Practice recommendations for lung cancer radiotherapy during the COVID-19 pandemic: An ESTRO-ASTRO consensus statement

Abstract

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused radiotherapy resource pressures and led to increased risks for lung cancer patients and healthcare staff. An international group of experts in lung cancer radiotherapy established this practice recommendation pertaining to whether and how to adapt radiotherapy for lung cancer in the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: For this ESTRO & ASTRO endorsed project, 32 experts in lung cancer radiotherapy contributed to a modified Delphi consensus process. We assessed potential adaptations of radiotherapy in two pandemic scenarios. The first, an early pandemic scenario of risk mitigation, is characterized by an altered risk-benefit ratio of radiotherapy for lung cancer patients due to their increased susceptibility for severe COVID-19 infection, and minimization of patient travelling and exposure of radiotherapy staff. The second, a later pandemic scenario, is characterized by reduced radiotherapy resources requiring patient triage. Six common lung cancer cases were assessed for both scenarios: peripherally located stage I NSCLC, locally advanced NSCLC, postoperative radiotherapy after resection of pN2 NSCLC, thoracic radiotherapy and prophylactic cranial irradiation for limited stage SCLC and palliative thoracic radiotherapy for stage IV NSCLC. Results: In a risk-mitigation pandemic scenario, efforts should be made not to compromise the prognosis of lung cancer patients by departing from guideline-recommended radiotherapy practice. In that same scenario, postponement or interruption of radiotherapy treatment of COVID-19 positive patients is

Quantifying the Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer Patients: A Technical Report of Patient Experience During the COVID-19 Pandemic at a High-volume Radiation Oncology Proton Center in New York City

“…Similar to the UW, we instituted policies to minimize risks to patients, including providing patient education materials; completing daily symptom screenings of patients and close contacts; implementing rigorous sanitization measures; deferring treatment of indolent diseases; instituting telemedicine appointments, virtual meetings, restricting visitors, spacingout treatment times, and closing patient waiting rooms. Patients in subacute care or nursing facilities were no longer eligible for treatment until discharged and we utilized hypofractionation to shorten treatment schedules per expert-consensus, when feasible [2][3][4][5]. Lastly, we began prospectively monitoring each patient on treatment and those expected to initiate treatment for new symptoms, date of onset, possible sick contacts, and COVID-19 test results.…”

Two months of Radiation Oncology in the heart of Italian “red zone” during COVID-19 pandemic: paving a safe path over thin ice.

“…Oncology and radiation oncology practice have been affected as well, as the urgency of providing life-saving treatments could be undermined by the risk of infection. This generated a large body of recommendations, surveys and guidelines [7][8][10][11]. Nevertheless, currently published clinical data are still limited, especially considering subjects on active treatment [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19].…”

Development and execution of a pandemic preparedness plan: Therapeutic medical physics and radiation dosimetry during the COVID‐19 crisis

“…Zaorsky et al . recommend the “RADS” framework, which stands for “Remote visits, Avoid radiation, Defer radiation, Shorten radiation.” 15 Several site‐specific recommendations have been published to aid physicians in decisions of avoiding or deferring radiation and toward specific fractionation regimens to shorten radiation 16–19 . Many of these works, however, were accepted for publication and made available online after the coronavirus began to spread exponentially in the greater New York area.…”