Transfer between hospitals as a predictor of delay in diagnosis and treatment of patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer:a register based cohort-study

Abstract Background Lung cancer is the second most frequent cancer diagnosis in Denmark. Although improved during the last decade, the prognosis of lung cancer is still poor with an overall 5-year survival rate of approximately 12%. Delay in diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer has been suggested as a potential cause of the poor prognosis and as consequence, fast track cancer care pathways were implemented describing maximum acceptable time thresholds from referral to treatment. In Denmark, patients with lung cancer are often transferred between hospitals with diagnostic facilities to hospitals with treatment facilities during the care pathway. We wanted to investigate whether this organizational set-up influenced the time that patients wait for the diagnosis and treatment. Therefore, the objective of this study was to uncover the impact of transfer between hospitals on the delay in the diagnosis and treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC). Methods We performed a historical prospective cohort study using data from the Danish Lung Cancer Registry (DLCR). All patients diagnosed with primary NSCLC from January 1st 2008 to December 31st 2012 were included. Patients with unresolved pathology and incomplete data on the dates of referral, diagnosis and treatment were excluded. Results A total of 11 273 patients were included for further analyses. Transfer patients waited longer for treatment after the diagnosis, (Hazard ratio (HR) 0.81 (0.68–0.96)) and in total time from referral to treatment (HR 0.84 (0.77–0.92)), than no-transfer patients. Transfer patients had lower odds of being diagnosed (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.82 (0.74–0.94) and treated (OR 0.66 (0.61–0.72) within the acceptable time thresholds described in the care pathway. Conclusion Fast track cancer care pathways were implemented to unify and accelerate the diagnosis and treatment of cancer. We found that the transfer between hospitals during the care pathway might cause delay from diagnosis to treatment as well as in the total time from referral to treatment in patients with Non Small-Cell Lung Cancer. The difference between no-transfer and transfer patients persists after adjusting for known predictors of delay

Transfer between hospitals as a predictor of delay in diagnosis and treatment of patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer:a register based cohort-study

Abstract Background Lung cancer is the second most frequent cancer diagnosis in Denmark. Although improved during the last decade, the prognosis of lung cancer is still poor with an overall 5-year survival rate of approximately 12%. Delay in diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer has been suggested as a potential cause of the poor prognosis and as consequence, fast track cancer care pathways were implemented describing maximum acceptable time thresholds from referral to treatment. In Denmark, patients with lung cancer are often transferred between hospitals with diagnostic facilities to hospitals with treatment facilities during the care pathway. We wanted to investigate whether this organizational set-up influenced the time that patients wait for the diagnosis and treatment. Therefore, the objective of this study was to uncover the impact of transfer between hospitals on the delay in the diagnosis and treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC). Methods We performed a historical prospective cohort study using data from the Danish Lung Cancer Registry (DLCR). All patients diagnosed with primary NSCLC from January 1st 2008 to December 31st 2012 were included. Patients with unresolved pathology and incomplete data on the dates of referral, diagnosis and treatment were excluded. Results A total of 11 273 patients were included for further analyses. Transfer patients waited longer for treatment after the diagnosis, (Hazard ratio (HR) 0.81 (0.68–0.96)) and in total time from referral to treatment (HR 0.84 (0.77–0.92)), than no-transfer patients. Transfer patients had lower odds of being diagnosed (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.82 (0.74–0.94) and treated (OR 0.66 (0.61–0.72) within the acceptable time thresholds described in the care pathway. Conclusion Fast track cancer care pathways were implemented to unify and accelerate the diagnosis and treatment of cancer. We found that the transfer between hospitals during the care pathway might cause delay from diagnosis to treatment as well as in the total time from referral to treatment in patients with Non Small-Cell Lung Cancer. The difference between no-transfer and transfer patients persists after adjusting for known predictors of delay

Role of Comorbidity on Survival after Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy for Nonsurgically Treated Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND: Comorbidity, such as diseases of the cardiovascular, pulmonary, and other systems, may influence prognosis in lung cancer and complicate its treatment. The performance status of patients, which is a known prognostic marker, may also be influenced by comorbidity. Due to the close link between tobacco smoking and lung cancer, and because lung cancer is often diagnosed in advanced ages (median age at diagnosis in Denmark is 70 years), comorbidity is present in a large proportion of lung cancer patients. METHODS: Patients with any stage lung cancer who did not have surgical treatment were identified in the Danish Lung Cancer Registry. Danish Lung Cancer Registry collects data from clinical departments, the Danish Cancer Registry, Danish National Patient Registry, and the Central Population Register. A total of 20,552 patients diagnosed with lung cancer in 2005 to 2011 were identified. Comorbidity data were extracted from the Danish National Patient Registry, which is a register of all in- and outpatient visits to hospitals in Denmark. By record linkage, lung cancer patients who had previously been diagnosed with comorbid conditions were assigned a Charlson comorbidity index. Initial cancer treatment was categorized as chemotherapy, chemoradiation, radiotherapy, or no therapy. Data on Charlson comorbidity index, performance status, age, sex, stage, pulmonary function (forced expiratory volume in 1 second), histology, and type of initial treatment (if any) were included in univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses. RESULTS: Treatment rates for chemotherapy and chemoradiation declined with increasing comorbidity and in particular increasing age. Women received treatment more often than men. In a univariable analysis of all patients combined, stage, performance status, age, sex, lung function, and comorbidity were all associated with survival. Apart from excess mortality among patients with unspecified histological subtypes (hazard ratio), there was no clear difference between the specified subtypes. When adjusting for the other factors, particularly age, sex, performance status, and stage proved to be robust while risk estimates for comorbidity were attenuated somewhat. When grouped by the three types of cancer treatment or no treatment, there was no influence of comorbidity on radiation therapy and modest influence on survival after chemotherapy and chemoradiation. In contrast, age remained a strong negative prognosticator after multivariate adjustment as did stage and performance status. CONCLUSION: Comorbidity has a limited effect on survival and only for patients treated with chemotherapy. It is rather the performance of the patient at diagnosis than the medical history that prognosticates survival in this patient group

Impact of C-reactive protein and albumin levels on short, medium, and long term mortality in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Objectives and study design: In this population-based study of 602 patients, we amended C-reactive protein (CRP) and plasma albumin (PA) levels around the diagnosis of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) to the International Prognostic Index (IPI) and assessed 0-90, 91-365, and +365-day survival.Results: The CRP did not contribute to the IPI's prognostic or discriminatory ability, regardless of time period, particularly not in models with PA. In contrast, the PA was an important contributor, especially in the 0-90 day period, but also up to one year after the diagnosis. For day 0-90, the model with the IPI only had an Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristics (AUROC) of 0.742, whereas the IPI with PA as a continuous variable rendered an AUROC of 0.841. Especially the lower PA quartile (18-32 g/L) contributed to the worse prognosis.Conclusions: The amendment of PA to the IPI may significantly improve the short-term prognostic and discriminative ability.Key messagesThe amendment of the plasma albumin (PA) level to the International Prognostic Index significantly improved the prediction of mortality up to one year after the diagnosis of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.It was especially the lower quartile of the PA level (18-32 g/L) that contributed to the worse prognosis.publishersversionpublishe

Social factors and age play a significant role in cervical cancer and advanced-stage disease among Danish women

Abstract Background For cervical cancer (CC), the implementation of preventive strategies has the potential to make cervical cancer occurrence and death largely avoidable. To better understand the factors possibly responsible for cervical cancer, we aimed to examine possible differences in age and social parameters as well as screening status between women with low- or high-stage cervical cancer and matched controls. Methods Through the Danish Cancer Registry (DCR), women diagnosed with cervical cancer in Denmark between 1987 and 2016 were included. These were age- and residence-matched in a 1:5 ratio with controls from the general female population. The study population was sub grouped into a low-stage subpopulation with women with early-stage cervical cancer and matched controls and a high-stage subpopulation with women with late-stage cervical cancer and matched controls. Age and social parameters were compared within the subpopulations as well as between low- and high-stage cases. For part of the study population, screening attendance was examined to compare differences in adherence. Results Overall, we found that the risk of cervical cancer is significantly increased in socially disadvantaged women and not least non-attenders in screening. Interestingly, the high-stage subpopulation was significantly older than the low-stage subpopulation (p < 0.001), and when examining the impact of age further, we found that for cervical cancer cases, the risk of having low-stage disease decreases significantly with increasing age, whereas the risk of having high-stage disease increases significantly with increasing age. In the screening cohort, significantly less cases than controls were attenders in screening with the most pronounced differences seen in the old subpopulation (women aged 50–64 years) and in the high-stage subpopulation (p-values all < 0.001). Interestingly, when examining the risk of CC for attenders and non-attenders, we demonstrated that many social parameters continue to influence the risk of cervical cancer, even in women attending screening. Conclusions Older women, socially disadvantaged women, and non-attenders in screening are particularly vulnerable in terms of developing cervical cancer, especially high-stage disease. Therefore, improvements in the participating rate in screening as well as a revision of the current screening guidelines are needed

Additional file 1 of Social factors and age play a significant role in cervical cancer and advanced-stage disease among Danish women

Supplementary Material