Background: Most safety and efficacy trials of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines excluded patients with cancer, yet these patients are more likely than healthy individuals to contract SARS-CoV-2 and more likely to become seriously ill after infection. Our objective was to record short-term adverse reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine in patients with cancer, to compare the magnitude and duration of these reactions with those of patients without cancer, and to determine whether adverse reactions are related to active cancer therapy. Patients and Methods: A prospective, single-institution observational study was performed at an NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. All study participants received 2 doses of the Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine separated by approximately 3 weeks. A report of adverse reactions to dose 1 of the vaccine was completed upon return to the clinic for dose 2. Participants completed an identical survey either online or by telephone 2 weeks after the second vaccine dose. Results: The cohort of 1,753 patients included 67.5% who had a history of cancer and 12.0% who were receiving active cancer treatment. Local pain at the injection site was the most frequently reported symptom for all respondents and did not distinguish patients with cancer from those without cancer after either dose 1 (39.3% vs 43.9%; P=.07) or dose 2 (42.5% vs 40.3%; P=.45). Among patients with cancer, those receiving active treatment were less likely to report pain at the injection site after dose 1 compared with those not receiving active treatment (30.0% vs 41.4%; P=.002). The onset and duration of adverse events was otherwise unrelated to active cancer treatment. Conclusions: When patients with cancer were compared with those without cancer, few differences in reported adverse events were noted. Active cancer treatment had little impact on adverse event profiles.
7 Background: Studies suggest that many Emergency Department (ED) visits and hospitalizations for cancer patients may be preventable. CMS has made changes to the hospital outpatient reporting program (OP-35) targeting ED visits and admissions in treatment patients for preventable conditions. Oncologic urgent care centers aim to streamline care for this population. Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC) developed an urgent care center called the Direct Referral Unit (DRU) in July 2011. We sought to assess the impact of the DRU on care utilization. Methods: We abstracted visits to our adjacent hospital (Jeanes) ED and the DRU from January 2014-June 2018. Visit rates represent the ratio of visits over the total number of patients with a clinic visit at FCCC per year. ED and DRU visits were associated with both a cancer and visit diagnosis per the International Classification of Disease (ICD). Patient demographics were abstracted. We also analyzed visit charges, inpatient admission and 30-day therapy utilization (chemotherapy, immunotherapy, radiation). Results: A total of 13,210 visits were analyzed including 5,789 ED visits and 7,421 DRU visits. Visits to the Jeanes ED increased over time. The average age of patients at time of first visit was 63 and visits were most common in females and Caucasians. Hispanic and African American (AA) patients were more likely to visit the ED compared to the DRU (OR: 7.54 and 1.30). Patients with GI (27%) and thoracic (15%) malignancies had the most visits. Commercial insurance use was most common (48%) followed by Medicare (34%) and Medicaid (16%). DRU use was most frequent on Mondays (22%), while ED use occurred the most on Sundays (17%). The most common DRU visit diagnoses in order of prevalence were dehydration, nausea/vomiting, abdominal pain, fever, shortness of breath, fatigue, diarrhea, cellulitis/rash, constipation and anemia. Inpatient admission rates were similar between the two settings (p=.8176). Patients on active cancer treatment more frequently presented to the DRU in comparison to the ED (p<.0001). The average charges were $2226.22 for a DRU visit vs. $10,253.44 for an ED visit. Conclusions: The increase in ED visits over time as well the more frequent ED use in Hispanic and AA patients both suggest a need for greater urgent care access. Many of the most common visit diagnoses to the DRU align with CMS’s list of preventable conditions, demonstrating the DRU’s success as a triage center targeting these conditions. DRU visits were associated with considerable cost savings, supporting the use of cancer urgent care centers as a cost-effective method to reduce acute care.
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.