Delay to elective colorectal cancer surgery and implications for survival: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Treatment delay significantly increases mortality in colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis

Delaying the initiation of cancer treatment increases the risk of mortality, particularly in colorectal cancer (CRC), which is among the most common and deadliest malignancies. This study aims to explore the impact of treatment delays on mortality in CRC. A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus for studies published between 2000 and 2025. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models with inverse variance method to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) for both overall and cancer-specific survival at 4-, 8-, and 12-week treatment delay intervals, with heterogeneity assessed through I2-statistics and publication bias evaluated using funnel plots and Egger's test. A total of 20 relevant studies were included in the meta-analysis. The analyses of all patients demonstrated a progressively increasing risk of 12-39% with longer treatment delays (4 weeks, HR = 1.12; 95% CI, 1.08-1.16; 8 weeks, HR = 1.24; 95% CI, 1.16-1.34; 12 weeks, HR = 1.39; 95% CI, 1.25-1.55). In particular, incrementally higher hazard ratios were observed for all-cause mortality at 4 weeks (HR = 1.14; 95% CI, 1.09-1.18), 8 weeks (HR = 1.29; 95% CI, 1.20-1.39), and 12 weeks (HR = 1.47; 95% CI, 1.31-1.64). In contrast, cancer-specific survival analysis showed a similar trend but did not reach statistical significance (4 weeks, HR = 1.07; 95% CI, 0.98-1.18; 8 weeks, HR = 1.15; 95% CI, 0.95-1.39; 12 weeks, HR = 1.23; 95% CI, 0.93-1.63). Treatment delays in colorectal cancer patients were associated with progressively worsening overall survival, with each 4-week delay increment leading to a substantially higher mortality risk. This study suggests that timely treatment initiation should be prioritized in clinical practice, as these efforts can lead to substantial improvements in survival rates.

The COVID-19 pandemic and clinical characteristics of colorectal cancer: a multicenter retrospective study

The spread of COVID-19 has led to numerous hospitals prioritizing case management and to delays in diagnosis and treatment. Consequently, many cancer patients have developed life-threatening complications during the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on colorectal cancer (CRC), including its clinical and pathologic characteristics. This multicenter cohort study was performed at six institutions in Korea and included a total of 3871 patients with CRC treated between March 2019 and February 2021. After exclusion of 211 patients who did not undergo surgery, the data of 3660 patients were compared 1 year before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The patients' baseline characteristics, CRC-related complications, perioperative outcomes including emergency surgery, R0 resection rates, stoma formations, postoperative complications, and pathologic outcomes were assessed. The number of patients decreased during the pandemic (- 18.0%, from 2127 to 1744), but the baseline characteristics did not differ. The pandemic group had greater disease severity given the presence of bleeding, perforation, and obstruction as complications (9.8% vs. 12.7%, P = 0.033). The proportion of patients who had open surgery (15.9% vs. 17.6%, P = 0.049), stoma formation (11.9% vs. 15.4%, P < 0.001), early postoperative complications (13.5% vs. 17.5%, P = 0.001), and adjuvant chemotherapy increased in the pandemic group (45.5% vs. 50.1%, P = 0.003). The clinical and pathologic features of CRC partly worsened during the pandemic. Healthcare providers and governments should prepare to encounter patients with CRC having poor clinical features for years and encourage people to participate in cancer screening programs. The Clinical Research Information Service (No. KCT0008063), January 2, 2023, retrospectively registered.

Differences in Surgical Cancer Care Delivery and Outcomes Between Safety-Net and Non-Safety-Net Hospitals in the United States: A Comprehensive Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Studies evaluating the association of safety-net hospitals (SNHs) with outcomes of surgical care in cancer patients have demonstrated mixed results. We sought to systematically investigate the association of SNH status with measures of surgical cancer care delivery and outcomes.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of the literature identified from the MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Risk of bias assessment was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute's tool. The findings were synthesized qualitatively.

RESULTS

Of the 1749 records identified, 33 retrospective studies were included, 79% of which investigated national databases. Risk of bias assessment revealed average score of 78%. Among studies assessing each outcome, lower likelihood of receiving appropriate surgical interventions in SNH patients was reported by 85%; longer intervals to surgery by 100%; and prolonged hospital stays by 73%. Most studies reported no differences in survival (65%) or readmission (67%). Results were mixed regarding complications and mortality. Patient characteristics and shortage of resources and interdisciplinary teams were frequently proposed factors for observed disparities.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer patients at SNHs may be less likely to undergo some surgical treatments and experience longer intervals to treatment but achieve largely comparable short- and long-term outcomes to non-SNH patients.

Impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on the number of colorectal cancer surgeries performed: analysis of a nationwide inpatient database in Japan

PURPOSE

This study examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of colorectal cancer surgeries performed in Japan.

METHODS

We selected patients who underwent colorectal cancer surgeries between January, 2017 and December, 2020 from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database. The COVID-19 pandemic was divided into three waves. We evaluated the changes in the number of surgeries performed for colorectal cancer during each wave, stratified by cancer stage using Poisson regression.

RESULTS

During the first wave, the rate ratio (RR) for stage III colon cancer decreased significantly (RR, 0.94), whereas those for stages 0 to II (RR, 1.01) and stage IV (RR, 1.04) were not different. During the second and third waves, the RR for stage 0 to II colon cancer decreased significantly (RR, 0.96), that for stage IV increased (RR, 1.09), and that for stage III was not different (RR, 0.97). During the first wave, the RR for stage 0 to II rectal cancer increased significantly (RR, 1.09), that for stage IV decreased (RR, 0.84), and that for stage III was not different (RR, 0.97).

CONCLUSIONS

The number of colorectal cancer surgeries changed during the pandemic and varied according to the stage of disease.

Longitudinal retrospective study of real-world adherence to colorectal cancer screening before and after the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA

Introduction

At-home stool tests are an increasingly popular practice for colorectal cancer screening, especially when access to healthcare facilities is challenging. However, there is limited information about whether stool tests provide sufficient coverage when patients must undergo repeat testing. This study evaluates repeat preventative stool tests over 2 year periods in a healthcare system with 51 hospitals and over 1000 clinics across seven western US states, before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

We conduct a real-world, observational, retrospective and longitudinal study based on electronic medical records. We measure the rate of repeat screening and mean delay in repeat screening among patients who receive an initial stool test. We estimate the changes in the likelihood of colorectal cancer screening using a Cox proportional hazard model.

Results

Our sample included 4 03 085 patients. The share of patients with an initial negative stool test who received a repeat screening ranged from 38% to 49% across different years. Among patients who received a repeat screening, there is a delay of 3 months on average. The volume of stool tests increased during the pandemic: the HR of screening after the onset of the pandemic to that before the pandemic was 1.18 (95% CI (1.15, 1.20), p<0.001).

Conclusions

Our findings show that less than 50% of patients received a repeat stool test, creating gaps in their screening coverage. The increase in stool tests during the pandemic is partly due to a substitution away from colonoscopies, underscoring the increasing importance of stool tests in CRC screening. Programmes that aim to increase CRC screening uptake should focus on repeated testing after an initial screening.

Preoperative COVID-19 and Postoperative Mortality in Cancer Surgery: A South Korean Nationwide Study

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the impact of preoperative COVID-19 on early postoperative mortality in patients undergoing time-sensitive cancer surgery.

METHODS

This retrospective, nationwide cohort study included adult patients who underwent various cancer (thyroid, breast, stomach, colorectal, hepatobiliary, genitourinary, lung, and multiple cancer) surgeries under general anesthesia in South Korea in 2022. Patients were grouped according to the duration from the date of COVID-19 confirmation to the date of surgery (0-2 weeks, 3-4 weeks, 5-6 weeks, and ≥7 weeks). Patients without preoperative COVID-19 also were included. Multivariable logistic regression analysis with Firth correction was performed to investigate the association between preoperative COVID-19 and 30-day and 90-day postoperative mortality. The covariates encompassed sociodemographic factors, the type of surgery, and vaccination status in addition to the aforementioned groups.

RESULTS

Of the 99,555 patients analyzed, 30,933 (31.1%) were preoperatively diagnosed with COVID-19. Thirty-day mortality was increased in those who underwent surgery within 0-2 weeks after diagnosis of COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-2.12; P = 0.038); beyond 2 weeks, there was no significant increase in mortality. A similar pattern was observed for 90-day mortality. Full vaccination against COVID-19 was associated with reduced 30-day (OR 0.38; 95% CI 0.29-0.50; P < 0.001) and 90-day (OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.33-0.46; P < 0.001) mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer surgery within 2 weeks of COVID-19 diagnosis was associated with increased early postoperative mortality. These findings support current guidelines that recommend postponing elective surgery for at least 2 weeks after the diagnosis of COVID-19.

The trends and outcomes of inflammatory bowel disease surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective propensity score-matched analysis from a multi-institutional research network

Background and Aims

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. Elective operations and surveillance endoscopies were postponed for IBD patients to preserve healthcare resources and to prevent the spread of COVID-19. This study aimed to describe the trends and outcomes of IBD surgery during the pandemic.

Methods

This was a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis using data extracted from TriNetX, a multi-institutional research database. IBD patients admitted for surgery were identified between March 2019 to February 2020 (prepandemic) and March 2020 to February 2023 (pandemic). The monthly volume of IBD surgical procedures was compared during the pandemic to the prepandemic period. After matching, the risk of adverse outcomes following IBD surgery was compared between the 3 years of the pandemic compared to the prepandemic cohort.

Results

There was a reduction in both elective and emergency IBD operations during the pandemic. These trends were not significant. After matching, the risks of returning to theaters and hospital readmission were comparable across the 3 years of the pandemic. In the first and second years of the pandemic, elective patients were at a greater risk of mortality (risk ratio [RR], 2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.160-3.448 and RR, 1.778; 95% CI, 1.003-3.150, respectively) and the emergency cohort had a higher risk of critical care admission (RR, 1.759; 95% CI, 1.126-2.747 and RR, 1.742; 95% CI, 1.131-2.682, respectively).

Conclusion

Our study highlights the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of IBD patients undergoing surgery. These results provide insights into the management of IBD surgery during times of crisis and can help guide decision-making and resource allocation for IBD patients requiring surgical intervention.

Delayed diagnosis, disease and secondary prevention, especially in young patients with colorectal cancer

<b>Introduction:</b> Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide and the second cause of death. Its incidence rate decreased by about 3% per year between 2011 and 2015, and mortality by 35% between 1990 and 2007. This improvement is a result of cancer prevention and early detection strategies through screening. The decline in cancer rates may have been due to a growing awareness of colorectal cancer in the Polish population. There was a discernible improvement in the quality of surgical treatment with time.<b>Aim:</b> The aim of the study was to determine the relationship between colonoscopy and the incidence of CRC, the incidence and family history of cancer and other intestinal diseases, as well as between the stage and time from first symptoms to the start of treatment.<b>Materials and methods:</b> A retrospective analysis of the records of patients with CRC treated surgically between 1995 and 2005 at the Department of General, Oncological, and Gastroenterological Surgery in Krakow and a diagnostic survey method were used.<b>Results:</b> There was a statistically significant relationship between the performance of colonoscopy and the incidence of CRC (P<0.001). There was no correlation between CRC and the incidence of cancer and other bowel diseases in the family, or between the stage and the time from first symptoms to the start of treatment. The length of time was long, usually up to 6 months, 1-3 years, and in some cases longer than 6 years.<b>Discussion:</b> Unfortunately, the incidence of CRC in young people under 50 years (EOCRC) has increased. Screening is of proven importance in reducing the incidence and mortality of CRC and every effort should be made to carry out as many of these screenings as possible. The time between diagnosis and treatment should also be kept as short as possible. Recommendations for the timeframe from diagnosis to treatment of cancer exist in many countries. In Australia, guidelines for an optimal care pathway suggest a timeframe of up to 7-9 weeks, similar to the National Health Service UK guidelines in the UK. Timeliness of treatment is an important factor in cancer care, to assess the consequences of delays and disruptions in oncology care.<b>Conclusions:</b> The incidence of CRC was lowest among those who had prophylactic examinations - colonoscopies. Studies on secondary prevention have confirmed that there was poor diagnosis in this area, even though there were cases of CRC in the immediate family, so it is worth educating the public and encouraging them to have colonoscopies and take care of their health. The long time between the appearance of the first clinical symptoms and the start of treatment, which was presented in the study, is unfortunately associated with a worse prognosis, as any delay in starting treatment for oncology patients is unfavorable.<b>Significance of the research for the development of the field:</b> The role of secondary prevention in the prevention of CRC and the need to educate the public to catch the first worrying signs of cancer and to consult a doctor are emphasized.

Digestive and breast cancer patients managed during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic: Short and middle term outcomes

BACKGROUND

The first wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Spain lasted from middle March to the end of June 2020. Spanish population was subjected to lockdown periods and scheduled surgeries were discontinued or reduced during variable periods. In our centre, we managed patients previously and newly diagnosed with cancer. We established a strategy based on limiting perioperative social contacts, preoperative screening (symptoms and reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction) and creating separated in-hospital COVID-19-free pathways for non-infected patients. We also adopted some practice modifications (surgery in different facilities, changes in staff and guidelines, using continuously changing personal protective equipment…), that supposed new inconveniences.

AIM

To analyse cancer patients with a decision for surgery managed during the first wave, focalizing on outcomes and pandemic-related modifications.

METHODS

We prospectively included adults with a confirmed diagnosis of colorectal, oesophago-gastric, liver-pancreatic or breast cancer with a decision for surgery, regardless of whether they ultimately underwent surgery. We analysed short-term outcomes [30-d postoperative morbimortality and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection] and outcomes after 3 years (adjuvant therapies, oncological events, death, SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination). We also investigated modifications to usual practice.

RESULTS

From 96 included patients, seven didn't receive treatment that period and four never (3 due to COVID-19). Operated patients: 28 colon and 21 rectal cancers; laparoscopy 53.6%/90.0%, mortality 3.57%/0%, major complications 7.04%/25.00%, anastomotic leaks 0%/5.00%, 3-years disease-free survival (DFS) 82.14%/52.4% and overall survival (OS) 78.57%/76.2%. Six liver metastases and six pancreatic cancers: no mortality, one major complication, three grade A/B liver failures, one bile leak; 3-year DFS 0%/33.3% and OS 50.0%/33.3% (liver metastases/pancreatic carcinoma). 5 gastric and 2 oesophageal tumours: mortality 0%/50%, major complications 0%/100%, anastomotic leaks 0%/100%, 3-year DFS and OS 66.67% (gastric carcinoma) and 0% (oesophagus). Twenty breast cancer without deaths/major complications; 3-year OS 100% and DFS 85%. Nobody contracted SARS-CoV-2 postoperatively. COVID-19 pandemic-related changes: 78.2% treated in alternative buildings, 43.8% waited more than 4 weeks, two additional colostomies and fewer laparoscopies.

CONCLUSION

Some patients lost curative-intent surgery due to COVID-19 pandemic. Despite practice modifications and 43.8% delays higher than 4 weeks, surgery was resumed with minimal changes without impacting outcomes. Clean pathways are essential to continue surgery safely.

Colorectal cancer: a comprehensive review of carcinogenesis, diagnosis, and novel strategies for classified treatments

Colorectal cancer is the third most common and the second deadliest cancer worldwide. To date, colorectal cancer becomes one of the most important challenges of the health system in many countries. Since the clinical symptoms of this cancer appear in the final stages of the disease and there is a significant golden time between the formation of polyps and the onset of cancer, early diagnosis can play a significant role in reducing mortality. Today, in addition to colonoscopy, minimally invasive methods such as liquid biopsy have received much attention. The treatment of this complex disease has been mostly based on traditional treatments including surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy; the high mortality rate indicates a lack of success for current treatment methods. Moreover, disease recurrence is another problem of traditional treatments. Recently, new approaches such as targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and nanomedicine have opened new doors for cancer treatment, some of which have already entered the market, and many methods have shown promising results in clinical trials. The success of immunotherapy in the treatment of refractory disease, the introduction of these methods into neoadjuvant therapy, and the successful results in tumor shrinkage without surgery have made immunotherapy a tough competitor for conventional treatments. It seems that the combination of those methods with such targeted therapies will go through promising changes in the future of colorectal cancer treatment.

Patient management after primary rectal cancer diagnosis. Special focus on surgical treatment for non-metastatic disease

Background: Rectal cancer is a public health priority. Primary objectives of this study were to evaluate the quality of care for non-metastatic rectal cancer using process and outcome indicators. Delay of management, length of stay and readmission rate, sphincter preservation, morbidity, number of examined lymph nodes, mortality, overall and disease-free survivals were evaluated. Secondary objectives were to estimate the relationship between possible predictive parameters for (1) anastomotic leakage (logistic regression), (2) overall or disease-free survivals (cox regression).Methods: We performed a retrospective study on 312 consecutive patients diagnosed with primary rectal cancer between 2016 and 2019. We focused on the 163 patients treated by surgery for non-metastatic cancer.Results: The treatment began within 33 days (range 0-264) after incidence, resection rate was 67%. Digestive continuity rate in lower, middle and upper rectum was 30%, 87% and 96%. Median of 14 lymph nodes (range 1-46) was analyzed. Length of stay and readmission rate were 11 days (range 3-56) and 4%, respectively. Within 90 postoperative days, clinical anastomotic leakage occurred in 9.2% of cases, major morbidity rate was 17%, mortality 1.2%. Multivariate analysis revealed that stoma decreased the risk of anastomotic leakage [hazard ratio: 0.16; 95% confidence intervals: 0.04-0.63; p = 0.008]. The 5-year overall survival after surgery was 85 ± 4%, disease-free survival 83 ± 4%. Patients with major complications, male gender and R1/R2 resection margin had a poorer prognosis.Conclusion: This work showed encouraging results in rectal cancer treatment in our institution, our results were in line with recommendations at the time.

Effect of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on colorectal cancer diagnosis and prognosis

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Our aim was to determine the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on the diagnosis and prognosis of colorectal cancer (CRC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective cohort study included individuals diagnosed with CRC between March 13, 2019 and June 20, 2021 across 21 Spanish hospitals. Two time periods were compared: prepandemic (from March 13, 2019 to March 13, 2020) and pandemic (from March 14, 2020 to June 20, 2021, lockdown period and 1 year after lockdown).

RESULTS

We observed a 46.9% decrease in the number of CRC diagnoses (95% confidence interval (CI): 45.1%-48.7%) during the lockdown and 29.7% decrease (95% CI: 28.1%-31.4%) in the year after the lockdown. The proportion of patients diagnosed at stage I significantly decreased during the pandemic (21.7% vs. 19.0%; p = 0.025). Centers that applied universal preprocedure SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing experienced a higher reduction in the number of colonoscopies performed during the pandemic post-lockdown (34.0% reduction; 95% CI: 33.6%-34.4% vs. 13.7; 95% CI: 13.4%-13.9%) and in the number of CRCs diagnosed (34.1% reduction; 95% CI: 31.4%-36.8% vs. 26.7%; 95% CI: 24.6%-28.8%). Curative treatment was received by 87.5% of patients diagnosed with rectal cancer prepandemic and 80.7% of patients during the pandemic post-lockdown period (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a decrease in the number of diagnosed CRC cases and in the proportion of stage I CRC. The reduction in the number of colonoscopies and CRC diagnoses was higher in centers that applied universal SARS-CoV-2 PCR screening before colonoscopy. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic has affected curative treatment of rectal cancers.

Neoadjuvant calcium electroporation for potentially curable colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The development of new perioperative treatment modalities to activate the immune system in colorectal cancer might have a beneficial effect on reducing the risk of recurrence after surgery. Calcium electroporation is a promising treatment modality that potentially modulates the tumor microenvironment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of the procedure in the neoadjuvant setting in localized left-sided colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS

The study included patients with potentially curable sigmoid or rectal cancer with no indication for other neoadjuvant treatment. Patients were offered calcium electroporation as a neoadjuvant treatment before elective surgery. Follow-up visits were conducted on the preoperative day before elective surgery, POD2, POD14, and POD30, with an evaluation of adverse events, impact on elective surgery, clinical examination, and quality of recovery.

RESULTS

Endoscopic calcium electroporation was performed as an outpatient procedure in all 21 cases, with no procedure-related complications reported. At follow-up, five adverse events were registered, two of which were classified as serious adverse events. Surgery was performed as planned in 19 patients (median time to surgery, 8 days), and the final two patients underwent surgery with a delay due to adverse events (14 and 33 days). No significant impact on the quality of recovery scores nor inflammatory markers were seen before and after calcium electroporation, nor baseline and POD30.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic calcium electroporation is a safe and feasible procedure in patients with potentially curable CRC. The study showed limited side effects and limited impact on the following elective surgical resection.

Inadvertent laparoscopic lavage of perforated colon cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic lavage for perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis has been grabbing the headlines, it is known that the clinical presentation of peritonitis can also be caused by an underlying perforated carcinoma. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of patients undergoing inadvertent laparoscopic lavage of perforated colon cancer as well as the delay in cancer diagnosis.

METHODS

The PubMed database was systematically searched to include all studies meeting inclusion criteria. Studies were screened through titles and abstracts with potentially eligible studies undergoing full-text screening. The primary endpoints of this meta-analysis were the rates of perforated colon cancer patients having undergone inadvertent laparoscopic lavage as well as the delay in cancer diagnosis. This was expressed in pooled rate % and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Eleven studies (three randomized, two prospective, six retrospective) totaling 642 patients met inclusion criteria. Eight studies reported how patients were screened for cancer and the number of patients who completed follow-up. The pooled cancer rate was 3.4% (0.9%, 5.8%) with low heterogeneity (Isquare2 = 34.02%) in eight studies. Cancer rates were 8.2% (0%, 3%) (Isquare2 = 58.2%) and 1.7% (0%, 4.5%) (Isquare2 = 0%) in prospective and retrospective studies, respectively. Randomized trials reported a cancer rate of 7.2% (3.1%, 11.2%) with low among-study heterogeneity (Isquare2 = 0%) and a median delay to diagnosis of 2 (1.5-5) months.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review found that 7% of patients undergoing laparoscopic lavage for peritonitis had perforated colon cancer with a delay to diagnosis of up to 5 months.

Three-Year Analysis of the Rectal Cancer Care Trajectory after the COVID-19 Pandemic

The global pandemic period from 2020 to 2022 caused important alterations in oncology care. This study aimed to describe the trends and variations in patient characteristics, comorbidities, and treatment approaches during this time in Romania. We conducted a retrospective database search to identify patients with rectal cancer who underwent surgical intervention between 2020 and 2022 and the year 2019, which served as a pre-pandemic period control. This study included 164 patients, with a yearly increase of approximately 10% in surgical interventions noted from 2020 (1709 interventions) to 2022 (2118 interventions), but an overall 34.4% decrease compared with the pre-pandemic period. Notable shifts were observed in the type of surgeries performed, with laparoscopic procedures doubling from 2020 (25%) to 2022 (47.5%), confirming the decrease in emergency presentations during the last year of the COVID-19 pandemic and a recovery to normality with planned, elective interventions. Elective interventions increased significantly in 2022 (79.7%) compared with the previous years (p = 0.043), with a concurrent rise in neoadjuvant therapy uptake in 2022 (35.6%). However, significant alterations in the TNM staging, from 12.5% stage IV cases in 2020 to 25.4% in 2022 (p = 0.039), indicated an increased diagnosis of advanced stages of rectal cancer as the years progressed. There was a significant difference in albumin levels over the years (p = 0.019) and in the American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) scores (from 6.2% ASA stage IV in 2020 to 16.9% in 2022), denoting an increase in case complexity (p = 0.043). This study reveals a trend of increasing surgical interventions and the prevalence of more advanced stages of rectal cancer during the pandemic years. Despite the subtle fluctuations in various patient characteristics and treatment approaches, notable shifts were documented in the severity at diagnosis and surgery types, pointing toward more advanced disease presentations and changes in surgical strategies over the period studied. Nevertheless, the trends in ICU admission rates and mortality did not alter significantly during the pandemic period.

Measuring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on colorectal cancer presentation: a retrospective comparative study

BACKGROUNDS

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic provided challenges to surgical care in Australia. This study aimed to measure the potential impact of COVID-19 on colorectal cancer presentation through surgical volume and cancer staging at a major tertiary referral hospital in the city of Sydney Australia.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed using routinely collected data from consecutive colorectal cancer patients undergoing surgery during the COVID-19 period (1 March 2020 to 1 October 2021) and compared with the pre-COVID-19 period (1 March 2018 to 1 October 2019). The main outcomes included patient demographics, surgical volume (including overall, elective and emergency) and cancer staging. Differences in outcomes between the two studied periods were compared using Pearson's chi-squared test, Fisher test or t-test.

RESULTS

A total of 381 patients composed the COVID-19 group (Mean age = 62.4 years) and 364 patients composed the pre-COVID-19 group (Mean age = 65.6 years; P<0.001). No significant differences were observed for overall, elective or emergency surgical volumes. Patients in the COVID-19 group had a reduction in Stage I and an increase in Stage II and III disease, with Stage IV and recurrent disease being similar with a variation of <1% when compared to the pre-COVID-19 group (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Disruptions in patient screening, diagnosis and management from elective surgery restrictions and patient hesitancy may not have resulted in observed changes to surgical volume, however, it may have contributed to an increase in Stages II and III colorectal cancer during COVID-19.

Racial and ethnic differences in colon cancer surgery type performed and delayed treatment among people 45 years old and older in the USA between 2007 and 2017: Mediating effect on survival

BACKGROUND

This study examined the associations of socioeconomic status (SES), race/ethnicity, surgery type, and treatment delays with mortality among colon cancer patients. In addition, the study also quantifies the extent to which clinical and SES factors' variations explain the racial/ethnic differences in overall survival.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We studied 111,789 adult patients ≥45 years old who were diagnosed with colon cancer between 2010 and 2017, identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. We performed logistic regression models to examine the association of SES and race/ethnicity with surgery type and first course of treatment delays. We also performed mediation analysis to quantify the extent to which treatment, sociodemographic and clinicopathologic factors mediated racial/ethnic differences in survival.

RESULTS

Non-Hispanic (NH) Blacks [adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) = 1.19, 95% CI:1.13-1.25] were significantly more likely to undergo subtotal colectomy and to experience treatment delays [aOR = 1.39, 95% CI: 1.31-1.48] compared to NH Whites. Hispanics [aOR = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.49-1.69] were more likely to experience treatment delays than NH Whites. Delayed first course of treatment explained 23.56% and 56.73% of the lower survival among NH Blacks and Hispanics, respectively, compared to their NH White counterparts.

CONCLUSIONS

Race/ethnicity is significantly associated with the surgery type performed and the first course of treatment delays. Variations in treatment, SES, and clinicopathological factors significantly explained racial disparities in overall mortality. These disparities highlight the need for multidisciplinary interventions to address the treatment and social factors perpetuating racial disparities in colon cancer mortality.

The effect of time before diagnosis and treatment on colorectal cancer outcomes: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate existing evidence on the relationship between diagnostic and treatment intervals and outcomes for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Four databases were searched for English language articles assessing the role of time before initial treatment in colorectal cancer on any outcome, including stage and survival. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion and data were synthesised narratively. A dose-response meta-analysis was performed to examine the association between treatment interval and survival.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty papers were included in the systematic review, eight were included in the meta-analysis. Forty-five different intervals were considered in the time from first symptom to treatment. The most common finding was of no association between the length of intervals on any outcome. The dose-response meta-analysis showed a U-shaped association between the treatment interval and overall survival with the nadir at 45 days.

CONCLUSION

The review found inconsistent, but mostly a lack of, association between interval length and colorectal cancer outcomes, but study design and quality were heterogeneous. Meta-analysis suggests survival becomes increasingly poorer for those commencing treatment more than 45 days after diagnosis.

REGISTRATION

This review was registered, and the protocol is available, in PROSPERO, the international database of systematic reviews, with the registration ID CRD42021255864.

Bariatric Patient Engagement in a Pre-surgery Virtual Patient Navigation Platform (VPNP)

BACKGROUND

This study analyzed patient engagement with a virtual patient navigation platform (VPNP) designed to help guide bariatric surgery candidates through the complex pre-operative workup for surgery.

METHODS

Data on baseline sociodemographic and medical history was collected on patients enrolled in the bariatric program at a single academic institution between March and May 2021. The System Usability Scale (SUS) survey was administered to assess VPNP usability. Two groups emerged: "engaged" (ENG; n = 30) who activated their accounts and completed the SUS, and "not-engaged" (NEG; n = 35) who did not activate their accounts (n = 13) or did not use the app (n = 22) and were therefore ineligible for the SUS survey.

RESULTS

Analyses demonstrated that only insurance status differed between groups (private insurance: 60% versus 34.3% for ENG versus NEG, respectively; p = 0.038). SUS survey analysis demonstrated high perceived usability (median score = 86.3), corresponding to the 97th percentile of usability. The top three reasons for disengagement included being too busy (22.9%), not being interested (20%), and being unsure about the purpose of the app (20%).

CONCLUSIONS

The VPNP scored in the 97th percentile of usability. However, given a majority of patients did not engage with the app, and engagement was associated with completing pre-surgery requirements faster (unpublished), future work will focus on mitigating identified reasons for patients not engaging.

Effects of the Pandemic on the Care of Patients With Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a decrease in the rates of diagnosis and treatment of cancer. However, only a few detailed analyses have been made to date regarding the effect of the pandemic on the care of cancer patients in Germany. Such studies are needed as the basis for well-founded recommendations on health-care delivery priorities during pandemics and other, comparable situations of crisis.

METHODS

This review is based on publications that were retrieved by a selective search of the literature for controlled studies from Germany on the effects of the pandemic on colonoscopies, first diagnoses of colorectal cancer (CRC), surgical procedures for CRC, and CRC-related mortality.

RESULTS

Compared to 2019, the rate of screening colonoscopies performed by physicians in private practice was 1.6% higher in 2020 and 4.3% higher in 2021. On the other hand, the rate of diagnostic colonoscopies in the inpatient setting was 15,7% lower in 2020, while that of therapeutic colonoscopies was 11.7% lower. According to the data evaluated here, first diagnoses of CRC were 2.1% less common in January to September in 2020 than they had been in 2019; according to routine data collected by the statutory health insurance provider GRK, surgery for CRC was 10% less common in 2020 than in 2019. With regard to mortality, sufficient data from Germany were lacking to draw definite conclusions. International modeling data suggest an increase in mortality due to decreased colorectal screening rates during the pandemic that may at least be partially compensated for by intensified screening strategies following the pandemic.

CONCLUSION

Three years after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, there is still only a limited evidence base for an evaluation of the effects of the pandemic on medical care and on the outcomes of patients with CRC in Germany. The implementation of central data and research infrastructures will be necessary for further study of the long-term effects of this pandemic, as well as to enable optimal preparedness for future crisis situations.

The safety of colorectal cancer surgery during the COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has placed unprecedented pressure on the healthcare systems. This study evaluated the safety of colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (PROSPERO ID: CRD 42022327968). Relevant articles were systematically searched in the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases. The postoperative complications, anastomotic leakage, postoperative mortality, 30-day readmission, tumor stage, total hospitalization, postoperative hospitalization, preoperative waiting, operation time, and hospitalization in the intensive care unit (ICU) were compared between the pre-pandemic and during the COVID-19 pandemic periods.

Results

Among the identified 561 articles, 12 met the inclusion criteria. The data indicated that preoperative waiting time related to CRC surgery was higher during the COVID-19 pandemic (MD, 0.99; 95%CI, 0.71-1.28; p < 0.00001). A similar trend was observed for the total operative time (MD, 25.07; 95%CI, 11.14-39.00; p =0.0004), and on T4 tumor stage during the pandemic (OR, 1.77; 95%CI, 1.22-2.59; p=0.003). However, there was no difference in the postoperative complications, postoperative 90-day mortality, anastomotic leakage, and 30-day readmission times between pre-COVID-19 pandemic and during the COVID-19 pandemic periods. Furthermore, there was no difference in the total hospitalization time, postoperative hospitalization time, and hospitalization time in ICU related to CRC surgery before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic did not affect the safety of CRC surgery. The operation of CRC during the COVID-19 pandemic did not increase postoperative complications, postoperative 90-day mortality, anastomotic leakage, 30-day readmission, the total hospitalization time, postoperative hospitalization time, and postoperative ICU hospitalization time. However, the operation of CRC during COVID-19 pandemic increased T4 of tumor stage during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, the preoperative waiting and operation times were longer during the COVID-19 pandemic. This provides a reference for making CRC surgical strategy in the future.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022327968.

Changes in the Utilization of Health Care Services by Cancer Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic

PURPOSE

The first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in Korea elicited changes in healthcare service utilization. This study aimed to report changes in healthcare service utilization among cancer patients during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in Korea.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed records from National Health Insurance Service Database and identified cancer patients as those with specific beneficiary codes ("V193" or "V194") assigned to cancer patients. We calculated percentage changes in the number of patients between 2019 and 2020 based on claims records for outpatient clinic visits, hospitalization, and emergency room visits by month, age group, residential areas, and hospital location.

RESULTS

The number of newly diagnosed cancer patients in 2020 decreased by 3.2%, compared to the previous year. The number of patients who visited an outpatient clinic, were hospitalized, and visited the emergency room decreased by 2.6%, 4.0%, and 3.5%, respectively, in 2020, compared to the year 2019.

CONCLUSION

During the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of newly diagnosed cancer patients decreased by 3.2%, compared to the previous year, and their utilization of healthcare services declined significantly after the outbreak of COVID-19.

Statewide Examination of Access to Cancer Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic caused interruptions in the delivery of medical care across a wide range of conditions including cancer. Trends in surgical treatment for cancer during the pandemic have not been well described. We sought to characterize associations between the pandemic and access to surgical treatment for breast, colorectal, and lung cancer in Illinois.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study evaluating inpatient admissions at Illinois hospitals providing surgical care for lung cancer (n = 1913 cases, n = 64 hospitals), breast cancer (n = 910 cases, n = 108 hospitals), and colorectal cancer (n = 5339 cases, n = 144 hospitals). Using discharge data from the Illinois Health and Hospital Association's Comparative Health Care and Hospital Data Reporting Services database, average monthly surgical case volumes were compared from 2019 to 2020. We also compared rates of cancer surgery for each cancer type, by patient characteristics, and hospital type across the three time periods using Pearson chi-squared and ANOVA testing as appropriate. Three discrete time periods were considered: prepandemic (7-12/2019), primary pandemic (4-6/2020), and pandemic recovery (7-12/2020). Hospital characteristics evaluated included hospital type (academic, community, safety net), COVID-19 burden, and baseline cancer surgery volume.

RESULTS

There were 2096 fewer operations performed for breast, colorectal, and lung cancer in 2020 than 2019 in Illinois, with the greatest reductions in cancer surgery volume occurring at the onset of the pandemic in April (colorectal, -48.3%; lung, -13.1%) and May (breast, -45.2%) of 2020. During the pandemic, breast (-14.6%) and colorectal (-13.8%) cancer surgery experienced reductions in volume whereas lung cancer operations were more common (+26.4%) compared to 2019. There were no significant differences noted in gender, race, ethnicity, or insurance status among patients receiving oncologic surgery during the primary pandemic or pandemic recovery periods. Academic hospitals, hospitals with larger numbers of COVID-19 admissions, and those with greater baseline cancer surgery volumes were associated with the greatest reduction in cancer surgery during the primary pandemic period (all cancer types, P < 0.01). During the recovery period, hospitals with greater baseline breast and lung cancer surgery volumes remained at reduced surgery volumes compared to their counterparts (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with significant reductions in breast and colorectal cancer operations in Illinois, while lung cancer operations remained relatively consistent. Overall, there was a net reduction in cancer surgery that was not made up during the recovery period. Academic hospitals, those caring for more COVID-19 patients, and those with greater baseline surgery volumes were most vulnerable to reduced surgery rates during peaks of the pandemic and to delays in addressing the backlog of cases.

Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on gastroenterological surgeries in 2020: A study using the National Clinical Database of Japan

Aim

This study aimed to investigate the effect of the coronavirus disease pandemic on the number of surgeries for gastroenterological cancer cases in Japan.

Methods

The data recorded in the National Clinical Database of Japan between 2018 and 2020 were utilized for this study. Five specific surgeries for primary cancers and surgery for acute diffuse peritonitis were considered the primary endpoints. We divided the study period into the prepandemic and postpandemic (after April 2020) periods and examined the number of surgeries in relation to clinical factors.

Results

Overall, 228 860 surgeries were analyzed. Among the five primary cancer surgeries, the number of distal gastrectomies for gastric cancer decreased the most (to 81.0% of the monthly number in the prepandemic period), followed by that of low anterior resections for rectal cancer (91.4%). In contrast, the number of pancreaticoduodenectomies for pancreatic cancer increased by 7.1%, while that of surgeries for peritonitis remained stable. This trend was observed nationwide. We also noted a marked reduction in the number of distal gastrectomy (to 72.5%), low anterior resection (84.0%), and esophagectomy (88.8%) procedures for T1 tumors. The noncurative resection rate and mortalities were low despite the increased proportion of T4 tumors and older patients.

Conclusion

A marked reduction in surgeries for gastric and rectal cancers with early T factors may reflect prioritization of surgeries and reduction in cancer screenings. Although the quality of the surgery was maintained in terms of reduced mortalities and morbidities, the long-term effects of this pandemic should be monitored.

Complete Spontaneous Regression of Colorectal Cancer: A Report of Two Cases

Spontaneous regression of cancer is rare, and rarer still in colorectal cancer. We present a report of two cases of spontaneous regression of histologically proven proximal colonic cancers described in detail, alongside endoscopic, histological, and radiological images. We discussed the potential mechanisms by reviewing previous literature.

Global elective breast- and colorectal cancer surgery performance backlogs, attributable mortality and implemented health system responses during the COVID-19 pandemic: A scoping review

Globally, 28.4 million non-emergent ('elective') surgical procedures have been deferred during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on elective breast- or colorectal cancer (CRC) procedure backlogs and attributable mortality, globally. Further, we evaluated the interaction between procedure deferrals and health systems, internationally. Relevant articles from any country, published between December 2019-24 November 2022, were identified through searches of online databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE) and by examining the reference lists of retrieved articles. We organised health system-related findings thematically per the Structures-Processes-Outcomes conceptual model by Donabedian (1966). Of 337 identified articles, we included 50. Eleven (22.0%) were reviews. The majority of included studies originated from high-income countries (n = 38, 76.0%). An ecological, modelling study elucidated that global 12-week procedure cancellation rates ranged from 68.3%-73%; Europe and Central Asia accounted for the majority of cancellations (n = 8,430,348) and sub-Saharan Africa contributed the least (n = 520,459). The percentage reduction in global, institutional elective breast cancer surgery activity ranged from 5.68%-16.5%. For CRC, this ranged from 0%-70.9%. Significant evidence is presented on how insufficient pandemic preparedness necessitated procedure deferrals, internationally. We also outlined ancillary determinants of delayed surgery (e.g., patient-specific factors). The following global health system response themes are presented: Structural changes (i.e., hospital re-organisation), Process-related changes (i.e., adapted healthcare provision) and the utilisation of Outcomes (i.e., SARS-CoV-2 infection incidence among patients or healthcare personnel, postoperative pulmonary complication incidence, hospital readmission, length of hospital stay and tumour staging) as indicators of health system response efficacy. Evidence on procedure backlogs and attributable mortality was limited, partly due to insufficient, real-time surveillance of cancer outcomes, internationally. Elective surgery activity has decreased and cancer services have adapted rapidly, worldwide. Further research is needed to understand the impact of COVID-19 on cancer mortality and the efficacy of health system mitigation measures, globally.

An umbrella review of systematic reviews on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer prevention and management, and patient needs

The relocation and reconstruction of health care resources and systems during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may have affected cancer care. An umbrella review was undertaken to summarize the findings from systematic reviews on impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer treatment modification, delays, and cancellations; delays or cancellations in screening and diagnosis; psychosocial well-being, financial distress, and use of telemedicine as well as on other aspects of cancer care. Bibliographic databases were searched for relevant systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis published before November 29th, 2022. Abstract, full- text screening, and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. AMSTAR-2 was used for critical appraisal of included systematic reviews. Fifty-one systematic reviews were included in our analysis. Most reviews were based on observational studies judged to be at medium and high risk of bias. Only two reviews had high or moderate scores based on AMSTAR-2. Findings suggest treatment modifications in cancer care during the pandemic versus the pre-pandemic period were based on low level of evidence. Different degrees of delays and cancellations in cancer treatment, screening, and diagnosis were observed, with low- and- middle- income countries and countries that implemented lockdowns being disproportionally affected. A shift from in-person appointments to telemedicine use was observed, but utility of telemedicine, challenges in implementation and cost-effectiveness in cancer care were little explored. Evidence was consistent in suggesting psychosocial well-being of patients with cancer deteriorated, and cancer patients experienced financial distress, albeit results were in general not compared to pre-pandemic levels. Impact of cancer care disruption during the pandemic on cancer prognosis was little explored. In conclusion, substantial but heterogenous impact of COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care has been observed.

Association of preoperative COVID-19 and postoperative respiratory morbidity during the Omicron epidemic wave: the DROMIS-22 multicentre prospective observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Preoperative COVID-19 has been associated with excess postoperative morbi-mortality. Consequently, guidelines were developed that recommended the postponement of surgery for at least 7 weeks after the infection. We hypothesised that vaccination against the SARS-CoV-2 and the large predominance of the Omicron variant attenuated the effect of a preoperative COVID-19 on the occurrence of postoperative respiratory morbidity.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study in 41 French centres between 15 March and 30 May 2022 (ClinicalTrials NCT05336110), aimed at comparing the postoperative respiratory morbidity between patients with and without preoperative COVID-19 within 8 weeks prior to surgery. The primary outcome was a composite outcome combining the occurrence of pneumonia, acute respiratory failure, unexpected mechanical ventilation, and pulmonary embolism within the first 30 postoperative days. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality, hospital length-of-stay, readmissions, and non-respiratory infections. The sample size was determined to have 90% power to identify a doubling of the primary outcome rate. Adjusted analyses were performed using propensity score modelling and inverse probability weighting.

FINDINGS

Of the 4928 patients assessed for the primary outcome, of whom 92.4% were vaccinated against the SARS-CoV-2, 705 had preoperative COVID-19. The primary outcome was reported in 140 (2.8%) patients. An 8-week preoperative COVID-19 was not associated with increased postoperative respiratory morbidity (odds ratio 1.08 [95% CI 0.48-2.13]; p = 0.83). None of the secondary outcomes differed between the two groups. Sensitivity analyses concerning the timing between COVID-19 and surgery, and the clinical presentations of preoperative COVID-19 did not show any association with the primary outcome, except for COVID-19 patients with ongoing symptoms the day of surgery (OR 4.29 [1.02-15.8]; p = 0.04).

INTERPRETATION

In our Omicron-predominant, highly immunised population undergoing general surgery, a preoperative COVID-19 was not associated with increased postoperative respiratory morbidity.

FUNDING

The study was fully funded by the French Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (SFAR).

A systematic review of methodological considerations in time to diagnosis and treatment in colorectal cancer research

Research focusing on timely diagnosis and treatment of colorectal cancer is necessary to improve outcomes for people with cancer. Previous attempts to consolidate research on time to diagnosis and treatment have noted varied methodological approaches and quality, limiting the comparability of findings. This systematic review was conducted to comprehensively assess the scope of methodological issues in this field and provide recommendations for future research. Eligible articles had to assess the role of any interval up to treatment, on any outcome in colorectal cancer, in English, with no limits on publication time. Four databases were searched (Ovid Medline, EMBASE, EMCARE and PsycInfo). Papers were screened by two independent reviewers using a two-stage process of title and abstract followed by full text review. In total, 130 papers were included and had data extracted on specific methodological and statistical features. Several methodological problems were identified across the evidence base. Common issues included arbitrary categorisation of intervals (n = 107, 83%), no adjustment for potential confounders (n = 65, 50%), and lack of justification for included covariates where there was adjustment (n = 40 of 65 papers that performed an adjusted analysis, 62%). Many articles introduced epidemiological biases such as immortal time bias (n = 37 of 80 papers that used survival as an outcome, 46%) and confounding by indication (n = 73, 56%), as well as other biases arising from inclusion of factors outside of their temporal sequence. However, determination of the full extent of these problems was hampered by insufficient reporting. Recommendations include avoiding artificial categorisation of intervals, ensuring bias has not been introduced due to out-of-sequence use of key events and increased use of theoretical frameworks to detect and reduce bias. The development of reporting guidelines and domain-specific risk of bias tools may aid in ensuring future research can reliably contribute to recommendations regarding optimal timing and strengthen the evidence base.

Ferric carboxymaltose infusion versus oral iron supplementation for preoperative iron deficiency anaemia in patients with colorectal cancer (FIT): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

A third of patients with colorectal cancer who are eligible for surgery in high-income countries have concomitant anaemia associated with adverse outcomes. We aimed to compare the efficacy of preoperative intravenous and oral iron supplementation in patients with colorectal cancer and iron deficiency anaemia.

METHODS

In the FIT multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled trial, adult patients (aged 18 years or older) with M0 stage colorectal cancer scheduled for elective curative resection and iron deficiency anaemia (defined as haemoglobin level of less than 7·5 mmol/L (12 g/dL) for women and less than 8 mmol/L (13 g/dL) for men, and a transferrin saturation of less than 20%) were randomly assigned to either 1-2 g of ferric carboxymaltose intravenously or three tablets of 200 mg of oral ferrous fumarate daily. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with normalised haemoglobin levels before surgery (≥12 g/dL for women and ≥13 g/dL for men). An intention-to-treat analysis was done for the primary analysis. Safety was analysed in all patients who received treatment. The trial was registered at ClincalTrials.gov, NCT02243735, and has completed recruitment.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 31, 2014, and Feb 23, 2021, 202 patients were included and assigned to intravenous (n=96) or oral (n=106) iron treatment. Treatment began a median of 14 days (IQR 11-22) before surgery for intravenous iron and 19 days (IQR 13-27) for oral iron. Normalisation of haemoglobin at day of admission was reached in 14 (17%) of 84 patients treated intravenously and 15 (16%) of 97 patients treated orally (relative risk [RR] 1·08 [95% CI 0·55-2·10]; p=0·83), but the proportion of patients with normalised haemoglobin significantly increased for the intravenous treatment group at later timepoints (49 [60%] of 82 vs 18 [21%] of 88 at 30 days; RR 2·92 [95% CI 1·87-4·58]; p<0·0001). The most prevalent treatment-related adverse event was discoloured faeces (grade 1) after oral iron treatment (14 [13%] of 105), and no treatment-related serious adverse events or deaths were observed in either group. No differences in other safety outcomes were seen, and the most common serious adverse events were anastomotic leakage (11 [5%] of 202), aspiration pneumonia (5 [2%] of 202), and intra-abdominal abscess (5 [2%] 202).

INTERPRETATION

Normalisation of haemoglobin before surgery was infrequent with both treatment regimens, but significantly improved at all other timepoints following intravenous iron treatment. Restoration of iron stores was feasible only with intravenous iron. In selected patients, surgery might be delayed to augment the effect of intravenous iron on haemoglobin normalisation.

FUNDING

Vifor Pharma.

Has the COVID-19 pandemic changed the clinical picture and tumour stage at the time of presentation of patients with colorectal cancer? A retrospective cohort study

Introduction

Treatment of patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected the management of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). The aim of this study was to compare the diagnosis delay, symptoms, and stage of patients with CRC during the pandemic with a control cohort.

Material and methods

Patients referred to the CRC multidisciplinary team between September 2019 and January 2020 (cohort 1, control group) were compared with those who presented between September 2020 and March 2021 (cohort 2, pandemic group).

Results

389 patients were included, 169 in cohort 1 and 220 in cohort 2. No differences were observed in the main characteristics of the patients. CRC screening and anaemia were the most common causes leading to the diagnosis of the tumour in cohort 1 and 2, respectively (p < 0.001). Diagnostic and therapeutic delay was longer in cohort 2 [6.4 (95% CI 5.8-6.9) vs. 4.8 (95% CI 4.3-5.3) months, p < 0.001]. More patients required non-elective treatment in the pandemic cohort (15.5% vs. 9.5%, p = 0.080). The tumour stage was more advanced in patients in cohort 2 [positive nodes in 52.3% vs. 36.7% (p = 0.002), and metastatic disease in 23.6% vs. 16.6% (p = 0.087)].

Conclusion

CRC patients in the pandemic cohort had a longer diagnostic and therapeutic delay and less patients were diagnosed because of CRC screening. In addition, patients with CRC during the pandemic needed non-elective treatment more frequently than patients in the control cohort, and their tumour stage tended to be more advanced.

Has the COVID-19 pandemic changed the clinical picture and tumour stage at the time of presentation of patients with colorectal cancer? A retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Treatment of patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected the management of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). The aim of this study was to compare the diagnosis delay, symptoms, and stage of patients with CRC during the pandemic with a control cohort.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients referred to the CRC multidisciplinary team between September 2019 and January 2020 (cohort 1, control group) were compared with those who presented between September 2020 and March 2021 (cohort 2, pandemic group).

RESULTS

389 patients were included, 169 in cohort 1 and 220 in cohort 2. No differences were observed in the main characteristics of the patients. CRC screening and anaemia were the most common causes leading to the diagnosis of the tumour in cohort 1 and 2, respectively (p<0.001). Diagnostic and therapeutic delay was longer in cohort 2 [6.4 (95% CI 5.8-6.9) vs. 4.8 (95% CI 4.3-5.3) months, p<0.001]. More patients required non-elective treatment in the pandemic cohort (15.5% vs. 9.5%, p=0.080). The tumour stage was more advanced in patients in cohort 2 [positive nodes in 52.3% vs. 36.7% (p=0.002), and metastatic disease in 23.6% vs. 16.6% (p=0.087)].

CONCLUSION

CRC patients in the pandemic cohort had a longer diagnostic and therapeutic delay and less patients were diagnosed because of CRC screening. In addition, patients with CRC during the pandemic needed non-elective treatment more frequently than patients in the control cohort, and their tumour stage tended to be more advanced.

The Emerging Boon of Information and Communication Technology in Multidisciplinary Cancer Care: A Force Multiplier With a Human Touch

Cancer care (CC) is incredibly complex and requires the coordination of multiple disciplines for optimal outcomes. Historically, this has been accomplished with multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTBs), but the benefits, while perhaps intuitive, have not always been demonstrated with sufficient research robustness and validity. We hypothesize that this difficulty in demonstrating the benefit of MDTBs may be related to a delay in decision-making and operationalizing those decisions. The history and value of MDTBs are presented as well as their weaknesses and limited demonstration of improved outcomes. A major weakness highlighted by the challenges of MDTBs is the concept of total package time (TPT) (rather, the inability to keep it as short as possible); any significant delays in CC for any discipline may have a deleterious impact on any given patient's care outcome. Drawing on our own experience with utilizing information and communication technology (ICT) during an effort to apply accountability theory to improve specifically radiation therapy package time (RTPT), we argue that similar principles will be applicable in the improvement of not only the TPT which relies on multiple disciplines, but other factors of CC as well, such as coordination. Experience with improvement in RTPT is discussed and the underlying theory is demonstrated as a sound methodology to apply beyond RTPT to TPT involving coordination of multiple disciplines and stands to lead to the full realization of the benefits of the multidisciplinary approach. The complexity of cancer means that real solutions to optimal outcomes are also, by nature, complex, but here simple accountability theory is demonstrated that may unlock the next phase of multidisciplinary coordination. In this work, we argue that the benefits of the MDTB format can be fully realized with the addition of ICT, a technological breakthrough in the past two decades, while not forgetting about continued human factors.

The Challenges of Colorectal Cancer Surgery during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Romania: A Three-Year Retrospective Study

The predictions on the influence of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on access to medical services in Romania predicted a 35% drop in oncological hospitalizations in 2020 compared to the previous decade, raising the hypothesis that patients with colorectal cancer can become indirect victims of the ongoing pandemic. Therefore, the aim of the current research was to observe how the COVID-19 pandemic influenced colorectal cancer surgery in Romania, to determine the level of addressability towards specialized care, to compare the cancer staging between the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods, and to observe the risk factors for disease progression. This retrospective study was spread over three years, respectively, from March 2019 to March 2022, and included a total of 198 patients with a history of colorectal cancer surgery. It was decided to perform a parallel comparison of 2019, 2020, and 2021 to observe any significant changes during the pandemic. Our clinic encountered a significant decrease in all interventions during the pandemic; although the number of CRC surgeries remained constant, the cases were more difficult, with significantly more patients presenting in emergency situations, from 31.3% in 2019 to 50.0% in 2020 and 57.1% in 2021. Thus, the number of elective surgeries decreased significantly. The proportion of TNM (tumor-node-metastasis) staging was, however, statistically significant between the pre-pandemic and pandemic period. In 2019, 13.3% of patients had stage IIa, compared with 28.8% in 2020 and 13.1% in 2021. Similarly, the proportion of very advanced colorectal cancer was higher during the pandemic period of 2020 and 2021 (12.0% in 2019 vs. 12.5% in 2020 and 25.0% in 2021), which was represented by a significantly higher proportion of patients with bowel perforation. Patients with an advanced TNM stage had a 6.28-fold increased risk of disease progression, followed by lymphovascular invasion (HR = 5.19). However, the COVID-19 pandemic, represented by admission years 2020 and 2021, did not pose a significant risk for disease progression and mortality. In-hospital mortality during the pandemic also did not change significantly. After the pandemic restrictions have been lifted, it would be advisable to conduct a widespread colorectal cancer screening campaign in order to identify any instances of the disease that went undetected during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical outcomes in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery: A retrospective study and meta-analysis of data from 11,082 participants

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic is affecting the care of patients with colorectal cancer worldwide, resulting in the postponement of many colorectal cancer surgeries. However, the effectiveness and safety of performing colorectal cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic is unknown. This study evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical outcomes in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery.

Methods

We retrospectively identified patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery in January 21, 2019, to April 1, 2019, vs. January 21, 2020, to April 1, 2020. Data regarding perioperative outcomes (postoperative complications, conversion rate, duration of surgery, intraoperative blood loss, transfusion, reoperation, intensive care, histological examination, morbidity, and length of hospital stay) were retrieved and compared between the two cohorts. A meta-analysis of 14 studies was also conducted to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical outcomes in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery.

Results

The sample included 68 patients who underwent surgery in 2020 and 136 patients who underwent surgery in 2019. No patient was converted from laparoscopy to laparotomy or required reoperation. R0 resection was completed in all patients in both groups. There was no significant difference in postoperative complications (p = 0.508), duration of surgery (p = 0.519), intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.148), transfusion (0.217), intensive care (p = 0.379), mean lymph node yield (p = 0.205), vascular positivity rate (p = 0.273), nerve invasion rate (p = 0.713), anastomosis leak rate (p = 1), morbidity (p = 0.478), and length of hospital stay (p = 0.623) between the two groups. The meta-analysis also showed no significant difference in short-term outcomes between the two groups.

Conclusions

Our study shows that the COVID-19 pandemic has not led to a deterioration in the surgical outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery or reduction in the quality of cancer removal. Therefore, we do not recommend postponing elective colorectal cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

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.

Elective operations delay and emergency department visits and inpatient admissions during COVID-19

Introduction

At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, many hospitals postponed elective operations for a 12-week period in early 2020. During this time, there was concern that the delay would lead to worse health outcomes. The objective of this study is to analyze the effect of delaying operations during this period on ED (Emergency Department) visits and/or urgent IP (Inpatient) admissions.

Methods

Electronic Health Record (EHR) data on canceled elective operations between 3/17/20 to 6/8/20 was extracted and a descriptive analysis was performed looking at patient demographics, delay time (days), procedure type, and procedure on rescheduled, completed elective operations with and without a related ED visit and/or IP admission during the delay period.

Results

Only 4 out of 197 (2.0%) operations among 4 patients out of 186 patients (2.0%) had an ED visit or IP admission diagnosis related to the postponed operation. When comparing the two groups, the 4 patients were older and had a longer median delay time compared to the 186 patients without an ED visit or IP admission.

Conclusion

Postponement of certain elective operations may be done with minimal risk to the patient during times of crisis. However, this minimal risk may be due to the study site's selection of elective operations to postpone. For example, none of the elective operations canceled or postponed were cardiovascular operations, which have worse health outcomes when delayed.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic in the diagnosis and management of colorectal cancer patients

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed an unprecedented challenge to healthcare systems worldwide, causing downscaling of almost all other activities, especially in its early stages. Currently, the availability of vaccines along with the spread of new viral variants has modified the epidemiology of the disease, and the previous activity is being gradually resumed in most healthcare facilities. In this review, we have summarized the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic in the diagnosis and management of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. Population-based screening with either colonoscopy or fecal occult blood tests has proven to reduce CRC incidence and mortality, so screening programs have been implemented in most western countries. However, during the first COVID-19 wave, most of these programs had to be disrupted temporarily. In this review, we have thoroughly analyzed the consequences of these disruptions of screening programs as well as of the forced delays in diagnostic and therapeutic services on CRC prognosis, although its exact impact cannot be exactly measured yet. In any way, strategies to minimize its effect, such as catch-up strategies expanding the colonoscopy capacity or using fecal occult blood concentration and other risk factors to prioritize patients, are urgently needed. The COVID-19 pandemic has also led to a change in CRC patient presentation, with an overall temporary decreased incidence due to postponed diagnoses, but with more patients presenting in need of an emergency admission or with symptoms. Finally, changes in treatment approaches in CRC patients have been reported during the pandemic, namely a drop in the proportion of laparoscopic surgeries or a rise in short-term radiotherapy courses. We have therefore aimed to summarize the available evidence to guide the healthcare professionals treating CRC patients to choose the best treatment options in the current pandemic situation.

Emergency Surgery Rates Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Access Sensitive Surgical Conditions

INTRODUCTION

Access sensitive surgical conditions should be treated electively with optimal access but result in emergency operations when access is limited. However, the rates of emergency procedures for these conditions are unknown.

METHODS

Cross-sectional retrospective review of Medicare beneficiaries who underwent access sensitive surgical procedures (abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, colectomy for colorectal cancer, or incisional hernia repair) between 2014 and 2018. Risk-adjusted outcomes using a multivariable logistical regression that adjusted for patient factors (age, sex, race, and Elixhauser comorbidities), hospital characteristics (ownership, size, geographic region, surgical volume) and type of operation were compared between planned and emergency (urgent and emergent) surgical procedures. Outcome measures were rates of emergency procedures as well as associated postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 744,818 Medicare beneficiaries undergoing access sensitive surgical procedures, 259,541 (34.9%) were done in the emergency setting. Risk-adjusted rates of emergency surgery varied widely across hospital service areas from 23.28% (lowest decile) to 54.88% (highest decile) (Odds Ratio 4.74; P < 0.001). Emergency procedures were associated with significantly higher rates of 30-d mortality (8.15% versus 3.65%, P < 0.001) and readmissions (16.28% versus 12.88%, P < 0.001) compared to elective procedures. Sensitivity analysis with younger and healthier beneficiaries demonstrated persistently high rates (23.3%) of emergency surgery with wide regional variation and worse patient outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency surgery for access sensitive surgical conditions is extremely common and varied almost fivefold across United States hospital service areas. This suggests there are opportunities to improve access for these common surgical conditions.

Social Vulnerability And Outcomes For Access-Sensitive Surgical Conditions Among Medicare Beneficiaries

Concerns have been raised over wide variation in rates of unplanned (emergency or urgent) surgery for access-sensitive surgical conditions-diagnoses requiring surgery that preferably is planned (elective) but, when access is limited, may be delayed until worsening symptoms require riskier and costlier unplanned surgery. Yet little is known about geographic and community-level factors that may increase the likelihood of unplanned surgery with adverse outcomes. We examined the relationship between community-level social vulnerability and rates of unplanned surgery for three access-sensitive conditions in 2014-18 among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries ages 65-99. Compared with patients from communities with the lowest social vulnerability, those from communities with the highest vulnerability were more likely, overall, to undergo unplanned surgery (36.2 percent versus 33.5 percent). They were also more likely to experience worse outcomes largely attributable to differential rates of unplanned surgery, including higher rates of mortality (5.4 percent versus 5.0 percent) and additional surgery within thirty days (19.6 percent versus 18.1 percent). Our findings suggest that policy addressing community-level social vulnerability may mitigate the observed differences in surgical procedures and outcomes for access-sensitive conditions.

Decreased numbers of gastric, colorectal, lung, and breast cancer surgeries performed in 17 cancer-designated hospitals in Gunma Prefecture of Japan during the COVID-19 pandemic

Purpose

This study aims to clarify the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer surgery in Gunma Prefecture.

Methods

A total of 9839 cases (1406 gastric cancer, 3569 colorectal cancer, 1614 lung cancer, and 3250 breast cancer) from 17 hospitals in Gunma Prefecture were investigated. We compared the number of surgical cases, proportion of cases found by screening, and cStage at the time of the first visit by month in 2020 and 2021 with those in 2019.

Results

The rate of decline in cancer surgery was 8.9% in 2020 compared with 2019 (p = 0.0052). Compared with the same month of 2019, in some months of 2020 and 2021, significant decreases were observed in the number of surgeries for gastric and colorectal cancer, the percentage of surgical cases detected by screening in all four cancers, and the proportion of cancers with a relatively early cStage in gastric and breast cancer.

Conclusions

The number of surgical cases of the four cancer types detected by cancer screening decreased in Gunma Prefecture owing to the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, for some cancer types, the number of operations performed in patients with early-stage cancer is also decreased.

Non-erythropoiesis-stimulating agent, non-iron therapies for the management of anaemia: protocol for a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Preoperative anaemia is associated with poor postoperative outcomes and is the strongest predictor of allogenic blood transfusion, which contributes further to patient morbidity. Emphasis has been placed on correcting anaemia prior to surgery to mitigate these outcomes. Conflicting evidence exists regarding the benefit of currently recommended interventions. With greater understanding of iron haemostasis and erythropoiesis, novel therapies have been identified. These are at varying stages of development with some demonstrating promising results in patients with chronic kidney disease. It is not known how these agents have been studied outside this population, particularly in the perioperative context. To address this, we will conduct a scoping review of the published literature to chart the evidence.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The scoping review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews framework. The electronic database search will include Scopus, MEDLINE (Ovid) and Excerpta Medica database (Ovid), with no language restrictions, and will include all publications since 1 January 2010. This review will have three objectives: (1) to describe the mechanisms of action for novel agents, (2) to describe the level of evidence and stage of development of novel agents in a perioperative setting, and (3) to determine the potential agents suitable for prospective controlled trials in a preoperative or postoperative patient cohort and aiming to improve patient-centred outcomes. The review process will involve two reviewers with a third reviewer resolving disagreements. Data will be extracted and organised with subsequent analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This scoping review does not require research ethics approval. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and inform the development of future prospective trials based on established evidence from potential therapeutic agents.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

This protocol has been registered prospectively on the Open Science Framework registry (DOI:10.17605/OSF.IO/SM3UH, https://osf.io/sm3uh/?view_only=39876ccf7a4348dfbd566535b957a7db).Cite Now.

The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

AIM

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery.

METHODS

This was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin.

RESULTS

Overall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P < 0.001). After adjustment, delay was not associated with a lower rate of complete resection (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90-1.55, P = 0.224), which was consistent in elective patients only (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, P = 0.672). Longer delays were not associated with poorer outcomes.

CONCLUSION

One in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease.

Surgical safety in the COVID-19 era: present and future considerations

The impacts of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been globally paradigm shifting in all aspects. Surgeons have experienced unprecedented changes regarding operation schedules, preparations before surgery, and the precautions needed both during and after surgery. Many medical centers simultaneously reported a decrease in their numbers of surgeries, whether they were elective or emergent, or for cancerous or benign resections. However, accumulated surgical outcomes from the last 2 years of experience presented postoperative morbidity and mortality data that were comparable to the pre-pandemic era, whether in elective or urgent settings. Although COVID-19 showed a significant association with postoperative morbidity and mortality, the majority of noninfected patients could be treated successfully with stringent mitigation protocols. Initially recommended to be avoided at the start of the pandemic, minimally invasive surgery seems to be safe and feasible according to reported surgical outcomes. Numerous sets of guidelines have now been produced from medical societies and adhering to the basic precautions has been found to be practicable. It is crucial that health care systems and surgical staff remain vigilant and attentive to the ever-changing situation in this pandemic in order to provide optimal medical support to their patients.

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.

Bioinformatics and in-silico findings reveal medical features and pharmacological targets of biochanin A against colorectal cancer and COVID-19

Severe mortality due to the COVID-19 pandemic resulted from the lack of effective treatment. Although COVID-19 vaccines are available, their side effects have become a challenge for clinical use in patients with chronic diseases, especially cancer patients. In the current report, we applied network pharmacology and systematic bioinformatics to explore the use of biochanin A in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and COVID-19 infection. Using the network pharmacology approach, we identified two clusters of genes involved in immune response (IL1A, IL2, and IL6R) and cell proliferation (CCND1, PPARG, and EGFR) mediated by biochanin A in CRC/COVID-19 condition. The functional analysis of these two gene clusters further illustrated the effects of biochanin A on interleukin-6 production and cytokine-cytokine receptor interaction in CRC/COVID-19 pathology. In addition, pathway analysis demonstrated the control of PI3K-Akt and JAK-STAT signaling pathways by biochanin A in the treatment of CRC/COVID-19. The findings of this study provide a therapeutic option for combination therapy against COVID-19 infection in CRC patients.