Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre-including this research content-immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. Articles

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.

PURPOSE Many patients with cancer, often those with rare cancers such as sarcomas, travel long distances to access expert care. The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated widespread changes in delivery of cancer care, including rapid adoption of telemedicine-based care. We aimed to evaluate the impact of telemedicine on patients, clinicians, and care delivery at the Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) Sarcoma Unit during the pandemic. METHODS Data were extracted from patient records for all planned outpatient appointments at the RMH Sarcoma Unit from March 23 to April 24, 2020. Patients and clinicians completed separate questionnaires to understand their experiences. RESULTS Of 379 planned face-to-face appointments, 283 (75%) were converted to telemedicine. Face-to-face appointments remained for patients who needed urgent start of therapy or performance status assessment. Patients lived on average > 1.5 hours from RMH. Patient satisfaction (n = 108) with telemedicine was high (mean, 9/10), and only 48% (n = 52/108) would not want to hear bad news using telemedicine. Clinicians found telemedicine efficient, with no associated increased workload, compared with face-to-face appointments. Clinicians indicated lack of physical examination did not often affect care provision when using telemedicine. Most clinicians (n = 17; 94%) believed telemedicine use was practice changing; congruently, 80% (n = 86/108) of patients desired some telemedicine as part of their future care, citing reduced cost and travel time. CONCLUSION Telemedicine can revolutionize delivery of cancer care, particularly for patients with rare cancers who often live far away from expert centers. Our study demonstrates important patient and clinician benefits; assessment of longer-term impact on patient outcomes and health care systems is needed.

Osteosarcoma is the most common primary bone sarcoma and is often diagnosed in the 2nd–3rd decades of life. Response to the aggressive and highly toxic neoadjuvant methotrexate-doxorubicin-cisplatin (MAP) chemotherapy schedule is strongly predictive of outcome. Outcomes for patients with osteosarcoma have not significantly changed for over thirty years. There is a need for more effective treatment for patients with high risk features but also reduced treatment-related toxicity for all patients. Predictive biomarkers are needed to help inform clinicians to de-escalate or add therapy, including immune therapies, and to contribute to future clinical trial designs. Here, we review a variety of approaches to improve outcomes and quality of life for patients with osteosarcoma with a focus on incorporating toxicity reduction, immune therapy and molecular analysis to provide the most effective and least toxic osteosarcoma therapy.

Background: In light of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, cancer centres in the United Kingdom and Europe re-organised their services at an unprecedented pace, and many patients with cancer have had their treatments severely disrupted. Patients with cancer were considered at high risk on sparse evidence, and despite a small number of emerging observational studies, the true incidence and impact of COVID-19 in the 'at-risk' population of patients with cancer is yet to be defined. Methods: Epidemiological and clinical data were collected prospectively for patients attending the Royal Marsden Hospital and three network hospitals between March 1st and April 30th 2020 that were confirmed to have Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) infection. Significance of clinical and pathological characteristics was assessed using the Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon rank sum test, whilst univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to further assess risk. The number of patients attending in March/ April 2020 for face-to-face attendances was also extracted. Findings: During the 2-month study period, 867 of 13,489 (6.4%) patients met the criteria leading to swab testing. Of the total at-risk population, only 113 of 13,489 (0.84%) were swab positive, 101 of 13,489 (0.75%) required hospital admission and 29 of 13,489 (0.21%) died of

Sarcomas are rare cancers with a spectrum of clinical needs and outcomes. We investigated care experiences and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in sarcoma patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients with appointments during the first two months of the UK lockdown were invited to complete a survey. Questions included views on care modifications, COVID-19 worry and psychosocial impact, and EORTC-QLQ-C30 items. 350 patients completed the survey; median age 58 (16–92) years. Care modifications included telemedicine (74%) and postponement of appointments (34%), scans (34%) or treatment (10%). Most felt the quality of care was not affected (72%), however, social life (87%) and emotional wellbeing (41%) were affected. Worry about COVID-19 infection was moderately high (mean 5.8/10) and significantly related to higher cancer-related worry; associated with lower emotional functioning irrespective of treatment intent. Curative patients (44%) with low resilient coping scores had significantly higher COVID-19 worry. Patients who did not know their treatment intent (22%) had significantly higher COVID-19 worry and insomnia. In summary, care experiences were generally positive; however, cancer-related worry, low resilient coping and uncertainty about treatment intent were associated with COVID-19 worry. These patients may benefit from additional psychological support during the pandemic and beyond.

Patients with cancer have higher COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. Here we present the prospective CAPTURE study, integrating longitudinal immune profiling with clinical annotation. Of 357 patients with cancer, 118 were SARS-CoV-2 positive, 94 were symptomatic and 2 died of COVID-19. In this cohort, 83% patients had S1-reactive antibodies and 82% had neutralizing antibodies against wild type SARS-CoV-2, whereas neutralizing antibody titers against the Alpha, Beta and Delta variants were substantially reduced. S1-reactive antibody levels decreased in 13% of patients, whereas neutralizing antibody titers remained stable for up to 329 days. Patients also had detectable SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells and CD4+ responses correlating with S1-reactive antibody levels, although patients with hematological malignancies had impaired immune responses that were disease and treatment specific, but presented compensatory cellular responses, further supported by clinical recovery in all but one patient. Overall, these findings advance the understanding of the nature and duration of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 in patients with cancer.

Background: Low-grade fibromyxoid sarcoma (LGFMS) is a rare sarcoma subtype with a generally indolent pattern of clinical behaviour, but treatments for advanced disease are limited. Patients and Methods: A retrospective search of a prospectively maintained institutional database identified 102 patients treated from December 1994 to August 2018. We evaluated the outcome of patients and the efficacy and safety of non-surgical therapies in LGFMS. Results: Ninety-four out of 102 (92.2%) underwent primary resection, seven (6.9%) were treated with systemic therapy and one (1.0%) is currently being treated with pre-operative radiotherapy. The RECIST 1.1 response rate to first-line chemotherapy was 0%, and median progression-free survival was 1.84 months (95% confidence intervaI=0.10-3.6 months). Conclusion: Conventional systemic therapy has limited efficacy in advanced LGFMS.