COVID-19 in cancer patients: update from the joint analysis of the ESMO-CoCARE, BSMO, and PSMO international databases.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has significantly affected patients with cancer and revealed unanticipated challenges in securing optimal cancer care across different disciplines. The European Society for Medical Oncology COVID-19 and CAncer REgistry (ESMO-CoCARE) is an international, real-world database, collecting data on the natural history, management, and outcomes of patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: This is the 2nd CoCARE analysis, jointly with Belgian (Belgian Society of Medical Oncology, BSMO) and Portuguese (Portuguese Society of Medical Oncology, PSMO) registries, with data from January 2020 to December 2021. The aim is to identify significant prognostic factors for COVID-19 hospitalization and mortality (primary outcomes), as well as intensive care unit admission and overall survival (OS) (secondary outcomes). Subgroup analyses by pandemic phase and vaccination status were carried out. RESULTS: The cohort includes 3294 patients (CoCARE: 2049; BSMO: 928, all hospitalized by eligibility criteria; PSMO: 317), diagnosed in four distinct pandemic phases (January to May 2020: 36%; June to September 2020: 9%; October 2020 to February 2021: 41%; March to December 2021: 12%). COVID-19 hospitalization rate was 54% (CoCARE/PSMO), ICU admission 14%, and COVID-19 mortality 22% (all data). At a 6-month median follow-up, 1013 deaths were recorded with 73% 3-month OS rate. No significant change was observed in COVID-19 mortality among hospitalized patients across the four pandemic phases (30%-33%). Hospitalizations and ICU admission decreased significantly (from 78% to 34% and 16% to 10%, respectively). Among 1522 patients with known vaccination status at COVID-19 diagnosis, 70% were non-vaccinated, 24% had incomplete vaccination, and 7% complete vaccination. Complete vaccination had a protective effect on hospitalization (odds ratio = 0.24; 95% confidence interval [0.14-0.38]), ICU admission (odds ratio = 0.29 [0.09-0.94]), and OS (hazard ratio = 0.39 [0.20-0.76]). In multivariable analyses, COVID-19 hospitalization was associated with patient/cancer characteristics, the first pandemic phase, the presence of COVID-19-related symptoms or inflammatory biomarkers, whereas COVID-19 mortality was significantly higher in symptomatic patients, males, older age, ethnicity other than Asian/Caucasian, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2, body mass index <25, hematological malignancy, progressive disease versus no evident disease, and advanced cancer stage. CONCLUSIONS: The updated CoCARE analysis, jointly with BSMO and PSMO, highlights factors that significantly affect COVID-19 outcomes, providing actionable clues for further reducing mortality.

Changes in anticancer treatment plans in patients with solid cancer hospitalized with COVID-19: analysis of the nationwide BSMO-COVID registry providing lessons for the future.

BACKGROUND: Solid cancer is an independent prognostic factor for poor outcome with COVID-19. As guidelines for patient management in that setting depend on retrospective efforts, we here present the first analyses of a nationwide database of patients with cancer hospitalized with COVID-19 in Belgium, with a focus on changes in anticancer treatment plans at the time of SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Nineteen Belgian hospitals identified all patients with a history of solid cancer hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 2020 and February 2021. Demographic, cancer-specific and COVID-specific data were pseudonymously entered into a central Belgian Society of Medical Oncology (BSMO)-COVID database. The association between survival and primary cancer type was analyzed through multivariate multinomial logistic regression. Group comparisons for categorical variables were carried out through a Chi-square test. RESULTS: A total of 928 patients were registered in the database; most of them were aged ≥70 years (61.0%) and with poor performance scores [57.2% Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) ≥2]. Thirty-day COVID-related mortality was 19.8%. In multivariate analysis, a trend was seen for higher mortality in patients with lung cancer (27.6% versus 20.8%, P = 0.062) and lower mortality for patients with breast cancer (13.0% versus 23.3%, P = 0.052) compared with other tumour types. Non-curative treatment was associated with higher 30-day COVID-related mortality rates compared with curative or no active treatment (25.8% versus 14.3% versus 21.9%, respectively, P < 0.001). In 33% of patients under active treatment, the therapeutic plan was changed due to COVID-19 diagnosis, most frequently involving delays/interruptions in systemic treatments (18.6%). Thirty-day COVID-related mortality was not significantly different between patients with and without treatment modifications (21.4% versus 20.5%). CONCLUSION: Interruption in anticancer treatments at the time of SARS-CoV-2 infection was not associated with a reduction in COVID-related mortality in our cohort of patients with solid cancer, highlighting that treatment continuation should be strived for, especially in the curative setting.

Short and medium-term outcomes of patients with solid cancer hospitalized with COVID-19 in Belgium according to cancer diagnosis and treatment characteristics

Background: Solid cancer is an independent prognostic factor for COVID-19 related mortality. Adverse prognostic factors in these patients include low performance status, lung cancer, advanced cancer stage and recent diagnosis. In this study, we further evaluated prognostic effects of cancer diagnosis and treatment variables and characterized changes in anticancer treatment plans due to COVID-19 diagnosis in a nation-wide cohort study. Methods: Patients with a history of solid cancer hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 2020 and February 2021 in one of the 20 participating institutions in Belgium were included. Patient demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 hospitalization course and treatment, cancer and anticancer treatment characteristics, treatment changes due to COVID-19 and clinical outcomes in-hospital and during follow-up were retrospectively registered in a central database. The primary objective was to evaluate potential differences in 30-day and 3-month COVID-19-related mortality according to cancer and anticancer treatment characteristics. Results: A total of 946 patients (median age 73y, interquartile range 64-81y) were included. Pre-existing comorbidities were present in 90.1% of patients, and 21.9% had a history of > 1 malignancy. Half of the patients (n = 463, 49.3%) had received anticancer treatment ≤3 months before COVID-19 diagnosis (“active cancer”), of whom 286 (63.1%) in the non-curative setting. The overall 30-day and 3-month COVID-19- related mortality rates in this cohort were 21.4% (n = 178) and 24.1% (n = 194), respectively. COVID- related 3-month mortality was comparable in patients with active cancer (n = 96, 24.3%) and in patients with non-active cancer (n = 97, 24.0%), but within the first group COVID-related mortality was higher in those receiving systemic treatment in the non-curative (28.3%) versus the curative setting (15.2%). A change in the anticancer treatment plan due to COVID-19 was recorded in 148/463 patients with active cancer (32.0%). In patients with changes in systemic treatment plans (n = 146), treatment was delayed in 94 patients (in half of cases for > 1 month) and cancelled in 42 patients. The main reason for modifications in anti-cancer treatment was COVID-19 related complications (79.6%), followed by fear for/existence of anticancer treatment related toxicity (14.8%). Conclusions: Our nation-wide analysis in patients with solid cancer hospitalized with COVID-19 shows comparable 3-month mortality among patients who did and who did not receive anticancer treatment in the three months before COVID-19 diagnosis. Changes in anticancer treatment were very frequent in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Further monitoring of the long-term impact of COVID-19-related changes to anticancer treatment plans is warranted.

Demographic and laboratory determinants of humoral immune responses and impact of different anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine platforms in patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Patients (pts) with cancer have increased mortality from COVID-19 and their vaccination is crucial to prevent severe infection. We aimed to identify demographic and laboratory determinants of humoral immune responses to COVID-19 vaccination in pts with cancer and investigate differences in responses based on the vaccine platform. Methods: We searched for records in PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL up to 28/09/21, as well as conference proceedings from ASCO and ESMO 2021. We included studies of pts ≥16 yr with a cancer diagnosis, who were vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Studies were excluded if ≥10% of the participants had other causes of immunosuppression or baseline anti- SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies (Ab)/previous COVID-19 (PROSPERO ID: CRD42021282338). For this subgroup analysis of studies that reported a proportion of pts with cancer and positive Ab titers at any timepoint following complete vaccination, a random-effects model was used to estimate the humoral response rate (HRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: We included 64 records, reporting data from 10,511 cancer pts. The HRR in the overall population and by subgroup are shown in Table. Elder patients with hematologic cancers (59%, CI 47-70%,N= 667) and patients with lymphopenia (50%, CI 25-75%, N = 111) or hypogammaglobulinemia (36%, CI 19-57%, N=226) were the subgroups with lower HRR. Male (77%, CI 69-84%, N = 2,659) and Asian (84%, CI 54-96%, N = 37) pts showed a trend to lower HRR when compared with females and other races, respectively. Pts vaccinated with mRNA vaccine platforms (79%, CI 74-83%, N = 9,404) had numerically higher HRR than those receiving the adenovirus vaccines (28%, CI 19-40%, N = 74). Conclusions: This study highlights demographic and laboratory determinants of weaker immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, permitting better identification of more vulnerable pts. Despite the small number of pts included receiving adenovirus vaccines, these data also suggest prioritizing mRNA platform vaccination in pts with cancer.

Impact of cancer diagnosis, stage, and systemic therapies on immunogenicity after COVID-19 vaccination in patients with cancer: A systematic review and metaanalysis

Background: Patients (pts) with cancer are at increased risk of severe COVID-19. Both underlying malignancy and anti-cancer treatments influence the immune system, potentially impacting the level of vaccine protection achieved. Methods: A systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL and conference proceedings (ASCO annual meetings and ESMO congress) up to 28/09/21, was conducted to identify studies reporting anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein immunoglobulin G seroconversion rates (SR) at any time point after complete COVID-19 immunization (mRNA- or adenoviral-based vaccines) in cancer pts. Complete immunization was defined as 1 dose of JNJ-78436735 vaccine or 2 doses of BNT162b2, mRNA-1273 or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccines. Subgroup analyses were performed to examine the impact of cancer diagnosis, disease stage, and anticancer therapies on the SR. Overall effects were pooled using random-effects models and reported as pooled SR with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Of 1,548 identified records, 64 studies were included in this analysis reporting data from 10,511 subjects. The Table shows the SR in the overall population and specific subgroups. In pts with solid malignancies (SM), disease stage and primary site did not significantly impact the SR. In pts with hematologic malignancies (HM), SR were significantly lower in pts with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) compared to acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), and multiple myeloma (MM). Concerning the impact of cancer therapies on SR, pts with SM undergoing chemotherapy had numerically lower SR (N = 1,234, SR 87%, CI 81-92) compared to those treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (N = 574, SR 94%, CI 88-97) or endocrine therapy (N = 326, SR 94%, CI 86-97) with or without another targeted therapy. Pts with HM treated with anti-CD20 therapy (within the last 12 months: N = 360, SR 7%, CI 2-20;or more than 12m: N = 175, SR 59%, CI 35-80), immune-modulating agents (BTK or BCL2 inhibitors) (N = 462, SR 47%, CI 32-64%) or other immunotherapies (anti-CD19/CART or anti-CD38) (N = 293, SR 37%, CI 23-53) had lower SR compared to pts treated with autologous (N = 353, SR 77%, CI 67- 85) or allogenic stem cell transplantation (N = 509, SR 77%, CI 68-84). Conclusions: SR varies between cancer types and anticancer therapies with some cancer pts having low protection against COVID- 19 even after complete vaccination.

Mortality in adult patients with solid or hematological cancers and SARS-CoV-2 infection with a specific focus on lung and breast malignancies: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) infection and a diagnosis of cancer are at high risk of severe symptomatic disease (COVID-19) and death. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies, to estimate the case-fatality rate (CFR) of patients with solid or hematological tumors and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed library up to 31 January, 2021, was performed in order to identify publications reporting the CFR among adult patients with solid or hematological tumors and SARS-CoV-2 infection. CFR was defined as the rate of deaths among SARS-CoV-2-positive cancer patients. Moreover, we separately assessed the CFR among patients with lung and breast cancer. Studies with at least 10 patients were included. The CFR was assessed through a random effect model, and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. The Higgins I2 index was computed to assess the heterogeneity between studies. Results: The systematic search of the literaturereturned 1,727studies. 1,551 were excluded on the basis of the title, 29 based on the abstract, and 3 were duplicates. A total of 144 studies were selected, including 35,725 patients with solid or hematological tumors and SARS-CoV-2 infection. In total, 46 and 32 studies reported the CFR among COVID-19 patients with lung (total N = 1,555) and breast (total N = 1.398) cancer, respectively. Overall, the CFR was 25.5% (95% CI 23.1%-28.1%, Egger test p < 0.001). A sensitivity analysis, after excluding studies with less than 100 patients, showed a CFR of 22.1% (95% CI 19.4%-25.2%). The CFR among patients with lung cancer and SARSCoV2 infection was 33.4% (95% CI 28.1%-39.6%) when including all studies and 26.3% (95% CI 17.6%-39.2%) at the sensitivity analysis after excluding studies with less than 100 patients. The CFR among patients with breast cancer and SARS-CoV2 infection was 13.7% (95% CI 9.1%-20.7%) when including all studies and 13.0% (95% CI 7.6%-22.1%) at the sensitivity analysis after excluding studies with less than 100 patients. Conclusions: One year after the outbreak of the pandemic, this large metaanalysis reports the impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with cancer. This population experienced a high probability of mortality, with a comparatively higher CFR in patients with lung cancer, and a comparatively lower CFR in patients with breast cancer. Patients with an underlying diagnosis of cancer require special attention with aggressive preventive measures that also include early access to COVID-19 vaccination.

Impact of COVID-19 on social media as perceived by the oncology community: results from a survey in collaboration with the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the OncoAlert Network.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted all aspects of modern-day oncology, including how stakeholders communicate through social media. We surveyed oncology stakeholders in order to assess their attitudes pertaining to social media and how it has been affected during the pandemic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 40-item survey was distributed to stakeholders from 8 July to 22 July 2020 and was promoted through the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the OncoAlert Network. RESULTS: One thousand and seventy-six physicians and stakeholders took part in the survey. In total, 57.3% of respondents were medical oncologists, 50.6% aged <40 years, 50.8% of female gender and mostly practicing in Europe (51.5%). More than 90% of respondents considered social media a useful tool for distributing scientific information and for education. Most used social media to stay up to date on cancer care in general (62.5%) and cancer care during COVID-19 (61%) given the constant flow of information. Respondents also used social media to interact with other oncologists (78.8%) and with patients (34.4%). Overall, 61.1% of respondents were satisfied with the role that social media was playing during the COVID-19 pandemic. On the other hand, 41.1% of respondents reported trouble in discriminating between credible and less credible information and 30% stated social networks were a source of stress. For this reason, one-third of respondents reduced its use during the COVID-19 pandemic. Regarding meeting attendance, a total of 59.1% of responding physicians preferred in-person meetings to virtual ones, and 51.8% agreed that virtual meetings and social distancing could hamper effective collaboration. CONCLUSION: Social media has a useful role in supporting cancer care and professional engagement in oncology. Although one-third of respondents reported reduced use of social media due to stress during the COVID-19 pandemic, the majority found social media useful to keep up to date and were satisfied with the role social media was playing during the pandemic.