Symptoms and patient factors associated with longer time to diagnosis for colorectal cancer: results from a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to investigate symptoms, clinical factors and socio-demographic factors associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis and time to diagnosis. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of participants referred for suspicion of CRC in two English regions. Data were collected using a patient questionnaire, primary care and hospital records. Descriptive and regression analyses examined associations between symptoms and patient factors with total diagnostic interval (TDI), patient interval (PI), health system interval (HSI) and stage. RESULTS: A total of 2677 (22%) participants responded; after exclusions, 2507 remained. Participants were diagnosed with CRC (6.1%, 56% late stage), other cancers (2.0%) or no cancer (91.9%). Half the cohort had a solitary first symptom (1332, 53.1%); multiple first symptoms were common. In this referred population, rectal bleeding was the only initial symptom more frequent among cancer than non-cancer cases (34.2% vs 23.9%, P=0.004). There was no evidence of differences in TDI, PI or HSI for those with cancer vs non-cancer diagnoses (median TDI CRC 124 vs non-cancer 138 days, P=0.142). First symptoms associated with shorter TDIs were rectal bleeding, change in bowel habit, 'feeling different' and fatigue/tiredness. Anxiety, depression and gastro-intestinal co-morbidities were associated with longer HSIs and TDIs. Symptom duration-dependent effects were found for rectal bleeding and change in bowel habit. CONCLUSIONS: Doctors and patients respond less promptly to some symptoms of CRC than others. Healthcare professionals should be vigilant to the possibility of CRC in patients with relevant symptoms and mental health or gastro-intestinal comorbidities.

The cost-effectiveness of a novel SIAscopic diagnostic aid for the management of pigmented skin lesions in primary care: a decision-analytic model.

OBJECTIVES: Pigmented skin lesions are commonly presented in primary care. Appropriate diagnosis and management is challenging because the vast majority are benign. The MoleMate system is a handheld SIAscopy scanner integrated with a primary care diagnostic algorithm aimed at improving the management of pigmented skin lesions in primary care. METHODS: This decision-model-based economic evaluation draws on the results of a randomized controlled trial of the MoleMate system versus best practice (ISRCTN79932379) to estimate the expected long-term cost and health gain of diagnosis with the MoleMate system versus best practice in an English primary care setting. The model combines trial results with data from the wider literature to inform long-term prognosis, health state utilities, and cost. RESULTS: Results are reported as mean and incremental cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio with probabilistic sensitivity analysis, and value of information analysis. Over a lifetime horizon, the MoleMate system is expected to cost an extra £18 over best practice alone, and yield an extra 0.01 QALYs per patient examined. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is £1,896 per QALY gained, with a 66.1% probability of being below £30,000 per QALY gained. The expected value of perfect information is £43.1 million. CONCLUSIONS: Given typical thresholds in the United Kingdom (£20,000-£30,000 per QALY), the MoleMate system may be cost-effective compared with best practice diagnosis alone in a primary care setting. However, there is considerable decision uncertainty, driven particularly by the sensitivity and specificity of MoleMate versus best practice, and the risk of disease progression in undiagnosed melanoma; future research should focus on reducing uncertainty in these parameters.

Nasal Septal Flaps for Repair of Large or Recurrent Palatal Fistula: Report of Technique and 4-Year Experience.

SUMMARY: Large or multiply recurrent oronasal fistulas following cleft palate repair present a challenging problem. Nasal septal mucoperichondrial flaps have been widely used for repair of skull base defects; however, their use in the repair of oronasal cleft palate fistulas has not previously been described. In this pilot study, the authors describe anterior palatal fistula repair using a nasal septal flap and review their experience with this technique over 4 years. Fourteen patients with anterior palatal fistulas not amenable to repair using local palatal flaps were included for analysis. The mean size of the fistula was 12 mm in maximum dimension. Flap healing with complete or near-complete closure of fistula was achieved in 13 patients (93%). Five of these patients had a small, slit-like residual fistula that was asymptomatic. Nasal septal flaps are a new technique for repair of large or recurrent palatal fistulas. The procedure is well-tolerated with minimal side effects, high success rate, and low incidence of recurrence. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.

Protocol for the MoleMate UK Trial: a randomised controlled trial of the MoleMate system in the management of pigmented skin lesions in primary care [ISRCTN 79932379].

BACKGROUND: Suspicious pigmented lesions are a common presenting problem in general practice consultations; while the majority are benign a small minority are melanomas. Differentiating melanomas from other pigmented lesions in primary care is challenging: currently, 95% of all lesions referred to a UK specialist are benign. The MoleMate system is a new diagnostic aid, incorporating a hand-held SIAscopy scanner with a primary care diagnostic algorithm. This trial tests the hypothesis that adding the MoleMate system to current best primary care practice will increase the proportion of appropriate referrals of suspicious pigmented lesions to secondary care compared with current best practice alone. METHODS/DESIGN: The MoleMate UK Trial is a primary care based multi-centre randomised controlled trial, with randomisation at patient level using a validated block randomisation method for two age groups (45 years and under; 46 years and over). We aim to recruit adult patients seen in general practice with a pigmented skin lesion that cannot immediately be diagnosed as benign and the patient reassured. The trial has a 'two parallel groups' design, comparing 'best practice' with 'best practice' plus the MoleMate system in the intervention group. The primary outcome is the positive predictive value (PPV) of referral defined as the proportion of referred lesions seen by secondary care experts that are considered 'clinically significant' (i.e. biopsied or monitored). Secondary outcomes include: the sensitivity, specificity and negative predictive value (NPV) of the decision not to refer; clinical outcomes (melanoma thickness, 5 year melanoma incidence and mortality); clinician outcomes (Index of Suspicion, confidence, learning effects); patient outcomes (satisfaction, general and cancer-specific worry), and cost-utility. DISCUSSION: The MoleMate UK Trial tests a new technology designed to improve the management of suspicious pigmented lesions in primary care. If effective, the MoleMate system could reduce the burden on skin cancer clinics of patients with benign pigmented skin lesions, and improve patient care in general practice.

Using the 7-point checklist as a diagnostic aid for pigmented skin lesions in general practice: a diagnostic validation study.

BACKGROUND: GPs need to recognise significant pigmented skin lesions, given rising UK incidence rates for malignant melanoma. The 7-point checklist (7PCL) has been recommended by NICE (2005) for routine use in UK general practice to identify clinically significant lesions which require urgent referral. AIM: To validate the Original and Weighted versions of the 7PCL in the primary care setting. DESIGN AND SETTING: Diagnostic validation study, using data from a SIAscopic diagnostic aid randomised controlled trial in eastern England. METHOD: Adults presenting in general practice with a pigmented skin lesion that could not be immediately diagnosed as benign were recruited into the trial. Reference standard diagnoses were histology or dermatology expert opinion; 7PCL scores were calculated blinded to the reference diagnosis. A case was defined as a clinically significant lesion for primary care referral to secondary care (total 1436 lesions: 225 cases, 1211 controls); or melanoma (36). RESULTS: For diagnosing clinically significant lesions there was a difference between the performance of the Original and Weighted 7PCLs (respectively, area under curve: 0.66, 0.69, difference = 0.03, P<0.001). For the identification of melanoma, similar differences were found. Increasing the Weighted 7PCL's cut-off score from recommended 3 to 4 improved detection of clinically significant lesions in primary care: sensitivity 73.3%, specificity 57.1%, positive predictive value 24.1%, negative predictive value 92.0%, while maintaining high sensitivity of 91.7% and moderate specificity of 53.4% for melanoma. CONCLUSION: The Original and Weighted 7PCLs both performed well in a primary care setting to identify clinically significant lesions as well as melanoma. The Weighted 7PCL, with a revised cut-off score of 4 from 3, performs slightly better and could be applied in general practice to support the recognition of clinically significant lesions and therefore the early identification of melanoma.

Development and evaluation of a brief self-completed family history screening tool for common chronic disease prevention in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Family history is an important risk factor for many common chronic diseases, but it remains underutilised for diagnostic assessment and disease prevention in routine primary care. AIM: To develop and validate a brief self-completed family history questionnaire (FHQ) for systematic primary care assessment for family history of diabetes, ischaemic heart disease, breast cancer, and colorectal cancer. DESIGN AND SETTING: Two-stage diagnostic validation study in 10 general practices in eastern England. Method Participants aged 18-50 years were identified via random sampling from electronic searches of general practice records. Participants completed a FHQ then had a three-generational 'gold standard' pedigree taken, to determine disease risk category. In stage 1, the FHQ comprised 12 items; in stage 2 the shorter 6-item FHQ was validated against the same 'gold standard'. RESULTS: There were 1147 participants (stage 1: 618; stage 2: 529). Overall, 32% were at increased risk of one or more marker conditions (diabetes 18.9%, ischaemic heart disease 13.3%, breast cancer 6.2%, colorectal cancer 2.2%). The shorter 6-item FHQ performed very well for all four conditions: pooled data from both stages show diabetes, sensitivity = 98%, specificity = 94%; ischaemic heart disease, sensitivity = 93%, specificity = 81%; breast cancer, sensitivity = 81%, specificity = 83%; colorectal cancer, sensitivity = 96%, specificity = 88%, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.90 for males and 0.89 for females. CONCLUSION: This brief self-completed FHQ shows good diagnostic accuracy for identifying people at higher risk of four common chronic diseases. It could be used in routine primary care to identify patients who would be most likely to benefit from a more detailed pedigree and risk assessment, and consequent management strategies.

Effect of adding a diagnostic aid to best practice to manage suspicious pigmented lesions in primary care: randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether adding a novel computerised diagnostic tool, the MoleMate system (SIAscopy with primary care scoring algorithm), to current best practice results in more appropriate referrals of suspicious pigmented lesions to secondary care, and to assess its impact on clinicians and patients. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 15 general practices in eastern England. PARTICIPANTS: 1297 adults with pigmented skin lesions not immediately diagnosed as benign. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were assessed by trained primary care clinicians using best practice (clinical history, naked eye examination, seven point checklist) either alone (control group) or with the MoleMate system (intervention group). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Appropriateness of referral, defined as the proportion of referred lesions that were biopsied or monitored. Secondary outcomes related to the clinicians (diagnostic performance, confidence, learning effects) and patients (satisfaction, anxiety). Economic evaluation, diagnostic performance of the seven point checklist, and five year follow-up of melanoma incidence were also secondary outcomes and will be reported later. RESULTS: 1297 participants with 1580 lesions were randomised: 643 participants with 788 lesions to the intervention group and 654 participants with 792 lesions to the control group. The appropriateness of referral did not differ significantly between the intervention or control groups: 56.8% (130/229) v 64.5% (111/172); difference -8.1% (95% confidence interval -18.0% to 1.8%). The proportion of benign lesions appropriately managed in primary care did not differ (intervention 99.6% v control 99.2%, P=0.46), neither did the percentage agreement with an expert decision to biopsy or monitor (intervention 98.5% v control 95.7%, P=0.26). The percentage agreement with expert assessment that the lesion was benign was significantly lower with MoleMate (intervention 84.4% v control 90.6%, P<0.001), and a higher proportion of lesions were referred (intervention 29.8% v control 22.4%, P=0.001). Thirty six histologically confirmed melanomas were diagnosed: 18/18 were appropriately referred in the intervention group and 17/18 in the control group. Clinicians in both groups were confident, and there was no evidence of learning effects, and therefore contamination, between groups. Patients in the intervention group ranked their consultations higher for thoroughness and reassuring care, although anxiety scores were similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that the MoleMate system improved appropriateness of referral. The systematic application of best practice guidelines alone was more accurate than the MoleMate system, and both performed better than reports of current practice. Therefore the systematic application of best practice guidelines (including the seven point checklist) should be the paradigm for management of suspicious skin lesions in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN79932379.