Factors associated with increased financial toxicity after the completion of radiation treatment for gynecologic cancer.

PURPOSE: We evaluated financial toxicity (FT) in patients with gynecologic cancer treated with radiation and assessed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients' financial wellbeing. METHODS: Patients completed a survey 1 month after completing radiation from August 2019-March 2020 and November 2020-June 2021. The survey included the COmprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) tool, EQ-5D to measure quality of life (QOL) and pandemic-related questions for the second survey period. High FT was COST score ≤ 23. RESULTS: Of 97 respondents (92% response rate), 49% completed the survey pre-pandemic and 51% after; the majority were white (76%) and had uterine cancer (64%). Sixty percent received external beam radiation with or without brachytherapy; 40% had only brachytherapy. High FT was associated with worse QOL (r = -0.37, P < 0.001), younger age and type of insurance (both p ≤ 0.03). Respondents with high FT were 6.0 (95% CI 1.0-35.9) times more likely to delay/avoid medical care, 13.6 (95% CI 2.9-64.3) times more likely to borrow money, and 6.9 (95% CI 1.7-27.2) times as likely to reduce spending on basic goods. The pandemic cohort had a smaller proportion of respondents with high FT than the pre-pandemic cohort (20% vs. 35%, p = 0.10) and a higher median COST score (32 (IQR 25-35) vs. 27 (IQR 19-34), p = 0.07). CONCLUSION: Privately insured, younger respondents who received radiation for gynecologic cancer were at risk for FT. High FT was associated with worse QOL and economic cost-coping strategies. We observed less FT in the pandemic cohort, though not statistically different from the pre-pandemic cohort.

How Cumulative Statistics Can Mislead: The Temporal Dynamism of Sex Disparities in COVID-19 Mortality in New York State.

Overall, men have died from COVID-19 at slightly higher rates than women. But cumulative estimates of mortality by sex may be misleading. We analyze New York State COVID-19 mortality by sex between March 2020 and August 2021, demonstrating that 72.7% of the total difference in the number of COVID-19 deaths between women and men was accrued in the first seven weeks of the pandemic. Thus, while the initial surge in COVID-19 mortality was characterized by stark sex disparities, this article shows that disparities were greatly attenuated in subsequent phases of the pandemic. Investigating changes over time could help illuminate how contextual factors contributed to the development of apparent sex disparities in COVID-19 outcomes.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Messenger RNA Vaccine Immunogenicity in Immunosuppressed Individuals.

Individuals on immunosuppressive (IS) therapy have increased mortality from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, and delayed viral clearance may lead to new viral variants. IS therapy reduces antibody responses following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccination; however, a comprehensive assessment of vaccine immunogenicity is lacking. Here we show that IS therapy reduced neutralizing, binding, and nonneutralizing antibody functions in addition to CD4 and CD8 T-cell interferon-γ responses following COVID-19 mRNA vaccination compared to immunocompetent individuals. Moreover, IS therapy reduced cross-reactivity against SARS-CoV-2 variants. These data suggest that the standard COVID-19 mRNA vaccine regimens will likely not provide optimal protection in immunocompromised individuals.

The psychological impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on women who become pregnant after receiving treatment for infertility: a longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the psychological health of patients with infertility who have become pregnant with that of women who have not. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study conducted from April 2020 to June 2020. The participants completed three questionnaires over this period. SETTING: A single large, university-affiliated infertility practice. PATIENTS: A total of 443 pregnant women and 1,476 women still experiencing infertility who completed all three questionnaires. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient-reported primary stressor over three months of the first major COVID-19 surge; further data on self-reported sadness, anxiety, loneliness, and the use of personal coping strategies. RESULTS: Pregnant participants were significantly less likely to report taking an antidepressant or anxiolytic medication, were less likely to have a prior diagnosis of depression, were more likely to cite COVID-19 as a top stressor, and overall were less likely to practice stress-relieving activities during the first surge. CONCLUSIONS: Women who became pregnant after receiving treatment for infertility cited the pandemic as their top stressor and were more distressed about the pandemic than their nonpregnant counterparts but were less likely to be engaging in stress-relieving activities. Given the ongoing impact of the pandemic, patients with infertility who become pregnant after receiving treatment should be counseled and encouraged to practice specific stress-reduction strategies.

Sex disparities in COVID-19 outcomes in the United States: Quantifying and contextualizing variation.

This paper presents the first longitudinal study of sex disparities in COVID-19 cases and mortalities across U.S. states, derived from the unique 13-month dataset of the U.S. Gender/Sex COVID-19 Data Tracker. To analyze sex disparities, weekly case and mortality rates by sex and mortality rate ratios were computed for each U.S. state, and a multilevel crossed-effects conditional logistic binomial regression model was fitted to estimate the variation of the sex disparity in mortality over time and across states. Results demonstrate considerable variation in the sex disparity in COVID-19 cases and mortalities over time and between states. These data suggest that the sex disparity, when present, is modest, and likely varies in relation to context-sensitive variables, which may include health behaviors, preexisting health status, occupation, race/ethnicity, and other markers of social experience.

Gender-Based Violence Risk Mitigation by Non-GBV Specialists Prior to and during COVID-19: A Global Survey of Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices of Humanitarian Practitioners.

Available evidence indicates that the COVID-19 pandemic and response measures may lead to increased risk of gender-based violence (GBV), including in humanitarian contexts. This study examined the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of humanitarian practitioners related to GBV risk mitigation approaches during COVID-19 in order to refine current guidance and inform future materials. A global, online cross-sectional survey of humanitarian practitioners was conducted between November 2020 and April 2021. We calculated descriptive statistics and used Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests to compare knowledge, attitudes, and practices among GBV specialists and non-specialists. Of 170 respondents, 58% were female and 44% were GBV specialists. Almost all (95%) of the respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they have a role to play in GBV risk mitigation. Compared to GBV specialists, a higher proportion of non-specialists reported little to no knowledge on GBV risk mitigation global guidance (38% vs. 7%, p < 0.001) and on how to respond to a disclosure of GBV (18% vs. 3%, p < 0.001). Respondents reported several barriers to integrating GBV risk mitigation into their work during COVID-19, including insufficient funding, capacity, knowledge, and guidance. Efforts to mainstream GBV risk mitigation actions should continue and intensify, leveraging the lessons and experiences generated thus far.