The Paradoxical Effects of COVID-19 on Cancer Care: Current Context and Potential Lasting Impacts

COVID-19-related liver injury: Mechanisms, diagnosis, management; its impact on pre-existing conditions, cancer and liver transplant: A comprehensive review

AIMS

This review explores the mechanisms, diagnostic approaches, and management strategies for COVID-19-induced liver injury, with a focus on its impact on patients with pre-existing liver conditions, liver cancer, and those undergoing liver transplantation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive literature review included studies on clinical manifestations of liver injury due to COVID-19. Key areas examined were direct viral effects, drug-induced liver injury, cytokine storms, and impacts on individuals with chronic liver diseases, liver transplants, and the role of vaccination. Data were collected from clinical trials, observational studies, case reports, and review literature.

KEY FINDINGS

COVID-19 can cause a spectrum of liver injuries, from mild enzyme elevations to severe hepatic dysfunction. Injury mechanisms include direct viral invasion, immune response alterations, drug toxicity, and hypoxia-reperfusion injury. Patients with chronic liver conditions (such as alcohol-related liver disease, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma) face increased risks of severe outcomes. The pandemic has worsened pre-existing liver conditions, disrupted cancer treatments, and complicated liver transplantation. Vaccination remains crucial for reducing severe disease, particularly in chronic liver patients and transplant recipients. Telemedicine has been beneficial in managing patients and reducing cross-infection risks.

SIGNIFICANCE

This review discusses the importance of improved diagnostic methods and management strategies for liver injury caused by COVID-19. It emphasizes the need for close monitoring and customized treatment for high-risk groups, advocating for future research to explore long-term effects, novel therapies, and evidence-based approaches to improve liver health during and after the pandemic.

"You matter": patients perceptions and disparities about cancer care and telehealth during and after COVID-19 pandemic

PURPOSE

Disparities in cancer care have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study is to establish how telehealth mitigated the effect of COVID-19 on the healthcare sector and to identify potential disparities in perception and experience with telehealth in cancer care during and after the pandemic.

METHODS

We identified individuals with an established cancer diagnosis who received treatment at a comprehensive academic cancer center with a diverse patient population between 2019 and 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were asked to complete a self-administrated survey intended to collect patient-reported outcomes on socioeconomic and mental health challenges incurred during the pandemic as well as participants' experience with telehealth. The assessment was adapted from a 21-question-based survey applied for mental health. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize participant characteristics and the response to the survey items. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess and analyze the contributing factors to the survey responses.

RESULTS

A total of N = 136 participants were included in this analysis. The majority of participants (60.6%) reported increased anxiety, stress, or experience of distress as a direct result of COVID-19. However, among 54.1% of survey responders participated in a telehealth appointment and 84.4% agreed it was an easy and effective experience.

CONCLUSION

Elderly, male, and black participants reported the worst impact related to the pandemic. The majority of patients had a positive experience with telehealth. The results of the study suggest that telehealth services can serve as a tool for patients with cancer during and beyond active treatment to access supportive services.

Survival Among Patients With High-Risk Gastrointestinal Cancers During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Importance

Prior reports demonstrated that patients with cancer experienced worse outcomes from pandemic-related stressors and COVID-19 infection. Patients with certain malignant neoplasms, such as high-risk gastrointestinal (HRGI) cancers, may have been particularly affected.

Objective

To evaluate disruptions in care and outcomes among patients with HRGI cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic, assessing for signs of long-term changes in populations and survival.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used data from the National Cancer Database to identify patients with HRGI cancer (esophageal, gastric, primary liver, or pancreatic) diagnosed between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2020. Data were analyzed between August 23 and September 4, 2023.

Main Outcome and Measures

Trends in monthly new cases and proportions by stage in 2020 were compared with the prior 2 years. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression were used to assess 1-year mortality in 2020 compared with 2018 to 2019. Proportional monthly trends and multivariable logistic regression were used to evaluate 30-day and 90-day mortality in 2020 compared with prior years.

Results

Of the 156 937 patients included in this study, 54 994 (35.0%) were aged 60 to 69 years and 100 050 (63.8%) were men. There was a substantial decrease in newly diagnosed HRGI cancers in March to May 2020, which returned to prepandemic levels by July 2020. For stage, there was a proportional decrease in the diagnosis of stage I (-3.9%) and stage II (-2.3%) disease, with an increase in stage IV disease (7.1%) during the early months of the pandemic. Despite a slight decrease in 1-year survival rates in 2020 (50.7% in 2018 and 2019 vs 47.4% in 2020), survival curves remained unchanged between years (all P > .05). After adjusting for confounders, diagnosis in 2020 was not associated with increased 1-year mortality compared with 2018 to 2019 (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.97-1.01). The rates of 30-day (2.1% in 2018, 2.0% in 2019, and 2.1% in 2020) and 90-day (4.3% in 2018, 4.4% in 2019, and 4.6% in 2020) operative mortality also remained similar.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this retrospective cohort study, a period of underdiagnosis and increase in stage IV disease was observed for HRGI cancers during the pandemic; however, there was no change in 1-year survival or operative mortality. These results demonstrate the risks associated with gaps in care and the tremendous efforts of the cancer community to ensure quality care delivery during the pandemic. Future research should investigate long-term survival changes among all cancer types as additional follow-up data are accrued.

The Psychosocial Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Survivors in the United States: An Integrative Review

Adolescent and young adult cancer survivors (AYAs) are uniquely challenged with navigating health care systems during an important developmental phase of life. During the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, many people experienced social isolation, mental health symptoms, and schooling and employment changes, which may have affected vulnerable AYA cancer survivors. The purpose of this integrative review is to explore the psychosocial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on AYA cancer survivors in the United States. A literature search was conducted in November 2022 using PubMed, Web of Science, and SCOPUS databases with the following search terms: distress*, depress*, lonel*, anx*, insomnia*, cancer*, neoplasm, COVID-19, coronavirus, young adult, AYA, teen*, and adolescen*. The initial search yielded 468 articles. Inclusion criteria required that studies were conducted in the United States, published in English, with a sample of patients diagnosed with cancer between ages 15 and 39. After review and appraisal of each relevant article, eight were included. Through comparative analysis of eight articles, including qualitative and quantitative studies, three themes emerged: mental health impact, health care impact, and financial impact. Mental health impact included increased anxiety, worsening depression and social isolation, and sleep disturbances. Changes in health care included delays in care, medical cost-coping and benefits of virtual care. Financial difficulties included employment changes and benefits of remote work. The COVID-19 pandemic had an immense impact on the psychosocial health of AYA cancer survivors. It is essential that oncology providers and health care teams consider specific interventions to best serve the psychosocial needs of their AYA patients.

Patient Perceptions of the Impact of the COVID Pandemic on the Quality of Their Gastrointestinal Cancer Care

We surveyed patients who had a received care for a gastrointestinal cancer between 03/2020 and 05/2021 to understand their perceptions of the impact of the Covid pandemic on cancer care delivery and quality of care. Three-hundred fifty-eight respondents provided evaluable responses (response rate: 17.3%). Approximately half of respondents (46.4%) perceived that they had experienced a pandemic-related cancer care modification; most changes were initiated by a clinician or the cancer center (44.6%). Relative to White patients those from Racialized Groups (OR: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.03-3.54) were more likely to report a cancer treatment change. Additionally, relative to patients in follow-up, those who were newly diagnosed (OR: 2.39; 95% CI: 1.21-4.71) were more likely to report a change. Compared to White patients, patients from Racialized Groups were approximately twice as likely to report perceiving that virtual visits during Covid negatively impacted the quality of their care (OR: 2.21; 95% CI: 0.96-5.08). These findings potentially reflect pre-existing systemic disparities in quality of and access to care, as well as differences in how care is experienced by patients from Racialized Groups.

Cancer management during the COVID-19 world pandemic

Since 2019, the world has been experiencing an outbreak of a novel beta-coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2. The worldwide spread of this virus has been a severe challenge for public health, and the World Health Organization declared the outbreak a public health emergency of international concern. As of June 8, 2023, the virus' rapid spread had caused over 767 million infections and more than 6.94 million deaths worldwide. Unlike previous SARS-CoV-1 and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus outbreaks, the COVID-19 outbreak has led to a high death rate in infected patients; this has been caused by multiorgan failure, which might be due to the widespread presence of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors-functional receptors of SARS-CoV-2-in multiple organs. Patients with cancer may be particularly susceptible to COVID-19 because cancer treatments (e.g., chemotherapy, immunotherapy) suppress the immune system. Thus, patients with cancer and COVID-19 may have a poor prognosis. Knowing how to manage the treatment of patients with cancer who may be infected with SARS-CoV-2 is essential. Treatment decisions must be made on a case-by-case basis, and patient stratification is necessary during COVID-19 outbreaks. Here, we review the management of COVID-19 in patients with cancer and focus on the measures that should be adopted for these patients on the basis of the organs or tissues affected by cancer and by the tumor stage.

Alterations in Cancer Treatment During the First Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the US

Importance

The COVID-19 pandemic created challenges to the evaluation and treatment of cancer, and abrupt resource diversion toward patients with COVID-19 put cancer treatment on hold for many patients. Previous reports have shown substantial declines in cancer screening and diagnoses in 2020; however, the extent to which the delivery of cancer care was altered remains unclear.

Objective

To assess alterations in cancer treatment in the US during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) on patients older than 18 years with newly diagnosed cancer from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2020.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcomes were accessibility (time to treatment, travel distance, and multi-institutional care), availability (proportional changes in cancer treatment between years), and utilization (reductions by treatment modality, hospital type) of cancer treatment in 2020 compared with 2018 to 2019. Autoregressive models forecasted expected findings for 2020 based on observations from prior years.

Results

Of 1 229 654 patients identified in the NCDB in 2020, 1 074 225 were treated for cancer, representing a 16.8% reduction from what was expected. Patients were predominately female (53.8%), with a median age of 66 years (IQR, 57-74 years), similar to demographics in 2018 and 2019. Median time between diagnosis and treatment was 26 days (IQR, 0-36 days) in 2020, and median travel distance for care was 11.1 miles (IQR, 5.0-25.3 miles), similar to 2018 and 2019. In 2020, fewer patients traveled longer distances (20.2% reduction of patients traveling >35 miles). The proportions of patients treated with chemotherapy (32.0%), radiation (29.5%), and surgery (57.1%) were similar to those in 2018 and 2019. Overall, 146 805 fewer patients than expected underwent surgery, 80 480 fewer received radiation, and 68 014 fewer received chemotherapy. Academic hospitals experienced the greatest reduction in cancer surgery and treatment, with a decrease of approximately 484 patients (-19.0%) per hospital compared with 99 patients (-12.6%) at community hospitals and 110 patients (-12.8%) at integrated networks.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found that among patients diagnosed with cancer in 2020, access and availability of treatment remained intact; however, reductions in treated patients varied across treatment modalities and were greater at academic hospitals than at community hospitals and integrated networks compared with expected values. These results suggest the resilience of cancer service lines and frame the economic losses from reductions in cancer treatment during the pandemic.

Stakeholder perspectives on the impact of COVID-19 on oncology services: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

As COVID-19 spread across the globe, cancer services were required to rapidly pivot to minimise risks without compromising outcomes for patients or staff. The aim of this study was to document changes to oncology services as a result of COVID-19 from the perspectives of both providers and receivers of care during the initial phase of the pandemic.

METHODS

Participants were recruited between June and December 2020 through an email invitation via professional or consumer organisations, two hospital-based oncology services and snowballing. Semi-structured interviews focused on health service changes and their impacts, which were then analysed by thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients, 16 carers and 29 health professionals were recruited. Fifteen patients (n = 47%) had localised disease, and 19 (n = 59%) were currently receiving treatment. Oncology staff included oncologists, palliative care physicians, nurses, allied health and psychosocial practitioners. Four themes arose from the data: safety, increased stress and burnout, communication challenges and quality of cancer care.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an ongoing need for cancer-specific information from a single, trusted source to inform medical practitioners and patients/carers. More data are required to inform evidence-based guidelines for cancer care during future pandemics. All stakeholders require ongoing support to avoid stress and burnout.

Quantifying the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer center clinical trial operations

BACKGROUND

Oncology clinical trials are complex, and the COVID-19 pandemic caused major disruptions in 2020.

METHODS

Using its networking and sharing of best practices, the Association of American Cancer Institutes, comprising 105 cancer centers, solicited a longitudinal series of voluntary surveys from members to assess how clinical trial office operations were affected. The surveys showed that centers were able to keep oncology trials available to patients while maintaining safety. Data were collected regarding interventional clinical trial accruals for the calendar years 2019, 2020, and 2021.

RESULTS

Data demonstrated a sizeable decrease in interventional treatment trial accruals in both 2020 and 2021 compared with prepandemic figures in 2019. No cancer center reported an increase in interventional treatment trial accruals in 2020 compared with 2019, with most centers reporting a moderate decrease. In mid-2022, 15% of respondents reported an increasing trend, 31% reported no significant change, and 54% continued to report a decrease.

CONCLUSIONS

The pandemic necessitated rapid adoption of trial operations, with the emergence of several best practices, including remote monitoring, remote consenting, electronic research charts, and work-from-home strategies for staff. The national infrastructure to conduct trials was significantly affected by the pandemic, with noteworthy resiliency, evidenced by improvements in efficiencies and patient-centered care delivery but with residual capacity challenges that will be evident for the foreseeable future.

The Enduring Effects of COVID for Cancer Care: Learning from Real-Life Clinical Practice

For three years, COVID-19 has circulated among our communities and around the world, fundamentally changing social interactions, health care systems, and service delivery. For people living with (and receiving treatment for) cancer, pandemic conditions presented significant additional hurdles in an already unstable and shifting environment, including disrupted personal contact with care providers, interrupted access to clinical trials, distanced therapeutic encounters, multiple immune vulnerabilities, and new forms of financial precarity. In a 2020 perspective in this journal, we examined how COVID-19 was reshaping cancer care in the early stages of the pandemic and how these changes might endure into the future. Three years later, and in light of a series of interviews with patients and their caregivers from the United States and Australia conducted during the pandemic, we return to consider the potential legacy effects of the pandemic on cancer care. While some challenges to care provision and survivorship were unforeseen, others accentuated and amplified existing problems experienced by patients, caregivers, and health care providers. Both are likely to have enduring effects in the "post-pandemic" world, raising the importance of focusing on lessons that can be learned for the future.

The experience of cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the care of many cancer patients in a variety of ways. This study was conducted to understand the experience cancer patients have had during the pandemic.

METHOD

Cancer patients who were under the care of the Trust between September 2020 - January 2021 were invited to take part in a survey sent through as a text message.

RESULTS

A total of 600 patients were sent a text message with a link to an online survey. There were 82 patients who responded. The data has been divided into three themes of information provision and safety around COVID-19, impact on cancer care and feeling supported by staff.

CONCLUSION

It was encouraging to see that patients felt safe coming into the hospitals if it was required and they received appropriate information about changes to their care and how to protect themselves against COVID-19. Most patients stated that the pandemic had not influenced their cancer care. Of those that did experience delays most were understanding of this. There was a mixture of responses in terms of patients feeling supported by staff, most inpatients did feel supported and 75% of patients were able to contact their specialist nurse.

Measuring the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Health Behaviors and Health Care Utilization in Rural and Urban Patients with Cancer and Cancer Survivors

Healthcare access and health behaviors differ between those living in urban and rural communities and contribute to inequitable cancer health outcomes. The COVID-19 pandemic led to significant disruptions in daily life and healthcare delivery. This cross-sectional survey aimed to measure the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the health behaviors of cancer patients and survivors, comparing outcomes for urban and rural respondents. Survey was administered from January 2021-June 2021 to cancer patients or survivors (treated within the last 5 years) at one of six cancer centers in Washington and Idaho. Respondent ZIP code was used to assess rurality using Rural-Urban Commuting Area designation. 515 rural (43.5% of those contacted) and 146 urban (40% of those contacted) cancer patients and survivors participated. Few differences between urban and rural cancer patients and cancer survivors were noted. Rural residents were older (69.2 years vs. 66.9 years). Rural respondents had higher mean alcohol consumption than urban respondents (4.4 drinks per week vs. 2.7 drinks per week). 12.2% of those who reported drinking in the last 30 days also reported increased alcohol consumption since the start of the pandemic, with no difference in reported increased alcohol consumption in rural vs. urban respondents. 38.5% reported decreased physical activity. 20.5% reported cancelling or delaying cancer care due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Delays in cancer healthcare services and worsening health behaviors due to the COVID-19 pandemic may contribute to poorer health outcomes, with few differences between rural and urban cancer patients and cancer survivors.

Expanding access to early phase trials: the CATCH-UP.2020 experience

BACKGROUND

Disparities in cancer outcomes persist for underserved populations; one important aspect of this is limited access to promising early phase clinical trials. To address this, the National Cancer Institute-funded Create Access to Targeted Cancer Therapy for Underserved Populations (CATCH-UP.2020) was created. We report the tools developed and accrual metrics of the initial year of CATCH-UP.2020 with a focus on racial, ethnic, geographic, and socioeconomically underserved populations.

METHODS

CATCH-UP.2020 is a P30 supplement awarded to 8 National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers with existing resources to rapidly open and accrue to Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network (ETCTN) trials with emphasis on engaging patients from underserved populations. Sites used patient-based, community-based, investigator-based, and program-based tools to meet specific program goals.

RESULTS

From September 2020 to August 2021, CATCH-UP.2020 sites opened 45 ETCTN trials. Weighted average trial activation time for the 7 sites reporting this was 107 days. In the initial year, sites enrolled 145 patients in CATCH-UP.2020 with 68 (46.9%) representing racial, ethnic, rural, and socioeconomically underserved populations using the broader definition of underserved encompassed in the grant charge. During the initial year of CATCH-UP.2020, a time impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, 15.8% (66 of 417) and 21.4% (31 of 145) of patients enrolled to ETCTN trials at network and at CATCH-UP sites, respectively, were from racial and ethnic minority groups, a more limited definition of underserved for which comparable data are available.

CONCLUSION

Targeted funding accelerated activation and accrual of early phase trials and expanded access to this therapeutic option for underserved populations.

Defining the Role of the Modern Oncology Provider in Mitigating Financial Toxicity

Financial toxicity, the cumulative financial hardships resulting from cancer diagnosis and treatment, is a growing problem in the United States. With the proliferation of costly novel therapeutics and improved cancer survival, financial toxicity will remain a major issue in cancer care delivery. Frontline oncology providers serve as gatekeepers in the medical system and, as such, could play essential roles in recognizing and addressing financial toxicity. Providers and health systems could help mitigate financial toxicity through routine financial toxicity screening, financial navigation, and advocacy. Specific strategies include developing and implementing financial screening instruments that can be integrated in electronic medical records and establishing team-based financial navigation programs to help patients with out-of-pocket medical costs, nonmedical spending, and insurance optimization. Finally, providers should continue to advocate for policies and legislation that decrease cost and promote value-based care. In this review, we examine opportunities for provider engagement in these areas and highlight gaps for future research.

Differences in urban and suburban/rural settings regarding care provision and barriers of cancer care for older adults during COVID-19

PURPOSE

Care for older adults with cancer became more challenging during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in urban hotspots. This study examined the potential differences in healthcare providers' provision of as well as barriers to cancer care for older adults with cancer between urban and suburban/rural settings.

METHODS

Members of the Advocacy Committee of the Cancer and Aging Research Group, with the Association of Community Cancer Centers, surveyed multidisciplinary healthcare providers responsible for the direct care of patients with cancer. Respondents were recruited through organizational listservs, email blasts, and social media messages. Descriptive statistics and chi-square tests were used.

RESULTS

Complete data was available from 271 respondents (urban (n = 144), suburban/rural (n = 127)). Most respondents were social workers (42, 44%) or medical doctors/advanced practice providers (34, 13%) in urban and suburban/rural settings, respectively. Twenty-four percent and 32.4% of urban-based providers reported "strongly considering" treatment delays among adults aged 76-85 and > 85, respectively, compared to 13% and 15.4% of suburban/rural providers (Ps = 0.048, 0.013). More urban-based providers reported they were inclined to prioritize treatment for younger adults over older adults than suburban/rural providers (10.4% vs. 3.1%, p = 0.04) during the pandemic. The top concerns reported were similar between the groups and related to patient safety, treatment delays, personal safety, and healthcare provider mental health.

CONCLUSION

These findings demonstrate location-based differences in providers' attitudes regarding care provision for older adults with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Challenges faced in the cancer diagnosis and management-COVID-19 pandemic and beyond-Lessons for future

The COVID-19 pandemic with multiple waves of infection has caused panic and distress globally. Cancer patients being immuno-compromised are more susceptible to infection leading to increased morbidity and unpredictability of their survival. There has been a halt in the diagnosis and treatment of patients suffering from cancer because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Oncologists have the tedious task of assessing the urgency of managing cancer patients against the risk of Coronavirus infection. Timely diagnostic services along with the treatment strategy are needed for the proper management of cancer patients. Since the laboratories are already overwhelmed with the investigations related to the COVID-19 management, there has been a compromise and delay in the diagnosis, thus leading to an overall lag in the management of cancer patients.

Paradoxes of pandemic infection control: Proximity, pace and care within and beyond SARS-CoV-2

From the adoption of mask-wearing in public settings to the omnipresence of hand-sanitising, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has brought unprecedented cultural attention to infection prevention and control (IPC) in everyday life. At the same time, the pandemic threat has enlivened and unsettled hospital IPC processes, fracturing confidence, demanding new forms of evidence, and ultimately involving a rapid reassembling of what constitutes safe care. Here, drawing on semi-structured interviews with 63 frontline healthcare workers from two states in Australia, interviewed between September 2020 and March 2021, we illuminate some of the affective dimensions of IPC at a time of rapid change and evolving uncertainty. We track how a collective sense of risk and safety is relationally produced, redefining attitudes and practices around infective risk, and transforming accepted paradigms of care and self-protection. Drawing on Puig de la Bellacasa's formulation, we propose the notion of IPC as a multidimensional matter of care. Highlighting the complex negotiation of space and time in relation to infection control and care illustrates a series of paradoxes, the understanding of which helps illuminate not only how IPC works, in practice, but also what it means to those working on the frontline of the pandemic.

Association of Perceived Benefit or Burden of Research Participation With Participants' Withdrawal From Cancer Clinical Trials

IMPORTANCE

Attrition in cancer clinical trials (CCTs) can lead to systematic bias, underpowered analyses, and a loss of scientific knowledge to improve treatments. Little attention has focused on retention, especially the role of perceived benefits and burdens, after participants have experienced the trial.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the association between patients' perceived benefits and burdens of research participation and CCT retention.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This survey study was conducted at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center in the Northeast region of the US. The sample included adult patients with a cancer diagnosis participating in cancer therapeutic trials. Data were collected from September 2015 to June 2019. Analysis of study data was ongoing since November 2019 through October 2022.

EXPOSURES

Self-reported validated survey instrument with a list of 22 benefits and 23 burdens of research participation that can be rated by patients with a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

A primary outcome was actual withdrawal from the CCT, and a composite outcome was composite withdrawal that included both actual withdrawal and thoughts of withdrawing. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regressions were used.

RESULTS

Among the 334 participants in the sample, the mean (SD) age was 61.9 (11.5) years and 174 women (52.1%) were included. Top-cited benefits included both aspirational and action-oriented goals, including helping others (94.2%), contributing to society (90.3%), being treated respectfully (86.2%), and hoping for a cure (86.0%). Worry over receiving a placebo (61.3%), rearranging one's life (41.9%), and experiencing bothersome adverse effects (41.6%) were notable burdens. An increased burden score was associated with a higher probability of actual withdrawal (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.86; 95% CI, 1.1-3.17; P = .02) or composite withdrawal (adjusted OR, 3.44; 95% CI, 2.09-5.67; P < .001). An increased benefit score was associated with lower composite withdrawal (adjusted OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.24-0.66; P < .001). For participants who reported the benefits as being equal to or greater than the burdens, 13.4% withdrew. For those who perceived the benefits as being less than the burdens, 33.3% withdrew (adjusted OR, 3.38; 95% CI, 1.13-10.14; P = .03). The risk of withdrawal was even higher for the composite outcome (adjusted OR, 7.70; 95% CI, 2.76-21.48; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This survey study found that patients perceived important benefits from CCT participation, and this perception was associated with trial retention, even among those who also perceived substantial burdens. A broader dialogue among stakeholders can inform an ethical and patient-centric focus on benefits throughout the course of a CCT to increase retention.

Risk factors for heightened COVID-19-Related anxiety among breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted medical care, increased isolation, and exacerbated anxiety in breast cancer patients. Since March 2020, Breastcancer.org experienced a sustained surge in requested pandemic-related information and support. To characterize the pandemic-related experiences of breast cancer patients, we surveyed the Breastcancer.org Community early in the COVID-19 era.

METHODS

Breastcancer.org Community members were invited to complete an online questionnaire regarding their experience during the pandemic. Self-reported data on demographics, comorbidities, care disruptions, anxiety, coping ability, telemedicine use, and satisfaction with care were collected. Results were analyzed using Stata 16.0 (Stata Corp., Inc).

RESULTS

Included were 568 current and previous breast cancer patients, primarily with U.S. residence. Overall, 43.8% reported at least one comorbidity associated with severe COVID-19 illness and 61.9% experienced care delays. Moderate to extreme anxiety about contracting COVID-19 was reported by 36.5%, increasing with number of comorbidities (33.0% vs. 55.4%, p = 0.021), current breast cancer diagnosis (30.4% vs. 42.5%, p = 0.011), and poorer coping ability (15.5% vs. 53.9%, p < 0.0001). Moderate to extreme anxiety about cancer care disruptions was reported by 29.1%, increasing with current breast cancer diagnosis (19.1% vs. 38.9%, p < 0.0001), actual delayed care (18.9% vs. 35.3%, p < 0.0001), and poorer coping ability (13.1% vs. 57.7%, p < 0.0001). Most utilized telehealth and found it helpful, but also expressed increased anxiety and subjectively expressed that these were less preferable.

CONCLUSION

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, anxiety was reported by a large proportion of breast cancer patients, with increased prevalence in those with risk factors. Attention to mental health is critical, as emotional distress not only harms quality of life but may also compromise outcomes.

The evolving scenario of cancer care provision across the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Over the past 2 years, the COVID-19 pandemic has had short-term and long-term effects on the delivery of cancer care. Some European countries faced an unprecedented widespread crisis during the first year of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, only being able afterwards to gradually recover, thanks to the improvement in preventive measures, changes in public health and reactive processes in cancer care and a better understanding of the ongoing heath emergency.

RECENT FINDINGS

The development of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and COVID-19 specific treatments, the growing testing and tracking capability to limit virus diffusion, and research efforts to better define areas of action have all greatly limited the negative impact of the health emergency on routine cancer care.The need to protect those more vulnerable and to ensure continuity of care for oncology patients has been balanced across the pandemic, with the aim to guarantee an optimal standard of care.

SUMMARY

This article aims to provide an overview on the evolving scenario of cancer care throughout the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe, focusing on the particular features that characterized the pandemic course as well as the main differences that were observed across it.

Amyloidosis and COVID-19: experience from an amyloid program in Canada

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV2) and associated COVID-19 infection continue to impact patients globally. Patients with underlying health conditions are at heightened risk of adverse outcomes from COVID-19; however, research involving patients with rare health conditions remains scarce. The amyloidoses are a rare grouping of protein deposition diseases. Light-chain and transthyretin amyloidosis are the most common disease forms, often present with systemic involvement of vital organs including the heart, nerves, kidneys, and GI tracts of affected individuals. The Amyloidosis Program of Calgary examined 152 ATTR patients and 103 AL patients analyzing rates of vaccination, COVID-19 testing, infection outcomes, influence referrals, and excess deaths. Results showed 15 total PCR-confirmed COVID-19 infections in the tested population of amyloid patients, with a higher frequency of infections among patient with AL compared to the ATTR cohort (26.2% vs 5.1%). Four patients (26.6%) required hospital admission for COVID-19 infection, 2 ATTR, and 2 AL patients. Of the confirmed cases, 1 (0.07%) unvaccinated ATTR patient died of a COVID-19 infection. An excess of deaths was found in both the ATTR and AL cohorts when comparing pre-pandemic years 2018 and 2019 to the pandemic years of 2020 and 2021. The finding suggests that amyloidosis patients are likely at a high risk for severe COVID-19 infection and mortality, especially those of advanced age, those on an active treatment with chemotherapy, and those with concomitant B-cell or plasma cell disorder. The impact of virtual healthcare visits and pandemic measures on the excess of deaths observed requires further research.

Remote monitoring of cancer patients during the Covid-19 pandemic - an interview study of nurses' and physicians' experiences

Background

Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, remote monitoring of patients outside hospitals rapidly increased. Previous studies show that healthcare professionals’ competence in digitalization needs to be improved. Little is known about how Covid-19 has affected the use of remote monitoring of cancer patients. The purpose of the study was therefore to explore healthcare personnels’ experiences with remote monitoring of cancer patients during the Covid-19 pandemic. 

Methods

The study had an explorative and descriptive design using semi-structured individual interviews for data collection. Data was analyzed by content analysis.

Results

A total of ten healthcare personnel working in the cancer department and out-patient cancer clinic in the hospital participated; four physicians and six registered nurses. Two categories and four subcategories were identified: 1) «Maintaining personalized healthcare services» comprising the subcategories a) «Adjusting services to patients’ health condition» and b) «Ensuring continuity»; and 2) «A supplement, but not a replacement» comprising the subcategories a) «Impact on interpersonal relations» and b) «The importance of clinical assessment».

Conclusions

This study indicates that remote monitoring through telephone was preferred by both healthcare personnel and patients. The nurses and physicians experienced a more frequent contact with their patients, but emphasized the importance of physical meetings for building relationship, and for thorough clinical examination. Our findings indicate a need to facilitate a work environment where healthcare personnel can be fast learners in using digital tools to provide best possible healthcare quality. Moreover, it is imperative to develop a workplace suitable for the use of digital technology for remote monitoring, and to provide digital tools that is easy to use for both healthcare personnel and patients.

Cancer Patients’ Experiences with Telehealth before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic in British Columbia

Background: Patients have had their cancer care either postponed or changed to telehealth visits to reduce exposure to COVID-19. However, it is unclear how these changes may have affected their experiences. We aim to identify patient characteristics that affect telehealth experiences and evaluate their preferences for using telehealth in the future. Methods: Patients who completed the Outpatient Cancer Care (OCC) Patient Experience Survey were invited to participate. They comepleted the modified OCC Survey, which focused on telehealth during the pandemic. Linear and logistic regression analyses were used to identify patient characteristics that influenced telehealth experiences and preferences for future telehealth use. Results: Perceived ease of participation in telehealth is a significant predictor of the change in patients’ ratings of their telehealth experience. We found that cancer patients had lower preferences for using telehealth in the future if they were older, female, or non-white; resided in an urban area; had no previous telehealth experience; had lower education; and had poorer mental health. Conclusions: To optimize cancer care and improve equitable access to high-quality telehealth care during the pandemic and beyond, clinicians and policymakers will need to consider patients’ self-reported experiences and their personal characteristics.

Outcomes by time to definitive chemoradiation treatment for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has raised concerns about delaying treatment for localized cancer and its impact on long-term outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate the impact of time to chemoradiation (CRT) on recurrence and survival outcomes for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC).

METHODS

In the national Veterans Affairs' database, we identified patients with urothelial histology, MIBC (T2-4a/N0-3/M0) diagnosed between 2000 to 2018 and treated with definitive CRT. Time to treatment was defined as the number of days between date of diagnosis and start date of CRT. The cohort was stratified into < 90 (early) or ≥ 90 days (delayed) groups. Endpoints of locoregional failure (LRF), distant failure (DF), overall survival (OS), and bladder cancer-specific survival (BCS) were evaluated in multivariable Cox and Fine-Gray models.

RESULTS

305 patients with MIBC underwent CRT - 190 (62.3%) received early CRT, 115 (37.7%) received delayed CRT. Multivariable analysis (including success of transurethral resection of bladder tumor and type of chemotherapy) revealed no difference in recurrence between groups - LRF HR 1.12 (95%CI 0.76-1.67, P = 0.56) and DF HR 1.03 (95%CI 0.70-1.53, P = 0.88). Similarly, there were no differences in survival outcomes. The lack of association was maintained at both earlier and later time cutoffs (60-120 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that a short-term delay in definitive therapy may not affect long-term outcomes for patients with MIBC undergoing CRT. This study does not endorse delays in therapy, but rather provides information to aid patients and clinicians navigate the unique challenges of MIBC care in both pandemic and non-pandemic times.

Oncology During the COVID-19 Pandemic: a Lockdown Perspective

Purpose for Review

This perspective piece aims to understand the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the field of oncology, exploring the factors provoking a fall in cancer diagnostic rates, interruption of cancer screening programmes, disruption of oncological treatment and adjuvant care, and the necessary adaption oncological practice has undergone (and will be required to undergo) post-pandemic, including the shift to digital consultations.

Recent Findings

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the field of oncological research has faced significant challenges. Yet, innovation has prevailed with new developments being made across the globe. Looking to the future of oncology, this piece will also suggest potential solutions to overcome the late-stage ramifications of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Summary

The COVID-19 pandemic has triggered a global health crisis, the ramifications of which have reached every corner of the world and overwhelmed already overburdened healthcare systems. However, we are still yet to see the full domino effect of the pandemic as it continues to reveal and exacerbate pre-existing weaknesses in healthcare systems across the world.

Disparities in time to start of definitive radiation treatment for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer

Background

Chemoradiation or radiation therapy alone are curative standards for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer.

Objective

To investigate factors that influence time to initiation of chemoradiation or radiation and the subsequent impact of time to treatment on recurrence and survival outcomes.

Methods

Patients with locally advanced cervical cancer treated with definitive chemoradiation or radiation at our institution between November 2015 and August 2020 were retrospectively identified. Time to treatment initiation was defined as the number of days from date of diagnosis (via biopsy) to the start date of radiation. The cohort was stratified by the median time to treatment into early (<75 days) and delayed (≥75 days) cohorts. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted to examine factors associated with delayed time to treatment.

Results

We identified 143 patients with locally advanced cervical cancer who underwent definitive chemoradiation or radiation. Median follow-up time was 18 months (range 2–62). A total of 71 (49.7%) patients had time to treatment <75 days and 72 (50.3%) patients had time to treatment ≥75 days. The delayed cohort had a higher proportion of Hispanic patients (51.4% vs 31.0%, p=0.04). In multivariable modeling, Hispanic women were 2.71 times more likely (p=0.04) to undergo delayed time to treatment than non-Hispanic white women. Additionally, patients with stage >IIB disease were less likely to undergo delayed time to treatment (OR 0.26, p=0.02) than patients with stage <IIB disease. There was no interaction between race/ethnicity and disease stage. Delayed time to treatment was not associated with inferior overall survival, loco-regional failure, or distant failure.

Conclusion

Hispanic patients with locally advanced cervical cancer were more likely to receive delayed time to definitive treatment of ≥75 days. Further studies examining the presence of similar disparities in delay to definitive treatment for locally advanced cervical cancer at other institutions and settings are warranted.

Virtual Cancer Care Equity in Canada: Lessons From COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic radically shifted healthcare delivery to patients with cancer. Virtual cancer care, or the remote delivery of health care, has become an important resource for patients in Canada to maintain access to cancer care during the pandemic. With an increased number of people regularly accessing the internet and smartphones being ubiquitous for nearly all ages, technology in health care has grown. Virtual cancer care has been referenced as the fourth pillar of cancer care and it appears it may be here to stay. This article explores the benefits and challenges associated with virtual cancer care and outlines the importance of ensuring it is safe and equitable. Oncology nurses can identify where virtual care can be used to mitigate inequities and call attention when these tools exacerbate inequities.

Healthcare Disparities and Outcomes of Cancer Patients in a Community Setting from a COVID-19 Epicenter

There have been numerous studies demonstrating how cancer patients are at an increased risk of mortality. Within New York City, our community hospital emerged as an epicenter of the first wave of the pandemic in the spring of 2020 and serves a unique population that is predominately uninsured, of a lower income, and racially/ethnically diverse. In this single institution retrospective study, the authors seek to investigate COVID-19 diagnosis, severity and mortality in patients with an active cancer diagnosis. Demographic, clinical characteristics, treatment, SARS-CoV-2 laboratory results, and outcomes were evaluated. In our community hospital during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, patients with active cancer diagnosis appear to be at increased risk for mortality (30%) and severe events (50%) due to the SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to the general population. A higher proportion of active cancer patients with Medicaid insurance, Hispanic ethnicity, other race, and male sex had complications and death from COVID-19 infection. The pandemic has highlighted the health inequities that exist in vulnerable patient populations and underserved communities such as ours.

