Could diagnostic and therapeutic delay affect the prognosis of gastrointestinal primary malignancies in the COVID-19 pandemic era? A literature review

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Performance of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Background/Aims

Non-time-sensitive gastrointestinal endoscopy was deferred because of the risk of exposure to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but no population-based studies have quantified the adverse impact on gastrointestinal procedures. This study examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the performance of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), colonoscopy, ERCP, and abdominal ultrasonography (US) in South Korea.

Methods

This nationwide, population-based study compared the claim data of EGD, colonoscopy, ERCP, and abdominal US in 2020 and 2021 (COVID-19 era) with those in 2019 (before the COVID-19 era).

Results

During the first year (2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic, the annual claim data of EGD and colonoscopy were reduced by 6.3% and 6.9%, respectively, but those of ERCP and abdominal US were increased by 1.0% and 2.9%, compared to those in 2019. During the first surge (March and April 2020) of COVID-19, the monthly claim data of EGD, colonoscopy, ERCP, and abdominal US were reduced by 28.8%, 43.8%, 5.1%, and 21.6%, respectively, in March 2020, and also reduced by 17.2%, 32.8%, 4.4%, and 9.5%, respectively, in April 2020, compared to those in March and April 2019. During March and April 2020, the monthly claims of ERCP, compared with those in 2019, declined less significantly than those of EGD and colonoscopy (both p<0.001).

Conclusions

The claims of EGD and colonoscopy were reduced more significantly than those of ERCP and abdominal US during the COVID-19 pandemic because ERCPs are time-sensitive procedures and abdominal USs are non-aerosolized procedures.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Esophagogastroduodenoscopy and Gastric Cancer Claims in South Korea: A Nationwide, Population-Based Study

PURPOSE

There has been little information about the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and gastric cancer claims. This study aimed to measure the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on EGD and gastric cancer claims in South Korea.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This nationwide, population-based study compared the claims data of EGD, gastric cancer, early gastric cancer (EGC), advanced gastric cancer (AGC) and gastric cancer operation in 2020 and 2021 (COVID-19 era) to those in 2019 (before COVID-19 pandemic).

RESULTS

The annual claims of EGD, gastric cancer, EGC, and AGC were reduced by 6.3%, 5.0%, 4.7%, and 3.6% in 2020 and by 2.2%, 1.0%, 0.6%, and 1.9% in 2021, respectively, compared to 2019. The amount of annual claims of gastric cancer operation was reduced by 8.8% in 2020, but increased by 0.9% in 2021, compared to those in 2019. The monthly claims of EGD, gastric cancer, EGC, AGC, and gastric cancer operation were mainly reduced in the first epidemic wave of COVID-19, but decreased in the 2nd to 4th epidemic wave. Compared to 2019, the monthly claim of EGD, gastric cancer, EGC, AGC, and gastric cancer operation were reduced by 28.8%, 14.3%, 18.1%, 9.2%, and 5.8% in March 2020 and by 17.2%, 10.8%, 10.3%, 7.2%, and 35.4% in April 2020, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on EGD, gastric cancer, EGC, AGC, and gastric cancer operation was worst during the first surge of COVID-19, but decreased in the 2nd to 4th epidemic wave of the disease in 2020 and 2021.

Consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer in referral centers in Italy

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus pandemic had a major impact in Italy. The Italian health system's re-organization to face the emergency may have led to significant consequences especially in the diagnosis and treatment of malignancies. This study aimed to assess the impact of the pandemic in the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer in nine Gruppo Italiano RIcerca Cancro Gastrico (GIRCG) centers.

METHODS

All patients assessed for gastric adenocarcinoma at nine GIRCG centers between January 2019 and November 2020 were included. Patients were grouped according to the date of "patient 1's" diagnosis in Italy: preCOVID versus COVID. Clinico-pathological and outcome differences between the two groups were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 632 patients were included in the analysis (205 in the COVID group). The cT4 weighted ratios were higher in 2020 from April to September, with the greatest differences in May, August and September. The cM+ weighted ratio was significantly higher in July 2020. The mean number of gastrectomies had the greatest reduction in March and May 2020 compared with 2019. The median times from diagnosis to chemotherapy, to complete diagnostic work-up or to operation were longer in 2019. The median time from the end of chemotherapy to surgery was 17 days longer in the preCOVID group.

CONCLUSIONS

A greater number of advanced or metastatic cases were diagnosed after the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection, especially after the "full lockdown" periods. During the pandemic, once gastric cancer patients were referred to one of the centers, a shorter time to complete the diagnostic work-up or to address them to the best treatment option was required.

Time to treatment of esophageal cancer in Ontario: A population-level cross-sectional study

Objective

Timely cancer treatment improves survival and anxiety for some sites. Patients with esophageal cancer require specific workup before treatment, which can prolong the time from diagnosis to treatment (treatment interval [TI]). The geographical variation of this interval remains uninvestigated in patients with esophageal cancer.

Methods

This retrospective population-level study conducted in Ontario used linked administrative health care databases. Patients treated for esophageal cancer between 2013 and 2018 were included. The TI was time from diagnosis to treatment. Patients were assigned a geographical Local Health Integration Network on the basis of postal code. Covariates included patient, disease, and diagnosing physician characteristics. Quantile regression modeled TI length at the 50th and 90th percentile and identified associated factors.

Results

Of 7509 patients, 78% were male and most were aged between 60 and 69 years. The 50th and 90th percentile TI was 36 (interquartile range, 22-55) and 77 days, respectively. The difference between the Local Health Integration Network with the longest and shortest TI at the 50th and 90th percentile was 18 and 25 days, respectively. Older age (P < .0001), greater comorbidity (P = .0005), greater material deprivation (P = .001), rurality (P = .03), histology (P = .02), and treatment group (P < .0001) were associated with a longer median TI. Older age (P = .03), greater comorbidity (P = .003), greater material deprivation (P = .005), rurality (P = .04), and treatment group (P < .0001) were associated with a longer 90th percentile TI.

Conclusions

Geographic variability of time to treatment exists across Ontario. Investigation of facility-level differences is warranted. Patient and disease factors are associated with longer wait times. These results might inform future health care policy and resource allocation.