Pandemic Phase-Adjusted Analysis of COVID-19 Outcomes Reveals Reduced Intrinsic Vulnerability and Substantial Vaccine Protection From Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in Patients With Breast Cancer

Global review of COVID-19 mitigation strategies and their impact on cancer service disruptions

During the COVID-19 pandemic, countries adopted mitigation strategies to reduce disruptions to cancer services. We reviewed their implementation across health system functions and their impact on cancer diagnosis and care during the pandemic. A systematic search was performed using terms related to cancer and COVID-19. Included studies reported on individuals with cancer or cancer care services, focusing on strategies/programs aimed to reduce delays and disruptions. Extracted data were grouped into four functions (governance, financing, service delivery, and resource generation) and sub-functions of the health system performance assessment framework. We included 30 studies from 16 countries involving 192,233 patients with cancer. Multiple mitigation approaches were implemented, predominantly affecting sub-functions of service delivery to control COVID-19 infection via the suspension of non-urgent cancer care, modified treatment guidelines, and increased telemedicine use in routine cancer care delivery. Resource generation was mainly ensured through adequate workforce supply. However, less emphasis on monitoring or assessing the effectiveness and financing of these strategies was observed. Seventeen studies suggested improved service uptake after mitigation implementation, yet the resulting impact on cancer diagnosis and care has not been established. This review emphasizes the importance of developing effective mitigation strategies across all health system (sub)functions to minimize cancer care service disruptions during crises. Deficiencies were observed in health service delivery (to ensure equity), governance (to monitor and evaluate the implementation of mitigation strategies), and financing. In the wake of future emergencies, implementation research studies that include pre-prepared protocols will be essential to assess mitigation impact across cancer care services.

Vaccination of Adults With Cancer: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To guide the vaccination of adults with solid tumors or hematologic malignancies.

METHODS

A systematic literature review identified systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and nonrandomized studies on the efficacy and safety of vaccines used by adults with cancer or their household contacts. This review builds on a 2013 guideline by the Infectious Disease Society of America. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 1, 2013, to February 16, 2023. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations.

RESULTS

A total of 102 publications were included in the systematic review: 24 systematic reviews, 14 RCTs, and 64 nonrandomized studies. The largest body of evidence addressed COVID-19 vaccines.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The goal of vaccination is to limit the severity of infection and prevent infection where feasible. Optimizing vaccination status should be considered a key element in the care of patients with cancer. This approach includes the documentation of vaccination status at the time of the first patient visit; timely provision of recommended vaccines; and appropriate revaccination after hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, or B-cell-depleting therapy. Active interaction and coordination among healthcare providers, including primary care practitioners, pharmacists, and nursing team members, are needed. Vaccination of household contacts will enhance protection for patients with cancer. Some vaccination and revaccination plans for patients with cancer may be affected by the underlying immune status and the anticancer therapy received. As a result, vaccine strategies may differ from the vaccine recommendations for the general healthy adult population vaccine.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Transvaginal Polytetrafluoroethylene Mesh Surgery for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: One-Year Safety and Efficacy Results

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) mesh by comparing conventionally used polypropylene (PP) mesh in tension-free vaginal mesh (TVM) surgery for pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

METHODS

We conducted an observational cohort study of patients who underwent TVM using a PTFE or PP mesh. PTFE was used from June 2019 to May 2021, and PP mesh from January 2018 to May 2019. Outcomes included POP recurrence, perioperative complications, and patient satisfaction. Restricted mean survival time was used to analyze POP recurrence, comparing the time to recurrence between the two groups at 1year after TVM.

RESULTS

Of 171 patients, 104 underwent PP mesh placement (PP group) and 67 underwent PTFE mesh placement (PTFE group). POP recurrence was observed in 10 and nine patients in the PP and PTFE groups, respectively. The mean time until the recurrence in the PTFE group was significantly shorter than that in the PP group (restricted mean survival time difference: -20.3days; 95% CI, -40.1 to -0.5; P = .044). Subgroup analysis revealed the meantime until recurrence was significantly shorter in the PTFE group for postoperative periods 3months or less, ages >70years, and POP stage ≥3. There were no intervention cases in either group and no significant differences in the perioperative complications. Patient satisfaction was greater in the PTFE group after 3months postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

TVM surgery with a PTFE mesh is more prone to recurrence than that with a PP mesh, but with higher patient satisfaction. Within 3months of surgery, elderly patients and those with advanced-stage POP require care to prevent recurrence.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and recent chemotherapy on COVID-19 morbidity and mortality in patients with soft tissue sarcoma: an analysis from the OnCovid registry

Background

To date, limited evidence exists on the impact of COVID-19 in patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS), nor about the impact of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and recent chemotherapy on COVID-19 morbidity and mortality in this specific population.

Methods

We described COVID-19 morbidity and mortality among patients with STS across 'Omicron' (15 December 2021-31 January 2022), 'Pre-vaccination' (27 February 2020-30 November 2020), and 'Alpha-Delta' phase (01 December 2020-14 December 2021) using OnCovid registry participants (NCT04393974). Case fatality rate at 28 days (CFR28) and COVID-19 severity were also described according to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status, while the impact of the receipt of cytotoxic chemotherapy within 4 weeks prior to COVID-19 on clinical outcomes was assessed with Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (IPTW) models adjusted for possible confounders.

Results

Out of 3820 patients, 97 patients with STS were included. The median age at COVID-19 diagnosis was 56 years (range: 18-92), with 65 patients (67%) aged < 65 years and most patients had a low comorbidity burden (65, 67.0%). The most frequent primary tumor sites were the abdomen (56.7%) and the gynecological tract (12.4%). In total, 36 (37.1%) patients were on cytotoxic chemotherapy within 4 weeks prior to COVID-19. The overall CFR28 was 25.8%, with 38% oxygen therapy requirement, 34% rate of complications, and 32.3% of hospitalizations due to COVID-19. CFR28 (29.5%, 21.4%, and 12.5%) and all indicators of COVID-19 severity demonstrated a trend toward a numerical improvement across the pandemic phases. Similarly, vaccinated patients demonstrated numerically improved CFR28 (16.7% versus 27.7%) and COVID-19 morbidity compared with unvaccinated patients. Patients who were on chemotherapy experienced comparable CFR28 (19.4% versus 26.0%, p = 0.4803), hospitalizations (50.0% versus 44.4%, p = 0.6883), complication rates (30.6% versus 34.0%, p = 0.7381), and oxygen therapy requirement (28.1% versus 40.0%, p = 0.2755) compared to those who were not on anticancer therapy at COVID-19, findings further confirmed by the IPTW-fitted multivariable analysis.

Conclusion

In this study, we demonstrate an improvement in COVID-19 outcomes in patients with STS over time. Recent exposure to chemotherapy does not impact COVID-19 morbidity and mortality and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination confers protection against adverse outcomes from COVID-19 in this patient population.

Immune responses and clinical outcomes following the third dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-BNT162b2 vaccine in advanced breast cancer patients receiving targeted therapies: a prospective study

Purpose

Metastatic breast cancer patients are the most prevalent oncology population with advanced disease facing COVID-19 pandemic. Immune responses after mRNA-based vaccination during treatment with CDK4/6 inhibitors or HER2-directed agents remain unclear. We conducted a prospective analysis to elucidate changes in antibody titers and lymphocyte counts following full course of mRNA-BNT162b2 (tozinameran) vaccination in recipients undergoing these targeted therapies.

Methods

Patients who had received a booster dosing and had been treated for at least 6 months were eligible. Antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein were measured at four subsequent time points. Immunophenotyping of circulating lymphocytes was performed before the third dose of tozinameran and four weeks later to quantify the absolute counts of CD3+CD4+ T-helper cells, CD3+CD8+ T-cytotoxic cells, CD19+ B cells, and CD56+CD16+ NK cells. We also assessed the incidence of breakthrough infections and investigated whether immune changes affect time-to-treatment failure (TTF) after booster vaccination.

Results

The current analysis included 69 patients, of whom 38 (55%) and 31 (45%) were being treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors and HER2-targeted therapies, respectively. All participants received a third dose of tozinameran between September 23 and October 7, 2021. Multivariate analysis revealed that CDK4/6 inhibition predicted a significantly impaired humoral response after the booster dose. This detrimental effect was also evident for T-helper cell counts before the third immunization, but it disappeared in the subsequent evaluation. After a median follow-up of 22.3 months, we observed 19 (26%) cases of COVID-19 outbreaks, all experiencing favorable clinical outcomes. Univariate analysis showed a significant association between the onset of SARS-CoV-2 infections and the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors, as well as with an impaired antibody and T-helper cell response. Only the last two covariates remained independent predictors after multivariate testing. Dynamic variations in antibody titers and T-helper cell counts did not affect TTF in multivariate regression analysis.

Conclusions

Our results confirm that the immune response to tozinameran is impaired by CDK4/6 inhibitors, increasing the odds of breakthrough infections despite the third vaccine dose. Current evidence recommends maintaining efforts to provide booster immunizations to the most vulnerable cancer patients, including those with advanced breast cancer undergoing CDK4/6 inhibition.

COVID-19 in cancer patients: update from the joint analysis of the ESMO-CoCARE, BSMO, and PSMO international databases

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 has significantly affected patients with cancer and revealed unanticipated challenges in securing optimal cancer care across different disciplines. The European Society for Medical Oncology COVID-19 and CAncer REgistry (ESMO-CoCARE) is an international, real-world database, collecting data on the natural history, management, and outcomes of patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 infection.

METHODS

This is the 2nd CoCARE analysis, jointly with Belgian (Belgian Society of Medical Oncology, BSMO) and Portuguese (Portuguese Society of Medical Oncology, PSMO) registries, with data from January 2020 to December 2021. The aim is to identify significant prognostic factors for COVID-19 hospitalization and mortality (primary outcomes), as well as intensive care unit admission and overall survival (OS) (secondary outcomes). Subgroup analyses by pandemic phase and vaccination status were carried out.

RESULTS

The cohort includes 3294 patients (CoCARE: 2049; BSMO: 928, all hospitalized by eligibility criteria; PSMO: 317), diagnosed in four distinct pandemic phases (January to May 2020: 36%; June to September 2020: 9%; October 2020 to February 2021: 41%; March to December 2021: 12%). COVID-19 hospitalization rate was 54% (CoCARE/PSMO), ICU admission 14%, and COVID-19 mortality 22% (all data). At a 6-month median follow-up, 1013 deaths were recorded with 73% 3-month OS rate. No significant change was observed in COVID-19 mortality among hospitalized patients across the four pandemic phases (30%-33%). Hospitalizations and ICU admission decreased significantly (from 78% to 34% and 16% to 10%, respectively). Among 1522 patients with known vaccination status at COVID-19 diagnosis, 70% were non-vaccinated, 24% had incomplete vaccination, and 7% complete vaccination. Complete vaccination had a protective effect on hospitalization (odds ratio = 0.24; 95% confidence interval [0.14-0.38]), ICU admission (odds ratio = 0.29 [0.09-0.94]), and OS (hazard ratio = 0.39 [0.20-0.76]). In multivariable analyses, COVID-19 hospitalization was associated with patient/cancer characteristics, the first pandemic phase, the presence of COVID-19-related symptoms or inflammatory biomarkers, whereas COVID-19 mortality was significantly higher in symptomatic patients, males, older age, ethnicity other than Asian/Caucasian, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2, body mass index <25, hematological malignancy, progressive disease versus no evident disease, and advanced cancer stage.

CONCLUSIONS

The updated CoCARE analysis, jointly with BSMO and PSMO, highlights factors that significantly affect COVID-19 outcomes, providing actionable clues for further reducing mortality.

Timely course of SARS-CoV-2 infections and vaccinations in patients with hemato-oncological diseases: analysis of a real-life cohort

BACKGROUND

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has particularly impacted patients with hemato-oncological malignancies, as they showed not only a higher propensity for severe courses but also weaker immune responses after vaccination. Still, data on the influence of pandemic waves and vaccinations on outcomes are rare. This study aimed to analyze the timely course of infections and vaccinations in a real-life cohort of patients with hemato-oncological diseases.

METHODS

In this cohort study, 1817 patients with hemato-oncological diseases from 1 February 2020 to 15 December 2022 at the 'Franz Tappeiner' Hospital in Merano/Meran, Italy, were followed for SARS-CoV-2 infections and vaccinations.

RESULTS

Of 1817 patients with hemato-oncological malignancies, 735 (40.5%) were infected at least once with SARS-CoV-2, and 1614 (88.8%) received one or more doses of the approved vaccinations. Patients receiving antineoplastic treatment had a lower SARS-CoV-2 infection rate [35.1% versus 41.0%; odds ratio (OR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64-0.95], but higher risk of hospitalization (13.4% versus 6.9%; OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.25-3.69) compared with untreated patients. Overall, the case fatality rate (CFR) was 3.4%. Unvaccinated patients were more prone to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) courses requiring hospitalization (OR 2.34, 95% CI 1.25-4.36) and had a higher CFR (7.3% versus 1.6%; OR 4.98, 95% CI 2.16-12.98) than their vaccinated counterparts. In the Delta wave, patients with two vaccinations had a lower infection risk (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.10-0.35) and tendentially lower hospitalization rates (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.05-1.29) than unvaccinated patients. In the Omicron wave, 345/1198 (28.8%) patients with three or more vaccinations had breakthrough infections, resulting in a similar risk for infection (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.60-1.30) but numerically lower risk for hospitalization (24/345, 7.0%) than unvaccinated individuals (4/40, 10.0%). Scheduled visits were postponed in 128/335 (38.2%) patients due to COVID-19, and deferrals correlated with pandemic wave (P = 0.002) and vaccination status (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 infections and outcomes differ between distinct phases of the pandemic. Vaccination with variant-specific vaccines should be prioritized as general protective measures are increasingly lifted.

Perspectives and Challenges of COVID-19 with Obesity-Related Cancers

The emergence of COVID-19 has created an unprecedented threat worldwide, involving overwhelmed health-care systems in the majority of countries [...]

COVID-19 vaccination status, side effects, and perceptions among breast cancer survivors: a cross-sectional study in China

Introduction

Breast cancer is the most prevalent malignancy in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, vaccination data of this population are limited.

Methods

A cross-sectional study of COVID-19 vaccination was conducted in China. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to assess factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination status.

Results

Of 2,904 participants, 50.2% were vaccinated with acceptable side effects. Most of the participants received inactivated virus vaccines. The most common reason for vaccination was "fear of infection" (56.2%) and "workplace/government requirement" (33.1%). While the most common reason for nonvaccination was "worry that vaccines cause breast cancer progression or interfere with treatment" (72.9%) and "have concerns about side effects or safety" (39.6%). Patients who were employed (odds ratio, OR = 1.783, p = 0.015), had stage I disease at diagnosis (OR = 2.008, p = 0.019), thought vaccines could provide protection (OR = 1.774, p = 0.007), thought COVID-19 vaccines were safe, very safe, not safe, and very unsafe (OR = 2.074, p < 0.001; OR = 4.251, p < 0.001; OR = 2.075, p = 0.011; OR = 5.609, p = 0.003, respectively) were more likely to receive vaccination. Patients who were 1-3 years, 3-5 years, and more than 5 years after surgery (OR = 0.277, p < 0.001; OR = 0.277, p < 0.001, OR = 0.282, p < 0.001, respectively), had a history of food or drug allergies (OR = 0.579, p = 0.001), had recently undergone endocrine therapy (OR = 0.531, p < 0.001) were less likely to receive vaccination.

Conclusion

COVID-19 vaccination gap exists in breast cancer survivors, which could be filled by raising awareness and increasing confidence in vaccine safety during cancer treatment, particularly for the unemployed individuals.