Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 18 de 18
Filter
2.
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety ; 31:118-118, 2022.
Article in English | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-2084294
3.
International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics ; 114(3):e459-e459, 2022.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-2036116

ABSTRACT

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use has been well-documented among cancer patients, with increasing public awareness of non-traditional treatments in the era of COVID-19. However, the temporal trends in usage at the patient level have not been well defined. We sought to characterize trends in what CAM interventions patients used before, during and after cancer treatment. An NCI-designated cancer center and a comprehensive cancer center prospectively enrolled adult cancer patients onto a cross-sectional survey assessing CAM use between 2020 and 2021. The survey evaluated perceptions and use of CAM, including vitamins/minerals, herbal supplements and alternative medicines, diets, and mind/body therapies. Types of CAM utilized were self-reported by use before, during and after primary cancer treatment. Differences in utilization were analyzed with two-proportion z-tests. Among 749 patients enrolled, 578 (77%) reported using CAM. Among CAM users, the most popular interventions used at some point included multivitamins (60%), vitamin D (58%), prayer (48%), vitamin C (35%), massage (33%), meditation (28%), fish oil (24%), probiotics (21%), turmeric (20%), CBD products (19%), chiropractic manipulation (17%), marijuana (16%) and vegetarian diet (12%). Vitamin use nearly universally declined over the before → during → after period, for example multivitamin (52% → 39% → 31%, p<0.01), vitamin D (37% → 42% → 30%, p<0.01), and calcium (21% → 24% → 15%), p<0.01). No vitamin consumption increased after treatment compared to before. Multiple herbal supplements increased during treatment but stayed higher than pre-treatment levels, including CBD (5.4% → 13% → 8.2%, p<0.01), marijuana (6.0% → 12% → 7.9%, p<0.01) and turmeric (9.1% → 13% → 9.3%). Many specialized diets were adopted during treatment but were not continued afterward, including vegetarian (5.4% → 8.3% → 5.5%), vegan (2.2% → 5.2% → 2.2%), ketogenic (3.3% → 4.3% → 2.6%), alkaline (1.2% → 3.6% → 1.9%) and raw food (0.9% → 1.4% → 0.3%). Mind/body intervention use also nearly universally decreased over the before to after period, such as chiropractic manipulation (16% → 7.4% → 5.9%, p<0.01), yoga (12% → 12% → 9.2%) or pilates (34.2% → 2.2% → 1.6%). Some increased during treatment but decreased after, like acupuncture (8.0% → 12% → 5.9%, p<0.01) or meditation (18% → 23% → 15%, p<0.01), with the largest decrease being in prayer (43% → 44% → 32%, p<0.01). Although CAM use is known to be common, the patterns of use before, during and after treatment have not been well-defined. Herbal supplements were the most likely to continue to be used after cancer treatment. General health maintenance, wellness and mind/body interventions largely decreased below pre-treatment levels after treatment, regardless of utilization during treatment. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics is the property of Pergamon Press - An Imprint of Elsevier Science 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 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 . (Copyright applies to all s.)

4.
International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics ; 114(3):e449-e449, 2022.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-2036114

ABSTRACT

The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has been associated with detrimental effects on survival outcomes in cancer patients compared to standard of care medical interventions. CAM has received a significant increase in public awareness and interest in recent years. We sought to understand use patterns and perceptions in radiotherapy patients. Data was collected from a cross-sectional survey of prospectively enrolled adult cancer patients, conducted at an NCI-designated cancer center and a comprehensive cancer center between 2020 and 2021. Cancer patients who received or were recommended radiotherapy were selected for analysis and grouped by CAM use. CAM users analyzed were those reporting use of enteral and parental interventions, including alternative medicines, special diets and herbal, vitamin and mineral supplements, and excluding mind/body practices. Differences between CAM users and non-users were analyzed with χ2 and two-sample t-tests. Predictors of CAM use were identified with multivariable logistic regression. Of the 749 respondents, 445 (59%) received or were recommended radiotherapy. Of those 445, 297 (67%) used enteral or parenteral CAM. Among CAM users, 81% were satisfied and 77% felt CAM was effective for intended use. The most common goal of CAM therapy was symptom management (44%), although CAM use as a curative-intent treatment (31%) was common. Compared to non-users, CAM users were more likely to be female (76% vs 62%, p<0.01), have self-reported incurable disease (73% vs 62%, p=0.04), to feel CAM is safe (45% vs 9%, p<0.01), effective at curing cancer (26% vs 11%, p<0.01), effective at managing symptoms (42% vs 20%, p<0.01), more likely to trust naturopaths (33% vs 22%, p=0.02) or chiropractors (26% vs 15%, p=0.01), more likely since COVID-19 to have a more favorable view of CAM (79% vs 42%, p=0.01) or use CAM (61% vs 40%, p=0.04), but less likely to decline recommended surgery (7% vs 19%, p<0.01) or recommended radiotherapy (5% vs 11%, p=0.03). No differences were noted between CAM users and non-users in trust of physicians or any media. Predictors of enteral or parenteral CAM use included female gender (OR 1.4, p=0.04), breast cancer (OR 2.1, p=0.03), colon cancer (OR 3.5, p=0.01), and metastatic cancer (OR 2.2, p<0.01). The use of CAM is common among patients receiving or recommended radiotherapy, with nearly one-third of patients using CAM as a cancer cure. However, radiotherapy patients using CAM were less likely than non-users to decline other recommended therapies, dispelling the notion that CAM-users are more likely to eschew standard-of-care treatments, at least in this cohort. Understanding the patterns and perceptions of CAM use in radiotherapy patients is essential for improving patient-physician communication and treatment decision-making. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics is the property of Pergamon Press - An Imprint of Elsevier Science 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 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 . (Copyright applies to all s.)

5.
Journal of Clinical Oncology ; 40(16), 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-2005722

ABSTRACT

Background: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use has been associated with worse survival outcomes in cancer patients compared to standard of care therapies. CAM has received a significant increase in public awareness and interest in the COVID-19 pandemic era. We sought to understand how the COVID-19 pandemic affected CAM use and perceptions in cancer patients. Methods: Data was collected from adult cancer patients prospectively enrolled on a cross-sectional survey conducted at an NCI-designated cancer center and a comprehensive cancer center between 2020 and 2021. The survey included questions assessing changes in patient attitude towards CAM and likelihood of using CAM, both relative to prior to COVID-19. Analyzed CAM users included those taking vitamin, mineral and herbal supplements, alternative medicines and special diets, and excluded mindbody practices as the focus of this analysis was on enteral and parenteral CAM therapies. Differences in the impact of COVID-19 on CAM use beliefs and practices between CAM users and non-users were analyzed with χ2 and two-sample t-tests. Results: Out of 749 respondents, 578 (77%) used any CAM and 470 (63%) used enteral or parenteral CAM. Results shown in table. Compared to prior to COVID- 19, CAM users were more likely to view CAM more favorably (12% vs 5%, p < 0.01), while non-users were more likely to have an unchanged opinion (90% vs 84%, p = 0.03). Females had higher rates of viewing CAM more favorably than males (80% vs 58%, p = 0.04). Patients who viewed CAM more favorably had higher rates of self-reported incurable cancer (36% vs 11%, p = 0.04), declining recommended hormone therapy (22% vs 0%, p < 0.01), and higher trust of social media (19% vs 0%, p = 0.02) and websites (24% vs 0%, p < 0.01). Since the start of COVID-19, CAM users were more likely to report increased likelihood of using CAM (12% vs 6%, p = 0.01). Patients who were more likely to use CAM had higher rates of declining recommended chemotherapy (12% vs 0%, p = 0.02), and higher trust of social media (15% vs 2%, p = 0.01) and websites (28% vs 7%, p < 0.01). Conclusions: During the COVID-19 pandemic, attitudes on CAM use in oncology patients have become increasingly polarizing. Patients with favorable attitudes toward CAM were likely to decline recommended standard of care therapy and more like to use CAM since COVID-19. This data helps characterize shifting attitudes toward CAM and may help guide shared decision-making between physician and patient.

6.
European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology ; 78(SUPPL 1):S68-S69, 2022.
Article in English | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-1913146
7.
Diabetes Technology and Therapeutics ; 24(SUPPL 1):A137-A138, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1896138

ABSTRACT

Background and Aims: Background: Frailty associated with older age increases the risk of complications for diabetes and its treatment, in particular hypoglycaemia. Free Style Libre is a form of flash glucose monitoring that has been commissioned for use in people living with type 1 diabetes who meet NHS criteria and can reduce hypoglycaemia. Aims: Evaluate whether patients ≥65-years-old across Birmingham Heartlands Hospital (BHH) and Solihull Hospital (SOL) are meeting AATD time in range CGM targets. Methods: BHH and SOL patients ≥65-years-old using Free-Style Libre until June 2021 were included in the study population. Patient data such as average scans per day, TIR, TAR, TBR and time <3.0mmol/L were transferred from Libreview. Demographic and HbA1c data were retrieved from electronic patient records. Results: 65 patients were identified, 44 were eligible for inclusion. 68.2% (30/44) met the TIR target of >50%, 45.5% (20/ 44) met the TAR target of <10% and 18.2% (8/44) met the TBR target of <1%. Further analysis of TBR, comparing patients to the AATD recommendation for younger people, found that 75% (33/ 44) spent <4% of time below range. 18.2% (8/44) spent <1% in hypoglycaemia (<3mmol/L) and 81.8% (36/44) spent ≥1% in hypoglycaemia. Conclusions: Despite using Free Style Libre, older patients remain at significant risk of hypoglycaemia. This risk should be managed in outpatient clinics using hypo-awareness and frailty scores. Free Style Libre data can be used as per the ABCD risk stratification criteria for triaging these patients with high risk hypoglycaemia during the COVID-19 recovery phase.

8.
Curr Top Microbiol Immunol ; 2022 Jun 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1888824

ABSTRACT

Venetian quarantine 400 years ago was an important public health measure. Since 1900 this has been refined to include "challenge" or deliberate infection with pathogens be they viruses, bacteria, or parasites. Our focus is virology and ranges from the early experiments in Cuba with Yellow Fever Virus to the most widespread pathogen of our current times, COVID-19. The latter has so far caused over four million deaths worldwide and 190 million cases of the disease. Quarantine and challenge were also used to investigate the Spanish Influenza of 1918 which caused over 100 million deaths. We consider here the merits of the approach, that is the speeding up of knowledge in a practical sense leading to the more rapid licensing of vaccines and antimicrobials. At the core of quarantine and challenge initiatives is the design of the unit to allow safe confinement of the pathogen and protection of the staff. Most important though is the safety of volunteers. We can see now, as in 1900, that members of our society are prepared and willing to engage in these experiments for the public good. Our ethnology study, where the investigator observed the experiment from within the quarantine, gave us the first indication of changing attitudes amongst volunteers whilst in quarantine. These quarantine experiments, referred to as challenge studies, human infection studies, or "controlled human infection models" involve thousands of clinical samples taken over two to three weeks and can provide a wealth of immunological and molecular data on the infection itself and could allow the discovery of new targets for vaccines and therapeutics. The Yellow Fever studies from 121 years ago gave the impetus for development of a successful vaccine still used today whilst also uncovering the nature of the Yellow Fever agent, namely that it was a virus. We outline how carefully these experiments are approached and the necessity to have high quality units with self-contained air-flow along with extensive personal protective equipment for nursing and medical staff. Most important is the employment of highly trained scientific, medical and nursing staff. We face a future of emerging pathogens driven by the increasing global population, deforestation, climate change, antibiotic resistance and increased global travel. These emerging pathogens may be pathogens we currently are not aware of or have not caused outbreaks historically but could also be mutated forms of known pathogens including viruses such as influenza (H7N9, H5N1 etc.) and coronaviruses. This calls for challenge studies to be part of future pandemic preparedness as an additional tool to assist with the rapid development of broad-spectrum antimicrobials, immunomodulators and new vaccines.

