BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer are hypothesised to be at increased risk of contracting COVID-19, leading to changes in treatment pathways in those treated with systemic anti-cancer treatments (SACT). This study investigated the outcomes of patients receiving SACT to assess whether they were at greater risk of contracting COVID-19 or having more severe outcomes. METHODS: Data was collected from all patients receiving SACT in two cancer centres as part of CAPITOL (COVID-19 Cancer PatIenT Outcomes in North London). The primary outcome was the effect of clinical characteristics on the incidence and severity of COVID-19 infection in patients on SACT. We used univariable and multivariable models to analyse outcomes, adjusting for age, gender and comorbidities. RESULTS: A total of 2871 patients receiving SACT from 2 March to 31 May 2020 were analysed; 68 (2.4%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. Cancer patients receiving SACT were more likely to die if they contracted COVID-19 than those who did not [adjusted (adj.) odds ratio (OR) 9.84; 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.73-16.9]. Receiving chemotherapy increased the risk of developing COVID-19 (adj. OR 2.99; 95% CI = 1.72-5.21), with high dose chemotherapy significantly increasing risk (adj. OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.35-6.48), as did the presence of comorbidities (adj. OR 2.29; 95% CI 1.19-4.38), and having a respiratory or intrathoracic neoplasm (adj. OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.04-4.36). Receiving targeted treatment had a protective effect (adj. OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.30-0.95). Treatment intent (curative versus palliative), hormonal- or immunotherapy and solid versus haematological cancers had no significant effect on risk. CONCLUSION: Patients on SACT are more likely to die if they contract COVID-19. Those on chemotherapy, particularly high dose chemotherapy, are more likely to contract COVID-19, while targeted treatment appears to be protective.
BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer are hypothesised to be at increased risk of contracting COVID-19, leading to changes in treatment pathways in those treated with systemic anti-cancer treatments (SACT). This study investigated the outcomes of patients receiving SACT to assess whether they were at greater risk of contracting COVID-19 or having more severe outcomes. METHODS: Data was collected from all patients receiving SACT in two cancer centres as part of CAPITOL (COVID-19 Cancer PatIenT Outcomes in North London). The primary outcome was the effect of clinical characteristics on the incidence and severity of COVID-19 infection in patients on SACT. We used univariable and multivariable models to analyse outcomes, adjusting for age, gender and comorbidities. RESULTS: A total of 2871 patients receiving SACT from 2 March to 31 May 2020 were analysed; 68 (2.4%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. Cancer patients receiving SACT were more likely to die if they contracted COVID-19 than those who did not [adjusted (adj.) odds ratio (OR) 9.84; 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.73-16.9]. Receiving chemotherapy increased the risk of developing COVID-19 (adj. OR 2.99; 95% CI = 1.72-5.21), with high dose chemotherapy significantly increasing risk (adj. OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.35-6.48), as did the presence of comorbidities (adj. OR 2.29; 95% CI 1.19-4.38), and having a respiratory or intrathoracic neoplasm (adj. OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.04-4.36). Receiving targeted treatment had a protective effect (adj. OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.30-0.95). Treatment intent (curative versus palliative), hormonal- or immunotherapy and solid versus haematological cancers had no significant effect on risk. CONCLUSION: Patients on SACT are more likely to die if they contract COVID-19. Those on chemotherapy, particularly high dose chemotherapy, are more likely to contract COVID-19, while targeted treatment appears to be protective.
What is already known on this topicOne of the major challenges with COVID-19 has been the changes to cancer
services, including changes to the type of systemic anti-cancer treatment
being delivered to patients.There needs to be a better understanding of which cancer patients are at the
greatest amount of risk to make informed decisions on how cancer treatment
can be altered to protect patients from COVID-19 infection.To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the first investigations into
the risk of contracting COVID-19 in a cohort of all cancer patients on
systemic anti-cancer therapy.What this study addsPatients on systemic anti-cancer therapy are more likely to die if they
contract COVID-19.The type of anti-systemic cancer treatment received by cancer patients can
affect their likelihood of contacting COVID-19, with chemotherapy increasing
risk, targeted therapy decreasing risk and a potential protective effect for
hormonal and immunotherapy.
Introduction
COVID-19, the disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, has caused a global pandemic.[1] As of 31 August 2020, the United Kingdom (UK) has seen 334,471 cases and
41,499 deaths due to COVID-19.[2] During the course of this pandemic, heterogeneity in the rate of infection
and mortality from COVID-19 throughout the population has become increasingly
apparent. Distinct patient subgroups including the elderly, male gender and patients
with comorbidities including hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, diabetes,
chronic lung disease and cancer appear to be at significantly increased risk.[3]It has been widely hypothesised that patients on systemic anti-cancer therapies are
at higher risk of contracting COVID-19, and are subsequently at higher risk of
developing severe complications owing to being immunocompromised by the effects of
systemic anticancer therapy, the use of supportive medications such as steroids or
due to the immunosuppressive properties of cancer itself.[4] Moreover, patients receiving immunomodulatory drugs such as checkpoint
inhibitors may be susceptible to severe COVID-19 illness due to an enhanced immune
response to infections.Several studies from across the world have therefore investigated the outcomes of
cancer patients who contracted COVID-19.[4-11] The majority of these have
indicated that outcomes for patients with cancer diagnosed with COVID-19 are poor,
with a high mortality rate.[4,6-11] Even before these results were
available, measures were being taken in order to protect cancer patients as much as
possible from increased risks of COVID-19 based on initial data from China
demonstrated that patients with cancer were at increased risk of COVID-19
infection.[12,13] Changes to the types of anti-systemic cancer therapy delivered
by increasing the usage of targeted therapies, hormonal therapy and immunotherapy
and reducing the dose of cytotoxic chemotherapy have been applied.[14] There has already been large scale disruption to cancer diagnostics and
surgery due to the pandemic, which will likely lead to a backlog of accumulated
cancer cases and a potential increase in mortality.[15,16] Before decisions are made in
the longer term to continue with the changes made to the delivery of systemic
anti-cancer therapy (SACT), it is important to understand which cancer patients are
at highest risk of developing COVID-19 and its complications, to personalise cancer
treatment and to ensure that measures are put in place to protect cancer patients on
SACT.The CAPITOL (COVID-19 CAncer PatIenT Outcomes in North London) study has therefore
been designed to investigate the outcomes of patients on any form of SACT; to
further understand the incidence of COVID-19 in this patient group as well as to
understand factors that increase risk and alter outcomes of COVID-19 infection.
Methods
Patient selection
This retrospective study includes all consecutive patients with any active
malignancies who received systemic anti-cancer therapy at two North London
teaching hospitals (University College London Hospital and North Middlesex
University Hospital) between 2 March and 31 May 2020. We defined systemic
anti-cancer therapy as any medication prescribed to treat a malignancy. Figure 1 illustrates how
patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 using reverse transcription-polymerase
chain reaction (RT-PCR). Patients who were infected with COVID-19 before
commencing SACT were excluded from the study (n = 16). Outcomes
were monitored until 24 July 2020.
Figure 1.
An illustration depicting the current RT-PCR based method of detecting
patient infection with SARS-CoV-2 to confirm a diagnosis of
COVID-19.
An illustration depicting the current RT-PCR based method of detecting
patient infection with SARS-CoV-2 to confirm a diagnosis of
COVID-19.RT-PCR, reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction.
Data collection
Patient records were reviewed using the hospital electronic medical records (EMR)
for clinical characteristics including age, gender, ethnicity and comorbidities
[the presence of hypertension, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease (COPD) and diabetes]. Primary tumour types were classified
according to International Classification of Disease, 10th revision (ICD-10) codes.[17] Data was collected on medications including systemic anti-cancer
treatment [defined as immunotherapy, chemotherapy, targeted or hormonal
(including endocrine) treatments], long-term anti-coagulation and steroid
therapy. Patients were considered to be on long-term steroid therapy if taking
equivalent to 5 mg prednisolone daily for a minimum of 28 days during the
selected data collection period. Data collected for patients with COVID-19
included laboratory values, symptoms at presentation, presence of radiological
findings in keeping with COVID-19 and severe outcomes [defined as a composite of
death, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, NIV (non-invasive ventilation)
and/or intubation].
Outcomes
The primary outcome of this study was to evaluate the association between a
diagnosis of COVID-19 and mortality in oncology patients on active systemic
anti-cancer treatment. Secondary outcomes were the association between systemic
anti-cancer treatment type and primary tumour subtype with the risk of
contracting COVID-19.
Statistical methodology
Patient demographics and clinical characteristics were explored descriptively
using STATA v15.1, 2017 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). Logistic
regression was used to determine the odds ratio (OR) for mortality in those with
a diagnosis of COVID-19 versus those without. Baseline factors
were compared between COVID-19 positive and negative patients using chi-squared
tests and their prognostic value was assessed using logistic regression;
p values < 0.05 were considered significant. All
logistic regression models were adjusted for age, gender and comorbidities (the
presence of hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and COPD). Forest
plots were created using GraphPad Prism 8 (GraphPad Software, La Jolla, CA,
USA).
Patient and public involvement
This study was conducted using electronic patient records, so patients were not
directly involved in the design of this study.
Results
Patient characteristics
A total of 2871 patients were recorded as receiving SACT during the recorded time
period; 80 patients were excluded from further analysis, either because they
were treated for basal cell carcinoma or a non-malignant haematological
condition (such as TTP, MAHA or HUS). A final total of 2791 patients were
analysed (Figure 2).
Figure 2.
A CONSORT diagram illustrating the study design and the overall patient
numbers.
SACT, systemic anti-cancer treatments.
A CONSORT diagram illustrating the study design and the overall patient
numbers.SACT, systemic anti-cancer treatments.Out of a total of 2791 patients analysed, 2.4% (n = 68) were
diagnosed with COVID-19; 57 patients had confirmation of COVID-19 by RT-PCR test
and 11 patients had a radiological and clinical diagnosis of COVID-19. Regarding
gender, 48.1% (n = 1345) of patients were male and 51.8%
(n = 1446) were female. The median age of all patients was
64 years (interquartile range 52–73), and the median number of comorbidities per
patient was one. Regarding their cancer, 55.3% (n = 1544) had a
solid tumour and 44.6% (n = 1247) a haematological malignancy.
Following adjustment for age, gender, comorbidities, n = 2764
were analysed (Table
1).
Table 1.
Univariate regression analysis and OR of developing COVID-19, with 95%
CIs. Red bars indicate criteria for statistical significance were met
(p < 0.05).
Predictor
n = 2764
OR[*] (95% CI)
p-value[*]
Sex, n (%)
Male
1332 (48.2%)
1.94 (1.17–3.22)
0.01
Female (ref)
1432 (51.8%)
Age, median (IQR)
64 years (52–73)
1.00 (0.98–1.02)
0.93
Comorbidities, n (%)
CVD
382 (13.8%)
1.61 (0.88–2.95)
0.12
HTN
664 (24.0)
1.46 (0.83–2.58)
0.19
Diabetes
256 (9.3%)
0.73 (0.30–1.77)
0.49
COPD
90 (3.3%)
1.13 (0.34–3.71)
0.85
Long-term steroids
347 (12.6%)
2.03 (1.14–3.62)
<0.05
Anticoagulation
332 (12.0%)
1.64 (0.83–3.23)
0.15
Any comorbidities, n (%)
1448 (52.4%)
2.29 (1.19–4.38)
0.01
Type of malignancy, n (%)
Haematological
1245 (45.3%)
1.22 (0.74–2.00)
0.44
Solid (ref)
1519 (55.0%)
Cancer type – Solid malignancies, n
(%)
Breast
316 (11.4%)
0.53 (0.16–1.79)
0.31
CNS
88 (3.2%)
1.00 (0.24–4.24)
>0.99
Gastrointestinal
223 (8.1%)
0.88 (0.35–2.21)
0.78
Female reproductive organs (n = 1432)
246 (17.2%)
1.13 (0.41–3.10)
0.81
Male reproductive organs (n = 1332)
178 (13.4%)
0.13 (0.02–0.997)
0.05
Respiratory and intrathoracic organs
205 (7.4%)
2.12 (1.04–4.36)
0.04
Sarcoma
180 (6.5%)
0.45 (0.11–1.86)
0.27
Urinary tract
23 (0.8%)
3.61 (0.82–15.90)
0.09
Unknown primary
14 (0.5%)
3.35 (0.42–26.48)
0.25
Cancer type – Haematological malignancies,
n (%)
Acute lymphoblastic leukaemias
57 (2.1%)
0.64 (0.08–4.84)
0.67
Hodgkin lymphoma
41 (1.5%)
1.05 (0.13–8.24)
0.96
Myeloid neoplasms
478 (17.3%)
0.60 (0.28–1.27)
0.18
Non-Hodgkin lymphomas
324 (11.7%)
1.77 (0.96–3.27)
0.07
Plasma cell neoplasms
345 (12.5%)
1.38 (0.72–2.63)
0.33
Treatment intent, n (%)
Palliative
1782 (64.5%)
0.89 (0.53–1.48)
0.65
Curative (ref)
982 (35.5%)
Cancer treatment, n (%)
Chemotherapy
1421 (51.4%)
2.99 (1.72–5.21)
<0.001
High dose
130 (9.1%)
2.36 (1.35–6.48)
0.007
Standard dose (ref)
1291 (90.9%)
Hormone therapy
144 (5.2%)
0.18 (0.02–1.33)
0.09
Targeted treatment
964 (34.9%)
0.53 (0.30–0.95)
0.03
Immunotherapy
229 (8.3%)
0.31 (0.08–1.28)
0.11
Ethnicity, n (%)
n = 1808
Asian/Asian British
76 (4.2%)
2.22 (0.85–5.81)
0.10
Black/African/Caribbean/Black British
408 (22.6%)
0.81 (0.41–1.58)
0.53
Mixed/Multiple Ethnic Groups
957 (52.9%)
0.04 (0.01–0.13)
<0.001
White
278 (15.4%)
12.13 (6.96–21.1)
<0.001
Other
89 (4.9%)
0.66 (0.16–2.75)
0.56
All models include variables age (continuous), gender (male/female),
CVD (yes/no), HTN (yes/no), COPD (yes/no) and diabetes (yes/no) by
default.
Univariate regression analysis and OR of developing COVID-19, with 95%
CIs. Red bars indicate criteria for statistical significance were met
(p < 0.05).All models include variables age (continuous), gender (male/female),
CVD (yes/no), HTN (yes/no), COPD (yes/no) and diabetes (yes/no) by
default.CI, confidence interval; CNS, central nervous system; COPD, chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease; CVD, cardiovascular disease; HTN,
hypertension; IQR, interquartile range; OR, odds ratio.
Main study outcomes
Cancer patients receiving SACT were more likely to die if they contracted
COVID-19 than those who did not contract COVID-19 [OR 9.80; 95% confidence
interval (CI) 5.76–16.7; p < 0.001]. This association
persisted even after correction for age, gender and comorbidities
[cardiovascular disease (CVD), hypertension (HTN), COPD and diabetes] [adjusted
(adj. OR 9.84; 95% CI 5.73–16.9; p < 0.001].Univariate analysis demonstrated that receiving chemotherapy increased the risk
of contracting COVID-19 (Table 1, Figures
3 and 4),
even after correction for age, gender and comorbidities (adj. OR 2.99; 95%
CI = 1.72–5.21; p = 0.001). In patients receiving chemotherapy,
high dose (compared with low or standard dose chemotherapy) was significantly
associated with risk of COVID-19 (adj. OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.35–6.48,
p < 0.05). Receiving hormone therapy (adj. OR 0.18; 95%
CI 0.02–1.33; p = 0.09) or immunotherapy (adj. OR 0.31 95% CI
0.08–1.28; p = 0.11) did not have a significant effect on the
likelihood of contracting COVID-19. Conversely, receiving targeted treatment
appeared to have a protective effect against contracting COVID-19 (adj. OR 0.53;
95% CI 0.30–0.95). Treatment intent (curative or palliative) did not affect the
risk of contracting COVID-19 (adj. OR 0.89; 95% CI = 0.53–1.48;
p = 0.65).
Figure 3.
Univariate regression analysis and OR of developing COVID-19, with 95%
CIs. Red bars indicate criteria for statistical significance were met
(p < 0.05).
All models include variables age (continuous), gender (male/female), CVD
(yes/no), HTN (yes/no), COPD (yes/no) and diabetes (yes/no) by
default.
Univariate regression analysis and OR of death from COVID-19, with 95%
CIs. Red bars indicate criteria for statistical significance were met
(p < 0.05). The corrected risk of death included
include variables age (continuous), gender (male/female), CVD (yes/no),
HTN (yes/no), COPD (yes/no) and diabetes (yes/no).
Univariate regression analysis and OR of developing COVID-19, with 95%
CIs. Red bars indicate criteria for statistical significance were met
(p < 0.05).All models include variables age (continuous), gender (male/female), CVD
(yes/no), HTN (yes/no), COPD (yes/no) and diabetes (yes/no) by
default.CI, confidence interval; CNS, central nervous system; COPD, chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease; CVD, cardiovascular disease; HTN,
hypertension; OR, odds ratio.Univariate regression analysis and OR of death from COVID-19, with 95%
CIs. Red bars indicate criteria for statistical significance were met
(p < 0.05). The corrected risk of death included
include variables age (continuous), gender (male/female), CVD (yes/no),
HTN (yes/no), COPD (yes/no) and diabetes (yes/no).CI, confidence interval; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease;
CVD, cardiovascular disease; HTN, hypertension; OR, odds ratio.Patients with a haematological cancer were not found to be at higher risk of
contracting COVID-19 than patients with solid tumours (adj. OR 1.22; 95% CI
0.74–2.00; p = 0.44). Patients with respiratory and
intrathoracic neoplasms (including non-small cell lung cancer, small cell lung
cancer and mesothelioma) were at an increased risk of contracting COVID-19 (adj.
OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.04–4.36; p < 0.05). Cancer of the male
reproductive organs (including prostate cancer) trended towards a reduced
likelihood of contracting COVID-19, but the association was not statistically
significant (adj. OR 0.13; 0.02–1.00; p = 0.05). Non-Hodgkin
lymphoma appeared to increase the risk of contracting COVID-19, but the
significance of this association was lost after adjusting for age, gender and
comorbidities (adj. OR 1.77; 0.96–3.27; p = 0.07).The presence of any comorbidities significantly increased the risk of contracting
COVID-19 (adj. OR 2.29; 95% CI 1.19–4.38; p = 0.01), but no
association was seen when analysing for separate comorbidities (cardiovascular
disease, hypertension, COPD and diabetes). Patients on long-term steroids were
at increased risk of contracting COVID-19 (adj. OR 2.03; 95% CI 1.14–3.62;
p < 0.05), while patients on long-term anticoagulation
had no increased risk of developing COVID-19 (adj. OR 1.64; 95% CI 0.83–3.23;
p = 0.15).
Multivariable analysis
Multivariable analysis including age, gender, comorbidities (CVD, HTN, COPD,
diabetes), receiving chemotherapy, having a respiratory tract cancer and use of
long-term steroids consolidated the previous results showing associations with
the risk of developing COVID-19. Multivariable analysis including ethnicity
(which significantly reduces the sample size) maintained the results with the
exception of respiratory cancers, which were no longer associated with an
increased risk of contracting COVID-19. This is potentially due to the fact that
a higher proportion of respiratory cancer patients were white compared with the
rest of the population. Receiving chemotherapy still significantly increased the
risk of developing COVID-19 (adj. OR 2.67; 95% CI 1.43–4.97;
p < 0.05, as did White ethnicity
(p = <0.001) and steroid use
(p = <0.001), with Mixed/Multiple ethnicities decreasing
risk (p = <0.001).
COVID-19 positive patient analysis
Of the 68 patients positive for COVID-19 infection, 65% (n = 44)
were male and the median age was 65 years. The median number of comorbidities
was one. By ethnic group, 57% (n = 39) were White, 16%
(n = 11) were Black African, Black Caribbean or Black
British, 7% (n = 5) were Asian or Asian British, 4%
(n = 3) were Mixed/Multiple Ethnic Groups, 3%
(n = 2) were listed as Other and 12%
(n = 8) as Unknown. Computed tomography (CT) images from one of
the cases are shown in Figure
5.
Figure 5.
(A–C) HR-CT chest of a 48-year-old man with (DLBCL), prior to infection
with COVID-19. (D–F) HR-CT of the same DLBCL patient at the time of
diagnosis with COVID-19. Images show bilateral multiple patchy areas of
ground-glass changes involving all the lobes, mainly peripheral.
Systemic anti-cancer treatment at time of infection was with rituximab
and polatuzumab (bendamustine had been held in light of the COVID-19
pandemic).
DLBCL, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma; HR-CT, High resolution computed
tomography.
(A–C) HR-CT chest of a 48-year-old man with (DLBCL), prior to infection
with COVID-19. (D–F) HR-CT of the same DLBCL patient at the time of
diagnosis with COVID-19. Images show bilateral multiple patchy areas of
ground-glass changes involving all the lobes, mainly peripheral.
Systemic anti-cancer treatment at time of infection was with rituximab
and polatuzumab (bendamustine had been held in light of the COVID-19
pandemic).DLBCL, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma; HR-CT, High resolution computed
tomography.In all, 61% (n = 41) of patients positive for COVID-19 presented
with symptoms of fever, 54% (n = 36) with cough, 34%
(n = 23) with shortness of breath, 18%
(n = 12) with gastrointestinal symptoms, 13%
(n = 9) were asymptomatic and no patients presented with
anosmia or ageusia. Presenting symptoms were not recorded for one patient.Of the 67% (n = 41) of patients who had imaging (chest X-ray or
CT chest, n = 61) had evidence of changes suggestive of a
diagnosis of COVID-19. 53% (n = 31) had bilateral changes,
while 10% (n = 6) had incidental changes associated with or
diagnostic of COVID-19. Of note, 5% (n = 3) of patients
received a diagnosis of venothromboembolism while diagnosed with COVID-19.A total of 34% (n = 23) of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 died
during the follow-up period of this study. There was no difference in the
likelihood of death if the last administered dose of systemic anti-cancer
therapy was within 28 days of the diagnosis of COVID-19 (OR 1.56; 95%
CI = 0.27–9.12; p = 0.62, corrected for age, gender and
comorbidities), but only four patients had treatment more than 28 days before
being diagnosed with COVID-19. Treatment within 28 days of diagnosis did not
increase the likelihood of ICU admission (adj. OR 1.11; 95% CI 0.10–12.84;
p = 0.94) or of a severe outcome (death, ICU admission,
invasive or non-invasive ventilation) (adj. OR 1.10; 95% CI 0.19–6.24). Reducing
the interval to 14 days between the most recent treatment and diagnosis of
COVID-19 also did not demonstrate any association (p = 0.26 for
the likelihood of death and p = 0.34 for the likelihood of a
severe outcome).There was an increased risk of death among patients contracting COVID-19 if they
were treated for a haematological malignancy versus patients
treated for a solid tumour, even after correction for age, gender and
comorbidities (OR 6.92; 95% CI 1.47–32.61; p < 0.05).
Treatment intent (curative or palliative) did not affect the likelihood of death
(adj. OR 0.83; 95% CI = 0.25–2.78; p = 0.76). There was no
significant difference in the risk of death in COVID-19 positive patients by
treatment type received; chemotherapy (n = 46, adj. OR 0.59;
95% CI 0.18–1.94; p = 0.38), targeted treatment
(n = 18, adj. OR 2.91, 95% CI 0.83–10.21,
p = 0.096), and there were no deaths among patients
receiving hormone therapy (n = 1) or immunotherapy
(n = 2). The targeted treatments received by COVID-19
positive patients included lenalidomide/dexamethasone (n = 3),
afatinib (n = 2), rituximab (n = 2),
azacytidine (n = 2), rituximab and bendamustine and polatuzumab
(n = 2), ixazomib/lenalidomide, ruxolitinib, imatinib,
eribulin, temozolamide, acalabrutinib, bortezomib/thalidomide/dexamethasone,
bortezomib/panobinostat/dexamethasone, and ralitrexed (all
n = 1). The two patients on immunotherapy received durvalumab
and guadecitabine/pembrolizumab, and the patient on hormone therapy received
abiraterone. COVID-19 patients who had received chemotherapy were not more
likely to be admitted to ICU (adj. OR 1.38; 95% CI 0.26–7.43;
p = 0.71) and the use of long-term steroids had no impact on
the risk of death (p = 0.495).A total of 88% (n = 60) of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 were
either admitted to hospital or were already an inpatient at diagnosis. The
length of admission was 0–135 days (median 6 days) in COVID-19 positive
patients. Treatment with dexamethasone had no impact on the likelihood of death
(adj. OR 1.07; 95% CI = 0.26–4.46; p = 0.925); however,
patients who had been receiving long-term anticoagulation when diagnosed with
COVID-19 (either LMWH or DOAC) appeared to have an increased risk of death (adj.
OR = 13.03; 95% CI = 2.85–59.50; p = 0.001).
Discussion
There have been conflicting data on the outcomes of oncology patients who contracted
COVID-19 illness and required hospital admission. This, however, is one of the first
studies exploring the risk of contracting COVID-19 infection in patients receiving
active SACT.[18]This study demonstrated that patients on active SACT were significantly more likely
to die if infected with COVID-19 when compared with patients on SACT who did not
develop COVID-19. One-third (34%, n = 23) of those infected
subsequently died from COVID-19, which is in keeping with current literature on
oncology patients.[9,11]The prevalence of COVID-19 in our cohort of patients was 2.5%, a figure eight-fold
greater than that reported for the general population matched by location and timeframe.[19] During the same period, the prevalence of COVID-19 was 0.3% in Camden and
Enfield (the two north London boroughs in which the hospitals in our study are
located). However, the utility of this figure is clearly limited by the lack of
other matched variables and the rate of testing in the general public compared with
the population of cancer patients on active treatment.A UK-based prospective study evaluated 1044 COVID-19 positive patients using data
from the UK Coronavirus Cancer Monitoring Project (UKCCMP) to assess the association
between cancer type (in all cancer patients) and the likelihood of COVID-19
infection. Control data was a non-COVID-19 UK cancer population from the UK Office
for National Statistics from 2017, adjusted for age and sex.[10] Here, we concentrate solely on cancer patients receiving systemic anti-cancer
therapy and have taken into account various other confounding factors including
co-morbidities and type of cancer treatment, a real-world comparator to determine
which characteristics can impact cancer patient vulnerability to COVID-19
infection.The proportions of haematological to solid organ cancer patients were relatively
evenly split (55% versus 45%). Haematological malignancy did not
impact the risk of COVID-19 infection, but patients had a significantly worse risk
of mortality if infected. This is reflected in work elsewhere, including a European
study of 890 patients which reported worse outcomes in haematological cancer
patients infected with COVID-19,[9,20] as well as data from Hubei, China.[21] There are several reasons why haematological cancer patients could be more
susceptible to severe outcomes, namely the negative impact of the cancer itself or
its treatment on the immune system.[22] There is utility in making this comparison in a study such as ours where all
individuals are on active treatment, as it removes the potential confounding of
patients off-treatment shielding at home more strictly. The most recent UKCCMP study
by Lee et al. found a higher prevalence of COVID-19 in
haematological patients[10]; a reason for the discrepancy in our data could be due to the heterogeneous
group that leukaemia encompassed and the overrepresentation of myelodysplastic
syndromes in our cohort.Our results suggest oncology patients are significantly more vulnerable to COVID-19
infection if they were being actively treated with chemotherapy, with a
significantly higher risk of COVID-19 associated with high-dose chemotherapy
regimens compared with low-dose regimens. There has been much discussion on whether
being on anti-cancer treatment, in particular chemotherapy, has an adverse effect on
outcomes of COVID-19 positive patients. A study from China with 105 COVID-19
positive patients suggested that chemotherapy is associated with worse mortality in
cancer patients.[20] However, this has been disputed by a UK study suggesting that recent
anti-cancer treatment regardless of treatment modality is not associated with worse
outcomes in COVID-19 positive patients.[11]Interestingly, our results did not show an increased risk of COVID-19 infection in
patients on immunotherapy or hormone therapy, and being on a targeted treatment
appeared to have a protective effect. The OR for immunotherapy and hormonal
treatments were relatively low, raising the possible hypothesis that these
treatments may also have a protective effect against COVID-19. Future studies
evaluating the possible beneficial effect of targeted therapy, hormone therapy and
immunotherapy on COVID-19 risks with a larger sample size could potentially help
direct treatment decisions using an evidence-based approach, should there be a
second wave of COVID-19. Consideration could be given to ceasing chemotherapy in
preference of checkpoint inhibitor therapy, for example, in those with lung cancer,
or commencing further lines of hormonal treatment in preference to chemotherapy in
metastatic prostate cancer. This is something we need to approach with caution in
light of data suggesting that immunotherapy may be an independent risk factor for
severe events in a study of 423 COVID-19 positive patients.[23] Immune checkpoint inhibitors may cause an increase in cytokine release, which
is also seen in the cytokine storm that leads to the often-fatal acute respiratory
distress syndrome (ARDS) seen in COVID-19 patients. Alternatively, other studies
found that treatment with immunotherapy did not impact mortality negatively in
COVID-19 positive cancer patients,[11] and it is hypothesised that immunotherapy may reduce the risk of developing
the cytokine storm primarily responsible for the development of ARDS in COVID-19.[24] Studies of larger populations looking specifically at different treatment
modalities in different tumour groups are needed before we can draw definitive
conclusions.The RECOVERY study concluded a 17% reduction in 28-day mortality in COVID-19 patients
requiring respiratory support treated with dexamethasone, but the benefit of
dexamethasone was lost in patients who were not unwell enough to require respiratory support.[25] One can hypothesize that dexamethasone is only beneficial in very unwell
patients, as it may reduce the effects of the cytokine storm caused by COVID-19,
which has the greatest effect in the most unwell patients. Our results suggest that
being on long-term steroids enhances the risk of contracting COVID-19, which is not
unexpected based on the immunosuppressive effects of long-term steroids.We found that the presence of any co-morbidity significantly increased a patient’s
chance of contracting COVID-19. However, when we looked at cardiovascular disease,
diabetes, hypertension and COPD individually there was no association found to
highlight any of these as specific risk factors. We recognise this is likely due to
our small population size, as these four co-morbidities emerged as independent risk
factors for COVID-19 related mortality in much larger data sets, including a study
on hospitalised patients over 65 in the UK and in a series of 218 patients with
cancer in New York, in the United States (US).[26,27] Evidence looking at cancer
patient mortality from COVID-19 suggests that the risk of death is driven by age,
gender and co-morbidities[11,28]; our evidence suggests that the presence of comorbidities does
not increase the chance of contracting COVID-19, but does increase the risk of death
if it is contracted.We recognise several limitations to our study. Firstly, our small sample size of 68
COVID-19 positive patients limits the strength of our results when looking
specifically at this cohort. The World Health Organisation (WHO) suggest using chest
imaging for diagnostic work-up when initial RT-PCR testing is negative and there is
high clinical suspicion of COVID-19,[29] which was the case for 11 patients in our population with a radiological
diagnosis of COVID-19. However, we recognise their inclusion is a limitation given
the element of subjectivity to diagnosis it introduces as no single radiological
feature of COVID-19 is diagnostic or specific. There is perhaps also some strength
to be gained from including these patients who are SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR negative as it
may reduce the bias against the exclusion of less severe cases. As the vast majority
of the patients who tested positive for COVID-19 had symptoms at presentation, we
were not able to identify the true rate of asymptomatic COVID-19 infection, which
has been reported to be higher in cancer patients than in their caregivers.[30]In summary, we found that patients on active systemic anti-cancer treatment are
significantly more likely to die if they contract COVID-19. Patients on active
cancer treatment are more likely to be infected with COVID-19 if they are being
treated with chemotherapy, particularly high-dose chemotherapy; treatment with
immunotherapy and hormonal treatments had no significant impact on the chances of
contracting COVID-19, while targeted treatment appeared to have a protective effect.
Our results also hypothesise a possible protective property against COVID-19 of
hormonal treatments and immunotherapy, providing an interesting question for future
research.
Authors: Justin Jee; Michael B Foote; Melissa Lumish; Aaron J Stonestrom; Beatriz Wills; Varun Narendra; Viswatej Avutu; Yonina R Murciano-Goroff; Jason E Chan; Andriy Derkach; John Philip; Rimma Belenkaya; Marina Kerpelev; Molly Maloy; Adam Watson; Chris Fong; Yelena Janjigian; Luis A Diaz; Kelly L Bolton; Melissa S Pessin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2020-08-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Nicole M Kuderer; Toni K Choueiri; Dimpy P Shah; Yu Shyr; Samuel M Rubinstein; Donna R Rivera; Sanjay Shete; Chih-Yuan Hsu; Aakash Desai; Gilberto de Lima Lopes; Petros Grivas; Corrie A Painter; Solange Peters; Michael A Thompson; Ziad Bakouny; Gerald Batist; Tanios Bekaii-Saab; Mehmet A Bilen; Nathaniel Bouganim; Mateo Bover Larroya; Daniel Castellano; Salvatore A Del Prete; Deborah B Doroshow; Pamela C Egan; Arielle Elkrief; Dimitrios Farmakiotis; Daniel Flora; Matthew D Galsky; Michael J Glover; Elizabeth A Griffiths; Anthony P Gulati; Shilpa Gupta; Navid Hafez; Thorvardur R Halfdanarson; Jessica E Hawley; Emily Hsu; Anup Kasi; Ali R Khaki; Christopher A Lemmon; Colleen Lewis; Barbara Logan; Tyler Masters; Rana R McKay; Ruben A Mesa; Alicia K Morgans; Mary F Mulcahy; Orestis A Panagiotou; Prakash Peddi; Nathan A Pennell; Kerry Reynolds; Lane R Rosen; Rachel Rosovsky; Mary Salazar; Andrew Schmidt; Sumit A Shah; Justin A Shaya; John Steinharter; Keith E Stockerl-Goldstein; Suki Subbiah; Donald C Vinh; Firas H Wehbe; Lisa B Weissmann; Julie Tsu-Yu Wu; Elizabeth Wulff-Burchfield; Zhuoer Xie; Albert Yeh; Peter P Yu; Alice Y Zhou; Leyre Zubiri; Sanjay Mishra; Gary H Lyman; Brian I Rini; Jeremy L Warner Journal: Lancet Date: 2020-05-28 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Thilo Gambichler; Judith Reuther; Christina H Scheel; Jürgen Christian Becker Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 13.751
Authors: Janice L Atkins; Jane A H Masoli; Joao Delgado; Luke C Pilling; Chia-Ling Kuo; George A Kuchel; David Melzer Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2020-10-15 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Lennard Y W Lee; Jean-Baptiste Cazier; Thomas Starkey; Sarah E W Briggs; Roland Arnold; Vartika Bisht; Stephen Booth; Naomi A Campton; Vinton W T Cheng; Graham Collins; Helen M Curley; Philip Earwaker; Matthew W Fittall; Spyridon Gennatas; Anshita Goel; Simon Hartley; Daniel J Hughes; David Kerr; Alvin J X Lee; Rebecca J Lee; Siow Ming Lee; Hayley Mckenzie; Chris P Middleton; Nirupa Murugaesu; Tom Newsom-Davis; Anna C Olsson-Brown; Claire Palles; Thomas Powles; Emily A Protheroe; Karin Purshouse; Archana Sharma-Oates; Shivan Sivakumar; Ashley J Smith; Oliver Topping; Chris D Turnbull; Csilla Várnai; Adam D M Briggs; Gary Middleton; Rachel Kerr Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2020-08-24 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Annika Fendler; Lewis Au; Scott T C Shepherd; Fiona Byrne; Maddalena Cerrone; Laura Amanda Boos; Karolina Rzeniewicz; William Gordon; Benjamin Shum; Camille L Gerard; Barry Ward; Wenyi Xie; Andreas M Schmitt; Nalinie Joharatnam-Hogan; Georgina H Cornish; Martin Pule; Leila Mekkaoui; Kevin W Ng; Eleanor Carlyle; Kim Edmonds; Lyra Del Rosario; Sarah Sarker; Karla Lingard; Mary Mangwende; Lucy Holt; Hamid Ahmod; Richard Stone; Camila Gomes; Helen R Flynn; Ana Agua-Doce; Philip Hobson; Simon Caidan; Michael Howell; Mary Wu; Robert Goldstone; Margaret Crawford; Laura Cubitt; Harshil Patel; Mike Gavrielides; Emma Nye; Ambrosius P Snijders; James I MacRae; Jerome Nicod; Firza Gronthoud; Robyn L Shea; Christina Messiou; David Cunningham; Ian Chau; Naureen Starling; Nicholas Turner; Liam Welsh; Nicholas van As; Robin L Jones; Joanne Droney; Susana Banerjee; Kate C Tatham; Shaman Jhanji; Mary O'Brien; Olivia Curtis; Kevin Harrington; Shreerang Bhide; Jessica Bazin; Anna Robinson; Clemency Stephenson; Tim Slattery; Yasir Khan; Zayd Tippu; Isla Leslie; Spyridon Gennatas; Alicia Okines; Alison Reid; Kate Young; Andrew J S Furness; Lisa Pickering; Sonia Gandhi; Steve Gamblin; Charles Swanton; Emma Nicholson; Sacheen Kumar; Nadia Yousaf; Katalin A Wilkinson; Anthony Swerdlow; Ruth Harvey; George Kassiotis; James Larkin; Robert J Wilkinson; Samra Turajlic Journal: Nat Cancer Date: 2021-10-27
Authors: Annika Fendler; Lewis Au; Scott T C Shepherd; Fiona Byrne; Maddalena Cerrone; Laura Amanda Boos; Karolina Rzeniewicz; William Gordon; Ben Shum; Camille L Gerard; Barry Ward; Wenyi Xie; Andreas M Schmitt; Nalinie Joharatnam-Hogan; Georgina H Cornish; Martin Pule; Leila Mekkaoui; Kevin W Ng; Eleanor Carlyle; Kim Edmonds; Lyra Del Rosario; Sarah Sarker; Karla Lingard; Mary Mangwende; Lucy Holt; Hamid Ahmod; Richard Stone; Camila Gomes; Helen R Flynn; Ana Agua-Doce; Philip Hobson; Simon Caidan; Michael Howell; Mary Wu; Robert Goldstone; Margaret Crawford; Laura Cubitt; Harshil Patel; Mike Gavrielides; Emma Nye; Ambrosius P Snijders; James I MacRae; Jerome Nicod; Firza Gronthoud; Robyn L Shea; Christina Messiou; David Cunningham; Ian Chau; Naureen Starling; Nicholas Turner; Liam Welsh; Nicholas van As; Robin L Jones; Joanne Droney; Susana Banerjee; Kate C Tatham; Shaman Jhanji; Mary O'Brien; Olivia Curtis; Kevin Harrington; Shreerang Bhide; Jessica Bazin; Anna Robinson; Clemency Stephenson; Tim Slattery; Yasir Khan; Zayd Tippu; Isla Leslie; Spyridon Gennatas; Alicia Okines; Alison Reid; Kate Young; Andrew J S Furness; Lisa Pickering; Sonia Gandhi; Steve Gamblin; Charles Swanton; Emma Nicholson; Sacheen Kumar; Nadia Yousaf; Katalin A Wilkinson; Anthony Swerdlow; Ruth Harvey; George Kassiotis; James Larkin; Robert J Wilkinson; Samra Turajlic Journal: Res Sq Date: 2021-09-20
Authors: Ruoding Tan; Cindy Yun; Arpamas Seetasith; Daniel Sheinson; Robert Walls; Innocent Ngwa; Josina C Reddy; Qing Zhang; Matthew H Secrest; Peter Lambert; Khaled Sarsour Journal: Oncologist Date: 2022-03-11