Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 788
Filter
1.
J Med Internet Res ; 23(2): e24767, 2021 02 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1575466

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Online medical records are being used to organize processes in clinical and outpatient settings and to forge doctor-patient communication techniques that build mutual understanding and trust. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to understand the reasons why patients tend to avoid using online medical records and to compare the perceptions that patients have of online medical records based on demographics and cancer diagnosis. METHODS: We used data from the Health Information National Trends Survey Cycle 3, a nationally representative survey, and assessed outcomes using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests. The patients (N=4328) included in the analysis had experienced an outpatient visit within the previous 12 months and had answered the online behavior question regarding their use of online medical records. RESULTS: Patients who were nonusers of online medical records consisted of 58.36% of the sample (2526/4328). The highest nonuser rates were for patients who were Hispanic (460/683, 67.35%), patients who were non-Hispanic Black (434/653, 66.46%), and patients who were older than 65 years (968/1520, 63.6%). Patients older than 65 years were less likely to use online medical records (odds ratio [OR] 1.51, 95% CI 1.24-1.84, P<.001). Patients who were White were more likely to use online medical records than patients who were Black (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.43-2.05, P<.001) or Hispanic (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.37-1.98, P<.001). Patients who were diagnosed with cancer were more likely to use online medical records compared to patients with no cancer (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.11-1.55, 95% CI 1.11-1.55, P=.001). Among nonusers, older patients (≥65 years old) preferred speaking directly to their health care providers (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.35-2.31, P<.001), were more concerned about privacy issues caused by online medical records (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.22-2.66, P<.001), and felt uncomfortable using the online medical record systems (OR 10.55, 95% CI 6.06-19.89, P<.001) compared to those aged 18-34 years. Patients who were Black or Hispanic were more concerned about privacy issues (OR 1.42, 1.09-1.84, P=.007). CONCLUSIONS: Studies should consider social factors such as gender, race/ethnicity, and age when monitoring trends in eHealth use to ensure that eHealth use does not induce greater health status and health care disparities between people with different backgrounds and demographic characteristics.


Subject(s)
Electronic Health Records/standards , Health Information Exchange/standards , Surveys and Questionnaires/standards , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Data Analysis , Female , History, 21st Century , Humans , Internet Use , Male , Middle Aged , Physician-Patient Relations , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
2.
Lancet Oncol ; 22(6): 765-778, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1531901

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety profiles of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with cancer is unknown. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine in patients with cancer. METHODS: For this prospective observational study, we recruited patients with cancer and healthy controls (mostly health-care workers) from three London hospitals between Dec 8, 2020, and Feb 18, 2021. Participants who were vaccinated between Dec 8 and Dec 29, 2020, received two 30 µg doses of BNT162b2 administered intramuscularly 21 days apart; patients vaccinated after this date received only one 30 µg dose with a planned follow-up boost at 12 weeks. Blood samples were taken before vaccination and at 3 weeks and 5 weeks after the first vaccination. Where possible, serial nasopharyngeal real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR) swab tests were done every 10 days or in cases of symptomatic COVID-19. The coprimary endpoints were seroconversion to SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein in patients with cancer following the first vaccination with the BNT162b2 vaccine and the effect of vaccine boosting after 21 days on seroconversion. All participants with available data were included in the safety and immunogenicity analyses. Ongoing follow-up is underway for further blood sampling after the delayed (12-week) vaccine boost. This study is registered with the NHS Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales (REC ID 20/HRA/2031). FINDINGS: 151 patients with cancer (95 patients with solid cancer and 56 patients with haematological cancer) and 54 healthy controls were enrolled. For this interim data analysis of the safety and immunogenicity of vaccinated patients with cancer, samples and data obtained up to March 19, 2021, were analysed. After exclusion of 17 patients who had been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 (detected by either antibody seroconversion or a positive rRT-PCR COVID-19 swab test) from the immunogenicity analysis, the proportion of positive anti-S IgG titres at approximately 21 days following a single vaccine inoculum across the three cohorts were 32 (94%; 95% CI 81-98) of 34 healthy controls; 21 (38%; 26-51) of 56 patients with solid cancer, and eight (18%; 10-32) of 44 patients with haematological cancer. 16 healthy controls, 25 patients with solid cancer, and six patients with haematological cancer received a second dose on day 21. Of the patients with available blood samples 2 weeks following a 21-day vaccine boost, and excluding 17 participants with evidence of previous natural SARS-CoV-2 exposure, 18 (95%; 95% CI 75-99) of 19 patients with solid cancer, 12 (100%; 76-100) of 12 healthy controls, and three (60%; 23-88) of five patients with haematological cancers were seropositive, compared with ten (30%; 17-47) of 33, 18 (86%; 65-95) of 21, and four (11%; 4-25) of 36, respectively, who did not receive a boost. The vaccine was well tolerated; no toxicities were reported in 75 (54%) of 140 patients with cancer following the first dose of BNT162b2, and in 22 (71%) of 31 patients with cancer following the second dose. Similarly, no toxicities were reported in 15 (38%) of 40 healthy controls after the first dose and in five (31%) of 16 after the second dose. Injection-site pain within 7 days following the first dose was the most commonly reported local reaction (23 [35%] of 65 patients with cancer; 12 [48%] of 25 healthy controls). No vaccine-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: In patients with cancer, one dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine yields poor efficacy. Immunogenicity increased significantly in patients with solid cancer within 2 weeks of a vaccine boost at day 21 after the first dose. These data support prioritisation of patients with cancer for an early (day 21) second dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine. FUNDING: King's College London, Cancer Research UK, Wellcome Trust, Rosetrees Trust, and Francis Crick Institute.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , COVID-19/immunology , Neoplasms/immunology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Dose-Response Relationship, Immunologic , Female , Humans , Immunogenicity, Vaccine/immunology , London/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/blood , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/virology , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Wales
3.
Oncology (Williston Park) ; 35(1): 26-28, 2021 Jan 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1485807

ABSTRACT

Against the difficult and trying backdrop of the pandemic, cancer investigators persisted, and for patients with lung cancer, that persistence paid off in spectacular ways. With several new FDA approved treatments, as well as 2 new targetable mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), 2020 was a banner year in the overall lung cancer space. ONCOLOGY® recently sat down with Jennifer W. Carlisle, MD, of Emory University's Winship Cancer Institute, to discuss the many advances made during the last year for patients with lung cancer along with her hopes for further significant milestones in the year to come.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Medical Oncology/organization & administration , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/genetics , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/genetics , Precision Medicine , SARS-CoV-2
4.
J Clin Oncol ; 39(20): 2232-2246, 2021 07 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1484813

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Variation in risk of adverse clinical outcomes in patients with cancer and COVID-19 has been reported from relatively small cohorts. The NCATS' National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) is a centralized data resource representing the largest multicenter cohort of COVID-19 cases and controls nationwide. We aimed to construct and characterize the cancer cohort within N3C and identify risk factors for all-cause mortality from COVID-19. METHODS: We used 4,382,085 patients from 50 US medical centers to construct a cohort of patients with cancer. We restricted analyses to adults ≥ 18 years old with a COVID-19-positive or COVID-19-negative diagnosis between January 1, 2020, and March 25, 2021. We followed N3C selection of an index encounter per patient for analyses. All analyses were performed in the N3C Data Enclave Palantir platform. RESULTS: A total of 398,579 adult patients with cancer were identified from the N3C cohort; 63,413 (15.9%) were COVID-19-positive. Most common represented cancers were skin (13.8%), breast (13.7%), prostate (10.6%), hematologic (10.5%), and GI cancers (10%). COVID-19 positivity was significantly associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.24). Among COVID-19-positive patients, age ≥ 65 years, male gender, Southern or Western US residence, an adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index score ≥ 4, hematologic malignancy, multitumor sites, and recent cytotoxic therapy were associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality. Patients who received recent immunotherapies or targeted therapies did not have higher risk of overall mortality. CONCLUSION: Using N3C, we assembled the largest nationally representative cohort of patients with cancer and COVID-19 to date. We identified demographic and clinical factors associated with increased all-cause mortality in patients with cancer. Full characterization of the cohort will provide further insights into the effects of COVID-19 on cancer outcomes and the ability to continue specific cancer treatments.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Neoplasms/mortality , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/mortality , Case-Control Studies , Cause of Death , Electronic Health Records , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Neoplasms/therapy , Prognosis , Registries , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Time Factors , United States , Young Adult
5.
Heliyon ; 6(4): e03795, 2020 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1454150

ABSTRACT

A temporary discontinuation (drug holiday) of high-dose antiresorptive (AR) agents has been proposed to reduce the risk of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ). The aim of this systematic review was to answer the question: Is high-dose AR drug holiday, at the time of tooth extraction or dentoalveolar surgery, necessary to prevent the development of MRONJ in patients with cancer? This protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database. Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for relevant studies up to and including April 2019. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort and cross-sectional studies, surveys, and case reports with more than five patients were included. Records were imported into www.covidence.org. Electronic searches were supplemented by manual searches and reference linkage. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analysis (PRISMA) were followed. Although only one study fitted the population, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) framework, valuable information on AR drug holiday could be extracted from 14 of 371 reviewed articles. Among these, 3 were prospective and 11 were retrospective studies. These studies described or evaluated high-dose AR drug holidays. In 2 studies, patients were being treated with denosumab, but neither showed that a drug holiday was effective. The remaining 12 studies evaluated bisphosphonate treatment and 2 of these studies found no reason to use AR drug holiday before surgery. Three studies recommended drug holidays, whereas most of the studies recommended assessing each patient separately. The only paper that fitted the PICO approach was a non-randomized, prospective study with a control group. This study concluded that drug holiday was not necessary. Thus, there are no evidence for using drug holiday, but it is also clear that caused by a limited numbers of eligible patients, and a great variation in between these patient, high-level evidence for using AR drug holiday is almost impossible to obtain.

6.
J Med Virol ; 93(10): 5839-5845, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1432415

ABSTRACT

Undoubtedly, cancer patients have suffered the most from the COVID-19 pandemic process. However, cancer is a heterogeneous disease, and each patient has responded differently to COVID-19. We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with cancer and COVID-19. We retrospectively reviewed 45 cancer patients hospitalized in the Cerrahpasa Medical Faculty COVID-19 department from March 23 to October 23, 2020. We analyzed the demographic characteristics, symptoms, laboratory findings, treatment, prognosis, and cancer subtypes of patients and mortality who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Between March 23 and October 23, 2020, 45 hospitalized cancer patients who had laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection were included, with a median age of 60 years (range: 23-92). Patients were divided into two groups a survivor and a non-survivor. Symptoms, demographic information, comorbidities, treatments for COVID-19, and laboratory findings of the two groups were evaluated separately. Two parameters were found, which showed a significant difference between non-survivors and survivors displaying a disadvantage for COPD and low platelet count (p = 0.044-0.038). The mortality rate of all patients was 66%. The presence of comorbidities such as COPD and low platelet count in cancer patients with COVID-19 infection may draw the attention of physicians.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/classification , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Turkey/epidemiology
7.
Memo ; 14(1): 1-2, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1401094
8.
Cancer Res Treat ; 53(3): 650-656, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1403959

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has spread worldwide rapidly and patients with cancer have been considered as a vulnerable group for this infection. This study aimed to examine the expressions of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and transmembrane serine protease 2 (TMPRSS2) in tumor tissues of six common cancer types. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The expression levels of ACE2 and TMPRSS2 in tumors and control samples were obtained from online databases. Survival prognosis and biological functions of these genes were investigated for each tumor type. RESULTS: There was the overexpression of ACE2 in colon and stomach adenocarcinomas compared to controls, meanwhile colon and prostate adenocarcinomas showed a significantly higher expression of TMPRSS2. Additionally, survival prognosis analysis has demonstrated that upregulation of ACE2 in liver hepatocellular carcinoma was associated with higher overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.65; p=0.016) and disease-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.66; p=0.007), while overexpression of TMPRSS2 was associated with a 26% reduced risk of death in lung adenocarcinoma (p=0.047) but 50% increased risk of death in breast invasive carcinoma (p=0.015). CONCLUSION: There is a need to take extra precautions for COVID-19 in patients with colorectal cancer, stomach cancer, and lung cancer. Further information on other types of cancer at different stages should be investigated.


Subject(s)
Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/genetics , COVID-19/diagnosis , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Neoplasms/genetics , Serine Endopeptidases/genetics , Adenocarcinoma/complications , Adenocarcinoma/diagnosis , Adenocarcinoma/epidemiology , Adenocarcinoma/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/complications , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/genetics , Case-Control Studies , Databases as Topic , Female , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/complications , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/genetics , Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Humans , Liver Neoplasms/complications , Liver Neoplasms/diagnosis , Liver Neoplasms/epidemiology , Liver Neoplasms/genetics , Lung Neoplasms/complications , Lung Neoplasms/diagnosis , Lung Neoplasms/epidemiology , Lung Neoplasms/genetics , Male , Mutation , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Pandemics , Prognosis , Prostatic Neoplasms/complications , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Prostatic Neoplasms/epidemiology , Prostatic Neoplasms/genetics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Survival Analysis
9.
Ecancermedicalscience ; 15: 1189, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1394745

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic presents serious challenges to cancer care because of the associated risks from the infection itself and the disruption of care delivery. Therefore, many professional societies have published recommendations to help manage patients with cancer during the current pandemic. The objective of our study is to assess the national responses of Middle East North Africa (MENA) countries in terms of publishing relevant guidelines and analyse various components of these guidelines. METHODS: A survey based on the preliminary review of the literature regarding cancer care adaptations has been developed and then completed by a group of oncologists from the following Arab countries affected by the pandemic: Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates and Yemen. The survey inquired about COVID-19 cases, national recommendations regarding general measures of COVID-19 prevention and patient care in oncology as well as their implementation about cancer care adaptations during the pandemic. RESULTS: Analysis of the COVID-19 pandemic-related guidelines revealed at least 30 specific recommendations that we categorised into seven essential components. All included countries had national guidelines except one country. Estimated full compliances with all specific category recommendations ranged from 30% to 69% and partial compliance ranged from 23% to 61%. CONCLUSION: There is a very good response and preparedness in the Arab Middle East and North Africa region surveyed. However, there are inconsistencies in the various components of the guidelines across the region, which reflects the evolving status of the pandemic in each country as well as the lack of clear evidence-based guidelines for many of the issues in question. There is a need for a clear framework on essential components that should be included in these guidelines to assure providing the best guidance to the oncology community.

10.
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol ; 147(5): 1469-1479, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1384445

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The severe acute respiratory syndrome-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic disrupted medical care for persons with cancer including those with lymphoma. Many professional societies recommend postponing, decreasing, or stopping anti-cancer therapy in selected persons during the pandemic. Although seemingly sensible, these recommendations are not evidence-based and their impact on anxiety and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) is unknown. METHODS: We surveyed 2532 subjects including 1060 persons with lymphoma, 948 caregivers, and 524 normals using a purposed-designed questionnaire on a patient organization website. Respondents also completed the Zung Self-Rating Anxiety and patient respondents, the EORTC QLQ-C30 instruments to quantify anxiety, and HRQoL. We also evaluated caregiver support and an online education programme of the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO). Data of HRQoL from a 2019 pre-pandemic online survey of 1106 persons with lymphoma were a control. RESULTS: 33% (95% confidence interval [CI] 30, 36%) of lymphoma patients and 31% (28, 34%) of caregivers but only 21% (17, 24%) of normals had any level of anxiety (both pair-wise P < 0.001). Among lymphoma respondents, physical exercise and better caregiver support were associated with less anxiety, whereas female sex, receiving therapy, and reduced therapy intensity were associated with more anxiety. Paradoxically, lymphoma respondents during the pandemic had better HRQoL than pre-pandemic controls. Reduced therapy intensity was associated with worse HRQoL, whereas respondents who scored caregiver support and the online patient education programme high had better HRQoL. CONCLUSION: During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, lymphoma patients and their caregivers had significantly higher incidences of anxiety compared with normals. Lymphoma respondents reported better HRQoL compared with pre-pandemic controls. Reduced therapy intensity in persons with cancer may have unanticipated adverse effects on anxiety and HRQoL. Regular and intense support by caregivers and online education programmes alleviate anxiety and improve HRQoL.


Subject(s)
Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Lymphoma/therapy , Quality of Life/psychology , Withholding Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , Caregivers/psychology , Depression/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Internet , Lymphoma/psychology , Male , Middle Aged , Psychosocial Support Systems , Risk , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
14.
Artif Organs ; 45(9): 1050-1060, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1361914

ABSTRACT

Prognosis of patients suffering from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is poor. This is especially true for immunosuppressed patients. It is controverisal whether these patients should receive veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) while evidence on this topic is sparse. We report retrospective data of a single-center registry of patients with severe ARDS requiring ECMO support between October 2010 and June 2019. Patients were analyzed by their status of immunosuppression. ECMO weaning success and hospital survival were analyzed before and after propensity score matching (PSM). Moreover, ventilator free days (VFD) were compared. A total of 288 patients were analyzed (age 55 years, 67% male), 88 (31%) presented with immunosuppression. Survival rates were lower in immunosuppressed patients (27% vs. 53%, P < .001 and 27% vs. 48% after PSM, P = .006). VFD (60 days) were lower for patients with immunosuppression (11.9 vs. 22.4, P < .001), and immunosuppression was an independent predictor for mortality in multivariate analysis. Hospital survival was 20%, 14%, 35%, and 46% for patients with oncological malignancies, solid organ transplantation, autoimmune diseases, and HIV, respectively. In this analysis immunosuppression was an independent predictor for mortality. However, there were major differences in the weaning and survival rates between the etiologies of immunosuppression which should be considered in decision making.


Subject(s)
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/mortality , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Adult , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Immunocompromised Host , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Propensity Score , Retrospective Studies , Survival Rate
15.
J Cancer ; 12(12): 3558-3565, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1355160

ABSTRACT

Purpose: Data are extremely limited with regards to the impact of COVID-19 on cancer patients. Our study explored the distinct clinical features of COVID-19 patients with cancer. Experimental Design: 189 COVID-19 patients, including 16 cancer patients and 173 patients without cancer, were recruited. Propensity score 1:4 matching (PSM) was performed between cancer patients and patients without cancer based on age, gender and comorbidities. Survival was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method and the difference was compared by the log-rank test. Results: PSM analysis yielded 16 cancer patients and 64 propensity score-matched patients without cancer. Compared to patients without cancer, cancer patients tended to have leukopenia and elevated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) and procalcitonin. For those with critical COVID-19, cancer patients had an inferior survival than those without cancer. Also, cancer patients with severe/critical COVID-19 tended to be male and present with low SPO2 and albumin, and high hs-CRP, lactate dehydrogenase and blood urea nitrogen on admission compared to those with mild COVID-19. In terms of risk factors, recent cancer diagnosis (within 1 year of onset of COVID-19) and anti-tumor treatment within 3 months of COVID-19 diagnosis were associated with inferior survival. Conclusions: We found COVID-19 patients with cancer have distinct clinical features as compared to patients without cancer. Importantly, cancer patients with critical COVID-19 were found to have poorer outcomes compared to those without cancer. In the cancer cohort, patients with severe/critical COVID-19 presented with a distinct clinical profile from those with mild COVID-19; short cancer history and recent anti-cancer treatment were associated with inferior survival.

16.
Cancer Cell ; 39(8): 1081-1090.e2, 2021 08 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1343145

ABSTRACT

As COVID-19 adversely affects patients with cancer, prophylactic strategies are critically needed. Using a validated antibody assay against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, we determined a high seroconversion rate (94%) in 200 patients with cancer in New York City that had received full dosing with one of the FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines. On comparison with solid tumors (98%), a significantly lower rate of seroconversion was observed in patients with hematologic malignancies (85%), particularly recipients following highly immunosuppressive therapies such as anti-CD20 therapies (70%) and stem cell transplantation (73%). Patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy (97%) or hormonal therapies (100%) demonstrated high seroconversion post vaccination. Patients with prior COVID-19 infection demonstrated higher anti-spike IgG titers post vaccination. Relatively lower IgG titers were observed following vaccination with the adenoviral than with mRNA-based vaccines. These data demonstrate generally high immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccination in oncology patients and identify immunosuppressed cohorts that need novel vaccination or passive immunization strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/immunology , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Seroconversion , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Female , Host-Pathogen Interactions/immunology , Humans , Immunogenicity, Vaccine , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/therapy , Public Health Surveillance , Risk Factors , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/blood , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Vaccination
17.
AJR Am J Roentgenol ; 217(4): 975-983, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1341589

