ABSTRACT
Background: Older patients with cancer are at a higher risk of invasive infections. Vaccination is an effective approach to decrease the mortality and morbidity associated with infections. Objective(s): Our primary objective was to evaluate the proportion of older patients with cancer who had received routine vaccinations against pneumococcal, influenza, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Our secondary objective was to identify the factors associated with vaccine uptake such as age, sex, education, marital status, comorbidities, and place of residence. Material(s) and Method(s): This cross-sectional observational study was conducted in the geriatric oncology outpatient clinic of the Department of Medical Oncology at the Tata Memorial Hospital, a tertiary care cancer hospital in Mumbai, India, from February 2020 to January 2023. We included all patients aged >=60 years who were evaluated in the geriatric oncology clinic during the study period and for whom the immunization details were available. The uptake of COVID-19 vaccine was calculated from March 2021 onwards, which was when the COVID-19 vaccine became available to patients aged >=60 years in India. Result(s): We enrolled 1762 patients;1342 (76.2%) were male. The mean age was 68.4 (SD, 5.8) years;795 (45%) patients were from the west zone of India. Only 12 (0.68%) patients had received the pneumococcal vaccine, and 13 (0.7%) had received the influenza vaccine. At least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine had been taken by 1302 of 1562 patients (83.3%). On univariate logistic regression, education, marital status, geographic zone of residence, and primary tumor site were correlated with the uptake of COVID-19 vaccine. Factors associated with a greater COVID-19 vaccine uptake included education (up to Std 10 and higher vs. less than Std 10: Odds Ratio [OR], 1.46;95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-1.99;P = 0.018, and illiterate vs. less than Std 10: OR, 0.70;95% CI, 0.50-0.99;P = 0.041), marital status (unmarried vs. married: OR, 0.27;95% CI, 0.08-1.08;P = 0.046, and widow/widower vs. married: OR, 0.67;95% CI, 0.48-0.94;P = 0.017), lung and gastrointestinal vs. head-and-neck primary tumors (lung cancer vs. head-and-neck cancer: OR, 1.60;95% CI, 1.02-2.47;P = 0.038, and gastrointestinal vs.head-and-neck cancer: OR, 2.18;95% CI, 1.37-3.42;P < 0.001), and place of residence (west zone vs. central India: OR, 0.34;95% CI, 0.13-0.75;P = 0.015). Conclusion(s): Fewer than 1 in 100 older Indian patients with cancer receive routine immunization with influenza and pneumococcal vaccines. Hearteningly, the uptake of COVID-19 vaccination in older Indian patients with cancer is over 80%, possibly due to the global recognition of its importance during the pandemic. Similar measures as those used to increase the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines during the pandemic may be beneficial to increase the uptake of routine vaccinations.Copyright © 2023 Cancer Research, Statistics, and Treatment.
ABSTRACT
Background: Patients with cancer are at a higher risk of severe forms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and mortality. Therefore, widespread COVID-19 vaccination is required to attain herd immunity. Objective(s): We aimed to evaluate the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine in Indian patients with cancer and to collect information regarding vaccine hesitancy and factors that contributed to vaccine hesitancy. Material(s) and Method(s): This was a questionnaire-based survey conducted between May 7, 2021 and June 10, 2021 in patients aged 45 years and over, with solid tumors. The primary end points of the study were the proportion of Indian patients with cancer aged 45 years and older who had not received the COVID-19 vaccine, and the reasons why these patients had not received the COVID-19 vaccine. Our secondary end points were the proportion of patients with a history of COVID-19 infection, and the proportion of the patients who had vaccine hesitancy. Additionally, we attempted to assess the factors that could impact vaccine hesitancy. Result(s): A total of 435 patients were included in the study. Of these, 348 (80%) patients had not received even a single dose of the COVID-19 vaccine;66 (15.2%) patients had received the first dose, and 21 (4.8%) had received both the doses. Approximately half (47.1%) of the patients reported that they took the COVID-19 vaccine based on the advice from a doctor. The reasons for not taking the COVID-19 vaccine could be considered as vaccine hesitancy in 259 (77%) patients. The two most common reasons were fear in 124 (38%) patients (fear of side-effects and of the impact of the vaccine on the cancer/therapy) and lack of information in 87 (26.7%) patients. On the multivariate analysis, the two factors found to be significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy were a lower educational level (OR, 1.78;95% CI, 1-3.17;P = 0.048) and a lack of prior advice regarding the COVID-19 vaccine (OR, 2.80;95% CI, 1.73-4.53;P < 0.001). Conclusion(s): Vaccine hesitancy is present in over half of our patients, and the most common reasons are a fear of the vaccine impacting the cancer therapy, fear of side-effects, and lack of information. Widespread vaccination can only be attained if systematic programs for education and dissemination of information regarding the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine are given as much importance as fortification of the vaccination supply and distribution system.Copyright © 2021 Cancer Research, Statistics, and Treatment Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow.
ABSTRACT
Background: Cancer(ca) and old age are risk factors for developing severe COVID-19 (C19+) disease, related morbidity and mortality. These patients (pts) were excluded from clinical trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of 3 FDA approved C19 vaccines (vax). Genitourinary (GU) ca-prostate, bladder and kidney ca contribute to the majority of non-skin ca and median age of these pts range from 65-75 yrs. We aimed to study these highly vulnerable pts behavior and outcomes regarding C19 vax in comparison to non-GU ca pts (18-89 years). Method(s): A prospective and observational single center study. Adult ca pts seen in clinics from Nov 2021-Sept 2022 were randomly interviewed using telephone surveys after a verbal consent. Type of ca and therapy data were collected from pts' medical records. The survey included C19 disease status, vax status positive (+) or negative (-), reason for vax status, side effects (s.e), impact on ca Rx or ca progression. Data was entered on REDCap. The primary end point was rate of vaccination in adult ca pts. Secondary end points were to quantify C19 vax acceptance vs. hesitance, identify s.e of C19 vax and effect of C19 vax on outcomes in GU and non-GU Ca pts. Result(s): N=172;GU ca 21 (12.2%) and non-GUca 151 (87.8%). Among GU ca pts- 9 had prostate ca, 7 had bladder ca and 5 had renal ca. C19+ in 4 (19%) GU and 45 (30.2%) non-GU pts. GU pts: 90.5% received C19 vax (Pfizer 47.6%;Moderna 42.9%, J & J 0%);9.5% were not vaxed. Non-GU pts: 85.2% received C19 vax (Pfizer 39.1%;Moderna 43%, J & J 2.6%);14.8% were not vaxed. The top 3 risk factors for serious C19+ were age >65yr (76.2%), heart disease (61.9%) and BMI.30 (42.9%) in GU ca pts and age >65yr (46.4%), BMI.30 (35.1%) and smoking (19.9%) in non-GU ca pts. The top 3 reasons for C19 vax (+) in GU ca pts: protection against C19+ for self (81%), for others (47.6%) and provider recommendation (38.1%). The main reasons for vax hesitancy in C19 vax (-) GU ca pts: concern for allergy to the vax (4.8%) and prior C19 infection (4.8%). The common s.e of C19 vax reported in GU ca pts were injection site inflammation (19%), headache (4.8%), muscle/body aches (4.8%) but no lymphadenopathy. None of GU ca pts reported delay in Rx or progression of the disease due to C-19 vax. Conclusion(s): C19 vax were overall well tolerated and did not impact ca outcomes in pts with GU malignancies. Oncologists should discuss the importance of C19 vax in the context of ca.
ABSTRACT
Background: To mitigate the risks of chemotherapy associated neutropenia, during the COVID-19 pandemic, all genitourinary (GU) cancer patients treated with chemotherapy at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (PMCC) were offered primary prophylaxis with GCSF. We hypothesize that this reduced rates of febrile neutropenia, hospitalizations, healthcare costs and improved overall outcomes, compared to GU cancer patients treated with chemotherapy without GCSF in the 2 years prior to the pandemic. Method(s): We performed a retrospective review of GU cancer patients, receiving curative or palliative intent chemotherapy, with or without primary GCSF prophylaxis between January 2018 and June 2022. GCSF was given either as a single dose or as consecutive doses post chemotherapy. Main outcomes were incidence of febrile neutropenia, hospitalization, health care expenditures as well as disease specific outcomes. Result(s): Overall, 248 patients with prostate cancer (44%), urothelial cancers (33%) germ cell (21%), and rare GU cancers (4%) were identified. Median age was 70 (range 19-91), 92% were male, 65% were ECOG 0/1. Treatment intent was neoadjuvant (13%), adjuvant (20%), or palliative (67%). Main regimens used were docetaxel, cabazitaxel, carboplatin, cisplatin/ etoposide, gemcitabine/cisplatin and BEP. Median follow-up was 10.5 months (0.23-52.3 months). A total of 206/248 received primary GCSF prophylaxis. During chemotherapy, the median white blood cell levels were higher in the GCSF group compared to the non-GCSF group (14.1+/-10+/-9/L vs 2.90+/-10+/-9/L, p<0.0001);and neutropenia rates were markedly lower (2% vs. 93%, P=,0.0001). Hospital admission rates were significantly lower in G-CSF users compared to nonusers (19% vs. 69%, P,0.0001). Symptomatic disease progression 13% was the leading cause of admission in the G-CSF group. Infectious causes such as UTI, pneumonia, COVID-19, and sepsis were seen in only 12% of the G-CSF group compared to 31% in the non-users. G-CSF was generally well tolerated with just 0.97% discontinuing G-CSF. Conclusion(s): During the COVID-19 pandemic, primary prophylactic G-CSF use in GU cancer patients, undergoing chemotherapy significantly lowered rates of both febrile neutropenia and hospitalizations and could be a cost-effective strategy in this patient population that warrants further study.
ABSTRACT
Background: Cancer patients have increased risk for severe outcomes related to SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19), due to their increased vulnerability to infection, older age, and comorbidities in comparison to the general population. While multiple studies have been completed examining outcomes of COVID-19 infection in cancer patients overall, there has been limited investigation into the outcomes of COVID-19 infection in patients with genitourinary (GU) cancers. Method(s): We completed a single institution retrospective study to examine the outcomes of adults with GU cancers and COVID-19 infection from March 10, 2020 to June 15, 2022. Baseline data included age, sex, BMI, type of malignancy, cancer status (stable or progressive disease, in remission), current and previous anticancer therapy received, and comorbidities. Result(s): Eighty-four patients with a GU cancer diagnosis and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified. Seventy-nine (94%) were male and the median age was 64 years (range 24-91). Forty-four (52%) were non-Hispanic white, 28 (33%) were Hispanic, and 11 (13%) were African-American. Prostate cancer was the most common (n = 45), followed by renal cell carcinoma (n = 20), testicular (n = 9), bladder (n = 6), and penile cancer (n = 3). Eight patients had >=2 episodes of COVID-19 infection. Sixty-three percent of patients were unvaccinated at the time of infection, while 37% of patients had breakthrough infection. Hospitalization was required for 39.3% (n = 33), with 4.8% (n = 4) requiring ICU admission. Of the patients requiring hospitalization, 26.2% (n = 22) died. Hospitalization was associated with having>=2 comorbidities (OR 18.6 [95% CI, 3.1-111.8], p<0.01) and receiving active cancer treatment (OR 12.4 [95% CI, 1.92- 79.7], p, 0.01). Mortality was associated with advanced age (OR 21.7 [95% CI, 1.40-341.7], p=0.03) and >=2 comorbidities (OR 19.2 [95% CI, 3.02-122.5], p=0.02). Vaccination was negatively associated with both hospitalization (OR 0.04 [95% CI, 0.02-0.91], p=0.04) and mortality (OR 0.14 [95% CI, 0.02-0.84], p=0.03). Conclusion(s): Among patients with GU cancer, advanced age and comorbidities are associated with adverse outcomes of COVID-19 infection;vaccination is protective. With the emergence of variants and waning immunity of vaccines, our findings highlight the importance of development and implementation of enhanced mitigation strategies in cancer patients, especially those undergoing active cancer treatment.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Patients presenting for radiation therapy (RT) at a single institution were analysed regarding treatment delays and disparities during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods: The study was conducted at an urban multidisciplinary cancer centre. In April 2020, the institution's radiation oncology department implemented universal COVID-19 screening protocols prior to RT initiation. COVID-19 testing information on cancer patients planned for RT from 04/2020 to 01/2021 was reviewed. Trends of other lifetime COVID-19 testing and overall care delays were also studied. Results: Two hundred and fifty-four consecutive cancer patients received RT. Median age was 63 years (range 24-94) and 57·9% (n = 147) were Black. Most (n = 107, 42·1%) patients were insured through Medicare. 42·9% (n = 109) presented with stage IV disease. One (0·4%) asymptomatic patient tested positive for COVID-19 pre-RT. The cohort received 975 lifetime COVID-19 tests (median 3 per patient, range 1-18) resulting in 29 positive test results across 21 patients. Sixteen patients had RT delays. Identifying as Hispanic/Latino was associated with testing positive for COVID-19 (p = 0·015) and RT delay (p = 0·029). Conclusion: Most patients with cancer planned for RT tested negative for COVID-19 and proceeded to RT without delay. However, increased testing burden, delays in diagnostic workup and testing positive for COVID-19 may intensify disparities affecting this urban patient population. © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press.
ABSTRACT
Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by betacoronavirus SARS-CoV-2, is associated with an increased risk of severe infection or death in cancer patients compared to the general population. The CANVAX trial recently demonstrated that short term immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are modestly impaired in patients with cancer- particularly those who receive myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Because little is known regarding longitudinal antibody or T-cell responses in cancer patients who receive cytotoxic chemotherapy or non-myelosuppressive targeted systemic therapy, the aim of this longitudinal study is to assess immune B and T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 over a 12-month period in solid tumor patients who receive chemotherapy or non-immunosuppressive therapy compared to healthy individuals without cancer. Methods: This is an ongoing prospective non-interventional clinical trial (NCT05238467). Approximately 100 patients will be enrolled into three different arms. Accrual began in May 2021 and 37 patients have been enrolled. Eligible patients must not have prior COVID-19 infection < 6 months from study enrollment and have a diagnosis of a solid tumor (breast, genitourinary, or gastrointestinal cancers), who either: received myelosuppressive chemotherapy within 60 days prior to initial or booster COVID vaccination, or who started on chemotherapy within 30 to 60 days after the initial or booster COVID vaccination (Arm A);or received non-immunosuppressive treatments (Arm B);or have no history of cancer or prior history of cancer but beyond 12 months from completion of curative cancer treatment (Arm C, control cohort). Whole blood will be collected in accordance with standard operating procedures. Blood samples analyzed for the presence of antibodies against the major antigenic components of SARS-CoV-2 including the spike glycoprotein (S), receptor binding domain (R) and nucleocapsid phosphoprotein (N). Antibody levels will be quantified utilizing quantitative ELISA. T-cell responses will also be quantified. The primary endpoint is seroprotection rate with an antibody titer protective (1:40) at any point: baseline, 2, 6, and 12 months. The secondary endpoint is to evaluate differences in longitudinal immunological responses to SARSCoV- 2 over a 12-month period. The difference of the seroprotection rate among 3 cohorts of participants will be examined using chi-square test. Moreover, the effect of treatment (chemotherapy, endocrine, TKIs) on seroprotection will be estimated using multivariable logistic regression controlling the effects of confounders, such as age, gender and cancer type. COVID antibody titers measured over time (baseline, 8 weeks, 6, 9, 12 months after the second vaccination) will be analyzed using mixedeffect models. .
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: The use of telemedicine in management of genitourinary malignancies has expanded greatly in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to evaluate patient perspectives across the first year of widespread telemedicine use at our institution. METHODS: We conducted a prospective survey study from July 2020 through June 2021 of patients who had telemedicine visits with urology, medical oncology, or radiation oncology for management of genitourinary malignancies. Patients received a questionnaire regarding the telemedicine experience. Responses were scored on a 5- point Likert scale. The primary outcome was patient satisfaction. RESULTS: We received 134 survey responses. Overall, 100 patients (75%) reported being “extremely satisfied” with the telemedicine encounter, and 100 patients (75%) “strongly agreed” that they were able to discuss sensitive topics about cancer care as well as they could at an in-person visit. On ordinal logistic regression adjusting for patient age and gender, patient satisfaction scores decreased over time (OR 0.88 per month, 95% CI 0.78-0.99, p=0.042, Figure). In particular, patients were less satisfied over time with the explanations they received about their condition, the concern their physicians showed for their questions, the information they received about treatment options, the instructions they received about follow-up care, and the amount of time the physicians spent with them (all p<0.05). Technological barriers to telemedicine were encountered by 16 patients (12%), and these were associated with lower patient satisfaction (p<0.001). The rate of technological barriers did not significantly change over time, though it was associated with increasing patient age. CONCLUSIONS: While the majority of patients are satisfied with telemedicine for management of genitourinary malignancies, satisfaction has decreased after the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly with regard to patient counseling and time spent. Additionally, technological barriers to telemedicine implementation remain common, particularly among the elderly. (Figure Presented).
ABSTRACT
Background: To understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on National Health Services (NHS) cancer service delivery, care and patients, we examined the impact of changes in cancer service delivery, treatment intensity and delay by evaluating oncological outcomes of genitourinary (GU) cancer patients receiving systemic anticancer treatment (SACT) during 1st March and 8th July 2020. Methods: We used data from patients with GU cancers (i.e. prostate, urothelial, kidney and testicular) treated with SACT at Guy's Cancer Centre during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: demographics (sex, age, ethnicity, ECOG performance status (PS), comorbidities, smoking history, socio-economic status (SES)) and disease characteristics (stage, treatment type and setting, lines of treatment), as well as results from SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing. Classification of COVID-19 severity was based on the World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines. Results: A total of 457 GU cancer patients received SACT during the study period: 68% prostate cancer, 23% renal cancer, 7% urothelial cancer, 2% testicular cancer. Mean age was 69 years (SD: 11.2). 91% were males, 82% were classified as low SES and out of the 291 patients we had ethnicity data on 199 (68%) were White British. The majority of patients had a PS of 1 and 95% of all patients had stage IV disease and hence received palliative SACT, with 58% being in the second line setting. Half of the patients received hormone therapy, 17% received chemotherapy, 20% received targeted therapy, 13% received immunotherapy (IO) and 1% received combination IO and targeted treatment. Only 5 (1%) patients tested SARS-CoV-2 positive: 2 had prostate cancer, 2 renal and 1 bladder cancer. Mean age was 66 years (SD: 5.6). They were all male, 2 White British, 1 Black African and 2 of unknown ethnicity and were all classified as low SES. Average PS was 2. Of these 5 patients 3 had at least two comorbidities (i.ehypertension, diabetes mellitus, renal impairment, frailty) and were receiving multiple medications. All had stage IV disease and received palliative SACT. 3 were on hormone therapy alone and 2 on chemotherapy. 2 of the patients presented symptoms within less than 7 days from PCR diagnosis, 1 within 7 to 14 days and 1 after 14 days. All 5 COVID-19 positive patients required hospitalization, 4 suffered severe pneumonia, 1 died from COVID-19 and 2 died from cancer related causes. In comparison, the mortality rate for the COVID-19 negative patients was 3.3%. Conclusion: Despite the impact of COVID-19 in health provision, a large number of our GU patients at Guy's Cancer Centre safely received SACT. Our results suggest that the continuation of SACT during the COVID-19 pandemic did not increase the risk of COVID-19 in our patient cohort (SARS-CoV-2 infection rate: 1%). Of note, the infection rate was lower than observed in a similar study in our centre for gastrointestinal cancer patients (SARS-CoV-2 infection rate: 3.4%). In light of the above, decisions against SACT or SACT intensity should carefully be evaluated.
ABSTRACT
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with a significant disruption in healthcare services including cancer screening and diagnosis. Delays in cancer screening and treatment may lead to increased mortality. We aimed to analyze changes in screening, diagnosis and surgical treatment of common GU malignancies in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We evaluated screening, novel diagnoses, and surgical management modalities of prostate cancer (PCa), urothelial carcinoma (UC) and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) within Massachusetts General Brigham, the largest healthcare system in the Northeastern United States, over four 3-month time periods during the pandemic (March 2020- March 2021). The percentage change in screening, diagnoses and management modalities during pandemic periods as compared to the immediate pre-pandemic period (December 2019-March 2020) was calculated as (Nperiod - Ncontrol)/Ncontrol. The difference in "predicted" versus "observed" diagnoses in each pandemic period was compared to the average of the four preceding 3-month periods (March 2019-March 2020) to account for seasonal variation. Results: The first pandemic peak (March-June 2020) was associated with a significant decline across screening, diagnosis and treatment, ranging from -15.7 to -64.8%, followed by a progressive recovery, ranging from -5.9 to +25.1% in the latest period (December 2020-March 2021) (Table). Although 725 diagnoses were "missed" between March and June 2020 as compared to the previous 12 months, 971 diagnoses were "recovered" between June 2020 and March 2021. Conclusions: A substantial disruption in the screening, diagnosis and treatment of GU malignancies was observed early in the pandemic, followed by a progressive rebound and recovery. The highest declines were observed for PSA screening, and the lowest for cystectomy procedures, reflecting triaging of care based on severity during the pandemic.
ABSTRACT
Background: Short-term effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination is widely demonstrated, but the emerging real-world data suggest that immunity may wane over-time (Levin et al. NEJM 2021). Herein we aimed to explore the long-term efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccination among pts with genitourinary cancer. Methods: In this study, pts with genitourinary malignancies (prostate, kidney, and bladder cancers) who had not received COVID-19 vaccination were included. Blood samples were collected prior to and after one dose of either an adenovirus- or mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine at the 2- and 6-month timepoints. Additional blood samples from pts receiving systemic treatment were collected at 3 consecutive therapy cycles following vaccination. Antibody titers were assessed using the SCoV-2 Detect IgG ELISA assay and results were reported as immune status ratios (ISR). T-cell receptor (TCR) repertoire sequencing was performed using the MiXCR software (MiLabs) and custom strips were used to assess TCR abundance and homology clustering. Results: A total of 183 pts were enrolled, and 136 pts provided baseline blood samples. Among these, 59 (8:51 F:M) provided samples for both the 2-and 6-month timepoints by the 10/6/2021 data cut-off. In this subset of pts, median age was 66 (range 48-85) and 33 (55.9%), 25 (42.4%), and 1 (1.7%) pts had prostate, kidney, and bladder cancer, respectively. A majority of the pts (93.2%) were on systemic treatment with 23.7% on immune checkpoint inhibitors, 18.6% on targeted agents, and 1.7% on chemotherapy. The most commonly administered vaccines were BNT162b2 (61.0%) followed by mRNA-1273 (37.3%) and Ad26.COV2.S (1.7%). The mean (±standard deviation) ISR values at baseline and 2 months were 0.68±1.59 and 6.62±1.75, respectively. At the 6-month timepoint, mean ISR was 5.46±1.61;this was significantly lower than the 2-month antibody titers (p < 0.0001), and reflects a reduction of 17.6%. Further data on TCR sequencing will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first data assessing the long-term serologic outcomes of COVID-19 vaccination in pts with cancer. Our data suggest waning immunity over time in cancer pts. Strategies to prolong host immunity against SARS COV-2 (e.g., booster vaccination) are likely warranted.