RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 The impact of lag time to cancer diagnosis and treatment on clinical outcomes prior to the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.06.21.22276569
DO 10.1101/2022.06.21.22276569
A1 Tope, Parker
A1 Farah, Eliya
A1 Ali, Rami
A1 El-Zein, Mariam
A1 Miller, Wilson H.
A1 Franco, Eduardo L.
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/06/22/2022.06.21.22276569.abstract
AB Background The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted cancer care, raising concerns regarding the impact of wait time, or ‘lag time’, on clinical outcomes. We aimed to contextualize pandemic-related lag times by mapping pre-pandemic evidence from systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses on the association between lag time to cancer diagnosis and treatment with mortality- and morbidity-related outcomes.Methods We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews for reviews published prior to the pandemic (1 January 2010-31 December 2019). We extracted data on methodological characteristics, lag time interval start and endpoints, qualitative findings from systematic reviews, and pooled risk estimates of mortality-(i.e., overall survival) and morbidity- (i.e., local regional control) related outcomes from meta-analyses. We categorized lag times according to milestones across the cancer care continuum and summarized outcomes by cancer site and lag time interval.Results We identified 9,032 records through database searches, of which 29 were eligible. We classified 33 unique types of lag time intervals across 10 cancer sites, of which breast, colorectal, head and neck, and ovarian cancers were investigated most. Two systematic reviews investigating lag time to diagnosis reported contradictory findings regarding survival outcomes among pediatric patients with Ewing’s sarcomas or central nervous system tumours. Comparable risk estimates of mortality were found for lag time intervals from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy for breast, colorectal, and ovarian cancers. Risk estimates of pathologic complete response indicated an optimal time window of 7-8 weeks for neoadjuvant chemotherapy completion prior to surgery for rectal cancers. In comparing methods across meta-analyses on the same cancer sites, lag times, and outcomes, we identified critical variations in lag time research design.Conclusions Our review highlighted measured associations between lag time and cancer-related outcomes and identified the need for a standardized methodological approach in areas such as lag time definitions and accounting for the waiting-time paradox. Prioritization of lag time research is integral for revised cancer care guidelines under pandemic contingency and assessing the pandemic’s long-term effect on patients with cancer.Competing Interest StatementAll authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: MZ has no conflicts of interest to disclose. EF, RA, and PT received MSc. Stipends from the Gerald Bronfman Department of Oncology, McGill University. ELF reports support for the present manuscript in the form of a grant to his institution is his name from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Cancer Research Society; consultancy for Merck; a patent related to the discovery "DNA methylation markers for early detection of cervical cancer", registered at the Office of Innovation and Partnerships, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; and financial interests with Elsevier and Elifesciences Ltd in the form of support fees to maintain the editorial office and work as Senior Editor, respectively. WHM reports grants to his institution from Merck, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Cancer Research Society, Terry Fox Research Institute, Samuel Waxman Cancer Research Foundation, and CCSRI; consultancy for Merck, BMS, Roche, GSK, Novartis, Amgen, Mylan, EMD Serono, and Sanofi; honoraria from McGill University, JGH, BMS, Merck, Roche, GSK, Novartis, Amgen, Mylan EMD Serono, and Sanofi; payments to his institution for participation in a clinical trial within the past 2 years from BMS, Novartis, GSK, Roche, AstraZeneca, Methylgene, MedImmune, Bayer, Amgen, Merck, Incyte, Pfizer, Sanofi, Array, MiMic, Ocellaris Pharma, Astellas, Alkermes, Exelixis, VelosBio, and Genetech. No other relationships or activities could appear to have influenced the submitted work.Funding StatementThe present work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR-COVID-19 Rapid Research Funding opportunity, VR5-172666 grant to Eduardo L. Franco). Parker Tope, Eliya Farah, and Rami Ali each received MSc. stipends from the Gerald Bronfman Department of Oncology, McGill University.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Searches were restricted to peer-reviewed literature published between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2019 available on MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data from included studies presented by the current work are available on MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and/or Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews. We include our systematic search strategy in Supplementary Material.