Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Revista
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
BJOG ; 123(6): 1012-20, 2016 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26032603

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To compare time to diagnosis of the typically slow-growing Type I (low-grade serous, low-grade endometrioid, mucinous, clear cell) and the more aggressive Type II (high-grade serous, high-grade endometrioid, undifferentiated, carcinosarcoma) invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (iEOC). DESIGN: Multicentre observational study. SETTING: Ten UK gynaecological oncology centres. POPULATION: Women diagnosed with primary EOC between 2006 and 2008. METHODS: Symptom data were collected before diagnosis using patient questionnaire and primary-care records. We estimated patient interval (first symptom to presentation) using questionnaire data and diagnostic interval (presentation to diagnosis) using primary-care records. We considered the impact of first symptom, referral and stage on intervals for Type I and Type II iEOC. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient and diagnostic intervals. RESULTS: In all, 78% of 60 Type I and 21% of 134 Type II iEOC were early-stage. Intervals were comparable and independent of stage [e.g. median patient interval for Type I: early-stage 0.3 months (interquartile range 0.3-3.0) versus late-stage 0.3 months (interquartile range 0.3-4.5), P = 0.8]. Twenty-seven percent of women with Type I and Type II had diagnostic intervals of at least 9 months. First symptom (questionnaire) was also similar, except for the infrequent abnormal bleeding (Type I 15% versus Type II 4%, P = 0.01). More women with Type I disease (57% versus 41%, P = 0.04) had been referred for suspected gynaecological cancer. Median time from referral to diagnosis was 1.4 months for women with iEOC referred via a 2-week cancer referral to any specialty compared with 2.6 months (interquartile range 2.0-3.7) for women who were referred routinely to gynaecology. CONCLUSION: Overall, shorter diagnostic delays were seen when a cancer was suspected, even if the primary tumour site was not recognised to be ovarian. Despite differences in carcinogenesis and stage for Type I and Type II iEOC, time to diagnosis and symptoms were similar. Referral patterns were different, implying subtle symptom differences. If symptom-based interventions are to impact on ovarian cancer survival, it is likely to be through reduced volume rather than stage-shift. Further research on histological subtypes is needed. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: No difference in time to diagnosis for Type I versus Type II invasive epithelial ovarian cancers.


Assuntos
Neoplasias Epiteliais e Glandulares/patologia , Neoplasias Ovarianas/patologia , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Encaminhamento e Consulta , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Carcinoma Epitelial do Ovário , Diagnóstico Tardio , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Feminino , Humanos , Prontuários Médicos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Gradação de Tumores , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Neoplasias Epiteliais e Glandulares/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Ovarianas/diagnóstico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Avaliação de Sintomas , Fatores de Tempo
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA