Using a Nominal Group Technique to Develop a Science Communication Curriculum for Health Professionals and Clinical Researchers.

Effective science communication is fundamental to closing the gap from research and innovation to clinical implementation. Existing paradigms of science communication are often challenged by a lack of skill and engagement, particularly from those who progress the science. Currently, a standardized curriculum on science communication, with global applicability, does not exist. The purpose of this project is to address the gap in training by health professionals and clinical researchers through the development of a globally relevant curriculum for science communication. The nominal group technique (NGT) was used whereby a convenience sample of eleven science communication experts from across the globe generated, discussed, and arrived at a consensus on topics that should be included in a standardized science communication curriculum. Experts represented diverse backgrounds within the health sciences. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and geographical constraints, the NGT was conducted virtually. The consensus-building methodology allowed for each expert to equally present ideas and collaborate with one another to create a robust and comprehensive curriculum for effective science communication. Expert panelists reached a consensus on 10 essential components of a standardized global science communication curriculum. Following the refinement of the curriculum topic areas, a virtual meeting with project co-investigators was held to review the topics and discuss relevance, applicability, and appeal to the local contexts. A standardized science communication curriculum is needed for health professionals and clinical researchers. The NGT achieved expert consensus on the core topics. The next steps are to develop the course ensuring optimal participation from learners across the globe.

Comorbidity between lung cancer and COVID-19 pneumonia: role of immunoregulatory gene transcripts in high ACE2-expressing normal lung.

Background: SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) elicits a T-cell antigen-mediated immune response of variable efficacy. To understand this variability, we explored transcriptomic expression of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2, the SARS-CoV-2 receptor) and of immunoregulatory genes in normal lung tissues from patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: This study used the transcriptomic and the clinical data for NSCLC patients generated during the CHEMORES study [n = 123 primary resected (early-stage) NSCLC] and the WINTHER clinical trial (n = 32 metastatic NSCLC). Results: We identified patient subgroups with high and low ACE2 expression (p = 1.55 × 10-19) in normal lung tissue, presumed to be at higher and lower risk, respectively, of developing severe COVID-19 should they become infected. ACE2 transcript expression in normal lung tissues (but not in tumor tissue) of patients with NSCLC was higher in individuals with more advanced disease. High-ACE2 expressors had significantly higher levels of CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocytes and natural killer cells but with presumably impaired function by high Thymocyte Selection-Associated High Mobility Group Box Protein TOX (TOX) expression. In addition, immune checkpoint-related molecules - PD-L1, CTLA-4, PD-1, and TIGIT - are more highly expressed in normal (but not tumor) lung tissues; these molecules might dampen immune response to either viruses or cancer. Importantly, however, high inducible T-cell co-stimulator (ICOS), which can amplify immune and cytokine reactivity, significantly correlated with high ACE2 expression in univariable analysis of normal lung (but not lung tumor tissue). Conclusions: We report a normal lung immune-tolerant state that may explain a potential comorbidity risk between two diseases - NSCLC and susceptibility to COVID-19 pneumonia. Further, a NSCLC patient subgroup has normal lung tissue expressing high ACE2 and high ICOS transcripts, the latter potentially promoting a hyperimmune response, and possibly leading to severe COVID-19 pulmonary compromise.

Virtual oncology research-different models and lessons learned.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The COVID-19 pandemic posed several challenges to cancer research including halting of trials, reduced recruitment and protocol violations related to inflexible processes followed in clinical trials. Researchers adopted innovative measures to mitigate these problems and continue studies without compromising their quality. This review collates these adaptations that could well continue after the pandemic. RECENT FINDINGS: The COVID-19 pandemic forced researchers globally to adopt innovative measures to overcome the challenges of the pandemic. These included protocol amendments to adjust to the pandemic and travel restrictions, and increased use of digital technologies. 'Virtual' clinical trials were conducted increasingly with adaptations in ethics and regulatory approvals, patient recruitment and consenting, study interventions and delivery of study medications, trial assessments, and monitoring. Many of these adaptations are safe and feasible, without compromising study quality and data integrity. Although these may not be universally applicable in all types of research, they bring many benefits including more diverse patient participation, less burden on patients for study procedures and reduced resources to conduct trials. SUMMARY: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected cancer research adversely; however, learnings from the pandemic and adaptations from researchers are likely to improve the efficiency of clinical research beyond the pandemic.

Outcomes of COVID-19 and risk factors in patients with cancer.

Patients with cancer are at higher risk for adverse coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes. Here, we studied 1,253 patients with cancer, who were diagnosed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 at a tertiary referral cancer center in India. Most patients had mild disease; in our settings, recent cancer therapies did not impact COVID-19 outcomes. Advancing age, smoking history, concurrent comorbidities and palliative intent of treatment were independently associated with severe COVID-19 or death. Thus, our study provides useful insights into cancer management during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Risk assessment of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection among employees of a tertiary cancer care center

Objectives: Continuation of health-care facilities for non-COVID illness during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is mired with apprehension of infection to health care workers (HCWs). The lack of facilities can result in dire outcomes for patients of NCDs such as cancer. The Objective of this paper is to assess the risk of running a healthcare facility during the pandemic. Material and Methods: A retrospective analysis was carried out at a tertiary cancer hospital to understand the quantum of risk to HCWs while providing care to patients of cancer and to SARS-CoV-2 patients, within the same set-up with optimal segregation. Data were collected for 6 weeks during which attendance, exposure, and infection status of doctors and nurses were recorded along with comorbidities.

Healthcare in post-COVID India: A call for a decentralized healthcare system.

Over the years, healthcare system in India has been largely centralized, expensive and impersonal. In a country where expenditure on healthcare is low, most healthcare expenditure is out-of-pocket and where most of the population continue to live in rural areas or in urban fringes, such a care is inaccessible, unresponsive and unaffordable. COVID pandemic exposed these realities further. Based on experiences of directly managing health services during COVID-19 pandemic in different settings and across different levels, authors of this paper argue for a decentralized, distributed and responsive health systems for India, that is likely to be more effective and sustainable in normal times, and in times of crisis.

Global cancer research in the era of COVID-19: a bibliometric analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer across the world have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic due to increased risk of infection and disruption to cancer diagnosis and treatment. Widening of healthcare disparities is expected as the gap between health systems with and without adequate resources to mitigate the pandemic become more apparent. We undertook a bibliometric analysis of research related to cancer and COVID-19 to understand (1) the type of research that has been conducted (e.g. patients, services and systems) and (2) whether the pandemic has impacted the state of global cancer research as measured by research outputs to date. METHODS: An existing filter for cancer research consisting of title words and the names of specialist cancer journals was used to identify cancer and COVID-19 related articles and reviews in the Web of Science (©Clarivate Analytics) between January 2019 and February 2021. RESULTS: One thousand five hundred and forty-five publications were identified. The majority (57%) were reviews, opinion pieces or concerned with modelling impact of delays to diagnosis and treatment. The main research domains focused on managing or estimating COVID-19 risk to cancer patients accounting for 384 papers (25%). High Income countries contributed the largest volume (n = 1,115; 72%), compared to Upper Middle (n = 302; 20%), Lower Middle (n = 122; 8%) and Low Income countries (n = 2.4; 0.2%). No evidence of a reduction in global cancer research output was observed in 2020. CONCLUSIONS: We observed a shift in research focus rather than a decline in absolute output. However, there is variation based on national income and collaborations are minimal. There has been a focus on pan-cancer studies rather than cancer site-specific studies. Strengthening global multidisciplinary research partnerships with teams from diverse backgrounds with regard to gender, clinical expertise and resource setting is essential to prevent the widening of cancer inequalities.

Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among asymptomatic patients undergoing preoperative COVID testing prior to cancer surgery: ASPECT study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic, with high rate of asymptomatic infections and increased perioperative complications, prompted widespread adoption of screening methods. We analyzed the incidence of asymptomatic infection and perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing cancer surgery. We also studied the impact on subsequent cancer treatment in those with COVID-19. METHODS: All patients who underwent elective and emergency cancer surgery from April to September 2020 were included. After screening for symptoms, a preoperative test was performed from nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs before the procedure. Patients were followed up for 30 days postoperatively and complications were noted. RESULTS: 2108 asymptomatic patients were tested, of which 200 (9.5%) tested positive. Of those who tested positive, 140 (70%) underwent the planned surgery at a median of 30 days from testing positive, and 20 (14.3%) had ≥ Grade III complications. Forty (20%) patients did not receive the intended treatment; 110 patients were retested in the Postoperative period, and 41 (37.3%) tested positive and 9(22%) patients died of COVID-related complications. CONCLUSION: Routine preoperative testing for COVID-19 helps to segregate patients with asymptomatic infection. Higher complications occur in those who develop COVID-19 in postoperative period. Prolonged delay in surgery after COVID infection may influence planned treatment.

Surgical Site Infections in patients undergoing major oncological surgery during the COVID-19 paNdemic (SCION): A propensity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There are reports of outcomes of elective major cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated if reinforcement of hand hygiene, universal masking, and distancing as a part of pandemic precautions led to a decrease in the incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs) in major oncologic resections. METHODS: Propensity score matching using the nearest neighbor algorithm was performed on 3123 patients over seven covariates (age, comorbidities, surgery duration, prior treatment, disease stage, reconstruction, and surgical wound type) yielding 2614 matched (pre-COVID 1612 and COVID 1002) patients. Conditional logistic regression was used to identify if SSI incidence was lower amongst patients operated during the pandemic. RESULTS: There was a 4.2% (p = 0.006) decrease in SSI in patients operated during the pandemic. On multivariate regression, surgery during the COVID-19 period (odds ratio [OR] = 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.61-0.98; p = 0.03), prior chemoradiation (OR = 2.46; CI = 1.45-4.17; p < 0.001), duration of surgery >4 h (OR = 2.17; 95%CI = 1.55-3.05; p < 0.001) and clean contaminated wounds (OR = 2.50; 95% CI = 1.09-2.18; p = 0.012) were significantly associated with SSI. CONCLUSION: Increased compliance with hand hygiene, near-universal mask usage, and social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic possibly led to a 23% decreased odds of SSI in major oncologic resections. Extending these low-cost interventions in the post-pandemic era can decrease morbidity associated with SSI in cancer surgery.

Preparing for the Next Pandemic: An Asian National Cancer Centers Alliance (ANCCA) Initiative.

The COVID-pandemic has shown significant impact on cancer care from early detection, management plan to clinical outcomes of cancer patients. The Asian National Cancer Centres Alliance (ANCCA) has put together the 9 "Ps" as guidelines for cancer programs to better prepare for the next pandemic. The 9 "Ps" are Priority, Protocols and Processes, Patients, People, Personal Protective Equipments (PPEs), Pharmaceuticals, Places, Preparedness, and Politics. Priority: to maintain cancer care as a key priority in the health system response even during a global infectious disease pandemic. Protocol and processes: to develop a set of Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and have relevant expertise to man the Disease Outbreak Response (DORS) Taskforce before an outbreak. Patients: to prioritize patient safety in the event of an outbreak and the need to reschedule cancer management plan, supported by tele-consultation and use of artificial intelligence technology. People: to have business continuity planning to support surge capacity. PPEs and Pharmaceuticals: to develop plan for stockpiles management, build local manufacturing capacity and disseminate information on proper use and reduce wastage. Places: to design and build cancer care facilities to cater for the need of triaging, infection control, isolation and segregation. Preparedness: to invest early on manpower building and technology innovations through multisectoral and international collaborations. Politics: to ensure leadership which bring trust, cohesion and solidarity for successful response to pandemic and mitigate negative impact on the healthcare system.

Impact of COVID-19 on cancer care in India: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted health-care systems, leading to concerns about its subsequent impact on non-COVID disease conditions. The diagnosis and management of cancer is time sensitive and is likely to be substantially affected by these disruptions. We aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care in India. METHODS: We did an ambidirectional cohort study at 41 cancer centres across India that were members of the National Cancer Grid of India to compare provision of oncology services between March 1 and May 31, 2020, with the same time period in 2019. We collected data on new patient registrations, number of patients visiting outpatient clinics, hospital admissions, day care admissions for chemotherapy, minor and major surgeries, patients accessing radiotherapy, diagnostic tests done (pathology reports, CT scans, MRI scans), and palliative care referrals. We also obtained estimates from participating centres on cancer screening, research, and educational activities (teaching of postgraduate students and trainees). We calculated proportional reductions in the provision of oncology services in 2020, compared with 2019. FINDINGS: Between March 1 and May 31, 2020, the number of new patients registered decreased from 112 270 to 51 760 (54% reduction), patients who had follow-up visits decreased from 634 745 to 340 984 (46% reduction), hospital admissions decreased from 88 801 to 56 885 (36% reduction), outpatient chemotherapy decreased from 173634 to 109 107 (37% reduction), the number of major surgeries decreased from 17 120 to 8677 (49% reduction), minor surgeries from 18 004 to 8630 (52% reduction), patients accessing radiotherapy from 51 142 to 39 365 (23% reduction), pathological diagnostic tests from 398 373 to 246 616 (38% reduction), number of radiological diagnostic tests from 93 449 to 53 560 (43% reduction), and palliative care referrals from 19 474 to 13 890 (29% reduction). These reductions were even more marked between April and May, 2020. Cancer screening was stopped completely or was functioning at less than 25% of usual capacity at more than 70% of centres during these months. Reductions in the provision of oncology services were higher for centres in tier 1 cities (larger cities) than tier 2 and 3 cities (smaller cities). INTERPRETATION: The COVID-19 pandemic has had considerable impact on the delivery of oncology services in India. The long-term impact of cessation of cancer screening and delayed hospital visits on cancer stage migration and outcomes are likely to be substantial. FUNDING: None. TRANSLATION: For the Hindi translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

COVID-19 Pandemic and Its Gendered Impact on Indian Physicians.

PURPOSE: The 2018 WHO health workforce report analyzing gender equity in 104 countries reported that although women constituted 70% of the workers, they were less likely to be employed full-time and faced a 28% gender pay gap. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has affected professional as well as personal lives of physicians. We conducted a survey among Indian physicians to understand this impact. METHODS: A 31-point anonymized survey to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and resultant lockdown on physicians' domestic responsibilities was disseminated via e-mail and text messaging applications. Our aim was to evaluate whether the impact was gender-based and to look for differences in aspects of domestic work, childcare, and professional commitments. RESULTS: We obtained 1,041 responses, of which 643 identified themselves as men and 393 as women. An increase in the domestic responsibilities during the lockdown was confirmed by 90% of the women compared with 82% men. More women than men were solely responsible for domestic chores (38.7% v 23.7%), managed their children's education (74% v 31%), and felt an adverse impact of the pandemic on their professional work (60.8% v 42.6%). Fewer women's spouses (57/359) than men's (174/594, P = .00001) were forced to take leave or work reduced hours, and double the proportion of women (3.5% v 1.5%) had to quit their jobs to manage responsibilities at home. CONCLUSION: As the COVID-19 pandemic and the lockdown measures threw newer challenges, more women physicians than men (81% v 63%) shouldered the burden of increased domestic work and childcare. This survey highlights the need to re-examine the specific challenges faced by women physicians and identify means to support and empower them.

A Survey of Personnel Protective equipment's (PPE) Use and Comfort Levels Among Surgeons During Routine Cancer Surgery in the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Personnel protective equipment (PPE) are recommended during surgery even in COVID-19 negative patients especially in a high-prevalence region due to its higher false-negative rates. However, the use of PPE has not been universal mainly due to the perception of discomfort and associated stress and fatigue. This study was done to understand the pattern of PPE use by cancer surgeons during the pandemic and the associated discomfort, stress, and fatigue with its use. The survey, consisting of 29 questions, was circulated widely across the country by email and chat groups among cancer surgeons. The study was registered with the Clinical Trials Registry of India (CTRI/2020/08/027050). We received a total of 342 evaluable responses that could be included for analysis. All the respondents used appropriate PPE in different combinations. N-95 mask and the face shield were the two components of the PPE that gave rise to a lot of discomforts. Fogging (of face shields) (p < 0.001,OR 3.61), dryness of mouth (p < 0.001,OR 3.35), and breathing difficulty/feeling of suffocation (p = 0.034,OR 1.68) contributed to the stress, whereas headache (p < 0.001,OR 11.34) and breathing difficulty/feeling of suffocation (p < 0.001,OR 4.24) contributed to the fatigue associated with PPE use the most. PPE was routinely used during cancer surgery in COVID-19 negative patients during the pandemic. However, most surgeons experienced different degrees of discomfort, especially with the N-95 masks and eye protection. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13193-021-01316-6.