Background Olfactory dysfunction (OD) has been gaining recognition as a symptom of COVID-19, but its clinical utility has not been well defined. Objectives To quantify the clinical utility of identifying OD in the diagnosis of COVID-19 and determine an estimate of the frequency of OD amongst these patients. Methods PubMed was searched up to 1 August 2020. Meta-analysis A included studies if they compared the frequency of OD in COVID-19 positive patients (proven by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction) to COVID-19 negative controls. Metaanalysis B included studies if they described the frequency of OD in COVID-19 positive patients and if OD symptoms were explicitly asked in questionnaires or interviews or if smell tests were performed. Results The pooled frequency of OD in COVID-19 positive patients (17,401 patients, 60 studies) was 0.56 (0.47-0.64) but differs between detection via smell testing (0.76 [0.51-0.91]) and survey/questionnaire report (0.53 [0.45-0.62]), although not reaching statistical significance (p = 0.089). Patients with reported OD were more likely to test positive for COVID-19 (diagnostic odds ratio 11.5 [8.01-16.5], sensitivity 0.48 (0.40 to 0.56), specificity 0.93 (0.90 to 0.96), positive likelihood ratio 6.10 (4.47-8.32) and negative likelihood ratio 0.58 (0.52-0.64)). There was significant heterogeneity amongst studies with possible publication bias. Conclusion Frequency of OD in COVID-19 differs greatly across studies. Nevertheless, patients with reported OD were significantly more likely to test positive for COVID-19. Patient-reported OD is a highly specific symptom of COVID-19 which should be included as part of the pre-test screening of suspect patients.

BackgroundNasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) is endemic among Chinese populations in Southeast Asia. However, the outcomes of non-Chinese NPC patients in Singapore are not well reported.AimTo determine if non-Chinese NPC patients have a different prognosis and examine the clinical outcomes of NPC patients in a multi-ethnic society.MethodsRetrospective chart review of 558 NPC patients treated at a single academic tertiary hospital from 2002 to 2012. Survival and recurrence rates were analysed and predictive factors identified using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression model.ResultsOur cohort comprised 409 males (73.3%) and 149 females (26.7%) with a median age of 52 years. There were 476 Chinese (85.3%), 57 Malays (10.2%), and 25 of other ethnic groups (4.5%). Non-Chinese patients were more likely to be associated with advanced nodal disease at initial presentation (p = 0.049), compared with the Chinese. However, there were no statistical differences in their overall survival (OS) or disease specific survival (DSS) (p = 0.934 and p = 0.857 respectively). The 3-year and 5-year cohort OS and DSS rates were 79.3%, 70.7%, and 83.2%, 77.4% respectively. Advanced age (p<0.001), N2 disease (p = 0.036), N3 disease (p<0.001), and metastatic disease (p<0.001) at presentation were independently associated with poor overall survival. N2 disease (p = 0.032), N3 disease (p<0.001) and metastatic disease (p<0.001) were also independently associated with poor DSS. No predictive factors were associated with loco-regional recurrence after definitive treatment. Advanced age (p = 0.044), N2 disease (p = 0.033) and N3 disease (p<0.001) were independently associated with distant relapse.ConclusionIn a multi-ethnic society in Singapore, non-Chinese are more likely to present with advanced nodal disease. This however did not translate into poorer survival outcomes. Older patients with N2 or N3 disease are associated with a higher risk of distant relapse and poor overall survival.

No abstract

Risk stratification of patients with metastatic nasopharyngeal cancer is possible using a prognostic scoring system based on clinical and biochemical parameters. Patients with low-risk score may achieve good metastatic survival and may benefit from additional therapy for disease control.

Background This study aimed to determine the impact of pulmonary complications on death after surgery both before and during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. Methods This was a patient-level, comparative analysis of two, international prospective cohort studies: one before the pandemic (January–October 2019) and the second during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (local emergence of COVID-19 up to 19 April 2020). Both included patients undergoing elective resection of an intra-abdominal cancer with curative intent across five surgical oncology disciplines. Patient selection and rates of 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications were compared. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality. Mediation analysis using a natural-effects model was used to estimate the proportion of deaths during the pandemic attributable to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results This study included 7402 patients from 50 countries; 3031 (40.9 per cent) underwent surgery before and 4371 (59.1 per cent) during the pandemic. Overall, 4.3 per cent (187 of 4371) developed postoperative SARS-CoV-2 in the pandemic cohort. The pulmonary complication rate was similar (7.1 per cent (216 of 3031) versus 6.3 per cent (274 of 4371); P = 0.158) but the mortality rate was significantly higher (0.7 per cent (20 of 3031) versus 2.0 per cent (87 of 4371); P &lt; 0.001) among patients who had surgery during the pandemic. The adjusted odds of death were higher during than before the pandemic (odds ratio (OR) 2.72, 95 per cent c.i. 1.58 to 4.67; P &lt; 0.001). In mediation analysis, 54.8 per cent of excess postoperative deaths during the pandemic were estimated to be attributable to SARS-CoV-2 (OR 1.73, 1.40 to 2.13; P &lt; 0.001). Conclusion Although providers may have selected patients with a lower risk profile for surgery during the pandemic, this did not mitigate the likelihood of death through SARS-CoV-2 infection. Care providers must act urgently to protect surgical patients from SARS-CoV-2 infection.