Time intervals in the care pathway to cancer diagnosis during the COVID-19 pandemic: A large retrospective study from a high-volume center

Time to Diagnosis and Presenting Symptoms of Patients Diagnosed With Cancer Through Emergency and Nonemergency Routes: A Large Retrospective Study From a High-Volume Center

PURPOSE

The symptoms with which a patient with cancer presents and the route taken to diagnosis (emergency v nonemergency) may affect the speed with which the diagnosis of cancer is made, thereby affecting outcomes. We examined time to diagnosis by symptom for cancers diagnosed through emergency and nonemergency routes (NERs).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of patients diagnosed with 10 solid cancers at Hospital Clínic of Barcelona between March 2013 and June 2023. Cancers were diagnosed through emergency presentation and admission (inpatient emergency route [IER]), emergency presentation and outpatient referral (outpatient emergency route [OER]), and primary care presentation and outpatient referral (NER). We assessed the effect of diagnostic routes on intervals to diagnosis for 19 cancer symptoms.

RESULTS

A total of 5,174 and 1,607 patients were diagnosed with cancer through emergency routes and NERs, respectively. Over 85% of patients presenting with alarm (localizing) symptoms such as hematuria through emergency routes were diagnosed with the expected cancer, whereas those with nonlocalizing symptoms such as abdominal pain had a more heterogeneous cancer-site composition. Median intervals were shorter for alarm than nonlocalizing symptoms and tended to be shorter in IERs than OERs. However, for most symptoms, intervals in both routes were invariably shorter than in the NER. For example, diagnostic intervals for hematuria and abdominal pain were 3 and 5 days shorter in IERs than OERs, but they were 5-8 and 17-22 days shorter than in the NER, respectively.

CONCLUSION

For patients with alarm symptoms, intervals were shorter than for those with nonlocalizing symptoms and, for most symptoms, intervals were shorter when patients were evaluated by emergency routes rather than NERs.

Did the COVID-19 pandemic delay treatment for localized breast cancer patients? A multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Longer times between diagnosis and treatments of cancer patients have been estimated as effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, relatively few studies attempted to estimate actual delay to treatment at the patient level.

OBJECTIVE

To assess changes in delays to first treatment and surgery among newly diagnosed patients with localized breast cancer (BC) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We used data from the PAPESCO-19 multicenter cohort study, which included patients from 4 French comprehensive cancer centers. We measured the delay to first treatment as the number of days between diagnosis and the first treatment regardless of whether this was neoadjuvant chemotherapy or surgery. COVID-19 pandemic exposure was estimated with a composite index that considered both the severity of the pandemic and the level of lockdown restrictions. We ran generalized linear models with a log link function and a gamma distribution to model the association between delay and the pandemic.

RESULTS

Of the 187 patients included in the analysis, the median delay to first treatment was 42 (IQR:32-54) days for patients diagnosed before and after the start of the 1st lockdown (N = 99 and 88, respectively). After adjusting for age and centers of inclusion, a higher composite pandemic index (> = 50 V.S. <50) had only a small, non-significant effect on times to treatment. Longer delays were associated with factors other than the COVID-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSION

We found evidence of no direct impact of the pandemic on the actual delay to treatment among patients with localized BC.

Referral and Prescription Patterns for Female Patients With Urinary Incontinence

IMPORTANCE

Although behavioral modifications, medications, and other interventions can improve urinary incontinence (UI), many women never receive them.

OBJECTIVES

To better characterize UI treatment patterns in primary care, we examined prescriptions and referrals to pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) and specialist physicians within a large Midwestern academic health system.

STUDY DESIGN

Electronic health records were queried to identify a cohort of adult female patients receiving a new UI diagnosis during outpatient primary care visits from 2016 to 2020. Urinary incontinence referrals and referral completion were examined for the overall cohort, and medication prescriptions were examined for women with urgency or mixed UI. Logistic regression was used to assess the association of prescriptions and/or referrals with patient demographics, comorbidities, and UI diagnosis dates.

RESULTS

In the year after primary care UI diagnosis, 37.2% of patients in the overall cohort (n = 4,382) received guideline-concordant care. This included 20.6% of women who were referred for further management: 17.7% to urology/urogynecology and 3.2% to PFPT. Most women who were referred attended an initial appointment. Among those with urgency (n = 2,398) or mixed UI (n = 552), 17.1% were prescribed medication. Women with stress (odds ratio [OR], 3.10; 95% CI, 2.53-3.79) and mixed UI (OR, 6.17; 95% CI, 4.03-9.66) were more likely to be referred for further management, and women diagnosed during the COVID-19 pandemic were less likely to be referred for further care (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.29, 0.48).

CONCLUSION

Only slightly above 1 in 3 women with a new diagnosis of UI in primary care received guideline-based medications or referrals within 1 year, suggesting missed opportunities for timely care.

Utility of a quick diagnostic unit during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic for the diagnosis of cancer

OBJECTIVES

To analyse changes in health care activity, time of referral and diagnosis intervals and the incidence of cancer during the first two years of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in a quick diagnosis unit.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective observational study was carried out during the prepandemic year (March 1, 2019, to February 29, 2020) and the first two years of the pandemic (March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2022). Demographic and clinical variables, the first visit interval, the diagnosis interval and the first visit-diagnosis interval were evaluated and compared.

RESULTS

During the first pandemic wave, there was a reduction in referrals (-32.6%), which then increased 8.1% and 17.7% from the second wave until the end of the first pandemic year and the second pandemic year, respectively. An increase in referrals to primary care and a decrease in emergencies were identified. The increase in cancer diagnoses of 2.7% and 15.7% in the two years of the pandemic was proportional to the increase in referrals. No changes were observed in benign processes or in cancer locations and stages. The first visit interval was higher for benign diseases (p<0.0001). A prolongation of the diagnosis interval was observed in cancer patients, although during the three years of the study the median was <15 days.

CONCLUSIONS

The impact of the pandemic affected the length of intervals and the origins of referrals. The quick diagnosis units constitutes and urgent complementary cancer diagnostic route with a high diagnosis yield.

Axillary Treatment Management in Breast Cancer during COVID-19 Pandemic (Association between ACOSOG Z0011 Criteria and OSNA Test)

The outbreak of the SARS-COVID-2 pandemic (COVID-19) had a significant effect on the organisation of healthcare systems. Surgical units saw a significant reduction in the volume of surgical procedures performed, with lengthening waiting lists as a consequence. We assessed the surgical activity in relation to breast cancer that took place at the University Hospital of Cagliari, Italy, from February 2018 to March 2022. Two phases were identified based on the epidemiological circumstances: Phase 1-February 2018 to February 2020; Phase 2-March 2020 to March 2022. The surgery performed in the two phases was then compared. All the patients in our sample underwent a breast surgical procedure involving a lymph node biopsy using OSNA associated with the ACOSOG Z0011 criteria. In the study period overall at our facility, there were 4214 procedures, 417 of which involved breast surgery. In Phase 2, 91 procedures were performed using the OSNA method and ACOSOG Z0011 criteria, enabling the intraoperative staging of axillary nodes. Axillary treatment in breast cancer using this approach resulted in a significant reduction in the number of reoperations for the radicalisation of metastatic sentinel lymph nodes.