Experiencing the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic Whilst Living With Cancer

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has resulted in considerable consequences for many cancer patients, exacerbating pre-existing systemic health system limitations as well as creating new challenges. From socially distanced clinics and the widespread introduction of telehealth, to the halting of clinical trials and the reassessment of what constitutes "essential" treatment, care in oncology has abruptly changed. There is currently limited analysis of cancer patients' experiences of the pandemic and its impacts on illness, wellness, and everyday life. Through semi-structured interviews with 54 people living with cancer during the 2020 phase of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Australia, we explore how patients experience illness and care in reflecting upon a range of pandemic challenges, including delay, distance, and vulnerability. We find that in some cases, these pandemic conditions redefined the meaning of essential cancer care, reconfigured expectations around clinical trials, constructed new affective distances, and amplified dread and fear for people living with cancer.

SARS-CoV-2 Seropositivity and Seroconversion in Patients Undergoing Active Cancer-Directed Therapy

PURPOSE

Multiple studies have demonstrated the negative impact of cancer care delays during the COVID-19 pandemic, and transmission mitigation techniques are imperative for continued cancer care delivery. We aimed to gauge the effectiveness of these measures at the University of Pennsylvania.

METHODS

We conducted a longitudinal study of SARS-CoV-2 antibody seropositivity and seroconversion in patients presenting to infusion centers for cancer-directed therapy between May 21, 2020, and October 8, 2020. Participants completed questionnaires and had up to five serial blood collections.

RESULTS

Of 124 enrolled patients, only two (1.6%) had detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies on initial blood draw, and no initially seronegative patients developed newly detectable antibodies on subsequent blood draw(s), corresponding to a seroconversion rate of 0% (95% CI, 0.0 TO 4.1%) over 14.8 person-years of follow up, with a median of 13 health care visits per patient.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that patients with cancer receiving in-person care at a facility with aggressive mitigation efforts have an extremely low likelihood of COVID-19 infection.

Experiences of Young Adults With Lymphoma During the COVID-19 Pandemic

PURPOSE

To investigate the experiences of young adults with lymphoma during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PARTICIPANTS & SETTING

8 young adults with Hodgkin or non-Hodgkin lymphoma from one National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center in the northeastern United States.

METHODOLOGIC APPROACH

Secondary data analysis of a study that investigated the experiences of young adults with lymphoma during acute survivorship was used. Thematic analysis was chosen for the secondary data analysis methodology.

FINDINGS

Three themes define the experiences of young adults with lymphoma during the COVID-19 pandemic.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

Nurse-led survivorship care and education of young adults with cancer may mitigate COVID-19-related anxiety and threats.

Cancer symptom experience and help-seeking behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: a cross-sectional population survey

OBJECTIVES

To understand self-reported potential cancer symptom help-seeking behaviours and attitudes during the first 6 months (March-August 2020) of the UK COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

UK population-based survey conducted during August and September 2020. Correlates of help-seeking behaviour were modelled using logistic regression in participants reporting potential cancer symptoms during the previous 6 months. Qualitative telephone interviews with a purposeful subsample of participants, analysed thematically.

SETTING

Online UK wide survey.

PARTICIPANTS

7543 adults recruited via Cancer Research UK online panel provider (Dynata) and HealthWise Wales (a national register of 'research ready' participants) supplemented with social media (Facebook and Twitter) recruitment. 30 participants were also interviewed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Survey measures included experiences of 15 potential cancer symptoms, help-seeking behaviour, barriers and prompts to help-seeking.

RESULTS

Of 3025 (40.1%) participants who experienced a potential cancer symptom, 44.8% (1355/3025) had not contacted their general practitioner (GP). Odds of help-seeking were higher among participants with disability (adjusted OR (aOR)=1.38, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.71) and who experienced more symptoms (aOR=1.68, 95% CI 1.56 to 1.82), and lower among those who perceived COVID-19 as the cause of symptom(s) (aOR=0.36, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.52). Barriers included worries about wasting the doctor's time (1158/7543, 15.4%), putting strain on healthcare services (945, 12.6%) and not wanting to make a fuss (907, 12.0%). Interviewees reported reluctance to contact the GP due to concerns about COVID-19 and fear of attending hospitals, and described putting their health concerns on hold.

CONCLUSIONS

Many people avoided healthcare services despite experiencing potential cancer symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic. Alongside current help-seeking campaigns, well-timed and appropriate nationally coordinated campaigns should signal that services are open safely for those with unusual or persistent symptoms.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN17782018.

Report of National Brain Tumor Society roundtable workshop on innovating brain tumor clinical trials: building on lessons learned from COVID-19 experience

On July 24, 2020, a workshop sponsored by the National Brain Tumor Society was held on innovating brain tumor clinical trials based on lessons learned from the COVID-19 experience. Various stakeholders from the brain tumor community participated including the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), academic and community clinicians, researchers, industry, clinical research organizations, patients and patient advocates, and representatives from the Society for Neuro-Oncology and the National Cancer Institute. This report summarizes the workshop and proposes ways to incorporate lessons learned from COVID-19 to brain tumor clinical trials including the increased use of telemedicine and decentralized trial models as opportunities for practical innovation with potential long-term impact on clinical trial design and implementation.

Impact of COVID-19 On Breast Cancer Management: A Radiological Prespective from A Tertiary Centre

Objective

The coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused delaying breast cancer management, increasing time interval in chemotherapy cycles and surgery. This has implications on radiological manifestation of cancer. Further, we evaluated changes observed in mammography.

Materials and Methods

This case control study was conducted from March 25^th, 2020 to August 15^th, 2020 at the Integrated Breast Care Centre, All India Institute of Medical Science Rishikesh (AIIMS), Rishikesh. Sonomammography was performed on follow-up patients who were on chemotherapy and were scheduled for surgery. Moreover, duration of delay from the last neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) cycle was recorded. Similar data in the pre-COVID-19 period from November 4^th, 2019 to March 24^th, 2020 was compared with post-COVID-19 data and was analyzed by SPSS Version 23.

Results

The study included 54 patients who presented between March 25^th, 2020 and August 15^th, 2020. Furthermore, the delay in NACT cycles has been shown to be associated with disease progression (p = 0.045). Subgroup analysis of treatment duration with various parameters revealed significant correlation between size, appearance of ulceration, and response evaluation (p<0.05). However, no significant association was found between duration of delay and the histological subtype of lesion (p>0.05). A substantial difference was seen in the evaluation of NACT response in pre- and post-COVID-19 time, with partial response (n = 39, 58.24%) seen as the most common response in pre-COVID-19 time and progressive disease (n = 28, 51.9%) as the most common response in post-COVID-19 time (p<0.001).

Conclusion

The coronavirus pandemic has severe impact on breast cancer management. A delay in NACT causes progression in cancer. This can be seen in ultrasound and mammogram.

Clinical Utility of Next-Generation Sequencing-Based Panel Testing under the Universal Health-Care System in Japan: A Retrospective Analysis at a Single University Hospital

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) assay is part of routine care in Japan owing to its reimbursement by Japan's universal health-care system; however, reimbursement is limited to patients who finished standard treatment. We retrospectively investigated 221 patients who underwent Foundation One CDX (F1CDx) at our hospital. Every F1CDx result was assessed at the molecular tumor board (MTB) for treatment recommendation. Based on patients' preferences, presumed germline findings were also assessed at the MTB and disclosed at the clinic. In total, 204 patients underwent F1CDx and 195 patients completed the analysis; however, 13.8% of them could not receive the report due to disease progression. Among 168 patients who received the results, 41.6% had at least one actionable alteration, and 3.6% received genomically matched treatment. Presumed germline findings were nominated in 24 patients, and 16.7% of them contacted a geneticist counselor. The NGS assay should be performed earlier in the clinical course to maximize the clinical benefit. Broader reimbursement for the NGS assay would enhance the delivery of precision oncology to patients. Access to clinical trials affects the number of patients who benefit from NGS. Additionally, the disclosure of presumed germline findings is feasible in clinical practice.

JM. Retrospective Analysis of Early Impact of COVID-19 on Systemic Cancer Treatment—A Pilot Study

Introduction Cancer care during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is challenging as the patients are at an increased risk of developing complications compared with the general population.

Objectives This study was conducted to assess the impact of COVID-19 pandemic and nationwide lockdown on systemic cancer care.

Materials and Methods This comparative descriptive study was conducted in the Department of Medical Oncology and Haematology in a tertiary care center in India. The study compared and analyzed the consecutive patient data of two different units in the Department of Medical Oncology in the pre-COVID phase (PCP) and post lockdown relaxation phase (PLRP). We represented the categorical data in frequency and percentage, and chi-squared test was used to analyze the variables.

Results Patients were categorized based on demographic, disease-related, and hospital visit-related parameters and a significant drop noted in patients who utilized a prebooking facility (p = 0.0001), in the number of patients aged >50 years (p = 0.004), number of patients who presented with hematological malignancies (p = 0.006), and who came for follow-up (p = 0.0001). The other parameters remained statistically insignificant.

Conclusions During PLRP, active systemic cancer care seems to have been less affected, whereas follow-up of patients and visits of elderly patients were significantly reduced. If the pandemic remains under control, cancer care may not get compromised. This shows the importance of flattening the curve for quality management of other diseases during a pandemic.

SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity and seroconversion in patients undergoing active cancer-directed therapy

Multiple studies have demonstrated the negative impact of cancer care delays during the COVID-19 pandemic, and transmission mitigation techniques are imperative for continued cancer care delivery. To gauge the effectiveness of these measures at the University of Pennsylvania, we conducted a longitudinal study of SARS-CoV-2 antibody seropositivity and seroconversion in patients presenting to infusion centers for cancer-directed therapy between 5/21/2020 and 10/8/2020. Participants completed questionnaires and had up to five serial blood collections. Of 124 enrolled patients, only two (1.6%) had detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies on initial blood draw, and no initially seronegative patients developed newly detectable antibodies on subsequent blood draw(s), corresponding to a seroconversion rate of 0% (95%CI 0.0-4.1%) over 14.8 person-years of follow up, with a median of 13 healthcare visits per patient. These results suggest that cancer patients receiving in-person care at a facility with aggressive mitigation efforts have an extremely low likelihood of COVID-19 infection.

The Effects of COVID-19 on Cancer Care Provision: A Systematic Review

This systematic review aims to gather primary data from cancer institutions that have implemented changes to cancer service provision amid the COVID-19 outbreak to inform future intervention and health care facility response strategies. A comprehensive literature search was done on Global Health Medline and EMBASE using pertinent key words and MeSH terms relating to COVID-19 and Cancer service provision. A total of 72 articles were selected for inclusion in this systematic review. Following the narrative synthesis that was conducted of the literature, 6 core themes that encompassed common cancer service intervention adopted by institutions were identified: (1) Testing and Tracking, (2) Outreach and Communication, (3) Protection, (4) Social Distancing (5) Treatment Management, (6) Service Restructuring. Since cancer patients are a high-risk population amid the COVID-19 pandemic, these areas of targeted intervention can be used to inform necessary actions in institutions facing similar risks, based on previous learning from numerous cancer centers globally.

Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer Care: How the Pandemic Is Delaying Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment for American Seniors

PURPOSE

While the immediate care and access disruptions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic have received growing attention in certain areas, the full range of gaps in cancer screenings and treatment is not yet well understood or well documented throughout the country comprehensively.

METHODS

This study used a large medical claims clearinghouse database representing 5%-7% of the Medicare fee-for-service population to characterize changes in the utilization of cancer care services and gain insight into the impact of COVID-19 on the US cancer population, including identification of new patients, gaps in access to care, and disruption of treatment journeys.

RESULTS

In March-July 2020, in comparison with the baseline period of March-July 2019, there is a substantial decrease in cancer screenings, visits, therapy, and surgeries, with variation by cancer type and site of service. At the peak of the pandemic in April, screenings for breast, colon, prostate, and lung cancers were lower by 85%, 75%, 74%, and 56%, respectively. Significant utilization reductions were observed in April for hospital outpatient evaluation and management (E&M) visits (-74%), new patient E&M visits (-70%), and established patient E&M visits (-60%). A decrease in billing frequency was observed for the top physician-administered oncology products, dropping in both April (-26%) and July (-31%). Mastectomies were reduced consistently in April through July, with colectomies similarly reduced in April and May and prostatectomies dipping in April and July.

CONCLUSION

The current impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care in the United States has resulted in decreases and delays in identifying new cancers and delivery of treatment. These problems, if unmitigated, will increase cancer morbidity and mortality for years to come.