Symptoms of adult chronic and acute leukaemia before diagnosis: large primary care case-control studies using electronic records

Patient Preferences for Treatment in Relapsed/Refractory Acute Leukemia in the United Kingdom: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Background

Acute leukemia is a cancer of the white blood cells which progresses rapidly and aggressively. There are two types: acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The latter has a rare subtype: acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL). For some patients, following first-line treatment, remission is not achieved ("refractory disease"), and for others the leukemia returns after achieving remission ("relapse"). For these individuals, outcomes are typically poor. It is, therefore, important to understand patients' treatment priorities in this context.

Methods

Building upon formative qualitative research, an online survey containing a discrete choice experiment (DCE) was designed to explore patients' treatment preferences in the relapsed/refractory setting. The DCE attributes were mode of administration; quality of life during treatment; chance of response; duration of response; and quality of life during response. Each respondent completed twelve scenarios containing two hypothetical treatments. Participants were eligible if they lived in the United Kingdom and had a diagnosis of acute leukemia. The data were analysed using a latent class model.

Results

A total of 95 patients completed the survey. The latent class analysis identified two classes. For both, chance of response was the most important attribute. For class 1, every attribute was important, whereas for class 2, the only important attributes were quality of life (during treatment and response) and chance of response. A greater proportion of respondents would fall into class 1 overall, and those with ALL or APL and those more recently diagnosed were more likely to be in class 2.

Conclusion

Our results indicate that patients are strongly concerned about the chance of response, as well as quality of life (to a lesser extent), when faced with different treatment options in the relapsed/refractory setting. However, there is significant preference heterogeneity within the patient population, and other treatment characteristics also matter to many.

Cancer Diagnoses After Recent Weight Loss

Importance

Weight loss is common in primary care. Among individuals with recent weight loss, the rates of cancer during the subsequent 12 months are unclear compared with those without recent weight loss.

Objective

To determine the rates of subsequent cancer diagnoses over 12 months among health professionals with weight loss during the prior 2 years compared with those without recent weight loss.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Prospective cohort analysis of females aged 40 years or older from the Nurses' Health Study who were followed up from June 1978 until June 30, 2016, and males aged 40 years or older from the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study who were followed up from January 1988 until January 31, 2016.

Exposure

Recent weight change was calculated from the participant weights that were reported biennially. The intentionality of weight loss was categorized as high if both physical activity and diet quality increased, medium if only 1 increased, and low if neither increased.

Main Outcome and Measures

Rates of cancer diagnosis during the 12 months after weight loss.

Results

Among 157 474 participants (median age, 62 years [IQR, 54-70 years]; 111 912 were female [71.1%]; there were 2631 participants [1.7%] who self-identified as Asian, Native American, or Native Hawaiian; 2678 Black participants [1.7%]; and 149 903 White participants [95.2%]) and during 1.64 million person-years of follow-up, 15 809 incident cancer cases were identified (incident rate, 964 cases/100 000 person-years). During the 12 months after reported weight change, there were 1362 cancer cases/100 000 person-years among all participants with recent weight loss of greater than 10.0% of body weight compared with 869 cancer cases/100 000 person-years among those without recent weight loss (between-group difference, 493 cases/100 000 person-years [95% CI, 391-594 cases/100 000 person-years]; P < .001). Among participants categorized with low intentionality for weight loss, there were 2687 cancer cases/100 000 person-years for those with weight loss of greater than 10.0% of body weight compared with 1220 cancer cases/100 000 person-years for those without recent weight loss (between-group difference, 1467 cases/100 000 person-years [95% CI, 799-2135 cases/100 000 person-years]; P < .001). Cancer of the upper gastrointestinal tract (cancer of the esophagus, stomach, liver, biliary tract, or pancreas) was particularly common among participants with recent weight loss; there were 173 cancer cases/100 000 person-years for those with weight loss of greater than 10.0% of body weight compared with 36 cancer cases/100 000 person-years for those without recent weight loss (between-group difference, 137 cases/100 000 person-years [95% CI, 101-172 cases/100 000 person-years]; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

Health professionals with weight loss within the prior 2 years had a significantly higher risk of cancer during the subsequent 12 months compared with those without recent weight loss. Cancer of the upper gastrointestinal tract was particularly common among participants with recent weight loss compared with those without recent weight loss.

Evidence-Based Management of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: Consensus Statements from the Gulf Region

INTRODUCTION

Despite recent advances in diagnosis, prognostication, and treatment options, chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is still a largely incurable disease. New concepts on diagnosis, staging, treatment, and follow-up on CLL have been incorporated throughout recent years. The lack of regional consensus guidelines has led to varying practices in the management of patients with CLL in the region. This manuscript aims to reach a consensus among expert hematologists regarding the definitions, classifications, and related practices of CLL. The experts developed a set of statements utilizing their personal experience together with the current literature on CLL management. This consensus aims to provide guidance for healthcare professionals involved in the management of CLL and serves as a step in developing regional guidelines.

METHODS

Eight experts responded to 50 statements regarding the diagnosis, staging, treatment, and prognosis of CLL with three potential answering alternatives ranging between agree, disagree, and abstain. This consensus adopted a modified Delphi consensus methodology. A consensus was reached when at least 75% of the agreement to the answer was reached. This manuscript presents the scientific insights of the participating attendees, panel discussions, and the supporting literature review.

RESULTS

Of the 50 statements, a consensus was reached on almost all statements. Statements covered CLL-related topics, including diagnostic evaluation, staging, risk assessment, different patient profiles, prognostic evaluation, treatment decisions, therapy sequences, response evaluation, complications, and CLL during the COVID-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSION

In recent years, CLL management has progressed significantly, with many diagnostic tests and several novel treatments becoming available. This consensus gathers decades of consolidated principles, novel research, and promising prospects for the management of this disease.

Protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial assessing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Electronic RIsk-assessment for CAncer for patients in general practice (ERICA)

INTRODUCTION

The UK has worse cancer outcomes than most comparable countries, with a large contribution attributed to diagnostic delay. Electronic risk assessment tools (eRATs) have been developed to identify primary care patients with a ≥2% risk of cancer using features recorded in the electronic record.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial in English primary care. Individual general practices will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to intervention (provision of eRATs for six common cancer sites) or to usual care. The primary outcome is cancer stage at diagnosis, dichotomised to stage 1 or 2 (early) or stage 3 or 4 (advanced) for these six cancers, assessed from National Cancer Registry data. Secondary outcomes include stage at diagnosis for a further six cancers without eRATs, use of urgent referral cancer pathways, total practice cancer diagnoses, routes to cancer diagnosis and 30-day and 1-year cancer survival. Economic and process evaluations will be performed along with service delivery modelling. The primary analysis explores the proportion of patients with early-stage cancer at diagnosis. The sample size calculation used an OR of 0.8 for a cancer being diagnosed at an advanced stage in the intervention arm compared with the control arm, equating to an absolute reduction of 4.8% as an incidence-weighted figure across the six cancers. This requires 530 practices overall, with the intervention active from April 2022 for 2 years.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial has approval from London City and East Research Ethics Committee, reference number 19/LO/0615; protocol version 5.0, 9 May 2022. It is sponsored by the University of Exeter. Dissemination will be by journal publication, conferences, use of appropriate social media and direct sharing with cancer policymakers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN22560297.

Agreement between patient's description of abdominal symptoms of possible upper gastrointestinal cancer and general practitioner consultation notes: a qualitative analysis of video-recorded UK primary care consultation data

INTRODUCTION

Abdominal symptoms are common in primary care but infrequently might be due to an upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer. Patients' descriptions may differ from medical terminology used by general practitioners (GPs). This may affect how information about abdominal symptoms possibly due to an UGI cancer are documented, creating potential missed opportunities for timely investigation.

OBJECTIVES

To explore how abdominal symptoms are communicated during primary care consultations, and identify characteristics of patients' descriptions that underpin variation in the accuracy and completeness with which they are documented in medical records.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Primary care consultation video recordings, transcripts and medical records from an existing dataset were screened for adults reporting abdominal symptoms. We conducted a qualitative content analysis to capture alignments (medical record entries matching patient verbal and non-verbal descriptions) and misalignments (symptom information omitted or differing from patient descriptions). Categories were informed by the Calgary-Cambridge guide's 'gathering information' domains and patterns in descriptions explored.

RESULTS

Our sample included 28 consultations (28 patients with 18 GPs): 10 categories of different clinical features of abdominal symptoms were discussed. The information GPs documented about these features commonly did not match what patients described, with misalignments more common than alignments (67 vs 43 instances, respectively). Misalignments often featured patients using vague descriptors, figurative speech, lengthy explanations and broad hand gestures. Alignments were characterised by patients using well-defined terms, succinct descriptions and precise gestures for symptoms with an exact location. Abdominal sensations reported as 'pain' were almost always documented compared with expressions of 'discomfort'.

CONCLUSIONS

Abdominal symptoms that are well defined or communicated as 'pain' may be more salient to GPs than those expressed vaguely or as 'discomfort'. Variable documentation of abdominal symptoms in medical records may have implications for the development of clinical decision support systems and decisions to investigate possible UGI cancer.

Erythema nodosum after azacitidine in a patient with acute myeloid leukemia

INTRODUCTION

Nodular skin lesions in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) raise clinical suspicion for leukemia cutis versus fungal infections. Here, we report a rare case of treatment-related erythema nodosum (EN) in a patient with AML.

CASE REPORT

Approximately 5 weeks after the initiation of sorafenib and one week after azacitidine initiation, a 32-year-old man with primary refractory AML presented with several painful red nodules on the lower extremities. Histological examination established a diagnosis of EN.

MANAGEMENT AND OUTCOME

Treatment with topical and oral steroids led to complete resolution of the nodules. However, once the dose of steroids was reduced, the lesions rapidly recurred. Higher dose steroids were reinitiated, again with a resolution of the nodules, confirming steroid responsiveness of the underlying process.

DISCUSSION

Given the onset of lesions one week after the initiation of azacitidine and 5 weeks after the initiation of sorafenib, azacitidine was considered the more likely culprit. Only 2 cases of EN-like eruption after azacitidine and 1 case after sorafenib have been reported. Although fungal infections and leukemia cutis are the top differentials considered for skin nodules in a patient with AML, EN should be considered as an alternative diagnosis. Correct diagnosis is critical because it will guide treatment.

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.

Oral myeloid sarcoma as an uncommon manifestation of acute myeloid leukemia: A case series and review of the literature

BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW

Oral myeloid sarcoma (MS) is an extramedullary tumor that can occur in the setting of acute myeloid leukemia, either as the first sign of an underlying disease or later in the course of disease. The authors' aim was to present the clinical features of oral MS and review the literature.

CASE DESCRIPTION

Case 1 was an 82-year-old woman with an asymptomatic erythematous swelling on the maxillary gingiva and no history of hematologic malignancy. Case 2, a 65-year-old man, and case 3, a 58-year-old woman, each had a history of acute myeloid leukemia and a painful ulcer on the palatal mucosa and an asymptomatic ulcer on the lower lip mucosa, respectively. Case 1 was treated with focal radiation then chemotherapy and achieved complete remission initially, but died of relapse 2 years after diagnosis. Case 2 received radiotherapy and immunotherapy and had a complete response. Case 3 received chemotherapy and achieved remission initially, but relapsed and is undergoing investigational targeted therapies.

CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Oral MS can manifest as gingival or mucosal swelling or ulceration and can indicate onset or relapse of associated hematologic malignancies, which often have a poor prognosis. Because patients with oral findings are likely to seek treatment from their dentists first, oral clinicians should maintain a broad differential diagnosis list when evaluating oral lesions, especially if treatment prescribed for a more common diagnosis fails to resolve the lesion.

The effectiveness of the Guy's Rapid Diagnostic Clinic (RDC) in detecting cancer and serious conditions in vague symptom patients

BACKGROUND

Rapid Diagnostic Clinics (RDC) are being expanded nationally by NHS England. Guy's RDC established a pathway for GPs and internal referrals for patients with symptoms concerning for malignancy not suitable for a site-specific 2WW referral. However, little data assessing the effectiveness of RDC models are available in an English population.

METHODS

We evaluated all patients referred to Guy's RDC between December 2016 and June 2019 (n = 1341) to assess the rate of cancer diagnoses, frequency of benign conditions and effectiveness of the service.

RESULTS

There were 96 new cancer diagnoses (7.2%): lung (16%), haematological (13%) and colorectal (12%)-with stage IV being most frequent (40%). Median time to definitive cancer diagnosis was 28 days (IQR 15-47) and treatment 56 days (IQR 32-84). In all, 75% were suitable for treatment: surgery (26%), systemic (24%) and radiotherapy (14%). Over 180 serious non-neoplastic conditions were diagnosed (35.8%) of patients with no significant findings in two-third of patients (57.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

RDCs provide GPs with a streamlined pathway for patients with complex non-site-specific symptoms that can be challenging for primary care. The 7% rate of cancer diagnosis exceeds many 2WW pathways and a third of patients presented with significant non-cancer diagnoses, which justifies the need for rapid diagnostics. Rapid Diagnostic Centres (RDCs) are being rolled out nationally by NHS England and NHS Improvement as part of the NHS long-term plan. The aim is for a primary care referral pathway that streamlines diagnostics, patient journey, clinical outcomes and patient experience. This pilot study of 1341 patients provides an in-depth analysis of the largest single RDC in England. Cancer was diagnosed in 7% of patients and serious non-cancer conditions in 36%-justifying the RDC approach in vague symptom patients.

Development, validation and effectiveness of diagnostic prediction tools for colorectal cancer in primary care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Tools based on diagnostic prediction models are available to help general practitioners (GP) diagnose colorectal cancer. It is unclear how well they perform and whether they lead to increased or quicker diagnoses and ultimately impact on patient quality of life and/or survival. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the development, validation, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness, of cancer diagnostic tools for colorectal cancer in primary care.

METHODS

Electronic databases including Medline and Web of Science were searched in May 2017 (updated October 2019). Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full-texts. Studies were included if they reported the development, validation or accuracy of a prediction model, or assessed the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of diagnostic tools based on prediction models to aid GP decision-making for symptomatic patients presenting with features potentially indicative of colorectal cancer. Data extraction and risk of bias were completed by one reviewer and checked by a second. A narrative synthesis was conducted.

RESULTS

Eleven thousand one hundred thirteen records were screened and 23 studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-studies reported on the development, validation and/or accuracy of 13 prediction models: eight for colorectal cancer, five for cancer areas/types that include colorectal cancer. The Qcancer models were generally the best performing. Three impact studies met the inclusion criteria. Two (an RCT and a pre-post study) assessed tools based on the RAT prediction model. The third study looked at the impact of GP practices having access to RAT or Qcancer. Although the pre-post study reported a positive impact of the tools on outcomes, the results of the RCT and cross-sectional survey found no evidence that use of, or access to, the tools was associated with better outcomes. No study evaluated cost effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Many prediction models have been developed but none have been fully validated. Evidence demonstrating improved patient outcome of introducing the tools is the main deficiency and is essential given the imperfect classification achieved by all tools. This need is emphasised by the equivocal results of the small number of impact studies done so far.

A Preliminary Study of the Comfort in Patients with Leukemia Staying in a Positive Pressure Isolation Room

Background and Aim: Patients with leukemia who are isolated in positive pressure rooms for infection prevention usually experience significant physical and psychological distress. This study aimed to examine changes in leukemia patients' comfort level during chemotherapy in isolation wards. Methods: A longitudinal survey was conducted with measures which were repeated four times. Data were collected before chemotherapy, on the first and second week after receiving chemotherapy in positive pressure isolation rooms, and on the third week in the non-isolated hematology ward. Each patient received six questionnaires measuring demographic data, comfort status, functional status, fatigue related to cancer therapy, anxiety level, and distress symptoms. A mixed model with repeated measure analysis was used to examine the changing trajectories in physical and psychological health. Results: Twenty-one patients completed the study. During the process, the highest score for comfort level was shown before chemotherapy, and this decreased from the second week under isolation. Anxiety and uncertainty (p < 0.05) declined over time, and emotional states improved during the recovery period in the third and fourth weeks outside isolation. Physical well-being (p < 0.01), cancer-related fatigue (p < 0.05), hemoglobin (p < 0.01) and white blood cell count (p < 0.05) began to rise two weeks after chemotherapy. Conclusion: Comfort levels declined after chemotherapy until the third week of treatment. Anxiety, fatigue and distress symptoms varied across the four time points of chemotherapy from isolation to return to the non-isolated ward. Health care professionals should be aware of psychological symptoms when patients are in isolation rooms, and interventions for promoting a humanized environment, quality of life, and comfort should be considered and provided along with the treatment stages of chemotherapy.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Hyperuricemia might be an early manifestation of undiagnosed adult leukemia in a population-based cohort study

Background/objective

No published population-based study investigates the association between hyperuricemia and undiagnosed adult leukemia in Taiwan. The aim of the study was to investigate whether hyperuricemia might be an early manifestation of undiagnosed adult leukemia in Taiwan.

Methods

A population-based cohort study was conducted to analyze the database of the Taiwan National Health Insurance Program. There were 47708 subjects aged 20 to 84 years with newly diagnosed hyperuricemia as the hyperuricemia group from 2000 to 2013, and 190832 randomly selected subjects without hyperuricemia as the non-hyperuricemia group. The hyperuricemia group and the non-hyperuricemia group were followed for one year to estimate the incidence of new diagnosis of leukemia.

Results

The overall incidence of leukemia was 1.32-fold higher in the hyperuricemia group than the non-hyperuricemia group (0.74 versus 0.55 per 10000 person-months, 95% confidence interval 1.28-1.37). The incidence rate ratio of leukemia was statistically higher in the first 3 months of hyperuricemia diagnosis (incidence rate ratio 4.05).

Conclusion

Adults with hyperuricemia have a higher incidence of being diagnosed with leukemia than those without hyperuricemia. Hyperuricemia might be an early manifestation of undiagnosed adult leukemia. Clinicians should check the complete blood count with differential to detect the possibility of leukemia when adults present with hyperuricemia.

Cancer incidence in patients with a high normal platelet count: a cohort study using primary care data

BACKGROUND

A platelet count >400 × 109/l (i.e. thrombocytosis) is a recently discovered risk marker of cancer. The risk of undiagnosed cancer in patients with thrombocytosis is 11.6% for men and 6.2% for women, well above the 3% risk threshold set by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for cancer investigation. Patients with a platelet count at the upper end of the normal range (325-400 × 109/l) could be at increased risk of undiagnosed malignancy.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the risk of an undiagnosed cancer in patients with a platelet count at the upper end of the normal range.

METHODS

A primary care-based cohort study using Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) data from 2000 to 2013. The study sample comprised 2704 individuals stratified by platelet count: 325-349 × 109/l; 350-374 × 109/l; 375-399 × 109/l. Incident cancer diagnoses in the year following that platelet count were obtained from patient records.

RESULTS

Cancer incidence rose with increasing platelet count: 2.6% [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.9 to 3.6] in subjects with a count of 325-349 × 109/l, 3.7% (95% CI 2.5 to 5.3) in subjects with a count of 350-374 × 109/l and 5.1% (95% CI 3.4 to 7.5) in those with a count of 375-399 × 109/l. Colorectal cancer was most commonly diagnosed in all three groups. Cancer incidence was consistently higher in males than in females.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that clinicians should consider cancer in patients with a platelet count >375 × 109/l, review reasons for testing and any additional reported symptoms. Until these results are replicated on a larger scale, recommendations for clinical action cannot be made.

Selection of men for investigation of possible testicular cancer in primary care: a large case-control study using electronic patient records

BACKGROUND

Testicular cancer incidence has risen over the last two decades and is expected to continue to rise. There are no primary care studies on the clinical features of testicular cancer, with recent National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance based solely upon clinical consensus.

AIM

To identify clinical features of testicular cancer and to quantify their risk in primary care patients, with the aim of improving the selection of patients for investigation.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A matched case-control study in males aged ≥17 years, using Clinical Practice Research Datalink records.

METHOD

Putative clinical features of testicular cancer were identified and analysed using conditional logistic regression. Positive predictive values (PPVs) were calculated for those aged <50 years.

RESULTS

In all, 1398 cases were available, diagnosed between 2000 and 2012, with 4956 age-, sex-, and practice-matched controls. Nine features were independently associated with testicular cancer, the top three being testicular swelling (odds ratio [OR] 280, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 110 to 690), testicular lump (OR 270, 95% CI = 100 to 740), and scrotal swelling (OR 170, 95% CI = 35 to 800). The highest PPV for 17-49-year-olds was testicular lump, at 2.5% (95% CI = 1.1 to 5.6). Combining testicular lump with testicular swelling or testicular pain produced PPVs of 17% and 10%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Testicular enlargement carries a risk of cancer of 2.5% - close to the current 3% threshold in UK referral guidance. Contrary to traditional teaching, painful testicular enlargement may signify cancer. Some initial hydrocele diagnoses appear to be wrong, with missed cancers, suggesting an ultrasound may be useful when a hydrocele diagnosis is uncertain. These results support the existing NICE guidelines, and help to characterise when an ultrasound should be considered in symptomatic men.

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.

Improving early diagnosis of symptomatic cancer

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