Patients' perspectives and safety of COVID-19 vaccination among cancer patients: A prospective single-center study.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
e24043 Background: Concerns about safety and treatment interference are known barriers to COVID-19 vaccination in cancer patients. Data on safety and tolerability in this population remain scarce. One of the objectives of this study is to describe COVID-19 vaccination safety in cancer patients. Methods: Patients diagnosed with a malignancy requiring systemic treatment in the last 12 months and undergoing COVID-19 vaccination were prospectively enrolled in this single-center study. Validated questionnaires to assess vaccine-related adverse events (VRAEs) were collected; chart review identified baseline characteristics and treatments received. Descriptive statistics and logistic regressions were performed. Results: 253 questionnaires were collected from 171 patients, enrolled between May and September 2021. 130 patients were survey-eligible after the 1st dose (D1) and 185 after 2nd dose (D2). 91 questionnaires were collected after D1 (Questionnaire 1: Q1) and 162 after D2 (Questionnaire 2: Q2). Surveys couldn’t be collected due to interval > 1 month between D1 / enrollment, patients’ unavailability, withdrawal of study or death. Median age was 55 (24-87) and 62.8% were female. 58.5% had solid tumors, treated with chemotherapy (49%) or checkpoint inhibitors only (9.5%); 19.4% malignancies were treated with targeted therapies and 22.1% had hematological malignancies. Most frequent solid tumors were breast (31.3%), lung (15.9%) and gastro-intestinal (GI) (14.3%). Patients received 45.6% Pfizer/BioNTech, 52.8% Moderna and 1.6% Oxford/AstraZeneca. A combination of 2 different vaccines was administered to 11.9%. Interval between D1 and D2 was ≤30 days in 53.1%, 31-90 days in 42.6%, and 91-180 days in 4.3%. Among all patients, 84.1% developed VRAEs after a median of 2 days post-vaccine for a median of 4 days. 74.5% had local symptoms (Sx) (pain, sensitivity and/or redness at injection site and/or arm) and 65.8% had systemic Sx. Most frequent systemic Sx were fatigue, chills or myalgia (39.4%), GI (6.3%) and fever (2.9%). Most patients (90.7%) described their Sx as having no / minimal impact (Gr 1), 7.8% reported seeking medical consultation (Gr 2), and 1.5% lead to hospitalization (Gr 3) (1 cardiovascular event, 1 infection; causality with concurrent systemic treatment not excluded and 1 due to malignancy). Gr 2, but not Gr 3, VRAEs were more common after D2 (11.4% vs 2.5%, p = 0.03). 41.7% considered their Sx as a new health problem. On multivariate analysis, younger age and female sex were significantly associated with the development of any Sx (OR 1.08, p = 0.01; OR 2.92, p = 0.02, respectively) and local Sx (OR 1.04, p = 0.04; OR 2.19, p = 0.04), but not systemic Sx or new health problem. Conclusions: Patients experienced mostly minor and transient symptoms post-vaccination; few perceived these as a new health problem. COVID-19 vaccination is overall safe and well-tolerated among cancer patients.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».