait time from first consultation to first treatment initiated in the neoadjuvant cohort was shorter by 11.5 days as compared to the Surgery First cohort (21.5 +/- 19 vs 33.0 +/- 28 days; P = 0.001). Twenty-three (82%) of the surgery first and 11 (38%) of the neoadjuvant cohort patients waited longer than 8 weeks for initiation of radiotherapy (P = 0.001). Following surgical intervention, the majority of patients failed to meet target benchmarks for transition to chemotherapy (n = 25, 53%) and transition to radiotherapy (n = 26, 93%; P < 0.001). Conclusion: Patients undergoing IBR may incur delays in the setting of upfront surgery and in transitioning to adjuvant therapies. In the setting of breast reconstruction, further efforts are required to achieve target wait-times in multimodal breast cancer care.

Assurance of Timely Access to Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment by a Regional Breast Health Clinic Serving Both Urban and Rural-Remote Communities

In response to breast cancer diagnostic regional wait times exceeding both national and provincial standards and to symptomatic patient referrals for diagnostic mammography taking longer than abnormal screening mammography referrals, the Rae Fawcett Breast Health Clinic (RFBHC) was opened in 2017 in a mid-sized Canadian hospital serving both urban and rural-remote communities. We investigated whether the RFBHC improved wait times to breast cancer diagnosis, improved compliance with national and provincial breast cancer standards, and decreased the wait time disparity associated with referral source. Statistical analyses of wait time differences were conducted between patients who were diagnosed with breast cancer prior to and after the RFBHC establishment. Study group compliance with national and provincial standards and wait time differences by referral source were also analysed. A survey was administered to assess overall patient experience with the RFBHC and clinic wait times. RFBHC patients had a shorter mean wait to breast cancer diagnosis (24.4 vs. 45.7 days, p ≤ 0.001) and a shorter mean wait to initial breast cancer treatment (49.1 vs. 78.9 days, p ≤ 0.001) than pre-RFBHC patients. After the RFBHC establishment, patients who attended the RFBHC had a shorter mean wait time to breast cancer diagnosis (24.4 vs. 36.9 days, p = 0.005) and to initial treatment (49.1 vs. 73.1 days, p ≤ 0.001) than patients who did not attend the clinic. Compliance with national and provincial breast cancer standards improved after the RFBHC establishment and the wait time disparity between screening mammography referrals and symptomatic patient referrals decreased. Survey results indicate that the RFBHC is meeting patient expectations. We concluded that the establishment of a breast health clinic in a Canadian center serving urban and rural-remote communities improved breast diagnostic services.

Has the COVID-19 Pandemic Affected Breast Cancer Stage and Surgical Volume?

Background

This study investigates the effects of COVID-19 on the breast cancer stage and the volume of breast cancer surgery in a specialized breast institute.

Methods

Data of 332 patients who were diagnosed and treated for breast cancer between December 2019 and November 2020 were evaluated retrospectively according to periods of pandemic.

Results

A significant decrease in the number of operations, especially upfront surgeries rather than surgeries after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, was detected in the early period of the COVID-19 pandemic. It was found that patients with complaints were mostly admitted during this period (p = 0.024). No statistical significance was found for age, sex, side of the tumor, type of tumor, surgery to breast, and axilla. Following the early period of the pandemic, it was observed that patients with mostly luminal, early-stage, and less axillary nodal involvement (p < 0.05) were admitted, and as a result, it was founded that upfront surgeries increased, although no change in TNM staging was observed. However, it did affect the decision of initial treatment. Thus, the number of upfront surgeries was significantly higher than the NCT group (p = 0.027) following the early period.

Conclusion

Surgical volume is significantly affected in the early period of the COVID-19 pandemic. To overcome overload due to delayed surgeries related to pandemics, some hospitals should be spared for oncological treatments. Following the early period, mostly luminal type, early-stage patients were admitted, probably because of increased self-awareness and short wave duration, but the breast cancer stage was not affected.

Pattern of Time-to-Surgery in Patients With Breast Cancer at Different Stages of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background

The management of cancer surgeries is under unprecedented challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the breast cancer patients may face a time-delay in the treatment. This retrospective study aimed to present the pattern of time-to-surgery (TTS) and analyze the features of breast cancer patients under the different stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Patients who received surgeries for breast cancers at West China Hospital between February 15, 2020 and April 30, 2020 (the outbreak and post-peak stages), and between March 10, 2021 and May 25, 2021 (the normalization stage) were included. TTS was calculated as the time interval between the pathological diagnosis and surgical treatment of breast cancer patients. And the pandemic was divided into three stages based on the time when the patients were pathologically diagnosed and the severity of pandemic at that time point. TTS, demographic and clinicopathological features were collected from medical records.

