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.

Cannabinoids, when co-administered with opioids, may enable reduced opioid doses without loss of analgesic efficacy (ie, an opioid-sparing effect). The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review to determine the opioid-sparing potential of cannabinoids. Eligible studies included pre-clinical and clinical studies for which the outcome was either analgesia or opioid dose requirements. Clinical studies included controlled studies and case series. We searched Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Medline, and Embase. Nineteen pre-clinical and nine clinical studies met the search criteria. Seventeen of the 19 pre-clinical studies provided evidence of synergistic effects from opioid and cannabinoid co-administration. Our meta-analysis of pre-clinical studies indicated that the median effective dose (ED) of morphine administered in combination with delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (delta-9-THC) is 3.6 times lower (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.95, 6.76; n=6) than the ED of morphine alone. In addition, the ED for codeine administered in combination with delta-9-THC was 9.5 times lower (95% CI 1.6, 57.5, n=2) than the ED of codeine alone. One case series (n=3) provided very-low-quality evidence of a reduction in opioid requirements with cannabinoid co-administration. Larger controlled clinical studies showed some clinical benefits of cannabinoids; however, opioid dose changes were rarely reported and mixed findings were observed for analgesia. In summary, pre-clinical studies provide robust evidence of the opioid-sparing effect of cannabinoids, whereas one of the nine clinical studies identified provided very-low-quality evidence of such an effect. Prospective high-quality-controlled clinical trials are required to determine the opioid-sparing effect of cannabinoids.

Traditionally, rural areas in many countries are limited by a lack of access to health care due to the inherent challenges associated with recruitment and retention of healthcare professionals. Telemedicine, which uses communication technology to deliver medical services over distance, is an economical and potentially effective way to address this problem. In this research, we develop a new telepresence application using an Augmented Reality (AR) system. We explore the use of the Microsoft HoloLens to facilitate and enhance remote medical training. Intrinsic advantages of AR systems enable remote learners to perform complex medical procedures such as Point of Care Ultrasound (PoCUS) without visual interference. This research uses the HoloLens to capture the first-person view of a simulated rural emergency room (ER) through mixed reality capture (MRC) and serves as a novel telemedicine platform with remote pointing capabilities. The mentor’s hand gestures are captured using a Leap Motion and virtually displayed in the AR space of the HoloLens. To explore the feasibility of the developed platform, twelve novice medical trainees were guided by a mentor through a simulated ultrasound exploration in a trauma scenario, as part of a pilot user study. The study explores the utility of the system from the trainees, mentor, and objective observers’ perspectives and compares the findings to that of a more traditional multi-camera telemedicine solution. The results obtained provide valuable insight and guidance for the development of an AR-supported telemedicine platform.

A subset of patients with CRC in Ontario were assigned stage II disease on the basis of examination of relatively few lymph nodes.

Objectives: To determine the impact of novel invitation strategies on population participation in faecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Setting A community screening programme in Adelaide, South Australia. Methods: In total, 2400 people aged 50–74 years were randomly allocated to one of four CRC screening invitation strategies: (a) Control: standard invitation-to-screen letter explaining risk of CRC and the concept, value and method of screening; (b) Risk: invitation with additional messages related to CRC risk; (c) Advocacy: invitation with additional messages related to advocacy for screening from previous screening programme participants and (d) Advance Notification: first, a letter introducing Control letter messages followed by the standard invitation-to-screen. Invitations included an FIT kit. Programme participation rates were determined for each strategy relative to control. Associations between participation and sociodemographic variables were explored. Results: At 12 weeks after invitation, participation was: Control: 237/600 (39.5%); Risk: 242/600 (40.3%); Advocacy: 216/600 (36.0%) and Advance Notification: 290/600 (48.3%). Participation was significantly greater than Control only in the Advance Notification group (Relative risk [RR] 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06–1.43). This effect was apparent as early as two weeks from date of offer; Advance Notification: 151/600 (25.2%) versus Control: 109/600 (18.2%, RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.11–1.73). Conclusions: Advance notification significantly increased screening participation. The effect may be due to a population shift in readiness to undertake screening, and is consistent with the Transtheoretical Model of behaviour change. Risk or lay advocacy strategies did not improve screening participation. Organized screening programmes should consider using advance notification letters to improve programme participation.

SS for anal canal cancer was associated with significant morbidity. Long-term survival was achieved in 39% of patients. Comorbidities should guide patient selection, and R0 resection should be the goal.

In this series of patients who underwent resection of LRRC, microscopic margin status was the most significant predictor of OS and DFS. Requirement for en bloc sacrectomy was not associated with inferior survival. Carefully selected patients with distant metastases may benefit from resection of LRRC.

The majority of patients with locally advanced colorectal cancer did not receive a multivisceral resection. The geographic variation in the application of this procedure in patients with colon cancer suggests that local organizational structures and processes of care may play an important role in patient treatment and, therefore, prognosis.