Patient characteristics and cancer prevalence in the Danish cancer patient pathway for patients with serious non-specific symptoms and signs of cancer-A nationwide, population-based cohort study

Diagnostic flow for all patients referred with non-specific symptoms of cancer to a diagnostic centre in Denmark: A descriptive study

BACKGROUND

Since 2012, Cancer Patient Pathways for Non-specific Symptoms and Signs of Cancer (NSSC-CPP) have been implemented in Scandinavia and UK.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to describe the diagnostic flow for all patients referred from 1 January to 30 June 2020 to the NSSC-CPP in the Diagnostic Centre in Farsø (DC-F), Denmark.

METHODS

During the study period, we prospectively recorded information on the diagnostic flow, including: pathway trajectory, symptoms and findings leading to referral, diagnostic procedures and diagnoses at the end of DC Farsø work-up and within 6-months for all patients referred to the NSSC-CPP in DC Farsø using electronic patient files and the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR).

RESULTS

Of the 314 referrals to DC Farsø, 227 had diagnostic work-up in DC Farsø, the remaining were redirected to other CPPs (n = 11), outpatient clinics (n = 45) or redirected to general practice (n = 25). Of total referrals, 25 (8%) received a malignant diagnosis, 20 (6%) a non-malignant but clinically relevant diagnosis with initiation of treatment, 16 (5%) a non-malignant diagnosis but no treatment needed and in 253 (81%) referrals no severe new condition was diagnosed. Two (1%) additional malignancies were diagnosed within a 6-month follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

By tracking all patients referred to the NSSC-CPP in DC Farsø, including those redirected, this is the first study to describe the diagnostic flow for all patients referred to a diagnostic centre in Denmark. This knowledge is important for further organisation and planning of the NSSC-CPP.

Plasma H3Cit-DNA Discriminates Between Cancer and Inflammation in a Cohort of Patients with Unspecific Cancer Symptoms

Cancer detection is challenging, especially in patients with unspecific cancer symptoms. Biomarkers could identify patients at high risk of cancer. Prior studies indicate that neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) are associated with cancer, but also with autoimmune and infectious diseases. The objective of this prospective study was to investigate markers associated with NET formation (nucleosomal citrullinated histone 3 [H3Cit-DNA], cell free DNA [cfDNA] and neutrophil elastase [NE]), and c-reactive protein (CRP) in patients with unspecific cancer symptoms, such as fatigue, weight loss or radiological sign of malignancy without an apparent primary tumor, referred to the Diagnostic Center at Danderyd Hospital in Sweden. Blood samples were drawn on admission, before cancer diagnosis. Out of 475 patients, 160 (34%) were diagnosed with cancer, 56 (12%) with autoimmune disease, 32 (7%) with infectious disease, 71 (15%) with other diseases and 156 (33%) received no diagnosis. H3Cit-DNA, cfDNA, NE and CRP were significantly higher in patients with cancer compared to patients without cancer (p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001, p = 0.004, and p = 0.0002 respectively). H3Cit-DNA, but not cfDNA, NE or CRP, was significantly elevated in patients with cancer compared to patients with autoimmune disease (p = 0.0001). H3Cit-DNA, cfDNA, NE or CRP did not differ between cancer and infectious disease. In conclusion, H3Cit-DNA is elevated in patients diagnosed with cancer compared to non-cancer patients with the same symptomatology. Further studies should evaluate if H3Cit-DNA could aid in selecting patients that would benefit the most from a rapid cancer diagnostic work-up.

Risk of cancer and serious disease in Danish patients with urgent referral for serious non-specific symptoms and signs of cancer in Funen 2014-2021

BACKGROUND

In 2011, as the first European country, Denmark introduced the non-organ-specific cancer patient pathway (CPP) for patients presenting with non-specific symptoms and signs of cancer (NSSC). The proportion of patients with cancer over time is unknown.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of all patients with a NSSC-CPP investigational course in the province of Funen to the Diagnostic Centre in Svendborg from 2014 to 2021 was performed to evaluate the proportion of patients with cancer and serious disease over time.

RESULTS

A total of 6698 patients were referred to the NSSC-CPP of which 20.2% had cancer. While the crude referral rate increased from 114 per 100,000 people in 2014 and stabilised to around 214 in 2017-2021, the cancer detection rate of the total yearly new cancers in Funen diagnosed through the NSSC-CPP in DC Svendborg increased from 3 to 6%.

CONCLUSIONS

With now high and stable conversion and crude referral rates, the NSSC-CPP is one of the largest CPPs in Denmark as measured by the number of new cancer cases found. Similar urgent referral programmes in other countries might fill an unmet medical need for patients presenting with serious non-specific symptoms and signs of cancer in general practice.

Patients from general practice with non-specific cancer symptoms: a retrospective study of symptoms and imaging

BACKGROUND

Patients with non-specific symptoms or signs of cancer (NSSC) present a challenge as they are a heterogeneous population who are not candidates for fast-track work-up in an organ-specific cancer pre-planned pathway (CPP). Denmark has a cancer pre-planned pathway for this population (NSSC-CPP), but several issues remain unclarified, for example, distribution and significance of symptoms and findings, and choice of imaging.

AIM

To investigate symptoms, cancer diagnoses, and diagnostic yield of computed tomography (CT) and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG-PET/CT) in patients on NSSC-CPP to improve the overall diagnostic process.

DESIGN & SETTING

A retrospective medical chart review in a 1-year consecutive cohort (2020).

METHOD

A total of 802 referrals were reviewed for diagnostic imaging in patients with NSSP from general practices, specialist practices, or the local hospital diagnostic centre responsible for NSSC-CPP.

RESULTS

The study included 248 patients; 21% had cancer, most frequently gastrointestinal cancer (27%). The most frequent symptom was weight loss (56%). CT had a sensitivity of 85%, specificity of 87%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 65%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 96%. For 18F-FDG-PET/CT, the numbers were sensitivity 82%, specificity 62%, PPV 33%, and NPV 94%. Patients frequently underwent subsequent examinations following initial imaging.

CONCLUSION

The findings were in accordance with the literature. Patients with NSSC had a cancer prevalence of 21%, most frequently gastrointestinal. The most frequent symptom was weight loss and, even as the only symptom, it is a potential marker for cancer. CT and 18F-FDG-PET/CT were sensitive with high NPV, whereas PPV was superior in CT. Better stratification by symptoms or findings is an obvious focus point for future studies to further optimise the NSSC-CPP work-up strategy.

Time duration and health care resource use during cancer diagnoses in the United States: A large claims database analysis

BACKGROUND: Cancer diagnostic pathways are highly variable and not clearly established in the United States, which can lead to a diagnosis process that takes more time and exposes patients to invasive or unnecessary procedures, delays in treatment, worsening patient outcomes, and elevated health care resource utilization (HRU) and health care system costs. OBJECTIVE: To investigate current trends in time to diagnosis and diagnostic-related HRU preceding the patient's cancer diagnosis across all cancer types in the United States. METHODS: A retrospective claims analysis was conducted on patients newly diagnosed with cancer identified from 2018-2019 using Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart database, which includes Medicare Advantage and commercially insured members. Patients were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes and were required to have at least 2 outpatient visits at least 30 days apart or at least 1 inpatient cancer visit without prior cancer claims. The first diagnostic test was identified based on an algorithm of a 60-day gap between diagnostic tests prior to diagnosis. The index date was defined as the first diagnostic test date or an office visit less than 4 weeks prior to the first diagnostic test date. Patient characteristics, time to diagnosis, and HRU were descriptively analyzed for all patients and by cancer type. RESULTS: Among the 458,818 patients newly diagnosed with cancer included in this analysis, the mean age was 70.6 years, approximately half were female, and most were White people (65.0%) with Medicare Advantage coverage (74.0%). Patients with cancer had an overall mean (SD) time to diagnosis of 156.2 (164.9) days and 15.4% of patients waited longer than 180 days before a cancer diagnosis. High heterogeneity among cancer types was observed, with a mean time to diagnosis ranging from 121.6 days (bladder cancer) to 229.0 days (multiple myeloma). Imaging resource use during the diagnostic pathway was high for radiology (60.7%), computerized tomography (50.8%), magnetic resonance imaging (48.6%), and ultrasound (42.6%). A total of 69.3% of patients had endoscopy without biopsy, 36.5% had endoscopy with biopsy, 62.5% had other biopsies, and most patients did general urine and serum tests (91.3%) and nongenetic cancer-specific laboratory tests (84.3%). Resource use was highly varied by cancer type but tended to increase with a longer time to diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of patients experiencing a diagnostic process of longer than 180 days is clinically and economically meaningful. Diagnostic-related HRU was significant and highly variable, highlighting the inefficiencies in the cancer diagnostic process in the United States and the need for policies, guidelines, or medical interventions to streamline cancer diagnostic pathways to optimize patient outcomes and reduce health care system burden. DISCLOSURES: Dr Cong is an employee of Grail, LLC, which supported this study. Drs Gitlin and McGarvey are employees of BluePath Solutions, and Ms Shivaprakash was an employee of BluePath Solutions, which received financial support from Grail, LLC, for study-related research activities. This study was sponsored by Grail, LLC, a subsidiary of Illumina Inc. currently held separate from Illumina Inc. under the terms of the Interim Measures Order of the European Commission dated October 29, 2021. The sponsor had no role in the collection, management, and analysis of the data. The sponsor contributed to study design and data interpretation.

Combined plasma C‐reactive protein, interleukin 6 and YKL ‐40 for detection of cancer and prognosis in patients with serious nonspecific symptoms and signs of cancer

BACKGROUND AND METHODS

Inflammation is a hallmark of cancer and its progression. Plasma levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6) and YKL-40 reflect inflammation, and are elevated in patients with cancer. This study investigated whether plasma CRP, IL-6 and YKL-40 had diagnostic value in 753 patients referred with nonspecific signs and symptoms of cancer to a diagnostic outpatient clinic.

RESULTS

In total, 111 patients were diagnosed with cancer within 3 months and 30 after 3 months. CRP, IL-6 and YKL-40 were elevated in 44%, 60% and 45% of the cancer patients, and in 15%, 33% and 25% of the patients without cancer. Elevated levels of all three markers were associated with risk of cancer within 3 months: CRP (odds ratio (OR) 4.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.86-6.81), IL-6 (OR = 2.89, 1.91-4.37) and YKL-40 (OR = 2.42, 1.59-3.66). Multivariate explorative analyses showed that increasing values were associated with the risk of getting a cancer diagnosis (continuous scale: CRP (OR = 1.28, 1.12-1.47), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) (OR = 1.61, 1.41-1.98), CA19-9 (OR = 1.15, 1.03-1.29), age (OR = 1.29, 1.02-1.63); dichotomized values: CRP (OR = 2.54, 1.39-4.66), CEA (OR = 4.22, 2.13-8.34), age (OR = 1.42, 1.13-1.80)). CRP had the highest diagnostic value (area under the curve = 0.69). Combined high CRP, IL-6 and YKL-40 was associated with short overall survival (HR = 3.8, 95% CI 2.5-5.9, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, plasma CRP, IL-6 and YKL-40 alone or combined cannot be used to identify patients with cancer, but high levels were associated with poor prognosis. CRP may be useful to indicate whether further diagnostic evaluation is needed when patients present with nonspecific signs and symptoms of cancer.

Protocol for a feasibility study of a cancer symptom awareness campaign to support the rapid diagnostic centre referral pathway in a socioeconomically deprived area: Targeted Intensive Community-based campaign To Optimise Cancer awareness (TIC-TOC)

INTRODUCTION

Rapid diagnostic centres (RDCs) are being implemented across the UK to accelerate the assessment of vague suspected cancer symptoms. Targeted behavioural interventions are needed to augment RDCs that serve socioeconomically deprived populations who are disproportionately affected by cancer, have lower cancer symptom awareness and are less likely to seek help for cancer symptoms. The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility and acceptability of delivering and evaluating a community-based vague cancer symptom awareness intervention in an area of high socioeconomic deprivation.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Intervention materials and messages were coproduced with local stakeholders in Cwm Taf Morgannwg, Wales. Cancer champions will be trained to deliver intervention messages and distribute intervention materials using broadcast media (eg, local radio), printed media (eg, branded pharmacy bags, posters, leaflets), social media (eg, Facebook) and attending local community events. A cross-sectional questionnaire will include self-reported patient interval (time between noticing symptoms to contacting the general practitioner), cancer symptom recognition, cancer beliefs and barriers to presentation, awareness of campaign messages, healthcare resource use, generic quality of life and individual and area-level deprivation indicators. Consent rates and proportion of missing data for patient questionnaires (n=189) attending RDCs will be measured. Qualitative interviews and focus groups will assess intervention acceptability and barriers/facilitators to delivery.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval for this study was given by the London-West London & GTAC Research Ethics (21/LO/0402). This project will inform a potential future controlled study to assess intervention effectiveness in reducing the patient interval for vague cancer symptoms. The results will be critical to informing national policy and practice regarding behavioural interventions to support RDCs in highly deprived populations.

The pathway and characteristics of patients with non-specific symptoms of cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Non-specific symptoms are  common and often sign of a non-serious disease. Because of this, patients with non-specific symptoms of cancer (NSSC) present a challenge for general practitioners (GP). Studies describing characteristics of patients with NSSC have been done after fast-track pathways were created to diagnose and treat patients with NSSC. This study reviews characteristics of patients with NSSC and their patient pathways.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Database searches of Embase, Cochrane, PubMed, Cinahl and Web of Science were performed. Search terms used were cancer, patient pathway, and NSSC with their synonyms. The flow diagram Preferring Reporting Items for Systematic Review was applied to the systematic search. The Newcastle-Ottawa Assessment Scale (NOS) was used to compare the quality of the included studies.

RESULTS

Twelve studies met the inclusion criterias. All studies were considered to be of high methodological quality. Patient Pathway: 11-35% of patients were diagnosed with cancer. Median number of days through diagnostic process was 7-10.

PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS

The most prevalent cancers included hematological-(14-30%), gastrointestinal-(13-23%) and lung cancers (13%). Rheumatological, musculoskeletal and gastrointestinal diseases were among the most common non-malignant diseases diagnosed. Weight loss, fatigue, pain and loss of appetite were the most common symptoms. Cardiovascular diseases, lung diseases, diabetes and previous diagnosed cancer were the most common comorbidities. Mean age of included patients was 60-72 years.

CONCLUSION

Limited number of studies were found and they lacked sufficient heterogenic data to conduct a metaanalysis. Symptoms, diagnoses, age and gender were described with some heterogenic results. Further studies should be conducted to gather broader knowledge about patients with NSSC.

Intra-abdominal cancer risk with abdominal pain: a prospective cohort primary-care study

Background: Quantifying cancer risk in primary-care patients reporting abdominal pain would inform diagnostic strategies. Aim: To quantify oesophagogastric, colorectal, liver, pancreatic, ovarian, uterine, kidney and bladder cancer risks associated with newly reported abdominal pain with or without other symptoms, signs or abnormal blood tests (i.e. features) indicative of possible cancer. Design and setting: Observational prospective cohort study using Clinical Practice Research Datalink records with English cancer registry linkage. Methods: Participants (N=125,793) aged ≥40 years had newly reported abdominal pain in primary care during 01/01/2009-31/12/2013. The outcomes were 1-year cumulative incidence of cancer, and the composite 1-year cumulative incidence of cancers with shared additional features, stratified by age and sex. Results: With abdominal pain, overall risk was greater in men and increased with age, reaching 3.4% (95%CI 3.0–3.7%; predominantly colorectal cancer 1.9%, 1.6–2.1%) in men ≥70 years, compared with their expected incidence of 0.88% (0.87%–0.89%). Additional features increased cancer risk; for example, colorectal or pancreatic cancer risk with abdominal pain plus diarrhoea at 60–69 and ≥70, respectively, was 3.1% (1.9–4.9%) and 4.9% (3.7–6.4%), predominantly colorectal cancer (2.2%, 2–3.8% and 3.3%, 2.0–4.9%). Conclusions: Abdominal pain increases intra-abdominal cancer risk nearly fourfold in men aged ≥70, exceeding the 3% threshold warranting investigation. This threshold is surpassed for the over-60s only with additional features. These results help direct appropriate referral and testing strategies for patients based on their demographic profile and reporting features. We suggest non-invasive strategies first, such as faecal immunochemical testing, with safety-netting in a shared decision-making framework.

Use and diagnostic outcomes of cancer patient pathways in Denmark - is the place of initial diagnostic work-up an important factor?

Introduction

The Cancer Patient Pathway for Non-specific Symptoms and Signs of Cancer (NSSC-CPP) has been implemented in Denmark with regional and intra-regional differences. In some places, the initial diagnostic work-up (often including a CT scan) is performed by general practitioners (GPs) and in others by hospitals. Variations may influence the use of Organ Specific Cancer Patient Pathways (OS-CPPs) and prognostic outcomes for the patients. Therefore, the aims were: 1) To analyse how a CT scan referred from GP or hospital is followed by OS-CPPs and NSSC-CPPs at the national and regional level, and 2) To analyse, nationally and regionally, the diagnostic outcomes of persons referred to CT scan by either GP or hospital six months after and mortality one year after CT scan.

Methods

A nationwide population-based study including individuals with a first CT scan in 2013-2016, either referred from GP or hospital.

Results

Overall, individuals with a CT scan referred from GPs were more likely to start a NSSC-CPP or an OS-CPP than individuals with a CT scan referred by hospitals. Across the five Regions in Denmark, CT scans referred by GPs were associated with reduced odds of total mortality in all regions; (North, OR=0.78 [0.73 0.83], Central, OR=0.92 [0.87 0.96], South, OR=0.85 [0.81 0.89], Capital, OR=0.96 [0.91 1.00] and Zealand, OR=0.85 [0.79 0.90]) and increased odds of cancer-specific mortality in four regions, ORs ranging from 1.15-1.51 with no difference in Region North (1.00 [0.91 1.10]).

Conclusion

No obvious association between more CT scans and CPPs and reduced diagnoses and mortality was observed. The different diagnostic models might not explain the prognostic outcomes, but the different use of CT scans in, and between Regions play a large role in the differences in incidence and mortality.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07545-x.

Diagnostic center for primary care patients with nonspecific symptoms and suspected cancer: compliance to workflow and accuracy of tests and examinations

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate compliance to workflow and accuracy of tests in Sweden's first fast-track referral pathway for patients with nonspecific symptoms and suspected cancer (SCAN).

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study with consecutive inclusion of patients referred to the diagnostic center (DC).

SETTING

Patients with nonspecific symptoms were examined in primary care according to a protocol including two test packages and diagnostic imaging. If symptoms were not explained, patients were referred to the DC and a DC-test package was taken. At the DC, further investigations resulted in diagnosis/no diagnosis.

SUBJECTS

A total of 290 patients, median age 69 years (interquartile range [IQR] 59-76), 48% men, participated. A total of 64 (22%) were diagnosed with cancer, 186 (64%) with non-malignant disease and 40 (14%) had no new disease.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Compliance was estimated by percentage of compulsory tests taken. Test accuracy was assessed by likelihood ratios (LRs) regarding cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 23 (8%) patients had taken both primary care packages, whereas 150 (52%) patients went through entire diagnostic imaging. Abnormal pulmonary X-ray, peak expiratory flow (PEF) and calcium had the highest LRs in primary care (3.5; 3.2; 2.7). A total of 105 (36%) took the complete DC-package, of which bilirubin and cytomegalovirus had the highest LRs (11.5; 10.9). The median number (IQR) of abnormal primary care tests was 5 (3-6) for cancer, 3 (2-6) for other diagnoses and 1 (0-3) for no diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Compliance to test packages in primary care was low, which warrants review of the workflow. Few single tests had high accuracy regarding cancer, but the number of abnormal tests can provide guidance in complicated investigations of suspected malignancies.KEY POINTSFast-track referral pathways for patients with nonspecific serious symptoms have been implemented in several countries and are part of the national cancer strategy in all of Scandinavia.Compliance with compulsory tests in primary care was modest in this study; 8% of the patients had taken the entire compulsory test packages.Few single compulsory tests had high accuracy regarding subsequent cancer, which warrants a review of tests and examinations. However, patients diagnosed with cancer had a higher number of abnormal test results compared to the other groups.

Fast track clinic for early diagnosis of polymyalgia rheumatica: Impact on symptom duration and prednisolone initiation

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of a fast track clinic (FTC) for patients suspected of polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) regarding symptom duration, prednisolone initiation before rheumatological assessment, number of hospital contacts before diagnosis, and cancer diagnosis.

METHODS

It is a retrospective cohort study with a one year follow-up period. Patients referred to the FTC (1st August 2016 to 25th June 2019) were compared to a historical cohort of PMR patients (1st August 2014 to 1st August 2016). Referral criteria are: age over 50, symptoms of PMR but not cranial GCA, and increased C-reactive protein. Data were obtained from patient journals.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven PMR patients in the historical cohort and 113 FTC patients, of whom 83 patients had PMR, were included. The median (interquartile range) number of days from symptom onset until PMR diagnosis were 53 (31-83) days in the FTC versus 80 (58-132) days in the historical cohort (P<0.001). Prednisolone was prescribed before rheumatological assessment to 11% in the FTC versus 42% in the historical cohort (P<0.001). Patients in the FTC had significantly fewer contacts with the hospital before the diagnosis compared with the historical cohort. Four patients in the FTC were diagnosed with a cancer, all of which were found by imaging.

CONCLUSION

The FTC reduced the time from symptom onset until diagnosis, lowered prednisolone initiation before rheumatological assessment, and resulted in fewer hospital visits. The frequency of cancers was low in patients suspected of PMR and cancers were discovered by imaging.

Non-specific symptoms and signs of cancer: different organisations of a cancer patient pathway in Denmark

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate the Non-specific Symptoms and Signs of Cancer-Cancer Patient Pathway (NSSC-CPP) in order to describe organisational and clinical practice similarities and differences in the diagnostic work-up of suspected cancer in Denmark.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A questionnaire on the organisation and practice pertaining to the NSSC-CPP was completed by all 21 diagnostic units in the five healthcare regions in Denmark.

RESULTS

The questionnaire responses revealed regional and intraregional differences in the organisation and clinical practice of the NSSC-CPP. CT scan was the most often used imaging in the NSSC-CPP but there was no consensus whether the CT scan should be ordered and evaluated by general practitioners (GPs) or by the diagnostic units. Two regions were consistent but had different modalities regarding referrals from GPs. Three regions had intra-regional differences. The units reported on different types and frequency of forum for patient plan discussion and how to end a NSSC-CPP.

CONCLUSION

The NSSC-CPP is implemented with great regional and intra-regional differences in Denmark. GPs face different requirements when referring to the NSSC-CPP, which indicates that the division of role and responsibility between GPs and the diagnostic units is not well defined.KEY POINTSIn Denmark, the cancer patient pathway for non-specific symptoms and signs of cancer (NSSC-CPP) has been implemented with variations, but little is known about these different modalities. This study showed that both at a regional and an intra-regional level:•General practitioners meet different implementation of national guidelines in the diagnostic units when referring to the NSSCP-CPP•The suitable patient group for the NSSC-CPP is not well defined•Quality criteria are needed to monitor, evaluate and improve the diagnostic work-up for patients with non-specific symptoms and signs of cancer.

Time Intervals Under the Lens at Sweden's First Diagnostic Center for Primary Care Patients With Nonspecific Symptoms of Cancer. A Comparison With Matched Control Patients

Introduction

Fast-track referral pathways for patients with nonspecific, serious symptoms have been implemented in several countries. Our objective was to analyze time intervals in the diagnostic routes of patients diagnosed with cancer at Sweden’s first Diagnostic Center (DC) for nonspecific symptoms and compare with time intervals of matched control patients.

Methods

Adult patients with nonspecific symptoms that could not be explained by an initial investigation in primary care were eligible for referral to the DC. Patients diagnosed with cancer were matched with patients at another hospital within the same healthcare organization. We aimed for two control patients per DC-patient and matched on tumor type, age and sex. Five time intervals were compared: 1) patient interval (first symptom—primary care contact), 2) primary care interval (first visit—referral to the DC/secondary care), 3) diagnostic interval (first visit—cancer diagnosis), 4) information interval (cancer diagnosis—patient informed) and 5) treatment interval (cancer diagnosis—treatment start). Comparisons between groups and matched cohort analyses were made.

Results

Sixty-four patients (22.1%) were diagnosed with cancer at the DC, of which eight were not matchable. Forty-two patients were matched with two controls and 14 were matched with one control. There were no significant differences in patient-, primary care-, or diagnostic intervals between the groups. The information interval was shorter at the DC compared to the control group (difference between matched pairs 7 days, p = 0.001) and the treatment interval was also shorter at the DC with significant differences in the matched analysis (difference between matched pairs 13 days, p = 0.049). The findings remained the same in four sensitivity analyses, made to compensate for differences between the groups.

Conclusions

Up to diagnosis, we could not detect significant differences in time intervals between the DC and the control group. However, the shorter information and treatment intervals at the DC should be advantageous for these patients who will get timely access to treatment or palliative care. Due to limitations regarding comparability between the groups, the results must be interpreted with caution and further research is warranted.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov-ID: NCT01709539. Registration-date: October 18, 2012.

First results from five multidisciplinary diagnostic centre (MDC) projects for non-specific but concerning symptoms, possibly indicative of cancer

Background

Patients with non-specific symptoms often experience longer times to diagnosis and poorer clinical outcomes than those with site-specific symptoms. This paper reports initial results from five multidisciplinary diagnostic centre (MDC) projects in England, piloting rapid referral for patients with non-specific symptoms.

Methods

The evaluation covered MDC activity from 1st December 2016 to 31st July 2018, with projects using a common dataset. Logistical regression analyses were conducted, with a diagnosis of any cancer as the dependent variable. Exploratory analysis was conducted on presenting symptoms and diagnoses of cancer, and on comparisons within these groupings.

Results

In total, 2961 patients were referred into the MDCs and 241 cancers were diagnosed. The pathway detected cancers across a broad range of tumour sites, including several rare and less common cancers. An association between patient age and cancer was identified (p < 0.001). GP ‘clinical suspicion’ was identified as a strong predictor of cancer (p = 0.006), with a reduced association with cancer observed in patients with higher numbers of GP consultation before referral (p = 0.008).

Conclusions

The MDC model diagnoses cancer in patients with non-specific symptoms, with a conversion rate of 8%, demonstrating the diagnostic potential of a non-site-specific symptomatic referral pathway.

Rapid cancer diagnosis for patients with vague symptoms: a cost-effectiveness study

BACKGROUND

A pilot rapid diagnosis centre (RDC) allows GPs within targeted clusters to refer adults with vague and/or non-specific symptoms suspicious of cancer, who do not meet criteria for referral under an urgent suspected cancer (USC) pathway, to a multidisciplinary RDC clinic where they are seen within 1 week.

AIM

To explore the cost-effectiveness of the RDC compared with standard clinical practice.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Cost-effectiveness modelling using routine data from Neath Port Talbot Hospital, Wales.

METHOD

Discrete-event simulation modelled a cohort of 1000 patients from referral to radiological diagnosis based on routine RDC and hospital data. Control patients were those referred to a USC pathway but then downgraded. Published sources provided estimates of patient quality of life (QoL) and pre-diagnosis anxiety. The model calculates time to diagnosis, costs, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and estimates the probability of the RDC being a cost-effective strategy.

RESULTS

The RDC reduces mean time to diagnosis from 84.2 days in usual care to 5.9 days if a diagnosis is made at clinic, or 40.8 days if further investigations are booked during RDC. RDC provision is the superior strategy (that is, less costly and more effective) compared with standard clinical practice when run near or at full capacity. However, it is not cost-effective if capacity utilisation drops below 80%.

CONCLUSION

An RDC for patients presenting with vague or non-specific symptoms suspicious of cancer in primary care reduces time to diagnosis and provides excellent value for money if run at ≥80% capacity.

Cross-sectional study using primary care and cancer registration data to investigate patients with cancer presenting with non-specific symptoms

INTRODUCTION

Patients presenting to primary care with site-specific alarm symptoms can be referred onto urgent suspected cancer pathways, whereas those with non-specific symptoms currently have no dedicated referral routes leading to delays in cancer diagnosis and poorer outcomes. Pilot Multidisciplinary Diagnostic Centres (MDCs) provide a referral route for such patients in England.

OBJECTIVES

This work aimed to use linked primary care and cancer registration data to describe diagnostic pathways for patients similar to those being referred into MDCs and compare them to patients presenting with more specific symptoms.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study linked primary care data from the National Cancer Diagnosis Audit (NCDA) to national cancer registration and Route to Diagnosis records. Patient symptoms recorded in the NCDA were used to allocate patients to one of two groups - those presenting with symptoms mirroring referral criteria of MDCs (non-specific but concerning symptoms (NSCS)) and those with at least one site-specific alarm symptom (non-NSCS). Descriptive analyses compared the two groups and regression analysis by group investigated associations with long primary care intervals (PCIs).

RESULTS

Patients with NSCS were more likely to be diagnosed at later stage (32% stage 4, compared with 21% in non-NSCS) and via an emergency presentation (34% vs 16%). These patients also had more multiple pre-referral general practitioner consultations (59% vs 43%) and primary care-led diagnostics (blood tests: 57% vs 35%). Patients with NSCS had higher odds of having longer PCIs (adjusted OR: 1.24 (1.11 to 1.36)). Patients with lung and urological cancers also had higher odds of longer PCIs overall and in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in the diagnostic pathway show that patients with symptoms mirroring the MDC referral criteria could benefit from a new referral pathway.

Diagnostic property of direct referral from general practitioners to contrast-enhanced thoracoabdominal CT in patients with serious but non-specific symptoms or signs of cancer: a retrospective cohort study on cancer prevalence after 12 months

OBJECTIVES

To describe the diagnostic properties of thoracoabdominal contrast-enhanced CT (ceCT), when general practitioners (GPs) managed referral to ceCT through the non-specific symptoms or signs of cancer-cancer patient pathway (NSSC-CPP).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study including patients from a part of Denmark.

SETTING

Department of Internal Medicine at a university hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

In total, 529 patients underwent ceCT.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Our primary objective was to estimate the negative and positive likelihood ratios for being diagnosed with cancer within 1 year after ceCT. Our secondary outcomes were prevalence and final diagnoses of malignancy (including temporal trends since implementation of NSSC-CPP in 2012), the prevalence of revision of CT scans and referral patterns based on ceCT results.

RESULTS

In total, 529 subjects underwent ceCT and malignancy was identified in 104 (19.7%) patients; 101 (97.1%) during initial workup and 3 patients during the subsequent 12 months follow-up.Eleven patients had a false-negative ceCT, and revision classified the ceCT as 'probable/possible malignancy' in eight (73%) patients. The negative predictive value was 98% and positive predictive value 63%. Negative and positive likelihood ratios for malignancy was 0.1 and 7.9, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that ceCT as part of GP-coordinated workup has a low negative likelihood ratio for identifying malignancy; this is important since identifying patients for further workup is vital.

