Background During the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, patients with cancer in rural settings and distant geographical areas will be affected the most by curfews. Virtual management (telemedicine) has been shown to reduce health costs and improve access to care. Objective The aim of this survey is to understand oncologists’ awareness of and views on virtual management, challenges, and preferences, as well as their priorities regarding the prescribing of anticancer treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods We created a self-administrated electronic survey about the virtual management of patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated its clinical sensibility and pilot tested the instrument. We surveyed practicing oncologists in Gulf and Arab countries using snowball sampling via emails and social media networks. Reminders were sent 1 and 2 weeks later using SurveyMonkey. Results We received 222 responses from validated oncologists from April 2-22, 2020. An awareness of virtual clinics, virtual multidisciplinary teams, and virtual prescriptions was reported by 182 (82%), 175 (79%), and 166 (75%) respondents, respectively. Reported challenges associated with virtual management were the lack of physical exam (n=134, 60%), patients’ awareness and access (n=131, 59%), the lack of physical attendance of patients (n=93, 42%), information technology (IT) support (n=82, 37%), and the safety of virtual management (n=78, 35%). Overall, 111 (50%) and 107 (48%) oncologists did not prefer the virtual prescription of chemotherapy and novel immunotherapy, respectively. However, 188 (85%), 165 (74%), and 127 (57%) oncologists preferred the virtual prescription of hormonal therapy, bone modifying agents, and targeted therapy, respectively. In total, 184 (83%), 183 (83%), and 176 (80%) oncologists preferred to continue neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and perioperative treatments, respectively. Overall, 118 (53%) respondents preferred to continue first-line palliative treatment, in contrast to 68 (30%) and 47 (21%) respondents indicating a preference to interrupt second- and third-line palliative treatment, respectively. For administration of virtual prescriptions, all respondents preferred the oral route and 118 (53%) preferred the subcutaneous route. In contrast, 193 (87%) did not prefer the intravenous route for virtual prescriptions. Overall, 102 (46%) oncologists responded that they would “definitely” prefer to manage patients with cancer virtually. Conclusions Oncologists have a high level of awareness of virtual management. Although their survey responses indicated that second- and third-line palliative treatments should be interrupted, they stated that neoadjuvant, adjuvant, perioperative, and first-line palliative treatments should continue. Our results confirm that oncologists’ views on the priority of anticancer treatments are consistent with the evolving literature during the COVID-19 pandemic. Challenges to virtual management should be addressed to improve the care of patients with cancer.

Introduction: Atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumor (AT/RT) of the central nervous system is characterized by SMARCB1/INI deletion or mutation in the long arm of chromosome 22 11(22q11.2), also resulting in loss of nuclear expression of INI1 protein immunohistochemically. AT/RT tumors usually occur in children below 3 years. The tumor is usually seen in the cerebellum or the cerebrum, with an extremely rare incidence in the spinal cord. Materials and Methods: We report a rare case of AT/RT in a 6-year-old boy who had a primary spinal cord lesion in the thoracolumbar junction. Pathology revealed loss of nuclear staining of INI1 immunohistochemically. This is the first case reported with mixed intraspinal lesion (intra- and extramedullary). The patient underwent two surgeries and received radiotherapy and chemotherapy; however, he died 16 months after the initial presentation. Results and Discussion: We reviewed the literature on all children with spinal cord AT/RT. The review showed that the cervical region is the most common location of origin, especially in younger children. Reported cases were treated with a combination of surgery, systemic and intrathecal chemotherapy, and radiation therapy, and a survival time of 18 months represented the best outcome. Overall mean survival time was 10 months.

Central nervous system (CNS) involvement in patients with mature B non-Hodgkin lymphoma, posttransplantation proliferative disorder and acute lymphoblastic leukemia confers a significantly inferior prognosis as compared to patients without CNS disease. Intrathecal (IT) or intraventricular administration of rituximab is an option for this group of patients. We report 25 children with CNS involvement of CD201 B lymphoid malignancies who received in total 163 IT/intraventricular rituximab doses. The median number of doses received by each patient was 6, with a median dose of 25 mg. The most common adverse events were Grades 1 and 2 peripheral neuropathies in five patients (20%), allergy in two patients, and headache in two patients. These events were self-limited, occurring in the 48 hours after treatment and resolving within 24 hr. Three patients presented with more severe though transient side effects, one with a Grade III neuropathy and two with seizure. Eighteen patients (72%) of those treated with IT/intraventricular rituximab, with or without other CNS directed treatment, achieved a CNS remission. This case series suggests that IT/ intraventricular rituximab has therapeutic efficacy and relatively limited toxicity. Prospective trials of IT/ intraventricular rituximab for patients with CNS involvement of CD20 1 B lymphoid malignancies are warranted.