Erratum: Brain tumours in the time of COVID-19: An online survey on patients' disease experience in one Italian region.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1002895.].

The Korean Society for Neuro-Oncology (KSNO) Guideline for the Management of Brain Tumor Patients During the Crisis Period: A Consensus Survey About Specific Clinical Scenarios (Version 2023.1).

BACKGROUND: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there was a shortage of medical resources and the need for proper treatment guidelines for brain tumor patients became more pressing. Thus, the Korean Society for Neuro-Oncology (KSNO), a multidisciplinary academic society, has undertaken efforts to develop a guideline that is tailored to the domestic situation and that can be used in similar crisis situations in the future. As part II of the guideline, this consensus survey is to suggest management options in specific clinical scenarios during the crisis period. METHODS: The KSNO Guideline Working Group consisted of 22 multidisciplinary experts on neuro-oncology in Korea. In order to confirm a consensus reached by the experts, opinions on 5 specific clinical scenarios about the management of brain tumor patients during the crisis period were devised and asked. To build-up the consensus process, Delphi method was employed. RESULTS: The summary of the final consensus from each scenario are as follows. For patients with newly diagnosed astrocytoma with isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant and oligodendroglioma with IDH-mutant/1p19q codeleted, observation was preferred for patients with low-risk, World Health Organization (WHO) grade 2, and Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) ≥60, while adjuvant radiotherapy alone was preferred for patients with high-risk, WHO grade 2, and KPS ≥60. For newly diagnosed patients with glioblastoma, the most preferred adjuvant treatment strategy after surgery was radiotherapy plus temozolomide except for patients aged ≥70 years with KPS of 60 and unmethylated MGMT promoters. In patients with symptomatic brain metastasis, the preferred treatment differed according to the number of brain metastasis and performance status. For patients with newly diagnosed atypical meningioma, adjuvant radiation was deferred in patients with older age, poor performance status, complete resection, or low mitotic count. CONCLUSION: It is imperative that proper medical care for brain tumor patients be sustained and provided, even during the crisis period. The findings of this consensus survey will be a useful reference in determining appropriate treatment options for brain tumor patients in the specific clinical scenarios covered by the survey during the future crisis.

The Korean Society for Neuro-Oncology (KSNO) Guideline for the Management of Brain Tumor Patients During the Crisis Period: A Consensus Recommendation Using the Delphi Method (Version 2023.1).

BACKGROUND: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the need for appropriate treatment guidelines for patients with brain tumors was indispensable due to the lack and limitations of medical resources. Thus, the Korean Society for Neuro-Oncology (KSNO), a multidisciplinary academic society, has undertaken efforts to develop a guideline that is tailored to the domestic situation and that can be used in similar crisis situations in the future. METHODS: The KSNO Guideline Working Group was composed of 22 multidisciplinary experts on neuro-oncology in Korea. In order to reach consensus among the experts, the Delphi method was used to build up the final recommendations. RESULTS: All participating experts completed the series of surveys, and the results of final survey were used to draft the current consensus recommendations. Priority levels of surgery and radiotherapy during crises were proposed using appropriate time window-based criteria for management outcome. The highest priority for surgery is assigned to patients who are life-threatening or have a risk of significant impact on a patient's prognosis unless immediate intervention is given within 24-48 hours. As for the radiotherapy, patients who are at risk of compromising their overall survival or neurological status within 4-6 weeks are assigned to the highest priority. Curative-intent chemotherapy has the highest priority, followed by neoadjuvant/adjuvant and palliative chemotherapy during a crisis period. Telemedicine should be actively considered as a management tool for brain tumor patients during the mass infection crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: It is crucial that adequate medical care for patients with brain tumors is maintained and provided, even during times of crisis. This guideline will serve as a valuable resource, assisting in the delivery of treatment to brain tumor patients in the event of any future crisis.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of brain tumor surgeries in Poland: A national database study.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has greatly affected the treatment of most medical conditions. In particular, the treatment of seriously ill patients had to be adjusted due to the limited availability of in-hospital procedures. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of COVID-19-related changes on neuro-oncological surgeries in the Polish medical system. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data from the period of 2010-2020 were collected from National Health Insurance database for 2 diagnosis-related groups: A11 (complex intracranial procedures) and A12 (large intracranial procedures). The total number of procedures and diagnoses per year, trend changes and changes in procedures grouped by medical type were analyzed, including resections/biopsies, malignant/stable (nonmalignant) lesions, elective/acute procedures, and length of stay. RESULTS: Mean yearly numbers of 7177 (standard deviation (SD) = 760) procedures and 5934 (SD = 1185) diagnoses were recorded. Both numbers were growing up to 9.1% per year until 2018. From 2018, a 3.1% decrease in the number of procedures was observed, with a significantly larger decrease of 10.5% observed in 2020 (p < 0.001). The number of diagnoses decreased in 2019 by 2.7%, and by 9.2% in 2020 (p = 0.706), with a statistically significant change in the annual growth rate (p = 0.044). The number of resections decreased by 11.5% in 2020 (p = 0.204), with a significant change in the annual growth rate (p < 0.001). The number of biopsies decreased by 2.5% in 2020 (p = 0.018), with the annual decrement in 2019/2020 also being significant (p = 0.004). Decreases were observed in 2019 and 2020 for the number of malignant (0.5% and 6.3%, respectively) and nonmalignant (5.4% and 12.9%, respectively) tumors (p = 0.233 and p = 0.682 for absolute values, and p = 0.008 and p = 0.004 for the annual growth rates, respectively). The number of acute procedures in 2020 further decreased by 9.8% from 5.5% decrease in 2019 (p = 0.004), and the number of elective procedures decreased by 11.8% (p = 0.009). The annual growth rates for both acute and elective procedures were statistically significant (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The decrease in the number of neuro-oncological surgeries appeared to be much lower than the 20% decrease observed for general oncological surgeries in Poland during the COVID-19 pandemic. This seems to have resulted from postponing the treatment of less critical cases (i.e., nonmalignant and elective) and focusing on the treatment of the most precarious patients.

Variation in postoperative outcomes of patients with intracranial tumors: insights from a prospective international cohort study during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the international variation in surgical neuro-oncology practice and 30-day outcomes of patients who had surgery for an intracranial tumor during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We prospectively included adults aged ≥18 years who underwent surgery for a malignant or benign intracranial tumor across 55 international hospitals from 26 countries. Each participating hospital recorded cases for 3 consecutive months from the start of the pandemic. We categorized patients' location by World Bank income groups (high [HIC], upper-middle [UMIC], and low- and lower-middle [LLMIC]). Main outcomes were a change from routine management, SARS-CoV-2 infection, and 30-day mortality. We used a Bayesian multilevel logistic regression stratified by hospitals and adjusted for key confounders to estimate the association between income groups and mortality. RESULTS: Among 1016 patients, the number of patients in each income group was 765 (75.3%) in HIC, 142 (14.0%) in UMIC, and 109 (10.7%) in LLMIC. The management of 200 (19.8%) patients changed from usual care, most commonly delayed surgery. Within 30 days after surgery, 14 (1.4%) patients had a COVID-19 diagnosis and 39 (3.8%) patients died. In the multivariable model, LLMIC was associated with increased mortality (odds ratio 2.83, 95% credible interval 1.37-5.74) compared to HIC. CONCLUSIONS: The first wave of the pandemic had a significant impact on surgical decision-making. While the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection within 30 days after surgery was low, there was a disparity in mortality between countries and this warrants further examination to identify any modifiable factors.

Neurological Patients during the Covid-19 Pandemic

With the current pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), measures of social isolation were necessary, and this resulted in the interruption of several treatments. Regarding neuro-oncological patients, especially those with central nervous system (CNS) disorders, this interruption can cause serious damage or even compromise the success of the treatment in the future. It is essential that each case be evaluated separately to decide how to continue treatment during the pandemic, always considering the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and the benefits that the treatment will bring. The policy of not prescribing potentially toxic drugs, chemotherapy, and immunosuppressive therapies, as well as the use of techniques like stereotactic biopsy and telemedicine are important strategies at this time. Copyright © 2023. Sociedade Brasileira de Neurocirurgia. All rights reserved.

Impact of Covid-19 pandemic on neuro-oncology multidisciplinary tumor board in the pre-vaccine era: the Normandy experience.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID19 pandemic had a strong impact on the healthcare system, particularly in oncology. Brain tumor are usually revealed by acute and life threatening symptoms. We wanted to evaluate the possible consequences of the COVID19 pandemic in 2020 on the activity of neuro-oncology multidisciplinary tumor board in a Normandy region (France). METHODS: A descriptive, retrospective, multicenter study was conducted in the four referent centers (two universitary hospitals and two cancer centers). The main objective was to compare the average number of neuro-oncology patients presented per multidisciplinary tumor board per week between a pre-COVID19 reference period (period 1 from December 2018 to December 2019) and the pre-vaccination period (period 2 from December 2019 to November 2020). RESULTS: Across Normandy, 1540 cases were presented in neuro-oncology multidisciplinary tumor board in 2019 and 2020. No difference was observed between period 1 and 2: respectively 9.8 per week versus 10.7, P=0.36. The number of cases per week also did not significantly differ during the lockdown periods: 9.1/week versus 10.4 during the non-lockdown periods, P=0.26. The only difference observed was a higher proportion of tumor resection during the lockdown periods: 81.4% (n=79/174) versus 64.5% (n=408/1366), P=0.001. CONCLUSION: The pre-vaccination era of the COVID19 pandemic did not impact the activity of neuro-oncology multidisciplinary tumor board in the Normandy region. The possible consequences in terms of public health (excess mortality) due to this tumor location should now be investigated.

Brain tumours in the time of COVID-19: An online survey on patients' disease experience in one Italian region.

Background: Since the outbreak, in 2019, of COVID-19, the world has experienced marked changes in daily habits, partly reflecting the exceptional social restrictions and health measures adopted to contain the disease. All these measures significantly affected not only peoples's daily lives and psychological well-being but also the possibility for the healthcare system to function properly. In this setting, brain tumour patients were at risk due to their higher physical and mental fragility and their need for regular care. The aim of the present study was to assess, using a self-reported online questionnaire, the patients's perceptions regarding their disease experience. Materials and methods: We developed an online anonymous self-report survey to assess patients's disease experience during the pandemic. We investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients's cancer care schedules, their psychological distress and emotions felt during the pandemic, their levels of worry about COVID-19, and their oncological conditions. Results: 107 patients answered our survey, most of them suffering from a glioma. Less than one-third of the sample had their appointments cancelled, delayed or converted into online visits due to the pandemic. Of the patients who answered the survey, 95% declared they were satisfied with their Institute's oncological management. The feelings reported most often were peacefulness or anxiety/worry; the majority of the sample reported high levels of loneliness, which tended to increase with age, whilst the psychological distress was correlated with age and with having a recurrence of the disease. Half of the sample declared severe worry about their oncological condition, in particular subjects with a recurrence or who were receiving adjuvant therapies. Patients with recurrence tended to worry more about the possibility of contracting COVID-19, and its effects. Conclusion: Our findings illustrate how fragile and in need of care patients with a brain tumour may be, especially those with more severe clinical conditions. These data may help boost healthcare professionals's knowledge about brain tumour patients's needs and fears, so as to be able to offer them a better hospital experience and improve their clinical management, while possibly also reducing the psychological burden on patients and their families.

How has the COVID-19 pandemic impacted clinical care and research in Neuro-Oncology?

The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged the continued delivery of healthcare globally. Due to disease risk, clinicians were forced to re-evaluate the safety and priorities of pre-pandemic care. Neuro-oncology presents unique challenges, as patients can deteriorate rapidly without intervention. These challenges were also observed in countries with reduced COVID-19 burden with centres required to rapidly develop strategies to maintain efficient and equitable care. This review aims to summarise the impact of the pandemic on clinical care and research within the practice of Neuro-oncology. A narrative review of the literature was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASS and results screened using PRISMA guidelines with relevant inclusion and exclusion criteria. Search strategies included variations of 'Neuro-oncology' combined with COVID-19 and other clinical-related terms. Most adult and paediatric neurosurgical centres experienced reductions in new referrals and operations for brain malignancies, and those who did present for treatment frequently had operations cancelled or delayed. Many radiation therapy and medical oncology centres altered treatment plans to mitigate COVID-19 risk for patients and staff. New protocols were developed that aimed to reduce in-person visits and reduce the risk of developing severe complications from COVID-19. The COVID-19 pandemic has presented many challenges to the provision of safe and accessible healthcare. Despite these challenges, some benefits to healthcare provision such as the use of telemedicine are likely to remain in future practice. Neuro-oncology staff must remain vigilant to ensure patient and staff safety.

Awake craniotomy for glioblastoma in COVID-19-positive patients and delivering the standard of care: illustrative case.

BACKGROUND: Providing the standard of care to patients with glioblastoma (GBM) during the novel coronavirus of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a challenge, particularly if a patient tests positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Further difficulties occur in eloquent cortex tumors because awake speech mapping can theoretically aerosolize viral particles and expose staff. Moreover, microscopic neurosurgery has become difficult because the use of airborne-level personal protective equipment (PPE) crowds the space between the surgeon and the eyepiece. However, delivering substandard care will inevitably lead to disease progression and poor outcomes. OBSERVATIONS: A 60-year-old man with a left insular and frontal operculum GBM was found to be COVID-19 positive. Treatment was postponed pending a negative SARS-CoV-2 result, but in the interim, he developed intratumoral hemorrhage with progressive expressive aphasia. Because the tumor was causing dominant hemisphere language symptomatology, an awake craniotomy was the recommended surgical approach. With the use of airborne-level PPE and a surgical drape to protect the surgeon from the direction of potential aerosolization, near-total gross resection was achieved. LESSONS: Delaying the treatment of patients with GBM who test positive for COVID-19 will lead to further neurological deterioration. Optimal and timely treatment such as awake speech mapping for COVID-19-positive patients with GBM can be provided safely.

The Emergence of Virtual Tumor Boards in Neuro-Oncology: Opportunities and Challenges.

Background Virtual tumor board (VTB) platforms are an important aspect of cancer management. They enable easier access to a multidisciplinary team of experts. To deliver high-quality cancer care, it is necessary to coordinate numerous therapies and providers, share technical knowledge, and maintain open lines of communication among all professionals involved. The VTB is an essential tool in the diagnosis and treatment of brain cancer. For patients with glioma and brain metastases, multidisciplinary tumor board guidelines should guide diagnosis and therapy throughout the course of the illness. VTBs are an emerging resource across various cancer care networks in the United States. Methodology We performed a systematic search of all VTBs incorporating a platform designed for this specific role. We reviewed the records of the Genomet VTB, the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) VTB, and Xcures VTB. Summary data examined included the year of launch, demographics, characteristics of cases, average response time, advantages, and how they handle protected health information. Results Overall, 30% of VTBs examined were launched in 2017. All had a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant online environment. On a review of Xcures records, the median age of the female patients was 57 years and the median age of the male patients was 55 years. The data showed that 44% (4.4 out of every 10 patients) with a confirmed treatment chose the VTB integrated option. Overall, 76% of patients in the Xcures registry had primary central nervous system tumors, with at least 556 patients in the tumor registry which included 46% glioblastoma cases (96% primary, 4% secondary). In the MUSC VTB project, 112 thoracic tumor cases and nine neuro-oncology cases were reviewed. The tumor board met weekly, and the average response time was within 24 hours of case review and presentation. The Genomet VTB de-identifies all patient information; this is a virtual platform primarily focused on neuro-oncology cases. Cases involved a median of five specialists most commonly neuro-oncologists, neurosurgeons, radiation oncologists, molecular pathologists, and neuroradiologists. The case review revealed an age range of six months to 84 years (mean age = 44.5 years), with 69.6% males and 30.4% females, 43.5% glioblastomas, 8.7% adenocarcinomas, and 8.7% infratentorial tumors. The average response time observed in all cases was ≤24 hours. Conclusions VTBs allow for quicker expert analysis of cases. This has resulted in an accelerated number of cases reviewed with a shortened communication time. More studies are needed to gain additional insights into user engagement metrics.

Barriers and facilitators in the implementation of a telemedicine-based outpatient brain tumor surgery program.

OBJECTIVE: Despite growing evidence on the benefits of outpatient oncological neurosurgery (OON), it is only performed in a few specialized centers and there are no previous descriptions of established OON programs in Europe. Moreover, increasing application of telemedicine strategies, especially after the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, is drastically changing neurosurgical management, particularly in the case of vulnerable populations such as neuro-oncological patients. In this context, the authors implemented an OON program in their hospital with telematic follow-up. Herein, they describe the protocol and qualitatively analyze the barriers and facilitators of the development process. METHODS: An OON program was developed through the following steps: assessment of hospital needs, specific OON training, multidisciplinary team organization, and OON protocol design. In addition, the implementation phase included training sessions, a pilot study, and continuous improvement sessions. Finally, barriers and facilitators of the protocol's implementation were identified from the feedback of all participants. RESULTS: An OON protocol was successfully designed and implemented for resection or biopsy of supratentorial lesions up to 3 cm in diameter. The protocol included the patient's admission to the day surgery unit, noninvasive anesthetic monitoring, same-day discharge, and admission to the hospital-at-home (HaH) unit for telematic and on-site postoperative care. After a pilot study including 10 procedures in 9 patients, the main barriers identified were healthcare provider resistance to change, lack of experience in outpatient neurosurgery, patient reluctance, and limitations in the recruitment of patients. Key facilitators of the process were the patient education program, the multidisciplinary team approach, and the HaH-based telematic postoperative care. CONCLUSIONS: Initiating an OON program with telematic follow-up in a European clinical setting is feasible. Nevertheless, it poses several barriers that can be overcome by identifying and maximizing key facilitators of the process. Among them, patient education, a multidisciplinary team approach, and HaH-based postoperative care were crucial to the success of the program. Future studies should investigate the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine to assess potential cost savings, from reduced travel and wait times, and the impact on patient satisfaction.

Neuro-Oncologic Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has shocked health-care systems around the world necessitating profound shifts in resources and alterations to standard therapies. The pandemic’s impact on delivering care to people with cancer is regionally specific and the resultant changes in disease outcomes are not yet known. Neuro-oncologic conditions are often rare diseases with few effective therapies that require coordinated care by a team of specialists organized through a multidisciplinary cancer conference. During this pandemic, additional factors need to be considered such as COVID-19 exposure and therapy-related risks in the setting of a COVID-19 infection. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in dramatic changes to therapeutic clinical trials which are a preferred path of care in neuro-oncology due to dismal outcomes and few effective standard therapies. Herein, we discuss plans of care for neuro-oncologic conditions in a pandemic environment where every health-care exposure is considered a risk and standard approaches may not be possible due to limited access to resources such as intensive care units and surgical suites. © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Neurological Patients during the Covid-19 Pandemic

With the current pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), measures of social isolation were necessary, and this resulted in the interruption of several treatments. Regarding neuro-oncological patients, especially those with central nervous system (CNS) disorders, this interruption can cause serious damage or even compromise the success of the treatment in the future. It is essential that each case be evaluated separately to decide how to continue treatment during the pandemic, always considering the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and the benefits that the treatment will bring. The policy of not prescribing potentially toxic drugs, chemotherapy, and immunosuppressive therapies, as well as the use of techniques like stereotactic biopsy and telemedicine are important strategies at this time.

Tele-neuro-oncology: Current Practices and Future Directions.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to describe the current state of telemedicine within neuro-oncology. This article will address the development of tele-neuro-oncology over time with a focus on current use and applications of telemedicine within the field. Current modalities and practical considerations for tele-neuro-oncology visits and opportunities for growth will be highlighted. RECENT FINDINGS: The use of telemedicine has expanded significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly within neuro-oncology. The use of telemedicine is widely accepted by neuro-oncologic patients and providers and continues to expand in utilization and scope. The use of tele-neuro-oncology is expected to develop further with opportunities for multidisciplinary and integrated care, clinical trials, research, and education. Telemedicine provides a unique, patient-centered approach to neuro-oncologic care. Telehealth will remain a valuable tool, and its use and role are expected to expand within neuro-oncology.

Practice Patterns in Surgical Neuro-Oncology Among Low- and Middle-Income Countries During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Scoping Review and Situational Report from the Philippines.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has negatively affected the outcomes of surgical neuro-oncology patients worldwide. We aimed to review the practice patterns in surgical neuro-oncology in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We also present a situational report from our own country. METHODS: A scoping review was performed following the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. RESULTS: Twelve studies were included in the review. Most of the studies were from Asia (India, China, Iran, and Turkey), and 1 was from Brazil. Quantitative reports showed a decrease in the number of surgical neuro-oncology operations between pre-COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 time frames, but similar proportions of neuro-oncology procedures. Qualitative review showed similar practice patterns between LMICs and high-income countries, except for limitations in resources such as negative-pressure operating rooms and intensive care units, and maintenance of face-to-face consults despite the adoption of telemedicine. Limited data on adjuvant therapy were available in LMICs. CONCLUSIONS: In our review, we found that the practice patterns in surgical neuro-oncology in LMICs during the COVID-19 pandemic are similar to those in high-income countries, except for a few modifications because of resource limitation and patient preferences.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on neuro-oncology outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has uprooted healthcare systems worldwide, disrupting care and increasing dependence on alternative forms of health care delivery. It is yet to be determined how the pandemic affected neuro-oncology patient outcomes, given that the majority of even "elective" neurosurgical oncology procedures are time-sensitive. This study quantifies changes in neuro-oncological care during the height of the pandemic and investigates patient outcomes in 2020 compared to a historical control. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients with malignant brain tumor diagnoses who were seen at our institution between March 13 and May 1 of 2020 and 2019. Alterations in care, including shift from in-person to telehealth, delays in evaluation and intervention, and treatment modifications were evaluated. These variables were analyzed with respect to brain tumor control and mortality. RESULTS: 112 patients from 2020 to 166 patients from 2019 were included. There was no significant difference in outcomes between the cohorts, despite significantly more treatment delays (p = 0.0160) and use of telehealth (p < 0.0001) in 2020. Patients in 2020 who utilized telehealth visits had significantly more stable tumor control than those who had office visits (p = 0.0124), consistent with appropriate use of in-person visits for patients with progression. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that use of telehealth and selective alterations in neuro-oncological care during the COVID-19 pandemic did not lead to adverse patient outcomes. This suggests that adaptive physician-led changes were successful and may inform management during the ongoing pandemic, especially with the emergence of the Delta variant.

Cancer, cognition, and COVID: delivering direct-to-home teleneuropsychology services to neuro-oncology patients.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic induced rapid adoption of telemedicine services for neuro-oncology patients at an increased risk of infection. Neuropsychological assessment is important to neuro-oncology care yet challenging to complete outside of a structured testing environment. Teleneuropsychology (TNP) has been explored in limited populations and proven feasible and reliable. Conducting TNP visits directly to patients' home (DTH) had minimal prior study. METHODS: We used two voluntary surveys to examine acceptance (patients) and feasibility (providers) of DTH-TNP at two regionally diverse medical institutions providing neuropsychological services to neuro-oncology patients from April to September 2020. RESULTS: A total of 119 patients were scheduled during the study period, 79 of whom completed neuropsychological testing via DTH-TNP. Neuropsychology providers completed surveys on 68 of these encounters (86%). In 98% of cases, neuropsychologists were able to achieve or partially achieve the individually defined goals of their assessment. Common problems reported included patient dysregulation (16%) and slow/unreliable internet (15%). Of the 52 patients who responded, 98% were satisfied with the DTH-TNP experience, and 92% would recommend the virtual visit to others. All respondents felt understood by the examiner (100%) and the majority denied technical difficulties (90%), communication challenges (94%), or privacy concerns (98%). Patients reported reduced risk of infection and saved travel time as favorable aspects of DTH-TNP. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary results suggest neuro-oncology patients find DTH-TNP acceptable and neuropsychologists find it a feasible practice, while also recognizing its limitations. Results suggest that further study of DTH-TNP (eg, reliability, validity) for neuro-oncology patients is warranted.

US Food and Drug Administration regulatory updates in neuro-oncology.

OBJECTIVE: Contemporary management of patients with neuro-oncologic disease requires an understanding of approvals by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) related to nervous system tumors. To summarize FDA updates applicable to neuro-oncology practitioners, we sought to review oncology product approvals and Guidances that were pertinent to the field in the past year. METHODS: Oncology product approvals between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020, were reviewed for clinical trial outcomes involving tumors of the nervous system. FDA Guidances relevant to neuro-oncology were also reviewed. RESULTS: Five oncology product approvals described outcomes for nervous system tumors in the year 2020. These included the first regulatory approval for neurofibromatosis type 1: selumetinib for children with symptomatic, inoperable plexiform neurofibromas. Additionally, there were 4 regulatory approvals for non-central nervous system (CNS) cancers that described clinical outcomes for patients with brain metastases. These included the approval of tucatinib for metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer including patients with brain metastases, brigatinib for anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and pralsetinib and selpercatinib for RET fusion-positive NSCLC. Finally, two FDA Guidances for Industry, "Cancer Clinical Trial Eligibility Criteria: Brain Metastases" and "Evaluating Cancer Drugs in Patients with Central Nervous System Metastases" were published to facilitate drug development for and inclusion of patients with CNS metastases in clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the challenges of the past year brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic, progress continues to be made in neuro-oncology. These include first-of-their-kind FDA approvals and Guidances that are relevant to the management of patients with nervous system tumors.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the management of glioma patients around the world. An evidence-based review.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus pandemic has affected many health care services worldwide since the emergence of the first case in Wuhan. Surgical neuro-oncology care is a fundamental part of hospital services, making it susceptible to strategic changes amid the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: An electronic search on several databases (PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Google Scholar) from the beginning of the pandemic to the end of 2020, each paper was reviewed independently. The publication inclusion and exclusion criteria were done using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS: Eight studies were found to be eligible for our meta-analysis. Most of the studies were on a retrospective basis, except one which was retrospective and prospective. An overall of 951 glioma patients' were included for surgical admission from the beginning of the pandemic until 2020. Seventy-four patients' had mortality outcomes, and 250 patients had complications for both surgical admitted and non-surgical admitted purposes. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, we made the first systematic review and meta-analysis regarding the management of glioma patients' during the pandemic of COVID-19. Our main findings are that the number of surgical admissions for glioma patients' did not significantly differ between COVID-19 negative and COVD-19 positive cases; however, surprisingly, we found that both overall complications and mortality outcomes were more significant COVID-19 negative patients' from the reported studies.