1
|
Krell J, Shaw D, McGrane J, Hartkopf A, Herrero A, Yeoh C, Masvidal M, Raspagliesi F, York W, Schilder JM, Mascialino B, McDermott E, Kalilani L, Hanker L. Ovarian Cancer Retrospective European (O'CaRE) study: first-line outcomes by number of risk factors for progression. Future Oncol 2024:1-11. [PMID: 39445504 DOI: 10.1080/14796694.2024.2402217] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2024] [Accepted: 09/07/2024] [Indexed: 10/25/2024] Open
Abstract
Aim: The Ovarian Cancer Retrospective European (O'CaRE) study assessed the cumulative impact of high-risk factors on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) following first-line treatment in patients diagnosed with advanced ovarian cancer.Patients & methods: Medical records were collected from five European countries (2014 and 2015). Patients were grouped by number of high-risk factors: stage IV diagnosis, no known BRCA mutation, interval debulking surgery or no surgery, or visible residual disease.Results: Our analysis included 405 patients grouped based on having one (20.4%); two (32.3%); three (33.7%) or four (11.9%) high-risk factors. Increasing cumulative numbers of high-risk factors were associated with numerically shorter PFS and OS.Conclusion: Risk profiles should be carefully considered when planning clinical care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan Krell
- Institute of Reproductive and Developmental Biology, Imperial College London, London, W12 0HS, UK
| | - Danielle Shaw
- The Clatterbridge Cancer Centre NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, L7 8YA, UK
| | - John McGrane
- Sunrise Oncology Centre, Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust, Cornwall, TR1 3LJ, UK
| | - Andreas Hartkopf
- Department of Women's Health, Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, Tübingen, 72076, Germany
| | - Ana Herrero
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet, Zaragoza, 50009, Spain
| | - Cheng Yeoh
- Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, PO6 3LY, UK
| | - Maria Masvidal
- Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Universitari Sant Joan de Reus, Tarragona, 43204, Spain
| | - Francesco Raspagliesi
- Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milano, 20133, Italy
| | - Whitney York
- GSK, Medical & Market Access Oncology Statistics, Philadelphia, PA 19426, USA
| | | | | | | | | | - Lars Hanker
- Department of Gynecology & Obstetrics, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, 23538, Germany
- Department of Gynecology & Obstetrics, University Hospital Münster, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ćwiertnia A, Borzyszkowska D, Golara A, Tuczyńska N, Kozłowski M, Poncyljusz W, Sompolska-Rzechuła A, Kotrych K, Cymbaluk-Płoska A. Ovarian Cancer Staging-How CT Scan Descriptions Differ from Surgical Findings. J Clin Med 2024; 13:4560. [PMID: 39124826 PMCID: PMC11312800 DOI: 10.3390/jcm13154560] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/11/2024] [Revised: 07/23/2024] [Accepted: 07/31/2024] [Indexed: 08/12/2024] Open
Abstract
Ovarian cancer is one of the most common causes of cancer death in women worldwide. Most often, it is detected in an advanced stage due to its insidious onset and lack of symptoms in stages I and II. That is why imaging diagnostics is so important. Therefore, we assessed the consistency of the image seen on CT with the actual image assessed during surgery. Objectives: The aim of this study is to compare preoperative evaluation based on CT reports with those obtained during ovarian cancer surgery to determine whether CT is helpful in assessing the possibility of optimal or complete cytoreduction. Methods: This retrospective study included patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer who underwent diagnostic laparoscopy or laparotomy with cytoreduction. We compared ovarian cancer lesions described by radiologists on CT scans to those described during laparoscopy or laparotomy; the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for paired observations was used to compare the variables. Results: We observed that the morphology of the tumor, mesenteric infiltration, and the assessment of the involvement of the abdominal, para-aortic, and iliac lymph nodes may differ in CT examination and during surgery. Conclusions: The site of the tumor exit on a CT scan does not always reflect the original site seen during surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adrianna Ćwiertnia
- Department of Reconstructive Surgery and Gynecological Oncology, University Clinical Hospital No. 2, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Al. Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland; (D.B.); (N.T.); (A.C.-P.)
| | - Dominika Borzyszkowska
- Department of Reconstructive Surgery and Gynecological Oncology, University Clinical Hospital No. 2, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Al. Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland; (D.B.); (N.T.); (A.C.-P.)
| | - Anna Golara
- Department of Reconstructive Surgery and Gynecological Oncology, University Clinical Hospital No. 2, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Al. Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland; (D.B.); (N.T.); (A.C.-P.)
| | - Natalia Tuczyńska
- Department of Reconstructive Surgery and Gynecological Oncology, University Clinical Hospital No. 2, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Al. Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland; (D.B.); (N.T.); (A.C.-P.)
| | - Mateusz Kozłowski
- Department of Reconstructive Surgery and Gynecological Oncology, University Clinical Hospital No. 2, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Al. Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland; (D.B.); (N.T.); (A.C.-P.)
| | - Wojciech Poncyljusz
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Interventional Radiology, University Clinical Hospital No. 1, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 71-252 Szczecin, Poland;
| | - Agnieszka Sompolska-Rzechuła
- Department of Applied Mathematics in Economics, Faculty of Economics, West Pomerania University of Technology Szczecin, Janickiego 31, 71-270 Szczecin, Poland;
| | - Katarzyna Kotrych
- Institute of X-ray Diagnostic and CT, USG and MRI Scanning Workroom, University Clinical Hospital No. 2, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 70-204 Szczecin, Poland;
| | - Aneta Cymbaluk-Płoska
- Department of Reconstructive Surgery and Gynecological Oncology, University Clinical Hospital No. 2, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Al. Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland; (D.B.); (N.T.); (A.C.-P.)
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Nasser S, Fotopoulou C, Gültekin M, Dimitrova D, Bilir E, Inci G, Morice P, Mirza MR, Martin AG, Berek J, Sehouli J. Patient care and access to clinical trials in gynaecological oncology: global implications of the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2024; 310:577-586. [PMID: 38836928 PMCID: PMC11168972 DOI: 10.1007/s00404-024-07511-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2023] [Accepted: 04/07/2024] [Indexed: 06/06/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Our prospective international survey evaluated the impact of the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management gynaecological malignancies from the multidisciplinary physicians' perspective with particular focus on clinical infrastructures and trial participation. METHODS Our survey consisted of 53 COVID-related questions. It was sent to healthcare professionals in gynaecological oncology centres across Europe and Pan-Arabian region via the study groups and gynaecological societies from April 2020 to October 2020. All healthcare professionals treating gynaecological cancers were able to participate in our survey. RESULTS A total of 255 answers were collected from 30 countries. The majority (73%) of participants were gynaecological oncologists from university hospitals (71%) with at least an Intensive Care Unit with cardiopulmonary support available at their institutions. Most institutions continued to perform elective surgeries only for oncological cases (98%). Patients had to wait on average 2 weeks longer for their surgery appointments compared to previous years (range 0-12 weeks). Most cases that were prioritised for surgical intervention across all gynaecological tumours were early-stage disease (74%), primary situation (61%) and good ECOG status (63%). The radicality of surgery did not change in the majority of cases (78%) across all tumour types. During the pandemic, only 38% of clinicians stated they would start a new clinical trial. Almost half of the participants stated the pandemic negatively impacted the financial structure and support for clinical trials. Approximately 20% of clinicians did not feel well-informed regarding clinical algorithm for COVID-19 patients throughout the pandemic. Thirty percent stated that they are currently having trouble in providing adequate medical care due to staff shortage. CONCLUSION Despite well-established guidelines, pandemic clearly affected clinical research and patientcare. Our survey underlines the necessity for building robust emergency algorithms tailored to gynaecological oncology to minimise negative impact in crises and to preserve access to clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Nasser
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecological Oncology, Charite Campus Virchow Klinikum, Augustenburgerplatz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
| | - Christina Fotopoulou
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecological Oncology, Charite Campus Virchow Klinikum, Augustenburgerplatz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany
- Department of Gynecological Oncology, Queen Charlotte's Hospital, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Murat Gültekin
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Hacettepe University Hospitals, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Desislava Dimitrova
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecological Oncology, Charite Campus Virchow Klinikum, Augustenburgerplatz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany
| | - Esra Bilir
- Department of Global Health, Koç University Graduate School of Health Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospitals Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Gülhan Inci
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecological Oncology, Charite Campus Virchow Klinikum, Augustenburgerplatz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Mansoor Raza Mirza
- Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | | | - Jonathan Berek
- Stanford Women´S Cancer Center, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA
| | - Jalid Sehouli
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecological Oncology, Charite Campus Virchow Klinikum, Augustenburgerplatz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Mukherjee A, Shammas N, Xu L, Cannavale KL, Gilfillan AD, Szamreta EA, Monberg M, Hodeib M, Chao CR. Impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic on neoadjuvant chemotherapy use in patients diagnosed with epithelial type ovarian cancer. Front Oncol 2024; 14:1290719. [PMID: 38601762 PMCID: PMC11005450 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1290719] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2023] [Accepted: 03/13/2024] [Indexed: 04/12/2024] Open
Abstract
Introduction The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic posed critical challenges in providing care to ovarian cancer (OC) patients, including delays in OC diagnosis and treatment initiation. To accommodate for delays in OC surgery, the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) recommended preferential use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy during the pandemic. The purpose of this study was to assess the association of the COVID-19 pandemic with neoadjuvant chemotherapy use in patients diagnosed with OC. Methods This retrospective cohort study included patients diagnosed with stage II-IV ovarian cancer of epithelial subtype between 01/01/2017-06/30/2021 at Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC), a large integrated healthcare system in the United States. Ovarian cancer patients diagnosed between 2017-2020 were identified from KPSC's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-affiliated cancer registry. Patients diagnosed in 2021 were identified from the electronic medical records (EMR) using ICD-10 diagnosis codes, followed by medical chart review to validate diagnosis and extract information on histology and stage at diagnosis. March 4, 2020 was used as the cut-off to define pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between OC diagnosis and treatment completion were excluded. Data on neoadjuvant chemotherapy use were extracted from the cancer registry and EMR, supplemented by chart review. Modified Poisson regression was used to evaluate the association of the pandemic with neoadjuvant chemotherapy use. Results Of 566 OC patients, 160 (28.3%) were diagnosed in the pandemic period. Patients diagnosed in the pandemic period were slightly younger (mean age 62.7 vs 64.9 years, p=0.07) and had a higher burden of Charlson comorbidities (p=0.05) than patients diagnosed in pre-pandemic period. No differences in time to treatment initiation were observed by pandemic periods. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy use was documented in 58.7% patients during the pandemic period compared to 47.3% in pre-pandemic period (p=0.01). After adjusting for covariates, patients diagnosed in the pandemic period were 29% more likely to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy than patients diagnosed in pre-pandemic period [RR(95%CI): 1.29(1.12-1.49)]. Discussions Ovarian cancer patients diagnosed in the COVID-19 pandemic were more likely to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy than patients diagnosed before the pandemic. Future research on patient outcomes and trends in the post-pandemic period are warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amrita Mukherjee
- Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, United States
| | - Natalie Shammas
- Obstetrics and Gynecology, Adventist Health White Memorial Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Lanfang Xu
- Data Reporting and Analytics, MedHealth Statistical Consulting Inc., Solon, OH, United States
| | - Kimberly L. Cannavale
- Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, United States
| | - Alec D. Gilfillan
- Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, United States
| | - Elizabeth A. Szamreta
- Center for Observational and Real-World Evidence (CORE), Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, United States
| | - Matthew Monberg
- Center for Observational and Real-World Evidence (CORE), Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, United States
| | - Melissa Hodeib
- Gynecology Oncology, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Riverside, CA, United States
| | - Chun R. Chao
- Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Kim J, Linos E, Fishman DA, Dove MS, Hoch JS, Keegan TH. Factors Associated with Online Patient-Provider Communications Among Cancer Survivors in the United States during COVID: A Cross-Sectional Study. JMIR Cancer 2023; 9:e44339. [PMID: 37074951 DOI: 10.2196/44339] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2022] [Revised: 04/05/2023] [Accepted: 04/17/2023] [Indexed: 04/20/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Online Patient-Provider Communication (OPPC) is crucial in enhancing access to health information, self-care, and related health outcomes among cancer survivors. The necessity of OPPC increased during SARS/COVID-19 (COVID), yet investigations in vulnerable subgroups have been limited. OBJECTIVE Thus, this study aimed to assess the prevalence of OPPC and sociodemographic and clinical characteristics associated with OPPC among cancer survivors and adults without a history of cancer during COVID vs. pre-COVID. METHODS Nationally representative cross-sectional survey data (Health Information National Trends Survey, HINTS 5 2017-2020) was used among cancer survivors (n= 1,900) and adults without a history of cancer (n= 13, 292). COVID included data from February to June 2020. We calculated the prevalence of three types of OPPC, defined as using email/internet, tablet/smartphone, or Electronic Health Records (EHR) for patient-provider communication, in the past 12 months. To investigate the associations of sociodemographic and clinical factors with OPPC, multivariable-adjusted weighted logistic regression was performed to obtain odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS The average prevalence of OPPC increased from pre-COVID to COVID among cancer survivors (39.7% vs. 49.7%, email/internet; 32.2% vs. 37.9%, tablet/smartphone; 19.0% vs. 30.0%, EHR). Cancer survivors (OR=1.32, 95% CI 1.06-1.63) were slightly more likely to use email/internet communications than adults without a history of cancer prior to COVID. Among cancer survivors, email/internet (OR=1.61, 1.08-2.40) and EHR (OR=1.92, 1.22-3.02) were more likely to be used during COVID than pre-COVID. During COVID, subgroups of cancer survivors, including Hispanics (OR=0.26, 0.09-0.71 vs. non-Hispanic Whites), or those with the lowest income (OR=6.14, 1.99-18.92 $50,000 to <$75,000; OR=0.42, 1.56-11.28 ≥ $75,000 vs. <$20,000), with no usual source of care (OR=6.17, 2.12-17.99), or reporting depression (OR=0.33, 0.14-0.78) were less likely to use email/internet and those who were the oldest (OR=9.33, 2.18-40.01 age 35-49; OR=3.58, 1.20-10.70 age 50-64; OR=3.09, 1.09-8.76 age 65-74 vs. ≥75), unmarried (OR=2.26, 1.06-4.86) or had public/no health insurance (ORs=0.19-0.21 Medicare, Medicaid, or Other, vs. private) were less likely to use tablet/smartphone to communicate with providers. Cancer survivors with a usual source of care (OR=6.23, 1.66-23.39) or healthcare office visits within a year (ORs=7.55-8.25) were significantly more likely to use EHR to communicate. While not observed in cancer survivors, lower education level was associated with lower OPPC among adults without a history of cancer during COVID. CONCLUSIONS Our findings identified vulnerable subgroups of cancer survivors who were left behind in online patient-provider communications which are becoming an increasing part of healthcare. Those vulnerable subgroups of cancer survivors with lower OPPC should be helped through multidimensional interventions to prevent further inequities. CLINICALTRIAL Not applicable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jiyeong Kim
- Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California, Davis, 1 Shields Ave, Davis, US
| | - Eleni Linos
- Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, US
- Department of Dermatology, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, US
| | - Debra A Fishman
- Health Management and Education, UC Davis Health Cardiac Rehabilitation, Davis, US
| | - Melanie S Dove
- Division of Health Policy and Management, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, US
| | - Jeffrey S Hoch
- Division of Health Policy and Management, Department of Public Health Sciences, Center for Healthcare Policy and Research, University of California, Davis, Davis, US
| | - Theresa H Keegan
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, UC Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, Sacramento, US
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Perego G, Di Mattei VE, Mazzetti M, Milano F, Gatti C, Rancoita PMV, Taranto P, Rabaiotti E, Cioffi R, Candiani M. The Experience of COVID-19 in a Sample of Gynecological Cancer Patients Undergoing Chemotherapy: A Focus on the Psychological Implications. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2023; 20:3851. [PMID: 36900862 PMCID: PMC10002022 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20053851] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2023] [Revised: 02/16/2023] [Accepted: 02/20/2023] [Indexed: 06/18/2023]
Abstract
Cancer patients are at an increased risk of developing severe consequences due to the COVID-19 infection. However, psychological outcomes in this population have been overlooked in the literature. The present study aims to identify significant psychological differences between gynecological cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy before and during the pandemic. Additionally, we explore the correlations between COVID-19-related concerns and anxiety, depression, distress, and quality of life levels. Forty-two patients completed the STAI-Y, the EORTC QLQ-C30, the BDI II, the DT, and an ad-hoc questionnaire that investigated COVID-19-related concerns. The analyses did not show significant differences in the psychometric scales between the two groups, highlighting a considerable resilience against mental health and quality of life deterioration during the COVID-19 pandemic in gynecologic cancer patients. However, COVID-19-related concerns were positively associated with anxiety and inversely related to emotional functioning levels. These results emphasize the importance of a comprehensive patient care and the need to implement a multidisciplinary approach that includes psychological support in the treatment plan. Moreover, it is essential to encourage clear communication to convey comprehensive information about the impact of the pandemic on physical and psychological levels, as well as to offer psychoeducational tools to face the pandemic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gaia Perego
- School of Psychology, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, 20132 Milan, Italy
- Clinical and Health Psychology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy
| | - Valentina Elisabetta Di Mattei
- School of Psychology, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, 20132 Milan, Italy
- Clinical and Health Psychology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy
| | - Martina Mazzetti
- Clinical and Health Psychology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy
| | - Francesca Milano
- Department of Psychology, University of Milano-Bicocca, 20132 Milan, Italy
| | - Carola Gatti
- Clinical and Health Psychology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy
| | - Paola Maria Vittoria Rancoita
- University Centre for Statistics in Biomedical Sciences (CUSSB), Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, 20132 Milan, Italy
- School of Medicine, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, 20132 Milan, Italy
| | - Paola Taranto
- Clinical and Health Psychology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy
| | - Emanuela Rabaiotti
- Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy
| | - Raffaella Cioffi
- Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy
| | - Massimo Candiani
- School of Medicine, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, 20132 Milan, Italy
- Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Sorayaie Azar A, Babaei Rikan S, Naemi A, Bagherzadeh Mohasefi J, Pirnejad H, Bagherzadeh Mohasefi M, Wiil UK. Application of machine learning techniques for predicting survival in ovarian cancer. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2022; 22:345. [PMID: 36585641 PMCID: PMC9801354 DOI: 10.1186/s12911-022-02087-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2022] [Accepted: 12/15/2022] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Ovarian cancer is the fifth leading cause of mortality among women in the United States. Ovarian cancer is also known as forgotten cancer or silent disease. The survival of ovarian cancer patients depends on several factors, including the treatment process and the prognosis. METHODS The ovarian cancer patients' dataset is compiled from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. With the help of a clinician, the dataset is curated, and the most relevant features are selected. Pearson's second coefficient of skewness test is used to evaluate the skewness of the dataset. Pearson correlation coefficient is also used to investigate the associations between features. Statistical test is utilized to evaluate the significance of the features. Six Machine Learning (ML) models, including K-Nearest Neighbors , Support Vector Machine (SVM), Decision Tree (DT), Random Forest (RF), Adaptive Boosting (AdaBoost), and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), are implemented for survival prediction in both classification and regression approaches. An interpretable method, Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP), is applied to clarify the decision-making process and determine the importance of each feature in prediction. Additionally, DTs of the RF model are displayed to show how the model predicts the survival intervals. RESULTS Our results show that RF (Accuracy = 88.72%, AUC = 82.38%) and XGBoost (Root Mean Squad Error (RMSE)) = 20.61%, R2 = 0.4667) have the best performance for classification and regression approaches, respectively. Furthermore, using the SHAP method along with extracted DTs of the RF model, the most important features in the dataset are identified. Histologic type ICD-O-3, chemotherapy recode, year of diagnosis, age at diagnosis, tumor stage, and grade are the most important determinant factors in survival prediction. CONCLUSION To the best of our knowledge, our study is the first study that develops various ML models to predict ovarian cancer patients' survival on the SEER database in both classification and regression approaches. These ML algorithms also achieve more accurate results and outperform statistical methods. Furthermore, our study is the first study to use the SHAP method to increase confidence and transparency of the proposed models' prediction for clinicians. Moreover, our developed models, as an automated auxiliary tool, can help clinicians to have a better understanding of the estimated survival as well as important features that affect survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amir Sorayaie Azar
- grid.412763.50000 0004 0442 8645Department of Computer Engineering, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran
| | - Samin Babaei Rikan
- grid.412763.50000 0004 0442 8645Department of Computer Engineering, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran
| | - Amin Naemi
- grid.10825.3e0000 0001 0728 0170Center for Health Informatics and Technology, The Maersk Mc-Kinney Moller Institute, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | | | - Habibollah Pirnejad
- grid.412763.50000 0004 0442 8645Patient Safety Research Center, Clinical Research Institute, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran ,grid.6906.90000000092621349Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management (ESHPM), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Uffe Kock Wiil
- grid.10825.3e0000 0001 0728 0170Center for Health Informatics and Technology, The Maersk Mc-Kinney Moller Institute, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Diagnosis and Management of Gynecological Cancer: A Single-Center Analysis. MEDICINA (KAUNAS, LITHUANIA) 2022; 58:medicina58121862. [PMID: 36557063 PMCID: PMC9787860 DOI: 10.3390/medicina58121862] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2022] [Revised: 12/12/2022] [Accepted: 12/13/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
Background and Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted health systems worldwide, particularly cancer care. Because the actual implications of these changes on gynecological oncology healthcare are still unclear, we aim to evaluate the impact of this pandemic on the diagnosis and management of gynecological cancer. Materials and Methods: This is a single-center retrospective observational study, including patients diagnosed with gynecological malignancies between January 2019 and December 2021. Patients were included into three groups based on the timing of cancer diagnosis: pre-pandemic (2019), pandemic with high restrictions (2020) and pandemic recovery (2021). Results: Overall, 234 patients were diagnosed with gynecological cancer during the period of study. A decrease in the number of newly diagnosed cervical cancers and other rare tumors (leiomyosarcoma, invasive hydatidiform mole) was apparent in 2020. Some aggressive histological types of endometrial and ovarian cancer were more commonly diagnosed in the pandemic recovery group (p < 0.05), although no differences were demonstrated concerning tumor staging in all gynecological cancers. The median time between the first multidisciplinary team meeting and the treatment initiation was higher after the COVID-19 pandemic in endometrial cancer (23.0 vs. 34.0 vs. 36.0 days, p < 0.05). Patients with ovarian cancer were more frequently proposed for neoadjuvant therapy in 2020 compared to the other periods (33.3% vs. 55.0% vs. 10.0% p < 0.05). A significant reduction in the laparoscopic approach was observed during 2020 in endometrial cancer (32.1% vs. 14.3% vs. 36.4%, p < 0.05). No significant differences were registered regarding median hospitalization days or intra- and post-operative complications between these periods. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the diagnosis and management of most gynecological malignancies, namely, on time to first treatment, chosen oncological therapies and surgical approaches. These results suggest important clinical and healthcare implications that should be addressed in future prospective studies.
Collapse
|
9
|
Fotopoulou C, Khan T, Bracinik J, Glasbey J, Abu-Rustum N, Chiva L, Fagotti A, Fujiwara K, Ghebre R, Gutelkin M, Konney TO, Ng J, Pareja R, Kottayasamy Seenivasagam R, Sehouli J, Surappa STS, Bhangu A, Leung E, Sundar S. Outcomes of gynecologic cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: an international, multicenter, prospective CovidSurg-Gynecologic Oncology Cancer study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2022; 227:735.e1-735.e25. [PMID: 35779589 PMCID: PMC9242690 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.06.052] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2022] [Revised: 06/21/2022] [Accepted: 06/22/2022] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The CovidSurg-Cancer Consortium aimed to explore the impact of COVID-19 in surgical patients and services for solid cancers at the start of the pandemic. The CovidSurg-Gynecologic Oncology Cancer subgroup was particularly concerned about the magnitude of adverse outcomes caused by the disrupted surgical gynecologic cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic, which are currently unclear. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to evaluate the changes in care and short-term outcomes of surgical patients with gynecologic cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesized that the COVID-19 pandemic had led to a delay in surgical cancer care, especially in patients who required more extensive surgery, and such delay had an impact on cancer outcomes. STUDY DESIGN This was a multicenter, international, prospective cohort study. Consecutive patients with gynecologic cancers who were initially planned for nonpalliative surgery, were recruited from the date of first COVID-19-related admission in each participating center for 3 months. The follow-up period was 3 months from the time of the multidisciplinary tumor board decision to operate. The primary outcome of this analysis is the incidence of pandemic-related changes in care. The secondary outcomes included 30-day perioperative mortality and morbidity and a composite outcome of unresectable disease or disease progression, emergency surgery, and death. RESULTS We included 3973 patients (3784 operated and 189 nonoperated) from 227 centers in 52 countries and 7 world regions who were initially planned to have cancer surgery. In 20.7% (823/3973) of the patients, the standard of care was adjusted. A significant delay (>8 weeks) was observed in 11.2% (424/3784) of patients, particularly in those with ovarian cancer (213/1355; 15.7%; P<.0001). This delay was associated with a composite of adverse outcomes, including disease progression and death (95/424; 22.4% vs 601/3360; 17.9%; P=.024) compared with those who had operations within 8 weeks of tumor board decisions. One in 13 (189/2430; 7.9%) did not receive their planned operations, in whom 1 in 20 (5/189; 2.7%) died and 1 in 5 (34/189; 18%) experienced disease progression or death within 3 months of multidisciplinary team board decision for surgery. Only 22 of the 3778 surgical patients (0.6%) acquired perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infections; they had a longer postoperative stay (median 8.5 vs 4 days; P<.0001), higher predefined surgical morbidity (14/22; 63.6% vs 717/3762; 19.1%; P<.0001) and mortality (4/22; 18.2% vs 26/3762; 0.7%; P<.0001) rates than the uninfected cohort. CONCLUSION One in 5 surgical patients with gynecologic cancer worldwide experienced management modifications during the COVID-19 pandemic. Significant adverse outcomes were observed in those with delayed or cancelled operations, and coordinated mitigating strategies are urgently needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christina Fotopoulou
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Gynecologic Oncology, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Tabassum Khan
- Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Juraj Bracinik
- Particle Physics Group, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - James Glasbey
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Global Health Research Unit on Global Surgery, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | | | - Luis Chiva
- University Clinic of Navarra, Madrid, Spain
| | - Anna Fagotti
- Division Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Keiichi Fujiwara
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center and on behalf of GOTIC and APGOT, Saitama, Japan
| | - Rahel Ghebre
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health and Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
| | - Murat Gutelkin
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Thomas O Konney
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital, Kumasi, Ghana
| | - Joseph Ng
- Gynecologic Oncology Department, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Rene Pareja
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, National Cancer Institute, Bogotá and Astorga Oncology Clinic, Medellín, Colombia
| | | | - Jalid Sehouli
- Department of Gynecology with Center of Surgical Oncology, Charité Campus Virchow Klinikum, Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Aneel Bhangu
- NIHR Global Health Research Unit on Global Surgery, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Elaine Leung
- Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Sudha Sundar
- Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Adzrago D, Sulley S, Tagoe I, Ormiston CK, Odame EA, Mamudu L, Williams F. Assessment of anxiety/depression among cancer patients before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychooncology 2022; 31:1681-1691. [PMID: 36029183 PMCID: PMC9762178 DOI: 10.1002/pon.6026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2022] [Revised: 08/11/2022] [Accepted: 08/24/2022] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess differences in the prevalence of anxiety/depression symptoms among cancer patients before (2019) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020); and the associations between anxiety/depression and sociodemographic and health behavior factors among cancer patients before and during the pandemic. METHODS We analyzed data from the 2019 (n = 856) and 2020 (n = 626) Health Information National Trends Survey, a nationally representative survey of United States adults aged ≥18 years. Only adults with a cancer diagnosis were used in the analyses. Anxiety/depression was assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (low/none [0-2], mild [3-5], moderate [6-8], and severe [9-12]) and dichotomized as low/none and current anxiety/depression (mild/moderate/severe). Multivariate analysis was performed. RESULTS The prevalence of anxiety/depression symptoms among cancer patients was 32.7% before the COVID-19 pandemic and 31.1% during the pandemic. The odds of anxiety/depression among patients with fair/poor health status was higher during the pandemic relative to before (before: odds ratio [OR] = 1.85 vs. during: OR = 3.89). Participants aged 50-64 years (before: OR = 0.29, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 0.11-0.76; during: OR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.11-0.97) and ≥65 years (before: OR = 0.13, 95% CI = 0.05-0.34; during: OR = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.07-0.47) had lower odds of anxiety/depression before and during the pandemic compared to those aged 35-49 years. Hispanics/Latinos had higher odds of anxiety/depression (OR = 2.70, 95% CI = 1.11-6.57) before the pandemic and lower odds of anxiety/depression during the pandemic (OR = 0.2, 95% CI = 0.05-1.01) compared to non-Hispanic Whites. Those who completed high school (before: OR = 0.08, 95% CI = 0.01-0.42), some college (before: OR = 0.10, 95% CI = 0.02-0.42), ≥college degree had lower odds of anxiety/depression symptoms (before: OR = 0.05, 95% CI = 0.01-0.26; during: OR = 0.06, 95% CI = 0.01-0.61) compared to those with less than a high school education. CONCLUSION Our results suggest the need to increase the provision of mental health services to cancer patients at high risk of developing anxiety/depression symptoms, particularly during public health emergencies, to alleviate further health burdens.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Adzrago
- Center for Health Promotion and Prevention ResearchThe University of Texas School of Public HealthThe University of Texas Health Science Center at HoustonHoustonTexasUSA
| | | | - Ishmael Tagoe
- School of Population HealthUniversity of ToledoToledoOhioUSA
| | - Cameron K. Ormiston
- Division of Intramural ResearchNational Institute on Minority Health and Health DisparitiesNational Institutes of HealthBethesdaMarylandUSA
| | - Emmanuel A. Odame
- Department of Environmental Health SciencesSchool of Public HealthUniversity of Alabama at BirminghamBirminghamAlabamaUSA
| | - Lohuwa Mamudu
- Department of Public HealthCalifornia State UniversityFullertonCaliforniaUSA
| | - Faustine Williams
- Division of Intramural ResearchNational Institute on Minority Health and Health DisparitiesNational Institutes of HealthBethesdaMarylandUSA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Knowledge, Attitude, and Perception of Cancer Patients towards COVID-19 in Pakistan: A Cross-Sectional Study. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:ijerph19137926. [PMID: 35805584 PMCID: PMC9265320 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19137926] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2022] [Revised: 06/20/2022] [Accepted: 06/23/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
Background: Cancer patients, being immunocompromised, are at higher risk of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The current study determines cancer patients’ knowledge, attitude, perception, and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted in Pakistan from 1 April 2020 to 1 May 2020. The study respondents were cancer patients with ages equal to or greater than 18 years. Following a request for participation, the URL for the survey was distributed on numerous channels. Other social media platforms, including WeChat, WhatsApp, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Messenger, and LinkedIn, were used to increase cancer patient interaction. The questionnaire comprised five different sections such as: (1) sociodemographic information, (2) knowledge, (3) attitude, (4) perception, and (5) impact of COVID-19 on cancer patients. Descriptive medical statistics such as frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation were used to illustrate the demographic characteristics of the study participants. To compare mean knowledge scores with selected demographic variables, independent sample t-tests and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used, which are also practical methods in epidemiological, public health and medical research. The cut-off point for statistical significance was set at a p-value of 0.05. Results: More than 300 cancer patients were invited, of which 208 agreed to take part. The response rate was 69.33% (208/300). Gender, marital status, and employment status had a significant association with knowledge scores. Of the total recruited participants, 96% (n = 200) (p < 0.01) knew about COVID-19, and 90% were aware of general symptoms of COVID-19 disease, such as route of transmission and preventive measurements. In total, 94.5% (n = 197) (p < 0.01) were willing to accept isolation if they were infected with COVID-19, and 98% (n = 204) (p < 0.01) had reduced their use of public transportation. More than 90% (n = 188) (p < 0.01) of cancer patients were found to be practicing preventative measures such as using a face mask, keeping social distance, and avoiding handshaking and hugging. Around 94.4% (n = 196) (p < 0.01) of cancer patients had been impacted by, stopped or had changed cancer treatment during this pandemic, resulting in COVID-related anxiety and depression. Conclusion: The included cancer patients exhibited a good level of COVID-19 knowledge, awareness, positive attitude, and perception. Large-scale studies and efforts are needed to raise COVID-19 awareness among less educated and high-risk populations. The present survey indicates that mass-level effective health education initiatives are required for developing countries to improve and reduce the gap between KAP and COVID-19.
Collapse
|
12
|
Algera M, van Driel W, Slangen B, Kruitwagen R, Wouters M, Ten Cate A, Aalders A, van der Kolk A, Kruse A, Jong AVHD, van de Swaluw A, Visschers B, Buis C, Gerestein C, Smeets C, Boll D, van de Laar R, Ngo D, Davelaar E, Ooms E, van Dorst E, Schmeink C, van Es E, Roes E, Ten Cate F, Rijcken F, Dunné FRV, Fons G, Jansen G, Verhoeve H, Nagel H, Keizer H, Smedts H, Ebisch I, van de Lande J, Louwers J, Briet J, De Waard J, Diepstraten J, Vollebergh J, Van der Avoort I, Van Dijk J, Lange J, Mens J, Gaarenstroom K, Overmars K, De Vries L, Hofman L, Bartelink L, Huisman M, Verbruggen M, Vos M, Huisman M, Kleppe M, van den Hende M, van der Aa M, Wust M, Baas M, Engelen M, Scheers E, Moonen-Delarue M, Tjiong M, Leffers N, Reesink N, Timmers P, Kolk P, Vencken P, Yigit R, Smit R, Westenberg S, Coppus S, Stam T, Schukken T, van Baal W, Minderhoud-Bassie W, Van der Plas-Koning Y, van Ham M. Impact of the COVID-19-pandemic on patients with gynecological malignancies undergoing surgery: A Dutch population-based study using data from the 'Dutch Gynecological Oncology Audit'. Gynecol Oncol 2022; 165:330-338. [PMID: 35221132 PMCID: PMC8860632 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2022.02.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2021] [Revised: 02/13/2022] [Accepted: 02/16/2022] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The COVID-19-pandemic caused drastic healthcare changes worldwide. To date, the impact of these changes on gynecological cancer healthcare is relatively unknown. This study aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19-pandemic on surgical gynecological-oncology healthcare. METHODS This population-based cohort study included all surgical procedures with curative intent for gynecological malignancies, registered in the Dutch Gynecological Oncology Audit, in 2018-2020. Four periods were identified based on COVID-19 hospital admission rates: 'Pre-COVID-19', 'First wave', 'Interim period', and 'Second wave'. Surgical volume, perioperative care processes, and postoperative outcomes from 2020 were compared with 2018-2019. RESULTS A total of 11,488 surgical procedures were analyzed. For cervical cancer, surgical volume decreased by 17.2% in 2020 compared to 2018-2019 (mean 2018-2019: n = 542.5, 2020: n = 449). At nadir (interim period), only 51% of the expected cervical cancer procedures were performed. For ovarian, vulvar, and endometrial cancer, volumes remained stable. Patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer more frequently received neoadjuvant chemotherapy in 2020 compared to 2018-2019 (67.7% (n = 432) vs. 61.8% (n = 783), p = 0.011). Median time to first treatment was significantly shorter in all four malignancies in 2020. For vulvar and endometrial cancer, the length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in 2020. No significant differences in complicated course and 30-day-mortality were observed. CONCLUSIONS The COVID-19-pandemic impacted surgical gynecological-oncology healthcare: in 2020, surgical volume for cervical cancer dropped considerably, waiting time was significantly shorter for all malignancies, while neoadjuvant chemotherapy administration for advanced-stage ovarian cancer increased. The safety of perioperative healthcare was not negatively impacted by the pandemic, as complications and 30-day-mortality remained stable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M.D. Algera
- Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC), Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maastricht, the Netherlands,GROW- School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht, the Netherlands,Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing (DICA), Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands,Corresponding author at: Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Rijnsburgerweg 10, 2333 AA Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - W.J. van Driel
- Center for Gynecological Oncology Amsterdam, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Department of Gynecology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - B.F.M. Slangen
- Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC), Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maastricht, the Netherlands,GROW- School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - R.F.P.M. Kruitwagen
- Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC), Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maastricht, the Netherlands,GROW- School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - M.W.J.M. Wouters
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing (DICA), Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands,Netherlands Cancer Institute, Department of Surgical Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands,Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - the participants of the Dutch Gynecological Oncology Collaborator groupBaalbergenA.1Ten CateA.D.2AaldersA.L.3van der KolkA.4KruseA.J.5JongA.M.L.D. Van Haaften-de6van de SwaluwA.M.G.7VisschersB.A.J.T.8BuisC.C.N.9GeresteinC.G.1017SmeetsC.M.W.H.11BollD.12van de LaarR.13NgoD.H.14DavelaarE.15OomsE.A.16van DorstE.B.L.17SchmeinkC.E.18van EsE.J.M.19RoesE.M.20Ten CateF.A.21RijckenF.E.M.22DunnéF.M.R. Rosier-van23FonsG.24JansenG.H.25VerhoeveH.R.26NagelH.T.C.27KeizerH.H.28SmedtsH.P.M.29EbischI.M.W.30van de LandeJ.2LouwersJ.A.31BrietJ.32De WaardJ.33DiepstratenJ.4VolleberghJ.H.A.34Van der AvoortI.A.M.35Van DijkJ.E.W.36LangeJ.G.37MensJ.W.M.20GaarenstroomK.N.69OvermarsK.38De VriesL.C.39HofmanL.N.40BartelinkL.R.41HuismanM.A.42VerbruggenM.B.43VosM.C.44HuismanM.45KleppeM.46van den HendeM.47van der AaM.48WustM.D.49BaasM.I.50EngelenM.J.A.51ScheersE.C.A.H.52Moonen-DelarueM.W.G.53TjiongM.Y.54LeffersN.55ReesinkN.56TimmersP.J.57KolkP.58VenckenP.M.L.H.59YigitR.60SmitR.A.61WestenbergS.M.62CoppusS.F.P.J.63StamT.C.27SchukkenT.K.64van BaalW.M.65Minderhoud-BassieW.66Van der Plas-KoningY.W.C.M.67van HamM.A.P..C.68Reinier de Graaf Groep, Delft, the NetherlandsSpaarne Gasthuis, Haarlem, the NetherlandsRijnstate Ziekenhuis, Arnhem, the NetherlandsStichting Olijf, the NetherlandsIsala Klinieken, Zwolle, the NetherlandsHagaZiekenhuis, The Hague, the NetherlandsDijklander Ziekenhuis, Hoorn, the NetherlandsStichting Zorgsaam Zeeuws Vlaanderen, Terneuzen, the NetherlandsNij Smellinghe, Drachten, the NetherlandsMeander Medisch Centrum, Amersfoort, the NetherlandsSlingeland Ziekenhuis, Doetinchem, the NetherlandsCatharina Ziekenhuis, Eindhoven, the NetherlandsVieCuri Medisch Centrum, Venlo, the NetherlandsElkerliek Ziekenhuis, Helmond, the NetherlandsLangeland Ziekenhuis, Zoetermeer, the NetherlandsRode Kruis Ziekenhuis, Beverwijk, the NetherlandsUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the NetherlandsSint Anna Ziekenhuis, Geldrop, the NetherlandsSint Jansgasthuis, Weert, the NetherlandsErasmus Medical Center Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the NetherlandsBovenij Ziekenhuis, Amsterdam, the NetherlandsAlrijne Zorggroep, Leiderdorp, the NetherlandsTer Gooi Ziekenhuis, Hilversum, the NetherlandsAcademic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the NetherlandsTjongerschans Ziekenhuis, Heereveen, the NetherlandsOnze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the NetherlandsHaaglanden Medical Center, the Hague, the NetherlandsMedisch Centrum Leeuwarden, Leeuwarden, the NetherlandsAmphia Ziekenhuis, Breda, the NetherlandsCanisius Wilhelmina ziekenhuis, Nijmegen, the NetherlandsDiakonessenhuis, Utrecht, the NetherlandsZiekenhuisgroep Twente, Almelo, the NetherlandsFranciscus Gasthuis & Vlietland, Rotterdam, the NetherlandsBernhoven Ziekenhuis, Uden, the NetherlandsIkazia Ziekenhuis, Rotterdam, the NetherlandsStreekziekenhuis Koningin Beatrix, Winterswijk, the NetherlandsSint Antonius Ziekenhuis, Nieuwengein, the NetherlandsAmstelland Ziekenhuis, Amstelveen, the NetherlandsTreant Zorggroep, Hoogeveen, the NetherlandsAlbert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis, Dordrecht, the NetherlandsGelderse Vallei, Ede, the NetherlandsDeventer Ziekenhuis, Deventer, the NetherlandsZaans Medisch Centrum, Zaandam, the NetherlandsElisabeth- TweeSteden Ziekenhuis, Tilburg, the NetherlandsGelre Ziekenhuis, Apeldoorn, the NetherlandsMartini Ziekenhuis, Groningen, the NetherlandsIJsselland Ziekenhuis, Capelle aan de IJssel, the NetherlandsNetherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (NCCN), the NetherlandsSaxenburgh Medisch Centrum, Hardenberg, the NetherlandsZiekenhuis Rivierenland, Tiel, the NetherlandsZuyderland Medisch Centrum, Heerlen, the NetherlandsWilhelmina Ziekenhuis, Assen, the NetherlandsLaurentius Ziekenhuis, Roermond, the NetherlandsVrije Universiteit Medisch Centrum, Amsterdam, the NetherlandsOmmelander Ziekenhuis, Scheemda, the NetherlandsMedisch Centrum Twente, Enschede, the NetherlandsMaasstad Ziekenhuis, Rotterdam, the NetherlandsGroene Hart Ziekenhuis, Gouda, the NetherlandsBravis Ziekenhuis, Roosendaal, the NetherlandsUniversity Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the NetherlandsJeroen Bosch Ziekenhuis, ‘s-Hertogenbosch, the NetherlandsNoordwest Ziekenhuisgroep, Alkmaar, the NetherlandsMaxima Medisch Centrum, Veldhoven, the NetherlandsAntonius Ziekenhuis, Sneek, the NetherlandsFlevoziekenhuis, Almere, the NetherlandsSint Jansdal Ziekenhuis, Harderwijk, the NetherlandsAdmiraal de Ruyter Ziekenhuis, Vlissingen, the NetherlandsRadboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the NetherlandsLeiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Cohen M, Yagil D, Aviv A, Soffer M, Bar-Sela G. Cancer patients attending treatment during COVID-19: intolerance of uncertainty and psychological distress. J Cancer Surviv 2022; 16:1478-1488. [PMID: 35066775 PMCID: PMC8783796 DOI: 10.1007/s11764-021-01126-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2021] [Accepted: 10/25/2021] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Miri Cohen
- School of Social Work, University of Haifa, 199 Aba Khoushy Ave., Mount Carmel, 3498838, Haifa, Israel.
| | - Dana Yagil
- Department of Human Services, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel
| | - Ariel Aviv
- Hematology Unit, HaEmek Medical Center, Afula, Israel
| | - Michal Soffer
- School of Social Work, University of Haifa, 199 Aba Khoushy Ave., Mount Carmel, 3498838, Haifa, Israel
| | - Gil Bar-Sela
- Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
- Cancer Center, Emek Medical Center, Afula, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Oncology Care and Clinical Trials. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13235924. [PMID: 34885038 PMCID: PMC8656780 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13235924] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2021] [Revised: 11/22/2021] [Accepted: 11/23/2021] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary The coronavirus pandemic has had a considerable impact on all parts of society. Unsurprisingly, healthcare has been particularly affected, including cancer care and trials of new drugs. This article will summarize the impact the pandemic has had on cancer healthcare taking into consideration how the pandemic affected potential cancer patients and stopped them seeking medical advice for new symptoms. The pandemic also affected the ability of people to access healthcare services and undergo the tests necessary to diagnose cancer. This article will also discuss the impact of the pandemic on existing treatments and the trials of new drugs. In light of the unprecedented speed of development of new treatments and vaccines for the virus itself, it will also review whether some of these adaptations could be used to accelerate the development of novel cancer therapies. Abstract The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused considerable global disruption to clinical practice. This article will review the impact that the pandemic has had on oncology clinical trials. It will assess the effect of the COVID-19 situation on the initial presentation and investigation of patients with suspected cancer. It will also review the impact of the pandemic on the subsequent management of cancer patients, and how clinical trial approval, recruitment, and conduct were affected during the pandemic. An intriguing aspect of the pandemic is that clinical trials investigating treatments for COVID-19 and vaccinations against the causative virus, SARS-CoV-2, have been approved and conducted at an unprecedented speed. In light of this, this review will also discuss the potential that this enhanced regulatory environment could have on the running of oncology clinical trials in the future.
Collapse
|
15
|
Ferrara F, Zoupanou S, Primiceri E, Ali Z, Chiriacò MS. Beyond liquid biopsy: Toward non-invasive assays for distanced cancer diagnostics in pandemics. Biosens Bioelectron 2021; 196:113698. [PMID: 34688113 PMCID: PMC8527216 DOI: 10.1016/j.bios.2021.113698] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/14/2021] [Revised: 10/01/2021] [Accepted: 10/07/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Liquid biopsy technologies have seen a significant improvement in the last decade, offering the possibility of reliable analysis and diagnosis from several biological fluids. The use of these technologies can overcome the limits of standard clinical methods, related to invasiveness and poor patient compliance. Along with this there are now mature examples of lab-on-chips (LOC) which are available and could be an emerging and breakthrough technology for the present and near-future clinical demands that provide sample treatment, reagent addition and analysis in a sample-in/answer-out approach. The possibility of combining non-invasive liquid biopsy and LOC technologies could greatly assist in the current need for minimizing exposure and transmission risks. The recent and ongoing pandemic outbreak of SARS-CoV-2, indeed, has heavily influenced all aspects of life worldwide. Ordinary tasks have been forced to switch from “in presence” to “distanced”, limiting the possibilities for a large number of activities in all fields of life outside of the home. Unfortunately, one of the settings in which physical distancing has assumed noteworthy consequences is the screening, diagnosis and follow-up of diseases. In this review, we analyse biological fluids that are easily collected without the intervention of specialized personnel and the possibility that they may be used -or not-for innovative diagnostic assays. We consider their advantages and limitations, mainly due to stability and storage and their integration into Point-of-Care diagnostics, demonstrating that technologies in some cases are mature enough to meet current clinical needs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Ferrara
- STMicroelectronics s.r.l., via per Monteroni, 73100, Lecce, Italy; CNR NANOTEC - Institute of Nanotechnology, via per Monteroni, 73100, Lecce, Italy.
| | - Sofia Zoupanou
- CNR NANOTEC - Institute of Nanotechnology, via per Monteroni, 73100, Lecce, Italy; University of Salento, Dept. of Mathematics & Physics E. de Giorgi, Via Arnesano, 73100, Lecce, Italy
| | - Elisabetta Primiceri
- CNR NANOTEC - Institute of Nanotechnology, via per Monteroni, 73100, Lecce, Italy
| | - Zulfiqur Ali
- University of Teesside, School of Health & Life Sciences, Healthcare Innovation Centre, Middlesbrough, TS1 3BX, Tees Valley, England, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Falzone L, Scandurra G, Lombardo V, Gattuso G, Lavoro A, Distefano AB, Scibilia G, Scollo P. A multidisciplinary approach remains the best strategy to improve and strengthen the management of ovarian cancer (Review). Int J Oncol 2021; 59:53. [PMID: 34132354 PMCID: PMC8208622 DOI: 10.3892/ijo.2021.5233] [Citation(s) in RCA: 61] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2021] [Accepted: 03/31/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Ovarian cancer represents one of the most aggressive female tumors worldwide. Over the decades, the therapeutic options for the treatment of ovarian cancer have been improved significantly through the advancement of surgical techniques as well as the availability of novel effective drugs able to extend the life expectancy of patients. However, due to its clinical, biological and molecular complexity, ovarian cancer is still considered one of the most difficult tumors to manage. In this context, several studies have highlighted how a multidisciplinary approach to this pathology improves the prognosis and survival of patients with ovarian cancer. On these bases, the aim of the present review is to present recent advantages in the diagnosis, staging and treatment of ovarian cancer highlighting the benefits of a patient‑centered care approach and on the importance of a multidisciplinary team for the management of ovarian cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luca Falzone
- Epidemiology and Biostatistics Unit, National Cancer Institute‑IRCCS Fondazione G. Pascale, I‑80131 Naples, Italy
| | | | | | - Giuseppe Gattuso
- Department of Biomedical and Biotechnological Sciences, University of Catania, I‑95123 Catania, Italy
| | - Alessandro Lavoro
- Department of Biomedical and Biotechnological Sciences, University of Catania, I‑95123 Catania, Italy
| | | | - Giuseppe Scibilia
- Unit of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cannizzaro Hospital, I‑95126 Catania, Italy
| | - Paolo Scollo
- Unit of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cannizzaro Hospital, I‑95126 Catania, Italy
| |
Collapse
|