Expected Medium- and Long-Term Impact of the COVID-19 Outbreak in Oncology

The impact of COVID-19 on 2020 monthly incidence trends of primary brain and other CNS tumors

BACKGROUND

To mitigate disease spread, restrictions implemented in the United States surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic created an environment that led to delays in cancer diagnosis. The data needed to accurately analyze the impact of the pandemic on brain and CNS tumor incidence has not been available until now. Utilizing incidence data from the Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States (CBTRUS) we analyzed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary brain and other CNS tumor incidence for the first year of the pandemic.

METHODS

Monthly age-adjusted incidence rates and incidence trends for 2019 and 2020 were determined for age at diagnosis, sex, race, ethnicity, diagnostic confirmation, behavior, tumor histopathology, and county-level urbanization. Monthly incidence rate ratios comparing 2020 and 2019 were evaluated for the same factors.

RESULTS

Overall, there was a notable decrease in incidence rates in March-May 2020 when compared to 2019. These decreases were driven by nonmalignant tumors, with a 50% incidence decrease between March 2020 and 2019. Individuals who were Black had a larger incidence decrease in early 2020 than individuals who were White. Radiographically confirmed tumors saw larger incidence decreases than histologically confirmed tumors. There were no changes in monthly incidence of glioblastoma in 2020 compared to 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

These data provide evidence that disruptions in medical care, such as governmental and health care mandates, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an overall decreased incidence of primary brain tumors in early 2020.

Delays in diagnosis and surgery of sarcoma patients during the COVID-19 outbreak in Spain

Background and objectives

Social distancing and quarantine implanted during the COVID-19 outbreak could have delayed the accession of oncologic patients to hospitals and treatments. This study analysed the management of sarcoma patients during this period in five Spanish hospitals.

Design and methods

Clinical data from adult sarcoma patients, soft tissue and bone sarcomas, managed during the COVID-19 outbreak, from 15 March to 14 September 2020 (Covid cohort), were retrospectively collected and time for diagnosis, surgery and active treatments were compared with sarcoma patients managed during the same pre-pandemic period in 2018 (Control cohort).

Results

A total of 126 and 182 new sarcoma patients were enrolled in the Covid and Control cohorts, respectively, who were mainly diagnosed as soft tissue sarcomas (81.0% and 80.8%) and at localized stage (80.2% and 79.1%). A diagnostic delay was observed in the Covid cohort with a median time for the diagnosis of 102.5 days (range 6-355) versus 83 days (range 5-328) in the Control cohort (p = 0.034). Moreover, a delay in surgery was observed in cases with localized disease from the Covid cohort with a median time of 96.0 days (range 11-265) versus 54.5 days (range 2-331) in the Control cohort (p = 0.034). However, a lower delay for neoadjuvant radiotherapy was observed in the Covid cohort with a median time from the diagnosis to the neoadjuvant radiotherapy of 47 days (range 27-105) versus 91 days (range 27-294) in the Control cohort (p = 0.039). No significant differences for adjuvant radiotherapy, neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant/adjuvant palliative chemotherapy were observed between both cohorts. Neither progression-free survival (PFS) nor overall survival (OS) was significantly different.

Conclusion

Delays in diagnosis and surgery were retrospectively observed in sarcoma patients during the COVID-19 outbreak in Spain, while the time for neoadjuvant radiotherapy was reduced. However, no impact on the PFS and OS was observed.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the in-hospital diagnostic pathway of breast and colorectal cancer in the Netherlands: A population-based study

BACKGROUND

In the Netherlands, the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a temporary halt of population screening for cancer and limited hospital capacity for non-COVID care. We aimed to investigate the impact of the pandemic on the in-hospital diagnostic pathway of breast cancer (BC) and colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS

71,159 BC and 48,900 CRC patients were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients, diagnosed between January 2020 and July 2021, were divided into six periods and compared to the average of patients diagnosed in the same periods in 2017-2019. Diagnostic procedures performed were analysed using logistic regression. Lead time of the diagnostic pathway was analysed using Cox regression. Analyses were stratified for cancer type and corrected for age, sex (only CRC), stage and region.

RESULTS

For BC, less mammograms were performed during the first recovery period in 2020. More PET-CTs were performed during the first peak, first recovery and third peak period. For CRC, less ultrasounds and more CT scans and MRIs were performed during the first peak. Lead time decreased the most during the first peak by 2 days (BC) and 8 days (CRC). Significantly fewer patients, mainly in lower stages, were diagnosed with BC (-47%) and CRC (-36%) during the first peak.

CONCLUSION

Significant impact of the COVID-19 pandemic was found on the diagnostic pathway, mainly during the first peak. In 2021, care returned to the same standards as before the pandemic. Long-term effects on patient outcomes are not known yet and will be the subject of future research.

Palliative care for cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: A narrative synthesis from 36 studies of 16 countries

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 epidemic, palliative care has become even more indispensable for cancer patients.

AIM

To identify the changes in palliative care for cancer patients and improvements in palliative care quality during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

A systematic review and narrative synthesis was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Web of Science. An evaluation tool using mixed methods was used to assess the quality of the study. The main relevant themes identified were used to group qualitative and quantitative findings.

