Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
2.
Cell Rep Med ; 3(10): 100781, 2022 10 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2042207

ABSTRACT

Patients with blood cancer continue to have a greater risk of inadequate immune responses following three COVID-19 vaccine doses and risk of severe COVID-19 disease. In the context of the CAPTURE study (NCT03226886), we report immune responses in 80 patients with blood cancer who received a fourth dose of BNT162b2. We measured neutralizing antibody titers (NAbTs) using a live virus microneutralization assay against wild-type (WT), Delta, and Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 and T cell responses against WT and Omicron BA.1 using an activation-induced marker (AIM) assay. The proportion of patients with detectable NAb titers and T cell responses after the fourth vaccine dose increased compared with that after the third vaccine dose. Patients who received B cell-depleting therapies within the 12 months before vaccination have the greatest risk of not having detectable NAbT. In addition, we report immune responses in 57 patients with breakthrough infections after vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Humans , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral , BNT162 Vaccine , Clinical Studies as Topic , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Immunity , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Cancer Cell ; 40(2): 114-116, 2022 02 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1588171
5.
Int J Health Plann Manage ; 36(5): 1397-1406, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1245422

ABSTRACT

During the on-going COVID-19 pandemic a number of key public health services have been severely impacted. These include elective surgical services due to the synergetic resources required to provide both perioperative surgical care whilst also treating acute COVID-19 patients and also the poor outcomes associated with surgical patients who develop COVID-19 in the perioperative period. This article discusses the important principles and concepts for providing important surgical services during the COVID-19 pandemic based on the model of the RMCancerSurgHub which is providing surgical cancer services for a population of approximately 2 million people across London during the pandemic. The model focusses on creating local and regional hub centres which provide urgent treatment for surgical patients in an environment that is relatively protected from the burden of COVID-19 illness. The model extensively utilises the extended multidisciplinary team to allow for a flexible approach with core services delivered in 'clean' sites which can adapt to viral surges. A key requirement is that of a clinical prioritisation process which allows for equity in access within and between specialties ensuring that patients are treated on the basis of greatest need, while at the same time protecting those whose conditions can safely wait from exposure to the virus. Importantly, this model has the ability to scale-up activity and lead units and networks into the recovery phase. The model discussed is also broadly applicable to providing surgical services during any viral pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Elective Surgical Procedures , Pandemics , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Perioperative Care , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Br J Radiol ; 94(1117): 20200994, 2021 Jan 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-947957

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: In accordance with initial guidance from the Royal College of Surgeons and Royal College of Radiologists, we evaluated the utility of CT of the chest in the exclusion of asymptomatic COVID-19 infection prior to elective cancer surgery on self-isolating patients during the pandemic. METHODS: All surgical referrals without symptoms of COVID-19 infection in April and May 2020 were included. Patient records were retrospectively reviewed. Screening included CT chest for major thoracic and abdominal surgery. CTs were reported according to British Society of Thoracic Imaging guidelines and correlated with reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and surgical outcomes. RESULTS: The prevalence of RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 infection in our screened population was 0.7% (5/681). 240 pre-operative CTs were performed. 3.8% (9/240) of CTs were reported as abnormal, only one of which was RT-PCR positive. 2% (5/240) of cases had surgery postponed based on CT results. All nine patients with CTs reported as abnormal have had surgery, all without complication. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of asymptomatic COVID-19 infection in our screened population was low. The pre-test probability of CT chest in asymptomatic, self-isolating patients is consequently low. CT can produce false positives in this setting, introducing unnecessary delay in surgery for a small proportion of cases. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Self-isolation, clinical assessment and RT-PCR are effective at minimising COVID-19 related surgical risk. The addition of CT chest is unhelpful. Our data have particular relevance during the second wave of infection and in the recovery phase.


Subject(s)
Asymptomatic Infections , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Elective Surgical Procedures , Neoplasms/surgery , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Isolation , Preoperative Period , Retrospective Studies , Thorax , United Kingdom
7.
Gut ; 70(6): 1053-1060, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-733147

