[Experience of care and daily life during national sanitary confinement in patients followed and treated in Cancer Control Centers: The BaroCov Inquiry]

Predictive factors of long-term follow-up attendance in very long-term childhood cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

Long-term follow-up (LTFU) clinics have been developed but only some childhood cancer survivors (CCS) attend long-term follow-up (LTFU).

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors that influence LTFU attendance.

METHODS

Five-year CCS treated for a solid tumor or lymphoma in Gustave Roussy before 2000, included in the FCCSS cohort (French Childhood Cancer Survivor Study), aged >18 years and alive at the date of the LTFU Clinic opening (January 2012) were invited to a LTFU visit. Factors associated with attendance at the LTFU clinic between 2012 and 2020 were estimated using logistic regression analyses. Analyses included different types of factors: clinical (tumor characteristics, cancer treatments, late effects), medical (medical expenses were used as a proxy of survivor's health status), social (deprivation index based on census-tract data relating to income, educational level, proportion of blue-collar workers, and unemployed people living in the area of residence), and spatial (distance to the LTFU clinic).

RESULTS

Among 2341 CCS contacted (55% males, mean age at study, 45 years; SD ± 10 years; mean age at diagnosis, 6 years; SD ± 5 years), 779 (33%) attended at least one LTFU visit. Initial cancer-related factors associated with LTFU visit attendance were: treatment with both radiotherapy and chemotherapy (odds ratio [OR], 4.02; 95% CI, 2.11-7.70), bone sarcoma (OR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.56-3.78), central nervous system primitive tumor (OR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.02-2.67), and autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (OR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.34-3.20). Late effects (OR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.31-2.20), highest medical expenses (OR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.22-2.22), living in the most advantaged area (OR vs. the most deprived area = 1.60; 95% CI, 1.15-2.22), and shorter distance from LTFU care center (<12 miles) also increased attendance.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who are apparently healthy as well as socially disadvantaged and living far away from the center are less likely to attend LTFU care.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Among 2341 adult childhood cancer survivors contacted between 2012 and 2020, 33% attended at least one long-term follow-up visit. Clinical factors related to attendance were multimodal treatment of first cancer (combining chemotherapy and radiotherapy), stem cell transplant, type of diagnosis (bone tumor and central nervous system primitive tumor), late effects (at least one disease among second malignancy, heart disease, or stroke), and highest medical expenses. In addition, the study identified social and spatial inequalities related to attendance, with independent negative effects of distance and social deprivation on attendance, even though the medical costs related to the long-term follow-up examinations are covered by the French social security system.

[Experiences of patients with cancer during the first COVID-19 lockdown: What was the impact on the patients' healthcare pathway, mental condition, and access to supportive care in cancer?]

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the organisation of the healthcare system. Very little data is available regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients' perceptions of their healthcare pathway. The objective of this survey was to evaluate cancer patients' perceptions of the impact of the first COVID-19 lockdown on continuity of care, their mental condition, as well as their access to Supportive Care in Cancer (SCC).

METHODS

Between June 2nd and 30th, 2020, an anonymous questionnaire was sent out to the patients who visited 17 healthcare establishments in the Centre-Val de Loire region.

RESULTS

Our survey questioned 861 patients, amongst which 839 were selected. The population was predominantly female (58%). Breast cancer was the most represented (27%). Approximately three patients out of four considered that their care was maintained during the lockdown. In total, 348 patients (44%) reported an altered mental status. Approximately 1/4th of patients benefited from SCC. More than half of the patients felt that SCC was not relevant to their situation, although 40% of these patients expressed mental issues.

CONCLUSION

Our survey highlighted a negative impact on patients' mental condition and a low use of SCC in spite of existing needs. This demonstrates the necessity of evaluating the patients' needs and offering adequate SCC at various stages of the healthcare pathway, as well as the need for a clearly identifiable offer for the healthcare professionals and the patients.

Experiences of patients and providers while using telemedicine in cancer care during COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative literature

Purpose

The objective of this meta-synthesis was to identify, appraise, and synthesize patients and provider’s experiences while using telemedicine in cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

The databases Medline, Embase, Cinahl, PsycInfo, Web of Science, and other related databases were searched. Reviewers followed the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) meta-aggregation method to identify categories and synthesized findings and to assign a level of confidence to synthesized findings. The listed quotations and the original author interpretations were synthesized using MAXQDA software.

Results

Nineteen studies were included in the meta-synthesis. Three synthesized findings emerged from 243 primary findings: telemedicine assists but cannot be a substitute for face-to-face appointments in a health care crisis and in the provision of routine care to stable patients with cancer, infrastructural drivers and healthcare provider’s support and attention affect patients’ experiences and feelings about telemedicine, and patients who use telemedicine expect their health care providers to devote enough time and consider emotional needs, the lack of which can develop a negative response. The methodological quality of the studies ranged between 4 and 10, and the overall level of confidence of the synthesized findings was determined to be low and medium.

Conclusion

The findings from this meta-synthesis gave a new insight to promoting the safe and evidence-based use of telemedicine during the current pandemic and future emergencies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-07415-6.

Cancer and COVID-19: ethical issues concerning the use of telemedicine during the pandemic

The lockdown imposed in France during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic wreaked havoc with access to healthcare. From March 2020 onwards, the oncologists of Foch Hospital, like many others at hospitals throughout the world, were obliged to adapt to the new conditions, including, in particular, the impossibility of seeing patients in classic consultations for the diagnosis and treatment of cancer. Patients with cancer are particularly susceptible to this new virus, due to their immune status, and this made it difficult to carry out standard hospital visits for these patients. Some patients refused to come to the hospital, whereas the doctors decided, for others, that consultation conditions at the hospital were not sufficiently safe, with sanitary measures that had yet to be precisely defined. Telemedicine was one of the adaptations adopted during this period. This mode of consultation was little used before the pandemic, for various reasons, and reimbursement was not automatic. This new approach proved to have limitations as well as advantages, as demonstrated by our empirical ethics research study, a retrospective qualitative survey of the doctors of the oncology and supportive care departments of Foch Hospital, performed during July 2021. The interview grid was based on the studies on telemedicine, oncology, COVID-19 and empirical ethics available at the time. Based on the experience gained in this domain during the first wave of the epidemic, which hit France between March and June 2020, we identified three eligibility criteria for consultations in telemedicine: the consultation concerned should not be the first consultation, the patient should be a known patient that the doctor trusts not to minimize the description of symptoms, and the results of the patient’s evaluations and examinations must be good. It may be appropriate to continue the use of teleconsultation in the future, provided that these criteria are respected.

Risk perceptions and health care use in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic in adults treated for childhood cancer

Purpose

During the COVID-19 pandemic, childhood cancer survivors (CCS) may have felt more at risk of having severe consequences of COVID-19 and therefore may have been more likely to defer their health care use. We aimed to assess the risk perceptions of CCS related to COVID-19 (perceived infection risk, perceived risk of experiencing a severe illness in the event of infection), and their forgoing of health care during the year 2020.

Methods

In December 2020, we interviewed through an online self-report questionnaire 580 5-year CCS participating in the French Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (FCCSS) cohort. Combining clinical and patient-reported outcomes, we studied predictors of perceived risks related to COVID-19 and forgoing health care.

Results

Overall, 60% of respondents stated that COVID-19 could have severe consequences for their health if infected. Survivors with a cardiovascular disease and those who felt more at risk of being infected were more likely to think that COVID-19 could have severe health consequences for them. Moreover, 30% of respondents seeking care declared they had forgone at least one medical appointment in 2020. Forgoing medical appointments was more common among CCS who reported a deterioration in their financial situation in 2020 and those who felt more at risk of being infected.

Conclusions

This study shows that a considerable proportion of survivors had forgone medical appointments because of the pandemic; forgoing care was more frequent among the most socioeconomically disadvantaged survivors.

Implications for cancer survivors.

This study presents data hitherto absent in the literature and suggests the need to develop telehealth to ensure appropriate long-term follow-up of CCS.

COVID-19 et modification des aides à domicile : étude prospective auprès de 100 patients suivis en CLCC

Contexte

Lors de l’épidémie de la COVID-19, les mesures de confinement ont été associées à des recommandations professionnelles pour la prise en charge des patients. Nous avons constaté auprès des patients suivis en service de soins de support que certains actes à domicile n’étaient plus effectués. L’objectif de notre étude est de déterminer l’impact du confinement sur les aides à domicile des patients atteints de cancer.

Matériels et méthodes

Cette étude observationnelle descriptive monocentrique et prospective a été réalisée en Hôpital de jour de soins de support du 20 avril au 15 mai 2020 auprès de 100 patients. Ils étaient interrogés sur les aides à domicile et leurs fréquences avant et après le confinement. Notre étude a reçu l’avis favorable du Comité d’éthique des hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg.

Résultats

Environ deux tiers des patients ont subi une modification de leurs aides à domicile. Un arrêt du passage d’un professionnel à domicile a concerné 40 % d’entre eux et une diminution de la fréquence, 10 % d’entre eux. Certaines populations ont été significativement plus touchées : les patients de statut OMS 3 et 4, les femmes, les patients vivant seuls et ceux atteints d’un handicap moteur. Un arrêt de la réalisation d’un acte habituellement réalisé par un professionnel à domicile a concerné 49 % des patients avec un report de ces tâches sur les patients ou leurs aidants.

Conclusion

Notre étude montre un impact fort du confinement sur les aides à domicile en dépit des recommandations émises sur la continuité des soins. Notre étude souligne l’importance de veiller à l’accès aux soins des plus vulnérables.

[Adapting to the SARS-CoV2 pandemic: Experience of the Curie Institute]

L’Institut Curie prend en charge exclusivement des personnes atteintes de cancer, considérées dès le début de la pandémie SARS-CoV2 comme particulièrement « vulnérables ». Cette pandémie, qui a surpris le monde médical, est venue exiger brusquement de l’Ensemble Hospitalier une réorganisation rapide et multimodale, tout en ayant un impact sur chacun à des degrés divers. Nous examinerons ici comment cet hôpital a fait face, dans le souci d’une nouvelle balance bénéfices-risques, en temps de plus grande incertitude médicale et de rareté de certaines ressources, pour ces malades « vulnérables » mais aussi leurs proches et les personnels. Nous dégagerons par thématique les aspects positifs et les difficultés rencontrées, et ensuite ce qui pourrait être utile à d’autres hôpitaux alors que la pandémie se poursuit.