Distress in the diagnostic phase of cancer is a major problem and the rapid decrease of anxiety in patients eventually not diagnosed with cancer suggests a benefit of rapid diagnostic programs. The available evidence however is limited and shows some inconsistencies. Studies differ in subjects, objective and are limited by quality and quantity. Conflicting results prohibit a conclusion on patients ultimately diagnosed with cancer.

Aim of the study Patients with cancer might have an increased risk for severe outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To identify risk factors associated with a worse outcome of COVID-19, a nationwide registry was developed for patients with cancer and COVID-19. Methods This observational cohort study has been designed as a quality of care registry and is executed by the Dutch Oncology COVID-19 Consortium (DOCC), a nationwide collaboration of oncology physicians in the Netherlands. A questionnaire has been developed to collect pseudonymised patient data on patients’ characteristics, cancer diagnosis, and treatment. All patients with COVID-19 and a cancer diagnosis or treatment in the past 5 years are eligible. Results Between March 27 th and May 4 th , 442 patients were registered. For this first analysis, 351 patients were included of whom 114 patients died. In multivariable analyses, age ≥65 years ( p <0.001), male gender ( p =0.035), prior or other malignancy ( p =0.045), and active diagnosis of haematological malignancy ( p =0.046) or lung cancer ( p =0.003) were independent risk factors for a fatal outcome of COVID-19. In a subgroup analysis of patients with active malignancy, the risk for a fatal outcome was mainly determined by tumour type (haematological malignancy or lung cancer) and age (≥65 years). Conclusion The findings in this registry indicate that patients with a haematological malignancy or lung cancer have an increased risk of a worse outcome of COVID-19. During the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, these vulnerable patients should avoid exposure to SARS-CoV-2, whereas treatment adjustments and prioritizing vaccination, when available, should also be considered.

Suspected lung cancer patients had high baseline distress levels. A decrease over time was found in RODP compared with SDA patients. QoL did not change relevantly. Albeit observational, these data indicate that patients experience less distress in rapid diagnostic programs than in stepwise diagnostic evaluation.

No abstract

Background: The diagnostic evaluation of patients presenting with possible lung cancer is often complex and time consuming. A rapid outpatient diagnostic program (RODP) including ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) as a routine diagnostic tool may improve timeliness, however the diagnostic performance of such a combined approach of RODP remains unclear. Objectives: We evaluated timeliness of care and diagnostic performance of FDG-PET and contrast-enhanced CT (FDG-PET/CT) in an RODP for all patients referred with a chest X-ray suspicious of lung cancer. Methods: Charts of patients referred to the 2-day RODP of our tertiary care university clinic after an abnormal chest X-ray between 1999 and 2009 were reviewed. Between 1999 and 2005 co-registered FDG-PET and CT imaging took place; from September 2005 onwards, a hybrid system was used. We analyzed timeliness of care and diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/CT to differentiate malignant from benign lesions. Results: In 386 patients available for analysis, 260 were diagnosed with lung cancer and 23 had another type of malignancy; in 78 patients benign disease was confirmed, and in another 45 the diagnosis was not pathologically confirmed but a median 24.5-month follow-up confirmed a benign outcome. Sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values and accuracy of FDG-PET/CT to differentiate lung cancer from benign disease were 97.7, 60.2, 92.5, 84.0 and 85.8%, respectively. Lung cancer patients had a median referral, diagnostic and therapeutic delay of 7, 2 and 19 days, respectively. Conclusions: FDG-PET/CT in an RODP setting for suspected lung cancer has high performance in detecting cancer and facilitates timely care.