Literature DB >> 33431382

Time from presentation to pre-diagnostic chest X-ray in patients with symptomatic lung cancer: a cohort study using electronic patient records from English primary care.

Kirsten D Arendse1, Fiona M Walter1, Mark Pilling1, Yin Zhou2, Willie Hamilton3, Garth Funston1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: National guidelines in England recommend prompt chest X-ray (within 14 days) in patients presenting in general practice with unexplained symptoms of possible lung cancer, including persistent cough, shortness of breath, or weight loss. AIM: To examine time to chest X-ray in symptomatic patients in English general practice before lung cancer diagnosis, and explore demographical variation. DESIGN AND
SETTING: Retrospective cohort study using routinely collected general practice, cancer registry, and imaging data from England.
METHOD: Patients with lung cancer who presented symptomatically in general practice in the year pre-diagnosis and who had a pre-diagnostic chest X-ray were included. Time from presentation to chest X-ray (presentation-test interval) was determined and intervals classified based on national guideline recommendations as concordant (≤14 days) or non-concordant (>14 days). Variation in intervals was examined by age, sex, smoking status, and deprivation.
RESULTS: In a cohort of 2102 patients with lung cancer, the median presentation-test interval was 49 (interquartile range [IQR] 5-172) days. Of these, 727 (35%) patients had presentation-test intervals of ≤14 days (median 1 [IQR 0-6] day) and 1375 (65%) had presentation-test intervals of >14 days (median 128 [IQR 52-231] days). Intervals were longer among patients who smoke (equivalent to 63% longer than non-smokers; P<0.001), older patients (equivalent to 7% longer for every 10 years from age 27; P = 0.013), and females (equivalent to 12% longer than males; P = 0.016).
CONCLUSION: In symptomatic primary care patients who underwent chest X-ray before lung cancer diagnosis, only 35% were tested within the timeframe recommended by national guidelines. Patients who smoke, older patients, and females experienced longer intervals. These findings could help guide initiatives aimed at improving timely lung cancer diagnosis.
© The Authors.

Entities:  

Keywords:  chest X-ray; clinical practice guideline; diagnostic intervals; early diagnosis; lung cancer

Year:  2021        PMID: 33431382      PMCID: PMC7805412          DOI: 10.3399/bjgp20X714077

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


  34 in total

1.  International variation in adherence to referral guidelines for suspected cancer: a secondary analysis of survey data.

Authors:  Brian D Nicholson; David Mant; Richard D Neal; Nigel Hart; Willie Hamilton; Bethany Shinkins; Greg Rubin; Peter W Rose
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2016-01-06       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Establishing population-based surveillance of diagnostic timeliness using linked cancer registry and administrative data for patients with colorectal and lung cancer.

Authors:  Clare Pearson; Jess Fraser; Michael Peake; Roland Valori; Veronique Poirier; Victoria H Coupland; Sara Hiom; Sean McPhail; Jodie Moffat; Georgios Lyratzopoulos; Jon Shelton
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol       Date:  2019-06-15       Impact factor: 2.984

3.  What are the clinical features of lung cancer before the diagnosis is made? A population based case-control study.

Authors:  W Hamilton; T J Peters; A Round; D Sharp
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2005-10-14       Impact factor: 9.139

Review 4.  Timeliness of access to lung cancer diagnosis and treatment: A scoping literature review.

Authors:  Margo M Jacobsen; Sophie C Silverstein; Michael Quinn; Leo B Waterston; Christian A Thomas; James C Benneyan; Paul K J Han
Journal:  Lung Cancer       Date:  2017-08-15       Impact factor: 5.705

5.  Rethinking diagnostic delay in cancer: how difficult is the diagnosis?

Authors:  Georgios Lyratzopoulos; Jane Wardle; Greg Rubin
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2014-12-09

Review 6.  Is increased time to diagnosis and treatment in symptomatic cancer associated with poorer outcomes? Systematic review.

Authors:  R D Neal; P Tharmanathan; B France; N U Din; S Cotton; J Fallon-Ferguson; W Hamilton; A Hendry; M Hendry; R Lewis; U Macleod; E D Mitchell; M Pickett; T Rai; K Shaw; N Stuart; M L Tørring; C Wilkinson; B Williams; N Williams; J Emery
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 7.640

7.  Symptom lead times in lung and colorectal cancers: what are the benefits of symptom-based approaches to early diagnosis?

Authors:  M Biswas; A E Ades; W Hamilton
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2014-12-02       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  Stage at diagnosis and early mortality from cancer in England.

Authors:  S McPhail; S Johnson; D Greenberg; M Peake; B Rous
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 9.  Socio-economic inequalities in stage at diagnosis, and in time intervals on the lung cancer pathway from first symptom to treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lynne F Forrest; Sarah Sowden; Greg Rubin; Martin White; Jean Adams
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2016-09-28       Impact factor: 9.139

10.  Factors associated with timeliness of post-primary care referral, diagnosis and treatment for lung cancer: population-based, data-linkage study.

Authors:  L F Forrest; J Adams; M White; G Rubin
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2014-09-09       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  1 in total

1.  Identifying opportunities for timely diagnosis of bladder and renal cancer via abnormal blood tests: a longitudinal linked data study.

Authors:  Yin Zhou; Fiona M Walter; Luke Mounce; Gary A Abel; Hardeep Singh; Willie Hamilton; Grant D Stewart; Georgios Lyratzopoulos
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2021-12-31       Impact factor: 5.386

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.