RESULTS

A total of 36 studies were identified, primarily from different countries, with a total of 14,427 patients, 238 caregivers and 354 health care providers. Cancer palliative care has been experiencing several difficulties following the COVID-19 pandemic, including increased mortality and infection rates as well as delays in patient treatment that have resulted in poorer prognoses. Treatment providers are seeking solutions such as electronic management of patients and integration of resources to care for the mental health of patients and staff. Telemedicine plays an important role in many ways but cannot completely replace traditional treatment. Clinicians strive to meet patients' palliative care needs during special times and improve their quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

Palliative care faces unique challenges during the COVID-19 epidemic. With adequate support to alleviate care-related challenges, patients in the home versus hospital setting will be able to receive better palliative care. In addition, this review highlights the importance of multiparty collaboration to achieve personal and societal benefits of palliative care.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No Patient or Public Contribution.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on training conditions and education in oncologic disciplines: a survey-based analysis

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to changes in global health care. Medical societies had to update guidelines and enhance new services such as video consultations. Cancer treatment had to be modified. The aim of this study is to ensure optimal care for cancer patients with the help of high-quality training even in times of crisis. We therefore conducted a nationwide survey of physicians in training in oncological disciplines during the pandemic to assess the impact on their education.

METHODS

The survey was sent to tumour centres, hospitals, specialist societies, and working and junior research groups and distributed via newsletters and homepages. Interim results and a call for participation were published as a poster (DEGRO) [26] and in the German Cancer Society (DKG) journal FORUM [42]. The survey contained 53 questions on conditions of education and training and on clinical and scientific work. Statistics were carried out with LimeSurvey and SPSS (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).

RESULTS

Between February and November 2022, 450 participants answered the survey, with radio-oncologists being the largest group (28%). Most colleagues (63%) had access to digital training methods. Virtual sessions were rated as a good alternative, especially as multidisciplinary meetings (54%) as well as in-house and external training programs (48%, 47%). The time spent by training supervisors on education was rated as less than before the pandemic by 57%. Half of all participants perceived communication (54%), motivation (44%) and atmosphere (50%) in the team as bad. The participants felt strongly burdened by extra work (55%) and by a changed team atmosphere (49%). One third felt a change in the quality of training during the pandemic and rated it as negative (35%). According to 37% of the participants, this had little influence on their own quality of work. Additional subgroup analyses revealed significant differences in gender, specialty and education level.

CONCLUSION

In order to improve oncology training in times of crisis, access to digital training options and meetings should be ensured. Participants wish for regular team meetings in person to enable good team spirit, compensation for overtime work and sufficient time for training supervisors for discussion and feedback.

Impact of COVID-19 on cancer care pathways in a comprehensive cancer center in northern Italy

The COVID-19 pandemic burdened health care systems worldwide. Health services were reorganized with the dual purpose of ensuring the most adequate continuity of care and, simultaneously, the safety of patients and health professionals. The provision of care to patients within cancer care pathways (cCPs) was not touched by such reorganization. We investigated whether the quality of care provided by a local comprehensive cancer center has been maintained using cCP indicators. A retrospective single-cancer center study was conducted on eleven cCPs from 2019 to 2021 by comparing three timeliness indicators, five care indicators and three outcome indicators yearly calculated on incident cases. Comparisons of indicators between 2019 and 2020, and 2019 and 2021, were performed to assess the performance of cCP function during the pandemic. Indicators displayed heterogeneous significant changes attributed to all cCPs over the study period, affecting eight (72%), seven (63%) and ten (91%) out of eleven cCPs in the comparison between 2019 and 2020, 2020 and 2021, and 2019 and 2021, respectively. The most relevant changes were attributed to a negative increase in time-to-treatment surgery-related indicators and to a positive increase in the number of cases discussed by cCP team members. No variations were found attributed to outcome indicators. Significant changes did not account for clinical relevance once discussed by cCP managers and team members. Our experience demonstrated that the CP model constitutes an appropriate tool for providing high levels of quality care, even in the most critical health situations.

Quality of life and emotional distress in sarcoma patients diagnosed during COVID-19 pandemic: a supplementary analysis from the SarCorD study

Background

The COVID-19 outbreak had a negative psychological impact on cancer patients. In this study, we analyzed emotional distress and quality of life in patients diagnosed with sarcoma during the first year of the pandemic compared to the previous year.

Methods

We retrospectively enrolled patients with soft tissue, bone sarcoma, and aggressive benign musculoskeletal diseases diagnosed during the pandemic (COVID group) or the year before (control group) at the IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute in Rome. Patients who had undergone a psychological assessment with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the Distress Thermometer at diagnosis were included in the final analysis. We analyzed whether there is a difference in the various domains of quality of life between the two groups and whether there are changes over time in each group.

Results

We enrolled 114 patients (72 control group; 42 COVID group), affected by soft tissue (64%), bone sarcoma (29%), and aggressive benign musculoskeletal diseases (7%). We did not observe significant differences in the health-related quality of life domains in the control and COVID groups, except for the financial domain (p = 0.039), with 9.7% vs. 23.8% of patients with a score > 0 in the control and COVID groups, respectively. We observed emotional distress at diagnosis in 48.6% of patients in the control group vs. 69.0% in the COVID group (p = 0.034). In the control group, we observed an improvement in physical function (p = 0.043) and in QoL (p = 0.022), while in the COVID group, we observed a deterioration in role function (p = 0.044) during follow-up. In the COVID group, 22.2% of patients were concerned about COVID-19, 61.1% by tumor, 91.1% stated that the pandemic worsened their subjective perception of cancer, and 19.4% perceived that their quality of care had worsened.

Conclusion

We observed a higher level of distress among patients diagnosed during the pandemic compared to the year before, probably due to the increased concern for both infection and cancer, the worsened perception of health status, and the perception of a poorer quality of health care.

New reporting items and recommendations for randomized trials impacted by COVID-19 and force majeure events: a targeted approach

Background

Appropriate analyses and reporting are essential to the reproducibility and interpretation of clinical trials. However, the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic and other force majeure events, like the war in Ukraine, have impacted the conduct of clinical trials.

Methods

The number of clinical trials potentially impacted were estimated from clinicaltrials.gov. To identify reporting items considered vital for assessing the impact of COVID-19, we reviewed 35 randomized phase III trials from three top oncology journals published between July and December 2020. For validation, we reviewed 29 phase III trials published between January and December 2021.

Results

Our results show that the number of clinical trials being potentially impacted in cancer, cardiovascular diseases, and diabetes is at least 1,484, 535, and 145, respectively. The magnitude of disruption is most significant in oncology trials. Based on the review of 35 trials, a modified checklist with ten new and four modified items covering pandemic's impact on trial conduct, protocol changes, delays, data capture, analysis and interpretation was developed to ensure comprehensive and transparent reporting. Our validation shows that six out of seven applicable reporting items were reported in less than 21% of the articles.

Conclusions

Our recommendations were proposed to improve the reporting of randomized clinical trials impacted by COVID-19 and force majeure events that are broadly applicable to different areas of medical research.

Trends among patients with endometriosis over a 7-year period and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic: experience from an academic high-level endometriosis centre in Germany

PURPOSE

Endometriosis is known to be an underestimated disease. Lately the awareness of the disease seems to have improved. Aim of this analysis is to provide an overview of the development of treatment of patients diagnosed with endometriosis. This includes a special scope on implications of the COVID-19 pandemic since in multiple settings postponed treatments resulting in negative impact on prognosis were reported.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analysed the development of numbers of patients treated for endometriosis in an academic centre within a 7-year period, 01/2015-12/2021, performing a systematic analysis of ICD-10-Codes from our computer system used in clinical routine.

RESULTS

Treatment numbers increased over the past 7 years, i.e., 239 treated cases in 2015 vs. 679 in 2021. Following restrictions for outpatient evaluation and surgical capacity at our centre, during COVID-19 pandemic the numbers of treated patients were reduced, especially in the first lockdown period (03/22/2020-05/05/2020 vs. same period in 2019: outpatient clinic (9 vs. 36; p < 0.001), patients surgically treated (27 vs. 52; p < 0,001)). The comparison of 2020 to 2019 showed a reduction in April 2020 of - 37% in outpatient department and up to - 90% for surgically treated patients. Comparing to 2019, we found a reduction of surgical interventions in 2020 by - 9% and an increase by 83% in 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

Raising numbers of patients treated for endometriosis point to a new awareness for the disease. After the decline during the lockdown period numbers raised again, leading to a delay, but not an omission of treatment. A certified endometriosis centre with established and well-organized structures is required to improve not only treatment results but also quality of life of those affected.

Impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in hospital-acquired infections and bacterial resistance at an oncology hospital

Objective

Hospital-acquired infection (HAI) rates were negatively affected by the the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We describe the incidence of HAIs, main pathogens, and multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) isolated in cancer patients before and during the pandemic.

Design

This retrospective, comparative study included patients with HAIs. We compared 2 periods: the prepandemic period (2018, 2019, and the first 3 months of 2020) with the pandemic period (April-December 2020 and all of 2021).

Setting

Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, a tertiary-care oncology public hospital in Mexico City, Mexico.

Methods

Patients with the following HAIs were included: nosocomial pneumonia, ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), secondary bloodstream infection (BSI), central-line-associated bloodstream infection (CLBSI), and Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). Demographic data, clinical characteristics, pathogens isolated, and MDRO data were included.

Results

We identified 639 HAIs: 381 (7.95 per 100 hospital discharges) in the prepandemic period and 258 (7.17 per 100 hospital discharges) in the pandemic period. Hematologic malignancy was documented in 263 (44.3%) patients; 251 (39.2%) were in cancer progression or relapse. Nosocomial pneumonia was more frequent during the pandemic period (40.3% vs 32.3%; P = .04). Total episodes of VAP were not different between the 2 periods (28.1% vs 22.1%; P = .08), but during the pandemic period, the VAP rate was higher among COVID-19 patients than non-COVID-19 patients (72.2% vs 8.8%; P < .001). Escherichia coli, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, and Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia cases were more frequent in the pandemic period. Extended-spectrum β-lactamases (ESBL)-E. coli was the only MDRO that occurred more frequently during the pandemic period.

Conclusions

In cancer patients, nosocomial pneumonia was more frequent during the pandemic period. We did not observe a significant impact on other HAIs. MDROs did not significantly increase during the pandemic.

Impact and control of the COVID pandemic in an elite sports club: Real Madrid

The incidence and risk factors for poor outcome in patients with COVID are well known, as are the protective measures in high-risk populations. In contrast, the epidemiological and clinical behavior of this disease in the population of elite athletes who are the paradigm of good health is poorly understood. Data on COVID in athletes are scarce and have focused preferentially on the consequences on sports performance of confinement measures and on the pathophysiological risks of infected athletes. Real Madrid is a large elite sports institution with facilities in the City of Madrid where 600 athletes train daily. The incidence of COVID during a study period of 671 days of observation in athletes, professional or amateur, working in the institution has been 0,74 per 1,000 days of exposure. The disease has been asymptomatic or oligosymptomatic in all athletes and did not require any hospital admissions. The different teams did not have to suspend any of its sportive commitments for COVID during the study period and there was no evidence of outbreaks of internal transmission between members of the different teams.

New approach to implement cancer patient care: The valutazione percorso rete oncologica campana (ValPeROC)‐experience from an Italian oncology network

OBJECTIVE

The primary goal of the Campania Oncology Network (ROC) was to reduce cancer delay and care fragmentation through the establishment of cancer-specific multidisciplinary oncologic groups (GOMs) and diagnostic and therapeutic assistance paths (PDTAs).

METHODS

Five cancer centres of the ROC, with their own cancer specific GOM, were selected. In our analysis, we have focused on four neoplasms: lung, colon, ovarian and prostate cancers. The median time for pre-GOM and GOM Times was calculated for each tumour site. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were performed to individuate risk factors for pre-GOM and GOM Time.

RESULTS

Significant differences were observed for prostate cancer compared to other patients either for pre-GOM or GOM Times. Significant risks were found for ovarian and prostate cancers in pre-GOM time and for prostate cancer in GOM-Time.

CONCLUSIONS

This experience will produce knowledge and data to guide decision-making and to manage more effectively the challenges of fighting cancer in Campania region. The Valutazione Percorso Rete Oncologica Campana (ValPeROC) study evaluates, for the first time, the ROC activity, through the analysis of key performance indices. Pre-GOM and GOM Time represent the quality of the entire regional health system and are useful to define models, which can evaluate the performance of the ROC over time.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on diagnosis and treatment of patients with soft tissue and bone sarcomas or aggressive benign musculoskeletal diseases: A single-center retrospective study (SarCorD study)

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic led to a rapid reorganization of healthcare activities, leading to reduced access to clinics, interruption of screenings, and treatment schedule modifications in several cancer types. Few data are available on sarcomas. We analyzed COVID-19-related diagnostic delay in a sarcoma referral center in Italy.

Methods

We retrospectively enrolled in this study patients with histological diagnosis of soft tissue or bone sarcoma and aggressive benign musculoskeletal diseases obtained during the first year of the pandemic (Covid group) or the year before (Control group) and followed at the Regina Elena National Cancer Institute in Rome. The primary endpoint was the time from the first symptom to histological diagnosis.

Results

We evaluated 372 patients, 185 of whom were eligible for primary endpoint analysis (92 patients in the Control group and 93 patients in the Covid group). The patients were affected by soft tissue sarcoma in most cases (63.0% and 66.7% in Covid and Control groups, respectively). We observed a diagnostic delay in the Covid group with a median time from the first symptom to the definitive histological diagnosis of 103.00 days (95% CI 92.77–113.23) vs. 90.00 days (95% CI 69.49–110.51) in the Control group (p = 0.024), but not a delay in treatment beginning (151 days, 95% CI 132.9–169.1 vs. 144 days, 95% CI 120.3–167.7, respectively, p = 0.208). No differences in stage at diagnosis were observed (12% vs. 16.5% of patients with metastatic disease at diagnosis in the Covid and Control groups, respectively, p = 0.380). Progression-free survival (p = 0.897) and overall survival (p = 0.725) were comparable in the subgroup of patients affected by soft tissue sarcoma.

Conclusions

A delay in sarcoma diagnosis but not in starting treatment has been observed during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, no difference in stage at diagnosis or in terms of survival has been observed.

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.

Social Media Listening to Understand the Lived Experience of Individuals in Europe With Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Systematic Search and Content Analysis Study

Background

Despite a wealth of real-world data on metastatic breast cancer (mBC), insights into the lived experience are lacking. This study aimed to explore how the lived experience of mBC is described on social media.

Methods

A predefined search string identified posts relevant to the lived experience of mBC from Twitter, patient forums, and blogs across 14 European countries. The final data set was analyzed using content analysis.

Results

A total of 76,456 conversations were identified between November 1, 2018, and November 30, 2020. Twitter was the most commonly used social media platform across all 76,456 conversations from the raw data set (n = 61,165; 80%). Automated and manual relevancy checks followed by a final random sampling filter identified 820 conversations for content analysis. The majority of data from the raw data set was generated from the United Kingdom (n = 31,346; 41%). From this final data set, 61% of posts were authored by patients, 15% by friends and/or family members of patients, and 14% by caregivers. A total of 686 conversations described the patient journey (n = 686/820; 84%); 64% of these (n = 439) concerned breast cancer treatment, with approximately 40% of discussions regarding diagnosis and tests (n = 274/686) and less than 20% of discussions surrounding disease management (n = 123/686; 18%). Key themes relating to a lack of effective treatment, prolonged survival and associated quality of life, debilitating consequences of side effects, and the social impacts of living with mBC were identified.

Conclusions

The findings from this study provided an insight into the lived experience of mBC. While retrospective data collection inherently limits the amount of demographic or clinical information that can be obtained from the population sample, social media listening studies offer training to healthcare professionals in communication, the importance of quality of life, organization of healthcare, and even the design of clinical trials. As new targeted therapies are gradually incorporated into clinical practice, innovative technologies, such as social media listening, have the potential to support regulatory procedures and drug toxicity monitoring, as well as provide the patient voice in the regulation of new and existing medicines.

Changes in the quality of cancer care as assessed through performance indicators during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Cancer comprises a high burden on health systems. Performance indicators monitoring cancer outcomes are routinely used in OECD countries. However, the development of process and cancer-pathway based information is essential to guide health care delivery, allowing for better monitoring of changes in the quality of care provided. Assessing the changes in the quality of cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic requires a structured approach considering the high volume of publications. This study aims to summarize performance indicators used in the literature to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care (January-June 2020) in OECD countries and to assess changes in the quality of care as reported via selected indicators.

METHODS

Search conducted in MEDLINE and Embase databases. Performance indicators and their trends were collated according to the cancer care pathway.

