Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies ; 279:233-241, 2022.
Article in English | Scopus | ID: covidwho-1787787

ABSTRACT

The tourism sector is one of the most affected by the health situation caused by COVID-19. As a result, digital transformation is accelerating in this sector. One of the pillars of this transformation is the management of organizations based on data-driven decision-making. The raw material for such data-driven strategies is obviously the sources of information used. This paper attempts to give a knowledge map of the diverse sources of information used in tourism for this decision-making. To this purpose, we analyse the scientific publications of the last five years in order to identify the main areas of action related to the sources used for data-driven management in tourism. As a result of this bibliometric analysis, we have identified 14 topics that have attracted the interest of the scientific community grouped into three main areas of action. © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

4.
Journal of Thoracic Oncology ; 16(10):S892, 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1482771

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Stage IIIB-IV non-small cell lung cancer patients with mutations in the EGF receptor gene (EGFR) usually derive clinical benefit from to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR TKIs) but ultimately relapse. In preclinical studies, we have showed that anti-EGF antibodies generated by vaccination significantly increased the antitumor activity of TKIs in EGFR-mut cell lines, blocking EGFR, Erk1/2, Akt and STAT3 activation and delaying emergence of resistance. Based on these findings, the EPICAL trial was initiated (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03623750). Methods: The EPICAL was a single arm, phase 1b, single arm study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of first line anti-EGF vaccination combined with afatinib. The trial enrolled advanced NSCLC patients with sensitizing EGFR mutations confirmed in a central laboratory. Patients received 40 mg/day of afatinib and five intramuscular anti-EGF vaccinations every 14 days and then every three months until progression. Four medical centers in Spain participated, with a target enrollment of 30 patients. However, the COVID-19 outbreak forced an early termination of the study in March 2020 with only 23 patients included. Serial blood samples were collected and used to evaluate the levels of selected growth factors by ELISA and biological activity by addition of sera to in vitro cultures of EGFR-mut cells followed by Western blotting. Results: Of the 23 patients enrolled in the trial, nine (39%) had exon 19 in-frame deletions, twelve (52%) exon 21 substitutions and two (9%) exon 18 missense mutations. Combination treatment was well tolerated and no SAES related to anti-EGF vaccination were reported. Objective response and disease control rates were 78.3% (95%CI=53.6-92.5) and 95.7% (95%CI=78.1-99.9), respectively. At data cut-off, with a median follow-up of 11.4 months (95%CI=8.1-15.2), the median progression-free survival was 17.4 months (95% CI=13.22-NA) and median survival not reached (95% CI=15.21-NA). Median PFS for patients with exon 19 deletions and exon 21 point mutations were 13.9 months (95%CI=8.7-NR) and 17.4 months (95%CI=13.2-NR), respectively. Three months after initiation of treatment, high titers of anti-EGF antibodies were detected in all patients and serum EGF and TGFα levels were found to be significantly lower compared to baseline levels. Finally, treatment with post-vaccination patient’s sera inhibited EGFR, AKT and ERK1/2 phosphorylation in EGFR-mut cells growing in vitro. Conclusion: The combination of an anti–EGF vaccine with afatinib is well tolerated and induces a sustained immunogenic effect. Vaccination against EGF might enhance the clinical efficacy of EGFR TKIs. Keywords: anti-EGF vaccination, EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer, EGFR inhibitors

5.
Journal of Thoracic Oncology ; 16(10):S883-S884, 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1474794

ABSTRACT

Introduction: There are currently no predictive biomarkers for long-term survival after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy. However, the identification of non-small lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who obtain long-term benefit from chemoimmunotherapy is essential to optimize therapies. Methods: Using samples from NADIM clinical trial (NCT03081689), in which resectable stage IIIA NSCLC patients were treated with neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy with nivolumab, we have evaluated the capacity of ctDNA levels before treatment initiation to predict overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by calculating Harrell’s C-statistic and we compare its predictive value with classical survival surrogates as the pathological response and clinical response assessed according to RECIST criteria v.1.1. The ctDNA was analyzed by NGS, using the Oncomine Pan-Cancer Cell-Free Assay™ (Thermo Fisher Scientific®). To explore the prognostic value of the amount of ctDNA at baseline, for each positive plasma sample, we calculated the sum of the mutant allele frequency (MAF) for all detected mutations. Patients who died from COVID19 were excluded from this analysis. Results: In our study, clinical responses based on RECIST criteria were not predictive for OS or PFS. On the contrary, in the multivariate analysis, patients with low ctDNA levels (<1% MAF), in the baseline sample, had significantly improved PFS and OS than patients in whom the opposite situation occurred (adjusted HR: 0.22;95%CI: 0.06-0.75;P=0.016 and adjusted HR: 0.04;95%CI: 0.00-0.45;P=0.008 for PFS and OS, respectively). The adjusted C-statistic (c) to predict PFS for ctDNA was 0.68 (95%CI: 0.51-0.84), which was superior to that of RECIST criteria (c=0.61;95%CI: 0.45-0.78) and similar to that of pathological response (c=0.68;95%CI: 0.52-0.84). Similarly, baseline ctDNA levels predicted OS (c=0.85;95%CI: 0.72-0.99) better than RECIST criteria (c=0.68;95%CI: 0.44-0.93). Conclusion: Pre-treatment ctDNA levels predicted more accurately long-term survival than radiological assessments in NADIM study and might be useful for the design of new clinical trials.

6.
Journal of Thoracic Oncology ; 16(10):S883, 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1474793

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy been shown to be highly effective in resectable stage IIIA NSCLC. Now we provide long term survival data Methods: This was an open-label, multicentre, single-arm phase 2 trial in which patients with histologically or cytologically documented stage IIIA NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 and who were deemed locally to be surgically resectable by a multidisciplinary clinical team were treated with neoadjuvant intravenous paclitaxel (200 mg/m2) and carboplatin (area under curve 6;6 mg/mL per min) plus nivolumab (360 mg) on day 1 of each 21-day cycle, for three cycles before surgical resection, followed by adjuvant intravenous nivolumab monotherapy for 1 year (240 mg every 2 weeks for 4 months, followed by 480 mg every 4 weeks for 8 months). Here we report progression-free survival (PFS) and Overall survival (OS) at 36 and 42 months, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (ITT), which included all patients who received neoadjuvant treatment, and in the per-protocol population (PP), which included all patients who had tumour resection and received at least one cycle of adjuvant treatment. Results: Median follow-up time was 37.9 months (95%CI: 36.7-40.7), with a 94% maturity at 36 months. Among the ITT population (N=46), 37 patients, constituting the PP population, received subsequent adjuvant therapy. Of them, 27 (58.7%) patients completed the adjuvant treatment (16 cycles), 10 (21.7%) patients received between 3 and 15 cycles of adjuvant therapy, and 9 (19.6%) patients did not receive adjuvant therapy. At the time of data cutoff (March 2021), progression disease was diagnosed in 14 patients and 9 deaths were recorded in the ITT population. Of these, three deaths corresponded to patients who did not undergo surgery and had disease progression, four deaths corresponded to patients who underwent surgery and had disease progression, and the two remaining deaths corresponded to patients who were diagnosed as being disease free but died from COVID19 infection. Notably, among patients who could not undergo surgery (N=5), one of them is still alive and with no evidence of disease. PFS at 36 and 42 months in the ITT population were 69.6% (95%CI: 54.1-80.7), in both cases. Similarly, PFS at 36 and 42 in the PP population were 81.1% (95%CI: 64.4-90.5) in both cases. The percentage of patients who were alive at 36 and 42 months in the modified ITT population were 81.86% (95% CI: 66.8-90.6) and 78.94% (95%CI: 63.1-88.6), respectively. Likewise, OS at 36 and 42 months in the PP population was 91.0% (95%CI: 74.2-97.0) and 87.3% (95%CI: 69.3-95.1), respectively. Conclusion: The efficacy of nivolumab in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with resectable stage IIIA NSCLC is clearly supported by long term survival data. Keywords: NADIM trial, neoadjuvant chemo-therapy, long term survival

7.
Journal of Clinical Oncology ; 39(15 SUPPL), 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1339318

ABSTRACT

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID19) is diagnosed by detecting the virus by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). The majority of p go on to develop antibodies (Ab) against viral proteins. However, it is not known how long these antibodies last nor whether cancer treatments could affect the duration of immune response. The prognosis and greater or lesser vulnerability of the oncological population are also unknown. Methods: This prospective, longitudinal, multicenter serological study in the setting of SARS-CoV-2 was carried out in 50 Spanish hospitals. Eligibility criteria was a diagnosis of any thoracic cancer. The first determinations were performed between April 21, 2020 and June 3, 2020, either for p in follow up or in active treatment. Between September 10, 2020, and November 20, 2020, the second antibody (Ab) determination was performed in all previously seropositive p. Clinical and treatment data were collected, as was their clinical situation at study end. Study objectives were to prospectively determine seroprevalence in unselected lung cancer p during the first wave of the pandemic;the natural history of these p;the persistence of immunity more than 4 months after first determination;protection or lack thereof against reinfection after this period, and the nature of such protection;and the influence of treatments on maintenance or loss of immunity. Results: Of 1,500 p studied, 128 were seropositive, representing an overall prevalence of 8.5% seropositivity [95% confidence interval [CI], 7.2%, 10.1%]. Seventy-five percent were in active cancer treatment. COVID-19 infection was suspected in 47.7% [95% CI, 38.8%, 56.6%]. A second determination was performed on average 4.5 months later [IQR: 4;5] and obtained for 104 of the initially seropositive p (81%). A second determination could not be obtained in 24 p, the majority due to death caused by disease progression (73%). In the second determination, IgG was not detected in 30.8% (32/104) of p. The severity of the infection, the need for hospitalization (p: 0.032) and the presence of symptoms at diagnosis (p: 0.02), including fever (p: 0.005) and nasal congestion (p: 0.005), were associated with persistence of immunity in the second determination. No variables or treatments received were associated with Ab loss. At time of last follow-up among those p for whom a second determination was performed, 89% (93 p) had completely recovered from the virus, with no lasting after effects. Only 1 of the 128 (0.78%) seropositive p had died from COVID-19. Conclusions: The prevalence of infection in lung cancer p is similar to that of the general population. Immunity against SARS-CoV-2 does not appear to be compromised by treatment, persisting beyond 4 months. Neither do mortality rates appear to be particularly high in this unselected population.

8.
XLinguae ; 14(1):182-196, 2021.
Article in Spanish | Scopus | ID: covidwho-1097532

ABSTRACT

In these turbulent times of changes and transformations where educational processes are being virtualized due to the pandemic, we must not forget the difficulties that this implies for certain vulnerable learners and some learning contexts. That is the case of the L2 learning by immigrants and refugees. Such learners already have a starting difficulty, both for not mastering the language of learning and for the digital divide, which is increased by the migration variable. This work analyses, within a context of “normality”, the motivation of immigrants and refugees, in the light of their links and expectations. The differences in the relation with the Italian language are shown. The results show that the dependency on the host society, the uncertainty of the future and the absence of family ties are influential factors for refugees learning motivation. On the contrary, immigrants are not subjected to these factors, and therefore their Italian L2 learning motivations are different. By this research we conclude that adult refugees and immigrant students have different attitudes through the residency country language learning. © 2021, Slovenska Vzdelavacia Obstaravacia. All rights reserved.

9.
Annals of Oncology ; 31:S814-S815, 2020.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-801393

ABSTRACT

Background: Tedopi® is an anticancer vaccine with modified neoepitopes restricted to HLA-A2+ targeting five tumor-associated antigens frequently expressed in lung cancer: CEA, HER2, MAGE2, MAGE3 and P53. ATALANTE-1 was a randomized, open-label, 2-Step phase 3 study comparing the efficacy of Tedopi® with standard treatment (SoC) in HLA-A2+ NSCLC patients in 2nd or 3rd line treatment after progression on ICI. Methods: HLA-A2+ NSCLC patients, EGFR and ALK negative, having progressed to platinum-based chemotherapy (CT) and anti-PD(L)1, ECOG PS 0-1 were randomized 2:1 to receive Tedopi® subcutaneously Q3W for 6 cycles, followed by maintenance Q8W up to first year, then Q12W, or SoC (docetaxel 75 mg/m2 Q3W or pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 Q3W). The Step-1 hypotheses were based on the evaluation of 1y-OS rate (Fleming design: H0 futility boundary at 25%;H1 alternative efficacy: 40% of OS rate at 12 months). Step-2 was a superiority study with OS as primary endpoint. Results: At cutoff of February 2020, 99 patients (Tedopi® n=63;SoC n=36) were randomized and analyzable for Step-1. The 1y-OS was 29/63 (46%) [95%CI 33-59]) in Tedopi® group and 13/36 (36%) [95%CI 21-54] in SoC. The Step-1 endpoint has shown a lower limit of the 95% confidence interval above the futility boundary (25%) with an OS estimate of 10% above the estimate of SoC. Secondary endpoints and subgroup data will be further presented. Grade 3-4 related TEAEs were 11 % in Tedopi® group and 43 % in SoC. There was no related grade 5 TEAE. Related TEAE leading to withdrawal from the study were also less frequent in Tedopi® group (6%) versus SoC (14%). Due to the risk of COVID-19 pandemic on data integrity, following recommendation of the Independent Data Monitoring Committee and Steering Committee, the decision was taken to early terminate the study at Step-1 and definitely stop new accrual while continuing the OS follow-up in all patients. Conclusions: The Step-1 primary endpoint was positively achieved with a 1y-OS rate of 46% and a good safety profile. Step-1 results shown a favorable benefit/risk of Tedopi® over SoC as 2nd or 3rd line treatment in advanced HLA-A2+ NSCLC patients after failure to ICI. Clinical trial identification: EudraCT: 2015-003183-36;NCT02654587. Legal entity responsible for the study: OSE Immunotherapeutics. Funding: OSE Immunotherapeutics. Disclosure: G. Giaccone: Advisory/Consultancy: CStone;Advisory/Consultancy: Novartis;Advisory/Consultancy: Daiichi;Research grant/Funding (institution): Medimunne;Research grant/Funding (institution): Incyte. E. Felip: Advisory/Consultancy: AbbVie;Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: AstraZeneca;Advisory/Consultancy: Blueprint Medicine;Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Boehringer Ingelheim;Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: BMS;Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Elli Lilly;Advisory/Consultancy: Guardant Health;Advisory/Consultancy: Janssen;Advisory/Consultancy: Merck KgaA;Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: MSD;Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Novartis;Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Pfizer;Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Roche;Advisory/Consultancy: Samsung;Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Takeda;Advisory/Consultancy: GSK;Advisory/Consultancy: Bayer;Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Medscape;Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Prime Oncology;Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Touchime;Research grant/Funding (institution): Fundation Merck Salud;Advisory/Consultancy: Grifols. R. Garcia Campelo: Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Pfizer;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Novartis;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Roche;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Lilly;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: AstraZeneca;H noraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Takeda;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: MSD. F. DENIS: Advisory/Consultancy, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Roche;Advisory/Consultancy: Shugai;Advisory/Consultancy: AstraZeneca;Advisory/Consultancy: Bayer;Advisory/Consultancy: MSD;Advisory/Consultancy, Licensing/Royalties: Sivan. E. Quoix: Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: BMS;Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Shugai;Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Roche;Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Takeda;Honoraria (self), interview at ASCO 2019: Medscape. A. Madroszyk: Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: AstraZeneca;Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Roche;Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Pfizer;Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: MSD. D. Debieuvre: Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: BMS;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution): MSD;Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (institution): AstraZeneca;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Roche;Honoraria (self): Shugai;Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution): Pfizer;Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Novartis;Research grant/Funding (institution): Lilly;Research grant/Funding (institution): Sandoz;Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Boehringer Ingelheim. W. Hilgers: Advisory/Consultancy, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: BMS;Honoraria (self): MSD;Advisory/Consultancy, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Janssen;Advisory/Consultancy, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Astellas;Advisory/Consultancy, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Roche;Advisory/Consultancy: AstraZeneca;Advisory/Consultancy: Roche. T. Moran: Advisory/Consultancy: Roche;Advisory/Consultancy: Boehringer Ingelheim. D. Galetta: Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Roche;Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Boehringer Ingelheim;Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: MSD;Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: BMS;Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: AstraZeneca. F. Cappuzzo: Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Roche;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: AstraZeneca;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: BMS;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Bayer;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Pfizer;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Lilly;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: Takeda;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Speaker Bureau/Expert testimony: MSD. G. Robinet: Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (institution), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Roche;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: MSD;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: AstraZenaca;Advisory/Consultancy: BMS. S. Viteri: Full/Part-time employment: Pangaea Oncology;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Roche;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: BMS;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution): AbbVie;Honoraria (self), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: MSD;Research grant/Funding (institution), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Ose Immunotherapeutics;Research grant/Funding (institution), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Merck KgaA;Research grant/Funding (institution): Janssen;Research grant/Funding (institution): Boehringer Ingelheim;Research grant/Funding (institution): Boston Pharmaceuticals Research grant/Funding (institution): Exelexis;Research grant/Funding (institution): Novocure;Research grant/Funding (institution): MedImmune. N. Peled: Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: AstraZeneca;Honoraria (institution), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution): Bayer;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Boehringer Ingelheim;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: BMS;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution): Lilly;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution): Foundation Medicine;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution): Guardian 360;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution): Genesort;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution): Merck KgaA;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: MSD;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Novartis;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution): NovellusDx;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Pfizer;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Roche;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution), Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Takeda. D. Costantini: Shareholder/Stockholder/Stock options, Licensing/Royalties, Full/Part-time employment, Officer/Board of Directors: OSEImmunotherapeutics. R. Dziadziuszko: Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Roche;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: AstraZeneca;Honoraria (self): Pfizer;Honoraria (self): Novartis;Honoraria (self): MSD;Honoraria (self): Foundation Medicine;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: Takeda;Advisory/Consultancy: Seattle Genetics. B. Besse: Research grant/Funding (institution): AbbVie;Research grant/Funding (institution): Amgen;Research grant/Funding (institution): AstraZeneca;Research grant/Funding (institution): Beigene;Research grant/Funding (institution): Blueprint Medicine;Research grant/Funding (institution): BMS;Research grant/Funding (institution): Boehringer Ingelheim;Research grant/Funding (institution): Cellgene;Research grant/Funding (institution): Cristal Therapeutics;Research grant/Funding (institution): Daichi-Sankyo;Research grant/Funding (institution): Elli-Lilly;Research grant/Funding (institution): GSK;Research grant/Funding (institution): Ignyta;Research grant/Funding (institution): Ipsen;Research grant/Funding (institution): Inivata;Research grant/Funding (institution): Janssen;Research grant/Funding (institution): Merck KgaA;Research grant/Funding (institution): MSD;Research grant/Funding (institution): Nektar;Research grant/Funding (institution): Onxeo;Research grant/Funding (institution): Ose Immunotherapeutics;Research grant/Funding (institution): Pfizer;Research grant/Funding (institution): PharmaMar;Research grant/Funding (institution): Roche-Genentech;Research grant/Funding (institution): Sanofi;Research grant/Funding (institution): Servier;Research grant/Funding (institution): Spectrum Pharmaceuticals;Research grant/Funding (institution): Takeda;Research grant/Funding (institution): Tiziana Pharma;Research grant/Funding (institution): Tolero Pharmaceuticals. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

10.
Rehabilitacion (Madr) ; 54(4): 276-283, 2020.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-735390

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic poses a challenge to the management of non-COVID pathologies such as lymphatic diseases and lipoedema. The use of telemedicine can prevent the spread of the disease. A system is needed to help determine the clinical priority and selection of face-to-face or telemedicine options for each patient and how to carry them out during the pandemic. The Spanish Lymphology Group has drafted a consensus document with recommendations based on the literature and clinical experience, as clinical practice guidelines for the management of lymphatic abnormalities and lipoedema during the COVID-19 pandemic. These recommendations must be adapted to the characteristics of each patient, the local conditions of the centres, and the decisions of health care professionals. The document contains minimum criteria, subject to modifications according to the evolution of the pandemic, scientific knowledge and instructions from health authorities.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections , Lipedema/therapy , Lymphatic Diseases/therapy , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Telemedicine , COVID-19 , Comorbidity , Compression Bandages , Continuity of Patient Care , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Disease Management , Emergencies , Equipment Design , Health Services Needs and Demand , Humans , Lipedema/complications , Lipedema/rehabilitation , Lymphatic Diseases/complications , Lymphatic Diseases/rehabilitation , Manual Lymphatic Drainage , Office Visits , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Education as Topic , Patient Participation , Physical Therapy Modalities , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Precision Medicine , SARS-CoV-2 , Telephone , Triage , Videoconferencing
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL