Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 19 de 19
Filter
1.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(3): e224304, 2022 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1763163

ABSTRACT

Importance: Non-Hispanic Black individuals experience a higher burden of COVID-19 than the general population; hence, there is an urgent need to characterize the unique clinical course and outcomes of COVID-19 in Black patients with cancer. Objective: To investigate racial disparities in severity of COVID-19 presentation, clinical complications, and outcomes between Black patients and non-Hispanic White patients with cancer and COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used data from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry from March 17, 2020, to November 18, 2020, to examine the clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 in Black patients with cancer. Data analysis was performed from December 2020 to February 2021. Exposures: Black and White race recorded in patient's electronic health record. Main Outcomes and Measures: An a priori 5-level ordinal scale including hospitalization intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, and all-cause death. Results: Among 3506 included patients (1768 women [50%]; median [IQR] age, 67 [58-77] years), 1068 (30%) were Black and 2438 (70%) were White. Black patients had higher rates of preexisting comorbidities compared with White patients, including obesity (480 Black patients [45%] vs 925 White patients [38%]), diabetes (411 Black patients [38%] vs 574 White patients [24%]), and kidney disease (248 Black patients [23%] vs 392 White patients [16%]). Despite the similar distribution of cancer type, cancer status, and anticancer therapy at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, Black patients presented with worse illness and had significantly worse COVID-19 severity (unweighted odds ratio, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.15-1.58]; weighted odds ratio, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.11-1.33]). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that Black patients with cancer experience worse COVID-19 outcomes compared with White patients. Understanding and addressing racial inequities within the causal framework of structural racism is essential to reduce the disproportionate burden of diseases, such as COVID-19 and cancer, in Black patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Female , Humans , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies
2.
Cancer Discov ; 12(2): 303-330, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1685769

ABSTRACT

The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has left patients with current or past history of cancer facing disparate consequences at every stage of the cancer trajectory. This comprehensive review offers a landscape analysis of the current state of the literature on COVID-19 and cancer, including the immune response to COVID-19, risk factors for severe disease, and impact of anticancer therapies. We also review the latest data on treatment of COVID-19 and vaccination safety and efficacy in patients with cancer, as well as the impact of the pandemic on cancer care, including the urgent need for rapid evidence generation and real-world study designs. SIGNIFICANCE: Patients with cancer have faced severe consequences at every stage of the cancer journey due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This comprehensive review offers a landscape analysis of the current state of the field regarding COVID-19 and cancer. We cover the immune response, risk factors for severe disease, and implications for vaccination in patients with cancer, as well as the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care delivery. Overall, this review provides an in-depth summary of the key issues facing patients with cancer during this unprecedented health crisis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Neoplasms/complications , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Neoplasms/immunology , Neoplasms/therapy , Pandemics
3.
Lancet Healthy Longev ; 3(3): e143-e152, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1683812

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Older age is associated with poorer outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection, although the heterogeneity of ageing results in some older adults being at greater risk than others. The objective of this study was to quantify the association of a novel geriatric risk index, comprising age, modified Charlson comorbidity index, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, with COVID-19 severity and 30-day mortality among older adults with cancer. METHODS: In this cohort study, we enrolled patients aged 60 years and older with a current or previous cancer diagnosis (excluding those with non-invasive cancers and premalignant or non-malignant conditions) and a current or previous laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis who reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) multinational, multicentre, registry between March 17, 2020, and June 6, 2021. Patients were also excluded for unknown age, missing data resulting in unknown geriatric risk measure, inadequate data quality, or incomplete follow-up resulting in unknown COVID-19 severity. The exposure of interest was the CCC19 geriatric risk index. The primary outcome was COVID-19 severity and the secondary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality; both were assessed in the full dataset. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were estimated from ordinal and binary logistic regression models. FINDINGS: 5671 patients with cancer and COVID-19 were included in the analysis. Median follow-up time was 56 days (IQR 22-120), and median age was 72 years (IQR 66-79). The CCC19 geriatric risk index identified 2365 (41·7%) patients as standard risk, 2217 (39·1%) patients as intermediate risk, and 1089 (19·2%) as high risk. 36 (0·6%) patients were excluded due to non-calculable geriatric risk index. Compared with standard-risk patients, high-risk patients had significantly higher COVID-19 severity (adjusted OR 7·24; 95% CI 6·20-8·45). 920 (16·2%) of 5671 patients died within 30 days of a COVID-19 diagnosis, including 161 (6·8%) of 2365 standard-risk patients, 409 (18·5%) of 2217 intermediate-risk patients, and 350 (32·1%) of 1089 high-risk patients. High-risk patients had higher adjusted odds of 30-day mortality (adjusted OR 10·7; 95% CI 8·54-13·5) than standard-risk patients. INTERPRETATION: The CCC19 geriatric risk index was strongly associated with COVID-19 severity and 30-day mortality. Our CCC19 geriatric risk index, based on readily available clinical factors, might provide clinicians with an easy-to-use risk stratification method to identify older adults most at risk for severe COVID-19 as well as mortality. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute Cancer Center.

4.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(1): e2142046, 2022 01 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1605268

ABSTRACT

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a distinct spatiotemporal pattern in the United States. Patients with cancer are at higher risk of severe complications from COVID-19, but it is not well known whether COVID-19 outcomes in this patient population were associated with geography. Objective: To quantify spatiotemporal variation in COVID-19 outcomes among patients with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This registry-based retrospective cohort study included patients with a historical diagnosis of invasive malignant neoplasm and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between March and November 2020. Data were collected from cancer care delivery centers in the United States. Exposures: Patient residence was categorized into 9 US census divisions. Cancer center characteristics included academic or community classification, rural-urban continuum code (RUCC), and social vulnerability index. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. The secondary composite outcome consisted of receipt of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit admission, and all-cause death. Multilevel mixed-effects models estimated associations of center-level and census division-level exposures with outcomes after adjustment for patient-level risk factors and quantified variation in adjusted outcomes across centers, census divisions, and calendar time. Results: Data for 4749 patients (median [IQR] age, 66 [56-76] years; 2439 [51.4%] female individuals, 1079 [22.7%] non-Hispanic Black individuals, and 690 [14.5%] Hispanic individuals) were reported from 83 centers in the Northeast (1564 patients [32.9%]), Midwest (1638 [34.5%]), South (894 [18.8%]), and West (653 [13.8%]). After adjustment for patient characteristics, including month of COVID-19 diagnosis, estimated 30-day mortality rates ranged from 5.2% to 26.6% across centers. Patients from centers located in metropolitan areas with population less than 250 000 (RUCC 3) had lower odds of 30-day mortality compared with patients from centers in metropolitan areas with population at least 1 million (RUCC 1) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.31; 95% CI, 0.11-0.84). The type of center was not significantly associated with primary or secondary outcomes. There were no statistically significant differences in outcome rates across the 9 census divisions, but adjusted mortality rates significantly improved over time (eg, September to November vs March to May: aOR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.17-0.58). Conclusions and Relevance: In this registry-based cohort study, significant differences in COVID-19 outcomes across US census divisions were not observed. However, substantial heterogeneity in COVID-19 outcomes across cancer care delivery centers was found. Attention to implementing standardized guidelines for the care of patients with cancer and COVID-19 could improve outcomes for these vulnerable patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Pandemics , Rural Population , Social Vulnerability , Urban Population , Aged , Cause of Death , Censuses , Female , Health Facilities , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Registries , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Spatial Analysis , United States/epidemiology
5.
JAMA Oncol ; 7(12): 1882-1890, 2021 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1391526

ABSTRACT

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has had consequences for patients with cancer worldwide and has been associated with delays in diagnosis, interruption of treatment and follow-up care, and increases in overall infection rates and premature mortality. Observations: Despite the challenges experienced during the pandemic, the global oncology community has responded with an unprecedented level of investigation, collaboration, and technological innovation through the rapid development of COVID-19 registries that have allowed an increased understanding of the natural history, risk factors, and outcomes of patients with cancer who are diagnosed with COVID-19. This review describes 14 major registries comprising more than 28 500 patients with cancer and COVID-19; these ongoing registry efforts have provided an improved understanding of the impact and outcomes of COVID-19 among patients with cancer. Conclusions and Relevance: An initiative is needed to promote active collaboration between different registries to improve the quality and consistency of information. Well-designed prospective and randomized clinical trials are needed to collect high-level evidence to guide long-term epidemiologic, behavioral, and clinical decision-making for this and future pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Pandemics , Registries , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/therapy
7.
Blood ; 136(Supplement 1):28-30, 2020.
Article in English | PMC | ID: covidwho-1339054

ABSTRACT

Background: Patients with hematologic malignancy (HM) are hypothesized to be at high risk of poor outcomes with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), due to disease and therapy-related immunosuppression. Despite this, there are minimal reported data describing the outcomes of HM patients with COVID-19.Methods: The COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) (NCT04354701) is an international registry aimed at investigating the clinical course and complications of COVID-19 in patients with cancer. The CCC19 cohort includes patients with active cancer or a history of cancer with presumed or laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. The registry contains de-identified patient demographics, information regarding cancer diagnosis and treatment history, COVID-19 treatments, and clinical outcomes. Patients greater than 18 years of age with laboratory-confirmed, symptomatic COVID-19 and HM diagnoses were included in this study. The primary outcome is a composite of severe COVID-19 illness (composed of mechanical ventilation, severe illness requiring hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) requirement, or death);mechanical ventilation, ICU level of care, supplemental oxygen, and 30-day mortality are reported as secondary outcomes. Baseline characteristics are reported for the entire cohort. Reported clinical outcomes are stratified by cancer type, cancer status, line of therapy received (never treated, first, second or later), receipt of cellular therapy or transplant (none, within 12 months, >12 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis), last receipt of cytotoxic therapy (within 4 weeks, 1-3 months, 3-12 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis), and receipt of HM therapies under investigation as repurposed treatments for COVID-19 (Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors, Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, Bcr-Abl kinase inhibitors).Results: From March 17, 2020 to July 31, 2020, a total of 757 patients with HM and COVID-19 were enrolled and met inclusion criteria. Median follow-up was 30 days (IQR 17-70 days). Median age was 65 years (IQR 55-75), 62% (470) were over age 60, 57% were men, 45% were non-Hispanic white (22% Black, 18% Hispanic, 5% other), 39% were former or current smokers, 27% were obese, 18% had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≥2, and 51% were on active treatment within 3 months of COVID-19 diagnosis.Among patients with HM, 281 (37%) developed the primary endpoint. Five-hundred and eleven patients (67%) were hospitalized (some with non-severe disease), 188 (25%) required ICU level of care, 133 (18%) required mechanical ventilation, 409 (54%) required supplemental oxygen, and 143 (19%) died within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. Stratified rates of severe outcomes are shown in the Table. The rate of severe COVID-19 was highest in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (53%), and lowest in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (23%). Patients receiving cytotoxic systemic therapy within 3 months of COVID-19 diagnosis had higher rates of severe COVID-19 (41%) and 30-day mortality (28%) than patients who completed treatment 3-12 months (26% severe COVID-19, 16% 30-day mortality) or more than 12 months (29% severe COVID-19, 13% 30-day mortality) prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Patients receiving cellular therapy or transplant within a year prior to COVID-19 diagnosis had similar rates of severe COVID-19 (36% v. 38%) and 30-day mortality (23% v. 19%) to patients who had not received such therapies within a year prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Patients on second-line or later therapy experienced similar rates of poor outcomes (42% severe COVID-19, 20% 30-day mortality) to patients on first-line therapy (39% severe COVID-19, 18% 30-day mortality) and untreated patients (42% severe COVID-19, 20% 30-day mortality). Outcomes for patients receiving therapies under investigation as repurposed COVID-19 treatments were similar to the cohort at large.Conclusions: This is the largest cohort study to date describing COVID-19 outcomes in patients with HM. Rates of severe COVID-19 outcomes including death were high. Unadjusted rates o severe COVID-19 outcomes were higher in patients with previously described risk factors such as advanced age, poor performance status, and progressive disease, as well as those receiving recent cytotoxic therapy. Outcomes varied widely by malignancy but were similar across treatment contexts. Additional data collection and analyses are ongoing.

8.
Blood ; 136(Supplement 1):56-58, 2020.
Article in English | PMC | ID: covidwho-1338999

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 may have increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and pulmonary embolism (PE). Cancer and anti-cancer therapies are well-known additional risk factors for VTE. Nonetheless, the VTE risk in patients with both cancer and COVID-19 infection remains unknown as recent studies have not found an association due to sample size limitations. We report the incidence of and risk factors for VTE and PE among hospitalized patients with cancer and COVID-19.Methods: The COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) developed an international retrospective cohort study (NCT04354701) to investigate the clinical course and complications of COVID-19 among adult patients with an active or previous history of cancer. For the current study, cumulative incidences of clinically detected VTE and PE were analyzed among hospitalized patients with laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2. Pre-specified subgroup analysis was performed to examine the interaction between intensive care unit (ICU) admission and recent anti-cancer therapy on VTE outcomes. Bivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess the association between baseline variables and VTE;unadjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were reported. These variables included age, sex, obesity (BMI>30), race/ethnicity, performance status, comorbidities, blood type, history of VTE, recent surgery, recent anti-cancer therapy, cancer subtype VTE risk grouping (adapted from Khorana Score), pre-admission anticoagulant or antiplatelet use, and ICU admission status.Results: From March 17, 2020 to July 31, 2020, 3914 patients were enrolled in the CCC19 registry. For the present analysis, patients were excluded if they had inadequate follow-up <4 weeks (n=950), were not admitted to the hospital (n=1008), or had unknown VTE outcomes (n=327). Among the 1629 hospitalized patients, the median follow-up was 35 days. Patients were comprised from 3 countries (92% US, 6% Canada, 2% Spain), with a median age of 70, 45% female, and a median comorbidity score of 3. Racial/ethnic breakdown included 44% White, 26% Black, 14% Hispanic, and 13% Other. A past history of VTE was reported in 9% of patients;pre-admission anticoagulant use and antiplatelet use were reported in 25% and 35% of patients, respectively. The most common cancer types included prostate (18%), breast (15%), and lymphoma (14%). Based on the VTE risk grouping adapted from the original Khorana Score, 34% were low-risk, 29% were high-risk, and 6% were very high-risk. The receipt of anti-cancer therapy within 3 months of diagnosis was observed in 39% of patients (17% cytotoxic chemotherapy, 11% targeted therapy, 7% endocrine therapy, and 5% immunotherapy).The overall incidence of inhospital VTE and PE was 9.3% and 5.2%, respectively. The corresponding estimates were 13.4% and 7.9% among the ICU subgroup. On bivariable analysis, significant predictors of VTE included ICU admission, recent anti-cancer therapy, active cancer status, cancer subtype VTE risk grouping, and pre-admission antiplatelet use (Table 1). Pre-admission anticoagulant use had significant associations with PE but not VTE. Multivariable adjustment is ongoing to identify independent risk factor for VTE and clarify the impact of pre-admission anticoagulant/antiplatelet use controlled for other potential confounders.Both ICU admission status and anti-cancer therapy increased the risk of VTE independently. Non-ICU patients not on anti-cancer therapy had the lowest incidence of VTE (4.5%), whose estimate was similar to that reported in the non-cancer hospitalized population with COVID-19 infection. Patients with either ICU admission or recent anti-cancer therapy had the intermediate risk (11.0%), whereas ICU patients with recent anti-cancer therapy had the highest risk (16.7%). We did not observe confounding or effect modification by the ICU subgroup on the association between anti-cancer therapy and VTE.Conclusion: In this cohort study of hospitalized patients with cancer and COVID-19, recent anti-cancer t erapy, active disease, high-risk VTE cancer subtypes, and ICU admission have increased risk of VTE and PE, while pre-admission anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapy may reduce the risk. This information will aid in developing a risk prediction tool for VTE in hospitalized patients with cancer and COVID-19.

9.
J Thromb Haemost ; 19(10): 2522-2532, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1309788

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 have increased risks of venous (VTE) and arterial thromboembolism (ATE). Active cancer diagnosis and treatment are well-known risk factors; however, a risk assessment model (RAM) for VTE in patients with both cancer and COVID-19 is lacking. OBJECTIVES: To assess the incidence of and risk factors for thrombosis in hospitalized patients with cancer and COVID-19. METHODS: Among patients with cancer in the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry (CCC19) cohort study, we assessed the incidence of VTE and ATE within 90 days of COVID-19-associated hospitalization. A multivariable logistic regression model specifically for VTE was built using a priori determined clinical risk factors. A simplified RAM was derived and internally validated using bootstrap. RESULTS: From March 17, 2020 to November 30, 2020, 2804 hospitalized patients were analyzed. The incidence of VTE and ATE was 7.6% and 3.9%, respectively. The incidence of VTE, but not ATE, was higher in patients receiving recent anti-cancer therapy. A simplified RAM for VTE was derived and named CoVID-TE (Cancer subtype high to very-high risk by original Khorana score +1, VTE history +2, ICU admission +2, D-dimer elevation +1, recent systemic anti-cancer Therapy +1, and non-Hispanic Ethnicity +1). The RAM stratified patients into two cohorts (low-risk, 0-2 points, n = 1423 vs. high-risk, 3+ points, n = 1034) where VTE occurred in 4.1% low-risk and 11.3% high-risk patients (c statistic 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.63-0.71). The RAM performed similarly well in subgroups of patients not on anticoagulant prior to admission and moderately ill patients not requiring direct ICU admission. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized patients with cancer and COVID-19 have elevated thrombotic risks. The CoVID-TE RAM for VTE prediction may help real-time data-driven decisions in this vulnerable population.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Venous Thromboembolism , Cohort Studies , Humans , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2 , Venous Thromboembolism/diagnosis , Venous Thromboembolism/epidemiology
10.
JAMA Oncol ; 2021 06 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1274650

ABSTRACT

Importance: COVID-19 is a life-threatening illness for many patients. Prior studies have established hematologic cancers as a risk factor associated with particularly poor outcomes from COVID-19. To our knowledge, no studies have established a beneficial role for anti-COVID-19 interventions in this at-risk population. Convalescent plasma therapy may benefit immunocompromised individuals with COVID-19, including those with hematologic cancers. Objective: To evaluate the association of convalescent plasma treatment with 30-day mortality in hospitalized adults with hematologic cancers and COVID-19 from a multi-institutional cohort. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study using data from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry with propensity score matching evaluated patients with hematologic cancers who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Data were collected between March 17, 2020, and January 21, 2021. Exposures: Convalescent plasma treatment at any time during hospitalization. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis with adjustment for potential confounders was performed. Hazard ratios (HRs) are reported with 95% CIs. Secondary subgroup analyses were conducted on patients with severe COVID-19 who required mechanical ventilatory support and/or intensive care unit admission. Results: A total of 966 individuals (mean [SD] age, 65 [15] years; 539 [55.8%] male) were evaluated in this study; 143 convalescent plasma recipients were compared with 823 untreated control patients. After adjustment for potential confounding factors, convalescent plasma treatment was associated with improved 30-day mortality (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.37-0.97). This association remained significant after propensity score matching (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.29-0.92). Among the 338 patients admitted to the intensive care unit, mortality was significantly lower in convalescent plasma recipients compared with nonrecipients (HR for propensity score-matched comparison, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.20-0.80). Among the 227 patients who required mechanical ventilatory support, mortality was significantly lower in convalescent plasma recipients compared with nonrecipients (HR for propensity score-matched comparison, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.14-0.72). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest a potential survival benefit in the administration of convalescent plasma to patients with hematologic cancers and COVID-19.

11.
13.
JMIR Med Inform ; 9(4): e25035, 2021 Apr 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1133823

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Accurate and rapid clinical decisions based on real-world evidence are essential for patients with cancer. However, the complexity of chemotherapy regimens for cancer impedes retrospective research that uses observational health databases. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare the anticancer treatment trajectories and patterns of clinical events according to regimen type using the chemotherapy episodes determined by an algorithm. METHODS: We developed an algorithm to extract the regimen-level abstracted chemotherapy episodes from medication records in a conventional Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) common data model (CDM) database. The algorithm was validated on the Ajou University School Of Medicine (AUSOM) database by manual review of clinical notes. Using the algorithm, we extracted episodes of chemotherapy from patients in the EHR database and the claims database. We also developed an application software for visualizing the chemotherapy treatment patterns based on the treatment episodes in the OMOP-CDM database. Using this software, we generated the trends in the types of regimen used in the institutions, the patterns of the iterative chemotherapy use, and the trajectories of cancer treatment in two EHR-based OMOP-CDM databases. As a pilot study, the time of onset of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia according to regimen was measured using the AUSOM database. The anticancer treatment trajectories for patients with COVID-19 were also visualized based on the nationwide claims database. RESULTS: We generated 178,360 treatment episodes for patients with colorectal, breast, and lung cancer for 85 different regimens. The algorithm precisely identified the type of chemotherapy regimen in 400 patients (average positive predictive value >98%). The trends in the use of routine clinical chemotherapy regimens from 2008-2018 were identified for 8236 patients. For a total of 12 regimens (those administered to the largest proportion of patients), the number of repeated treatments was concordant with the protocols for standard chemotherapy regimens for certain cases. In addition, the anticancer treatment trajectories for 8315 patients were shown, including 62 patients with COVID-19. A comparative analysis of neutropenia showed that its onset in colorectal cancer regimens tended to cluster between days 9-15, whereas it tended to cluster between days 2-8 for certain regimens for breast cancer or lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: We propose a method for generating chemotherapy episodes for introduction into the oncology extension module of the OMOP-CDM databases. These proof-of-concept studies demonstrated the usability, scalability, and interoperability of the proposed framework through a distributed research network.

14.
Cancer Discov ; 10(10): 1514-1527, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-981743

ABSTRACT

Among 2,186 U.S. adults with invasive cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, we examined the association of COVID-19 treatments with 30-day all-cause mortality and factors associated with treatment. Logistic regression with multiple adjustments (e.g., comorbidities, cancer status, baseline COVID-19 severity) was performed. Hydroxychloroquine with any other drug was associated with increased mortality versus treatment with any COVID-19 treatment other than hydroxychloroquine or untreated controls; this association was not present with hydroxychloroquine alone. Remdesivir had numerically reduced mortality versus untreated controls that did not reach statistical significance. Baseline COVID-19 severity was strongly associated with receipt of any treatment. Black patients were approximately half as likely to receive remdesivir as white patients. Although observational studies can be limited by potential unmeasured confounding, our findings add to the emerging understanding of patterns of care for patients with cancer and COVID-19 and support evaluation of emerging treatments through inclusive prospective controlled trials. SIGNIFICANCE: Evaluating the potential role of COVID-19 treatments in patients with cancer in a large observational study, there was no statistically significant 30-day all-cause mortality benefit with hydroxychloroquine or high-dose corticosteroids alone or in combination; remdesivir showed potential benefit. Treatment receipt reflects clinical decision-making and suggests disparities in medication access.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1426.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Drug Utilization/statistics & numerical data , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Neoplasms/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Age Factors , Aged , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , COVID-19 , Clinical Decision-Making , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Drug Therapy, Combination/methods , Drug Therapy, Combination/statistics & numerical data , Follow-Up Studies , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/complications , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Sex Factors , Treatment Outcome , United States/epidemiology
15.
J Biomed Inform ; 113: 103657, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-970257

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, health systems postponed non-essential medical procedures to accommodate surge of critically-ill patients. The long-term consequences of delaying procedures in response to COVID-19 remains unknown. We developed a high-throughput approach to understand the impact of delaying procedures on patient health outcomes using electronic health record (EHR) data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used EHR data from Vanderbilt University Medical Center's (VUMC) Research and Synthetic Derivatives. Elective procedures and non-urgent visits were suspended at VUMC between March 18, 2020 and April 24, 2020. Surgical procedure data from this period were compared to a similar timeframe in 2019. Potential adverse impact of delay in cardiovascular and cancer-related procedures was evaluated using EHR data collected from January 1, 1993 to March 17, 2020. For surgical procedure delay, outcomes included length of hospitalization (days), mortality during hospitalization, and readmission within six months. For screening procedure delay, outcomes included 5-year survival and cancer stage at diagnosis. RESULTS: We identified 416 surgical procedures that were negatively impacted during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the same timeframe in 2019. Using retrospective data, we found 27 significant associations between procedure delay and adverse patient outcomes. Clinician review indicated that 88.9% of the significant associations were plausible and potentially clinically significant. Analytic pipelines for this study are available online. CONCLUSION: Our approach enables health systems to identify medical procedures affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and evaluate the effect of delay, enabling them to communicate effectively with patients and prioritize rescheduling to minimize adverse patient outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/diagnosis , Cardiovascular Diseases/surgery , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Neoplasms/surgery , Pandemics , Time-to-Treatment , Adult , COVID-19/virology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
17.
JCO Glob Oncol ; 6: 1461-1471, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-807637

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the ASCO launched a Global Webinar Series to address various aspects of cancer care during the pandemic. Here we present the lessons learned and recommendations that have emerged from these webinars. METHODS: Fifteen international health care experts from different global regions and oncology disciplines participated in one of the six 1-hour webinars to discuss the latest data, share their experiences, and provide recommendations to manage cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic. These sessions include didactic presentations followed by a moderated discussion and questions from the audience. All recommendations have been transcribed, categorized, and reviewed by the experts, who have also approved the consensus recommendations. RESULTS: The summary recommendations are divided into different categories, including risk minimization; care prioritization of patients; health care team management; virtual care; management of patients with cancer undergoing surgical, radiation, and systemic therapy; clinical research; and recovery plans. The recommendations emphasize the protection of patients and health care teams from infections, delivery of timely and appropriate care, reduction of harm from the interruption of care, and preparation to handle a surge of new COVID-19 cases, complications, or comorbidities thereof. CONCLUSION: The recommendations from the ASCO Global Webinar Series may guide practicing oncologists to manage their patients during the ongoing pandemic and help organizations recover from the crisis. Implementation of these recommendations may improve understanding of how COVID-19 has affected cancer care and increase readiness to manage the current and any future outbreaks effectively.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Global Health , Medical Oncology/standards , Neoplasms/therapy , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , COVID-19 , Consensus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Health Services Accessibility/organization & administration , Health Services Accessibility/standards , Health Services Accessibility/trends , Humans , Infection Control/organization & administration , Infection Control/standards , Medical Oncology/organization & administration , Medical Oncology/trends , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Neoplasms/immunology , Oncologists/organization & administration , Oncologists/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/immunology , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicine/organization & administration , Telemedicine/standards , Telemedicine/trends
18.
Cancer Cell ; 38(5): 629-646, 2020 11 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-807391

ABSTRACT

Patients with cancer have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This effect has included the adverse outcomes in patients with cancer who develop COVID-19, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the delivery of cancer care, and the severe disruption to cancer research. However, patients with cancer are a heterogeneous population, and recent studies have now documented factors that allow risk stratification of patients with cancer in order to optimize care. In this review, we highlight data at the intersection of COVID-19 and cancer, including the biological interplay between the two diseases and practical recommendations for the treatment of patients with cancer during the pandemic. We additionally discuss the potential long-lasting impact of the pandemic on cancer care due to its deleterious effect on cancer research, as well as biological insights from the cancer research community that could help develop novel therapies for all patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Delivery of Health Care/standards , Neoplasms/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Humans , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/virology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL