Cheng Mark T K, Morris James S, Shah Syed F H, Tolley Abraham, Chen-Xu José, Sogandji Nihal, Fong Long H, Irodi Anushka, Chan Justine T N, Kamelian Kimia, Sievers Benjamin L, Sarela Shazia, Ho Margaret K, Burn Abigail, Patel Anita, Mbolo Ghislaine D, Hasan Muhammad, Fehintola Abdulbasit O, Yin Chan C, Spata Enti, Gupta Ravindra K, Favara David M
University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Addenbrooke's Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Hills Road, Cambridge, UK, CB2 0QQ.
Cambridge Institute of Therapeutic Immunology & Infectious Disease (CITIID), Department of Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
EClinicalMedicine. 2025 May 2;83:103194. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103194. eCollection 2025 May.
SARS-CoV-2 is known to impact patients with cancer adversely. Previous meta-analyses have lacked clarity on the recency of cancer diagnosis, anti-cancer treatment durations, and SARS-CoV-2 specific variants of concern (VOC). This study aimed to compare SARS-CoV-2 multivariable-adjusted clinical outcomes between patients with cancer and those without cancer, identifying key risk factors spanning pre- and post-Omicron periods.
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we identified from Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, and the WHO COVID-19 Research Database prospective and retrospective case-control studies and cohort studies published from 1st January 2019 to 22nd November 2024. We included case-control and cohort studies comparing at least 10 patients with active cancer (diagnosed or treated within three years prior to SARS-CoV-2 infection) to controls without cancer using multivariable analyses. Exclusion criteria included lack of clarity about active/inactive status of cancer, lack of a control group without cancer, lack of multivariate analysis comparing outcomes of interest in patients with active cancer vs patients without cancer, case reports or case series, and SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis not confirmed via laboratory testing. Outcomes measured were SARS-CoV-2 infection severity (WHO ordinal scale) and mortality differences by tumour type, treatment, and VOC (using sequencing data from NCBI Genbank and GISAID). A random-effects meta-analysis model was applied. The systematic review was PRISMA compliant and was registered with PROSPERO, CRD420234454524.
Of 35,501 studies initially identified, 30 met eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analysis, comprising 281,270 patients with cancer and 18,876,411 controls. Using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) risk of bias standards, 21 studies were rated good, one study rated was fair, and eight studies were rated poor. We found higher mortality odds ratios (OR) in patients with cancer infected with SARS-CoV-2: 1·40 (95% CI: 1·12-1·73, I = 98·1%) for solid tumours and 2·10 (95% CI: 1·43-3·07, I = 97·3%) for haematological malignancies, with the difference in mortality between these groups not reaching statistical significance (Q (1) = 3·32; = 0·0068). Amongst the solid cancers, thoracic and colorectal were linked to increased odds of mortality (ORs: 2·63 [95% CI: 1·65-4·20, I = 98·7%], and 1·65 [95% CI: 1·26-2·15, I = 92·7%], respectively). Metastatic cancers (OR: 3·59; 95% CI: 1·07-12·04, I = 99·5%) were also linked to greater odds of mortality compared to localised cancers (OR: 1·76; 95% CI: 1·32-2·34, I = 96·6%; = 0·26). No cancer types showed a reduced risk vs controls. Mortality varied significantly among VOCs; Alpha (OR: 4·59; 95% CI: 2·66-7·92, I: N/A) and Omicron (OR: 2·74; 95% CI: 1·84-4·09, I = 90·2%) were more associated with death than the ancestral Wu-1 (OR: 1·43; 95% CI: 1·14-1·80, I = 98·2%) and Delta (OR: 1·94; 95% CI: 1·65-2·29, I:N/A) variants (X (4) = 20·4; = 0·0004).
This comprehensive meta-analysis indicates that patients with active cancer with SARS-CoV-2 have a higher risk of mortality and hospitalisation than those without cancer. The risk of death was comparable between active solid and haematological tumours. SARS-CoV-2 severity and mortality risks were higher with thoracic, colorectal, or any metastatic cancers. Additionally, differences were noted in mortality risks across VOCs, diverging from VOC-associated mortality patterns in the general population. However, the strict three-year cutoff used to define active cancer excludes studies that used broader cancer criteria (i.e., any history of cancer), which may limit generalisability. Further limitations include varied definitions of disease severity, retrospective data collection, incomplete vaccination or lineage data, and significant between-study heterogeneity, potentially influencing these findings.
Cancer Research UK; UK Research and Innovation.
已知严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)会对癌症患者产生不利影响。以往的荟萃分析在癌症诊断的近期性、抗癌治疗持续时间以及SARS-CoV-2特定关注变体(VOC)方面缺乏清晰度。本研究旨在比较癌症患者和非癌症患者之间经多变量调整的SARS-CoV-2临床结局,确定涵盖奥密克戎毒株出现前后时期的关键风险因素。
在这项系统评价和荟萃分析中,我们从医学期刊数据库(Medline)、荷兰医学文摘数据库(Embase)、考科蓝系统评价中心(Cochrane Central)和世界卫生组织COVID-19研究数据库中识别出2019年1月1日至2024年11月22日发表的前瞻性和回顾性病例对照研究及队列研究。我们纳入了使用多变量分析将至少10例活动性癌症患者(在SARS-CoV-2感染前三年内被诊断或接受治疗)与无癌症对照进行比较的病例对照研究和队列研究。排除标准包括癌症活动/非活动状态不明确、缺乏无癌症对照组、缺乏比较活动性癌症患者与无癌症患者感兴趣结局的多变量分析、病例报告或病例系列,以及未通过实验室检测确诊SARS-CoV-2。测量的结局为SARS-CoV-2感染严重程度(世界卫生组织序贯量表)以及按肿瘤类型、治疗和VOC(使用来自美国国立生物技术信息中心基因库(NCBI Genbank)和全球共享流感数据倡议组织(GISAID)的测序数据)划分的死亡率差异。应用随机效应荟萃分析模型。该系统评价符合系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)标准,并在国际前瞻性系统评价注册库(PROSPERO)注册,注册号为CRD420234454524。
在最初识别的35501项研究中,30项符合纳入标准并被纳入荟萃分析,包括281270例癌症患者和对照组18876411例。根据美国医疗保健研究与质量局(AHRQ)的偏倚风险标准,21项研究被评为良好,1项研究被评为中等,8项研究被评为较差。我们发现感染SARS-CoV-2的癌症患者死亡率比值比(OR)更高:实体瘤为1.40(95%置信区间:1.12 - 1.73,I² = 98.1%),血液系统恶性肿瘤为2.10(95%置信区间:1.43 - 3.07,I² = 97.3%),两组之间的死亡率差异未达到统计学意义(Q(1) = 3.32;P = 0.0068)。在实体癌中,胸腺癌和结直肠癌与死亡率增加的几率相关(OR分别为:2.63 [95%置信区间:1.65 - 4.20,I² = 98.7%],以及1.65 [95%置信区间:1.26 - 2.15,I² = 92.7%])。与局限性癌症相比,转移性癌症(OR:3.59;95%置信区间:1.07 - 12.04,I² = 99.6%)的死亡几率也更高(OR:1.76;95%置信区间:1.32 - 2.34,I² = 96.6%;P = 0.26)。没有癌症类型显示出与对照组相比风险降低。不同VOC之间死亡率差异显著;与原始的武汉-1毒株(OR:1.43;95%置信区间:1.14 - 1.80,I² = 98.2%)和德尔塔毒株(OR:1.94;95%置信区间:1.65 - 2.29,I²:无可用数据)相比,阿尔法毒株(OR:4.59;95%置信区间:2.66 - 7.92,I²:无可用数据)和奥密克戎毒株(OR:2.74;95%置信区间:1.84 - 4.09,I² = 90.2%)与死亡的关联更强(χ²(4) = 20.4;P = 0.0004)。
这项全面的荟萃分析表明,感染SARS-CoV-2的活动性癌症患者比未患癌症的患者有更高的死亡风险和住院风险。活动性实体瘤和血液系统肿瘤的死亡风险相当。胸腺癌、结直肠癌或任何转移性癌症患者感染SARS-CoV-2后的严重程度和死亡风险更高。此外,不同VOC之间的死亡风险存在差异,这与一般人群中VOC相关的死亡模式不同。然而,用于定义活动性癌症的严格三年期限排除了使用更广泛癌症标准(即任何癌症病史)的研究,这可能会限制研究结果的普遍性。进一步的局限性包括疾病严重程度的不同定义、回顾性数据收集、疫苗接种或谱系数据不完整以及研究间显著的异质性,这些可能会影响这些研究结果。
英国癌症研究中心;英国研究与创新署。