Virtual Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic for Patients With Hematologic Malignancies: A Single-Institution Experience.

PURPOSE: The use of virtual care rapidly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic and has persisted as a routine method of care delivery. Much of the literature on virtual care in oncology has focused on solid tumors, and little is known about its application in malignant hematology. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients with hematologic malignancies at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre from October 2019 to March 2021 to determine the use of virtual care during this period, cost-savings associated with virtual visits, and patient satisfaction. Patient satisfaction was assessed using the Your Voice Matters survey, a provincially administered survey to evaluate patient experience. RESULTS: Overall, 12.1% (1,122/9,295) of patients had a virtual visit during the study period (0% from October 2019 to February 2020, 36% from March to August 2020, and 30% from September 2020 to March 2021), of which 36% were in the lymphoma clinic and 46% were in the myeloma clinic. The mean two-way opportunity cost for an in-person visit was $168.00 CAD per person with public transit, and $120.40 CAD per person driving. Responses to the Your Voice Matters survey indicated that patients with a virtual visit reported that physical symptoms were discussed appropriately (mean 4.73/5), and were more likely to ask for a follow-up virtual visit compared with patients with in-person visits (mean 4.50/5 v 3.02/5, respectively; P < .01). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that virtual care may be a feasible and well-received tool for delivering care to a substantial proportion of patients with hematologic malignancies, while enabling substantial cost-savings to patients.

COVID-19 and Cancer Patients in the Second Year of the Pandemic: Investigating Treatment Impact, Information Sources, and COVID-19-Related Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices.

BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus that has triggered the present COVID-19 pandemic continues to spread globally, resulting in widespread morbidity and mortality. Patients with cancer remain one of the most vulnerable subsets of the population to the disease. This study examined the effects of the pandemic on cancer patients' treatment, psychology, knowledge, attitudes, and practices. METHODS: A survey was emailed to 9861 patients at a cancer centre in Toronto, Canada. Descriptive results were summarized. Qualitative feedback was coded and summarized. Regression modelling was used to explore factors associated with patient psychological well-being, knowledge, attitudes, and practices. RESULTS: A total of 1760 surveys were completed, with a response rate of 17.8%. Most participants did not experience any pandemic-related treatment delays, and vaccination rates were high. Participants who identified themselves as non-white (OR 3.30, CI: 1.30-5.30; p ≤ 0.001), and those who referred to journal articles for information (p = 0.002) reported higher psychological impact scores. There were no significant predictors of whether participants would use personal protective equipment when leaving their homes or whether they would go to crowded places. DISCUSSION: This study provides another snapshot of cancer patients perceptions and needs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Virtual Care and Electronic Patient Communication During COVID-19: Cross-sectional Study of Inequities Across a Canadian Tertiary Cancer Center.

BACKGROUND: Virtual care (VC) visits (telephone or video) and email-based patient communication have been rapidly adopted to facilitate cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Inequities in access and patient experience may arise as these digital health tools become prevalent. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to characterize inequities in access and patient-reported experience following adoption of digital health tools at a tertiary cancer center during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We designed a cross-sectional study of outpatients with visits from September to December 2020. Patient characteristics and responses to an email-based patient-experience survey were collated. Inequities in access were assessed across three pairs of comparison groups: (1) patients with VC and in-person visits, (2) patients with and without documented email addresses, and (3) responders and nonresponders to the survey. Inequities in patient-reported experience were assessed among survey responders. Demographics were mapped to area-level averages from national census data. Socioeconomic status was mapped to area-level dimensions of the Canadian Index of Multiple Deprivation. Covariate balance between comparison groups was assessed using standardized mean differences (SMDs), with SMD≥0.2 indicating differences between groups. Associations between patient experience satisfaction scores and covariates were assessed using multivariable analyses, with P<.05 indicating statistical significance. RESULTS: Among the 42,194 patients who had outpatient visits, 62.65% (n=26,435) had at least one VC visit and 31.15% (n=13,144) were emailable. Access to VC and email was similar across demographic and socioeconomic indices (SMD<0.2). Among emailable patients, 21.84% (2870/13,144) responded to the survey. Survey responsiveness was similar across indices, aside from a small difference by age (SMD=0.24). Among responders, 24.4% received VC and were similar to in-person responders across indices (SMD<0.2). VC and in-person responders had similar satisfaction levels with all care domains surveyed (all P>.05). Regardless of visit type, patients had variable satisfaction with care domains across demographic and socioeconomic indices. Patients with higher ethnocultural composition scores were less satisfied with the cultural appropriateness of their care (odds ratio [OR] 0.70, 95% CI 0.57-0.86). Patients with higher situational vulnerability scores were less satisfied with discussion of physical symptoms (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.48-0.93). Patients with higher residential instability scores were less satisfied with discussion of both physical (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.97) and emotional (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.77-0.96) symptoms, and also with the duration of their visit (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.74-0.98; P=.02). Male patients were more satisfied with how their health care provider had listened to them (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.11-2.44; P=.01). CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of VC and email can equitably maintain access and patient-reported experience in cancer care across demographics and socioeconomic indices. Existing health inequities among structurally marginalized patients must continue to be addressed to improve their care experience.

COVID-19 and patients with cancer: Investigating treatment impact, information sources, and COVID-19-related knowledge, attitudes, and practices.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused enormous strain on public health. Patients with cancer are particularly susceptible to the disease, and their treatment plans have been threatened by public health restrictions designed to contain the spread. METHODS: This study examined the effects of the pandemic on cancer patients' psychology, knowledge, attitudes, and practices concerning COVID-19 as well as their perceptions of the impact of COVID-19 on their cancer health care services. A survey was sent to 5800 patients at a cancer center in Toronto, Canada. Descriptive results were summarized. Qualitative feedback was coded and summarized. To examine for potential associations, regression models were tested for the outcomes of patient psychological well-being, knowledge, attitudes, and practices, and they accounted for several demographic, health literacy, and disease variables. RESULTS: A total of 1631 surveys were completed. Most patients saw their appointments shifted to virtual visits, and for a substantial minority, there was no change. A majority of the patients (62%) expressed fears about contracting the virus. There were no independent predictors of COVID-19-related knowledge. Fears were more pronounced among patients who did not speak English and those who used social media more often. Female participants, those who scored higher on knowledge questions, and those who used cancer center materials were more likely to take preventative measures against infection. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a snapshot of the state of cancer patient treatment and the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of patients between the first 2 waves of the pandemic. The study's results can inform our understanding of adaptation to conditions during and after the outbreak.

Time trends of drug-specific actionable adverse events among patients on androgen receptor antagonists: Implications for remote monitoring.

INTRODUCTION: In light of COVID-19, reducing patient exposure via remote monitoring is desirable. Patients prescribed abiraterone/ enzalutamide are scheduled for monthly in-person appointments to screen for adverse events (AEs). We determined time trends of drug-specific actionable AEs among users of abiraterone/enzalutamide to assess the safety of remote monitoring. METHODS: A chart review was conducted on 828 prostate cancer patients prescribed abiraterone and/or enzalutamide. Data were collected to determine time to actionable first AEs, including hypertension, elevated liver enzymes (aspartate transaminase [AST], alanine transaminase [ALT]), hyperbilirubinemia, and hypokalemia. Survival analysis was used to determine time to AEs. RESULTS: In this study, 425 and 403 patients received enzalutamide and abiraterone, respectively. In total, 25.6% of those who took enzalutamide experienced an AE, compared to 28.8% of patients on abiraterone. For patients using abiraterone and experiencing an AE, cumulative incidence of AEs at three, six, nine, and 12 months were: 67.2%, 81.9%, 90.5%, and 93.9%, respectively. Among enzalutamide users experiencing an AE, cumulative incidence of AEs at three, six, nine, and 12 months were 51.4%, 70.7%, 82.6%, and 88.1%, respectively. The AEs associated with enzalutamide were hypertension and liver dysfunction (77.1% and 22.9%, respectively). In the abiraterone group, associated AEs were liver dysfunction (47.4%), hypertension (47.4%), and hypokalemia (5.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Attaining AEs secondary to abiraterone/enzalutamide decreases over time and tends to occur within the first six months of therapy. Most actionable AEs can be remotely monitored. Given COVID-19, remote monitoring after six months of initiating abiraterone or enzalutamide appears appropriate.

Implementation and Outcomes of Virtual Care Across a Tertiary Cancer Center During COVID-19.

Importance: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has burdened health care resources and disrupted care of patients with cancer. Virtual care (VC) represents a potential solution. However, few quantitative data support its rapid implementation and positive associations with service capacity and quality. Objective: To examine the outcomes of a cancer center-wide virtual care program in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study applied a hospitalwide agile service design to map gaps and develop a customized digital solution to enable at-scale VC across a publicly funded comprehensive cancer center. Data were collected from a high-volume cancer center in Ontario, Canada, from March 23 to May 22, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcome measures were care delivery volumes, quality of care, patient and practitioner experiences, and cost savings to patients. Results: The VC solution was developed and launched 12 days after the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 22 085 VC visits (mean, 514 visits per day) were conducted, comprising 68.4% (range, 18.8%-100%) of daily visits compared with 0.8% before launch (P < .001). Ambulatory clinic volumes recovered a month after deployment (3714-4091 patients per week), whereas chemotherapy and radiotherapy caseloads (1943-2461 patients per week) remained stable throughout. No changes in institutional or provincial quality-of-care indexes were observed. A total of 3791 surveys (3507 patients and 284 practitioners) were completed; 2207 patients (82%) and 92 practitioners (72%) indicated overall satisfaction with VC. The direct cost of this initiative was CAD$ 202 537, and displacement-related cost savings to patients totaled CAD$ 3 155 946. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that implementation of VC at scale at a high-volume cancer center may be feasible. An agile service design approach was able to preserve outpatient caseloads and maintain care quality, while rendering high patient and practitioner satisfaction. These findings may help guide the transformation of telemedicine in the post COVID-19 era.

The reality of virtual care: Implications for cancer care beyond the pandemic.

There has been longstanding interest in virtual care in oncology, but outdated reimbursement structures and a paradoxical lack of agility within electronic systems limited widespread adoption. Through the example of the Province of Ontario, Canada and the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, we describe how a collective sense of action from COVID-19, a system of distributed leadership and decision-making, and the use of a Service Design process to map the ambulatory encounter onto a digital workflow were critical enablers of a large-scale virtual transition. Rigorous evaluation of virtual care models will be essential to maintain integration of virtual care post-pandemic.