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.

The Destiny of a Gynecology Clinic from Bucharest and its' patients during COVID-19 Pandemic – A sad Romanian story

Background/Aim: Since March 2020 when the number of COVID-19 positive patients reported a fulminant increase in Romania, reorganisation of the medical services took place in order to provide the possibility of treating increasing number of cases with this pathology and to diminish as much as possible the number of COVID-19 related deaths. The aim of the current paper is to analyse the outcomes of 273 patients with gynaecological cancers who could not be treated in the service were they were initially addressed. Material and Method: a total number of 343 patients with gynecologic oncology disorders were addressed to "Dr. Ion Cantacuzino” hospital in Bucharest Romania and could not be treated in this unit due to the fact that it became an auxilia-ry service for obstetrical COVID positive patients. Results: complete follow up was possible in 273 cases 87 patients were redistributed to other services of gynecologic oncology and received their surgical treatment as planned, 141 patients received their surgical treatment in other clinics after a mean delay of six months while 45 cases were further submitted to oncological treatment, four of them being dead at the end of the study. Conclusions: modification of hospital structure and diminishing the oncological patients' access to oncologic surgery during COVID pandemic significantly impacted on gynecologic cancer care. © 2022, Amaltea Medical Publishing House. All rights reserved.

The long game: Telemedicine patient satisfaction metrics and methods of recurrence detection for gynecologic cancer patients throughout the initial year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective: The primary aim of this study was to evaluate gynecologic cancer patients' satisfaction with telemedicine visits over a one-year period during the COVID-19 pandemic. The secondary aim was to characterize how gynecologic cancer recurrence was detected with high telemedicine utilization. Methods: A survey study and a retrospective cohort study of patients participating in telemedicine visits between April 20, 2020 and March 30, 2021 in a gynecologic oncology clinic were undertaken. To assess patient satisfaction with telemedicine visits, the Telemedicine Satisfaction Survey (TeSS) was administered to patients by phone. Retrospective chart review was conducted to gather clinical data regarding diagnosis, treatment, and recurrence. Results: Three hundred and sixteen patients completed the TeSS for a response rate of 80.2%. Patients rated the following aspects of the telemedicine encounter as good or excellent: quality of technology (97.8%), personal comfort (90.8%), length-of-visit (95.2%), treatment explanation (93.7%), overall experience (92.7%). Moreover, 87.0% of patients would use telemedicine again. Retrospective data was collected for 394 patients, 312 of which had invasive cancer (79.2%). Twenty-nine (7.4%) patients experienced a recurrence during the study period. The most common method of detection was patient-reported symptoms (n = 17, 58.6%). The remaining recurrences were diagnosed by scheduled biomarkers (n = 7, 24.1%), scheduled imaging (n = 4, 13.8%) and asymptomatic exam (n = 1, 3.4%). Conclusions: After one year of the COVID-19 pandemic and the implementation of routine telehealth visits, gynecologic cancer patients were overwhelmingly satisfied with the use of telemedicine. During this period, recurrences were most often diagnosed by patient-reported symptoms.

Medi-Cinema: A Pilot Study on Cinematherapy and Cancer as A New Psychological Approach on 30 Gynecological Oncological Patients.

BACKGROUND: Several subjects affected by cancer experience a significant level of multidimensional disease. This longitudinal study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of psycho-oncological support using Cinema as an emotional mediator and to promote perceived well-being by personalized psychological treatment. METHODS: Thirty women diagnosed with gynecological cancer watched 12 movies and participated in a psychotherapy group co-conducted by two psychotherapists. Patients completed nine questionnaires at T0 (baseline), T1 (3 months) and T2 (6 months). RESULTS: Patients observed significant improvements (CORE-OM: p < 0.001) in psychological well-being. The results showed statistically significant differences, even in several other dimensions, such as Anxiety (STAY-Y1-2: p < 0.001), Empathy (BEES, p < 0.001), Coping (COPE: p < 0.001), QoL (QLQ-C30, p: 0.026), couple relationship (DAS, Satisfaction: p: 0.013; Cohesion: p: 0.004) and alexithymia (TAS-20, Difficulty Identifying Feeling: p: 0.002; Externally-Oriented Thinking: p: 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The data show that cinema, as an innovative psychological approach, could be a valid instrument to support patients in oncological pathways as well as facilitating the process of recognizing themselves in other patients and communicating about their own feelings.

Perspectives of Gynecologic Oncologists on Minimally Invasive Surgery During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Turkish Society of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Oncology (MIJOD) Survey.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate gynecologic oncologists' trends and attitudes towards the use of Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in active period of the COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey. METHODS: Online national survey sent to members of Turkish Endoscopy Platform consisting of six sections and 45 questions between the dates 1-15 June 2020 in Turkey to explore their surgical practice during the pandemic in three hospital types: Education and research hospital/university hospital, state hospital and private Hospital. Participants were gynecologic oncologists who are members of Turkish Endoscopy Platform. RESULTS: Fifty-eight percent of participants canceled all operations except for cancer surgeries and emergent operations. About a quarter of participants (28%) continued to operate laparoscopically and/or robotically. For the evaluation of the suspected adnexial mass (SAM) 64% used laparotomy and only 13 % operated by laparoscopy (L/S). For the management of low-risk early-stage endometrial cancer only fifth of the participants preferred to perform L/S. For endometrial cancer with high-intermediate risk factors more than half of participants preferred complete staging with laparotomy. For advanced stage ovarian cancer, one-fifth of the participants preferred to perform an explorative laparotomy, whilst 15 % preferred diagnostic laparoscopy to triage the patients for either NACT or cytoreductive surgery. On the contrary 41 % of participants chose to have cytology by paracentesis for neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Gynecologic oncologists with >10 years L/S experience used MIS more for SAM. Furthermore, experienced surgeons used L/S more for endometrial cancer patients. In busy COVID hospitals, more participants preferred laparotomy over L/S. CONCLUSION: Use of MIS decreased during the pandemic in Turkey. More experienced surgeons continued to perform MIS. Surgical treatment was the preferred approach for SAM, early-stage endometrial cancer.  However, NACT was more popular compared to radical surgery.

Building a Personalized Medicine Infrastructure for Gynecological Oncology Patients in a High-Volume Hospital.

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.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on referral to and delivery of gynecologic oncology care.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on referral to and delivery of gynecologic oncology care at a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients referred for evaluation by a gynecologic oncologist at Washington University in St. Louis from October 2019 - February 2020 (pre-COVID-19), and April - August 2020 (COVID-19). The primary outcome, time from referral to evaluation by a gynecologic oncologist, was compared between the two time periods. Secondary outcomes included time from initial evaluation to treatment and delays/interruptions in care due to the pandemic. Sub-group analyses were performed on patients with a cancer diagnosis to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on treatment decision making. RESULTS: 884 patients were referred during the study period. Total referrals fell by 32% (526 to 358 patients, p < 0.001) and referrals for cancer fell by 18% (228 to 188 patients, p = 0.049). The pandemic did not impact time from referral to initial gynecologic oncology appointment overall (pre-COVID-19: 19.1 vs. COVID-19: 17.4 days, p = 0.315) or among patients with cancer (14.4 vs. 13.9 days, p = 0.662). Time from initial appointment to cancer treatment decreased by 9 days (34 days to 25 days, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Referrals to gynecologic oncology decreased significantly during the early months of COVID-19. Though time from referral to evaluation was not impacted by the pandemic, time to treatment initiation decreased despite institutional changes related to COVID-19.

Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine in Gynecologic Oncology Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in gynecologic oncology patients under chemotherapy. METHODS: A prospective cohort study including gynecologic oncology women who were under chemotherapy or had completed it within 6 months at the time of the study. All patients received a two-dose schedule of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Results were compared with a control group of healthy women vaccinated in the same period. RESULTS: Overall, 44 oncologic patients with a mean age of 61.3 ± 10.7 years were enrolled: 28 (63.6%) had ovarian cancer, 9 (20.4%) endometrial, and 7 (16%) cervical. The IgG antibody titer after 1 month from vaccination was low in 9 (20.5%) patients, moderate in 21 (47.7%), and high in 14 (31.8%). The 3-month titer was null in 2 (4.5%) patients, low in 26 (59.1%), moderate in 13 (29.5%), and high in 3 (6.8%). Patients ≥ 50 years reported lower 1-month (p = 0.018) and 3-month (p = 0.004) titers compared with <50 years. Patients with BMI < 30 kg/m2 had a higher 1-month titer compared with BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 (p = 0.016). Compared with healthy women (n = 44), oncologic patients showed a lower 3-month titer (p < 0.001). None of the patients experienced serious adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 vaccine was safe and immunogenic in gynecologic oncology patients under chemotherapy. Serological monitoring and further vaccine shots should be considered to boost protection.

Nationwide Survey of German Outpatient Gynecologic Oncology Practices during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: Reactions to the First Wave and Future Perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: In the spring of 2020, coronavirus disease 2019 posed a substantial challenge for countries and their healthcare systems. In Germany, over 70% of all cancer patients are treated in an outpatient setting, so gynecologic oncology practices are the guarantors of optimal patient care. We developed a survey to evaluate the management of gynecologic oncology patients. METHODS: The survey consisted of 38 questions and was sent to the members of the Berufsverband Niedergelassener Gynäkologischer Onkologen in Deutschland e.V. (BNGO), a professional association of gynecologic oncologists in the outpatient sector in Germany. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 54 out of 133 (41%) gynecologic oncologists from 14 out of 15 (93%) federal states where the BNGO is represented. Facing the pandemic, popular measures were mask requirements (100%), restriction of access to practices (94%), increased number of disinfectant dispensers (85%), installment of panes of acrylic glass (76%), or spatial alterations (67%). For most patients the pandemic had no influence on prioritization of therapies (82%) or prescribed systemic treatments (87%). Despite an increase in perceived psychological burden among the staff (72%), 85% (45/54) of the practices were not offered any additional psychological support. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: As most cancer patients in Germany are treated in an outpatient setting, a suitable reaction of oncology centers to the new circumstances was crucial to secure optimal treatment and patient care. Nevertheless, the low prioritization of mental health or distress of healthcare workers poses a serious threat to the maintenance of optimal medical care in further waves of the pandemic.

Financial toxicity, mental health, and gynecologic cancer treatment: The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic among low-income women in New York City.

BACKGROUND: New York City (NYC) emerged as an epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic, and marginalized populations were affected at disproportionate rates. The authors sought to determine the impact of COVID-19 on cancer treatment, anxiety, and financial distress among low-income patients with gynecologic cancer during the peak of the NYC pandemic. METHODS: Medicaid-insured women who were receiving gynecologic oncology care at 2 affiliated centers were contacted by telephone interviews between March 15 and April 15, 2020. Demographics and clinical characteristics were obtained through self-report and retrospective chart review. Financial toxicity, anxiety, and cancer worry were assessed using modified, validated surveys. RESULTS: In total, 100 patients completed the telephone interview. The median age was 60 years (range, 19-86 years), and 71% had an annual income <$40,000. A change in employment status and early stage cancer (stage I and II) were associated with an increase in financial distress (P < .001 and P = .008, respectively). Early stage cancer and telehealth participation were significantly associated with increased worry about future finances (P = .017 and P = .04, respectively). Lower annual income (<$40,000) was associated with increased cancer worry and anxiety compared with higher annual income (>$40,000; P = .036 and P = .017, respectively). When controlling for telehealth participation, income, primary language, and residence in a high COVID-19 prevalence area, a delay in medical care resulted in a 4-fold increased rate of anxiety (P = .023, 95% CI, 1.278-14.50). Race was not significantly associated with increased financial distress, cancer worry, or anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: Low socioeconomic status was the most common risk factor for increased financial distress, cancer worry, and anxiety. Interventions aimed at improving access to timely oncology care should be implemented during this ongoing pandemic.

Care as Usual: An Acceptable Strategy to Apply During the COVID-19 Pandemic in a French Tertiary Gynecologic Oncology Department.

We describe and analyze a "care as usual" strategy of a French Comprehensive Cancer Center during the COVID-19 pandemic to manage surgical patients with gynecological cancer. We conducted a retrospective analysis evaluating the surgical activity in our gynecologic oncology department between January 21 and May 12, 2020. We compared the surgical activity and surgical and oncologic outcomes during the pre-lockdown period and the pandemic period. The main objective was to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical activity. The secondary objectives were to analyze the surgical and the oncologic outcomes. We compared the surgical activity during the 8 weeks after the national lockdown (85 procedures) to the surgical activity in the 8 weeks preceding the lockdown (127 procedures). We observed a 33% decrease in activity between the two periods. The clinical and epidemiologic characteristics were similar between the two periods. There were no differences between the surgical approaches (p = 0.592), the surgical complexity (p = 0.323), the length of stay (p = 0.85), and even for the complex procedure (p = 0.96) and the perioperative (p = 0.791) and postoperative complication rates (p = 0.102). We observed a significant decrease in the time of return to intended oncological treatment (RIOT) during the lockdown period with an average of 31.9 days compared to 46.9 days in the pre-lockdown period (p = 0.003). During the COVID-19 pandemic, "care as usual" represents an acceptable strategy without impairing the oncologic outcome in a Comprehensive Cancer Center with a patient-centered clinical pathway for gynecologic oncologic surgical patients.

Gynecologic oncology treatment modifications or delays in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in a publicly funded versus privately funded North American tertiary cancer center.

OBJECTIVE: To compare gynecologic oncology surgical treatment modifications and delays during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic between a publicly funded Canadian versus a privately funded American cancer center. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of all planned gynecologic oncology surgeries at University Health Network (UHN) in Toronto, Canada and Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) in Boston, USA, between March 22,020 and July 302,020. Surgical treatment delays and modifications at both centers were compared to standard recommendations. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: A total of 450 surgical gynecologic oncology patients were included; 215 at UHN and 235 at BWH. There was a significant difference in median time from decision-to-treat to treatment (23 vs 15 days, p < 0.01) between UHN and BWH and a significant difference in treatment delays (32.56% vs 18.29%; p < 0.01) and modifications (8.37% vs 0.85%; p < 0.01), respectively. On multivariable analysis adjusting for age, race, treatment site and surgical priority status, treatment at UHN was an independent predictor of treatment modification (OR = 9.43,95% CI 1.81-49.05, p < 0.01). Treatment delays were higher at UHN (OR = 1.96,95% CI 1.14-3.36 p = 0.03) and for uterine disease (OR = 2.43, 95% CI 1.11-5.33, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: During the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic, gynecologic oncology patients treated at a publicly funded Canadian center were 9.43 times more likely to have a surgical treatment modification and 1.96 times more likely to have a surgical delay compared to an equal volume privately funded center in the United States.

A quality improvement pathway to rapidly increase telemedicine services in a gynecologic oncology clinic during the COVID-19 pandemic with patient satisfaction scores and environmental impact.

The primary goal was to convert 50% of all outpatient Gynecologic Oncology (GynOnc) encounters during the COVID-19 pandemic to telemedicine within one week. The secondary goal was to reach 100% documentation of telemedicine consent. The tertiary goal was to analyze patient satisfaction scores. An additional goal was to estimate CO2 emissions prevented from being produced. The period from 3/16/2020-4/15/2020 was targeted. The initial intervention involved transitioning surveillance visits. A second intervention, with nursing and advanced-practice-provider support, included transitioning additional visit types, and distributing a note template. The Telehealth Satisfaction Survey (TeSS) was administered to patients. Descriptive statistics and run charts were used to analyze and depict results. Within four weeks, there were 408 encounters; 217 were telemedicine (53.2%). Following the second intervention, 13 of 15 days (86.7%) reached the 50% telemedicine target and consent was documented in 96.6% of the telemedicine encounters. The TeSS had a 74.8% response-rate. Patients rated the following aspects of the telemedicine encounter as good or excellent: call quality (96.5%), personal comfort (92.9%), length-of-visit (94.7%), treatment explanation (93.8%), overall experience (88.5%). Moreover, 82.3% of patients would use telemedicine again. Additionally, 6.25 metric tons of CO2 emissions from travel were prevented from being produced. A GynOnc clinic can rapidly implement telemedicine systems. With multidisciplinary team planning and standardized note templates, transitioning 50% of encounters to telemedicine and achieving high rates of consent documentation were accomplished in four weeks. This increase in telemedicine represented a measurable decrease in the amount of CO2 emissions. Additionally, patients were overwhelmingly satisfied.

Management of gynecological cancers in the COVID-19 era: a survey from Turkey

Objective: This study aimed to investigate how gynecologic oncologists modified their patient management during Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) in Turkey. Material and Methods: An online survey was sent to gynecologic oncology specialists and fellows in Turkey. It included management questions about strategies for newly diagnosed or recurrent endometrial, cervical, ovarian and vulvar cancer during the pandemic. Participants were asked if treatment of these cancers can be delayed or not and, if yes, the duration of delay. Results: 32.9% of surgeons prescribed oral or intrauterine progesterone for early stage, low-grade endometrial cancer. Conversely, 65.7% and 45.7% of the most surgeons did not change their management for early stage high-grade and advanced stage endometrial cancers respectively, as they perform surgery. 58% and 67.1% of the surgeons continued to prefer standard surgical treatment for microinvasive and early stage cervical cancers, respectively. Radiotherapy was preferred administered with hypofractionated doses for locally advanced cervical cancer (57.1%). While 67.1% of surgeons operated early stage ovarian cancer patients, 50% administered neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) to all advanced stage ovarian cancers and 50% administered more cycles of NACT in preference to interval debulking surgery. 93.7% of the surgeons responded that treatment should not be delayed beyond eight weeks. Conclusion: Most Turkish gynecologic oncologists modified their management of gynecologic cancers due to the COVID-19 pandemic. While chemotherapy was preferred for ovarian cancer, postponement of the surgery, with or without non-surgical options, was considered for early stage, low-grade endometrial cancer. Treatment of gynecologic cancers should be decided on a case by case basis, taking into account local COVID-19 infection rates and availability of health facilities. Prognosis is also an important consideration if delay is contemplated. Standard treatment and normal time-frames should be used if possible. If not, a postponement for a maximum of eight weeks or referral to another center were acceptable alternatives.

Gynecologic oncology at the time of COVID-19 outbreak.

The World Health Organization (WHO) classified the novel coronavirus (i.e., coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]) as a global public health emergency. COVID-19 threatens to curtail patient access to evidence-based treatment. Medicine is changing, basically due to the limited available resources. In the field of gynecologic oncology, we have to re-design our treatments' paradigm. During COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, the highest priority is to achieve the maximum benefit from less demanding procedures. Extensive procedures should be avoided, in order to reduce hospitalization and postoperative events that might increase the in-hospital spread of the virus. There are ongoing concerns on the use of laparoscopic procedures, related to the possible contamination of the staff working in the operation room. Other minimally invasive techniques, including, vaginal surgery as well as robotic-assisted and isobaric procedures would be preferred over laparoscopy. A fair allocation of resources is paramount adequate treatments.