Mortality Among Adults With Cancer Undergoing Chemotherapy or Immunotherapy and Infected With COVID-19

Managing and treating COVID-19 in patients with hematological malignancies: a narrative review and expert insights

Patients with hematologic malignancies (HMs) are at a significantly higher risk of contracting COVID-19 and experiencing severe outcomes compared to individuals without HMs. This heightened risk is influenced by various factors, including the underlying malignancy, immunosuppressive treatments, and patient-related factors. Notably, immunosuppressive regimens commonly used for HM treatment can lead to the depletion of B cells and T cells, which is associated with increased COVID-19-related complications and mortality in these patients. As the pandemic transitions into an endemic state, it remains crucial to acknowledge and address the ongoing risk for individuals with HMs. In this review, we aim to summarize the current evidence to enhance our understanding of the impact of HMs on COVID-19 risks and outcomes, identify particularly vulnerable individuals, and emphasize the need for specialized clinical attention and management. Furthermore, the impaired immune response to COVID-19 vaccination observed in these patients underscores the importance of implementing additional mitigation strategies. This may include targeted prophylaxis and treatment with antivirals and monoclonal antibodies as indicated. To provide practical guidance and considerations, we present two illustrative cases to highlight the real-life challenges faced by physicians caring for patients with HMs, emphasizing the need for individualized management based on disease severity, type, and the unique circumstances of each patient.

Safety and efficacy of tixagevimab/cilgavimab for pre-exposure prophylaxis in kidney transplant recipients: a multicenter retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Immunocompromised patients show an impaired vaccine response and remain at high risk of severe COVID-19, despite vaccination. Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been developed for prophylaxis and treatment. The combination tixagevimab/cilgavimab (AZD7442) has been authorized for emergency use as pre-exposure prophylaxis for COVID-19, but data on safety and efficacy in kidney transplant recipients during the Omicron period are limited.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study including 253 kidney transplant recipients, of whom 98 were treated with tixagevimab/cilgavimab 150 mg/150 mg and 155 who received only four doses of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine.

RESULTS

Only 13.3% of patients developed SARS-CoV-2 infection after the administration of tixagevimab/cilgavimab; in comparison, 34.2% of patients had been infected after the fourth dose of vaccine (p = 0.00013). Most infected patients in the AZD7442 group remained asymptomatic (92.3% vs 54.7%), 7.7% had mild symptoms and none had severe disease, need for hospitalization or died, while in the control group, 9.4% of patients had moderate or severe disease (p = 0.04). Using Kaplan-Meier curves we demonstrated that the controls presented early infection compared to the AZD7442 group (p = 0.000014). No changes in eGFR or proteinuria, assessed before and after the administration, were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, our study showed that tixagevimab/cilgavimab 150/150 mg is effective and safe in preventing infection and severe disease when administered to patients with weak or no response to COVID-19 vaccine.

Glioblastoma patients' survival and its relevant risk factors during the pre-COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 pandemic: real-world cohort study in the USA and China

BACKGROUND

Although the COVID-19 pandemic has exerted potential impact on patients with glioblastomas (GBMs), it remains unclear whether the survival and its related risk factors of GBM patients would be altered or not during the period spanning from pre-COVID-19 to post-COVID-19 pandemic era. This study aimed to clarify the important issues above.

METHODS

Two observational cohorts were utilized, including the nationwide American cohort from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End-Results (SEER) and the Chinese glioblastoma cohort (CGC) at our institution during 2018-2020. Demographics, tumour features, treatment regimens and clinical outcomes were collected. Cox regression model, competing risk model, and subgroup and sensitivity analysis were used to dynamically estimate the survival and its relevant risk factors over different diagnosis years from the pre-COVID-19 (2018 and 2019) to post-COVID-19 (2020) pandemic. Causal mediation analysis was further adopted to explore the potential relationship between risk factors and mortality.

RESULTS

This study included 11321 GBM cases in SEER and 226 GBM patients in CGC, respectively. Instead of the diagnostic years of 2018-2020, the prognostic risk factors, such as advanced age, bilateral tumour and absence of comprehensive therapy (surgery combined with chemoradiotherapy), were identified to persistently affect GBM survival independently during the period from 2018 to 2020 in the SEER cohort (all P < 0.05). In CGC, lack of comprehensive therapy for GBM patients were restated as survival risk factors during the same timeframe. Causal mediation analysis showed that the effect of comprehensive therapy on all-cause mortality played a determinant role (direct effect value -0.227, 95% CI -0.248 to -0.207), which was partially mediated by age (9.11%) rather than tumour laterality.

CONCLUSIONS

As the timeframe shifted from pre-COVID-19 to post-COVID-19 pandemic, survival of GBM patients remained stable, yet advanced age, bilateral tumours, and passive treatment continuingly impacted GBM survival. It is necessary to optimize the comprehensive treatment for GBM patients even in the post-pandemic era.

Effect of anti-COVID-19 drugs on patients with cancer

The clinical treatment of patients with cancer who are also diagnosed with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been a challenging issue since the outbreak of COVID-19. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the effects of commonly used drugs for treating COVID-19 in patients with cancer. Hence, this review aims to provide a reference for the clinical treatment of patients with cancer to minimize the losses caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study, we also focused on the relationship between COVID-19, commonly used drugs for treating COVID-19, and cancer. We specifically investigated the effect of these drugs on tumor cell proliferation, migration, invasion, and apoptosis. The potential mechanisms of action of these drugs were discussed and evaluated. We found that most of these drugs showed inhibitory effects on tumors, and only in a few cases had cancer-promoting effects. Furthermore, inappropriate usage of these drugs may lead to irreversible kidney and heart damage. Finally, we have clarified the use of different drugs, which can provide useful guidance for the clinical treatment of cancer patients diagnosed with COVID-19.

Previous immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy is associated with decreased COVID-19-related hospitalizations and complications in patients with cancer: Results of a propensity-matched analysis of the OnCovid registry

OBJECTIVES

To date, studies have not provided definitive answers regarding whether previous immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment alters outcomes for cancer patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

The OnCovid registry (NCT04393974) was searched from February 27, 2020, to January 31, 2022, for patients who received systemic anti-cancer therapy in the 4 weeks before laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis. Propensity-score matching using country, vaccination status, primary tumor type, sex, age, comorbidity burden, tumor stage, and remission status investigated differences in predefined clinical outcomes comparing those who had or had not received ICIs.

RESULTS

Of 3523 patients screened, 137 ICI-only and 1378 non-ICI met inclusion criteria. Before matching, ICI patients were older, male, enrolled at centers in Italy, and had histories of smoking, thoracic cancers, advanced cancer stages, and active malignancies (P ≤0.02). After matching, there were 120 ICI and 322 non-ICI patients. ICI patients had no differences (odds ratio: 95% CI) in presenting COVID-19 symptoms (0.69: 0.37-1.28), receipt of COVID-specific therapy (0.88: 0.54-1.41), 14-day (0.95: 0.56-1.61), or 28-day (0.79: 0.48-1.29) mortalities. However, ICI patients required less COVID-19-related hospitalization (0.37: 0.21-0.67) and oxygen therapy (0.51: 0.31-0.83) and developed fewer complications (0.57: 0.36-0.92).

CONCLUSION

In this propensity-score matched analysis, previous ICI therapy did not worsen and potentially improved COVID-19 outcomes in patients with cancer.

Current Technologies and Future Perspectives in Immunotherapy towards a Clinical Oncology Approach

Immunotherapy is now established as a potent therapeutic paradigm engendering antitumor immune response against a wide range of malignancies and other diseases by modulating the immune system either through the stimulation or suppression of immune components such as CD4+ T cells, CD8+ T cells, B cells, monocytes, macrophages, dendritic cells, and natural killer cells. By targeting several immune checkpoint inhibitors or blockers (e.g., PD-1, PD-L1, PD-L2, CTLA-4, LAG3, and TIM-3) expressed on the surface of immune cells, several monoclonal antibodies and polyclonal antibodies have been developed and already translated clinically. In addition, natural killer cell-based, dendritic cell-based, and CAR T cell therapies have been also shown to be promising and effective immunotherapeutic approaches. In particular, CAR T cell therapy has benefited from advancements in CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing technology, allowing the generation of several modified CAR T cells with enhanced antitumor immunity. However, the emerging SARS-CoV-2 infection could hijack a patient's immune system by releasing pro-inflammatory interleukins and cytokines such as IL-1β, IL-2, IL-6, and IL-10, and IFN-γ and TNF-α, respectively, which can further promote neutrophil extravasation and the vasodilation of blood vessels. Despite the significant development of advanced immunotherapeutic technologies, after a certain period of treatment, cancer relapses due to the development of resistance to immunotherapy. Resistance may be primary (where tumor cells do not respond to the treatment), or secondary or acquired immune resistance (where tumor cells develop resistance gradually to ICIs therapy). In this context, this review aims to address the existing immunotherapeutic technologies against cancer and the resistance mechanisms against immunotherapeutic drugs, and explain the impact of COVID-19 on cancer treatment. In addition, we will discuss what will be the future implementation of these strategies against cancer drug resistance. Finally, we will emphasize the practical steps to lay the groundwork for enlightened policy for intervention and resource allocation to care for cancer patients.

COVID-19 in Patients with Melanoma: A Single-Institution Study

We conducted a single-center, non-interventional retrospective study of melanoma patients with COVID-19 (1 March 2020 until 17 March 2023). The cohort was further divided into three groups according to the periods of SARS-CoV-2 variant dominance in Greece. We recorded demographics, comorbidities, vaccination data, cancer diagnosis/stage, types of systemic melanoma treatments, date of COVID-19 diagnosis and survival. We identified 121 patients. The vast majority (87.6%) had advanced disease (stages III or IV). A total of 80.1% of the patients were receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor-based therapies, 92.5% had asymptomatic/mild COVID-19 and 7.4% had moderate/severe/critical disease, while 83.5% contracted COVID-19 during the third period of the pandemic. Sixteen patients (13.2%) were hospitalized for COVID-19 with a median length of stay of 12 days (range: 1-55 days). Advanced age, heart failure, number of comorbidities (≤1 vs. >1), vaccination status and the time period of the infection correlated with more severe COVID-19, whereas only heart failure and time period were independently correlated with severity. The 30-day mortality rate after COVID-19 was 4.2%. With a median follow-up of 340 days post-COVID-19, 17.4% of patients were deceased. In this cohort of melanoma patients with COVID-19, the 30-day mortality rate was low. There was no association between melanoma stage, treatment receipt and type of treatment with COVID-19 severity.

The Impact COVID-19 Infection on Cancer Patients: A Tertiary Cancer Center Experience in Jordan

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients are at higher risk of serious complications of COVID-19. Few studies evaluated the impact of COVID-19 on cancer patients in low- and middle-income countries. Our study aims to evaluate the outcomes of COVID-19 infection in cancer patients treated at our institution.  Methods: Medical records of patients with a positive COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) between April 2020 and October 2020 were reviewed. Fisher's exact test and logistic regression analysis were employed to correlate various variables with mortality. Survival estimates were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

A total of 317 patients were included, with a median age was 55 years (range: 19-88). 82 (25.9%) had hematological neoplasms while the remainder had solid cancers. At the time of infection, 220 (69.4%) had active cancer, and 99 (31.2%) had received systemic anticancer treatment (SACT) within four weeks. Hospitalization was required for 101 (31.8%), 17 (5.3%) were admitted to the ICU and 50 (15.8%) died. Among patients with active cancer, SACT was delayed or discontinued in 140 (63.6%) patients.  In the entire patient cohort, low albumin (p=<0.001) and leucocytosis (p=<0.001) correlated with mortality within six months of COVID-19 infection. The six-month mortality rate in patients with active cancer was significantly higher in patients with hypertension (p=0.024), no recent SACT (0.017), hematological cancer (p=0.029), low albumin (p=<0.001), leucocytosis (p=0.002) and lymphocyte count of less than 500/µL (p=0.004). Recent chemotherapy was associated with better 6-month survival rates (78.8% vs 89.9%, p=0.012) in patients with active cancer, patients with solid cancers (95.9% vs 82.2%, p=0.006) and was non-inferior in patient with hematological neoplasms (72% vs 65.4%, p=0.519).  Conclusion: COVID-19 infection in our cancer patients was associated with significant morbidity and mortality and adversely affected their treatment. The decision to delay or discontinue SACT should be individualized, considering other risk factors for mortality.

Mortality of COVID-19 in patients with hematological malignancies versus solid tumors: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Cancer patients are more vulnerable to COVID-19 compared to the general population, but it remains unclear which types of cancer have the highest risk of COVID-19-related mortality. This study examines mortality rates for those with hematological malignancies (Hem) versus solid tumors (Tumor). PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for relevant articles using Nested Knowledge software (Nested Knowledge, St Paul, MN). Articles were eligible for inclusion if they reported mortality for Hem or Tumor patients with COVID-19. Articles were excluded if they were not published in English, non-clinical studies, had insufficient population/outcomes reporting, or were irrelevant. Baseline characteristics collected included age, sex, and comorbidities. Primary outcomes were all-cause and COVID-19-related in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included rates of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Effect sizes from each study were computed as logarithmically transformed odds ratios (ORs) with random-effects, Mantel-Haenszel weighting. The between-study variance component of random-effects models was computed using restricted effects maximum likelihood estimation, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) around pooled effect sizes were calculated using Hartung-Knapp adjustments. In total, 12,057 patients were included in the analysis, with 2,714 (22.5%) patients in the Hem group and 9,343 (77.5%) patients in the Tumor group. The overall unadjusted odds of all-cause mortality were 1.64 times higher in the Hem group compared to the Tumor group (95% CI: 1.30-2.09). This finding was consistent with multivariable models presented in moderate- and high-quality cohort studies, suggestive of a causal effect of cancer type on in-hospital mortality. Additionally, the Hem group had increased odds of COVID-19-related mortality compared to the Tumor group (OR = 1.86 [95% CI: 1.38-2.49]). There was no significant difference in odds of IMV or ICU admission between cancer groups (OR = 1.13 [95% CI: 0.64-2.00] and OR = 1.59 [95% CI: 0.95-2.66], respectively). Cancer is a serious comorbidity associated with severe outcomes in COVID-19 patients, with especially alarming mortality rates in patients with hematological malignancies, which are typically higher compared to patients with solid tumors. A meta-analysis of individual patient data is needed to better assess the impact of specific cancer types on patient outcomes and to identify optimal treatment strategies.

Risk factors for mortality among lung cancer patients with covid-19 infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection experience high mortality rates. The study aims to determine the risk factors for mortality in lung cancer patients with COVID-19 infection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Followed the PRISMA reporting guidelines, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were systematically searched to February 20, 2023, for studies of lung cancer patients with COVID-19 infection. The main outcome of interest was the risk factor for mortality. We also compared the mortality rate of those patients among different continents. A pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI was presented as the result of this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis of 33 studies involving 5018 patients showed that pooled mortality rate of lung cancer in COVID-19 patients was 0.31 (95% CI: 0.25-0.36). Subgroup analysis based on the continents showed significant difference of the mortality rate was observed between Asia and the rest of world (χ2 = 98.96, P < 0.01). Older age (SMD: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.09-0.40, P < 0.01), advanced lung cancer (RR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.04-1.26, P < 0.01), coexisting comorbidities such as hypertension (RR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.01-1.35, P = 0.04) and cardiovascular disease (RR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.03-1.91, P = 0.03) were associated with higher risk of mortality rate in those patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings of this meta-analysis confirms an increased risk of mortality in lung cancer patients with COVID-19 infection, whose risk factors for these patients appear to be exacerbated by older age, advanced-stage lung cancer, and comorbidities such as hypertension and cardiovascular disease.

Comparison of adverse effects of anti-tumor therapy for breast cancer shortly after COVID-19 diagnosis vs. the control period

Background

COVID-19 is an acute infectious disease caused by SARS-CoV-2. The best time to restart antitumor therapy in breast cancer patients after SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown. This study aimed to evaluate treatment-related adverse events in breast cancer patients who received antitumor therapies within a short time after SARS-CoV-2 infection (observation) as well as before (control) and to provide safety data.

Methods

We conducted a self-controlled cohort study using the data from the Breast Disease Center of Peking University First Hospital. We identified patients who received antitumor therapy within 28 days after COVID-19 infection between December 20, 2022, and January 20, 2023. The primary outcome was treatment-related adverse events. McNemar's test was used to compare the incidence rate of adverse reactions between periods.

Results

We identified 183 patients with breast cancer, of whom 109 were infected with SARS-CoV-2 within 28 days before antitumor treatment and were included. In total, 28 patients (25.7%) received neoadjuvant therapy, 60 (55.0%) received adjuvant therapy, and 21 (19.3%) received advanced rescue therapy. None of patients required hospitalization for severe or critical COVID-19, but 15 patients (13.8%) still had sequelae of COVID-19 while receiving antitumor treatment. The most common adverse events were peripheral neuropathy (n = 32 [29.4%]), pain (n = 29 [26.6%]), fatigue (n = 28 [25.7%]), nausea (n = 23 [21.1%]), and neutropenia (n = 19 [17.4%]). There was no increased risk of overall treatment-related adverse events (n = 87 [79.8%] vs. n = 91 [83.5%]; p = 0.42) or serious adverse events (n = 13 [11.9%] vs. n = 12 [11.0%]; p = 1.00) from receiving antitumor therapy shortly after the diagnosis of COVID-19. We also found no increased risk in subgroup analyses, and no patients discontinued antitumor therapy due to adverse events.

Conclusion

Restarting antitumor therapy 2-4 weeks after having mild or moderate COVID-19 is a relatively safe strategy for breast cancer patients that does not increase the risk of treatment-related adverse events.

COVID-19 severity and cardiovascular outcomes in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer and cardiovascular disease

Background

Data regarding outcomes among patients with cancer and co-morbid cardiovascular disease (CVD)/cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) after SARS-CoV-2 infection are limited.

Objectives

To compare Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related complications among cancer patients with and without co-morbid CVD/CVRF.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study of patients with cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2, reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from 03/17/2020 to 12/31/2021. CVD/CVRF was defined as established CVD or no established CVD, male ≥ 55 or female ≥ 60 years, and one additional CVRF. The primary endpoint was an ordinal COVID-19 severity outcome including need for hospitalization, supplemental oxygen, intensive care unit (ICU), mechanical ventilation, ICU or mechanical ventilation plus vasopressors, and death. Secondary endpoints included incident adverse CV events. Ordinal logistic regression models estimated associations of CVD/CVRF with COVID-19 severity. Effect modification by recent cancer therapy was evaluated.

Results

Among 10,876 SARS-CoV-2 infected patients with cancer (median age 65 [IQR 54-74] years, 53% female, 52% White), 6253 patients (57%) had co-morbid CVD/CVRF. Co-morbid CVD/CVRF was associated with higher COVID-19 severity (adjusted OR: 1.25 [95% CI 1.11-1.40]). Adverse CV events were significantly higher in patients with CVD/CVRF (all p<0.001). CVD/CVRF was associated with worse COVID-19 severity in patients who had not received recent cancer therapy, but not in those undergoing active cancer therapy (OR 1.51 [95% CI 1.31-1.74] vs. OR 1.04 [95% CI 0.90-1.20], pinteraction <0.001).

Conclusions

Co-morbid CVD/CVRF is associated with higher COVID-19 severity among patients with cancer, particularly those not receiving active cancer therapy. While infrequent, COVID-19 related CV complications were higher in patients with comorbid CVD/CVRF. (COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium Registry [CCC19]; NCT04354701).

Were cancer patients worse off than the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic? A population-based study from Norway, Denmark and Iceland during the pre-vaccination era

Background

In a population-based setting, we investigated the risks of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 and developing severe COVID-19 outcomes among cancer patients compared with the general population.

Methods

In nationwide cohorts, we identified all individuals in Norway, Denmark and Iceland who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 or had a severe COVID-19 outcome (hospitalisation, intensive care, and death) from March until December 2020, using data from national health registries. We estimated standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing cancer patients with the general population.

Findings

During the first wave of the pandemic, cancer patients in Norway and Denmark had higher risks of testing SARS-CoV-2 positive compared to the general population. Throughout 2020, recently treated cancer patients were more likely to test SARS-CoV-2 positive. In Iceland, cancer patients experienced no increased risk of testing positive. The risk of COVID-19-related hospitalisation was higher among cancer patients diagnosed within one year of hospitalisation (Norway: SIR = 2.43, 95% CI 1.89-3.09; Denmark: 2.23, 1.96-2.54) and within five years (Norway: 1.58, 1.35-1.83; Denmark: 1.54, 1.42-1.66). Risks were higher in recently treated cancer patients and in those diagnosed with haematologic malignancies, colorectal or lung cancer. Risks of COVID-19-related intensive care and death were higher among cancer patients.

Interpretation

Cancer patients were at increased risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the first pandemic wave when testing availability was limited, while relative risks of severe COVID-19 outcomes remained increased in cancer patients throughout 2020. Recent cancer treatment and haematologic malignancy were the strongest risk factors.

Funding

Nordic Cancer Union.

COVID-19 infection among patients with cancer in Australia from 2020 to 2022: a national multicentre cohort study

Background

The global COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately affected certain populations and its management differed between countries. This national study describes characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with cancer in Australia.

Methods

We performed a multicentre cohort study of patients with cancer and COVID-19 from March 2020 to April 2022. Data were analysed to determine varying characteristics between cancer types and changes in outcomes over time. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine risk factors associated with oxygen requirement.

Findings

620 patients with cancer from 15 hospitals had confirmed COVID-19. There were 314/620 (50.6%) male patients, median age 63.5 years (IQR 50-72) and majority had solid organ tumours (392/620, 63.2%). The rate of COVID-19 vaccination (≥1 dose) was 73.4% (455/620). Time from symptom onset to diagnosis was median 1 day (IQR 0-3), patients with haematological malignancy had a longer duration of test positivity. Over the study period, there was a significant decline in COVID-19 severity. Risk factors associated with oxygen requirement included male sex (OR 2.34, 95% CI 1.30-4.20, p = 0.004), age (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.06, p = 0.005); not receiving early outpatient therapy (OR 2.78, 95% CI 1.41-5.50, p = 0.003). Diagnosis during the omicron wave was associated with lower odds of oxygen requirement (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.13-0.43, p < 0.0001).

Interpretation

Outcomes from COVID-19 in patients with cancer in Australia over the pandemic have improved, potentially related to changing viral strain and outpatient therapies.

Funding

This study was supported by research funding from MSD.

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

PURPOSE

Although representing the majority of newly diagnosed cancers, patients with breast cancer appear less vulnerable to COVID-19 mortality compared with other malignancies. In the absence of patients on active cancer therapy included in vaccination trials, a contemporary real-world evaluation of outcomes during the various pandemic phases, as well as of the impact of vaccination, is needed to better inform clinical practice.

METHODS

We compared COVID-19 morbidity and mortality among patients with breast cancer across prevaccination (February 27, 2020-November 30, 2020), Alpha-Delta (December 1, 2020-December 14, 2021), and Omicron (December 15, 2021-January 31, 2022) phases using OnCovid registry participants (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04393974). Twenty-eight-day case fatality rate (CFR28) and COVID-19 severity were compared in unvaccinated versus double-dosed/boosted patients (vaccinated) with inverse probability of treatment weighting models adjusted for country of origin, age, number of comorbidities, tumor stage, and receipt of systemic anticancer therapy within 1 month of COVID-19 diagnosis.

RESULTS

By the data lock of February 4, 2022, the registry counted 613 eligible patients with breast cancer: 60.1% (n = 312) hormone receptor-positive, 25.2% (n = 131) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, and 14.6% (n = 76) triple-negative. The majority (61%; n = 374) had localized/locally advanced disease. Median age was 62 years (interquartile range, 51-74 years). A total of 193 patients (31.5%) presented ≥ 2 comorbidities and 69% (n = 330) were never smokers. In total, 392 (63.9%), 164 (26.8%), and 57 (9.3%) were diagnosed during the prevaccination, Alpha-Delta, and Omicron phases, respectively. Analysis of CFR28 demonstrates comparable estimates of mortality across the three pandemic phases (13.9%, 12.2%, 5.3%, respectively; P = .182). Nevertheless, a significant improvement in outcome measures of COVID-19 severity across the three pandemic time periods was observed. Importantly, when reported separately, unvaccinated patients from the Alpha-Delta and Omicron phases achieved comparable outcomes to those from the prevaccination phase. Of 566 patients eligible for the vaccination analysis, 72 (12.7%) were fully vaccinated and 494 (87.3%) were unvaccinated. We confirmed with inverse probability of treatment weighting multivariable analysis and following a clustered robust correction for participating center that vaccinated patients achieved improved CFR28 (odds ratio [OR], 0.19; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.40), hospitalization (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.69), COVID-19 complications (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.45), and reduced requirement of COVID-19-specific therapy (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.63) and oxygen therapy (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.67) compared with unvaccinated controls.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight a consistent reduction of COVID-19 severity in patients with breast cancer during the Omicron outbreak in Europe. We also demonstrate that even in this population, a complete severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination course is a strong determinant of improved morbidity and mortality from COVID-19.

Management of patients with multiple myeloma and COVID-19 in the post pandemic era: a consensus paper from the European Myeloma Network (EMN)

In the post-pandemic COVID-19 period, human activities have returned to normal and COVID-19 cases are usually mild. However, patients with multiple myeloma (MM) present an increased risk for breakthrough infections and severe COVID-19 outcomes, including hospitalization and death. The European Myeloma Network has provided an expert consensus to guide patient management in this era. Vaccination with variant-specific booster vaccines, such as the bivalent vaccine for the ancestral Wuhan strain and the Omicron BA.4/5 strains, is essential as novel strains emerge and become dominant in the community. Boosters should be administered every 6-12 months after the last vaccine shot or documented COVID-19 infection (hybrid immunity). Booster shots seem to overcome the negative effect of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies on humoral responses; however, anti-BCMA treatment remains an adverse predictive factor for humoral immune response. Evaluation of the immune response after vaccination may identify a particularly vulnerable subset of patients who may need additional boosters, prophylactic therapies and prevention measures. Pre-exposure prophylaxis with tixagevimab/cilgavimab is not effective against the new dominant variants and thus is no longer recommended. Oral antivirals (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir) and remdesivir are effective against Omicron subvariants BA.2.12.1, BA.4, BA.5, BQ.1.1 and/or XBB.1.5 and should be administered in MM patients at the time of a positive COVID-19 test or within 5 days post symptoms onset. Convalescent plasma seems to have low value in the post-pandemic era. Prevention measures during SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks, including mask wearing and avoiding crowded places, seem prudent to continue for MM patients.

The Scottish COVID Cancer Immunity Prevalence Study: A Longitudinal Study of SARS-CoV-2 Immune Response in Patients Receiving Anti-Cancer Treatment

BACKGROUND

Cancer and anti-cancer treatment (ACT) may be risk factors for severe SARS-CoV-2 infection and limited vaccine efficacy. Long-term longitudinal studies are needed to evaluate these risks. The Scottish COVID cancer immunity prevalence (SCCAMP) study characterizes the incidence and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination in patients with solid tumors undergoing ACT. This preliminary analysis includes 766 patients recruited since May 2020.

METHODS

Patients with solid-organ cancers attending secondary care for active ACT consented to the collection of routine electronic health record data and serial blood samples over 12 months. Blood samples were tested for total SARS-CoV-2 antibody.

RESULTS

A total of 766 participants were recruited between May 28, 2020 and October 31, 2021. Most received cytotoxic chemotherapy (79%). Among the participants, 48 (6.3%) were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by PCR. Infection rates were unaffected by ACT, largely aligning with the local population. Mortality proportion was not higher with a recent positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR (10.4% vs 10.6%). Multivariate analysis revealed lower infection rates in vaccinated patients regardless of chemotherapy (HR 0.307 [95% CI, 0.144-0.6548]) or immunotherapy (HR 0.314 [95% CI, 0.041-2.367]) treatment. A total of 96.3% of patients successfully raised SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after >2 vaccines. This was independent of the treatment type.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest on-going longitudinal real-world dataset of patients undergoing ACT during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. This preliminary analysis demonstrates that patients with solid tumors undergoing ACT have high protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection following COVID-19 vaccination. The SCCAMP study will evaluate long-term COVID-19 antibody trends, focusing on specific ACTs and patient subgroups.

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

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

Cancer, more than a “COVID-19 co-morbidity”

Patients with cancer represent a particularly vulnerable population at risk of adverse outcomes related to COVID-19. Collectively, the initial studies, including patients with and without cancer, confirmed that patients with cancer had a higher risk of complications and death related to COVID-19. Subsequent studies on patients with COVID-19 and cancer investigated patient and disease-related factors associated with COVID-19 severity and morality. Multiple interconnected factors include demographics, comorbidities, cancer-associated variables, treatment side effects, and other parameters. However, there is a lack of clarity on the contributions of any one factor. In this commentary, we deconvolute the data of specific risk factors associated with worse outcomes due to COVID-19 in cancer patients and focus on understanding the recommended guidelines to mitigate COVID-19 risk in this vulnerable population. In the first section, we highlight the key parameters, including age and race, cancer status, type of malignancy, cancer therapy, smoking status and comorbidities that impact outcomes for cancer patients with COVID-19. Next, we discuss efforts made at the patient, health system, and population levels to mitigate the effects of the ongoing outbreak for patients with cancer, including (1) screening, barrier and isolation strategies (2), Masking/PPE (3), vaccination, and (4) systemic therapies (e.g., evusheld) to prevent disease onset in patients. In the last section, we discuss optimal treatment strategies for COVID-19, including additional therapies for patients with COVID-19 and cancer. Overall, this commentary focuses on articles with high yield and impact on understanding the evolving evidence of risk factors and management guidelines in detail. We also emphasize the ongoing collaboration between clinicians, researchers, health system administrators and policymakers and how its role will be important in optimizing care delivery strategies for patients with cancer. Creative patient-centered solutions will be critical in the coming years, post the pandemic.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Frontline Pembrolizumab-Based Treatment for Advanced Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Pembrolizumab monotherapy or pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy has become an important frontline treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). To date, it remains unclear how the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic impacted the treatment outcome.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental study was conducted based on a real-world database, comparing pandemic with pre-pandemic patient cohorts. The pandemic cohort consisted of patients who initiated treatment from March to July 2020, with follow-up through March 2021. The pre-pandemic cohort consisted of those initiating treatment between March and July 2019.The outcome was overall real-world survival. Multivariable Cox-proportional hazard models were constructed.

RESULTS

Analyses included data from 2090 patients: 998 in the pandemic cohort and 1092 in the pre-pandemic cohort. Baseline characteristics were comparable, with 33% of patients having PD-L1 expression level ≥50% and 29% of patients receiving pembrolizumab monotherapy. Among those treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy (N = 613), there was a differential impact of the pandemic on survival by PD-L1 expression levels (p-interaction = 0.02). For those with PD-L1 level < 50%, survival was better in the pandemic cohort than the pre-pandemic cohort: hazard ratio (HR) 0.64 (95% CI: 0.43-0.97, p = 0.03). However, for those with PD-L1 level ≥ 50%, survival was not better in the pandemic cohort: HR 1.17 (95% CI: 0.85-1.61, p = 0.34). We found no statistically significant impact of the pandemic on survival among patients treated with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with an increase in survival among patients with lower PD-L1 expression who were treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy. This finding suggests an increased efficacy of immunotherapy due to viral exposure in this population.

Patients with advanced pancreatic and biliary cancer appear vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant: An observational study during the COVID-19 outbreak in Shanghai

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has spread rapidly across the globe. Cancer patients have a higher risk of severe infections and associated mortality than the general population. However, the lethal effect of Omicron-variant affection on advanced pancreatic and biliary cancer patients is still not clear. Herein, we designed an observational study to shed light on the influence of the Omicron variant on this so-called "King of Cancer" and improve management of these patients with COVID-19 in the future.

Methods

Omicron-infected patients with advanced pancreatic and biliary cancer were enrolled from 15 April to 31 May 2022. Four groups were set up in this study: Group 1, Omicron-infected cancer patients (N = 4); Group 2, non-infected cancer patients (N = 4); Group 3, infected non-cancer-afflicted subjects (N = 4); Group 4, non-infected non-cancer-afflicted subjects (N = 4). On Days 0, 7, and 14 after infection, the blood samples were collected dynamically from all subjects. The primary endpoints were disease severity and survival.

Results

At the endpoint of this observational study, Patient Nos. 2, 3, and 4 died separately on Days 11, 25, and 13 after viral infection. All of them had advanced cancer, with a death rate of up to 75%. Group 1 presented an overall T-cell exhaustion status compared with other groups. Group 1 had obviously lower T-cell populations and higher B-cell percentages and CD4⁺T/CD8⁺T ratios (P <0.05). Time-course cytokine monitoring results showed that IL-1β was significantly decreased in Group 1 (P <0.05) and generally kept at a low level without obvious fluctuation. IL-6 was markedly increased in infected cancer patients (P <0.01) but remained at a low level and had no apparent change during the whole infection process in non-cancer-afflicted subjects. Furthermore, several inflammatory parameter indexes indicated a tight association of Omicron infection with the disease course and prognosis of Omicron-infected cancer patients.

Conclusions

Advanced pancreatic and biliary cancer patients with Omicron infection have severe symptoms and poor outcomes. More attention, protective measures, and routine healthcare services should be recommended to these vulnerable populations in clinical practice during the pandemic in the foreseeable future.

Impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on lung cancer patients: A meta-analysis

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic poses a great challenge to the treatment of lung cancer patients.

Materials and methods

The PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched for studies published before March 15, 2022, and Stata 14.0 software was used to perform a meta-analysis with a random-effects model. The odds ratio (OR) along with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) was reported.

Results

Our meta-analysis included 80 articles with 318,352 patients involved. The proportion of lung cancer patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was 2.4% (95% CI: 0.02-0.03) prior to the Omicron variant outbreak. Among COVID-19 patients, those with lung cancer showed a higher mortality rate than those with other types of malignant solid tumors (OR = 1.82, 95% CI: 1.61-2.06) and non-cancer patients (OR = 4.67, 95% CI: 3.61-6.05); however, no significant difference was observed in the mortality rate between patients with lung cancer and those with hematologic malignancies (OR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.85-1.33). SARS-CoV-2 infection significantly increased the mortality rate in lung cancer patients (OR = 8.94, 95% CI: 6.50-12.31). By contrast, the all-cause mortality rate in lung cancer patients (OR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.69-1.57) and the proportion of patients diagnosed with advanced lung cancer (OR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.85-1.27) did not significantly change before and after the pandemic.

Conclusions

More attention should be paid on improving the health of lung cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 and Lung Cancer Survival: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: The outbreak of COVID-19 poses an unprecedented challenge to global public health. Patients with cancer are at a higher risk during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Patients with lung cancer and COVID-19 were compared to those without cancer and those with other malignancies for the main outcome of this study. The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in susceptibility, disease severity, and mortality between lung cancer patients and the general population. Methods: Using PRISMA reporting guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literature. The Cochrane Library database, PubMed, EMBASE, and PubMed Central were comprehensively searched for published papers until 31 May 2022. A pooled risk ratio (OR) with 95% CI was presented as the result of this meta-analysis. Results: We included 29 studies involved 21,257 patients with lung cancer and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Analysis data showed that mortality in patients with lung cancer was significantly higher than that in patients without cancer (HR = 2.00 [95%CI 1.52, 2.63], p < 0.01) or with other malignancies (HR = 1.91 [95%CI 1.53, 2.39], p < 0.01). In addition, we also observed a higher risk of severe infection in terms of life-threatening or required ICU admission/mechanical ventilation for lung cancer patients (HR = 1.47 [95%CI 1.06, 2.03], p = 0.02) than for patients with no cancer or other malignancies. Regarding lung cancer as a risk factor for acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection, we could not reach statistical significance (hazard ratio [HR] =2.73 [95%CI 0.84, 8.94], p = 0.1). Conclusion: Lung cancer represents an important comorbidity and modifies COVID-19 prognosis in terms of disease severity and mortality. More patients experience severe or even fatal events. Considering their inherent fragility, patients with lung cancer, and generally all oncological populations, should be treated more carefully during the COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19: Third dose booster vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough coronavirus infection, hospitalisations and death in patients with cancer: A population-based study

PURPOSE

People living with cancer and haematological malignancies are at an increased risk of hospitalisation and death following infection with acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Coronavirus third dose vaccine boosters are proposed to boost waning immune responses in immunocompromised individuals and increase coronavirus protection; however, their effectiveness has not yet been systematically evaluated.

METHODS

This study is a population-scale real-world evaluation of the United Kingdom's third dose vaccine booster programme for cancer patients from 8th December 2020 to 7th December 2021. The cancer cohort comprises individuals from Public Health England's national cancer dataset, excluding individuals less than 18 years. A test-negative case-control design was used to assess the third dose booster vaccine effectiveness. Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to compare risk in the cancer cohort relative to the general population.

RESULTS

The cancer cohort comprised of 2,258,553 tests from 361,098 individuals. Third dose boosters were evaluated by reference to 87,039,743 polymerase chain reaction coronavirus tests. Vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough infections, symptomatic infections, coronavirus hospitalisation and death in cancer patients were 59.1%, 62.8%, 80.5% and 94.5%, respectively. Lower vaccine effectiveness was associated with a cancer diagnosis within 12 months, lymphoma, recent systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) or radiotherapy. Patients with lymphoma had low levels of protection from symptomatic disease. In spite of third dose boosters, following multivariable adjustment, individuals with cancer remain at an increased risk of coronavirus hospitalisation and death compared to the population control (OR 3.38, 3.01, respectively. p < 0.001 for both).

CONCLUSIONS

Third dose boosters are effective for most individuals with cancer, increasing protection from coronavirus. However, their effectiveness is heterogenous and lower than the general population. Many patients with cancer will remain at the increased risk of coronavirus infections even after 3 doses. In the case of patients with lymphoma, there is a particularly strong disparity of vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough infection and severe disease. Breakthrough infections will disrupt cancer care and treatment with potentially adverse consequences on survival outcomes. The data support the role of vaccine boosters in preventing severe disease, and further pharmacological intervention to prevent transmission and aid viral clearance to limit the disruption of cancer care as the delivery of care continues to evolve during the coronavirus pandemic.

Antibody response to a third booster dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in adults with haematological and solid cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patients living with cancer are at a significantly increased risk of morbidity and mortality after infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). This systematic review aims to investigate the current available evidence about the immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccines in patients living with cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search was undertaken for studies published until March 1, 2022. A systematic narrative review was undertaken to include all studies that evaluated the efficacy of booster vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with cancer.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies encompassing 1205 patients with cancer were included. We found that a booster vaccine dose induced a higher response in patients with solid cancer as compared to haematological malignancies. Recent systemic anticancer therapy does not appear to affect seroconversion in solid organ malignancies, however, there is an association between B-cell depleting therapies and poor seroconversion in haematological patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Third booster vaccination induces an improved antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 in adults with haematological and solid cancer, relative to patients who only receive two doses. Access to vaccination boosters should be made available to patients at risk of poor immunological responses, and the provision of fourth doses may be of benefit to this vulnerable population.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO number CRD42021270420.

COVID-19 Diagnosis and Risk of Death Among Adults With Cancer in Indiana: Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Prior studies, generally conducted at single centers with small sample sizes, found that individuals with cancer experience more severe outcomes due to COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection. Although early examinations revealed greater risk of severe outcomes for patients with cancer, the magnitude of the increased risk remains unclear. Furthermore, prior studies were not typically performed using population-level data, especially those in the United States. Given robust prevention measures (eg, vaccines) are available for populations, examining the increased risk of patients with cancer due to SARS-CoV-2 infection using robust population-level analyses of electronic medical records is warranted.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper is to evaluate the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and all-cause mortality among recently diagnosed adults with cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of newly diagnosed adults with cancer between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2020, using electronic health records linked to a statewide SARS-CoV-2 testing database. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. We used the Kaplan-Meier estimator to estimate survival during the COVID-19 period (January 15, 2020, to December 31, 2020). We further modeled SARS-CoV-2 infection as a time-dependent exposure (immortal time bias) in a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for clinical and demographic variables to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) among newly diagnosed adults with cancer. Sensitivity analyses were conducted using the above methods among individuals with cancer-staging information.

RESULTS

During the study period, 41,924 adults were identified with newly diagnosed cancer, of which 2894 (6.9%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The population consisted of White (n=32,867, 78.4%), Black (n=2671, 6.4%), Hispanic (n=832, 2.0%), and other (n=5554, 13.2%) racial backgrounds, with both male (n=21,354, 50.9%) and female (n=20,570, 49.1%) individuals. In the COVID-19 period analysis, after adjusting for age, sex, race or ethnicity, comorbidities, cancer type, and region, the risk of death increased by 91% (adjusted HR 1.91; 95% CI 1.76-2.09) compared to the pre-COVID-19 period (January 1, 2019, to January 14, 2020) after adjusting for other covariates. In the adjusted time-dependent analysis, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an increase in all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 6.91; 95% CI 6.06-7.89). Mortality increased 2.5 times among adults aged 65 years and older (adjusted HR 2.74; 95% CI 2.26-3.31) compared to adults 18-44 years old, among male (adjusted HR 1.23; 95% CI 1.14-1.32) compared to female individuals, and those with ≥2 chronic conditions (adjusted HR 2.12; 95% CI 1.94-2.31) compared to those with no comorbidities. Risk of mortality was 9% higher in the rural population (adjusted HR 1.09; 95% CI 1.01-1.18) compared to adult urban residents.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings highlight increased risk of death is associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients with a recent diagnosis of cancer. Elevated risk underscores the importance of adhering to social distancing, mask adherence, vaccination, and regular testing among the adult cancer population.

Colorectal cancer in patients with SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) are more likely to develop severe course of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and experience increased risk of mortality compared to SARS-CoV-2 patients without CRC.

Objectives

To estimate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in CRC patients and analyse the demographic parameters, clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes in CRC patients with COVID-19 illness.

Methods

For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched Proquest, Medline, Embase, Pubmed, CINAHL, Wiley online library, Scopus and Nature for studies on the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in CRC patients, published from December 1, 2019 to December 31, 2021, with English language restriction. Effect sizes of prevalence were pooled with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Sub-group analyses were performed to minimize heterogeneity. Binary logistic regression model was used to explore the effect of various demographic and clinical characteristics on patient’s final treatment outcome (survival or death).

Results

Of the 472 papers that were identified, 69 articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis (41 cohort, 16 case-report, 9 case-series, 2 cross-sectional, and 1 case-control studies). Studies involving 3362 CRC patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 (all patients were adults) were analyzed. The overall pooled proportions of CRC patients who had laboratory-confirmed community-acquired and hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infections were 8.1% (95% CI 6.1 to 10.1, n = 1308, 24 studies, I² 98%, p = 0.66), and 1.5% (95% CI 1.1 to 1.9, n = 472, 27 studies, I² 94%, p < 0.01). The median patient age ranged from 51.6 years to 80 years across studies. The majority of the patients were male (n = 2243, 66.7%) and belonged to White (Caucasian) (n = 262, 7.8%), Hispanic (n = 156, 4.6%) and Asian (n = 153, 4.4%) ethnicity. The main source of SARS-CoV-2 infection in CRC patients was community-acquired (n = 2882, 85.7%; p = 0.014). Most of those SARS-CoV-2 patients had stage III CRC (n = 725, 21.6%; p = 0.036) and were treated mainly with surgical resections (n = 304, 9%) and chemotherapies (n = 187, 5.6%), p = 0.008. The odd ratios of death were significantly high in patients with old age (≥ 60 years) (OR 1.96, 95% CI 0.94–0.96; p < 0.001), male gender (OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.41–0.47; p < 0.001) CRC stage III (OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.02–1.05; p = 0.041), CRC stage IV (OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.17–1.2; p = 0.009), recent active treatment with chemotherapies (OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.5–0.66; p = 0.023) or surgical resections (OR 1.4, 95% CI 0.8–0.73; p = 0.016) and admission to ICU (OR 1.88, 95% CI 0.85–1.12; p < 0.001) compared to those who survived.

Conclusion

SARS-CoV-2 infection in CRC patient is not uncommon and results in a mortality rate of 26.2%. Key determinants that lead to increased mortality in CRC patients infected with COVID-19 include older age (≥ 60 years old); male gender; Asian and Hispanic ethnicity; if SARS-CoV-2 was acquired from hospital source; advanced CRC (stage III and IV); if patient received chemotherapies or surgical treatment; and if patient was admitted to ICU, ventilated or experienced ARDS.

COVID19 in hematological patients and telemedicine: lessons learned across Europe and the US

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To describe the state-of-the-art of telemedicine in hematology through the description of most relevant studies published in the pre-COVID19 and during the COVID19 era.

RECENT FINDINGS

Telemedicine has recently gained momentum in hematology due to the COVID19 pandemic. Due to a necessary improvement of domiciliary follow-up of patients during the pandemic and an increase in technologies able to offer telemedicine, the number of studies has increased in the last 2 years. Telemedicine showed the potential to improve the monitoring of both benign and malignant hematological diseases. Patients affected by thalassemias, hemophilias and/or myeloproliferative diseases were monitored successfully with telemedicine platform. For higher-risk patients such as high-dose chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation, better platforms are needed (e.g. use of wearable devices systems). Also, telemedicine showed to be useful for the follow-up of hematological patients with COVID19.

SUMMARY

Despite the clear potential advantages of telemedicine for the follow-up of hematological patients, more evidence is required before adopting this approach in larger cohorts of patients. Larger- and higher-quality studies are highly needed in this setting.

Fatal Outcome of COVID-19 Relapse in a Fully Vaccinated Patient with Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Receiving Maintenance Therapy with the Anti-CD20 Monoclonal Antibody Obinutuzumab: A Case Report

Few data are available regarding the effectiveness of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in immunocompromised patients. Vaccination may have a suboptimal efficacy in this population, in particular if patients are exposed to anti-B-cell therapy. We report the virological and clinical characteristics of a patient with follicle center lymphoma under bimonthly maintenance therapy with obinutuzumab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody. Despite three doses of BNT162b2 vaccine, the patient was infected by the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. After an initial period of clinical and molecular remission due to early therapy with sotrovimab, the patient experienced a fatal relapse sustained by the same viral strain.

COVID-19 and Cancer: Special Considerations for Patients Receiving Immunotherapy and Immunosuppressive Cancer Therapies

Patients with cancer generally have a higher risk of adverse outcomes from COVID-19, with higher age, male sex, poor performance status, cancer type, and uncontrolled malignant disease as the main risk factors. However, the influence of specific cancer therapies varies and raises concerns during the pandemic. In patients undergoing cancer immunotherapy or other immunosuppressive cancer treatments, we summarize the evidence on outcomes from COVID-19; address the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination; and review COVID-19 antiviral therapeutics for the patient with cancer. Despite higher mortality for patients with cancer, treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors does not seem to increase mortality risk based on observational evidence. Inhibitory therapies directed toward B-cell lineages, including monoclonal antibodies against CD20 and CAR T-cell therapies, are associated with poor outcomes in COVID-19; however, the data are sparse. Regarding vaccination in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors, clinical efficacy comparable to that in the general population can be expected. In patients undergoing B-cell-depleting therapy, immunogenicity and clinical efficacy are curtailed, but vaccination is not futile, which is thought to be due to the cellular response. Vaccine reactogenicity and toxicity in all groups of patients with cancer are comparable to that of the general population. Preexposure prophylaxis with monoclonal antibodies directed against the viral spike may provide passive immunity for those not likely to mount an adequate vaccine response. If infected, prompt treatment with monoclonal antibodies or oral small molecule antivirals is beneficial, though with oral antiviral therapies, care must be taken to avoid drug interactions in patients with cancer.

Development and Validation of a Predictive Nomogram with Age and Laboratory Findings for Severe COVID-19 in Hunan Province, China

Purpose

To identify more objectively predictive factors of severe outcome among patients hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Patients and Methods

A retrospective cohort of 479 hospitalized patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in Hunan Province was selected. The prognostic effects of factors such as age and laboratory indicators were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model. A prognostic nomogram model was established to predict the progression of patients with COVID-19.

Results

A total of 524 patients in Hunan province with COVID-19 from December 2019 to October 2020 were retrospectively recruited. Among them, 479 eligible patients were randomly assigned into the training cohort (n = 383) and validation cohort (n = 96), at a ratio of 8:2. Sixty-eight (17.8%) and 15 (15.6%) patients developed severe COVID-19 after admission in the training cohort and validation cohort, respectively. The differences in baseline characteristics were not statistically significant between the two cohorts with regard to age, sex, and comorbidities (P > 0.05). Multivariable analyses included age, C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, lactic dehydrogenase, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, urea, albumin-to-globulin ratio, and eosinophil count as predictive factors for patients with progression to severe COVID-19. A nomogram was constructed with sufficient discriminatory power (C index = 0.81), and proper consistency between the prediction and observation, with an area under the ROC curve of 0.81 and 0.86 in the training and validation cohort, respectively.

Conclusion

We proposed a simple nomogram for early detection of patients with non-severe COVID-19 but at high risk of progression to severe COVID-19, which could help optimize clinical care and personalized decision-making therapies.

Updates in Cancer Rehabilitation Telehealth

Purpose of Review

To describe the various uses of telehealth as it applies to cancer rehabilitation and to review recent findings since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Recent Findings

Telehealth has numerous applications in cancer rehabilitation including physiatry services, skilled therapies, exercise interventions, symptom management, and support groups. Numerous studies have shown that regular physician and skilled therapy services can be provided through telehealth platforms, though certain clinical situations may require in-person visits. Telehealth exercise-based interventions are feasible, safe, and can improve quality of life. Telehealth also may be an effective tool in symtom management and as a medium for support groups.

Summary

Telemedicine and telehealth platforms are effective tools in the field of cancer rehabilitation that not only provide increased safety and convenience for a burdened patient population but may also hold the potential to elevate beyond the current standard of care.