Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 20
Filter
1.
J Pers Med ; 12(1)2021 Dec 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1630476

ABSTRACT

Gynecological cancers require complex intervention since patients have specific needs to be addressed. Centralization to high-volume centers improves the oncological outcomes of patients with gynecological cancers. Research in gynecological oncology is increasing thanks to modern technologies, from the comprehensive molecular characterization of tumors and individual pathophenotypes. Ongoing studies are focusing on personalizing therapies by integrating information across genomics, proteomics, and metabolomics with the genetic makeup and immune system of the patient. Hence, several challenges must be faced to provide holistic benefit to the patient. Personalized approaches should also recognize the unmet needs of each patient to successfully deliver the promise of personalized care, in a multidisciplinary effort. This may provide the greatest opportunity to improve patients' outcomes. Starting from a narrative review on gynecological oncology patients' needs, this article focuses on the experience of building a research and care infrastructure for personalized patient management.

2.
J Gynecol Oncol ; 33(1): e10, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1573883

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has correlated with the disruption of screening activities and diagnostic assessments. Endometrial cancer (EC) is one of the most common gynecological malignancies and it is often detected at an early stage, because it frequently produces symptoms. Here, we aim to investigate the impact of COVID-19 outbreak on patterns of presentation and treatment of EC patients. METHODS: This is a retrospective study involving 54 centers in Italy. We evaluated patterns of presentation and treatment of EC patients before (period 1: March 1, 2019 to February 29, 2020) and during (period 2: April 1, 2020 to March 31, 2021) the COVID-19 outbreak. RESULTS: Medical records of 5,164 EC patients have been retrieved: 2,718 and 2,446 women treated in period 1 and period 2, respectively. Surgery was the mainstay of treatment in both periods (p=0.356). Nodal assessment was omitted in 689 (27.3%) and 484 (21.2%) patients treated in period 1 and 2, respectively (p<0.001). While, the prevalence of patients undergoing sentinel node mapping (with or without backup lymphadenectomy) has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic (46.7% in period 1 vs. 52.8% in period 2; p<0.001). Overall, 1,280 (50.4%) and 1,021 (44.7%) patients had no adjuvant therapy in period 1 and 2, respectively (p<0.001). Adjuvant therapy use has increased during COVID-19 pandemic (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the characteristics and patterns of care of EC patients. These findings highlight the need to implement healthcare services during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Endometrial Neoplasms , Endometrial Neoplasms/epidemiology , Endometrial Neoplasms/therapy , Female , Humans , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 2021 Dec 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1571237

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: 'Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2' (SARS-CoV-2) infection has dramatically affected the management of patients with cancer, who are most vulnerable to the consequences of the infection. Patients with vulvar cancer are frequently elderly and affected by multiple co-morbidities, thus representing a particularly frail population. OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical impact of the SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients scheduled for treatment for active vulvar cancer. METHODS: Data on patients with vulvar tumors referred to Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS between February 2020 and July 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with a positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction in nasopharyngeal swab were considered as positive for SARS-Cov-2. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-one patients with vulvar cancer were evaluated and scheduled for treatment. The median age was 72 years (range 35-94). Seven (3.7%) patients were diagnosed with SARS-Cov-2 infection: three (42.9%) had their treatment delayed, with no apparent consequences, two (28.6%) had their treatment delayed and later abandoned because of clinical worsening due to oncologic disease progression, and two (28.6%) contracted the infection in the post-operative period and died due to respiratory complications. CONCLUSIONS: In most cases the infection had major clinical implications, being associated with significant delays in oncologic treatments and extremely high mortality when contracted in the post-operative period.

4.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 21136, 2021 10 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1493228

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic is impressively challenging the healthcare system. Several prognostic models have been validated but few of them are implemented in daily practice. The objective of the study was to validate a machine-learning risk prediction model using easy-to-obtain parameters to help to identify patients with COVID-19 who are at higher risk of death. The training cohort included all patients admitted to Fondazione Policlinico Gemelli with COVID-19 from March 5, 2020, to November 5, 2020. Afterward, the model was tested on all patients admitted to the same hospital with COVID-19 from November 6, 2020, to February 5, 2021. The primary outcome was in-hospital case-fatality risk. The out-of-sample performance of the model was estimated from the training set in terms of Area under the Receiving Operator Curve (AUROC) and classification matrix statistics by averaging the results of fivefold cross validation repeated 3-times and comparing the results with those obtained on the test set. An explanation analysis of the model, based on the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), is also presented. To assess the subsequent time evolution, the change in paO2/FiO2 (P/F) at 48 h after the baseline measurement was plotted against its baseline value. Among the 921 patients included in the training cohort, 120 died (13%). Variables selected for the model were age, platelet count, SpO2, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), hemoglobin, C-reactive protein, neutrophil count, and sodium. The results of the fivefold cross-validation repeated 3-times gave AUROC of 0.87, and statistics of the classification matrix to the Youden index as follows: sensitivity 0.840, specificity 0.774, negative predictive value 0.971. Then, the model was tested on a new population (n = 1463) in which the case-fatality rate was 22.6%. The test model showed AUROC 0.818, sensitivity 0.813, specificity 0.650, negative predictive value 0.922. Considering the first quartile of the predicted risk score (low-risk score group), the case-fatality rate was 1.6%, 17.8% in the second and third quartile (high-risk score group) and 53.5% in the fourth quartile (very high-risk score group). The three risk score groups showed good discrimination for the P/F value at admission, and a positive correlation was found for the low-risk class to P/F at 48 h after admission (adjusted R-squared = 0.48). We developed a predictive model of death for people with SARS-CoV-2 infection by including only easy-to-obtain variables (abnormal blood count, BUN, C-reactive protein, sodium and lower SpO2). It demonstrated good accuracy and high power of discrimination. The simplicity of the model makes the risk prediction applicable for patients in the Emergency Department, or during hospitalization. Although it is reasonable to assume that the model is also applicable in not-hospitalized persons, only appropriate studies can assess the accuracy of the model also for persons at home.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Machine Learning , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Blood Cell Count , Blood Chemical Analysis , COVID-19/blood , Cohort Studies , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Models, Statistical , Multivariate Analysis , Oxygen/blood , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , ROC Curve , Risk Factors , Rome/epidemiology
5.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 9(10)2021 Sep 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1444347

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Tdap and flu immunization in pregnancy has been proven to be both effective and safe. Despite this, the vaccination rate in pregnant women is low in Italy. The COVID-19 pandemic has focused the attention of public opinion on communicable diseases, underlining the importance of primary prevention measures such as vaccination. We conducted a survey to investigate the behavior of pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic regarding maternal immunization to identify the reasons for vaccine hesitancy in order to overcome them. The new challenge is COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy, and preliminary data show hesitancy towards it. Our analysis may be useful to improve immunization in the pregnant population, including through the COVID-19 vaccine. METHODS: A targeted survey was performed in Italy including 520 women who experienced in the first trimester of pregnancy, prior to the novel coronavirus spread, the 2019-2020 influenza vaccination campaign and the Tdap vaccine recommendation in the third trimester during the COVID pandemic. They represent a unique model to investigate if the new coronavirus outbreak might have changed attitudes towards vaccination in pregnancy in the same patients. Data were collected from a self-completed paper questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were calculated and percentages were compared using the chi-2 test or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: We obtained data from 195 of the 520 women who gave birth during the inclusion period; 325 cases declined to participate in the survey. A total of 8.7% (17 cases) performed flu vaccination in the first trimester of pregnancy (pre-COVID era), 50.8% (99 cases) accepted Tdap immunization during their third trimester of gestation (COVID-19 pandemic) and 6.7% (13 cases) received both vaccines during pregnancy. For both the flu and Tdap shots, pregnant patients were more likely to accept the vaccines if they were recommended by a healthcare provider, whereas the main reason not to be vaccinated was the lack of such a recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: Our survey shows that the COVID-19 experience, which has raised awareness as to the role of vaccines in preventable diseases, may positively change attitudes toward immunization in pregnancy. Vaccination must be recommended to all pregnant women and organized during routine prenatal care as an important element for the prevention of communicable diseases. Vaccination hesitancy can be minimized through consistent recommendation to all pregnant women offered by obstetric staff during routine prenatal care. This approach is likely to be effective in terms of building trust in flu and Tdpa immunization among pregnant women, as well as to avoid unjustified hesitancy towards the more recent COVID-19 vaccines.

6.
J Obstet Gynaecol ; : 1-8, 2021 Sep 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1440514

ABSTRACT

The impact of Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on Italian Gynaecological Units practice and the compliance and satisfaction with available guidelines/recommendations is unknown. Therefore, a survey was conducted among all Italian Gynaecological Units Directors in April 2020. The response rate was 90% (135/150). 77.8% of centres performed surgery only for oncologic or not deferrable pathologies, and 9.6% was closed. 68.7% of directors were at least moderately satisfied by published guidelines/recommendations, but 94.8% of respondents identified limitations, mainly (83%) the absent definition of benign non-deferrable pathology. Responders considered as non-deferrable severe endometriosis (69.6%), endometriosis with organ failure/dysfunction (74.1%), and unresponsive symptomatic fibroids (89.6%). Despite guidelines/recommendations, respondents treated ovarian (77%) and endometrial (71.6%) cancer as usual. Only a minority of respondents reduced the laparoscopic approach (11.2%) and adopted all recommended surgical precautions (9.6%). Compliance with available guidelines/recommendations appears incomplete. Reconsidering guidelines/recommendations regarding oncological cases and specify non-deferrable benign pathologies would improve guidelines/recommendations compliance.Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has profoundly influenced medical routine practice worldwide. Surgery units have been forced to reduce or even completely restrict their activity to re-allocate human resources. Many major international gynaecological societies have released statements and guidelines, providing various recommendations to guide practice changes. However, the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on Italian Gynaecological Units practice and the compliance and satisfaction with available guidelines/recommendations is unknown.What do the results of this study add? Study results provide evidence showing how the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has changed surgical activity in the Italian Gynaecological Units. Most centres reduced surgical activity, limiting surgery only for oncologic or not deferrable pathologies. Moreover, our research shows the level of compliance and satisfaction with available guidelines/recommendations and where they need to be improved. Most directors were at least moderately satisfied but identified different limitations. Guidelines/recommendations do not provide enough details, such as the absent definition of benign non-deferrable pathologies.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? The limited compliance with available guidelines/recommendations and identified limitations suggest reconsidering guidelines/recommendations focussing on identified gaps. Provide more details, such as specifying non-deferrable benign pathologies, would improve guidelines/recommendations compliance.

7.
Front Psychol ; 12: 632999, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1202089

ABSTRACT

Objective: To assess the psychological distress of healthcare providers (HCPs) working in the field of obstetrics during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to identify factors associated with psychological distress at the individual, interpersonal, and organizational level. Design: Cross-sectional survey study. Setting: Four University hospitals in Italy. Participants: HCPs working in obstetrics, including gynecologists, residents in gynecology and obstetrics, and midwives. Methods: The 104-item survey Impatto PSIcologico COVID-19 in Ostetricia (IPSICO) was created by a multidisciplinary expert panel and administered to HCPs in obstetrics in May 2020 via a web-based platform. Main Outcome Measures: Psychological distress assessed by the General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12) included in the IPSICO survey. Results: The response rate to the IPSICO survey was 88.2% (503/570), and that for GHQ-12 was 84.4% (481/570). Just over half (51.1%; 246/481) of the GHQ-12 respondents reported a clinically significant level of psychological distress (GHQ-12 ≥3). Psychological distress was associated with either individual (i.e., female gender, stressful experience related to COVID-19, exhaustion, and the use of dysfunctional coping strategies), interpersonal (i.e., lower family support, limitations in interactions with colleagues), and organizational (i.e., reduced perception of protection by personal protective equipment, perceived delays on updates and gaps in information on the pandemic) factors in dealing with the pandemic. Conclusions: Results confirm the need for monitoring and assessing the psychological distress for HCPs in obstetrics. Interventions at the individual, interpersonal, and organizational level may relieve the psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic and foster resilience skills in facing emotional distress.

8.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 31(8): 1154-1158, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1197273

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, cancer care had to be reorganized; national and international recommendations were published to manage anticancer treatments safely and to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection for patients and health workers. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the adoption of recommendations for the management of patients with gynaecologic cancer receiving treatment during the pandemic resulted in containment of infections and continuing oncologic care. METHODS: Based on the published recommendations, and according to the local Health Direction guidelines, we developed and drafted a security protocol to modify access of patients with gynaecologic cancer to the "Fondazione Policlinico Agostino Gemelli-IRCCS, Rome" between February 1 and April 30, 2020 and compared results with the corresponding 3 months of 2019. RESULTS: Between February and April 2019, we registered 3254 admissions, including 2253 patients receiving intravenous chemotherapies, 298 receiving oral therapies, and 703 having hospital visits. Between February and April 2020, we registered 3213 admissions, including 2221 patients receiving intravenous chemotherapies, 401 receiving oral therapies, and 591 having hospital visits. Oral treatments and general visits were different in the two time periods (p<0.001). Despite the elevated patient flow, only one patient (0.1%) tested positive for COVID-19 and there were no cases among healthcare staff. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the adopted security protocol we provided continuity of care for all patients and limited the spread of the COVID-19 infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Genital Neoplasms, Female/therapy , Female , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
9.
Ital J Pediatr ; 47(1): 29, 2021 Feb 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1082904

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Suspending ordinary care activities during the COVID-19 pandemic made it necessary to find alternative routes to comply with care recommendations not only for acute health needs but also for patients requiring follow-up and multidisciplinary visits. We present the 'Contactless' model, a comprehensive operational tool including a plurality of services delivered remotely, structured according to a complexity gradient, aimed to cover diagnostic procedures and monitor disease progression in chronic pediatric patients. METHODS: A multidisciplinary and multiprofessional project team was recruited, in collaboration with patients' associations, to map a panel of available Evidence-Based solutions and address individual needs in full respect of the concept of personalized medicine. The solutions include a number of services from videoconsultations to more structure videotraining sessions. RESULTS: A modular framework made up of four three Macro-levels of complexity - Contactless Basic, Intermediate and Advanced - was displayed as an incremental set of services and operational planning establishing each phase, from factors influencing eligibility to the delivery of the most accurate and complex levels of care. CONCLUSION: The multimodal, multidisciplinary 'Contactless' model allowed the inclusion of all Units of our Pediatric Department and families with children with disability or complex chronic conditions. The strengths of this project rely on its replicability outside of pediatrics and in the limited resources needed to practically impact patients, caregivers and professionals involved in the process of care. Its implementation in the future may contribute to reduce the duration of hospital admissions, money and parental absence from work.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Disabled Children , Models, Organizational , Pediatrics/organization & administration , Telemedicine/organization & administration , Child , Chronic Disease , Humans , Pandemics , Program Development
10.
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM ; 2(2): 100107, 2020 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1064726

