Evidence of advanced stage colorectal cancer with longer diagnostic intervals: a pooled analysis of seven primary care cohorts comprising 11 720 patients in five countries.

BACKGROUND: The benefits from expedited diagnosis of symptomatic cancer are uncertain. We aimed to analyse the relationship between stage of colorectal cancer (CRC) and the primary and specialist care components of the diagnostic interval. METHODS: We identified seven independent data sets from population-based studies in Scotland, England, Canada, Denmark and Spain during 1997-2010 with a total of 11 720 newly diagnosed CRC patients, who had initially presented with symptoms to a primary care physician. Data were extracted from patient records, registries, audits and questionnaires, respectively. Data sets were required to hold information on dates in the diagnostic interval (defined as the time from the first presentation of symptoms in primary care until the date of diagnosis), symptoms at first presentation in primary care, route of referral, gender, age and histologically confirmed stage. We carried out reanalysis of all individual data sets and, using the same method, analysed a pooled individual patient data set. RESULTS: The association between intervals and stage was similar in the individual and combined data set. There was a statistically significant convex (∩-shaped) association between primary care interval and diagnosis of advanced (i.e., distant or regional) rather than localised CRC (P=0.004), with odds beginning to increase from the first day on and peaking at 90 days. For specialist care, we saw an opposite and statistically significant concave (∪-shaped) association, with a trough at 60 days, between the interval and diagnosis of advanced CRC (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that longer diagnostic intervals are associated with more advanced CRC. Furthermore, the study cannot define a specific 'safe' waiting time as the length of the primary care interval appears to have negative impact from day one.

Therapeutic delay reduces survival of rectal cancer but not of colonic cancer.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between therapeutic delay and long-term survival from colorectal cancer is unclear. This association was examined prospectively among patients with colorectal cancer in Denmark. METHODS: A total of 740 patients with colorectal cancer were included in a prospective, population-based study in three Danish counties from 1 January 2001 to 31 July 2002. Delay was determined by self-report during a standardized interview. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to compute the hazard ratio (HR) associated with delay, while adjusting for age, sex and co-morbidity, and also for urgency of surgery in patients with colonic cancer. RESULTS: For rectal cancer only, a time span of at least 60 days from the onset of symptoms until treatment (total therapeutic delay) was associated with a 69 per cent higher risk of mortality compared with a total therapeutic delay of less than 60 days (HR 1.69 (95 per cent confidence interval 1.01 to 2.83)). Provider delay (interval from first physician contact until treatment) and hospital delay (interval from referral to a hospital until treatment) of at least 60 days had no impact on survival from colorectal cancer. CONCLUSION: A total therapeutic delay of at least 60 days was a negative prognostic factor for long-term survival from rectal cancer.

Re-resection rates and risk characteristics following breast conserving surgery for breast cancer and carcinoma in situ: A single-centre study of 1575 consecutive cases.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the frequency of re-resections and describe risk characteristics: invasive carcinoma or carcinoma in situ (CIS), palpability of the lesion, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: 1703 breast conserving surgeries were performed: 1575 primary breast conserving surgeries (BCS), and 128 diagnostic excisions (DE). 176 BCS (11.2% [9.6; 12.7]) and 100 DE had inadequate margins indicating re-resection. The overall re-resection rate was 16.2% [14.5; 18.0]. 10.3% of invasive carcinoma BCS patients, and 28.6% CIS patients underwent re-resection (relative risk (RR) 2.8 [1.9; 4.1]). Invasive lobular carcinoma (ilc) had an RR of re-resection of 2.5 [1.7; 3.8], compared with invasive ductal carcinoma (idc). CONCLUSION: Overall 11.2% of the BCS patients needed a re-resection. For isolated CIS (28.6%), RR of re-resection was almost three times as high compared to invasive carcinoma (10.3%). Ilc had an RR of re-resection of 2.5 compared to idc. Palpability and neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not significantly influence the risk of re-resection.