Time to surgery in thoracic cancers and prioritization during COVID-19: a systematic review

No detectable impact of short-term treatment delays on lung cancer survival

Timely initiation of treatment is a core principle of oncologic care, especially for aggressive cancers such as lung cancer. However, the real-world impact of short-term delays in treatment initiation on survival outcomes in lung cancer remains unclear. This meta-analysis evaluates the association between treatment delays of 4, 8, and 12 weeks and all-cause mortality in lung cancer patients. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies published between 2000 and 2025. Of 5360 screened records, 15 studies were included, comprising 16 cohorts for overall survival of lung cancer patients. Hazard ratios (HRs) for 4-, 8-, and 12-week treatment delays were estimated using random-effects meta-analyses. Heterogeneity was measured with the I2 statistic, and publication bias was assessed using funnel plots and Egger's test. No significant association was found between treatment delay and survival at any of the time points. Pooled HRs were 1.00 (95% CI, 0.99-1.02) for a 4-week delay, 1.01 (95% CI, 0.99-1.03) for an 8-week delay, and 1.01 (95% CI, 0.98-1.05) for a 12-week delay. Despite high heterogeneity (I2 = 97%), no evidence of publication bias was detected. This meta-analysis found no significant impact of short-term treatment delays (up to 12 weeks) on mortality in lung cancer patients. These findings challenge the assumption that brief delays universally worsen outcomes and underscore the importance of individualized treatment planning and prioritization.

Enhancing Care Coordination in Oncology and Nononcology Thoracic Surgery Care Pathways Through a Digital Health Solution: Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Health-system fragmentation in Quebec significantly impacts care coordination, leading to interruptions in patients' care pathways and adverse effects on their health. Coordinating interfacility service corridors is complex and requires collaboration between multiple health care providers (HCPs) and care settings. Effective care coordination is essential to ensure optimal patient management at transition points.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to improve oncology and nononcology thoracic surgery care pathways by enhancing care coordination during interfacility transfers through a digital health solution.

METHODS

A multicenter implementation study was conducted across 2 health regions and 2 health care facilities in Quebec. We conducted 27 semistructured interviews with HCPs and managers to better understand the care pathways. Participatory design workshops were held with future users and key stakeholders at an early stage of the technology's design to validate the prototype's functionalities and workflows. A web survey was sent to all end users (N=13) to assess their experience with the platform.

RESULTS

All participants (100%) either "agreed" or "strongly agreed" that the platform provided significant benefits. It enhanced interestablishment coordination (4/13, 31% agreed and 9/13, 69% strongly agreed) and continuity of care and services (8/13, 62% agreed and 5/13, 38% strongly agreed), and it contributed to better management and patient intake (10/13, 77% agreed and 3/13, 23% strongly agreed) and process fluidity (3/13, 77% agreed and 3/13, 23% strongly agreed). Surgeons from the McGill University Health Centre confirmed that the platform facilitated and secured information transmission (2/5, 40% agreed and 3/5, 60% strongly agreed) and kept track of oncology patient referrals, follow-up needs, and cases where surgery is unnecessary (2/5, 40% agreed and 3/5, 60% strongly agreed). Nursing staff from the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de l'Outaouais and McGill University Health Centre reported high satisfaction with the platform's support during preoperative visit, surgery, and discharge processes. All participants perceived the platform as intuitive and easy to use. Additionally, participants valued its efficiency in providing rapid access to patient data, which reduces task time and ensures document security, thereby improving care coordination across facilities. The project's success has convinced the HCPs and senior management at both health care facilities to pursue long-term use of the Akinox digital health platform.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot project represents a significant advancement in thoracic surgery care pathways and the coordination of interfacility health care service corridors. The project provides care pathways that are adaptable to other surgical specialties. It also paves the way for improving care in cancer and other health care networks while highlighting the key role of nurse navigators in patient care management. The project underscores the value of strategic leadership and stakeholders' collaboration to improve care coordination and operational efficiency by demonstrating technology's essential role in patient care pathways.

