Consequences of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on urological surgery in France: a nationwide analysis of the healthcare system database.

The SARS-CoV-2 outbreak overwhelmed the healthcare systems worldwide. Saturation of hospitals and the risk of contagion led to a reduction in the care of other diseases. OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on urological surgery in France during the year 2020. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: An observational descriptive study was conducted on anonymised data collected from the national healthcare database established each year as part of the Program for the Medicalization of Information Systems in Medicine, Surgery, Obstetrics and Odontology. INTERVENTION: None. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We gathered the number of urology surgical procedures carried out between 2010 and 2019, and we observed the difference between the forecast and actual number of urological surgeries performed in 2020. RESULTS: Urological surgeries decreased by 11.4%, non-oncological surgeries being more affected (-13.1%) than oncological ones (-4.1%). Among the most relevant surgeries, female urinary incontinence (-44.7%) and benign prostatic hyperplasia (-20.8%) were the most impacted ones, followed by kidney cancer (-9%), urolithiasis (-8.7%), radical cystectomy for bladder cancer (-6.1%), prostate cancer (-3.6%) and transurethral resection of bladder tumour (-2%). Public hospitals had a more reduced activity (-17.7%) than private ones (-9.1%). Finally, the distribution of the reduction in urological activities by region did not correspond to the regional burden of SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSIONS: Urological care was severely affected during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Even if oncological surgeries were prioritised, the longer it takes to receive appropriate care, the greater the risk on survival impact. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The data collection and analysis was authorised by the French Data Protection Authority (CNIL) under the number1 861 282v2.

Covid-19 and beyond: Broadening horizons about social media use in oncology. A survey study with healthcare professionals caring for youth with cancer.

Objectives: The study aimed to explore the attitudes of Swiss healthcare professionals toward the use of social media in adolescent and young adult oncology, and to examine whether the ongoing social restrictions due to COVID-19 might have altered these attitudes. Methods: This research was a survey study. The subjects were healthcare providers working in pediatric or adult oncology settings in Switzerland. 62 providers completed the survey. We performed descriptive and inferential statistical analyses. Results: While considered useful for various professional aspects (professional life 62.1%, educational purposes 72.7%, networking 83.3%, patient engagement 57.6%, clinical trial recruitment 51.5%), only a small proportion of participants actually used social media for professional reasons weekly (32.8%). Just over half considered themselves skillful in using these platforms (56.1%). Regression analysis revealed that self-assessed skillfulness with social media, the Covid-19 impact on attitudes, and the oncology setting, significantly predicted assessment of the usefulness of social media. Although, in answers to open items, institutional guidelines were deemed crucial to improve social media use, many respondents seemed unaware of their existence (50.8%). Only a minority reported an impact of Covid-19 on their attitudes towards the professional implementation of social media (25.0%). Conclusion: The global health crisis creates important challenges for young patients with cancer and their healthcare providers. In times of social restrictions, social media may be a promising tools to facilitate health information provision, connectivity, and patient care. Virtual mentorship and targeted social media training interventions might be a good way to improve familiarity with using social media and to increase awareness about existing ethical guidelines for their use.

Factors associated with cancer treatment delay: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment delays are significantly associated with increased mortality risk among adult cancer patients; however, factors associated with these delays have not been robustly evaluated. This review and meta-analysis will evaluate factors associated with treatment delays among patients with five common cancers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Scientific databases including Ovid MEDLINE, Elsevier Embase, EBSCOhost CINAHL Plus Full Text, Elsevier Scopus and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global will be searched to identify relevant articles published between January 2000 and October 2021. Research articles published in the USA evaluating factors associated with treatment delay among breast, lung, prostate, cervical or colorectal adult cancer patients will be included. The primary outcome of the meta-analysis will be the pooled adjusted and unadjusted odds of treatment delay for patient, disease, provider and system-level factors defined according to specified time intervals. The secondary outcomes will be mean or median treatment delay for each cancer site according to first treatment and the influence of factors on the pooled mean treatment delay for each cancer site (via meta-regression analyses). Results from qualitative and mixed-methods studies will be narratively synthesised. Three reviewers will independently screen records generated from the search and two reviewers will independently extract data following a consensus agreement. Statistical heterogeneity will be assessed with a standard I2 test and funnel plots will be conducted to evaluate publication bias. Risk of bias will be assessed independently by two authors using validated tools according to the article's study design. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal ethical approval is not required because the work is being carried out on publicly accessible studies. The findings of this review will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed scientific journal, academic conferences, social media, and key stakeholders. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021293131.

Financial burden for caregivers of adolescents and young adults with cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors are vulnerable to cancer-related financial burden, which is likely shared by their caregivers. This study aims to enhance an existing conceptual model of financial burden by conducting concept elicitation interviews with caregivers to generate knowledge that can be translated to inform instrumental and psychosocial support in cancer care. METHODS: Qualitative concept elicitation interviews were conducted with 24 caregivers of AYA cancer survivors (caregivers of adolescents, n = 12; caregivers of emerging adults, n = 12) recruited from four sites. Constant comparative methods were used to identify themes, and results were interpreted and organized into domains of the conceptual model. We also explored COVID-19 related financial impacts among a subset (n = 12) of caregivers. RESULTS: Seven themes emerged, which varied by age group and strengthened the conceptualization of the model. Themes centered on: (1) direct and indirect costs of cancer; (2) impact of socioeconomic status on financial burden; (3) caregiver desire to shield AYAs from distress due to financial burden; (4) strategies to manage cancer-related costs; (5) worries about AYAs' financial future; (6) seeking and receiving financial support; and (7) navigating the healthcare system. Findings also revealed that COVID-19 exacerbates financial burden for some caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: Building upon our prior work, we have adapted the conceptual model of financial burden to reflect perspectives of AYAs, oncology providers, and now, caregivers. An important next step is to develop a reliable and valid self-report measure of financial burden among caregivers of AYA cancer survivors.

Active surveillance of chemotherapy-related symptom burden in ambulatory cancer patients via the implementation of electronic patient-reported outcomes and sensor-enabled vital signs capture: protocol for a decentralised feasibility pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Remote patient monitoring (RPM) has emerged as a potential avenue for optimising the management of symptoms in patients undergoing chemotherapy. However, RPM is a complex, multilevel intervention with technology, workflow, contextual and patient experience components. The purpose of this pilot study is to determine the feasibility of RPM protocol implementation with respect to decentralised recruitment, patient retention, adherence to reporting recommendations, RPM platform usability and patient experience in ambulatory cancer patients at high risk for chemotherapy-related symptoms. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol describes a single-arm decentralised feasibility pilot study of technology-enhanced outpatient symptom management system in patients with gastrointestinal and thoracic cancer receiving chemotherapy and cancer care at a single site (MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston Texas). An anticipated total of 25 patients will be recruited prior to the initiation of chemotherapy and provided with a set of validated questionnaires at enrollment and after our 1-month feasibility pilot trial period. Our intervention entails the self-reporting of symptoms and vital signs via a HIPAA-compliant, secure tablet interface that also enables (1) the provision of self-care materials to patients, (2) generation of threshold alerts to a dedicated call-centre and (3) videoconferencing. Vital sign information (heart rate, blood pressure, pulse, oxygen saturation, weight and temperature) will be captured via Bluetooth-enabled biometric monitoring devices which are integrated with the tablet interface. Protocolised triage and management of symptoms will occur in response to the alerts. Feasibility and acceptability metrics will characterise our recruitment process, protocol adherence, patient retention and usability of the RPM platform. We will also document the perceived effectiveness of our intervention by patients. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been granted approval by the institutional review board of MD Anderson Cancer Center. We anticipate dissemination of our pilot and subsequent effectiveness trial results via presentations at national conferences and peer-reviewed publications in the relevant medical journals. Our results will also be made available to cancer survivors, their caregivers and hospital administration. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCI202107464.

Predicting muscle loss during lung cancer treatment (PREDICT): protocol for a mixed methods prospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Low muscle mass and low muscle attenuation (radiodensity), reflecting increased muscle adiposity, are prevalent muscle abnormalities in people with lung cancer receiving curative intent chemoradiation therapy (CRT) or radiation therapy (RT). Currently, there is a limited understanding of the magnitude, determinants and clinical significance of these muscle abnormalities in the lung cancer CRT/RT population. The primary objective of this study is to identify the predictors of muscle abnormalities (low muscle mass and muscle attenuation) and their depletion over time in people with lung cancer receiving CRT/RT. Secondary objectives are to assess the magnitude of change in these parameters and their association with health-related quality of life, treatment completion, toxicities and survival. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Patients diagnosed with lung cancer and planned for treatment with CRT/RT are invited to participate in this prospective observational study, with a target of 120 participants. The impact and predictors of muscle abnormalities (assessed via CT at the third lumbar vertebra) prior to and 2 months post CRT/RT on the severity of treatment toxicities, treatment completion and survival will be assessed by examining the following variables: demographic and clinical factors, weight loss, malnutrition, muscle strength, physical performance, energy and protein intake, physical activity and sedentary time, risk of sarcopenia (Strength, Assistance in walking, Rise from a chair, Climb stairs, Falls history (SARC-F) score alone and with calf-circumference) and systemic inflammation. A sample of purposively selected participants with muscle abnormalities will be invited to take part in semistructured interviews to understand their ability to cope with treatment and explore preference for treatment strategies focused on nutrition and exercise. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The PREDICT study received ethics approval from the Human Research Ethics Committee at Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre (HREC/53147/PMCC-2019) and Deakin University (2019-320). Findings will be disseminated through peer review publications and conference presentations.

SafeFit Trial: virtual clinics to deliver a multimodal intervention to improve psychological and physical well-being in people with cancer. Protocol of a COVID-19 targeted non-randomised phase III trial.

INTRODUCTION: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic (caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus) on individuals with cancer has been profound. It has led to increased anxiety, distress and deconditioning due to reduced physical activity. We aim to investigate whether SafeFit, a multimodal intervention of physical activity, nutrition and psychological support delivered virtually by cancer exercise specialists (CES), can improve physical and emotional functionings during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A phase III non-randomised intervention trial, target recruitment of 1050 adults with suspected or confirmed diagnosis of cancer. All recruited participants will receive the multimodal intervention delivered by CES for 6 months. Sessions will be delivered 1-to-1 using telephone/video conferencing consultations. CES will work with each participant to devise a personalised programme of (1) physical activity, (2) basic dietary advice and (3) psychological support, all underpinned by behaviour change support. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Physical and emotional functioning as measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ-C30). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: overall quality of life measured by EORTC-QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5L, health economics, patient activation, self-efficacy to self-manage chronic disease, distress, impact of COVID-19 on emotional functioning, self-reported physical activity, functional capacity and nutrition. Adherence to the intervention will also be measured and a process evaluation conducted. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the Health Research Authority (reference number 20/NW/0254). Results of this trial will be disseminated through publication of peer-reviewed articles, presentations at scientific conferences, and to the public and people with cancer in collaboration with our patient and public involvement representatives and partners. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04425616.

A call to action: Antiracist patient engagement in adolescent and young adult oncology research and advocacy.

Amidst the concurrent global crises of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), uprisings against Anti-Black racism and police brutality, as well as anti-Asian racism and violence, the field of medicine found itself simultaneously called upon to respond as essential workers in the public health devastation of COVID-19, and as representatives of healthcare institutions wrought with the impacts of systemic racism. Clinicians, researchers, and advocates in adolescent and young adult (AYA) oncology, must come together in authentic activism to begin the work of creating structural change to advance antiracist approaches to patient engagement in AYA oncology research and advocacy. Critical review of existing practices is needed to ensure that ethical and effective research methods are employed when engaging with racial and ethnic minority AYA patients with cancer, who may be particularly vulnerable and exploited in the current context.

Experiences of cancer immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ExCIm)-insights of people affected by cancer and healthcare professionals: a qualitative study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: There is a global interest in cancer immunotherapy. Clinical trials have found that one group, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), has demonstrated clinical benefits across various cancers. However, research focused on the experiences of people affected by cancer who have undergone this treatment using qualitative methodology is currently limited. Moreover, little is known about the experiences and education needs of the healthcare staff supporting the people receiving these immunotherapies. This study therefore seeks to explore the experiences of using ICIs by both the people affected by cancer and the healthcare professionals who support those people, and use the findings to make recommendations for ICI supportive care guidance development, cancer immunotherapy education materials for healthcare professionals, cancer policy and further research. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Patient participants (n=up to 30) will be recruited within the UK. The sample will incorporate a range of perspectives, sociodemographic factors, diagnoses and ICI treatments, yet share some common experiences. Healthcare professionals (n=up to 15) involved in supporting people receiving immunotherapy will also be recruited from across the UK. Data will be generated through in-depth, semistructured interviews. Reflexive thematic analysis will be used to obtain thorough understanding of individual's perspectives on, and experiences of, immunotherapy. Study dates are as follows: December 2019-March 2022. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The research will be performed in accordance with the UK Policy for Health and Social Care Research and Cardiff University's Research Integrity and Governance Code of Practice (2018). The study received ethical approval from the West Midlands and Black Country Research Ethics Committee in October 2019. Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales approvals were confirmed in December 2019. All participants will provide informed consent. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals, non-academic platforms, the Macmillan Cancer Support website, disseminated at relevant national and international conferences and presented via a webinar. The study is listed on the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Research Network Central Portfolio.

Cross-sectoral communication by bringing together patient with cancer, general practitioner and oncologist in a video-based consultation: a qualitative study of oncologists' and nurse specialists' perspectives.

Shared care models in the field of cancer aim to improve care coordination, role clarification and patient satisfaction. Cross-sectoral communication is pivotal. Involvement of patients may add to intended mechanisms.A randomised controlled trial 'The Partnership Study' tested the effect of bringing together patient, general practitioner (GP) and oncologist for a consultation conducted by video. PURPOSE: As part of the process evaluation, this study aimed to explore experiences, attitudes and perspectives of the oncological department on sharing patient consultations with GPs using video. METHODS: Four semistructured interviews with five oncologists and four nurse specialists were conducted in February 2020. We focused on the informants' experiences and reflections on the potential of future implementation of the concept 'inviting the GP for a shared consultation by video'. The analyses were based on an inductive, open-minded, hermeneutic phenomenological approach. RESULTS: A total of six overall themes were identified: structuring consultation and communication, perceptions of GP involvement in cancer care, stressors, making a difference, alternative ways of cross-sector communication and needs for redesigning the model. The concept made sense and was deemed useful, but solving the many technical and organisational problems is pivotal. Case-specific tasks and relational issues were targeted by pragmatically rethinking protocol expectations and the usual way of communication and structuring patient encounters. Case selection was discussed as one way of maturing the concept. CONCLUSION: This Danish study adds new insight into understanding different aspects of the process, causal mechanisms as well as the potential of future implementation of video-based tripartite encounters. Beyond solving the technical problems, case selection and organisational issues are important. Acknowledging the disruption of the usual workflow, the introduction of new phases of the usual encounter and the variety of patient-GP relationships to be embraced may help to better understand and comply with barriers and facilitators of communication and sharing. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02716168.