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

COVID-19 vaccination outcomes in patients with a solid malignancy: Insights from extensive real-world data and propensity score matched analyses

OBJECTIVES

This nationwide, multicentric, retrospective analysis of 1,126,946 COVID-19 cases (March 2020-June 2022) aims to elucidate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on mortality in patients with a sole solid malignancy.

METHODS

Using data from the national digital medical record repository, outcomes were compared among fully vaccinated and nonvaccinated cohorts, factoring in gender, virus type, age, vaccination status, vaccine type, and cancer type. Logistic regression calculated odds ratios (OR) and their significance.

RESULTS

Among 6,050 patients with both cancer and comorbidities, 1,797 had only solid malignancy. Vaccinated individuals in this group had reduced mortality rates, especially those >63 years (OR 0.169 [95% confidence interval [CI] 0.090-0.317]; P < .001). Lower deaths were observed in non-ICU (OR 0.193 [95% CI 0.097-0.382]; P < .001) and ICU cases (OR 0.224 [95% CI 0.077-0.646]; P = .003), with both vaccine types. No statistically significant benefits were observed against delta and omicron variants. Intrathoracic malignancies (OR 0.376 [95% CI 0.146-0.971]; P = .043) and palliative treatment (OR 0.384 [95% CI 0.192-0.766]; P = .006) showed vaccination benefits. Logistic regression revealed a higher fatal risk in nonvaccinated males >63. Propensity score matching supported these outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with sole solid malignancies face elevated COVID-19 mortality risk, particularly without active cytostatic therapy, with advanced disease on palliative treatment, or intrathoracic malignancies.

Previous immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy is associated with decreased COVID-19-related hospitalizations and complications in patients with cancer: Results of a propensity-matched analysis of the OnCovid registry

OBJECTIVES

To date, studies have not provided definitive answers regarding whether previous immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment alters outcomes for cancer patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

The OnCovid registry (NCT04393974) was searched from February 27, 2020, to January 31, 2022, for patients who received systemic anti-cancer therapy in the 4 weeks before laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis. Propensity-score matching using country, vaccination status, primary tumor type, sex, age, comorbidity burden, tumor stage, and remission status investigated differences in predefined clinical outcomes comparing those who had or had not received ICIs.

RESULTS

Of 3523 patients screened, 137 ICI-only and 1378 non-ICI met inclusion criteria. Before matching, ICI patients were older, male, enrolled at centers in Italy, and had histories of smoking, thoracic cancers, advanced cancer stages, and active malignancies (P ≤0.02). After matching, there were 120 ICI and 322 non-ICI patients. ICI patients had no differences (odds ratio: 95% CI) in presenting COVID-19 symptoms (0.69: 0.37-1.28), receipt of COVID-specific therapy (0.88: 0.54-1.41), 14-day (0.95: 0.56-1.61), or 28-day (0.79: 0.48-1.29) mortalities. However, ICI patients required less COVID-19-related hospitalization (0.37: 0.21-0.67) and oxygen therapy (0.51: 0.31-0.83) and developed fewer complications (0.57: 0.36-0.92).

CONCLUSION

In this propensity-score matched analysis, previous ICI therapy did not worsen and potentially improved COVID-19 outcomes in patients with cancer.

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

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

Were cancer patients worse off than the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic? A population-based study from Norway, Denmark and Iceland during the pre-vaccination era

Background

In a population-based setting, we investigated the risks of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 and developing severe COVID-19 outcomes among cancer patients compared with the general population.

Methods

In nationwide cohorts, we identified all individuals in Norway, Denmark and Iceland who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 or had a severe COVID-19 outcome (hospitalisation, intensive care, and death) from March until December 2020, using data from national health registries. We estimated standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing cancer patients with the general population.

Findings

During the first wave of the pandemic, cancer patients in Norway and Denmark had higher risks of testing SARS-CoV-2 positive compared to the general population. Throughout 2020, recently treated cancer patients were more likely to test SARS-CoV-2 positive. In Iceland, cancer patients experienced no increased risk of testing positive. The risk of COVID-19-related hospitalisation was higher among cancer patients diagnosed within one year of hospitalisation (Norway: SIR = 2.43, 95% CI 1.89-3.09; Denmark: 2.23, 1.96-2.54) and within five years (Norway: 1.58, 1.35-1.83; Denmark: 1.54, 1.42-1.66). Risks were higher in recently treated cancer patients and in those diagnosed with haematologic malignancies, colorectal or lung cancer. Risks of COVID-19-related intensive care and death were higher among cancer patients.

Interpretation

Cancer patients were at increased risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the first pandemic wave when testing availability was limited, while relative risks of severe COVID-19 outcomes remained increased in cancer patients throughout 2020. Recent cancer treatment and haematologic malignancy were the strongest risk factors.

Funding

Nordic Cancer Union.

Assessing the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the health of residents and the healthcare system in Alberta, Canada: an observational study-The Alberta POST-COVID Follow-up Study

INTRODUCTION

Very little is known about how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the health of residents and the healthcare system in Alberta, Canada. The purpose of this study is to establish an observational study to characterise the health of residents in Alberta, Canada, over time, covering a population that tested negative or positive for COVID-19 during the pandemic. The primary outcome is to characterise 'long COVID-19' and the health status of residents during the COVID-19 pandemic. Secondary outcomes include the estimation of the risk of and risk factors associated with adverse health outcomes and healthcare utilisation and burdens.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a population-level provincial observational study which will follow-up with Alberta residents who underwent testing for COVID-19 and completed surveys adapted from the ISARIC COVID-19 long-term follow-up survey. The survey data will be linked with medical records. Statistical analyses will be carried out to characterise 'long COVID-19' and the health status of residents during the pandemic. The outcomes of this study will inform strategies for primary care and rehabilitation services to prevent chronic consequences; contribute to healthcare management, interventional studies, rehabilitation and health management to reduce overall morbidity and improve long-term outcomes of COVID-19 and the COVID-19 pandemic and potentially guide a self-evaluation of a remote monitoring system to manage individuals' health.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was reviewed and approved by the University of Alberta ethics committee (Study ID: Pro00112053 & Pro00113039) on 13 August 2021 and adheres to the Alberta Health Services research information management policy. Study results will be used to manage clinical care, published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at local, national and international conferences.

PROTOCOL VERSION

6 June 2022 EUROQOL ID: 161 015.

How SARS-CoV-2 Infection Impacts the Management of Patients with Vulvar Cancer: Experience in a Third-Level Hospital of Southern Italy

Background: Since February 2020, the spread of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Italy has induced the government to call for lockdown of any activity apart from primary needs, and changing the lives of each of us. All that has dramatically impacted the management of patients affected by cancer. Patients with vulvar cancer (VC) represent a particularly frail population because they are elderly and affected by multiple comorbidities. The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical impact of the SARS-CoV-2 infection on VC patients in terms of delay or impossibility of carrying out the scheduled treatment. Methods: The medical records of patients affected by vulvar tumors, referred to "DAI Materno-Infantile" of AOU Federico II of Naples between February 2020 and January 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. The presence of a positive reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in nasopharyngeal swab defined the positivity to SARS-CoV-2. Results: Twenty-four patients with VC were analyzed and scheduled for treatment. The median age was 70.7 years (range: 59-80). Seven (29.2%) patients were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection: In three (42.8%) patients, the treatment was delayed with no apparent consequences, in four (57.2%), the treatment was delayed or changed due to cancer progression and, of these four, one died due to respiratory complications of COVID-19, and one died due to oncologic disease progression. Conclusion: COVID-19 caused, in most cases, significant delays in oncologic treatments and high mortality in our series of patients affected by VC.

Programmed Cell Death Protein 1 Axis Inhibition in Viral Infections: Clinical Data and Therapeutic Opportunities

A vital function of the immune system is the modulation of an evolving immune response. It is responsible for guarding against a wide variety of pathogens as well as the establishment of memory responses to some future hostile encounters. Simultaneously, it maintains self-tolerance and minimizes collateral tissue damage at sites of inflammation. In recent years, the regulation of T-cell responses to foreign or self-protein antigens and maintenance of balance between T-cell subsets have been linked to a distinct class of cell surface and extracellular components, the immune checkpoint molecules. The fact that both cancer and viral infections exploit similar, if not the same, immune checkpoint molecules to escape the host immune response highlights the need to study the impact of immune checkpoint blockade on viral infections. More importantly, the process through which immune checkpoint blockade completely changed the way we approach cancer could be the key to decipher the potential role of immunotherapy in the therapeutic algorithm of viral infections. This review focuses on the effect of programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 blockade on the outcome of viral infections in cancer patients as well as the potential benefit from the incorporation of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in treatment of viral infections.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of lung cancer patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

Background

COVID-19 is spreading rapidly worldwide, and the population is generally susceptible to SARS-CoV-2, especially those with cancer. Hence, our study aims to design a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical characteristics and prognoses of lung cancer patients with COVID-19.

Methods

The protocol is prepared following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The literature will be searched in Embase, Pubmed, the Cochrane Library, LitCovid, and CNKI for potentially eligible articles. The quality of the articles will be used in the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) and Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Statistical analysis will be performed through RevMan 5 software. This review protocol has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022306866).

Discussion

To clarify whether COVID-19 affects the clinical symptoms and prognoses of lung cancer patients. Further study is needed to establish the best evidence-based for the management of lung cancer patients with COVID-19.

Conclusion

The definitive conclusion will be important to physicians effectively manage lung cancer patients with COVID-19.

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

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

Cancers and COVID-19 Risk: A Mendelian Randomization Study

Simple Summary

During the COVID-19 pandemic, cancer patients are regarded as a highly vulnerable population. Given the unavoidable bias and unmeasured confounders in observational studies, the causal effects of cancers on COVID-19 outcomes are largely unknown. In the study, we tried to evaluate the causal effects of cancers on COVID-19 outcomes using the Mendelian randomization (MR) approach. No strong evidence was observed to support a causal role of cancer in COVID-19 development. Previous observational correlations between cancers and COVID-19 outcomes were likely confounded. Large and well-conducted epidemiological studies are required to determine whether cancers causally contribute to increased risk of COVID-19.

Abstract

Observational studies have shown increased COVID-19 risk among cancer patients, but the causality has not been proven yet. Mendelian randomization analysis can use the genetic variants, independently of confounders, to obtain causal estimates which are considerably less confounded. We aimed to investigate the causal associations of cancers with COVID-19 outcomes using the MR analysis. The inverse-variance weighted (IVW) method was employed as the primary analysis. Sensitivity analyses and multivariable MR analyses were conducted. Notably, IVW analysis of univariable MR revealed that overall cancer and twelve site-specific cancers had no causal association with COVID-19 severity, hospitalization or susceptibility. The corresponding p-values for the casual associations were all statistically insignificant: overall cancer (p = 0.34; p = 0.42; p = 0.69), lung cancer (p = 0.60; p = 0.37; p = 0.96), breast cancer (p = 0.43; p = 0.74; p = 0.43), endometrial cancer (p = 0.79; p = 0.24; p = 0.83), prostate cancer (p = 0.54; p = 0.17; p = 0.58), thyroid cancer (p = 0.70; p = 0.80; p = 0.28), ovarian cancer (p = 0.62; p = 0.96; p = 0.93), melanoma (p = 0.79; p = 0.45; p = 0.82), small bowel cancer (p = 0.09; p = 0.08; p = 0.19), colorectal cancer (p = 0.85; p = 0.79; p = 0.30), oropharyngeal cancer (p = 0.31; not applicable, NA; p = 0.80), lymphoma (p = 0.51; NA; p = 0.37) and cervical cancer (p = 0.25; p = 0.32; p = 0.68). Sensitivity analyses and multivariable MR analyses yielded similar results. In conclusion, cancers might have no causal effect on increasing COVID-19 risk. Further large-scale population studies are needed to validate our findings.

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

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion