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.

Addressing Chronic Gynecological Diseases in the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic.

Introduction: the COVID-19 pandemic has had a considerable impact on healthcare systems worldwide. Since the actual influence of the pandemic on gynecological care is still unclear, we aim to evaluate the effect of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on gynecological procedures compared to the pre-pandemic period in Romania. Materials and Methods: this is a single-center retrospective observational study, involving patients hospitalized in the year before the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (PP), in the first year of the pandemic (P1), and in the second year of the pandemic until February 2022 (P2). The percentages of interventions were analyzed globally but also according to the type of surgery applied on the female genital organs. Results: during pandemic, the number of gynecological surgeries dropped considerably, by more than 50% in some cases, or even decreased by up to 100%, having a major impact on women's health, especially in the first year of the pandemic (P1), before slightly increasing in the post-vaccination period (PV). Surgically treated cancer cases dropped by over 80% during the pandemic, and the consequences of this will be seen in the future. Conclusions: the COVID-19 pandemic played an important part in gynecological care management in the Romanian public health care system, and the effect will have to be investigated in the future.

Evaluation of the medically necessary, time sensitive triage score during and beyond the local COVID-19 pandemic in the Gynaecologic Oncology Unit of a tertiary hospital in South Africa.

OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to evaluate the Medically Necessary Time Sensitive (MeNTS) scoring system in triaging gynaecologic oncologic surgery during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study including 209 patients who either had surgery (151) or surgery postponed (58) between the 26th March and 30th September 2020 in an academic hospital in South Africa. The MeNTS score was used to independently score each patient three times by two observers. RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 46.6 ± 15 years and the cumulative mean MeNTS score was 51.0 ± 5.1. Over two-thirds of the cases had surgery. There was no significant difference between the first and second observers' cumulative scores, 51.0 vs 51.1 (p 0.77). The cumulative score among those who had surgery was significantly lower than that for those whose surgeries were postponed, 49.8 vs 54.1 (p <0.0001). The intra-observer and inter-observer reliability were 0.78 and 0.74 respectively. After adjusting for confounding variables, those with low cumulative MeNTS scores were about 5 times more likely to have surgery than those with high scores (Adj. OR = 4.67, 95% CI: 1.92-11.4, p <0.001. Patients with malignant diagnosis were also 5 times more likely to be operated than those with benign diagnosis (Adj. OR = 5.03, 95% CI: 1.73-14.6, p <0.001. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.85 suggesting an excellent discriminatory power between those who were operated and those who were postponed. CONCLUSION: The study provided some insight into the potential usefulness of MeNTS score in prioritizing patients for surgery in gynaecologic oncologic sub-specialty. The score performed well across a range of gynaecologic conditions and procedures with good intra-observer and inter-observer consistency and reliability. This is a prioritization tool that is dynamically adaptable to accommodate changes in resources availability and operating theatre capacity.

The Experience of COVID-19 in a Sample of Gynecological Cancer Patients Undergoing Chemotherapy: A Focus on the Psychological Implications.

Cancer patients are at an increased risk of developing severe consequences due to the COVID-19 infection. However, psychological outcomes in this population have been overlooked in the literature. The present study aims to identify significant psychological differences between gynecological cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy before and during the pandemic. Additionally, we explore the correlations between COVID-19-related concerns and anxiety, depression, distress, and quality of life levels. Forty-two patients completed the STAI-Y, the EORTC QLQ-C30, the BDI II, the DT, and an ad-hoc questionnaire that investigated COVID-19-related concerns. The analyses did not show significant differences in the psychometric scales between the two groups, highlighting a considerable resilience against mental health and quality of life deterioration during the COVID-19 pandemic in gynecologic cancer patients. However, COVID-19-related concerns were positively associated with anxiety and inversely related to emotional functioning levels. These results emphasize the importance of a comprehensive patient care and the need to implement a multidisciplinary approach that includes psychological support in the treatment plan. Moreover, it is essential to encourage clear communication to convey comprehensive information about the impact of the pandemic on physical and psychological levels, as well as to offer psychoeducational tools to face the pandemic.

Help-seeking behaviour in women diagnosed with gynaecological cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Identifying what prompts or hinders women's help-seeking behaviour is essential to ensure timely diagnosis and management of gynaecological cancers. AIM: To understand the factors that influence the help- seeking behaviour of women diagnosed with gynaecological cancer. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review and narrative synthesis of studies from high-income settings worldwide. METHOD: Five databases were searched for studies, of any design, that presented factors related to the help-seeking behaviour of women diagnosed with a gynaecological cancer. Data from the articles were extracted and presented using narrative synthesis, which was both inductive and deductive. The COM-B (capability, opportunity, motivation, behaviour) model of behaviour change was used as a framework. RESULTS: In total, 21 studies were included in the review. Inductive synthesis presented three main themes of factors related to the help-seeking behaviour of women diagnosed with gynaecological cancer: patient factors, such as knowledge of symptoms; emotional factors, including previous healthcare experience, embarrassment, and trust; and practical factors, including time and resources. Deductive synthesis demonstrated that capability (namely, symptom knowledge), opportunity (having the required time and overcoming the cultural taboos surrounding gynaecological symptoms), and motivation (believing that seeking help is beneficial) are all required to initiate help-seeking behaviour. CONCLUSION: Although it is a journey of defined steps, the help- seeking behaviour of women with symptoms diagnosed with gynaecological cancer is influenced by personal and societal factors. Interventions to improve help seeking will need to address the specific identified factors, as well as capability, opportunity, and motivation.

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

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

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Diagnosis and Management of Gynecological Cancer: A Single-Center Analysis.

Background and Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted health systems worldwide, particularly cancer care. Because the actual implications of these changes on gynecological oncology healthcare are still unclear, we aim to evaluate the impact of this pandemic on the diagnosis and management of gynecological cancer. Materials and Methods: This is a single-center retrospective observational study, including patients diagnosed with gynecological malignancies between January 2019 and December 2021. Patients were included into three groups based on the timing of cancer diagnosis: pre-pandemic (2019), pandemic with high restrictions (2020) and pandemic recovery (2021). Results: Overall, 234 patients were diagnosed with gynecological cancer during the period of study. A decrease in the number of newly diagnosed cervical cancers and other rare tumors (leiomyosarcoma, invasive hydatidiform mole) was apparent in 2020. Some aggressive histological types of endometrial and ovarian cancer were more commonly diagnosed in the pandemic recovery group (p < 0.05), although no differences were demonstrated concerning tumor staging in all gynecological cancers. The median time between the first multidisciplinary team meeting and the treatment initiation was higher after the COVID-19 pandemic in endometrial cancer (23.0 vs. 34.0 vs. 36.0 days, p < 0.05). Patients with ovarian cancer were more frequently proposed for neoadjuvant therapy in 2020 compared to the other periods (33.3% vs. 55.0% vs. 10.0% p < 0.05). A significant reduction in the laparoscopic approach was observed during 2020 in endometrial cancer (32.1% vs. 14.3% vs. 36.4%, p < 0.05). No significant differences were registered regarding median hospitalization days or intra- and post-operative complications between these periods. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the diagnosis and management of most gynecological malignancies, namely, on time to first treatment, chosen oncological therapies and surgical approaches. These results suggest important clinical and healthcare implications that should be addressed in future prospective studies.

Oncological big data platforms for promoting digital competencies and professionalism in Chinese medical students: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: Advancements in big data technology are reshaping the healthcare system in China. This study aims to explore the role of medical big data in promoting digital competencies and professionalism among Chinese medical students. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This study was conducted among 274 medical students who attended a workshop on medical big data conducted on 8 July 2021 in Tongji Hospital. The workshop was based on the first nationwide multifunction gynecologic oncology medical big data platform in China, at the National Union of Real-World Gynecologic Oncology Research & Patient Management Platform (NUWA platform). OUTCOME MEASURES: Data on knowledge, attitudes towards big data technology and professionalism were collected before and after the workshop. We have measured the four skill categories: doctor‒patient relationship skills, reflective skills, time management and interprofessional relationship skills using the Professionalism Mini-Evaluation Exercise (P-MEX) as a reflection for professionalism. RESULTS: A total of 274 students participated in this workshop and completed all the surveys. Before the workshop, only 27% of them knew the detailed content of medical big data platforms, and 64% knew the potential application of medical big data. The majority of the students believed that big data technology is practical in their clinical practice (77%), medical education (85%) and scientific research (82%). Over 80% of the participants showed positive attitudes toward big data platforms. They also exhibited sufficient professionalism before the workshop. Meanwhile, the workshop significantly promoted students' knowledge of medical big data (p<0.05), and led to more positive attitudes towards big data platforms and higher levels of professionalism. CONCLUSIONS: Chinese medical students have primitive acquaintance and positive attitudes toward big data technology. The NUWA platform-based workshop may potentially promote their understanding of big data and enhance professionalism, according to the self-measured P-MEX scale.

Management of Gynecologic Cancer During COVID-19 Pandemic: South Asian Perspective.

Management of gynecological cancers has suffered during the pandemic, partly due to lockdown and partly due to directing resources to manage COVID-19 patients. Modification of gynecological cancer management during this pandemic is recommended. Cervical cancer patients who present with stage IA1 disease can have a delay of up to 8 weeks for surgical treatment, considering the slow tumor growth rate. Women with stages IA2, IB1, IB2, IIA1 must undergo radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy within 6 to 8 weeks. In areas where surgical treatment is not available, patients should be referred for radiation therapy/areas with adequate surgical expertise. The surgical option is attractive for early cancers during the COVID era, as it involves a single visit compared to the multiple visits required for chemoradiation. The value of lymph node staging needs to be reconsidered. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be given preference over primary cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancers. Surgeries, which demand extended surgical time such as Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy and pelvic exenterations, should be avoided during this pandemic. For patients scheduled for interval surgery after two or three neoadjuvant cycles, six cycles of chemotherapy should be considered before surgery is performed. For early-stage, low-grade endometrial cancer, consideration should be given to medical management until surgery is possible. The above recommendations have been made keeping in mind the geography, patient load, and availability of resources available to health care providers from southeast Asia. They might not be applicable globally and every practitioner should take call regarding patient's management as per availability of resources and loco-regional circumstances. The implementation of recommended international guidelines for the management of gynecologic cancers should take precedence. Each modification to the standard approach should be approved by a multidisciplinary team depending on the condition of the patients and the locoregional circumstances.

Single centre experience of 800 gynaecologic oncology cases in 2020: influence of pandemy on cancer surgeries.

We aimed to evaluate the gynaecological oncology surgeries in the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 800 operations performed between January and December 2020 were retrieved. Since the COVID-19 pandemic affected operations as of April 1 2020, we compared the cases of the last nine months of the year with the first three months. Of the operations, 265 (33.1%) were performed between January and March and 535 (66.9%) between April and December. Of 168 malignant operations; 78 (46%) were uterine cancer, 58 (35%) ovarian cancer, 28 (17%) cervical cancer and four (2%) vulvar cancer. If we compared the last nine months of the year with the first three months, a significant increase was observed in the rates of malignant and premalignant, while a significant decrease was detected in benign operations (p<.001). Gynaecological oncology surgeries performed with open or laparoscopic approaches during the COVID-19 pandemic should continue by taking preventive measures. Impact StatementWhat is already known on this subject? During the COVID-19 pandemic, many international associations and organisations recommended the suspension of elective surgeries. It is still controversial whether the gynaecologic oncology surgical procedures to be performed in this unprecedented time should be laparoscopic or laparotomic.What do the results of this study add? The malignant and premalignant gynaecological oncology surgeries should be safely performed laparoscopically or by laparotomy in the COVID-19 pandemic.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Gynaecologic oncology surgeries can be safely performed by attaching appropriate personal protective equipment procedures with pre-operative COVID-19 PCR testing in the COVID-19 era.

Increased risk for thromboembolic events from combination of a gynecologic malignancy with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection: a case report.

PURPOSE: During the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic, several patient groups are at particular risk. Mortality is higher among cancer patients and may be increased further by thromboembolic events, which are more common in coronavirus 2019 patients according to recent publications. We discuss the association of gynecologic malignancies, Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and thromboembolism by reporting a case study and summarizing available literature. CASE REPORT: A 71-year-old Caucasian patient with ovarian cancer receiving first-line chemotherapy was diagnosed with deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Routine screening revealed infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in absence of specific symptoms. After uneventful recovery, oncologic treatment could be continued a few weeks later. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature on PubMed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The search included articles ahead of print, published between 1 December 2019 and 1 June 2020. Cross-searches were conducted on all relevant articles. RESULTS: We identified five articles meeting the defined criteria, including two retrospective studies, a review, a position paper, as well as a letter to the editor. CONCLUSION: Cancer patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 have a relatively poor outcome, which may partially be due to a higher rate of thromboembolic events. Thromboprophylaxis is recommended, and scoring systems are helpful in early detection. In cancer patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, individual risk for thromboembolic events should be taken into account when considering interruption versus continuation of antitumoral therapy. However, further data and studies are required.