The impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on the diagnosis and treatment of cancer in Northern Portugal.

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected the availability of healthcare resources, and adjustments to cancer care have been necessary considering the risk of morbidity by COVID-19 and of cancer progression. This study aims to quantify the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the care of patients with cancer by comparing a period of 4 months after the outbreak began (2 March 2020) with an equal period from 2019. METHODS: Cancer cases of the esophagus, stomach, colon and rectum, pancreas, lung, skin-melanoma, breast, cervix, prostate, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and leukemia from the Portuguese Oncology Institute of Porto, and diagnosed between 2 March and 1 July 2019 (before COVID-19) and 2020 (after COVID-19) were identified. Those with the first treatment outside the Portuguese Oncology Institute of Porto were excluded. Sociodemographic, clinical and treatment characteristics were obtained from the cancer registry database and clinical files. RESULTS: The absolute number of new cancer cases decreased nearly 40% after the COVID-19 pandemic (from 1430 to 866). The largest decreases were observed for cervical (-74.3%) and prostate (-71.7%) cancers. Cases were more often diagnosed at more advanced stages in 2020 (P = 0.001), and the proportion of patients not starting any treatment until 1 July was just under 20% in 2019 and nearly 40% in 2020. The median times from symptoms onset, first medical exam and first appointment to diagnosis, and from diagnosis to first appointment, multidisciplinary tumor board meeting and first treatment were shorter after COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: There was a notable overall decrease in cancer diagnoses after COVID-19, with changes in the characteristics of incident cases.

Fundamental privacy rights in a pandemic state.

Faced with the emergence of the Covid-19 pandemic, and to better understand and contain the disease's spread, health organisations increased the collaboration with other organisations sharing health data with data scientists and researchers. Data analysis assists such organisations in providing information that could help in decision-making processes. For this purpose, both national and regional health authorities provided health data for further processing and analysis. Shared data must comply with existing data protection and privacy regulations. Therefore, a robust de-identification procedure must be used, and a re-identification risk analysis should also be performed. De-identified data embodies state-of-the-art approaches in Data Protection by Design and Default because it requires the protection of direct and indirect identifiers (not just direct). This article highlights the importance of assessing re-identification risk before data disclosure by analysing a data set of individuals infected by Covid-19 that was made available for research purposes. We stress that it is highly important to make this data available for research purposes and that this process should be based on the state of the art methods in Data Protection by Design and by Default. Our main goal is to consider different re-identification risk analysis scenarios since the information on the intruder side is unknown. Our conclusions show that there is a risk of identity disclosure for all of the studied scenarios. For one, in particular, we proceed to an example of a re-identification attack. The outcome of such an attack reveals that it is possible to identify individuals with no much effort.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the short-term survival of patients with cancer in Northern Portugal.

The COVID-19 pandemic led to potential delays in diagnosis and treatment of cancer patients, which may negatively affect the prognosis of these patients. Our study aimed to quantify the impact of COVID-19 on the short-term survival of cancer patients by comparing a period of 4 months after the outbreak began (2 March 2020) with an equal period from 2019. All cancer cases of the esophagus, stomach, colon and rectum, pancreas, lung, skin-melanoma, breast, cervix, and prostate, from the Portuguese Oncology Institute of Porto (IPO-Porto) and diagnosed between 2 March and 1 July of 2019 (before COVID-19) and 2020 (after COVID-19) were identified. Information regarding sociodemographic, clinical and treatment characteristics were collected from the cancer registry database and clinical files. Vital status was assessed to 31 October of the respective years. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate crude and propensity score-adjusted hazards ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) of death. During follow-up to 31 October, there were 154 (11.8%) deaths observed before COVID-19 and 131 (17.2%) after COVID-19, corresponding to crude and adjusted HRs (95% CI) of 1.51 (1.20-1.91) and 1.10 (0.86-1.40), respectively. Significantly higher adjusted hazards of death were observed for patients with Stage III cancer (HR = 2.37; 95% CI: 1.14-4.94) and those undergoing surgical treatment (HR = 3.97; 95% CI: 1.14-13.77) or receiving radiotherapy (HR = 1.96; 95% CI: 1.96-3.74), while patients who did not receive any treatment had a lower mortality hazards (HR = 0.62; 95% CI: 0.46-0.83). The higher overall short-term mortality observed during the COVID-19 pandemic largely reflects the effects of the epidemic on the case-mix of patients being diagnosed with cancer.

Is There an Impact of COVID-19 on Admission of Patients to the Emergency Department for Vascular Surgery?

BACKGROUND: On March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak a pandemic. During this period, surgical activity and admission to the Emergency Department (ED) decreased globally. The aim of this article is to understand how the admission of a patient to the ED for vascular surgery changed in our center in Portugal and if this situation prevented urgent surgical procedures. METHODS: Through a retrospective study, we compared the volume of patients admitted to the ED during the emergency state (ES) in Portugal with the same period in 2019. In addition, we analyzed the urgent surgical activity during the ES and in the correspondent period of the previous 10 years, regarding limb acute ischemia, acute aortic pathology, and vascular trauma. Two groups of patients were formed-patients operated during the ES and during the non-ES, for control. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS® Statistics, version 25. RESULTS: In the ES, 115 patients were observed at the ED and 179 in the 2019 corresponding period. During the ES, patients significantly recurred less to the ED directly from home (P < 0.001) and were less referred to the ED by primary care doctors (P < 0.001). Patients observed at the ED were significantly more urgent-required urgent surgery or were admitted to the department-than those in 2019 (40% vs. 24%). However, there were no differences when only considering urgent surgery (14% in ES vs. 10% in 2019). In the ES, 38% of patients observed at the ED were discharged with no follow-up related to vascular surgery against 60% in 2019, although this difference was not significant. Compared with the preceding 10 years, there are not significant differences in the number of patients who underwent urgent surgery in both ES and non-ES periods. In patients with acute limb ischemia, we did not find an increase in the time between onset of symptoms and ED admission, during the ES. CONCLUSIONS: Fewer patients were admitted at the ED during the ES, and those admitted were significantly more urgent. We did not find a decrease in the number of urgent surgeries when compared with the preceding 10 years. Therefore, we cannot assume that coronavirus pandemic precluded urgent surgical procedures.