Pandemic Phase-Adjusted Analysis of COVID-19 Outcomes Reveals Reduced Intrinsic Vulnerability and Substantial Vaccine Protection From Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in Patients With Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Although representing the majority of newly diagnosed cancers, patients with breast cancer appear less vulnerable to COVID-19 mortality compared with other malignancies. In the absence of patients on active cancer therapy included in vaccination trials, a contemporary real-world evaluation of outcomes during the various pandemic phases, as well as of the impact of vaccination, is needed to better inform clinical practice. METHODS: We compared COVID-19 morbidity and mortality among patients with breast cancer across prevaccination (February 27, 2020-November 30, 2020), Alpha-Delta (December 1, 2020-December 14, 2021), and Omicron (December 15, 2021-January 31, 2022) phases using OnCovid registry participants (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04393974). Twenty-eight-day case fatality rate (CFR28) and COVID-19 severity were compared in unvaccinated versus double-dosed/boosted patients (vaccinated) with inverse probability of treatment weighting models adjusted for country of origin, age, number of comorbidities, tumor stage, and receipt of systemic anticancer therapy within 1 month of COVID-19 diagnosis. RESULTS: By the data lock of February 4, 2022, the registry counted 613 eligible patients with breast cancer: 60.1% (n = 312) hormone receptor-positive, 25.2% (n = 131) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, and 14.6% (n = 76) triple-negative. The majority (61%; n = 374) had localized/locally advanced disease. Median age was 62 years (interquartile range, 51-74 years). A total of 193 patients (31.5%) presented ≥ 2 comorbidities and 69% (n = 330) were never smokers. In total, 392 (63.9%), 164 (26.8%), and 57 (9.3%) were diagnosed during the prevaccination, Alpha-Delta, and Omicron phases, respectively. Analysis of CFR28 demonstrates comparable estimates of mortality across the three pandemic phases (13.9%, 12.2%, 5.3%, respectively; P = .182). Nevertheless, a significant improvement in outcome measures of COVID-19 severity across the three pandemic time periods was observed. Importantly, when reported separately, unvaccinated patients from the Alpha-Delta and Omicron phases achieved comparable outcomes to those from the prevaccination phase. Of 566 patients eligible for the vaccination analysis, 72 (12.7%) were fully vaccinated and 494 (87.3%) were unvaccinated. We confirmed with inverse probability of treatment weighting multivariable analysis and following a clustered robust correction for participating center that vaccinated patients achieved improved CFR28 (odds ratio [OR], 0.19; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.40), hospitalization (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.69), COVID-19 complications (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.45), and reduced requirement of COVID-19-specific therapy (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.63) and oxygen therapy (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.67) compared with unvaccinated controls. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight a consistent reduction of COVID-19 severity in patients with breast cancer during the Omicron outbreak in Europe. We also demonstrate that even in this population, a complete severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination course is a strong determinant of improved morbidity and mortality from COVID-19.

COVID-19 Sequelae and the Host Proinflammatory Response: An Analysis From the OnCovid Registry.

BACKGROUND: Fifteen percent of patients with cancer experience symptomatic sequelae, which impair post-COVID-19 outcomes. In this study, we investigated whether a proinflammatory status is associated with the development of COVID-19 sequelae. METHODS: OnCovid recruited 2795 consecutive patients who were diagnosed with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 infection between February 27, 2020, and February 14, 2021. This analysis focused on COVID-19 survivors who underwent a clinical reassessment after the exclusion of patients with hematological malignancies. We evaluated the association of inflammatory markers collected at COVID-19 diagnosis with sequelae, considering the impact of previous systemic anticancer therapy. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Of 1339 eligible patients, 203 experienced at least 1 sequela (15.2%). Median baseline C-reactive protein (CRP; 77.5 mg/L vs 22.2 mg/L, P < .001), lactate dehydrogenase (310 UI/L vs 274 UI/L, P = .03), and the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR; 6.0 vs 4.3, P = .001) were statistically significantly higher among patients who experienced sequelae, whereas no association was reported for the platelet to lymphocyte ratio and the OnCovid Inflammatory Score, which includes albumin and lymphocytes. The widest area under the ROC curve (AUC) was reported for baseline CRP (AUC = 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63 to 0.69), followed by the NLR (AUC = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.61) and lactate dehydrogenase (AUC = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.61). Using a fixed categorical multivariable analysis, high CRP (odds ratio [OR] = 2.56, 95% CI: 1.67 to 3.91) and NLR (OR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.01 to 2.10) were confirmed to be statistically significantly associated with an increased risk of sequelae. Exposure to chemotherapy was associated with a decreased risk of sequelae (OR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.91), whereas no associations with immune checkpoint inhibitors, endocrine therapy, and other types of systemic anticancer therapy were found. CONCLUSIONS: Although the association between inflammatory status, recent chemotherapy and sequelae warrants further investigation, our findings suggest that a deranged proinflammatory reaction at COVID-19 diagnosis may predict for sequelae development.

[The views of cancer out-patients on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic]. / Die Auswirkungen der COVID-19-Pandemie aus der Sicht ambulanter Krebspatienten.

BACKGROUND: This study investigates current needs and psychosocial burden of out-patients with cancer during the COVID-19-Pandemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between 11/2020 and 02/2021 122 cancer patients who underwent out-patient treatment at the Comprehensive Cancer Center Munich participated in the study. Based on a standardized, semi-structured interview, participants were asked about their knowledge and informational needs related to COVID-19, risk perception and concerns regarding continuing out-patient treatment, COVID-19 related distress, confidence in the national health system, and their readiness to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Additionally, patients filled out the distress thermometer (DT). RESULTS: More than a third of the patients (34,2 %, n = 41/120) wanted to receive more information about the effects of the coronavirus on their cancer and their treatment. 17,2 % (n = 21/122) had faced changes concerning their current or planned treatment. 42/121 (34,7 %) of the patients were clinically distressed (DT ≥ 5). A possible overload of the health care system was the most commonly reported COVID-related concern (77,9 %, n = 95/122), followed by being concerned that their family members might be additionally worried about them (56,2 %, n = 68/121). 71,2 % (n = 74/104) of the patients are willing to be vaccinated; 60 % (n = 18/30) of those undecided or refusing at the time of the survey expressed a desire to have a consultation with an oncologist before giving their final consent to vaccination. DISCUSSION: Corona-specific distress of cancer patients relates in particular to the course of therapy, but also to a possible overload of the health care system. Oncology care teams should allow space for questions from their patients, acknowledge possible uncertainties, provide emotional support, and draw attention to reliable sources of information.

Die Auswirkungen der COVID-19-Pandemie aus der Sicht ambulanter Krebspatienten The views of cancer out-patients on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic

Zusammenfassung Hintergrund  Diese Studie untersucht aktuelle Bedürfnisse und Belastungen von ambulanten Krebspatienten im Rahmen der COVID-19-Pandemie. Material und Methoden  Zwischen 11/2020 und 02/2021 wurden 122 ambulante Krebspatientinnen und -patienten des Comprehensive Cancer Center München in die Studie eingeschlossen und anhand eines standardisierten, halbstrukturierten Interviews zu Wissensstand und Informationsbedürfnissen in Bezug auf COVID-19, Risikowahrnehmung und Sorgen hinsichtlich der ambulanten Krebsbehandlung, COVID-19-spezifischen Belastungen sowie zum Vertrauen in das Gesundheitssystem und der Impfbereitschaft befragt. Zusätzlich wurde psychosozialer Distress anhand des Distress-Thermometers (DT) erhoben. Ergebnisse  Über ein Drittel der Krebspatienten (34,2 %, n = 41/120) hatte noch Informationsbedarf hinsichtlich der Auswirkungen des Coronavirus auf ihre Erkrankung oder Behandlung. 17,2 % (n = 21/122) waren von Veränderungen der laufenden oder geplanten Krebstherapie betroffen. Bei n = 42/121 (34,7 %) der Patienten zeigte sich ein erhöhter psychosozialer Distress (DT ≥ 5). Die häufigste Corona-spezifische Belastung war die Angst vor einer Überlastung des Gesundheitssystems (77,9 %, n = 95/122), gefolgt von der Befürchtung, dass sich Angehörige noch größere Sorgen um die betroffenen Patienten machen (56,2 %, n = 68/121). 71,2 % (n = 74/104) der Patienten sind bereit, sich impfen zu lassen;60 % (n = 18/30) der zum Zeitpunkt der Untersuchung Unentschlossenen oder Ablehner wünschen sich vor einer endgültigen Entscheidung für die Impfung ein Informationsgespräch mit ihrem Onkologen/ihrer Onkologin. Schlussfolgerung  Corona-spezifische Belastungen von Krebspatienten betreffen insbesondere den Verlauf der Therapie, aber auch eine mögliche Überlastung des Gesundheitssystems. Onkologische Behandler-Teams sollten Fragen ihrer Patienten Raum geben, mögliche Unsicherheiten anerkennen, emotionale Unterstützung leisten und auf valide Informationsquellen aufmerksam machen.

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.

ABC6 Consensus: Assessment by a Group of German Experts.

Background: The first International Consensus Conference for Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC1) took place 10 years ago in November 2011. The rationale was - and still is - to standardize treatment of advanced breast cancer (ABC) based on the available evidence and to ensure that worldwide all breast cancer patients receive adequate treatment and access to new therapies. Rationale for the Manuscript: The 6th International Consensus Conference for ABC (ABC6) took place from November 4 to 6, 2021 and was the first in a purely online format, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In the present manuscript, a working group of German breast cancer experts comments on the voting results of the ABC6 panelists regarding their applicability for routine clinical practice in Germany. Method: The ABC6 votes mainly include modified or new statements. With regard to all statements not modified for the ABC6 consensus, the German experts refer to the published paper of the ABC5 consensus. The German experts base their comments on the current recommendations of the Breast Committee of the Gynecological Oncology Working Group (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie, AGO Mamma). Topics: ABC6 focused on new treatment options and their implications for clinical practice. Optimal therapy sequencing for example was one of the issues. To solve the challenge of a more individualized treatment, precision medicine is fundamental. Oligometastatic disease, brain metastases and adequate supportive and palliative care were also addressed. Of special interest was the treatment of inoperable locally advanced breast cancer, which was discussed as a separate topic. As in previous years, patient advocates from around the world were an integral part of the ABC6 conference and had a major input into the consensus.

Time-Dependent COVID-19 Mortality in Patients With Cancer: An Updated Analysis of the OnCovid Registry.

