Characteristics and patterns of care of endometrial cancer before and during COVID-19 pandemic

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on brachytherapy and cancer patient outcomes: A systematic review

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the use of brachytherapy in patients with gynecologic and prostate cancers including treatment delays, increased burden of mortality, and associated clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS/METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Databases were searched for studies published through September 2023 using MeSH terms and keywords related to "COVID and brachytherapy." Inclusion criteria included all studies reporting on the impact of COVID-19 on treatment delay, treatment omission, recurrence rates, and clinical outcomes in patients requiring brachytherapy for prostate or gynecologic cancers from December 2019 to September 2023. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers (LH, IV).

RESULTS

Of the 292 screened records, 10 studies (9 retrospective, 1 prospective single-arm exploratory noninferiority) were included. Hypofractioned regimens were the preferred approach in radiation treatment (RT) centers, with 6 of 10 studies noting shift towards hypofractionation. For cervical cancer, intracavitary brachytherapy was limited to 3-4 fractions, reducing personnel and patient exposure. Treatment delays influenced by COVID-19 ranged between 19% and 53% and treatment omissions ranged between 2% and 28%. These disruptions arose from factors such as patient fear of contracting COVID-19, COVID-19 infection, barriers to accessing care, and operating room closures. Three studies reported on a single-application (SA) rather than a multiple application (MA) approach for cervical cancer. They reported excellent local control, shorter overall treatment time at the expense of higher grade ≥2 vaginal, genitourinary, and gastrointestinal events. For cervical cancer patients, overall treatment time (OTT) was significantly impacted by COVID-19 as reported by 2 studies from India. OTT > 60 days occurred in 40-53% of patients.

CONCLUSION

This is the first systematic review to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on brachytherapy in patients with gynecologic and prostate cancers. Although many expert consensus recommendations have been published during the pandemic regarding radiation therapy, few studies evaluated its clinical impact on brachytherapy delivery and patient outcomes. The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in treatment delays, omissions in brachytherapy, and further adoption of hypofractionated regimens. Early results demonstrate that despite increased toxicities, local control rates with hypofractionated treatment are similar to standard fractionation. The impact of the pandemic on gynecologic and prostate cancers is yet to be determined as well as the long-term outcomes on patients treated during the lockdown period.

Impact of the Sars-Cov-2 outbreak on the initial clinical presentation of new solid cancer diagnoses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic might have delayed cancer diagnosis and management. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the initial tumor stage of new cancer diagnoses before and after the pandemic.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed articles that compared the tumor stage of new solid cancer diagnoses before and after the initial pandemic waves. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis to compare the rate of metastatic tumors and the distribution of stages at diagnosis. Subgroup analyses were performed by primary tumor site and by country.

RESULTS

From 2,013 studies published between January 2020 and April 2022, we included 58 studies with 109,996 patients. The rate of metastatic tumors was higher after the COVID-19 outbreak than before (pooled OR: 1.29 (95% CI, 1.06-1.57), I2: 89% (95% CI, 86-91)). For specific cancers, common ORs reached statistical significance for breast (OR: 1.51 (95% CI 1.07-2.12)) and gynecologic (OR: 1.51 (95% CI 1.04-2.18)) cancers, but not for other cancer types. According to countries, common OR (95% CI) reached statistical significance only for Italy: 1.55 (1.01-2.39) and Spain:1.14 (1.02-1.29). Rates were comparable for stage I-II versus III-IV in studies for which that information was available, and for stages I-II versus stage III in studies that did not include metastatic patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite inter-study heterogeneity, our meta-analysis showed a higher rate of metastatic tumors at diagnosis after the pandemic. The burden of social distancing policies might explain those results, as patients may have delayed seeking care.

Access to Surgery for Endometrial Cancer Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Ontario, Canada: A Population-Based Study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on endometrial cancer stage and surgical treatment in Ontario, Canada.

METHODS

This descriptive study identified cases from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2021 from endometrial cancer hysterectomy specimens in the Ontario Health-Cancer Care Ontario, ePath system. Endometrial biopsy records from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2021 were matched to surgical specimens by provincial health card number. Time to surgery and surgical stage were compared before (2017-2019) and during (2020-2021) the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

There were 10 446 women treated with hysterectomy for endometrial cancer in Ontario from 2017-2021. In April and May 2020, corresponding with the provincial state of emergency, there was a 56% relative reduction in endometrial biopsies. Despite this 2-month reduction in endometrial biopsy volume, there was no change in surgical volume for endometrial cancer treatment. The median time from endometrial biopsy to surgery was 56 days (IQR 40, 80) during the pandemic (2020-2021) compared to 58 days (IQR 43, 82) prior to the pandemic (2017-2019) (P < 0.001). There was no upstaging of endometrial cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

The Ontario healthcare system continued to prioritize service delivery to endometrial cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, despite the increase in virtual care and decrease in operating room time. There were no significant surgical delays or upstaging of endometrial cancer.

Optimizing Outcomes through a Multidisciplinary Team Approach in Endometrial Cancer

This study aimed to assess the impact of a multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach on outcomes with endometrial cancer (EC) patients, utilizing 2013-2020 data from the Reggio Emilia Cancer Registry. Recurrence rate, treatments, and outcome indicators were compared between the MDT (319 cases) and non-MDT (324 cases) groups. Among 643 cases, 52.4% were over 65 years old, 98% had microscopic confirmation, and 73% were in stage I. Surgery was performed in 89%, with 41% receiving adjuvant therapies. Recurrence rates (10%) were similar between the two groups, but MDT patients who were older and predominantly in stage I exhibited 79% recurrence within one year (21% in the non-MDT group). Disease-free survival (DFS) showed no significant difference [HR 1.1; 95% CI 0.7-1.6], while differences in overall survival (OS) were notable [HR 1.5; 95% CI 1.0-2.4]. The 5-year OS rates were 87% and 79% in the MDT and non-MDT groups. Comparing the 2013-2015 to 2016-2020 study periods, a shift towards caring for older women, more advanced-stage patients, and those residing outside the metropolitan area, along with a greater number of relapsed cases (from 16% to 76%), were accounted for. These findings underscore the impact of an MDT on EC outcomes, highlighting the evolving patient demographics over time.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on the Diagnostic and Therapeutic Management of Endometrial Cancer: A Monocentric Retrospective Comparative Study

Endometrial cancer represents an ideal target to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 being the most frequent gynecological malignancy in Italy, generally detected at early stages and correlated with favorable oncological outcomes. The present comparative retrospective study carried out at Campus Bio-medico University Foundation in Rome aims to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the presentation, diagnosis and treatment of EC. All women with a histological diagnosis of non-endometrioid and endometrioid endometrial cancer between 1 March 2018 and 31 October 2022 were included. The number of cases was higher in period 2 (95 vs. 64 cases). Time to diagnosis did not show statistically significant differences but in period 2, 92.06% of the diagnoses were made following abnormal uterine bleeding, while in period 1, only 67.02% were. The waiting time for the intervention was significantly shorter in period 2. Definitive histology, FIGO staging, surgical technique and adjuvant therapy did not show significant differences between the two periods. The study demonstrates that the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic did not have a direct effect on the diagnostic delay, tumor staging and type of therapy but rather on the presentation pattern of endometrial cancer.

Mixed Endometrial Epithelial Carcinoma: Epidemiology, Treatment and Survival Rates-A 10-Year Retrospective Cohort Study from a Single Institution

Mixed endometrial carcinoma (MEEC) refers to rare endometrial tumours that are composed of two or more distinct histotypes, at least one of which is serous or clear cell. The aim of this study was to evaluate the epidemiology, treatment outcomes and survival rates of patients with mixed endometrial carcinoma. The medical records of 34 patients diagnosed with MEEC between March 2010 and January 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. Clinicopathological variables and treatment strategies were assessed, and overall survival and disease-free survival rates were evaluated. The histology of endometrioid and serous component was found in 26 (76.5%) patients, followed by serous and clear-cell components (5/34, 14.5%) and mixed endometrioid serous and clear-cell components (3/34, 8.8%). The median age at diagnosis was 70 years (range 52-84), and the median follow-up time was 55 months. The 5-year disease-free survival and the 5-year overall survival were 50.4% and 52.4%, respectively. Advanced disease stage was identified as an independent predictor of inferior disease-free (<0.003) and overall survival (p < 0.001). Except for stage, none of the traditional prognostic factors was associated with disease recurrence or death from disease. MEECs represent rare high-risk endometrial carcinomas with significant diagnostic and treatment challenges. Undoubtedly, the implementation of a molecular analysis can offer further diagnostic and management insights.

Practice patterns and 90-day treatment-related morbidity in early-stage cervical cancer

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the impact of the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) Trial on patterns of care and surgery-related morbidity in early-stage cervical cancer.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, a multi-institutional study evaluating 90-day surgery-related outcomes of patients undergoing treatment for early-stage cervical cancer before (period I: 01/01/2016-06/01/2018) and after (period II: 01/01/2019-06/01/2021) the publication of the results of the LACC trial.

RESULTS

Charts of 1295 patients were evaluated: 581 (44.9%) and 714 (55.1%) before and after the publication of the LACC trial, respectively. After the publication of the LACC trial, the number of patients treated with minimally invasive radical hysterectomy decreased from 64.9% to 30.4% (p < 0.001). Overall, 90-day complications occurred in 110 (18.9%) and 119 (16.6%) patients in the period I and period II, respectively (p = 0.795). Similarly, the number of severe (grade 3 or worse) complications did not differ between the two periods (38 (6.5%) vs. 37 (5.1%); p = 0.297). Overall and severe 90-day complications were consistent between periods even evaluating stage IA (p = 0.471), IB1 (p = 0.929), and IB2 (p = 0.074), separately.

CONCLUSIONS

The present investigation highlighted that in referral centers the shift from minimally invasive to open radical hysterectomy does not influence 90-day surgery-related morbidity.

Management of Gynecologic Cancer During COVID-19 Pandemic: South Asian Perspective

Management of gynecological cancers has suffered during the pandemic, partly due to lockdown and partly due to directing resources to manage COVID-19 patients. Modification of gynecological cancer management during this pandemic is recommended. Cervical cancer patients who present with stage IA1 disease can have a delay of up to 8 weeks for surgical treatment, considering the slow tumor growth rate. Women with stages IA2, IB1, IB2, IIA1 must undergo radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy within 6 to 8 weeks. In areas where surgical treatment is not available, patients should be referred for radiation therapy/areas with adequate surgical expertise. The surgical option is attractive for early cancers during the COVID era, as it involves a single visit compared to the multiple visits required for chemoradiation. The value of lymph node staging needs to be reconsidered. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be given preference over primary cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancers. Surgeries, which demand extended surgical time such as Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy and pelvic exenterations, should be avoided during this pandemic. For patients scheduled for interval surgery after two or three neoadjuvant cycles, six cycles of chemotherapy should be considered before surgery is performed. For early-stage, low-grade endometrial cancer, consideration should be given to medical management until surgery is possible. The above recommendations have been made keeping in mind the geography, patient load, and availability of resources available to health care providers from southeast Asia. They might not be applicable globally and every practitioner should take call regarding patient's management as per availability of resources and loco-regional circumstances. The implementation of recommended international guidelines for the management of gynecologic cancers should take precedence. Each modification to the standard approach should be approved by a multidisciplinary team depending on the condition of the patients and the locoregional circumstances.