Adverse Events Reported by Patients With Cancer After Administration of a 2-Dose mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine.

BACKGROUND: Most safety and efficacy trials of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines excluded patients with cancer, yet these patients are more likely than healthy individuals to contract SARS-CoV-2 and more likely to become seriously ill after infection. Our objective was to record short-term adverse reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine in patients with cancer, to compare the magnitude and duration of these reactions with those of patients without cancer, and to determine whether adverse reactions are related to active cancer therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective, single-institution observational study was performed at an NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. All study participants received 2 doses of the Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine separated by approximately 3 weeks. A report of adverse reactions to dose 1 of the vaccine was completed upon return to the clinic for dose 2. Participants completed an identical survey either online or by telephone 2 weeks after the second vaccine dose. RESULTS: The cohort of 1,753 patients included 67.5% who had a history of cancer and 12.0% who were receiving active cancer treatment. Local pain at the injection site was the most frequently reported symptom for all respondents and did not distinguish patients with cancer from those without cancer after either dose 1 (39.3% vs 43.9%; P=.07) or dose 2 (42.5% vs 40.3%; P=.45). Among patients with cancer, those receiving active treatment were less likely to report pain at the injection site after dose 1 compared with those not receiving active treatment (30.0% vs 41.4%; P=.002). The onset and duration of adverse events was otherwise unrelated to active cancer treatment. CONCLUSIONS: When patients with cancer were compared with those without cancer, few differences in reported adverse events were noted. Active cancer treatment had little impact on adverse event profiles.

Racial and ethnic variations in caregiving-related physical, emotional, and financial strain during COVID-19 among those caring for adult cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Cancer caregiving is shown to be a burdensome experience in typical times. The purpose of this study was to describe cancer caregivers' emotional, physical, and financial strain during the COVID-19 pandemic and compared to preCOVID-19, and explore racial and ethnic variations in caregiver strain. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey using Lucid, LLC, incorporating quotas for race, ethnicity, gender and age. Caregivers had to be adults living in the USA and currently providing unpaid care to an adult cancer patient (i.e., during COVID-19) and prior to the pandemic. We assessed the caregivers' emotional, physical, and financial strain and asked them to compare to preCOVID-19 caregiving. Analyses included descriptive and linear regression adjusting for sociodemographic and caregiving-related variables. RESULTS: A total of 285 caregivers met eligibility, and most were nonHispanic white (72.3%) and female (59.6%). Based on a scale of "1: Much lower" to "5: Much higher", the financial, physical and emotional strain/stress experienced by caregivers compared to preCOVID-19 was, on average, 3.52 (SD: 0.82; range: 1-5) for financial strain, 3.61 (SD: 0.86; range: 1-5) for physical strain, and 3.88 (SD: 0.89; range: 1-5) for emotional stress. NonHispanic black caregivers were significantly more likely than nonHispanic white caregivers to indicate that caregiving-related financial strain was higher than preCOVID-19. Moreover, Hispanic caregivers compared to nonHispanic white caregivers reported caregiving-related emotional stress was higher than preCOVID-19. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest a need to be attentive to racial and ethnic variations in emotional and financial strain and provide targeted support in clinical care and via public policy during a public health crisis.

Health psychology in the time of COVID-19.

Health Psychology has received numerous papers over the past several months on topics related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Many of them concern depression, anxiety, stress, or other forms of distress in the general population or in health care workers. We have received far fewer papers on COVID-related health behaviors and health communications-factors that have played central roles in the spread of the pandemic and that are major topics in health psychology. Our experience is consistent with the published scientific literature on the pandemic. A Medline search that we conducted in late September yielded over 23,000 English-language articles pertaining to COVID-19. Over 1,400 of them concerned topics that are within the scope of Health Psychology. As shown in Table 1, COVID-related mental disorders comprised the largest category. Many other studies concerned other forms of stress or emotional distress. At least 248 articles addressed the profound ethnic and racial disparities in COVID-19 infection and death rates and in access to health care that are accentuating longstanding health inequities; 22 (9%) of these articles addressed behavioral or psychosocial aspects of COVID-19 health disparities. Thus, the literature on the behavioral and psychosocial aspects of the pandemic has been dominated, so far at least, by research on stress or distress. Fewer reports have been published so far on critical COVID-related health behaviors, health communication, or health disparities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).