Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on the survival of patients with high-grade glioma and best practice recommendations.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has changed the clinical day-to-day practice. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on patients with high-grade glioma (HGG) as well as to derive best practice recommendations. We compared a multi-institutional cohort with HGG (n = 251) from 03/2020 to 05/2020 (n = 119) to a historical cohort from 03/2019 to 05/2019 (n = 132). The endpoints were outcome (progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)) as well as patterns of care and time intervals between treatment steps. The median OS for WHO grade 4 gliomas was 12 months in 2019 (95% Confidence Interval 9.7-14.3 months), and not reached in 2020 (p = .026). There were no other significant differences in the Kaplan-Meier estimates for OS and PFS between cohorts of 2019 and 2020, neither did stratification by WHO grade reveal any significant differences for OS, PFS or for patterns of care. The time interval between cranial magnetic resonance imaging (cMRI) and biopsy was significantly longer in 2020 cohort (11 versus 21 days, p = .031). Median follow-up was 10 months (range 0-30 months). Despite necessary disease containment policies, it is crucial to ensure that patients with HGG are treated in line with the recent guidelines and standard of care (SOC) algorithms. Therefore, we strongly suggest pursuing no changes to SOC treatment, a timely diagnosis and treatment with short time intervals between first symptoms, initial diagnosis, and treatment, as well as a guideline-based cMRI follow-up.

Implementation, relevance, and virtual adaptation of neuro-oncological tumor boards during the COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide provider survey.

PURPOSE: Neuro-oncology tumor boards (NTBs) hold an established function in cancer care as multidisciplinary tumor boards. However, NTBs predominantly exist at academic and/or specialized centers. In addition to increasing centralization throughout the healthcare system, changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic have arguably resulted in advantages by conducting clinical meetings virtually. We therefore asked about the experience and acceptance of (virtualized) NTBs and their potential benefits. METHODS: A survey questionnaire was developed and distributed via a web-based platform. Specialized neuro-oncological centers in Germany were identified based on the number of brain tumor cases treated in the respective institution per year. Only one representative per center was invited to participate in the survey. Questions targeted the structure/organization of NTBs as well as changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: A total of 65/97 institutions participated in the survey (response rate 67%). In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, regular conventions of NTBs were maintained by the respective centers and multi-specialty participation remained high. NTBs were considered valuable by respondents in achieving the most optimal therapy for the affected patient and in maintaining/encouraging interdisciplinary debate/exchange. The settings of NTBs have been adapted during the pandemic with the increased use of virtual technology. Virtual NTBs were found to be beneficial, yet administrative support is lacking in some places. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual implementation of NTBs was feasible and accepted in the centers surveyed. Therefore, successful implementation offers new avenues and may be pursued for networking between centers, thereby increasing coverage of neuro-oncology care.