Search

OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic caused delays in definitive treatment of patients with prostate cancer. Beyond the immediate delay a backlog for future patients is expected. The objective of this work is to develop guidance on criteria for prioritisation of surgery and reconfiguring management pathways for patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer who opt for surgical treatment. A second aim was to identify the infection prevention and control (IPC) measures to achieve a low likelihood of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hazard if radical prostatectomy (RP) was to be carried out during the outbreak and whilst the disease is endemic. METHODS: We conducted an accelerated consensus process and systematic review of the evidence on COVID-19 and reviewed international guidance on prostate cancer. These were presented to an international prostate cancer expert panel (n = 34) through an online meeting. The consensus process underwent three rounds of survey in total. Additions to the second- and third-round surveys were formulated based on the answers and comments from the previous rounds. The Consensus opinion was defined as ≥80% agreement and this was used to reconfigure the prostate cancer pathways. RESULTS: Evidence on the delayed management of patients with prostate cancer is scarce. There was 100% agreement that prostate cancer pathways should be reconfigured and measures developed to prevent nosocomial COVID-19 for patients treated surgically. Consensus was reached on prioritisation criteria of patients for surgery and management pathways for those who have delayed treatment. IPC measures to achieve a low likelihood of nosocomial COVID-19 were coined as 'COVID-19 cold' sites. CONCLUSION: Reconfiguring management pathways for patients with prostate cancer is recommended if significant delay (>3-6 months) in surgical management is unavoidable. The mapped pathways provide guidance for such patients. The IPC processes proposed provide a framewo

The development of contractile muscle fatigue (CMF) affects training responses in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Downhill walking induces CMF with lower dyspnoea and fatigue than level walking. This study compared the effect of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) comprising downhill walking training (DT) to PR comprising level walking (conventional training (CT)) in patients with COPD. In this randomised controlled trial, 35 patients (62+/-8 years; forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) 50+/-17% predicted) were randomised to DT or CT. Exercise tolerance (6-minute walk test distance (6MWD); primary outcome), muscle function, symptoms, quality-of-life and physical activity levels were assessed before and after PR. Absolute training changes and the proportion of patients exceeding the 30 m 6MWD minimally important difference (MID) were compared between groups. Quadriceps muscle biopsies were collected after PR in a subset of patients to examine physiological responses to long-term eccentric training. No between-group differences were observed in absolute 6MWD improvement (mean 6MWD change 77+/-46 m DT versus 56+/-47 m CT; p=0.45), however 94% of patients in DT exceeded the 6MWD MID compared to 65% in CT (p=0.03). Patients in DT tended to have larger improvements than CT in other outcomes. Muscle biopsy analyses did not differ between groups. PR incorporating downhill walking confers similar magnitudes of effects to PR with conventional walking across clinical outcomes in patients with COPD, however, offers a more reliable stimulus to maximise the achievement of clinically relevant gains in functional exercise tolerance in people with COPD.Copyright ©ERS 2020