Physical and mental health of breast cancer patients and survivors before and during successive SARS-CoV-2-infection waves.

PURPOSE: During the first SARS-CoV-2-infection wave, a deterioration in emotional well-being and increased need for mental health care were observed among patients treated or being treated for breast cancer. In this follow-up study, we assessed patient-reported quality of life (QoL), physical functioning, and psychosocial well-being during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave in a large, representative cohort. METHODS: This longitudinal cohort study was conducted within the prospective, multicenter UMBRELLA breast cancer cohort. To assess patient-reported QoL, physical functioning and psychosocial well-being, COVID-19-specific surveys were completed by patients during the first and second SARS-CoV-2-infection waves (April and November 2020, respectively). An identical survey was completed by a comparable reference population during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection waves. All surveys included the validated EORTC-QLQ-C30/BR23, HADS and "De Jong-Gierveld Loneliness" questionnaires. Pre-COVID-19 EORTC-QLQ-C30/BR23 and HADS outcomes were available from UMBRELLA. Response rates were 69.3% (n = 1106/1595) during the first SARS-CoV-2-infection wave and 50.9% (n = 822/1614) during the second wave. A total of 696 patients responded during both SARS-CoV-2-infection waves and were included in the analysis comparing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave to PROs during the first wave. Moreover, PROs reported by all patients during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave (n = 822) were compared to PROs of a similar non-cancer reference population (n = 241) and to their pre-COVID-19 PROs. RESULTS: Patient-reported QoL, physical functioning, and psychosocial well-being of patients treated or being treated for breast cancer remained stable or improved from the first to the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave. The proportion of emotional loneliness reduced from 37.6 to 29.9% of patients. Compared to a similar non-cancer reference population, physical, emotional, and cognitive functioning, future perspectives and symptoms of dyspnea and insomnia were worse in patients treated or being treated for breast cancer during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave. PROs in the second wave were similar to pre-COVID-19 PROs. CONCLUSION: Although patients scored overall worse than individuals without breast cancer, QoL, physical functioning, and psychosocial well-being did not deteriorate between the first and second wave. During the second wave, PROs were similar to pre-COVID-19 values. Overall, current findings are cautiously reassuring for future mental health of patients treated or being treated for breast cancer.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on perceived access to health care and preferences for health care provision in individuals (being) treated for breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate perceived access to health care and preferences for health care provision among patients (being) treated for breast cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Longitudinal study within the prospective, multicenter UMBRELLA cohort of patients (being) treated for breast cancer. All cohort participants enrolled in UMBRELLA between October 2013 and November 2020 were sent a COVID-19-specific survey during the first and second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, i.e., April 2020 and November 2020, respectively. RESULTS: In total, 1106 (69.3%) and 822 (50.9%) cohort participants completed the survey in the first and second wave, respectively. The proportion of patients experiencing that their treatment or follow-up care was affected due to COVID-19 decreased from 28.4% (n = 198) in April 2020 to 14.8% (n = 103) in November 2020. Throughout the pandemic, one or more hospital consultations were postponed in 10.0% (n = 82) of all patients and changed into a teleconsultation in 23.1% (n = 190). The proportion of patients who experienced a higher threshold to contact their general practitioner due to COVID-19 decreased from 29.9% (n = 204) in the first wave to 20.8% (n = 145) in the second wave. In-person consultations remained most preferred in 35.2% (n = 289) of all patients. Nearly half of all patients (48.3%, n = 396) indicated that telehealth would be a useful alternative for in-person consultations in future. CONCLUSION: Perceived access to health care has improved substantially throughout the pandemic. Digital care is well received by patients (being) treated for breast cancer.

(Ex-)breast cancer patients with (pre-existing) symptoms of anxiety and/or depression experience higher barriers to contact health care providers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: To identify factors associated with (perceived) access to health care among (ex-)breast cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Cross-sectional study within a large prospective, multicenter cohort of (ex-)breast cancer patients, i.e., UMBRELLA. All participants enrolled in the UMBRELLA cohort between October 2013 and April 2020 were sent a COVID-19-specific survey, including the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) questionnaire. RESULTS: In total, 1051 (66.0%) participants completed the survey. During COVID-19, 284 (27.0%) participants reported clinically relevant increased levels of anxiety and/or depression, i.e., total HADS score ≥ 12. Participants with anxiety and/or depression reported statistically significant higher barriers to contact their general practitioner (47.5% vs. 25.0%, resp.) and breast cancer physicians (26.8% vs. 11.2%, resp.) compared to participants without these symptoms. In addition, a higher proportion of participants with anxiety and/or depression reported that their current treatment or (after)care was affected by COVID-19 compared to those without these symptoms (32.7% vs. 20.5%, resp.). Factors independently associated with symptoms of anxiety and/or depression during COVID-19 were pre-existent anxiety (OR 6.1, 95% CI 4.1-9.2) or depression (OR 6.0, 95% CI 3.5-10.2). CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, (ex-)breast cancer patients with symptoms of anxiety and/or depression experience higher barriers to contact health care providers. Also, they more often report that their health care was affected by COVID-19. Risk factors for anxiety and/or depression during COVID-19 are pre-existent symptoms of anxiety or depression. Extra attention-including mental health support-is needed for this group.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Patient-Reported Outcomes of Breast Cancer Patients and Survivors.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic (officially declared on the March 11, 2020), and the resulting measures, are impacting daily life and medical management of breast cancer patients and survivors. We evaluated to what extent these changes have affected quality of life, physical, and psychosocial well-being of patients previously or currently being treated for breast cancer. METHODS: This study was conducted within a prospective, multicenter cohort of breast cancer patients and survivors (Utrecht cohort for Multiple BREast cancer intervention studies and Long-term evaLuAtion). Shortly after the implementation of COVID-19 measures, an extra survey was sent to 1595 participants, including the validated European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core (C30) and breast cancer-specific (BR23) Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30/BR23) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) questionnaire. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were compared with the most recent PROs collected within UMBRELLA pre-COVID-19. The impact of COVID-19 on PROs was assessed using mixed model analysis, adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: 1051 patients and survivors (65.9%) completed the survey; 31.1% (n = 327) reported a higher threshold to contact their general practitioner amid the COVID-19 pandemic. A statistically significant deterioration in emotional functioning was observed (mean = 82.6 [SD = 18.7] to 77.9 [SD = 17.3]; P < .001), and 505 (48.0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 45.0% to 51.1%) patients and survivors reported moderate to severe loneliness. Small improvements were observed in quality of life and physical, social, and role functioning. In the subgroup of 51 patients under active treatment, social functioning strongly deteriorated (77.3 [95% CI = 69.4 to 85.2] to 61.3 [95% CI = 52.6 to 70.1]; P = .002). CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, breast cancer patients and survivors were less likely to contact physicians and experienced a deterioration in their emotional functioning. Patients undergoing active treatment reported a substantial drop in social functioning. One in 2 reported loneliness that was moderate or severe. Online interventions supporting mental health and social interaction are needed during times of social distancing and lockdowns.

Post-lumpectomy CT-guided tumor bed delineation for breast boost and partial breast irradiation: Can additional pre- and postoperative imaging reduce interobserver variability?

For breast boost radiotherapy or accelerated partial breast irradiation, the tumor bed (TB) is delineated by the radiation oncologist on a planning computed tomography (CT) scan. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the interobserver variability (IOV) of the TB delineation is reduced by providing the radiation oncologist with additional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or CT scans. A total of 14 T1-T2 breast cancer patients underwent a standard planning CT in the supine treatment position following lumpectomy, as well as additional pre- and postoperative imaging in the same position. Post-lumpectomy TBs were independently delineated by four breast radiation oncologists on standard postoperative CT and on CT registered to an additional imaging modality. The additional imaging modalities used were postoperative MRI, preoperative contrast-enhanced (CE)-CT and preoperative CE-MRI. A cavity visualization score (CVS) was assigned to each standard postoperative CT by each observer. In addition, the conformity index (CI), volume and distance between centers of mass (dCOM) of the TB delineations were calculated. On CT, the median CI was 0.57, with a median volume of 22 cm3 and dCOM of 5.1 mm. The addition of postoperative MRI increased the median TB volume significantly to 28 cm3 (P<0.001), while the CI (P=0.176) and dCOM (P=0.110) were not affected. The addition of preoperative CT or MRI increased the TB volume to 26 and 25 cm3, respectively (both P<0.001), while the CI increased to 0.58 and 0.59 (both P<0.001) and the dCOM decreased to 4.7 mm (P=0.004) and 4.6 mm (P=0.001), respectively. In patients with CVS≤3, the median CI was 0.40 on CT, which was significantly increased by all additional imaging modalities, up to 0.52, and was accompanied by a median volume increase up to 6 cm3. In conclusion, the addition of postoperative MRI, preoperative CE-CT or preoperative CE-MRI did not result in a considerable reduction in the IOV in postoperative CT-guided TB delineation, while target volumes marginally increased. The value of additional imaging may be dependent on CVS.

MRI and CT imaging for preoperative target volume delineation in breast-conserving therapy.

BACKGROUND: Accurate tumor bed delineation after breast-conserving surgery is important. However, consistency among observers on standard postoperative radiotherapy planning CT is low and volumes can be large due to seroma formation. A preoperative delineation of the tumor might be more consistent. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the consistency of preoperative target volume delineation on CT and MRI for breast-conserving radiotherapy. METHODS: Tumors were delineated on preoperative contrast-enhanced (CE) CT and newly developed 3D CE-MR images, by four breast radiation oncologists. Clinical target volumes (CTVs) were created by addition of a 1.5 cm margin around the tumor, excluding skin and chest wall. Consistency in target volume delineation was expressed by the interobserver variability. Therefore, the conformity index (CI), center of mass distance (dCOM) and volumes were calculated. Tumor characteristics on CT and MRI were scored by an experienced breast radiologist. RESULTS: Preoperative tumor delineation resulted in a high interobserver agreement with a high median CI for the CTV, for both CT (0.80) and MRI (0.84). The tumor was missed on CT in 2/14 patients (14%). Leaving these 2 patients out of the analysis, CI was higher on MRI compared to CT for the GTV (p<0.001) while not for the CTV (CT (0.82) versus MRI (0.84), p=0.123). The dCOM did not differ between CT and MRI. The median CTV was 48 cm3 (range 28-137 cm3) on CT and 59 cm3 (range 30-153 cm3) on MRI (p<0.001). Tumor shapes and margins were rated as more irregular and spiculated on CE-MRI. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that preoperative target volume delineation resulted in small target volumes with a high consistency among observers. MRI appeared to be necessary for tumor detection and the visualization of irregularities and spiculations. Regarding the tumor delineation itself, no clinically relevant differences in interobserver variability were observed. These results will be used to study the potential for future MRI-guided and neoadjuvant radiotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Clinical Trials Registry Platform NTR3198.

Improving target delineation on 4-dimensional CT scans in stage I NSCLC using a deformable registration tool.

INTRODUCTION: Correct target definition is crucial in stereotactic radiotherapy for lung tumors. We evaluated use of deformable registration (DR) for target contouring on 4-dimensional (4D) CT scans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three clinicians contoured gross tumor volume (GTV) in an end-inspiration phase of 4DCT of 6 patients on two occasions. Two clinicians contoured GTVs in all phases of 4DCT and on maximum intensity projections (MIP). The initial GTV was auto-propagated to 9 other phases using a B-spline algorithm (VelocityAI). Internal target volumes (ITVs) generated were (i) ITV(10manual) encompassing all physician-contoured GTVs, (ii) ITV-MIP(optimized) from MIP after review of individual 4DCT phases, (iii) ITV(10deformed) encompassing auto-propagated GTVs using DR, and (iv) ITV(10deformed-optimized), from an ITV(10deformed) target that was modified to form a 'clinically optimal' ITV. Volume-overlaps were scored using Dice's Similarity Coefficients (DSCs). RESULTS: Intra-clinician GTV reproducibility was greater than inter-clinician reproducibility (mean DSC 0.93 vs. 0.88, p<0.0004). In five of 6 patients, ITV-MIP(optimized) differed from the ITV(10deformed-optimized). In all patients, the DSC between ITV(10deformed-optimized) and ITV(10deformed) was higher than that between ITV(10deformed-optimized) and ITV-MIP(optimized) (p<0.02 T-test). CONCLUSION: ITVs created in stage I tumors using DR were closer to 'clinically optimal' ITVs than was the case with a MIP-modified approach.