Pulmonary tumour thrombotic microangiopathy mimicking immunotherapy-associated pneumonitis.

We present a case of pulmonary tumour thrombotic microangiopathy (PTTM) in a patient on adjuvant immunotherapy for resected triple negative breast cancer. The patient presented with deranged liver function tests and subsequently developed severe hypoxia and thrombocytopaenia, with right heart failure. The primary differential diagnosis considered was immunotherapy-associated hepatitis and pneumonitis. Despite organ support, the patient deteriorated rapidly and died of respiratory failure. As is often the case with PTTM, the diagnosis was only found at postmortem. PTTM should be considered in patients with a background of cancer (and may be more common in certain subtypes) who present with this unusual combination of clinical features. While the condition carries an extremely poor prognosis, prompter recognition for future patients may allow consideration of novel treatments.

Influences on reproductive decision-making among forcibly displaced women resettling in high-income countries: a scoping review and thematic analysis.

BACKGROUND: Forced displacement impacts the health, rights and safety of women, which is further compounded by gender inequality. In particular, this has consequences for forcibly displaced women's reproductive health once resettled in a new country. To ensure the reproductive health and rights of forcibly displaced women during and after resettlement, there must be careful consideration of their reproductive decision-making taking into account the context and environment of the host country. AIM: This scoping review aimed to explore the influences on reproductive decision-making among forcibly displaced women resettling in high-income countries. METHOD: A scoping review was conducted following the PRISMA-ScR for reporting. EBSCO was used to search databases covering global health, health policy, psychology, sociology, and philosophy for articles published from 1 January 2012 to 27 April 2022. Data extracted from each article included author(s), year of publication, publication type, aims/objectives, study design, sampling method, data collection or eligibility criteria, study population (i.e., sample size and characteristics), migration status, country(ies) of origin, host country(ies), key findings and limitations. Two independent reviewers screened all articles against eligibility criteria using Covidence. Data charting and thematic analysis were performed independently by one reviewer. FINDINGS: Nineteen articles published between 2013 and 2022 mostly conducted in the United States (36.8%) and Australia (21.1%), with the majority reporting on qualitative findings (68.4%), and women from a wide array of countries and cultures (most commonly African countries) were included. Influences on women's reproductive decision-making related to the contexts before displacement, during displacement, and after arrival, with influences on women's reproductive decision-making identified specific to the context. The influences before displacement included conflict; religious beliefs; socio-cultural gendered expectations; and external control over reproductive autonomy. During displacement influences included paternalism and access to education. Influences after arrival included pressure, restriction, coercion; knowledge and misconceptions; patriarchal power dynamics; and seeking empowerment. An adapted socio-ecological model was developed to interpret the findings. CONCLUSION: This review highlights the complexity and nuances within forcibly displaced women's experiences which influence their reproductive decision-making. Further research may review the evidence base to provide guidance for healthcare professionals and health policies aimed at empowering women to make autonomous reproductive decisions; develop training for healthcare professionals to prevent pressure, restriction and coercion of women's reproductive autonomy; and inform development of policy that takes an intersectional approach to women's health rights and gender equality.

A population-scale temporal case-control evaluation of COVID-19 disease phenotype and related outcome rates in patients with cancer in England (UKCCP).

Patients with cancer are at increased risk of hospitalisation and mortality following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. However, the SARS-CoV-2 phenotype evolution in patients with cancer since 2020 has not previously been described. We therefore evaluated SARS-CoV-2 on a UK populationscale from 01/11/2020-31/08/2022, assessing case-outcome rates of hospital assessment(s), intensive care admission and mortality. We observed that the SARS-CoV-2 disease phenotype has become less severe in patients with cancer and the non-cancer population. Case-hospitalisation rates for patients with cancer dropped from 30.58% in early 2021 to 7.45% in 2022 while case-mortality rates decreased from 20.53% to 3.25%. However, the risk of hospitalisation and mortality remains 2.10x and 2.54x higher in patients with cancer, respectively. Overall, the SARS-CoV-2 disease phenotype is less severe in 2022 compared to 2020 but patients with cancer remain at higher risk than the non-cancer population. Patients with cancer must therefore be empowered to live more normal lives, to see loved ones and families, while also being safeguarded with expanded measures to reduce the risk of transmission.

Re-defining reproductive coercion using a socio-ecological lens: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Reproductive coercion is a significant public health issue in Australia which has mainly been conceptualised as a form of violence at the interpersonal level. This limited scope ignores the role of the gendered drivers of violence and fails to encompass a socio-ecological lens which is necessary to consider the multiple interacting layers that create the context in which reproductive coercion occurs. The aim of the scoping review was to explore how the reproductive coercion is defined by international research. Specifically, how is reproductive coercion defined at the social-cultural-systems-structural levels, and are the definitions of reproductive coercion inclusive of the conditions and contexts in which reproductive coercion occurs? METHODS: A scoping review was undertaken to explore existing definitions of reproductive coercion. Searches were conducted on Embase, Cochrane Library, Informit Health Collection, and the EBSCOHost platform. Google was also searched for relevant grey literature. Articles were included if they were: theoretical research, reviews, empirical primary research, grey literature or books; published between January 2018 and May 2022; written in English; and focused on females aged 18-50 years. Data from eligible articles were deductively extracted and inductively thematically analysed to identify themes describing how reproductive coercion is defined. RESULTS: A total of 24 articles were included in the scoping review. Most research defined reproductive coercion at the interpersonal level with only eight articles partially considering and four articles fully considering the socio-cultural-systems-structural level. Thematic analysis identified four main themes in reproductive coercion definitions: Individual external exertion of control over a woman's reproductive autonomy; Systems and structures; Social and cultural determinants; and Freedom from external forces to achieve reproductive autonomy. CONCLUSIONS: We argue for and propose a more inclusive definition of reproductive coercion that considers the gendered nature of reproductive coercion, and is linked to power, oppression and inequality, which is and can be perpetrated and/or facilitated at the interpersonal, community, organisational, institutional, systems, and societal levels as well as by the state.

Immunotherapy-related adverse events in real-world patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer on chemoimmunotherapy: a Spinnaker study sub-analysis.

Background: The Spinnaker study evaluated survival outcomes and prognostic factors in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer receiving first-line chemoimmunotherapy in the real world. This sub-analysis assessed the immunotherapy-related adverse effects (irAEs) seen in this cohort, their impact on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and related clinical factors. Methods: The Spinnaker study was a retrospective multicentre observational cohort study of patients treated with first-line pembrolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy in six United Kingdom and one Swiss oncology centres. Data were collected on patient characteristics, survival outcomes, frequency and severity of irAEs, and peripheral immune-inflammatory blood markers, including the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and systemic immune-inflammation index (SII). Results: A total of 308 patients were included; 132 (43%) experienced any grade irAE, 100 (32%) Grade 1-2, and 49 (16%) Grade 3-4 irAEs. The median OS in patients with any grade irAES was significantly longer (17.5 months [95% CI, 13.4-21.6 months]) than those without (10.1 months [95% CI, 8.3-12.0 months]) (p<0.001), either if Grade 1-2 (p=0.003) or Grade 3-4 irAEs (p=0.042). The median PFS in patients with any grade irAEs was significantly longer (10.1 months [95% CI, 9.0-11.2 months]) than those without (6.1 months [95% CI, 5.2-7.1 months]) (p<0.001), either if Grade 1-2 (p=0.011) or Grade 3-4 irAEs (p=0.036). A higher rate of irAEs of any grade and specifically Grade 1-2 irAEs correlated with NLR <4 (p=0.013 and p=0.018), SII <1,440 (p=0.029 ad p=0.039), response to treatment (p=0.001 and p=0.034), a higher rate of treatment discontinuation (p<0.00001 and p=0.041), and the NHS-Lung prognostic classes (p=0.002 and p=0.008). Conclusions: These results confirm survival outcome benefits in patients with irAEs and suggest a higher likelihood of Grade 1-2 irAEs in patients with lower NLR or SII values or according to the NHS-Lung score.

The National COVID Cancer Antibody Survey: a hyper-accelerated study proof of principle for cancer research.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a range of novel and adaptive research designs. In this perspective, we use our experience coordinating the National COVID Cancer Antibody Survey to demonstrate how a balance between speed and integrity can be achieved within a hyper-accelerated study design. Using the COVID-19 pandemic as an example, we show this approach is necessary in the face of uncertain and evolving situations wherein reliable information is needed in a timely fashion to guide policy. We identify streamlined participant involvement, healthcare systems integration, data architecture and real-world real-time analytics as key areas that differentiate this design from traditional cancer trials, and enable rapid results. Caution needs to be taken to avoid the exclusion of patient subgroups without digital access or literacy. We summarise the merits and defining features of hyper-accelerated cancer studies.

The Effects of GCSF Primary Prophylaxis on Survival Outcomes and Toxicity in Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer on First-Line Chemoimmunotherapy: A Sub-Analysis of the Spinnaker Study.

GCSF prophylaxis is recommended in patients on chemotherapy with a >20% risk of febrile neutropenia and is to be considered if there is an intermediate risk of 10−20%. GCSF has been suggested as a possible adjunct to immunotherapy due to increased peripheral neutrophil recruitment and PD-L1 expression on neutrophils with GCSF use and greater tumour volume decrease with higher tumour GCSF expression. However, its potential to increase neutrophil counts and, thus, NLR values, could subsequently confer poorer prognoses on patients with advanced NSCLC. This analysis follows on from the retrospective multicentre observational cohort Spinnaker study on advanced NSCLC patients. The primary endpoints were OS and PFS. The secondary endpoints were the frequency and severity of AEs and irAEs. Patient information, including GCSF use and NLR values, was collected. A secondary comparison with matched follow-up duration was also undertaken. Three hundred and eight patients were included. Median OS was 13.4 months in patients given GCSF and 12.6 months in those not (p = 0.948). Median PFS was 7.3 months in patients given GCSF and 8.4 months in those not (p = 0.369). A total of 56% of patients receiving GCSF had Grade 1−2 AEs compared to 35% who did not receive GCSF (p = 0.004). Following an assessment with matched follow-up, 41% of patients given GCSF experienced Grade 1−2 irAEs compared to 23% of those not given GCSF (p = 0.023). GCSF prophylaxis use did not significantly affect overall or progression-free survival. Patients given GCSF prophylaxis were more likely to experience Grade 1−2 adverse effects and Grade 1−2 immunotherapy-related adverse effects.

The coping continuum and acts reciprocity - a qualitative enquiry about household coping with food insecurity in Victoria, Australia.

OBJECTIVE: Food insecurity exists when a household has limited or uncertain access to food. This paper explores the strategies employed by households who are already accessing emergency and community food assistance to meet their food needs. METHOD: Interviews to explore strategies used to mitigate food insecurity of people living in Victoria, Australia, between June 2018 and January 2019. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Seventy-eight interviews were conducted. Analysis resulted in two themes highlighting the range of coping strategies employed to mitigate the impacts of food insecurity; broadly described as 1) the coping continuum and 2) coping reciprocity. CONCLUSIONS: Food insecure households employ a range of strategies to secure food. Households that engage with the emergency and community food sector are described as in crisis or struggling, often skipping meals or reducing food consumed, or as coping and managing, characterised by bulking meals and growing food. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: Coping with food insecurity exists on a continuum from crisis to management and reciprocity. With the prevalence of food insecurity expected to increase, some of these coping strategies will need to be incorporated into the practice of emergency and community food providers to assist households to meet food needs.

Are mothers under lunchbox pressure? An exploration of the experiences of Victorian mothers preparing lunchboxes for their children.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: A healthy diet is particularly important during childhood. Research suggests that more than 95% of Australian primary school aged children do not eat a diet consistent with the Australian Dietary Guidelines, putting them at risk of poor health. Interventions to improve the quality of children's lunchboxes may help address this issue. However, there is limited understanding of the factors impacting lunchbox preparation. METHODS: This study explored the experiences of 10 mothers of Victorian primary school students. Mothers took part in semi-structured interviews exploring their views on lunchbox preparation and food choices. The study used a Constructivist Grounded Theory methodology and data were analysed using an inductive, thematic approach. RESULTS: Analysis of the interviews yielded four main themes. (i) Mothers experienced a range of non-nutritional barriers that impacted the food choices they made for their children. (ii) Children's preferences influenced parental food choices. (iii) Mothers experienced and/or perceived judgement about the food choices they make for their children. And (iv) Mothers identified a lack of support and information from schools about what was appropriate for school lunch. CONCLUSION: Findings of this study indicate that mothers are concerned with balancing nutrition and child preferences within the broader context of guidelines, perceived or real judgement and income constraints. SO WHAT?: The school environment may be an ideal setting to promote healthy eating but support for parents is needed. This is the first study in Victoria exploring mothers' perspectives on lunchbox preparation and provides initial information on which future research can build.

Association of SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Antibody Vaccine Response With Infection Severity in Patients With Cancer: A National COVID Cancer Cross-sectional Evaluation.

Importance: Accurate identification of patient groups with the lowest level of protection following COVID-19 vaccination is important to better target resources and interventions for the most vulnerable populations. It is not known whether SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing has clinical utility for high-risk groups, such as people with cancer. Objective: To evaluate whether spike protein antibody vaccine response (COV-S) following COVID-19 vaccination is associated with the risk of SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection or hospitalization among patients with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a population-based cross-sectional study of patients with cancer from the UK as part of the National COVID Cancer Antibody Survey. Adults with a known or reported cancer diagnosis who had completed their primary SARS-CoV-2 vaccination schedule were included. This analysis ran from September 1, 2021, to March 4, 2022, a period covering the expansion of the UK's third-dose vaccination booster program. Interventions: Anti-SARS-CoV-2 COV-S antibody test (Elecsys; Roche). Main Outcomes and Measures: Odds of SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection and COVID-19 hospitalization. Results: The evaluation comprised 4249 antibody test results from 3555 patients with cancer and 294 230 test results from 225 272 individuals in the noncancer population. The overall cohort of 228 827 individuals (patients with cancer and the noncancer population) comprised 298 479 antibody tests. The median age of the cohort was in the age band of 40 and 49 years and included 182 741 test results (61.22%) from women and 115 737 (38.78%) from men. There were 279 721 tests (93.72%) taken by individuals identifying as White or White British. Patients with cancer were more likely to have undetectable anti-S antibody responses than the general population (199 of 4249 test results [4.68%] vs 376 of 294 230 [0.13%]; P < .001). Patients with leukemia or lymphoma had the lowest antibody titers. In the cancer cohort, following multivariable correction, patients who had an undetectable antibody response were at much greater risk for SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection (odds ratio [OR], 3.05; 95% CI, 1.96-4.72; P < .001) and SARS-CoV-2-related hospitalization (OR, 6.48; 95% CI, 3.31-12.67; P < .001) than individuals who had a positive antibody response. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that COV-S antibody testing allows the identification of patients with cancer who have the lowest level of antibody-derived protection from COVID-19. This study supports larger evaluations of SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing. Prevention of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to patients with cancer should be prioritized to minimize impact on cancer treatments and maximize quality of life for individuals with cancer during the ongoing pandemic.

COVID-19: Third dose booster vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough coronavirus infection, hospitalisations and death in patients with cancer: A population-based study.

PURPOSE: People living with cancer and haematological malignancies are at an increased risk of hospitalisation and death following infection with acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Coronavirus third dose vaccine boosters are proposed to boost waning immune responses in immunocompromised individuals and increase coronavirus protection; however, their effectiveness has not yet been systematically evaluated. METHODS: This study is a population-scale real-world evaluation of the United Kingdom's third dose vaccine booster programme for cancer patients from 8th December 2020 to 7th December 2021. The cancer cohort comprises individuals from Public Health England's national cancer dataset, excluding individuals less than 18 years. A test-negative case-control design was used to assess the third dose booster vaccine effectiveness. Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to compare risk in the cancer cohort relative to the general population. RESULTS: The cancer cohort comprised of 2,258,553 tests from 361,098 individuals. Third dose boosters were evaluated by reference to 87,039,743 polymerase chain reaction coronavirus tests. Vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough infections, symptomatic infections, coronavirus hospitalisation and death in cancer patients were 59.1%, 62.8%, 80.5% and 94.5%, respectively. Lower vaccine effectiveness was associated with a cancer diagnosis within 12 months, lymphoma, recent systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) or radiotherapy. Patients with lymphoma had low levels of protection from symptomatic disease. In spite of third dose boosters, following multivariable adjustment, individuals with cancer remain at an increased risk of coronavirus hospitalisation and death compared to the population control (OR 3.38, 3.01, respectively. p < 0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: Third dose boosters are effective for most individuals with cancer, increasing protection from coronavirus. However, their effectiveness is heterogenous and lower than the general population. Many patients with cancer will remain at the increased risk of coronavirus infections even after 3 doses. In the case of patients with lymphoma, there is a particularly strong disparity of vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough infection and severe disease. Breakthrough infections will disrupt cancer care and treatment with potentially adverse consequences on survival outcomes. The data support the role of vaccine boosters in preventing severe disease, and further pharmacological intervention to prevent transmission and aid viral clearance to limit the disruption of cancer care as the delivery of care continues to evolve during the coronavirus pandemic.

An International Comparison of Presentation, Outcomes and CORONET Predictive Score Performance in Patients with Cancer Presenting with COVID-19 across Different Pandemic Waves.

Patients with cancer have been shown to have increased risk of COVID-19 severity. We previously built and validated the COVID-19 Risk in Oncology Evaluation Tool (CORONET) to predict the likely severity of COVID-19 in patients with active cancer who present to hospital. We assessed the differences in presentation and outcomes of patients with cancer and COVID-19, depending on the wave of the pandemic. We examined differences in features at presentation and outcomes in patients worldwide, depending on the waves of the pandemic: wave 1 D614G (n = 1430), wave 2 Alpha (n = 475), and wave 4 Omicron variant (n = 63, UK and Spain only). The performance of CORONET was evaluated on 258, 48, and 54 patients for each wave, respectively. We found that mortality rates were reduced in subsequent waves. The majority of patients were vaccinated in wave 4, and 94% were treated with steroids if they required oxygen. The stages of cancer and the median ages of patients significantly differed, but features associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes remained predictive and did not differ between waves. The CORONET tool performed well in all waves, with scores in an area under the curve (AUC) of >0.72. We concluded that patients with cancer who present to hospital with COVID-19 have similar features of severity, which remain discriminatory despite differences in variants and vaccination status. Survival improved following the first wave of the pandemic, which may be associated with vaccination and the increased steroid use in those patients requiring oxygen. The CORONET model demonstrated good performance, independent of the SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Efficacy outcomes and prognostic factors from real-world patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with first-line chemoimmunotherapy: The Spinnaker retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Efficacy outcomes and prognostic factors of real-world patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) treated with first-line chemoimmunotherapy are still limited. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the retrospective Spinnaker study, data was collected from patients in six United Kingdom and one Swiss oncology centres with first-line pembrolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy. Efficacy outcomes and potential prognostic factors were estimated aiming at developing a prognostic model. RESULTS: Three-hundred-eight patients were included, 32% ≥ 70 years, with ≥ 3 metastatic sites in 33%, brain or liver metastases in 10% and 12%, respectively. With a median follow-up of 18.0 months (mo.) (range, 15.9-20.1), median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 12.7 mo. (range, 10.2-15.2), and 8.0 mo. (range, 7.1-8.8), respectively. The neutrophils-to-lymphocytes ratio (NLR) and systemic immune-inflammatory index (SII) (i.e., NLR × platelet count) were both significantly higher in ECOG PS 1 (p = 0.0147 and p = 0.0018, respectively), underweight or normal body mass index (p = 0.0456 and p = 0.0062, respectively), ≥3 metastatic sites (p = 0.0069 and p = 0.112), pretreatment steroids (p = 0.0019 and p = 0.0017). By MVA, the number of metastatic sites ≥ 3 (p < 0.001 and p = 0.002), squamous histology (p = 0.033 and p = 0.013) and SII ≥ 1444 (p = 0.031 and p = 0.009, respectively) were associated with both worse OS and PFS and led to a highly discriminating three-class risk prognostic model. CONCLUSION: Real-world PFS with chemoimmunotherapy in aNSCLC patients is similar to that reported in clinical trials. A high number of metastatic sites, squamous histology and high SII are adverse prognostic factors that might contribute to a clinically useful prognostic model.

Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 breakthrough infections in patients with cancer (UKCCEP): a population-based test-negative case-control study.

BACKGROUND: People with cancer are at increased risk of hospitalisation and death following infection with SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, we aimed to conduct one of the first evaluations of vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections in patients with cancer at a population level. METHODS: In this population-based test-negative case-control study of the UK Coronavirus Cancer Evaluation Project (UKCCEP), we extracted data from the UKCCEP registry on all SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results (from the Second Generation Surveillance System), vaccination records (from the National Immunisation Management Service), patient demographics, and cancer records from England, UK, from Dec 8, 2020, to Oct 15, 2021. Adults (aged ≥18 years) with cancer in the UKCCEP registry were identified via Public Health England's Rapid Cancer Registration Dataset between Jan 1, 2018, and April 30, 2021, and comprised the cancer cohort. We constructed a control population cohort from adults with PCR tests in the UKCCEP registry who were not contained within the Rapid Cancer Registration Dataset. The coprimary endpoints were overall vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough infections after the second dose (positive PCR COVID-19 test) and vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough infections at 3-6 months after the second dose in the cancer cohort and control population. FINDINGS: The cancer cohort comprised 377 194 individuals, of whom 42 882 had breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections. The control population consisted of 28 010 955 individuals, of whom 5 748 708 had SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections. Overall vaccine effectiveness was 69·8% (95% CI 69·8-69·9) in the control population and 65·5% (65·1-65·9) in the cancer cohort. Vaccine effectiveness at 3-6 months was lower in the cancer cohort (47·0%, 46·3-47·6) than in the control population (61·4%, 61·4-61·5). INTERPRETATION: COVID-19 vaccination is effective for individuals with cancer, conferring varying levels of protection against breakthrough infections. However, vaccine effectiveness is lower in patients with cancer than in the general population. COVID-19 vaccination for patients with cancer should be used in conjunction with non-pharmacological strategies and community-based antiviral treatment programmes to reduce the risk that COVID-19 poses to patients with cancer. FUNDING: University of Oxford, University of Southampton, University of Birmingham, Department of Health and Social Care, and Blood Cancer UK.

Establishment of CORONET, COVID-19 Risk in Oncology Evaluation Tool, to Identify Patients With Cancer at Low Versus High Risk of Severe Complications of COVID-19 Disease On Presentation to Hospital.

PURPOSE: Patients with cancer are at increased risk of severe COVID-19 disease, but have heterogeneous presentations and outcomes. Decision-making tools for hospital admission, severity prediction, and increased monitoring for early intervention are critical. We sought to identify features of COVID-19 disease in patients with cancer predicting severe disease and build a decision support online tool, COVID-19 Risk in Oncology Evaluation Tool (CORONET). METHODS: Patients with active cancer (stage I-IV) and laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 disease presenting to hospitals worldwide were included. Discharge (within 24 hours), admission (≥ 24 hours inpatient), oxygen (O2) requirement, and death were combined in a 0-3 point severity scale. Association of features with outcomes were investigated using Lasso regression and Random Forest combined with Shapley Additive Explanations. The CORONET model was then examined in the entire cohort to build an online CORONET decision support tool. Admission and severe disease thresholds were established through pragmatically defined cost functions. Finally, the CORONET model was validated on an external cohort. RESULTS: The model development data set comprised 920 patients, with median age 70 (range 5-99) years, 56% males, 44% females, and 81% solid versus 19% hematologic cancers. In derivation, Random Forest demonstrated superior performance over Lasso with lower mean squared error (0.801 v 0.807) and was selected for development. During validation (n = 282 patients), the performance of CORONET varied depending on the country cohort. CORONET cutoffs for admission and mortality of 1.0 and 2.3 were established. The CORONET decision support tool recommended admission for 95% of patients eventually requiring oxygen and 97% of those who died (94% and 98% in validation, respectively). The specificity for mortality prediction was 92% and 83% in derivation and validation, respectively. Shapley Additive Explanations revealed that National Early Warning Score 2, C-reactive protein, and albumin were the most important features contributing to COVID-19 severity prediction in patients with cancer at time of hospital presentation. CONCLUSION: CORONET, a decision support tool validated in health care systems worldwide, can aid admission decisions and predict COVID-19 severity in patients with cancer.

Who do Australian women seek social support from during the reproductive decision-making process?

Limited evidence exists about women's experiences of social support for reproductive decision-making, particularly who women seek social support from during decision-making. Using a concurrent mixed methods approach, this research explored who women aged 25-35 years living in Victoria, Australia, seek social support from during reproductive decision-making. Women seek social support for reproductive decision-making from multiple sources. However, through exploring women's support seeking for reproductive decision-making, rather than once a reproductive decision had been made, the study highlights the nuanced and contextual nature of support seeking for reproductive decision-making demonstrating support seeking is influenced by: type of reproductive decision; women's relationships with members of their social network; previous experiences of support seeking for reproductive decisions; expectations of the support they would receive; homophily; and temporality. This research provides important insight into who women seek support from for reproductive decision-making. Understanding this will help inform future social and public health interventions.

Prognostic effect of body mass index in patients with advanced NSCLC treated with chemoimmunotherapy combinations.

INTRODUCTION: It has been recognized that increasing body mass index (BMI) is associated with improved outcome from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with various malignancies including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, it is unclear whether baseline BMI may influence outcomes from first-line chemoimmunotherapy combinations. METHODS: In this international multicenter study, we evaluated the association between baseline BMI, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in a cohort of patients with stage IV NSCLC consecutively treated with first-line chemoimmunotherapy combinations. BMI was categorized according to WHO criteria. RESULTS: Among the 853 included patients, 5.3% were underweight; 46.4% were of normal weight; 33.8% were overweight; and 14.5% were obese. Overweight and obese patients were more likely aged ≥70 years (p=0.00085), never smokers (p<0.0001), with better baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status (p=0.0127), and had lower prevalence of central nervous system (p=0.0002) and liver metastases (p=0.0395). Univariable analyses showed a significant difference in the median OS across underweight (15.5 months), normal weight (14.6 months), overweight (20.9 months), and obese (16.8 months) patients (log-rank: p=0.045, log rank test for trend: p=0.131), while no difference was found with respect to the median PFS (log-rank for trend: p=0.510). Neither OS nor PFS was significantly associated with baseline BMI on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to what was observed in the context of chemotherapy-free ICI-based regimens, baseline BMI does not affect clinical outcomes from chemoimmunotherapy combinations in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Self-management programmes for adult patients with bronchiectasis: a systematic review and realist synthesis.

PURPOSE: Self-management for patients with bronchiectasis has been identified as an important component that could potentially empower patients to manage their condition and improve their quality of life. Evidence was reviewed to investigate what self-management programmes work, why and in what circumstances. METHODS: A systematic review and realist synthesis were conducted. A comprehensive database search was performed on seven databases for evidence published up to July 2021. Leading candidate self-management programmes identified from the systematic review became the focus of the realist synthesis. A realist logic of analysis was applied to produce explanatory context-mechanism-outcome configurations. These explanations were consolidated into programme theories drawing on health behaviour change theory. RESULTS: By synthesising the data from eight eligible articles, programme theories articulated how three different self-management programmes work that included: (i) education and action planning, (ii) education and airway clearance techniques (ACT) and, (iii) education, exercise and ACT. Patient characteristics and collaborative partnership between healthcare professionals and patients were identified as important contexts that influenced the improvement in self-efficacy, health-related quality of life, and exercise capacity. CONCLUSIONS: This review contributes to a better understanding of how the complex interaction between contexts and mechanisms can improve outcomes of clinical interest.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThis evidence synthesis has identified potentially important combinations of interventions to be considered in self-management programmes for adults with bronchiectasis.Collaborative partnership between patient and healthcare professionals should be considered to improve short-term self-efficacy.Targeting self-management programmes to increase short-term health-related quality of life and exercise capacity should consider the context of patient characteristics.

As COVID-19 cases surge despite mass vaccination, it's time to focus on the vulnerable.

The COVID-19 pandemic is an era-defining, international emergency impacting the global economy, politics and countless individual lives. People living with cancer have increased risk of hospitalisation and mortality from COVID-19. There are limited data regarding vaccine efficacy in people with cancer, with lack of empirical evidence to guide vaccine strategy in cancer patients fostering uncertainty. Vulnerable groups, for whom vaccination protection may be attenuated, now carry the greatest burden of risk amongst the population. The cancer community needs to reconsider the potential on-going impact of COVID-19 and develop and plan new programs of work to mitigate it. Multiple potential future scenarios now exist, ranging from full protection from COVID-19 for cancer patients via herd immunity to viral evolution for vaccine resistance and increased virulence. Defining those most vulnerable to COVID-19 post-vaccination will require large-scale data and evidence to comprehensively identify factors that reduce vaccine efficacy. Once identified, protecting these groups through transmission and mortality risk reduction will become paramount. As the pandemic progresses, "protecting the vulnerable" may enable a return to normal for the majority, whilst still protecting individuals living with and beyond cancer who already live with the challenges of having a cancer diagnosis.

COVID-19 prevalence and mortality in patients with cancer and the effect of primary tumour subtype and patient demographics: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer are purported to have poor COVID-19 outcomes. However, cancer is a heterogeneous group of diseases, encompassing a spectrum of tumour subtypes. The aim of this study was to investigate COVID-19 risk according to tumour subtype and patient demographics in patients with cancer in the UK. METHODS: We compared adult patients with cancer enrolled in the UK Coronavirus Cancer Monitoring Project (UKCCMP) cohort between March 18 and May 8, 2020, with a parallel non-COVID-19 UK cancer control population from the UK Office for National Statistics (2017 data). The primary outcome of the study was the effect of primary tumour subtype, age, and sex and on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) prevalence and the case-fatality rate during hospital admission. We analysed the effect of tumour subtype and patient demographics (age and sex) on prevalence and mortality from COVID-19 using univariable and multivariable models. FINDINGS: 319 (30·6%) of 1044 patients in the UKCCMP cohort died, 295 (92·5%) of whom had a cause of death recorded as due to COVID-19. The all-cause case-fatality rate in patients with cancer after SARS-CoV-2 infection was significantly associated with increasing age, rising from 0·10 in patients aged 40-49 years to 0·48 in those aged 80 years and older. Patients with haematological malignancies (leukaemia, lymphoma, and myeloma) had a more severe COVID-19 trajectory compared with patients with solid organ tumours (odds ratio [OR] 1·57, 95% CI 1·15-2·15; p<0·0043). Compared with the rest of the UKCCMP cohort, patients with leukaemia showed a significantly increased case-fatality rate (2·25, 1·13-4·57; p=0·023). After correction for age and sex, patients with haematological malignancies who had recent chemotherapy had an increased risk of death during COVID-19-associated hospital admission (OR 2·09, 95% CI 1·09-4·08; p=0·028). INTERPRETATION: Patients with cancer with different tumour types have differing susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 phenotypes. We generated individualised risk tables for patients with cancer, considering age, sex, and tumour subtype. Our results could be useful to assist physicians in informed risk-benefit discussions to explain COVID-19 risk and enable an evidenced-based approach to national social isolation policies. FUNDING: University of Birmingham and University of Oxford.