Examining time intervals between diagnosis and treatment in the management of patients with limited stage small cell lung cancer

Timeliness of Lung Cancer Care From the Point of Suspicious Image at an Urban Safety Net Hospital

BACKGROUND

Timeliness of care is an important metric for lung cancer patients, and care delays in the safety-net setting have been described. Timeliness from the point of the suspicious image is not well-studied. Herein, we evaluate time intervals in the workup of lung cancer at an urban, safety net hospital and assess for disparities by demographic and clinical factors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of lung cancer patients receiving some portion of their care at Boston Medical Center between 2015 and 2020. A total of 687 patients were included in the final analysis. Median times from suspicious image to first treatment (SIT), suspicious image to diagnosis (SID), and diagnosis to treatment (DT) were calculated. Nonparametric tests were applied to assess for intergroup differences in time intervals.

RESULTS

SIT, SID, and DT for the entire cohort was 78, 34, and 32 days, respectively. SIT intervals were 87 days for females and 72 days for males (p < .01). SIT intervals were 106, 110, 81, and 41 days for stages I, II, III, and IV, respectively (p < .01). SID intervals differed between black (40.5) and Hispanic (45) patients compared to white (28) and Asian (23) patients (p < .05).

CONCLUSION

Advanced stage at presentation and male gender were associated with more timely treatment from the point of suspicious imaging while white and Asian were associated with more timely lung cancer diagnosis. Future analyses should seek to elucidate drivers of timeliness differences and assess for the impact of timeliness disparities on patient outcomes in the safety net setting.

Impact of Delays in Lung Cancer Treatment on Survival

Timely care is an important dimension of health care quality, but the impact of delays in care on lung cancer outcomes is unclear. Quantifying the impact of delays in cancer treatment on survival is necessary to inform resource allocation, quality improvement initiatives, and lung cancer guidelines. Review of the available literature demonstrated significant heterogeneity between studies in terms of the impact of delay. Frequently paradoxical results were reported, with delay being associated with improved survival in patients with advanced disease. However, significant methodologic flaws were identified in many studies, which probably is the reason for the paradoxical results. The most significant methodologic limitations identified were incorrectly controlling for final pathologic stage (a mediator in the causal chain from delay to survival), failure to control for confounding by acuity of cancer presentation, and failure to consider effect measure modification. The effect of delay on survival probably varies by stage. The impact of delays is lowest for subcentimeter nodules, probably highest in stage II disease, and low in patients who are only eligible for palliative care. Precise quantification of the impact of delay is not currently possible. Given the available evidence, quality metrics for the timeliness of lung cancer care should focus on local barriers to care. These metrics should be carefully designed to take into account clinical-radiographic stage at initial presentation.

Delays for diagnosis and treatment of lung cancers: a systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The impact of diagnosis and treatment delays for non-small cell lung cancer management is poorly understood, even if the literature on the subject is currently increasing in importance. We have few indicators that can serve as reference for quality assurance actions. The objective of this review was to review the literature on the subject.

METHODS

A literature search, using the words 'human lung cancer delay' and 'human lung cancer waiting time', was undertaken in Medline database.

RESULTS

Several studies analyzed these delays mostly in a monocentric setting. There is an important variability in the definition of these delays, in the collection methods and in the results obtained. However, it seems distinctly clear that long delays are frequently observed in less symptomatic patients and, therefore, are accompanied by better prognosis.

CONCLUSION

More standardized definitions and procedures to calculate time intervals between cancer diagnosis and treatment should be implemented to better understand the delays of lung cancer management.

Clinical and organizational factors in the initial evaluation of patients with lung cancer: Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines

BACKGROUND

This guideline is intended to provide an evidence-based approach to the initial evaluation of patients with known or suspected lung cancer. It also includes an assessment of the impact of timeliness of care and multidisciplinary teams on outcome.

METHODS

The applicable current medical literature was identified by a computerized search and evaluated using standardized methods. Recommendations were framed using the approach described by the Guidelines Oversight Committee of the American College of Chest Physicians. Data sources included MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

RESULTS

Initial evaluation should include a thorough history and physical examination; CT imaging; pulmonary function tests; and hemoglobin, electrolyte, liver function, and calcium levels. Additional testing for distant metastases and paraneoplastic syndromes should be determined on the basis of these results. Paraneoplastic syndromes may have an adverse impact on cancer treatment, so they should be controlled rapidly with the goal of proceeding with definitive cancer treatment in a timely manner. Although the relationship between timeliness of care and survival is difficult to quantify, efforts to deliver timely care are reasonable and should be balanced with the need to attend to other dimensions of health-care quality (eg, safety, effectiveness, efficiency, equality, consistency with patient values and preferences). Quality care will require multiple disciplines. Although it is difficult to assess the impact, we suggest that a multidisciplinary team approach to care be used, particularly for patients requiring multimodality therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The initial evaluation of patients with lung cancer should include a thorough history and physical examination, pulmonary function tests, CT imaging, basic laboratory tests, and selective testing for distant metastases and paraneoplastic syndromes.

Lung cancer diagnostic and treatment intervals in the United States: a health care disparity?

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer diagnostic and treatment delays have been described for several patient populations. However, few studies have analyzed these intervals among patients treated in contemporary health care systems in the United States. We therefore studied the timing of lung cancer diagnosis and treatment at a U.S. medical center providing care to a diverse patient population within two different hospital systems.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer stage I to III from 2000 to 2005 at public and private hospitals affiliated with the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. We recorded patient and disease characteristics; dates of initial radiograph suspicious for lung cancer, diagnosis, and treatment; and overall survival. Associations between these factors were assessed using univariate analysis, multivariate logistic regression, and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 482 patients met criteria for analysis. In univariate analyses, the image-treatment interval was significantly associated with race, age, income, insurance type, and hospital type (76 days for public versus 45 days for private; p < 0.0001). In multivariate analysis, only hospital type remained significantly associated with the image-treatment interval; patients in the private hospital setting were more likely to receive timely treatment (hazard ratio 1.85; 95% confidence interval, 1.37-2.50; p < 0.001). In univariate analysis, the image-treatment interval was not associated with disease stage (p = 0.27) or with survival (p = 0.42).

CONCLUSION

Intervals between suspicion, diagnosis, and treatment of lung cancer vary widely among patients. Health care system factors, such as hospital type, largely account for these discrepancies. In this study, these intervals do not appear to be associated with clinical outcomes.

Duration of symptoms, stage at diagnosis and relative survival in colon and rectal cancer

In colorectal cancer, the relation between duration of symptoms and stage at presentation and prognosis is not yet settled. All 1263 patients treated for colorectal cancer at Levanger Hospital, 1980-2004, and 2892 patients treated in Norway during 2004 were included. The association between symptom duration as an explanatory variable and tumour stage as a dependent variable was analysed using a proportional odds logistic regression model. Known duration of symptoms was divided into four categories: <1 week, 1-8 weeks, 2-6 months and >6 months. There was an inverse relationship between symptom duration and colon cancer TNM-stage, OR=0.73 (95% CI 0.63-0.84), p<0.001 (Levanger Hospital) and 0.84 (0.75-0.95), p=0.004 (Norway 2004), where the OR is per category of symptom duration. Duration of symptoms were also inversely associated with T-stage, N-stage and M-stage in colon cancer. These relationships were not found for rectal cancer. In colon cancer the relative five-year survival for the four intervals of symptom duration was 44%, 39%, 54% and 66%, p<0.001, in Levanger, 1980-2004, and four-year survival was 46%, 62%, 75% and 74%, p<0.001, in Norway 2004, respectively. For rectal cancer survival was not dependent on symptom duration. In a multivariate analysis of relative survival of patients with colon cancer, duration of symptoms was associated with survival independent of tumour differentiation and TNM-stage. Increasing duration of symptoms was positively associated with less advanced disease and better survival in colon cancer, but not in rectal cancer.