Importance: Whether the severity and mortality of COVID-19 in patients with cancer have improved in terms of disease management and capacity is yet to be defined. Objective: To test whether severity and mortality from COVID-19 among patients with cancer have improved during the course of the pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: OnCovid is a European registry that collects data on consecutive patients with solid or hematologic cancer and COVID-19. This multicenter case series study included real-world data from 35 institutions across 6 countries (UK, Italy, Spain, France, Belgium, and Germany). This update included patients diagnosed between February 27, 2020, and February, 14, 2021. Inclusion criteria were confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and a history of solid or hematologic cancer. Exposures: SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: Deaths were differentiated at 14 days and 3 months as the 2 landmark end points. Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared by stratifying patients across 5 phases (February to March 2020, April to June 2020, July to September 2020, October to December 2020, and January to February 2021) and across 2 major outbreaks (February to June 2020 and July 2020 to February 2021). Results: At data cutoff, 2795 consecutive patients were included, with 2634 patients eligible for analysis (median [IQR] age, 68 [18-77] years ; 52.8% men). Eligible patients demonstrated significant time-dependent improvement in 14-day case-fatality rate (CFR) with estimates of 29.8% (95% CI, 0.26-0.33) for February to March 2020; 20.3% (95% CI, 0.17-0.23) for April to June 2020; 12.5% (95% CI, 0.06-22.90) for July to September 2020; 17.2% (95% CI, 0.15-0.21) for October to December 2020; and 14.5% (95% CI, 0.09-0.21) for January to February 2021 (all P < .001) across the predefined phases. Compared with the second major outbreak, patients diagnosed in the first outbreak were more likely to be 65 years or older (974 of 1626 [60.3%] vs 564 of 1008 [56.1%]; P = .03), have at least 2 comorbidities (793 of 1626 [48.8%] vs 427 of 1008 [42.4%]; P = .001), and have advanced tumors (708 of 1626 [46.4%] vs 536 of 1008 [56.1%]; P < .001). Complications of COVID-19 were more likely to be seen (738 of 1626 [45.4%] vs 342 of 1008 [33.9%]; P < .001) and require hospitalization (969 of 1626 [59.8%] vs 418 of 1008 [42.1%]; P < .001) and anti-COVID-19 therapy (1004 of 1626 [61.7%] vs 501 of 1008 [49.7%]; P < .001) during the first major outbreak. The 14-day CFRs for the first and second major outbreaks were 25.6% (95% CI, 0.23-0.28) vs 16.2% (95% CI, 0.13-0.19; P < .001), respectively. After adjusting for country, sex, age, comorbidities, tumor stage and status, anti-COVID-19 and anticancer therapy, and COVID-19 complications, patients diagnosed in the first outbreak had an increased risk of death at 14 days (hazard ratio [HR], 1.85; 95% CI, 1.47-2.32) and 3 months (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.08-1.51) compared with those diagnosed in the second outbreak. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this registry-based study suggest that mortality in patients with cancer diagnosed with COVID-19 has improved in Europe; this improvement may be associated with earlier diagnosis, improved management, and dynamic changes in community transmission over time.

Prevalence and impact of COVID-19 sequelae on treatment and survival of patients with cancer who recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection: evidence from the OnCovid retrospective, multicentre registry study.

BACKGROUND: The medium-term and long-term impact of COVID-19 in patients with cancer is not yet known. In this study, we aimed to describe the prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae and their impact on the survival of patients with cancer. We also aimed to describe patterns of resumption and modifications of systemic anti-cancer therapy following recovery from SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: OnCovid is an active European registry study enrolling consecutive patients aged 18 years or older with a history of solid or haematological malignancy and who had a diagnosis of RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. For this retrospective study, patients were enrolled from 35 institutions across Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK. Patients who were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection between Feb 27, 2020, and Feb 14, 2021, and entered into the registry at the point of data lock (March 1, 2021), were eligible for analysis. The present analysis was focused on COVID-19 survivors who underwent clinical reassessment at each participating institution. We documented prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae and described factors associated with their development and their association with post-COVID-19 survival, which was defined as the interval from post-COVID-19 reassessment to the patients' death or last follow-up. We also evaluated resumption of systemic anti-cancer therapy in patients treated within 4 weeks of COVID-19 diagnosis. The OnCovid study is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04393974. FINDINGS: 2795 patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection between Feb 27, 2020, and Feb 14, 2021, were entered into the study by the time of the data lock on March 1, 2021. After the exclusion of ineligible patients, the final study population consisted of 2634 patients. 1557 COVID-19 survivors underwent a formal clinical reassessment after a median of 22·1 months (IQR 8·4-57·8) from cancer diagnosis and 44 days (28-329) from COVID-19 diagnosis. 234 (15·0%) patients reported COVID-19 sequelae, including respiratory symptoms (116 [49·6%]) and residual fatigue (96 [41·0%]). Sequelae were more common in men (vs women; p=0·041), patients aged 65 years or older (vs other age groups; p=0·048), patients with two or more comorbidities (vs one or none; p=0·0006), and patients with a history of smoking (vs no smoking history; p=0·0004). Sequelae were associated with hospitalisation for COVID-19 (p<0·0001), complicated COVID-19 (p<0·0001), and COVID-19 therapy (p=0·0002). With a median post-COVID-19 follow-up of 128 days (95% CI 113-148), COVID-19 sequelae were associated with an increased risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] 1·80 [95% CI 1·18-2·75]) after adjusting for time to post-COVID-19 reassessment, sex, age, comorbidity burden, tumour characteristics, anticancer therapy, and COVID-19 severity. Among 466 patients on systemic anti-cancer therapy, 70 (15·0%) permanently discontinued therapy, and 178 (38·2%) resumed treatment with a dose or regimen adjustment. Permanent treatment discontinuations were independently associated with an increased risk of death (HR 3·53 [95% CI 1·45-8·59]), but dose or regimen adjustments were not (0·84 [0·35-2·02]). INTERPRETATION: Sequelae post-COVID-19 affect up to 15% of patients with cancer and adversely affect survival and oncological outcomes after recovery. Adjustments to systemic anti-cancer therapy can be safely pursued in treatment-eligible patients. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre and the Cancer Treatment and Research Trust.

COVID-19 vaccination in patients with breast cancer and gynecological malignancies: A German perspective.

INTRODUCTION: The side effects of systemic cancer therapy and the lack of clinical data on safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination in cancer patients cause uncertainty among the patients about whether to get vaccinated or not. Here, we evaluated attitude towards and effects of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with breast and gynecological cancer undergoing systemic cancer therapy. METHODS: Since March 15th, 2021, cancer patients who received one of the approved COVID-19 vaccines were routinely interviewed about immediate and late side effects. Clinical parameters such as current therapy, time interval between therapy administration and vaccination, and changes in the therapy schedule due to vaccination were documented. The collected data were analyzed de-identified as a part of routine quality assurance. RESULTS: By July 27th, 2021, 218 patients (74.3% breast cancer patients) had received one of two COVID-19 vaccine doses, and 112 patients had received both doses: 77.5% received Conmirnaty (BioNTech/Pfizer), 16.1% Vaxzevria (Astra Zeneca) and 5.9% COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna. The COVID-19 vaccines had an acceptable safety profile with self-limiting local and systemic adverse events, which rarely lasted >48 h post vaccination. Symptoms occurred predominantly after the second dose of the vaccine and less frequently in older patients >55 years. No vaccine-related serious adverse events were reported, and only limited effects of vaccination on the therapy schedule were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Breast and gynecologic cancer patients tolerate the COVID-19 vaccination while undergoing systemic cancer therapy without any additional side effects beyond those reported in the general population.

Changes in gynecologic and breast cancer diagnoses during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: analysis from a tertiary academic gyneco-oncological center in Germany.

PURPOSE: With the beginning of 2021, the world has been suffering from the COVID-19 pandemic for more than 1 year. More and more, we are able to evaluate side effects of the pandemic in the healthcare sector. A negative impact on cancer diagnoses is one of them. Careful observation of trends in an academic gyneco-oncological context appears important to identify potential negative developments. METHODS: We analyzed the case number of gynecologic and breast cancer diagnoses in the period from January to June 2020 compared to 2019 and during the period of the first general German lockdown (March 22nd until May 5th 2020). Patients were characterized by age, tumor type, FIGO or TNM stage and presence of symptoms at initial hospital presentation. RESULTS: The frequency of newly diagnosed gynecologic and breast cancer cases from beginning of January until end of June changed by - 10% and by - 12% during the lockdown in 2020 compared to 2019. In both periods, reduction of breast cancer cases was relatively larger than decrease of gynecologic cancers. Moreover, median patient age decreased. For the first half of 2020, we found a shift towards higher tumor stages (N+/M1 or FIGO III-IV). During the lockdown period, the appearance of tumor-associated symptoms at diagnosis increased by about 12%. CONCLUSION: This analysis illustrates the anticipated general decrease in diagnoses of primary cancers during the lockdown periods in 2020 due to COVID-19 pandemic for gynecologic and breast cancer cases.

St. Gallen/Vienna 2021: A Brief Summary of the Consensus Discussion on Customizing Therapies for Women with Early Breast Cancer.

Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the 2021 St. Gallen/Vienna Consensus Conference on Early Breast Cancer Treatment Standards had to be held virtually. Despite the challenge of convening global contributors to both the conference itself as well as the important Consensus Panel, the scientific committee and the organizers managed to organize a well-received scientific conference, and also the panel discussion was well received in the worldwide scientific community, as indicated by numerous positive feedbacks already within the first 24 h. The virtual format was unusual, but opened the door for new elements such as Consensus questions proposed from the audience, but also live audience interaction on both days - the Consensus was split into 2 parts in order to accommodate as many time zones globally as possible, leading to almost a doubling of discussion time compared to previous meetings. Also, about 3,400 participants from over 100 countries and all continents came together, including many colleagues who could attend for the first time from world regions with restrictions that so far did not allow the travel to Vienna. Traditionally, the Panel votings and discussions were preceded by 3 days of high-level live-discussions about the lectures that were available on demand already a week before. Also, all the lectures and live discussions in mini-panels are made available online for at least 6 months (https://www.oncoconferences.ch/events/bcc-2021/). The traditional panel votings were once more moderated by Eric Winer from Harvard and included interactive elements such as audience votings and audience questions, presented by Michael Gnant. This rapid report by the editors-in-chief of Breast Care summarizes the results of the 2021 international panel votings with respect to locoregional and systemic treatment as a quick news update for our readers and clearly does not intend to replace the official St. Gallen Consensus publication that will follow shortly in Annals of Oncology.

Systemic pro-inflammatory response identifies patients with cancer with adverse outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection: the OnCovid Inflammatory Score.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer are particularly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The systemic inflammatory response is a pathogenic mechanism shared by cancer progression and COVID-19. We investigated systemic inflammation as a driver of severity and mortality from COVID-19, evaluating the prognostic role of commonly used inflammatory indices in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer accrued to the OnCovid study. METHODS: In a multicenter cohort of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer in Europe, we evaluated dynamic changes in neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio (NLR); platelet:lymphocyte ratio (PLR); Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), renamed the OnCovid Inflammatory Score (OIS); modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS); and Prognostic Index (PI) in relation to oncological and COVID-19 infection features, testing their prognostic potential in independent training (n=529) and validation (n=542) sets. RESULTS: We evaluated 1071 eligible patients, of which 625 (58.3%) were men, and 420 were patients with malignancy in advanced stage (39.2%), most commonly genitourinary (n=216, 20.2%). 844 (78.8%) had ≥1 comorbidity and 754 (70.4%) had ≥1 COVID-19 complication. NLR, OIS, and mGPS worsened at COVID-19 diagnosis compared with pre-COVID-19 measurement (p<0.01), recovering in survivors to pre-COVID-19 levels. Patients in poorer risk categories for each index except the PLR exhibited higher mortality rates (p<0.001) and shorter median overall survival in the training and validation sets (p<0.01). Multivariable analyses revealed the OIS to be most independently predictive of survival (validation set HR 2.48, 95% CI 1.47 to 4.20, p=0.001; adjusted concordance index score 0.611). CONCLUSIONS: Systemic inflammation is a validated prognostic domain in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer and can be used as a bedside predictor of adverse outcome. Lymphocytopenia and hypoalbuminemia as computed by the OIS are independently predictive of severe COVID-19, supporting their use for risk stratification. Reversal of the COVID-19-induced proinflammatory state is a putative therapeutic strategy in patients with cancer.

Risk-adapted adjuvant therapy of luminal early breast cancer in 2020.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The present review summarizes recent original publications addressing the topic of risk-adapted adjuvant therapy in early breast cancer (EBC). As neoadjuvant therapy has become a standard for triple negative and HER2+ EBC, it focusses on luminal EBC. RECENT FINDINGS: Gene expression assays have become standard of care in luminal EBC, at least for patients with node negative disease. Two prospective randomized clinical trials, TAILORx (Oncotype DX) and MINDACT (MammaPrint) have presented additional analyses underlining the clinical utility of the tests. In times of COVID-19, immunohistochemically determined ER, PR, and Ki67 and early Ki67 response to endocrine therapy can be used to safely allocate patients for preoperative endocrine therapy and delay surgeries if resources are scarce. In patients with luminal high-risk disease, adding a CDK 4/6 inhibitor (abemaciclib) improves patient outcome already after short-term follow-up. SUMMARY: Determination of recurrence risk will remain important in luminal EBC for optimal therapy decisions. In the future, risk-adapted treatment concepts will include decision making for chemotherapy but also for endocrine-based approaches.

Expected Medium- and Long-Term Impact of the COVID-19 Outbreak in Oncology.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected healthcare systems globally, leading to reorganization of medical activities. We performed an international survey aimed to investigate the medium- and long-term impact on oncology units. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An 82-item survey was distributed from June 17 to July 14, 2020 among medical oncologists worldwide. RESULTS: One hundred nine medical oncologists from 18 countries in Europe (n = 93), United States (n = 5), and Latin America (n = 11) answered the survey. A systematic tracing of COVID-19-positive patients was continued in the postacute phase by 77.1% of the centers; 64.2% of the respondents participated in a local registry and 56% in international or national registries of infected patients. Treatment adaptations were introduced, and surgery was the most affected modality being delayed or canceled in more than 10% of patients in 34% of the centers, whereas early cessation of palliative treatment was reported in 32.1% of the centers; 64.2% of respondents reported paying attention to avoid undertreatments. The use of telemedicine has been largely increased. Similarly, virtual tools are increasingly used particularly for medical education and international or national or multidisciplinary meetings. 60.6% of the participants reduced clinical activity, and 28.4% compensated by increasing their research activity. Significant reduction of clinical trial activities is expected in 37% of centers this year. The well-being of healthcare staff would not recover by the end of the year according to 18% of the participants. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 outbreak has had a major impact on oncologic activity, which will persist in the future, irrespective of geographical areas.

Oncological care organisation during COVID-19 outbreak.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 appeared in late 2019, causing a pandemic spread. This led to a reorganisation of oncology care in order to reduce the risk of spreading infection between patients and healthcare staff. Here we analysed measures taken in major oncological units in Europe and the USA. METHODS: A 46-item survey was sent by email to representatives of 30 oncological centres in 12 of the most affected countries. The survey inquired about preventive measures established to reduce virus spread, patient education and processes employed for risk reduction in each oncological unit. RESULTS: Investigators from 21 centres in 10 countries answered the survey between 10 April and 6 May 2020. A triage for patients with cancer before hospital or clinic visits was conducted by 90.5% of centres before consultations, 95.2% before day care admissions and in 100% of the cases before overnight hospitalisation by means of phone calls, interactive online platforms, swab test and/or chest CT scan. Permission for caregivers to attend clinic visits was limited in many centres, with some exceptions (ie, for non-autonomous patients, in the case of a new diagnosis, when bad news was expected and for terminally ill patients). With a variable delay period, the use of personal protective equipment was unanimously mandatory, and in many centres, only targeted clinical and instrumental examinations were performed. Telemedicine was implemented in 76.2% of the centres. Separated pathways for COVID-19-positive and COVID-19-negative patients were organised, with separate inpatient units and day care areas. Self-isolation was required for COVID-19-positive or symptomatic staff, while return to work policies required a negative swab test in 76.2% of the centres. CONCLUSION: Many pragmatic measures have been quickly implemented to deal with the health emergency linked to COVID-19, although the relative efficacy of each intervention should be further analysed in large observational studies.

Clinical portrait of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in European cancer patients.

The SARS-Cov-2 pandemic significantly impacted on oncology practice across the globe. There is uncertainty as to the contribution of patients' demographics and oncological features on severity and mortality from Covid-19 and little guidance as to the role of anti-cancer and anti-Covid-19 therapy in this population. In a multi-center study of 890 cancer patients with confirmed Covid-19 we demonstrated a worsening gradient of mortality from breast cancer to haematological malignancies and showed that male gender, older age, and number of co-morbidities identifies a subset of patients with significantly worse mortality rates from Covid-19. Provision of chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy did not worsen mortality. Exposure to antimalarials was associated with improved mortality rates independent of baseline prognostic factors. This study highlights the clinical utility of demographic factors for individualized risk-stratification of patients and support further research into emerging anti-Covid-19 therapeutics in SARS-Cov-2 infected cancer patients.

Evidence-based guidelines for managing patients with primary ER+ HER2- breast cancer deferred from surgery due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Many patients with ER+ HER2- primary breast cancer are being deferred from surgery to neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NeoET) during the COVID-19 pandemic. We have collated data from multiple international trials of presurgical endocrine therapy in order to provide guidance on the identification of patients who may have insufficiently endocrine-sensitive tumors and should be prioritised for early surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy rather than NeoET during or in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic for safety or when surgical activity needs to be prioritized. For postmenopausal patients, our data provide strong support for the use of ER and PgR status at diagnosis for triaging of patients into three groups in which (taking into account clinical factors): (i) NeoET is likely to be inappropriate (Allred ER <6 or ER 6 and PgR <6) (ii) a biopsy for Ki67 analysis (on-treatment Ki67) could be considered after 2-4 weeks of NeoET (a: ER 7 or 8 and PgR <6 or b: ER 6 or 7 and PgR ≥6) or (iii) NeoET is an acceptable course of action (ER 8 and PgR ≥6). Cut-offs for percentage of cells positive are also given. For group (ii), a high early on-treatment level of Ki67 (>10%) indicates a higher priority for early surgery. Too few data were available for premenopausal patients to provide a similar treatment algorithm. These guidelines should be helpful for managing patients with early ER+ HER2- breast cancer during and in the aftermath of the COVID-19 crisis.

A Web- and App-Based Connected Care Solution for COVID-19 In- and Outpatient Care: Qualitative Study and Application Development.

BACKGROUND: From the perspective of health care professionals, coronavirus disease (COVID-19) brings many challenges as well as opportunities for digital health care. One challenge is that health care professionals are at high risk of infection themselves. Therefore, in-person visits need to be reduced to an absolute minimum. Connected care solutions, including telehealth, remote patient monitoring, and secure communications between clinicians and their patients, may rapidly become the first choice in such public health emergencies. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the COVID-19 Caregiver Cockpit (C19CC) was to implement a free-of-charge, web- and app-based tool for patient assessment to assist health care professionals working in the COVID-19 environment. METHODS: Physicians in Argentina, Germany, Iran, Italy, Portugal, Switzerland, and the United States explained their challenges with COVID-19 patient care through unstructured interviews. Based on the collected feedback, the first version of the C19CC was built. In the second round of interviews, the application was presented to physicians, and more feedback was obtained. RESULTS: Physicians identified a number of different scenarios where telemedicine or connected care solutions could rapidly improve patient care. These scenarios included outpatient care, discharge management, remote tracking of patients with chronic diseases, as well as incorporating infected physicians under quarantine into telehealth services. CONCLUSIONS: The C19CC is the result of an agile and iterative development process that complements the work of physicians. It aims to improve the care and safety of people who are infected by COVID-19.