Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
Add filters

Language
Document Type
Year range
2.
Annals of Oncology ; 32:S1135, 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1432863

ABSTRACT

Background: The impact of active cancer on susceptibility to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains controversial. This study leverages the infrastructure across the University of California (UC) Cancer Consortium, pooling electronic health record (EHR) data to assess the relationship between active cancer diagnoses (n=151,392) and COVID-19 positivity. Methods: In this cohort study, patients with COVID-19 test results and active cancer diagnoses were identified from the UC Health System COVID Research Data Set (CORDS). This data set collects COVID-19 test results from the 5 academic medical centers in the UC Health System and their NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers. COVID-19 test results were identified by Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC). Active cancer was defined as an EHR-based malignant diagnosis within 9 months of testing, irrespective of active therapy. Total daily positivity rates were aggregated, and overall rates were compared across patients with and without active cancer using the Pearson’s Chi-squared test. Results: We identified 1,032,588 COVID-19 tests from March 3, 2020 to April 15, 2021, with 151,392 tests (14.7%) associated with an active cancer diagnosis. Monthly trends in positivity rates throughout the pandemic were similar between patients with and without cancer (Table). Overall positivity was lower in patients with active cancer (2.0% versus 4.4%;p<0.001). This was consistent across individual UC sites. [Formula presented] Conclusions: COVID-19 positivity rates were not increased for individuals with active cancer diagnoses in the UC Cancer Consortium. A lower positivity rate amongst cancer patients may be due to demographic, behavioral, occupational or environmental factors, as well as greater asymptomatic testing of cancer patients at some UC sites. Interactions with local prevalence and patient and cancer characteristics will be presented. Legal entity responsible for the study: The authors. Funding: Has not received any funding. Disclosure: All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

3.
Journal of Clinical Oncology ; 39(15 SUPPL), 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1339181

ABSTRACT

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic affected oncology practice in ways that are still evolving. In particular, COVID-19 has led to changes in cancer treatment for patients (pts) infected with COVID, which may have long-term implications for both COVID and cancer-related outcomes. In this retrospective analysis, we describe changes in cancer management over time for cancer pts diagnosed with COVID-19 at two academic institutions in Northern California. Methods: Adult and pediatric pts diagnosed with COVID19 receiving active cancer management, defined as therapy/surgery/diagnostics within 3 weeks of COVID diagnosis, were identified through the EMR. Patients whose care was affected by COVID-19 were identified and analyzed for significant intra-group differences with regards to management type, treatment intent, and the time of COVID-19 diagnosis ('early' was defined as March to June 2020 and 'late' as July 2020 to January 2021). The duration and characteristics of such changes were compared across subgroups. Chi-squared test was used to compare the incidence of delays between subgroups. Results: Among 134 COVID-positive pts on active cancer management, 83 (62%) had significant changes in management that consisted primarily of treatment delays. More delays were identified in patients treated with curative intent earlier in the course of the pandemic compared to later (OR 4.1, p=0.022). This difference was not seen among pts treated with palliative intent. In addition, pts on oral (PO) therapy were significantly less likely to have treatment changes than those on IV/IM therapy (OR 0.32, p=0.005). This difference was driven by a decrease in management changes for those on PO therapy in the later time period (OR 0.27, p=0.026). Pts diagnosed later were more likely to have delays due to clinical reasons rather than institutional policy (OR 6.2, P<.005). The median delay in both time frames was 21 days. Comparison of subgroups is shown in the table. Conclusions: We found significant changes in management of cancer pts with COVID-19 that evolved over time. Oncologists have become increasingly willing to continue therapy for cancer pts treated with curative intent and pts on oral therapy. Changes in cancer therapy have become more frequently related to patient clinical status, and less so due to institutional policies. It will be important to analyze how these changes in management are ultimately reflected in cancer outcomes in order to equip patients and oncologists to react to the next pandemic.

4.
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL