key: cord-0945144-bq87yxnm authors: Ribera, P.; Climent, C.; Soriano, S.; Declara, I. Macias; Fernandez, L.; Vilà, L.; Segui, M. A.; Pericay, C. title: 1641P Patient preferences towards the application of telemedicine on cancer care during Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. ONCOTELEMED STUDY date: 2021-09-30 journal: Annals of Oncology DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2021.08.1634 sha: 6c7cf3236b0511284ce5219c965942af5b120c8a doc_id: 945144 cord_uid: bq87yxnm Background: COVID-19 became a worldwide pandemic in March 2020. To reduce virus spread and ensure continuity of cancer care, the use of telehealth was rapidly implemented. Currently, there is no mature data on patient's perception about the use of telemedicine during this period, so we sought to evaluate the opinion of patients with cancer who were attended telematically in Hospital Parc Taulí. Methods: 646 patients were visited by an oncologist via phone call between Marc 13 and April 30 2020. A 12-question survey was conducted between February 4 and April 19 2021 during an in-person visit or by telephone. The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of our hospital. Results: 487 patients (75.4%) responded;57% by phone call. Median age was 68 years [27-90]. 65.7% of patients had a follow-up visit and 34.3% were receiving treatment. Most patients (>80%) were satisfied with the telephonic visit and believed that it was useful to solve their concerns. Around 60% said that they would agree to continue with some virtual visits following the COVID-19 pandemic. 62% of patients would agree to be informed telematically of radiological results while 82% would agree for analytical results. 52% would agree to be visited virutally if they were receiving an oral treatment whereas only 33.5% would agree if the treatment was endovenous. In general, younger patients (<50 years old) feel more comfortable with virtual visits than older ones (>70 y) (77.4% vs 62%, p=0.07). Only 20% of patients older than 50 believe that they can handle new technologies as opposed to 58.5% of younger ones (p=0.001). 60.4% of the younger patients would like to have different technological tools to contact their oncologist whereas most patients (47.6%) older than 70 prefer only phone calls (p=0.001). Regardless of the type of visit (treatment or follow-up) patients felt comfortable with virtual attendance (58.7% and 65.6% respectively, p=0.2). Conclusions: As a whole, patients surveyed believed that telehealth could have a role following the COVID-19 pandemic. However, telemedicine is not applicable in all cases. Visits to older patients, to inform about radiological results and to patients recieving treatment should be assessed case by case. Legal entity responsible for the study: The authors. Funding: Has not received any funding. Disclosure: P. Ribera: Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Merck;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Sanofy;Financial Interests, Personal, Other: Lilly;Financial Interests, Personal, Other: Roche. S. Soriano: Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Kywowa Kirin. I. Macias Declara: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Amgen;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Roche;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Sanofi;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: BMS. L. Fernandez: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Novartis;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: BMS;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: MSD;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Pierre-Fabre;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Roche;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Novartis. L. Vilà: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Boehringer Ingelheim;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: AstraZeneca;Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: AstraZeneca;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: AstraZeneca;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Bristol Myers;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Merck;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Roche. M.A. Segui: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: MSD;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Daichi-Sanyo;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Pfizer;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Novartis;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Lilly;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Eisai;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Roche;Financial Interes s, Personal, Advisory Board: AstraZeneca;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Seagen;Non-Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: Novartis;Non-Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: Lilly;Non-Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: Roche;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Pfizer;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Eisai;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Roche;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: MSD. C. Pericay: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Amgen;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Ipsen;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Servier;Non-Financial Interests, Institutional, Principal Investigator: Amgen;Non-Financial Interests, Institutional, Principal Investigator: Lilly;Non-Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: Merck;Non-Financial Interests, Institutional, Principal Investigator: Roche;Non-Financial Interests, Institutional, Principal Investigator: Sanofi;Non-Financial Interests, Institutional, Principal Investigator: Servier. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest. Background: Outcomes and risk factors associated with COVID-19 worsening among cancer patients have previously been reported. However, the actual impact of SARs-Co-V2 infection on the cancer treatment strategy remains unknown. Here, we report the Gustave Roussy (GR) experience, one year after the onset of the pandemic focusing on the impact of COVID-19 in patients with ongoing management of oncohematological disease. Methods: All patients positively tested for SARS-CoV-2 and managed at GR between Mar 14 th 2020 and Feb 15 th 2021 (data cut-off) have been included. Patients underlying oncohematological disease and COVID19 characteristics have been collected. Cancer and COVID-19 management and outcomes have been assessed. Primary endpoint was the overall impact of COVID-19 on oncological and hematological treatment strategy assessed at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Results: At the time of the analysis, 423 patients (median age: 62 years) were found positive for SARS-CoV-2 and managed at GR with a median follow up of 5.6 months (0-13 months). Among them, 284 (67%) were admitted due to COVID-19. Clinical deterioration occurred in 87 patients (21%), 43 patients (10%) were transferred in intensive care unit and 123 (29%) patients died, among which 47 (11%) died from COVID-19. Overall, 329 (78%) patients were on active treatment for underlying oncohematological disease at time of COVID diagnosis. Impact of COVID-19 on cancer treatment strategy in those patients is presented in the Table. The majority (N¼268, 81%) had no change in oncological strategy. For those who experienced a delay, median delay in treatment was 21 days (N¼99, [1-77]), 30 days (N¼15, ), 7 days (N¼8, ) for systemic treatment, surgery and radiotherapy respectively. Conclusions: COVID-19 outbreak is associated with a significant mortality in patients with cancer. However, for patients who did not die from COVID-19, we provide the first report supporting that ongoing treatment was maintained or could be resumed in the majority of cases in a timely manner. Legal entity responsible for the study: Gustave Roussy. Funding: Has not received any funding. Background: The health emergency caused by the SarS-Cov-2 pandemic has been strongly impacting on oncological patients' (pts). The purpose of this study was to explore the emotional impact and perception of cancer pts who received the vaccine against COVID-19 at the University Hospital and Trust of Verona (Italy). Methods: After the first dose of COVID-19 vaccine an anonymously questionnaire was proposed to cancer pts (March-May 2021). The survey investigated anxiety and depression levels using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), psychological distress with the Distress Thermometer (DT). Additionally, four specific items regarding the awareness about: i) infection risks, ii) interference with chemotherapy treatment, and iii) adverse effects, were developed. Descriptive analyses were performed. Results: A total of 736 patients (mean age 63 yrs) completed the questionnaire. Breast (23%) and gastrointestinal (40%) were the most represented cancer sites. The majority of pts (65%) reported mild levels of distress (DT 4), while moderate (DT 5-7) and severe (DT !8) levels were identified in 26% and 9% of participants, respectively. A total of 11% and 8% of pts experienced clinically significant symptoms of anxiety and depression (HADS !11), whereas 15% were borderline (HADS score 8-10). Two thirds of pts (67%) thought that the vaccination may reduce the infection risks and 56% felt safer. Overall, 59% of pts did not believe that vaccine-related side effects may interfere with the oncological treatment and 49% considered the vaccination safe. Conclusions: Most cancer pts undergoing COVID-19 vaccination presented mild levels of anxiety, depression and distress. Oncological pts undergoing vaccination felt safe and judged the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination to overweight the potential side effects. Legal entity responsible for the study: The authors. Funding: Has not received any funding. Conclusions: These results contribute to a better understanding of the psychological consequences of COVID-19 pandemic in the context of cancer and highlight the need Legal entity responsible for the study: Institut Paoli-Calmettes Marseille France. Funding: Janssen Advisory Board: BMS; Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker: Janssen; Financial Interests, Institutional, Advisory Board: Janssen; Financial Interests, Institutional, Advisory Board: Pfizer; Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker: Astellas; Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker: MSD; Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker: Astellas; Financial Interests, Institutional Invited Speaker: Astellas; Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker: Janssen; Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker: AMGEN; Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker: BMS; Financial Interests, Institutional, Advisory Board: Janssen; Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker: Sanofi; Financial Interests, Institutional, Funding: Janssen; Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker: BMS; Non-Financial Interests, Principal Investigator: Ipsen; Non-Financial Interests 1643P Knowledge and attitude of cancer patients towards COVID-19 pandemic: A study from Pakistan Lodhi Department Ofedical Oncology and Radiothrapy Legal entity responsible for the study: The authors.Funding: Has not received any funding. Background: Pandemic spread, rapid transmissibility and currently incurable status has made COVID-19 a major concern of today. Old age and weak immunity make cancer patients highly susceptible to get infected.Methods: A questionnaire-based study was conducted to determine knowledge of cancer patients about COVID-19 and resulting response in terms of preventive measures, delays in scheduled cancer management and impact of delay on cancer. Data was analyzed using SPSS version.23. Descriptive variables were reported as means and frequencies. Intergroup analysis was done using Chi square test with p<0.05 taken as significant.Results: Of 269 enrolled patients, the majority had advanced/metastatic disease (82.4%) and were being treated on an outpatient basis (71.6%). Almost all (99.6%) were aware of COVID, electronic/print being the most common source of information (62.7%). Though having different views, 81.5% took it as a natural calamity. 71.3% considered themselves among the highrisk population. During first and second wave, 22.4% had delayed their investigations while treatment interruptions were seen in 34.7% patients, with average duration of delay being 55AE27 days and traveling difficulties due to lockdown commonest reason of delay (54.8%). During this period 62.4% either noted worsening of symptoms or new symptoms. Despite all the chaos, 89.9% selected for treatment continuation if provided with a chance and appropriate facilities. Correlation of delay in therapy with high level of education (p¼0.013) and perception about COVID-19 as a natural calamity (p¼0.041) was found to be statistically significant.