Results

A total of 367 patients were included. As for demographic features, it demonstrated statistically significant differences in insurance type (p<0.001) and regular screening (p<0.001), as well as age (p=0.013) and menstrual status (p=0.004). As for clinicopathological features, axillary involvement (p=0.019) was a factor that differed among three stages. The overall TTS was 23.56 ± 21.39 days. TTS for patients who were diagnosed during the outbreak of COVID-19 were longer than those diagnosed during pandemic post-peak and normalization stage (p<0.001). Pandemic stage (p<0.001) and excision biopsy before surgery (OR, 6.459; 95% CI, 2.225-18.755; p=0.001) were markedly correlated with the TTS of patients.

Conclusions

TTS of breast cancer patients significantly varied in different stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. And breast cancer patients’ daily lives and disease treatments were affected by the pandemic in many aspects, such as health insurance access, physical screening and change of therapeutic schedules. As the time-delay may cause negative influences on patients’ disease, we should minimize the occurrence of such time-delay. It is vital to come up with comprehensive measures to deal with unexpected situations in case the pandemic occurs.

The Prevalence and Death Risk of Male Breast Cancer: A Study Based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Database

This study was to investigate the prevalence and death risk of male breast cancer (MBC) patients. The prevalence trend was based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database from 1975 to 2017. A competitive risk analysis was performed to analyze the death risk of MBC patients. Hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The results indicated that the prevalence of MBC after the standardization of the total population increased in 1975–2017 and its annual percentage change (APC) was 0.536% (95% CI = [0.362%, 0.713%]). The prevalence of MBC was rapidly increased in patients aged ≥70 years (APC = 0.780%; 95% CI = [0.491%, 1.076%]) and Grade Ⅱ tumors (APC = 1.462%; 95% CI = [1.260%, 1.686%]). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year cumulative mortality of MBC patients who died of MBC was 2.23% (95% CI = [1.61%, 2.85%]), 7.56% (95% CI = [6.33%, 8.78%]), and 13.10% (95% CI = [11.10%, 11.32%]), respectively. Competitive risk analysis demonstrated that Blacks (HR = 1.76; 95% CI = [1.12, 2.77]), Grade 3 (HR = 2.56; 95% CI = [1.03, 6.35]), AJCC (American Joint Committee on Cancer) Stage Ⅲ (HR = 3.04; 95% CI = [1.76, 5.26]), and AJCC Stage Ⅳ (HR = 7.27; 95% CI = [1.36, 38.83]) were associated with an increased MBC-specific death risk, whereas married status (HR = 0.40; 95% CI = [0.25, 0.64]), surgery (HR = 0.25; 95% CI = [0.12, 0.50]), Luminal A subtype (HR = 0.20; 95% CI = [0.07, 0.53]), and Luminal B subtype (HR = 0.29; 95% CI = [0.10, 0.87]) were related to a reduced MBC-specific death risk. In addition, similar results can be observed in patients with surgery recommended and done (p < .05). This study may provide evidence for the prevalence trend, cumulative mortality, and death risk of MBC patients.

The Relationship between Time to Surgery (TTS) and Survival in Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background:

Curative operation is the practical and primary therapy for masses of breast cancers. In contrast, the correlation between the time interval from breast cancer diagnosis to curative surgery and survival is still uncertain.

Methods:

An electronic literature search was conducted on PubMed/Medline and EMBASE (between Jan 2000 and Jan 2020). Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) or Disease-Free Survival (DFS). The HR with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a random-effects or fixed-effects model.

Results:

The combined HR for OS was 1. 10 (95% CI 1. 08–1. 11; P=0. 000) by fixed-effects model, no statistically significant heterogeneity was found (P=1. 000; I2=0%), and this difference was statistically significant (Z=11. 99; P=0. 000).

Conclusion:

This meta-analysis showed a significant adverse association between more prolonged time to surgery (TTS) and lower overall survival in patients with breast cancer. It is reasonable to minimize that interval between diagnosis and curative surgery.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on diagnosis, stage, and initial treatment of breast cancer in the Netherlands: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic forced the Dutch national screening program to a halt and increased the burden on health care services, necessitating the introduction of specific breast cancer treatment recommendations from week 12 of 2020. We aimed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on the diagnosis, stage and initial treatment of breast cancer.