RESULTS

This study included 135 articles, from which 1013 indicators were retrieved. Indicators assessing the diagnostic process showed a decreasing trend: from 33 indicators reporting on screening, 30 (91%) signalled a decrease during the pandemic (n = 30 indicators, 91%). A reduction was also observed in the number of diagnostic procedures (n = 64, 58%) and diagnoses (n = 130, 89%). The proportion of diagnoses in the emergency setting and waiting times showed increasing trends (n = 8, 89% and n = 14, 56%, respectively). A decreasing trend in the proportion of earliest stage cancers was reported by 63% of indicators (n = 9), and 70% (n = 43) of indicators showed an increasing trend in the proportion of advanced-stage cancers. Indicators reflecting the treatment process signalled a reduction in the number of procedures: 79%(n = 82) of indicators concerning surgeries, 72%(n = 41) of indicators assessing radiotherapy, and 93%(n = 40) of indicators related to systemic therapies. Modifications in cancer treatment were frequently reported: 64%(n = 195) of indicators revealed changes in treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a summary of performance indicators used in the literature to assess the cancer care pathway from January 2020 to June 2020 in OECD countries, and the changes in the quality of care signalled by these indicators. The trends reported inform on potential bottlenecks of the cancer care pathway. Monitoring this information closely could contribute to identifying moments for intervention during crises.

Nationwide Study to Assess the Psychosocial, Financial, and Professional Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Radiation Therapy Technologists

Radiation therapy technologists (RTTs), being the frontline health care workers, are vulnerable to COVID-19 disease and subsequent detrimental consequences of the pandemic. Hence, the study was undertaken for the comprehensive assessment of adverse effects of COVID-19 pandemic on RTTs.

Incidence and immunomic features of apyretic COVID-19 in patients affected by solid tumors: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE

Little is known about SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion in asymptomatic patients affected by solid cancer, and whether it is associated with specific transcriptomics changes in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC).

METHODS

Patients affected by solid cancer treated in a top comprehensive cancer center in Italy during the first COVID-19 pandemic wave, and negative for COVID-19-symptoms since the first detection of COVID-19 in Italy, were prospectively evaluated by SARS-CoV-2 serology in the period between April 14th and June 23rd 2020. Follow-up serologies were performed, every 21-28 days, until August 23rd 2020. All SARS-CoV-2 IgM + patients underwent confirmatory nasopharyngeal swab (NPS). PBMCs from a subset of SARS-CoV-2 IgM + patients were collected at baseline, at 2 months, and at 7 months for transcriptome sequencing.

RESULTS

SARS-CoV-2 serology was performed on 446 of the 466 recruited patients. A total of 14 patients (3.14%) tested positive for at least one SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin in the period between April 14th and August 23rd 2020. Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 IgM decreased from 1.48% in the first month of the accrual to 0% in the last month. Viral RNA could not be detected in any of the NPS. PBMC serial transcriptomic analysis showed progressive downregulation of interleukin 6 upregulated signatures, chemokine-mediated signaling and chemokine-chemokine receptor KEGG pathways. B- and T-cell receptor pathways (p-values = 0.0002 and 0.017 respectively) were progressively upregulated.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion rate in asymptomatic patients affected by solid cancer is consistent with that of asymptomatic COVID-19 assessed in the general population through NPS at the peak of the first wave. Transcriptomic features over time in IgM + asymptomatic cases are suggestive of previous viral exposure.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on oncological disease extent at FDG PET/CT staging: the ONCOVIPET study

PURPOSE

To investigate whether the COVID-19 pandemic and national lockdown had an impact on the extent of cancer disease at FDG PET/CT staging as surrogate marker.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study including cancer patients submitted to FDG PET/CT staging from June 1 to October 31, 2020, and June 1 to October 31, 2019, respectively. Data regarding primary tumour, nodal (N) status and number of involved nodal stations, and presence and number of distant metastases (M) were collected. Each scan was classified in limited vs advanced status. Data were aggregated across the study population and tumour type. Bi-weekly frequencies of the observed events were analysed.

RESULTS

Six hundred eleven patients were included (240 in 2019 vs 371 in 2020, respectively). A significant increase of advanced disease patients (rate 1.56, P < 0.001), N + or M + patients (rate 1.84 and 2.09, respectively, P < 0.001), and patients with a greater number of involved N stations or M (rate 2.01 and 2.06, respectively, P < 0.001) were found in 2020 compared with data of 2019. Analysis by tumour type showed a significant increase of advanced disease in lymphoma and lung cancer in 2020 compared with 2019 (P < 0.001). In addition, a significant increase of nodal involvement was found in lung, gastro-intestinal, and breast cancers, as well as in lymphoma patients (P < 0.02). A significant increase of distant metastases was found in lung cancers (P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Cancer patients with advanced disease at FDG PET/CT staging increased in 2020 compared with 2019, following the national lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic, 1.5-fold with a significant increase of patients with N or M involvement. Targeted health interventions are needed to mitigate the effects of the pandemic on patient outcome.

Implicaciones de la pandemia en la radioterapia para el cáncer de mama. Radioterapia hipofraccionada

La pandemia por el nuevo coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) ha puesto a prueba los sistemas de salud de todo el mundo, de una forma tan apremiante que no se veía hace muchos años. Las implicaciones en la atención en salud no afectan únicamente a los pacientes con la COVID-19, sino que son transversales a todas las enfermedades. Específicamente en cáncer de mama, los esquemas de radioterapia hipofraccionada constituyen una alternativa válida y segura que ayuda a disminuir la exposición de las pacientes al nuevo virus, la congestión de las instituciones de salud y los costos propios de los tratamientos oncológicos especializados. En este artículo, se realizó una revisión de la literatura más relevante sobre los regímenes acortados de radioterapia en cáncer de mama: hipofraccionamiento e hipofraccionamiento extremo, y sobre su equivalencia con el fraccionamiento estándar. Al final, se destacan las recomendaciones de diferentes sociedades científicas y expertos internacionales, para considerar esquemas de radioterapia hipofraccionados, a propósito de la contingencia de salud mundial.

HOLA COVID-19 Study: Evaluating the Impact of Caring for Patients With COVID-19 on Cancer Care Delivery in Latin America

PURPOSE

The HOLA COVID-19 study sought to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on oncology practices across Latin America (LATAM), challenges faced by physicians, and how practices and physicians adapted while delivering care to patients with cancer.

METHODS

This international cross-sectional study of oncology physicians in LATAM included a 43-item anonymous online survey to evaluate changes and adaptations to clinical practice. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the association of caring for patients with COVID-19 and changes to clinical practice.

RESULTS

A total of 704 oncology physicians from 19 countries completed the survey. Among respondents, the most common specialty was general oncology (34%) and 56% of physicians had cared for patients with COVID-19. The majority of physicians (70%) noted a decrease in the number of new patients evaluated during the COVID-19 pandemic when compared with prepandemic, and 73% reported adopting the use of telemedicine in their practice. More than half (58%) of physicians reported making changes to the treatments that they offered to patients with cancer. In adjusted models, physicians who had cared for patients with COVID-19 had higher odds of changing the type of chemotherapy or treatments that they offered (adjusted odds ratio 1.81; 95% CI, 1.30 to 2.53) and of delaying chemotherapy start (adjusted odds ratio 2.05; 95% CI, 1.49 to 2.81). Physicians identified significant delays in access to radiation and surgical services, diagnostic tests, and supportive care.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly disrupted global cancer care. Although changes to health care delivery are a necessary response to this global crisis, our study highlights the significant disruption and changes to the treatment plans of patients with cancer in LATAM resulting from the COVID-19 health care crisis.

Leveraging Electronic Health Records to Address Breast Cancer Disparities

Purpose of Review

Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in women, and the leading cause of cancer death. However, racial and ethnic minority groups, as well as rural and underserved populations, face disparities that limit their access to specialty care for breast cancer. To address these disparities, health care providers can leverage an electronic health record (EHR).

Recent Findings

Few studies have evaluated the potential benefits of using EHRs to address breast cancer disparities, and none of them outlines a standard approach for this effort. However, these studies outline that EHRs can be used to identify and notify patients at risk for breast cancer. These systems can also automate referrals and scheduling for screening and genetic testing, as well as recruit eligible patients for clinical trials. EHRs can also provide educational materials to reduce risks associated with modifiable risk factors, such as physical activity, obesity, and smoking. These systems can also support telemedicine visits and centralize inter-institutional communication to improve treatment adherence and the quality of care.

Summary

EHRs have tremendous potential to increase accessibility and communication for patients with breast cancer by augmenting patient engagement, improving communication between patients and providers, and strengthening communication among providers. These efforts can reduce breast cancer disparities by increasing breast cancer screening, improving treatment adherence, expanding access to specialty care, and promoting risk-reducing habits among racial and ethnic minority groups and other underserved populations.

Breast Cancer Disparities and the Digital Divide

Purpose of Review

Socioeconomically disadvantaged populations and minority groups suffer from high breast cancer mortality, a disparity caused by decreased access to specialty care, lower treatment adherence, co-morbidities, and genetic predisposition for biologically aggressive breast tumor subtypes. Telehealth has the potential to mitigate breast cancer disparities by increasing access to specialty care and health information. However, unequal access to high-speed/broadband internet service and telehealth itself magnifies breast cancer disparities in vulnerable populations. This review evaluates the impact of the digital divide on breast cancer outcomes, as well as strategies for leveraging telehealth to reduce breast cancer disparities.

Recent Findings

There is a paucity of research specific to employing telehealth to address breast cancer disparities. Previous studies provide examples of telehealth utilization for increasing screening mammography, in addition to improving access to breast cancer care, including breast cancer specialist, nurse navigators, and clinical trials. Telehealth can also be used as an approach to risk reduction, with strategies to support weight management and genetic testing.

Summary

Eliminating the digital divide holds enormous potential for mitigating breast cancer disparities through an intentional focus on improving access to telehealth. With increased accessibility, resource allocation, and improved digital infrastructure, telehealth can be used to address disparities in early detection, quality of breast cancer care, treatment adherence, and risk assessment. Further research is essential to elucidate best practices in breast cancer telehealth approaches in underserved communities.

The impact of COVID-19 on cancer care and oncology clinical research: an experts' perspective

The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic promises to have lasting impacts on cancer clinical trials that could lead to faster patient access to new treatments. In this article, an international panel of oncology experts discusses the lasting impacts of the pandemic on oncology clinical trials and proposes solutions for clinical trial stakeholders, with the support of recent data on worldwide clinical trials collected by IQVIA. These lasting impacts and proposed solutions encompass three topic areas. Firstly, acceleration and implementation of new operational approaches to oncology trials with patient-centric, fully decentralized virtual approaches that include remote assessments via telemedicine and remote devices. Geographical differences in the uptake of remote technology, including telemedicine, are discussed in the article, focusing on the impact of the local adoption of new operational approaches. Secondly, innovative clinical trials. The pandemic has highlighted the need for new trial designs that accelerate research and limit risks and burden for patients while driving optimization of clinical trial objectives and endpoints, while testing is being minimized. Areas of considerations for clinical trial stakeholders are discussed in detail. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the underrepresentation of minority groups in clinical trials; the approach for oncology clinical trials to improve generalizability of efficacy and outcomes data is discussed. Thirdly, a new problem-focused collaborative framework between oncology trial stakeholders, including decision makers, to leverage and further accelerate the innovative approaches in clinical research developed during the COVID-19 pandemic. This could shorten timelines for patient access to new treatments by addressing the cultural and technological barriers to adopting new operational approaches and innovative clinical trials. The role of the different stakeholders is described, with the aim of making COVID-19 a catalyst for positive change in oncology clinical research and eventually in cancer care.

The Utilization and Benefits of Telehealth Services by Health Care Professionals Managing Breast Cancer Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Telehealth is the delivery of many health care services and technologies to individuals at different geographical areas and is categorized as asynchronously or synchronously. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused major disruptions in health care delivery to breast cancer (BCa) patients and there is increasing demand for telehealth services. Globally, telehealth has become an essential means of communication between patient and health care provider. The application of telehealth to the treatment of BCa patients is evolving and increasingly research has demonstrated its feasibility and effectiveness in improving clinical, psychological and social outcomes. Two areas of telehealth that have significantly grown in the past decade and particularly since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic are telerehabilitation and teleoncology. These two technological systems provide opportunities at every stage of the cancer care continuum for BCa patients. We conducted a literature review that examined the use of telehealth services via its various modes of delivery among BCa patients particularly in areas of screening, diagnosis, treatment modalities, as well as satisfaction among patients and health care professionals. The advantages of telehealth models of service and delivery challenges to patients in remote areas are discussed.

Oncological patients' reactions to COVID-19 pandemic: A single institution prospective study

Background

The spread of the COVID‐19 pandemic has led to a rapid reorganization in all human and hospital activities, with impact on cancer patients.

Aim

An analysis of cancer patients fears, and awareness of COVID‐19 has been done in this study.

Methods and results

We analyzed cancer patients' reactions to the pandemic and their perception of oncological care reorganization, through a 12‐item survey, proposed at the peak of pandemic and 3 months later. Overall, 237 patients were included in the study. During the peak of pandemic 34.6% of patients were more worried about COVID‐19 than cancer versus 26.4% in the post‐acute phase (p = .013). Although 49.8% of patients in the acute phase and 42.3% in the post‐acute phase considered their risk of death if infected ≥50%, and more than 70% of patients thought to be at higher risk of complications, the majority of them did not consider the possibility to stop or delay their treatment. Patients were more interested in following news about COVID‐19 than cancer and they complied with all preventive measures in more than 90% of the cases.

Conclusions

Although cancer patients worried about COVID‐19 and evaluated the risk of complication or death due to COVID‐19 as extremely high, they were still asking for the best oncological treatment.

Impact of COVID-19 on cancer service delivery: a follow-up international survey of oncology clinicians

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a vast impact on cancer service delivery around the world. Previously reported results from our international survey of oncology clinicians, conducted through March-April 2020, found that clinicians reported altering management in both the curative and palliative settings and not in proportion to the COVID-19 case burden in their region of practice. This follow-up survey, conducted from 27^th September to 7^th November 2020, aimed to explore how attitudes and practices evolved over the 2020 pandemic period.

Participants and methods

Participants were medical, radiation and surgical oncologist and trainees. Surveys were distributed electronically via ESMO and other collaborating professional societies. Participants were asked to compare their practice prior to the pandemic to both the period of March-April 2020, referred to as the ‘early’ period, and the current survey period, referred to as the ‘later’ period.

Results

One hundred and seventy-two oncology clinicians completed the survey. The majority of respondents were medical oncologists (n = 136, 79%) and many were from Europe (n = 82, 48%). In the ‘early’ period, 88% (n = 133) of clinicians reported altering their practice compared to 63% (n = 96) in the ‘later’ period. Compared to prior to the pandemic, clinicians reported fewer new patient presentations in the ‘early’ period and a trend towards more patients presenting with advanced disease in the ‘later’ period.

Conclusions

Results indicate a swing back towards pre-COVID-19 practices despite an increase in the rate of cumulative COVID-19 cases across 2020. The impact of these changes on cancer associated morbidity and mortality remains to be measured over the months and years to come.

•

This collaborative international survey of oncology clinicians was conducted in October/November of 2020.

•

Findings indicate a swing back towards ‘pre-coronavirus disease’ practice.

•

Fewer clinicians altered practice compared to the ‘early’ period of the pandemic in 2020 (63% versus 88%).

•

Clinicians reported seeing more new patients and a greater proportion of patients presenting with advanced disease.

Trends in cancer imaging by indication, care setting, and hospital type during the COVID-19 pandemic and recovery at four hospitals in Massachusetts

Background

We aimed to investigate the effects of COVID‐19 on computed tomography (CT) imaging of cancer.

Methods

Cancer‐related CTs performed at one academic hospital and three affiliated community hospitals in Massachusetts were retrospectively analyzed. Three periods of 2020 were considered as follows: pre‐COVID‐19 (1/5/20–3/14/20), COVID‐19 peak (3/15/20–5/2/20), and post‐COVID‐19 peak (5/3/20–11/14/20). 15 March 2020 was the day a state of emergency was declared in MA; 3 May 2020 was the day our hospitals resumed to non‐urgent imaging. The volumes were assessed by (1) Imaging indication: cancer screening, initial workup, active cancer, and surveillance; (2) Care setting: outpatient and inpatient, ED; (3) Hospital type: quaternary academic center (QAC), university‐affiliated community hospital (UACH), and sole community hospitals (SCHs).

