Answers to common questions about COVID-19 vaccines in children with cancer.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in 2020 evolved into a global pandemic, and COVID-19 vaccines became rapidly available, including for pediatric patients. However, questions emerged that challenged vaccine acceptance and use. We aimed to answer these questions and give recommendations applicable for use in pediatric patients with cancer by healthcare professionals and the public. METHODS: A 12-member global COVID-19 Vaccine in Pediatric Oncology Working Group made up of physicians and nurses from all world regions met weekly from March to July 2021. We used a modified Delphi method to select the top questions. The Working Group, in four-member subgroups, answered assigned questions by providing brief recommendations, followed by a discussion of the rationale for each answer. All Working Group members voted on each recommendation using a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being complete agreement. A "pass" recommendation corresponded to an agreement ≥7.5. RESULTS: We selected 15 questions from 173 suggested questions. Based on existing published information, we generated answers for each question as recommendations. The overall average agreement for the 24 recommendations was 9.5 (95% CI 9.4-9.6). CONCLUSION: Top COVID-19 vaccine-related questions could be answered using available information. Reports on COVID-19 vaccination and related topics have been published at record speed, aided by available technology and the priority imposed by the pandemic; however, all efforts were made to incorporate emerging information throughout our project. Recommendations will be periodically updated on a dedicated website.

The COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid global response for children with cancer from SIOP, COG, SIOP-E, SIOP-PODC, IPSO, PROS, CCI, and St Jude Global.

The COVID-19 pandemic is one of the most serious global challenges to delivering affordable and equitable treatment to children with cancer we have witnessed in the last few decades. This Special Report aims to summarize general principles for continuing multidisciplinary care during the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic. With contributions from the leadership of the International Society for Pediatric Oncology (SIOP), Children's Oncology Group (COG), St Jude Global program, and Childhood Cancer International, we have sought to provide a framework for healthcare teams caring for children with cancer during the pandemic. We anticipate the burden will fall particularly heavily on children, their families, and cancer services in low- and middle-income countries. Therefore, we have brought together the relevant clinical leads from SIOP Europe, COG, and SIOP-PODC (Pediatric Oncology in Developing Countries) to focus on the six most curable cancers that are part of the WHO Global Initiative in Childhood Cancer. We provide some practical advice for adapting diagnostic and treatment protocols for children with cancer during the pandemic, the measures taken to contain it (e.g., extreme social distancing), and how to prepare for the anticipated recovery period.

Disparities in the delivery of pediatric oncology nursing care by country income classification: International survey results.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, a task force of the International Society of Paediatric Oncology (SIOP) Paediatric Oncology in Developing Countries Nursing Workgroup published six baseline standards to provide a framework for pediatric oncology nursing care in low- and lower-middle income countries (L/LMIC). We conducted an international survey in 2016-2017 to examine the association between country income level and nurses' resporting of conformity to the standards at their respective institutions. PROCEDURE: Data from a cross-sectional web-based survey completed by nurses representing 54 countries were analyzed (N = 101). Responses were clustered by relevance to each standard and compared according to the 2017 World Bank-defined country income classification (CIC) of hospitals. RESULTS: CIC and nurse-to-patient ratios in inpatient wards were strongly associated (P < 0.0001). Nurses in L/LMIC prepared chemotherapy more often (P < 0.0001) yet were less likely to have access to personal protective equipment such as nitrile gloves (P = 0.0007) and fluid-resistant gowns (P = 0.011) than nurses in high-resource settings. Nurses in L/LMIC were excluded more often from physician/caregiver meetings to discuss treatment options (P = 0.04) and at the time of diagnosis (P = 0.002). Key educational topics were missing from nursing orientation programs across all CICs. An association between CIC and the availability of written policies (P = 0.009) was found. CONCLUSIONS: CIC and the ability to conform to pediatric oncology baseline nursing standards were significantly associated in numerous elements of the baseline standards, a likely contributor to suboptimal patient outcomes in L/LMIC. To achieve the goal of high-quality cancer care for children worldwide, nursing disparities must be addressed.

A Prospective Cohort Quality Improvement Study to Reduce the Time to Antibiotics for New Fever in Neutropenic Pediatric Oncology Inpatients.

BACKGROUND: Fever and neutropenia (F&N) is a pediatric oncology emergency due to the risk of disseminated infection. Quality improvement (QI) efforts to improve time to antibiotics for F&N in the emergency department have been documented, but the issue has not been studied in the established inpatient setting. PROCEDURE: We undertook a prospective cohort QI study to decrease time to antibiotics for neutropenic pediatric oncology inpatients with new fever to <60 min. Our key intervention was discussion of a plan in case of new fever, including antibiotic(s) to be started, for each patient on rounds. Timing for each step in the process, from fever identification to antibiotic administration, was measured through the electronic medical record for each fever event. RESULTS: The median time to antibiotics during the 3-three month intervention study period was 76.0 min, although the distribution was skewed due to several long outliers (mean 142.5, interquartile range 51-206, range 47-593 min). Time to antibiotics was significantly shorter when a fever contingency plan was documented in the most recent note than not (mean 102 vs. 254 min, P = 0.039). Over the total 2.75 year data-collection period, the quarterly percentage of patients receiving antibiotics within 60 min has improved from 35 to 65, whereas quarterly mean time to antibiotics has improved from 99 to 50 min. CONCLUSIONS: Daily discussion of a fever contingency plan appears effective in decreasing the time to antibiotics for neutropenic pediatric oncology inpatients with new fever, likely by circumventing the need for multi-level discussion of the antibiotic plan when fever is identified.

A strategy to improve treatment-related mortality and abandonment of therapy for childhood ALL in a developing country reveals the impact of treatment delays.

BACKGROUND: Treatment-related mortality and abandonment of therapy are major barriers to successful treatment of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in the developing world. PROCEDURE: A collaboration was undertaken between Instituto Nacional de Cancerologia (Bogota, Colombia), which serves a poor patient population in an upper-middle income country, and Dana-Farber/Boston Children's Cancer and Blood Disorders Center (Boston, USA). Several interventions aimed at reducing toxic deaths and abandonment were implemented, including a reduced-intensity treatment regimen and a psychosocial effort targeting abandonment. We performed a cohort study to assess impact. RESULTS: The Study Population comprised 99 children with ALL diagnosed between 2007 and 2010, and the Historic Cohort comprised 181 children treated prior to the study interventions (1995-2004). Significant improvements were achieved in the rate of deaths in complete remission (13% to 3%; P = 0.005), abandonment (32% to 9%; P < 0.001), and event-free survival with abandonment considered an event (47% to 65% at 2 years; P = 0.016). However, relapse rate did not improve. Medically unnecessary treatment delays were common, and landmark analysis revealed that initiating the PIII phase of therapy ≥4 weeks delayed predicted markedly inferior disease-free survival (P = 0.016). Conversely, patients who received therapy without excessive delays had outcomes approaching those achieved in high-income countries. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a twinning program was followed by reductions in abandonment and toxic deaths, but relapse rate did not improve. Inappropriate treatment delays were common and strongly predicted treatment failure. These findings highlight the importance of adherence to treatment schedule for effective therapy of ALL.

Global challenges in pediatric oncology.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Reduction of child mortality is one of the Millennium Development Goals; as low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) advance toward the achievement of this goal, initiatives aimed at reducing the burden of noncommunicable diseases, including childhood cancer, need to be developed. RECENT FINDINGS: Approximately 200 000 children and adolescents are diagnosed with cancer every year worldwide; of those, 80% live in LMICs, which account for 90% of the deaths. Lack of quality population-based cancer registries in LMICs limits our knowledge of the epidemiology of pediatric cancer; however, available information showing variations in incidence may indicate unique interactions between environmental and genetic factors that could provide clues to cause. Outcome of children with cancer in LMICs is dictated by late presentation and underdiagnosis, high abandonment rates, high prevalence of malnutrition and other comorbidities, suboptimal supportive and palliative care, and limited access to curative therapies. Initiatives integrating program building with education of healthcare providers and research have proven to be successful in the development of regional capacity. Intensity-graduated treatments adjusted to the local capacity have been developed. SUMMARY: Childhood cancer burden is shifted toward LMICs; global initiatives directed at pediatric cancer care and control are urgently needed. International partnerships facilitating stepwise processes that build capacity while incorporating epidemiology and health services research and implementing intensity-graduated treatments have been shown to be effective.

Increasing COVID-19 Vaccination Rates for Children With Sickle Cell Disease.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 vaccine is important for children with sickle cell disease (SCD). This quality improvement project's objective was to increase the proportion of children with SCD receiving ≥2 COVID-19 vaccine doses to ≥70% by June 2022. METHODS: We used the Model for Improvement framework. We assessed COVID-19 vaccination rates biweekly. Three plan-do-study-act cycles focusing on patient education, provider awareness, and access were performed. Process measures included the outcome of outreach calls and educational video views. Missed clinic appointments was our balancing measure. Line graphs and statistical process control charts were used to track changes. Interrupted time series was used to model implementation rates while accounting for preexisting trends. RESULTS: A total of 243 patients were included. During the preintervention (September 2021-January 2022) and intervention periods (February 2022-June 2022), overall vaccination rates increased from 33% to 41% and 41% to 64%, respectively. Mean vaccination rate in eligible children in each 2-week period increased from 2.1% to 7.2%. The achieved vaccination rate was 11% greater than predicted for patients with SCD. For the general population the achieved vaccination rate was 23% lower than predicted. The proportion of missed visits did not change (9.0% vs. 9.6%). During outreach calls, 10 patients (13.5%) booked a vaccine. Forty percent of patients watched the promotional video. CONCLUSIONS: A significant number of patients with SCD are not vaccinated against COVID-19. Targeting misinformation and improving vaccine access aided in increasing vaccination. Additional interventions are needed as a large number of patients remain unvaccinated.

A new measure for multi-professional medical team communication: design and methodology for multilingual measurement development.

Background: As implementation science in global health continues to evolve, there is a need for valid and reliable measures that consider diverse linguistic and cultural contexts. A standardized, reproducible process for multilingual measure development may improve accessibility and validity by participants in global health settings. To address this need, we propose a rigorous methodology for multilingual measurement development. We use the example of a novel measure of multi-professional team communication quality, a determinant of implementation efforts. Methods: The development and translation of this novel bilingual measure is comprised of seven steps. In this paper, we describe a measure developed in English and Spanish, however, this approach is not language specific. Participants are engaged throughout the process: first, an interprofessional panel of experts and second, through cognitive interviewing for measure refinement. The steps of measure development included: (1) literature review to identify previous measures of team communication; (2) development of an initial measure by the expert panel; (3) cognitive interviewing in a phased approach with the first language (English); (4): formal, forward-backward translation process with attention to colloquialisms and regional differences in languages; (5) cognitive interviewing repeated in the second language (Spanish); (6) language synthesis to refine both instruments and unify feedback; and (7) final review of the refined measure by the expert panel. Results: A draft measure to assess quality of multi-professional team communication was developed in Spanish and English, consisting of 52 questions in 7 domains. This measure is now ready for psychometric testing. Conclusions: This seven-step, rigorous process of multilingual measure development can be used in a variety of linguistic and resource settings. This method ensures development of valid and reliable tools to collect data from a wide range of participants, including those who have historically been excluded due to language barriers. Use of this method will increase both rigor and accessibility of measurement in implementation science and advance equity in research and practice.

CritCom: assessment of quality of interdisciplinary communication around deterioration in pediatric oncologic patients.

Background: High-quality clinical care requires excellent interdisciplinary communication, especially during emergencies, and no tools exist to evaluate communication in critical care. We describe the development of a pragmatic tool focusing on interdisciplinary communication during patient deterioration (CritCom). Methods: The preliminary CritCom tool was developed after a literature review and consultation with a multidisciplinary panel of global experts in communication, pediatric oncology, and critical care to review the domains and establish content validity iteratively. Face and linguistic validity were established through cognitive interviews, translation, and linguistic synthesis. We conducted a pilot study among an international group of clinicians to establish reliability and usability. Results: After reviewing 105 potential survey items, we identified 52 items across seven domains. These were refined through cognitive interviews with 36 clinicians from 15 countries. CritCom was piloted with 433 clinicians (58% nurses, 36% physicians, and 6% other) from 42 hospitals in 22 countries. Psychometric testing guided the refinement of the items for the final tool. CritCom comprised six domains with five items each (30 total). The final tool has excellent reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.81-0.86), usability (93% agree or strongly agree that the tool is easy to use), and similar performance between English and Spanish tools. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to establish the final 6-domain structure. Conclusions: CritCom is a reliable and pragmatic bilingual tool to assess the quality of interdisciplinary communication around patient deterioration for children in diverse resource levels globally. Critcom results can be used to design and evaluate interventions to improve team communication.

Development and Content Validation of an Instrument to Measure Baseline Standards for Pediatric Oncology Nursing in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

The Nursing Working Group of the International Society of Pediatric Oncology developed baseline standards for pediatric oncology nursing care in low- and middle-income countries. The standards represent the foundational support required to provide quality nursing care and address barriers such as inadequate staffing, lack of support, limited access to education, and unsafe nursing environments. The purpose of the current study was to develop and validate an instrument to accurately measure the standards. Content validity was assessed by a panel of expert pediatric oncology nurses from all geographical regions of the World Health Organization. The experts were informed about the study's purpose and provided the publications used to develop the instrument. The experts rated how well each criterion measured the corresponding standard by using a 4-point scale. A content validity index (CVI) was computed by using the percentage of total standards given a score of 3 or 4 by the experts. A CVI of .98 was obtained from the panel's evaluation. A CVI of more than .80 is recommended for a newly developed instrument. On the basis of the panel's recommendations, minor modifications were made to the instrument. We developed and validated the content of an instrument to accurately measure baseline standards for pediatric oncology nursing care. This instrument will aid future research on the effect of nursing standards on clinical outcomes, including mortality and abandonment of treatment, with the potential to influence health policy decisions and improve nursing support in low- and middle-income countries.

The threat of the COVID-19 pandemic on reversing global life-saving gains in the survival of childhood cancer: a call for collaborative action from SIOP, IPSO, PROS, WCC, CCI, St Jude Global, UICC and WHPCA.

The COVID-19 pandemic poses an unprecedented health crisis in all socio-economic regions across the globe. While the pandemic has had a profound impact on access to and delivery of health care by all services, it has been particularly disruptive for the care of patients with life-threatening noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) such as the treatment of children and young people with cancer. The reduction in child mortality from preventable causes over the last 50 years has seen childhood cancer emerge as a major unmet health care need. Whilst survival rates of 85% have been achieved in high income countries, this has not yet been translated into similar outcomes for children with cancer in resource-limited settings where survival averages 30%. Launched in 2018, by the World Health Organization (WHO), the Global Initiative for Childhood Cancer (GICC) is a pivotal effort by the international community to achieve at least 60% survival for children with cancer by 2030. The WHO GICC is already making an impact in many countries but the disruption of cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic threatens to set back this global effort to improve the outcome for children with cancer, wherever they may live. As representatives of the global community committed to fostering the goals of the GICC, we applaud the WHO response to the COVID-19 pandemic, in particular we support the WHO's call to ensure the needs of patients with life threatening NCDs including cancer are not compromised during the pandemic. Here, as collaborative partners in the GICC, we highlight specific areas of focus that need to be addressed to ensure the immediate care of children and adolescents with cancer is not disrupted during the pandemic; and measures to sustain the development of cancer care so the long-term goals of the GICC are not lost during this global health crisis.

Predictors of Hospitals' Nonachievement of Baseline Nursing Standards for Pediatric Oncology.

BACKGROUND: The International Society of Pediatric Oncology established baseline standards for pediatric oncology nursing; limited evidence is available to predict hospitals' capacity to meet these standards internationally. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to (1) determine the proportion of hospitals that met, partially met or did not meet baseline standards for pediatric oncology nursing and (2) identify predictors of hospitals' nonachievement of baseline standards for pediatric oncology nursing. METHODS/ANALYSIS: A secondary analysis of International Society of Pediatric Oncology web-based survey data of baseline nursing standards was conducted. Predictor variables were derived from surveyed hospital characteristics and external data sources. Multivariable parsimonious logistic regression models identified predictors of hospitals' nonachievement of each standard. RESULTS: Nurses from 101 hospitals across 54 countries completed the survey; 12% to 66% of hospitals reported meeting each of 6 baseline standards. Predictors of nonachievement of standards included low current health expenditure as percentage of gross domestic product, World Health Organization Region of Africa, United Nations "developing or transition" country classification, countries with fewer than 3 nurses/midwives per 1000 population, and hospitals without bone marrow transplant and/or intensive care units. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals with characteristics predictive of inability to meet baseline standards will likely require greater capacity-building support and advocacy to improve the quality of nursing care. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Findings from this study highlight internal and external factors that challenge the delivery of high-quality pediatric oncology nursing care internationally.

Clinical practice guideline improves the treatment of sickle cell disease vasoocclusive pain.

BACKGROUND: Pain is the most common complication of sickle cell disease requiring emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalization. A Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) to manage acute sickle cell pain offers clinicians a standardized approach for the provision of evidence-based, cost-effective care. After CPG implementation, monitoring of pre-established indicators is a strategy to evaluate progress toward meeting the goal of providing rapid, effective pain relief for patients with acute sickle cell pain. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients with sickle cell disease admitted through the ED at Children's Hospital Boston with the primary diagnosis of vaso-occlusive pain was performed for a period before and after implementation of the CPG. Endpoints measured were: use of a validated pain scale, time from ED triage to first dose of analgesic, use of adequate weight-based analgesic dosing, frequency and location of PCA initiation, and time from ED triage to patient controlled analgesia (PCA) initiation. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty three sickle cell pain admissions in 93 unique subjects were analyzed, 51 pre-CPG and 212 post-CPG. Statistically significant improvements in use of pain scale, appropriate weight-based analgesic dosing, utilization of PCA, and time to initiation of PCA were observed. There was not a statistically significant improvement in the percentage of subjects who received their 1st dose of analgesic within 1 hr; however the median time to first analgesic was reduced significantly from 80 to 65 min (P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a CPG to manage acute sickle cell pain in the ED improves the ability to deliver timely, effective analgesia to this patient population. Establishing and monitoring internal benchmarks provides a means for ongoing evaluation of the pre-established goals for patient care.

Rituximab plus short-duration chemotherapy as first-line treatment for follicular non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: a phase II trial of the minnie pearl cancer research network.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of rituximab with short-duration chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of patients with follicular non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated stage II-IV follicular NHL, grade 1 or 2, were eligible for this multicenter phase II trial. All patients received four weekly doses of rituximab (375 mg/m(2) intravenous), followed by three courses of combination chemotherapy (either cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone [CHOP], or cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone [CVP]) plus rituximab. Patients were evaluated for response after completing treatment, and were then followed up at 3-month intervals. RESULTS: Between January 2000 and July 2001, 86 patients were treated. Eight-two patients (95%) completed treatment; no patient was withdrawn due to toxicity. The overall response rate was 93%, with 55% complete responses. After a median follow-up of 42 months, the 3- and 4-year actuarial progression-free survivals were 71% and 62%, respectively. Five patients (6%) died from lymphoma; the overall actuarial survival at 3 years was 95%. Grade 3/4 leukopenia occurred in 53% of patients, but only six patients (7%) had neutropenia or fever. Grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities were uncommon. CONCLUSION: Rituximab plus short-course chemotherapy is well tolerated as first-line treatment for patients with follicular NHL. The overall and complete response rates are similar to those reported with chemotherapy/rituximab combinations of longer duration. The actuarial progression-free survival of 62% at 4 years is encouraging, but further follow-up is necessary. Rituximab plus short-course chemotherapy may prove to be as effective as longer-duration chemotherapy and currently provides an attractive option for first-line treatment of elderly patients and others who tolerate chemotherapy poorly.

Rituximab as first-line and maintenance therapy for patients with indolent non-hodgkin's lymphoma.

PURPOSE: To evaluate response to single-agent rituximab in patients with indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) and no previous systemic therapy, and the feasibility, toxicity, and efficacy of maintenance rituximab, administered at 6-month intervals, in patients with objective response or stable disease after first-line rituximab therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with indolent NHL (follicular or small lymphocytic subtypes) previously untreated with systemic therapy received rituximab 375 mg/m(2) intravenously weekly for 4 weeks. Patients were restaged at week 6 for response; those with objective response or stable disease received maintenance rituximab courses (identical dose and schedule) at 6-month intervals. Maintenance was continued for a maximum of four rituximab courses or until progression. Between March 1998 and May 1999, 62 patients were entered onto this trial; minimum follow-up was 24 months. RESULTS: Sixty patients (97%) completed the first 4-week course of rituximab and were assessable for response. All have now completed rituximab therapy; 36 (58%) received four courses at 6-month intervals. The objective response rate at 6 weeks was 47%; 45% of patients had stable disease. With continued maintenance, final response rate increased to 73%, with 37% complete responses. Response was similar in patients with follicular versus small lymphocytic subtypes (76% v 70%, respectively). Median actuarial progression-free survival was 34 months. Two patients experienced grade 3/4 toxicity with the first dose; one patient was removed from treatment. No cumulative or additional toxicities were seen with maintenance courses. CONCLUSION: Rituximab is highly active and extremely well tolerated as first-line single-agent therapy for indolent NHL. First-line treatment with scheduled maintenance at 6-month intervals produces high overall and complete response rates and a longer progression-free survival (34 months) than has been reported with a standard 4-week treatment.

Long-term follow-up of patients treated with paclitaxel/carboplatin-based chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: sequential phase II trials of the Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network.

PURPOSE: To provide long-term follow-up on the survival of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with paclitaxel/carboplatin-based regimens in a multicenter, community-based setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between March 1995 and April 1998, 321 patients with newly diagnosed stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer were treated on sequential phase II trials with the following combination regimens: paclitaxel/carboplatin, paclitaxel/carboplatin/gemcitabine, and paclitaxel/carboplatin/vinorelbine. Details of these three regimens and patient populations have been previously reported. Responding and stable patients continued treatment until tumor progression or for a recommended six treatment courses. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 58 months (minimum follow-up, 40 months), the median survival for the entire group of patients was 8.6 months, with actual 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates of 40%, 19%, and 7%, respectively. The actuarial 4-year survival rate for the entire group was 4%. No statistically significant differences in survival were seen among the three regimens. Administration of all three regimens was feasible in a community-based setting; however, myelosuppression and hospitalizations for treatment of neutropenia/fever were more frequent with the three-drug regimens. CONCLUSION: Paclitaxel/carboplatin-based regimens, in addition to prolonging median survival and improving 1-year survival, result in substantial improvements in the 2-year survival of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer when compared retrospectively with supportive care or traditional cisplatin-based regimens. In these sequential phase II trials, we did not demonstrate any advantages of three-drug regimens when compared with paclitaxel/carboplatin. Because few patients remain alive after 4 years with any of these chemotherapy regimens, future treatment improvements will require the introduction of novel agents.