ABSTRACT

As mass COVID-19 vaccination is underway, radiologists are encountering transient FDG uptake in normal or enlarged axillary, supraclavicular, and cervical lymph nodes after ipsilateral deltoid vaccination. This phenomenon may confound interpretation in patients with cancer undergoing FDG PET/CT. In this article, we present our institutional approach for management of COVID-19 vaccine-related lymphadenopathy on FDG PET/CT according to early experience. We suggest performing PET/CT at least 2 weeks after vaccination in patients with a cancer for which interpretation is anticipated to be potentially impacted by the vaccination but optimally 4-6 weeks after vaccination given increased immunogenicity of mRNA vaccines and potentially longer time for resolution than lymphadenopathy after other vaccines. PET/CT should not be delayed when clinically indicated to be performed sooner. Details regarding vaccination should be collected at the time of PET/CT to facilitate interpretation. Follow-up recommendations for postvaccination lymphadenopathy are provided, considering the lymph node's morphology and likely clinical relevance. Consideration should be given to administering the vaccine in the arm contralateral to a unilateral cancer to avoid confounding FDG uptake on the side of cancer. Our preliminary experience and suggested institutional approach should guide radiologists in management of patients with cancer undergoing PET/CT after COVID-19 vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , COVID-19/prevention & control , Fluorodeoxyglucose F18/pharmacokinetics , Lymphadenopathy/diagnostic imaging , Lymphadenopathy/etiology , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography/methods , Radiopharmaceuticals/pharmacokinetics , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
18.
Pathogens ; 9(1)2020 Jan 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1300286

ABSTRACT

Cancer is the first cause of death by disease in childhood globally. The most frequent types of cancers in children and adolescents are leukemias, followed by brain and central nervous system tumors and lymphomas. The recovery rate of cancer in children is around 80% in developed countries and up to 30% in developing countries. Some of the main causes of complications in children and adolescents with cancer are respiratory viral infections, mainly in bone marrow-transplanted patients. Respiratory viruses have been detected in the bronchoalveolar lavage or nasal wash specimens from cancer patients with or without respiratory illness symptoms. Human metapneumovirus (HMPV) is within the ten most common viruses that are encountered in samples from pediatric patients with underlying oncology conditions. In most of cases, HMPV is found as the only viral agent, but co-infection with other viruses or with bacterial agents has also been reported. The discrepancies between the most prevalent viral agents may be due to the different populations studied or the range of viral agents tested. Some of the cases of infection with HMPV in cancer patients have been fatal, especially in those who have received a hematopoietic stem cell transplant. This review seeks to show a general view of the participation of HMPV in respiratory illness as a complication of cancer in childhood and adolescence.

20.
Curr Opin Psychiatry ; 34(4): 376-385, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1304034

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To understand the effect of COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown on persons with alcohol use disorders. RECENT FINDINGS: From a total of 455 titles on COVID-19 and alcohol, 227 abstracts were screened, and 95 articles were reviewed (on November 25th, 2020). The immediate effect was an increase in alcohol related emergencies including alcohol withdrawal, related suicides, and methanol toxicity. Although there are mixed findings with respect to changes in the quantity of drinking, there are reports of binge/heavy drinking during the lockdown as well as relapse postlockdown. Psychological, social, biological, economic and policy-related factors appear to influence the changes in drinking. Although preliminary data suggest no change in alcohol use among persons with comorbid mental illness, findings in this population are presently limited. Among patients with alcohol related liver disease, outcomes appear worse and caution is warranted with the use of medications. Alcohol also appears to increases the risk of COVID-19 infection and complicates its course.Although some nations banned alcohol sales completely during lockdown, others declared it as an essential commodity, resulting in different problems across countries. Alcohol use has added to the burden of the problem particularly among vulnerable groups like the adolescents, elderly, patients with cancer, as well as health professionals. Services for patients with alcohol use disorders have been affected. SUMMARY: The COVID-19 pandemic has had considerable impact on alcohol use, with an increase in alcohol related emergencies, changes in alcohol use patterns, increased risk of contracting COVID-19, effect on alcohol policies and sales, and an effect on vulnerable groups. It is essential to understand and respond to the current situation, intervene early, and prevent further repercussions of the pandemic.Video abstract link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IJWtIs6e554PryKWhdma4VB--mjSZq1C/view?usp=sharing.


Subject(s)
Alcoholism/epidemiology , Alcoholism/psychology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , Physical Distancing , Quarantine/psychology , Adolescent , Aged , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL