No abstract

The pandemic spread of the COVID-19 virus significantly affected daily life, but the highest pressure was piled on the health care system. Our aim was to evaluate an impact of COVID-19 pandemic management measures on cancer services at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) of Lithuania. We assessed the time period from 1 February 2020 to 31 December 2020 and compared it to the same period of 2019. Data for our analysis were extracted from the NCI Hospital Information System (HIS) and the National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF). Contingency table analysis and ANOVA were performed. The COVID-19 pandemic negatively affected the cancer services provided by NCI. Reductions in diagnostic radiology (−16%) and endoscopy (−29%) procedures were accompanied by a decreased number of patients with ongoing medical (−30%), radiation (−6%) or surgical (−10%) treatment. The changes in the number of newly diagnosed cancer patients were dependent on tumor type and disease stage, showing a rise in advanced disease at diagnosis already during the early period of the first lockdown. The extent of out-patient consultations (−14%) and disease follow-up visits (−16%) was also affected by the pandemic, and only referrals to psychological/psychiatric counselling were increased. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on the structure of cancer services by fostering the application of modified systemic anticancer therapy or hypofractionated radiotherapy. The most dramatic drop occurred in the number of patients participating in cancer prevention programs; the loss was 25% for colon cancer and 62% for breast cancer screening. Marked restriction in access to preventive cancer screening and overall reduction of the whole spectrum of cancer services may negatively affect cancer survival measures in the nearest future.

Introduction Recent data suggest that margins ≥2 mm after breast-conserving surgery may improve local control in invasive breast cancer (BC). By allowing large resection volumes, oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCII; Clough level II/Tübingen 5-6) may achieve better local control than conventional breast conserving surgery (BCS; Tübingen 1-2) or oncoplastic breast conservation with low resection volumes (OBCI; Clough level I/Tübingen 3-4). Methods Data from consecutive high-risk BC patients treated in 15 centers from the Oncoplastic Breast Consortium (OPBC) network, between January 2010 and December 2013, were retrospectively reviewed. Results A total of 3,177 women were included, 30% of whom were treated with OBC (OBCI n = 663; OBCII n = 297). The BCS/OBCI group had significantly smaller tumors and smaller resection margins compared with OBCII (pT1: 50% vs. 37%, p = 0.002; proportion with margin <1 mm: 17% vs. 6%, p < 0.001). There were significantly more re-excisions due to R1 (“ink on tumor”) in the BCS/OBCI compared with the OBCII group (11% vs. 7%, p = 0.049). Univariate and multivariable regression analysis adjusted for tumor biology, tumor size, radiotherapy, and systemic treatment demonstrated no differences in local, regional, or distant recurrence-free or overall survival between the two groups. Conclusions Large resection volumes in oncoplastic surgery increases the distance from cancer cells to the margin of the specimen and reduces reexcision rates significantly. With OBCII larger tumors are resected with similar local, regional and distant recurrence-free as well as overall survival rates as BCS/OBCI.

In this study, dosing with ADPREM at intervals of 24 hours was therapeutically equivalent to CRM dosed at intervals of 12 hours.