2019
DOI: 10.1111/ecc.13100
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Advanced‐stage cancer and time to diagnosis: An International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) cross‐sectional study

Abstract: Objective: To investigate the relationship between tumour stage at diagnosis and selected components of primary and secondary care in the diagnostic interval for breast, colorectal, lung and ovarian cancers. Methods:Observational study based on data from 6,162 newly diagnosed symptomatic cancer patients from Module 4 of the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership. We analysed the odds of advanced stage of cancer as a flexible function of the length of primary care interval (days from first presentation t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
40
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
(97 reference statements)
1
40
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Patients with advanced tumours generally receive an expedited diagnosis (possibly as an emergency) and have poor outcomes because of their high inherent mortality: the so-called “sick-quick”. Conversely, patients presenting with vague symptoms usually have longer diagnostic intervals, and higher mortality – thought to reflect the impact of diagnostic delay, particularly between referral and diagnosis [ [32] , [33] , [34] , [35] ]. The revised guidance aimed to benefit patients by legitimising doctors to investigate at a lower risk of undiagnosed cancer.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Patients with advanced tumours generally receive an expedited diagnosis (possibly as an emergency) and have poor outcomes because of their high inherent mortality: the so-called “sick-quick”. Conversely, patients presenting with vague symptoms usually have longer diagnostic intervals, and higher mortality – thought to reflect the impact of diagnostic delay, particularly between referral and diagnosis [ [32] , [33] , [34] , [35] ]. The revised guidance aimed to benefit patients by legitimising doctors to investigate at a lower risk of undiagnosed cancer.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…21 The third sensitivity analysis involved repeating the main analysis by restricting it to patients who had a diagnostic interval (time from symptomatic presentation to diagnosis) of 0-60 days, since time to diagnosis could influence the association between presenting symptoms and stage. 22 For the fourth sensitivity analysis, we adjusted for route to diagnosis as the association between route to cancer diagnosis (a patient's health-care utilisation pathway before diagnosis) and stage might also influence the association of interest. 23 Therefore, the main analysis was repeated with further adjustment for route to diagnosis among patients with complete information about their diagnostic route.…”
Section: Implications Of All the Available Evidencementioning
confidence: 99%
“… 1 There are no effective interventions to support asymptomatic detection through population screening for most of this group, but expediting the diagnosis of individuals with symptoms may help improve clinical and patient-reported outcomes. 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%