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) prioritisation to mitigate the impact of delays in the colorectal cancer (CRC) urgent diagnostic (2-week-wait (2WW)) pathway consequent from the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: We modelled the reduction in CRC survival and life years lost resultant from per-patient delays of 2-6 months in the 2WW pathway. We stratified by age group, individual-level benefit in CRC survival versus age-specific nosocomial COVID-19-related fatality per referred patient undergoing colonoscopy. We modelled mitigation strategies using thresholds of FIT triage of 2, 10 and 150 µg Hb/g to prioritise 2WW referrals for colonoscopy. To construct the underlying models, we employed 10-year net CRC survival for England 2008-2017, 2WW pathway CRC case and referral volumes and per-day-delay HRs generated from observational studies of diagnosis-to-treatment interval. RESULTS: Delay of 2/4/6 months across all 11 266 patients with CRC diagnosed per typical year via the 2WW pathway were estimated to result in 653/1419/2250 attributable deaths and loss of 9214/20 315/32 799 life years. Risk-benefit from urgent investigatory referral is particularly sensitive to nosocomial COVID-19 rates for patients aged >60. Prioritisation out of delay for the 18% of symptomatic referrals with FIT >10 µg Hb/g would avoid 89% of these deaths attributable to presentational/diagnostic delay while reducing immediate requirement for colonoscopy by >80%. CONCLUSIONS: Delays in the pathway to CRC diagnosis and treatment have potential to cause significant mortality and loss of life years. FIT triage of symptomatic patients in primary care could streamline access to colonoscopy, reduce delays for true-positive CRC cases and reduce nosocomial COVID-19 mortality in older true-negative 2WW referrals. However, this strategy offers benefit only in short-term rationalisation of limited endoscopy services: the appreciable false-negative rate of FIT in symptomatic patients means most colonoscopies will still be required.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Colonoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Delayed Diagnosis , Occult Blood , Risk Assessment/methods , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Colonoscopy/methods , Colonoscopy/standards , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/mortality , Critical Pathways , Delayed Diagnosis/adverse effects , Delayed Diagnosis/statistics & numerical data , Early Detection of Cancer , Humans , Immunochemistry/methods , Infection Control/methods , Life Tables , Mortality , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom/epidemiology
8.
Lancet Oncol ; 21(8): 1035-1044, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-665626

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 lockdown, referrals via the 2-week-wait urgent pathway for suspected cancer in England, UK, are reported to have decreased by up to 84%. We aimed to examine the impact of different scenarios of lockdown-accumulated backlog in cancer referrals on cancer survival, and the impact on survival per referred patient due to delayed referral versus risk of death from nosocomial infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. METHODS: In this modelling study, we used age-stratified and stage-stratified 10-year cancer survival estimates for patients in England, UK, for 20 common tumour types diagnosed in 2008-17 at age 30 years and older from Public Health England. We also used data for cancer diagnoses made via the 2-week-wait referral pathway in 2013-16 from the Cancer Waiting Times system from NHS Digital. We applied per-day hazard ratios (HRs) for cancer progression that we generated from observational studies of delay to treatment. We quantified the annual numbers of cancers at stage I-III diagnosed via the 2-week-wait pathway using 2-week-wait age-specific and stage-specific breakdowns. From these numbers, we estimated the aggregate number of lives and life-years lost in England for per-patient delays of 1-6 months in presentation, diagnosis, or cancer treatment, or a combination of these. We assessed three scenarios of a 3-month period of lockdown during which 25%, 50%, and 75% of the normal monthly volumes of symptomatic patients delayed their presentation until after lockdown. Using referral-to-diagnosis conversion rates and COVID-19 case-fatality rates, we also estimated the survival increment per patient referred. FINDINGS: Across England in 2013-16, an average of 6281 patients with stage I-III cancer were diagnosed via the 2-week-wait pathway per month, of whom 1691 (27%) would be predicted to die within 10 years from their disease. Delays in presentation via the 2-week-wait pathway over a 3-month lockdown period (with an average presentational delay of 2 months per patient) would result in 181 additional lives and 3316 life-years lost as a result of a backlog of referrals of 25%, 361 additional lives and 6632 life-years lost for a 50% backlog of referrals, and 542 additional lives and 9948 life-years lost for a 75% backlog in referrals. Compared with all diagnostics for the backlog being done in month 1 after lockdown, additional capacity across months 1-3 would result in 90 additional lives and 1662 live-years lost due to diagnostic delays for the 25% backlog scenario, 183 additional lives and 3362 life-years lost under the 50% backlog scenario, and 276 additional lives and 5075 life-years lost under the 75% backlog scenario. However, a delay in additional diagnostic capacity with provision spread across months 3-8 after lockdown would result in 401 additional lives and 7332 life-years lost due to diagnostic delays under the 25% backlog scenario, 811 additional lives and 14 873 life-years lost under the 50% backlog scenario, and 1231 additional lives and 22 635 life-years lost under the 75% backlog scenario. A 2-month delay in 2-week-wait investigatory referrals results in an estimated loss of between 0·0 and 0·7 life-years per referred patient, depending on age and tumour type. INTERPRETATION: Prompt provision of additional capacity to address the backlog of diagnostics will minimise deaths as a result of diagnostic delays that could add to those predicted due to expected presentational delays. Prioritisation of patient groups for whom delay would result in most life-years lost warrants consideration as an option for mitigating the aggregate burden of mortality in patients with cancer. FUNDING: None.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Neoplasms/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Referral and Consultation , Waiting Lists , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , England , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Models, Statistical , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Survival Analysis
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL