The impact of the SARS-COV2 pandemic on the delivery of chemotherapy for gynecologic cancer at a tertiary care institution in the United States epicenter

OBJECTIVES: In New York City, the SARS-CoV2 pandemic epicenter of the United States, the surge of cases predated much of the country by several weeks, leading to changes in practice patterns that have informed decisions made by other medical institutions. As the SARS-CoV2 pandemic unfolded, many professional subspecialty organizations released practice guidelines in order to minimize transmission of COVID-19 and protect vulnerable populations. The impact of modifications to traditional gynecologic cancer treatment is not known. Here, we describe the impact of the SARS-COV2 pandemic on chemotherapy practices for gynecologic cancer during the pandemic surge. METHODS: We identified patients age 18 or older at Montefiore Medical Center who had a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of gynecologic cancer and received care between March 16, 2020 and June 7, 2020; these dates reflect a series of executive orders issued by the Governor of New York allowing the State Commissioner of Health to cancel elective procedures at hospitals and ambulatory surgery centers. Clinical data were abstracted from patients’ charts. Patients with incomplete treatment records were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 146 women who were included to whom 169 cycles of cytotoxic chemotherapy were delivered during the study period and 68 women (46.6%) received at least one cycle of chemotherapy. Nine patients screened positive for symptoms of COVID or active infection during the study period. Among patients receiving chemotherapy, 52.9% (n=36) had modifications to traditional cancer treatment as a result of state and institutional regulations. Dose reduction was the leading pandemic-related treatment modification and occurred in 69.4% of patients (n=25). Other treatment modifications included prophylactic use of pegfilgrastim (n=1), and treatment deferral or delay (n=7). Women receiving a platinum-based doublet (n=36) during the study period were more likely to sustain dose reduction in chemotherapy (25%) compared to patients undergoing other regimens (0%). A total of 111 women received at least one dose of disease-modifying therapy during the cohort period including chemotherapy, immunotherapy, anti-angiogenesis agents, hormonal therapy, PARP inhibitors, or investigational agents. Treatments were most often discontinued due to completion of adjuvant therapy (n=5), progression of disease (n=4), or toxicity (n=5). Notably 5 patients chose to defer therapy in the setting of the pandemic surge. Only one patient was identified as receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy specifically due to COVID pandemic-related restrictions. CONCLUSIONS: The SARS-COV2 pandemic has led to modification of current standard chemotherapy delivery for gynecologic malignancies with the shared goal of protecting the most vulnerable populations from COVID infection. The impact of these modifications on cancer specific outcomes is not yet known. Future investigation will focus on identifying whether treatment modification to circumvent iatrogenic immunosuppression compromises oncologic outcomes.