The COMFORT trial: a randomised control trial comparing group-based COMpassion-FOcussed therapy and breathing pattern ReTraining with treatment as usual on the psychological functioning of patients diagnosed with cancer recurrence during COVID.

BACKGROUND: A cancer diagnosis is a known precipitant of psychological distress, with fear of recurrence being a well-documented distressing consequence of cancer. Cancer recurrence often results in an additional psychological burden, which may exacerbate as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This is a single-centre, prospective, randomised controlled trial. Patients identified as having experienced cancer recurrence since March 2020 (the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland) will be screened for participation. Eligible, consenting candidates who score 4 or higher on the Distress Thermometer will be enrolled in the study. Participants will be randomly allocated to receive either a 6-week, group-based, online, compassion-focussed therapy and breathing pattern retraining intervention or the control arm. Those in the control arm will all be offered the group intervention after the 18-week study period. The primary outcome is the Distress Thermometer score at 18 weeks post-baseline though secondary outcomes will include measures of mood, traumatic distress and mental adjustment to cancer. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this protocol describes the first RCT which directly examines the effect of a group-based psychological intervention on Irish patients experiencing cancer recurrence in the context of COVID-19. The outcome of this trial is likely to be twofold: It will determine if the psychological intervention achieves its primary objective of distress amelioration 3 months post-intervention and to establish the feasibility of delivering this intervention in a virtual format. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05518591. Registered on 25 August 2022. All items from the World Health Organization Trial Registration Data set have been included.

Immunological assessment of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy from diagnosis to delivery: A multicentre prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Background Population-based data on SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy and assessment of passive immunity to the neonate, is lacking. We profiled the maternal and fetal response using a combination of viral RNA from naso-pharyngeal swabs and serological assessment of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: This multicentre prospective observational study was conducted between March 24th and August 31st 2020. Two independent cohorts were established, a symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 cohort and a cohort of asymptomatic pregnant women attending two of the largest maternity hospitals in Europe. Symptomatic women were invited to provide a serum sample to assess antibody responses. Asymptomatic pregnant women provided a nasopharyngeal swab and serum sample. RT-PCR for viral RNA was performed using the Cobas SARS-CoV-2 6800 platform (Roche). Umbilical cord bloods were obtained at delivery. Maternal and fetal serological response was measured using both the Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay (Roche), Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG Assay and the IgM Architect assay. Informed written consent was obtained from all participants. RESULTS: Ten of twenty three symptomatic women had SARS-CoV-2 RNA detected on nasopharyngeal swabs. Five (5/23, 21.7%) demonstrated serological evidence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies and seven (30.4%, 7/23) were positive for IgM antibodies. In the asymptomatic cohort, the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in RNA was 0.16% (1/608). IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detected in 1·67% (10/598, 95% CI 0·8%-3·1%) and IgM in 3·51% (21/598, 95% CI 2·3-5·5%). Nine women had repeat testing post the baseline test. Four (4/9, 44%) remained IgM positive and one remained IgG positive. 3 IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detectable in cord bloods from babies born to five seropositive women who delivered during the study. The mean gestation at serological test was 34 weeks. The mean time between maternal serologic positivity and detection in umbilical cord samples was 28 days. CONCLUSION: Using two independent serological assays, we present a comprehensive illustration of the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 in pregnancy, and show a low prevalence of asymptomatic SARS-CoV2. Transplacental migration of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was identified in cord blood of women who demonstrated antenatal anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, raising the possibility of passive immunity.

From physical to virtual: How the COVID-19 pandemic changed a tertiary gynaecologic oncology surveillance program in Ireland.

•Virtual follow up is acceptable to gynecological oncology patients.•Some patients may be reluctant to sit in waiting rooms post pandemic.•Lack of physical examination did not affect most patients' appointments.

Perspectives, fears and expectations of patients with gynaecological cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A Pan-European study of the European Network of Gynaecological Cancer Advocacy Groups (ENGAGe).

BACKGROUND: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on European gynaecological cancer patients under active treatment or follow-up has not been documented. We sought to capture the patient perceptions of the COVID-19 implications and the worldwide imposed treatment modifications. METHODS: A patient survey was conducted in 16 European countries, using a new COVID-19-related questionnaire, developed by ENGAGe and the Hospital Anxiety & Depression Scale questionnaire (HADS). The survey was promoted by national patient advocacy groups and charitable organisations. FINDINGS: We collected 1388 forms; 592 online and 796 hard-copy (May, 2020). We excluded 137 due to missing data. Median patients' age was 55 years (range: 18-89), 54.7% had ovarian cancer and 15.5% were preoperative. Even though 73.2% of patients named cancer as a risk factor for COVID-19, only 17.5% were more afraid of COVID-19 than their cancer condition, with advanced age (>70 years) as the only significant risk factor for that. Overall, 71% were concerned about cancer progression if their treatment/follow-up was cancelled/postponed. Most patients (64%) had their care continued as planned, but 72.3% (n = 892) said that they received no information around overall COVID-19 infection rates of patients and staff, testing or measures taken in their treating hospital. Mean HADS Anxiety and Depression Scores were 8.8 (range: 5.3-12) and 8.1 (range: 3.8-13.4), respectively. Multivariate analysis identified high HADS-depression scores, having experienced modifications of care due to the pandemic and concern about not being able to visit their doctor as independent predictors of patients' anxiety. INTERPRETATION: Gynaecological cancer patients expressed significant anxiety about progression of their disease due to modifications of care related to the COVID-19 pandemic and wished to pursue their treatment as planned despite the associated risks. Healthcare professionals should take this into consideration when making decisions that impact patients care in times of crisis and to develop initiatives to improve patients' communication and education.