Collateral damage: the impact on outcomes from cancer surgery of the COVID-19 pandemic

Incident Cancer Detection During the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

Resource restrictions were established in many jurisdictions to maintain health system capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Disrupted healthcare access likely impacted early cancer detection. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of the pandemic on weekly reported cancer incidence.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a population-based study involving individuals diagnosed with cancer from September 25, 2016, to September 26, 2020, in Ontario, Canada. Weekly cancer incidence counts were examined using segmented negative binomial regression models. The weekly estimated backlog during the pandemic was calculated by subtracting the observed volume from the projected/expected volume in that week.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 358,487 adult patients with cancer. At the start of the pandemic, there was an immediate 34.3% decline in the estimated mean cancer incidence volume (relative rate, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.57-0.75), followed by a 1% increase in cancer incidence volume in each subsequent week (relative rate, 1.009; 95% CI, 1.001-1.017). Similar trends were found for both screening and nonscreening cancers. The largest immediate declines were seen for melanoma and cervical, endocrinologic, and prostate cancers. For hepatobiliary and lung cancers, there continued to be a weekly decline in incidence during the COVID-19 period. Between March 15 and September 26, 2020, 12,601 fewer individuals were diagnosed with cancer, with an estimated weekly backlog of 450.

CONCLUSIONS

We estimate that there is a large volume of undetected cancer cases related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Incidence rates have not yet returned to prepandemic levels.

Global impact of the first wave of COVID-19 on liver transplant centers: A multi-society survey (EASL-ESOT/ELITA-ILTS)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The global impact of SARS-CoV-2 on liver transplantation (LT) practices across the world is unknown. The goal of this survey was to assess the impact of the pandemic on global LT practices.

METHOD

A prospective web-based survey (available online from 7^th September 2020 to 31^st December 2020) was proposed to the active members of the EASL-ESOT/ELITA-ILTS in the Americas (including North, Central, and South America) (R1), Europe (R2), and the rest of the world (R3). The survey comprised 4 parts concerning transplant processes, therapy, living donors, and organ procurement.

RESULTS

Of the 470 transplant centers reached, 128 answered each part of the survey, 29 centers (23%), 64 centers (50%), and 35 centers (27%) from R1, R2, and R3, respectively. When we compared the practices during the first 6 months of the pandemic in 2020 with those a year earlier in 2019, statistically significant differences were found in the number of patients added to the waiting list (WL), WL mortality, and the number of LTs performed. At the regional level, we found that in R2 the number of LTs was significantly higher in 2019 (p <0.01), while R3 had more patients listed, higher WL mortality, and more LTs performed before the pandemic. Countries severely affected by the pandemic ("hit" countries) had a lower number of WL patients (p = 0.009) and LTs (p = 0.002) during the pandemic. Interestingly, WL mortality was still higher in the "non-hit" countries in 2020 compared to 2019 (p = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

The first wave of the pandemic differentially impacted LT practices across the world, especially with detrimental effects on the "hit" countries. Modifications to the policies of recipient and donor selection, organ retrieval, and postoperative recipient management were adopted at a regional or national level.

LAY SUMMARY

The health emergency caused by the coronavirus pandemic has dramatically changed clinical practice during the pandemic. The first wave of the pandemic impacted liver transplantation differently across the world, with particularly detrimental effects on the countries badly hit by the virus. The resilience of the entire transplant network has enabled continued organ donation and transplantation, ultimately improving the lives of patients with end-stage liver disease.

COVID-19 infection and its consequences among surgical oncology patients: A systematic analysis, meta-analysis and meta-regression

We conducted this meta‐analysis to address the outcomes in cancer patients after oncologic surgery during COVID‐19 pandemic. The primary endpoint was the COVID‐19–related mortality rate. Higher body mass index was significantly and negatively associated with higher all‐cause mortality and in‐hospital COVID‐19 infection rates. Male sex, preoperative respiratory disease, and smoking history were positively and significantly associated with increased all‐cause mortality rates. Furthermore, male sex was positively and significantly associated with the COVID‐19 infection rate.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on non-COVID induced sepsis survival

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has taken a toll on health care systems worldwide, which has led to increased mortality of different diseases like myocardial infarction. This is most likely due to three factors. First, an increased workload per nurse ratio, a factor associated with mortality. Second, patients presenting with COVID-19-like symptoms are isolated, which also decreases survival in cases of emergency. And third, patients hesitate to see a doctor or present themselves at a hospital. To assess if this is also true for sepsis patients, we asked whether non-COVID-19 sepsis patients had an increased 30-day mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This is a post hoc analysis of the SepsisDataNet.NRW study, a multicentric, prospective study that includes septic patients fulfilling the SEPSIS-3 criteria. Within this study, we compared the 30-day mortality and disease severity of patients recruited pre-pandemic (recruited from March 2018 until February 2020) with non-COVID-19 septic patients recruited during the pandemic (recruited from March 2020 till December 2020).

RESULTS

Comparing septic patients recruited before the pandemic to those recruited during the pandemic, we found an increased raw 30-day mortality in sepsis-patients recruited during the pandemic (33% vs. 52%, p = 0.004). We also found a significant difference in the severity of disease at recruitment (SOFA score pre-pandemic: 8 (5 - 11) vs. pandemic: 10 (8 - 13); p < 0.001). When adjusted for this, the 30-day mortality rates were not significantly different between the two groups (52% vs. 52% pre-pandemic and pandemic, p = 0.798).

CONCLUSIONS

This led us to believe that the higher mortality of non-COVID19 sepsis patients during the pandemic might be attributed to a more severe septic disease at the time of recruitment. We note that patients may experience a delayed admission, as indicated by elevated SOFA scores. This could explain the higher mortality during the pandemic and we found no evidence for a diminished quality of care for critically ill sepsis patients in German intensive care units.

Delayed Diagnosis and Treatment of Cancer Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Henan, China: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis

Objective

To investigate the possible impact of lockdown policies on the diagnosis and treatment of cancer patients in Henan, China.

Design Setting and Participants

We collected data from the Henan Cancer Hospital, affiliated with Zhengzhou University. The monthly numbers of inpatient admissions from January 2014 to December 2019 were used to forecast the number of inpatient admissions in 2020, which was then compared to the actual number of patients admitted during the pandemic to evaluate how the actual number diverges from this forecast. We conducted an interrupted time series analysis using the autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model.

Main Outcomes and Measures

For specific diagnoses, treatment modalities, and age groups, we compared the changes in monthly admissions after the pandemic with the forecasted changes from the model.

Results

The observed overall monthly number of inpatient admissions decreased by 20.2% [95% confidence interval (CI), 11.7-27.2%], 78.9% (95% CI, 77.3-80.4%), and 40.9% (95% CI, 35.6-45.5%) in January, February, and March 2020, respectively, as compared with those predicted using the ARIMA model. After the lockdown, visits for all treatment modalities decreased sharply. However, apparent compensation and recovery of the backlog appeared in later surgeries. As a result, the number of patients who underwent surgery in 2020 (30,478) was close to the number forecasted by the ARIMA model (30,185). In the same period, patients who received other treatments or underwent examinations were 106,074 and 36,968, respectively; the respective numbers that were forecasted by ARIMA were 127,775 and 60,025, respectively. These findings depict a decrease of 16.9 and 38.4% in patients who received other treatments or underwent examinations only, respectively. Regarding diagnosis, the reported incidence of various cancers decreased dramatically in February, with varying extent and speed of recovery.

Conclusion and Relevance

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly delayed the diagnosis and treatment of cancer in Henan, China. Long-term research should be conducted to assess the future effects of lockdown policies.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on colorectal cancer patients at an NHS Foundation Trust hospital-A retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Current NHS guidelines recommend that treatment of colorectal patients referred through the two-week wait referral system should occur within sixty two days from the date of referral. The COVID-19 pandemic which started in March 2020 has however led to significant delays in the delivery of health services, including colorectal cancer treatments. This study investigates the effects of delayed colorectal cancer treatments during the COVID pandemic on disease progression.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of 107 patients with histologically confirmed diagnosis of colorectal cancer was conducted. The occurrence of cancer upstaging after initial diagnosis was assessed and compared between patients with treatment delays and patients who received treatments within the period recommended by NHS guidelines. A logistic regression was performed to evaluate the association between treatment delays beyond 62 days and cancer upstaging.

RESULTS

The median age of the cohort was 71.2 years and 64.5% of the patients were over 65 years. Treatment delays were observed in 53.3% of reviewed patients. Patients with treatment delays received cancer treatments 95.8 (31.0) days on average after referral, compared to 46.3 (11.5) days in patients who experienced no treatment delays (p-value<0.0001). 38.6% of patients with treatment delays experienced cancer upstaging by the time of treatment, compared to 20% in the non-delay group (p-value = 0.036). Patients who received treatment after sixty two days from date of referral were 3.27 times more likely to experience colorectal cancer upstaging compared to those who received timely treatments.

CONCLUSION

Although an effective response to the Covid-19 pandemic requires the reallocation of healthcare resources, there is a need to ensure that treatments and health outcomes of patients with chronic diseases such as colorectal cancer continue to be prioritized and delivered in timely fashion.

Covid-19's impact on radiotherapy in the Republic of Srpska

Background/Aim. The aim of this epidemiological study was to investigate the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the weekly number of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) fractions and monthly brachytherapy (BT) applications, without intentional hypofractionation. We also investigated how the pandemic affected the number of EBRT patients younger and older than 70 years. Methods. The Affidea Radiotherapy Center, Banja Luka (BL), provides radiotherapy (RT) to the population (1.15 million) of the Republic of Srpska (Bosnia and Herzegovina). We analyzed the period of 14 months before the onset and the same period during the Covid-19. Results. The average weekly number of EBRT fractions from January 2019 to the end of February 2020, was 680.5 (SD 67.4), and from March 2020 to the end of April 2021, it was 617.1 (SD 96.4). During April 2020, the weekly number of the EBRT decreased by 67.9 % compared to the same period in 2019, while in March 2021 it fell by 42.4 %. Paired samples T-test showed that the occurrence of the Covid-19 pandemic had a statistically significant effect t(60)=4.627, p<0.05, on the reduction in the number of weekly EBRT fractions in BL RT center. When comparing EBRT patients over 70 years old to those fewer than 70 years old, the decrease was 16.3 % vs. 1.6 %, respectively. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test revealed that the Covid-19 pandemic had a statistically significant effect (Z=-2.42, p=0.016) on reducing the number of monthly BT applications. Conclusion. A statistically significant decline in EBRT and BT was observed in BL RT Centre for the first fourteen months of the pandemic. The "waves" of the pandemic "closed" the medical wards needed for the diagnosis and therapy of oncology patients and converted them into Covid-19. Therefore, some oncology patients who would have had indication for RT never received it.

Impact of COVID-19 on presentation, staging, and treatment of head and neck mucosal squamous cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

During the COVID-19 pandemic, maintenance of safe and timely oncologic care has been challenging. The goal of this study is to compare presenting symptoms, staging, and treatment of head and neck mucosal squamous cell carcinoma during the pandemic with an analogous timeframe one year prior.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective cohort study at a single tertiary academic center of new adult patients evaluated in a head and neck surgical oncology clinic from March -July 2019 (pre-pandemic control) and March - July 2020 (COVID-19 pandemic).

RESULTS

During the pandemic, the proportion of patients with newly diagnosed malignancies increased by 5%, while the overall number of new patients decreased (n = 575) compared to the control year (n = 776). For patients with mucosal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), median time from referral to initial clinic visit decreased from 11 days (2019) to 8 days (2020) (p = 0.0031). There was no significant difference in total number (p = 0.914) or duration (p = 0.872) of symptoms. During the pandemic, patients were more likely to present with regional nodal metastases (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.846, 95% CI 1.072-3.219, p = 0.028) and more advanced clinical nodal (N) staging (p = 0.011). No significant difference was seen for clinical tumor (T) (p = 0.502) or metastasis (M) staging (p = 0.278). No significant difference in pathologic T (p = 0.665), or N staging (p = 0.907) was found between the two periods.

CONCLUSION

Head and neck mucosal SCC patients presented with more advanced clinical nodal disease during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic despite no change in presenting symptoms.

Does Mental Health Affect the Decision to Vaccinate Against SARS-CoV-2? A Cross-Sectional Nationwide Study Before the Vaccine Campaign

The COVID-19 pandemic generated a sense of threat in the society, leading to social isolation and mental health deterioration. A great deal of hope for the development of herd immunity was placed in preventive vaccinations. The survey, performed before vaccine campaign between September 26-October 27, 2020, during the second wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Poland with the Computer Assisted Web Interviews method. The study was partly community based and partly open to the public. Participants were invited to complete the survey using Google forms via social media (Facebook, WhatsApp). The survey was also distributed 54 times at the request of interested persons via e-mail. Total 1,043 questionnaires were assessed for eligibility and 41 were excluded (13 because of the age under 18, and 28 due to refusal to participate: non-response after sending questionnaire via e-mail). Finally 1,001 questionnaires were included to the study and statistical analysis was performed on the basis of the 1,001 responses. The questionnaire consisted of three parts: a sociodemographic survey, a questionnaire assessing the knowledge of the SARS-CoV-2 and the General Health Questionnaire-28. Participants also determined their attitude toward being vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. The questionnaire was completed by a total of 1,001 participants: 243 people declared that they will not get vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Majority of people declaring the willingness to vaccinate were representatives of medical professions, suffering from chronic diseases, with higher values on the total GHQ-28 scale and the subscales: anxiety and insomnia, social dysfunction and somatic dysfunction. Loss of income, difficult access to health care, recognizing the restrictions as excessive and knowledge about COVID-19 were found as significant positive determinants of the reluctance to vaccinate. Greater readiness to vaccinate can be associated with greater certainty about its effectiveness and a hypothetical collectivist attitude. Experiencing anxiety and psychopathological symptoms are risk factors for infection, but can also be conducive to reliance on information about vaccination presented in the media. Reluctance to vaccinate may result from greater awareness of the complexity of the disease, and thus less faith in the effectiveness of vaccines.

Delayed presentation of inflammatory breast carcinoma during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Breast cancer may present with distinct cutaneous manifestations that may be paraneoplastic or secondary to direct skin infiltration, distant skin metastases, or dermal lymphatic tumor embolization (inflammatory breast carcinoma).

Case report

A 51-year-old Asian woman visited the emergency care department during the outbreak of COVID-19 in Northern Italy. About 6 months before, she had noted the onset of right breast swelling accompanied by skin redness and itching. She never consulted a physician, and, over time, the local skin condition progressed to a large scaly plaque covering the entire breast surface including the nipple. At presentation, abduction of the right upper limb was impaired due to severe shoulder pain. CT scan showed the presence of bilateral breast masses with necrotic and colliquative features, and multiple skeletal, nodal, pulmonary, and brain images suggestive of metastases. An ultrasound-guided core biopsy of the contralateral breast showed grade 2 non-special type infiltrating carcinoma. The patient was referred to the breast oncology unit and is currently being treated with aromatase inhibitors and chemotherapy.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the entire spectrum of oncological care including breast cancer. Hopefully, telemedicine will contribute to increase patients' confidence and will provide earlier diagnosis and treatment while minimizing the risk of contagion.

Special aspects of medical care for cancer patients during COVID-19 pandemic

The biggest challenge for the World Health Organization today is the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. The current situation prompted major adjustments in the system of cancer care. In this review, we investigate the aspects of cancer treatment and care during the pandemic, since in this setting oncological services face challenges in determining the feasibility of anticancer treatments while minimizing the risk of infection. Cancer patients are at a higher risk from COVID-19 disease. Therefore, oncological community is discussing on the priorities for providing cancer therapies and care and at the same time minimizing the risk of infection.

Diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in patients older than 65 years: analysis of 3 year Real World data of practice patterns and outcomes in England

BACKGROUND

We wished to examine treatment and outcome patterns in older diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients, with a focus on the effect of route-to-diagnosis to outcome.

METHODS

Data were extracted from Public Health England's National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service between 2013 and 2015 included route-to-diagnosis, disease characteristics and survival for 9186 patients ≥65 years. Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy data identified front-line regimens, cycles and doses.

RESULTS

Route-to-diagnosis were emergency (34%), NHS urgent cancer pathway (rapid haemato-oncologist review <2 weeks), (29%) and standard GP referral (25%). The most common regimen was R-CHOP (n = 4392). 313 patients received R-miniCHOP (7% of R-CHOP). For all patients, 3-year overall survival (OS) for 65-79 years was 57% and for ≥80 years was 32%. Three-year OS for R-CHOP-treated patients diagnosed via emergency presentation was 54% (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.63, p < 0.01) and 75% (adjusted HR 0.81, p < 0.01) on the NHS urgent cancer pathway (reference HR:1.00: GP referrals). 3-year OS was 54% for both R-miniCHOP and R-CHOP in ≥80 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Our comprehensive population analysis is the first to show that the NHS urgent cancer pathway is associated with a superior survival after adjusting for multiple confounders. Equivalent survival for R-CHOP and R-mini-CHOP was demonstrated in those ≥80 years.

Patients' perspectives on the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on access to cancer care and social contacts in Sweden and the UK: a cross-sectional study

PURPOSE

We aimed to determine whether there was a difference in access to cancer-related healthcare between people living in Sweden and the United Kingdom (UK) during the COVID-19 pandemic. We also describe how the pandemic affected social contact of patients undergoing treatment.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study used survey data collected through the War on Cancer mobile phone application between September 5, 2020, and January 6, 2021. We included individuals with cancer diagnoses living in Sweden or the UK. The association between difficulty accessing cancer-related healthcare and country was examined using logistic regression. Frequencies were used to describe the effect of the pandemic on social contact.

RESULTS

Of 491 individuals included in the study, 183 were living in the UK and 308 in Sweden. Living in the UK was associated with greater difficulty accessing cancer-related healthcare (n = 99/183, 54.1%) than living in Sweden (n = 100/308, 32.5%) (odds ratio 2.12, 95% CI 1.39-3.23, p < 0.001). The pandemic affected social contact for almost all patients (n = 218/238, 91.6%) undergoing treatment.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the differential impact that the pandemic may have had on patients' access to cancer-related care in the UK and Sweden. In both countries, the pandemic overwhelmingly affected social contact of individuals undergoing cancer treatment. New ways must be found to improve access to cancer-related care and reduce social isolation for patients with cancer during a pandemic.

Counting the social, psychological, and economic costs of COVID-19 for cancer patients

PURPOSE

Cancer patients were particularly vulnerable to the adverse impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic given their reliance on the healthcare system, and their weakened immune systems. This systematic review examines the social, psychological, and economic impacts of COVID-19 on cancer patients.

METHODS

The systematic search, conducted in March 2021, captures the experience of COVID-19 Wave I, when the most severe restrictions were in place globally, from a patient perspective.

RESULTS

The search yielded 56 studies reporting on the economic, social, and psychological impacts of COVID-19. The economic burden associated with cancer for patients during the pandemic included direct and indirect costs with both objective (i.e. financial burden) and subjective elements (financial distress). The pandemic exasperated existing psychological strain and associated adverse outcomes including worry and fear (of COVID-19 and cancer prognosis); distress, anxiety, and depression; social isolation and loneliness. National and institutional public health guidelines to reduce COVID-19 transmission resulted in suspended cancer screening programmes, delayed diagnoses, postponed or deferred treatments, and altered treatment. These altered patients' decision making and health-seeking behaviours.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 compounded the economic, social, and psychological impacts of cancer on patients owing to health system adjustments and reduction in economic activity. Identification of the impact of COVID-19 on cancer patients from a psychological, social, and economic perspective following the pandemic can inform the design of timely and appropriate interventions and supports, to deal with the backlog in cancer care and enhance recovery.

Quality of Life of People with Cancer in the Era of the COVID-19 Pandemic in India: A Systematic Review

Background:

The recent pandemic of COVID-19 caused havoc on the health system globally and raised a lot of questions and issues. Treatment for cancer is an emergency that cannot be taken back, particularly in an era of global pandemics. Cancer treatment mainly includes chemotherapy, surgery, radiotherapy, and palliative care, and because of the pandemic, all of these treatments are affected. The COVID-19 pandemic also had a potential effect on the quality of life and mental health of patients as well as health workers.

Objective:

This systematic review was intended to discuss the quality of life of people with cancer in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic in India in the light of the best available facts.

Methods:

An extensive literature search was done on PubMed, Medline, Embase, Clinical Key and Google Scholar databases till 3rd Feb 2021. Out of 1455 research articles, 06 research articles were included in this systematic review.

Results:

The results showed that cancer treatment delivery was as per standard safety protocol and the best treatment decisions were made by scheduling and setting priority. Till data, no direct research was conducted on the Indian continent to assess the quality of life of cancer patients in the COVID-19 era. The effect on the quality of life of cancer patients is very large and needs to be explored more by further research. Issues to be discussed with health care administrators and policy makers further. The tele-oncology method of cancer care delivery to patients is another rational option which is applicable as well.

Conclusion:

This systematic review demonstrated up-to-date evidence regarding the quality of life of cancer patients in the COVID-19 era in India. No research has been done to assess the quality of life of cancer patients. Still, the area is unrevealed, but evidence from other global studies indicates an altered quality of life for cancer patients. To maintain quality of life, cancer physicians should make evidence-based decisions and incorporate multidisciplinary management into decision making.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Urologic Oncology Surgery: Implications for Moving Forward

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused the destruction of routine hospital services globally, leading to an increase in the backlog of elective surgery cases. The aim of the study was to retrospectively investigate the pandemic's impact on the urologic oncology surgical activity of a high-volume center located in Milan, Italy. The number and type of procedures performed in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic was evaluated using 2019 data as control. Waiting times for each surgical procedure were compared, on a bimonthly basis, between the two different years. Overall, a 26.7% reduction in the number of urologic oncology surgeries between 2019 and 2020 was observed (2019: 720, 2020: 528). Both the main indication for surgery and the type of procedure performed significantly differed between 2019 and 2020 (all p < 0.0001), with a decrease in the number of radical prostatectomies and an increase in the number of radical cystectomies and radical nephrectomies/nephroureterectomies performed in 2020. Waiting time decreased by 20% between 2019 and 2020, with the most significant reduction seen after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (July-October 2020), in particular for partial nephrectomy and radical prostatectomy, possibly due to the underdiagnosis of cases. In conclusion, in accordance with recommendations by international urological societies on prioritization strategies for oncological procedures, a higher proportion of surgeries for high-risk tumors was performed in 2020 at our center at the expense of procedures for lower risk diseases; however, future implications for patients' prognosis still need to be determined.

Consultations for clinical features of possible cancer and associated urgent referrals before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: an observational cohort study from English primary care

Background

It remains unclear to what extent reductions in urgent referrals for suspected cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic were the result of fewer patients attending primary care compared to GPs referring fewer patients.

Methods

Cohort study including electronic health records data from 8,192,069 patients from 663 English practices. Weekly consultation rates, cumulative consultations and referrals were calculated for 28 clinical features from the NICE suspected cancer guidelines. Clinical feature consultation rate ratios (CRR) and urgent referral rate ratios (RRR) compared time periods in 2020 with 2019.

Findings

Consultations for cancer clinical features decreased by 24.19% (95% CI: 24.04–24.34%) between 2019 and 2020, particularly in the 6–12 weeks following the first national lockdown. Urgent referrals for clinical features decreased by 10.47% (95% CI: 9.82–11.12%) between 2019 and 2020. Overall, once patients consulted with primary care, GPs urgently referred a similar or greater proportion of patients compared to previous years.

Conclusion

Due to the significant fall in patients consulting with clinical features of cancer there was a lower than expected number of urgent referrals in 2020. Sustained efforts should be made throughout the pandemic to encourage the public to consult their GP with cancer clinical features.

Differences in the Impact of COVID-19 on Pathology Laboratories and Cancer Diagnosis in Girona

Introduction: The recent COVID-19 pandemic has compromised socio-health care, with consequences for the diagnosis and follow-up of other pathologies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on cancer diagnosis in Girona, Spain. Methodology: Observational study of samples received in two pathology laboratories during 2019–2020 (tertiary hospital in Girona and county hospital in Figueres). Date, sample type, and location and morphology were available. Samples were recoded to determine malignancy and grouped by location. Comparisons were made by calendar year and period of exposure to COVID-19. Results: 102,360 samples were included: 80,517 from Girona and 21,843 from Figueres. The reduction in activity in the pathology laboratories in 2020 compared to the previous year was 25.4% in Girona and 27.5% in Figueres. The reduction in cancer diagnoses in 2020 compared to 2019 was 6.8% in Girona and 21% in Figueres. In both laboratories, a decrease was observed in the diagnoses of neoplasms of the lip, oral cavity and pharynx, larynx, colon, rectum and anus, kidney and urinary system, melanoma, and central nervous system. A statistically significant higher probability of a sample received in the pathology laboratory displaying malignancy during COVID-19 was found (Girona: OR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.23–1.34; Figueres: OR = 1.10, 95% CI: 1.01–1.20) with respect to the COVID-19-free period. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a reduction in cancer diagnoses by pathology departments that varies according to tumor location and type of hospital. Despite this, the optimization of care resources and the recovery effort have partially reduced the impact of the pandemic in certain neoplasms.

Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 Epidemic on Lung Cancer Surgery in France: A Nationwide Study

Simple Summary

Few studies have investigated the link between SARS-CoV-2 and health restrictions and its effects on the health of lung cancer (LC) patients. This study aimed to assess the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on activity volume, postoperative complications and in-hospital mortality (IHM) for LC resections in 2020 at the national level in France. Our study shows a decrease in the volume of LC resections, especially during the first lockdown. We also show that only 0.43% of patients hospitalized for LC surgery during 2020 developed a SARS-CoV-2 infection, but this low rate is counterbalanced by a high IHM (21%) in these 51 patients. Our findings suggest that, even if the IHM is high, LC surgery is feasible during a pandemic provided that the general guidance protocols edited by the surgical societies are respected. Therefore, this study provides further arguments to encourage teams to test for COVID-19 prior to surgery and patients to be vaccinated.

Abstract

Few studies have investigated the link between SARS-CoV-2 and health restrictions and its effects on the health of lung cancer (LC) patients. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic on surgical activity volume, postoperative complications and in-hospital mortality (IHM) for LC resections in France. All data for adult patients who underwent pulmonary resection for LC in France in 2020, collected from the national administrative database, were compared to 2018–2019. The effect of SARS-CoV-2 on the risk of IHM and severe complications within 30 days among LC surgery patients was examined using a logistic regression analysis adjusted for age, sex, comorbidities and type of resection. There was a slight decrease in the volume of LC resections in 2020 (n = 11,634), as compared to 2018 (n = 12,153) and 2019 (n = 12,227), with a noticeable decrease in April 2020 (the peak of the first wave of epidemic in France). We found that SARS-CoV-2 (0.43% of 2020 resections) was associated with IHM and severe complications, with, respectively, a sevenfold (aOR = 7.17 (3.30–15.55)) and almost a fivefold (aOR = 4.76 (2.31–9.80)) increase in risk. Our study suggests that LC surgery is feasible even during a pandemic, provided that general guidance protocols edited by the surgical societies are respected.

Learning through a Pandemic: The Current State of Knowledge on COVID-19 and Cancer

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has left patients with current or past history of cancer facing disparate consequences at every stage of the cancer trajectory. This comprehensive review offers a landscape analysis of the current state of the literature on COVID-19 and cancer including the immune response to COVID-19, risk factors for severe disease, and impact of anticancer therapies. We also review the latest data on treatment of COVID-19 and vaccination safety and efficacy in patients with cancer, as well as impact of the pandemic on cancer care, including the urgent need for rapid evidence generation and real-world study designs.

[Explaining the age-adjusted excess mortality with COVID-19-attributed deaths from January 2020 to July 2021]

Hintergrund

Unsicherheiten in der Todesursachencodierung erschweren die Bestimmung der durch COVID-19 verursachten Mortalität. Dagegen ist die altersadjustierte Übersterblichkeit ein robuster Indikator für Auswirkungen der COVID-19-Pandemie auf die öffentliche Gesundheit. Die Übersterblichkeit spiegelt neben COVID-19-Sterbefällen aber potenziell auch negative Folgen der Maßnahmen zur Pandemieeindämmung wider.

Ziele

Diese Studie prüft, ob es in Deutschland von 01/2020 bis 07/2021 eine Übersterblichkeit gab, die nicht durch COVID-19 erklärbar ist, sondern für indirekte Effekte gesundheitspolitischer Maßnahmen auf die Mortalität spricht.

Methoden

Übersterblichkeitstrends im Zeitraum von 01/2020 bis 07/2021, jeweils in den Bundesländern sowie in den Kreisen von Rheinland-Pfalz, wurden auf Konsistenz mit COVID-19 zugeschriebenen Sterbefällen geprüft. Die erwarteten monatlichen Sterbefälle wurden auf Basis der Daten von 2015 bis 2019 vorhergesagt. Dabei wurden die Bevölkerungsstruktur, Lufttemperatur, saisonale Influenzaaktivität sowie zyklische und langfristige Zeittrends berücksichtigt.

Ergebnisse

In 232/304 (76,3 %) Monat-Bundesland- bzw. in 607/684 (88,7 %) Monat-Kreis-Kombinationen lag die COVID-19 zugeschriebene Mortalität innerhalb der 95 %-Vorhersageintervalle für die Übersterblichkeit. Die Rangkorrelation zwischen Übersterblichkeit und COVID-19-attribuierter Mortalität betrug für die Bundesländer 0,42 (95 %-Konfidenzintervall [0,31; 0,53]) und für die Kreise 0,21 (95 %-Konfidenzintervall [0,13; 0,29]).

Diskussion

Die gute Übereinstimmung der räumlich-zeitlichen Übersterblichkeitsmuster mit den COVID-19 zugeschriebenen Sterbefällen ist konsistent mit der Annahme, dass die Maßnahmen zur Eindämmung der COVID-19-Pandemie zwischen 01/2020 und 07/2021 nicht wesentlich zur Übersterblichkeit in Deutschland beigetragen haben.

Zusatzmaterial online

Zusätzliche Informationen sind in der Online-Version dieses Artikels (10.1007/s00103-021-03465-z) enthalten.

Predictors of poor precautionary practices towards COVID-19 among cancer patients

Objective: Our study goal was to evaluate the behavioral response and practices of cancer patients to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the Middle East and north Africa. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a validated anonymous 45-question survey administered via SurveyMonkey^® to cancer patients in 13 centers in Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco and Saudi Arabia. Results: During the study period (from 21 April to 30 May 2020), 3642 patients participated in the study. The majority of patients (84.81%) were worried about contracting the infection. The reported strict adherence to precautions included avoiding the following actions: hand-shaking (77.40%), hugging and kissing (82.89%), social gathering (90.09%), meeting friends (84.68%) and visiting markets (75.65%). In a multivariate analysis, patients with poor precautionary practices were about twice as likely to cancel their medical appointment or a treatment session. Conclusion: Improving cancer patients' knowledge of and adherence to precautionary measures is needed not just to reduce the risk of acquiring infection but also to minimize the interruption of their medical care.

The overall impact of COVID-19 on healthcare during the pandemic: A multidisciplinary point of view

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic globally changed the priorities of medical and surgical procedures. It has caused many healthcare systems to stop performing their routine screenings. Altering medical clinics to COVID-19 referral centers, lockdowns, and the public fear to refer to medical centers caused a significant reduction in the referral rate; especially in the elderly. This short review article highlights the transform in clinical practice during the post-COVID era and the need for future medical revolutions.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was separately performed by both authors. The articles published between 2019 and August 2021 were included in this study and selected according to a quality appraisal method.

RESULTS

We have summarized the possible corresponding changes in the diagnosis and treatment of all fields of medical care including internal medicine, surgical, and minor subcategories after the COVID-19 pandemic. We have also discussed the potential impacts of the pandemic on all these different categories and subcategories of medicine, including the outpatient setting and clinical work. We do believe that the lack of routine check-ups has led to an increase in the stage of disease in patients with a previously diagnosed problem. On the other hand, the dramatic change in the lifestyle of the population including restricted mobility and increased consumption of unhealthy food has caused metabolic syndrome and other new diseases that have not been diagnosed and properly managed.

CONCLUSION

Our findings revealed the urgent need for public health awareness. It indicated the need to carry out both psychological and screening approaches in the post-COVID era to not miss patients with a chronic disease and new cases who were undiagnosed during the COVID pandemic.

Changes in mortality patterns and place of death during the COVID-19 pandemic: A descriptive analysis of mortality data across four nations

BACKGROUND

Understanding patterns of mortality and place of death during the COVID-19 pandemic is important to help provide appropriate services and resources.

AIMS

To analyse patterns of mortality including place of death in the United Kingdom (UK) (England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland) during the COVID-19 pandemic to date.

DESIGN

Descriptive analysis of UK mortality data between March 2020 and March 2021. Weekly number of deaths was described by place of death, using the following definitions: (1) expected deaths: average expected deaths estimated using historical data (2015-19); (2) COVID-19 deaths: where COVID-19 is mentioned on the death certificate; (3) additional non-COVID-19 deaths: above expected but not attributed to COVID-19; (4) baseline deaths: up to and including expected deaths but excluding COVID-19 deaths.

RESULTS

During the analysis period, 798,643 deaths were registered in the UK, of which 147,282 were COVID-19 deaths and 17,672 were additional non-COVID-19 deaths. While numbers of people who died in care homes and hospitals increased above expected only during the pandemic waves, the numbers of people who died at home remained above expected both during and between the pandemic waves, with an overall increase of 41%.

CONCLUSIONS

Where people died changed during the COVID-19 pandemic, with an increase in deaths at home during and between pandemic waves. This has implications for planning and organisation of palliative care and community services. The extent to which these changes will persist longer term remains unclear. Further research could investigate whether this is reflected in other countries with high COVID-19 mortality.

Impact of COVID-19 on Radiation Oncology, an Austrian Experience

The COVID-19 pandemic has an unprecedented impact on cancer treatment worldwide. We aimed to evaluate the effects of the pandemic on the radiation treatment of patients in order to provide data for future management of such crises. We compared the number of performed radiotherapy sessions of the pandemic period from February 2020 until May 2021 with those of 2018 and 2019 for reference. At our department, no referred patients had to be rejected or postponed, nor any significant changes in fractionation schedules implemented. Nevertheless, there was a substantial drop in overall radiotherapy sessions in 2020 following the first incidence wave of up to −25% (in June) in comparison to previous years. For breast cancer, a maximum decline of sessions of −45% (July) was recorded. Only a short drop of prostate cancer sessions (max −35%, May) followed by a rebound (+42%, July) was observed. Over the investigated period, a loss of 4.4% of expected patients never recovered. The severe impact of COVID-19 on cancer treatment, likely caused by retarded diagnosis and delayed interdisciplinary co-treatment, is reflected in a lower count of radiotherapy sessions. Radiation oncology is a crucial cornerstone in upholding both curative treatment options and treatment capacity during a pandemic.

Red urine and a red herring - diagnosing rare diseases in the light of the COVID-19 pandemic

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has occupied the time and resources of health care professionals for more than 1 year. The risk of missed diagnoses has been discussed in the medical literature, mainly for common diseases such as cancer and cardiovascular events. However, rare diseases also need appropriate attention in times of a pandemic.

Case Report We report a 34-year-old woman with fever, pinprick sensation in her chest and thoracic spine, and dizziness after receiving the first dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination. The patient’s condition worsened with abdominal pain, red urine, and hyponatremia, needing intensive care admission. Syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone secretion (SIADH) was diagnosed. Vaccine-induced thrombocytopenia and thrombosis were ruled out. Acute hepatic porphyria was finally diagnosed, and the patient recovered completely after treatment with hemin.

Conclusion Currently, the focus of physicians is on COVID-19 and associated medical problems, such as vaccine side effects. However, it is important to be vigilant for other uncommon medical emergencies in medically exceptional situations that may shift our perception.

Impact of COVID-19 on non-COVID intensive care unit service utilization, case mix and outcomes: A registry-based analysis from India

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been responsible for over 3.4 million deaths globally and over 25 million cases in India. As part of the response, India imposed a nation-wide lockdown and prioritized COVID-19 care in hospitals and intensive care units (ICUs). Leveraging data from the Indian Registry of IntenSive care, we sought to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on critical care service utilization, case-mix, and clinical outcomes in non-COVID ICUs.  Methods: We included all consecutive patients admitted between 1 st October 2019 and 27 th September 2020. Data were extracted from the registry database and included patients admitted to the non-COVID or general ICUs at each of the sites. Outcomes included measures of resource-availability, utilisation, case-mix, acuity, and demand for ICU beds. We used a Mann-Whitney test to compare the pre-pandemic period (October 2019 - February 2020) to the pandemic period (March-September 2020). In addition, we also compared the period of intense lockdown (March-May 31 st 2020) with the pre-pandemic period. Results: There were 3424 patient encounters in the pre-pandemic period and 3524 encounters in the pandemic period. Comparing these periods, weekly admissions declined (median [Q1 Q3] 160 [145,168] to 113 [98.5,134]; p<0.001); unit turnover declined (median [Q1 Q3] 12.1 [11.32,13] to 8.58 [7.24,10], p<0.001), and APACHE II score increased (median [Q1 Q3] 19 [19,20] to 21 [20,22] ; p<0.001). Unadjusted ICU mortality increased (9.3% to 11.7%, p=0.015) and the length of ICU stay was similar (median [Q1 Q3] 2.11 [2, 2] vs. 2.24 [2, 3] days; p=0.151). Conclusion: Our registry-based analysis of the impact of COVID-19 on non-COVID critical care demonstrates significant disruptions to healthcare utilization during the pandemic and an increase in the severity of illness.

Identifying unmet non-COVID-19 health needs during the COVID-19 outbreak based on social media data: a proof-of-concept study in Wuhan city

Background

The occupancy of healthcare resources by the COVID-19 outbreak had led to the unmet health needs of non-COVID-19 diseases. We aimed to explore whether the social media information could help surveil and understand the characteristics of unmet non-COVID-19 health needs during the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan city.

Methods

This was an observational study based on social media data. The study period was set during the 3 months of the COVID-19 outbreak. Non-COVID-19 urgent and emergent health needs in Wuhan city were derived from Sina Weibo—one of China’s largest social media platforms. Lag Spearman correlation was used to investigate the epidemiological relationship between the COVID-19 outbreak and non-COVID-19 health needs. Patient’s primary diseases and needed care were annotated and categorized according to the International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision. The delay time in seeking help was calculated and compared.

Results

After screening 114,795 Weibo posts, a total of 229 patients with non-COVID-19 health needs were included in our study. There were significant correlations between the daily number of COVID-19 cases at a 10-day lag, deaths at a 5-day lag, and non-COVID-19 Weibo. The actual number of non-COVID-19 patients with urgent and emergent health needs was estimated to be about 6,966. Patients with non-COVID-19 health needs were skewed to those aged 50 to 70 years. The non-COVID-19 diseases were diverse, with 46.3% as non-neoplastic diseases and 53.7% as neoplasms. The most needed cares were palliative cancer care (22.7%), chemotherapy (18.8%), and critical care (17.0%). The median delay in seeking help was 3 days [interquartile range (IQR), 1 to 15 days] for acute care, and 18.5 days (IQR, 6 to 30 days) for cancer care.

Conclusions

Our preliminary findings in Wuhan city indicated that the social media data might provide a viable option to surveil and understand the unmet health needs during an outbreak. Those heterogeneous health needs derived from the social media data might inspire a more resilient healthcare system to address the unmet needs promptly.

Impact of COVID-19 on the Diagnosis and Surgical Treatment of Colorectal Cancer: A National Perspective

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Cancer management during the COVID-19 pandemic: Choosing between the devil and the deep blue sea

COVID-19 was declared a "Public Health Emergency of International Concern" in March 2020. Since then, drastic measures were implemented to reduce the virus spread. These measures prevented cancer patients from receiving prompt medical care. A delay in testing and treating cancer patients is thought to protect them from serious COVID-19 complications but exposes them at the same time to the risk of disease progression and cancer related mortality. Healthcare providers are therefore facing the dilemma of choosing between two unpleasant scenarios. To shed light upon the matter, we present in this review article, based on an extensive search of the literature, an overview of the delay in the management of cancer patients, possible contributors to this delay and its benefits and risks on cancer patients' health.

Effect of COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns on planned cancer surgery for 15 tumour types in 61 countries: an international, prospective, cohort study

BACKGROUND

Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction.

METHODS

This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index <20), moderate lockdowns (20-60), and full lockdowns (>60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926.

FINDINGS

Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16-30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77-0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50-0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80-0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54-0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays.

INTERPRETATION

Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.

Newly diagnosed cancer and the COVID-19 pandemic: tumour stage migration and higher early mortality

BACKGROUND

We compared the new outpatient clinic referrals during the first 10 months of the COVID-19 pandemic with the year before.

METHODS

We compared baseline characteristics of the 2208 new referrals in 2020 (n=922) and 2019 (n=1286) with Χ2 and Mann-Whitney U tests and calculated ORs with binary logistic regression. To evaluate the expected changes in the cancer survival secondary to stage migration, we used the 5-year survival data of Survival, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program 2010-2016.

RESULTS

The percentage of patients with inoperable or metastatic disease was significantly increased during the pandemic (49.8% vs 39%, OR: 1.553, 95% CI: 1.309 to 1.843, p<0.001). We observed a significant decrease in the percentage of patients diagnosed via the screening methods (18.8% vs 28.7%, OR: 1.698, 95% CI: 1.240 to 2.325, p=0.001). The 90-day mortality after the cancer diagnosis was significantly higher during the pandemic (10.5% vs 6.6%, OR: 1.661, 95% CI: 1.225 to 2.252, p=0.001). Due to the increased advanced-stage disease rate at first referral, significant decreases in 5-year survival rates were expected for breast cancer (-8.9%), colorectal cancer (-11.1%), cervix cancer (-10.3%) and melanoma (-7%).

CONCLUSION

We think that collaborative efforts are paramount to prevent the pandemic of late cancer diagnoses and ensure patient safety during the pandemic.

COVID-19 Presentation and Outcomes among Cancer Patients: A Matched Case-Control Study

Simple Summary

Cancer patients have been described in previous studies as having a higher risk of contracting COVID-19 and a higher risk of developing a severe form of the disease. In this study, we compared a group of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 within the Lyon area with a matched group of patients free of cancer and also hospitalized for COVID-19. Cancer patients and control patients were matched in order to have a similar age, gender, and other preexisting conditions. In this study, the risk of death was higher among cancer patients, but the intensity of care was lower (lower access to intensive care unit, shorter length of stay). The risk of death among cancer patients appears to be mainly driven by the severity of the infection and therapeutic limitations decided at admission.

Abstract

It has been suggested that cancer patients are at higher risk of contracting COVID-19 and at higher risk of developing a severe form of the disease and fatality. This study’s objectives were to measure the excess risk of mortality and morbidity of patients with cancer among patients hospitalized for a SARS-CoV-2 infection, and to identify factors associated with the risk of death and morbidity among cancer patients. All first cancer patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in the two main hospitals of the Lyon area were included. These patients were matched based on age, gender, and comorbidities with non-cancer control patients. A total of 108 cancer patients and 193 control patients were included. The severity at admission and the symptoms were similar between the two groups. The risk of early death was higher among cancer patients, while the risk of intubation, number of days with oxygen, length of stay in ICU, and length of hospital stay were reduced. The main factors associated with early death among cancer patients was the severity of COVID-19 and the number of previous chemotherapy lines. The outcomes appear to be driven by the severity of the infection and therapeutic limitations decided at admission.

COVID-19 and the impact on gynecologic cancer care

The COVID‐19 pandemic resulted in significant reconfiguration of gynecologic cancer services and care pathways across the globe, with a transformation of working practices. Services had to adapt to protect their vulnerable patients from infection, whilst providing care despite reduced resources/capacity and staffing. The international gynecologic cancer community introduced modified clinical care guidelines. Remote working, reduced hospital visiting, routine COVID‐testing, and use of COVID‐free surgical areas/hubs enabled the ongoing and safe delivery of complex cancer care, with priority levels for cancer treatments established to guide decision‐making by multidisciplinary tumor boards. Some 2.3 million cancer surgeries were delayed or cancelled during the first peak, with many patients reporting significant anxiety/concern for cancer progression and COVID infection. Although COVID trials were prioritized, recruitment to other cancer trials/research activity was significantly reduced. The impact of resultant protocol deviations on outcomes remains to be established. During the recovery healthcare services must maintain capacity and flexibility to manage future surges of infection, address the large backlog of patients with altered or delayed treatments, along with salvaging screening and prevention services. Training needs/mental well‐being of trainees need addressing and staff burnout prevented. Future research needs to fully evaluate the impact of COVID‐19 on long‐term patient outcomes.

This article reviews the global changes introduced to gynecologic cancer care due to COVID‐19, and their impact on services and patients. Key lessons are considered for the recovery and future.

Impact of the COVID-19 lockdown in France on the diagnosis and staging of breast cancers in a tertiary cancer centre

Objectives

Due to COVID-19, a lockdown took place between March 17 and May 1, 2020, in France. This study evaluates the impact of the lockdown on the diagnosis and staging of breast cancers in a tertiary cancer centre.

Methods

Our database was searched for all consecutive invasive breast cancers diagnosed in our institution during the lockdown (36 working days), during equivalent periods of 36 working days before and after lockdown and a reference period in 2019. The number and staging of breast cancers diagnosed during and after lockdown were compared to the pre-lockdown and reference periods. Tumour maximum diameters were compared using the Mann–Whitney test. Proportions of tumour size categories (T), ipsilateral axillary lymph node invasion (N) and presence of distant metastasis (M) were compared using Fisher’s exact test.

Results

Compared to the reference period (n = 40 in average), the number of breast cancers diagnosed during lockdown (n = 32) decreased by 20% but increased by 48% after the lockdown (n = 59). After the lockdown, comparatively to the reference period, breast cancers were more often symptomatic (86% vs 57%; p = 0.001) and demonstrated bigger tumour sizes (p = 0.0008), the rates of small tumours (T1) were reduced by 38%, locally advanced cancers (T3, T4) increased by 80% and lymph node invasion increased by 64%.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 lockdown was associated with a 20% decrease in the number of diagnosed breast cancers. Because of delayed diagnosis, breast cancers detected after the lockdown had poorer prognosis with bigger tumour sizes and higher rates of node invasion.

Key Points

• The number of breast cancer diagnosed in a large tertiary cancer centre in France decreased by 20% during the first COVID-19 lockdown.

• Because of delayed diagnosis, breast cancers demonstrated bigger tumour size and more frequent axillary lymph node invasion after the lockdown.

• In case of a new lockdown, breast screening programme and follow-up examinations should not be suspended and patients with clinical symptoms should be encouraged to seek attention promptly.

Adherence to guidance for prioritizing higher risk groups for breast cancer screening during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Ontario Breast Screening Program: a descriptive study

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer screening in Ontario, Canada, was deferred during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, and a prioritization framework to resume services according to breast cancer risk was developed. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of the pandemic within the Ontario Breast Screening Program (OBSP) by comparing total volumes of screening mammographic examinations and volumes of screening mammographic examinations with abnormal results before and during the pandemic, and to assess backlogs on the basis of adherence to the prioritization framework.

METHODS

A descriptive study was conducted among women aged 50 to 74 years at average risk and women aged 30 to 69 years at high risk, who participated in the OBSP. Percentage change was calculated by comparing observed monthly volumes of mammographic examinations from March 2020 to March 2021 with 2019 volumes and proportions by risk group. We plotted estimates of backlog volumes of mammographic examinations by risk group, comparing pandemic with prepandemic screening practices. Volumes of mammographic examinations with abnormal results were plotted by risk group.

RESULTS

Volumes of mammographic examinations in the OBSP showed the largest declines in April and May 2020 (> 99% decrease) and returned to prepandemic levels as of March 2021, with an accumulated backlog of 340 876 examinations. As of March 2021, prioritization had reduced the backlog volumes of screens for participants at high risk for breast cancer by 96.5% (186 v. 5469 expected) and annual rescreens for participants at average risk for breast cancer by 13.5% (62 432 v. 72 202 expected); there was a minimal decline for initial screens. Conversely, the backlog increased by 7.6% for biennial rescreens (221 674 v. 206 079 expected). More than half (59.4%) of mammographic examinations with abnormal results were for participants in the higher risk groups.

INTERPRETATION

Prioritizing screening for those at higher risk for breast cancer may increase diagnostic yield and redirect resources to minimize potential long-term harms caused by the pandemic. This further supports the clinical utility of risk-stratified cancer screening.

Mitigating the impact of COVID-19 on colorectal cancer screening: Organized service screening perspectives from the Asia-Pacific region

Colorectal cancer(CRC) is one of the most prevalent malignancies in the Asia-Pacific region, and many countries in this region have launched population CRC service screening. In this study, CRC screening key indicators, including the FIT(fecal immunochemical test) screening rate (or participation rate) and the rate of undergoing colonoscopy after positive FIT in 2019 and 2020, were surveyed in individual countries in the Asia-Pacific region. The impact of the pandemic on the effectiveness of CRC screening was simulated given different screening rates and colonoscopy rates and assuming the pandemic would persist or remain poorly controlled for a long period of time, using the empirical data from the Taiwanese program and the CRC natural history model. During the COVID-19 pandemic, most of the programs in this region were affected, but to different extents, which was largely influenced by the severity of the local pandemic. Most of the programs continued screening services in 2020, although a temporary pause occurred in some countries. The modeling study revealed that prolonged pauses of screening led to 6% lower effectiveness in reducing CRC mortality. Screening organizers should coordinate with health authorities to elaborate on addressing screening backlogs, setting priorities for screening, and applying modern technologies to overcome potential obstacles. Many novel approaches that were developed and applied during the COVID-19 pandemic, such as the risk-stratified approach that takes into account personal CRC risk and the local epidemic status, as well as new digital technologies, are expected to play important roles in CRC screening in the future.

[The Impact of Lockdown during the COVID-19 Pandemic on Care for Elective Patients (C-elective Study) - Results of a Multicenter Survey]

BACKGROUND

Due to the COVID-19-related lockdown regulations, surgical clinics had to cut down elective procedures. The impact of the cancellation and postponing surgery on patients is unclear.

METHODS

All patients from six hospitals with canceled surgery during the first lockdown (03/16-04/24/2020) were asked to answer a questionnaire.

RESULTS

In total, 225 patients took part. In 88 (39.1%) patients, the disease-related complaints changed, mainly towards an increase in severity (82.6%). That was especially true for hernia patients (44.4%). In 4% of the cases, there was a complication requiring surgery in the time interval between the original date of the operation and the interview. For about a third, the cancelation of scheduled surgery caused major administrative difficulties. Most of the patients (76.3%) understood the measures taken, though 40.4% of them considered that their indication was very urgent.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The overall complication rate was low, and patients agreed to the measures taken; however, especially hernia patients showed increasing symptoms and some acute incarcerations. It seems reasonable to monitor symptomatic patients closely, in order to prioritise them when surgical capacity is restricted.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer

Since late December 2019, the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its rapid international spread have posed a global health threat. The World Health Organization has declared the outbreak of COVID-19 as "public health emergency of international concern". COVID-19 not only brings tremendous pressure to the medical system but also brings new challenges to the global economy. The occurrence and development of cancer has always been an area of active research, and COVID-19 also has a long-lasting impact on the diagnosis, treatment, and research of cancer. In the context, we review the adverse effects of COVID-19 on the screening, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of cancer patients and the countermeasures in this situation, and provide solutions for improving the quality of life of cancer patients in the normalized prevention and control of COVID-19.

The Impact and Restoration of Colorectal Services during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A view from Oxford

Aim

The coronavirus pandemic has significantly disrupted the way we deliver healthcare worldwide. We have been flexible and creative in order to continue providing elective colorectal cancer operations and to restart services for benign cases during the recovery period of the pandemic. In this paper, we describe the impact of coronavirus on our elective services and how we have implemented new patient pathways to allow us to continue providing patient care.

Patients and Methods

Data on major colorectal elective resections were prospectively collected in an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) database. Data on the number of proctology cases and telemed appointments were collected from the hospital theatre information management system and electronic patient record system, respectively.

Results

During the pandemic, there was a complete shift towards cancer cases, with benign services and proctology cases being placed on hold. Hospital length of stay was reduced. We implemented earlier hospital discharge and more intense telephone follow‐up after elective major surgery. This has not resulted in an increase in postoperative complications, nor any increase in readmission to hospital. During the recovery phase, we have introduced a higher proportion of telemed consultations, including one‐stop telemed proctology clinics, resulting in straight to tests or investigations.

Conclusion

We have created a streamlined multidisciplinary pathway to reinstate our elective colorectal services as soon as possible and to minimise potential harm caused to patients whose treatment have been delayed. We anticipate many of these changes will be permanently incorporated into our clinical practice once the pandemic is over.

COVID-19 in gastroenterology: Where are we now? Current evidence on the impact of COVID-19 in gastroenterology

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has created unprecedented challenges in all fields of society with social, economic, and health-related consequences worldwide. In this context, gastroenterology patients and healthcare systems and professionals have seen their routines changed and were forced to adapt, adopting measures to minimize the risk of infection while guaranteeing continuous medical care to chronic patients.

OBJECTIVE

At this point, it is important to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on this field to further improve the quality of the services provided in this context.

METHODS/RESULTS/CONCLUSION

We performed a literature review that summarizes the main aspects to consider in gastroenterology, during the pandemic crisis, and includes a deep discussion on the main changes affecting gastroenterology patients and healthcare systems, anticipating the pandemic recovery scenario with future practices and policies.

Inequalities in the decline and recovery of pathological cancer diagnoses during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

The restructuring of healthcare systems to cope with the demands of the COVID-19 pandemic has led to a reduction in clinical services such as cancer screening and diagnostics.

METHODS

Data from the four Northern Ireland pathology laboratories were used to assess trends in pathological cancer diagnoses from 1st March to 12th September 2020 overall and by cancer site, sex and age. These trends were compared to the same timeframe from 2017 to 2019.

RESULTS

Between 1st March and 12th September 2020, there was a 23% reduction in cancer diagnoses compared to the same time period in the preceding 3 years. Although some recovery occurred in August and September 2020, this revealed inequalities across certain patient groups. Pathological diagnoses of lung, prostate and gynaecological malignancies remained well below pre-pandemic levels. Males and younger/middle-aged adults, particularly the 50-59-year-old patient group, also lagged behind other population demographic groups in terms of returning to expected numbers of pathological cancer diagnoses.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a critical need to protect cancer diagnostic services in the ongoing pandemic to facilitate timely investigation of potential cancer cases. Targeted public health campaigns may be needed to reduce emerging inequalities in cancer diagnoses as the COVID-19 pandemic continues.

Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on care of melanoma patients in Berlin, Germany: the Mela-COVID survey

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic imposes major challenges for care of cancer patients.

Objectives

Our aim was to assess the effects of the pandemic on treatment and appointments of patients with malignant melanoma based on a large skin cancer centre in Berlin, Germany, and identify reasons for, and impact factors associated with these changes.

Materials & Methods

Patients with melanoma treated from January 1^st 2019 received a postal survey with questions on impairment due to the pandemic, fear of COVID-19, fear of melanoma, changes in therapy and/or appointments, including reasons for the changes. Impact factors on postponed/missed appointments were examined using descriptive analyses and multivariate logistic regression.

Results

The response rate was 41.3% (n = 324; 57.4% males; mean age: 67.9 years). Among 104 participants currently receiving therapy, four (3.8%) reported treatment changes due to the pandemic. Postponements or cancellations of appointments occurred in 48 participants (14.8%), most frequently, at their own request (81.3%) due to fear of SARS-CoV-2 infection (68.8%). Current treatment was associated with a reduced chance of postponing/missing appointments (OR = 0.208, p = 0.003), whereas a high or very high level of concern for COVID-19 (OR = 6.806, p = 0.034; OR = 10.097, p = 0.038), SARS-CoV-2 infection among close acquaintances (OR = 4.251, p = 0.026), anxiety disorder (OR = 5.465, p = 0.016) and AJCC stage IV (OR = 3.108, p = 0.048) were associated with a higher likelihood of postponing/missing appointments.

Conclusion

Among our participants, treatment changes were rare and the proportion of missed/delayed appointments was rather small. The main reasons for delays/cancellations of appointments were anxiety and concern for COVID-19.

Supplementary data

Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at doi:10.1684/ejd.2021.4098.

Table S1. Disease and treatment characteristics and their association with postponed/missed appointments.

Table S2. Treatment changes or postponement due to the pandemic.

Table S3. Comorbidities and their association with postponed/missed appointments.

Fig. S1. Number of new SARS-CoV-2 infections per day in Germany and Berlin between February 1^st 2020 and July 1^st 2020.

SafeFit Trial: virtual clinics to deliver a multimodal intervention to improve psychological and physical well-being in people with cancer. Protocol of a COVID-19 targeted non-randomised phase III trial

INTRODUCTION

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic (caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus) on individuals with cancer has been profound. It has led to increased anxiety, distress and deconditioning due to reduced physical activity. We aim to investigate whether SafeFit, a multimodal intervention of physical activity, nutrition and psychological support delivered virtually by cancer exercise specialists (CES), can improve physical and emotional functionings during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A phase III non-randomised intervention trial, target recruitment of 1050 adults with suspected or confirmed diagnosis of cancer. All recruited participants will receive the multimodal intervention delivered by CES for 6 months. Sessions will be delivered 1-to-1 using telephone/video conferencing consultations. CES will work with each participant to devise a personalised programme of (1) physical activity, (2) basic dietary advice and (3) psychological support, all underpinned by behaviour change support.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Physical and emotional functioning as measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ-C30).

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

overall quality of life measured by EORTC-QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5L, health economics, patient activation, self-efficacy to self-manage chronic disease, distress, impact of COVID-19 on emotional functioning, self-reported physical activity, functional capacity and nutrition. Adherence to the intervention will also be measured and a process evaluation conducted.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained from the Health Research Authority (reference number 20/NW/0254). Results of this trial will be disseminated through publication of peer-reviewed articles, presentations at scientific conferences, and to the public and people with cancer in collaboration with our patient and public involvement representatives and partners.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04425616.

Impact of COVID-19 Related Lockdown on the Frequency of Acute and Oncological Surgeries-Lessons Learned From an Austrian University Hospital

Innsbruck Medical University Hospital, Austria, provides the highest level of care for a region of approximately 1.8 million people. During the early COVID-19 outbreak in spring 2020 surgical activity was drastically reduced with the prime goal of preserving hospital capacities, especially intensive care beds. We conducted a retrospective analysis of surgical activities performed at Innsbruck Medical University Hospital during the lockdown period from March 15 to April 14, 2020 and compared these activities to the same period during the previous 5 years. Total surgical activity was reduced by 65.4% compared to the same period during the previous 5 years (p < 0.001); elective surgeries were reduced by 88.7%, acute surgeries by 35.3% and oncological surgeries by 47.8% compared to the previous 5 years (all p < 0.001). This dramatic decrease in acute and oncological surgeries can most likely be ascribed to the fact that many patients avoided health care facilities because of the strict stay-at-home policy and/or the fear of contracting SARS-CoV-2 in the hospital. In view of future waves, the population should be encouraged to seek medical help for acute symptoms and to attend cancer screening programs.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on microbial keratitis presentation patterns

BACKGROUND

Microbial keratitis (MK) is the most common non-surgical ophthalmic emergency, and can rapidly progress, causing irreversible sight-loss. This study explored whether the COVID-19 (C19) national lockdown impacted upon the clinical presentation and outcomes of MK at a UK tertiary-care centre.

METHODS

Medical records were retrospectively reviewed for all patients with presumed MK requiring corneal scrapes, presenting between 23rd March and 30th June in 2020 (Y2020), and the equivalent time windows in 2017, 2018 and 2019 (pre-C19).

RESULTS

In total, 181 and 49 patients presented during the pre-C19 and Y2020 periods, respectively. In Y2020, concurrent ocular trauma (16.3% vs. 5.5%, p = 0.030) and immunosuppression use (12.2% vs 1.7%, p = 0.004) were more prevalent. Despite proportionately fewer ward admissions during the pandemic (8.2% vs 32.6%, p<0.001), no differences were observed in baseline demographics; presenting visual acuity (VA; median 0.6 vs 0.6 LogMAR, p = 0.785); ulcer area (4.0 vs 3.0mm2, p = 0.520); or final VA (0.30 vs 0.30 LogMAR, p = 0.990). Whilst the overall rates of culture positivity were similar in Y2020 and pre-C19 (49.0% vs. 54.7%, p = 0.520), there were differences in the cultures isolated, with a lower rate of poly-microbial cultures in Y2020 (8.3% vs. 31.3%, p = 0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient characteristics, MK severity and final visual outcomes did not appear to be affected in the first UK lockdown, despite fewer patients being admitted for care. Concurrent trauma and systemic immunosuppression use were greater than in previous years. The difference in spectra of isolated organisms may relate to behavioural changes, such as increased hand hygiene.

Higher severity and risk of in-hospital mortality for COVID-19 patients with cancer during the year 2020 in Brazil: A countrywide analysis of secondary data

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and cancer are serious public health problems worldwide. However, little is known about the risk factors of in-hospital mortality among COVID-19 patients with and without cancer in Brazil. The objective of this study was to evaluate the risk factors of in-hospital mortality among COVID-19 patients with and without cancer and to compare mortality according to gender and topography during the year 2020 in Brazil.

METHODS

This was a secondary data study of hospitalized adult patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 by real-time polymerase chain reaction testing in Brazil. The data were collected from the Influenza Epidemiological Surveillance Information System.

RESULTS

This study analyzed data from 322,817 patients. The prevalence of cancer in patients with COVID-19 was 2.3%. COVID-19 patients with neurological diseases and cancer had the most lethal comorbidities in both sexes. COVID-19 patients with cancer were more likely to be older (median age, 67 vs 62 years; P < .001), to have a longer hospital stay (13.1 vs 11.5 days; P < .001), to be admitted to the intensive care unit (45.3% vs 39.6%; P < .001), to receive more invasive mechanical ventilation (27.1% vs 21.9%), and to have a higher risk of death (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.83-2.06; P < .001) than those without cancer. Patients with hematological neoplasia (aOR, 2.85; 95% CI, 2.41-3.38; P < .001) had a higher risk of mortality than those with solid tumors (aOR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.72-1.95; P < .001) in both sexes.

CONCLUSIONS

Brazilian COVID-19 patients with cancer have higher disease severity and a higher risk of mortality than those without cancer.