Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
JCO Glob Oncol ; 7: 649-658, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1218296

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: COVID-19 has affected cancer care worldwide. Clinical trials are an important alternative for the treatment of oncologic patients, especially in Latin America, where trials can be the only opportunity for some of them to access novel and, sometimes, standard treatments. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study, in which a 22-question survey regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on oncology clinical trials was sent to 350 representatives of research programs in selected Latin American institutions, members of the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group. RESULTS: There were 90 research centers participating in the survey, with 70 of them from Brazil. The majority were partly private or fully private (n = 77; 85.6%) and had confirmed COVID-19 cases at the institution (n = 57; 63.3%). Accruals were suspended at least for some studies in 80% (n = 72) of the responses, mostly because of sponsors' decision. Clinical trials' routine was affected by medical visits cancelation, reduction of patients' attendance, reduction of other specialties' availability, and/or alterations on follow-up processes. Formal COVID-19 mitigation policies were adopted in 96.7% of the centers, including remote monitoring and remote site initiation visits, telemedicine visits, reduction of research team workdays or home office, special consent procedures, shipment of oral drugs directly to patients' home, and increase in outpatient diagnostic studies. Importantly, some of these changes were suggested to be part of future oncology clinical trials' routine, particularly the ones regarding remote methods, such as telemedicine. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this was the first survey to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on Latin American oncology clinical trials. The results are consistent with surveys from other world regions. These findings may endorse improvements in clinical trials' processes and management in the postpandemic period.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Research/trends , COVID-19 , Medical Oncology/trends , Brazil , Clinical Trials as Topic , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Latin America/epidemiology , Pandemics
2.
Ecancermedicalscience ; 14: 1100, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-797140

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Cancer patients may have a higher risk of severe events and unfavourable outcomes in the setting of COVID-19. This review addresses the question of whether to test asymptomatic cancer patients before initiating systemic cancer treatments. METHODS: This systematic review was conducted based on the PRISMA framework. Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched, as well as guidelines from international institutions involved in cancer care and COVID-19 research. Studies published in English, from 1 December 2019 to 27 May 2020 were considered eligible. We included studies which mentioned testing strategies for SARS-CoV-2 of asymptomatic cancer patients before starting immunosuppressive treatments. RESULTS: We identified 1,163 studies and 4 guidelines through the literature search. A total of 18 articles were considered eligible and were included in the final analysis. Two articles were cohort studies, and the remaining were expert consensuses and published guidelines. The most common recommendation among the studies in this systematic review was to test asymptomatic patients for SARS-CoV-2 prior to treatment. CONCLUSION: There is a lack of studies which directly address COVID-19 testing of asymptomatic patients before treatment. Our systematic review showed that most of the published data favours routine test for SARS-CoV-2 before initiating systemic treatment but failed to identify a good level of evidence to support these recommendations. Based upon this review, we proposed local recommendations at our centre. Each institution should consider the pros and cons of testing asymptomatic patients, evaluating accessibility to testing resources and local epidemiology.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL