Abstract
The large burden of COVID-19 on health care systems worldwide has raised concerns among medical oncologists about the impact of COVID-19 on the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer patients. In this retrospective cohort study, we investigated the impact of COVID-19 on lung cancer diagnosis and treatment before and during the COVID-19 era. New lung cancer diagnoses decreased by 34.7% during the pandemic with slightly more advanced stages of disease, there was a significant increase in the utilization of radiosurgery as the first definitive treatment, and a decrease in both systemic treatment as well as surgery compared to the pre-COVID-19 era. There was no significant delay in starting chemotherapy and radiation treatment during the pandemic compared to pre-COVID-19 time. However, we observed a delay to lung cancer surgery during the pandemic time. COVID-19 seems to have had a major impact at our lung cancer center on the diagnoses and treatment patterns of lung cancer patients. Many oncologists fear that they will see an increase in newly diagnosed lung cancer patients in the coming year. This study is still ongoing and further data will be collected and analyzed to better understand the total impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our lung cancer patient population.
Keywords: lung cancer, COVID-19, diagnosis and treatment pattern
1. Introduction
Globally, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has slowed down clinical activities, including cancer care, in order to follow public health directives. A cross-sectional study conducted in 356 centers across 54 countries found that 88% of centers had a hard time delivering care to patients, due to the large burden on the health care system, lack of protective equipment, decline in number of healthcare personnel working, and low access to medications [1]. Another recent study reported that due to the COVID-19 pandemic, screening of cancers declined drastically, 85% for breast, 75% for colon, 74% for prostate, and 56% for lung cancer [2]. This may potentially lead to a delayed diagnosis and more advanced stage patients. This finding is consistent with the report issued in January 2021 by the Quebec Ministry of Health stating that a decrease in the number of new cancer diagnoses is expected, given the decline in medical consultations and various services (screening examinations, tests confirming cancer diagnosis, and tumor tissue sent to pathology) [3]. Garassino et al. reported increased mortality in patients with thoracic malignancy who were infected with COVID-19 [4].
The large burden of COVID-19 on health care systems worldwide has raised concern among medical oncologists as to whether cancer patients are being treated and diagnosed within acceptable wait times, as recommended by guidelines. It is well established that a delay in cancer treatment has an impact on the quality of life, mental health, and clinical outcomes (such as survival and recurrence). A longer wait time is associated with a higher chance of being treated with palliative therapy over a definitive treatment. Currently, British Thoracic Society (BTS) [5], National Health Service (NHS) [6,7], RAND Corporation [8], American College of Chest Physicians [9], and Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) [10] are the only guidelines that specify recommended wait times from the date of referral to treatment in the care of cancer patients.
Very few studies have assessed the impact of COVID-19 on waiting times in cancer patients, especially those with lung cancer. Lung cancer patients have more severe symptoms and complications of COVID-19, as it is a disease of the respiratory tract [11]. In this study we will explore some of the repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic on lung cancer care. We will investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the lung cancer care trajectory of patients being treated at the Peter Brojde Lung Cancer Center at the Jewish General Hospital in Montreal, Québec. The adherence to wait time guidelines will be compared before and during the COVID-19 era. In addition, lung cancer treatment pattern changes attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic will also be evaluated.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Population
This is a retrospective cohort study including patient diagnosed with lung cancer between March 2019 and March 2021 at our center. The target population was divided into two cohorts:
Pre-COVID-19 cohort of patients diagnosed between 1 March 2019 and 29 February 2020.
COVID-19 cohort of patients diagnosed between 1 March 2020 and 28 February 2021.
The study was approved by the Research Ethics Board (REB). Patients were identified from the electronic health record system and included in the analysis if they had a confirmed pathological diagnosis of lung cancer, known treatment characteristics (such as dates and type of treatment), and were followed at the Jewish General Hospital. Any second opinions were excluded from the study population.
2.2. The Primary Objective
To investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on lung cancer diagnoses and the lung cancer care trajectory of patients being treated at the Peter Brojde Lung Cancer Center by comparing the year 2019 to 2020.
2.3. Secondary Objectives
To evaluate and compare the local wait times to the recommended guidelines before and during the COVID-19 era, and determine any repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic on lung cancer care.
To characterize any lung cancer treatment pattern changes attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic.
2.4. Data Collection
For the purpose of this study, the following information was collected from electronic medical records:
Demographics: age, sex, smoking history;
Diagnosis timing: referral date, date of first lung specialist consult, date of diagnosis;
Disease characteristics: stage, histopathological diagnosis, molecular testing results;
Treatment history: referral date, type of first definitive treatment (chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or surgery), start and end date of treatment.
2.5. Definitions of Wait Times
The intervals investigated for this study are shown in Table 1 with the recommended wait times from existing guidelines [9,12,13]. In this study, the wait time to be seen by a lung cancer specialist was defined as the time between referral for suspected cancer and first appointment with the lung cancer specialist. Diagnosis was defined as a date of pathological confirmation of lung cancer. The wait time to diagnosis was defined as an interval between the referral and diagnosis date. The wait time for first treatment was calculated from the date of referral and from the date of diagnosis. The decision-to-treat (DTT) to first definitive treatment (FDT) interval was defined as the interval between the date when the patient agreed to a proposed treatment plan and the date that the patient receives the first definitive treatment. The wait time for surgery was calculated as a difference between thoracic surgeon consult date and date of the surgery.
Table 1.
Recommended wait times for lung cancer patients.
| Wait Time | Mean Time (Days) | Guidelines |
|---|---|---|
| Referral → Lung cancer specialist | 14 | National Health Service [13] |
| Referral → Diagnosis | 30 | British Thoracic Society [12] |
| Referral → First treatment | 62 | National Health Service |
| Diagnosis → First treatment | 30 | British Thoracic Society |
| Decision-to-treat → First definitive treatment | 31 | British Thoracic Society |
| Diagnosis → First chemotherapy | 28 | British Thoracic Society |
| Surgery consult → Surgery | 28 | British Thoracic Society |
| Radiation consult → First radiation therapy | 42 | RAND Corporation [9] |
2.6. Statistical Analysis
In this study, the mean, median, and ranges were used to summarize patient characteristics and wait time intervals. Binary wait time variables were used to calculate the proportion of patients who met the recommended wait times. Chi-square statistics were used to define the significance of the differences. A p-value of less than 0.05 is considered as a significant difference. The dataset was locked on 28th February 2021. All statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS software.
3. Results
During the study period, a total of 281 patients were diagnosed with lung cancer. This included both non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC). A total of 170 patients were included in the 2019 cohort and 111 patients in the 2020 cohort (Figure 1). The overall number of diagnosed lung cancer cases declined by 34.7% during the pandemic. After excluding all cases of second opinions, there were 130 patients diagnosed in 2019 compared to 103 patients in 2020 (Figure 1).
Figure 1.
Patient flow chart.
Patients’ characteristics are presented in Table 2. There was no difference between the two cohorts. In both cohorts the mean age of the patients was similar, the majority were male, smokers, and were diagnosed with an advanced stage of lung cancer.
Table 2.
Patients’ characteristics.
| Characteristics | 2019 n = 130 |
2020 n = 103 |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (mean; range) | 70 (40–96) | 71 (42–92) | |
| Sex (male/female) | 73/57 | 56/47 | |
| Cancer stage (n/%) | Early stage (T1–3N0–1M0) Locoregional (T1–4N2–3M0) Advanced/metastatic stage (TanyNanyM1) |
42 (32) 20 (15) 68 (53) |
33 (35) 11 (10) 59 (55) |
| Smoking history (n/%) | Former/current smoker Non-smoker |
99 (76) 1 31 (24) |
74 (74) 29 (26) |
| Treatment type: (n/%) | FDT 2 PT 3 |
110 (85) 20 (15) |
84 (82) 19 (18) |
1 = data from two patients are missing, 2 = first definitive treatment, 3 = palliative treatment.
The type of treatment received is presented in Table 3. Overall, 194 patients received first definitive treatment (FDT): radiosurgery, chemotherapy, or surgery. FDT was given to 110/130 (85%) of patients in 2019 and to 84/103 (82%) of patients in 2020 (Table 2, Figure 2). Treatment patterns of early-stage disease revealed a significant increase in the utilization of radiosurgery as the first definitive treatment: 21% in 2020 vs. 7% in 2019 (p < 0.05) and a decrease in lung cancer surgery: 25% in 2020 vs. 38% in 2019 (p = 0.09). No changes were observed in systemic chemotherapy: 44/60 (73%) of patients received chemotherapy with or without immunotherapy in 2019 and 28/40 (70%) in 2020 (p > 0.05). The use of targeted therapy did not changed (p > 0.05).
Table 3.
Type of first treatment.
| Type of First Treatment | 2019 n = 110 |
2020 n = 84 |
p-Value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Radiosurgery (n/%) | 8 (7) | 18 (21) | <0.05 | |
| Chemotherapy (n/%): | Total Standard systemic chemotherapy Immunotherapy ± chemotherapy Targeted therapy |
60 (54) 21 (37) 23 (36) 17 (27) |
40 (47) 12 (30) 16 (40) 12 (30) |
0.07 |
| Surgery | 42 (38) | 26 (25) | 0.09 | |
Figure 2.
Major effect of COVID–19.
3.1. Wait Times
Table 4 outlines the intervals and the mean wait times for the years 2019 and 2020. The percentage of patients who met the recommended wait times is also shown in Table 5. Despite the pandemic and the use of telemedicine, there was no significant delay in first appointment with a lung cancer specialist, and 72% of patients were seen within the recommended 14-day target, compared to 69% in 2019 (p = 0.35). We did not observe a significant delay in lung cancer diagnosis between years 2019 and 2020 (p = 0.15). However, the target wait time of 30 days for diagnosis was not met in 40% of patients in 2019 and 48% in 2020 (p = 0.29). A significant delay for lung cancer surgery was observed during the pandemic: 76 days versus 64 days in 2019 (p = 0.04). The most common type of surgery was VATS lobectomy: 27/46 (58%) in 2019 and 16/26 (62%) in 2020; followed by wedge resection: 18 (38%) in 2019) vs. 10 (38%) in 2020. One patient had a pneumonectomy in 2019. No statistical difference was observed.
Table 4.
Mean wait times before (2019) and during COVID-19 era (2020).
| Interval | Recommended Wait Times (days) | 2019 n = 130 |
2020 n = 103 |
p-Value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | Mean (SD 1) Days | n | Mean (SD 1) Days | |||
| Referral → Lung cancer specialist | 14 | 130 | 12 (14) | 103 | 11 (13) | 0.67 |
| Referral → Diagnosis | 30 | 130 | 59 (51) | 103 | 59 (67) | 0.94 |
| Referral → First treatment | 62 | 130 | 79 (47) | 103 | 82 (71) | 0.76 |
| Wait for path report | - | 130 | 8 (7.3) | 103 | 8 (7.6) | 0.98 |
| Decision-to-treat to FDT 2 | 31 | 130 | 52 (48) | 103 | 51 (61) | 0.94 |
| Diagnosis to chemotherapy | 28 | 64 | 38 (25) | 39 | 34 (24) | 0.95 |
| Diagnosis to RT 3 | 42 | 24 | 35 (30) | 38 | 46 (33) | 0.31 |
| Surgical consult to surgery | 28 | 42 | 64 (43) | 27 | 76 (83) | 0.04 |
| Wait for molecular test results | 7 | 73 | 21.9 (9.9) | 51 | 21.6 (8.7) | 0.90 |
1 Standard deviation, 2 first definitive treatments, 3 radiation treatment.
Table 5.
Meeting the wait time standards.
| Interval | Recommended Wait Time | 2019 | 2020 | p-Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proportion (%) | ||||
| Referral → Lung cancer specialist | 14 days | 90/130 (69) | 74/103 (72) | 0.35 |
| Referral → Diagnosis | 30 days | 52/130 (40) | 49/103 (48) | 0.15 |
| Referral → First treatment | 62 days | 56/130 (43) | 49/103 (48) | 0.29 |
| Diagnosis → First systemic chemotherapy 1 | 28 days | 24/64 (37) | 7/20 (35) | 0.45 |
| Diagnosis → First targeted chemotherapy | 28 days | 11/17 (64) | 5/7 (66) | 0.43 |
| Surgical consult → Surgery | 28 days | 6/42 (14) | 8/26 (30) | 0.12 |
| Radiation oncology consult → Radiation treatment | 42 days | 17/24 (71) | 30/38 (79) | 0.52 |
1 Systemic treatment includes chemotherapy, IO, or combination of the two.
Mean wait time for definitive radiation was similar before and during the pandemic: 35 vs. 46 days, respectively. The majority of patients were started on radiation therapy within the recommended wait time of 42 days (79% in 2019 and 71% in 2020). Although there was no significant differences in the mean wait times for the remaining intervals, less than 50% of patients met the target wait times in both cohorts (Table 4 and Table 5).
Among the patients who received systemic chemotherapy, 37% in 2019 and 35% in 2020 were treated within the 28-day target (Table 5). However, for targeted therapy, the proportions of those treated within 28 days were 64% in 2019 and 66% in 2020.
3.2. Molecular Testing
The molecular tests used in our institution included next-generation sequencing (NGS), liquid biopsy, and NanoString (Table 6). In both cohorts, NGS was the most common molecular test with a mean wait time of 15 days in 2019 compared to 18 days in 2020 (p = 0.03). There was no significant delay in getting liquid biopsy or NanoString results between the two cohorts.
Table 6.
Mean wait time for molecular testing.
| Type of Molecular Test | 2019 n = 127 |
2020 n = 106 |
p-Value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | Mean (SD 1) Days | n | Mean (SD 1) Days | ||
| NGS 2 | 66 | 15 (6) | 62 | 18 (9) | 0.03 |
| Liquid biopsy | 9 | 6 (10) | 15 | 4 (18) | 0.81 |
| NanoString | 18 | 25 (11) | 19 | 27 (18) | 0.50 |
| Total | 100 | 16 (9) | 96 | 18 (14) | 0.11 |
1 Standard deviation, 2 next-generation sequencing.
4. Discussion
In this retrospective chart review study comparing the lung cancer trajectory before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, we found that referral to a lung cancer specialist and subsequent diagnosis of lung cancer declined by 34.7% during the pandemic. Fear related to contracting COVID-19, quarantining, and stay-at-home orders have caused patients to be more apprehensive to seek care for emergent issues [2]. This finding is further supported by the study conducted by Dr. Reyes and colleagues that found a 38% decrease in new lung cancer cases in 2020 compared to the pre-COVID-19 era [14]. According to Quebec Ministry of Health, about 4100 people may have gone undiagnosed with all cancer types during the pandemic.
Despite the pandemic, we were able to deliver definitive treatment (FDT) to the same number of patients (85% in 2019 vs. 82% in 2020). The majority of patients in our study were seen by a lung cancer specialist within a target wait time of 14 days (72%). This has not significantly changed when compared to the pre-COVID era. We found no difference in wait time to obtain a lung cancer diagnosis before and during the pandemic: 40% and 48% of patients with suspected lung cancer had the diagnosis confirmed within the target of 30 days, respectively. We observed a small delay for next-generation sequencing test results. The question remains if these delays changed the outcomes. Dr. Bissonette and colleagues have reported that in patients who had diagnostic and planning PET-CT 21 days apart, the overall upstaging occurred in 25% of patients. The rate of overall upstaging increased with longer delays between staging and treatment planning PET-CT scans [15].
The COVID-19 pandemic revealed the needs for more information and guidance for changes in existing practice among lung cancer specialists including thoracic surgeons [16]. Many institutions have changed the treatment plan in order to minimize the risk of patient exposure, in accordance with recommendations of certain expert groups [17,18,19,20,21,22]. The consensus was that select treatment is still possible in a 28-day period. However, in this present crisis, lung cancer surgeries should be deferred if possible in patients with a low risk of progression [22]. Furthermore, considering the availability of certain treatments, alternatives should be considered. The Quebec Lung Cancer Network recommended stereotactic radiation as an alternative to surgery for stage I–IIa lung cancers [17]. As a result of prioritization of available treatments, we observed a 14% (21% in 2020 vs. 7% in 2019) increase in radiosurgery given with the curative intent to early-stage disease and a 13% (25% in 2020 vs. 38% in 2019) decrease in surgical resections during the pandemic. Overall, in the province of Quebec an 18% decrease in lung cancer surgeries was observed during the pandemic compared to 2019 [3]. This decline in surgery was partially due to reduced operating room hours, the lack of medical staff, and long waiting list. When radiosurgery was offered as an alternative to surgery, some patients preferred to receive radiosurgery rather than surgery, to minimize their hospital stay and decrease their risk of getting COVID-19 infection. In our study, 70% of patients exceeded the 28-day target wait time for lung cancer surgery. According to the Quebec Ministry’s report, very few patients had a cancer surgery within 0–56 days, while a greater proportion of cases were waiting for surgery more than 56 days. Participants of the Spanish Thoracic Society study also reported a decrease in surgical resection and prolonged wait time for surgery with a mean time exciding one month [20]. The majority of our patients receiving radiation therapy were treated within the recommended wait time. This observation is similar to the one reported by Nadpara et al., who concluded that wait times from diagnosis to first radiotherapy was shorter than the wait time for surgery [23]. Rapid diagnostic assessment programs (DAPs) and enhanced recovery protocols (ERPs) may improve timeliness of surgical care [3]. Dr. Hubert and colleagues reported that using the DAP, the median time between the patient’s first clinic visit and referral to surgery was 30 days, and the median time between surgical consult and treatment was 29 days [24]. To date, there is no consensus whether a longer preoperative delay has a negative effect on overall survival. Yang and colleagues reported that patients who had surgery 38 days or more after diagnosis had a significantly worse 5-year overall survival than patients who had surgery earlier (hazard ratio (HR) 1.13; 95% CI, 1.02–1.25; p = 0.02). Conversely, Quarterman and colleagues reported a median interval between presentation and surgical treatment of 82 days. They were unable to demonstrate a negative effect of longer preoperative delays on overall survival (p = 0.54) [25].
The type of chemotherapy received did not vary before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, less than 40% of our patients met the target of 28 days before and during the pandemic for systemic chemotherapy, and more than 60% of patients met the target for targeted therapy. Hospital staff shortages and increased workload of those who continued to work in cancer care and patients recurrent visits to the hospital might explain the delay of systemic chemotherapy. Fujita and colleagues reported delay in systemic chemotherapy compared to targeted treatment in lung cancer patients. They also found that adding immunotherapy to standard chemotherapy causes a longer delay during the COVID-19 era [26].
5. Limitations
This study is, to our knowledge, the largest single-institution report comparing lung cancer trajectory before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in the province of Quebec. There are, however, limitations to our study. This is a retrospective chart review from a single institution. The study population is relatively small and is not representative of the general population and prone to selection bias. The results may not be generalizable to other institutions.
6. Conclusions
COVID-19 seems to have had a major impact at our lung cancer center for the diagnoses and treatment patterns of our lung cancer patients. Diagnoses of lung cancer dropped off significantly during the pandemic. Many oncologists fear that they will see an increase in newly diagnosed lung cancer patients in the coming year, as vaccination rates continue to increase. In addition, treatment patterns seemed to indicate a decrease in surgery and an increase in radiosurgery. This study is still ongoing and further data will be collected and analyzed to better understand the total impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our lung cancer patient population.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis, G.K., J.S.A. and A.A.; writing—original draft preparation, G.K., J.S.A. and A.A.; writing—review and editing, J.S.A., V.C., K.S., C.P., L.S., J.F.; supervision, J.S.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement
The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board (or ethics committee) of Jewish General Hospital (2021-2655 and date of approval 2021-01-19).
Informed Consent Statement
Patient consent was waived due to the retrospective chart review nature of the study.
Data Availability Statement
The data are not publicly available due to privacy issue.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Footnotes
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
- 1.Jazieh A.R., Akbulut H., Curigliano G., Rogado A., Alsharm A.A., Razis E.D., Mula-Hussain L., Errihani H., Khattak A., De Guzman R.B., et al. Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Cancer Care: A Global Collaborative Study. JCO Glob. Oncol. 2020;6:1428–1438. doi: 10.1200/GO.20.00351. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Patt D., Gordan L., Diaz M., Okon T., Grady L., Harmison M., Markward N., Sullivan M., Peng J., Zhou A. Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer Care: How the Pandemic Is Delaying Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment for American Seniors. JCO Clin. Cancer Inform. 2020;4:1059–1071. doi: 10.1200/CCI.20.00134. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.QC Gouvernement Analyse des Répercussions de la Pandémie de la COVID-19 sur les Soins et les Services en Cancérologie au Québec. [(accessed on 15 May 2021)];2020 Available online: https://publications.msss.gouv.qc.ca/msss/fichiers/2020/20-210-378W.pdf.
- 4.Garassino M.C., Whisenant J.G., Huang L.-C., Trama A., Torri V., Agustoni F., Baena J., Banna G., Berardi R., Bettini A.C., et al. COVID-19 in patients with thoracic malignancies (TERAVOLT): First results of an international, registry-based, cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21:914–922. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30314-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Di Girolamo C., Walters S., Gildea C., Majano S.B., Rachet B., Morris M. Can we assess Cancer Waiting Time targets with cancer survival? A population-based study of individually linked data from the National Cancer Waiting Times monitoring dataset in England, 2009–2013. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:e0201288. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201288. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Olsson J.K., Schultz E.M., Gould M.K. Timeliness of care in patients with lung cancer: A systematic review. Thorax. 2009;64:749–756. doi: 10.1136/thx.2008.109330. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Spurgeon P., Barwell F., Kerr D. Waiting times for cancer patients in England after general practitioners’ referrals: Retrospective national survey. BMJ. 2000;320:838–839. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7238.838. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Minhas R. Hitting the target and missing the point? Int. J. Clin. Pract. 2009;63:1275–1277. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2009.02162.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Malin J.L., Asch S.M., Kerr E.A., McGlynn E.A. Evaluating the quality of cancer care: Development of cancer quality indicators for a global quality assessment tool. Cancer. 2000;88:701–707. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(20000201)88:3<701::AID-CNCR29>3.0.CO;2-V. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.2020 Canadian Cancer Statistics Special Report-EN. [(accessed on 10 May 2021)]. Available online: http://cancer.ca/Canadian-Cancer-Statistics-2020-EN.
- 11.Tartarone A., Lerose R. COVID-19 and cancer care: What do international guidelines say? Med. Oncol. 2020;37:1–5. doi: 10.1007/s12032-020-01406-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.The Lung Cancer Working Party of The British Thoracic Society Standards of Care Committee BTS recommendations to respiratory physicians for organising the care of patients with lung cancer. Thorax. 1998;53((Suppl. 1)):S1–S8. doi: 10.1136/thx.53.suppl_1.S1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.National Health Service National Cancer Waiting Times Monitoring Dataset Guidance. 2020. [(accessed on 10 May 2021)]. Available online: https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/09/national-cancer-waiting-times-monitoring-dataset-guidance-v11-sep2020.pdf.
- 14.Reyes R., López-Castro R., Auclin E., García T., Chourio M., Rodriguez A., López L., Laguna J., Lucena C., Molins L., et al. MA03.08 Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic in the Diagnosis and Prognosis of Lung Cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2021;16:S141. doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2021.01.219. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Bissonnette J.-P., Sun A., Grills I.S., Almahariq M.F., Geiger G., Vogel W., Sonke J.-J., Everitt S., Mac Manus M. Non-small cell lung cancer stage migration as a function of wait times from diagnostic imaging: A pooled analysis from five international centres. Lung Cancer. 2021;155:136–143. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2021.03.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Depypere L.P., Daddi N., Gooseman M.R., Batirel H.F., Brunelli A. The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on the practice of thoracic oncology surgery: A survey of members of the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS) Eur. J. Cardio-Thorac. Surg. 2020;58:752–762. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezaa284. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Blais N., Bouchard M., Chinas M., Lizotte H., Morneau M., Spicer J., Martel S. Consensus Statement: Summary of the Quebec Lung Cancer Network Recommendations for Prioritizing Patients with Thoracic Cancers in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Curr. Oncol. 2020;27:313–317. doi: 10.3747/co.27.6685. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Dingemans A.-M.C., Soo R.A., Jazieh A.R., Rice S.J., Kim Y.T., Teo L.L., Warren G.W., Xiao S.-Y., Smit E.F., Aerts J.G., et al. Treatment Guidance for Patients With Lung Cancer During the Coronavirus 2019 Pandemic. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2020;15:1119–1136. doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2020.05.001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Hilzenrat R.A., Deen S.A., Yee J., Grant K.A., Ashrafi A.S., Coughlin S., McGuire A.L. Thoracic Surgeon Impressions of the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Lung Cancer Care—Lessons from the First Wave in Canada. Curr. Oncol. 2021;28:940–949. doi: 10.3390/curroncol28010092. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Martínez-Hernández N.J., Caballero Silva U., Cabañero Sánchez A., Campo-Cañaveral de la Cruz J.L., Obeso Carillo A., Jarabo Sarceda J.R., Sevilla López S., Cilleruelo Ramos Á., Recuero Díaz J.L., Call S., et al. Effect of COVID-19 on Thoracic Oncology Surgery in Spain: A Spanish Thoracic Surgery Society (SECT) Survey. Cancers. 2021;13:2897. doi: 10.3390/cancers13122897. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Antonoff M., Backhus L., Boffa D.J., Broderick S.R., Brown L.M., Carrott P., Clark J.M., Cooke D., David E., Facktor M., et al. COVID-19 guidance for triage of operations for thoracic malignancies: A consensus statement from Thoracic Surgery Outcomes Research Network. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2020;160:601–605. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2020.03.061. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Zaniboni A., Ghidini M., Grossi F., Indini A., Trevisan F., Iaculli A., Dottorini L., Moleri G., Russo A., Vavassori I., et al. A Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines and Treatment Recommendations for Cancer Care in the COVID-19 Pandemic. Cancers. 2020;12:2452. doi: 10.3390/cancers12092452. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Nadpara P.A., Madhavan S.S., Tworek C. Disparities in Lung Cancer Care and Outcomes among Elderly in a Medically Underserved State Population—A Cancer Registry-Linked Database Study. Popul. Health Manag. 2016;19:109–119. doi: 10.1089/pop.2015.0027. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Hubert J., Bourdages-Pageau E., Garneau C.A.P., Labbé C., Ugalde P.A. Enhanced recovery pathways in thoracic surgery: The Quebec experience. J. Thorac. Dis. 2018;10:S583–S590. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2018.01.156. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Quarterman R.L., McMillan A., Ratcliffe M.B., Block M.I. Effect of preoperative delay on prognosis for patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2003;125:108–114. doi: 10.1067/mtc.2003.93. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Fujita K., Ito T., Saito Z., Kanai O., Nakatani K., Mio T. Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on lung cancer treatment scheduling. Thorac. Cancer. 2020;11:2983–2986. doi: 10.1111/1759-7714.13615. [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.
Data Availability Statement
The data are not publicly available due to privacy issue.