Results

During the COVID‐19 peak, a significant drop in CT volumes was observed (−42.2%, p < 0.0001), with cancer screening, initial workup, active cancer, and cancer surveillance declining by 81.7%, 54.8%, 30.7%, and 44.7%, respectively (p < 0.0001). In the post‐COVID‐19 peak period, cancer screening and initial workup CTs did not recover (−11.7%, p = 0.037; −20.0%, p = 0.031), especially in the outpatient setting. CT volumes for active cancer recovered, but inconsistently across hospital types: the QAC experienced a 9.4% decline (p = 0.022) and the UACH a 41.5% increase (p < 0.001). Outpatient CTs recovered after the COVID‐19 peak, but with a shift in utilization away from the QAC (−8.7%, p = 0.020) toward the UACH (+13.3%, p = 0.013). Inpatient and ED‐based oncologic CTs increased post‐peak (+20.0%, p = 0.004 and +33.2%, p = 0.009, respectively).

Conclusions

Cancer imaging was severely impacted during the COVID‐19 pandemic. CTs for cancer screening and initial workup did not recover to pre‐COVID‐19 levels well into 2020, a finding that suggests more patients with advanced cancers may present in the future. A redistribution of imaging utilization away from the QAC and outpatient settings, toward the community hospitals and inpatient setting/ED was observed.

Impact of COVID-19 lockdown on routine oncology versus emergency care at a high volume cancer centre

BACKGROUND

We investigated the influence of population-wide COVID-19 lockdown measures implemented on 16, March 2020 on routine and emergency care of cancer outpatients at a tertiary care cancer centre in Vienna, Austria.

METHODS

We compared the number/visits of cancer outpatients receiving oncological therapies at the oncologic day clinic (DC) and admissions at the emergency department (ED) of our institution in time periods before (pre-lockdown period: 1 January - 15 March 2020) and after (post-lockdown period: 16 March- 31 May 2020) lockdown implementation with the respective reference periods of 2018 and 2019. Additionally, we analysed Emergency Severity Index (ESI) score of unplanned cancer patient presentations to the ED in the same post-lockdown time periods. Patient outcome was described as 3-month mortality rate (3-MM).

RESULTS

In total, 16 703 visits at the DC and 2664 patient visits for the respective time periods were recorded at the ED. No decrease in patient visits was observed at the DC after lockdown implementation (P = .351), whereas a substantial decrease in patient visits at the ED was seen (P < .001). This translates into a 26%-31% reduction of cancer-related patient visits per half month after the lockdown at the ED (P < .001 vs. 2018 + 2019). There was no difference in the distribution of ESI scores at ED presentation (P = .805), admission rates or 3-MM in association with lockdown implementation (P = .086).

CONCLUSION

We demonstrate the feasibility of maintaining antineoplastic therapy administration during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, our data underline the need for adapted management strategies for emergency presentations of cancer patients.

Safeguarding COVID-19 and cancer management: drug design and therapeutic approach

Recent clinical cohort studies have highlighted that there is a three-fold greater SARS-Cov-2 infection risk in cancer patients, and overall mortality in individuals with tumours is increased by 41% with respect to general COVID-19 patients. Thus, access to therapeutics and intensive care is compromised for people with both diseases (comorbidity) and there is risk of delayed access to diagnosis. This comorbidity has resulted in extensive burden on the treatment of patients and health care system across the globe; moreover, mortality of hospitalized patients with comorbidity is reported to be 30% higher than for individuals affected by either disease. In this data-driven review, we aim specifically to address drug discoveries and clinical data of cancer management during the COVID-19 pandemic. The review will extensively address the treatment of COVID-19/cancer comorbidity; treatment protocols and new drug discoveries, including the description of drugs currently available in clinical settings; demographic features; and COVID-19 outcomes in cancer patients worldwide.

Mortality in adult patients with solid or hematological malignancies and SARS-CoV-2 infection with a specific focus on lung and breast cancers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to estimate mortality in adult patients with solid or hematological malignancies and SARS-CoV-2 infection.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, up to 31 January 2021, identified publications reporting the case-fatality rate (CFR) among adult patients with solid or hematological malignancies and SARS-CoV-2 infection. The CFR, defined as the rate of death in this population, was assessed with a random effect model; 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

Among 135 selected studies (N = 33,879 patients), the CFR was 25.4% (95% CI 22.9%-28.2%). At a sensitivity analysis including studies with at least 100 patients, the CFR was 21.9% (95% CI 19.1%-25.1%). Among COVID-19 patients with lung (N = 1,135) and breast (N = 1,296) cancers, CFR were 32.4% (95% CI 26.5%-39.6%) and 14.2% (95% CI 9.3%-21.8%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with solid or hematological malignancies and SARS-CoV-2 infection have a high probability of mortality, with comparatively higher and lower CFRs in patients with lung and breast cancers, respectively.

Treatment Decisions for Patients with Cancer during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Patients with cancer have been disproportionally affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, with high rates of severe outcomes and death. Similarly, treatment decisions in this vulnerable population have been altered to a major degree during the past year, with significant disruption of care reported. Although complex, therapeutic choices in patients with cancer in times of COVID-19 are critical, as they may save thousands of lives. A mounting body of evidence, in addition to clear recommendations by multiple international societies, can help oncologists decide appropriately the necessity to administer antineoplastic regimens, helping to avoid a surge in cancer-related deaths in the upcoming months.