Report on lung cancer surgery during COVID-19 pandemic at a high volume US institution.

Background: The impact of COVID-19 has been felt in every field of medicine. We sought to understand how lung cancer surgery was affected at a high volume institution. We hypothesized that patients would wait longer for surgery, have more advanced tumors, and experience more complications during the COVID-19 crisis. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted, comparing pathologically confirmed non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) surgical cases performed in 2019 to cases performed from March to May 2020, during the height of the COVID-19 crisis. Clinical and pathologic stage, tumor size, time to surgery, follow up time, and complications were evaluated. Results: A total of 375 cases were performed in 2019 vs. 58 cases in March to May 2020. Overall, there were no differences in the distribution of clinical stages or in the distribution of median wait times to surgery between groups (COVID-19 16.5 days vs. pre-COVID-19 17 days, P=0.54), nor were there differences when subdivided into Stage I-II and Stage III-IV. Case volume was lowest in April 2020 with 6 cases vs. 37 in April 2019, P<0.01. Tumor size was clinically larger in the COVID-19 group (median 2.1 vs. 1.9 cm, P=0.05) but not at final pathology. No differences in complications were observed between groups (COVID-19 31.0% vs. pre-COVID-19 30.9%, P=1.00). No patients from the COVID-19 group tested positive for the disease during their hospital stay or by the median 15 days to first follow-up. Conclusions: Surgical wait time, pathologic tumor size, and complications were not different among patients undergoing surgery before vs. during the pandemic. Importantly, no patients became infected as a result of their hospital stay. The significant decrease in surgical cases is concerning for untreated cancers that may progress without proper treatment.

The companion effect on adventure tourists’ satisfaction and subjective well-being: the moderating role of gender

Purpose>In an adventure tourism context (i.e. sky diving, bungee jumping) the effect of the absence or presence of a travel companion;companion relative ability (i.e. perception of a companion’s possessed resources useful for the achievement of travel goals);and tourist gender on the impact of companion relative ability on tourists’ satisfaction and subjective well-being is examined. This paper aims to investigate the mediating role of satisfaction that combines companion relative ability, tourist gender, tourist satisfaction and subjective well-being.Design/methodology/approach>This research uses three situational experiments. A one-factor between-subjects experimental design was used for Study 1. Studies 2 and 3 used a one-factor between-subjects and a 2 × 3 factorial between-subjects design. Participants included tourists visiting a national park in China assigned to scenarios using an anonymous intercept approach and an online survey.Findings>Having a companion with greater/comparable relative ability produces a greater effect on tourist satisfaction and subjective well-being than having a companion with lower relative ability. Furthermore, the perceived relative ability of a travel companion results in a stronger positive effect on tourist satisfaction and subjective well-being for female tourists. Meanwhile, satisfaction fully mediates the impact of the interaction between companion relative ability and tourist gender on subjective well-being.Originality/value>The current research validates the companion effect on adventure tourists’ satisfaction and subjective well-being. An additional contribution is an investigation into the effect of companion relative ability. The study is the only one the authors are aware of that examines the moderating role of tourist gender on the effect of companion relative ability on tourist satisfaction and subjective well-being and identifies the mechanism that combines companion relative ability, tourist gender, tourist satisfaction and subjective well-being.

Pre-COVID-19 National Mortality Trends in Open and Video-Assisted Lobectomy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: In the current era of episode-based hospital reimbursements, it is important to determine the impact of hospital size on contemporary national trends in surgical technique and outcomes of lobectomy. METHODS: Patients aged >18 y undergoing open and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy from 2008 to 2014 were identified using insurance claims data from the National Inpatient Sample. The impact of hospital size on surgical approach and outcomes for both open and VATS lobectomy were analyzed. RESULTS: Over the 7-y period, 202,668 lobectomies were performed nationally, including 71,638 VATS and 131,030 open. Although the overall number of lobectomies decreased (30,058 in 2008 versus 27,340 in 2014, P < 0.01), the proportion of VATS lobectomies increased (24.0% versus 46.9%), and open lobectomies decreased (76.0% versus 53.0%, all P < 0.01). When stratified by hospital size, small hospitals had a significant increase in the proportion of open lobectomies (6.4%-12.2%; P = 0.01) and trend toward increased number of VATS lobectomies (2.7%-12.2%). Annual mortality rates for VATS (range: 1.0%-1.9%) and open (range: 1.9%-2.4%) lobectomy did not significantly differ over time (all P > 0.05) but did decrease among small hospitals (4.1%-1.3% and 5.1%-1.1% for VATS and open, respectively; both P < 0.05). After adjusting for confounders, hospital bed size was not a predictor of in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of VATS lobectomies has increased over time, more so among small hospitals. Mortality rates for open lobectomy remain consistently higher than VATS lobectomy (range 0.4%-1.4%) but did not significantly differ over time. This data can help benchmark hospital performance in the future.

IN THESE UNPRECEDENTED TIMES: A CRITICAL INCIDENTS TECHNIQUE EXAMINATION OF STUDENT PERCEPTIONS’ OF SATISFYING AND DISSATISFYING LEARNING EXPERIENCES

Higher education has and continues to be sharply disrupted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In this paper, our focus is on the pandemic’s impact on higher education, specifically on undergraduate marketing students’ perceptions of learning experiences during the switch from traditional face-to-face learning to online approaches. Understanding student perspectives on which specific aspects of their learning experience were satisfying or dissatisfying offers faculty valuable insight as to how to navigate this (for many) new teaching environment and enhance student experiences and outcomes. Collecting data during spring semester 2020 offers a unique view from students as universities abruptly pivoted from previously face-to-face instruction to online learning. The Critical Incidents Technique was used to capture the voice and perceptions of marketing students. Results are reported and aligned with teaching strategies for faculty to utilize in this new (for many) learning environment, as well as future learning/teaching shifts necessitated by other disruptions in higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Marketing Education Review is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer Performed During the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Delay in time to esophagectomy for esophageal cancer has been shown to have worse peri-operative and long-term outcomes. We hypothesized that COVID-19 would cause a delay to surgery, with worse perioperative outcomes, compared to standard operations. All esophagectomies for esophageal cancer at a single institution from March-June 2020, COVID-19 group, and from 2019 were reviewed and peri-operative details were compared between groups. Ninety-six esophagectomies were performed in 2019 vs 37 during March-June 2020 (COVID-19 group). No differences between groups were found for preoperative comorbidities. Wait-time to surgery from final neoadjuvant treatment was similar, median 50 days in 2019 vs 53 days during COVID-19 p = 0.601. There was no increased upstaging, from clinical stage to pathologic stage, 9.4% in 2019 vs 7.5% in COVID-19 p = 0.841. Fewer overall complications occurred during COVID-19 vs 2019, 43.2% vs 64.6% p = 0.031, but complications were similar by specific grades. Readmission rates were not statistically different during COVID-19 than 2019, 16.2% vs 10.4% p = 0.38. No peri-operative mortalities or COVID-19 infections were seen in the COVID-19 group. Esophagectomy for esophageal cancer was not associated with worse outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic with minimal risk of infection when careful COVID-19 guidelines are followed. Prioritization is recommended to ensure no delays to surgery.

Large-Scale Multi-omic Analysis of COVID-19 Severity.

We performed RNA-seq and high-resolution mass spectrometry on 128 blood samples from COVID-19-positive and COVID-19-negative patients with diverse disease severities and outcomes. Quantified transcripts, proteins, metabolites, and lipids were associated with clinical outcomes in a curated relational database, uniquely enabling systems analysis and cross-ome correlations to molecules and patient prognoses. We mapped 219 molecular features with high significance to COVID-19 status and severity, many of which were involved in complement activation, dysregulated lipid transport, and neutrophil activation. We identified sets of covarying molecules, e.g., protein gelsolin and metabolite citrate or plasmalogens and apolipoproteins, offering pathophysiological insights and therapeutic suggestions. The observed dysregulation of platelet function, blood coagulation, acute phase response, and endotheliopathy further illuminated the unique COVID-19 phenotype. We present a web-based tool (covid-omics.app) enabling interactive exploration of our compendium and illustrate its utility through a machine learning approach for prediction of COVID-19 severity.