Early in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic, the UK National Health Service (NHS) identified patients with multiple myeloma (MM) as a ‘clinically extremely vulnerable’ population. 1 In contrast, the clinical significance of COVID‐19 to MM precursors, monoclonal gammopathy of undermined significance (MGUS) 2 and smouldering MM (SMM) 3 remains unknown.
Here for the first time, we summarise the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on 274 MM spectrum individuals (66 MGUS, 33 SMM and 175 MM) who participated in the IMPaCCT (Investigating the impact of COVID‐19 on caregivers and patients) study. The first wave of this online international longitudinal study took place between 24 April and 14 July 2020.
Participants answered open‐ and closed‐ended questions to capture information on their demographics, COVID‐19 status and the impact of COVID‐19 on them and their care pathways. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed using the World Health Organisation Quality of Life (WHOQOL‐BREF 4 ) and the EuroQoL five Dimensions five Levels (EQ‐5D‐5L 5 ) instruments. The survey was pilot tested and then promoted online via social media, blogs and charity/patient advocacy groups. Descriptive statistics were applied to quantitative data. The WHOQOL‐BREF and EQ‐5D‐5L questionnaires were analysed following published guidelines. 4 , 5 Open‐ended questions were analysed using qualitative content analysis 6 and framework analysis 7 by two independent reviewers (S.Q. and L.L.). Ethical approval was obtained from Queen's University Belfast (MHLS 20_52).
The majority of respondents were female, aged >60 years, within 5 years of diagnosis and did not live alone (online Tables SI and SII). Most MGUS and MM respondents resided in the UK (60·6% and 78·9% respectively) whereas SMM respondents (54·5%) mostly resided in the USA. Although no participants reported a medically confirmed COVID‐19 diagnosis, 15·2% suspected they had previously contracted the disease; commonly reported symptoms included fatigue (82·5%), cough (65·0%), fever (65·0%), headache (60·0%) and sore throat (57·5%).
While 69·3% of participants reported their QoL as being good or very good on the WHOQOL‐BREF, participants scored lower (indicating less satisfaction) compared to pre‐pandemic UK population norms, 8 in the physical (P < 0·0001), psychological (P < 0·0001) and social (P < 0·0001) domains but scored higher in the environmental domain (relating to physical/home environment, physical safety, care access and quality, etc.; P = 0·001) (Table I). 8 , 9
Table I.
WHOQOL‐BREF and EQ‐5D‐5L findings.
| Normative values 8 , 9 | Total (N = 266*) | MGUS (N = 65) | SMM (N = 33) | MM (N = 168) | P (comparisons between MM subgroups) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WHOQOL‐BREF domain, mean (SD) | ||||||
| Physical health | 76·5 | 59·5 (20·3) | 58·5 (22·5) | 70·6 (19·5) | 57·8 (19·1) | 0·002 |
| Psychological | 67·8 | 61·1 (18·5) | 56·3 (20·2) | 62·1 (20·6) | 62·8 (17·1) | 0·081 |
| Social relationships | 70·5 | 61·5 (19·7) | 57·8 (21·5) | 63·6 (21·9) | 62·5 (18·4) | 0·153 |
| Environment | 68·2 | 71·5 (16) | 65 (19·3) | 75·2 (14·5) | 73·2 (14·1) | 0·002 |
| EQ‐5D‐5L domain | ||||||
| Mobility, n (%) | ||||||
| Any problem | 18·4% | 143 (53·8) | 31 (47·7) | 12 (36·4) | 100 (59·5) | 0·027 |
| No problems | 123 (46·2) | 34 (52·3) | 21 (63·6) | 68 (40·5) | 0·066 | |
| Slight problems | 75 (28·2) | 20 (30·8) | 7 (21·2) | 48 (28·6) | ||
| Moderate problems | 44 (16·5) | 6 (9·2) | 5 (15·2) | 33 (19·6) | ||
| Severe problems | 24 (9·0) | 5 (7·7) | 0 | 19 (11·3) | ||
| Unable | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Self‐care, n (%) | ||||||
| Any problem | 4·3% | 61 (22·9) | 13 (20·0) | 4 (12·1) | 44 (26·2) | 0·173 |
| No problems | 205 (77·1) | 52 (80·0) | 29 (87·9) | 124 (73·8) | 0·570 | |
| Slight problems | 40 (15·0) | 10 (15·4) | 3 (9·1) | 27 (16·1) | ||
| Moderate problems | 20 (7·5) | 3 (4·6) | 1 (3·0) | 16 (9·5) | ||
| Severe problems | 1 (0·4) | 0 | 0 | 1 (0·6) | ||
| Unable | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Usual activities, n (%) | ||||||
| Any problem | 16·3% | 163 (61·5) | 37 (57·8) | 12 (36·4) | 114 (67·9) | 0·002 |
| No problems | 102 (38·5) | 27 (42·2) | 21 (63·6) | 54 (32·1) | 0·037 | |
| Slight problems | 88 (33·2) | 22 (34·4) | 8 (24·2) | 58 (34·5) | ||
| Moderate problems | 55 (20·8) | 9 (14·1) | 4 (12·1) | 42 (25·0) | ||
| Severe problems | 18 (6·8) | 6 (9·4) | 0 | 12 (7·1) | ||
| Unable | 2 (0·8) | 0 | 0 | 2 (1·2) | ||
| Missing values | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Pain/discomfort, n (%) | ||||||
| Any problem | 33·0% | 214 (80·8) | 50 (78·1) | 26 (78·8) | 138 (82·1) | 0·750 |
| No problems | 51 (19·3) | 14 (21·9) | 7 (21·2) | 30 (17·9) | 0·457 | |
| Slight problems | 108 (40·8) | 22 (34·4) | 17 (51·5) | 69 (41·1) | ||
| Moderate problems | 82 (30·9) | 21 (32·8) | 9 (27·3) | 52 (31·0) | ||
| Severe problems | 24 (9·1) | 7 (10·9) | 0 | 17 (10·1) | ||
| Extreme problems | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Missing values | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Anxiety/depression, n (%) | ||||||
| Any problem | 21·0% | 170 (64·2) | 49 (76·6) | 20 (60·6) | 101 (60·1) | 0·059 |
| No problems | 95 (35·9) | 15 (23·4) | 13 (39·4) | 67 (39·9) | 0·056 | |
| Slight problems | 103 (38·9) | 26 (40·6) | 8 (24·2) | 69 (41·1) | ||
| Moderate problems | 48 (18·1) | 15 (23·4) | 10 (30·3) | 23 (13·7) | ||
| Severe problems | 15 (5·7) | 6 (9·4) | 2 (6·1) | 7 (4·2) | ||
| Extreme problems | 4 (1·5) | 2 (3·1) | 0 | 2 (1·2) | ||
| Missing values | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Visual assessment score, mean (SD) | 77·3 | 66·2 (19·1) | 64·9 (19·6) | 69·3 (20·6) | 66 (18·7) | 0·4378 |
| Missing values, n | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2 | ||
MGUS, monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance; MM, multiple myeloma; SD, standard deviation; SMM, smouldering multiple myeloma.
Includes only those who responded to WHOQOL‐BREF or EQ‐5D‐5L questionnaires.
All groups had lower scores (indicating more problems) across the EQ‐5D‐5L domains compared to pre‐pandemic UK normative values, 9 with MM respondents reporting more problems across all domains. Notably, high rates of anxiety/depression were reported by MGUS/SMM/MM participants (64·2%); however, only 7·2% considered this to be severe or extreme (Table I).
COVID‐19‐related anxiety and depression were frequently mentioned, and many people reported distress at being housebound. Older respondents and those with MM were more likely to report they were self‐isolating (P < 0·001). While concerns about contracting COVID‐19, experiencing severe symptoms and impact on the future were mentioned (“It feels as if my life is being wasted”), many concerns focussed on fears of disease progression (Concerned myeloma may have spread, a patient with MM, 1–3 years since diagnosis).
Significantly more MM than MGUS or SMM respondents reported altered healthcare appointments (69·7% vs. 40·3% and 40·6% respectively, P < 0·001). Changes to treatment appointments were reported, with 22 patients with MM reporting chemotherapy appointments were changed, delayed or cancelled. Many participants expressed concern about the impact of delayed or cancelled appointments (I worry appointments will be delayed meaning changes in condition aren't picked up as soon as they could be, a patient with MGUS <1 year since diagnosis) (Table II). Fear about COVID‐19 exposure, particularly at a hospital, was also noted (Reluctant to go to the hospital clinic at all, even for blood work and consultation, a patient with SMM >5 years since diagnosis). In contrast, patients with MGUS were more likely than other participants (P = 0·004) to report feeling their care had suffered or they had been abandoned (I feel neglected and that my illness isn't of any importance, a patient with MGUS <1 year since diagnosis).
Table II.
Supporting quotes from qualitative analysis of COVID‐19 impact on myeloma‐spectrum respondents.
| Psychological impacts |
|
| Social/financial impacts |
|
| Health/care impacts |
|
| Telemedicine experience |
|
| What further information/services/support would be useful for you at this time? |
|
Quotes which are underlined are those which appear in the text, with demographic descriptions of the respondent provided.
Most respondents accessing telemedicine services (78·3%) described their experience as positive or satisfactory, citing such advantages as increased convenience. Conversely, some participants reported telemedicine to be less effective than face‐to‐face appointments, had difficulty understanding information relayed by telephone and were left feeling less reassured after their calls. Healthcare professionals and scientists were the most highly trusted sources of COVID‐19 information (84·9% and 80·5% trusting most/all information from these sources respectively), although MGUS respondents reported having less trust in healthcare providers than SMM or MM respondents (P = 0·013).
Many respondents highlighted the need for specific information regarding the risk of contracting COVID‐19 and shielding. In particular, patients with MM wanted to know how to shield properly and for how long, whereas pre‐cancer patients wanted to know whether they should be shielding (I don't know if I should be shielding with MGUS, a patient with MGUS 4–5 years since diagnosis). Many respondents also wanted continued access to their normal care, including specialist appointments, medical tests and test results.
Individuals across the MM spectrum appear to have been negatively affected by the COVID‐19 pandemic in similar ways, frequently reporting they felt isolated, anxious or depressed. This may be related to the uncertainty of the COVID‐19 pandemic, recommended social distancing and self‐isolation, plus reduced availability of support and care services. Supporting this, Myeloma UK, the leading UK MM charity, reported unprecedented demand for their MM Infoline and ‘Ask The Nurse’ service 10 in March 2020, with service users particularly interested in COVID‐19‐specific issues including risk of infection, lifestyle, emotional issues and end‐of‐life support. 10
The present study benefits from a mixed‐methods design and inclusion of both patients with MGUS and SMM, providing novel insight into the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic across the MM spectrum. Planned follow‐up surveys will lead to identifying long‐term impacts of the COVID‐19 pandemic and additional support needs for this population. However, online recruitment and questions asking for self‐reported disease status may reduce the generalisability of the findings to the wider MGUS/SMM/MM population.
Participant concerns over undetected disease progression and lack of timely healthcare appointments/treatments are also linked to the desire for unambiguous information about any heightened COVID‐19 risk. As services resume, healthcare and other service providers should also be aware of patients' fears about accessing care in hospitals during the pandemic and plan to address the psychosocial needs of patients across the MM spectrum.
Competing interests
The authors have no competing interests.
Author contributions
Lesley A. Anderson and Charlene M. McShane designed the initial concept for the study with input from the wider IMPaCCT team based at Queen's University Belfast and University of Aberdeen. Stephen J. Quinn, Charlene M. McShane and Lynne Lohfeld analysed the data. Stephen J. Quinn wrote the first draft of the paper. Stephen J. Quinn, Charlene M. McShane, Lesley A. Anderson and Lynne Lohfeld had access to the data and reviewed/revised the paper.
Supporting information
Table SI. Demographic characteristics of MGUS, SMM and MM participants.
Table SII. COVID‐19 symptoms, concerns and preventative measures across myeloma‐spectrum groups.
Acknowledgements
The study team would like to thank the participants for taking the time to complete this survey. The authors would also like to acknowledge the contributions of the wider IMPaCCT study team members in the initial design of the study. The named authors take sole responsibility for the analysis and interpretation presented within this paper.
References
- 1. National Health Service UK . Who's at higher risk from coronavirus. 2020. Available at: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus‐covid‐19/people‐at‐higher‐risk/whos‐at‐higher‐risk‐from‐coronavirus/. Accessed: 22 November 2021.
- 2. Gonzalez‐Lugo JD, Bachier‐Rodriguez L, Goldfinger M, Shastri A, Sica RA, Gritsman K, et al. A case series of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and COVID‐19. Br J Haematol. 2020;190:e130–3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Wang B, Van Oekelen O, Mouhieddine TH, Del Valle DM, Richter J, Cho HJ, et al. A tertiary center experience of multiple myeloma patients with COVID‐19: lessons learned and the path forward. J Hematol Oncol. 2020;13:1–12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. World Health Organisation . WHOQOL‐BREF: Introduction, administration, scoring and generic version of the assessment: field trial version, December 1996. Geneva; 1996. (Programme on Mental Health).
- 5. EuroQol Research Foundation . EQ‐5D‐5L User Guide. 2019.
- 6. Erlingsson C, Brysiewicz P. A hands‐on guide to doing content analysis. African J Emerg Med. 2017;7:93–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Srivastava A, Thomson SB. Framework analysis: a qualitative methodology for applied policy research. J Adm Gov. 2009;4:72–9. [Google Scholar]
- 8. Skevington SM, Mccrate FM. Expecting a good quality of life in health: assessing people with diverse diseases and conditions using the WHOQOL‐BREF. Heal Expect. 2012;15:49–62. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Szende A, Janssen B, Cabasés J, eds. Self‐Reported Population Health: An International Perspective Based on EQ‐5D. Dordrecht, NL: Springer, 2014;1–196. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Quinn SC, Watters ED, Dempsey SL, Dolman KS, Laketic‐Ljubojevic I. Providing tailored information and support through the Myeloma UK, Myeloma Infoline and Ask The Nurse services during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Psychooncology. 2020;29:1439–41. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Table SI. Demographic characteristics of MGUS, SMM and MM participants.
Table SII. COVID‐19 symptoms, concerns and preventative measures across myeloma‐spectrum groups.