Does delay in diagnosing colorectal cancer in symptomatic patients affect tumor stage and survival? A population-based observational study

Berberine inhibits colorectal liver metastasis via modulation of TGF-β in a cecum transplant mouse model

BACKGROUND

Hepatic metastasis is the primary cause of colorectal cancer (CRC)-induced death. Our previous results showed the anti-metastatic effects of Coptidis rhizoma using in vitro model.

AIM

The present study aimed to investigate whether berberine, the main active compound of C. rhizoma, inhibits colon-liver metastasis in an animal model, and to elucidate the underlying mechanisms.

METHODS

Murine colon carcinoma (CT26) tumor tissue was implanted into the cecum of balb/c mice with/without oral administration of berberine (100 mg/kg) for 21 days, after which liver metastasis was evaluated. In addition, the pharmacological actions of berberine were explored using 5-fluorouracil-resistant human colon cancer cells (HCT116/R).

RESULT

The administration of berberine significantly decreased the number of tumor nodules in the liver, while significant activation of E-cadherin (an epithelial marker), and suppression of vimentin, Snail and TGF-β (mesenchymal markers) were observed in primary colon tumor tissues. Berberine treatment also notably lowered the levels of inflammatory cytokines (TGF-β, TNF- α, IL-6 and IL-1β) in the blood. In HCT116/R cells, berberine significantly inhibited migration and invasion and modulated the expression of TGF-β and representative molecules related to its pathway. The results obtained with a TGF-β inhibitor (SB431542) and a TGF-β siRNA, strongly suggest that the mechanism of action of berberine is linked to TGF-β signaling.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, berberine evidently possess an anti-colon-liver metastatic effect, and its underlying mechanisms involve the inhibition of epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) through the TGF-β signaling pathway. Thus, we cautiously propose the pharmacological potential of berberine in drug research studies targeting hepatic metastasis from CRC.

Delays in Presentation, Diagnosis, and Treatment Among Patients With GI Cancer in Southwest Nigeria

PURPOSE

The incidence of GI cancers is increasing in sub-Saharan African countries. We described the oncological care pathway and assessed presentation, diagnosis, and treatment intervals and delays among patients with GI cancer who presented to the Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospitals Complex in Ile-Ife, Nigeria.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 545 patients with GI cancer in the African Research Group for Oncology (ARGO) database. We defined presentation interval as the interval between symptom onset and presentation to tertiary hospital, diagnostic interval as between presentation and diagnosis, and treatment interval as between diagnosis and initiation of treatment. We considered >3 months, >1 month, and >1 month to be presentation, diagnosis, and treatment delays, respectively. We compared lengths of intervals using Mann-Whitney U tests and logistic regression.

RESULTS

The most frequent cancer types were pancreatic (32%) and colorectal (28%). Most patients presented at stages III (38%) and IV (30%). The median presentation interval was 84 days (IQR, 56-191), and 49% presented after 3 months or longer. The median diagnosis and treatment intervals were 0 (IQR, 0-8) and 7 (IQR, 0-23) days, respectively. There was no relationship between age, sex, education, or distance to tertiary hospital and presentation delay, but patients with stage III to IV versus I to II had higher odds of presentation delay (odds ratio [OR], 1.68 [95% CI, 1.13 to 2.50]). Among patients with pancreatic cancer, older patients were less likely to have a diagnosis delay (OR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.25 to 0.98]).

CONCLUSION

About half of patients with GI cancer in Ile-Ife, Nigeria, did not present to tertiary hospitals until more than 90 days after noticing symptoms. Efforts are warranted to improve public knowledge of GI cancer symptoms and to strengthen health systems for prompt diagnosis and referral to specialty care.

The effect of time before diagnosis and treatment on colorectal cancer outcomes: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate existing evidence on the relationship between diagnostic and treatment intervals and outcomes for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Four databases were searched for English language articles assessing the role of time before initial treatment in colorectal cancer on any outcome, including stage and survival. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion and data were synthesised narratively. A dose-response meta-analysis was performed to examine the association between treatment interval and survival.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty papers were included in the systematic review, eight were included in the meta-analysis. Forty-five different intervals were considered in the time from first symptom to treatment. The most common finding was of no association between the length of intervals on any outcome. The dose-response meta-analysis showed a U-shaped association between the treatment interval and overall survival with the nadir at 45 days.

CONCLUSION

The review found inconsistent, but mostly a lack of, association between interval length and colorectal cancer outcomes, but study design and quality were heterogeneous. Meta-analysis suggests survival becomes increasingly poorer for those commencing treatment more than 45 days after diagnosis.

REGISTRATION

This review was registered, and the protocol is available, in PROSPERO, the international database of systematic reviews, with the registration ID CRD42021255864.

A systematic review of methodological considerations in time to diagnosis and treatment in colorectal cancer research

Research focusing on timely diagnosis and treatment of colorectal cancer is necessary to improve outcomes for people with cancer. Previous attempts to consolidate research on time to diagnosis and treatment have noted varied methodological approaches and quality, limiting the comparability of findings. This systematic review was conducted to comprehensively assess the scope of methodological issues in this field and provide recommendations for future research. Eligible articles had to assess the role of any interval up to treatment, on any outcome in colorectal cancer, in English, with no limits on publication time. Four databases were searched (Ovid Medline, EMBASE, EMCARE and PsycInfo). Papers were screened by two independent reviewers using a two-stage process of title and abstract followed by full text review. In total, 130 papers were included and had data extracted on specific methodological and statistical features. Several methodological problems were identified across the evidence base. Common issues included arbitrary categorisation of intervals (n = 107, 83%), no adjustment for potential confounders (n = 65, 50%), and lack of justification for included covariates where there was adjustment (n = 40 of 65 papers that performed an adjusted analysis, 62%). Many articles introduced epidemiological biases such as immortal time bias (n = 37 of 80 papers that used survival as an outcome, 46%) and confounding by indication (n = 73, 56%), as well as other biases arising from inclusion of factors outside of their temporal sequence. However, determination of the full extent of these problems was hampered by insufficient reporting. Recommendations include avoiding artificial categorisation of intervals, ensuring bias has not been introduced due to out-of-sequence use of key events and increased use of theoretical frameworks to detect and reduce bias. The development of reporting guidelines and domain-specific risk of bias tools may aid in ensuring future research can reliably contribute to recommendations regarding optimal timing and strengthen the evidence base.

Relationship between time from symptom's onset to diagnosis and prognosis in patients with symptomatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists regarding the relationship of the outcome of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) with the time from symptom onset to diagnosis. The aim of this study is to investigate this association, with the assumption that this relationship was nonlinear and with adjustment for multiple confounders, such as tumor grade, symptoms, or admission to an emergency department.

METHODS

This multicenter study with prospective follow-up was performed in five regions of Spain from 2010 to 2012. Symptomatic cases of incident CRC from a previous study were examined. At the time of diagnosis, each patient was interviewed, and the associated hospital and clinical records were reviewed. During follow-up, the clinical records were reviewed again to assess survival. Cox survival analysis with a restricted cubic spline was used to model overall and CRC-specific survival, with adjustment for variables related to the patient, health service, and tumor.

RESULTS

A total of 795 patients had symptomatic CRC and 769 of them had complete data on diagnostic delay and survival. Univariate analysis indicated a lower HR for death in patients who had diagnostic intervals less than 4.2 months. However, after adjustment for variables related to the patient, tumor, and utilized health service, there was no relationship of the diagnostic delay with survival of patients with colon and rectal cancer, colon cancer alone, or rectal cancer alone. Cubic spline analysis indicated an inverse association of the diagnostic delay with 5-year survival. However, this association was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicated that the duration of diagnostic delay had no significant effect on the outcome of patients with CRC. We suggest that the most important determinant of the duration of diagnostic delay is the biological profile of the tumor. However, it remains the responsibility of community health centers and authorities to minimize diagnostic delays in patients with CRC and to implement initiatives that improve early diagnosis and provide better outcomes.

Coptidis Rhizoma Suppresses Metastatic Behavior by Inhibiting TGF-β-Mediated Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition in 5-FU-Resistant HCT116 Cells

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most lethal malignancy worldwide. The high mortality rate of CRC is largely due to cancer metastasis. Recently, suppressing epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) has been considered a promising strategy for treating metastatic cancer, especially drug-resistant metastatic cancer. The present study aimed to evaluate the antimetastatic effect of Coptidis Rhizoma, as well as the potential underlying mechanisms, using a 5-fluorouracil-resistant colon tumor cell model (HCT116/R). Coptidis Rhizoma 30% ethanol extract (CRE) significantly inhibited HCT116/R cells migration and invasion. CRE effectively inhibited EMT in HCT116/R cells by upregulating the expression of an epithelial marker (E-cadherin) and downregulating the expression of mesenchymal markers (vimentin, Snail, and ZEB2) at both the protein and gene levels. Immunofluorescence assays also confirmed consistent patterns in the levels of E-cadherin and vimentin. In addition, the anti-EMT activity of CRE and its related effects were associated with the CRE-mediated suppression of the TGF-β pathway, as shown by changes in the levels of downstream molecules (phosphorylated Akt and p38), and inhibition of migration, invasion, and protein expression of TGF-β after treatment/cotreatment with a TGF-β inhibitor (SB431542). In conclusion, Coptidis Rhizoma exerts an antimetastatic effect, especially in the treatment of drug-resistant cancer, and the possible mechanisms are associated with inhibiting EMT via TGF-β signaling. Thus, Coptidis Rhizoma will likely become a potential therapeutic candidate for simultaneously mitigating drug resistance and metastasis in CRC.

Does Preoperative Waiting Time Affect the Short-Term Outcomes and Prognosis of Colorectal Cancer Patients? A Retrospective Study from the West of China

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to analyze the effect of preoperative waiting time on the short-term outcomes and prognosis in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 3744 CRC patients who underwent primary CRC surgery at a single clinical medical center from Jan 2011 to Jan 2020. The baseline information, short-term outcomes, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared among the short-waiting group, the intermediate-waiting group, and the long-waiting group.

RESULTS

A total of 3744 eligible CRC patients were enrolled for analysis. There were no significant differences in all of the baseline information and short-term outcomes among the three groups. In multivariate analysis, older age (OS: p=0.000, HR = 1.947, 95% CI = 1.631-2.324; DFS: p=0.000, HR = 1.693, 95% CI = 1.445-1.983), advanced clinical stage (OS: p=0.000, HR = 1.301, 95% CI = 1.161-1.457; DFS: p=0.000, HR = 1.262, 95% CI = 1.139-1.400), overall complications (OS: p=0.000, HR = 1.613, 95% CI = 1.303-1.895; DFS: p=0.000, HR = 1.560, 95% CI = 1.312-1.855), and major complications (OS: p=0.001, HR = 1.812, 95% CI = 1.338-2.945; DFS: p=0.006, HR = 1.647, 95% CI = 1.153-2.352) were independent factors of OS and DFS. In addition, no significant difference was found in all stages (OS, p=0.203; DFS, p=0.108), stage I (OS, p=0.419; DFS, p=0.579), stage II (OS, p=0.465; DFS, p=0.385), or stage III (OS, p=0.539; DFS, p=0.259) in terms of OS and DFS among the three groups.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative waiting time did not affect the short-term outcomes or prognosis in CRC patients.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on colorectal cancer patients at an NHS Foundation Trust hospital-A retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Current NHS guidelines recommend that treatment of colorectal patients referred through the two-week wait referral system should occur within sixty two days from the date of referral. The COVID-19 pandemic which started in March 2020 has however led to significant delays in the delivery of health services, including colorectal cancer treatments. This study investigates the effects of delayed colorectal cancer treatments during the COVID pandemic on disease progression.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of 107 patients with histologically confirmed diagnosis of colorectal cancer was conducted. The occurrence of cancer upstaging after initial diagnosis was assessed and compared between patients with treatment delays and patients who received treatments within the period recommended by NHS guidelines. A logistic regression was performed to evaluate the association between treatment delays beyond 62 days and cancer upstaging.

RESULTS

The median age of the cohort was 71.2 years and 64.5% of the patients were over 65 years. Treatment delays were observed in 53.3% of reviewed patients. Patients with treatment delays received cancer treatments 95.8 (31.0) days on average after referral, compared to 46.3 (11.5) days in patients who experienced no treatment delays (p-value<0.0001). 38.6% of patients with treatment delays experienced cancer upstaging by the time of treatment, compared to 20% in the non-delay group (p-value = 0.036). Patients who received treatment after sixty two days from date of referral were 3.27 times more likely to experience colorectal cancer upstaging compared to those who received timely treatments.

CONCLUSION

Although an effective response to the Covid-19 pandemic requires the reallocation of healthcare resources, there is a need to ensure that treatments and health outcomes of patients with chronic diseases such as colorectal cancer continue to be prioritized and delivered in timely fashion.

Risk Factors for Adverse Events in Patients With Breast, Colorectal, and Lung Cancer

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to identify risk factors associated with medical errors and iatrogenic injuries during an initial course of cancer-directed treatment.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study of 400 patients 18 years or older undergoing an initial course of treatment for breast, colorectal, or lung cancer at a comprehensive cancer center, we abstracted patient, disease, and treatment-related variables from the electronic medical record. We examined adverse events (AEs) and preventable AEs by risk factor using the χ2 or Fisher exact tests. We estimated the association between risk factors and the relative risk of an additional AE or preventable AE in multivariable negative binomial regression models with backwards selection (P < 0.1).

RESULTS

There were 304 AEs affecting 136 patients (34%) and 97 preventable AEs affecting 53 patients (13%). In multivariable analyses, AEs were overrepresented in those with lung cancer compared with patients with breast cancer (incident rate ratio = 1.9, 95% confidence interval = 1.1-3.2). Nonwhite race (1.6, 1.0-2.6), Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (2.0, 0.9-4.1), advanced disease (1.7, 1.1-2.6), use of each additional class of high-risk nonchemotherapy medication (1.6, 1.3-1.9), and chemotherapy (2.1, 1.3-3.3) were all associated with risk of an additional AE. Preventable AEs were associated with lung cancer (7.4, 2.4-23.2), Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (5.5, 1.7-17.9), and high-risk nonchemotherapy medications (1.5, 1.2-2.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factors for AEs among patients with cancer reflected patients' underlying disease, cancer-directed therapy, and high-risk noncancer medications. The association of AEs with ethnicity merits further research. Risk factor models could be used prospectively to identify patients with cancer at increased risk of harm.

Disentangling Racial, Ethnic, and Socioeconomic Disparities in Treatment for Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is curable if diagnosed early and treated properly. Black and Hispanic patients with colorectal cancer are more likely to experience treatment delays and/or receive lower standards of care. Socioeconomic deprivation may contribute to these disparities, but this has not been extensively quantified. We studied the interrelationship between patient race/ethnicity and neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES) on receipt of timely appropriate treatment among patients with colorectal cancer in California.

METHODS

White, Black, and Hispanic patients (26,870) diagnosed with stage I-III colorectal cancer (2009-2013) in the California Cancer Registry were included. Logistic regression models were used to examine the association of race/ethnicity and nSES with three outcomes: undertreatment, >60-day treatment delay, and >90-day treatment delay. Joint effect models and mediation analysis were used to explore the interrelationships between race/ethnicity and nSES.

RESULTS

Hispanics and Blacks were at increased risk for undertreatment [Black OR = 1.39; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.23-1.57; Hispanic OR = 1.17; 95% CI = 1.08-1.27] and treatment delay (Black/60-day OR = 1.78; 95% CI = 1.57-2.02; Hispanic/60-day OR = 1.50; 95% CI = 1.38-1.64) compared with Whites. Of the total effect (OR = 1.15; 95% CI = 1.07-1.24) of non-white race on undertreatment, 45.71% was explained by nSES.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower nSES patients of any race were at substantially higher risk for undertreatment and treatment delay, and racial/ethnic disparities are reduced or eliminated among non-white patients living in the highest SES neighborhoods. Racial and ethnic disparities persisted after accounting for neighborhood socioeconomic status, and between the two, race/ethnicity explained a larger portion of the total effects.

IMPACT

This research improves our understanding of how socioeconomic deprivation contributes to racial/ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer.

Conflicting Guidelines: A Systematic Review on the Proper Interval for Colorectal Cancer Treatment

BACKGROUND

Timely treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC) is a quality indicator in oncological care. However, patients with CRC might benefit more from preoperative optimization rather than rapid treatment initiation. The objectives of this study are (1) to determine the definition of the CRC treatment interval, (2) to study international recommendations regarding this interval and (3) to study whether length of the interval is associated with outcome.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of the literature in June 2020 through MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases, complemented with a web search and a survey among colorectal surgeons worldwide. Full-text papers including subjects with CRC and a description of the treatment interval were included.

RESULTS

Definition of the treatment interval varies widely in published studies, especially due to different starting points of the interval. Date of diagnosis is often used as start of the interval, determined with date of pathological confirmation. The end of the interval is rather consistently determined with date of initiation of any primary treatment. Recommendations on the timeline of the treatment interval range between and within countries from two weeks between decision to treat and surgery, to treatment within seven weeks after pathological diagnosis. Finally, there is no decisive evidence that a longer treatment interval is associated with worse outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

The interval from diagnosis to treatment for CRC treatment could be used for prehabilitation to benefit patient recovery. It may be that this strategy is more beneficial than urgently proceeding with treatment.

Age-related and socioeconomic inequalities in timeliness of referral and start of treatment in colorectal cancer: a population-based analysis

BACKGROUND

Poorer colorectal cancer survival in the UK than in similar countries may be partly due to delays in the care pathway. To address this, cancer waiting time targets were established. We investigated if socio-demographic inequalities exist in meeting cancer waiting times for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We identified primary colorectal cancers (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision C18-C20; n=35 142) diagnosed in the period 2001-2010 in the Northern and Yorkshire Cancer Registry area. Using multivariable logistic regression, we calculated likelihood of referral and treatment within target by age group and deprivation quintile.

RESULTS

48% of the patients were referred to hospital within target (≤14 days from general practitioner (GP) referral to first hospital appointment); 52% started treatment within 31 days of diagnosis; and 44% started treatment within 62 days of GP referral. Individuals aged 60-69, 70-79 and 80+ years were significantly more likely to attend a first hospital appointment within 14 days than those aged <60 years (adjusted OR=1.23, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.34; adjusted OR=1.19, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.29; adjusted OR=1.30, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.42, respectively). Older age was significantly associated with lower likelihood of starting treatment within 31 days of diagnosis and 62 days of referral. Deprivation was not related to referral within target but was associated with lower likelihood of starting treatment within 31 days of diagnosis or 62 days of referral (most vs least: adjusted OR=0.82, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

Older patients with colorectal cancer were less likely to experience referral delays but more likely to experience treatment delays. More deprived patients were more likely to experience treatment delays. Investigation of patient pathways, treatment decision-making and treatment planning would improve understanding of these inequalities.

Cancer diagnostic tools to aid decision-making in primary care: mixed-methods systematic reviews and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Tools based on diagnostic prediction models are available to help general practitioners diagnose cancer. It is unclear whether or not tools expedite diagnosis or affect patient quality of life and/or survival.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to evaluate the evidence on the validation, clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and availability and use of cancer diagnostic tools in primary care.

METHODS

Two systematic reviews were conducted to examine the clinical effectiveness (review 1) and the development, validation and accuracy (review 2) of diagnostic prediction models for aiding general practitioners in cancer diagnosis. Bibliographic searches were conducted on MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science) in May 2017, with updated searches conducted in November 2018. A decision-analytic model explored the tools' clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in colorectal cancer. The model compared patient outcomes and costs between strategies that included the use of the tools and those that did not, using the NHS perspective. We surveyed 4600 general practitioners in randomly selected UK practices to determine the proportions of general practices and general practitioners with access to, and using, cancer decision support tools. Association between access to these tools and practice-level cancer diagnostic indicators was explored.

RESULTS

Systematic review 1 - five studies, of different design and quality, reporting on three diagnostic tools, were included. We found no evidence that using the tools was associated with better outcomes. Systematic review 2 - 43 studies were included, reporting on prediction models, in various stages of development, for 14 cancer sites (including multiple cancers). Most studies relate to QCancer® (ClinRisk Ltd, Leeds, UK) and risk assessment tools.

DECISION MODEL

In the absence of studies reporting their clinical outcomes, QCancer and risk assessment tools were evaluated against faecal immunochemical testing. A linked data approach was used, which translates diagnostic accuracy into time to diagnosis and treatment, and stage at diagnosis. Given the current lack of evidence, the model showed that the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic tools in colorectal cancer relies on demonstrating patient survival benefits. Sensitivity of faecal immunochemical testing and specificity of QCancer and risk assessment tools in a low-risk population were the key uncertain parameters.

SURVEY

Practitioner- and practice-level response rates were 10.3% (476/4600) and 23.3% (227/975), respectively. Cancer decision support tools were available in 83 out of 227 practices (36.6%, 95% confidence interval 30.3% to 43.1%), and were likely to be used in 38 out of 227 practices (16.7%, 95% confidence interval 12.1% to 22.2%). The mean 2-week-wait referral rate did not differ between practices that do and practices that do not have access to QCancer or risk assessment tools (mean difference of 1.8 referrals per 100,000 referrals, 95% confidence interval -6.7 to 10.3 referrals per 100,000 referrals).

LIMITATIONS

There is little good-quality evidence on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of diagnostic tools. Many diagnostic prediction models are limited by a lack of external validation. There are limited data on current UK practice and clinical outcomes of diagnostic strategies, and there is no evidence on the quality-of-life outcomes of diagnostic results. The survey was limited by low response rates.

CONCLUSION

The evidence base on the tools is limited. Research on how general practitioners interact with the tools may help to identify barriers to implementation and uptake, and the potential for clinical effectiveness.

FUTURE WORK

Continued model validation is recommended, especially for risk assessment tools. Assessment of the tools' impact on time to diagnosis and treatment, stage at diagnosis, and health outcomes is also recommended, as is further work to understand how tools are used in general practitioner consultations.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017068373 and CRD42017068375.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 66. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Effect of Health Care Provider Delays on Short-Term Outcomes in Patients With Colorectal Cancer: Multicenter Population-Based Observational Study

BACKGROUND

The United Kingdom has lower survival figures for all types of cancers compared to many European countries despite similar national expenditures on health. This discrepancy may be linked to long diagnostic and treatment delays.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine whether delays experienced by patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) affect their survival.

METHODS

This observational study utilized the Somerset Cancer Register to identify patients with CRC who were diagnosed on the basis of positive histology findings. The effects of diagnostic and treatment delays and their subdivisions on outcomes were investigated using Cox proportional hazards regression. Kaplan-Meier plots were used to illustrate group differences.

RESULTS

A total of 648 patients (375 males, 57.9% males) were included in this study. We found that neither diagnostic delay nor treatment delay had an effect on the overall survival in patients with CRC (χ²₃=1.5, P=.68; χ23=0.6, P=.90, respectively). Similarly, treatment delays did not affect the outcomes in patients with CRC (χ²₃=5.5, P=.14). The initial Cox regression analysis showed that patients with CRC who had short diagnostic delays were less likely to die than those experiencing long delays (hazard ratio 0.165, 95% CI 0.044-0.616; P=.007). However, this result was nonsignificant following sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic and treatment delays had no effect on the survival of this cohort of patients with CRC. The utility of the 2-week wait referral system is therefore questioned. Timely screening with subsequent early referral and access to diagnostics may have a more beneficial effect.

Delays in referral from primary care worsen survival for patients with colorectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Delays in referral for patients with colorectal cancer may occur if the presenting symptom is falsely attributed to a benign condition.

AIM

To investigate whether delays in referral from primary care are associated with a later stage of cancer at diagnosis and worse prognosis.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A national retrospective cohort study in England including adult patients with colorectal cancer identified from the cancer registry with linkage to Clinical Practice Research Datalink, who had been referred following presentation to their GP with a 'red flag' or 'non-specific' symptom.

METHOD

The hazard ratios (HR) of death were calculated for delays in referral of between 2 weeks and 3 months, and >3 months, compared with referrals within 2 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 4527 (63.5%) patients with colon cancer and 2603 (36.5%) patients with rectal cancer were included in the study. The percentage of patients presenting with red-flag symptoms who experienced a delay of >3 months before referral was 16.9% of those with colon cancer and 13.5% of those with rectal cancer, compared with 35.7% of patients with colon cancer and 42.9% of patients with rectal cancer who presented with non-specific symptoms. Patients referred after 3 months with red-flag symptoms demonstrated a significantly worse prognosis than patients who were referred within 2 weeks (colon cancer: HR 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.29 to 1.81; rectal cancer: HR 1.30; 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.60). This association was not seen for patients presenting with non-specific symptoms. Delays in referral were associated with a significantly higher proportion of late-stage cancers.

CONCLUSION

The first presentation to the GP provides a referral opportunity to identify the underlying cancer, which, if missed, is associated with a later stage in diagnosis and worse survival.

KRAS mutation and abnormal expression of Cripto-1 as two potential candidate biomarkers for detection of colorectal cancer development

Colorectal cancer (CRC), regardless of standard procedures of treatment and screening, is still considered one of the deadliest cancers in the Western world, and in economically developed Asian countries, especially Iran. The current study was undertaken to investigate whether changes in the level of Cripto-1 (CR-1) expression and KRAS mutations have a cumulative effect on the onset and progression of CRC. Fifty colorectal tissue samples, including 35 colorectal carcinomas with matching adjacent mucosa, and 15 colorectal adenomas, were chosen for analysis. Twenty-five CRC biopsies and 15 adenoma were analyzed for KRAS mutations by DNA sequencing (Sanger sequencing), and all 50 patients (35 CRCs and 15 adenomas) were evaluated by immunohistochemistry for the CR-1 protein expression. The inducible somatic KRAS mutation (G12D) was observed in nine (36%) of CRC patients, and in two (13.3%) of adenoma patients. The CR-1 expression level in both adenomas (P < .05) and carcinomas (P < .001), were significantly different, compared with the matching adjacent mucosa. The intensity of CR-1 staining in adenomas was less than the intensity of staining, detected in the CRCs (P < .001). The G12D KRAS mutation and CR-1 abnormalities are significantly associated as two signature biomarkers with potential clinical characteristics for the detection of CRC development.

Fall of another myth for colon cancer: Duration of symptoms does not differ between right- or left-sided colon cancers

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Patients with colorectal cancer continue to present with relatively advanced tumors that are associated with poor oncological outcomes. The aim of the present study was to assess the association between localization, symptom duration, and tumor stage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective, multicenter cohort study was conducted on patients newly diagnosed with a histologically proven colorectal adenocarcinoma. Standardized questionnaire-interviews were performed. Data were collected on principal presenting symptoms, duration of symptoms (time to first presentation to a doctor and time to diagnosis) and treatment, diagnostic procedures, tumor site, and stage of the tumor (tumor, node, and metastasis (TNM)).

RESULTS

A total of 1795 patients with colorectal cancer were interviewed (mean age: 60.76±13.50 years, male patients: 1057, patients aged >50 years: 1444, colon/rectal cancer: 899/850, right side/left side: 383/1250, stage 0-1-2/stage 3-4: 746/923). No statistically significant correlations were found between duration of symptoms and either tumor site or stage. Principal presenting symptoms were significantly associated with left colon cancer. Patients who had "anemia," "change in bowel habits," "anal pruritus or discharge," "weight loss," and "tumor in right colon" had a significantly longer symptom time.

CONCLUSION

Symptom duration is not associated with localization, nor is the tumor stage. Diagnosis of colorectal cancer at an earlier stage may be best achieved by screening of the population.

ACORN: Observational Study of Bevacizumab in Combination With First-Line Chemotherapy for Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in the UK

INTRODUCTION

Survival in metastatic colorectal cancer is worse than expected in the United Kingdom. Real-world data are needed to better understand UK-specific treatment practices that may explain this.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The Avastin ColORectal Non-interventional (ACORN) study is a multicenter, prospective, UK-based, observational, phase 4 study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01506167) that recruited patients with metastatic colorectal cancer scheduled to receive bevacizumab in combination with first-line chemotherapy as part of routine clinical practice. Primary end points included progression-free survival, overall survival (OS), serious adverse events (AEs), and grade 3 to 5 bevacizumab-related AEs.

RESULTS

A total of 714 patients were recruited between August 30, 2012, and February 4, 2014. Median follow-up was 16.4 months. Median first-line chemotherapy duration was 5.6 months, with capecitabine/oxaliplatin (265 [37.1%]) being the most common regimen. Median total chemotherapy duration was 8.1 months and did not vary by geographic location in the UK. Median progression-free survival (95% confidence interval) was 8.7 (8.2-9.1) months, and median OS was 17.8 (16.1-19.3) months. There was no significant difference in efficacy by chemotherapy regimen administered. Ninety-nine patients (13.9%) received bevacizumab after disease progression. The safety profile of bevacizumab was consistent with previous studies.

CONCLUSION

ACORN provided evidence that there were no clear differences observed in outcomes between bevacizumab with capecitabine-based chemotherapy and fluorouracil-based regimens, and confirmed the safety profile of bevacizumab in a real-world UK-based population. The lower-than-expected OS is likely due to the short total chemotherapy duration, less frequent use of bevacizumab after disease progression, and higher rates of in-situ primary tumors.

Associations of alcohol intake, smoking, physical activity and obesity with survival following colorectal cancer diagnosis by stage, anatomic site and tumor molecular subtype

The influence of lifestyle factors on survival following a diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC) is not well established. We examined associations between lifestyle factors measured before diagnosis and CRC survival. The Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study collected data on alcohol intake, cigarette smoking and physical activity, and body measurements at baseline (1990-1994) and wave 2 (2003-2007). We included participants diagnosed to 31 August 2015 with incident stages I-III CRC within 10-years post exposure assessment. Information on tumor characteristics and vital status was obtained. Tumor DNA was tested for microsatellite instability (MSI) and somatic mutations in oncogenes BRAF (V600E) and KRAS. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for associations between lifestyle factors and overall and CRC-specific mortality using Cox regression. Of 724 eligible CRC cases, 339 died (170 from CRC) during follow-up (average 9.0 years). Exercise (non-occupational/leisure-time) was associated with higher CRC-specific survival for stage II (HR = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.10-0.60) but not stages I/III disease (p for interaction = 0.01), and possibly for colon and KRAS wild-type tumors. Waist circumference was inversely associated with CRC-specific survival (HR = 1.25 per 10 cm increment, 95% CI: 1.08-1.44), independent of stage, anatomic site and tumor molecular status. Cigarette smoking was associated with lower overall survival, with suggestive evidence of worse survival for BRAF mutated CRC, but not with CRC-specific survival. Alcohol intake was not associated with survival. Survival did not differ by MSI status. We have identified pre-diagnostic predictors of survival following CRC that may have clinical and public health relevance.

Coping With Prediagnosis Symptoms of Colorectal Cancer: A Study of 244 Individuals With Recent Diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) symptoms are often vague and vary in severity, intensity, type, and timing. Receipt of medical care is dependent on symptom recognition and assessment, which may impede timely diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe and categorize how CRC patients coped with symptoms prior to seeking medical care, examine sociodemographic differences in these coping strategies, and determine the strategies associated with time to seek medical care and overall time to diagnosis.

METHODS

Two hundred forty-four white and African American patients in Virginia and Ohio who received a diagnosis of CRC and who experienced symptoms prior to diagnosis were administered a semistructured interview and the Brief COPE questionnaire.

RESULTS

Eighty-three percent used more than 1 coping strategy. Common symptom-specific coping strategies were to "wait-and-see," self-treat, and rationalize symptoms. Males were more likely to wait and see (P < .001); African Americans and Medicaid recipients were more likely to self-treat via lifestyle changes (P's < .01). Younger individuals (<50 years old) had higher Brief COPE reframing, planning, and humor scores; those with lower education and income had higher denial scores (P's < .01). Using more symptom-specific coping strategies and engaging in avoidance/denial were associated with longer time to seek medical care and overall time to diagnosis (P's < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals experiencing CRC symptoms use multiple, diverse coping strategies that are influenced by sociodemographic characteristics. Denial is particularly relevant for delay in seeking care and timely diagnosis.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Public health campaigns could focus on secondary prevention of CRC by targeting at-risk groups such as males, African Americans, or Medicaid recipients, who choose waiting or self-treatment in response to initial symptoms.

Waiting times for cancer patients in Sweden: A nationwide population-based study

AIMS

The reported long waiting times for cancer patients have mostly been related to prognostic outcome and less to patient-related experience to outcome. We assessed waiting times for patients with cancer of the breast, prostate, colon or rectum in Sweden.

METHODS

The median time from referral to start of treatment was assessed using data from clinical cancer registers for patients who received curative treatment during 2011, 2012 and 2013.

RESULTS

The median overall waiting time in different counties ranged from 7 to 28 days for breast cancer, from 117 to 280 days for prostate cancer, from 27 to 64 days for colon cancer and from 48 to 80 days for rectal cancer. For the entire nation, the median time from referral to start of treatment remained unchanged from 2011 to 2013 for each cancer diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Large variations were found in waiting times between different counties in Sweden and between different types of cancer. The long waiting times identified in this study emphasize the need to improve national programmes for more rapid diagnosis and treatment.

Factors associated with mode of colorectal cancer detection and time to diagnosis: a population level study

Background

Although it is well-known that early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) is important for optimal patient survival, the relationship of patient and health system factors with delayed diagnosis are unclear. The purpose of this study was to identify the demographic, clinical and healthcare factors related to mode of CRC detection and length of the diagnostic interval.

Methods

All residents of Alberta, Canada diagnosed with first-ever incident CRC in years 2004–2010 were identified from the Alberta Cancer Registry. Population-based administrative health datasets, including hospital discharge abstract, ambulatory care classification system and physician billing data, were used to identify healthcare services related to CRC diagnosis. The time to diagnosis was defined as the time from the first CRC-related healthcare visit to the date of CRC diagnosis. Mode of CRC detection was classified into three groups: urgent, screen-detected and symptomatic. Quantile regression was performed to assess factors associated with time to diagnosis.

Results

9626 patients were included in the study; 25% of patients presented as urgent, 32% were screen-detected and 43% were symptomatic. The median time to diagnosis for urgent, screen-detected and symptomatic patients were 6 days (interquartile range (IQR) 2–14 days), 74 days (IQR 36–183 days), 84 days (IQR 39–223 days), respectively. Time to diagnosis was greater than 6 months for 27% of non-urgent patients. Healthcare factors had the largest impact on time to diagnosis: 3 or more visits to a GP increased the median by 140 days whereas 2 or more visits to a GI-specialist increased it by 108 days compared to 0–1 visits to a GP or GI-specialist, respectively.

Conclusion

A large proportion of CRC patients required urgent work-up or had to wait more than 6 months for diagnosis. Actions are needed to reduce the frequency of urgent presentation as well as improve the timeliness of diagnosis. Findings suggest a need to improve coordination of care across multiple providers.

Delayed Workup of Rectal Bleeding in Adult Primary Care: Examining Process-of-Care Failures

BACKGROUND

Although delayed colorectal cancer diagnoses figure prominently in medical malpractice claims, little is known about the quality of primary care clinicians' workup of rectal bleeding.

METHODS

In this study, 438 patients were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes for rectal bleeding, hemorrhoids, and blood in the stool at 10 Boston adult primary care practices. Following nurse chart abstraction, physician reviewers assessed the overall quality of care and key care processes. Subjects' characteristics and physician reviewers' processes-of-care assessments were tabulated, and logistic regression models were used to examine the association of process failures with overall quality and guideline concordance.

RESULTS

Although reviewers judged the overall quality of care to be good or excellent in 337 (77%) of 438 cases, 312 (71%) patients experienced at least one process-of-care failure in the workup of rectal bleeding. Clinicians failed to obtain an adequate family history in 38% of cases, complete a pertinent physical exam in 23%, and order laboratory tests in 16%. Failure to order or perform tests, or to make follow-up plans were associated with increased odds of poor or fair care. Guideline concordance bore little relationship with quality judgments. Reviewers judged that 128 delays could have been reduced or prevented.

CONCLUSION

Process-of-care failures among adult primary care patients with rectal bleeding were frequent and associated with fair or poor quality. Educating practitioners and creating systems to ensure adequate history taking, physical examination, and processes for ordering, performing, and interpreting diagnostic tests may improve performance.

Effect of diagnostic delay on survival in patients with colorectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Disparate and contradictory results make studies necessary to investigate in more depth the relationship between diagnostic delay and survival in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. The aim of this study is to analyse the relationship between the interval from first symptom to diagnosis (SDI) and survival in CRC.

Methods

Retrospective study of n = 942 CRC patients. SDI was calculated as the time from the diagnosis of cancer and the first symptoms of CRC.

Cox regression was used to estimate five-year mortality hazard ratios as a function of SDI, adjusting for age and gender. SDI was modelled according to SDI quartiles and as a continuous variable using penalized splines.

Results

Median SDI was 3.4 months. SDI was not associated with stage at diagnosis (Stage I = 3.6 months, Stage II-III = 3.4, Stage IV = 3.2; p = 0.728). Shorter SDIs corresponded to patients with abdominal pain (2.8 months), and longer SDIs to patients with muchorrhage (5.2 months) and rectal tenesmus (4.4 months).

Adjusting for age and gender, in rectum cancers, patients within the first SDI quartile had lower survival (p = 0.003), while in colon cancer no significant differences were found (p = 0.282). These results do not change after adjusting for TNM stage.

The splines regression analysis revealed that, for rectum cancer, 5-year mortality progressively increases for SDIs lower than the median (3.7 months) and decreases as the delay increases until approximately 8 months. In colon cancer, no significant relationship was found between SDI and survival.

Conclusions

Short diagnostic intervals are significantly associated with higher mortality in rectal but not in colon cancers, even though a borderline significant effect is also observed in colon cancer. Longer diagnostic intervals seemed not to be associated with poorer survival. Other factors than diagnostic delay should be taken into account to explain this “waiting-time paradox”.

Pancreatic cancer: Wait times from presentation to treatment and survival in a population-based study

Pancreatic survival is one of the worst in oncology. To what extent wait times affect outcomes in unknown No population-based study has previously explored patient and treatment delays among individuals with pancreatic cancer. The aim of this study was to estimate patient and treatment delays in patients with pancreatic cancer and to measure their association with survival in a nonselected population. All patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer for the first time between 2009 and 2011 and registered in two French digestive cancer registries were included. Patient delay (time from onset of symptoms until the first consultation categorized into <1 or ≥1 month), and treatment delay (time between the first consultation and treatment categorized into less or more than 29 days, the median time) were collected. Overall delay was used to test associations between survival and the timeliness of care by combining patient delay and treatment delay. Patient delay was longer than 1 month in 46% of patients. A patient delay longer than one month was associated with the absence of jaundice (p < 0.001) and the presence of metastasis (p = 0.003). After adjusting for other covariates, such as symptoms and treatment, the presence of metastasis was negatively associated with treatment delay longer than 29 days (p = 0.025). After adjustment for other covariates, especially metastatic dissemination and the result of the resection, overall delay was not significantly associated with prognosis. We found little evidence to suggest that timely care was associated with the survival of patients.

Prediagnostic Physical Activity and Colorectal Cancer Survival: Overall and Stratified by Tumor Characteristics

BACKGROUND

Physical activity is associated with a lower incidence of colorectal cancer; however, the relationship of physical activity with colorectal cancer survival is not yet clear. We evaluated the association between prediagnostic physical activity and colorectal cancer survival, overall and accounting for tumor markers associated with colorectal cancer survival: BRAF and KRAS mutation status and microsatellite instability (MSI) status.

METHODS

Participants were 20- to 74-year-old colorectal cancer patients diagnosed between 1998 and 2007 from the population-based Seattle Colon Cancer Family Registry (S-CCFR). Self-reported physical activity in the years preceding colorectal cancer diagnosis was summarized as average metabolic equivalent task hours per week (MET-h/wk; n = 1,309). Somatic BRAF and KRAS mutations and MSI status were evaluated on a subset of patients (n = 1043). Cox regression was used to estimate HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for overall and disease-specific survival after adjusting for relevant confounders. Stratified analyses were conducted across categories of BRAF, KRAS, and MSI, as well as tumor stage and site.

RESULTS

Higher prediagnostic recreational physical activity was associated with significantly more favorable overall survival (HR for highest vs. lowest category, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.52-0.96); associations were similar for colorectal cancer-specific survival. Results consistently indicated a favorable association with physical activity across strata defined by tumor characteristics.

CONCLUSION

Individuals who were physically active before colorectal cancer diagnosis experienced better survival than those who were inactive or minimally active.

IMPACT

Our results support existing physical activity recommendations for colorectal cancer patients and suggest that the beneficial effect of activity is not specific to a particular molecular phenotype of colorectal cancer.

Diagnostic intervals and its association with breast, prostate, lung and colorectal cancer survival in England: historical cohort study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink

Rapid diagnostic pathways for cancer have been implemented, but evidence whether shorter diagnostic intervals (time from primary care presentation to diagnosis) improves survival is lacking. Using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, we identified patients diagnosed with female breast (8,639), colorectal (5,912), lung (5,737) and prostate (1,763) cancers between 1998 and 2009, and aged >15 years. Presenting symptoms were classified as alert or non-alert, according to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance. We used relative survival and excess risk modeling to determine associations between diagnostic intervals and five-year survival. The survival of patients with colorectal, lung and prostate cancer was greater in those with alert, compared with non-alert, symptoms, but findings were opposite for breast cancer. Longer diagnostic intervals were associated with lower mortality for colorectal and lung cancer patients with non-alert symptoms, (colorectal cancer: Excess Hazards Ratio, EHR >6 months vs <1 month: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.72-1.00; Lung cancer: EHR 3-6 months vs <1 month: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.80-0.95; EHR >6 months vs <1 month: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.74-0.89). Prostate cancer mortality was lower in patients with longer diagnostic intervals, regardless of type of presenting symptom. The association between diagnostic intervals and cancer survival is complex, and should take into account cancer site, tumour biology and clinical practice. Nevertheless, unnecessary delay causes patient anxiety and general practitioners should continue to refer patients with alert symptoms via the cancer pathways, and actively follow-up patients with non-alert symptoms in the community.

Are alarm symptoms predictive of cancer survival?: population-based cohort study

Background

Alarm symptom presentations are predictive of cancer diagnosis but may also be associated with cancer survival.

Aim

To evaluate diagnostic time intervals, and consultation patterns after presentation with alarm symptoms, and their association with cancer diagnosis and survival.

Design and setting

Cohort study using the Clinical Practice Research Database, with linked Cancer Registry data, in 158 general practices.

Method

Participants included those with haematuria, haemoptysis, dysphagia, and rectal bleeding or urinary tract cancer, lung cancer, gastro-oesophageal cancer, and colorectal cancer.

Results

The median (interquartile range) interval in days from first symptom presentation to the corresponding cancer diagnosis was: haematuria and urinary tract cancer, 59 (28–109); haemoptysis and lung cancer, 35 (18–89); dysphagia and gastro-oesophageal cancer, 25 (12–48); rectal bleeding and colorectal cancer, 49 (20–157). Three or more alarm symptom consultations were associated with increased odds of diagnosis of urinary tract cancer (odds ratio [OR] 1.84, 95% CI = 1.50 to 2.27), lung cancer (OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.07 to 2.90) and gastro-oesophageal cancer (OR = 2.17, 95% CI = 1.48 to 3.19). Longer diagnostic intervals were associated with increased mortality only for urinary tract cancer (hazard ratio 2.23, 95% CI = 1.35 to 3.69). Patients with no preceding alarm symptom had shorter survival from diagnosis of urinary tract, lung or colorectal cancer than those presenting with a relevant alarm symptom.

Conclusion

After alarm symptom presentation, repeat consultations are associated with cancer diagnoses. Longer diagnostic intervals appeared to be associated with a worse prognosis for urinary tract cancer only. Mortality is higher when cancer is diagnosed in the absence of alarm symptoms.

Is increased time to diagnosis and treatment in symptomatic cancer associated with poorer outcomes? Systematic review

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether more timely cancer diagnosis brings favourable outcomes, with much of the previous evidence, in some cancers, being equivocal. We set out to determine whether there is an association between time to diagnosis, treatment and clinical outcomes, across all cancers for symptomatic presentations.

METHODS

Systematic review of the literature and narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

We included 177 articles reporting 209 studies. These studies varied in study design, the time intervals assessed and the outcomes reported. Study quality was variable, with a small number of higher-quality studies. Heterogeneity precluded definitive findings. The cancers with more reports of an association between shorter times to diagnosis and more favourable outcomes were breast, colorectal, head and neck, testicular and melanoma.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first review encompassing many cancer types, and we have demonstrated those cancers in which more evidence of an association between shorter times to diagnosis and more favourable outcomes exists, and where it is lacking. We believe that it is reasonable to assume that efforts to expedite the diagnosis of symptomatic cancer are likely to have benefits for patients in terms of improved survival, earlier-stage diagnosis and improved quality of life, although these benefits vary between cancers.

Finding medical care for colorectal cancer symptoms: experiences among those facing financial barriers

Financial barriers can substantially delay medical care seeking. Using patient narratives provided by 252 colorectal cancer patients, we explored the experience of financial barriers to care seeking. Of the 252 patients interviewed, 84 identified financial barriers as a significant hurdle to obtaining health care for their colorectal cancer symptoms. Using verbatim transcripts of the narratives collected from patients between 2008 and 2010, three themes were identified: insurance status as a barrier (discussed by n = 84; 100% of subsample), finding medical care (discussed by n = 30; 36% of subsample) and, insurance companies as barriers (discussed by n = 7; 8% of subsample). Our analysis revealed that insurance status is more nuanced than the categories insured/uninsured and differentially affects how patients attempt to secure health care. While barriers to medical care for the uninsured have been well documented, the experiences of those who are underinsured are less well understood. To improve outcomes in these patients it is critical to understand how financial barriers to medical care are manifested. Even with anticipated changes of the Affordable Care Act, it remains important to understand how perceived financial barriers may be influencing patient behaviors, particularly those who have limited health care options due to insufficient health insurance coverage.

A prospective study of the effect of bowel movement frequency, constipation, and laxative use on colorectal cancer risk

OBJECTIVES

Constipation and laxative use have been hypothesized to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, but existing epidemiologic studies have been inconclusive. To address this issue, the authors prospectively examined the association between CRC incidence and constipation, non-fiber laxative use, and fiber laxative use among 75,214 participants of the VITamins And Lifestyle study.

METHODS

Information on bowel movement frequency as well as average 10-year non-fiber laxative use, fiber laxative use, and constipation was ascertained by means of a questionnaire. Patients were followed from the time of receipt of the baseline questionnaire (2000-2002) until 2008 for CRC incidence, over which time 558 incident CRC cases occurred. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

RESULTS

Compared with individuals who used non-fiber laxatives less than once per year, the HRs associated with low (1-4 times per year) and high (≥5 times per year) use were 1.49 (95% CI: 1.04-2.14) and 1.43 (95% CI: 0.82-2.28), respectively (Ptrend=0.05). HRs for CRC were statistically significantly decreased and lowest in individuals who reported using fiber laxatives often (4+ days per week for 4+ years) vs. those who reported no use (HR=0.44; 95% CI: 0.21-0.95), although the trend was not significant (Ptrend=0.19). No statistically significant associations between bowel movement frequency or constipation and CRC risk were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this study suggest that risk for CRC increases with non-fiber laxative use and decreases with fiber laxative use. However, further observational and experimental studies are needed to clarify these relationships before drawing conclusions about the preferred treatment of constipation.

Guideline for referral of patients with suspected colorectal cancer by family physicians and other primary care providers

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this guideline is to assist FPs and other primary care providers with recognizing features that should raise their suspicions about the presence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in their patients.

COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE

Committee members were selected from among the regional primary care leads from the Cancer Care Ontario Provincial Primary Care and Cancer Network, the members of the Ontario Colorectal Cancer Screening Advisory Committee, and the members of the Cancer Care Ontario Gastrointestinal Cancer Disease Site Group.

METHODS

This guideline was developed through systematic review of the evidence base, synthesis of the evidence, and formal external review involving Canadian stakeholders to validate the relevance of recommendations.

REPORT

Evidence-based guidelines were developed to improve the management of patients presenting with clinical features of CRC within the Canadian context.

CONCLUSION

The judicious balancing of suspicion of CRC and level of risk of CRC should encourage timely referral by FPs and primary care providers. This guideline might also inform indications for referral to CRC diagnostic assessment programs.

Time from first presentation in primary care to treatment of symptomatic colorectal cancer: effect on disease stage and survival

Background:

British 5-year survival from colorectal cancer (CRC) is below the European average, but the reasons are unclear. This study explored if longer provider delays (time from presentation to treatment) were associated with more advanced stage disease at diagnosis and poorer survival.

Methods:

Data on 958 people with CRC were linked with the Scottish Cancer Registry, the Scottish Death Registry and the acute hospital discharge (SMR01) dataset. Time from first presentation in primary care to first treatment, disease stage at diagnosis and survival time from date of first presentation in primary care were determined. Logistic regression and Cox survival analyses, both with a restricted cubic spline, were used to model stage and survival, respectively, following sequential adjustment of patient and tumour factors.

Results:

On univariate analysis, those with <4 weeks from first presentation in primary care to treatment had more advanced disease at diagnosis and the poorest prognosis. Treatment delays between 4 and 34 weeks were associated with earlier stage (with the lowest odds ratio occurring at 20 weeks) and better survival (with the lowest hazard ratio occurring at 16 weeks). Provider delays beyond 34 weeks were associated with more advanced disease at diagnosis, but not increased mortality. Following adjustment for patient, tumour factors, emergency admissions and symptoms and signs, no significant relationship between provider delay and stage at diagnosis or survival from CRC was found.

Conclusions:

Although allowing for a nonlinear relationship and important confounders, moderately long provider delays did not impact adversely on cancer outcomes. Delays are undesirable because they cause anxiety; this may be fuelled by government targets and health campaigns stressing the importance of very prompt cancer diagnosis. Our findings should reassure patients. They suggest that a health service's primary emphasis should be on quality and outcomes rather than on time to treatment.

Factors associated with delayed patient appraisal of colorectal cancer symptoms

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the relationship between symptoms, financial and cognitive barriers with patient delays in seeking evaluation of symptoms.

METHODS

Data were collected from 252 colorectal cancer patients from academic and community oncology practices in Virginia and Ohio. We used a cross-sectional, mixed methods design collected data through patient interviews and medical record reviews. Structural equation modeling (SEM) tested the hypothesized relationships between symptoms, financial and cognitive barriers and patient care seeking delays.

RESULTS

In bivariate analyses, patients who reported a financial barrier to accessing health care (t (246) = -2.6, p < 0.01) were more likely to have greater care-seeking delays. Model testing revealed that experiencing cognitive barriers was a significant, positive, direct predictor of appraisal delay (0.35; p < 0.01). Indirect pathways from symptoms (0.07; p < 0.05) and financial barriers (0.09; p < 0.05) to appraisal delay via cognitive barriers were significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient interpretations of symptoms were influenced by financial barriers. Conceptualizing financial barriers as a component of the symptom appraisal process is conceptually different from viewing it as only a structural barrier preventing healthcare access. Implications for practice These findings extend our understanding of why and how patients seemingly ignore serious symptoms, which hamper physician ability to provide curative therapy. In addition to uninsured patients, this may have important implications for the treatment and care of those who are underinsured.

[Waiting times for cancer care in four most frequent cancers in several French regions in 2011 and 2012]

Measuring waiting times is a good indicator of quality of cancer care and could reveal inequalities in cancer care access.

AIMS

To determine the most representative waiting times in breast, lung, colon and prostate cancer care in several regions of France. To analyze the influence of individual, medical or health care system factors on those waiting times.

METHODS

This study was piloted by the French Cancer Institute in partnership with the National Federation of the Regional Health Observatories and was driven by the Regional Oncology Networks and the Regional Health Observatories. In 2011, 2,530 women with breast cancer and 1,945 patient with lung cancer were included in eight regions, and in 2012, 3,248 patients with colon cancer and 4,207 men with prostate cancer were included in 13 regions, two of which were overseas departments. Data were analyzed from multidisciplinary discussion reports and from medical records.

RESULTS

The mean time intervals (± standard deviation) for the various components of access to care were as follows in breast cancer: mammography to pathologist diagnosis, 17,7 days (±15,9); diagnosis (or treatment proposal) to surgery, 22,9 days (±13,9). In lung cancer: first suspect medical image to pathologist diagnosis, 21,5 days (±17,6); diagnosis to treatment proposal, 13,5 days (±10,7). In colon cancer: coloscopy to pathologist diagnosis, 4,5 days (±4,1); diagnosis to surgery, 18,9 days (±14,9). In prostate cancer: pathologist diagnosis to treatment proposal, 36,5 days (±26,5); treatment proposal to surgery, 45,2 days (±30,1). Data collection was particularly difficult because of very heterogeneous way in medical records filling by care centers, so the data collection method used in the study could not be used in routine procedures. Waiting times measured in the four cancers had an important variability. In fact, age, circumstance of diagnosis, tumor stage and category of care center had an influence. After considering those different factors, differences between regions remained from range 2 to 4. Those regional differences could be explained by organizational factors but were not explored in our study. In the same way, data on individual factors (social vulnerability, category of employment) were not available to measure their effects on this study. Besides, our results were comparable to those in international publications or national recommendations in other countries.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that waiting times could be good indicators and could reveal inequalities in cancer care access. Measuring them would lead to characterize those inequalities and to propose actions to improve access to cancer care whose impact could be measured.

Multiplexed cytokine profiling of serum for detection of colorectal cancer

AIM

To evaluate the concentrations of eight cytokines in order to identify potential biomarkers for assisting in the detection of colorectal cancer.

MATERIALS & METHODS

The concentrations of IFN-γ, IL-10, IL-6, IL-8, TNF-α, MMP-2, MMP-7 and MMP-9 were detected in the sera of 69 healthy controls, 93 colorectal adenoma patients and 149 colorectal cancer (CRC) patients.

RESULTS

Multivariate logistic regression analyses, which included CEA, CA199, IL-8, TNF-α and MMP-7, were used to evaluate the diagnostic value for differentiating between colorectal adenoma and CRC. The area under the curve was 0.945 (95% CI: 0.909-0.981). The sensitivity and specificity were 85.86 and 96.78%, respectively. Compared with the conventional biomarkers CEA and CA199, multivariate logistic regression showed significant improvement.

CONCLUSION

Our data demonstrated that testing using a panel of three serum cytokines, CEA and CA199 may have strong potential to assist in the detection of CRC.

Do diagnostic and treatment delays for colorectal cancer increase risk of death?

BACKGROUND

Using 1998-2005 SEER-Medicare data, we examined the effect of diagnostic and treatment delays on all-cause and colorectal cancer (CRC)-specific death among US adults aged ≥ 66 years with invasive colon or rectal cancer. We hypothesized that longer delays would be associated with a greater risk of death.

METHODS

We defined diagnostic and treatment delays, respectively, as days between (1) initial medical consult for CRC symptoms and pathologically confirmed diagnosis (maximum: 365 days) and (2) pathologically confirmed diagnosis and treatment (maximum: 120 days). Cases (CRC deaths) and controls (deaths due to other causes or censored) were matched on survival time. Logistic regression analyses adjusted for sociodemographic, tumor, and treatment factors.

RESULTS

Median diagnostic delays were 60 (colon) and 40 (rectal) days and treatment delays were 13 (colon) and 16 (rectal) days in 10,663 patients. Colon cancer patients with the longest diagnostic delays (8-12 months vs. 14-59 days) had higher odds of all-cause (aOR: 1.31 CI: 1.08-1.58), but not CRC-specific death. Colon cancer patients with the shortest treatment delays (<1 vs. 1-2 weeks) had higher odds of all-cause (aOR: 1.23 CI: 1.01-1.49), but not CRC-specific death. Among rectal cancer patients, delays were not associated with risk of all-cause or CRC-specific death.

CONCLUSIONS

Longer delays of up to 1 year after symptom onset and 120 days for treatment did not increase odds of CRC-specific death. There may be little clinical benefit in detecting and treating existing symptomatic disease earlier. Screening prior to symptom onset must remain the primary goal to reduce CRC incidence, morbidity, and mortality.

Evidence of increasing mortality with longer diagnostic intervals for five common cancers: a cohort study in primary care

BACKGROUND

Early diagnosis is considered a key factor in improving the outcomes in cancer therapy; it remains unclear, however, whether long pre-diagnostic patient pathways influence clinical outcomes negatively. The aim of this study was to assess the association between the length of the diagnostic interval and the five-year mortality for the five most common cancers in Denmark while addressing known biases.

METHODS

A total of 1128 patients with colorectal, lung, melanoma skin, breast or prostate cancer were included in a prospective, population-based study in a Danish county. The diagnostic interval was defined as the time from the first presentation of symptoms in primary care till the date of diagnosis. Each type of cancer was analysed separately and combined, and all analyses were stratified according to the general practitioner's (GP's) interpretation of the presenting symptoms. We used conditional logistic regression to estimate five-year mortality odds ratios as a function of the diagnostic interval using restricted cubic splines and adjusting for comorbidity, age, sex and type of cancer.

RESULTS

We found increasing mortality with longer diagnostic intervals among the approximately 40% of the patients who presented in primary care with symptoms suggestive of cancer or any other serious illness. In the same group, very short diagnostic intervals were also associated with increased mortality. Patients presenting with vague symptoms not directly related to cancer or any other serious illness had longer diagnostic intervals and the same survival probability as those who presented with cancer suspicious/serious symptoms. For the former, we found no statistically significant association between the length of the diagnostic interval and mortality.

CONCLUSION

In full coherence with clinical logic, the healthcare system instigates prompt investigation of seriously ill patients. This likely explains the counter-intuitive findings of high mortality with short diagnostic intervals; but it does not explain the increasing mortality with longer diagnostic intervals. Thus, the study provides further evidence for the hypothesis that the length of the diagnostic interval affects mortality negatively.

Factors related with symptom duration until diagnosis and treatment of symptomatic colorectal cancer

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) survival depends mostly on stage at the time of diagnosis. However, symptom duration at diagnosis or treatment have also been considered as predictors of stage and survival. This study was designed to: 1) establish the distinct time-symptom duration intervals; 2) identify factors associated with symptom duration until diagnosis and treatment.

Methods

This is a cross-sectional study of all incident cases of symptomatic CRC during 2006–2009 (795 incident cases) in 5 Spanish regions. Data were obtained from patients’ interviews and reviews of primary care and hospital clinical records. Measurements: CRC symptoms, symptom perception, trust in the general practitioner (GP), primary care and hospital examinations/visits before diagnosis, type of referral and tumor characteristics at diagnosis. Symptom Diagnosis Interval (SDI) was calculated as time from first CRC symptoms to date of diagnosis. Symptom Treatment Interval (STI) was defined as time from first CRC symptoms until start of treatment. Nonparametric tests were used to compare SDI and STI according to different variables.

Results

Symptom to diagnosis interval for CRC was 128 days and symptom treatment interval was 155. No statistically significant differences were observed between colon and rectum cancers. Women experienced longer intervals than men. Symptom presentation such as vomiting or abdominal pain and the presence of obstruction led to shorter diagnostic or treatment intervals. Time elapsed was also shorter in those patients that perceived their first symptom/s as serious, disclosed it to their acquaintances, contacted emergencies services or had trust in their GPs. Primary care and hospital doctor examinations and investigations appeared to be related to time elapsed to diagnosis or treatment.

Conclusions

Results show that gender, symptom perception and help-seeking behaviour are the main patient factors related to interval duration. Health service performance also has a very important role in symptom to diagnosis and treatment interval. If time to diagnosis is to be reduced, interventions and guidelines must be developed to ensure appropriate examination and diagnosis during both primary and hospital care.

Current state of medical-advice-seeking behaviour for symptoms of colorectal cancer: determinants of failure and delay in medical consultation

AIM

There are few data on the factors associated with healthcare-seeking behaviour for symptoms of colorectal cancer. This study describes the determinants of failure and delay in seeking medical advice for rectal bleeding and change in bowel habit.

METHOD

In total, 1592 persons (56-88 years) were randomly selected from the Hunter Community Study and mailed a questionnaire.

RESULTS

In all, 18% (60/332) of respondents experiencing rectal bleeding and 20% (39/195) reporting change in bowel habit had never consulted a doctor. The rate of delay (>1 month) for each symptom was 18% and 37%. The reasons for delay included the assumption that the symptoms were not serious or that they were benign. Triggers for seeking medical advice varied. Healthcare-seeking behaviour for rectal bleeding had not significantly improved compared with a previous community-based study.

CONCLUSION

The seriousness of symptoms, importance of early detection and prompt medical consultation must be articulated in health messages to at-risk persons.

Internet use for prediagnosis symptom appraisal by colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

This study explored the characteristics of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients who accessed Internet-based health information as part of their symptom appraisal process prior to consulting a health care provider.

METHOD

Newly diagnosed CRC patients who experienced symptoms prior to diagnosis were interviewed. Brief COPE was used to measure patient coping. Logistic and linear regressions were used to assess Internet use and appraisal delay.

RESULTS

Twenty-five percent of the sample (61/242) consulted the Internet prior to visiting a health care provider. Internet use was associated with having private health insurance (odds ratio [OR] = 2.55; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.20-5.43) and experiencing elimination symptoms (OR = 1.43; 95% CI = 1.14-1.80) and was marginally associated with age (OR = 0.96; 95% CI = 0.93-0.99). Internet use was not related to delayed medical care seeking.

CONCLUSION

Internet use did not influence decisions to seek medical care. The Internet provided a preliminary information resource for individuals who experienced embarrassing CRC symptoms, had private health insurance, and were younger.

Time to diagnosis and mortality in colorectal cancer: a cohort study in primary care

Background:

The relationship between the diagnostic interval and mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC) is unclear. This association was examined by taking account of important confounding factors at the time of first presentation of symptoms in primary care.

Methods:

A total of 268 patients with CRC were included in a prospective, population-based study in a Danish county. The diagnostic interval was defined as the time from first presentation of symptoms until diagnosis. We analysed patients separately according to the general practitioner's interpretation of symptoms. Logistic regression was used to estimate 3-year mortality odds ratios as a function of the diagnostic interval using restricted cubic splines and adjusting for tumour site, comorbidity, age, and sex.

Results:

In patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of cancer or any other serious illness, the risk of dying within 3 years decreased with diagnostic intervals up to 5 weeks and then increased (P=0.002). In patients presenting with vague symptoms, the association was reverse, although not statistically significant.

Conclusion:

Detecting cancer in primary care is two sided: aimed at expediting ill patients while preventing healthy people from going to hospital. This likely explains the counterintuitive findings; but it does not explain the increasing mortality with longer diagnostic intervals. Thus, this study provides evidence for the hypothesis that the length of the diagnostic interval affects mortality in CRC patients.

Mutation and epigenetic molecular clocks in cancer

A quandary of evolution is how to measure change over time. A natural inclination is to use morphologic criteria-the greater the differences between two phenotypes, the greater amount of time needed to evolve these differences. However, appearances may be deceiving, and another approach to infer time is with molecular clocks. Here, the greater the differences between two genomes, on average the greater the time since a common ancestor. Recent advances in DNA sequencing shed new light on how human cancers might evolve.