ABSTRACT

Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to report pregnancy and perinatal outcomes of coronavirus spectrum infections, and particularly coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) disease because of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 infection during pregnancy. Data Sources: Medline, Embase, Cinahl, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched electronically utilizing combinations of word variants for coronavirus or severe acute respiratory syndrome or SARS or Middle East respiratory syndrome or MERS or COVID-19 and pregnancy. The search and selection criteria were restricted to English language. Study Eligibility Criteria: Inclusion criteria were hospitalized pregnant women with a confirmed coronavirus related-illness, defined as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), or COVID-19. Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods: We used meta-analyses of proportions to combine data and reported pooled proportions, so that a pooled proportion may not coincide with the actual raw proportion in the results. The pregnancy outcomes observed included miscarriage, preterm birth, preeclampsia, preterm prelabor rupture of membranes, fetal growth restriction, and mode of delivery. The perinatal outcomes observed were fetal distress, Apgar score <7 at 5 minutes, neonatal asphyxia, admission to a neonatal intensive care unit, perinatal death, and evidence of vertical transmission. Results: Nineteen studies including 79 hospitalized women were eligible for this systematic review: 41 pregnancies (51.9%) affected by COVID-19, 12 (15.2%) by MERS, and 26 (32.9%) by SARS. An overt diagnosis of pneumonia was made in 91.8%, and the most common symptoms were fever (82.6%), cough (57.1%), and dyspnea (27.0%). For all coronavirus infections, the pooled proportion of miscarriage was 64.7% (8/12; 95% confidence interval, 37.9-87.3), although reported only for women affected by SARS in two studies with no control group; the pooled proportion of preterm birth <37 weeks was 24.3% (14/56; 95% confidence interval, 12.5-38.6); premature prelabor rupture of membranes occurred in 20.7% (6/34; 95% confidence interval, 9.5-34.9), preeclampsia in 16.2% (2/19; 95% confidence interval, 4.2-34.1), and fetal growth restriction in 11.7% (2/29; 95% confidence interval, 3.2-24.4), although reported only for women affected by SARS; 84% (50/58) were delivered by cesarean; the pooled proportion of perinatal death was 11.1% (5/60; 95% confidence interval, 84.8-19.6), and 57.2% of newborns (3/12; 95% confidence interval, 3.6-99.8) were admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit. When focusing on COVID-19, the most common adverse pregnancy outcome was preterm birth <37 weeks, occurring in 41.1% of cases (14/32; 95% confidence interval, 25.6-57.6), while the pooled proportion of perinatal death was 7.0% (2/41; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-16.3). None of the 41 newborns assessed showed clinical signs of vertical transmission. Conclusion: In hospitalized mothers infected with coronavirus infections, including COVID-19, >90% of whom also had pneumonia, preterm birth is the most common adverse pregnancy outcome. COVID-19 infection was associated with higher rate (and pooled proportions) of preterm birth, preeclampsia, cesarean, and perinatal death. There have been no published cases of clinical evidence of vertical transmission. Evidence is accumulating rapidly, so these data may need to be updated soon. The findings from this study can guide and enhance prenatal counseling of women with COVID-19 infection occurring during pregnancy, although they should be interpreted with caution in view of the very small number of included cases.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Spontaneous/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Fetal Growth Retardation/epidemiology , Fetal Membranes, Premature Rupture/epidemiology , Pre-Eclampsia/epidemiology , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Premature Birth/epidemiology , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/epidemiology , Cesarean Section/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical/statistics & numerical data , Intensive Care Units, Neonatal/statistics & numerical data , Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus , Perinatal Death , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Outcome/epidemiology , SARS Virus , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Eur J Ophthalmol ; 31(6): 2886-2893, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-992309

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The possible transmission of severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by tears and conjunctiva is still debated. METHODS: Main outcome was to investigate the agreement between nasopharyngeal swab (NPs) and conjunctival swabs (Cs) in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. We divided patients into four groups: (1) NPs and Cs both negative (C-NF-), (2) NPs positive and Cs negative (NFs+Cs-), (3) NPs negative and Cs positive (NFs-Cs+), and (4) NPs and Cs both positive (NFs-Cs+). The secondary outcomes were to correlate Cs results with systemic clinical parameters such as: oxygen saturation (SpO2), dyspnea degree (DP), radiologic pulmonary impairment based on chest radiography (XR) or computed tomography (CT), blood chemistry as D-Dimer (D-Dimer), fibrinogen, ferritin, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and C-reactive protein (C-RP). RESULTS: A total of 100 conjunctival swabs in 50 patients with SARS-CoV-2 have been enrolled in this interventional clinical trials. Ocular signs (conjunctivitis) were present in five patients (10%). NPs and Cs highlighted a poor level of agreement (0.025; p = 0.404). Median SpO2 levels are the highest in the NF-C- group (98%) and the lowest (90%) in the group NF+C+ (p = 0.001). Pulmonary impairment was statistically significantly different between NFs and Cs groups (p = 0.019). Pulmonary impairment score increased from NFs-Cs- group (3.8 ± 3.9), to NFs+Cs+ group (6.7 ± 4.1). Intensive care unit patients showed higher COVID-19 Cs positivity in conjunctiva (12.5%) against hospitalized ones (5.8%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients hospitalized for SARS-CoV-2 the virus can be detected in conjunctival swab. Intensive care unit patients may reveal a higher COVID-19 presence in the conjunctiva. The most severe pulmonary impairment can be observed in NFs and Cs positivity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov registration. ETHICAL COMMITTEE AUTHORIZATION: ID number: 0013008/20.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Conjunctiva/virology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , COVID-19/diagnosis , Humans , Italy
12.
Mol Biol Rep ; 48(1): 983-987, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-973586

ABSTRACT

Recently, our lab, part of a referral center in Italy, reported its experience regarding the execution of germline BRCA1/2 (gBRCA) testing during the first months of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which highlights a substantial reduction (about 60%) compared with the first 2 months of the current year. This evidence appeared to be a lockdown effect due to extraordinary restriction measures to slow down the spread of SARS-CoV-2. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the overall effects of the ongoing pandemic on gBRCA testing in our institution and to understand how COVID-19 has influenced testing after the complete lockdown (March 8-May 5, 2020). Additionally, we compared this year's trend with trends of the last 3 years to better monitor gBRCA testing progress. This detailed analysis highlights two important findings: (1) gBRCA testing did not increase significantly after the lockdown period (May-October 2020) compared with the lockdown period (March-April 2020), emphasizing that even after the lockdown period testing remained low. (2) Comparing the total tests per year (January-October 2017, 2018, 2019, with 2020), the impact of COVID-19 on gBRCA testing is apparent, with similarities of trends registered in 2017. These evidences reveal a gBRCA testing delay for cancer patients and healthy patients at this moment, and the new era of gBRCA testing in the management of ovarian, breast, pancreas and prostate cancer patients has been seriously questioned due to the COVID-19 pandemic. As consequence, we underline that measures to guarantee oncogenetic testing (e.g., gBRCA testing) along with new diagnostic/clinic strategies are mandatory. For these reasons, several proposals are presented in this study.


Subject(s)
BRCA1 Protein/blood , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Ovarian Neoplasms/diagnosis , Pancreatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Pandemics , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Biomarkers, Tumor/blood , COVID-19/psychology , Delayed Diagnosis/ethics , Early Detection of Cancer/statistics & numerical data , Female , Health Policy , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Physical Distancing , Quarantine/psychology , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity
14.
J Gynecol Oncol ; 31(6): e92, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-881380

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused rapid and drastic changes in cancer management. The Italian Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (SIGO), and the Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian cancer and gynecologic malignancies (MITO) promoted a national survey aiming to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on clinical activity of gynecologist oncologists and to assess the implementation of containment measures against COVID-19 diffusion. METHODS: The survey consisted of a self-administered, anonymous, online questionnaire. The survey was sent via email to all the members of the SIGO, and MITO groups on April 7, 2020, and was closed on April 20, 2020. RESULTS: Overall, 604 participants completed the questionnaire with a response-rate of 70%. The results of this survey suggest that gynecologic oncology units had set a proactive approach to COVID-19 outbreak. Triage methods were adopted in order to minimize in-hospital diffusion of COVID-19. Only 38% of gynecologic surgeons were concerned about COVID-19 outbreak. Although 73% of the participants stated that COVID-19 has not significantly modified their everyday practice, 21% declared a decrease of the use of laparoscopy in favor of open surgery (19%). However, less than 50% of surgeons adopted specific protection against COVID-19. Additionally, responders suggested to delay cancer treatment (10%-15%), and to perform less radical surgical procedures (20%-25%) during COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: National guidelines should be implemented to further promote the safety of patients and health care providers. International cooperation is of paramount importance, as heavily affected nations can serve as an example to find out ways to safely preserve clinical activity during the COVID-19 outbreak.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Gynecology/methods , Infection Control/methods , Medical Oncology/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Female , Genital Neoplasms, Female/therapy , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Humans , International Cooperation , Italy , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , SARS-CoV-2 , Societies, Medical , Surveys and Questionnaires , Triage/methods , Triage/statistics & numerical data
15.
Preprint | SSRN | ID: ppcovidwho-1447

ABSTRACT

Background: SARS-CoV-2 belongs to a subgrouof coronaviruses rampant in bats for centuries. It has caused the COVID-19 pandemic. Most patients recover, but a m

16.
J Patient Saf ; 16(4): e299-e302, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-780592

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: On May 12, 2020, a symposium titled "Liability of healthcare professionals and institutions during COVID-19 pandemic" was held in Italy with the participation of national experts in malpractice law, hospital management, legal medicine, and clinical risk management. The symposium's rationale was the highly likely inflation of criminal and civil proceedings concerning alleged errors committed by health care professionals and decision makers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Its aim was to identify and discuss the main issues of legal and medicolegal interest and thus to find solid solutions in the spirit of preparedness planning. METHODS: There were 5 main points of discussion: (A) how to judge errors committed during the pandemic because of the application of protocols and therapies based on no or weak evidence of efficacy, (B) whether hospital managers can be considered liable for infected health care professionals who were not given adequate personal protective equipment, (C) whether health care professionals and institutions can be considered liable for cases of infected inpatients who claim that the infection was transmitted in a hospital setting, (D) whether health care institutions and hospital managers can be considered liable for the hotspots in long-term care facilities/care homes, and (E) whether health care institutions and hospital managers can be considered liable for the worsening of chronic diseases. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Limitation of the liability to the cases of gross negligence (with an explicit definition of this term), a no-fault system with statal indemnities for infected cases, and a rigorous methodology for the expert witnesses were proposed as key interventions for successfully facing future proceedings.


Subject(s)
Health Personnel/legislation & jurisprudence , Legislation, Hospital , Liability, Legal , Pandemics/legislation & jurisprudence , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
17.
Microbes Infect ; 22(10): 592-597, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-744191

ABSTRACT

The Envelope (E) protein of SARS-CoV-2 is the most enigmatic protein among the four structural ones. Most of its current knowledge is based on the direct comparison to the SARS E protein, initially mistakenly undervalued and subsequently proved to be a key factor in the ER-Golgi localization and in tight junction disruption. We compared the genomic sequences of E protein of SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV and the closely related genomes of bats and pangolins obtained from the GISAID and GenBank databases. When compared to the known SARS E protein, we observed a significant difference in amino acid sequence in the C-terminal end of SARS-CoV-2 E protein. Subsequently, in silico modelling analyses of E proteins conformation and docking provide evidences of a strengthened binding of SARS-CoV-2 E protein with the tight junction-associated PALS1 protein. Based on our computational evidences and on data related to SARS-CoV, we believe that SARS-CoV-2 E protein interferes more stably with PALS1 leading to an enhanced epithelial barrier disruption, amplifying the inflammatory processes, and promoting tissue remodelling. These findings raise a warning on the underestimated role of the E protein in the pathogenic mechanism and open the route to detailed experimental investigations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/metabolism , Membrane Proteins/chemistry , Nucleoside-Phosphate Kinase/chemistry , SARS-CoV-2/chemistry , Tight Junctions/chemistry , Viral Envelope Proteins/chemistry , Amino Acid Sequence , Animals , COVID-19/genetics , Chiroptera/virology , Databases, Genetic , Humans , Membrane Proteins/genetics , Membrane Proteins/metabolism , Molecular Dynamics Simulation , Nucleoside-Phosphate Kinase/genetics , Nucleoside-Phosphate Kinase/metabolism , Pangolins/virology , SARS Virus/chemistry , SARS Virus/genetics , SARS Virus/metabolism , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/metabolism , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Tight Junctions/metabolism , Viral Envelope Proteins/genetics , Viral Envelope Proteins/metabolism
18.
J Ultrasound ; 23(4): 449-456, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-648722

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 pandemic is representing a serious challenge to worldwide public health. Lung Ultrasonography (LUS) has been signaled as a potential useful tool in this pandemic contest either to intercept viral pneumonia or to foster alternative paths. LUS could be useful in determining early lung involvement suggestive or not of COVID-19 pneumonia and potentially plays a role in managing decisions for hospitalization in isolation or admission in general ward. In order to face pandemic, in a period in which a large number of emergency room accesses with suspicious symptoms are expected, physicians need a standardized ultrasonographic approach, fast educational processes in order to be able to recognize both suggestive and not suggestive echographic signs and shared algorithms for LUS role in early management of patients.


Subject(s)
Clinical Protocols , Coronavirus Infections/diagnostic imaging , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnostic imaging , Algorithms , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Clinical Decision-Making , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Early Diagnosis , Hospitalization , Humans , Inservice Training , Medical Staff, Hospital/education , Pandemics , Patient Isolation , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Ultrasonography
19.
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol ; 146(10): 2535-2545, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-639888

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Since the community spread of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the practice of oncologic care at our comprehensive cancer center has changed. Postponing cancer treatment without consideration of its implications could cost more lives than can be saved. In this special situation, we must continue to provide our cancer patients with the highest quality of medical services assuring the safety. This article provides general guidance on supporting curative treatment strategies in vulvar cancer patients. METHODS: At our institution, a vulvar cancer multidisciplinary team (Vul.Can MDT) of specialists is responsible for personalized treatment of this disease. The phase 2 period necessarily requires specific procedures for both outpatient and inpatient pathways and to provide strategies concerning the management of vulvar cancer patients even in case of an eventually concomitant SARS-CoV-2 infection. In brief, an accurate remote and in person triage must be provided routinely and patients submitted to specific diagnostic tests prior to every major treatment or procedure (surgery, RT, and CT) or in case of suspicion for COVID-19 syndrome. The decisional workflow for these women often old and frail, have been rapidly adjusted by our Vul.Can MDT to mitigate the potential risks of COVID-19. RESULTS: The team produced two types of recommendations concerning: (1) safety regulations of care pathways, patients and health care providers, (2) personalized treatment strategies. We present a protocol that can be applied in clinical practice: the flowcharts provided, include the modulation of treatment intensity designed for surgical procedures and radiation, stratified for FIGO stage of disease and intention. CONCLUSION: We suggest that our proposals are applicable in this setting of patients, considering anyway current international recommendations and guidelines.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Critical Pathways , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Precision Medicine , Vulvar Neoplasms/epidemiology , COVID-19 , Clinical Decision-Making , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Disease Management , Female , Humans , Pandemics , Patient Care Team , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Vulvar Neoplasms/complications , Vulvar Neoplasms/diagnosis , Vulvar Neoplasms/therapy , Workflow
20.
Mol Biol Rep ; 47(6): 4857-4860, 2020 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-209514

ABSTRACT

The first person-to-person transmission of the 2019-novel coronavirus in Italy on 21 February 2020 led to an infection chain that represents one of the largest known COVID-19 outbreaks outside Asia. Hospitals have been forced to reorganized their units in response to prepare for an unforeseen healthcare emergency. In this context, our laboratory (Molecular and Genomic Diagnostics Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS) re-modulated its priorities by temporarily interrupting most of the molecular tests guaranteeing only those considered "urgent" and not postponable. In particular, this paper details changes regarding the execution of germline BRCA (gBRCA) testing in our laboratory. A substantial reduction in gBRCA testing (about 60%) compared to the first 2 months of the current year was registered, but the requests have not been reset. The requesting physicians were mainly gynaecologists and oncologists. These evidences further emphasize the new era of gBRCA testing in the management of cancer patients and confirms definitively the integration of gBRCA testing/Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) into clinical oncology. Finally, a re-organization of gBRCA testing in our Unit, mainly related to delayed and reduced arrival of tests was necessary, ensuring, however, a high-quality standard and reliability, mandatory for gBRCA testing in a clinical setting.


Subject(s)
BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Early Detection of Cancer/statistics & numerical data , Ovarian Neoplasms/diagnosis , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Betacoronavirus/genetics , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/pathology , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Early Diagnosis , Female , Genomics/methods , High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Mutation , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Ovarian Neoplasms/pathology , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/pathology , Referral and Consultation/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...