Timeliness of surgery for early-stage lung cancer: Patient factors and predictors

Objectives

Time-to-treatment initiation is an important consideration for patients undergoing thoracic surgery for early-stage lung cancer because delays have the potential to adversely affect outcomes. This study seeks to quantify time-to-treatment initiation for patients with clinical stage I lung cancer, explore patient factors and predictors that lead to an increased time-to-treatment initiation, and compare surgeon perception of appropriate time-to-treatment initiation to the results.

Methods

Time-to-treatment initiation was determined for patients enrolled in the Mount Sinai Initiative for Early Lung Cancer Research on Treatment study who underwent surgical resection for clinical stage I lung cancer between March 2016 and December 2021. The following dates were determined: (1) date of first suspicious radiologic imaging, (2) date of first biopsy, and (3) date of surgery. A total of 15 thoracic surgeons who participated in the Mount Sinai Initiative for Early Lung Cancer Research on Treatment were assessed on their perception on time-to-treatment initiation.

Results

For 638 patients, median time from first suspicious imaging findings to biopsy was 40 days, biopsy to surgery was 37 days, and suspicious imaging to surgery was 84 days. Significant factors that resulted in longer time-to-treatment initiation in the multivariate analysis were African American or Black race (P = .005), vascular disease (P = .01), and median household income less than $75,000 (P = .04). Although the surgeon's perception was that the average time from biopsy to surgery was 28 days, it was longer for 63.5% of participants; surgeon perception of maximum time between diagnosis and surgery was 84 days and longer for 28.7% of participants.

Conclusions

Patient factors such as race, income, and comorbidities were found to have differences in time-to-treatment initiation. Delays to surgery exceeded the expectations of thoracic surgeons.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Time to Treatment in Surgical Oncology: A National Registry Study in The Netherlands

To avoid delay in oncological treatment, a 6-weeks norm for time to treatment has been agreed on in The Netherlands. However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health systems resulted in reduced capacity for regular surgical care. In this study, we investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on time to treatment in surgical oncology in The Netherlands.

METHODS

A population-based analysis of data derived from five surgical audits, including patients who underwent surgery for lung cancer, colorectal cancer, upper gastro-intestinal, and hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) malignancies, was performed. The COVID-19 cohort of 2020 was compared to the historic cohorts of 2018 and 2019. Primary endpoints were time to treatment initiation and the proportion of patients whose treatment started within 6 weeks. The secondary objective was to evaluate the differences in characteristics and tumour stage distribution between patients treated before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

A total of 14,567 surgical cancer patients were included in this study, of these 3292 treatments were started during the COVID-19 pandemic. The median time to treatment decreased during the pandemic (26 vs. 27 days, p < 0.001) and the proportion of patients whose treatment started within 6 weeks increased (76% vs. 73%, p < 0.001). In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, adjusting for patient characteristics, no significant difference in post-operative outcomes between patients who started treatment before or after 6 weeks was found. Overall, the number of procedures performed per week decreased by 8.1% during the pandemic. This reduction was most profound for patients with stage I lung carcinoma and colorectal carcinoma. There were fewer patients with pulmonary comorbidities in the pandemic cohort (11% vs. 13%, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite pressure on the capacity of the healthcare system during the COVID-19 pandemic, a larger proportion of surgical oncological patients started treatment within six weeks, possibly due to prioritisation of cancer care and reductions in elective procedures. However, during the pandemic, a decrease in the number of surgical oncological procedures performed in The Netherlands was observed, especially for patients with stage I disease.

Optimum timing of lung resection surgery following SARS-CoV-2 infection for non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

The impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection on postoperative recovery of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is need to be understood, thereby informing the optimal timing of surgical decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic for NSCLC patients. This study reports the postoperative outcomes of surgical NSCLC patients with preoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection.

METHOD

This single-center retrospective cohort study included 241 NSCLC patients who underwent lobectomy or sub-lobectomy between December 1, 2022 and February 14, 2023. Surgical outcomes of patients with preoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection (stratified by the time from diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection to surgery) were compared with those without preoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcomes were total postoperative complications and postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs), the secondary outcomes included operation time, total postoperative drainage and time, length of hospital stay (LOS), 30-day and 90-day postoperative symptoms.

RESULTS

This study included 153 (63.5%) patients with preoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection and 88 (36.5%) patients without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. In patients with a preoperative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, the incidence of total postoperative complications (OR, 3.00; 95% CI, 1.12-8.01; p = 0.028) and PPCs (OR, 4.20; 95% CI, 1.11-15.91; p = 0.035) both increased in patients infected having surgery within 2 weeks compared with non-infection before surgery. However, patients who underwent lung resection more than 2 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis had a similar risk of postoperative complications and surgical outcomes with those non-infection before surgery.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to provide evidence regarding the optimum timing of lung resection surgery and assessing early outcomes after surgery in NSCLC patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our study documents that the SARS-CoV-2 infection did not complicate surgical procedures for lung cancer, and suggest that lung surgery should be postponed at least 2 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 infection for NSCLC patients.

Current challenges and perspectives in lung cancer care during COVID-19 waves

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In the era of the SARS-Cov2 pandemic, the multidisciplinary care of patients with lung cancer is the main challenge for clinicians. The depiction of complex networking between SARS-CoV2 and cancer cells is crucial to understanding the downstream signalling pathways leading to more severe clinical behaviour of COVID-19 among lung cancer patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

The immunosuppressive status caused by both blunted immune response and active anticancer treatments (e.g. radiotherapy, chemotherapy) affects also the response to vaccines. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly influenced early detection, therapeutic management, and clinical research for patients with lung cancer.

SUMMARY

SARS-CoV-2 infection does undoubtedly represent a challenge for care of patients with lung cancer. Since symptoms of infection may overlap with underlying condition, diagnosis must be reached and treatment should start as soon as possible. Although any cancer treatment should be procrastinated as long as infection is not cured, every choice must be pondered on individual basis, according to clinical conditions. Underdiagnosis should be avoided, and both surgical and medical treatment must be tailored to each patient. Therapeutic scenario standardization represents a major challenge for clinicians and researchers.

The influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on lung cancer surgery in Queensland

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic poses unprecedented challenges to global healthcare. The contemporary influence of COVID-19 on the delivery of lung cancer surgery has not been examined in Queensland.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective registry analysis of the Queensland Cardiac Outcomes Registry (QCOR), thoracic database examining all adult lung cancer resections across Queensland from 1/1/2016 to 30/4/2022. We compared the data prior to, and after, the introduction of COVID-restrictions.

RESULTS

There were 1207 patients. Mean age at surgery was 66 years and 1115 (92%) lobectomies were performed. We demonstrated a significant delay from time of diagnosis to surgery from 80 to 96 days (P < 0.0005), after introducing COVID-restrictions. The number of surgeries performed per month decreased after the pandemic and has not recovered (P = 0.012). 2022 saw a sharp reduction in cases with 49 surgeries, compared to 71 in 2019 for the same period.

CONCLUSION

Restrictions were associated with a significant increase in pathological upstaging, greatest immediately after the introduction of COVID-restrictions (IRR 1.71, CI 0.93-2.94, P = 0.05). COVID-19 delayed the access to surgery, reduced surgical capacity and consequently resulted in pathological upstaging throughout Queensland.

Preoperative risk factors predict perioperative allogenic blood transfusion in patients undergoing primary lung cancer resections: a retrospective cohort study from a high-volume thoracic surgery center

BACKGROUND

Our study aimed to identify preoperative predictors for perioperative allogenic blood transfusion (ABT) in patients undergoing major lung cancer resections in order to improve the perioperative management of patients at risk for ABT.

METHODS

Patients admitted between 2014 and 2016 in a high-volume thoracic surgery clinic were retrospectively evaluated in a cohort study based on a control group without ABT and the ABT group requiring packed red blood cell units within 15 days postoperatively until discharge. The association of ABT with clinically established parameters (sex, preoperative anemia, liver and coagulation function, blood groups, multilobar resections) was analyzed by contingency tables, receiver operating characteristics (ROC) and logistic regression analysis, taking into account potential covariates.

RESULTS

60 out of 529 patients (11.3%) required ABT. N1 and non-T1 tumors, thoracotomy approach, multilobar resections, thoracic wall resections and Rhesus negativity were more frequent in the ABT group. In multivariable analyses, female sex, preoperative anemia, multilobar resections, as well as serum alanine-aminotransferase levels, thrombocyte counts and Rhesus negativity were identified as independent predictors of ABT, being associated with OR (95% Confidence interval, p-value) of 2.44 (1.23-4.88, p = 0.0112), 18.16 (8.73-37.78, p < 0.0001), 5.79 (2.50-13.38, p < 0.0001), 3.98 (1.73-9.16, p = 0.0012), 2.04 (1.04-4.02, p = 0.0390) and 2.84 (1.23-6.59, p = 0.0150), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing major lung cancer resections, multiple independent risk factors for perioperative ABT apart from preoperative anemia and multilobar resections were identified. Assessment of these predictors might help to identify high risk patients preoperatively and to improve the strategies that reduce perioperative ABT.

The Validity of a New Procedure-Based Definition of Cancer Status in Patients with Breast-, Lung- and Colorectal Cancer in the Danish National Patient Registry

Background/Aim

The Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR) provides unique epidemiological insight, but often lacks granular data. We propose a procedure-based definition of cancer status in patients with breast-, lung- and colorectal cancer, which can be applied to administrative health databases. New definitions of cancer status are needed as mortality and morbidity are closely linked to cancer status, yet most studies only use duration since cancer diagnosis as a severity marker. The aim of the study was to validate a new pragmatic definition.

Methods

Medical journals of 600 patients, with breast-, lung- and colorectal cancer from the Department of Oncology at Herlev-Gentofte Hospital were retrospectively reviewed. We defined active cancer as a cancer diagnosis, not followed by a potentially curative procedure within 6 months of the diagnosis. The remaining patients were characterized as having non-active cancer. This dichotomization was then compared to a cancer status assessment based on treatment received and paraclinical test such as their first post-procedural control scan. Based on this comparison, we calculated the positive predictive value (PPV) of our definitions of active and non-active cancer.

Results

The calculated PPVs for active breast-, lung- and colorectal cancer were 87% (CI 95%: 0.74-0.99), 91% (CI 95%: 0.87-0.96) and 82% (CI 95%: 0.73-0.91). The PPVs for non-active breast-, lung- and colorectal cancer were 95% (CI 95%: 0.92-0.99), 91% (CI 95%: 0.82-0.99) and 73% (CI 95%: 0.66-0.81), respectively.

Conclusion

We found an overall high PPV for both active and non-active cancer across all three types of cancer.

The safety of esophageal cancer surgery during COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has drastically challenged the safety of on esophageal cancer (EC) surgery during COVID-19. The study aimed to evaluate the safety of EC surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA-P 2015 guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42022335164). A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Medline, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure database, Chinese Scientific Journal database, and Wan Fang database was conducted to identify potentially relevant publications from January 2020 to May 2022. All data were independently extracted by two researchers. We will apply a fixed-effect model or random effect model basis on the heterogeneity test and employ with RevMan 5.4.1 software for data synthesis. The dichotomous surgical outcomes used risk ratios or risk differences, and for continuous surgical outcomes, mean differences (MD) or standardized MD, both with 95% confidence intervals were used. The primary outcomes were postoperative complications, anastomotic leaks, and mortality. The secondary outcomes were total hospital stay, postoperative stay, preoperative waiting, operation time, blood loss, transfusion, postoperative intensive care unit (ICU) stay, number of patients needing ICU stay, and 30-day readmission.

