scholarly journals Influence of clinical characteristics and anti-cancer therapy on outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 5,678 cancer patients

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ik Shin Chin ◽  
Sara Galavotti ◽  
Kay Por Yip ◽  
Helen Curley ◽  
Roland Arnold ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Therapy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Close Monitoring ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Cancer Services ◽  
Anti Cancer ◽  
Healthcare Crisis ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic started a healthcare crisis and heavily impacted cancer services. Methods Data from cohort studies of COVID-19 cancer patients published up until October 23rd 2020 from PubMed, PubMed Central, medRxiv and Google Scholar were reviewed. Meta-analyses using the random effects model was performed to assess the risk of death in cancer patients with COVID-19. Results Our meta-analyses including up to 5,678 patients from 13 studies showed that the following were all statistically significant risk factors for death following SARS-CoV-2 infection in cancer patients: age of 65 and above, presence of co-morbidities, cardiovascular disease, chronic lung disease, diabetes and hypertension. There was no evidence that patients who had received cancer treatment within 60 days of their COVID-19 diagnosis were at a higher risk of death, including patients who had recent chemotherapy. Conclusions Cancer patients are susceptible to severe COVID-19, especially older patients and patients with co-morbidities who will require close monitoring. Our findings support the continued administration of anti-cancer therapy during the pandemic. The analysis of chemotherapy was powered at 70% to detect an effect size of 1.2 but all other anti-cancer treatments had lower power. Further studies are required to better estimate their impact on the outcome of cancer patients.

Determinants of enhanced vulnerability to Covid-19 in U.K. cancer patients: Results from the OnCovid study.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1574-1574
Author(s):  
David James Pinato ◽  
Lorenza Scotti ◽  
Alessandra Gennari ◽  
Emeline Colomba ◽  
Ailsa Sita-Lumsden ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Therapy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Case Fatality ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Anti Cancer ◽  
The Uk

1574 Background: Despite high contagiousness and rapid spread, SARS-Cov-2 has led to heterogeneous outcomes across affected nations. Within Europe, the United Kingdom is the most severely affected country, with a death toll in excess of 100.000 as of February 2021. We aimed to compare the national impact of Covid-19 on the risk of death in UK cancer patients versus those in continental Europe (EU). Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the OnCovid study database, a European registry of cancer patients consecutively diagnosed with Covid-19 in 27 centres from February 27 to September 10, 2020. We analysed case fatality rates and risk of death at 30 days and 6 months stratified by region of origin (UK versus EU). We compared patient characteristics at baseline, oncological and Covid-19 specific therapy across cohorts and tested these in multivariable Cox regression models to identify predictors of adverse outcome in UK versus EU patients. Results: Compared to EU patients (n = 924), UK patients (n = 468) were characterised by higher case fatality rates (40.38% versus 26.5%, p < 0.0001), higher risk of death at 30 days (hazard ratio, HR 1.64 [95%CI 1.36-1.99]) and 6 months after Covid-19 diagnosis (47.64% versus 33.33%, p < 0.0001, HR 1.59 [95%CI 1.33-1.88]). UK patients were more often males, of older age and more co-morbid than EU counterparts (p < 0.01). Receipt of anti-cancer therapy was lower in UK versus EU patients (p < 0.001). Despite equal proportions of complicated Covid-19, rates of intensive care admission and use of mechanical ventilation, UK cancer patients were less likely to receive anti-Covid-19 therapies including corticosteroids, anti-virals and interleukin-6 antagonists (p < 0.0001). Multivariable analyses adjusted for imbalanced prognostic factors confirmed the UK cohort to be characterised by worse risk of death at 30 days and 6 months, independent of patient’s age, gender, tumour stage and status, number of co-morbidities, Covid-19 severity, receipt of anti-cancer and anti-Covid-19 therapy. Rates of permanent cessation of anti-cancer therapy post Covid-19 were similar in UK versus EU. Conclusions: UK cancer patients have been more severely impacted by the unfolding of the Covid-19 pandemic despite societal risk mitigation factors and rapid deferral of anti-cancer therapy. The increased frailty of UK cancer patients highlights high-risk groups that should be prioritised for anti-SARS-Cov-2 vaccination. Continued evaluation of long-term outcomes is warranted.

Abstract 15723: Risk Factors of Fluoropyrimidine Induced Cardiotoxicity Among Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chao Li ◽  
Kaniz A Tanni ◽  
Surachat Ngorsuraches ◽  
Chiahung Chou ◽  
Li Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cardiac Disease ◽  
Prediction Interval ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Smoking Habit ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Meta Analyses

Introduction: Cancer patients are at increased risk of experiencing cardiotoxicity during their fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. However, risk factors for fluoropyrimidine-induced cardiotoxicity (FIC) are not entirely understood. Methods: We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, IPA, CINAHL, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies published between January 1, 1990 and December 31, 2019, examining risk factors for cardiotoxicity induced by 5-fluorouracil, capecitabine or floxuridine. Two reviewers independently assessed publication quality and extracted study-level data into standardized evidence tables. Review Manager 5 software was used to convert data to risk ratios (RRs) and calculate pooled RRs for meta-analyses using a random-effects method. We conducted a Cochran’s Q test and obtained I 2 index to quantify study heterogeneity in each meta-analysis, with prediction interval (PI) to show the expected range of true effects in future similar studies. Results: Of 690 publications identified for abstract and title screening, 22 unique studies were included in the final review, and 20 of them had sufficient data for meta-analyses. Results indicated that patients undergoing capecitabine-based combination therapy had a higher risk of FIC than those with capecitabine monotherapy (pooled RR=1.61, 95% CI=1.01-2.55, I 2 =0%, 95% PI=0.08-31.71). Also, patients with pre-existing cardiac disease (pooled RR=3.01, 95% CI=2.02-4.49, I 2 =42%, 95% PI=1.03-8.78), hypertension (pooled RR=1.52, 95% CI=1.20-1.93, I 2 =0%, 95% PI=1.08-2.13) or smoking habit (pooled RR=2.22, 95% CI=1.03-4.78, I 2 =39%, 95% PI=0.15-32.46) had a significantly higher risk of FIC than their counterparts, while gender and comorbidities including diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and obesity were not significant risk factors of FIC. Conclusions: Cancer patients with pre-existing cardiac disease, hypertension, and smoking behavior had a higher risk of FIC when they are undergoing fluoropyrimidine-based treatments. Further research is needed to develop risk assessment tools for a risk prediction of FIC among cancer patients, which could advance risk stratification strategies and improve patient outcomes during the application of fluoropyrimidine-based treatments.

scholarly journals Cancer is associated with the severity and mortality of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ya Gao ◽  
Ming Liu ◽  
Shuzhen Shi ◽  
Yamin Chen ◽  
Yue Sun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Severe Illness ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Inverse Variance ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Prevalence Of Cancer

AbstractBackgroundCancer patients are considered a highly vulnerable population in the COVID-19 epidemic, but the relationship between cancer and the severity and mortality of patients with COVID-19 remains unclear. This study aimed to explore the prevalence of cancer in patients with COVID-19 and to examine whether cancer patients with COVID-19 may be at an increased risk of severe illness and mortality.MethodsA comprehensive electronic search in seven databases was performed, to identified studies reporting the prevalence of cancer in COVID-19 patients, or providing data of cancer between patients with severe or non-severe illness or between non-survivors and survivors. Meta-analyses were performed to estimate the pooled prevalence and odds risk (OR) using the inverse variance method with the random-effects model.ResultsThirty-four studies with 8080 patients were included. The pooled prevalence of cancer in patients with COVID-19 was 2.0% (95% CI: 2.0% to 3.0%). The prevalence in Italy (5.0%), France (6.0%), and Korea (4.0%) were higher than that in China (2.0%). Cancer was associated with a 2.84-fold significantly increased risk of severe illness (OR = 2.84, 95%CI: 1.75 to 4.62, P < 0.001) and a 2.60-fold increased risk of death (OR = 2.60, 95%CI: 1.28 to 5.26, P = 0.008) in patients with COVID-19. Sensitivity analyses showed that the results were stable after excluding studies with a sample size of less than 100.ConclusionsCancer patients have an increased risk of COVID-19 and cancer was associated with a significantly increased risk of severity and mortality of patients with COVID-19.

Clinical outcomes of cancer patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18600-e18600
Author(s):  
Maryam Alasfour ◽  
Salman Alawadi ◽  
Malak AlMojel ◽  
Philippos Apolinario Costa ◽  
Priscila Barreto Coelho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mortality Rate ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Prediction Intervals ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Newcastle Ottawa Scale ◽  
Small Sample Sizes ◽  
Meta Analyses

e18600 Background: Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and cancer have worse clinical outcomes compared to those without cancer. Primary studies have examined this population, but most had small sample sizes and conflicting results. Prior meta-analyses exclude most US and European data or only examine mortality. The present meta-analysis evaluates the prevalence of several clinical outcomes in cancer patients with COVID-19, including new emerging data from Europe and the US. Methods: A systematic search of PubMED, medRxiv, JMIR and Embase by two independent investigators included peer-reviewed papers and preprints up to July 8, 2020. The primary outcome was mortality. Other outcomes were ICU and non-ICU admission, mild, moderate and severe complications, ARDS, invasive ventilation, stable, and clinically improved rates. Study quality was assessed through the Newcastle–Ottawa scale. Random effects model was used to derive prevalence rates, their 95% confidence intervals (CI) and 95% prediction intervals (PI). Results: Thirty-four studies (N = 4,371) were included in the analysis. The mortality prevalence rate was 25.2% (95% CI: 21.1–29.7; 95% PI: 9.8-51.1; I 2 = 85.4), with 11.9% ICU admissions (95% CI: 9.2-15.4; 95% PI: 4.3-28.9; I 2= 77.8) and 25.2% clinically stable (95% CI: 21.1-29.7; 95% PI: 9.8-51.1; I 2 = 85.4). Furthermore, 42.5% developed severe complications (95% CI: 30.4-55.7; 95% PI: 8.2-85.9; I 2 = 94.3), with 22.7% developing ARDS (95% CI: 15.4-32.2; 95% PI: 5.8-58.6; I 2 = 82.4), and 11.3% needing invasive ventilation (95% CI: 6.7-18.4; 95% PI: 2.3-41.1; I 2 = 79.8). Post-follow up, 49% clinically improved (95% CI: 35.6-62.6; 95% PI: 9.8-89.4; I 2 = 92.5). All outcomes had large I 2 , suggesting high levels of heterogeneity among studies, and wide PIs indicating high variability within outcomes. Despite this variability, the mortality rate in cancer patients with COVID-19, even at the lower end of the PI (9.8%), is higher than the 2% mortality rate of the non-cancer with COVID-19 population, but not as high as what other meta-analyses conclude, which is around 25%. Conclusions: Patients with cancer who develop COVID-19 have a higher probability of mortality compared to the general population with COVID-19, but possibly not as high as previous studies have shown. A large proportion of them developed severe complications, but a larger proportion recovered. Prevalence of mortality and other outcomes published in prior meta-analyses did not report prediction intervals, which compromises the clinical utilization of such results.

scholarly journals The Optimal Time of Applying Enteral Immunonutrition in Esophageal Cancer Patients Receiving Esophagectomy: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xu Tian ◽  
Yan-Fei Jin ◽  
Zhao-Li Zhang ◽  
Hui Chen ◽  
Wei-Qing Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Infectious Complications ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Optimal Time ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: Enteral immunonutrition (EIN) has been extensively applied in cancer patients, however its role in esophageal cancer (EC) patients receiving esophagectomy remains unclear. We performed this network meta-analysis to investigate the impact of EIN on patients undergoing surgery for EC and further determine the optimal time of applying EIN.Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and China National Knowledgement Infrastructure (CNKI) to identify eligible studies. Categorical data was expressed as the odds ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI), and continuous data was expressed as mean difference (MD) with 95% CI. Pair-wise and network meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of EIN on clinical outcomes using RevMan 5.3 and ADDIS V.1.16.8 softwares. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was calculated to rank all nutritional regimes.Results: Total 14 studies involving 1071 patients were included. Pair-wise meta-analysis indicated no difference between EIN regardless of the application time and standard EN (SEN), however subgroup analyses found that postoperative EIN was associated with decreased incidence of total infectious complications (OR=0.47; 95%CI=0.26 to 0.84; p=0.01) and pneumonia (OR=0.47; 95%CI=0.25 to 0.90; p=0.02) and shortened LOH (MD=-1.01; 95%CI=-1.44 to -0.57; p<0.001) compared to SEN, which were all supported by network meta-analyses. Ranking probability analysis further indicated that postoperative EIN has the highest probability of being the optimal option in terms of these three outcomes.Conclusions: Postoperative EIN should be preferentially utilized in EC patients undergoing esophagectomy because it has optimal potential of decreasing the risk of total infectious complications and pneumonia and shortening LOH.OSF registration number: 10.17605/OSF.IO/KJ9UY.

scholarly journals Global Burden of Anxiety and Depression among Cystic Fibrosis Patient: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Mistire Teshome Guta ◽  
Tiwabwork Tekalign ◽  
Nefsu Awoke ◽  
Robera Olana Fite ◽  
Getahun Dendir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cystic Fibrosis ◽  
North America ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Systemic Review ◽  
Anxiety And Depression ◽  
Close Monitoring ◽  
The World ◽  
Trim And Fill ◽  
Meta Analyses

Aims. This systemic review and meta-analysis were aimed at determining the level of anxiety and depression among cystic fibrosis patients in the world. Methods. We conducted a systematic search of published studies from PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and manually on Google Scholar. This meta-analysis follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The quality of studies was assessed by the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Meta-analysis was carried out using a random-effects method using the STATA™ Version 14 software. Trim and fill analysis was done to correct the presence of significant publication bias. Result. From 419,820 obtained studies, 26 studies from 2 different parts of the world including 9766. The overall global pooled prevalence of anxiety and depression after correction for publication bias by trim and fill analysis was found to be 24.91(95% CI: 20.8-28.9) for anxiety. The subgroup analyses revealed with the lowest prevalence, 23.59%, (95% CI: 8.08, 39.09)) in North America and the highest, 26.77%, (95% CI: 22.5, 31.04) seen in Europe for anxiety and with the highest prevalence, 18.67%, (95% CI: 9.82, 27.5) in North America and the lowest, 13.27%, (95% CI: -10.05, 16.5) seen in Europe for depression. Conclusion. The global prevalence of anxiety and depression among cystic fibrosis patients is common. Therefore, close monitoring of the patient, regularly screening for anxiety and depression, and appropriate prevention techniques is recommended.

scholarly journals Immune Responses to COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines in Patients with Solid Tumors on Active, Immunosuppressive Cancer Therapy

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachna T Shroff ◽  
Pavani Chalasani ◽  
Ran Wei ◽  
Daniel Pennington ◽  
Grace Quirk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Therapy ◽  
Immune Responses ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Neutralizing Antibodies ◽  
Fold Increase ◽  
Control Cohort ◽  
Tumor Patients ◽  
Specific Memory ◽  
Anti Cancer ◽  
B Cell Subsets

Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have shown high efficacy, but immunocompromised participants were excluded from controlled clinical trials. We evaluated immune responses to the Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA vaccine in solid tumor patients (n=52) on active cytotoxic anti-cancer therapy. These responses were compared to a control cohort that also received the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine (n=50). Using live SARS-CoV-2 assays, neutralizing antibodies were detected in 67% and 80% of cancer patients after the first and second immunizations, respectively, with a 3-fold increase in median titers after the booster. Similar trends were observed in serum antibodies against the receptor-binding domain (RBD) and S2 regions of Spike protein, and in IFN𝛾+ Spike-specific T cells. The magnitude of each of these responses was diminished relative to the control cohort. We therefore quantified RBD- and Spike S1-specific memory B cell subsets as predictors of anamnestic responses to viral exposures or additional immunizations. After the second vaccination, Spike-specific plasma cell-biased memory B cells were observed in most cancer patients at levels similar to those of the control cohort after the first immunization. These data suggest that a third immunization might elevate antibody responses in cancer patients to levels seen in healthy individuals after the second dose. Trials should be conducted to test these predictions.

scholarly journals Do checkpoint inhibitors compromise the cancer patients’ immunity and increase the vulnerability to COVID-19 infection?

Immunotherapy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Kattan ◽  
Clarisse Kattan ◽  
Tarek Assi
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Therapy ◽  
Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Survival Outcomes ◽  
Toxicity Profile ◽  
Anti Cancer ◽  
Acquired Immunodeficiency ◽  
Improvement In Survival

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov-2) has been declared a pandemic by the WHO that claimed the lives of thousands of people within a few months. Cancer patients represent a vulnerable population due to the acquired immunodeficiency associated with anti-cancer therapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have largely impacted the prognosis of a multitude of malignancies with significant improvement in survival outcomes and a different, tolerable toxicity profile. In this paper, we assess the safety of ICI administration in cancer patients during the coronavirus pandemic in order to guide the usage of these highly efficacious agents.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document