Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index <20), moderate lockdowns (20–60), and full lockdowns (>60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04384926 . Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include...

No abstract

Background Anti–tumor necrosis factor agents (anti-TNFs) are efficacious at preventing the postoperative recurrence (POR) of Crohn disease, as demonstrated in 2 randomized controlled trials. However, real-life data for infliximab or adalimumab in this setting are scarce. Our aim was to assess both the efficiency of anti-TNFs at preventing early POR of Crohn disease in clinical practice and the associated risk factors for POR. Methods Patients in whom anti-TNFs were prescribed for the prevention of POR within 3 months after ileocolonic resection and who had an endoscopic assessment within 18 months were identified from the ENEIDA registry. Clinical and endoscopic features were collected within 18 months after surgery. Results In total, 152 patients were included (55 treated with infliximab, 97 with adalimumab, and 39% with concomitant immunosuppressants). Anti-TNF treatment was started after a median time of 29 days (IQR 13–44) after surgery. Eighty-two percent of patients had at least one risk factor for POR, and 82% had been exposed to anti-TNFs before the index surgery. Overall, 34% had endoscopic POR (as defined using a Rutgeerts endoscopic score > i1); 14% had advanced endoscopic POR (>i2); and 20% had clinical POR, with no differences between infliximab and adalimumab. In the multivariate analysis, only perianal disease (odds ratio 2.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26–5.91) and rectal involvement (odds ratio 2.79, 95% CI 1.09–7.14) were independent predictors of endoscopic POR. Conclusions In clinical practice, anti-TNFs for the prevention of POR of Crohn disease are frequently used in patients experienced with anti-TNFs and with concomitant immunosuppressants. The efficacy of infliximab and adalimumab for POR prevention is similar and in accordance with the results obtained in randomized controlled trials.

No abstract