Literature DB >> 32395672

Guidelines to Reduce Hospitalization Rates for Patients Receiving Curative-Intent Radiation Therapy During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Report from a Multicenter New York Area Institution.

William C Chen1,2, Sewit Teckie1,2, Gayle Somerstein1, Nilda Adair1, Louis Potters1,2.   

Abstract

As the COVID-19 pandemic spreads around the globe, access to radiation therapy remains critical for cancer patients. The priority for all radiation oncology departments is to protect the staff and to maintain operations in providing access to those patients requiring radiation therapy services. Patients with tumors of the aerodigestive tract and pelvis amongst others often experience toxicity during treatment, and there is a baseline risk that adverse effects may require hospital-based management. Routine care during weekly visits is important to guide patients through treatment and to mitigate against the need for hospitalization. Nevertheless, hospitalizations occur and there is a risk of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 spread. During the COVID-19 pandemic, typical resources used to help manage patients, such as dental services, interventional radiology, rehabilitation and others are limited or not at all available. Recognizing the need to provide access to treatment and the anticipated toxicity of such treatment, we have developed and implemented guidelines for clinical care management with the hope of avoiding added risk to our patients. If successful, these concepts may be integrated into our care directives in non-pandemic times.
© 2020 The Author(s).

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 32395672      PMCID: PMC7212958          DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2020.04.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol        ISSN: 2452-1094


Introduction

In December 2019, cases of pneumonia of unknown etiology were first reported in Wuhan City, Hubei Province of China. These cases have since been linked to a novel enveloped RNA beta coronavirus named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes the associated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). COVID-19 has caused a global pandemic, resulting in considerable morbidity, mortality, and health care resource strain. As of April 11, 2020, 10:00AM central European time, 1,610,909 global cases of COVID-19 and 99,690 global deaths had been reported to the World Health Organization. The New York metropolitan area has been one of the most severely affected regions, with 160,349 confirmed cases and 8078 deaths thus far within New York City and surrounding Nassau, Suffolk, and Westchester counties, accounting for 30% of U.S. cases and 38% of U.S. deaths. Our institution, Northwell Health, is the largest health care provider in New York State and is based in the aforementioned counties. Most of our hospitals have similarly seen a surge of COVID-19 cases, and throughout our health system, all non-emergent surgeries and procedures have temporarily been cancelled to provide capacity for COVID-19–related hospital admissions. Early data from Asia and Europe showed an increased rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 morbidity among patients with cancer.6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 In an effort to reduce exposure to patients with cancer and conserve health system resources, oncology societies and institutions have crafted working guidelines regarding cancer treatments.13, 14, 15, 16, 17 However, the majority of cancer cases require timely treatment, and we continue to provide curative and palliative treatments to hundreds of patients daily throughout the Northwell Health Cancer Institute. Radiation oncologists are well aware that several disease sites, such as head and neck, result in high unanticipated hospital admission rates during or soon after radiation therapy., As a department, we decided that we must intensify our current on-treatment care protocols to ensure timely completion of therapy and drastically reduce the chance of complications requiring hospital admission. Therefore, the faculty developed consensus-driven, experience-based guidelines for intensive on-treatment management for disease sites that often require concurrent radiation and chemotherapy for curative treatment and historically have higher rates of emergency department (ED) or hospital usage. In this report, we outline our departmental disease-site specific guidelines to reduce hospitalization rates during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Quality and safety are critically important to the delivery of radiation therapy and are cornerstones of our previously reported Smarter Radiation Oncology program., As part of our departmental culture, new patient radiation cases are peer-reviewed in prospective daily contouring rounds before treatment planning begins., Our departmental quality assurance program also tracks data on patient hospitalization and discontinuation of radiation therapy. In March 2020, as the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic upon our health system intensified, we established 2 overriding principles: (1) to maintain the safety of all staff and (2) to maintain access for those patients requiring radiation therapy services. First, as care providers from radiation medicine and other departments were being redeployed throughout the health system to help manage the pandemic, we purposefully sought to decrease staff density and machine utilization, thereby decreasing staff and patient exposure to and risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. A priority level was assigned to each case to determine which patients might safely avoid treatment or have treatment deferred, attempting to balance the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection versus potential adverse outcomes of deferring treatments. Faculty met virtually on 2 separate occasions to prospectively determine the urgency and priority of all pending cases, including pending simulations and treatment starts. Group consensus was required to assign each patient’s priority. Second, there was a desire from providers and patients to minimize SARS-CoV-2 exposure by limiting evaluation or interventions within the ED or hospital, where possible. To that end, additional management of adverse events during outpatient treatments should be carried out within the ambulatory radiation medicine clinic or the patient’s home. Given the hospital strain during the pandemic, resource availability for nonemergent procedures was also limited. This included, but was not limited to, operating room availability for cancer surgery, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement, esophageal dilation/stent placement, dental evaluation and extraction, infusion services, physical and occupational therapy, and home care services. Management of adverse effects would therefore need to be more proactive than reactive and require more intensive management by fewer care providers. Therefore, our goals required that we create a framework for clinical practice and resource management that may be applied to the current and future resource-constrained settings. Key questions included: Who benefits from increased support during treatment (health system resource utilization)? What health system resources and/or services may be limited or unavailable? How can we provide intensified support to reduce hospitalization rates and prevent strain on other departments? When should interventions be implemented to reduce the severity of adverse treatment effects? To address these questions and create a consensus guideline, a team of physicians, advanced care providers, and administrators within our radiation medicine service line convened to review pertinent literature and practice guidelines to establish recommendations for management of patients undergoing radiation treatments during this pandemic.

Results and Recommendations

As of April 10, 2020, there were 3402 COVID-19 inpatients within the 23 hospitals of the health care system, 27% of whom were being managed within an intensive care unit setting and 821 on ventilators. All available space in the hospitals such as postanesthesia care units, endoscopy suites, labor and delivery rooms, as well as auditoriums and lobbies have been converted to intensive care units or COVID wards.

Prioritization of cases

A tiered system of prioritization (Table 1) was developed and used to stagger radiation starts and purposefully reduce machine treatment volume. We classified cases as those in which patients need treatment immediately, within 30 days, or may be delayed beyond 30 days. As a result, we reduced the volume of patients on treatment within radiation medicine to approximately 70% of usual capacity.
Table 1

Prioritization of radiation treatment start date based on treatment indication

PriorityDescriptionExample cases
Priority ICases where a delay of treatment may result in a loss of life, progression of disease, or a permanent loss of neurologic or other function

Oncologic emergencies

Advanced head and neck

Advanced gastrointestinal

Advanced gynecologic

Advanced lung

These patients are to be assessed and managed accordingly.
Priority IICases that may be delayed for up to 4 weeks, and delay in treatment is unlikely to result in a loss of life or negatively affect a patient’s prognosis

Early stage head and neck

Early stage lung

Lymphoma

Brain SRS of benign diseases

If a patient’s treatment is deferred, waiting lists should be created for priority II patients requiring treatment. These waiting lists will be reviewed at least weekly depending on the overall situation and the availability of treatment slots.
Priority IIICases that may be delayed for 30 days or more, where such delay in radiation treatment is unlikely to result in a loss of life or negatively affect a patient’s prognosis.

Early stage prostate

Early stage breast

Prostate on androgen deprivation

If a patient’s treatment is deferred, waiting lists should be created for priority III patients requiring treatment. These waiting lists will be reviewed for pending treatment accordingly and the patients contacted for follow-up as needed.

Abbreviation: SRS = stereotactic radiosurgery.

Prioritization of radiation treatment start date based on treatment indication Oncologic emergencies Advanced head and neck Advanced gastrointestinal Advanced gynecologic Advanced lung Early stage head and neck Early stage lung Lymphoma Brain SRS of benign diseases Early stage prostate Early stage breast Prostate on androgen deprivation Abbreviation: SRS = stereotactic radiosurgery. Of the 307 cases identified and discussed among the faculty, 188 (61%) were classified priority 1, 84 (27%) were priority 2, and 35 (11%) were priority 3. Among the 188 priority 1, 36 were head and neck, 26 were lung, 22 were gynecologic, 19 were brain, 17 were gastrointestinal, and 34 were bone metastases (Table 2). The majority of cases in priority 1 were curative-intent, treated with concurrent chemoradiation. These treatments are often associated with moderate to significant adverse treatment effects.
Table 2

Patient characteristics

CharacteristicsNo. of patients (n = 307)%
Priority I18861.2
 Brain19
 Breast21
 Gastrointestinal17
 Genitourinary8
 Gynecologic22
 Head and neck36
 Lung26
 Palliative bone34
 Other5
Priority II8427.4
Priority III3511.4
Patient characteristics

Guidelines for pretreatment considerations and on-treatment management

Table 3 summarizes the guidelines we created to help manage potential adverse events based on disease site and/or treatment.25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 It is important to note that these recommendations apply only to patients who are not positive for SARS-CoV-2 and are not symptomatic from COVID-19.
Table 3

Consensus guidelines for intensive treatment management to reduce hospitalization and adverse events

Disease sitePretreatmentAcute CTCAE25 to manageSuggested interventions
Anal cancerHealth system resources potentially unavailable:

Home care/wound care services

DermatitisDesquamationPainDiarrheaDehydration cytopenias

Twice weekly OTV after second wk

Early use of: Silvadene, sitz baths, antidiarrheal, pain medication/management

CBC monitoring, weekly MedOnc visits (neutropenia/anemia)

Consider treatment break

Rectal cancer – advanced, low-lyingConsider induction chemotherapy as part of total neoadjuvant therapy to delay start of radiationDermatitisDesquamationPainDiarrhea

Twice weekly OTV after third wk

Early use of: Silvadene, sitz baths, antidiarrheal, pain medication/management

CBC monitoring, weekly MedOnc visits

Esophageal cancer – advancedHealth system resources potentially unavailable:

Nonemergent procedures (eg, esophageal dilation, stent placement, feeding tube placement)

Consider perioperative chemotherapy to defer radiation

EsophagitisWeight lossCoughDyspnea

Early

Twice weekly OTV after second wk

Early use of: PPI twice daily, oral steroids, Carafate, pain medications, dietary evaluation, nutritional supplement shakes

Hospital avoidance

IV fluid hydration by MedOnc

If MedOnc unavailable, IV fluid hydration within RadMed department

NG-tube placement (may be difficult, particularly if obstructive symptoms)

Lung cancer – advancedConsider induction chemotherapy (particularly for small cell)Consider deferring adjuvant RT start date for: consolidative RT or PCI for SCLC, postop N2 NSCLCCoughDyspneaEsophagitisWeight lossCytopenias

Evaluate for O2 need (nocturnal, ambulatory, at rest)

Twice weekly OTV after second wk

Early use of: oral steroids, PPI, Carafate, pain medications, nutritional supplement shakes

Aggressive management of esophagitis: PPI twice daily, gabapentin, dietary evaluation

Head and neck cancersHealth system resources potentially unavailable:

Dental evaluation

Feeding tube placement

Speech/swallow evaluation

Home care/wound care services

Consider weekly cisplatin dosing for fit candidates (30-40 mg/m2) instead of bolus cisplatin.If borderline candidate for systemic therapy, do not use. Consider altered fractionation to compensate for lack of systemic therapy.For elderly patients, consider hypofractionation and no chemotherapy.

MucositisOdynophagiaDysphagiaDehydrationWeight lossCytopenias

Early

Twice weekly OTV

Review CBC taken by MedOnc weekly

Early use of: pain medication/management, gabapentin, mouth rinses, nutritional supplement shakes, dietary evaluation

Hospital avoidance

When dysphagia begins, start IV fluid hydration by MedOnc (otherwise fluid bolus via PEG if available) twice weekly during chemoradiation

If MedOnc unavailable, consider IV fluid hydration within RadMed department

NG-tube placement if weight loss otherwise meeting criteria for PEG placement

Low threshold to stop chemotherapy if patient develops CTCAE ≥ 3

Consider treatment break for refractory grade 3 symptoms (<1 wk)

High-grade gliomaStandard fractionation vshyopfractionation for elderly/poor performance status vspalliativeHeadachesNauseaVomitingSeizures

Early

Twice weekly OTV after second wk

Steroid management, perhaps more antiepileptic use than normal

Hospital avoidance

If progressive neurologic symptoms, consider outpatient MRI, evaluation by neuro-oncology/neurosurgery

Vulvar cancerHealth system resources potentially unavailable:

Decreased OR availability → increased utilization of definitive chemoradiation

Home care/wound care services

PainDermatitisDesquamationDiarrheaDehydrationCytopenias

Twice weekly OTV after 2nd week

Early use of: Silvadene, sitz bath, pain medication/management, antidiarrheal

CBC monitoring, urinalysis, weekly MedOnc visits

Consider treatment break (goal < 1 wk)

Abbreviations: CBC = complete blood count; CTCAE = Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events; EGJ = esophagogastric junction; IV = intravenous; MRI = magnetic resonance imaging; NCCN = National Comprehensive Cancer Network; NG = nasogastric; NSCLC = nonsmall cell lung cancer; OR = operating room; OTV = on-treatment visit; PCI = prophylactic cranial irradiation; PEG = percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy; PPI = proton-pump inhibitor; RT = radiation therapy; SCLC = small cell lung cancer.

Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 98-11 allowed 10 day break as needed; in RTOG 0529, breaks were mostly due to neutropenia.

Total neoadjuvant therapy approach added to 2015 version of NCCN guidelines as an acceptable option.

Perioperative chemotherapy is an alternative option to chemoradiation for distal esophagus and EGJ.,

Consensus guidelines for intensive treatment management to reduce hospitalization and adverse events Home care/wound care services Twice weekly OTV after second wk Early use of: Silvadene, sitz baths, antidiarrheal, pain medication/management CBC monitoring, weekly MedOnc visits (neutropenia/anemia) Consider treatment break∗ Twice weekly OTV after third wk Early use of: Silvadene, sitz baths, antidiarrheal, pain medication/management CBC monitoring, weekly MedOnc visits Nonemergent procedures (eg, esophageal dilation, stent placement, feeding tube placement) Consider perioperative chemotherapy to defer radiation‡ Early Twice weekly OTV after second wk Early use of: PPI twice daily, oral steroids, Carafate, pain medications, dietary evaluation, nutritional supplement shakes Hospital avoidance IV fluid hydration by MedOnc If MedOnc unavailable, IV fluid hydration within RadMed department NG-tube placement (may be difficult, particularly if obstructive symptoms) Evaluate for O2 need (nocturnal, ambulatory, at rest) Twice weekly OTV after second wk Early use of: oral steroids, PPI, Carafate, pain medications, nutritional supplement shakes Aggressive management of esophagitis: PPI twice daily, gabapentin, dietary evaluation Dental evaluation Feeding tube placement Speech/swallow evaluation Home care/wound care services Consider weekly cisplatin dosing for fit candidates (30-40 mg/m2) instead of bolus cisplatin.If borderline candidate for systemic therapy, do not use. Consider altered fractionation to compensate for lack of systemic therapy.For elderly patients, consider hypofractionation and no chemotherapy. Early Twice weekly OTV Review CBC taken by MedOnc weekly Early use of: pain medication/management, gabapentin, mouth rinses, nutritional supplement shakes, dietary evaluation Hospital avoidance When dysphagia begins, start IV fluid hydration by MedOnc (otherwise fluid bolus via PEG if available) twice weekly during chemoradiation If MedOnc unavailable, consider IV fluid hydration within RadMed department NG-tube placement if weight loss otherwise meeting criteria for PEG placement Low threshold to stop chemotherapy if patient develops CTCAE ≥ 3 Consider treatment break for refractory grade 3 symptoms (<1 wk) Early Twice weekly OTV after second wk Steroid management, perhaps more antiepileptic use than normal Hospital avoidance If progressive neurologic symptoms, consider outpatient MRI, evaluation by neuro-oncology/neurosurgery Decreased OR availability → increased utilization of definitive chemoradiation Home care/wound care services Twice weekly OTV after 2nd week Early use of: Silvadene, sitz bath, pain medication/management, antidiarrheal CBC monitoring, urinalysis, weekly MedOnc visits Consider treatment break (goal < 1 wk) Abbreviations: CBC = complete blood count; CTCAE = Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events; EGJ = esophagogastric junction; IV = intravenous; MRI = magnetic resonance imaging; NCCN = National Comprehensive Cancer Network; NG = nasogastric; NSCLC = nonsmall cell lung cancer; OR = operating room; OTV = on-treatment visit; PCI = prophylactic cranial irradiation; PEG = percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy; PPI = proton-pump inhibitor; RT = radiation therapy; SCLC = small cell lung cancer. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 98-11 allowed 10 day break as needed; in RTOG 0529, breaks were mostly due to neutropenia. Total neoadjuvant therapy approach added to 2015 version of NCCN guidelines as an acceptable option. Perioperative chemotherapy is an alternative option to chemoradiation for distal esophagus and EGJ.,

Discussion

The global COVID-19 pandemic has caused considerable health system strain as a result of dramatically higher inpatient admissions and illness among clinical staff. Clinical practices have had to adapt quickly to meet demands for inpatient care while maintaining the safety of staff and noninfected patients. The vast majority of oncology treatments must proceed in a timely fashion. At Northwell Health, we are caring for many of the New York region COVID-19 cases and have had to quickly adjust our oncology patient management to keep our patients and staff safe and reduce hospital utilization. Our multicenter radiation department spans across teaching and community hospitals as well as outpatient centers. The current pandemic is having a profound effect on health care resources, thereby changing the routine practice of cancer treatments. The multidisciplinary aspect of cancer care—including but not limited to surgical oncology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, diagnostic radiology, pathology, clinical trials, genetic testing, social work, anesthesia, nutrition, occupational and physical therapy, pain and palliative care—is significantly limited based on the needs for care of patients with COVID-19. What was routine as recently as 4 weeks ago has been transformed radically. Fortunately, we have been able to continue providing patients advanced, high-quality radiation therapy and for the most part, concurrent chemotherapy. Despite social distancing, use of telehealth, conversion to shorter fractionation schedules, and deferment of some treatments, there are numerous patient touchpoints with the radiation care team. By nature of radiation treatments, patients are physically present within the department and interacting with team members often on a daily basis. Especially as other members of the patient’s multidisciplinary care team reduce in-person interactions, the radiation care team has become the main point of interaction. This proximity should be leveraged to aggressively and pre-emptively manage patients during treatment. Rates of unplanned acute hospital encounters during or soon after radiation therapy may differ across cancer diagnoses, but have been reported between 20% to 36%, with approximately half of acute encounters in the ED and half inpatient admissions.,, National policy initiatives have aimed to reduce acute hospital encounters among cancer patients through improved care coordination.33, 34, 35, 36 The importance of these initiatives are underscored during this crisis. Given the effect of treatment delay or morbidity upon prognosis, a broader macro view of health care outcomes during this pandemic recognizes that changes in routine care need to be usurped by a need for intense clinical management of patients with cancer to avoid complications that may require ED visits or hospitalizations. Therefore, as a faculty, we decided that a proactive, intensive approach to on-treatment management of at-risk patients was necessary to maintain excellent disease outcomes while avoiding health system strain. We developed these guidelines using our combined experience, knowledge of the literature, and consensus. We have implemented these on-treatment guidelines in our clinics beginning April 13, 2020. We expect that these clinical guidelines, which advocate for more intensive on-treatment management, will reduce rates of hospitalization and treatment breaks. We recognize that these recommendations represent a resource shift in the department toward more hands-on clinical care while one is otherwise trying to limit excess patient-facing care during the COVID-19 pandemic. By establishing a prioritization system to defer some patients, we have counterbalanced the volume of interactions throughout the department on any given day. Thus, the new management recommendations should not overburden what is an otherwise busy and packed clinical space.

Conclusions

The COVID-19 global pandemic has had a dramatic effect on New York area hospitals and practices. Northwell Health is currently managing thousands of New York’s inpatient cases, and elective procedures are on hold until the regional rates of infection slow considerably. In this resource-constrained environment, we must adapt our management of radiation patients to reduce their risk of hospitalization. Our faculty convened to set priorities for patient treatment and to develop consensus guidelines for intensive on-treatment management of at-risk disease sites, typically in patients undergoing curative-intent radiation therapy with concomitant chemotherapy. We believe these experience-driven and consensus-based guidelines will reduce adverse events that require ED usage and hospitalization among radiation medicine patients.
  14 in total

1.  Our pledge to achieve safety.

Authors:  Louis Potters; Beatrice Bloom
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 7.038

2.  Implementation of a "No Fly" safety culture in a multicenter radiation medicine department.

Authors:  Louis Potters; Ajay Kapur
Journal:  Pract Radiat Oncol       Date:  2011-06-16

3.  The Affordable Care Act and Cancer Care Delivery.

Authors:  Gabriel A Brooks; J Russell Hoverman; Carrie H Colla
Journal:  Cancer J       Date:  2017 May/Jun       Impact factor: 3.360

4.  Reducing Unplanned Admissions: Focusing on Hospital Admissions and Emergency Department Visits for Patients With Head and Neck Cancer During Radiation Therapy
.

Authors:  Lauren Terzo; Mary Fleming; Alekhya Yechoor; Jayne Camporeale; Miriam Troxler; Elaine Roth; Xianming Tan; Michael Pignone; Lawrence Marks; Bhishamjit S Chera
Journal:  Clin J Oncol Nurs       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 1.027

5.  Prospective contouring rounds: A novel, high-impact tool for optimizing quality assurance.

Authors:  Brett W Cox; Ajay Kapur; Anurag Sharma; Lucille Lee; Beatrice Bloom; Rajiv Sharma; Gina Goode; Louis Potters
Journal:  Pract Radiat Oncol       Date:  2015-07-26

6.  Fluorouracil, mitomycin, and radiotherapy vs fluorouracil, cisplatin, and radiotherapy for carcinoma of the anal canal: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Jaffer A Ajani; Kathryn A Winter; Leonard L Gunderson; John Pedersen; Al B Benson; Charles R Thomas; Robert J Mayer; Michael G Haddock; Tyvin A Rich; Christopher Willett
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-04-23       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Long-term outcomes and toxicities of a large cohort of anal cancer patients treated with dose-painted IMRT per RTOG 0529.

Authors:  Devarati Mitra; Theodore S Hong; Nora Horick; Brent Rose; Lorraine N Drapek; Lawrence S Blaszkowsky; Jill N Allen; Eunice L Kwak; Janet E Murphy; Jeffrey W Clark; David P Ryan; James C Cusack; Liliana G Bordeianou; David L Berger; Jennifer Y Wo
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2017-02-06

8.  Clinical Characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in China.

Authors:  Wei-Jie Guan; Zheng-Yi Ni; Yu Hu; Wen-Hua Liang; Chun-Quan Ou; Jian-Xing He; Lei Liu; Hong Shan; Chun-Liang Lei; David S C Hui; Bin Du; Lan-Juan Li; Guang Zeng; Kwok-Yung Yuen; Ru-Chong Chen; Chun-Li Tang; Tao Wang; Ping-Yan Chen; Jie Xiang; Shi-Yue Li; Jin-Lin Wang; Zi-Jing Liang; Yi-Xiang Peng; Li Wei; Yong Liu; Ya-Hua Hu; Peng Peng; Jian-Ming Wang; Ji-Yang Liu; Zhong Chen; Gang Li; Zhi-Jian Zheng; Shao-Qin Qiu; Jie Luo; Chang-Jiang Ye; Shao-Yong Zhu; Nan-Shan Zhong
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2020-02-28       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Risk of COVID-19 for patients with cancer.

Authors:  Hanping Wang; Li Zhang
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2020-03-03       Impact factor: 41.316

Review 10.  COVID-19 and Italy: what next?

Authors:  Andrea Remuzzi; Giuseppe Remuzzi
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2020-03-13       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  7 in total

1.  Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic Surge on Radiation Treatment: Report From a Multicenter New York Area Institution.

Authors:  Sewit Teckie; Janna Zeola Andrews; William Chun-Ying Chen; Anuj Goenka; Daniel Koffler; Nilda Adair; Louis Potters
Journal:  JCO Oncol Pract       Date:  2021-02-02

Review 2.  Disease Site-Specific Guidelines for Curative Radiation Treatment During 'Limited Surgery' and 'Hospital Avoidance': A Radiation Oncology Perspective From the Epicenter of COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Bhupesh Parashar; William C Chen; Joseph M Herman; Louis Potters
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2020-05-18

3.  Nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission in postoperative infection and mortality: analysis of 14 798 procedures.

Authors:  J A Elliott; R Kenyon; G Kelliher; A E Gillis; S Tierney; P F Ridgway
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2020-10-08       Impact factor: 6.939

4.  Implementation of Telehealth in Radiation Oncology: Rapid Integration During COVID-19 and Its Future Role in Our Practice.

Authors:  Anuj Goenka; Daniel Ma; Sewit Teckie; Catherine Alfano; Beatrice Bloom; Jamie Hwang; Louis Potters
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-10-09

5.  Posttraumatic Growth in Radiation Medicine During the COVID-19 Outbreak.

Authors:  Ajay Kapur; Brett Rudin; Louis Potters
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2022-04-18

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

Authors:  Adam C Riegel; Henry Chou; Jameson Baker; Jeffrey Antone; Louis Potters; Yijian Cao
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-07-11       Impact factor: 2.102

7.  Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Cancer Care: A Global Collaborative Study.

Authors:  Abdul Rahman Jazieh; Hakan Akbulut; Giuseppe Curigliano; Alvaro Rogado; Abdullah Ali Alsharm; Evangelia D Razis; Layth Mula-Hussain; Hassan Errihani; Adnan Khattak; Roselle B De Guzman; Clarissa Mathias; Mohammad Omar Farouq Alkaiyat; Hoda Jradi; Christian Rolfo
Journal:  JCO Glob Oncol       Date:  2020-09
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.