COVID-19 vaccination and breakthrough infections in patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Vaccination is an important preventive health measure to protect against symptomatic and severe COVID-19. Impaired immunity secondary to an underlying malignancy or recent receipt of antineoplastic systemic therapies can result in less robust antibody titers following vaccination and possible risk of breakthrough infection. As clinical trials evaluating COVID-19 vaccines largely excluded patients with a history of cancer and those on active immunosuppression (including chemotherapy), limited evidence is available to inform the clinical efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination across the spectrum of patients with cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We describe the clinical features of patients with cancer who developed symptomatic COVID-19 following vaccination and compare weighted outcomes with those of contemporary unvaccinated patients, after adjustment for confounders, using data from the multi-institutional COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19).

RESULTS

Patients with cancer who develop COVID-19 following vaccination have substantial comorbidities and can present with severe and even lethal infection. Patients harboring hematologic malignancies are over-represented among vaccinated patients with cancer who develop symptomatic COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccination against COVID-19 remains an essential strategy in protecting vulnerable populations, including patients with cancer. Patients with cancer who develop breakthrough infection despite full vaccination, however, remain at risk of severe outcomes. A multilayered public health mitigation approach that includes vaccination of close contacts, boosters, social distancing, and mask-wearing should be continued for the foreseeable future.

Association of clinical factors and recent anticancer therapy with COVID-19 severity among patients with cancer: a report from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer may be at high risk of adverse outcomes from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We analyzed a cohort of patients with cancer and coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) to identify prognostic clinical factors, including laboratory measurements and anticancer therapies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with active or historical cancer and a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis recorded between 17 March and 18 November 2020 were included. The primary outcome was COVID-19 severity measured on an ordinal scale (uncomplicated, hospitalized, admitted to intensive care unit, mechanically ventilated, died within 30 days). Multivariable regression models included demographics, cancer status, anticancer therapy and timing, COVID-19-directed therapies, and laboratory measurements (among hospitalized patients).

RESULTS

A total of 4966 patients were included (median age 66 years, 51% female, 50% non-Hispanic white); 2872 (58%) were hospitalized and 695 (14%) died; 61% had cancer that was present, diagnosed, or treated within the year prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Older age, male sex, obesity, cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities, renal disease, diabetes mellitus, non-Hispanic black race, Hispanic ethnicity, worse Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, recent cytotoxic chemotherapy, and hematologic malignancy were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Among hospitalized patients, low or high absolute lymphocyte count; high absolute neutrophil count; low platelet count; abnormal creatinine; troponin; lactate dehydrogenase; and C-reactive protein were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Patients diagnosed early in the COVID-19 pandemic (January-April 2020) had worse outcomes than those diagnosed later. Specific anticancer therapies (e.g. R-CHOP, platinum combined with etoposide, and DNA methyltransferase inhibitors) were associated with high 30-day all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical factors (e.g. older age, hematological malignancy, recent chemotherapy) and laboratory measurements were associated with poor outcomes among patients with cancer and COVID-19. Although further studies are needed, caution may be required in utilizing particular anticancer therapies.

CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER

NCT04354701.

Surgical oncology outcomes: The role of nurse practice environments

6105

Background: Increased attention has focused on the role of hospital characteristics on cancer patient outcomes. We examined two cancer-specific credentials, as well registered nurse practice environments, on outcomes of care. Methods: Through secondary analysis of existing data from hospital claims, the tumor registry, and a statewide of survey of nurses (RNs), we studied 30-day mortality (D) and failure to rescue (death given a complication) (FTR) for surgical oncology patients treated in 164 Pennsylvania hospitals from 1998–1999 (N=24,618). We compared D and FTR rates by a hospital’s NCI cancer center designation, American College of Surgeon’s (ACoS) cancer program approval and categorized scores on the Practice Environment Scale of the Nursing Work Index (PES-NWI). The PES-NWI scales measure RN participation in hospital affairs, RN foundations for quality of care, nurse manager leadership/support, staffing/resource adequacy, and RN-physician relations. Multivariate logistic regression models examined predictors of D and FTR, controlling for 25 patient variables. Standard errors were corrected for patient clustering in hospitals. Results: NCI centers had lower D and FTR rates (p < .01). ACoS hospitals had lower D and FTR rates (ns). Hospitals with low scores on PES-NWI scales had the poorest outcomes (p < .01). In logistic regression models, significant predictors included unfavorable PES-NWI Scores for D (OR=1.32, 95% CI: 1.06–1.65) and FTR (OR=1.39, 95% CI:1.03–1.88), and NCI centers for D (OR=0.64, 95% CI: 0.50–0.83) and FTR (OR=0.67, 95% CI: 0.47–0.96). The NCI effect lost significance when environment was included. ACoS program effects were small (OR= 0.99, p = .90) for both outcomes. Conclusions: Favorable outcomes in NCI centers may be partly explained by practice environments. The practice environment of RNs significantly predicts surgical oncology patient outcomes, and should be a focus of quality improvement activities.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

The registered nurse workforce: infrastructure for health care reform

As of March 1992, 83 percent of America's more than 2.2 million licensed registered nurses (RNs) were actively employed in nursing. RNs are the largest group of U.S. health care professionals and constitute a major part of the infrastructure necessary to any health care reform agenda. Therefore, it is critical to assess the extent to which the current nurse workforce is adequately prepared for its future role in a reformed health care system. Two central trends in the composition of the nurse workforce are noteworthy. First, while the number of RNs is large and continues to grow, cyclical, demand-driven shortages have occurred nationally since World War II. Further, hospital cost containment strategies periodically depress nurses' relative wages, contributing to the substitution of RNs for other workers. Second, there is concern in nursing, as in medicine, that the RN workforce is not optimally trained to meet future needs. While two-year associate degree programs now produce a majority of nursing graduates, the greatest need is for advanced practice nurses. Demand for such nurses is high and is expected to increase as more of the population gains access to health care services. The incentives put forth in the health care reform debate--expanded health insurance coverage, integrated health care delivery systems, and cost-effective practice--create the potential for expanded roles and increased job opportunities for nurses. Realizing this potential will depend largely on the profession's responsiveness to the changes confronting it under health care reform.