Comorbid chronic diseases and cancer diagnosis: disease-specific effects and underlying mechanisms

An earlier diagnosis is a key strategy for improving the outcomes of patients with cancer. However, achieving this goal can be challenging, particularly for the growing number of people with one or more chronic conditions (comorbidity/multimorbidity) at the time of diagnosis. Pre-existing chronic diseases might affect patient participation in cancer screening, help-seeking for new and/or changing symptoms and clinicians' decision-making on the use of diagnostic investigations. Evidence suggests, for example, that pre-existing pulmonary, cardiovascular, neurological and psychiatric conditions are all associated with a more advanced stage of cancer at diagnosis. By contrast, hypertension and certain gastrointestinal and musculoskeletal conditions might be associated with a more timely diagnosis. In this Review, we propose a comprehensive framework that encompasses the effects of disease-specific, patient-related and health-care-related factors on the diagnosis of cancer in individuals with pre-existing chronic illnesses. Several previously postulated aetiological mechanisms (including alternative explanations, competing demands and surveillance effects) are integrated with newly identified mechanisms, such as false reassurances, or patient concerns about appearing to be a hypochondriac. By considering specific effects of chronic diseases on diagnostic processes and outcomes, tailored early diagnosis initiatives can be developed to improve the outcomes of the large proportion of patients with cancer who have pre-existing chronic conditions.

Progress in cancer survival, mortality, and incidence in seven high-income countries 1995-2014 (ICBP SURVMARK-2): a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Population-based cancer survival estimates provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of cancer services and can reflect the prospects of cure. As part of the second phase of the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP), the Cancer Survival in High-Income Countries (SURVMARK-2) project aims to provide a comprehensive overview of cancer survival across seven high-income countries and a comparative assessment of corresponding incidence and mortality trends.

METHODS

In this longitudinal, population-based study, we collected patient-level data on 3·9 million patients with cancer from population-based cancer registries in 21 jurisdictions in seven countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, and the UK) for seven sites of cancer (oesophagus, stomach, colon, rectum, pancreas, lung, and ovary) diagnosed between 1995 and 2014, and followed up until Dec 31, 2015. We calculated age-standardised net survival at 1 year and 5 years after diagnosis by site, age group, and period of diagnosis. We mapped changes in incidence and mortality to changes in survival to assess progress in cancer control.

FINDINGS

In 19 eligible jurisdictions, 3 764 543 cases of cancer were eligible for inclusion in the study. In the 19 included jurisdictions, over 1995-2014, 1-year and 5-year net survival increased in each country across almost all cancer types, with, for example, 5-year rectal cancer survival increasing more than 13 percentage points in Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. For 2010-14, survival was generally higher in Australia, Canada, and Norway than in New Zealand, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. Over the study period, larger survival improvements were observed for patients younger than 75 years at diagnosis than those aged 75 years and older, and notably for cancers with a poor prognosis (ie, oesophagus, stomach, pancreas, and lung). Progress in cancer control (ie, increased survival, decreased mortality and incidence) over the study period was evident for stomach, colon, lung (in males), and ovarian cancer.

INTERPRETATION

The joint evaluation of trends in incidence, mortality, and survival indicated progress in four of the seven studied cancers. Cancer survival continues to increase across high-income countries; however, international disparities persist. While truly valid comparisons require differences in registration practice, classification, and coding to be minimal, stage of disease at diagnosis, timely access to effective treatment, and the extent of comorbidity are likely the main determinants of patient outcomes. Future studies are needed to assess the impact of these factors to further our understanding of international disparities in cancer survival.

FUNDING

Canadian Partnership Against Cancer; Cancer Council Victoria; Cancer Institute New South Wales; Cancer Research UK; Danish Cancer Society; National Cancer Registry Ireland; The Cancer Society of New Zealand; National Health Service England; Norwegian Cancer Society; Public Health Agency Northern Ireland, on behalf of the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry; The Scottish Government; Western Australia Department of Health; and Wales Cancer Network.

Prospective Cohort of Referrals to a Cancer of Unknown Primary Clinic, including Direct Access from Primary Care

AIMS

The UK National Health Service has well-developed site-specific referral pathways for patients with suspected cancer, but historically there has been inequality of access for patients with suspected Metastatic malignant disease of Unknown primary Origin (MUO). The Brighton cancer of unknown primary (CUP) clinic covers a population of about 650 000. As well as 'in-house' referrals, direct general practitioner referrals are also accepted (since 2015), aiming to shorten the diagnostic pathway and improve patient support. We present data from the first 3 years of activity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Referrals were screened by an oncologist, ensuring adherence to the strict referral criterion of imaging evidence of a suspected diagnosis of MUO. A standardised data collection form was completed at each clinic appointment by the CUP team. Outcomes were cross-checked against clinic lists, letters and multidisciplinary meeting (MDM) records. A data analysis was carried out of all referrals to the CUP clinic (2015-2018), including general practitioner referrals.

RESULTS

In total, 258 patients were seen in the CUP clinic in the first 3 years. The median age was 71 years (range 23-95 years). Source of referral: general practitioner (30%); physician (27%); acute oncology (24%); other MDM (16%); surgeon (3%). A final diagnosis of cancer was made in 83% of referrals, with a primary site identified in 83% of those cancer cases: 19% haematological, 11% lung, 9% urological, 8% upper gastrointestinal, 6% breast, 5% skin, 4% gynaecological, 4% lower gastrointestinal, 0.3% thyroid and 0.3% sarcoma. 10% of referrals remained with a MUO diagnosis (not fit for further investigation) and 7% had confirmed CUP. 17% had a benign diagnosis (of which 56% were general practitioner referrals). Of the general practitioner referrals: 55% were seen in the CUP clinic, 31% did not meet referral criteria and 14% were declined after MDM review of imaging confirmed benign appearances.

CONCLUSION

The development of direct general practitioner referrals to CUP clinics nationally should be encouraged (as supported by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) - they are feasible and manageable within a tertiary CUP clinic, resulting in high rates of cancer diagnoses, with attendant early support from specialist nursing teams and oncological review.

Contrasting effects of comorbidities on emergency colon cancer diagnosis: a longitudinal data-linkage study in England

BACKGROUND

One in three colon cancers are diagnosed as an emergency, which is associated with worse cancer outcomes. Chronic conditions (comorbidities) affect large proportions of adults and they might influence the risk of emergency presentations (EP).

METHODS

We aimed to evaluate the effect of specific pre-existing comorbidities on the risk of colon cancer being diagnosed following an EP rather than through non-emergency routes. The cohort study included 5745 colon cancer patients diagnosed in England 2005-2010, with individually-linked cancer registry, primary and secondary care data. In addition to multivariable analyses we also used potential-outcomes methods.

RESULTS

Colon cancer patients with comorbidities consulted their GP more frequently with cancer symptoms during the pre-diagnostic year, compared with non-comorbid cancer patients. EP occurred more frequently in patients with 'serious' or complex comorbidities (diabetes, cardiac and respiratory diseases) diagnosed/treated in hospital during the years pre-cancer diagnosis (43% EP in comorbid versus 27% in non-comorbid individuals; multivariable analysis Odds Ratio (OR), controlling for socio-demographic factors and symptoms: men OR = 2.40; 95% CI 2.0-2.9 and women OR = 1.98; 95% CI 1.6-2.4. Among women younger than 60, gynaecological (OR = 3.41; 95% CI 1.2-9.9) or recent onset gastro-intestinal conditions (OR = 2.84; 95% CI 1.1-7.7) increased the risk of EP. In contrast, primary care visits for hypertension monitoring decreased EPs for both genders.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with comorbidities have a greater risk of being diagnosed with cancer as an emergency, although they consult more frequently with cancer symptoms during the year pre-cancer diagnosis. This suggests that comorbidities may interfere with diagnostic reasoning or investigations due to 'competing demands' or because they provide 'alternative explanations'. In contrast, the management of chronic risk factors such as hypertension may offer opportunities for earlier diagnosis. Interventions are needed to support the diagnostic process in comorbid patients. Appropriate guidelines and diagnostic services to support the evaluation of new or changing symptoms in comorbid patients may be useful.

Transforming cancer outcomes in England: earlier and faster diagnoses, pathways to success, and empowering alliances

Cancer outcomes and patient experience in England have never been better but survival remains worse than in comparable countries. Differences in stage at diagnosis and, to a lesser extent, access to optimal treatments are likely to be the most important factors. The national cancer plan emphasizes earlier and faster diagnosis and the creation of cancer alliances providing strategic leadership and coordination. Earlier diagnosis is being promoted by national awareness campaigns designed to overcome fatalism and perceived barriers to consulting a general practitioner as well as improvements to existing screening programs and the introduction of more targeted screening such as Lung Health Checks. These are supported by local social marketing campaigns in which trained volunteers support and advise others about cancer and cancer care. The epidemiology of symptoms in general practice provides an organizing framework for cancer diagnostic pathways. Alliances are implementing a broader model of cancer diagnostic clinics at a larger scale taking into account the different needs of patients with 1) obvious alert symptoms, 2) low risk but not no risk symptoms, and 3) serious but not specific symptoms. Faster diagnosis is being promoted by the introduction of a Faster Diagnosis Standard requiring patients are given a diagnosis of cancer or have it ruled out within 28 days of referral. The three cancer alliances forming the National Cancer Vanguard together with NHS England are publishing clinically led evidence-based Timed Diagnostic Pathways which show how the drastic changes needed can be achieved. Cancer alliances have been successful in developing clinical cancer pathways which need support by improved commissioning and regulatory approaches which align clinical pathways with financial and performance ratings. Clinical leadership has been essential but further focus is needed on making sure that performance and regulatory approaches give proper attention and encouragement to earlier and faster diagnosis.

Symptom Signatures and Diagnostic Timeliness in Cancer Patients: A Review of Current Evidence

Early diagnosis is an important aspect of contemporary cancer prevention and control strategies, as the majority of patients are diagnosed following symptomatic presentation. The nature of presenting symptoms can critically influence the length of the diagnostic intervals from symptom onset to presentation (the patient interval), and from first presentation to specialist referral (the primary care interval). Understanding which symptoms are associated with longer diagnostic intervals to help the targeting of early diagnosis initiatives is an area of emerging research. In this Review, we consider the methodological challenges in studying the presenting symptoms and intervals to diagnosis of cancer patients, and summarize current evidence on presenting symptoms associated with a range of common and rarer cancer sites. We propose a taxonomy of cancer sites considering their symptom signature and the predictive value of common presenting symptoms. Finally, we consider evidence on associations between symptomatic presentations and intervals to diagnosis before discussing implications for the design, implementation, and evaluation of public health or health system interventions to achieve the earlier detection of cancer.