Background: Cancer patients (pts) have higher risk of severe COVID-19 infection. However, observations are based on non-comparative retrospective studies. Evidence regarding vaccination in cancer pts is limited, but there is enough evidence to support COVID-19 vaccination, even under active treatment. Data on humoral and cellular immune response to antiviral vaccination in cancer pts are scarce. In pts receiving immunosuppressive therapies (IST) like chemotherapy and targeted therapies, seroconversion/protection rates are expected to be lower than general population, but not in pts receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Serum antibodies against an infectious agent may be an immunity indicator.Methods: Prospective observational longitudinal study with the intent of evaluating the humoral response of cancer pts to COVID-19 vaccination. The study includes pts diagnosed in any stage, without or under active treatment, or survivors followed in Hospital Prof. Dr. Fernando Fonseca, in partnership with Instituto Gulbenkian de Ciência. Pts are divided into 4 arms, independently of the vaccine: A e IST; B e ICI; C eHormone therapy (HT); D e Cancer survivors. Recruitment started in March 2021, expecting at least 50 pts per arm. IgG, IgA and IgM anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies ELISA determination in 9 timepoints: before 1st dose and at the 3rd, 6th, 12th, 15th, 24th, 36th, 48th and 60th weeks post 1st dose. Side effects' questionnaire will be implemented after 1st and 2nd doses.Results: Recruitment is ongoing and a total of 202 pts were enrolled, of which 178 pts have 3-weeks post 1st dose evaluated: 101 in arm A: 11 in B: 31 in C; and 35 in D.The mean age is 61.6 years, with 53.4% females. Regarding vaccines, 55 pts were submitted to ChAdOx1-S/nCoC-19, 5 to Ad26.COV2.S, 89 to BNT162b2 and 12 to mRNA-1273 vaccines. At 3 weeks, 33/97 pts (34%) in arm A, 2/11 pts (18%) in B, 14/28 pts (50%) in C and 15/35 pts (43%) in D already generated anti-spike IgG. Most common side effects were local inflammatory reaction (47%), generalized muscle pain (17%), fatigue (11%), and chills (10%).Conclusions: Efficacy and safety profiles of vaccines against COVID-19 infection in cancer pts is still unknown.This study hopes to assess differences in immunization between pts' treatment profiles and duration profiles and safety profiles.Legal entity responsible for the study: The authors.
Objectives Several studies have investigated whether patients with prior breast cancer (BC) are at increased risk for endometrial cancer/uterine serous cancer (USC). We aimed to study this relationship and analyze the effect of prior BC on the incidence and prognosis of USC patients. Methods With permission of the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program of the United States National Cancer Institute, clinicopathological information of women diagnosed with BC and following USC were analyzed. The recorded data included age at diagnosis, stage of disease, cause of death, interval time between BC and USC diagnosis and overall survival. ResultsThe SEER database included 10021 patients with USC during the years 1975-2015. 698 (6.96%) of these patients had been previously diagnosed with breast cancer (BC). The incidence of USC in patients with BC history was 57 times higher than in women without BC history (p value < 0.001). The incidence of USC did not differ between ER positive and ER negative BC patients (p. value 0.94). The mean survival of USC patients with previous BC history was 8 years (96 months, 95% CI 85.7-106.2), shorter than in USC patients with no BC history presenting a mean survival of 10.6 years (127 months, 95% CI 124.0-130.8) (p. value =0.002). Conclusions Our results highlight the relationship between BC and USC, suggesting an increased risk for USC among BC patients. This clinical association should be introduced to BC patients, and physicians should be alert to any EC presenting symptom in BC survivors.
e18564 Background: Representatives from 8 global cancer coalitions/alliances, representing 650 cancer patient groups and the interests of over 14 million patients have come together during the pandemic to review and evaluate the patient-perspective impact. Cancer services have faced challenges as a result of COVID-19, including suspension of screening and diagnostic services; delays in diagnosis leading to higher mortality rates; cancellation/deferral of life-saving treatments; changes in treatment regimens and suspension of vital research. For organisations that provide support to cancer patients, declining income, the need to reduce staff and move to virtual working practices has put extra strain while demand for support due to the pandemic has increased. Methods: 5 coalitions surveyed their member organisations. A number of coalitions consulted their members by individual surveys or consultations. Results: A survey of 157 organisations representing advanced breast, bladder, lymphoma, ovarian and pancreatic cancer patient groups from 56 countries found that 57% experienced an average increase of 44% in patient calls and emails. 45% reported that their future viability may be under threat because of the impact of COVID-19 on income. Examples of good practice were reported where healthcare systems have acted to protect patients and cancer services. These include the introduction of COVID-free centres, separation of cancer patients from those who may have COVID-19, and the introduction of virtual and telemedicine services. Organisations have also introduced new ways of working including virtual psychological support services and app-based support groups. These best practices should form part of a global plan of action for future health crisis. Conclusions: Collaboration between patient advocacy organisations, governments and health services is needed to ensure the ground lost to the COVID-19 pandemic is regained. Action is required to restore cancer services safely and effectively without delay. Additional resources for organisations that support cancer patients are required to ensure that they continue to provide vital services. Finally, a global plan of action for cancer is required to meet the challenges of any future health crisis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.