METHODS

Women included in the Netherlands Cancer Registry and diagnosed during four periods in weeks 2-17 of 2020 were compared with reference data from 2018/2019 (averaged). Weekly incidence was calculated by age group and tumor stage. The number of women receiving initial treatment within 3 months of diagnosis was calculated by period, initial treatment, age, and stage. Initial treatment, stratified by tumor behavior (ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS] or invasive), was analyzed by logistic regression and adjusted for age, socioeconomic status, stage, subtype, and region. Factors influencing time to treatment were analyzed by Cox regression.

RESULTS

Incidence declined across all age groups and tumor stages (except stage IV) from 2018/2019 to 2020, particularly for DCIS and stage I disease (p < 0.05). DCIS was less likely to be treated within 3 months (odds ratio [OR]wks2-8: 2.04, ORwks9-11: 2.18). Invasive tumors were less likely to be treated initially by mastectomy with immediate reconstruction (ORwks12-13: 0.52) or by breast conserving surgery (ORwks14-17: 0.75). Chemotherapy was less likely for tumors diagnosed in the beginning of the study period (ORwks9-11: 0.59, ORwks12-13: 0.66), but more likely for those diagnosed at the end (ORwks14-17: 1.31). Primary hormonal treatment was more common (ORwks2-8: 1.23, ORwks9-11: 1.92, ORwks12-13: 3.01). Only women diagnosed in weeks 2-8 of 2020 experienced treatment delays.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of breast cancer fell in early 2020, and treatment approaches adapted rapidly. Clarification is needed on how this has affected stage migration and outcomes.

Consecuencias de la pandemia COVID-19 en la unidad de patología mamaria en un hospital de segundo nivel. Nuestra experiencia

Introducción

La pandemia por COVID-19 ha modificado nuestra actividad asistencial habitual en los últimos meses. Debido al colapso hospitalario se han suspendido consultas, pruebas diagnósticas e intervenciones quirúrgicas, con el objetivo también de reducir la exposición de pacientes al SARS-CoV-2 en el medio hospitalario. Sin embargo, esto ha provocado un retraso en la atención de otros problemas sanitarios.

Material y métodos

Analizamos y comparamos los datos de la Unidad de Mama en un hospital de segundo nivel, en cuanto a la actividad del Programa de Diagnóstico Precoz de Cáncer de Mama (PDPCM), los diagnósticos de cáncer realizados, así como las pacientes intervenidas durante los meses de marzo a mayo de 2020, con respecto al mismo período del año anterior.

Resultados

El número de pacientes atendidas en el PDPCM en los meses de marzo a mayo de 2020 se ha reducido en un 91,7%, y las pacientes atendidas en el Servicio de Radiodiagnóstico del hospital en un 54,2%. La actividad quirúrgica también se ha visto mermada en un 57,69% con respecto al mismo periodo del año anterior.

Conclusiones

La disminución de la actividad del PDPCM y Radiología conllevan a un retraso diagnóstico que concluirá con un aumento de lista de espera y demora en el tratamiento, lo que posiblemente derive en un diagnóstico en estadios más avanzados de la enfermedad.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of surgery delays and survival in breast, lung and colon cancers: Implication for surgical triage during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Thousands of cancer surgeries were delayed during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study examines if surgical delays impact survival for breast, lung and colon cancers.

Methods

PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched. Articles evaluating the relationship between delays in surgery and overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) or cancer-specific survival (CSS) were included.

Results

Of the 14,422 articles screened, 25 were included in the review and 18 (totaling 2,533,355 patients) were pooled for meta-analyses. Delaying surgery for 12 weeks may decrease OS in breast (HR 1.46, 95%CI 1.28–1.65), lung (HR 1.04, 95%CI 1.02–1.06) and colon (HR 1.24, 95%CI 1.12–1.38) cancers. When breast cancers were analyzed by stage, OS was decreased in stages I (HR 1.27, 95%CI 1.16–1.40) and II (HR 1.13, 95%CI 1.02–1.24) but not in stage III (HR 1.20, 95%CI 0.94–1.53).

Conclusion

Delaying breast, lung and colon cancer surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic may decrease survival.

•

Delaying cancer surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic may impact survival.

•

Surgical delays of 12 weeks decreases survival in breast, lung and colon cancers.

•

Surgical delays worsen survival in stage I and II breast cancers but not stage III.

•

Triage recommendations for future waves of COVID-19 should consider this evidence.

"Door to Treatment" Outcomes of Cancer Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 has become a worldwide threat. We aimed to explore reflections of these unexpected changes to newly diagnosed cancer patients.

Method

We searched the 2 months after the index case of our country. The first admission day and the first day of intravenous treatment of newly diagnosed patients were recorded.

Results

In the 60 days measured during the pandemic, the total number of patients on polyclinics was 159/weekdays, and the total applied chemotherapy cycles were 276/week. For comparison, the total numbers in the previous year were 267/weekday and 363/week for polyclinic and applied chemotherapy cycles, respectively. The total number of newly admitted patients in 2020 was 283. For comparison, the number of new patients in the same 60-day period in 2019 was 495. Patients who were admitted for adjuvant treatment required a median of 8 days for the first course, those who were admitted for neoadjuvant treatment required 12 days, and metastatic patients required 14 days; there were no significant differences between treatment types (p = 0.233). However, the median treatment time was 11.5 and 17 days, in 2020 and in 2019, respectively. A significant difference was observed between the 2 groups (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

The effective shift of workers and accurate regulations have not resulted in apparent delays in patient care. While a decrease in the number of patients has detected, faster healthcare service was introduced to newly diagnosed patients. The reason for the decrease in the number of patients should be investigated with new studies.

Evaluation of medical practices in oncology in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in France: Physicians' point of view: the PRATICOVID study

The cancer population seems to be more susceptible to COVID‐19 infection and have worse outcomes. We had to adapt our medical practice to protect our patients without compromising their cancer prognosis. The national PRATICOVID study aims to describe the adaptation of cancer patient care for this population. We analyzed data from nine different institutions. The primary endpoint was to assess the prevalence of adapted patient care during the pandemic. The secondary endpoints were to describe the point of view of clinicians and patients during and after the pandemic. We analyzed 435 medical procedures between 9^th of March and 30^th of April. Because of the COVID‐19 pandemic, 47.6% of the outpatients received modified patient care. Twenty‐four percent of scheduled surgeries were postponed, or were performed without perioperative chemotherapy, 18.4% followed a hypofractioned schedule, and 57% had an adaptive systemic protocol (stopped, oral protocol, and spacing between treatments). Seventy percent of physicians used telemedicine. During this period, 67% of the physicians did not feel distressed taking care of their patients. However, 70% of physicians are worried about the aftermath of the lockdown, as regards future patient care. The PRATICOVID study is the first to assess modification of patient care in cancer outpatients during an epidemic. With this unprecedented crisis, physicians were able to adapt their practice in order to protect their patients against the virus while ensuring continuity of patient care. But physicians are worried about the aftereffects of the lockdown specifically in regard to care pathway issues.

Cancer Care Management During the COVID-19 Pandemic

New cases of the novel coronavirus, also known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), are increasing around the world. Currently, health care services are mainly focused on responding to and controlling the unique challenges of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. These changes, along with the higher susceptibility of patients with cancer to infections, have profound effects on other critical aspects of care and pose a serious challenge for the treatment of such patients. During the COVID-19 pandemic, it is important to provide strategies for managing the treatment of patients with cancer to limit COVID-19-associated risks at this difficult time. The present study set out to summarize the latest research on epidemiology, pathogenesis, and clinical features of COVID-19. We also address some of the current challenges associated with the management of patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic and provide practical guidance to clinically deal with these challenges.

"First Do No Harm": Significance of Delays from Diagnosis to Surgery in Patients with Non-metastatic Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

The majority of patients with non-metastatic breast cancer will undergo surgery. This involves complex decisions that inevitably increase time from diagnosis to surgery beyond the currently recommended 30 days. This study aims to analyse factors that increase time to surgery and establish whether it is justifiable in the context of improved individualised breast cancer management.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all patients at Austin Health surgically managed for non-metastatic invasive breast carcinoma between 2013 and 2019 was conducted. Time to surgery (TTS) was defined as time between informed diagnosis and cancer surgery. The patients were grouped into TTS groups of ≤30 days and >30 days. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression model were used to evaluate the impact of time interval between diagnosis and surgery.

RESULTS

Seven hundred and thirty-one patients were included in our TTS analysis, only half of this cohort received surgery within the recommended 30 days. Many of the factors identified to be associated with increased TTS are the key to optimal management. Median follow-up for the cohort was 30 months. Between wait groups of ≤30 and >30 days, there were no significant association found between TTS and survival outcomes for DFS (HR 1.20 95% CI 0.56-2.60) and OS (HR 1.58 95% CI 0.82-3.03).

CONCLUSION

Breast cancer management involves complex factors that significantly increase TTS. Surgery within 30 days of diagnosis is not associated with improved DFS and OS. Outcomes from this study support a revision of current recommendations for TTS in non-metastatic breast cancer care.

Adapting care for older cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: Recommendations from the International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) COVID-19 Working Group

The COVID-19 pandemic poses a barrier to equal and evidence-based management of cancer in older adults. The International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) formed a panel of experts to develop consensus recommendations on the implications of the pandemic on several aspects of cancer care in this age group including geriatric assessment (GA), surgery, radiotherapy, systemic treatment, palliative care and research. Age and cancer diagnosis are significant predictors of adverse outcomes of the COVID-19 infection. In this setting, GA is particularly valuable to drive decision-making. GA may aid estimating physiologic reserve and adaptive capability, assessing risk-benefits of either providing or temporarily withholding treatments, and determining patient preferences to help inform treatment decisions. In a resource-constrained setting, geriatric screening tools may be administered remotely to identify patients requiring comprehensive GA. Tele-health is also crucial to ensure adequate continuity of care and minimize the risk of infection exposure. In general, therapeutic decisions should favor the most effective and least invasive approach with the lowest risk of adverse outcomes. In selected cases, this might require deferring or omitting surgery, radiotherapy or systemic treatments especially where benefits are marginal and alternative safe therapeutic options are available. Ongoing research is necessary to expand knowledge of the management of cancer in older adults. However, the pandemic presents a significant barrier and efforts should be made to ensure equitable access to clinical trials and prospective data collection to elucidate the outcomes of COVID-19 in this population.

What is Elective Oncologic Surgery in the Time of COVID-19? A Literature Review of the Impact of Surgical Delays on Outcomes in Patients with Cancer

Background

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has spread beyond those infected with SARS-CoV-2. Its widespread consequences have affected cancer patients whose surgeries may be delayed in order to minimize exposure and conserve resources.

Methods

Experts in each surgical oncology subspecialty were selected to perform a review of the relevant literature. Articles were obtained through PubMed searches in each cancer subtype using the following terms: delay to surgery, time to surgery, outcomes, and survival.

Results

Delays in surgery > 4 weeks in breast cancer, ductal carcinoma in situ, T1 pancreatic cancer, ovarian cancer, and pediatric osteosarcoma, negatively impacted survival. Studies on hepatocellular cancer, colon cancer, and melanoma (Stage I) demonstrated reduced survival with delays > 3 months.

Conclusion

Studies have shown that short-term surgical delays can result in negative impacts on patient outcomes in multiple cancer types as well as in situ carcinoma. Conversely, other cancers such as gastric cancer, advanced melanoma and pancreatic cancer, well-differentiated thyroid cancer, and several genitourinary cancers demonstrated no significant outcome differences with surgical delays.

A Practical Approach to the Management of Cancer Patients During the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: An International Collaborative Group

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly spread globally since being identified as a public health emergency of major international concern and has now been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). In December 2019, an outbreak of atypical pneumonia, known as COVID-19, was identified in Wuhan, China. The newly identified zoonotic coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), is characterized by rapid human-to-human transmission. Many cancer patients frequently visit the hospital for treatment and disease surveillance. They may be immunocompromised due to the underlying malignancy or anticancer therapy and are at higher risk of developing infections. Several factors increase the risk of infection, and cancer patients commonly have multiple risk factors. Cancer patients appear to have an estimated twofold increased risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 than the general population. With the WHO declaring the novel coronavirus outbreak a pandemic, there is an urgent need to address the impact of such a pandemic on cancer patients. This include changes to resource allocation, clinical care, and the consent process during a pandemic. Currently and due to limited data, there are no international guidelines to address the management of cancer patients in any infectious pandemic. In this review, the potential challenges associated with managing cancer patients during the COVID-19 infection pandemic will be addressed, with suggestions of some practical approaches. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The main management strategies for treating cancer patients during the COVID-19 epidemic include clear communication and education about hand hygiene, infection control measures, high-risk exposure, and the signs and symptoms of COVID-19. Consideration of risk and benefit for active intervention in the cancer population must be individualized. Postponing elective surgery or adjuvant chemotherapy for cancer patients with low risk of progression should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Minimizing outpatient visits can help to mitigate exposure and possible further transmission. Telemedicine may be used to support patients to minimize number of visits and risk of exposure. More research is needed to better understand SARS-CoV-2 virology and epidemiology.

COVID-19 and Cancer: a Comprehensive Review

Purpose of Review

The outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has emerged to be the biggest global health threat worldwide, which has now infected over 1.7 million people and claimed more than 100,000 lives around the world. Under these unprecedented circumstances, there are no well-established guidelines for cancer patients.

Recent Findings

The risk for serious disease and death in COVID-19 cases increases with advancing age and presence of comorbid health conditions. Since the emergence of the first case in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, tremendous research efforts have been underway to understand the mechanisms of infectivity and transmissibility of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), a fatal virus responsible for abysmal survival outcomes. To minimize the mortality rate, it becomes prudent to identify symptoms promptly and employ treatments appropriately. Even though no cure has been established, multiple clinical trials are underway to determine the most optimal strategy. Managing cancer patients under these circumstances is rather challenging, given their vulnerable status and the aggressive nature of their underlying disease.

Summary

In this comprehensive review, we discuss the impact of COVID-19 on health and the immune system of those affected, reviewing the latest treatment approaches and ongoing clinical trials. Additionally, we discuss challenges faced while treating cancer patients and propose potential approaches to manage this vulnerable population during this pandemic.

Diagnosis and locoregional treatment of patients with breast cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic

We are facing a pandemic that is going to affect a significant part of the population. At the end of April in the world there are about 3,000,000 cases, with 205,000 deaths and 860,000 patients recovered.

The response to this pandemic has in many cases led to a significant change in the daily work of caring for cancer patients, the good results of which depend largely on time-adjusted protocols and multidisciplinary treatments.

We present a review of local, surgical and radiotherapy treatment together with authors’ recommendations made from personal experience on ways to act in the diagnosis and surgical treatment of breast cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The multidisciplinary Breast Committees must continue to meet weekly in videoconference format. All surgical actions and irradiations must be carried out with maximum safety for both the patients and the participating teams. Hypofractionation in radiation therapy should be the standard treatment. Sometimes it is recommended to apply a primary systemic treatment or even a primary irradiation. Great coordination between the surgical and oncology teams, both medical and radiotherapeutic, is essential.

Male breast cancer: a closer look at patient and tumor characteristics and factors that affect survival using the National Cancer Database

OBJECTIVE

To comprehensively describe the tumor and clinical characteristics of breast cancer in a cohort of male patients and to assess the factors that affect survival.

BACKGROUND

Much of the standard care of male breast cancer is based on the diagnosis and treatment strategies of female breast cancer. However, important clinical differences between the two have been elucidated, which suggests the need for unique attention to male breast cancer.

METHODS

We evaluated the records of male patients who were diagnosed with breast cancer between 2004 and 2015 using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Data obtained were demographic characteristics, clinical and tumor data, type of therapy, as well as survival data. We used descriptive statistics to characterize our study population. We then performed a survival and Cox proportional hazards analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 16,498 patients (median age: 63 years). Several treatment modalities were used, of which surgery was the most common (14,882 [90.4%]). The total follow-up time was 13 years (156 months). Five-year survival was 77.7% (95% CI 76.9-78.4) and 10-year survival was 60.7%. In a Cox proportional hazards model, mastectomy was associated with the greatest survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.49; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

We report what is to our knowledge the largest national population-based cohort of male breast cancer patients. Importantly, our data suggests that similar to female patients, several treatment modalities are significantly associated with improved survival in male patients, particularly surgery. Increasing age, black race, government insurance, more comorbidities, and higher tumor stages are associated with decreased survival.

No Effect of Pretreatment Breast MRI on the Timing of Surgical Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Although breast MRI has been shown to be more sensitive in the diagnosis of breast cancer than conventional mammography, one criticism breast MRI has faced in the preoperative treatment planning is that it can delay treatment.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed of all women diagnosed and treated for breast cancer over three consecutive years at an American university hospital. The subjects were divided into two groups: those who received preoperative breast MRI and those who did not. There were 189 patients included in this study, of whom 109 (57.67%) received pretreatment breast MRI.

RESULTS

Median time to treatment was not significantly different between pretreatment MRI and no pretreatment MRI groups (32 days versus 34.5 days, P = .950). Adjusting for age, detection method, stage, and histology type did not change this conclusion.

CONCLUSIONS

At this institution, preoperative breast MRI for patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer seemed to have no significant effect on the timing of surgical treatment in cases of newly diagnosed breast cancer.