RESULTS

This study will comprehensively summarize the high-quality trials to determine the safety of EC surgery during COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

Our systematic review and meta-analysis will present evidence for the safety of EC surgery during COVID-19.

Effect of COVID-19 on the delivery of care for thoracic surgical patients

Objective

In this study we aimed to determine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the delivery of care for thoracic surgical patients at an urban medical center.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of all thoracic surgical cases from May 1, 2019, to December 31, 2020, was conducted. Demographic characteristics, preoperative surgical indications, procedures, final pathologic diagnoses, and perioperative outcomes were recorded. A census of operative cases, relevant ancillary services, and outpatient thoracic clinics were obtained from our institutional database.

Results

Six hundred nineteen cases were included in this study (329 pre-COVID-19 and 290 COVID-19, representing an 11.8% reduction). There were no differences in type of thoracic procedures or perioperative outcomes among the 2 cohorts. Prolonged reduction of thoracic surgical cases (50% of baseline) during the first half of the COVID-19 period was followed by a resurgence of surgical volumes to 110% of baseline in the second half. A similar incidence of cases were performed for oncologic indications during the first half whereas more benign cases were performed in the second half, coinciding with the launch of our robotic foregut surgery program. After undergoing surgery during the pandemic, none of our patients reported COVID-19 symptoms within 14 days of discharge.

Conclusions

During the initial surge of COVID-19, while there was temporary closure of operative services, our health care system continued to provide safe care for thoracic surgery patients, particularly those with oncologic indications. Since phased reopening, we have experienced a rebound of surgical volume and case mix, ultimately mitigating the initial negative effect of the pandemic on delivery of thoracic surgical care.

Considerations for the Surgical Management of Thoracic Cancers During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Rational Strategies for Thoracic Surgeons

Objective

The novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in a global health crisis since first case was identified in December 2019. As the pandemic continues to strain global public health systems, elective surgeries for thoracic cancer, such as early-stage lung cancer and esophageal cancer (EC), have been postponed due to a shortage of medical resources and the risk of nosocomial transmission. This review is aimed to discuss the influence of COVID-19 on thoracic surgical practice, prevention of nosocomial transmission during the pandemic, and propose modifications to the standard practices in the surgical management of different thoracic cancer.

Methods

A literature search of PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar was performed for articles focusing on COVID-19, early-stage lung cancer, and EC prior to 1 July 2021. The evidence from articles was combined with our data and experience.

Results

We review the challenges in the management of different thoracic cancer from the perspectives of thoracic surgeons and propose rational strategies for the diagnosis and treatment of early-stage lung cancer and EC during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Conclusions

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the optimization of hospital systems and medical resources is to fight against COVID-19. Indolent early lung cancers, such as pure ground-glass nodules/opacities (GGOs), can be postponed with a lower risk of progression, while selective surgeries of more biologically aggressive tumors should be prioritized. As for EC, we recommend immediate or prioritized surgeries for patients with stage Ib or more advanced stage and patients after neoadjuvant therapy. Routine COVID-19 screening should be performed preoperatively before thoracic surgeries. Prevention of nosocomial transmission by providing appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), such as N-95 respirator masks with eye protection to healthcare workers, is necessary.

Effect of the COVID‐19 pandemic on surgical oncology practice—Results of an SSO survey

Background and Objectives

The COVID‐19 pandemic significantly affected healthcare delivery, shifting focus away from nonurgent care. The aim of this study was to examine the impact of the pandemic on the practice of surgical oncology.

Methods

A web‐based survey of questions about changes in practice during the COVID‐19 pandemic was approved by the Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) Research and Executive Committees and sent by SSO to its members.

Results

A total of 121 SSO members completed the survey, 77.7% (94/121) of whom were based in the United States. Breast surgeons were more likely than their peers to refer patients to neoadjuvant therapy (p = 0.000171). Head and neck surgeons were more likely to refer patients to definitive nonoperative treatment (p = 0.044), while melanoma surgeons were less likely to do so (p = 0.029). In all, 79.2% (95/120) of respondents are currently using telemedicine. US surgeons were more likely to use telemedicine (p = 0.004). Surgeons believed telemedicine is useful for long‐term/surveillance visits (70.2%, 80/114) but inappropriate (50.4%, 57/113) for new patient visits.

Conclusion

COVID‐19 pandemic resulted in increased use of neoadjuvant therapy, delays in operative procedures, and increased use of telemedicine. Telemedicine is perceived to be most efficacious for long‐term/surveillance visits or postoperative visits.

Impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on first-visit patients with oesophageal cancer in the first infection wave in Saitama prefecture near Tokyo: a single-centre retrospective study

Background

Although the novel coronavirus disease 2019 did not lead to a serious medical collapse in Japan, its impact on treatment of oesophageal cancer has rarely been investigated. This study aimed to investigate the influence of the pandemic on consultation status and initial treatment in patients with primary oesophageal cancer.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted among 546 patients with oesophageal cancer who visited our hospital from April 2018 to March 2021. Pre-pandemic and pandemic data were compared with the clinical features, oncological factors and initial treatment as outcome measures.

Results

Diagnoses of oesophageal cancer decreased during the early phase of the pandemic from April to June (P = 0.048); however, there was no significant difference between the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods throughout the year. The proportion of patients diagnosed with distant metastases significantly increased during the pandemic (P = 0.026), while the proportion of those who underwent initial radical treatment decreased (P = 0.044). The rate of definitive chemoradiotherapy decreased by 58.6% relative to pre-pandemic levels (P = 0.001).

Conclusions

Patients may have refrained from consultation during the early phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The resultant delay in diagnosis may have led to an increase in the number of patients who were not indicated for radical treatment, as well as a decrease in the number of those who underwent definitive chemoradiotherapy. Our findings highlight the need to maintain the health care system and raise awareness on the importance of consultation.

Thoracic surgery in the COVID-19 era: an Italian university hospital experience

Background

Aims of this study were to assess the results of anti-COVID19 measures applied to maintain thoracic surgery activity at an Italian University institution through a 12-month period and to assess the results as compared with an equivalent non-pandemic time span.

Methods

Data and results of 646 patients operated on at the department of Thoracic Surgery of the Tor Vergata University Policlinic in Rome between February 2019 and March 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided in 2 groups: one operated on during the COVID-19 pandemic (pandemic group) and another during the previous non-pandemic 12 months (non-pandemic group). Primary outcome measure was COVID-19 infection-free rate.

Results

Three patients developed mild COVID-19 infection early after surgery resulting in an estimated COVID-19 infection-free rate of 98%. At intergroup comparisons (non-pandemic vs. pandemic group), a greater number of patients was operated before the pandemic (352 vs. 294, p = 0.0013). In addition, a significant greater thoracoscopy/thoracotomy procedures rate was found in the pandemic group (97/151 vs. 82/81, p = 0.02) and the total number of chest drainages (104 vs. 131, p = 0.0001) was higher in the same group. At surgery, tumor size was larger (19.5 ± 13 vs. 28.2 ± 21; p < 0.001) and T3-T4/T1-T2 ratio was higher (16/97 vs. 30/56; p < 0.001) during the pandemic with no difference in mortality and morbidity. In addition, the number of patients lost before treatment was higher in the pandemic group (8 vs. 15; p = 0.01). Finally, in 7 patients admitted for COVID-19 pneumonia, incidental lung (N = 5) or mediastinal (N = 2) tumors were discovered at the chest computed tomography.

Conclusions

Estimated COVID-19 infection free rate was 98% in the COVID-19 pandemic group; there were less surgical procedures, and operated lung tumors had larger size and more advanced stages than in the non-pandemic group. Nonetheless, hospital stay was reduced with comparable mortality and morbidity. Our study results may help implement efficacy of the everyday surgical care.

EGFR Status Assessment for Better Care of Early Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma: What Is Changing in the Daily Practice of Pathologists?

The recent emergence of novel neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant therapies for early stage (I-IIIA) non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC), mainly tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting EGFR mutations and immunotherapy or chemo-immunotherapy, has suddenly required the evaluation of biomarkers predictive of the efficacy of different treatments in these patients. Currently, the choice of one or another of these treatments mainly depends on the results of immunohistochemistry for PD-L1 and of the status of EGFR and ALK. This new development has led to the setup of different analyses for clinical and molecular pathology laboratories, which have had to rapidly integrate a number of new challenges into daily practice and to establish new organization for decision making. This review outlines the impact of the management of biological samples in laboratories and discusses perspectives for pathologists within the framework of EGFR TKIs in early stage NSCLC.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of chronic noninfectious respiratory diseases

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged health care across the world, not just by the severity of the disease and the high mortality rate but also by the consequences on the management of the patients with chronic diseases.Areas covered: This review summarizes the most up-to-date published data regarding the impact of COVID-19 on the management and outcomes of patients with chronic noninfectious respiratory illnesses including obstructive sleep apnea, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, bronchiectasis, interstitial and pulmonary vascular diseases, and lung cancer.Expert opinion: Most of chronic respiratory diseases (except asthma and cystic fibrosis) are associated with more severe COVID-19 and poor outcomes but the mechanisms involved are not yet identified. The therapeutic management of the patients with chronic respiratory diseases and COVID-19 is similar to the other patients but the post-recovery course could be worse in this population and followed by the development of pulmonary fibrosis, bronchiectasis, and pulmonary hypertension. The pandemic highly impacted our usual medical activities by limiting the access to several diagnosis procedures, the necessity to develop new methods for the monitoring of the disease and adapt the therapeutic strategies. The long-term consequences of all these changes are still unknown.

Prevention of COVID-19 in Thoracic Surgery Patients: Lessons Learned during the First Pandemic Wave

BACKGROUND

 The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the implementation of measures to prevent perioperative COVID-19 in thoracic surgery during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic 2020 allowing a continued surgical treatment of patients.

METHODS

 The implemented preventive measures in patient management of the thoracic surgery department of the Asklepios Lung Clinic Munich-Gauting, Germany were retrospectively analyzed. Postoperative COVID-19 incidence before and after implementation of preventive measures was investigated. Patients admitted for thoracic surgical procedures between March and May 2020 were included in the study. Patient characteristics were analyzed. For the early detection of putative postoperative COVID-19 symptoms, typical post-discharge symptomatology of thoracic surgery patients was compared to non-surgical patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

RESULTS

 Thirty-five surgical procedures and fifty-seven surgical procedures were performed before and after implementation of the preventive measures, respectively. Three patients undergoing thoracic surgery before implementation of preventive measures developed a COVID-19 pneumonia post-discharge. After implementation of preventive measures, no postoperative COVID-19 cases were identified. Fever, dyspnea, dry cough and diarrhea were significantly more prevalent in COVID-19 patients compared to normally recovering thoracic surgery patients, while anosmia, phlegm, low energy levels, body ache and nausea were similarly frequent in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

 Based on the lessons learned during the first pandemic wave, we here provide a blueprint for successful easily implementable preventive measures minimizing SARS-CoV-2 transmission to thoracic surgery patients perioperatively. While symptoms of COVID-19 and the normal postoperative course of thoracic surgery patients substantially overlap, we found dyspnea, fever, cough, and diarrhea significantly more prevalent in COVID-19 patients than in normally recovering thoracic surgery patients. These symptoms should trigger further diagnostic testing for postoperative COVID-19 in thoracic surgery patients.