Sara Nasser

Background/Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic was a major challenge for healthcare systems and social life worldwide. During the pandemic, studies focused on examining structural changes in patient care and establishing new guidelines to manage COVID-19, but very few of them addressed patients’ perceptions and concerns regarding changes in cancer treatment during the pandemic. This study aimed to assess the changes in their therapy situation during three waves of the pandemic and the impact on their social life. Methods: This exploratory cross-sectional multicenter survey was conducted among patients with gynecological malignancies and breast cancer at gynecological oncology centers in Germany between October 2020 and February 2022. An anonymous paper-based 50-item questionnaire, available in German, assessed medical care, treatment modifications, mental health, and socioeconomic burden during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were analyzed descriptively. Two subgroup analyses were conducted, comparing age groups ≤70 and >70 years, as well as patients with and without a migrant background. Results: Overall, 778 patients met the inclusion criteria of the survey (median age: 59; range: 24–93). In the majority of the patients (77.1%), the treatment schedules remained unchanged during COVID-19 pandemic. Treatment appointments were modified in a small number of patients (9.0%). Changes in therapy schedules were slightly more common among the second- and third-generation migrants and among patients ≤70 years. Despite the uncertainty of the COVID-19 pandemic, most patients (83.4%) kept their trust in the healthcare system. Acceptance of preventive measures was high, and 85.9% were willing to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Psychological symptoms such as worries and fear were reported by more than half of the participants during the last 2 weeks previous to the survey and more common among patients ≤70 years. Only 8.6% were more afraid of a COVID-19 infection than their cancer disease. Conclusions: Despite major challenges in cancer care due to the COVID-19 pandemic, access to cancer treatment and adequate management at gynecological oncology centers in Germany remained stable. The increased psychological burden in crises requires new infrastructure and should be addressed to improve patient care in future crises. The acceptance of taking preventive measures against COVID-19 was high among cancer patients.

Purpose: We aim to evaluate the reach, engagement, and evolution of the inaugural Uterine Cancer Awareness Month (UCAM) social media campaign (2023–2024) on Twitter/X, focusing on user participation, content trends, and key influencers. Methods: We conducted a social network analysis of Twitter/X posts using the hashtags #endometrialcancer, #uterinecancer, and #wombcancer over three years (2022–2024). Data were collected and analysed using NodeXL Pro, utilizing the Clauset–Newman–Moore and Harel–Koren Fast Multiscale algorithms for cluster and layout visualization. Results: In 2022, 343 users generated 557 interactions, emphasizing health disparities and symptom awareness. The engagement peaked in 2023 with 302 users and 731 interactions, driven by strategic hashtag use and awareness efforts. A decline was noted in 2024 with 237 users and 484 interactions. Word pair analysis showed evolving themes, from general symptom awareness in 2022 to targeted messaging around advanced cases and recurrence in 2024. Conclusion: The UCAM-social media campaign showed promising initial growth but experienced a decline in engagement by 2024, highlighting the need for sustained and diversified strategies. Our study, which assessed the campaign’s impact over a period exceeding one year, a rarity in the current literature, highlights critical insights for future initiatives.

Purpose: Our prospective international survey evaluated the impact of the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management gynaecological malignancies from the multidisciplinary physicians’ perspective with particular focus on clinical infrastructures and trial participation. Methods: Our survey consisted of 53 COVID-related questions. It was sent to healthcare professionals in gynaecological oncology centres across Europe and Pan-Arabian region via the study groups and gynaecological societies from April 2020 to October 2020. All healthcare professionals treating gynaecological cancers were able to participate in our survey. Results: A total of 255 answers were collected from 30 countries. The majority (73%) of participants were gynaecological oncologists from university hospitals (71%) with at least an Intensive Care Unit with cardiopulmonary support available at their institutions. Most institutions continued to perform elective surgeries only for oncological cases (98%). Patients had to wait on average 2 weeks longer for their surgery appointments compared to previous years (range 0–12 weeks). Most cases that were prioritised for surgical intervention across all gynaecological tumours were early-stage disease (74%), primary situation (61%) and good ECOG status (63%). The radicality of surgery did not change in the majority of cases (78%) across all tumour types. During the pandemic, only 38% of clinicians stated they would start a new clinical trial. Almost half of the participants stated the pandemic negatively impacted the financial structure and support for clinical trials. Approximately 20% of clinicians did not feel well-informed regarding clinical algorithm for COVID-19 patients throughout the pandemic. Thirty percent stated that they are currently having trouble in providing adequate medical care due to staff shortage. Conclusion: Despite well-established guidelines, pandemic clearly affected clinical research and patientcare. Our survey underlines the necessity for building robust emergency algorithms tailored to gynaecological oncology to minimise negative impact in crises and to preserve access to clinical trials.

Purpose: Our prospective international survey evaluated the impact of the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management gynaecological malignancies from the multidisciplinary physicians' perspective with particular focus on clinical infrastructures, and trial participation. Methods: Our survey consisted of 53 COVID-related questions. It was sent to healthcare professionals in gynaecological oncology centres across Europe and Pan-Arabian region via the study groups and gynaecological societies from April 2020 to October 2020. All healthcare professionals treating gynaecological cancers were able to participate our survey. Results: A total of 255 answers were collected from 30 countries. The majority (73%) of participants were gynaecological oncologists from university hospitals (71%) with at least an intensive care unit with cardiopulmonary-support available at their institutions. Most institutions continued to perform elective surgeries only for oncological cases (98%). Patients had to wait on average two weeks longer for their surgery appointments compared to previous years (range 0-12 weeks). Most cases that were prioritised for surgical intervention across all gynaecological tumours were early-stage disease (74%), primary situation (61%), and good ECOG status (63%). The radicality of surgery did not change in the majority of cases (78%) across all tumour types. During the pandemic, only 38% of clinicians stated they would start a new clinical trial. Almost half of the participants stated the pandemic negatively impacted the financial structure and support for clinical trials. Approximately 20% of clinicians didn't feel well informed regarding clinical algorithm for COVID-19 patients throughout the pandemic. Thirty percent stated that they are currently having trouble in providing adequate medical care due to staff shortage. Conclusions: Despite well-established guidelines, pandemic clearly affected clinical research and patientcare. Our survey underlines the necessity for building robust emergency algorithms tailored to gynaecological oncology to minimize negative impact in crises and to preserve access to clinical trials.

Background: Malnutrition was associated with worse survival outcomes, impaired quality of life, and deteriorated performance status across various cancer types. We aimed to identify risk factors for malnutrition in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) and impact on survival. Methods: In our prospective observational monocentric study, we included the patients with primary and recurrent EOC, tubal or peritoneal cancer conducted. We assessed serum laboratory parameters, body mass index, nutritional risk index, nutritional risk screening score (NRS-2002), and bio-electrical impedance analysis. Results: We recruited a total of 152 patients. Patients > 65 years-old, with ascites of >500 mL, or with platinum-resistant EOC showed statistically significant increased risk of malnutrition when evaluated using NRS-2002 (p-values= 0.014, 0.001, and 0.007, respectively). NRS-2002 < 3 was an independent predictive factor for complete tumor resectability (p = 0.009). The patients with NRS-2002 ≥ 3 had a median overall survival (OS) of seven months (95% CI = 0–24 months), as compared to the patients with NRS-2002 < 3, where median OS was forty-six months (p = 0.001). A phase angle (PhAα) ≤ 4.5 was the strongest predictor of OS. Conclusions: In our study, we found malnutrition to be an independent predictor of incomplete cytoreduction and independent prognostic factor for poor OS. Preoperative nutritional assessment is an effective tool in the identification of high-risk EOC groups characterized by poor clinical outcome.

The aim of this survey was to increase the knowledge on the characteristics and health concerns of long-term survivors (LTS; survival > 5 years) after ovarian cancer in order to tailor follow-up care. This international survey was initiated by the NOGGO and was made available to members of ENGOT and GCIG. The survey is anonymous and consists of 68 questions regarding sociodemographic, medical (cancer) history, health concerns including distress, long-term side effects, and lifestyle. For this analysis, 1044 LTS from 14 countries were recruited. In total, 58% were diagnosed with FIGO stage III/IV ovarian cancer and 43.4% developed recurrent disease, while 26.0% were receiving cancer treatment at the time of filling in the survey. LTS who survived 5–10 years self-estimated their health status as being significantly worse than LTS who survived more than 10 years (p = 0.034), whereas distress also remained high 10 years after cancer diagnosis. Almost half of the cohort (46.1%) reported still having symptoms, which were mainly lymphedema (37.7%), fatigue (23.9%), pain (21.6%), polyneuropathy (16.9%), gastrointestinal problems (16.6%), and memory problems (15.5%). Almost all patients (94.2%) regularly received follow-up care. Specialized survivorship care with a focus on long-term side effects, lifestyle, and prevention should be offered beyond the typical five years of follow-up care.

Background: Malnutrition was associated with worse survival outcomes, impaired quality of life, and deteriorated performance status across various cancer types. We aimed to identify risk factors for malnutrition in patients with epithelial ovarian(EOC) and impact on survival. Methods: In our prospective study, we included the patients with primary and recurrent EOC, tubal or peritoneal cancer conducted. We assessed serum laboratory parameters, body mass index, nutritional risk index, nutritional risk screening score(NRS-2002), and bio-electrical impedance analysis. Results: We recruited a total of 152. Patients >65 years-old, with ascites of >500 ml, or with platinum-resistant EOC showed statistically significant increased risk of malnutrition when evaluated by NRS-2002(p-values = 0.014, 0.001, and 0.007, respectively). An NRS-2002<3 was an independent predictive factor for complete tumor resectability (p=0.009). The patients with NRS-2002≥3 had a median overall survival(OS) of seven months (95% CI=0-24 months), as compared to the patients with NRS-2002<3 where median OS was 46 months(p=0,001). Phase angle(PhAα)≤ 4.5 was the strongest predictor of OS. Conclusion: Malnutrition is an independent predictor of incomplete cytoreduction in study population. It is an independent prognostic factor for poor OS. Preoperative nutritional assessment is an effective tool in identification of high-risk groups within EOC characterized by poor clinical outcome.

Objective The primary objective was to reveal the impact of social media ambassadors and the collaboration between the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) and the OncoAlert Network on Twitter during the ESGO 2022 Congress by comparing it with the ESGO 2021 Congress. We also aimed to share our experience on how to organize a social media ambassador program and evaluate the potential benefits for the society and the ambassadors. Methods We defined the impact as promoting the congress, sharing the knowledge, change in follower count, and change in tweet, retweet, and reply counts. We used the Academic Track Twitter Application Programming Interface to retrieve data from ESGO 2021 and ESGO 2022. We used the keywords of ESGO2021 and ESGO2022 to retrieve data for each of the conferences. The time range in our study captured interactions from before, during, and after conferences. We collected the ambassadors’, ESGO’s, and the European Network of Young Gynae Oncologists’ (ENYGO’s) follower data on Twitter from November 2021 to November 2022 for comparative analysis. Results There was a 7.23-fold increase in the use of the official congress hashtag in 2022 compared with 2021. Compared with #ESGO2021 data, the main interventions of the Social Media Ambassadors and OncoAlert partnership determined 7.79-, 17.36-, 5.50-, 10.58-, and 8.50-fold increases with #ESGO2022 data in the mentions, mentions in retweet, tweet, retweet, and replies, respectively. Similarly, all other most commonly used hashtags in the top 10 list indicated a range from 2.56- to 7.00-fold increase. Compared to the ESGO 2021 congress month, ESGO and the majority (83.3%, n=5) of ambassadors gained more followers during ESGO 2022 congress month. Conclusions An official social media ambassadors program and collaboration with influential accounts in the field of interest are beneficial for congress-related engagement on a social media platform (Twitter). Individuals participating in the program can also benefit from gaining higher visibility among specific audience.