Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Pathologists and the coronavirus distraction effect
  1. Giancarlo Troncone1,
  2. Paul Hofman2
  1. 1 Public Health, University of Naplese Federico II, Naples, Italy
  2. 2 Pathology, INSERM, Nice, France
  1. Correspondence to Professor Giancarlo Troncone, Public Health, University of Naplese Federico II, Naples 80131, Italy; giancarlo.troncone{at}unina.it

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

The current COVID-19 pandemic has imposed sweeping changes in every aspect of life, not least in the way pathologists carry out their practice. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 spreads quickly from person to person through respiratory droplets released in the air by infected patients. Thus, respecting strict biosafety procedures while handling potentially infected fresh tissues, liquid samples or even air-dried fixed cytological preparations, has become paramount for pathologists. However, the so-called ‘distraction effect’ represents an even more subtle menace to the pathologists than the virus itself.1 In fact, because of this effect, pathologists run the risk of diverting their attention exclusively toward COVID-19 issues, with a detrimental effect for patients affected by other health-threatening diseases including cancer. Indeed, although rescheduling of non-urgent and elective pathological procedures has become common practice in the wake of today’s pandemic, pathologists should not postpone diagnostic procedures for high-risk patients with cancer.2 Likewise, molecular pathologists must continue to perform molecular predictive tests to assure timely selection of patients for targeted treatments.3 In this editorial, now that the peak of the pandemic is over in many countries, we argue that one lesson pathologists would do well to learn is that everyday pathology practice should never be overshadowed by other health concerns, even in the midst of a major health emergency.1

The report by Vigliar et al can be read as an epitomic example of what an effective prioritisation strategy can achieve in cytopathology in times of global health crises.2 In our experience, we found that whereas the number of the samples examined during the lockdown was drastically reduced, the percentage of malignant cases was significantly increased, thereby illustrating that cytology is crucial in the diagnosis of patients at high oncological risk.

By and large, whereas cytological activities for patients at …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Handling editor Runjan Chetty.

  • Contributors Both authors conceived, wrote and approved the final version of the editorial.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests GT reports personal fees (as speaker bureau or advisor) from Roche, MSD and Pfizer, outside the submitted editorial. PH has received honoraria from Roche, AstraZeneca, BMS, Novartis, Merck, MSD, Bayer, Qiagen, Lilly, Thermo Fisher and Biocartis, outside the submitted editorial.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.