Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Oncol Lett ; 24(6): 454, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2115593

ABSTRACT

Breast cancer is the most common cancer type in women in Saudi Arabia (SA). Globally, cancer treatment has been affected by the recent COVID-19 pandemic. The present retrospective study reviews the 30-day morbidity and mortality rates of patients with breast cancer receiving anticancer systemic treatment before (group1) and during the peak of the COVID-19 (group 2) pandemic at a tertiary center, King Abdulaziz University Hospital (Jeddah, SA). There were no differences between the two groups regarding sex, age, breast cancer stage distribution, intention to treat or class of anticancer treatment received. Patients treated during the peak pandemic period received delayed treatment. No statistically significant difference was observed in the 30-day morbidity or mortality rates, although there was a trend towards higher rates of morbidity among patients treated during the peak of the pandemic period. In group 2, only 2.3% of the patients tested positive for COVID-19, and there was no significant difference in the 30-day morbidity and mortality rates between COVID-positive and COVID-negative patients receiving anticancer treatment. Individuals with breast cancer are a vulnerable group of patients that should be treated with special care during pandemics or other crises that affect the health care system.

2.
J Cancer Res Ther ; 17(2): 547-550, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1268381

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Health emergency due to COVID-19 started in Uruguay on March 13, 2020; our mastology unit tried to ensure adequate oncological care, and protect patients from the virus infection and complications. OBJECTIVE: To assess the health care activities in the "peak" of the pandemic during 3 months. MATERIALS AND METHODS: we collected data from the electronic health record. RESULTS: There were a total of 293 medical appointments from 131 patients (221 face-to-face), that decreased by 16.7% compared to the same period in 2019 (352 appointments). The medical appointments were scheduled to evaluate the continuity of systemic treatment or modifications (95 patients; 72.5%), follow-up (17; 12.9%), first-time consultation (12; 9.1%), and assess paraclinical studies (7; 5.3%). The patients were on hormone therapy (81 patients; 74%), chemotherapy (CT) (21; 19%), and anti-HER2 therapies (9; 8%). New twenty treatments were initiated. Of the 14 patients that were on adjuvant/neoadjuvant CT, 9 (64.3%) continued with the same regimen with the addition of prophylactic granulocyte-colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF), and 5 (35.7%), who were receiving weekly paclitaxel, continued the treatment with no changes. Of the seven patients that were on palliative CT, 2 (28.5%) continued the treatment with the addition of G-CSF, 3 (42.8%) continued with weekly capecitabine or paclitaxel with no treatment changes, and 2 (28.5%) changed their treatment regimen (a less myelosuppressive regimen was selected for one and due to progression of the disease in the other patient). The ninety patients who were receiving adjuvant, neoadjuvant, or palliative criteria hormone therapy and/or anti-HER2 therapies, continued the treatment with no changes. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence suggests that, although medical appointments decreased by approximately 17%, we could maintain healthcare activities, continued most of the treatments while the most modified was CT with G-CSF to avoid myelosuppression.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , COVID-19/epidemiology , Continuity of Patient Care/statistics & numerical data , Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Medical Oncology/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Bone Marrow/drug effects , Breast Neoplasms/complications , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Communicable Disease Control/standards , Continuity of Patient Care/organization & administration , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Delivery of Health Care/standards , Electronic Health Records/statistics & numerical data , Female , Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor/administration & dosage , Hematopoiesis/drug effects , Hematopoiesis/immunology , Humans , Medical Oncology/organization & administration , Medical Oncology/standards , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Referral and Consultation/standards , Referral and Consultation/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Telemedicine/organization & administration , Telemedicine/standards , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , Triage/organization & administration , Triage/standards , Uruguay/epidemiology
3.
Expert Rev Clin Immunol ; 17(6): 619-627, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1191660

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Since the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the medical community has faced major challenges that affect disease management in all areas. Dermatologists and immunologists have to choose appropriate treatment strategy taking into consideration the risk of infection and possible exacerbation of the course of the disease in patients with confirmed infection. Management of atopic dermatitis (AD) in moderate to severe cases is based on systemic therapy such as cyclosporine, azathioprine, methotrexate and dupilumab.Areas covered: A literature search in PubMed database was performed until 6 March 2021. In this review, the authors discuss non-biologic and biologic systemic medications for AD and provide an overview of therapeutic recommendations during COVID-19 pandemic.Expert opinion: In case of an active COVID-19 infection, conventional systemic treatment and biological treatment needs to be stopped until clinical recovery. Noninfected patients with systemic treatment of AD should continue their therapy via self-application. The authors can conclude that understanding of dupilumab therapy is better recognized in context AD treatment during COVID-19 pandemic in comparison to cyclosporine, azathioprine and methotrexate. However, this systemic immunosuppressants still require further investigation and literature complementation.


Subject(s)
Biological Products/administration & dosage , COVID-19 , Dermatitis, Atopic/drug therapy , Immunosuppressive Agents/administration & dosage , Biological Products/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Atopic/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Atopic/immunology , Humans , Immunocompromised Host , Immunosuppressive Agents/adverse effects , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Treatment Outcome
4.
Cancers (Basel) ; 12(10)2020 Oct 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-906141

ABSTRACT

Lombardy was the first area in Italy to have an outbreak of coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) at the beginning of 2020. In this context, cancer has been reported as a major risk factor for adverse outcomes and death, so oncology societies have quickly released guidelines on cancer care during the pandemic. The aim of this study was to investigate the management of cancer patients and oncological treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic and to describe the containment measures performed in our outpatient clinic at Pavia (Lombardy). A comparison with the same period of the four previous years (2019, 2018, 2017, and 2016) was also performed. Using our electronic databases, we evaluated the number and characteristics of patients accessing the hospital for anticancer drug infusion from 24 February, 2020 to 30 April, 2020 and the number of radiological exams performed. Although a significant reduction in access for therapy was seen when compared with 2019 (2590 versus 2974, access rate ratio (ARR) = 0.85, p < 0.001), no significant differences in access numbers and ARR was evident between 2020 and 2018, 2017, or 2016 (2590 versus 2626 (ARR = 0.07), 2660 (ARR = 0.99), and 2694 (ARR = 0.96), respectively, p > 0.05). In 2020, 63 patients delayed treatment: 38% for "pandemic fear", 18% for travel restrictions, 13% for quarantine, 18% for flu syndrome other than COVID-19, and 13% for worsening of clinical conditions and death. Only 7/469 patients developed COVID-19. A significant reduction in radiological exams was found in 2020 versus all the other years considered (211 versus 360, 355, 385, 390 for the years 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, and 2016, respectively, p < 0.001). The low incidence of COVID-19 among our cancer patients, along with the hospital policy to control infection, enabled safe cancer treatment and a continuum of care in most patients, while a small fraction of patients experienced a therapeutic delay due to patient-related reasons.

5.
Dermatol Ther ; 33(6): e13986, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-635266

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 had a great impact on medical approaches among dermatologist. This systematic review focuses on all skin problems related to COVID-19, including primary and secondary COVID-related cutaneous presentations and the experts recommendations about dermatological managements especially immunomodulators usage issues. Search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, Embase and ScienceDirect. Other additional resources were searched included Cochrane, WHO, Medscape and coronavirus dermatology resource of Nottingham university. The search completed on May 3, 2020. Three hundred seventy-seven articles assigned to the inclusion and exclusion groups. Eighty-nine articles entered the review. Primary mucocutaneous and appendageal presentations could be the initial or evolving signs of COVID-19. It could be manifest most commonly as a maculopapular exanthamatous or morbiliform eruption, generalized urticaria or pseudo chilblains recognized as "COVID toes" (pernio-like acral lesions or vasculopathic rashes). During pandemic, Non-infected non-at risk patients with immune-medicated dermatologic disorders under treatment with immunosuppressive immunomodulators do not need to alter their regimen or discontinue their therapies. At-risk o suspected patients may need dose reduction, interval increase or temporary drug discontinuation (at least 2 weeks). Patients with an active COVID-19 infection should hold the biologic or non-biologic immunosuppressives until the complete recovery occur (at least 4 weeks).


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Immunosuppressive Agents/administration & dosage , Skin Diseases, Viral/etiology , Chilblains/virology , Humans , Immunosuppressive Agents/adverse effects , Skin Diseases/drug therapy , Skin Diseases/immunology , Skin Diseases, Viral/drug therapy , Skin Diseases, Viral/physiopathology
6.
J Dermatolog Treat ; 33(2): 622-625, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-381933

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In late 2019 a viral pneumonia began to spread across the world. The viral disease, COVID-19, is now officially a pandemic, causing concern for the potential risk of systemic therapies for patients with psoriasis. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review is to analyze what is currently known about COVID-19 in regard to the safety of systemic treatment, and to provide guidelines for use in psoriasis during this pandemic. METHODS: Review of guidelines from various dermatologic regulatory bodies regarding the use of systemic medications during the COVID-19 pandemic was performed and summarized. RESULTS: The AAD, NPF and IPC are in agreement regarding their recommendation that patients with active COVID-19 infection should discontinue any biologic therapy. CONCLUSION: Patients with active COVID-19 infections should discontinue systemic treatment for psoriasis. Patients with risk factors should discuss continuing treatment on a case by case basis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pneumonia, Viral , Psoriasis , Humans , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Psoriasis/complications , Psoriasis/drug therapy , Psoriasis/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL