The psychosocial and emotional experiences of cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization on March 11th, 2020. Global social lockdowns were instigated to reduce spread and prevent health-services from becoming overwhelmed. People having treatment for cancer are known to have heightened psychological/emotional burden. The combined impact of managing pandemic regulations alongside this may present additional burden. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine current evidence of the psychological and emotional impact of COVID-19 on people with cancer, early in the pandemic. METHODS: Five electronic databases were searched (Embase, Global Health, HMIC, PsychINFO, CINAHL) from September 2019 to October 2021. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed-method primary research studies exploring emotional and psychological impacts of COVID-19 on cancer patients, limited to English language, were included. Quality appraisal was conducted using the MMAT. RESULTS: Fifty-one papers, with 27,356 people from 21 countries treated for cancer, were included. 43 studies were quantitative with a survey method approach, six studies qualitative and four used a mixed methods design. MMAT score was mostly two or three. Four themes were identified: Emotional aspects and Quality of Life; Psychosocial aspects; Impact of COVID-19 on self; Impact of COVID-19 on cancer, with themes overlapping. CONCLUSION: Whilst emotional/psychological impacts such as anxiety, isolation, employment fears, and uncertainty about the future were potentially universal concerns early in the pandemic, they may have been particularly acute for people living with cancer and represent complex, overlapping factors. As COVID-19 continues to impact health-services and society, it is important to focus on any ongoing impact to the experience of cancer patients. Most of the studies reviewed used tools that do not provide deeper understanding of how and why emotional states of people with cancer were affected. Further qualitative work may reveal patterns of what was unique to cancer patients during the pandemic, compared to general populations.

The ALERT-B questionnaire: A screening tool for the detection of gastroenterological late effects after radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

There is an increasing need to measure treatment-related side effects in normal tissues following cancer therapy. The ALERT-B (Assessment of Late Effects of RadioTherapy - Bowel) questionnaire is a screening tool that is composed of four items related specifically to bowel symptoms. Those patients that respond with a "yes" to any of these items are referred on to gastroenterologist in order to improve the long-term consequences of these side effects of radiological treatment. Here we wish to test the ability of this questionnaire to identify these subsequent gastroenterological complications by tracking prostate cancer patients that were positive with respect to ALERT-B. We also carry out receiver-operator curve (ROC) analysis for baseline data for an overall ALERT-B questionnaire score with respect to subscale data for the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) and the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) questionnaire. 84.4% and 95.7% of patients identified by the ALERT-B questionnaire demonstrated complications diagnosed at 6 and 12 months post-treatment, respectively. ROC curve analysis of baseline data showed that ALERT-B detected clinically relevant levels of side effects established at baseline by the GSRS diarrhoea subscale (AUC = 0.867, 95% CI = 0.795 to 0.926) and at the minimally important level of side effects for the EPIC bowel subscale (AUC = 0.765, 95% CI = 0.617 to 0.913). These results show that ALERT-B provides a simple and effective screening tool for identifying gastroenterological complications after treatment for prostate cancer.

Clinical decision-making in managing changes in gastrointestinal function following cancer therapies: Is experience enough?

In patients with gastrointestinal (GI) disorders, identical symptoms may occur for many different reasons. This prospective study assessed whether experienced clinicians can predict accurately the underlying diagnosis or diagnoses contributing to specific symptoms based on the history and physical examination. Three clinicians assessed 47 patients referred for management of troublesome GI symptoms identified after treatment for cancer. Investigations were requested following our comprehensive, peer-reviewed algorithm. The clinicians then recorded their predictions as to the results of those investigations. After each patient had completed all their investigations, had received optimal management and had been discharged from the clinic, the predicted diagnoses were compared to those made. The clinicians predicted 92 diagnoses (1.9 per patient). After investigation, a total of 168 unique diagnoses were identified (3.5 per patient). Of the 92 predicted diagnoses, 41 (43%) matched the diagnosis. Of the 168 actual diagnoses identified, only 24% matched the prediction. None of the clinicians predicted the correct combination of diagnoses contributing to bowel symptoms. Clinical acumen alone is inadequate at determining cause for symptoms in patients with GI symptoms developing after cancer therapy.

Are bile acid malabsorption and bile acid diarrhoea important causes of loose stool complicating cancer therapy?

AIM: Gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms during and after cancer therapy can significantly affect quality of life and interfere with treatment. This study assessed whether bile acid malabsorption (BAM) or bile acid diarrhoea (BAD) are important causes of diarrhoea associated with cancer treatment. METHOD: A retrospective analysis was carried out of consecutive patients assessed for BAM using ((75) Se) Selenium homocholic acid taurocholate (SeHCAT) scanning, after reporting any episodes of loose stool, attending a gastroenterology clinic in a cancer centre. RESULTS: Between 2009 and 2013, 506 consecutive patients (54.5% male; age range: 20-91 years), were scanned. BAM/BAD was diagnosed in 215 (42.5%). It was mild in 25.6%, moderate in 29.3% and severe in 45.1%. Pelvic chemoradiation had induced BAM in > 50% of patients. BAM was also frequent after treatment for conditions not previously associated with BAM, such as anal and colorectal cancer, and was present in > 75% of patients referred after pancreatic surgery. It was also unexpectedly frequent in patients who were treated for malignancy outside the GI tract, such as breast cancer and haematological malignancy. CONCLUSION: BAM/BAD are very common and under-appreciated causes of GI symptoms after cancer treatment. Health professionals should have a low threshold in suspecting this condition, as diagnosis and treatment can significantly improve quality of life.