Factors associated with increased financial toxicity after the completion of radiation treatment for gynecologic cancer.

PURPOSE: We evaluated financial toxicity (FT) in patients with gynecologic cancer treated with radiation and assessed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients' financial wellbeing. METHODS: Patients completed a survey 1 month after completing radiation from August 2019-March 2020 and November 2020-June 2021. The survey included the COmprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) tool, EQ-5D to measure quality of life (QOL) and pandemic-related questions for the second survey period. High FT was COST score ≤ 23. RESULTS: Of 97 respondents (92% response rate), 49% completed the survey pre-pandemic and 51% after; the majority were white (76%) and had uterine cancer (64%). Sixty percent received external beam radiation with or without brachytherapy; 40% had only brachytherapy. High FT was associated with worse QOL (r = -0.37, P < 0.001), younger age and type of insurance (both p ≤ 0.03). Respondents with high FT were 6.0 (95% CI 1.0-35.9) times more likely to delay/avoid medical care, 13.6 (95% CI 2.9-64.3) times more likely to borrow money, and 6.9 (95% CI 1.7-27.2) times as likely to reduce spending on basic goods. The pandemic cohort had a smaller proportion of respondents with high FT than the pre-pandemic cohort (20% vs. 35%, p = 0.10) and a higher median COST score (32 (IQR 25-35) vs. 27 (IQR 19-34), p = 0.07). CONCLUSION: Privately insured, younger respondents who received radiation for gynecologic cancer were at risk for FT. High FT was associated with worse QOL and economic cost-coping strategies. We observed less FT in the pandemic cohort, though not statistically different from the pre-pandemic cohort.

Surveillance of gynecologic cancer patients post-COVID-19 vaccine: Are CA-125 levels reliable?

Objective: The COVID-19 vaccine is known to instigate an inflammatory response that impacts cancer testing. We aimed to evaluate carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA-125) trends in gynecologic oncology patients in surveillance following COVID-19 vaccination to inform clinical practice. Methods: This was a single institution retrospective study of patients who received a COVID-19 vaccine while undergoing surveillance of gynecologic cancers with serial serum CA-125 measurements. CA-125 levels from the three months before and after vaccination were included in analysis. Differences between mean and median pre- and post-vaccination CA-125 levels for each patient were calculated. The mean and median of these differences were calculated, as well as the distribution of change. Demographic and cancer-related variables were also recorded. Results: Twenty-six patients who received a COVID-19 vaccine and were followed with surveillance serum CA-125 levels were identified. The mean age was 68.2 years; 92 % received a two-vaccine series. Forty-six percent had endometrial cancer and 54 % had ovarian cancer. The mean change from pre- to post-vaccine mean CA-125 level was 0.16 (±7.17) U/mL and the median change from pre- to post-vaccine median CA-125 level was -0.30 (IQR 3.66) U/mL. The range in change from pre- to post-vaccine mean was -16.50 to 24.00 U/mL, with 73 % of patients between -4 and +4 U/mL. Conclusion: We found no clinically significant change in CA-125 level after patients under surveillance for gynecologic cancers were vaccinated against COVID-19, suggesting that that the vaccine does not impact the utility of CA-125 as a tool to monitor disease in this population.

Relationship between supportive care needs with coronavirus anxiety and death anxiety of women with gynecologic cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIM: The study aimed to determine the relationship between supportive care needs with coronavirus anxiety and death anxiety of women with gynecologic cancer during COVID-19. METHODS: The population of the study was women with gynecologic cancer who received chemotherapy in a university hospital. The study sample was calculated using G*Power 3.1.9.4 analysis program and completed with 64 patients who agreed to participate and met the research criteria. The personal information form, supportive care needs survey-short form (SCNS-SF29Tr ), coronavirus anxiety scale (CAS), and death anxiety scale (DAS) were used for data collection. RESULTS: The participants' SCNS-SF29Tr mean score was 105.7 ± 17.26, CAS mean score was 11.19 ± 3.96, and DAS mean score was 40.13 ± 15.5. There was a positive, very high-level correlation between the health system and information and psychological needs subscales of SCNS-SF29Tr and CAS (r = 0.809, r = 0.878, respectively; p < 0.05). In addition, a high-level relationship was found between the daily life subscale of SCNS-SF29Tr and CAS (r = 0.674; p < 0.001). A positive low-level relationship was determined between the health system and information, daily life, and psychological needs (except for the sexuality) subscales of SCNS-SF29Tr and DAS (r = 0.357, r = 0.252, r = 0.353 respectively; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Gynecologic cancer participants had unmet supportive care needs in all subscales except for the sexuality. The participants had higher supportive care needs, high-level coronavirus anxiety, and medium-level death anxiety. In addition, the participants' all supportive care needs have increased as their coronavirus anxiety levels have increased. The participants' supportive care needs have increased, except for sexuality, as their death anxiety levels have increased.

Perception of Telehealth During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Survivors of Gynecologic Cancer.

Our objective was to assess gynecologic cancer survivor preferences for telehealth cancer care. Gynecologic cancer survivors participating in a prospective cohort study were invited to complete a cross-sectional survey regarding their experience with and preferences for telehealth. Of 188 participants, 48.9% had undergone a telehealth visit since March 2020, and 53.7% reported a preference for exclusively in-person visits for their cancer care and surveillance. Furthermore, 80.5% of participants were satisfied with the telehealth care they received and 54.8% would recommend telehealth services to patients with similar conditions. Most participants thought a physical examination was critical to detecting recurrence, and concern that their provider may miss something during telehealth visits was greater among those who preferred in-person visits. With many gynecologic cancer survivors preferring in-person care, building a future care model that includes telehealth elements will require adaptations, careful evaluation of patient concerns, as well as patient education on telehealth.

Clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19 and gynecologic cancer: A society of gynecologic oncology COVID-19 and gynecologic cancer registry study.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with gynecologic malignancies may have varied responses to COVID-19 infection. We aimed to describe clinical courses, treatment changes, and short-term clinical outcomes for gynecologic oncology patients with concurrent COVID-19 in the United States. METHODS: The Society of Gynecologic Oncology COVID-19 and Gynecologic Cancer Registry was created to capture clinical courses of gynecologic oncology patients with COVID-19. Logistic regression models were employed to evaluate factors for an association with hospitalization and death, respectively, within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. RESULTS: Data were available for 348 patients across 7 institutions. At COVID-19 diagnosis, 125 patients (36%) had active malignancy. Delay (n = 88) or discontinuation (n = 10) of treatment due to COVID-19 infection occurred in 28% with those on chemotherapy (53/88) or recently receiving surgery (32/88) most frequently delayed. In addition to age, performance status, diabetes, and specific COVID symptoms, both non-White race (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 3.93, 95% CI 2.06-7.50) and active malignancy (aOR = 2.34, 95% CI 1.30-4.20) were associated with an increased odds of hospitalization. Eight percent of hospitalized patients (8/101) died of COVID-19 complications and 5% (17/348) of the entire cohort died within 30 days after diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Gynecologic oncology patients diagnosed with COVID-19 are at risk for hospitalization, delay of anti-cancer treatments, and death. One in 20 gynecologic oncology patients with COVID-19 died within 30 days after diagnosis. Racial disparities exist in patient hospitalizations for COVID-19, a surrogate of disease severity. Additional studies are needed to determine long-term outcomes and the impact of race.

Outcomes of gynecologic cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: an international, multicenter, prospective CovidSurg-Gynecologic Oncology Cancer study.

BACKGROUND: The CovidSurg-Cancer Consortium aimed to explore the impact of COVID-19 in surgical patients and services for solid cancers at the start of the pandemic. The CovidSurg-Gynecologic Oncology Cancer subgroup was particularly concerned about the magnitude of adverse outcomes caused by the disrupted surgical gynecologic cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic, which are currently unclear. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the changes in care and short-term outcomes of surgical patients with gynecologic cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesized that the COVID-19 pandemic had led to a delay in surgical cancer care, especially in patients who required more extensive surgery, and such delay had an impact on cancer outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: This was a multicenter, international, prospective cohort study. Consecutive patients with gynecologic cancers who were initially planned for nonpalliative surgery, were recruited from the date of first COVID-19-related admission in each participating center for 3 months. The follow-up period was 3 months from the time of the multidisciplinary tumor board decision to operate. The primary outcome of this analysis is the incidence of pandemic-related changes in care. The secondary outcomes included 30-day perioperative mortality and morbidity and a composite outcome of unresectable disease or disease progression, emergency surgery, and death. RESULTS: We included 3973 patients (3784 operated and 189 nonoperated) from 227 centers in 52 countries and 7 world regions who were initially planned to have cancer surgery. In 20.7% (823/3973) of the patients, the standard of care was adjusted. A significant delay (>8 weeks) was observed in 11.2% (424/3784) of patients, particularly in those with ovarian cancer (213/1355; 15.7%; P<.0001). This delay was associated with a composite of adverse outcomes, including disease progression and death (95/424; 22.4% vs 601/3360; 17.9%; P=.024) compared with those who had operations within 8 weeks of tumor board decisions. One in 13 (189/2430; 7.9%) did not receive their planned operations, in whom 1 in 20 (5/189; 2.7%) died and 1 in 5 (34/189; 18%) experienced disease progression or death within 3 months of multidisciplinary team board decision for surgery. Only 22 of the 3778 surgical patients (0.6%) acquired perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infections; they had a longer postoperative stay (median 8.5 vs 4 days; P<.0001), higher predefined surgical morbidity (14/22; 63.6% vs 717/3762; 19.1%; P<.0001) and mortality (4/22; 18.2% vs 26/3762; 0.7%; P<.0001) rates than the uninfected cohort. CONCLUSION: One in 5 surgical patients with gynecologic cancer worldwide experienced management modifications during the COVID-19 pandemic. Significant adverse outcomes were observed in those with delayed or cancelled operations, and coordinated mitigating strategies are urgently needed.

COVID-19 outcomes of patients with gynecologic cancer in New York City: An updated analysis from the initial surge of the pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Despite significant increase in COVID-19 publications, characterization of COVID-19 infection in patients with gynecologic cancer remains limited. Here we present an update of COVID-19 outcomes among people with gynecologic cancer in New York City (NYC) during the initial surge of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]). METHODS: Data were abstracted from gynecologic oncology patients with COVID-19 infection among 8 NYC area hospital systems between March and June 2020. Multivariable logistic regression was utilized to estimate associations between factors and COVID-19 related hospitalization and mortality. RESULTS: Of 193 patients with gynecologic cancer and COVID-19, the median age at diagnosis was 65.0 years (interquartile range (IQR), 53.0-73.0 years). One hundred six of the 193 patients (54.9%) required hospitalization; among the hospitalized patients, 13 (12.3%) required invasive mechanical ventilation, 39 (36.8%) required ICU admission. Half of the cohort (49.2%) had not received anti-cancer treatment prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. No patients requiring mechanical ventilation survived. Thirty-four of 193 (17.6%) patients died of COVID-19 complications. In multivariable analysis, hospitalization was associated with an age ≥ 65 years (odds ratio [OR] 2.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11, 4.07), Black race (OR 2.53, CI 1.24, 5.32), performance status ≥2 (OR 3.67, CI 1.25, 13.55) and ≥ 3 comorbidities (OR 2.00, CI 1.05, 3.84). Only former or current history of smoking (OR 2.75, CI 1.21, 6.22) was associated with death due to COVID-19 in multivariable analysis. Administration of cytotoxic chemotherapy within 90 days of COVID-19 diagnosis was not predictive of COVID-19 hospitalization (OR 0.83, CI 0.41, 1.68) or mortality (OR 1.56, CI 0.67, 3.53). CONCLUSIONS: The case fatality rate among patients with gynecologic malignancy with COVID-19 infection was 17.6%. Cancer-directed therapy was not associated with an increased risk of mortality related to COVID-19 infection.

COVID-19 and Gynecologic Oncology: What Have We Learned?

OPINION STATEMENT: COVID-19 has transformed the care we provide to gynecologic oncology patients. In addition to directly impacting the diagnosis and treatment of women with gynecologic cancer, it has affected our patient's ability to undergo recommended surveillance and has made an impact on every caregiver providing care during this time. Herein we review the current literature on the impact of COVID-19 on gynecologic oncology and highlight new approaches and innovations that have resulted in gynecologic cancer care as a result of the pandemic. The impact of COVID-19 on the field of gynecologic oncology has been profound. In addition to directly impacting the diagnosis and treatment of women with cancer, it has also challenged the very ethics with which we practice medicine. The equitable distribution of resources is paramount to upholding the Hippocratic Oath which we all invoke. The COVID-19 pandemic has stripped this oath down to its very core, forcing all medical practitioners to scrutinize who gets what resources and when. As the pandemic continues to unfold, the question remains - in the setting of a strained and overburdened healthcare system, how do we maximize beneficence to one group of patients, while maintaining non-maleficence to others? As gynecologic oncologists, we are responsible for advocating for our patients to ensure that the quality of their cancer care is not compromised, while also not overutilizing resources that are sorely needed for the care of COVID-19 victims, and not making them more likely to succumb to COVID-19 by the very nature of the treatment we provide. The effects of the pandemic are far-reaching and broad, and many of these are yet to be determined. Future studies are needed to analyze how the above-utilized strategies in GYN cancer care during the pandemic will impact the long-term outcomes of our patients.

Changes in gynecologic and breast cancer diagnoses during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: analysis from a tertiary academic gyneco-oncological center in Germany.

PURPOSE: With the beginning of 2021, the world has been suffering from the COVID-19 pandemic for more than 1 year. More and more, we are able to evaluate side effects of the pandemic in the healthcare sector. A negative impact on cancer diagnoses is one of them. Careful observation of trends in an academic gyneco-oncological context appears important to identify potential negative developments. METHODS: We analyzed the case number of gynecologic and breast cancer diagnoses in the period from January to June 2020 compared to 2019 and during the period of the first general German lockdown (March 22nd until May 5th 2020). Patients were characterized by age, tumor type, FIGO or TNM stage and presence of symptoms at initial hospital presentation. RESULTS: The frequency of newly diagnosed gynecologic and breast cancer cases from beginning of January until end of June changed by - 10% and by - 12% during the lockdown in 2020 compared to 2019. In both periods, reduction of breast cancer cases was relatively larger than decrease of gynecologic cancers. Moreover, median patient age decreased. For the first half of 2020, we found a shift towards higher tumor stages (N+/M1 or FIGO III-IV). During the lockdown period, the appearance of tumor-associated symptoms at diagnosis increased by about 12%. CONCLUSION: This analysis illustrates the anticipated general decrease in diagnoses of primary cancers during the lockdown periods in 2020 due to COVID-19 pandemic for gynecologic and breast cancer cases.

Inflammatory markers in gynecologic oncology patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection.

OBJECTIVE: Elevated inflammatory markers are predictive of COVID-19 infection severity and mortality. It is unclear if these markers are associated with severe infection in patients with cancer due to underlying tumor related inflammation. We sought to further understand the inflammatory response related to COVID-19 infection in patients with gynecologic cancer. METHODS: Patients with a history of gynecologic cancer hospitalized for COVID-19 infection with available laboratory data were identified. Admission laboratory values and clinical outcomes were abstracted from electronic medical records. Severe infection was defined as infection requiring ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, or resulting in death. RESULTS: 86 patients with gynecologic cancer were hospitalized with COVID-19 infection with a median age of 68.5 years (interquartile range (IQR), 59.0-74.8). Of the 86 patients, 29 (33.7%) patients required ICU admission and 25 (29.1%) patients died of COVID-19 complications. Fifty (58.1%) patients had active cancer and 36 (41.9%) were in remission. Patients with severe infection had significantly higher ferritin (median 1163.0 vs 624.0 ng/mL, p < 0.01), procalcitonin (median 0.8 vs 0.2 ng/mL, p < 0.01), and C-reactive protein (median 142.0 vs 62.3 mg/L, p = 0.02) levels compared to those with moderate infection. White blood cell count, lactate, and creatinine were also associated with severe infection. D-dimer levels were not significantly associated with severe infection (p = 0.20). CONCLUSIONS: The inflammatory markers ferritin, procalcitonin, and CRP were associated with COVID-19 severity in gynecologic cancer patients and may be used as prognostic markers at the time of admission.

[Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on breast and gynecologic cancers management. Experience of the Surgery Department in the Nice Anticancer Center]. / Impact de la pandémie de COVID-19 sur les prises en charge pour cancer du sein et gynécologique.

INTRODUCTION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the containment measures and the recommendations of several societies in oncology may have impacted the request for initial care for cancers. METHODS: In this monocentric retrospective study, the number and the characteristics of patients received for a first consultation for a breast or gynecologic tumor were compared between the containment period and a control period. The times from diagnosis to treatment and the type of initial care were compared too. RESULTS: During the outbreak, 91 patients were seen for a new request, versus 159 during the control period, a decrease of 43.5 %. Patients were older (62.9 versus 60.9 years old) but this difference was not significant. Tumor stage was not modified. Concerning senology, the time from the biopsy to the first consultation was 5.5 days longer during the outbreak (difference statistically insignificant). Among the 51 patients requiring a surgical treatment during the outbreak, 16 (31.48 %) were postponed after the end of the containment measures. After all, the average time from the consultation to the treatment was not modified. No modification of type of treatment was observed. DISCUSSION: At the height of the pandemic, benefits and risks of the cancer treatment had to be daily balanced against the risk of exposition to the COVID-19. The evaluation of practices for cancer care is essential to understand the real impact of COVID-19 outbreak on global cancer management, so as to get prepared to further crises.

Racial disparities in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 infection and gynecologic malignancy.

BACKGROUND: Mounting evidence suggests disproportionate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalizations and deaths because of racial disparities. The association of race in a cohort of gynecologic oncology patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 infection is unknown. METHODS: Data were abstracted from gynecologic oncology patients with COVID-19 infection among 8 New York City area hospital systems. A multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression model accounting for county clustering was used to analyze COVID-19-related hospitalization and mortality. RESULTS: Of 193 patients who had gynecologic cancer and COVID-19, 67 (34.7%) were Black, and 126 (65.3%) were non-Black. Black patients were more likely to require hospitalization compared with non-Black patients (71.6% [48 of 67] vs 46.0% [58 of 126]; P = .001). Of 34 (17.6%) patients who died from COVID-19, 14 (41.2%) were Black. Among those who were hospitalized, compared with non-Black patients, Black patients were more likely to: have ≥3 comorbidities (81.1% [30 of 37] vs 59.2% [29 of 49]; P = .05), to reside in Brooklyn (81.0% [17 of 21] vs 44.4% [12 of 27]; P = .02), to live with family (69.4% [25 of 36] vs 41.6% [37 of 89]; P = .009), and to have public insurance (79.6% [39 of 49] vs 53.4% [39 of 73]; P = .006). In multivariable analysis, among patients aged <65 years, Black patients were more likely to require hospitalization compared with non-Black patients (odds ratio, 4.87; 95% CI, 1.82-12.99; P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Although Black patients represented only one-third of patients with gynecologic cancer, they accounted for disproportionate rates of hospitalization (>45%) and death (>40%) because of COVID-19 infection; younger Black patients had a nearly 5-fold greater risk of hospitalization. Efforts to understand and improve these disparities in COVID-19 outcomes among Black patients are critical.

Clinical trials, adaptability and the COVID-19 pandemic.

Despite the impact of the COVD-19 pandemic and public health crisis on health care delivery, the GOG-Foundation has continued to prioritize the delivery of novel and state-of-the-science treatment options to patients via clinical trials.

Undergoing active treatment for gynecologic cancer during COVID-19: A qualitative study of the impact on healthcare and social support.

The COVID-19 pandemic poses unique challenges for oncology patients and clinicians. While guidelines for oncology care delivery during the pandemic have been established, there is a paucity of data examining patient experiences of cancer care during the COVID pandemic. This qualitative study captured the perspectives of women undergoing active treatment for gynecologic malignancy at an academic medical center. Hour-long semi-structured interviews were conducted via video-conference and transcribed verbatim. Focused coding was conducted to identify all data related to COVID-19. These data were then categorized into themes that emerged inductively. Seven women (N = 7) were interviewed. Several themes arose under two main categories: 1) Impact of COVID-19 on cancer care delivery and interactions and 2) Intersection of cancer and COVID-19 outside of the healthcare setting. Under category 1, themes included: going to treatment alone; variable access to care and information. Under category 2, themes included: unavailability of cancer-specific social support; mask wearing; COVID-19 & life outlook; adapting coping strategies. Participants' perceptions of having cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic varied and were not always negative. Healthcare systems can draw on our findings to inform interventions to ensure optimal patient care. Additionally, given our finding that noncompliance with mask wearing and physical distancing can be uniquely distressing to cancer patients, healthcare systems should prioritize clear messaging around COVID-19 precautions and ensure compliance of staff and patrons. Due to the rapidly changing nature of the pandemic, outcomes for these patients should be monitored and care guidelines should incorporate first-hand patient narratives.

COVID-19 outcomes of patients with gynecologic cancer in New York City.

BACKGROUND: New York City (NYC) is the epicenter of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]) in the United States. Clinical characteristics and outcomes of vulnerable populations, such as those with gynecologic cancer who develop COVID-19 infections, is limited. METHODS: Patients from 6 NYC-area hospital systems with known gynecologic cancer and a COVID-19 diagnosis were identified. Demographic and clinical outcome data were abstracted through a review of electronic medical records. RESULTS: Records for 121 patients with gynecologic cancer and COVID-19 were abstracted; the median age at the COVID-19 diagnosis was 64.0 years (interquartile range, 51.0-73.0 years). Sixty-six of the 121 patients (54.5%) required hospitalization; among the hospitalized patients, 45 (68.2%) required respiratory intervention, 20 (30.3%) were admitted to the intensive care unit, and 9 (13.6%) underwent invasive mechanical ventilation. Seventeen patients (14.0%) died of COVID-19 complications. No patient requiring mechanical ventilation survived. On multivariable analysis, hospitalization was associated with an age ≥64 years (risk ratio [RR], 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18-2.51), African American race (RR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.13-2.15), and 3 or more comorbidities (RR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.03-1.98). Only recent immunotherapy use (RR, 3.49; 95% CI, 1.08-11.27) was associated with death due to COVID-19 on multivariable analysis; chemotherapy treatment and recent major surgery were not predictive of COVID-19 severity or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The case fatality rate among gynecologic oncology patients with a COVID-19 infection is 14.0%. Recent immunotherapy use is associated with an increased risk of mortality related to COVID-19 infection. LAY SUMMARY: The case fatality rate among gynecologic oncology patients with a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection is 14.0%; there is no association between cytotoxic chemotherapy and cancer-directed surgery and COVID-19 severity or death. As such, patients can be counseled regarding the safety of continued anticancer treatments during the pandemic. This is important because the ability to continue cancer therapies for cancer control and cure is critical.

Alternative management for gynecological cancer care during the COVID-2019 pandemic: A Latin American survey.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the acceptance rate of treatment alternatives for women with either preinvasive conditions or gynecologic cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic among Latin American gynecological cancer specialists. METHODS: Twelve experts in gynecological cancer designed an electronic survey, according to recommendations from international societies, using an online platform. The survey included 22 questions on five topics: consultation care, preinvasive cervical pathology, and cervical, ovarian, and endometrial cancer. The questionnaire was distributed to 1052 specialists in 14 Latin American countries. A descriptive analysis was carried out using statistical software. RESULTS: A total of 610 responses were received, for an overall response rate of 58.0%. Respondents favored offering teleconsultation as triage for post-cancer treatment follow-up (94.6%), neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer (95.6%), and total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and defining adjuvant treatment with histopathological features in early stage endometrial cancer (85.4%). Other questions showed agreement rates of over 64%, except for review of pathology results in person and use of upfront concurrent chemoradiation for early stage cervical cancer (disagreement 56.4% and 58.9%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Latin American specialists accepted some alternative management strategies for gynecological cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may reflect the region's particularities. The COVID-19 pandemic led Latin American specialists to accept alternative management strategies for gynecological cancer care, especially regarding surgical decisions.