Diagnostic routes and time intervals for ovarian cancer in nine international jurisdictions; findings from the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP)
-
Published:2022-05-26
Issue:5
Volume:127
Page:844-854
-
ISSN:0007-0920
-
Container-title:British Journal of Cancer
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Br J Cancer
Author:
Menon UshaORCID, Weller David, Falborg Alina ZalouninaORCID, Jensen HenryORCID, Butler John, Barisic AndrianaORCID, Knudsen Anne Kari, Bergin Rebecca J., Brewster David H., Cairnduff Victoria, Fourkala Evangelia Ourania, Gavin Anna T., Grunfeld Eva, Harland Elizabeth, Kalsi Jatinderpal, Law Rebecca-Jane, Lin Yulan, Turner Donna, Neal Richard D., White Victoria, Harrison Samantha, Reguilon Irene, Lynch Charlotte, Vedsted PeterORCID, Barisic AndrianaORCID, Gavin Anna, Hawryluk Breann, Anandan Chantelle, Donnelly Conan, Jensen HenryORCID, Boylan Jackie, Kelly Jacqueline, Moore Kerry, Davis Maria Rejmyr, Malmberg Martin, Lambe Mats, Bucher Oliver, Vedsted PeterORCID, Bergin Rebecca, Almberg Sigrun Saur, Kearney Therese, Kalsi Tindie, Hammersley Victoria,
Abstract
Abstract
Background
International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership Module 4 reports the first international comparison of ovarian cancer (OC) diagnosis routes and intervals (symptom onset to treatment start), which may inform previously reported variations in survival and stage.
Methods
Data were collated from 1110 newly diagnosed OC patients aged >40 surveyed between 2013 and 2015 across five countries (51–272 per jurisdiction), their primary-care physicians (PCPs) and cancer treatment specialists, supplement by treatment records or clinical databases. Diagnosis routes and time interval differences using quantile regression with reference to Denmark (largest survey response) were calculated.
Results
There were no significant jurisdictional differences in the proportion diagnosed with symptoms on the Goff Symptom Index (53%; P = 0.179) or National Institute for Health and Care Excellence NG12 guidelines (62%; P = 0.946). Though the main diagnosis route consistently involved primary-care presentation (63–86%; P = 0.068), onward urgent referral rates varied significantly (29–79%; P < 0.001). In most jurisdictions, diagnostic intervals were generally shorter and other intervals, in particular, treatment longer compared to Denmark.
Conclusion
This study highlights key intervals in the diagnostic pathway where improvements could be made. It provides the opportunity to consider the systems and approaches across different jurisdictions that might allow for more timely ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Cancer Research,Oncology
Reference34 articles.
1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: A Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:394–424. 2. Cabasag CJ, Butler J, Arnold M, Rutherford M, Bardot A, Ferlay J, et al. Exploring variations in ovarian cancer survival by age and stage (ICBP SurvMark-2): a population-based study. Gynecologic Oncol. 2020;157:234–44. 3. Aust S, Seebacher-Shariat V. Screening for ovarian cancer: is there still hope? Magazine Eur Medical Oncol. 2020;13:189–92. 4. Jayde V, White K, Bloomfield P. Symptoms and diagnostic delay in ovarian cancer: a summary of the literature. Contemporary Nurse. 2014;34:55–65. 5. Gajjar K, Ogden G, Mujahid MI, Razvi K. Symptoms and risk factors of ovarian cancer: a survey in primary care. ISRN Obstetrics Gynecol. 2012;2012:754197: https://doi.org/10.5402/2012/754197.
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|