Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • For authors
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Author FAQs
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • For authors
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Author FAQs
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions

Cancer in the time of COVID-19: expert opinion on how to adapt current practice

Jo Raskin, Marnix Lebeer, Charlotte De Bondt, Reinier Wener, Annelies Janssens, Jan P. van Meerbeeck
European Respiratory Journal 2020 55: 2000959; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00959-2020
Jo Raskin
1Dept of Pulmonology and Thoracic Oncology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: jo.raskin@uza.be
Marnix Lebeer
1Dept of Pulmonology and Thoracic Oncology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Charlotte De Bondt
1Dept of Pulmonology and Thoracic Oncology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Reinier Wener
1Dept of Pulmonology and Thoracic Oncology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Annelies Janssens
1Dept of Pulmonology and Thoracic Oncology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium
2Antwerp University, Antwerp, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jan P. van Meerbeeck
1Dept of Pulmonology and Thoracic Oncology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium
2Antwerp University, Antwerp, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Our current thoracic oncology practice could/should be adapted to the COVID-19 pandemic by reducing time in hospital and patient contacts with healthcare workers, whilst maintaining quality of care. This letter offers expert advice on how to do so. https://bit.ly/2JR2IoT

To the Editor:

The susceptibility of cancer patients to the adverse outcomes of viral infections is well known from past experiences: influenza increases the risk of hospital admission with respiratory distress four times, and the risk of death 10 times, compared with patients without cancer [1]. This risk is particularly elevated in patients with neutropenia or lymphopenia, which is often the case in patients treated with chemotherapy. In Wuhan, China, 1% of patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) were reported to suffer from cancer, which is more than three times the incidence of cancer in the Chinese population in 2015 [2]. In addition, in 39% of cancer patients (compared with 8% of patients without cancer), transfer to the intensive care unit was necessary, with their illness deteriorating more rapidly (13 versus 43 days to severe event) [2]. Chemotherapy or surgery <1 month before was an important risk factor (OR 5.34, p=0.0026).

There is no doubt that patients with lung cancer or mesothelioma, who are often older and with concurrent obstructive or restrictive lung disease, are even more at risk of an unfavourable outcome where there is infection with SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, we have to reconsider our current clinical practice, in order to limit time in hospital, promote telemedicine, avoid unnecessary contact with medical personnel and reduce severe neutropenia.

The British Thoracic Society (BTS) recently published recommendations on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and lung cancer/mesothelioma [3], and the French Haut Conseil de la Santé Publique (HCSP) published on cancer in general [4, 5]. This letter describes the viewpoint of the authors on these general recommendations (not always in agreement!) and tries to translate them into practical advice for clinicians (note: some may not be feasible due to reimbursement issues), starting with the current standard care. In all patients, we suggest video consultation is used as much as possible instead of face-to-face consultation [3, 5].

Recommendations for the treatment of small-cell lung cancer

Stages I–III

  • Standard care in most patients is chemoradiotherapy with four cycles of cisplatin/etoposide as the preferred chemotherapy regimen.

  • Replacing intravenous with oral etoposide to reduce the time in hospital should be weighed against its lower biological availability and variable pharmacodynamics in a curative setting [6].

  • In patients with stage I small-cell lung cancer surgical resection of the tumour, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (four cycles of cisplatin/etoposide), is indicated.

  • In selected patients, accelerated hyperfractionation of radiotherapy (twice daily) remains an option to decrease the number of hospital visits.

Stage IV or not eligible for chemoradiotherapy

  • Palliative chemotherapy with platinum/etoposide is recommended.

  • Replacing intravenous with oral etoposide to reduce time in hospital may be considered, providing attention is given to its lower biological availability and variable pharmacodynamics [6].

  • In patients with increased risk of febrile neutropenia (FN), dose reduction may be an alternative to primary prophylactic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in all patients, given the palliative setting [7].

  • Given the limited improvement in overall survival and the need for tri-weekly clinic visits during the maintenance phase, the addition of a checkpoint inhibitor (atezolizumab or durvalumab) can be omitted.

  • The indication for second-line systemic therapy should be reviewed with extra care. In platinum-sensitive relapse, rechallenge with first-line chemotherapy is recommended. In platinum-refractory relapse, oral topotecan is the preferred regimen. Cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/vincristine is not recommended as an alternative to topotecan in view of the need to hospitalise the patient.

  • Any third-line chemotherapy should be considered only in fit patients with low risk of complications.

Recommendations for the treatment of nonsmall-cell lung cancer

Surgery

  • Consider delaying surgery for ≤3 months in small tumours that appear not to grow fast; follow-up of growth rate with chest CT is recommended [3].

  • Consider stereotactic radiotherapy as an alternative in patients who are marginally fit for surgery, due to comorbidity or limited pulmonary reserve [3].

  • Minimal invasive approaches are preferred over thoracotomy to limit time in hospital [3].

Adjuvant chemotherapy

  • Adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II and III and in some patients with high-risk stage IB leads to 5% improvement in 5-year survival and is therefore recommended.

  • In elderly patients with significant comorbidity or decreased performance (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score (PS) ≥2), the possible benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy may be outweighed by the increased risk of complications. Consider omitting adjuvant chemotherapy or stopping early (e.g. after three cycles) [3].

  • Consider administering cisplatin/docetaxel to limit time in hospital, as it avoids day 8 administration of gemcitabine or vinorelbine, and has equivalent efficacy. In non-squamous nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC), cisplatin/pemetrexed is an equally efficacious alternative [8].

  • In patients with an activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation, consider a 1-year course of daily oral EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) as an alternative to adjuvant chemotherapy (currently no phase 3 evidence of superiority available).

Radiotherapy

  • Consider delaying curative radiotherapy for small tumours that appear not to grow fast; follow-up of growth rate with chest computed tomography is recommended [3].

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy

  • Consider administering cisplatin/pemetrexed instead of cisplatin/etoposide, or weekly carboplatin/paclitaxel in non-squamous NSCLC to limit time in hospital [9].

  • Consider administering adjuvant durvalumab at a dose of 20 mg·kg−1 every 4 weeks instead of 10 mg·kg−1 every 2 weeks to limit time in hospital. Phase 1b data have not shown an increase in adverse events [3, 10]

Systemic therapy

  • Evaluate the indication for palliative chemotherapy, immunotherapy or both with extra care in elderly patients or patients with significant comorbidity, decreased performance (ECOG PS ≥2), social isolation, decubitus, urinary catheters, etc., especially in second or further lines [3].

  • Consider delaying chemotherapy or immunotherapy in patients who are asymptomatic and have indolent disease [3].

  • The usual recommendations for chemotherapy, immunotherapy and targeted therapy apply.

  • In patients with an increased risk of FN, dose reduction might be an alternative to primary prophylactic use of G-CSF in all patients, given the palliative setting [7].

  • Keep in mind that pneumonitis may also be drug-induced (e.g. chemotherapy, TKIs) or immune-mediated (checkpoint inhibitors).

  • Tri-weekly chemotherapy is preferred over weekly regimens (e.g. docetaxel) to limit time in hospital [4].

  • Consider limiting palliative chemotherapy to four cycles and omitting pemetrexed maintenance therapy [3].

  • In patients who have >50% programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy is preferred over pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy [3].

  • Consider administering nivolumab at a dose of 480 mg every 4 weeks instead of 240 mg every 2 weeks to limit time in hospital [3, 11].

  • Immunotherapy as second-line is preferred over chemotherapy in patients who did not receive immunotherapy as first-line.

  • Where there is a lack of response to immunotherapy or significant toxicity, early discontinuation should be considered.

  • Third-line chemotherapy is not advisable [3].

  • Consider evaluating the response to immunotherapy or TKI less often in clinically stable patients.

Supportive therapy/other

  • Advance care planning should be discussed with all patients in order to avoid admission to hospital [3].

  • Do not resuscitate status should be available for all stage IV patients.

  • Patients receiving denosumab or low-molecular weight heparin should be taught to self-administer [3].

  • Patients receiving denosumab should not routinely consult a dentist before starting.

  • Avoid transfusion of blood or platelets by using dose reduction or early discontinuation of chemotherapy in palliative patients.

Recommendations for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma

  • Where there is early stage disease in a fit patient, evaluate for multimodality treatment including surgery (preferably extended pleurectomy/decortication) and chemotherapy.

  • Palliative chemotherapy with four cycles of platinum/pemetrexed is recommended in all other cases of ECOG PS 0-1 patients.

  • Evaluate the indication for palliative chemotherapy with extra care in elderly patients, patients with significant comorbidity or poorer performance (ECOG PS ≥2).

  • Consider delaying chemotherapy in patients who are asymptomatic [3].

  • Pemetrexed maintenance therapy is not recommended due to lack of efficiency data.

  • Be reluctant with second-line chemotherapy with either vinorelbine, gemcitabine or doxorubicin.

  • A home-managed indwelling pleural catheter is preferred over procedures that require a clinic visit [3].

Recommendations for treatment of thymic epithelial tumours

  • Platinum/etoposide is preferred over more haematotoxic regimens such as ADOC (cisplatin/doxorubicin/vincristine/cyclophosphamide), CAP (cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/cisplatin) or VIP (etoposide/ifosfamide/cisplatin).

Shareable PDF

Supplementary Material

This one-page PDF can be shared freely online.

Shareable PDF ERJ-00959-2020.Shareable

Acknowledgements

J.P. van Meerbeeck is Chair of Assembly 11, Thoracic Oncology, European Respiratory Society.

Footnotes

  • Conflict of interest: J. Raskin has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: M. Lebeer has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: C. De Bondt has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: R. Wener has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: A. Janssens has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: J.P. van Meerbeeck has nothing to disclose.

  • Received April 1, 2020.
  • Accepted April 6, 2020.
  • Copyright ©ERS 2020
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Bitterman R,
    2. Eliakim-Raz N,
    3. Vinograd I, et al.
    Influenza vaccines in immunosuppressed adults with cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 2: CD008983.
    OpenUrl
  2. ↵
    1. Liang W,
    2. Guan W,
    3. Chen R, et al.
    Cancer patients in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a nationwide analysis in China. Lancet Oncol 2020; 21: 335–337.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    British Thoracic Society. Lung cancer and mesothelioma service guidance during the COVID-19 pandemic. https://www.brit-thoracic.org.uk/about-us/covid-19-information-for-the-respiratory-community/ Date last accessed: 4 April 2020.
  4. ↵
    Haut Conseil de la Santé publique. COVID-19 et Cancers Solides: Recommandations. https://www.hcsp.fr/Explore.cgi/avisrapportsdomaine?clefr=776 Date last accessed: 4 April 2020.
  5. ↵
    1. You B,
    2. Ravaud A,
    3. Canivet A, et al.
    The official French guidelines to protect patients with cancer against SARS-CoV-2 infection. Lancet Oncol 2020; 21: 619–621.
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. Clark PI,
    2. Slevin ML
    . The clinical pharmacology of etoposide and teniposide. Clin Pharmacokinet 1987; 12: 223–252.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. ↵
    1. Klastersky J,
    2. de Naurois J,
    3. Rolston K, et al.
    Management of febrile neutropaenia: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines. Ann Oncol 2016; 27: Suppl. 5, v111–v118.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Wakelee HA,
    2. Dahlberg SE,
    3. Tester WE, et al.
    Adjuvant chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in patients with resected non-small-cell lung cancer (E1505): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2017; 18: 1610–1623.
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. Senan S,
    2. Brade A,
    3. Wang L, et al.
    PROCLAIM: randomized phase III trial of pemetrexed-cisplatin or etoposide-cisplatin plus thoracic radiation therapy followed by consolidation chemotherapy in locally advanced nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34: 953–962.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. Antonia S,
    2. Goldberg SB,
    3. Balmanoukian A, et al.
    Safety and antitumour activity of durvalumab plus tremelimumab in non-small cell lung cancer: a multicentre, phase 1b study. Lancet Oncol 2016; 17: 299–308.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Garon EB,
    2. Reinmuth N,
    3. Falchero L, et al.
    CheckMate 384: Phase IIIb/IV trial of nivolumab (nivo) 480 mg Q4W versus 240 mg Q2W after ≤12 months of nivo in previously treated advanced NSCLC. J Clin Oncol 2019; 37: Suppl. 8, 100.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
PreviousNext
Back to top
View this article with LENS
Vol 55 Issue 5 Table of Contents
European Respiratory Journal: 55 (5)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Cancer in the time of COVID-19: expert opinion on how to adapt current practice
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Cancer in the time of COVID-19: expert opinion on how to adapt current practice
Jo Raskin, Marnix Lebeer, Charlotte De Bondt, Reinier Wener, Annelies Janssens, Jan P. van Meerbeeck
European Respiratory Journal May 2020, 55 (5) 2000959; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00959-2020

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Cancer in the time of COVID-19: expert opinion on how to adapt current practice
Jo Raskin, Marnix Lebeer, Charlotte De Bondt, Reinier Wener, Annelies Janssens, Jan P. van Meerbeeck
European Respiratory Journal May 2020, 55 (5) 2000959; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00959-2020
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Recommendations for the treatment of small-cell lung cancer
    • Recommendations for the treatment of nonsmall-cell lung cancer
    • Recommendations for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma
    • Recommendations for treatment of thymic epithelial tumours
    • Shareable PDF
    • Acknowledgements
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

Agora

  • Lower lung function in patients recovering from COVID-19
  • Efficacy of elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor in patients with cystic fibrosis
  • Ethical obligations for supporting healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic
Show more Agora

Correspondence

  • Ethical obligations for supporting healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic
  • Is high-dose glucocorticoid beneficial in COVID-19? Response to Correspondence
  • BALF lymphocytosis in chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis
Show more Correspondence

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About the ERJ

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Reviewers
  • CME
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Submit a manuscript
  • ERS author centre

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • Podcasts
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN:  0903-1936
Online ISSN: 1399-3003

Copyright © 2021 by the European Respiratory Society