Cancer care in German centers of excellence during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: An increasing number of international studies demonstrate serious negative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the timely diagnosis of cancer and on cancer treatment. Our study aimed to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate the capacities of German Comprehensive Cancer Centers (CCCs) in different areas of complex oncology care during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Prospective panel survey over 23 rounds among 18 CCCs in Germany between March 2020 and June 2022. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic substantially affected the oncological care system in Germany during the first 2 years. Persistent limitations of care in CCCs primarily affected follow-up (- 21%) and psycho-oncologic care (- 12%), but also tumor surgery (- 9%). Substantial limitations were also reported for all other areas of multidisciplinary oncological care. CONCLUSIONS: This study documents the limitations of oncological care during the COVID-19 pandemic and highlights the need to develop strategies to avoid similar limitations in the future.

Kapazität der onkologischen Versorgung in deutschen onkologischen Spitzenzentren während der ersten 2 Jahre der COVID-19-Pandemie Oncologic care capacity in German Comprehensive Cancer Centers during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic

Hintergrund Eine zunehmende Zahl von internationalen Studien zeigt, dass die COVID-19-Pandemie schwerwiegende negative Auswirkungen auf die rechtzeitige Diagnose von Krebs und auf die Krebsbehandlung hat. Ziel der Arbeit Ziel der Arbeit war die quantitative und qualitative Auswertung der Kapazitäten deutscher onkologischer Spitzenzentren (Comprehensive Cancer Centers, CCCs) in verschiedenen Bereichen der komplexen onkologischen Versorgung im Zeitraum März 2020 bis Juni 2022. Material und Methoden Unter 18 CCCs in Deutschland erfolgte zwischen März 2020 und Juni 2022 eine prospektive regelmäßige Panelerhebung. Ergebnisse Die COVID-19-Pandemie hat in den ersten beiden Jahren das onkologische Versorgungssystem in Deutschland substanziell beeinträchtigt. Anhaltende Einschränkungen der Versorgung in den CCCs betrafen in erster Linie die Nachsorge (−21 %) und die Psychoonkologie (−12 %), aber auch Tumoroperationen (−9 %). Deutliche Funktions- und Kapazitätseinschränkungen fanden sich ebenso in allen weiteren Bereichen der multidisziplinären onkologischen Betreuung. Diskussion Die Studie dokumentiert die eingeschränkte onkologische Versorgung der Bevölkerung während der COVID-19-Pandemie. Die Auswirkungen lassen sich noch nicht vollumfänglich darstellen. Dennoch müssen (jetzt) Strategien zur Vermeidung solcher Einschränkungen entwickelt werden.

Kapazität der onkologischen Versorgung in deutschen onkologischen Spitzenzentren während der ersten 2 Jahre der COVID-19-Pandemie

Background: An increasing number of international studies demonstrate serious negative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the timely diagnosis of cancer and on cancer treatment. Objectives: This study aimed to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate the capacities of German Comprehensive Cancer Centers (CCCs) in different areas of the complex oncological care structure from March 2020 to June 2022. Materials and methods: Prospective, regular panel survey were conducted among 18 CCCs in Germany between March 2020 and June 2022. Results: The COVID-19 pandemic substantially affected the oncologic care system in Germany during the first 2 years. Persistent limitations of care in CCCs primarily affected follow-up (−21%) and psychooncologic care (−12%), but also tumor surgery (−9%). Substantial limitations were also reported for all other areas of the multidisciplinary oncological care. Conclusions: This study documents the limited oncological care available during the COVID-19 pandemic. Its impact on patients’ outcomes cannot be fully revealed as yet. Nevertheless, strategies to avoid similar limitations in the future need to be developed (now).

Changing the landscape of European School of Oncology-European Society for Medical Oncology masterclasses in clinical oncology during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Aims: This study aimed to assess the participants' evaluation of the European School of Oncology-European Society for Medical Oncology virtual masterclasses in clinical oncology (MCOs) organized during the pandemic in 2021. Materials & methods: The participants answered an online evaluation questionnaire at the end of each MCO to evaluate the content and organization of the MCO. Results: The clinical session and case presentation scores ranged between 4.6 and 4.8 over 5. The participants strongly agreed that the MCOs offered updates to improve their knowledge and practice in 68-83% and 52-76%, respectively; 74-90% of the participants considered the quality of the meetings to be excellent. Conclusion: The participants were satisfied with the virtual MCOs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Virtual MCO may be an acceptable alternative educational modality in specific circumstances.

In 2002, the European School of Oncology (ESO) established masterclasses in clinical oncology (MCOs) and provided 41 in-person courses over the past two decades. As the COVID-19 pandemic forced travel restrictions and social distancing, the ESO and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) adapted the traditional MCOs to create virtual MCOs presented on e-ESO, an ESO e-learning platform. To date, five virtual MCOs have been organized for oncologists from western Europe, Latin America, Arab countries and southern Europe, the Baltic and Eurasia, eastern Europe and the Balkans. This study aimed to assess the participants' evaluation of the ESO-ESMO virtual MCOs organized during the pandemic in 2021 and to compare the participants' evaluation with that of previous in-person MCOs conducted between 2002 and 2019.

Correction: Covid-19 in outpatients-Is fever a useful indicator for SARS-CoV-2 infection?

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246312.].

Covid-19 in outpatients-Is fever a useful indicator for SARS-CoV-2 infection?

OBJECTIVE: Understanding mild to moderate symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is important in order to identify active cases early and thus counteract transmission. METHODS: In March 2020, Leipzig University Hospital established an outpatient clinic for patients potentially infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Confirmed cases with mild to moderate symptoms self-isolated at home and were followed-up by daily telephone calls for at least 14 days. Symptoms and course of illness of these patients are reported here. RESULTS: From March 20 to April 17, 2020, 1460 individuals were tested for SARS-CoV-2 by naso- or oropharyngeal swab for real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Covid-19 was confirmed in 91 (6.2%) patients, of which 87 were included in the final analysis. Patients presented for testing after a mean of 5.9 days (IQR = 2.0-8.5). The median age was 37.0 years (IQR = 28.5-53), and 48 (55.2%) were female. Five (5.7%) patients required hospital admission during the course of illness. Most frequently reported symptoms were fatigue (n = 64, 74%), cough (n = 58, 67%), and hyposmia/hypogeusia (n = 44, 51%). In contrast to previous reports, fever occurred in less than a third of patients (n = 25, 29%). By day 14, more than half of the patients had recovered completely (n = 37/70, 52.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Fever seems to be less common in patients of relatively young age diagnosed with mild to moderate Covid-19. This suggests that body temperature alone may be an insufficient indicator of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Impact of COVID-19 on cancer service delivery: results from an international survey of oncology clinicians.

OBJECTIVES: To report clinician-perceived changes to cancer service delivery in response to COVID-19. DESIGN: Multidisciplinary Australasian cancer clinician survey in collaboration with the European Society of Medical Oncology. SETTING: Between May and June 2020 clinicians from 70 countries were surveyed; majority from Europe (n=196; 39%) with 1846 COVID-19 cases per million people, Australia (AUS)/New Zealand (NZ) (n=188; 38%) with 267/236 per million and Asia (n=75; 15%) with 121 per million at time of survey distribution. PARTICIPANTS: Medical oncologists (n=372; 74%), radiation oncologists (n=91; 18%) and surgical oncologists (n=38; 8%). RESULTS: Eighty-nine per cent of clinicians reported altering clinical practices; more commonly among those with versus without patients diagnosed with COVID-19 (n=142; 93% vs n=225; 86%, p=0.03) but regardless of community transmission levels (p=0.26). More European clinicians (n=111; 66.1%) had treated patients diagnosed with COVID-19 compared with Asia (n=20; 27.8%) and AUS/NZ (n=8; 4.8%), p<0.001. Many clinicians (n=307; 71.4%) reported concerns that reduced access to standard treatments during the pandemic would negatively impact patient survival. The reported proportion of consultations using telehealth increased by 7.7-fold, with 25.1% (n=108) of clinicians concerned that patient survival would be worse due to this increase. Clinicians reviewed a median of 10 fewer outpatients/week (including non-face to face) compared with prior to the pandemic, translating to 5010 fewer specialist oncology visits per week among the surveyed group. Mental health was negatively impacted for 52.6% (n=190) of clinicians. CONCLUSION: Clinicians reported widespread changes to oncology services, in regions of both high and low COVID-19 case numbers. Clinician concerns of potential negative impacts on patient outcomes warrant objective assessment, with system and policy implications for healthcare delivery at large.

ESMO management and treatment adapted recommendations in the COVID-19 era: colorectal cancer.

COVID-19 pandemic challenges health system capacities in many countries. National healthcare services have to manage unexpected shortage of healthcare resources that have to be reallocated according to the principles of fair and ethical prioritisation, in order to maintain the highest levels of care to all patients, ensure the safety of patients and healthcare workers and save as many lives as possible. Beyond that, cancer care services have to pursue restructuring, following the same evidence-based dispositions. In this article, we propose guidance to the management of colorectal cancer during the pandemic, prioritised according to a three-tiered framework, based on expert clinical judgement and magnitude of benefit expected from specific interventions. Since the availability of resources for diagnostic procedures, surgery and postoperative care, systemic therapy and radiotherapy may differ, authors did separate prioritisation analyses. The impact of postponing or abrogating cancer interventions on outcomes according to a high, medium or low priority scale, is outlined and discussed. The implementation of healthcare services using telemedicine is explored: it reveals itself as functional and effective for limiting patients' need to travel to centres and thereby has the potential to reduce diffusion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Colorectal cancer demands a considerable amount of medical resources. Therefore, the redefinition of its diagnostic and therapeutic algorithms with a rigorous method is crucial in order to ensure the highest quality of continuum of care in the broader context of the pandemic and the challenged healthcare systems.