Diagnostic routes and time intervals for patients with colorectal cancer in 10 international jurisdictions; findings from a cross-sectional study from the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP)

OBJECTIVE: International differences in colorectal cancer (CRC) survival and stage at diagnosis have been reported previously. They may be linked to differences in time intervals and routes to diagnosis. The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership Module 4 (ICBP M4) reports the first international comparison of routes to diagnosis for patients with CRC and the time intervals from symptom onset until the start of treatment. Data came from patients in 10 jurisdictions across six countries (Canada, the UK, Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Australia). DESIGN: Patients with CRC were identified via cancer registries. Data on symptomatic and screened patients were collected; questionnaire data from patients\u27 primary care physicians and specialists, as well as information from treatment records or databases, supplemented patient data from the questionnaires. Routes to diagnosis and the key time intervals were described, as were between-jurisdiction differences in time intervals, using quantile regression. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 14 664 eligible patients with CRC diagnosed between 2013 and 2015 were identified, of which 2866 were included in the analyses. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Interval lengths in days (primary), reported patient symptoms (secondary). RESULTS: The main route to diagnosis for patients was symptomatic presentation and the most commonly reported symptom was \u27bleeding/blood in stool\u27. The median intervals between jurisdictions ranged from: 21 to 49 days (patient); 0 to 12 days (primary care); 27 to 76 days (diagnostic); and 77 to 168 days (total, from first symptom to treatment start). Including screen-detected cases did not significantly alter the overall results. CONCLUSION: ICBP M4 demonstrates important differences in time intervals between 10 jurisdictions internationally. The differences may justify efforts to reduce intervals in some jurisdictions

Life after prostate cancer diagnosis: protocol for a UK-wide patient-reported outcomes study

Background: Prostate cancer and its treatment may impact physically, psychologically and socially; affecting the health-related quality of life of men and their partners/spouses. The Life After Prostate Cancer Diagnosis (LAPCD) study is a UK-wide patient-reported outcomes study which will generate information to improve the health and well-being of men with prostate cancer. Methods and analysis: Postal surveys will be sent to prostate cancer survivors (18–42 months postdiagnosis) in all 4 UK countries (n=∼70 000). Eligible men will be identified and/or verified through cancer registration systems. Men will be surveyed twice, 12 months apart, to explore changes in outcomes over time. Second, separate cohorts will be surveyed once and the design will include evaluation of the acceptability of online survey tools. A comprehensive patient-reported outcome measure has been developed using generic and specific instruments with proven psychometric properties and relevance in national and international studies. The outcome data will be linked with administrative health data (eg, treatment information from hospital data). To ensure detailed understanding of issues of importance, qualitative interviews will be undertaken with a sample of men who complete the survey across the UK (n=∼150) along with a small number of partners/spouses (n=∼30). Ethics and dissemination: The study has received the following approvals: Newcastle and North Tyneside 1 Research Ethics Committee (15/NE/0036), Health Research Authority Confidentiality Advisory Group (15/CAG/0110), NHS Scotland Public Benefit and Privacy Panel (0516-0364), Office of Research Ethics Northern Ireland (16/NI/0073) and NHS R&D approval from Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Using traditional and innovative methods, the results will be made available to men and their partners/spouses, the funders, the NHS, social care, voluntary sector organisations and other researchers

Factors associated with emergency admission for people dying from cancer in Northern Ireland: an observational data linkage study

Abstract Background Many people living with cancer are admitted as an emergency, some just prior to diagnosis and others in their last year of life. Factors associated with accessing emergency care for people dying of cancer are complex and not well understood. This can make it difficult to have the resources and staffing in place to best care for individuals in their last year of life and their families. Methods This study uses routinely collected administrative data from people who died of cancer in N. Ireland (NI) during 2015 and explores how personal characteristics (e.g., gender, age) and disease related factors (e.g., tumour site, cancer stage at initial diagnosis) were associated with having an emergency admission to hospital in the last year and the last 28 days of their lives, using multivariate logistic regression. Results Almost three in four people had at least one emergency admission in the last year of life, and over one in three had an emergency admission the last 28 days of life. Patterns were similar for both time outcomes with males, people with haematological, lung or brain cancers, younger persons, those diagnosed with late-stage cancer, and people diagnosed close to time of death, being significantly more likely to have an emergency admission. While there was no significant association between deprivation and emergency admission rates, those living in urban areas were more likely to have an emergency admission in their last month of life compared to rural dwellers. Late diagnosis was evident with 538 people (12.8% of all deaths from cancer) being diagnosed within one month of death and 1242 (29%) within 3 months of death. Conclusion The high level of emergency admissions points to gaps in routine end-of-life care, and the need for additional training for hospital staff including frontline emergency department (ED) staff who are often the ‘gatekeepers’ to emergency inpatient care for people living with cancer. The levels of late diagnosis indicate a need for increased population awareness of cancer symptoms and system change to promote earlier diagnosis