Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Coronavirus Gene Expression’ Category

Live Notes, Real Time Conference Coverage 2020 AACR Virtual Meeting April 28, 2020 Session on COVID-19 and Cancer 9:00 AM

Posted in Biomarkers: Inflammation, Cancer - General, Cancer and Current Therapeutics, Cancer Researchers Fighting COVID-19, Coronavirus Gene Expression, COVID-19, COVID-19: Pandemic Surgery Guidance, Economic Impact of Coronavirus Pandemic, REAL TIME Conference Coverage Twitter's Hashtags and Handles per Presentation/session, SAR-Cov-2 a vasculotropic (blood vessels) RNA Virus, SARS-CoV-2, Seasonality & Environmental Factors in Resurgence, Serology tests for coronavirus antibodies, Vaccinology, Viral diseases, Virus Infective Acute Respiratory Syndrome: SARS-CoV, tagged , , , , , , , on April 28, 2020| Leave a Comment »

Live Notes, Real Time Conference Coverage 2020 AACR Virtual Meeting April 28, 2020 Session on COVID-19 and Cancer 9:00 AM

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD

 

COVID-19 and Cancer

Introduction

Antoni Ribas
UCLA Medical Center

  • Almost 60,000 viewed the AACR 2020 Virtual meeting for the April 27 session
  • The following speakers were the first cancer researchers treating patients at the epicenters of the pandemic even though nothing was known about the virus

 

The experience of treating patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic in China
Li Zhang, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology

  • reporting a retrospective study from three hospitals from Wuhan
  • 2.2% of Wuhan cancer patients were COVID positive; most were lung cancers and most male; 35% were stage four
  • most have hospital transmission of secondary infection; had severe events when admitted
  • 74% were prescribed antivirals like ganciclovir and others; iv IgG was given to some
  • mortailtiy rate of 26%; by April 4 54% were cured and discharged; median time of infection to severe event was 7 days; clinical presentation SARS sepsis, and shock
  • by day 10 in lung cancer patients, see lung path but after supportive therapy improved
  • cancer patients at stage four who did not receive therapy were at higher risk
  • cancer patients who had received chemo in last 14 days had higher risk of infection
  • they followed up with cancer patients on I/O inhibitors;  it seemed there was only one patient that contracted COVID19 so there may not be as much risk with immune checkpoint inhibitors

 

TERAVOLT (Thoracic cancERs international coVid 19 cOLlaboraTion): First results of a global collaboration to address the impact of COVID-19 in patients with thoracic malignancies

Marina Chiara Garassino

@marinagarassino
Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori

Dr Marina Chiara Garassino is the Chief of the Thoracic Oncology Unit at Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy. She leads the strategy for clinical and translational research in advanced and locally advanced NSCLC, SCLC, mesothelioma and thymic malignancies. Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori in Milan is the most important comprehensive cancer in Italy and one of the most important in Europe. As a medical oncologist, she has done research in precision medicine and in immuno-oncology. Her main research interests have been mainly development of new drugs and therapeutical strategies and biomarkers. She has contributed to over 150 peer-reviewed publications, including publications as first or last author in the New England Journal of Medicine, Lancet Oncology, Journal of Clinical Oncology, Annals of Oncology. She has delivered many presentations at international congresses,  including  AACR, ASCO, ECCO, ESMO, WCLC. Her education includes a degree and further specialization in Medical Oncology at Università degli Studi in Milan. She achieved a Master Degree in Oncology management at University of Economics “Luigi Bocconi”. She completed her training with an ESMO Clinical fellowship in 2009 at Christie’s Hospital in Manchester (UK). She was a member of the EMA SAG (Scientific Advisory Group). She is serving as ESMO Council member as the Chair of the National Societies Committee. She was the ESMO National Representative for Italy for 5 years (2011-2017). She is serving on several ESMO Committees (Public Policy extended Committee, Press Committee, Women for Oncology Committee, Lung Cancer faculty, Membership Committee).She used to be an active member of the Young Oncologist Committee. She’s serving on both ESMO, WCLC and ASCO annual congress Lung Cancer Track (2019, and 2020), Chair of ESMO National Societies, from 2019. She is the founder and president of Women for Oncology Italy.

  • 2 million confirmed cases but half of patients are asymptomatic and not tested; pooled prevalance of COVID in cancer patients in Italy was 2%; must take them as high risk patients
  • they were not prepared for pandemic lasting for months instead of days; March 15 in middle of outbreak they started TERAVOLT registry; by March 26 had IRB approval; they are accruing 17 new patients per week; Ontario also joined in and has become worldwide (21 countries involved);  in registry they also included radiologic exams and COVID testing result
  • most patients were males and many smokers; 75% had SCLC; 83% of cases had one comorbility like hypertension and one third had at least one comorbility; 73.9% of patients were on treatment (they see this in their clinic: 30% on chemo or TKI alone; other patients were just on folowup
  • most of symptoms overlap with symptoms of lung cancer like pneumonia and pneumonitits and multi organ failure; most were hospitalized
  • unexpected high mortality among lung cancer patients with COVID19; this mortality seems due to COVID and not to cancer;
  • study had some limitations like short followup and some surgical cases so some bias may be present
  • she stresses don’t go it alone and make your own registry JOIN A REGISTRY

 

Outcome of cancer patients infected with COVID-19, including toxicity of cancer treatments
Fabrice Barlesi @barlesi
Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus

Professor Fabrice Barlesi
 As a specialist in lung cancer, precision medicine and cancer immunology, Prof. Fabrice Barlesi is a major contributor to research in the field of novel oncological therapies. He was apppointed General Director of Gustave Roussy in January 2020.
Fabrice Barlesi is Professor of Medicine at the University of Aix-Marseille. He has been head of the Multidisciplinary Oncology and Innovative Therapies Department of the Nord Hospital in Marseille (Marseille Public Hospitals) and the Marseille Centre for Early Trials in Oncology (CLIP2) which were established by him. He holds a doctorate in Sciences and Management with methods of analysis of health care systems, together with an ESSEC (international business school) master’s degree in general hospital management.
Professor Barlesi was also a co-founder of the Marseille Immunopôle French Immunology network, which aims to coordinate immunological expertise in the Aix-Marseille metropolitan area. In this context, he has organised PIONeeR (Investment in the future RHU 2017), the major international Hospital-University research project whose objective is to improve understanding of resistance to immunotherapy – anti-PD1(L1) – in lung cancer and help to prevent and overcome it. He was also vice-chair of the PACA (Provence, Alps and Côte d’Azur) Region Cancer Research Directorate.
Professor Barlesi is the author and co-author of some 300 articles in international journals and specialist publications. In 2018, the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) awarded him the prestigious Heine H. Hansen prize. He appears in the 2019 world list of most influential researchers (Highly cited researchers, Web of Science Group).
  • March 14 started protective measures and at peak had increased commited beds at highest rate
  • 12% of cancer patients tested positive for COVID; (by RTPCR); they curated data across different chemo regimens used
  • they retrospectively collected data; primary endpoint was clinical worsening; median of disease 13 days;
  • they actually had more breast cancer patients and other solid malignancies; 23% of covid cases no symptoms; 83% finally did have the symptoms after followup; diarhea actually in 10% of cases so clinics are seeing this as a symptom
  • CT scan showed 66% cases had pneumonitits like display; 25% patients were managed as outpatient
  • 24% patients worsened during treatment but 75% were able to go home (treated at home or well)
  • I/O did not have negative outcome and you can use these drugs without increasing risk to COVID
  • although many clinical trials have been hindered they are actively recruiting for COVID-cancer studies
  • outcomes with respect to death and symptoms are comparable to worldwide stats

Adapting oncologic practice to COVID19 outbreak: From outpatient triage to risk assessment for specific treatment in Madrid, Spain
Carlos Gomez-Martin
Octubre University Hospital

  • MOST slides were DO NOT POST so as requested data will not be shown; this study will be published soon
  • Summary is that Spain is seeing statistics like other European countries and similar results
  • Tocilizumab, the IL6 antagonists had been suggested as a treatment for cytokine storm and they are involved in a trial with this agent; results will be published

Experience in using oncology drugs in patients with COVID-19

Paolo A. Ascierto
Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione Pascale

  • giving surgery only for patients at highest risk of cancer mortality so using neoadjuvant therapy more often
  • telemedicine is a viable strategy for patient consult
  • for metastatic melanoma they are given highest priority for treatment
  • they are conducting a tocilizumab clinical trial and have accrued over 300 patients
  • results are in press so please look for publication soon
  • also can use TNF inhibitor, JAK inhibitor, IL1 inhibitor to treat cytokine storm

COVID-19 and cancer: Flattening the curve but widening disparities
Louis P. Voigt
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

  • Sloan has performed about 5000 COVID tests;  78 patients needed hospitilization; 15 died; 40% still in ICU
  • they do see many African American patients
  • mortality rates in US (published) have been around 50-60 % for cancer patients with COVID; Sloan prelim results are lower but still accruing data

Patients with cancer appear more vulnerable to SARS-COV-2: A multi-center study during the COVID-19 outbreak
Hongbing Cai
Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University

  • metastatic cancer showed much higher risk than non cancer but non metastatic showed increased risk too
  • main criteria of outcome was ICU admission
  • patients need to be isolated and personalized treatment plans need to be made
  • many comparisons were between non cancer and cancer which was clearest significance; had not looked at cancer types or stage grade or treatment
  • it appears that there are more questions right now than answers so data collection is a priority

Follow on Twitter at:

@pharma_BI

@AACR

@CureCancerNow

@pharmanews

@BiotechWorld

@HopkinsMedicine

#AACR20

For other Articles on the Online Open Access Journal on COVID19 and Cancer please see

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/coronavirus-portal/

Opinion Articles from the Lancet: COVID-19 and Cancer Care in China and Africa

Actemra, immunosuppressive which was designed to treat rheumatoid arthritis but also approved in 2017 to treat cytokine storms in cancer patients SAVED the sickest of all COVID-19 patients

The Second in a Series of Virtual Town Halls with Leading Oncologist on Cancer Patient Care during COVID-19 Pandemic: What you need to know

Responses to the COVID-19 outbreak from Oncologists, Cancer Societies and the NCI: Important information for cancer patients

 

Read Full Post »

Opinion Articles from the Lancet: COVID-19 and Cancer Care in China and Africa

Posted in Biomarkers: Inflammation, Cancer - General, Cancer and Current Therapeutics, Cancer Prevention: Research & Programs, Cancer Researchers Fighting COVID-19, Cancer Screening, Coronavirus Gene Expression, COVID-19, COVID-19: Pandemic Surgery Guidance, Economic Impact of Coronavirus Pandemic, interventional oncology, number of asymptomatic infections, Population genetics, Population Health Management, Population Health Management, Genetics & Pharmaceutical, SAR-Cov-2 a vasculotropic (blood vessels) RNA Virus, SARS-CoV-2, Seasonality & Environmental Factors in Resurgence, Serology tests for coronavirus antibodies, Treatment Protocols for COVID-19, Virus Infective Acute Respiratory Syndrome: SARS-CoV, tagged , , , , , , , , , on April 25, 2020| Leave a Comment »

Opinion Articles from the Lancet: COVID-19 and Cancer Care in China and Africa

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD

Cancer Patients in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a nationwide analysis in China

Wenhua Liang, Weijie Guan, Ruchong Chen, Wei Wang, Jianfu Li, Ke Xu, Caichen Li, Qing Ai, Weixiang Lu, Hengrui Liang, Shiyue Li, Jianxing He

Lancet Oncol. 2020 Mar; 21(3): 335–337. Published online 2020 Feb 14. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30096-6

PMCID: PMC7159000

 

The National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease and the National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China collaborated to establish a prospective cohort to monitor COVID-19 cases in China.  As on Jan31, 20202007 cases have been collected and analyzed with confirmed COVID-19 infection in these cohorts.

Results: 18 or 1% of COVID-19 cases had a history of cancer (the overall average cancer incidence in the overall China population is 0.29%) {2015 statistics}.  It appeared that cancer patients had an observable higher risk of COVID related complications upon hospitalization. However, this was a higher risk compared with the general population.  There was no comparison between cancer patients not diagnosed with COVID-19 and an assessment of their risk of infection.  Interestingly those who were also cancer survivors showed an increased incidence of COVID related severe complications compared to the no cancer group.

Although this study could have compared the risk within a cancer group, the authors still felt the results warranted precautions when dealing with cancer patients and issued recommendations including:

  1. Postponing of adjuvant chemotherapy or elective surgery for stable cancer should be considered
  2. Stronger personal protection for cancer patients
  3. More intensive surveillance or treatment should be considered when patients with cancer are infected, especially in older patients

Further studies will need to address the risk added by specific types of chemotherapy: cytolytic versus immunotherapy e.g.

 

Preparedness for COVID-19 in the oncology community in Africa

Lancet Oncology, Verna Vanderpuye, Moawia Mohammed,Ali Elhassan

Hannah Simonds: Published:April 03, 2020DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30220-5

Africa has a heterogeneity of cultures, economies and disease patterns however fortunately it is one of the last countries to be hit by the COVID-19 pandemic, which allows some time for preparation by the African nations.  The authors note that with Africa’s previous experiences with epidemics, namely ebola and cholera, Africa should be prepared for this pandemic.

However, as a result of poor economic discipline, weak health systems, and poor health-seeking behaviors across the continent, outcomes could be dismal. Poverty, low health literacy rates, and cultural practices that negatively affect cancer outcomes will result in poor assimilation of COVID-19 containment strategies in Africa.”

In general African oncologists are following COVID-19 guidelines from other high-income countries, but as this writer acknowledges in previous posts, there was a significant lag from first cases in the United States to the concrete formulation of guidelines for both oncologists and patients with regard to this pandemic.  African oncologist are delaying the start of adjuvant therapies and switching more to oral therapies and rethink palliative care.

However the authors still have many more questions than answers, however even among countries that have dealt with this pandemic before Africa (like Italy and US), oncologists across the globe still have not been able to answer questions like: what if my patient develops a fever, what do I do during a period of neutropenia, to their satisfaction or the satisfaction of the patient.  These are questions even oncologists who are dealing in COVID hotspots are still trying to answer including what constitutes a necessary surgical procedure? As I have highlighted in recent posts, oncologists in New York have all but shut down all surgical procedures and relying on liquid biopsies taken in the at-home setting. But does Africa have this capability of access to at home liquid biopsy procedures?

In addition, as I had just highlighted in a recent posting, there exists extreme cancer health disparities across the African continent, as well as the COVID responses. In West Africa, COVID-19 protocols are defined at individual institutions.  This is more like the American system where even NCI designated centers were left to fashion some of their own guidelines initially, although individual oncologists had banded together to do impromptu meetings to discuss best practices. However this is fine for big institutions, but as in the US, there is a large rural population on the African continent with geographical barriers to these big centers. Elective procedures have been cancelled and small number of patients are seen by day.  This remote strategy actually may be well suited for African versus more developed nations, as highlighted in a post I did about mobile health app use in oncology, as this telemedicine strategy is rather new among US oncologists (reference my posts with the Town Hall meetings).

The situation is more complicated in South Africa where they are dealing with an HIV epidemic, where about 8 million are infected with HIV. Oncology services here are still expecting to run at full capacity as the local hospitals deal with the first signs of the COVID outbreak. In Sudan, despite low COVID numbers, cancer centers have developed contingency plans. and are deferring new referrals except for emergency cases.  Training sessions for staff have been developed.

For more articles in this online open access journal on Cancer and COVID-19 please see our

Coronovirus Portal
Responses to the #COVID-19 outbreak from Oncologists, Cancer Societies and the NCI: Important information for cancer patients

 

Read Full Post »

Innate immune genes and Two Nasal Epithelial Cell Types: Expression of SARS-CoV-2 entry factors – COVID19 Cell Atlas

Posted in Coronavirus Gene Expression, COVID-19, Genetics & Pharmaceutical, Genome Biology, Population genetics, Population Health Management, Genetics & Pharmaceutical, SARS-CoV-2, Virus Infective Acute Respiratory Syndrome: SARS-CoV, tagged , , , on April 23, 2020| Leave a Comment »

Innate Immune Genes and Two Nasal Epithelial Cell Types: Expression of SARS-CoV-2 Entry Factors – COVID19 Cell Atlas

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

SARS-CoV-2 entry factors are highly expressed in nasal epithelial cells together with innate immune genes

Nature Medicine (2020)Cite this article

Abstract

We investigated SARS-CoV-2 potential tropism by surveying expression of viral entry-associated genes in single-cell RNA-sequencing data from multiple tissues from healthy human donors. We co-detected these transcripts in specific respiratory, corneal and intestinal epithelial cells, potentially explaining the high efficiency of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. These genes are co-expressed in nasal epithelial cells with genes involved in innate immunity, highlighting the cells’ potential role in initial viral infection, spread and clearance. The study offers a useful resource for further lines of inquiry with valuable clinical samples from COVID-19 patients and we provide our data in a comprehensive, open and user-friendly fashion at www.covid19cellatlas.org.

Full size image

To further characterize specific epithelial cell types expressing ACE2, we evaluated ACE2 expression within the lung and airway epithelium. We found that, despite a low level of expression overall, ACE2 was expressed in multiple epithelial cell types across the airway, as well as in alveolar epithelial type II cells in the parenchyma, consistently with previous studies9,10,11. Notably, nasal epithelial cells, including two previously described clusters of goblet cells and one cluster of ciliated cells, show the highest expression among all investigated cells in the respiratory tree (Fig. 1b). We confirmed enriched ACE2 expression in nasal epithelial cells in an independent scRNA-seq study that includes nasal brushings and biopsies. The results were consistent; we found the highest expression of ACE2 in nasal secretory cells (equivalent to the two goblet cell clusters in the previous dataset) and ciliated cells (Fig. 1b).

In addition, scRNA-seq data from an in vitro epithelial regeneration system from nasal epithelial cells corroborated the expression of ACE2 in goblet/secretory cells and ciliated cells in air–liquid interface cultures (Extended Data Fig. 1). Notably, the differentiating cells in the air–liquid interface acquire progressively more ACE2 (Extended Data Fig. 1). The results also suggest that this in vitro culture system may be biologically relevant for the study of SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis.

Coronavirus Entry Genes Highly Expressed in Two Nasal Epithelial Cell Types

Apr 23, 2020

staff reporter

Save for later

TEM of SARS-CoV-2 particles; Credit: NIAID-RML

This story has been updated to include information on a related study appearing in Cell.

NEW YORK – Two types of cells inside the nose express high levels of the genes encoding proteins the SARS-CoV-2 uses to enter cells, suggesting they are the likely entry points for the virus.

SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, uses its spike protein to bind to cellular receptors in the human body. The virus relies on the ACE2 receptor protein and the TMPRSS2 protease to enter cells, but which cells are initially infected has been unclear.

An international team of researchers used single-cell RNA sequencing datasets put together by the Human Cell Atlas consortium to search for cell types that express both the ACE2 and TMPRSS2 genes. As they reported in Nature Medicine Thursday, they found a number of cells in different organs express the genes encoding these proteins, but they homed in on cells of the respiratory system, especially goblet cells and ciliated cells in the nose.

“Mucus-producing goblet cells and ciliated cells in the nose had the highest levels of both these [genes], of all cells in the airways,” first author Waradon Sungnak from the Wellcome Sanger Institute said in a statement. “This makes these cells the most likely initial infection route for the virus.”

Using the Human Cell Atlas dataset, Sungnak and his colleagues analyzed ACE2 and TMPRSS2 expression in a range of tissues, including not only respiratory tissue — previous analyses using immunohistochemistry had detected both ACE2 and TMPRSS2 in the nasal and bronchial epithelium — but also tissue from the eyes, digestive tract, muscle, and more.

ACE2 gene expression was generally low across the datasets analyzed, while TMPRSS2 was more broadly expressed, the researchers found. This suggested that ACE2 expression might be the limiting factor for viral entry in initial infections.

However, ACE2 was expressed in a number of epithelial cell types of respiratory tissues, and its expression was particularly high among goblet cells and ciliated cells of the nose. The researchers confirmed this finding using data from two other scRNA-seq studies.

Other genes often co-expressed alongside ACE2 in the respiratory system included ones involved in carbohydrate metabolism — possibly due to their role in goblet cell mucin synthesis — and those involved in innate and antiviral immune functions.

The ACE2 and TMPRSS2 genes were also expressed outside of the respiratory system, including by cells of the cornea and the lining of the intestine, which the researchers noted is in line with some clinical reports suggesting fecal shedding of the virus.

Where these viral entry receptor genes are expressed in the respiratory system could influence how transmissible a virus is. The researchers compared the tissue expression patterns of these viral receptor genes to those of receptor genes used by other coronaviruses and influenza viruses. The receptors used by highly infectious viruses like influenza were expressed more in the upper airway, while receptors for less infectious viruses like MERSCoV were expressed in the lower airway. This indicated to the researchers that the spatial distribution of the viral receptors may influence how transmissible a virus is.

“This is the first time these particular cells in the nose have been associated with COVID-19,” study co-author Martijn Nawijn from the University Medical Center Groningen and the HCA Lung Biological Network said in a statement. “The location of these cells on the surface of the inside of the nose make them highly accessible to the virus, and also may assist with transmission to other people.”

Another study that appeared as a preprint at Cell also used single-cell RNA-sequencing datasets from humans, nonhuman primates, and mice to examine where cells expressing both the ACE2 and TMPRSS2 genes are located. Those researchers, led by the Broad Institute’s Jose Ordovas-Montanes, found both genes were expressed among type II pneumocytes and ileal absorptive enterocytes as well as among nasal goblet secretory cells.

SOURCE

https://www.genomeweb.com/infectious-disease/coronavirus-entry-genes-highly-expressed-two-nasal-epithelial-cell-types?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=GWDN%20Thurs%20PM%202020-04-23&utm_term=GW%20Daily%20News%20Bulletin#.XqIbG1NKgdU

SOURCE for Original Research Study 

Sungnak, W., Huang, N., Bécavin, C. et al. SARS-CoV-2 entry factors are highly expressed in nasal epithelial cells together with innate immune genes. Nat Med (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0868-6

Download citation

Read Full Post »

AAAS Science Podcast: Why some diseases are seasonal and some are not: Coronaviruses and more

Posted in Biomarkers: Inflammation, Coronavirus Gene Expression, COVID-19, Economic Impact of Coronavirus Pandemic, number of asymptomatic infections, Population genetics, Population Health Management, SARS-CoV-2, Seasonality & Environmental Factors in Resurgence, Treatment Protocols for COVID-19, Vaccinology, Virus Infective Acute Respiratory Syndrome: SARS-CoV, tagged , , , on April 17, 2020| Leave a Comment »

AAAS Science Podcast: Why some diseases are seasonal and some are not: Coronaviruses and more

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD

 

The following podcast from the American Association for Advancement of Science (AAAS) discusses the seasonality of some viruses while other viruses are able to manifest themselves in different seasons over the globe.

Please Play

https://play.google.com/music/m/Da3pxbfyuykjy3r7xe5rprupmdq?t=Why_some_diseases_come_and_go_with_the_seasons_and_how_to_develop_smarter_safer_chemicals-Science_Ma

For more articles on COVID19 and SARS-CoV-2 on this Open Access Online Journal please see

Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 Portal

 

Read Full Post »

The Second in a Series of Virtual Town Halls with Leading Oncologist on Cancer Patient Care during COVID-19 Pandemic: What you need to know

Posted in Biomarkers: Inflammation, Cancer - General, Cancer and Current Therapeutics, Cancer Researchers Fighting COVID-19, Coronavirus Gene Expression, COVID-19, Immune-Mediation (independent immunopathology: lung and reticuloendothelial system), interventional oncology, Patient Experience: Personal Memories of Invasive Medical Intervantion, Patient-centered Medicine, Patient’s Voice: Personal Experience with Invasive Medical Procedures, REAL TIME Conference Coverage Twitter's Hashtags and Handles per Presentation/session, SARS-CoV-2, Vaccinology, Women Health, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , on April 3, 2020| Leave a Comment »

The Second in a Series of Virtual Town Halls with Leading Oncologist on Cancer Patient Care during COVID-19 Pandemic: What you need to know

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD 

@StephenJWillia2

The second virtual Town Hall with Leading International Oncologist, discussing the impact that the worldwide COVID-19 outbreak has on cancer care and patient care issues will be held this Saturday April 4, 2020.  This Town Hall Series is led by Dr. Roy Herbst and Dr. Hossein Borghaei who will present a panel of experts to discuss issues pertaining to oncology practice as well as addressing physicians and patients concerns surrounding the risk COVID-19 presents to cancer care.  Some speakers on the panel represent oncologist from France and Italy, and will give their views of the situation in these countries.

Please register at the link below.

Link to register: https://us04web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_YzsFbGacTg2DV73j6pYqxQ

This series is being hosted in partnership with Axiom Healthcare Strategies, Inc..

The Town Hall proceedings and live notes will be made available on this site and Live Notes will be Tweeted in Real Time using the #CancerCareandCOVID19 and @pharma_BI

 

Webinar banner

   Microsoft (Outlook)

Topic

COVID-19 Oncology Town Hall

Description

The goal of these town halls is to improve outcomes of cancer patients across the globe, by sharing insights and lessons learned from oncologists fighting COVID-19. Dr. Roy Herbst and Dr. Hossein Borghaei will be joined by a panel of thought leaders with expertise in a variety of solid tumors to discuss how COVID-19 has impacted patient care in oncology.

Following the session, a video, transcript, and key takeaways will be released on Monday 4/6.

Time

For Live Notes From the Last Town Hall Meeting Specifically on Lung Cancer and COVID19 please go to

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2020/03/28/live-notes-from-town-hall-for-patients-with-leading-oncologists-on-lung-cancer-and-covid19-3_28_20/

For more information on Cancer Care and Issues of Cancer and COVID19 please see our Coronavirus Portal at

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/coronavirus-portal/

 

 

Read Full Post »

US Responses to Coronavirus Outbreak Expose Many Flaws in Our Medical System

Posted in and Bioethics, Bio-Ethics, Biomarkers: Inflammation, coronavirus, Coronavirus Gene Expression, COVID-19, COVID-19 effects on Human Heart, COVID-19: Pandemic Surgery Guidance, Economic Impact of Coronavirus Pandemic, Ethics and Leadership, Federal Budget Appropriations, Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Health Law & Patient Safety, Health Law Policy, Healthcare costs and reimbursement, Healthcare Reform, Hospital-based Medical Innovations, Immune-Mediation (independent immunopathology: lung and reticuloendothelial system), Key Opinion Leaders in eScientific Publishing - Interviews with, Law and Medicine Conflicts, Leadership, Power, Social Interlocking Connections, number of asymptomatic infections, Patents, Patient Experience, Patient Experience: Personal Memories of Invasive Medical Intervantion, Patient Outlook, Patient’s Voice: Personal Experience with Invasive Medical Procedures, Population genetics, Population Health Management, Population Health Management, Genetics & Pharmaceutical, SARS-CoV-2, Seasonality & Environmental Factors in Resurgence, Serology tests for coronavirus antibodies, Support Staff, Treatment Protocols for COVID-19, United States, Vaccinology, Virus Infective Acute Respiratory Syndrome: SARS-CoV, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , on March 25, 2020| Leave a Comment »

US Responses to Coronavirus Outbreak Expose Many Flaws in Our Medical System

Curator: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.

The  coronavirus pandemic has affected almost every country in every continent however, after months of the novel advent of novel COVID-19 cases, it has become apparent that the varied clinical responses in this epidemic (and outcomes) have laid bare some of the strong and weak aspects in, both our worldwide capabilities to respond to infectious outbreaks in a global coordinated response and in individual countries’ response to their localized epidemics.

 

Some nations, like Israel, have initiated a coordinated government-private-health system wide action plan and have shown success in limiting both new cases and COVID-19 related deaths.  After the initial Wuhan China outbreak, China closed borders and the government initiated health related procedures including the building of new hospitals. As of writing today, Wuhan has experienced no new cases of COVID-19 for two straight days.

 

However, the response in the US has been perplexing and has highlighted some glaring problems that have been augmented in this crisis, in the view of this writer.    In my view, which has been formulated after social discussion with members in the field ,these issues can be centered on three major areas of deficiencies in the United States that have hindered a rapid and successful response to this current crisis and potential future crises of this nature.

 

 

  1. The mistrust or misunderstanding of science in the United States
  2. Lack of communication and connection between patients and those involved in the healthcare industry
  3. Socio-geographical inequalities within the US healthcare system

 

1. The mistrust or misunderstanding of science in the United States

 

For the past decade, anyone involved in science, whether directly as active bench scientists, regulatory scientists, scientists involved in science and health policy, or environmental scientists can attest to the constant pressure to not only defend their profession but also to defend the entire scientific process and community from an onslaught of misinformation, mistrust and anxiety toward the field of science.  This can be seen in many of the editorials in scientific publications including the journal Science and Scientific American (as shown below)

 

Stepping Away from Microscopes, Thousands Protest War on Science

Boston rally coincides with annual American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) conference and is a precursor to the March for Science in Washington, D.C.

byLauren McCauley, staff writer

Responding to the troubling suppression of science under the Trump administration, thousands of scientists, allies, and frontline communities are holding a rally in Boston’s Copley Square on Sunday.

#standupforscience Tweets

 

“Science serves the common good,” reads the call to action. “It protects the health of our communities, the safety of our families, the education of our children, the foundation of our economy and jobs, and the future we all want to live in and preserve for coming generations.”

It continues: 

But it’s under attack—both science itself, and the unalienable rights that scientists help uphold and protect. 

From the muzzling of scientists and government agencies, to the immigration ban, the deletion of scientific data, and the de-funding of public science, the erosion of our institutions of science is a dangerous direction for our country. Real people and communities bear the brunt of these actions.

The rally was planned to coincide with the annual American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) conference, which draws thousands of science professionals, and is a precursor to the March for Science in Washington, D.C. and in cities around the world on April 22.

 

Source: https://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/02/19/stepping-away-microscopes-thousands-protest-war-science

https://images.app.goo.gl/UXizCsX4g5wZjVtz9

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/c/embed/85438fbe-278d-11e7-928e-3624539060e8

 

 

The American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) also had marches for public awareness of science and meaningful science policy at their annual conference in Washington, D.C. in 2017 (see here for free recordings of some talks including Joe Biden’s announcement of the Cancer Moonshot program) and also sponsored events such as the Rally for Medical Research.  This patient advocacy effort is led by the cancer clinicians and scientific researchers to rally public support for cancer research for the benefit of those affected by the disease.

Source: https://leadingdiscoveries.aacr.org/cancer-patients-front-and-center/

 

 

     However, some feel that scientists are being too sensitive and that science policy and science-based decision making may not be under that much of a threat in this country. Yet even as some people think that there is no actual war on science and on scientists they realize that the public is not engaged in science and may not be sympathetic to the scientific process or trust scientists’ opinions. 

 

   

From Scientific American: Is There Really a War on Science? People who oppose vaccines, GMOs and climate change evidence may be more anxious than antagonistic

 

Certainly, opponents of genetically modified crops, vaccinations that are required for children and climate science have become louder and more organized in recent times. But opponents typically live in separate camps and protest single issues, not science as a whole, said science historian and philosopher Roberta Millstein of the University of California, Davis. She spoke at a standing-room only panel session at the American Association for the Advancement of Science’s annual meeting, held in Washington, D.C. All the speakers advocated for a scientifically informed citizenry and public policy, and most discouraged broadly applied battle-themed rhetoric.

 

Source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-there-really-a-war-on-science/

 

      In general, it appears to be a major misunderstanding by the public of the scientific process, and principles of scientific discovery, which may be the fault of miscommunication by scientists or agendas which have the goals of subverting or misdirecting public policy decisions from scientific discourse and investigation.

 

This can lead to an information vacuum, which, in this age of rapid social media communication,

can quickly perpetuate misinformation.

 

This perpetuation of misinformation was very evident in a Twitter feed discussion with Dr. Eric Topol, M.D. (cardiologist and Founder and Director of the Scripps Research Translational  Institute) on the US President’s tweet on the use of the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine based on President Trump referencing a single study in the International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents.  The Twitter thread became a sort of “scientific journal club” with input from international scientists discussing and critiquing the results in the paper.  

 

Please note that when we scientists CRITIQUE a paper it does not mean CRITICIZE it.  A critique is merely an in depth analysis of the results and conclusions with an open discussion on the paper.  This is part of the normal peer review process.

 

Below is the original Tweet by Dr. Eric Topol as well as the ensuing tweet thread

 

https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1241442247133900801?s=20

 

Within the tweet thread it was discussed some of the limitations or study design flaws of the referenced paper leading the scientists in this impromptu discussion that the study could not reasonably conclude that hydroxychloroquine was not a reliable therapeutic for this coronavirus strain.

 

The lesson: The public has to realize CRITIQUE does not mean CRITICISM.

 

Scientific discourse has to occur to allow for the proper critique of results.  When this is allowed science becomes better, more robust, and we protect ourselves from maybe heading down an incorrect path, which may have major impacts on a clinical outcome, in this case.

 

 

2.  Lack of communication and connection between patients and those involved in the healthcare industry

 

In normal times, it is imperative for the patient-physician relationship to be intact in order for the physician to be able to communicate proper information to their patient during and after therapy/care.  In these critical times, this relationship and good communication skills becomes even more important.

 

Recently, I have had multiple communications, either through Twitter, Facebook, and other social media outlets with cancer patients, cancer advocacy groups, and cancer survivorship forums concerning their risks of getting infected with the coronavirus and how they should handle various aspects of their therapy, whether they were currently undergoing therapy or just about to start chemotherapy.  This made me realize that there were a huge subset of patients who were not receiving all the information and support they needed; namely patients who are immunocompromised.

 

These are patients represent

  1. cancer patient undergoing/or about to start chemotherapy
  2. Patients taking immunosuppressive drugs: organ transplant recipients, patients with autoimmune diseases, multiple sclerosis patients
  3. Patients with immunodeficiency disorders

 

These concerns prompted me to write a posting curating the guidance from National Cancer Institute (NCI) designated cancer centers to cancer patients concerning their risk to COVID19 (which can be found here).

 

Surprisingly, there were only 14 of the 51 US NCI Cancer Centers which had posted guidance (either there own or from organizations like NCI or the National Cancer Coalition Network (NCCN).  Most of the guidance to patients had stemmed from a paper written by Dr. Markham of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle Washington, the first major US city which was impacted by COVID19.

 

Also I was surprised at the reactions to this posting, with patients and oncologists enthusiastic to discuss concerns around the coronavirus problem.  This led to having additional contact with patients and oncologists who, as I was surprised, are not having these conversations with each other or are totally confused on courses of action during this pandemic.  There was a true need for each party, both patients/caregivers and physicians/oncologists to be able to communicate with each other and disseminate good information.

 

Last night there was a Tweet conversation on Twitter #OTChat sponsored by @OncologyTimes.  A few tweets are included below

https://twitter.com/OncologyTimes/status/1242611841613864960?s=20

https://twitter.com/OncologyTimes/status/1242616756658753538?s=20

https://twitter.com/OncologyTimes/status/1242615906846547978?s=20

 

The Lesson:  Rapid Communication of Vital Information in times of stress is crucial in maintaining a good patient/physician relationship and preventing Misinformation.

 

3.  Socio-geographical Inequalities in the US Healthcare System

It has become very clear that the US healthcare system is fractioned and multiple inequalities (based on race, sex, geography, socio-economic status, age) exist across the whole healthcare system.  These inequalities are exacerbated in times of stress, especially when access to care is limited.

 

An example:

 

On May 12, 2015, an Amtrak Northeast Regional train from Washington, D.C. bound for New York City derailed and wrecked on the Northeast Corridor in the Port Richmond neighborhood of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Of 238 passengers and 5 crew on board, 8 were killed and over 200 injured, 11 critically. The train was traveling at 102 mph (164 km/h) in a 50 mph (80 km/h) zone of curved tracks when it derailed.[3]

Some of the passengers had to be extricated from the wrecked cars. Many of the passengers and local residents helped first responders during the rescue operation. Five local hospitals treated the injured. The derailment disrupted train service for several days. 

(Source Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Philadelphia_train_derailment)

What was not reported was the difficulties that first responders, namely paramedics had in finding an emergency room capable of taking on the massive load of patients.  In the years prior to this accident, several hospitals, due to monetary reasons, had to close their emergency rooms or reduce them in size. In addition only two in Philadelphia were capable of accepting gun shot victims (Temple University Hospital was the closest to the derailment but one of the emergency rooms which would accept gun shot victims. This was important as Temple University ER, being in North Philadelphia, is usually very busy on any given night.  The stress to the local health system revealed how one disaster could easily overburden many hospitals.

 

Over the past decade many hospitals, especially rural hospitals, have been shuttered or consolidated into bigger health systems.  The graphic below shows this

From Bloomberg: US Hospital Closings Leave Patients with Nowhere to go

 

 

https://images.app.goo.gl/JdZ6UtaG3Ra3EA3J8

 

Note the huge swath of hospital closures in the midwest, especially in rural areas.  This has become an ongoing problem as the health care system deals with rising costs.

 

Lesson:  Epidemic Stresses an already stressed out US healthcare system

 

Please see our Coronavirus Portal at

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/coronavirus-portal/

 

for more up-to-date scientific, clinical information as well as persona stories, videos, interviews and economic impact analyses

and @pharma_BI

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts