MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389609190 · doi:10.1002/ijc.34798

Risk of <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 death for people with a pre‐existing cancer diagnosis prior to <scp>COVID</scp>‐19‐vaccination: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

2023· review· en· W4389609190 on OpenAlexaffabout
Julia Steinberg, Suzanne Hughes, Harriet Hui, Matthew Allsop, Sam Egger, Michael David, Michael Caruana, Peter Coxeter, Chelsea Carle, Tonia C. Onyeka, Isabel Rewais, Maria J. Monroy‐Iglesias, Núria Vives, Feixue Wei, Derrick Bary Abila, Giulia Carreras, Marilina Santero, Emma O’Dowd, Gigi Lui, Musliu Adetola Tolani, Maeve Mullooly, Shing Fung Lee, Rebecca Landy, Sharon J. B. Hanley, Gemma Binefa, Charlene M. McShane, Muluken Gizaw, Poongulali Selvamuthu, Houda Boukheris, Annet Nakaganda, Işıl Ergin, Fábio Ynoe de Moraes, Nahari Timilshina, Ashutosh Kumar, Diama Bhadra Vale, Ana Molina‐Barceló, Lisa M Force, Denise Campbell, Yuqing Wang, Fang Wan, Anna‐Lisa Baker, Ramnik Singh, Rehana A Salam, Susan Yuill, Richa Shah, Iris Lansdorp‐Vogelaar, Muhammed Aasim Yusuf, Ajay Aggarwal, Raúl Murillo, Julie S. Torode, Erich V. Kliewer, Freddie Bray, Kelvin Chan, Stuart Peacock, Timothy P. Hanna, Ophira Ginsburg, Mieke Van Hemelrijck, Richard Sullivan, Felipe Roitberg, André Ilbawi, Isabelle Soerjomataram, Karen Canfell

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cancer · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityHealth Sciences CentreCanadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer ControlSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of TorontoCancer Care OntarioQueen's University
FundersMedical Research CouncilMinderoo FoundationNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchCepheidCentre International de Recherche sur le CancerWorld Health OrganizationAstraZenecaNational Institutes of HealthConquer Cancer FoundationNational Health and Medical Research CouncilBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisOdds ratioHazard ratioPopulationCancerConfidence intervalLung cancerPublication biasDemographyInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract While previous reviews found a positive association between pre‐existing cancer diagnosis and COVID‐19‐related death, most early studies did not distinguish long‐term cancer survivors from those recently diagnosed/treated, nor adjust for important confounders including age. We aimed to consolidate higher‐quality evidence on risk of COVID‐19‐related death for people with recent/active cancer (compared to people without) in the pre‐COVID‐19‐vaccination period. We searched the WHO COVID‐19 Global Research Database (20 December 2021), and Medline and Embase (10 May 2023). We included studies adjusting for age and sex, and providing details of cancer status. Risk‐of‐bias assessment was based on the Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale. Pooled adjusted odds or risk ratios (aORs, aRRs) or hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using generic inverse‐variance random‐effects models. Random‐effects meta‐regressions were used to assess associations between effect estimates and time since cancer diagnosis/treatment. Of 23 773 unique title/abstract records, 39 studies were eligible for inclusion (2 low, 17 moderate, 20 high risk of bias). Risk of COVID‐19‐related death was higher for people with active or recently diagnosed/treated cancer (general population: aOR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.36‐1.61, I 2 = 0; people with COVID‐19: aOR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.41‐1.77, I 2 = 0.58; inpatients with COVID‐19: aOR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.34‐2.06, I 2 = 0.98). Risks were more elevated for lung (general population: aOR = 3.4, 95% CI: 2.4‐4.7) and hematological cancers (general population: aOR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.68‐2.68, I 2 = 0.43), and for metastatic cancers. Meta‐regression suggested risk of COVID‐19‐related death decreased with time since diagnosis/treatment, for example, for any/solid cancers, fitted aOR = 1.55 (95% CI: 1.37‐1.75) at 1 year and aOR = 0.98 (95% CI: 0.80‐1.20) at 5 years post‐cancer diagnosis/treatment. In conclusion, before COVID‐19‐vaccination, risk of COVID‐19‐related death was higher for people with recent cancer, with risk depending on cancer type and time since diagnosis/treatment.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.030
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.167
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of CancerSame topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsFrench-language works237,207