Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer-Related Care in the United States: An Overview

Racial and Ethnic Inequities in Cancer Care Continuity During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Those With SARS-CoV-2

Importance

Racially and ethnically minoritized US adults were disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and experience poorer cancer outcomes, including inequities in cancer treatment delivery.

Objective

To evaluate racial and ethnic disparities in cancer treatment delays and discontinuations (TDDs) among patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 during different waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study used data from the American Society of Clinical Oncology Survey on COVID-19 in Oncology Registry (data collected from April 2020 to September 2022), including patients with cancer also diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 during their care at 69 US practices. Racial and ethnic differences were examined during 5 different waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States based on case surge (before July 2020, July to November 2020, December 2020 to March 2021, April 2021 to February 2022, and March to September 2022).

Exposures

Race and ethnicity.

Main Outcomes and Measures

TDD was defined as any cancer treatment postponed more than 2 weeks or cancelled with no plans to reschedule. To evaluate TDD associations with race and ethnicity, adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) were estimated using multivariable Poisson regression, accounting for nonindependence of patients within clinics, adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, comorbidities, cancer type, cancer extent, and SARS-CoV-2 severity (severe defined as death, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, or mechanical ventilation).

Results

A total of 4054 patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 were included (143 [3.5%] American Indian or Alaska Native, 176 [4.3%] Asian, 517 [12.8%] Black or African American, 469 [11.6%] Hispanic or Latinx, and 2747 [67.8%] White; 2403 [59.3%] female; 1419 [35.1%] aged 50-64 years; 1928 [47.7%] aged ≥65 years). The analysis focused on patients scheduled (at SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis) to receive drug-based therapy (3682 [90.8%]), radiation therapy (382 [9.4%]), surgery (218 [5.4%]), or transplant (30 [0.7%]), of whom 1853 (45.7%) experienced TDD. Throughout the pandemic, differences in racial and ethnic inequities based on case surge with overall TDD decreased over time. In multivariable analyses, non-Hispanic Black (third wave: aPR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.31-1.85) and Hispanic or Latinx (third wave: aPR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.13-1.62) patients with cancer were more likely to experience TDD compared with non-Hispanic White patients during the first year of the pandemic. By 2022, non-Hispanic Asian patients (aPR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.08-2.12) were more likely to experience TDD compared with non-Hispanic White patients, and non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native patients were less likely (aPR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.16-0.89).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study of patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2, racial and ethnic inequities existed in TDD throughout the pandemic; however, the disproportionate burden among racially and ethnically minoritized patients with cancer varied across SARS-CoV-2 waves. These inequities may lead to downstream adverse impacts on cancer mortality among minoritized adults in the United States.

"You matter": patients perceptions and disparities about cancer care and telehealth during and after COVID-19 pandemic

PURPOSE

Disparities in cancer care have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study is to establish how telehealth mitigated the effect of COVID-19 on the healthcare sector and to identify potential disparities in perception and experience with telehealth in cancer care during and after the pandemic.

METHODS

We identified individuals with an established cancer diagnosis who received treatment at a comprehensive academic cancer center with a diverse patient population between 2019 and 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were asked to complete a self-administrated survey intended to collect patient-reported outcomes on socioeconomic and mental health challenges incurred during the pandemic as well as participants' experience with telehealth. The assessment was adapted from a 21-question-based survey applied for mental health. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize participant characteristics and the response to the survey items. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess and analyze the contributing factors to the survey responses.

RESULTS

A total of N = 136 participants were included in this analysis. The majority of participants (60.6%) reported increased anxiety, stress, or experience of distress as a direct result of COVID-19. However, among 54.1% of survey responders participated in a telehealth appointment and 84.4% agreed it was an easy and effective experience.

CONCLUSION

Elderly, male, and black participants reported the worst impact related to the pandemic. The majority of patients had a positive experience with telehealth. The results of the study suggest that telehealth services can serve as a tool for patients with cancer during and beyond active treatment to access supportive services.

Head and Neck Cancer Incidence in the United States Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Importance

Research about population-level changes in the incidence and stage of head and neck cancer (HNC) associated with the COVID-19 pandemic is sparse.

Objective

To examine the change in localized vs advanced HNC incidence rates before and during the first year of the pandemic.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this cross-sectional study of patients in the US diagnosed with HNC from 2017 to 2020, the estimated number with cancer of the oral cavity and pharynx (floor of mouth; gum and other mouth; lip; oropharynx and tonsil; and tongue) and larynx were identified from the SEER cancer registry. Subgroup analyses were stratified by race and ethnicity, age, and sex. Data were analyzed after the latest update in April 2023.

Exposure

The COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcomes were the annual incidence rates per 100 000 people for localized HNC (includes both localized and regional stages) and advanced HNC (distant stage) and weighted average annual percentage change from 2019 to 2020. Secondary outcomes included annual percentage change for 2017 to 2018 and 2018 to 2019, which provided context for comparison.

Results

An estimated 21 664 patients (15 341 [71%] male; 10 726 [50%] ≥65 years) were diagnosed with oral cavity and pharynx cancer in 2019 in the US, compared with 20 390 (4355 [70%] male; 10 393 [51%] ≥65 years) in 2020. Overall, the HNC incidence rate per 100 000 people declined from 11.6 cases in 2019 to 10.8 in 2020. The incidence rate of localized cancer declined to 8.8 cases (-7.9% [95% CI, -7.5 to -8.2]) from 2019 to 2020. The localized cancer incidence during the first year of the pandemic decreased the most among male patients (-9.3% [95% CI, -9.2 to -9.5]), Hispanic patients (-12.9% [95% CI, -12.9 to -13.0]), and individuals with larynx cancer (-14.3% [95% CI, -13.6 to -15.0]). No change in the overall incidence rate was found for advanced HNC.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study, the incidence of localized HNC declined during the first year of the pandemic. A subsequent increase in advanced-stage diagnoses may be observed in later years.

Development and initial psychometric evaluation of a COVID-related psychosocial experiences questionnaire for cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

Cancer survivors are at elevated risk of psychological problems related to COVID-19, yet no published measure adequately assesses their psychosocial experiences during the pandemic.

PURPOSE

Describe the development and factor structure of a comprehensive, self-report measure (COVID-19 Practical and Psychosocial Experiences questionnaire [COVID-PPE]) assessing the pandemic's impact on US cancer survivors.

METHODS

The sample (n = 10,584) was divided into three groups to assess COVID-PPE factor structure by conducting: (1) initial calibration/exploratory analysis of the factor structure of 37 items (n = 5070), (2) confirmatory factor analysis of the best-fitting model (36 items after item removal; n = 5140), and (3) post-hoc confirmatory analysis with an additional six items not collected in the first two groups (42 items; n = 374).

RESULTS

The final COVID-PPE was divided into two sets of subscales, conceptualized as Risk Factors and Protective Factors. The five Risk Factors subscales were labeled Anxiety Symptoms, Depression Symptoms, Health Care Disruptions, Disruptions to Daily Activities and Social Interactions, and Financial Hardship. The four Protective Factors subscales were labeled Perceived Benefits, Provider Satisfaction, Perceived Stress Management Skills, and Social Support. Internal consistency was acceptable for seven subscales (αs = 0.726-0.895; ωs = 0.802-0.895) but poor or questionable for the remaining two subscales (αs = 0.599-0.681; ωs = 0.586-0.692).

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first published self-report measure comprehensively capturing psychosocial impact-both positive and negative-of the pandemic on cancer survivors. Future work should evaluate predictive utility of COVID-PPE subscales, particularly as the pandemic evolves, which may inform recommendations for cancer survivors and facilitate identification of survivors most in need of intervention.

Increased Risk of Surgical Field Contamination from Acute Pre-operative Treatment of Pediculosis Capitis (Lice) Infestation - A Case Report of Two Twin Pediatric Patients

Introduction

Little is known about the perioperative management of Pediculus capitis (lice) infestations, including risk of contamination to the sterile field, whether to delay surgery, and optimal time to treat and/or operate.

Case Report

Two identical twin patients presented for elective in situ percutaneous pinning of chronic slipped capital femoral epiphyses. Active pediculosis capitis was noted intraoperatively by the anesthesia team during the first patient's surgery. Meticulous examination of the sterile field at that time demonstrated no organisms or other sources of contamination. The second patient's surgery was delayed to discuss her case with the infectious disease team. Scant literature exists to guide recommendations. Ultimately, a single permethrin treatment immediately before surgery was recommended and followed by our team. After careful prepping and draping, a louse was observed on the sterile field near the planned pin insertion site. The case was immediately canceled and delayed indefinitely. After two additional treatments over the next 4 days, only eggs (but no active insects) were observed in the patient's hair. We elected to proceed to surgery at that time, which concluded without issue.

Conclusion

The surgical implications of an active lice infestation are numerous. Administration of antiparasitic medication in the immediate pre-operative period causes increased movement in pediculosis capitis, which may increase risk of sterile field contamination. Elective procedures should be postponed to complete multiple rounds of permethrin. In cases of urgent/emergent surgery, or in which treatment delay is unfeasible, foregoing delousing treatment in the immediate pre-operative period may be recommended.