Global Cancer by Richard Sullivan
Journal Cancer Policy, 2024
Background: The rising demand for palliative-care (PC) in Turkey, driven by cancer, has prompted ... more Background: The rising demand for palliative-care (PC) in Turkey, driven by cancer, has prompted increased attention since the national PC policy in 2010. Despite this, the healthcare system predominantly focuses on curative care, lacking PC integration. This is due to combination of administrative obstacles, fragmented coordination, education and training scarcity. Thus urgent strategies are required to address the growing PC gap. This qualitative study explores the perspectives of PC professionals and policymakers, providing valuable insights for national policy and program development. Material and method: This study employed an exploratory approach using key informant interviews. Interviews were conducted using semi-structured questionnaire. It sought to collect relevant contextual information in order to achieve its aim. Thematic content analysis was employed to examine and interpret the data. Result: Twenty-one participants, comprising nurses, specialists, and oncologists, were interviewed. The findings are encompassed by eight themes. 1) Integrated Care, highlights the importance of cohesive collaboration among diverse healthcare providers, social care services, and primary care systems to ensure comprehensive and effective care. 2) Meeting social care needs underscores significance of addressing a wide spectrum of patient requirements, including psychosocial support. 3) PC education emphasizes necessity of equipping healthcare professionals with the requisite skills and knowledge through comprehensive training. 4) Legalizing donotresuscitate orders draws attention to the critical discussion surrounding end-of-life decisions. 5) Empowering communities recognizes bridging knowledge gaps among patients and caregivers. 6) Decision-Making underscores the importance of informed and collaborative decision-making processes. 7) Cultural considerations urge the adoption of culturally sensitive approaches. 8) Ongoing challenges shed light on persistent issues such as provider attitudes, and administrative hurdles. Conclusion: This study highlights essential factors for establishing an integrated PC program for cancer patients in Turkey. The existing healthcare system in Turkey offers opportunities for advanced PC. Successful implementation demands strategic actions to facilitate meaningful transformation.
Lancet Regional health - Europe, 2024
Background The COVID-19 global pandemic placed unprecedented pressure on cancer services, requiri... more Background The COVID-19 global pandemic placed unprecedented pressure on cancer services, requiring new interim Systemic Anti-Cancer Treatments (SACT) options to mitigate risks to patients and maintain cancer services. In this study we analyse interim COVID-19 SACT therapy options recommended in England, evaluating the evidence supporting inclusion and delineating how these have been integrated into routine cancer care. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of interim Systemic Anti-Cancer Treatments endorsed by NHS England during the COVID-19 pandemic. Interim therapy options were compared to baseline (replacement) therapies by comparing data from the key pivotal trial(s) in terms of clinical efficacy and potential benefits (e.g., reduced immunosuppression or improved adverse effect profile) within the context of the pandemic. Furthermore, we evaluated the evolution of these interim SACT options, exploring if these have been integrated into current treatment pathways or are no longer accessible at the pandemic end. Findings 31 interim oncology treatment options, across 36 indications, for solid cancers were endorsed by NHS England between March 2020 and August 2021. Interim therapies focused on the metastatic setting (83%; 30/36), allowing greater utilisation of immune checkpoint inhibitors (45%; 14/31) and targeted therapies (26%; 8/31), in place of cytotoxic chemotherapy. Overall, 36% (13/36) of therapies could not have efficacy compared with baseline treatments due to a paucity of evidence. For those which could, 39% (9/23) had superior efficacy (e.g., overall survival), 26% (6/23) had equivocal efficacy and 35% (8/23) lower efficacy. 53% (19/36) of interim therapies had better or equivocal toxicity profiles (when assessable), and/or were associated with reduced immunosuppression. Almost half (47%; 17/36) of interim therapies did not have UK market authorisation, being classified as 'off label' use. Analysing access to interim options at the end of the pandemic (May 2023) identified 19 (53% 19/36) interim options were fully available, and a further four (11% 4/36) therapies were partially available. Interpretation Interim SACT options, introduced in England, across a range of solid cancers supported delivery of cancer services during the pandemic. Most interim therapies did not demonstrate superior efficacy, but provided other important benefits (e.g., reduced immunosuppression) in the context of the pandemic.
WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2024
WHO 2024
This report highlights the substantial impact of commercial determinants on noncommunicable disea... more This report highlights the substantial impact of commercial determinants on noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) in the WHO European Region. Nearly 7500 deaths per day in the Region are attributed to commercial determinants, such as tobacco, alcohol, processed food, fossil fuels and occupational practices. These commercial products and practices contribute to 25% of all deaths in the Region. The report's chapters systematically explore various facets of how commercial interests exacerbate NCDs and key strategies used by commercial actors to negatively influence NCD-related policies at the national and international level. The report also provides selected case studies from the Region to illustrate key strategies and outcomes of industry influence on health policies. The report then calls for urgent and coordinated action to address the commercial determinants of NCDs. It advocates for building coalitions based on the values of equity, sustainability, and resilience. Public health actors are urged to develop competencies in economic and legal frameworks, enforce transparency, and manage conflicts of interest effectively. The report underscores the need for robust financial reforms and strict regulation to curb industry power and protect public health. By implementing these strategies, the Region can accelerate progress towards global NCD targets and Sustainable Development Goals by 2030.
Cancer Medicine, 2024
Background: Cancer burden in India is rapidly growing, with oral, breast, and uterine cervix bein... more Background: Cancer burden in India is rapidly growing, with oral, breast, and uterine cervix being the three most commonly affected sites. It has a catastrophic epidemiological and financial impact on rural communities, the vast majority of whom are socio-economically disadvantaged. Strengthening the health system is necessary to address challenges in the access and provision of cancer services, thus improving outcomes among vulnerable populations.
Objective: To develop, test, and validate a health system capacity assessment (HSCA) tool that evaluates the capacity and readiness for cancer services provision in rural India.Methods: A multi-method process was pursued to develop a cancer-specific HSCA tool. Firstly, item generation entailed both a nominal group technique (to identify the health system dimensions to capture) and a rapid review of published and gray literature (to generate items within each of the selected dimensions). Secondly, tool development included the pre-testing of questionnaires through healthcare facility visits and item reduction through a series of in-depth interviews (IDIs) with key local stakeholders. Thirdly, tool validation was performed through expert consensus.
Results: A three-step HSCA multi-method tool was developed comprising: (a) desk review template, investigating policies and protocols at the state level, (b) fa- cility assessment protocol and checklist, catering to the Indian public healthcare
Clinical Oncology, 2024
Aims: This national study investigated hospital quality and patient factors associated with treat... more Aims: This national study investigated hospital quality and patient factors associated with treatment location for systemic anticancer treatment (SACT) in patients with metastatic cancers. Materials and methods: Using linked administrative datasets from the English NHS, we identified all patients diagnosed with metastatic breast and bowel cancer between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2018, who subsequently received SACT within 4 months from diagnosis. The extent to which patients bypassed their nearest hospital was investigated using a geographic information system (ArcGIS). Conditional logistic regression models were used to estimate the impact of travel time, hospital quality and patient characteristics on where patients underwent SACT. Results: 541 of 2,364 women (22.9%) diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer, and 2,809 of 10,050 (28.0%) patients diagnosed with metastatic bowel cancer bypassed their nearest hospital providing SACT. There was a strong preference for receiving treatment at hospitals near where patients lived (p < 0.001). However, patients who were younger (p ¼ 0.043 for breast cancer; p < 0.001 for bowel cancer) or from rural areas (p ¼ 0.001 for breast cancer; p < 0.001 for bowel cancer) were more likely to travel to more distant hospitals. Patients diagnosed with rectal cancer were more likely to travel further for SACT than patients with colon cancer (p ¼ 0.002). Patients were more likely to travel to comprehensive cancer centres (p ¼ 0.019 for bowel cancer) and designated Experimental Cancer Medicine Centres (ECMCs) although the latter association was not significant. Patients were less likely to receive SACT in hospitals with the highest readmission rates (p ¼ 0.046 for bowel cancer). Conclusion: Patients with metastatic cancer receiving primary SACT are prepared to travel to alternative more distant hospitals for treatment with a preference for larger comprehensive centres providing multimodal care or hospitals which offer early phase cancer clinical trials.
Clinical Oncology, 2024
Aims: In 2020 the UK Global Cancer Network (UKGCN) was formed to unite those in the UK interested... more Aims: In 2020 the UK Global Cancer Network (UKGCN) was formed to unite those in the UK interested in Global Oncology and to strengthen collaborative partnerships with stakeholders working across low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) in cancer health systems, governance, and care. The UKGCN undertook a mapping exercise to document collaborations to inform the UK's global oncology strategy. Materials and methods: A semi-structured survey was developed and disseminated using a snowball method over ten weeks from February 2021 across the UK's cancer community, to identify individuals and institutions engaged in clinical practice, research, and/or education with partners in LMICs. The survey was sent to individuals in NHS hospitals, charities, universities, other organisations, UKGCN members, and to contacts identified by a literature and web search. Results: A total of 639 invitations were sent, and 88 responses were received. Results demonstrate a range of collaborative efforts spanning many areas of cancer control: health promotion, prevention, diagnosis and treatment, survivorship, and palliative care. A wide range of countries were represented from Sub-Saharan Africa, South America, the MENA region, China, and SouthEast Asia. The projects included education and training (146), clinical practice/care (144), and research (226). Conclusion: This mapping exercise demonstrated considerable UK collaboration with stakeholders in LMICs across all three domains of education, clinical care, and research. The survey results provide an initial framework from which to promote in-depth strategic intelligence on the broad range of activities undertaken by the UK global oncology community. This information has been used as a catalyst to create new partnerships and connect colleagues working in similar geographical settings, encouraging bidirectional learning. The UKGCN will galvanise endeavours to improve equitable access to cancer services globally.
J Cancer Policy, 2024
During the COVID-19 pandemic, countries adopted mitigation strategies to reduce disruptions to ca... more During the COVID-19 pandemic, countries adopted mitigation strategies to reduce disruptions to cancer services. We reviewed their implementation across health system functions and their impact on cancer diagnosis and care during the pandemic. A systematic search was performed using terms related to cancer and COVID-19. Included studies reported on individuals with cancer or cancer care services, focusing on strategies/programs aimed to reduce delays and disruptions. Extracted data were grouped into four functions (governance, financing, service delivery, and resource generation) and sub-functions of the health system performance assessment framework. We included 30 studies from 16 countries involving 192,233 patients with cancer. Multiple mitigation approaches were implemented, predominantly affecting sub-functions of service delivery to control COVID-19 infection via the suspension of non-urgent cancer care, modified treatment guidelines, and increased telemedicine use in routine cancer care delivery. Resource generation was mainly ensured through adequate workforce supply. However, less emphasis on monitoring or assessing the effectiveness and financing of these strategies was observed. Seventeen studies suggested improved service uptake after mitigation implementation, yet the resulting impact on cancer diagnosis and care has not been established.
Eur J Cancer, 2024
Letter to the editor Access divergence to new cancer medicines in the United Kingdom To the Edito... more Letter to the editor Access divergence to new cancer medicines in the United Kingdom To the Editor, On the 6th March 2024 the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published final draft guidance for trastuzumab deruxtecan (TD) (Enhurtu), the first approved treatment for HER2-low breast cancer [1]. Following appraisal, and much to the disappointment of patients, healthcare professionals and charities, NICE was unable to recommend use of TD in this indication, citing high costs in relation to clinical benefit. This determination was surprising, being the first licensed treatment for this subtype of breast cancer and juxtaposed to the positive recommendation made by the Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC). This means it is likely the only UK nation with access to TD for HER2-low breast cancer will be Scotland (Wales and Northern Ireland typically follow NICE) [2]. This access divergence to TD across the UK is concerning, and further demonstrates the 'post-code' or 'country-code' lottery emerging for treatments within the NHS. TD is a HER2-targeted antibody drug conjugate (ADC), first approved (February 2021) for HER2-positive advanced/metastatic breast cancer, being accessible (NICE/SMC recommended) throughout the UK [3]. For England, NICE recommended access via the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF), designed for medicines that show promising clinical benefit, but require greater evidence to confirm cost-effectiveness. TD received subsequent market authorisation, in the UK and > 40 countries, in 2023 for HER2-low breast cancer (after chemotherapy) based on the DESTINY-Breast04 trial [4]. This approval was hailed as 'practice changing', being the first treatment for this emerging breast cancer subgroup, demonstrating a 50 % reduction of disease progression/death, with median progression-free survival 9.9months, compared to 5.1 months for physician-choice chemotherapy [4,5]. Beyond Scotland, TD is currently reimbursed in > 15 countries, including Canada, France, and Denmark [6,7]. However, NICE was unable to recommend TD (including via the CDF) for this indication due to uncertainties (e.g. immature overall survival) in estimating the cost-effectiveness, and a commercial agreement which did not represent appropriate use of resources, despite a 'severity-based decision modifier' (SBDM) being applied [1]. NICE adopted new appraisal methodology in 2023, incorporating a SBDM, enabling appraisal committees to make recommendations at variable cost-effectiveness thresholds based on disease severity [8]. The SBDM replaced the 'end-of-life' (EOL) decision modifiers which permitted higher cost effectiveness thresholds (up to £50,000) for life-extending treatments for patients, with short life expectancy. The EOL decision modifier facilitated approval of many cancer medicines at cost-effectiveness thresholds above that considered appropriate for other diseases (e.g. multiple sclerosis) [9]. The utility of the SBDM appears to be more restrictive and less generous, with a smaller proportion of cancer therapies qualifying for higher cost-effectiveness thresholds, concerning many cancer charities [8,10]. TD qualified for a mid-range SBDM of x1.2 (range x1-1.7), despite some committee-members
JGO Global, 2024
PURPOSE There is an urgent need to improve access to cancer therapy globally. Several independent... more PURPOSE There is an urgent need to improve access to cancer therapy globally. Several independent initiatives have been undertaken to improve access to cancer medicines, and additional new initiatives are in development. Improved sharing of experiences and increased collaboration are needed to achieve substantial improvements in global access to essential oncology medicines.
BMJ Oncology, 2024
The role of artificial intelligence (AI) in cancer care has evolved in the face of ageing populat... more The role of artificial intelligence (AI) in cancer care has evolved in the face of ageing population, workforce shortages and technological advancement. Despite recent uptake in AI research and adoption, the extent to which it improves quality, efficiency and equity of care beyond cancer diagnostics is uncertain to date. Henceforth, the objective of our systematic review is to assess the clinical readiness and deployability of AI through evaluation of prospective studies of AI in cancer care following diagnosis. We undertook a systematic review to determine the types of AI involved and their respective outcomes. A PubMed and Web of Science search between 1 January 2013 and 1 May 2023 identified 15 articles detailing prospective evaluation of AI in post diagnostic cancer pathway. We appraised all studies using Risk of Bias Assessment of Randomised Controlled Trials and Risk of Bias In Nonrandomised Studies-of Interventions quality assessment tools, as well as implementational analysis concerning time, cost and resource, to ascertain the quality of clinical evidence and real-world feasibility of AI. The results revealed that the majority of AI oncological research remained experimental without prospective clinical validation or deployment. Most studies failed to establish clinical validity and to translate measured AI efficacy into beneficial clinical outcomes. AI research are limited by lack of research standardisation and health system interoperability. Furthermore, implementational analysis and equity considerations of AI were largely missing. To overcome the triad of low-level clinical evidence, efficacy-outcome gap and incompatible research ecosystem for AI, future work should focus on multicollaborative AI implementation research designed and conducted in accordance with up-to-date research standards and local health systems.
Head & Neck, 2024
Introduction: India contributes two-thirds of the global mortality due to oral cancer and has a y... more Introduction: India contributes two-thirds of the global mortality due to oral cancer and has a younger population at risk. The societal costs of this premature mortality are barely discussed. Methods: Using the human capital approach, we aimed to estimate the productivity lost due to premature mortality, valued using individual socioeconomic data, related to oral cancer in India. A bottom-up approach was used to prospectively collect data of 100 consecutive patients with oral cancer treated between 2019 and 2020, with a follow-up of 36 months. Results: The disease-specific survival for early and advanced stage was 85% and 70%, with a median age of 47 years. With 671 years lost prematurely, the loss of productivity was $41 900/early and $96 044/advanced stage. Based on population level rates, the total cost of premature mortality was $5.6 billion, representing 0.18% of GDP. Conclusion: India needs to implement tailored strategies to reduce the economic burden from premature mortality.
JCO Global Oncol, 2024
Rapidly expanding systemic treatment options, combined with improved screening, diagnostic, surgi... more Rapidly expanding systemic treatment options, combined with improved screening, diagnostic, surgical, and radiotherapy techniques, have led to improved survival outcomes for many cancers over time. However, these overall survival gains have disproportionately benefited patients in high-income countries, whereas patients in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) continue to experience challenges in accessing timely and guideline concordant care. In September 2022, the Accelerating Anticancer Agent Development and Validation workshop was held, focusing on global cancer drug development. Panelists discussed key barriers such as the lack of diagnostic services and human resources, drug accessibility and affordability, lack of research infrastructure, and regulatory and authorization challenges, with a particular focus on Africa and Latin America. Potential opportunities to improve access and affordability were reviewed, such as the importance of prioritizing investments in diagnostics, investing health infrastructure and work force planning, coordinated drug procurement efforts and streamlined regulatory processing, incentivized pricing through regulatory change, and the importance of developing and promoting clinical trials that can answer relevant clinical questions for patients in LMICs. As a cancer community, we must continue to advocate for and work toward equitable access to high-quality interventions for patients, regardless of their geographical location.
Int J Cancer, 2024
While previous reviews found a positive association between pre-existing cancer diagnosis and COV... more While previous reviews found a positive association between pre-existing cancer diagnosis and COVID-19-related death, most early studies did not distinguish long-term cancer survivors from those recently diagnosed/treated, nor adjust for important confounders including age. We aimed to consolidate higher-quality evidence on risk of COVID-19-related death for people with recent/active cancer (compared to people without) in the pre-COVID-19-vaccination period. We searched the WHO COVID-19 Global Research Database (20 December 2021), and Medline and Embase (10 May 2023). We included studies adjusting for age and sex, and providing details of cancer status. Risk-of-bias assessment was based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled adjusted odds or risk ratios (aORs, aRRs) or hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using generic inverse-variance random-effects models. Random-effects meta-regressions were used to assess associations between effect estimates and time since cancer diagnosis/treatment. Of 23 773 unique title/ abstract records, 39 studies were eligible for inclusion (2 low, 17 moderate, 20 high risk of bias). Risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with active or recently diagnosed/treated cancer (general population: aOR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.36-1.61, I 2 = 0;
people with COVID-19: aOR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.41-1.77, I 2 = 0.58; inpatients with
COVID-19: aOR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.34-2.06, I 2 = 0.98). Risks were more elevated for
lung (general population: aOR = 3.4, 95% CI: 2.4-4.7) and hematological cancers (gen-
eral population: aOR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.68-2.68, I 2 = 0.43), and for metastatic cancers.
Meta-regression suggested risk of COVID-19-related death decreased with time since diagnosis/treatment, for example, for any/solid cancers, fitted aOR = 1.55 (95% CI: 1.37-1.75) at 1 year and aOR = 0.98 (95% CI: 0.80-1.20) at 5 years post-cancer diagnosis/treatment. In conclusion, before COVID-19-vaccination, risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with recent cancer, with risk depending on cancer type and time since diagnosis/treatment.
eCancer, 2024
Cancer medicines have become one of the most dominant global medical technologies. They generate ... more Cancer medicines have become one of the most dominant global medical technologies. They generate huge profits for the biopharmaceutical industry as well as fuel the research and advocacy activities of public funders, patient organisations, clinical and scientific communities and entire federal political ecosystems. The mismatch between the price, affordability and value of many cancer medicines and global need has generated significant policy debate, yet we see little change in behaviours from any of the major actors from public research funders through to regulatory authorities. In this policy analysis we examine whether, considering the money and power inherent in this system, any rationale global consensus and policy can be achieved to deliver affordable and equitable cancer medicines that consistently deliver clinically meaningful benefit.
Lancet Oncology, 2024
This Policy Review sourced opinions from experts in cancer care across low-income and middle-inco... more This Policy Review sourced opinions from experts in cancer care across low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) to build consensus around high-priority measures of care quality. A comprehensive list of quality indicators in medical, radiation, and surgical oncology was identified from systematic literature reviews. A modified Delphi study consisting of three 90-min workshops and two international electronic surveys integrating a global range of key clinical, policy, and research leaders was used to derive consensus on cancer quality indicators that would be both feasible to collect and were high priority for cancer care systems in LMICs. Workshop participants narrowed the list of 216 quality indicators from the literature review to 34 for inclusion in the subsequent surveys. Experts' responses to the surveys showed consensus around nine high-priority quality indicators for measuring the quality of hospitalbased cancer care in LMICs. These quality indicators focus on important processes of care delivery from accurate diagnosis (eg, histologic diagnosis via biopsy and TNM staging) to adequate, timely, and appropriate treatment (eg, completion of radiotherapy and appropriate surgical intervention). The core indicators selected could be used to implement systems of feedback and quality improvement.
Uploads
Global Cancer by Richard Sullivan
Objective: To develop, test, and validate a health system capacity assessment (HSCA) tool that evaluates the capacity and readiness for cancer services provision in rural India.Methods: A multi-method process was pursued to develop a cancer-specific HSCA tool. Firstly, item generation entailed both a nominal group technique (to identify the health system dimensions to capture) and a rapid review of published and gray literature (to generate items within each of the selected dimensions). Secondly, tool development included the pre-testing of questionnaires through healthcare facility visits and item reduction through a series of in-depth interviews (IDIs) with key local stakeholders. Thirdly, tool validation was performed through expert consensus.
Results: A three-step HSCA multi-method tool was developed comprising: (a) desk review template, investigating policies and protocols at the state level, (b) fa- cility assessment protocol and checklist, catering to the Indian public healthcare
people with COVID-19: aOR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.41-1.77, I 2 = 0.58; inpatients with
COVID-19: aOR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.34-2.06, I 2 = 0.98). Risks were more elevated for
lung (general population: aOR = 3.4, 95% CI: 2.4-4.7) and hematological cancers (gen-
eral population: aOR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.68-2.68, I 2 = 0.43), and for metastatic cancers.
Meta-regression suggested risk of COVID-19-related death decreased with time since diagnosis/treatment, for example, for any/solid cancers, fitted aOR = 1.55 (95% CI: 1.37-1.75) at 1 year and aOR = 0.98 (95% CI: 0.80-1.20) at 5 years post-cancer diagnosis/treatment. In conclusion, before COVID-19-vaccination, risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with recent cancer, with risk depending on cancer type and time since diagnosis/treatment.
Objective: To develop, test, and validate a health system capacity assessment (HSCA) tool that evaluates the capacity and readiness for cancer services provision in rural India.Methods: A multi-method process was pursued to develop a cancer-specific HSCA tool. Firstly, item generation entailed both a nominal group technique (to identify the health system dimensions to capture) and a rapid review of published and gray literature (to generate items within each of the selected dimensions). Secondly, tool development included the pre-testing of questionnaires through healthcare facility visits and item reduction through a series of in-depth interviews (IDIs) with key local stakeholders. Thirdly, tool validation was performed through expert consensus.
Results: A three-step HSCA multi-method tool was developed comprising: (a) desk review template, investigating policies and protocols at the state level, (b) fa- cility assessment protocol and checklist, catering to the Indian public healthcare
people with COVID-19: aOR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.41-1.77, I 2 = 0.58; inpatients with
COVID-19: aOR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.34-2.06, I 2 = 0.98). Risks were more elevated for
lung (general population: aOR = 3.4, 95% CI: 2.4-4.7) and hematological cancers (gen-
eral population: aOR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.68-2.68, I 2 = 0.43), and for metastatic cancers.
Meta-regression suggested risk of COVID-19-related death decreased with time since diagnosis/treatment, for example, for any/solid cancers, fitted aOR = 1.55 (95% CI: 1.37-1.75) at 1 year and aOR = 0.98 (95% CI: 0.80-1.20) at 5 years post-cancer diagnosis/treatment. In conclusion, before COVID-19-vaccination, risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with recent cancer, with risk depending on cancer type and time since diagnosis/treatment.
A new report from the Research for Health in Conflict Group led by academics from the Centre for Business Research at the University of Cambridge and colleagues from King’s College London and the American University of Beirut presents stark insights into the treatment of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK, especially their mental health.
2.51; OR = 1.93, 95%CI:1.31–2.84; OR = 2.29, 95%CI:1.45–3.62, respectively) as compared to females, white ethnicity, or solid cancer type, respectively. Male, Asian ethnicity, and hematological cancer type were associated with an increased risk of severe COVID‐19 (OR = 3.12, 95%CI:1.58–6.14; OR =
2.97, 95%CI:1.00–8.93; OR = 2.43, 95%CI:1.00–5.90, respectively). This study is one of the first to compare the risk of COVID‐19 incidence and severity in cancer patients when including cancer patients as controls. Results from this study have echoed those of previous reports, that patients who are male, of black or Asian ethnicity, or with a hematological malignancy are at an increased risk of COVID‐19.
2.51; OR = 1.93, 95%CI:1.31–2.84; OR = 2.29, 95%CI:1.45–3.62, respectively) as compared to females, white ethnicity, or solid cancer type, respectively. Male, Asian ethnicity, and hematological cancer type were associated with an increased risk of severe COVID‐19 (OR = 3.12, 95%CI:1.58–6.14; OR =
2.97, 95%CI:1.00–8.93; OR = 2.43, 95%CI:1.00–5.90, respectively). This study is one of the first to compare the risk of COVID‐19 incidence and severity in cancer patients when including cancer patients as controls. Results from this study have echoed those of previous reports, that patients who are male, of black or Asian ethnicity, or with a hematological malignancy are at an increased risk of COVID‐19.