The CAPER studies: five case-control studies aimed at identifying and quantifying the risk of cancer in symptomatic primary care patients

Symptoms in the general Norwegian adult population - prevalence and associated factors

BACKGROUND

Patients´ own perceptions and evaluations of symptoms, functioning and other health-related factors, i.e. Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs), are important elements for providing good patient care. Symptoms are subjective and best elicited by the patient orally or by using PRO measures (PROMs), be it on paper, or as electronic assessment tools. Reference values on frequently used PROMs facilitate the interpretation of scores for use in clinics and research settings, by comparing patient data with relevant samples from the general population. Study objectives were to (1) present reference values for the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) (2) examine the occurrence and intensity of symptoms assessed by the MDASI in a general Norwegian adult population sample, and (3) examine factors associated with higher symptom burden defined as the sum score of all symptoms, and factors associated with symptoms` interference on functions.

METHODS

In 2015, MDASI was sent by mail as part of a larger survey, to a representative sample of the general Norwegian adult population (N = 6165). Medical comorbidities were assessed by the Self-Administered Comorbidity Questionnaire. Depression was self-reported on the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9). Linear multivariable regression analysis was used to examine for factors associated with MDASI sum score and factors associated with symptoms' interference on functions.

RESULTS

The response rate was 36%. More women (54%) than men (46%) responded. Mean age was 55 years (SD 14). The most frequent symptoms were fatigue (59.7%), drowsiness (56.2%) and pain (56.1%). Fatigue, pain and disturbed sleep had the highest mean scores. The presence of one or more comorbidities, increasing PHQ-9 score and lower level of education were associated with higher MDASI sum score (p < 0.001). The MDASI sum score and the PHQ-9 score were positively associated with all interference items (p < 0.001) except for walking (p = 0.22).

CONCLUSION

This study provides the first Norwegian reference values for MDASI. The presence of one or more comorbidities, higher level of depressive symptoms and lower level of education were significantly associated with higher MDASI sum score. These covariates must be controlled for when using the reference values.

GPs' perspectives of the patient encounter - in the context of standardized cancer patient pathways

Objective: We aim to explore how GPs assign meanings and act upon patients' symptoms in primary care encounters in the context of standardized cancer patient pathways (CPPs).Design, setting and subjects: Thirteen individual interviews were conducted with GPs, at primary healthcare centers (n = 4) in one county in northern Sweden. Interviews were analyzed using grounded theory method. The results were then linked to symbolic interactionism.Main outcome measures: GPs' perspectives about assigning meanings to patients' presented symptoms and perception about CPPs.Results: In the encounter, GPs engaged in two simultaneous interactions, one with patients' symptoms - and the other with CPPs. The core category Disentangling patients' care trajectory consists of three categories, interpreted as GPs' strategies developed to assign meaning to symptoms. These strategies are carried out not in a straightforward manner but rather in a conflicting way, illuminating the complexity of GPs' daily work.Conclusions: Interacting with patients is vital for assigning meaning to presented symptoms. However, nowadays GPs are not only required to interact with patients, they are also required to interact with CPPs. These standardized routines might create pressure and demands on GPs, especially for those experiencing a lack of information about CPPs. Beside of carrying out the challenging patient/person-centered dialogues and interpreting presented symptoms, GPs also need to link the interpreted symptoms to CPPs. Therefore, it is essential that GPs are given opportunities at their workplaces to continuously be informed and be supported in order to practice CPPs and thereby optimize trajectories for patients undergoing cancer diagnostics.Key points Current awareness: • GPs deliberation about patients' trajectories is a complex process, often dealing with vague symptoms. How CPPs influence this process within the encounter has not been studied. Main statements:  • GPs in our study were involved in two simultaneous interactions, one with patients' symptoms in the encounter - and the other with CPPs within the healthcare organization. • Symbolic interactionism helped capture how GPs deliberated about conflicting and paradoxical aspects of the encounter, in terms of balancing two contradictory ways of action that GPs face when providing patient/person-centered care and linking to CPPs. • Based on our results, primary care needs support from healthcare organizations to build capacity about CPPs and how to use them.

New horizons in iron deficiency anaemia in older adults

Iron deficiency anaemia (IDA) is common in older adults and associated with a range of adverse outcomes. Differentiating iron deficiency from other causes of anaemia is important to ensure appropriate investigations and treatment. It is possible to make the diagnosis reliably using simple blood tests. Clinical evaluation and assessment are required to help determine the underlying cause and to initiate appropriate investigations. IDA in men and post-menopausal females is most commonly due to occult gastrointestinal blood loss until proven otherwise, although there is a spectrum of underlying causative pathologies. Investigation decisions should take account of the wishes of the patient and their competing comorbidities, individualising the approach. Management involves supplementation using oral or intravenous (IV) iron then consideration of treatment of the underlying cause of deficiency. Future research areas are outlined including the role of Hepcidin and serum soluble transferrin receptor measurement, quantitative faecal immunochemical testing, alternative dosing regimens and the potential role of IV iron preparations.

The association between unexpected weight loss and cancer diagnosis in primary care: a matched cohort analysis of 65,000 presentations

Background

We aimed to understand the time period of cancer diagnosis and the cancer types detected in primary care patients with unexpected weight loss (UWL) to inform cancer guidelines.

Methods

This retrospective matched cohort study used cancer registry linked electronic health records from the UK’s Clinical Practice Research Datalink from between 2000 and 2014. Univariable and multivariable time-to-event analyses examined the association between UWL, and all cancers combined, cancer site and stage.

Results

In all, 63,973 patients had UWL recorded, of whom 1375 (2.2%) were diagnosed with cancer within 2 years (days-to-diagnosis: mean 181; median 80). Men with UWL (HR 3.28 (2.88–3.73)) and women (1.87 (1.68–2.08)) were more likely than comparators to be diagnosed with cancer within 3 months. The association was greatest in men aged ≥50 years and women ≥70 years. The commonest cancers were pancreas, cancer of unknown primary, gastro-oesophageal, lymphoma, hepatobiliary, lung, bowel and renal-tract. The majority were late-stage, but there was some evidence of association with stage II and stage III cancers. In the 3–24 months after presenting with UWL, cancer diagnosis was less likely than in comparators.

Conclusion

UWL recorded in primary care is associated with a broad range of cancer sites of early and late-stage.

The use of electronic healthcare records for colorectal cancer screening referral decisions and risk prediction model development

BACKGROUND

The database used for the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) derives participant information from primary care records. Combining predictors with FOBTs has shown to improve referral decisions and accuracy. The richer data available from GP databases could be used to complement screening referral decisions by identifying those at greatest risk of colorectal cancer. We determined the availability of data for key predictors and whether this information could be used to inform more accurate screening referral decisions.

METHODS

An English BCSP cohort was derived using the electronic notifications received from the BCSP database to GP records. The cohort covered a period between 13th May 2009 to 17th January 2017. Completeness of variables and univariable associations were assessed. Risk prediction models were developed using Cox regression and multivariable fractional polynomials with backwards elimination. Optimism adjusted performance metrics were reported. The sensitivity and specificity of a combined approach using the negative FOBT model plus FOBT positive patients was determined using a probability equivalent to a 3% PPV NICE guidelines level.

RESULTS

292,059 participants aged 60-74 were derived for the BCSP screening cohort. A model including the screening test result had a C-statistic of 0.860, c-slope of 0.997, and R² of 0.597. A model developed for negative screening results only had a C-statistic of 0.597, c-slope of 0.940, and R² of 0.062. Risk predictors included in the models included; age, sex, alcohol consumption, IBS diagnosis, family history of gastrointestinal cancer, smoking status, previous negatives and whether a GP had ordered a blood test. For the combined screening approach, sensitivity increased slightly from 53.90% (FOBT only) to 58.82% but at the expense of an increased referral rate.

CONCLUSIONS

This research has identified several potential predictors for CRC in a BCSP population. A risk prediction model developed for BCSP FOBT negative patients was not clinically useful due to a low sensitivity and increased referral rate. The predictors identified in this study should be investigated in a refined algorithm combining the quantitative FIT result. Combining data from multiple sources enables fuller patient profiles using the primary care and screening database interface.

Communicating cancer risk in the primary care consultation when using a cancer risk assessment tool: Qualitative study with service users and practitioners

Background

Cancer risk assessment tools are designed to help detect cancer risk in symptomatic individuals presenting to primary care. An early detection of cancer risk could mean early referral for investigations, diagnosis and treatment, helping to address late diagnosis of cancer. It is not clear how best cancer risk may be communicated to patients when using a cancer risk assessment tool to assess their risk of developing cancer.

Objective

We aimed to explore the perspectives of service users and primary care practitioners on communicating cancer risk information to patients, when using QCancer, a cancer risk assessment tool.

Design

A qualitative study involving the use of individual interviews and focus groups.

Setting and participants

Conducted in primary care settings in Lincolnshire with a convenience sample of 36 participants (19 service users who were members of the public) and 17 primary care practitioners (general practitioners and practice nurses).

Results

Participants suggested ways to improve communication of cancer risk information: personalizing risk information; involving patients in use of the tool; sharing risk information openly; and providing sufficient time when using the tool during consultations.

Conclusion

Communication of cancer risk information is complex and difficult. We identified strategies for improving communication with patients involving cancer risk estimations in primary care consultations.

Evaluation of a national lung cancer symptom awareness campaign in Wales

Background

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality in Wales. We conducted a before- and after- study to evaluate the impact of a four-week mass-media campaign on awareness, presentation behaviour and lung cancer outcomes.

Methods

Population-representative samples were surveyed for cough symptom recall/recognition and worry about wasting doctors’ time pre-campaign (June 2016; n = 1001) and post-campaign (September 2016; n = 1013). GP cough symptom visits, urgent suspected cancer (USC) referrals, GP-ordered radiology, new lung cancer diagnoses and stage at diagnosis were compared using routine data during the campaign (July–August 2016) and corresponding control (July–August 2015) periods.

Results

Increased cough symptom recall (p < 0.001), recognition (p < 0.001) and decreased worry (p < 0.001) were observed. GP visits for cough increased by 29% in the target 50+ age-group during the campaign (p < 0.001) and GP-ordered chest X-rays increased by 23% (p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant change in USC referrals (p = 0.82), new (p = 0.70) or early stage (p = 0.27) diagnoses, or in routes to diagnosis.

Conclusions

Symptom awareness, presentation and GP-ordered chest X-rays increased during the campaign but did not translate into increased USC referrals or clinical outcomes changes. Short campaign duration and follow-up, and the small number of new lung cancer cases observed may have hampered detection effects.

Suspected cancer symptoms and blood test results in primary care before a diagnosis of lung cancer: a case-control study

Aim: To compare symptoms and blood test results prior to cancer diagnosis in individuals who developed lung cancer and those who did not. Patients & methods: Nested case-control study, lung cancer patients were matched to up four controls with no record of cancer. Differences in symptoms and blood test results were investigated in the 2-year period prior to diagnosis. Results: 26,379 lung cancer patients were matched to 92,125 controls. Elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) was independently predictive of lung cancer at every 2-month interval 12 months prior to diagnosis. Elevated CRP in conjunction with at least one symptom was associated with greater than fourfold higher odds of lung cancer. Conclusion: CRP may be a prediagnostic marker for lung cancer, and when present with other symptoms could facilitate the investigation of high-risk individuals.

Potential for Reducing Time to Referral for Colorectal Cancer Patients in Primary Care

PURPOSE

An optimal diagnostic process in primary care is pivotal for reducing cancer-related disease burden. This study aims to explore reasons for long times to referral for Dutch colorectal cancer (CRC) patients in primary care.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of anonymized free-text primary care records from the Julius General Practitioners' Network database, linked to the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients with a confirmed CRC diagnosis from 2007 through 2011 that symptomatically presented in primary care were included. Median time and interquartile ranges from presentation in primary care to referral were calculated for multiple patient and presentation characteristics. Associations of these characteristics with long time to referral (75th percentile was ≥59 days) were examined with log-binomial regression analyses. Routes to referral of patients with the longest times to referral were explored using thematic free-text analyses (90th percentile at ≥219 days).

RESULTS

Among the 309 people with CRC, patients who were female, did not have a registered family history, had a history of malignancy, lacked alarm symptoms at presentation, or had hemorrhoids at physical examination were at risk for longer time to referral in univariable analyses (longer median durations and/or univariable association with the 75th percentile). Only presentation without alarm symptoms showed a statistically significant association with long duration (75th percentile) in multivariable analysis (relative risk = 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1-2.6). Thematic exploration of the diagnostic routes to referral of patients with the longest durations (90th percentile) showed 2 dominating themes: "alternative working diagnosis" and "suboptimal diagnostic strategies," and included the sub-themes "omitting to reconsider an initial diagnosis" and "lacking follow-up."

CONCLUSIONS

Long time to referral for CRC in primary care is mainly related to low cancer suspicion. There is potential for reducing the longest times to referral for patients with CRC in primary care, with earlier reconsideration of the initial hypothesis and implementation of strict follow-up consultations.

Potential for prevention: a cohort study of colonoscopies and removal of adenomas in a FIT-based colorectal cancer screening programme

Introduction: Evidence suggests that colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using guaiac faecal occult blood tests (gFOBT) reduces the CRC burden by facilitating timely removal of adenomas. Yet, the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) is being implemented in many countries. The aim of this study was to analyse the risk of having adenomas detected when invited for FIT-based screening as compared to those not yet invited. Material and Methods: The study was designed as a register-based retrospective cohort study. The potential for prevention was estimated as number of individuals who had no adenomas, non-advanced adenomas, and advanced adenomas detected per 1000 invited/not yet invited individuals and the relative risk (RR) of each of the three outcomes. Results: A total of 1,359,340 individuals were included, 29.6% of whom had been invited and 70.4% had not yet been invited to participate in CRC screening. Compared with the not yet invited population, the invited group had a RR of no adenomas of 2.28 (2.22-2.34) and a RR of advanced adenomas of 7.41 (6.93-7.91). The RR of colonoscopy was 2.93 (2.87-2.99) for the invited population compared with the not yet invited population. Conclusion: The RR of having a colonoscopy was three times higher among those invited compared to those not yet invited for CRC screening and twice as often those who had been invited compared to those not yet invited had no adenomas detected. Still, the risk of advanced adenomas was more than seven times higher among the invited population, indicating that the screening programme holds great potential for reducing the CRC burden. Abbreviations: CI: Confidence interval; CRC: Colorectal cancer; FIT: Faecal immunochemical test; ICD: International Classification of Disease; RR: Relative risk.

Use of multiple inflammatory marker tests in primary care: using Clinical Practice Research Datalink to evaluate accuracy

Background

Research comparing C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and plasma viscosity (PV) in primary care is lacking. Clinicians often test multiple inflammatory markers, leading to concerns about overuse.

Aim

To compare the diagnostic accuracies of CRP, ESR, and PV, and to evaluate whether measuring two inflammatory markers increases accuracy.

Design and setting

Prospective cohort study in UK primary care using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

Method

The authors compared diagnostic test performance of inflammatory markers, singly and paired, for relevant disease, defined as any infections, autoimmune conditions, or cancers. For each of the three tests (CRP, ESR, and PV), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and area under receiver operator curve (AUC) were calculated.

Results

Participants comprised 136 961 patients with inflammatory marker testing in 2014; 83 761 (61.2%) had a single inflammatory marker at the index date, and 53 200 (38.8%) had multiple inflammatory markers. For ‘any relevant disease’, small differences were seen between the three tests; AUC ranged from 0.659 to 0.682. CRP had the highest overall AUC, largely because of marginally superior performance in infection (AUC CRP 0.617, versus ESR 0.589, P<0.001). Adding a second test gave limited improvement in the AUC for relevant disease (CRP 0.682, versus CRP plus ESR 0.688, P<0.001); this is of debatable clinical significance. The NPV for any single inflammatory marker was 94% compared with 94.1% for multiple negative tests.

Conclusion

Testing multiple inflammatory markers simultaneously does not increase ability to rule out disease and should generally be avoided. CRP has marginally superior diagnostic accuracy for infections, and is equivalent for autoimmune conditions and cancers, so should generally be the first-line test.

Diagnostic spectrum and time intervals in Sweden's first diagnostic center for patients with nonspecific symptoms of cancer

BACKGROUND

Fast-track referral is an increasingly used method for diagnostic evaluation of patients suspected of having cancer. This approach is challenging and not used as often for patients with only nonspecific symptoms. In order to expedite the diagnostics for these patients, we established Sweden's first Diagnostic Center (DC) focusing on outcomes related to diagnoses and diagnostic time intervals.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was designed as a prospective cohort study. Patients aged ≥18 years who presented in primary care with nonspecific symptoms of a serious disease were eligible for referral to the DC after having completed an initial investigation. Acceptable diagnostic time intervals were defined to be a maximum of 15 days in primary care and 22 days at the DC. Diagnostic outcome, length of diagnostic time intervals and patient satisfaction were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 290 patients were included in the study. Cancer was diagnosed in 22.1%, other diseases in 64.1%, and no diagnosis was identified in 13.8% of these patients. Patients diagnosed with cancer were older, had shorter patient interval (time from first symptom to help-seeking), shorter DC-interval (time from referral decision in primary care to diagnosis) and showed a greater number of symptoms compared to patients with no diagnosis. The median primary care interval was 21 days and the median DC interval was 11 days. Few symptoms, no diagnosis, female sex, longer patient interval, and incomplete investigations were associated with prolonged diagnostic time intervals. Patient satisfaction was high; 86% of patients reported a positive degree of satisfaction with the diagnostic procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated that the DC concept is feasible with a diagnosis reached in 86.2% of the patients in addition to favorable diagnostic time intervals at the DC and a high degree of patient satisfaction.

Predictive values of colorectal cancer alarm symptoms in the general population: a nationwide cohort study

Background

Alarm symptoms are used in many cancer referral guidelines. The objectives were to determine the 1-year predictive values (PVs) of colorectal cancer (CRC) alarm symptoms in the general population and to describe the proportion of alarm symptoms reported prior to diagnosis.

Methods

A nationwide prospective cohort of 69,060 individuals ≥40 years randomly selected from the Danish population was invited to complete a survey regarding symptoms and healthcare-seeking in 2012. Information on CRC diagnoses in a 12-month follow-up came from the Danish Cancer Registry. PVs and positive and negative likelihood ratios were calculated.

Results

A total of 37,455 individuals participated (response rate 54.2%). Sixty-four individuals were diagnosed with CRC. The single symptom with the highest positive PVs (PPV) and LR+ was rectal bleeding. PPVs were generally higher among individuals aged ≥75 years and highest among those reporting at least one specific alarm symptom that led to a GP contact.

Conclusion

In general, the PPVs of CRC alarm symptoms are low and the NPVs high, especially in the youngest age groups. The LR +  show a relative association with specific symptoms like rectal bleeding. Future campaigns on early diagnosis of CRC should focus on healthcare-seeking when experiencing rectal bleeding and target older people with the highest incidence.

Recognising Lung Cancer in Primary Care

Significant advances in the management of both early and advanced stage lung cancer have not yet led to the scale of improved outcomes which have been achieved in other cancers over the last 40 years. Diagnosis of lung cancer at the earliest stage of disease is strongly associated with improved survival. Therefore, although recent advances in oncology may herald breakthroughs in effective treatment, achieving early diagnosis will remain crucial to obtaining optimal outcomes. This is challenging, as most lung cancer symptoms are non-specific or are common respiratory symptoms which usually represent benign disease. Identification of patients at risk of lung cancer who require further investigation is an important responsibility for general practitioners (GPs). Diagnosis has historically relied upon plain chest X-ray (CXR), organised in response to symptoms. The sensitivity of this modality, however, compares unfavourably with that of computed tomography (CT). In some jurisdictions screening high-risk individuals with low dose CT (LDCT) is now recommended. However uptake remains low and the eligibility for screening programmes is restricted. Therefore, even if screening is widely adopted, most patients will continue to be diagnosed after presenting with symptoms. Achieving early diagnosis requires GPs to maintain an appropriate level of suspicion and readiness to investigate in high-risk patients or those with non-resolving symptoms. This article discusses the early detection of lung cancer from a primary care perspective. We outline risk factors and epidemiology, the role of screening and offer guidance on the recognition of symptomatic presentation and the investigation and referral of suspected lung cancer.

Association of Primary Care Consultation Patterns With Early Signs and Symptoms of Psychosis

IMPORTANCE

Primary care is an important part of the care pathway for patients with psychosis; therefore, primary care physicians need to be able to accurately identify those at clinical high risk of psychosis. The difficulty of this task is increased because clinical high-risk symptoms are frequently nonspecific to psychosis.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the consultation patterns for a prespecified set of symptoms can be used to identify primary care patients who later developed a psychotic illness.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This nested case-control study used primary care consultation data collected from 530 primary care practices in 13 UK regions from January 1, 2000, through September 30, 2009. Participants included 11 690 adults with a diagnosis of psychosis and 81 793 control participants who did not have a diagnosis of psychosis individually matched by age group, sex, and primary care practice. Data were analyzed from July 1, 2015, through June 2, 2017.

EXPOSURES

Prespecified symptoms selected from literature included attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder-like symptoms, bizarre behavior, blunted affect, problems associated with cannabis, depressive symptoms, role functioning problems, social isolation, symptoms of mania, obsessive-compulsive disorder-like symptoms, disordered personal hygiene, sleep disturbance, problems associated with cigarette smoking, and suicidal behavior (including self-harm).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Case (diagnosis of psychosis) or control (no diagnosis of psychosis) status. Conditional logistic regression was used to investigate the association between symptoms and case-control status in the 5 years before diagnosis. Positive predictive values (PPVs) were calculated using the Bayes theorem for symptoms stratified by age group and sex. Repeated-measures Poisson regression was used to investigate symptom consultation rate.

RESULTS

Of the total sample of 93 483 participants, 57.4% were female and 40.0% were older than 60 years (mean [SD] age, 51.34 [21.75] years). Twelve symptoms were associated with a later psychotic diagnosis (all prespecified symptoms except disordered personal hygiene). The strongest association was with suicidal behavior (odds ratio [OR], 19.06; 95% CI, 16.55-21.95). Positive predictive values were heterogeneous across age and sex. The highest PPVs were for suicidal behavior (33.0% in men 24 years or younger [95% CI, 24.2%-43.2%] and 19.6% in women aged 25-34 years [95% CI, 13.7%-27.2%]). Pairs of symptoms were associated with an increase in PPV. Consultation rates were higher in cases and increased 3 months before diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Most of the preselected nonspecific symptoms were associated with a later psychotic diagnosis, particularly among young men consulting for suicidal behavior, especially if consulting with increasing frequency. These symptoms should alert physicians to patients who may benefit from a further assessment of psychotic symptoms.

Risk of cancer and repeated urgent referral after negative investigation for cancer

INTRODUCTION

Many countries have implemented cancer patient pathways (CPPs) for organ-specific cancers. However, due to high symptom diversity, it can be difficult for the General Practitioner (GP) to decide on the appropriate CPP.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to estimate the proportion of patients who were referred to a second CPP, were diagnosed with cancer or died within 6 months after receiving a negative result from clinical investigation through an initial CPP.

METHODS

We conducted a historical cohort study using routinely collected data with 6 months of follow-up. Data were collected from Danish registries.

RESULTS

We included 109998 study subjects: 0.6% received a cancer diagnosis, 2.3% died and 6.1% were referred to a second CPP within 6 months. A total of 48.9% of the re-referrals after a first CPP in the gastrointestinal (GI) area were also referred to a second CPP in the GI area. Re-referral to a second CPP corresponded to a positive predictive value (PPV) of 4.4% to be diagnosed with cancer.

CONCLUSION

A total of 6% of patients who received a negative result after investigation in an organ-specific CPP were re-referred within 6 months to a new organ-specific CPP; many of these were in the same anatomical area as the first CPP. The PPV of 4.4% to be diagnosed with cancer indicates that some cancers may be missed in the diagnostic investigation through the first CPP. This calls for reconsideration of how CPPs may best support the primary cancer diagnosis.

Urological symptoms among 23,240 men in the general danish population - concerns about symptoms, their persistence and influence on primary care contacts

OBJECTIVE

To analyse possible associations between men's likelihood of contacting a general practitioner (GP) for urological symptoms and the persistence of the symptoms, the influence on daily activities and the level of concern about the symptoms.

DESIGN

Web-based nationwide cross-sectional questionnaire study.

SETTING

The general population in Denmark.

SUBJECTS

48,910 randomly selected men aged 20+ years.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Urological symptom prevalence and odds ratios for GP contact with urological symptoms in regard to concern for the symptom, influence on daily activities and the persistence of the symptom.

RESULTS

Some 23,240 men responded to the questionnaire, yielding a response rate of 49.8%. The prevalence of at least one urological symptom was 59.9%. Among men experiencing at least one urological symptom almost one-fourth reported contact to general practice regarding the symptom. Approximately half of the symptoms reported to be extremely concerning were discussed with a GP.

CONCLUSION

Increased symptom concern, influence on daily activities and long-term persistence increased the likelihood of contacting a GP with urological symptoms. This research points out that guidelines for PSA testing might be challenged by the high prevalence of urological symptoms. Key points  The decision process of whether to contact the general practitioner (GP) is influenced by different factors, but contradictory results has been found in triggers and barriers for help-seeking with urological symptoms.   • Increased symptom concern, influence on daily activities and long-term persistence consistently increased the likelihood of contacting a general practitioner with urological symptoms in men.   • Only 50% of the symptoms reported to be extremely concerning were however discussed with the GP.   • Guidelines for PSA testing might be challenged by the high prevalence of urological symptoms.

Barriers to contacting general practice with alarm symptoms of colorectal cancer: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

A prerequisite for general practitioners (GPs) being able to refer patients with cancer alarm symptoms for further investigations is that individuals present to the GP. Knowledge of barriers to help-seeking is, however, sparse. Objectives. The aim of this study was to analyse associations between the experience of recent-onset alarm symptom of colorectal cancer and four different barriers towards GP contact.

METHODS

A nationwide web-based cohort survey was conducted in 100000 individuals aged 20 years or above, randomly selected from the Danish Civil Registration System. Items regarding experience of four predefined alarm symptoms of colorectal cancer (rectal bleeding, abdominal pain, change in stool texture and change in stool frequency), decisions about contact to GPs and barriers towards GP contact were included.

RESULTS

A total of 37455 respondents over 40 years (51.8%) completed the questionnaire. The proportion of individuals with no contact to the GP varied between 69.8% and 79.8% for rectal bleeding and change in stool frequency, respectively. The most widely reported barriers were being worried about wasting the doctor's time and being too busy to make time to visit the doctor. Men with rectal bleeding significantly more often reported being worried about what the doctor might find. The proportion of individuals who reported barriers was, in general, higher among the youngest age group.

CONCLUSION

Barriers to contacting the GP were frequent when experiencing alarm symptoms of colorectal cancer. Reporting the different barriers was significantly associated with gender and age.

Online Decision Support Tool for Personalized Cancer Symptom Checking in the Community (REACT): Acceptability, Feasibility, and Usability Study

Background

Improving cancer survival in the UK, despite recent significant gains, remains a huge challenge. This can be attributed to, at least in part, patient and diagnostic delays, when patients are unaware they are suffering from a cancerous symptom and therefore do not visit a general practitioner promptly and/or when general practitioners fail to investigate the symptom or refer promptly. To raise awareness of symptoms that may potentially be indicative of underlying cancer among members of the public a symptom-based risk assessment model (developed for medical practitioner use and currently only used by some UK general practitioners) was utilized to develop a risk assessment tool to be offered to the public in community settings. Such a tool could help individuals recognize a symptom, which may potentially indicate cancer, faster and reduce the time taken to visit to their general practitioner. In this paper we report results about the design and development of the REACT (Risk Estimation for Additional Cancer Testing) website, a tool to be used in a community setting allowing users to complete an online questionnaire and obtain personalized cancer symptom-based risk estimation.

Objective

The objectives of this study are to evaluate (1) the acceptability of REACT among the public and health care practitioners, (2) the usability of the REACT website, (3) the presentation of personalized cancer risk on the website, and (4) potential approaches to adopt REACT into community health care services in the UK.

Methods

Our research consisted of multiple stages involving members of the public (n=39) and health care practitioners (n=20) in the UK. Data were collected between June 2017 and January 2018. User views were collected by (1) the “think-aloud” approach when participants using the website were asked to talk about their perceptions and feelings in relation to the website, and (2) self-reporting of website experiences through open-ended questionnaires. Data collection and data analysis continued simultaneously, allowing for website iterations between different points of data collection.

Results

The results demonstrate the need for such a tool. Participants suggest the best way to offer REACT is through a guided approach, with a health care practitioner (eg, pharmacist or National Health Service Health Check nurse) present during the process of risk evaluation. User feedback, which was generally consistent across members of public and health care practitioners, has been used to inform the development of the website. The most important aspects were: simplicity, ability to evaluate multiple cancers, content emphasizing an inviting community “feel,” use (when possible) of layperson language in the symptom screening questionnaire, and a robust and positive approach to cancer communication relying on visual risk representation both with affected individuals and the entire population at risk.

Conclusions

This study illustrates the benefits of involving public and stakeholders in developing and implementing a simple cancer symptom check tool within community. It also offers insights and design suggestions for user-friendly interfaces of similar health care Web-based services, especially those involving personalized risk estimation.

Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening in Detecting Earlier-Stage Disease-A Nationwide Cohort Study in Denmark

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Most studies of the effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) using the fecal occult blood test tested the guaiac fecal occult blood test. However, the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is now commonly used in screening. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of FIT-based screening for CRC on the number of incident CRC diagnoses and stage at diagnosis for individuals in Denmark who were invited for screening vs not yet invited.

METHODS

We collected data for this register-based retrospective cohort study during the first 16 months of the prevalence round of a FIT-based CRC screening program (March 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015). A total of 402,826 residents of Denmark (50-72 years old) were randomly invited to undergo CRC screening within the study period, and 956,514 were invited thereafter. We obtained information on CRC diagnosis, date, and stage at diagnosis from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group database. Cancer incidence per 100,000 invited/not yet invited individuals was calculated, along with the relative risk (RR) of CRC among invited compared with not yet invited individuals.

RESULTS

CRC incidence during the study period was 339.4/100,000 invited individuals and 169.6/100,000 not yet invited individuals. CRC incidence increased with age among invited and not yet invited individuals. For invited women compared with not yet invited women, the RR of being diagnosed with stage I CRC was 3.39 (95% CI, 2.61-4.39), with stage II CRC was 2.16 (95% CI, 1.71-2.72), with stage III CRC was 1.37 (95% CI, 1.08-1.75), and with stage IV CRC was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.68-1.23). For invited men compared with not yet invited men, the RR of being diagnosed with stage I CRC was 3.71 (95% CI, 2.97-4.64); with stage II CRC was 2.26 (95% CI, 1.84-2.77), with stage III CRC was 1.88 (95% CI, 1.53-2.30), and with stage IV CRC was 1.20 (95% CI, 0.95-1.52).

CONCLUSIONS

In analyzing data from a register-based cohort study in Denmark, we found that inviting individuals to undergo FIT-based CRC screening led to detection of almost 2-fold more cases of CRC than not inviting participants. The significant increase of CRC incidence among those invited for screening indicates a need for awareness of treatment capacity in countries introducing FIT-based CRC screening.

Anaemia as a risk stratification tool for symptomatic patients referred via the two-week wait pathway for colorectal cancer

Introduction Anaemia is associated with cancer. In 2014 a new form was introduced in our department requesting a haemoglobin (Hb) result on every two-week wait referral for suspected colorectal cancer (CRC). The aim of this study was to review the impact of this intervention. In particular, the significance of any evidence of anaemia (without additional indices) was investigated. Methods A review was conducted of 1,500 consecutive suspected CRC referrals recorded prospectively over a 10-month period. Data on demographics, referral Hb, referral criteria and outcomes were analysed. Anaemia was defined according to World Health Organization criteria (Hb <120g/l for women, Hb <130g/l for men). Results Overall, 1,015 patients were eligible for inclusion in the study. Over a third (38.2%) were documented as anaemic on referral. These patients were three times more likely to be diagnosed with CRC than non-anaemic patients (odds ratio [OR]: 3.22, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.87-5.57). Using a more stringent threshold (Hb <100g/l for women and <110g/l for men), they were four times more likely to have CRC (OR: 4.27, 95% CI: 2.35-7.75). Almost a quarter (23.7%) were actually anaemic at the time of referral but not referred with anaemia. In this subgroup, there was a 2.8-fold increase in risk of CRC diagnosis compared with non-anaemic patients (adjusted OR: 2.77, 95% CI: 1.55-4.95). Conclusions Nearly a quarter of patients not referred with iron deficiency anaemia had evidence of anaemia and this was still associated with a higher rate of CRC detection. A full blood count alone might help to risk stratify symptoms such as change in bowel habit in patients on urgent pathways and identify those cases most likely to benefit from invasive investigation.

Abdominal symptoms and cancer in the abdomen: prospective cohort study in European primary care

BACKGROUND

Different abdominal symptoms may signal cancer, but their role is unclear.

AIM

To examine associations between abdominal symptoms and subsequent cancer diagnosed in the abdominal region.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Prospective cohort study comprising 493 GPs from surgeries in Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Scotland, Belgium, and the Netherlands.

METHOD

Over a 10-day period, the GPs recorded consecutive consultations and noted: patients who presented with abdominal symptoms pre-specified on the registration form; additional data on non-specific symptoms; and features of the consultation. Eight months later, data on all cancer diagnoses among all study patients in the participating general practices were requested from the GPs.

RESULTS

Consultations with 61 802 patients were recorded and abdominal symptoms were documented in 6264 (10.1%) patients. Malignancy, both abdominal and non-abdominal, was subsequently diagnosed in 511 patients (0.8%). Among patients with a new cancer in the abdomen (n = 251), 175 (69.7%) were diagnosed within 180 days after consultation. In a multivariate model, the highest sex- and age-adjusted hazard ratio (HR) was for the single symptom of rectal bleeding (HR 19.1, 95% confidence interval = 8.7 to 41.7). Positive predictive values of >3% were found for macroscopic haematuria, rectal bleeding, and involuntary weight loss, with variations according to age and sex. The three symptoms relating to irregular bleeding had particularly high specificity in terms of colorectal, uterine, and bladder cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

A patient with undiagnosed cancer may present with symptoms or no symptoms. Irregular bleeding must always be explained. Abdominal pain occurs with all types of abdominal cancer and several symptoms may signal colorectal cancer. The findings are important as they influence how GPs think and act, and how they can contribute to an earlier diagnosis of cancer.

Reimagining the diagnostic pathway for gastrointestinal cancer

A crisis is looming for the diagnosis of gastrointestinal cancers, one grounded only partly in the steady increase in their overall incidence. Public demand for diagnostic tests to be undertaken early and at lower levels of risk is reflected in early diagnosis being a widely held policy objective for reasons of both clinical outcome and patient experience. In the UK, urgent referrals for suspected lower gastrointestinal cancer have increased by 78% in the past 6 years, with parallel increases in endoscopy and imaging activity. Such growth in demand is unsustainable with current models of care. If gastrointestinal cancer diagnosis is to be affordable, the roles of professionals and their interactions with each other will need to be reframed while retaining public confidence in the process. In this Perspective, we consider how the relationship between medical specialists and generalists could be redefined to make better use of the skills of each while delivering optimal clinical outcomes and a good patient experience.

Multivariable risk-based patient selection for prostate biopsy in a primary health care setting: referral rate and biopsy results from a urology outpatient clinic

Background

According to their guidelines, Dutch general practitioners (GPs) refer men with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level ≥3.0 ng/mL to the urologist for risk-based patient selection for prostate biopsy using the Rotterdam Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator (RPCRC). Use of the RPCRC in primary care could optimize the diagnostic pathway even further by reducing unnecessary referrals. To investigate this, we calculated the risk and assessed the rate of men referred to the urologist with PSA level ≥3.0 ng/mL by implementing the RPCRC in a primary health care setting.

Methods

In January 2014, an exploratory study was initiated in collaboration with the primary health care facility of the GP laboratory in Rotterdam. GPs were given the possibility to refer men with a suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa) or a screening wish to this primary care facility (STAR-SHL) where further assessment was performed by specially trained personnel. Risk-based advice on referral to the urologist was given to the GP on the basis of the RPCRC results. If requested, advice on the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) was provided. All men signed informed consent.

Results

Between January 2014 and September 2017, a total of 243 men, median age 64 [interquartile range (IQR), 57-70] years were referred for a consultation at the primary care facility. Of the 108 men with PSA level ≥3.0 ng/mL and a referral related to PCa, GPs were advised to refer 58 men to the urologist (54%). Of the men with available follow-up (FU) data [n=187, median FU, 16 (IQR, 9-25) months] 54 men were considered high-risk (i.e., had an elevated risk of PCa as calculated by the RPCRC). Of these men, 51 (94%) were actually referred to secondary care by their GP, and so far 38 men underwent biopsy. PCa was detected in 30 men [47% had Gleason score (GS) ≥3+4 PCa], translating to an overall positive predictive value (PPV) of 79%. Within the available FU time, 2 out of 38 (5%) men with PSA level ≥3.0 ng/mL which were considered low-risk have been diagnosed with GS 3+3 PCa.

Conclusions

Risk-stratification with the RPCRC in a primary health care setting could prevent almost half of referrals of men with PSA level ≥3.0 ng/mL to the urologist. In more than three-quarters of men referred for prostate biopsy, the suspicion of PCa was confirmed and almost half of men had clinically significant PCa (GS ≥3+4 PCa). These data show a huge potential for multivariable risk-stratification in primary care.

The Suspected CANcer (SCAN) pathway: protocol for evaluating a new standard of care for patients with non-specific symptoms of cancer

INTRODUCTION

Cancer survival in England lags behind most European countries, due partly to lower rates of early stage diagnosis. We report the protocol for the evaluation of a multidisciplinary diagnostic centre-based pathway for the investigation of 'low-risk but not no-risk' cancer symptoms called the Suspected CANcer (SCAN) pathway. SCAN is a new standard of care being implemented in Oxfordshire; one of a number of pathways implemented during the second wave of the Accelerate, Coordinate, Evaluate (ACE) programme, an initiative which aims to improve England's cancer survival rates through establishing effective routes to early diagnosis.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

To evaluate SCAN, we are collating a prospective database of patients referred onto the pathway by their general practitioner (GP). Patients aged over 40 years, with non-specific symptoms such as weight loss or fatigue, who do not meet urgent cancer referral criteria or for whom symptom causation remains unclear after investigation via other existing pathways, can be referred to SCAN. SCAN provides rapid CT scanning, laboratory testing and clinic review within 2 weeks. We will follow all patients in the primary and secondary care record for at least 2 years. The data will be used to understand the diagnostic yield of the SCAN pathway in the short term (28 days) and the long term (2 years). Routinely collected primary and secondary care data from patients not referred to SCAN but with similar symptoms will also be used to evaluate SCAN. We will map the routes to diagnosis for patients referred to SCAN to assess cost-effectiveness. Acceptability will be evaluated using patient and GP surveys.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Oxford Joint Research Office Study Classification Group has judged this to be a service evaluation and so outside of research governance. The results of this project will be disseminated by peer-reviewed publication and presentation at conferences.

Weight loss as a predictor of cancer and serious disease in primary care: an ISAC-approved CPRD protocol for a retrospective cohort study using routinely collected primary care data from the UK

BACKGROUND

Unexpected weight loss is a symptom of serious disease in primary care, for example between 1 in 200 and 1 in 30 patients with unexpected weight loss go on to develop cancer. However, it remains unclear how and when general practitioners (GPs) should investigate unexpected weight loss. Without clarification, GPs may wait too long before referring (choosing to watch and wait and potentially missing a diagnosis) or not long enough (overburdening hospital services and exposing patients to the risks of investigation). The overall aim of this study is to provide the evidence necessary to allow GPs to more effectively manage patients with unexpected weight loss.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis of UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) data to: (1) describe how often in UK primary care the symptom of reported weight loss is coded, when weight is measured, and how GPs respond to a patient attending with unexpected weight loss; (2) identify the predictive value of recorded weight loss for cancer and serious disease in primary care, using cumulative incidence plots to compare outcomes between subgroups and Cox regression to explore and adjust for covariates. Preliminary work in CPRD estimates that weight loss as a symptom is recorded for approximately 148,000 eligible patients > 18 years and is distributed evenly across decades of age, providing adequate statistical power and precision in relation to cancer overall and common cancers individually. Further stratification by cancer stage will be attempted but may not be possible as not all practices within CPRD are eligible for cancer registry linkage, and staging information is often incomplete. The feasibility of using multiple imputation to address missing covariate values will be explored.

DISCUSSION

This will be the largest reported retrospective cohort of primary care patients with weight measurements and unexpected weight loss codes used to understand the association between weight measurement, unexpected weight loss, and serious disease including cancer. Our findings will directly inform international guidelines for the management of unexpected weight loss in primary care populations.

The researchers' role in knowledge translation: a realist evaluation of the development and implementation of diagnostic pathways for cancer in two United Kingdom localities

Background

In examining an initiative to develop and implement new cancer diagnostic pathways in two English localities, this paper evaluates ‘what works’ and examines the role of researchers in facilitating knowledge translation amongst teams of local clinicians and policy-makers.

Methods

Using realist evaluation with a mixed methods case study approach, we conducted documentary analysis of meeting minutes and pathway iterations to map pathway development. We interviewed 14 participants to identify the contexts, mechanisms and outcomes (CMOs) that led to successful pathway development and implementation. Interviews were analysed thematically and four CMO configurations were developed.

Results

One site produced three fully implemented pathways, while the other produced two that were partly implemented. In explaining the differences, we found that a respected, independent, well-connected leader modelling partnership working and who facilitates a local, stable group that agree about the legitimacy of the data and project (context) can empower local teams to become sufficiently autonomous (mechanism) to develop and implement research-based pathways (outcome). Although both teams designed relevant, research-based cancer pathways, in the site where the pathways were successfully implemented the research team merely assisted, while, in the other, the research team drove the initiative.

Conclusion

Based on our study findings, local stakeholders can apply local and research knowledge to develop and implement research-based pathways. However, success will depend on how academics empower local teams to create autonomy. Crucially, after re-packaging and translating research for local circumstances, identifying fertile environments with the right elements for implementation and developing collaborative relationships with local leaders, academics must step back.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12961-017-0267-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Possible missed opportunities for diagnosing colorectal cancer in Dutch primary care: a multimethods approach

BACKGROUND

Early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) is important to achieve better survival. Discriminating symptoms suggestive of CRC from benign conditions is a challenge for GPs because most known 'alarm symptoms' have low predictive values.

AIM

To further understand the diagnostic process of CRC in general practice in terms of healthcare use and by analysing factors related to diagnostic intervals.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A multimethod approach comprising a historical, prospective registry study and qualitative content analysis.

METHOD

Healthcare use in the year before referral for colonoscopy was compared between patients diagnosed with CRC and an age-, sex,- and GP-matched control population. Qualitative content analysis was performed on free texts in electronic patient records from a purposive sample of patients with CRC.

RESULTS

Patients with CRC (n = 287) had 41% (25-59%) more face-to-face contacts and 21% (7-37%) more medication prescriptions than controls (n = 828). Forty-six per cent of patients with CRC had two or more contacts for digestive reasons, compared with 12.2% of controls, more often for symptoms than diagnoses. From qualitative analysis two themes emerged: 'possible missed diagnostic opportunities' and 'improvements in diagnostic process unlikely'. Possible missed diagnostic opportunities were related to patients waiting before presenting symptoms, doctors attributing symptoms to comorbid conditions or medication use, or doctors sticking to an initial diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Fewer missed diagnostic opportunities might occur if GPs are aware of pitfalls in diagnosing CRC: the assumption that symptoms are caused by comorbid conditions or medication, or relating complaints to pre-existing medical conditions. GPs also need to be aware that repeated digestive complaints warrant rethinking an earlier diagnosis.

Routine blood tests and probability of cancer in patients referred with non-specific serious symptoms: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Danish cancer patients have lower survival rates than patients in many other western countries. Half of the patients present with non-alarm symptoms and thus have a long diagnostic pathway. Consequently, an urgent referral pathway for patients with non-specific serious symptoms was implemented throughout Denmark in 2011-2012. As part of the diagnostic workup, a panel of blood tests are performed for all patients referred by their general practitioner (GP) to the urgent referral pathway. In this study, we analysed the probability of being diagnosed with cancer in GP-referred patients with abnormal blood test results.

METHOD

We performed a cohort study that included all patients aged 18 years or older referred by their GP to Silkeborg Regional Hospital for analysis of a panel of blood tests. All patients were followed for 3 months for a cancer diagnosis in the Danish Cancer Registry. The likelihood ratio and post-test probability of subsequently finding cancer were calculated in relation to abnormal blood test results.

RESULTS

Among the 1499 patients included in the study, 12.2% were subsequently diagnosed with cancer. The probability of cancer increased with the number of abnormal blood tests. Patients with specific combinations of two abnormal blood tests had a 23-62% probability of cancer. Only a few single abnormal blood tests were linked with a high post-test probability of cancer, and most abnormalities were not specific to cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

A number of specific abnormal blood tests and combinations of abnormal blood tests markedly increased the probability of cancer being diagnosed. Still, abnormal blood test results should be interpreted cautiously as most are non-specific to cancer. Thus, results from the blood test panel may strengthen the suspicion of cancer, but blood tests cannot be used as a stand-alone tool to rule out cancer.

Pointers to earlier diagnosis of endometriosis: a nested case-control study using primary care electronic health records

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is a condition with relatively non-specific symptoms, and in some cases a long time elapses from first-symptom presentation to diagnosis.

AIM

To develop and test new composite pointers to a diagnosis of endometriosis in primary care electronic records.

DESIGN AND SETTING

This is a nested case-control study of 366 cases using the Practice Team Information database of anonymised primary care electronic health records from Scotland. Data were analysed from 366 cases of endometriosis between 1994 and 2010, and two sets of age and GP practice matched controls: (a) 1453 randomly selected females and (b) 610 females whose records contained codes indicating consultation for gynaecological symptoms.

METHOD

Composite pointers comprised patterns of symptoms, prescribing, or investigations, in combination or over time. Conditional logistic regression was used to examine the presence of both new and established pointers during the 3 years before diagnosis of endometriosis and to identify time of appearance.

RESULTS

A number of composite pointers that were strongly predictive of endometriosis were observed. These included pain and menstrual symptoms occurring within the same year (odds ratio [OR] 6.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.9 to 10.6), and lower gastrointestinal symptoms occurring within 90 days of gynaecological pain (OR 6.1, 95% CI = 3.6 to 10.6). Although the association of infertility with endometriosis was only detectable in the year before diagnosis, several pain-related features were associated with endometriosis several years earlier.

CONCLUSION

Useful composite pointers to a diagnosis of endometriosis in GP records were identified. Some of these were present several years before the diagnosis and may be valuable targets for diagnostic support systems.

Evaluation of a prediction model for colorectal cancer: retrospective analysis of 2.5 million patient records

Earlier detection of colorectal cancer greatly improves prognosis, largely through surgical excision of neoplastic polyps. These include benign adenomas which can transform over time to malignant adenocarcinomas. This progression may be associated with changes in full blood count indices. An existing risk algorithm derived in Israel stratifies individuals according to colorectal cancer risk using full blood count data, but has not been validated in the UK. We undertook a retrospective analysis using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Patients aged over 40 with full blood count data were risk‐stratified and followed up for a diagnosis of colorectal cancer over a range of time intervals. The primary outcome was the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the 18–24‐month interval. We also undertook a case–control analysis (matching for age, sex, and year of risk score), and a cohort study of patients undergoing full blood count testing during 2012, to estimate predictive values. We included 2,550,119 patients. The area under the curve for the 18–24‐month interval was 0.776 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.771, 0.781]. Performance improves as the time interval reduces. The area under the curve for the age‐matched case–control analysis was 0.583 [0.574, 0.591]. For the population risk‐scored in 2012, the positive predictive value at 99.5% specificity was 8.8% with negative predictive value 99.6%. The algorithm offers an additional means of identifying risk of colorectal cancer, and could support other approaches to early detection, including screening and active case finding.

The Improving Rural Cancer Outcomes Trial: a cluster-randomised controlled trial of a complex intervention to reduce time to diagnosis in rural cancer patients in Western Australia

Background:

Rural Australians have poorer survival for most common cancers, due partially to later diagnosis. Internationally, several initiatives to improve cancer outcomes have focused on earlier presentation to healthcare and timely diagnosis. We aimed to measure the effect of community-based symptom awareness and general practice-based educational interventions on the time to diagnosis in rural patients presenting with breast, prostate, colorectal or lung cancer in Western Australia.

Methods:

2 × 2 factorial cluster randomised controlled trial. Community Intervention: cancer symptom awareness campaign tailored for rural Australians. GP intervention: resource card with symptom risk assessment charts and local cancer referral pathways implemented through multiple academic detailing visits. Trial Area A received the community symptom awareness and Trial Area B acted as the community campaign control region. Within both Trial Areas general practices were randomised to the GP intervention or control. Primary outcome: total diagnostic interval (TDI).

Results:

1358 people with incident breast, prostate, colorectal or lung cancer were recruited. There were no significant differences in the median or ln mean TDI at either intervention level (community intervention vs control: median TDI 107.5 vs 92 days; ln mean difference 0.08 95% CI −0.06–0.23 P=0.27; GP intervention vs control: median TDI 97 vs 96.5 days; ln mean difference 0.004 95% CI −0.18–0.19 P=0.99). There were no significant differences in the TDI when analysed by factorial design, tumour group or sub-intervals of the TDI.

Conclusions:

This is the largest trial to test the effect of community campaign or GP interventions on timeliness of cancer diagnosis. We found no effect of either intervention. This may reflect limited dose of the interventions, or the limited duration of follow-up. Alternatively, these interventions do not have a measurable effect on time to cancer diagnosis.

Distinguishing variation in referral accuracy from referral threshold: analysis of a national dataset of referrals for suspected cancer

OBJECTIVES

To distinguish between variation in referral threshold and variation in accurate selection of patients for referral in fast-track referrals for possible cancer. To examine factors associated with threshold and accuracy and model the effects of changing thresholds.

DESIGN

Analysis of national data on cancer referrals from general practices in England over a 5-year period. We developed a new method to estimate specificity of referral to complement existing sensitivity. We used bivariate meta-analysis to produce summary measures and described practices in relation to these.

SETTING

5479 general practitioner (GP) practices with data relating to more than 50 cancer cases diagnosed over the 5 years.

OUTCOMES

Number of practices whose 95% confidence regions for sensitivity and specificity indicated that they were outliers in terms of either referral threshold or decision accuracy.

RESULTS

2019 practices (36.8%) were outliers in relation to referral threshold compared with 1205 practices (22%) in relation to decision accuracy. Practice age profile, cancer incidence and deprivation showed a modest association with decision accuracy but not with thresholds. If all practices shared the referral behaviour of those in the highest quintile of age-standardised referral rate, there would be a 3.3% increase in cancers detected through fast-track pathways at the cost of a 36.9% increase in urgent referrals.

CONCLUSION

This new method permits variation in referral to be described more precisely and quality improvement activities to be targeted. Changing referral thresholds without increasing accuracy will result in modest effects on detection rates and a large increase in demand on diagnostic services.

Clinical characteristics and risk of serious disease in patients referred to a diagnostic centre: A cohort study

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the clinical characteristics of patients referred to a diagnostic centre through the Danish urgent referral pathway for non-specific serious symptoms. We aimed at estimating the distribution of serious disease and the diagnostic value of clinical characteristics for the diagnosis of cancer and serious non-malignant disease in these patients.

METHOD

A cohort study of 938 patients referred by their GP to the diagnostic centre at Silkeborg Regional Hospital. All patients were followed up for three months in national registries. The likelihood ratio (LR) of cancer or serious non-malignant disease were calculated in relation to clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 327 (34.9%) patients were diagnosed with new serious disease within three months: 118 patients (12.6%) with malignant disease and 209 patients (22.3%) with non-malignant disease. Most patients presented general symptoms. The highest LR of cancer was found for abdominal mass, high lactate dehydrogenase or abnormal findings in the diagnostic imaging. The highest LR of non-malignant disease was found for swollen joints or abnormal auscultation of lung or chest.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients referred by their GP to the diagnostic centre have high risk of serious disease. A multidisciplinary diagnostic approach is needed to embrace the diagnostic spectrum.

Sociodemographic characteristics of nonparticipants in the Danish colorectal cancer screening program: a nationwide cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

Fecal occult blood tests are recommended for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in Europe. Recently, the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) has come into use. Sociodemographic differences between participants and nonparticipants may be less pronounced when using FIT as there are no preceding dietary restrictions and only one specimen is required. The aim of this study was to examine the associations between sociodemographic characteristics and nonparticipation for both genders, with special emphasis on those who actively unsubscribe from the program.

METHODS

The study was a national, register-based, cross-sectional study among men and women randomized to be invited to participate in the prevalence round of the Danish CRC screening program between March 1 and December 31, 2014. Prevalence ratios (PRs) were used to quantify the association between sociodemographic characteristics and nonparticipation (including active nonparticipation). PRs were assessed using Poisson regression with robust error variance.

RESULTS

The likelihood of being a nonparticipant was highest in the younger part of the population; however, for women, the association across age groups was U-shaped. Female immigrants were more likely to be nonparticipants. Living alone, being on social welfare, and having lower income were factors that were associated with nonparticipation among both men and women. For both men and women, there was a U-shaped association between education and nonparticipation. For both men and women, the likelihood of active nonparticipation rose with age; it was lowest among non-western immigrants and highest among social welfare recipients.

CONCLUSION

Social inequality in screening uptake was evident among both men and women in the Danish CRC screening program, even though the program is free of charge and the screening kit is based on FIT and mailed directly to the individuals. Interventions are needed to bridge this gap if CRC screening is to avoid aggravating existing inequalities in CRC-related morbidity and mortality.

Clinical assessment to determine the risk of bowel cancer using Symptoms, Age, Mass and Iron deficiency anaemia (SAMI)

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to identify characteristics with independent predictive value for bowel cancer for use in the clinical assessment of patients attending colorectal outpatient clinics.

METHODS

This was a 22-year (1986-2007) retrospective cohort analysis of data collected prospectively from patients who attended colorectal surgical outpatient clinics in Portsmouth. The data set was split randomly into two groups of patients to generate and validate a predictive model. Multivariable logistic regression was used to create and validate a system to predict outcome. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and Hosmer-Lemeshow test were used to evaluate the model's predictive capability. The likelihood of bowel cancer was expressed as the odds ratio (OR).

RESULTS

Data from 29 005 patients were analysed. Discrimination of the model for bowel cancer was high in the development (C-statistic 0·87, 95 per cent c.i. 0·85 to 0·88) and validation (C-statistic 0·86, 0·84 to 0·87) groups. The most important co-variables in the final model were: age (OR 3·17-27·10), rectal (OR 31·48) or abdominal (OR 1·83-8·45) mass, iron deficiency anaemia (IDA) (OR 4·42-8·38), rectal bleeding and change in bowel habit in combination (OR 5·37), change in bowel habit without rectal bleeding, with or without abdominal pain (OR 2·12-2·52), and rectal bleeding with no perianal symptoms and without change in bowel habit (OR 2·91). Some 91·5 per cent of bowel cancers presented with these characteristics, 40·4 per cent with a mass and/or IDA. In patients with at least one of these characteristics the overall risk of having cancer was 10·0 (range 6·5-50·4) per cent, compared with 1·1 (0·3-2·3) per cent in patients without them.

CONCLUSION

A clinical assessment that systematically identifies or excludes four symptom-age combinations, a mass and IDA (SAMI) stratifies patients as having a low and higher risk of having bowel cancer. This could improve patient selection for referral and investigation.

Variations in GPs' decisions to investigate suspected lung cancer: a factorial experiment using multimedia vignettes

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer survival is low and comparatively poor in the UK. Patients with symptoms suggestive of lung cancer commonly consult primary care, but it is unclear how general practitioners (GPs) distinguish which patients require further investigation. This study examined how patients' clinical and sociodemographic characteristics influence GPs' decisions to initiate lung cancer investigations.

METHODS

A factorial experiment was conducted among a national sample of 227 English GPs using vignettes presented as simulated consultations. A multimedia-interactive website simulated key features of consultations using actors ('patients'). GP participants made management decisions online for six 'patients', whose sociodemographic characteristics systematically varied across three levels of cancer risk. In low-risk vignettes, investigation (ie, chest X-ray ordered, computerised tomography scan or respiratory consultant referral) was not indicated; in medium-risk vignettes, investigation could be appropriate; in high-risk vignettes, investigation was definitely indicated. Each 'patient' had two lung cancer-related symptoms: one volunteered and another elicited if GPs asked. Variations in investigation likelihood were examined using multilevel logistic regression.

RESULTS

GPs decided to investigate lung cancer in 74% (1000/1348) of vignettes. Investigation likelihood did not increase with cancer risk. Investigations were more likely when GPs requested information on symptoms that 'patients' had but did not volunteer (adjusted OR (AOR)=3.18; 95% CI 2.27 to 4.70). However, GPs omitted to seek this information in 42% (570/1348) of cases. GPs were less likely to investigate older than younger 'patients' (AOR=0.52; 95% CI 0.39 to 0.7) and black 'patients' than white (AOR=0.68; 95% CI 0.48 to 0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

GPs were not more likely to investigate 'patients' with high-risk than low-risk cancer symptoms. Furthermore, they did not investigate everyone with the same symptoms equally. Insufficient data gathering could be responsible for missed opportunities in diagnosis.

Primary care and cancer: Facing the challenge of early diagnosis and survivorship

With ageing populations and an increasing lifetime risk of cancer, primary care will continue to play an increasingly important role in early diagnosis and cancer survivorship, especially with the lowering of risk thresholds for referral and diagnostic investigations. However, primary care in many countries is in crisis with increasing workloads for primary care physicians. Potential solutions to these challenges will be outlined including development of multidisciplinary teams, diagnostic decision support, increasing access to diagnostics and cost-effective referral pathways.

Facilitating early diagnosis of lung cancer amongst primary care patients: The views of GPs

Early diagnosis of lung cancer (LC) is a policy priority. However, symptoms are vague, associated with other morbidities, and frequently unrecognised by both patients and general practitioners (GPs). This qualitative study, part of a larger mixed methods study, explored GP views regarding the potential for early diagnosis of LC within primary care. Five focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with GPs (n = 16) at primary care practices (n = 5) across four counties in south England. FGDs were audio‐recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a framework approach. Four broad themes emerged: patients’ reporting of symptoms; GP response to symptoms; investigating LC, and; potential initiatives for early diagnosis. GPs reported they often required high levels of suspicion to refer patients on to specialist respiratory consultations, and concerns of ‘system overload’ were prevalent. Greater access to more sensitive diagnostic investigations such as computed tomography, was argued for by some, particularly for symptomatic patients with negative chest X‐rays. GPs challenged current approaches to promoting earlier diagnosis through national symptom awareness campaigns, arguing instead that interventions targeted at high‐risk individuals might be more effective without burdening services already under pressure. Further work is needed to identify primary care patients who might most benefit from such targeted interventions.

Comorbid conditions delay diagnosis of colorectal cancer: a cohort study using electronic primary care records

BACKGROUND

Pre-existing non-cancer conditions may complicate and delay colorectal cancer diagnosis.

METHOD

Incident cases (aged ⩾40 years, 2007-2009) with colorectal cancer were identified in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, UK. Diagnostic interval was defined as time from first symptomatic presentation of colorectal cancer to diagnosis. Comorbid conditions were classified as 'competing demands' (unrelated to colorectal cancer) or 'alternative explanations' (sharing symptoms with colorectal cancer). The association between diagnostic interval (log-transformed) and age, gender, consultation rate and number of comorbid conditions was investigated using linear regressions, reported using geometric means.

RESULTS

Out of the 4512 patients included, 72.9% had ⩾1 competing demand and 31.3% had ⩾1 alternative explanation. In the regression model, the numbers of both types of comorbid conditions were independently associated with longer diagnostic interval: a single competing demand delayed diagnosis by 10 days, and four or more by 32 days; and a single alternative explanation by 9 days. For individual conditions, the longest delay was observed for inflammatory bowel disease (26 days; 95% CI 14-39).

CONCLUSIONS

The burden and nature of comorbidity is associated with delayed diagnosis in colorectal cancer, particularly in patients aged ⩾80 years. Effective clinical strategies are needed for shortening diagnostic interval in patients with comorbidity.

Risk of cervical cancer in symptomatic women aged ≥40 in primary care: A case-control study using electronic records

There are approximately 3,000 new UK diagnoses of cervical cancer annually, with many women presenting symptomatically. We aimed to identify and quantify features of cervical cancer in primary care in a case-control study in the UK. Putative features of cervical cancer were identified, and odd ratios and positive predictive values (PPVs) were calculated. About 1,006 women aged ≥40 years diagnosed with cervical cancer and 4,992 age-, sex- and practice-matched controls were selected from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Median age at diagnosis was 61 years (interquartile range 51-75). Seven symptoms and two abnormal investigations were associated with cervical cancer: post-menopausal bleeding, odds ratio 43 (95% confidence interval 25, 75); vaginal discharge or vaginitis 8.8 (5.2, 15), intermenstrual bleeding 4.7 (1.6, 14); haematuria 4.6 (2.1, 10); irregular menstruation 3.8 (1.6, 9.0); urinary tract infection 1.9 (1.3, 2.8); abdominal pain 1.8 (1.4, 2.5); high white cell count 5.1 (2.9, 8.8) and low haemoglobin 2.6 (1.8, 3.8): all p < .005. The PPV of cervical cancer in women aged ≥55 with post-menopausal bleeding was 4.6% (2.5, 8.3). Other than for post-menopausal bleeding no symptom is high risk. Some symptoms, particularly haematuria, may be helpful. The primary care clinician must consider the unlikely diagnosis when the likely diagnosis does not settle with treatment.

Clinical features of bowel disease in patients aged <50 years in primary care: a large case-control study

Background

Incidences of colorectal cancer (CRC) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are increasing in those aged <50 years.

Aim

To identify and quantify clinical features in primary care of CRC/IBD in those aged <50 years. This study considered the two conditions together and aimed to determine which younger patients, presenting in primary care with symptoms, would benefit from investigation for potentially serious colorectal disease.

Design and setting

Matched case-control study using primary care records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, UK.

Method

Incident cases (aged <50 years) of CRC (n = 1661) and IBD (n = 9578) diagnosed between 2000 and 2013 were each matched with up to three controls (n = 3979 CRC; n = 22 947 IBD). Odds ratios (OR) and positive predictive values (PPV) were estimated for features of CRC/IBD in the year before diagnosis.

Results

Ten features were independently associated with CRC/IBD (all P<0.001): rectal bleeding, change in bowel habit, diarrhoea, raised inflammatory markers, thrombocytosis, abdominal pain, low mean cell volume (MCV), low haemoglobin, raised white cell count, and raised hepatic enzymes. PPVs were >3% for rectal bleeding with diarrhoea, thrombocytosis, low MCV, low haemoglobin or raised inflammatory markers; for change in bowel habit with low MCV, thrombocytosis or low haemoglobin; and for diarrhoea with thrombocytosis.

Conclusion

This study quantified the risk of serious bowel disease in symptomatic patients aged <50 years in primary care. Rectal bleeding and change in bowel habit are strongly predictive of CRC/IBD when combined with abnormal haematology. The present findings help prioritise patients for colonoscopy where the diagnosis is not immediately apparent.

Impact of a continuing medical education meeting on the use and timing of urgent cancer referrals among general practitioners - a before-after study

Background

Detection of cancer in general practice is challenging because symptoms are diverse. Even so-called alarm symptoms have low positive predictive values of cancer. Nevertheless, appropriate referral is crucial. As 85% of cancer patients initiate their cancer diagnostic pathway in general practice, a Continuing Medical Education meeting (CME-M) in early cancer diagnosis was launched in Denmark in 2012. We aimed to investigate the effect of the CME-M on the primary care interval, patient contacts with general practice and use of urgent cancer referrals.

Methods

A before-after study was conducted in the Central Denmark Region included 396 general practices, which were assigned to one of eight geographical clusters. Practices were invited to participate in the CME-M with three-week intervals between clusters. Based on register data, we calculated urgent referral rates and patient contacts with general practice before referral. Information about primary care intervals was collected by requesting general practitioners to complete a one-page form for each urgent referral during an 8-month period around the time of the CME-Ms. CME-M practices were compared with non-participating reference practices by analysing before-after differences.

Results

Forty percent of all practices participated in the CME-M. There was a statistically significant reduction in the number of total contacts with general practice from urgently referred patients in the month preceding the referral and an increase in the proportion of patients who waited 14 days or more in general practice from the reported date of symptom presentation to the referral date from before to after the CME-M in the CME-M group compared to the reference group.

Conclusions

We found a reduced number of total patient contacts with general practice within the month preceding an urgent referral and an increase in the reported primary care intervals of urgently referred patients in the CME-M group. The trend towards higher urgent referral rates and longer primary care intervals may suggest raised awareness of unspecific cancer symptoms, which could cause the GP to register an earlier date of first symptom presentation. The standardised CME-M may contribute to optimising the timing and the use of urgent cancer referral.

Trial registration

NCT02069470 on ClinicalTrials.gov. Retrospectively registered, 1/29/2014

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-017-0607-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

How the probability of presentation to a primary care clinician correlates with cancer survival rates: a European survey using vignettes

OBJECTIVE

European cancer survival rates vary widely. System factors, including whether or not primary care physicians (PCPs) are gatekeepers, may account for some of these differences. This study explores where patients who may have cancer are likely to present for medical care in different European countries, and how probability of presentation to a primary care clinician correlates with cancer survival rates.

DESIGN

Seventy-eight PCPs in a range of European countries assessed four vignettes representing patients who might have cancer, and consensus groups agreed how likely those patients were to present to different clinicians in their own countries. These data were compared with national cancer survival rates.

SETTING

A total of 14 countries.

SUBJECTS

Consensus groups of PCPs.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Probability of initial presentation to a PCP for four clinical vignettes.

RESULTS

There was no significant correlation between overall national 1-year relative cancer survival rates and the probability of initial presentation to a PCP (r  = -0.16, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.08). Within that there was large variation depending on the type of cancer, with a significantly poorer lung cancer survival in countries where patients were more likely to initially consult a PCP (lung r = -0.57, 95% CI -0.83 to -0.12; ovary: r = -0.13, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.38; breast r = 0.14, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.58; bowel: r = 0.20, 95% CI -0.31 to 0.62).

CONCLUSIONS

There were wide variations in the degree of gatekeeping between countries, with no simple binary model as to whether or not a country has a "PCP-as-gatekeeper" system. While there was case-by-case variation, there was no overall evidence of a link between a higher probability of initial consultation with a PCP and poorer cancer survival. KEY POINTS European cancer survival rates vary widely, and health system factors may account for some of these differences. The data from 14 European countries show a wide variation in the probability of initial presentation to a PCP. The degree to which PCPs act as gatekeepers varies considerably from country to country. There is no overall evidence of a link between a higher probability of initial presentation to a PCP and poorer cancer survival.

Clinical features of metastatic cancer in primary care: a case-control study using medical records

BACKGROUND

How metastatic cancer initially presents is largely unknown.

AIM

To identify clinical features of metastatic cancer in primary care.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Case-control study in 11 general practices in Devon, UK.

METHOD

Cases of patients who had died with metastatic breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer were selected. In addition, two control groups were formed of patients with the same primary cancer but without metastases ('cancer controls') and patients without cancer ('healthy controls'), matched for age, sex, and practice. All symptoms, signs, and laboratory test abnormalities in the year before metastasis were identified. The primary analysis used conditional logistic regression.

RESULTS

In total, 162 cases, 152 cancer controls, and 145 healthy controls were studied. Common symptoms associated with cancer were: vomiting, 40 (25%) cases and 13 (9%) cancer controls (multivariable odds ratio [OR] 3.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.3 to 9.4, P = 0.011); low back pain, 38 (24%) cases and 17 (11%) cancer controls (OR 2.5, 95% CI = 1.1 to 5.6, P = 0.032); loss of appetite, 32 (20%) cases and nine (6%) cancer controls (OR 4.0, 95% CI = 1.2 to 13.2, P = 0.021); and shoulder pain, 27 (17%) cases and eight (5%) cancer controls (OR 5.3, 95% CI = 1.6 to 18, P = 0.007). Groin pain was uncommon, but strongly associated (16 [10%] cases and one [1%] cancer control [OR 10, 95% CI = 1.2 to 82, P = 0.032]), as was pleural disease (nine [6%] cases and one [1%] cancer control [OR 10, 95% CI = 1.1 to 92, P = 0.038]).

CONCLUSION

These features of disseminated cancer have been reported before in studies from secondary care, but the scarcity of specific symptoms (such as local pain) and the fairly common occurrence of non-specific symptoms (vomiting and loss of appetite) is important and may explain delays in the diagnosis of metastases.

Improving early diagnosis of symptomatic cancer

Much time, effort and investment goes into the diagnosis of symptomatic cancer, with the expectation that this approach brings clinical benefits. This investment of resources has been particularly noticeable in the UK, which has, for several years, appeared near the bottom of international league tables for cancer survival in economically developed countries. In this Review, we examine expedited diagnosis of cancer from four perspectives. The first relates to the potential for clinical benefits of expedited diagnosis of symptomatic cancer. Limited evidence from clinical trials is available, but the considerable observational evidence suggests benefits can be obtained from this approach. The second perspective considers how expedited diagnosis can be achieved. We concentrate on data from the UK, where extensive awareness campaigns have been conducted, and initiatives in the primary-care setting, including clinical decision support, have all occurred during a period of considerable national policy change. The third section considers the most appropriate patients for cancer investigations, and the possible community settings for identification of such patients; UK national guidance for selection of patients for investigation is discussed. Finally, the health economics of expedited diagnosis are reviewed, although few studies provide definitive evidence on this topic.