Spotlight on International Quality: COVID-19 and Its Impact on Quality Improvement in Cancer Care.

This report from ASCO's International Quality Steering Group summarizes early learnings on how the COVID-19 pandemic and its stresses have disproportionately affected cancer care delivery and its delivery systems across the world. This article shares perspectives from eight different countries, including Austria, Brazil, Ghana, Honduras, Ireland, the Philippines, South Africa, and the United Arab Emirates, which provide insight to their unique issues, challenges, and barriers to quality improvement in cancer care during the pandemic. These perspectives shed light on some key recommendations applicable on a global scale and focus on access to care, importance of expanding and developing new treatments for both COVID-19 and cancer, access to telemedicine, collecting and using COVID-19 and cancer registry data, establishing measures and guidelines to further enhance quality of care, and expanding communication among governments, health care systems, and health care providers. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care and quality improvement has been and will continue to be felt across the globe, but this report aims to share these experiences and learnings and to assist ASCO's international members and our global fight against the pandemic and cancer.

St. Gallen/Vienna 2021: A Brief Summary of the Consensus Discussion on Customizing Therapies for Women with Early Breast Cancer.

Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the 2021 St. Gallen/Vienna Consensus Conference on Early Breast Cancer Treatment Standards had to be held virtually. Despite the challenge of convening global contributors to both the conference itself as well as the important Consensus Panel, the scientific committee and the organizers managed to organize a well-received scientific conference, and also the panel discussion was well received in the worldwide scientific community, as indicated by numerous positive feedbacks already within the first 24 h. The virtual format was unusual, but opened the door for new elements such as Consensus questions proposed from the audience, but also live audience interaction on both days - the Consensus was split into 2 parts in order to accommodate as many time zones globally as possible, leading to almost a doubling of discussion time compared to previous meetings. Also, about 3,400 participants from over 100 countries and all continents came together, including many colleagues who could attend for the first time from world regions with restrictions that so far did not allow the travel to Vienna. Traditionally, the Panel votings and discussions were preceded by 3 days of high-level live-discussions about the lectures that were available on demand already a week before. Also, all the lectures and live discussions in mini-panels are made available online for at least 6 months (https://www.oncoconferences.ch/events/bcc-2021/). The traditional panel votings were once more moderated by Eric Winer from Harvard and included interactive elements such as audience votings and audience questions, presented by Michael Gnant. This rapid report by the editors-in-chief of Breast Care summarizes the results of the 2021 international panel votings with respect to locoregional and systemic treatment as a quick news update for our readers and clearly does not intend to replace the official St. Gallen Consensus publication that will follow shortly in Annals of Oncology.

ESMO Management and treatment adapted recommendations in the COVID-19 era: Breast Cancer.

The global preparedness and response to the rapid escalation to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2-related disease (COVID-19) to a pandemic proportion has demanded the formulation of a reliable, useful and evidence-based mechanism for health services prioritisation, to achieve the highest quality standards of care to all patients. The prioritisation of high value cancer interventions must be embedded in the agenda for the pandemic response, ensuring that no inconsistency or discrepancy emerge in the health planning processes.The aim of this work is to organise health interventions for breast cancer management and research in a tiered framework (high, medium, low value), formulating a scheme of prioritisation per clinical cogency and intrinsic value or magnitude of benefit. The public health tools and schemes for priority setting in oncology have been used as models, aspiring to capture clinical urgency, value in healthcare, community goals and fairness, while respecting the principles of benevolence, non-maleficence, autonomy and justice.We discuss the priority health interventions across the cancer continuum, giving a perspective on the role and meaning to maintain some services (undeferrable) while temporarily abrogate some others (deferrable). Considerations for implementation and the essential link to pre-existing health services, especially primary healthcare, are addressed, outlining a framework for the development of effective and functional services, such as telemedicine.The discussion covers the theme of health systems strategising, and why oncology care, in particular breast cancer care, should be maintained in parallel to pandemic control measures, providing a pragmatic clinical model within the broader context of public healthcare schemes.