PURPOSE While the immediate care and access disruptions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic have received growing attention in certain areas, the full range of gaps in cancer screenings and treatment is not yet well understood or well documented throughout the country comprehensively. METHODS This study used a large medical claims clearinghouse database representing 5%-7% of the Medicare fee-for-service population to characterize changes in the utilization of cancer care services and gain insight into the impact of COVID-19 on the US cancer population, including identification of new patients, gaps in access to care, and disruption of treatment journeys. RESULTS In March-July 2020, in comparison with the baseline period of March-July 2019, there is a substantial decrease in cancer screenings, visits, therapy, and surgeries, with variation by cancer type and site of service. At the peak of the pandemic in April, screenings for breast, colon, prostate, and lung cancers were lower by 85%, 75%, 74%, and 56%, respectively. Significant utilization reductions were observed in April for hospital outpatient evaluation and management (E&M) visits (−74%), new patient E&M visits (−70%), and established patient E&M visits (−60%). A decrease in billing frequency was observed for the top physician-administered oncology products, dropping in both April (−26%) and July (−31%). Mastectomies were reduced consistently in April through July, with colectomies similarly reduced in April and May and prostatectomies dipping in April and July. CONCLUSION The current impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care in the United States has resulted in decreases and delays in identifying new cancers and delivery of treatment. These problems, if unmitigated, will increase cancer morbidity and mortality for years to come.

The effect of poor blood stem cells mobilization on the outcome of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has not been well studied. Our aim is to evaluate poor mobilization as a prognostic factor in lymphoma patients undergoing ASCT. We analyzed 90 consecutive patients with Hodgkin's (HD) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) who underwent ASCT. Poor mobilization was defined as the inability to obtain > or = 1 x 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg ideal body weight with two large volume aphereses. Patients were divided into 2 groups: group 1 = poor mobilizers, and group 2 = good mobilizers. The poor mobilizers received lower median transplant CD34+ cell dose (2 x 10(6) vs. 4.5 x 10(6)/kg for good mobilizers, P = 0.001), were more heavily pretreated (P = 0.01), and required higher number of aphereses for PBSC collection (P = 0.0006). The median progression-free survival (PFS) in groups 1 and 2 was 10 and 41 months (P = 0.04), while the median overall survival (OS) was 38 months and not reached (P = 0.02), respectively. Univariate analysis showed that > or = 3 pre-transplant treatments, CD34+ cell dose < or = 2 x 10(6), elevated LDH before transplant, and poor mobilization were significant prognostic factors for poor PFS, while only the first three were significant for worse OS. Multivariate analysis using these same four factors revealed that number of pre-transplant treatments (HR = 6.03, P = 0.001), CD34+ cell dose (HR = 0.1, P = 0.0007) were the only independent predictive factors for worse overall outcome. In conclusion, our data show that poor mobilization could indicate poor outcome in lymphoma patients undergoing ASCT, however, it is more likely to be a reflection of the heavy pre-transplant therapy and lower CD34+ cell dose re-infused in this group of patients.

Purpose A novel transdermal formulation of granisetron (the granisetron transdermal delivery system (GTDS)) has been developed to deliver granisetron continuously over 7 days. This double-blind, phase III, non-inferiority study compared the efficacy and tolerability of the GTDS to daily oral granisetron for the control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Patients and methods Six hundred forty-one patients were randomized to oral (2 mg/day, 3-5 days) or transdermal granisetron (one GTDS patch, 7 days), before receiving multi-day chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was complete control of CINV (no vomiting/retching, no more than mild nausea, no rescue medication) from chemotherapy initiation until 24 h after final administration. The prespecified non-inferiority margin was 15%. Results Five hundred eighty-two patients were included in the per protocol analysis. The GTDS displayed noninferiority to oral granisetron: complete control was achieved by 60% of patients in the GTDS group, and 65% in the oral granisetron group (treatment difference, −5%; 95% confidence interval, −13-3). Both treatments were well tolerated, the most common adverse event being constipation.Conclusions The GTDS provides effective, well-tolerated control of CINV associated with moderately or highly emetogenic multi-day chemotherapy. It offers a convenient alternative route for delivering granisetron for up to 7 days that is as effective as oral granisetron.

Individualized PK dosing for rituximab produced efficacy comparable to other published maintenance strategies. PK data from this trial suggest that a rational maintenance strategy in patients with LGNHL would be a single dose of 375 mg/m(2) of rituximab every 3 to 4 months.