Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
BMC Urol ; 22(1): 71, 2022 Apr 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1951169

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Safe provision of systemic anti-cancer treatment (SACT) during the COVID-19 pandemic remains an ongoing concern amongst clinicians. METHODS: Retrospective analysis on uro-oncology patients who continued or started SACT between 1st March and 31st May 2020 during the pandemic (with 2019 as a comparator). RESULTS: 441 patients received SACT in 2020 (292 prostate, 101 renal, 38 urothelial, 10 testicular) compared to 518 patients in 2019 (340 prostate, 121 renal, 42 urothelial, 15 testicular). In 2020, there were 75.00% fewer patients with stage 3 cancers receiving SACT (p < 0.0001) and 94.44% fewer patients receiving radical treatment (p = 0.00194). The number of patients started on a new line of SACT was similar between both years (118 in 2019 vs 102 in 2020; p = 0.898) but with 53.45% fewer patients started on chemotherapy in 2020 (p < 0.001). Overall, 5 patients tested positive for COVID-19 (one asymptomatic, one mild, two moderate, one severe resulting in death). Compared to 2019, 30-day mortality was similar (1.69% in 2019 vs 0.98% in 2020; p = 0.649) whereas 6-month mortality was lower (9.32% in 2019 vs 1.96% in 2020; p = 0.0209) in 2020. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that delivery of SACT to uro-oncology patients during COVID-19 pandemic may be safe in high-incidence areas with appropriate risk-reduction strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Urologic Neoplasms , Female , Humans , Immunotherapy , Male , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , Urologic Neoplasms/drug therapy
2.
Br J Cancer ; 2022 Jul 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1937426

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the COVID pandemic, there was a paucity of data to support clinical decision-making for anticancer treatments. We evaluated the safety of radical treatments which were delivered whilst mitigating the risks of concurrent COVID-19 infection. METHODS: Using descriptive statistics, we report on the characteristics and short-term clinical outcomes of patients undergoing radical cancer treatment during the first COVID-19 wave compared to a similar pre-pandemic period. RESULTS: Compared to 2019, the number of patients undergoing radical treatment in 2020 reduced by: 28% for surgery; 18% for SACT; and 10% for RT. Within SACT, 36% received combination therapy, 35% systemic chemotherapy, 23% targeted treatments, 5% immunotherapy and 2% biological therapy. A similar proportion of RT was delivered in 2019 and 2020 (53% vs. 52%). Oncological outcomes were also similar to pre-COVID-19. The COVID-19 infection rates were low: 12 patients were positive pre surgery (1%), 7 post surgery (<1%), 17 SACT patients (2%) and 3 RT patients (<1%). No COVID-19-related deaths were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst there were fewer patients receiving radical anticancer treatments, those who did receive treatment were treated in a safe environment. Overall, cancer patients should have the confidence to attend hospitals and be reassured of the safety measures implemented.

3.
Cancers (Basel) ; 14(2)2022 Jan 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1613623

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess the outcome of cancer patients undergoing systemic anti-cancer treatment (SACT) at our centre to help inform future clinical decision-making around SACT during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Patients receiving at least one episode of SACT for solid tumours at Guy's Cancer Centre between 1 March and 31 May 2020 and the same period in 2019 were included in the study. Data were collected on demographics, tumour type/stage, treatment type (chemotherapy, immunotherapy, biological-targeted) and SARS-CoV2 infection. RESULTS: A total of 2120 patients received SACT in 2020, compared to 2449 in 2019 (13% decrease). From 2019 to 2020, there was an increase in stage IV disease (62% vs. 72%), decrease in chemotherapy (42% vs. 34%), increase in immunotherapy (6% vs. 10%), but similar rates of biologically targeted treatments (37% vs. 38%). There was a significant increase in 1st and 2nd line treatments in 2020 (68% vs. 81%; p < 0.0001) and reduction in 3rd and subsequent lines (26% vs. 15%; p = 0.004) compared to 2019. Of the 2020 cohort, 2% patients developed SARS-CoV2 infections. CONCLUSIONS: These real-world data from a tertiary Cancer Centre suggest that despite the challenges faced due to the COVID-19 pandemic, SACT was able to be continued without any significant effects on the mortality of solid-tumour patients. There was a low rate (2%) of SARS-CoV-2 infection which is comparable to the 1.4%-point prevalence in our total cancer population.

4.
Br J Cancer ; 125(7): 939-947, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1360191

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Using an updated dataset with more patients and extended follow-up, we further established cancer patient characteristics associated with COVID-19 death. METHODS: Data on all cancer patients with a positive reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) at Guy's Cancer Centre and King's College Hospital between 29 February and 31 July 2020 was used. Cox proportional hazards regression was performed to identify which factors were associated with COVID-19 mortality. RESULTS: Three hundred and six SARS-CoV-2-positive cancer patients were included. Seventy-one had mild/moderate and 29% had severe COVID-19. Seventy-two patients died of COVID-19 (24%), of whom 35 died <7 days. Male sex [hazard ratio (HR): 1.97 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.15-3.38)], Asian ethnicity [3.42 (1. 59-7.35)], haematological cancer [2.03 (1.16-3.56)] and a cancer diagnosis for >2-5 years [2.81 (1.41-5.59)] or ≥5 years were associated with an increased mortality. Age >60 years and raised C-reactive protein (CRP) were also associated with COVID-19 death. Haematological cancer, a longer-established cancer diagnosis, dyspnoea at diagnosis and raised CRP were indicative of early COVID-19-related death in cancer patients (<7 days from diagnosis). CONCLUSIONS: Findings further substantiate evidence for increased risk of COVID-19 mortality for male and Asian cancer patients, and those with haematological malignancies or a cancer diagnosis >2 years. These factors should be accounted for when making clinical decisions for cancer patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Hematologic Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/pathology , COVID-19/virology , Female , Hematologic Neoplasms/complications , Hematologic Neoplasms/pathology , Hematologic Neoplasms/virology , Hospitals , Humans , London/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/pathology , Neoplasms/virology , Risk Factors
5.
Cancers (Basel) ; 13(10)2021 May 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1234670

ABSTRACT

Very few studies investigating COVID-19 in cancer patients have included cancer patients as controls. We aimed to identify factors associated with the risk of testing positive for SARS CoV2 infection in a cohort of cancer patients. We analyzed data from all cancer patients swabbed for COVID-19 between 1st March and 31st July 2020 at Guy's Cancer Centre. We conducted logistic regression analyses to identify which factors were associated with a positive COVID-19 test. Results: Of the 2152 patients tested for COVID-19, 190 (9%) tested positive. Male sex, black ethnicity, and hematological cancer type were positively associated with risk of COVID-19 (OR = 1.85, 95%CI:1.37-2.51; OR = 1.93, 95%CI:1.31-2.84; OR = 2.29, 95%CI:1.45-3.62, respectively) as compared to females, white ethnicity, or solid cancer type, respectively. Male, Asian ethnicity, and hematological cancer type were associated with an increased risk of severe COVID-19 (OR = 3.12, 95%CI:1.58-6.14; OR = 2.97, 95%CI:1.00-8.93; OR = 2.43, 95%CI:1.00-5.90, respectively). This study is one of the first to compare the risk of COVID-19 incidence and severity in cancer patients when including cancer patients as controls. Results from this study have echoed those of previous reports, that patients who are male, of black or Asian ethnicity, or with a hematological malignancy are at an increased risk of COVID-19.

6.
Front Physiol ; 11: 564387, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-979032

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess the association between vitamin D deficiency and increased morbidity/mortality with COVID-19 respiratory dysfunction. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to 24 of April 2020) and PubMed (2020 to 17 of September 2020). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: A search using the search terms: [(cholecalciferol or ergocalciferol or vitamin D2 or vitamin D3 or vitamin D or 25OHD) and (SARS-CoV-2 or coronavirus or COVID or betacoronavirus or MERS-CoV or SARS-CoV or respiratory infection or acute respiratory distress syndrome or ARDS)]m.p. was conducted on the 24/04/2020 (Search A) and 17/09/2020 (Search B). RESULTS: 91 studies were identified as being concerned with Acute Respiratory Infection (ARI)/Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) and vitamin D, and 25 publications specifically explored the role of vitamin D deficiency in the development and progression of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 related ARDS. Search "A" identified three main themes of indirect evidence supporting such an association. Consistent epidemiological evidence exists linking low vitamin D levels to increased risk and severity of respiratory tract infections. We also report on plausible biological processes supporting such an association; and present weaker evidence supporting the benefit of vitamin D supplementation in reducing the risk and severity of ARIs. Uncertainty remains about what constitutes an appropriate dosing regimen in relation to reducing risk/severity of ARI/ARDS. More recent evidence (Search B) provided new insights into some direct links between vitamin D and COVID-19; with a number of cohort and ecological studies supporting an association with PCR-positivity for SARS-CoV-2 and vitamin D deficiency. The exact efficacy of the vitamin D supplementation for prevention of, or as an adjunct treatment for COVID-19 remains to be determined; but a number of randomized control trials (RCTs) currently underway are actively investigating these potential benefits. CONCLUSION: Our rapid review of literature supports the need for observational studies with COVID-19 infected populations to measure and assess vitamin D levels in relation to risk/severity and outcomes; alongside RCTs designed to evaluate the efficacy of supplementation both in preventive and therapeutic contexts. The overlap in the vitamin D associated biological pathways with the dysregulation reported to drive COVID-19 outcomes warrants further investigation.

8.
Front Oncol ; 10: 1279, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-706935

ABSTRACT

Background: There is insufficient evidence to support clinical decision-making for cancer patients diagnosed with COVID-19 due to the lack of large studies. Methods: We used data from a single large UK Cancer Center to assess the demographic/clinical characteristics of 156 cancer patients with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis between 29 February and 12 May 2020. Logistic/Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify which demographic and/or clinical characteristics were associated with COVID-19 severity/death. Results: 128 (82%) presented with mild/moderate COVID-19 and 28 (18%) with a severe case of the disease. An initial cancer diagnosis >24 months before COVID-19 [OR: 1.74 (95% CI: 0.71-4.26)], presenting with fever [6.21 (1.76-21.99)], dyspnea [2.60 (1.00-6.76)], gastro-intestinal symptoms [7.38 (2.71-20.16)], or higher levels of C-reactive protein [9.43 (0.73-121.12)] were linked with greater COVID-19 severity. During a median follow-up of 37 days, 34 patients had died of COVID-19 (22%). Being of Asian ethnicity [3.73 (1.28-10.91)], receiving palliative treatment [5.74 (1.15-28.79)], having an initial cancer diagnosis >24 months before [2.14 (1.04-4.44)], dyspnea [4.94 (1.99-12.25)], and increased CRP levels [10.35 (1.05-52.21)] were positively associated with COVID-19 death. An inverse association was observed with increased levels of albumin [0.04 (0.01-0.04)]. Conclusions: A longer-established diagnosis of cancer was associated with increased severity of infection as well as COVID-19 death, possibly reflecting the effects a more advanced malignant disease has on this infection. Asian ethnicity and palliative treatment were also associated with COVID-19 death in cancer patients.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL