Literature DB >> 20849687

Positive predictive values of ≥5% in primary care for cancer: systematic review.

Mark Shapley1, Gemma Mansell, Joanne L Jordan, Kelvin P Jordan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The positive predictive value (PPV) for cancer of symptoms, signs, and non-diagnostic test results of patients routinely consulting a GP (unselected primary care populations) can help to determine when malignancy should be excluded. Comparisons with other illness indicate that a value of 5% or more may be regarded as highly predictive. AIM: To identify symptoms, signs, and non-diagnostic test results in unselected primary care populations that are highly predictive of cancer. DESIGN OF STUDY: Systematic review.
SETTING: Primary care.
METHOD: Fourteen bibliographic databases were searched, using terms for primary care, cancer, and predictive values. Reference lists of relevant papers were hand-searched. Data were extracted and the quality of each paper was assessed using predefined criteria, and checked by a second reviewer.
RESULTS: Twenty-five studies were identified. PPVs of 5% or more in specific age and sex groups were reported for: rectal bleeding, change in bowel habit, and iron deficiency anaemia and colorectal cancer; haematuria and urological cancer; malignant rectal examination and prostate cancer; haemoptysis and lung cancer; dysphagia and oesophageal cancer; breast lump and breast cancer; and postmenopausal bleeding and gynaecological cancer.
CONCLUSION: Robust evidence was found for eight symptoms, signs, and non-diagnostic test results as strongly indicative of cancer for specific age and sex groups in unselected primary care populations. These have the potential to improve the early diagnosis of some cancers in primary care by the use of computer warning flags, improved guidelines, audit, and appraisal.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20849687      PMCID: PMC2930247          DOI: 10.3399/bjgp10X515412

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN: 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


  36 in total

1.  Risk as feelings.

Authors:  G F Loewenstein; E U Weber; C K Hsee; N Welch
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 17.737

2.  Factors identifying higher risk rectal bleeding in general practice.

Authors:  Brian G Ellis; Michael R Thompson
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  Incidence and causes of rectal bleeding in general practice as detected by colonoscopy.

Authors:  J V Metcalf; J Smith; R Jones; C O Record
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  Diagnostic work-up of rectal bleeding in general practice.

Authors:  Christoph Heintze; Dorothea Matysiak-Klose; Thorsten Kröhn; Ute Wolf; Alexander Brand; Christoph Meisner; Imma Fischer; Hartwig Wehrmeyer; Vittoria Braun
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  Dysphagia: a cost analysis of the diagnostic approach.

Authors:  Tuba Esfandyari; Jon W Potter; Michael F Vaezi
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 6.  Value of symptoms and additional diagnostic tests for colorectal cancer in primary care: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Petra Jellema; Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; David J Bruinvels; Christian D Mallen; Stijn J B van Weyenberg; Chris J Mulder; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-03-31

Review 7.  Critiques of the risk concept--valid or not?

Authors:  Jørgen Nexøe; Peder Andreas Halvorsen; Ivar Sønbø Kristiansen
Journal:  Scand J Public Health       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 3.021

8.  Investigation and management of iron deficiency anaemia in general practice: a cluster randomised controlled trial of a simple management prompt.

Authors:  E C M Logan; J M Yates; R M Stewart; K Fielding; D Kendrick
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 2.401

9.  The risk of colorectal cancer with symptoms at different ages and between the sexes: a case-control study.

Authors:  William Hamilton; Robert Lancashire; Debbie Sharp; Tim J Peters; Kk Cheng; Tom Marshall
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2009-04-17       Impact factor: 8.775

10.  The importance of anaemia in diagnosing colorectal cancer: a case-control study using electronic primary care records.

Authors:  W Hamilton; R Lancashire; D Sharp; T J Peters; K K Cheng; T Marshall
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2008-01-22       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  43 in total

1.  The predictive value of cancer symptoms in primary care.

Authors:  Kevin Barraclough
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Improving cancer outcomes: better access to diagnostics in primary care could be critical.

Authors:  Greg Rubin; Peter Vedsted; Jon Emery
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  Comments on the paper "Medicolegal implications of accuracy of GP referral letters to specialist breast clinic".

Authors:  D Murray
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 1.568

4.  Can the colour of per-rectal bleeding estimate the risk of lower gastrointestinal bleeding caused by malignant lesion?

Authors:  Pui-Yan Lai; Kin-Wai Chan; Carlos King-Ho Wong; William Meng; Wan Luk
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2015-10-31       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 5.  Systematic review of clinical features of suspected colorectal cancer in primary care.

Authors:  M Elisabeth Del Giudice; Emily T Vella; Amanda Hey; Marko Simunovic; William Harris; Cheryl Levitt
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 3.275

Review 6.  Systematic review of guidelines for the management of suspected lung cancer in primary care.

Authors:  M Elisabeth Del Giudice; Sheila-Mae Young; Emily T Vella; Marla Ash; Praveen Bansal; Andrew Robinson; Roland Skrastins; Yee Ung; Robert Zeldin; Cheryl Levitt
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 3.275

7.  Predictive values of GPs' suspicion of serious disease: a population-based follow-up study.

Authors:  Peter Hjertholm; Grete Moth; Mads Lind Ingeman; Peter Vedsted
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 8.  The diagnostic value of symptoms for colorectal cancer in primary care: a systematic review.

Authors:  Margaret Astin; Tom Griffin; Richard D Neal; Peter Rose; William Hamilton
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 5.386

9.  Identification of patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer in primary care: a case-control study.

Authors:  Marcela Ewing; Peter Naredi; Chenyang Zhang; Jörgen Månsson
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2016-11-07       Impact factor: 5.386

10.  Symptoms and risk factors to identify women with suspected cancer in primary care: derivation and validation of an algorithm.

Authors:  Julia Hippisley-Cox; Carol Coupland
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 5.386

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.