Cancer patient management strategy in a Cancer Center of Zhejiang, China during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Due to the increased risk of viral infection and the severe shortage of medical resources during the pandemic of COVID-19, most hospitals in the epidemic areas significantly reduced non-emergency admissions and services, if not closed. As a result, it has been difficult to treat cancer patients on time, which adversely affects their prognosis. To address this problem, cancer centers must develop a strategic plan to manage both inpatients and outpatients during the pandemic, provide them with the necessary treatment, and at the same time prevent the spread of the virus among patients, visitors and medical staff. METHODS: Based upon the epidemic situation in Zhejiang Province, China, the number of running non-emergency medical wards in the Zhejiang Cancer Hospital was gradually increased in a controlled manner. All staff of the hospital received COVID-19 preventive training and was provided with three different levels of protection according to the risks of their services. Only patients without a known history of SARS-CoV-2 contact were eligible to schedule an appointment. Body temperature was measured on all patients upon their arrival at the hospital. Chest CT image, blood cell counting and travel/contact history were investigated in patients with fever. Respiratory tract samples, such as sputum and throat swabs, from all patients, including those clinically suspected of SARS-CoV-2 infection, were collected for nucleic acid detection of SARS-CoV-2 before treatment. RESULTS: A total of 3697 inpatients and 416 outpatients seeking cancer treatment were enrolled from February 1 to April 3, 2020, in compliance with the hospital's infection-control interventions. The clinicopathological parameters of the patients were summarized herein. 4237 samples from 4101 patients produced negative RNA testing results. Four clinically suspected patients all presented negative RNA test results and were excluded from the SARS-CoV-2 infection through follow-up retesting and monitoring. Seven patients with only N-gene positive results were retested, followed by CT scan and SARS-CoV-2 contact history investigation. All of them were finally diagnosed as non-infected patients. There was one outpatient who was confirmed positive by virus RNA test and then followed up. She might be an asymptomatic laboratory-confirmed case. During the study period, there was no SARS-CoV-2 infection among staff, patients and escorts of patients in the Zhejiang Cancer Hospital. CONCLUSION: This study suggested our infection-control interventions, including viral nucleic acid test, could be used as a reliable method to screen cancer patients in the area with moderate COVID-19 prevalence. Cancer may not be a high-risk factor of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Chest CT of COVID-19 in patients with a negative first RT-PCR test: Comparison with patients with a positive first RT-PCR test.

To compare clinical and imaging features between patients with an initial negative reverse-transcription-polymerase chain-reaction (RT-PCR) test and patients with an initial positive RT-PCR test. CT follow-up analysis in the negative RT-PCR group is also described.Thirty-three patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by RT-PCR, with 216 lesions upon CT, were included. Demographic information and chest CT imaging features were collected.The average age in the whole study group was 46.9 ±â€Š11.1 years, with 18 males and 15 females. Patients in the positive RT-PCR test group were more likely to have a fever than patients in the negative RT-PCR test group (85.7% vs 50%, P < .05). Lesions in the positive group were more likely to be located in the peripheral area than lesions in the negative group (83.6% vs 68.2%, P < .05). Regarding the appearance of 216 lesions, ground-glass opacities (GGOs) with consolidation (43.2%) was the most common appearance in the negative group, followed by pure GGOs (31.8%), while in the positive group, pure GGOs (32%) and GGOs with interlobular septal thickening (32.8%) were both most frequent, and the difference between them was evident (P < .05). For the follow-up analysis, the largest short-axis of a lesion was smaller upon follow-up (median size 13.6 mm vs 14 mm), albeit by a smaller margin. Pure GGOs decreased in frequency, from 31.3% to 21.3%, while consolidation increased in frequency, from 7.5% to 12.5%.The manifestations of COVID-19 in patients with a first negative RT-PCR test and patients with a positive first RT-PCR test are different to some extent. The consolidation component may increase after follow-up.