Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on diagnosis, and healthcare utilization, among patients with cancer (lung, breast, and pancreas) and cardiovascular diseases (HF, AF, hypertensive, and chronic ischemic heart disease) in Germany: two systematic reviews.
Clinical Snapshot
PICO Framework
| P — Population | Patients with selected cancers (breast, lung, pancreatic) and cardiovascular diseases (atrial fibrillation/flutter, heart failure, hypertensive, chronic ischemic heart disease) in Germany |
| I — Intervention | COVID-19 pandemic period (2020-2023) with non-pharmaceutical interventions |
| C — Comparator | Pre-pandemic period (2018-2019) |
| O — Outcomes | Changes in new diagnoses, healthcare utilization, treatment patterns, and disease-specific mortality |
Bottom Line
This systematic review of German studies demonstrates substantial disruptions to cancer and cardiovascular care during COVID-19, with up to 25% reductions in new cancer diagnoses and 20% decreases in cardiovascular hospital admissions. While the evidence clearly shows healthcare access was compromised during pandemic peaks, the clinical consequences remain poorly understood due to limited follow-up data on treatment delays and mortality outcomes. The findings underscore the need for pandemic-resilient healthcare systems that maintain essential diagnostic and treatment services. However, the heterogeneous evidence base and focus on a single healthcare system limit broader generalizability. Clinicians should be aware that similar disruptions likely occurred globally, potentially creating a cohort of patients with delayed diagnoses requiring enhanced surveillance and catch-up care strategies.
Key Findings
P Value: Not applicable for systematic review
Effect Size: Up to 25% reduction in breast and lung cancer diagnoses; up to 20% reduction in cardiovascular admissions
Primary Outcome: Reduction in new cancer diagnoses and cardiovascular hospital admissions during pandemic
Nnt Or Sensitivity: Not applicable - descriptive systematic review of healthcare utilization patterns
Confidence Interval: Not reported due to narrative synthesis
Clinical Application
Findings highlight need for pandemic-resilient healthcare delivery models and early detection programs Relevant to Australian healthcare system given similar pandemic restrictions and hospital-based specialist care models; implications for Cancer Australia screening programs and cardiac services Patients with cancer and cardiovascular disease in developed healthcare systems with pandemic restrictions
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and related non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) (e.g., lockdowns and contact restrictions) disrupted routine healthcare delivery. In Germany, these measures affected diagnostic and treatment services for people with cancer and cardiovascular diseases, potentially delaying diagnosis and adversely influencing outcomes. We assessed whether and to what extent diagnosis, health utilization and health outcome among patients with selected cancer and cardiovascular conditions changed in Germany during the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted two systematic reviews of studies from Germany on selected cancers (breast, lung and pancreatic) and cardiovascular conditions (atrial fibrillation/flutter, heart failure, hypertensive and chronic ischemic heart disease). Protocols were registered in PROSPERO and the reviews were reported in accordance with PRISMA. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Embase and screened grey literature. Outcomes included changes in new diagnoses, healthcare utilization, treatment, and disease-specific mortality during the pandemic (2020-2023) compared with the pre-pandemic period (2018-2019). Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using an adapted ROBINS-E tool. Owing to heterogeneity, we synthesized findings narratively. RESULTS: We screened 1991 records for cancer and 4,981 records for cardiovascular diseases, and included 9 cancer studies and 10 cardiovascular studies. For cancer, several studies reported a relative reduction in new breast and lung cancer diagnoses of up to 25% during lockdown periods; hospital admissions decreased by up to 9%. For cardiovascular conditions, hospital admissions for atrial fibrillation/flutter and heart failure decreased by up to 20%, particularly during pandemic peaks. Evidence on treatment delays, changes in treatment, and mortality was limited, and outcomes for other included diagnoses were often not reported. DISCUSSION: The available evidence indicates substantial reductions in hospital admissions and new diagnoses among patients with cancer and cardiovascular disease in Germany during the pandemic, suggesting major disruptions to care delivery. However, heterogeneity and gaps in the evidence base limit a comprehensive assessment of downstream outcomes. More comprehensive, linked data and further research are needed to quantify the full pandemic's impact and to strengthen health-system resilience for future crises.
References
- 1.Ropeter, J., Overhageböck, N., Dreier, M., Meyerdierks, D., Imran, A., Heinsohn, T., Steinmann, M., Kuhlmann, A., Jahn, B., Lange, B., Klett-Tammen, C. J., & Harries, M. (2026). Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on diagnosis, and healthcare utilization, among patients with cancer (lung, breast, and pancreas) and cardiovascular diseases (HF, AF, hypertensive, and chronic ischemic heart disease) in Germany: two systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00103-023-03665-9
Related Research
The American journal of pathology
An Integrated Machine Learning and Genomic Framework for Precise Detection of Gastric Cancer
3 Aug 2026
Current opinion in chemical biology
Prediction of protein-protein interactions and co-complex models with deep learning
3 Aug 2026
European journal of radiology
A CT-based deep learning model to differentiate between benign and malignant adrenal lesions
3 Aug 2026
This content is for educational purposes for healthcare professionals only and does not constitute clinical advice. Clinical decisions should be based on individual patient assessment, current guidelines, and appropriate specialist consultation. Editorial Standards · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service