9.
Molecular Therapy ; 30(4):384-385, 2022.
Article in English | English Web of Science | ID: covidwho-1880584
10.
Molecular Therapy ; 30(4):11-12, 2022.
Article in English | English Web of Science | ID: covidwho-1880181
11.
Clinical Cancer Research ; 27(6 SUPPL 1), 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1816931

ABSTRACT

Purpose: Describe associations between changes in employment during the COVID-19 pandemic and financial toxicity among adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients and survivors. Methods: Eligible individuals were diagnosed between 15-39 years of age, currently age ≥18, and recruited through the Huntsman-Intermountain Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Care Program. We sent the survey to N=709. Survey questions included demographics, employment, and the 11-item COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) which captures financial toxicity in the last four weeks. COST is scored from 0 to 44 with lower scores indicating greater financial toxicity. Scores were dichotomized as high (0-21) or low (22-44). Changes in employment since March 2020 were categorized as no change, increase in hours, and decrease in hours/lost job. We calculated descriptive statistics and fit a multivariable logistic regression to examine the association between employment change and financial toxicity controlling for current age, gender, and treatment status. Results: Of 280 respondents (39.5% participation), 198 (70.7%) were employed prior to the pandemic and were thus included in analyses. Employed individuals were a mean of 29.4 years of age (range 18-58), 64.3% were female, and 50.5% had received cancer treatment since March 2020. Nearly a third (31.3%) had lost their job or reported reduced hours;50.3% reported high financial toxicity. Among those previously employed, participants who lost their job or had their hours reduced had nearly six times the odds of high financial toxicity than those who reported no change in hours (Odds Ratio [OR]=5.8, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 2.6-12.9). In the same model, the odds of reporting high financial toxicity was over twice as high among females than males (OR=2.3, 95% CI: 1.2-4.5). Treatment status and age were not significant. Conclusions: Employment changes during the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in increased financial toxicity among a population already susceptible to high financial hardship. Societal gender inequity appears to be mirrored in participants' financial toxicity during the pandemic. Employment interventions for patients and survivors of AYA cancers who have experienced job loss or reduction in work hours during the pandemic are needed and may particularly benefit females.

12.
Clinical Cancer Research ; 27(6 SUPPL 1), 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1816926

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To describe adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients' and survivors' experiences with telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Eligible participants were identified through the Huntsman Intermountain Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Care Program, which provides age-specific programming and patient navigation to AYA cancer patients and survivors in Utah and surrounding Mountain West states. Participants were emailed an online survey if they were currently age 18 or older and had been diagnosed with cancer between the ages of 15-39 years. We applied descriptive statistics to summarize demographics, comfortability with technology, access to reliable internet connection, and perceived quality of care while using telehealth. Results: AYAs (N=280) were an average of 29.4 years old at survey (range 18-58);65.2% were female and 82.4% non-Hispanic white. Over half (54.2%) had received cancer treatment since March 2020. All participants reported owning a computer, tablet, and/or smart phone they could use for telehealth appointments. The majority (93.5%) reported almost always or always having a reliable internet connection. AYAs felt most comfortable having a telehealth appointment in their own home (96.4%);only 12.5% felt comfortable using telehealth at work. Since March 2020, (N=183) 65.4% had a health care visit moved to a telehealth platform due to COVID-19. Of those who recently moved to telehealth, 60.1% had an oncology visit, 33.9% had a primary care visit, and 31.1% had a mental health visit. Additionally over one-third (35.2%) reported the quality of their medical care had decreased since moving to telehealth. This was most commonly due to 1) troubles with audio, video, or connecting through telehealth platforms;2) telehealth visits feeling impersonal;and 3) feeling that providers more easily dismissed or did not fully address their symptoms. Conclusions: Although AYAs are digital natives, over one third of AYAs feel the quality of their medical care has decreased since moving to telehealth for COVID-19. Further research should explore medical provider training in using telehealth systems and encourage telehealth practices that help AYAs feel more supported and understood.

13.
MEDLINE;
Preprint in English | MEDLINE | ID: ppcovidwho-326623

ABSTRACT

Background: The relationship between coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) and ischemic stroke is poorly defined. We aimed to leverage genetic data to investigate reported associations. Methods: Genetic association estimates for liability to Covid-19 and cardiovascular traits were obtained from large-scale consortia. Analyses primarily focused on critical Covid-19, defined as hospitalization with Covid-19 requiring respiratory support or resulting in death. Cross-trait linkage disequilibrium score regression was used to estimate genetic correlations of critical Covid-19 with ischemic stroke, other related cardiovascular outcomes, and risk factors common to both Covid-19 and cardiovascular disease (body mass index, smoking and chronic inflammation, estimated using C-reactive protein). Mendelian randomization analysis was performed to investigate whether liability to critical Covid-19 was associated with increased risk of any of the cardiovascular outcomes for which genetic correlation was identified. Results: There was evidence of genetic correlation between critical Covid-19 and ischemic stroke (r g =0.29, FDR p -value=4.65x10 -3 ), body mass index (r g =0.21, FDR- p -value = 6.26x10 -6 ) and C-reactive protein (r g =0.20, FDR- p -value=1.35x10 -4 ), but none of the other considered traits. In Mendelian randomization analysis, liability to critical Covid-19 was associated with increased risk of ischemic stroke (odds ratio [OR] per logOR increase in genetically predicted critical Covid-19 liability 1.03, 95% confidence interval 1.00-1.06, p -value=0.03). Similar estimates were obtained when considering ischemic stroke subtypes. Consistent estimates were also obtained when performing statistical sensitivity analyses more robust to the inclusion of pleiotropic variants, including multivariable Mendelian randomization analyses adjusting for potential genetic confounding through body mass index, smoking and chronic inflammation. There was no evidence to suggest that genetic liability to ischemic stroke increased the risk of critical Covid-19. Conclusions: These data support that liability to critical Covid-19 is associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke. The host response predisposing to severe Covid-19 is likely to increase the risk of ischemic stroke, independent of other potentially mitigating risk factors.

16.
Ann Oncol ; 32(6): 787-800, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1191173

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer may be at high risk of adverse outcomes from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We analyzed a cohort of patients with cancer and coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) to identify prognostic clinical factors, including laboratory measurements and anticancer therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with active or historical cancer and a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis recorded between 17 March and 18 November 2020 were included. The primary outcome was COVID-19 severity measured on an ordinal scale (uncomplicated, hospitalized, admitted to intensive care unit, mechanically ventilated, died within 30 days). Multivariable regression models included demographics, cancer status, anticancer therapy and timing, COVID-19-directed therapies, and laboratory measurements (among hospitalized patients). RESULTS: A total of 4966 patients were included (median age 66 years, 51% female, 50% non-Hispanic white); 2872 (58%) were hospitalized and 695 (14%) died; 61% had cancer that was present, diagnosed, or treated within the year prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Older age, male sex, obesity, cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities, renal disease, diabetes mellitus, non-Hispanic black race, Hispanic ethnicity, worse Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, recent cytotoxic chemotherapy, and hematologic malignancy were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Among hospitalized patients, low or high absolute lymphocyte count; high absolute neutrophil count; low platelet count; abnormal creatinine; troponin; lactate dehydrogenase; and C-reactive protein were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Patients diagnosed early in the COVID-19 pandemic (January-April 2020) had worse outcomes than those diagnosed later. Specific anticancer therapies (e.g. R-CHOP, platinum combined with etoposide, and DNA methyltransferase inhibitors) were associated with high 30-day all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical factors (e.g. older age, hematological malignancy, recent chemotherapy) and laboratory measurements were associated with poor outcomes among patients with cancer and COVID-19. Although further studies are needed, caution may be required in utilizing particular anticancer therapies. CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER: NCT04354701.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Aged , COVID-19 Testing , Female , Humans , Male , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
17.
Us Pharmacist ; 46(2):39-42, 2021.
Article in English | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-1161362
18.
Journal of Clinical Oncology ; 38(29):2, 2020.
Article in English | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-1063771
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL