Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on UK endoscopic activity and cancer detection: a National Endoscopy Database Analysis

The impact of extended invitation intervals on stage distribution of screen-detected and interval cancer within the Dutch colorectal cancer screening program

This study investigates the impact of extended invitation intervals on the stage distribution of screen-detected and interval colorectal cancers (CRCs) in the Netherlands' fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based screening program during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using data from individuals with negative FIT results in 2017-2019 and subsequent screening round in 2019-2021, we examined whether delays of up to 6 months affected CRC stage at diagnosis. We performed multivariate logistic regression to assess the association between invitation intervals and cancer stage. Our analysis found no significant difference in stage distribution for both screen-detected and interval CRCs despite the delays. Specifically, odds ratios for late-stage cancer remained close to 1 across various intervals, indicating minimal impact of extended invitation times. These results suggest that the short-term delays caused by the pandemic did not significantly affect the performance of the CRC screening program. This highlights the program's ability to adapt to temporary disruptions while maintaining effective early cancer detection. Our findings support the notion that such disruptions, when managed appropriately, do not substantially compromise the quality of screening outcomes, reinforcing the resilience and flexibility of CRC screening programs in the face of health crises.

Impact of introducing transnasal endoscopy on expanding diagnostic endoscopy services

INTRODUCTION

Demand for endoscopic services is outstripping capacity in the UK. Transnasal endoscopy (TNE) utilises a narrow calibre endoscope to pass through the nasal passages, thereby reducing retching and discomfort. It is better tolerated compared with standard transoral endoscopy (TOE) but is still rarely used as a diagnostic modality. There is still uncertainty about how well it performs against TOE in diagnostic ability, cost and efficiency.

METHODS

We explored utilising TNE to deal with the growing demand for endoscopy. We compared findings to TOE procedures undertaken during the same time period. We evaluated cost differences, duration/time in the department for procedures as well as quality of procedures (both in terms of performance indicators as well as image quality using the validated POLPREP score).

RESULTS

A total of 241 upper gastrointestinal endoscopy procedures were evaluated (100 TNE and 141 matched TOE) between December 2021 and February 2022. TNE outperformed TOE in obtaining >95% success rate in nationally approved key performance indicators (retroflexion and duodenal intubation, both p=0.026). It also was associated with better image quality in the oesophagus with a POLPREP A3 Score (excellent image quality) in 36/98 available images compared with 26/136 TOE (p=0.028) and was equivalent to TOE in the stomach and duodenum. TNE was identified as having a key role in facilitating complex cases, previously failed via the TOE route with a success rate in 11/12 (91.7%) of such cases. TNE also shows promise in correcting misdiagnoses of short-segment Barrett's oesophagus (39%) compared with TOE (14.8%) (p=0.087).

CONCLUSION

TNE is an emerging endoscopic modality, which shows great promise in replacing TOE in most diagnostic circumstances. In a modern healthcare service, TNE is cheaper, better tolerated and outperforms TOE in multiple domains.

Expansion of interventional endoscopy and day-case procedures: A nationwide longitudinal study of gastrointestinal endoscopy in France

BACKGROUND

An accurate assessment of the evolution of GI endoscopy volumes is warranted to identify long-term trends and to help anticipate training, infrastructure and human resource needs. The main objective of this longitudinal study was to evaluate the evolution of GI endoscopy in France.

METHODS

This retrospective study consisted of a cross-sectional analysis repeated each year from 2008 to 2018 using data from a national health database related to hospital admissions. All day-case and hospital stays presenting at least one of the 119 GI endoscopy procedures were extracted.

RESULTS

This study showed an increase in day-case and hospital stays including a GI endoscopy procedure of 18.4 %. In addition, day-case endoscopy increased from 67.8 % to 76.9 % of hospital admissions. There was a 19.6 % increase in lower GI endoscopy, with in particular a 247 % increase in endoscopic mucosal resection. EUS and pancreaticobiliary and duodenal endoscopy have seen the most significant increases, 63 % and 70.2 % respectively; notably, therapeutic EUS increased by 476 %.

CONCLUSION

This study shows the good dynamics of GI endoscopy in a European country with a sustained increase over 11 years in day-case and hospital stays of patients undergoing a GI endoscopy while day-case endoscopy is taking on an increasingly important role.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Delay of Melanoma Diagnosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Several studies have described how the restrictive measures due to COVID-19 have delayed melanoma diagnoses, resulting in an increased rate of more severe cases. Summarizing the sparse results in this context might help to understand the real impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on melanoma. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate how the clinical and prognostic factors of new melanoma diagnoses changed after COVID-19.

METHODS

A literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus was conducted in September 2023. We included studies published in peer-reviewed journals reporting histopathological data on new diagnoses of cutaneous melanoma in adult patients during and/or after the lockdown compared to those diagnosed before the COVID-19 pandemic. A meta-analysis was conducted utilizing a random effects model. The between-study heterogeneity was assessed via Higgins's I2 statistic. Publication bias was assessed using the Begg and Egger test. This study adhered to the updated PRISMA guidelines. The primary outcome was a comparison of melanoma thickness between the pre-COVID-19 and post-lockdown periods. The secondary outcomes were evaluations of the histopathological subtype, stage, and presence of ulceration and mitosis in melanomas diagnosed in these two pandemic phases.

RESULTS

The study included 45 articles. We found a significantly higher proportion of all factors indicating worse prognosis in the post-lockdown period compared to the pre-COVID-19 phase, including high thickness (SOR = 1.14, 95%CI 1.08-1.20 for 1-2 mm; SOR = 1.62, 95%CI 1.08-2.40, for >2 mm), the presence of ulcerations (SOR = 1.35, 95%CI 1.18-1.54), nodular subtype (SOR = 1.19, 95%CI 1.07-1.32), the presence of mitosis (SOR = 1.57, 95% CI 1.17-2.11), and stage III (SOR = 1.39, 95%CI 1.19-1.52) and IV (SOR = 1.44, 95%CI 1.26-1.63). Limitations include the limited studies' geographical distribution and moderate heterogeneity affecting meta-analysis estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis provided evidence of more advanced melanomas diagnosed in the post-COVID-19 pandemic period, emphasizing the importance of creating and updating pandemic preparedness plans to limit the impact of any future events on oncological care.

THE IMPACT OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC RESTRICTIVE MEASURES ON THE DIAGNOSIS OF ADENOMATOUS POLYPS AND COLORRECTAL ADENOCARCINOMA IN A POPULATION SUBMITTED TO COLONOSCOPY

BACKGROUND

•The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis of adenomatous polyps and colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND

•A cross-sectional study evaluating COL performed during the periods from 20 March to 31 October of 2019 and of 2020, which analyzed 10,232 colonoscopies.

BACKGROUND

•There was a 51,0% reduction in the number of COL performed in 2020 when compared to 2019. Of the altered exams, adenomatous polyps were diagnosed in 68.8% in 2019 and 78.3% in 2020. CRC was diagnosed in 0.9% in 2019 and 1.6% in 2020.

BACKGROUND

•The increase in adenomatous polyps and colorectal cancer diagnoses was observed, it was not enough to compensate for the reduction in the number of exams.

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is globally the third most common malignant neoplasm and the second leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. The COVID-19 pandemic led to the suspension of routine screening tests by health services. A 35.5% drop in total cancer diagnoses in 2020 is estimated when compared to 2019.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis of adenomatous polyps (AP) and CRC in a population undergoing colonoscopy (COL) in a clinic in Goiânia, Brazil.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study evaluating COL performed during the periods from 20 March to 31 October of 2019 and of 2020, was approved by the Research Ethics Committee (CAAE-45631421.0.0000.0037). We analyzed data related to identification, referral for medical examination, colonoscopic and histopathological findings.

RESULTS

We evaluated 10,232 (93.4%) COL, divided into two groups according to the year of performance. In 2019, 6,777 (66.2%) COL were performed and in 2020, 3,455 (33.8%), demonstrating a reduction of 51.0%. A total of 3,267 (31.9%) colonoscopies found polyps, 72.1% of which were AP (68.8% in 2019 and 78.3% in 2020, P<0.001). High-grade dysplasia was found in 5.0% of the AP (4.9% in 2019 and 5.8% in 2020, P<0.34). CRC was diagnosed in 121 (1.2%) (0.9% in 2019 and 1.6% in 2020, P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic significantly reduced COL in 2020, mainly due to infection fears and restrictions. However, the detection rate of cancer and polyps per procedure increased, indicating more symptomatic patients sought medical attention. Despite this, the absolute number of tumors and adenomas found decreased, potentially causing diagnostic losses and fewer prevented colorectal cancer cases. Thus, adaptive strategies are vital for maintaining essential healthcare services during similar crises.

Impact of the COVID-19 Prioritization Recommendations on Pathological Stages of Urologic Malignancies: A Real-World Analysis at a High-Volume Referral Institution

Background: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the European Association of Urology (EAU) Guidelines defined priority groups to guide the prioritization of surgery for urological malignancies. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 prioritization recommendations on tumor pathological characteristics in a real-world setting at our academic referral institution. Methods: We compared baseline and pathological tumor features of all patients with urological malignancies treated during the pandemic period (2020-2021) versus in the post-pandemic period (2022-2023). Our institution adhered to the international recommendations and prioritized those cases defined as "high-risk". Results: Data from 9196 patients treated for urological malignancies were reviewed and grouped according to period of surgery (4401 in the pandemic period vs. 4785 in the post-pandemic period). The overall number of surgical procedures was comparable for all diseases except for the number of radical prostatectomies (1117 vs. 1405; p = 0.03) and partial nephrectomies (609 vs. 759; p = 0.02), which were significantly lower in the pandemic period. Regarding tumor pathological features, none of the recorded variables were found to differ according to period of surgery, including disease stage, tumor grading, presence of necrosis, lymphovascular invasion, and histological variants. Conclusions: A correct policy of prioritization of oncological pathologies during emergency periods and a centralization of oncological cases in reference centers reduce the possible risk of worsening cancer disease features related to the reorganization of healthcare resources.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health-care use among patients with cancer in England, UK: a comprehensive phase-by-phase time-series analysis across attendance types for 38 cancers

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in the widespread disruption of cancer health provision services across the entirety of the cancer care pathway in the UK, from screening to treatment. The potential long-term health implications, including increased mortality for individuals who missed diagnoses or appointments, are concerning. However, the precise impact of lockdown policies on national cancer health service provision across diagnostic groups is understudied. We aimed to systematically evaluate changes in patterns of attendance for groups of individuals diagnosed with cancer, including the changes in attendance volume and consultation rates, stratified by both time-based exposures and by patient-based exposures and to better understand the impact of such changes on cancer-specific mortality.

METHODS

In this retrospective, cross-sectional, phase-by-phase time-series analysis, by using primary care records linked to hospitals and the death registry from Jan 1, 1998, to June 17, 2021, we conducted descriptive analyses to quantify attendance changes for groups stratified by patient-based exposures (Index of Multiple Deprivation, ethnicity, age, comorbidity count, practice region, diagnosis time, and cancer subtype) across different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in England, UK. In this study, we defined the phases of the COVID-19 pandemic as: pre-pandemic period (Jan 1, 2018, to March 22, 2020), lockdown 1 (March 23 to June 21, 2020), minimal restrictions (June 22 to Sept 20, 2020), lockdown 2 (Sept 21, 2020, to Jan 3, 2021), lockdown 3 (Jan 4 to March 21, 2021), and lockdown restrictions lifted (March 22 to March 31, 2021). In the analyses we examined changes in both attendance volume and consultation rate. We further compared changes in attendance trends to cancer-specific mortality trends. Finally, we conducted an interrupted time-series analysis with the lockdown on March 23, 2020, as the intervention point using an autoregressive integrated moving average model.

FINDINGS

From 561 611 eligible individuals, 7 964 685 attendances were recorded. During the first lockdown, the median attendance volume decreased (-35·30% [IQR -36·10 to -34·25]) compared with the preceding pre-pandemic period, followed by a median change of 4·38% (2·66 to 5·15) during minimal restrictions. More drastic reductions in attendance volume were seen in the second (-48·71% [-49·54 to -48·26]) and third (-71·62% [-72·23 to -70·97]) lockdowns. These reductions were followed by a 4·48% (3·45 to 7·10) increase in attendance when lockdown restrictions were lifted. The median consultation rate change during the first lockdown was 31·32% (25·10 to 33·60), followed by a median change of -0·25% (-1·38 to 1·68) during minimal restrictions. The median consultation rate decreased in the second (-33·89% [-34·64 to -33·18]) and third (-4·98% [-5·71 to -4·00]) lockdowns, followed by a 416·16% increase (409·77 to 429·77) upon lifting of lockdown restrictions. Notably, across many weeks, a year-over-year decrease in weekly attendances corresponded with a year-over-year increase in cancer-specific mortality. Overall, the pandemic period revealed a statistically significant reduction in attendances for patients with cancer (lockdown 1 -24 070·19 attendances, p<0·0001; minimal restrictions -19 194·89 attendances, p<0·0001; lockdown 2 -31 311·28 attendances, p<0·0001; lockdown 3 -43 843·38 attendances, p<0·0001; and lockdown restrictions lifted -56 260·50 attendances, p<0·0001) compared with before the pandemic.

INTERPRETATION

The UK's COVID-19 pandemic lockdown affected cancer health service access negatively. Many groups of individuals with cancer had declines in attendance volume and consultation rate across the phases of the pandemic. A decrease in attendances might lead to delays in cancer diagnoses, treatment, and follow-up, putting such groups of individuals at higher risk of negative health outcomes, such as cancer-specific mortality. We discuss the factors potentially responsible for explaining changes in service provision trends and provide insight to help inform clinical follow-up for groups of individuals at risk, alongside potential future policy changes in the care of such patients.

FUNDING

Wellcome Trust, National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre, National Institute for Health Research Great Ormond Street Hospital Biomedical Research Centre, Academy of Medical Sciences, and the University College London Overseas Research Scholarship.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on bone and soft tissue sarcoma patients' consultation and diagnosis

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic negatively affected the diagnosis and treatment of several cancer types. However, this pandemic's exact impact and extent on bone and soft tissue sarcomas need to be clarified. We aimed to investigate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic and emergency declaration by the local government on consultation behavior and clinical stage at diagnosis of bone and soft tissue sarcoma. A total of 403 patients diagnosed with bone and soft tissue sarcoma who initially visited three sarcoma treatment hospitals between January 2018 and December 2021 were included. The monthly number of newly diagnosed soft tissue sarcoma patients was reduced by 25%, and the proportion of soft tissue patients with stage IV disease at diagnosis significantly increased by 9% during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to before the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, the monthly number of new primary bone and soft tissue sarcoma patients significantly decreased by 43% during the state of emergency declaration. The COVID-19 pandemic had a negative impact on soft tissue sarcoma patients' consultation behavior and increased the proportion of advanced-stage patients at initial diagnosis. An emergency declaration by the local government also negatively affected primary bone and soft tissue sarcoma patients' consultation behavior.

The Resilience Hub approach for addressing mental health of health and social care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods evaluation

Background

Resilience Hubs provide mental health screening, facilitation of access and direct provision of psychosocial support for health and social care keyworkers in England affected by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Aim

To explore implementation of the Hubs, including characteristics of staff using the services, support accessed, costing data and a range of stakeholder perspectives on the barriers and enablers to Hub use and implementation of staff well-being support within the context of the pandemic.

Design

Mixed-methods evaluation.

Setting

Four Resilience Hubs.

Methods

Findings were integrated via mixed-method case studies, including: analyses of Hub mental health screening (N = 1973); follow-up questionnaire data (N = 299) on service use and health status of Hub clients; economic information provided by the Hubs; 63 interviews with Hub staff, wider stakeholders, Hub clients and keyworkers who did not use the Hubs.

Results

Findings were consistent across Hubs and workstreams. Most Hub clients were NHS staff. Under-represented groups included men, keyworkers from minority ethnic communities, care homes and emergency services staff. Clients reported comorbid mental health needs across multiple domains (anxiety; depression; post-traumatic stress; alcohol use; functioning). Their health status was lower than population norms and relevant pre-pandemic data. Several factors predicted higher needs, but having pre-pandemic emotional well-being concerns was one of the most robust predictors of higher need. Sixty per cent of participants who completed follow-up questionnaires reported receiving mental health support since Hub screening, most of which was directly or indirectly due to Hub support. High levels of satisfaction were reported. As in many services, staffing was the central component of Hub cost. Hubs were predominantly staffed by senior clinicians; this staffing model was consistent with the generally severe difficulties experienced by clients and the need for systemic/team-based working. Costs associated with health and social care use for Hub clients were low, which may be due to barriers to accessing support in general. Enablers to accessing Hubs included: a clear understanding of the Hubs, how to self-refer, and managerial support. Barriers included confusion between Hubs and other support; unhelpful beliefs about job roles, unsupportive managers, negative workplace cultures and difficulties caused by systemic issues. Some keyworkers highlighted a perceived need for further diversity and cultural competency training to improve reach to under-represented communities. Other barriers for these groups included prior negative experiences of services, structural inequalities and stigma. Some wider stakeholders had concerns around growing waiting times for Hub-provided therapy, and insufficient data on Hub usage and outcomes. Feedback was otherwise very positive.

Limitations

Main limitations included lack of comparative and pre-pandemic/baseline data, small numbers from under-represented groups limiting fine-grained analysis, and participant self-selection.

Conclusions

Findings highlighted the value of the Hub model of outreach, screening, support navigation and provision of direct support during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, and as a potential model to respond to future crises. The research provided recommendations to improve Hub promotion, equality/diversity/inclusion access issues, management of specialist resources and collection of relevant data on Hub outcomes and activities. Broader recommendations for the primary prevention of mental health difficulties across the health and care system are made, as individual support offers should be an adjunct to, not a replacement for, resolutions to systemic challenges. Research recommendations are made to conduct more robust evaluations of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the Hubs, using larger data sets and comparative data.

Study registration

This study is registered as researchregistry6303.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR132269) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 29. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

The Concept of Health Debt Incurred during the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Example of Basal Cell Skin Cancer Diagnosis in Lower Silesia

Introduction: This study explores the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis of basal cell carcinoma (BCC) in Lower Silesia, Poland, comparing pre-pandemic, pandemic, and post-pandemic periods. It investigates how different medical facilities adapted to the pandemic's challenges and the subsequent implications for cancer diagnosis. Methods: Data from histopathology and cytology laboratories were analyzed, focusing on BCC diagnoses from 2018 to 2022. This study included various medical centers categorized by size and source of implementation. Statistical analyses were conducted to compare diagnoses before, during, and after the pandemic. Results: During the initial wave of the pandemic, there was a significant reduction in newly diagnosed BCC cases, followed by a surge post-pandemic. Larger medical centers adapted more effectively, while district hospitals faced challenges. Private practices maintained stable diagnosis rates. The increase in diagnoses post-pandemic suggests a backlog of undiagnosed cases during the pandemic. Discussion: Challenges in accessing healthcare during the pandemic led to delayed cancer diagnoses. Larger medical centers were better equipped to handle the crisis, while district hospitals struggled. Private practices maintained stability, possibly due to pre-scheduled appointments. Recommendations include public education on symptom recognition and standardizing histopathological evaluation protocols. Conclusions: Despite data limitations, this study provides valuable insights into the pandemic's impact on cancer diagnosis, highlighting the need for proactive measures in future health crises to ensure timely detection and treatment of cancer cases.

The recovery of endoscopic activity and cancer detection after the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic had a substantial impact on cancer services. The aim of our study was to evaluate the recovery of endoscopic activity and cancer detection after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Endoscopic data from January 2019 to December 2020 were retrospectively collected to assess the endoscopic activity and cancer detection during the COVID-19 peak period (February 2020) and the post-COVID-19 peak period (March to July 2020).

Results

The COVID-19 pandemic almost brought endoscopic activity and cancer detection to a standstill. Diagnostic procedure and endoscopic resection showed the greatest reduction. With the decline in COVID-19 infections, endoscopic activity gradually returned to previous level in July. However, the detection rate of gastric cancer resumed in September, whereas colorectal cancer resumed in August. The monthly detection rates of gastric and colorectal cancers decreased from their initial peaks of 2.98 % and 6.45 %, respectively, and finally were even lower than the average in 2019. Similarly, the mean age of patients who received endoscopy also declined as the detection rates resumed. The increasing colonoscopies allowed the missing colorectal cancer patients to be caught up. In contrast, it was expected that 6.69 % of gastric cancer patients were missed and did not receive needed endoscopy.

Conclusions

The recovery of cancer detection occurred later than that of endoscopic activity, especially for gastric cancer. Older people were vulnerable to the continuous impact of COVID-19 pandemic than young people for seeking medical services. Urgent efforts are required to recover and maintain cancer services before subsequent waves of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Diagnostic yield from symptomatic gastroscopy in the UK: British Society of Gastroenterology analysis using data from the National Endoscopy Database

OBJECTIVE

This national analysis aimed to calculate the diagnostic yield from gastroscopy for common symptoms, guiding improved resource utilisation.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study was conducted of diagnostic gastroscopies between 1 March 2019 and 29 February 2020 using the UK National Endoscopy Database. Mixed-effect logistic regression models were used, incorporating random (endoscopist) and fixed (symptoms, age and sex) effects on two dependent variables (endoscopic cancer; Barrett's oesophagus (BO) diagnosis). Adjusted positive predictive values (aPPVs) were calculated.

RESULTS

382 370 diagnostic gastroscopies were analysed; 30.4% were performed in patients aged <50 and 57.7% on female patients. The overall unadjusted PPV for cancer was 1.0% (males 1.7%; females 0.6%, p<0.01). Other major pathology was found in 9.1% of procedures, whereas 89.9% reported only normal findings or minor pathology (92.5% in females; 94.6% in patients <50).Highest cancer aPPVs were reached in the over 50s (1.3%), in those with dysphagia (3.0%) or weight loss plus another symptom (1.4%). Cancer aPPVs for all other symptoms were below 1%, and for those under 50, remained below 1% regardless of symptom. Overall, 73.7% of gastroscopies were carried out in patient groups where aPPV cancer was <1%.The overall unadjusted PPV for BO was 4.1% (males 6.1%; females 2.7%, p<0.01). The aPPV for BO for reflux was 5.8% and ranged from 3.2% to 4.0% for other symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer yield was highest in elderly male patients, and those over 50 with dysphagia. Three-quarters of all gastroscopies were performed on patients whose cancer risk was <1%, suggesting inefficient resource utilisation.

Portuguese Results of the ETICC Study: Impact of the Pandemic COVID-19 in the Diagnosis and Management of Colorectal Cancer in 2020 in Portuguese Hospitals

Introduction

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had affected clinical practice in several ways, including the restriction of nonessential endoscopic procedures. Therefore, our aim was to evaluate how colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis and management was affected during the first year of pandemics in Portugal.

Methods

This is a Portuguese substudy of the French retrospective multicentric study ETICC (Etude de l'Impact de la pandémie COVID-19 sur le diagnostic et la prise en charge du Cancer Colorectal). We compared patients' characteristics, clinical manifestations, CRC staging at diagnosis, delay to first medical appointment, histological diagnosis, surgical and medical treatments between the year previous to the pandemics (control) and the first year of pandemics.

Results

We included 766 patients: 496 in the control group and 270 in the COVID group. There was no significant difference in CRC staging at diagnosis between both groups, with 21% being diagnosed as metastatic in the control group and 22% in the first year of pandemics (p = 0.770). Contrary to what happened in France, there was a significant decrease in CRC diagnosis in asymptomatic patients (25-8.4%; p < 0.001) and after a positive fecal immunochemical test (20.8-11.3%; p = 0.002) during the pandemics. Although the increase in the overall complication rate at diagnosis was nonsignificant, in Portugal, there was a significant increase in diagnosis of abdominal occlusion (12.1-18.1%; p = 0.033). In Portugal, time between the beginning of symptoms and the first medical appointment significantly increased from a median of 50 days to 64 days during COVID (p < 0.001). On the contrary, time between histological diagnosis and tumor resection had significantly decreased from a median of 65 to 39 days (p < 0.001). Time between histological diagnosis and neoadjuvant treatment was not statistically different (median of 64-67 days; p = 0.590), as was time between histological diagnosis and palliative chemotherapy (median of 50-51 days; p = 1.000). Time from CRC resection and adjuvant treatment has significantly decreased from a median of 54 to 43 days (p = 0.001).

Discussion

We found a significant impact in CRC diagnosis in the first year of pandemics, more pronounced than what was found in France. These are likely related not only with the closing of endoscopy units but also with the difficulties patients had in finding an appointment with their general practitioners. On the other hand, both in France and Portugal, the first year of pandemics did not worsen CRC staging at diagnosis and did not significantly affect medical and surgical treatments once the diagnosis was made.

The effects of the first UK lockdown for the COVID-19 pandemic on primary-care-recorded cancer and type-2 diabetes mellitus records: A population-based quasi-experimental time series study

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 disrupted consulting behaviour, healthcare delivery and cancer diagnostic services. This study quantifies the cancer incidence coded in UK general practice electronic health records and deviations from historical trends after the March 2020 national lockdown. For comparison, we study the coded incidence of type-2 diabetes mellitus, which is diagnosed almost entirely within primary care.

METHODS

Poisson interrupted time series models investigated the coded incidence of diagnoses in adults aged ≥ 18 years in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink before (01/03/2017-29/02/2020) and after (01/03/2020-28/02/2022) the first lockdown. Datasets were stratified by age, sex, and general practice per 28-day aggregation period. Models captured incidence changes associated with lockdown, both immediately and over time based on historical trends.

RESULTS

We studied 189,457 incident cancer and 191,915 incident diabetes records in 1480 general practices over 52,374,197 person-years at risk. During 01/03/2020-28/02/2022, there were fewer incident records of cancer (n = 22,199, 10.49 %, 10.44-10.53 %) and diabetes (n = 15,709, 7.57 %, 7.53-7.61 %) than expected. Within cancers, impacts ranged from no effect (e.g. unknown primary, pancreas, and ovary), to small effects for lung (n = 773, 3.11 %, 3.09-3.13 % fewer records) and female breast (n = 2686, 6.77 %, 6.73-6.81 %), to the greatest effect for bladder (n = 2874, 31.15 %, 31.00-31.31 %). Diabetes and cancer records recovered maximally to 86 % (95 %CI 80.3-92.7 %) and 74 % (95 %CI 70.3-78.6 %) in July 2021 and May 2021, respectively, of their expected values, declining again until the study end.

CONCLUSION

The "missing" cancer and diabetes diagnoses in primary care may comprise delayed or missed diagnoses, reduced incidence associated with excess deaths from COVID-19, and potentially increased non-coded recording of diagnoses. Future validation studies must quantify the concordance between primary care and National Cancer Registration Data and Hospital Episode Statistics over the pandemic era.

Influence of COVID-19 on Patients with Esophageal Varices under Prophylactic Endoscopic Band Ligation Therapy

Background and Objectives

Endoscopic band ligation (EBL) plays a critical role in patients with clinically significant portal hypertension, as variceal eradication (VE) is essential to prevent further variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (GI). The emergence of COVID-19 has led to a dramatic reduction in endoscopic activity. Our study aimed to evaluate the effect of COVID-19 on VE, GI, and 6-month mortality of patients treated with prophylactic EBL therapy. In addition, our goal was to identify the risk factors for our proposed outcomes.

Methods

A single-center retrospective cohort study included patients with esophageal varices treated with prophylactic EBL therapy between 2017 and 2021. To demonstrate the impact of COVID-19 on two independent groups on prophylactic EBL therapy with 1 year of follow-up, March 2019 was selected as the cut-off date. Clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data were recovered from electronic reports.

Results

Ninety-seven patients underwent 398 prophylactic EBL sessions, 75 men (77.3%) with mean age 59 ± 12 years. Most achieved VE (60.8%), 14.4% had GI bleeding post-therapy, and 15.5% died at 6 months. The rate of variceal obliteration was significantly lower in the pandemic group (40.9% vs. 77.4% in the pre-pandemic group, p = 0.001). Mean number of EBL sessions and pandemic group were independently associated with incomplete VE, while MELD-Na, portal vein thrombosis and failed VE were identified as risk factors associated with mortality at 6 months.

Conclusions

Almost 60% of patients in the pandemic group failed to eradicate esophageal varices. Failure to achieve this result conferred a higher risk of GI bleeding and death at 6 months, the latter also significantly associated with the MELD-Na score and portal vein thrombosis. Our study is among the first to demonstrate the impact of COVID-19 in patients receiving prophylactic EBL therapy.

The management of complicated colorectal cancer in older patients in a global perspective after COVID-19: the CO-OLDER WSES project

BACKGROUND

Colorectal (CRC) cancer is becoming a disease of the elderly. Ageing is the most significant risk factor for presenting CRC. Early diagnosis of CRC and management is the best way in achieving good outcomes and longer survival but patients aged ≥75 years are usually not screened for CRC. This group of patients is often required to be managed when they are symptomatic in the emergency setting with high morbidity and mortality rates. Our main aim is to provide clinical data about the management of elderly patients presenting complicated colorectal cancer who required emergency surgical management to improve their care.

METHODS

The management of complicated COlorectal cancer in OLDER patients (CO-OLDER; ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05788224; evaluated by the local ethical committee CPP EST III-France with the national number 2023-A01094-41) in the emergency setting project provides carrying out an observational multicenter international cohort study aimed to collect data about patients aged ≥75 years to assess modifiable risk factors for negative outcomes and mortality correlated to the emergency surgical management of this group of patients at risk admitted with a complicated (obstructed and perforated) CRC. The CO-OLDER protocol was approved by Institutional Review Board and released. Each CO-OLDER collaborator is asked to enroll ≥25 patients over a study period from 1st January 2018 to 30th October 2023. Data will be analyzed comparing two periods of study: before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. A sample size of 240 prospectively enrolled patients with obstructed colorectal cancer in a 5-month period was calculated. The secured database for entering anonymized data will be available for the period necessary to achieve the highest possible participation.

RESULTS

One hundred eighty hospitals asked to be a CO-OLDER collaborator, with 36 potentially involved countries over the world.

CONCLUSIONS

The CO-OLDER project aims to improve the management of elderly people presenting with a complicated colorectal cancer in the emergency setting. Our observational global study can provide valuable data on the effectiveness of different management strategies in improving primary assessment, management and outcomes for elderly patients with obstructed or perforated colorectal cancer in the emergency setting, guiding clinical decision-making. This information can help healthcare providers make informed decisions about the best course of action for these patients.

Diagnostic yield from symptomatic lower gastrointestinal endoscopy in the UK: A British Society of Gastroenterology analysis using data from the National Endoscopy Database

BACKGROUND

The value of lower gastrointestinal endoscopy (LGIE; colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy) relates to its ability to detect clinically relevant findings, predominantly cancers, preneoplastic polyps or inflammatory bowel disease. There are concerns that many LGIEs are performed on low-risk patients with limited benefit.

AIMS

To determine the diagnostic outcomes of LGIE for common symptoms.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study of diagnostic LGIE between March 2019 and February 2020 using the UK National Endoscopy Database. We used mixed-effects logistic regression models, incorporating random (endoscopist) and fixed (symptoms, patient age, and sex) effects upon two dependent variables (large polyp [≥10 mm] and cancer diagnosis). Adjusted positive predictive values (aPPVs) were calculated.

RESULTS

We analysed 384,510 LGIEs; 33.2% were performed on patients aged under 50 and 53.6% on women. Regarding colonoscopies, the unadjusted PPV for cancer was 1.5% (95% CI: 1.4-1.5); higher for men than women (1.9% vs. 1.1%, p < 0.01). The PPV for large polyps was 3.2% (95% CI: 3.1-3.2). The highest colonoscopy cancer aPPVs were in the over 50s (1.9%) and in those with rectal bleeding (2.5%) or anaemia (2.1%). Cancer aPPVs for other symptoms were <1% despite representing 54.3% of activity. In patients under 50, aPPVs were 0.4% for cancer and 1.6% for large polyps. Results were similar for sigmoidoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Most colonoscopies were performed on patients with low-risk symptoms, where cancer risk was similar to the general population. Cancer and large polyp yield was highest in elderly patients with rectal bleeding or anaemia, although still fell short of FIT-based screening yields.

During the COVID-19 pandemic 20 000 prostate cancer diagnoses were missed in England

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on prostate cancer incidence, prevalence, and mortality in England.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

With the approval of NHS England and using the OpenSAFELY-TPP dataset of 24 million patients, we undertook a cohort study of men diagnosed with prostate cancer. We visualised monthly rates in prostate cancer incidence, prevalence, and mortality per 100 000 adult men from January 2015 to July 2023. To assess the effect of the pandemic, we used generalised linear models and the pre-pandemic data to predict the expected rates from March 2020 as if the pandemic had not occurred. The 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the predicted values were used to estimate the significance of the difference between the predicted and observed rates.

RESULTS

In 2020, there was a drop in recorded incidence by 4772 (31%) cases (15 550 vs 20 322; 95% CI 19 241-21 403). In 2021, the incidence started to recover, and the drop was 3148 cases (18%, 17 950 vs 21 098; 95% CI 19 740-22 456). By 2022, the incidence returned to the levels that would be expected. During the pandemic, the age at diagnosis shifted towards older men. In 2020, the average age was 71.6 (95% CI 71.5-71.8) years, in 2021 it was 71.8 (95% CI 71.7-72.0) years as compared to 71.3 (95% CI 71.1-71.4) years in 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

Given that our dataset represents 40% of the population, we estimate that proportionally the pandemic led to 20 000 missed prostate cancer diagnoses in England alone. The increase in incidence recorded in 2023 was not enough to account for the missed cases. The prevalence of prostate cancer remained lower throughout the pandemic than expected. As the recovery efforts continue, healthcare should focus on finding the men who were affected. The research should focus on investigating the potential harms to men diagnosed at older age.

Transforming post pandemic cancer services

This paper outlines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer services in the UK including screening, symptomatic diagnosis, treatment pathways and projections on clinical outcomes as a result of these care disruptions. A restoration of cancer services to pre-pandemic levels is not likely to mitigate this adverse impact, particularly with an ageing population and increased cancer burden. New cancer cases are projected to rise to over 500,000 per year by 2035, with over 4 million people living with and beyond cancer. This paper calls for a strategic transformation to prioritise effort on the basis of available datasets and evidence-in particular, to prioritise cancers where an earlier diagnosis is feasible and clinically useful with a focus on mortality benefit by preventing emergency presentations by harnessing data and analytics. This could be delivered by a focus on underperforming groups/areas to try and reduce inequity, linking near real-time datasets with clinical decision support systems at the primary and secondary care levels, promoting the use of novel technologies to improve patient uptake of services, screening and diagnosis, and finally, upskilling and cross-skilling healthcare workers to expand supply of diagnostic and screening services.

Investigation of the impact of COVID-19 on postoperative outcomes using a nationwide Japanese database of patients undergoing laparoscopic distal gastrectomy and low anterior resection for gastric cancer and rectal cancer

Background

The COVID-19 outbreak made conventional medical care impossible, forcing changes in both healthcare providers and patients. In Japan, COVID-19 infection began spreading in earnest in 2020 and exploded in 2021. There was concern that the medical impact of COVID-19 in 2021 would differ from that in 2020. We aimed to clarify the impact of COVID-19 on mortality and anastomotic leakage in laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer and rectal cancer in Japan using the National Clinical Database (NCD).

Methods

We collected data from patients who underwent laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) and laparoscopic low anterior resection (LLAR) from January 2018 to December 2021 from the NCD, a web-based surgical registration system in Japan. The number of surgical cases, monthly incidence of mortality and morbidity (anastomotic leakage), standardized mortality ratio (SMR), and standardized morbidity-leakage ratio (SMLR [ratio of observed patients to expected patients calculated using the risk calculator established in the NCD]) were evaluated.

Results

The numbers of LDG and LLAR cases continued to decline in the first year of the pandemic in 2020 and were as low in 2021 as in 2020. Although the numbers of robot-assisted LDG and LLAR cases increased, the growth rate was lower than the rate of increase prior to the pandemic. Mortality and anastomotic leakage, two of the most important complications, as assessed by SMR and SMLR, did not worsen during the pandemic in comparison to the pre-pandemic period.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic surgeries were performed safely in Japan and were not affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

FIT negative clinic as a safety net for low-risk patients with colorectal cancer: impact on endoscopy and radiology utilisation-a retrospective cohort study

Background

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence to triage symptomatic primary care patients who have unexplained symptoms but do not meet the criteria for a suspected lower gastrointestinal cancer pathway. During the COVID-19 pandemic, FIT was used to triage patients referred with urgent 2-week wait (2ww) cancer referrals instead of a direct-to-test strategy. FIT-negative patients were assessed and safety netted in a FIT negative clinic.

Methods

We reviewed case notes for 622 patients referred on a 2ww pathway and seen in a FIT negative clinic between June 2020 and April 2021 in a tertiary care hospital. We collected information on demographics, indication for referral, dates for referral, clinic visit, investigations and long-term outcomes.

Results

The average age of the patients was 71.5 years with 54% female, and a median follow-up of 2.5 years. Indications for referrals included: anaemia (11%), iron deficiency (24%), weight loss (9%), bleeding per rectum (5%) and change in bowel habits (61%). Of the cases, 28% (95% CI 24% to 31%) had endoscopic (15%, 95% CI 12% to 18%) and/or radiological (20%, 95% CI 17% to 23%) investigations requested after clinic review, and among those investigated, malignancy rate was 1.7%, with rectosigmoid neuroendocrine tumour, oesophageal cancer and lung adenocarcinoma.

Conclusion

A FIT negative clinic provides a safety net for patients with unexplained symptoms but low risk of colorectal cancer. These real-world data demonstrate significantly reduced demand on endoscopy and radiology services for FIT-negative patients referred via the 2ww pathway.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the performance of endoscopy in the Tohoku region of Japan

Objectives

The whole picture of the disturbance in endoscopy performance caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Japan remains to be clarified. Therefore, the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society-Tohoku conducted this questionnaire survey in Tohoku region of Japan.

Methods

A questionnaire on the number of diagnostic endoscopy procedures and resulting diagnosed cancers in 2019 and 2020 was sent to all guidance/guidance cooperation hospitals in the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society who worked in the Tohoku region. The percentage change was calculated by comparing the numbers in 2020 with those in 2019 (the pre-COVID-19 period).

Results

Among the applicable 89 guidance/guidance cooperation hospitals, 83 (94%) returned the questionnaire. The number of endoscopy procedures promptly decreased to the nadir in April and May 2020 (during the first state of emergency in Japan); however, it recovered relatively quickly, within a few months after the state of emergency was lifted. Consequently, the annual reduction in the number of endoscopy procedures in 2020 (in comparison to 2019) was 10.1% for esophagogastroduodenoscopy and 7.9% for colonoscopy. The reduction in the number of diagnostic endoscopy procedures led to a 5.5% reduction in esophagogastric cancer and 2.7% in colorectal cancer.

Conclusions

This is the most comprehensive survey on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the performance of endoscopy and the resulting diagnosis of cancer in Japan. Understanding the magnitude of the decline in endoscopic examinations and cancer detection due to the pandemic is critical to understanding how many people will ultimately be affected and establishing a strategy for providing endoscopy during national emergencies.

Development and External Validation of a Prediction Model for Colorectal Cancer Among Patients Awaiting Surveillance Colonoscopy Following Polypectomy

Background and Aims

Demand for surveillance colonoscopy can sometimes exceed capacity, such as during and following the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, yet no tools exist to prioritize the patients most likely to be diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) among those awaiting surveillance colonoscopy. We developed a multivariable prediction model for CRC at surveillance comparing performance to a model that assigned patients as low or high risk based solely on polyp characteristics (guideline-based model).

Methods

Logistic regression was used for model development among patients receiving surveillance colonoscopy in 2014-2019. Candidate predictors included index colonoscopy indication, findings, and endoscopist adenoma detection rate, and patient and clinical characteristics at surveillance. Patients were randomly divided into model development (n = 36,994) and internal validation cohorts (n = 15,854). External validation was performed on 30,015 patients receiving surveillance colonoscopy in 2020-2022, and the multivariable model was then updated and retested.

Results

One hundred fourteen, 43, and 71 CRCs were detected at surveillance in the 3 cohorts, respectively. Polyp size ≥10 mm, adenoma detection rate <32.5% or missing, patient age, and ever smoked tobacco were significant CRC predictors; this multivariable model outperformed the guideline-based model (internal validation cohort area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve: 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.66-0.81 vs 0.52, 95% CI: 0.45-0.60). Performance declined at external validation but recovered with model updating (operating characteristic curve: 0.72 95% CI: 0.66-0.77).

Conclusion

When surveillance colonoscopy demand exceeds capacity, a prediction model featuring common clinical predictors may help prioritize patients at highest risk for CRC among those awaiting surveillance. Also, regular model updates can address model performance drift.

Decline in Cancer Diagnoses during the 'Zero COVID' Policy in Hong Kong: Indirect Spillover Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic

AIMS

Despite a largely successful 'zero COVID' policy in 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted routine cancer services in the city of Hong Kong. The aims of this study were to examine the trends in cancer incidence before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and estimate missed cancer diagnoses.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used population-based data from the Hong Kong Cancer Registry 1983-2020 to examine the trends of age- and sex-standardised cancer incidence before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We applied: (i) the annual average percentage change (AAPC) calculated using the Joinpoint regression model and (ii) the autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model to forecast cancer incidence rates in 2020. Missed cancer diagnoses in 2020 were estimated by comparing forecasted incidence rates to reported rates. A subgroup analysis was conducted by sex, age and cancer site.

RESULTS

The cancer incidence in Hong Kong declined by 4.4% from 2019 to 2020 (male 8.1%; female 1.1%) compared with the long-term AAPC of 0.5% from 2005 to 2019 (95% confidence interval 0.3, 0.7). The gap between the reported and forecasted incidence for 2020 ranged from 5.1 to 5.7% (male 8.5%, 9.8%; female 2.3%, 3.5%). We estimated 1525-1596 missed cancer diagnoses (ARIMA estimate -98, 3148; AAPC 514, 1729) in 2020. Most missed diagnoses were in males (ARIMA 1361 [327, 2394]; AAPC 1401 [1353, 1460]), with an estimated 479-557 missed cases of colorectal cancer (ARIMA 112, 837; AAPC 518, 597) and 256-352 missed cases of prostate cancer (AAPC 231, 280; ARIMA 110, 594).

CONCLUSION

The incidence of new cancer diagnoses declined in 2020 contrary to the long-term increase over the previous decades. Significantly lower diagnoses than expected were observed in males, particularly for colorectal and prostate cancers. Fewer reported cancer cases indicate missed diagnoses and could lead to delayed treatment that could impact future health outcomes.

Inequalities in the recovery of colorectal cancer services during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national population-based study

AIM

Evidence is lacking on whether there were inequalities in the recovery of colorectal cancer (CRC) services within the English National Health Service (NHS) following the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to evaluate recovery according to patient age and socioeconomic status.

METHOD

Using routinely collected data, CRC patients diagnosed and treated in the English NHS were identified for two timeframes: the 'initial pandemic period' (April-June 2020) and the 'pandemic period' (April 2020-March 2022). Poisson models evaluated changes in numbers of diagnoses, major resections, adjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant radiotherapy use for each timeframe, relative to the equivalent pre-pandemic timeframe (April-June 2019 and April 2018-March 2020, respectively), stratified by age and socioeconomic status. Tumour stage at presentation was evaluated over time.

RESULTS

Substantial deficits in diagnoses, major resections and adjuvant chemotherapy were identified in the initial pandemic period, whilst the use of neoadjuvant radiotherapy increased. Overall, these deficits recovered. Patients outside screening age, and in the most deprived group, had greater deficits in diagnoses and major resections. There was no evidence of stage migration by June 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

CRC services showed recovery to baseline during the pandemic. However, evident inequalities must be addressed in ongoing recovery efforts. Long-term outcomes will fully establish the impact of the pandemic on CRC patients.

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.

An algorithm-based active cleansing protocol can reduce the bowel preparation time for screening colonoscopy: A propensity score matching study

BACKGROUND

Methods that minimize the time for on-site bowel preparation before colonoscopy are needed. We prospectively validated that a novel algorithm-based active cleansing (ABAC) protocol could reduce the time for preparation compared with the conventional method.

METHODS

This was an open-label, multicenter, prospective comparative study from April to October 2021. The study compared the bowel preparation time for colonoscopy between patients instructed with the ABAC protocol and control groups. Patients in the ABAC protocol group as well as the control group were administered 2000 mL of polyethylene glycol (PEG) within 2 hours. After the first two hours, patients in the protocol group voluntarily took 300 ml of the solution without the instruction of nursing staff depending on the number of defecations in the first 2 hours. The intervention and control groups were adjusted for background characteristics by propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

After adjustment by PSM, 174 patients in each of the two groups were included in the final analysis. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the preparation time was significantly shorter in the intervention group than that in the control group (126.3 ± 32.7 min vs. 144.9 ± 39.9 min, P = 0.018). The proportion of additional PEG intake was significantly higher in the intervention group (16 [9.2%] vs. 6 [3.4%], P = 0.047). The number of defecations was also higher in the intervention group than in the control group (7.8 ± 2.5 vs. 6.3 ± 2.2, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Simple active instruction protocol is effective to reduce on-site bowel preparation time and nursing staff labor for colonoscopy.

Public Imaging Datasets of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy for Artificial Intelligence: a Review

With the advances in endoscopic technologies and artificial intelligence, a large number of endoscopic imaging datasets have been made public to researchers around the world. This study aims to review and introduce these datasets. An extensive literature search was conducted to identify appropriate datasets in PubMed, and other targeted searches were conducted in GitHub, Kaggle, and Simula to identify datasets directly. We provided a brief introduction to each dataset and evaluated the characteristics of the datasets included. Moreover, two national datasets in progress were discussed. A total of 40 datasets of endoscopic images were included, of which 34 were accessible for use. Basic and detailed information on each dataset was reported. Of all the datasets, 16 focus on polyps, and 6 focus on small bowel lesions. Most datasets (n = 16) were constructed by colonoscopy only, followed by normal gastrointestinal endoscopy and capsule endoscopy (n = 9). This review may facilitate the usage of public dataset resources in endoscopic research.

Colon Bowel Preparation in the Era of Artificial Intelligence: Is There Potential for Enhancing Colon Bowel Cleansing?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Proper bowel preparation is of paramount importance for enhancing adenoma detection rates and reducing postcolonoscopic colorectal cancer risk. Despite recommendations from gastroenterology societies regarding the optimal rates of successful bowel preparation, these guidelines are frequently unmet. Various approaches have been employed to enhance the rates of successful bowel preparation, yet the quality of cleansing remains suboptimal. Intensive bowel preparation techniques, supplementary administration of bowel solutions, and educational interventions aimed at improving patient adherence to instructions have been commonly utilized, particularly among patients at a high risk of inadequate bowel preparation. Expedited strategies conducted on the same day as the procedure have also been endorsed by scientific organizations. More recently, the utilization of artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged for the preprocedural detection of inadequate bowel preparation, holding the potential to guide the preparation process immediately preceding colonoscopy. This manuscript comprehensively reviews the current strategies employed to optimize bowel cleansing, with a specific focus on patients with elevated risks for inadequate bowel preparation. Additionally, the prospective role of AI in this context is thoroughly examined.

CONCLUSIONS

While a majority of outpatients may achieve cleanliness with standard cleansing protocols, dealing with hard-to-prepare patients remains a challenge. Rescue strategies based on AI are promising, but such evidence remains limited. To ensure proper bowel cleansing, a combination of strategies should be performed.

Short-term and long-term outcomes of patients with gastric cancer during versus before the COVID-19 pandemic: cohort study using propensity score matching method

BACKGROUND

The negative effects of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on patients with gastric cancer are poorly understood. This study was designed to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of patients with gastric cancer in the same period before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected consecutive patients with definite diagnosis of gastric cancer at our center between 1 January and 30 June of 2019 (Before COVID-19) and 2020 (During COVID-19). A comparison was made between the number of patients and their characteristics before and during the COVID-19 epidemic. Propensity score matching (PSM) at 1:1 ratio was performed to evaluate the outcomes of patients that underwent laparoscopic radical gastrectomy in two groups.

RESULT

The total number of patients diagnosed with gastric cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic increased by 21.4%, compared to that before the COVID-19 pandemic. AII the qualified patients were divided Before COVID-19 Pandemic group (BCP n = 99) and During COVID-19 Pandemic group (DCP n = 118). PSM yielded 81 patients with comparable baseline characteristics into each group. Compared to the BCP group, the DCP group had longer surgery time(P = 0.011), more blood loss(P = 0.015), longer postoperative hospital stay(P = 0.002). No statistical differences were observed in terms of type of resection, number of retrieved lymph nodes (LNs), pathology, short-term and long-term complications (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients diagnosed with gastric cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic had comparable short-term outcomes and long-term complications, but worse peri-operative outcomes, compared to that before the COVID-19 pandemic. Further research is needed to investigate long-term outcomes.

COVID-19 pandemic impact on screening and diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The healthcare level has been greatly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic compared with before the outbreak. This study aimed to review the impact of COVID-19 on the screening and diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa).

METHOD

The current study was designed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020. The keywords used to perform the search strategy were COVID-19 and prostate neoplasms. The four primary electronic databases comprising PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus and Embase were searched until 1 September 2022. After screening and selecting studies through the EndNote software, data were extracted from each included study by two independent authors. All studies were evaluated according to Newcastle-Ottawa Scale quality assessment tool.

RESULTS

As a result, 40 studies were included, categorised into two subjects. The majority of studies indicated a significant decrease in screening prostate-specific antibody tests during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with the pre-pandemic period, leading to delays in cancer diagnosis. The decrease in the number of diagnosed cases with low/intermediate stages to some extent was more than those with advanced stages. The PCa screening and diagnosis reduction ranged from nearly 0% to 78% and from 4.1% to 71.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our findings showed that during the COVID-19 lockdown, delays in PCa screening tests and diagnoses led to the negative health effects on patients with PCa. Thus, it is highly recommended performing regular cancer screening to reduce the impact of the COVID-19 lockdown.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021291656.

A Single-Center Study of the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Organization of Healthcare Service Delivery to Patients with Head and Neck Cancer

The aim of this study was to identify and assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis and treatment of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients of the Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery of the 4th Military Teaching Hospital in Wroclaw for whom oncological treatment was planned by a cancer case board between March 2018 and February 2022. We analysed the medical records of 625 patients. In order to verify whether the relationships between the analysed features were statistically significant, the chi-square test of independence and the Student's t-test for independent samples were used (p < 0.05). Our analysis showed that the impact of the pandemic on the organization of health service delivery to HNC patients was not uniform. The largest difference in the number of formulated treatment plans was observed at the beginning of the pandemic (22.1% reduction compared with the year before the pandemic). During the pandemic, the proportion of patients admitted on the basis of a DILO (diagnosis and oncological treatment) card issued by a primary care physician, instead of a regular referral to hospital, issued also by a primary care physician, was significantly higher compared with the that during the pre-pandemic period. The majority of cancer patients with a oncological treatment planned during the pandemic lived in urban areas. During the pandemic, the number of patients with more-advanced-stage cancer, assessed on the basis of the type of planned treatment (radical vs. palliative), did not increase compared with that during the pre-pandemic period. However, our follow-up period was quite short. It is necessary to intensify activities aimed at promoting health and increasing health awareness in people living in rural areas and setting long-term priorities and objectives for health policies at the national, regional and local levels, with particular focus on this group of people.

Changes in the Number of Gastrointestinal Cancers and Stage at Diagnosis with COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan: A Multicenter Cohort Study

This retrospective cohort study compared the number of newly diagnosed patients, stage at diagnosis, and detection process of gastrointestinal cancers based on hospital-based cancer registry data at two tertiary Japanese hospitals. The pre-COVID-19 period was from January 2017 to February 2020, with phase 1 (midst of COVID-19 pandemic) from March to December 2020 and phase 2 (the transition period to the "new normal") from January to December 2021. Each month, the number of patients diagnosed with esophageal, gastric, colorectal, pancreatic, liver, and biliary tract cancers were aggregated, classified by stage and detection process, and compared, including a total of 6453 patients. The number of colorectal Stage 0-II patients decreased significantly in phase 1 and increased in phase 2. The total number of colorectal cancer patients returned to pre-COVID-19 levels (mean monthly patients [SD]: 41.61 [6.81] vs. 36.00 [6.72] vs. 46.00 [11.32]). The number of patients with gastric cancer Stage I significantly decreased in phase 2 following phase 1. The number of gastric cancer patients decreased significantly from pre-COVID-19 levels (30.63 [6.62] vs. 22.40 [5.85] vs. 24.50 [4.15]). During phase 2, the number of patients diagnosed after screening with colorectal cancer increased significantly, whereas that with gastric cancer remained considerably lower. The number of Stage III colorectal and gastric cancer patients increased significantly from the pre-COVID-19 levels. Thus, gastric cancer may not be optimally screened during phases 1 and 2. There was a significant increase in patients with Stage III colorectal and gastric cancers from the pre-COVID-19 period; hence, the stage at diagnosis may have progressed.

Colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma incidence during post-polypectomy surveillance: a national cohort study in the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme

BACKGROUND

Improved colonoscopy quality has led to debate about whether all post-polypectomy surveillance is justified. We evaluated surveillance within the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) to determine the yield of surveillance and identify predictive factors for surveillance outcome.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of individuals undergoing post-polypectomy surveillance between July 2006 and January 2017. BCSP records were linked to the National Cancer Registration Database to identify interval-type post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers (CRCs). Advanced adenoma and CRC at surveillance were documented. CRC incidence was compared with the general population using standardized incidence ratios (SIRs). Predictors of advanced adenomas at first surveillance (S1), and CRC during follow-up, were identified.

RESULTS

44 151 individuals (23 078 intermediate risk; 21 073 high risk) underwent 64 544 surveillance episodes. Advanced adenoma and CRC yields were, respectively, 10.0 % and 0.5 % at S1, 8.5 % and 0.4 % at S2, and 10.8 % and 0.4 % at S3. S1 yield was lowest in those with one index adenoma ≥ 10 mm (advanced adenoma 6.1 %; CRC 0.3 %). The SIR was 0.76 (95 %CI 0.66-0.88), accounted for by the intermediate risk group (intermediate risk SIR 0.61, 95 %CI 0.49-0.75; high risk SIR 0.95, 95 %CI 0.79-1.15). Adenoma multiplicity, presence of a large nonpedunculated adenoma, and greater villous component were associated with advanced adenoma at S1. Older age and multiplicity were significantly associated with CRC risk.

CONCLUSION

This large, national analysis found low levels of CRC in those undergoing surveillance and low advanced adenoma yield in most subgroups. Less intensive surveillance in some subgroups is warranted, and surveillance may be avoided in those with a single large adenoma.

Triage policy to postpone endoscopy for patients with low-risk varices is safe during the lockdown period of COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND & AIMS

During the COVID-19 pandemic, most of the endoscopic services were electively postponed or suspended. We aimed to assess the safety of a triage policy in patients receiving esophageal variceal ligation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Triage policy of endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) was implemented in our hospital during the lockdown period from 15th May 2021 to 26th July 2021. One experienced gastroenterologist reviewed the prior-scheduled list of patients for the EVL prophylaxisprogram. We compared the clinical characteristics and outcomes with those receiving endoscopy due to esophageal varices from 17th May 2020 to 28th July 2020.

RESULTS

Of the 124 patients receiving EVL, a higher percentage of esophageal variceal bleeding (EVB) was noted (9/32, 28.1% vs. 8/92, 8.7%, p = 0.006) during the lockdown period, with a higher percentage of EVB in the referrals (7/9, 77.8% vs. 2/14, 14.2%, p = 0.007). Among patients who received prophylactic EVL, 6 of 78 (7.7%) experienced EVB during the normal period, which is no different to 2 of 23 (8.7%) during the lockdown period. Twenty-three patients whose endoscopies were postponed by triage policy due to low-risk or eradicated varices did not experience EVB during the lockdown period. Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) class C was predictive of EVB (relative risk 8.400, P = 0.033), entering the program of prophylactic EVL was the protective factor of EVB (relative risk 0.016, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Entrance into the prophylaxis program does not only decreases risk of EVB but also fosters comprehensive triage to postpone endoscopy during the lockdown period.

THE IMPACT OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND PROCEDURES IN A HIGH-VOLUME ENDOSCOPY UNIT IN BRAZIL

•In pancreatic neoplasms the EUS plays a key role in the management. •During the pandemic period, lockdown measures prevented patients with comorbidities from performing EUS. •The D-EUS decreased during COVID-19, while I-EUS increased and EUS-TA was the most commonly I-EUS procedure performed, with no increase in adverse events. •Despite the moderate impact of the pandemic period in endoscopic services around the world, EUS-TA of solid and cystic tumors of the pancreas was the main indication. Background - Reports of the impact of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic period/2020 on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) are scarce. Objective - We analyzed the impact of the pandemic period/2020 on the demographics, indications, and number of diagnostic EUS (D-EUS) and interventional EUS (I-EUS) procedures performed in a high-volume endoscopy unit compared with the previous non-pandemic period/2019. Methods - We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all patients undergoing D-EUS or I-EUS from March 1, 2019, to February 29, 2020 (non-pandemic period/2019) and from March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021 (pandemic period/2020). Data compared between the study periods included sex, age, comorbidities, EUS findings and diagnosis, need for interventional procedures during EUS, and adverse events (AEs). Results were significant at P<0.05. Results - EUS procedures decreased from 475 in the non-pandemic period/2019 to 289 in the pandemic period/2020, accounting for a 39% reduction. In non-pandemic period/2019, 388 (81.7%) D-EUS and 88 (18.5%) I-EUS were performed, against 206 (71.3%) D-EUS and 83 (28.7%) I-EUS in pandemic period/2020 (P=0.001). Only 5/289 (1.7%) patients had COVID-19. Fewer patients with comorbidities underwent EUS during pandemic period/2020 due to lockdown measures (P<0.001). D-EUS decreased, whereas I-EUS increased (P<0.001). EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) was the most common I-EUS, performed in 83/289 (28.7%) patients in pandemic period/2020, against 88/475 (18.5%) in non-pandemic period/2019 (P=0.001). AEs did not differ significantly between the study periods. Conclusion - Pandemic Period/2020 had a moderate impact on reducing EUS procedures due to the risks involved. Although I-EUS increased, EUS-related AEs did not. Solid and cystic pancreatic tumors remained a major indication for EUS-TA even during the pandemic period/2020.

Real-life patency of plastic biliary stents in the pandemic era: is stent removal after 6 months safe and effective?

BACKGROUND

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic conditioned the optimal timing of some endoscopic procedures. ESGE guidelines recommend replacement or removal of the plastic biliary stents within 3-6 months to reduce the risk of complications. Our aim was to analyse the outcomes of patients who had delayed plastic biliary stent removal following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the pandemic era.

METHODS

Retrospective study including consecutive ERCPs with plastic biliary stent placement between January 2019 and December 2021. Delayed removal was defined as presence of biliary stent >6 months after ERCP. The evaluated outcomes were stent migration, stent dysfunction, obstructive jaundice, cholangitis, acute pancreatitis, hospitalization, and biliary pathology-related mortality.

RESULTS

One-hundred and twenty ERCPs were included, 56.7% male patients, with a mean age of 69.4 ± 15.7 years. Indications for plastic biliary stent insertion were choledocholithiasis (72.5%), benign biliary stricture (20.0%), and post-cholecystectomy fistula (7.5%). Delayed stent removal occurred in 32.5% of the cases. The median time to stent removal was 3.5 ± 1.3 months for early removal and 8.6 ± 3.1 months for delayed removal. Patients who had delayed stent removal did not have a significantly higher frequency of stent migration (20.5 vs 11.1%, p = 0.17), stent dysfunction (17.9 vs 13.6%, p = 0.53), hospitalization (17.9 vs 14.8%, p = 0.66), obstructive jaundice (2.6 vs 0.0%, p = 0.33), cholangitis (10.3 vs 13.6%, p = 0.77), acute pancreatitis (0.0 vs 1.2%, p = 1.0), or biliary pathology-related mortality (2.6 vs 1.2%, p = 0.55).

CONCLUSIONS

Delayed plastic biliary stent removal does not seem to have a negative impact on patients' outcomes. In the current pandemic situation, while scheduled endoscopic procedures may have to be postponed, elective removal of plastic biliary stents can be safely deferred.

The Challenges of Gastric Cancer Surgery during the COVID-19 Pandemic

The aim of this study was to quantify the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the surgical treatment of patients with gastric cancer. Data from patients undergoing surgery for gastric cancer during the pandemic were analyzed and the results obtained were compared with the corresponding periods of 2016-2017 and 2018-2019. Various parameters were taken into consideration and their dynamics highlight significant changes in the pandemic year compared with the two pre-pandemic periods. Statistical analysis revealed a marked decrease in the number of surgeries performed during the pandemic (p < 0.001). Severe prognostic factors for gastric cancer, including weight loss and upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage, were associated with an increased number of postoperative fistulas, while emesis was statistically correlated with a more advanced cancer stage (p < 0.011). There was also a reduction in the total duration of hospitalization (p = 0.044) and postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.047); moreover, the mean duration of surgical intervention was higher during the pandemic (p = 0.044). These findings provide evidence for the significant changes in clinical and therapeutic strategies applied to patients undergoing surgery for gastric cancer during the study period. The ongoing pandemic has exerted a substantial and complex impact, the full extent of which remains yet to be fully comprehended.

A Review of the Effect of COVID-19-Related Lockdowns on Global Cancer Screening

COVID-19 lockdowns have led to significant disruptions in preventative health services worldwide. This review aims to assess the impact of COVID-19 lockdowns on worldwide preventive cancer screening participation. Major medical databases were searched using the keywords 'lockdown,' 'cancer,' and 'screening or diagnosis,' and relevant articles were evaluated against inclusion and exclusion criteria. The final review consisted of 38 studies. The impact of COVID-19 on screening uptake was categorized based on cancer type. All types of screening had decreased participation during or around the lockdown period. Racial and socioeconomic disparities, provider-related barriers, and patient attitudes about service disruptions during the pandemic were also highlighted in this review. Future research should focus on data from low- and middle-income countries to obtain a more comprehensive picture of the problem. Policy interventions that adopt self-screening or different screening intervals can also be considered to reduce impacts in future crises. Insights from existing studies and future research will allow for more proactive measures to manage future disruptions.

Study of capsule endoscopy delivery at scale through enhanced artificial intelligence-enabled analysis (the CESCAIL study)

AIM

Lower gastrointestinal (GI) diagnostics have been facing relentless capacity constraints for many years, even before the COVID-19 era. Restrictions from the COVID pandemic have resulted in a significant backlog in lower GI diagnostics. Given recent developments in deep neural networks (DNNs) and the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in endoscopy, automating capsule video analysis is now within reach. Comparable to the efficiency and accuracy of AI applications in small bowel capsule endoscopy, AI in colon capsule analysis will also improve the efficiency of video reading and address the relentless demand on lower GI services. The aim of the CESCAIL study is to determine the feasibility, accuracy and productivity of AI-enabled analysis tools (AiSPEED) for polyp detection compared with the 'gold standard': a conventional care pathway with clinician analysis.

METHOD

This multi-centre, diagnostic accuracy study aims to recruit 674 participants retrospectively and prospectively from centres conducting colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) as part of their standard care pathway. After the study participants have undergone CCE, the colon capsule videos will be uploaded onto two different pathways: AI-enabled video analysis and the gold standard conventional clinician analysis pathway. The reports generated from both pathways will be compared for accuracy (sensitivity and specificity). The reading time can only be compared in the prospective cohort. In addition to validating the AI tool, this study will also provide observational data concerning its use to assess the pathway execution in real-world performance.

RESULTS

The study is currently recruiting participants at multiple centres within the United Kingdom and is at the stage of collecting data.

CONCLUSION

This standard diagnostic accuracy study carries no additional risk to patients as it does not affect the standard care pathway, and hence patient care remains unaffected.

Computer vision-based solutions to overcome the limitations of wireless capsule endoscopy

Endoscopic investigation plays a critical role in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal (GI) diseases. Since 2001, Wireless Capsule Endoscopy (WCE) has been available for small bowel exploration and is in continuous development. Over the last decade, WCE has achieved impressive improvements in areas such as miniaturisation, image quality and battery life. As a result, WCE is currently a very useful alternative to wired enteroscopy in the investigation of various small bowel abnormalities and has the potential to become the leading screening technique for the entire gastrointestinal tract. However, commercial solutions still have several limitations, namely incomplete examination and limited diagnostic capacity. These deficiencies are related to technical issues, such as image quality, motion estimation and power consumption management. Computational methods, based on image processing and analysis, can help to overcome these challenges and reduce both the time required by reviewers and human interpretation errors. Research groups have proposed a series of methods including algorithms for locating the capsule or lesion, assessing intestinal motility and improving image quality.In this work, we provide a critical review of computational vision-based methods for WCE image analysis aimed at overcoming the technological challenges of capsules. This article also reviews several representative public datasets used to evaluate the performance of WCE techniques and methods. Finally, some promising solutions of computational methods based on the analysis of multiple-camera endoscopic images are presented.

The impact of early‐stage COVID‐19 pandemic on the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer: A cross‐sectional study using a large‐scale cancer registry in Hiroshima, Japan

Background

After the confirmation of coronavirus infection in Japan, a behavioral change caused people and physicians to refrain from visiting hospitals or undergoing examinations. This study aimed to assess how the trend of diagnosis in gastric cancers changed, and how it affected the therapeutic strategies and the interval from diagnosis to treatment during the COVID‐19 pandemic.

Methods

We use 15 cancer‐designated hospitals’ registries in Hiroshima, Japan. The target period was March to December 2020, and the same period in 2019 was set as the control period. The monthly mean of diagnoses and the interval from diagnosis to treatment were compared overall and separately by age, treatment procedure, diagnostic process, and clinical stage.

Result

In 2020, the monthly mean (standard deviation [SD]) of patients was 192.2 (29.9), a significant 20.1% decrease from 240.7 (20.7) in 2019 due to older age and curative treatment groups. By reason for performing endoscopy, the change rate in cancer screening, endoscopic follow‐up, and symptomatic status were ‐27.0%, ‐18.0%, and ‐17.3%, respectively. Meanwhile, the interval (days) from diagnosis to treatment (SD) was 37.8 (26.5) in 2020, significantly shorter than 46 (31.5) in 2019.

Conclusion

From 2019 to 2020, we observed a significant decrease in the diagnosis of curable early‐stage gastric cancer and treatments, although the interval from diagnosis to treatment decreased. This study suggests that cancer screening played a significant role in the decline in cancer diagnosis that occurred during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Even under COVID‐19 pandemic conditions, there should be an awareness of cancer screening and endoscopic follow‐up.

Unintended Consequences of COVID-19 Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs) for Population Health and Health Inequalities

Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020, governments around the world have adopted an array of measures intended to control the transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, using both pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). NPIs are public health interventions that do not rely on vaccines or medicines and include policies such as lockdowns, stay-at-home orders, school closures, and travel restrictions. Although the intention was to slow viral transmission, emerging research indicates that these NPIs have also had unintended consequences for other aspects of public health. Hence, we conducted a narrative review of studies investigating these unintended consequences of NPIs, with a particular emphasis on mental health and on lifestyle risk factors for non-communicable diseases (NCD): physical activity (PA), overweight and obesity, alcohol consumption, and tobacco smoking. We reviewed the scientific literature using combinations of search terms such as 'COVID-19', 'pandemic', 'lockdowns', 'mental health', 'physical activity', and 'obesity'. NPIs were found to have considerable adverse consequences for mental health, physical activity, and overweight and obesity. The impacts on alcohol and tobacco consumption varied greatly within and between studies. The variability in consequences for different groups implies increased health inequalities by age, sex/gender, socioeconomic status, pre-existing lifestyle, and place of residence. In conclusion, a proper assessment of the use of NPIs in attempts to control the spread of the pandemic should be weighed against the potential adverse impacts on other aspects of public health. Our findings should also be of relevance for future pandemic preparedness and pandemic response teams.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Cancer Diagnosis in Madrid (Spain) Based on the RTMAD Tumor Registry (2019–2021)

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused a significant disruption to cancer diagnosis, treatment and prevention worldwide that could have serious consequences in the near future. We intend to evaluate the weight of this backlog on a community-wide scale in Madrid during the period 2020–2021, and whether a stage shift towards the advanced stage has occurred. Cancer diagnoses in the Madrid tumor registry (RTMAD) from 2019–2021 were evaluated. Absolute and percentage differences in annual volume and observed-to-expected (O/E) volume ratios were calculated. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the O/E ratio. The SIR for 2020–2021 compared to 2019 was 94.5% (95% CI 93.8–95.3), with unequal gender-specific cancer diagnosis recovery (88.5% for males and 102.1% for females). Most cancer types were underdiagnosed in 2020. The tendency worsened in 2021 for colorectal and prostate cancers (87.8%), but lung cancer recovered (102.1%) and breast cancer was over-diagnosed (114.4%) compared with reference pre-COVID-19 data. These changes have modified the ranking of the most frequent malignancies diagnosed in Madrid. Breast cancer has overtaken colorectal and prostate cancers, displaced to second and third position, respectively. Not only was colorectal cancer diagnosis affected more as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic but diagnosis of this malignancy at the advance stage also increased by 3.6% in 2020 and 4.2% in 2021 compared to the reference period of 2019. In summary, there is a large volume of undetected cancer in Madrid caused by the reduced access to care secondary to the COVID-19 pandemic, especially regarding colorectal and prostate cancer. Strategies are needed to recover the backlog of diagnoses and effectively treat these cases in the future and solve the negative impact that will be caused by the diagnostic delay. Analyzing the impact of new diagnoses suffered by each different malignancy and their recovery will help to understand how the future allocation of resources should look.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Following the official announcement of the COVID-19 pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) in March 2020 and decreased activity of healthcare systems, relocation of resources, and the possible reluctance of patients to seek medical help, colorectal cancer patients were exposed to significant risks. Given that colon cancer is the third most common cancer and the second deadliest cancer in the world, its timely diagnosis and treatment are necessary to reduce costs and improve quality of life and patient survival. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis and treatment of colorectal cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A comprehensive search performed on June 2021 in various databases, including Medline, Web of Science, and Scopus. Keywords such as "diagnosis," "treatment," "coronavirus disease-19," "COVID-19," "coronavirus disease," "SARS-CoV-2 infection," "SARS-CoV-2," "2019-nCoV," "coronavirus, 2019 novel," "SARS-CoV-2 virus," severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2," "COVID-19," "COVID-19, coronavirus disease 19," "SARS coronavirus 2," "colorectal neoplasm," and "colorectal cancer " was used individually or a combination of these words. All retrieved articles were entered into a database on EndNote X7. Then, studies were first selected by title and then by abstract, and at the end, full texts were investigated.

RESULTS

Of the 850 studies, 43 were identified as eligible. According to studies, the diagnosis of colorectal cancer and the number of diagnostic procedures have decreased. Emergency visits due to obstruction or perforation of the large intestine or in advanced stages of cancer have increased, and a delay in the diagnosis of colorectal cancer has reported from 5.4 to 26%. Treatment of colorectal cancer has also decreased significantly or has been delayed, interrupted, or stopped. This reduction and delay have been observed in all treatments, including surgery, chemotherapy, and long-term radiation therapy; only cases of emergency surgery and short-term radiotherapy has increased. The waiting time for hospitalization and the length of hospital stay after surgery has been reported to be higher. Changes in patients' treatment plans and complete to partial cessation of hospitals activities-that provided treatment services-were reported.

CONCLUSION

According to the reduction in the diagnosis and treatment of colorectal cancer due to the COVID-19 pandemic, compensating for the reduction and preventing the continuation of this declining trend, requires serious and effective interventions to prevent its subsequent consequences, including referrals of people with advanced stages and emergency conditions, increasing treatment costs and reducing the quality of life and patients survival.