Search

Background: An efficient diagnostic pathway and early stage diagnosis for cancer patients is widely pursued. This study aims to chart the duration of the diagnostic pathway for patients with symptomatic oesophageal and gastric cancer, to identify factors associated with long duration and to assess the association of duration with tumour stage at diagnosis., Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study, using electronic health records of six routine primary care databases covering about 640,000 patients, partly linked to the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Symptomatic patients with oesophageal and gastric cancer (2010-2015) that presented in primary care were included. Duration of four diagnostic intervals was determined: patient interval; first symptoms to primary care consultation, primary care interval; consultation to referral, secondary care interval; referral to diagnosis, and the diagnostic interval; consultation to diagnosis. Characteristics associated with 'long duration' (≥P75 duration) were assessed using log-binomial regression. Median durations were stratified for tumour stages., Results: Among 312 symptomatic patients with upper gastrointestinal cancer, median durations were: patient interval: 29 days (interquartile interval 15-73), primary care interval: 12 days (interquartile interval 1-43), secondary care interval: 13 days (interquartile interval 6-29) and diagnostic interval: 31 days (11-74). Patient interval duration was comparable for patients with and without alarm symptoms. Absence of cancer-specific alarm symptoms was associated with 'long duration' of primary care interval and secondary care interval: relative risk 5.0 (95% confidence interval 2.7-9.1) and 2.1 (95% confidence interval 1.3-3.7), respectively. Median diagnostic interval duration for local stage disease was 51 days (interquartile interval 13-135) versus 27 days (interquartile interval 11-71) for advanced stage ( p  = 0.07)., Conclusion: In the diagnostic pathway of upper gastrointestinal cancers, the longest interval is the patient interval. Reducing time to diagnosis may be achieved by improving patients' awareness of alarm symptoms and by diagnostic strategies which better identify cancer patients despite low suspicion.

The aim of this study was to determine the incidence, management and diagnostic outcomes of breast cancer-related concerns presented in primary care. A dynamic cohort study was performed in the anonymised routine electronic medical records (EMRs) extracted from 49 General Practices in the Netherlands (163,471 person-years, women aged 18-75). Main Outcome Measures were: (1) incidence rates for breast cancer-related concerns in Primary Care, (2) proportions of these women with and without symptoms of the breast referred for further investigation, (3) proportions of referrals (not) according to the guideline and (4) proportions of women with breast cancer-related concerns diagnosed with breast cancer during follow-up. Breast cancer-related concerns are presented frequently in Primary Care (incidence rate 25.9 per 1,000 women annually). About half these women are referred for further investigation. There is room to improve General Practitioner management, mainly for women with an increased lifetime risk of developing breast cancer. Information concerning family history of cancer is often missing in the EMR. Since cancer is rarely diagnosed during follow-up, particularly when symptoms are absent, reduction of unnecessary concerns is plausible if identification of those without an increased risk is improved., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Hepatitis C virus infection is a serious health threat in today's society. Improved identification strategies have increased the number of patients undergoing the expensive treatment with ribavirin and peg-interferon, inducing a substantial economic burden., Methods: In a retrospective cohort study in three treatment centres in the Netherlands, files of patients treated between 2001 and 2010 were systematically searched for all cost-inducing treatment details. Costs of treatment resulting in sustained viral response (SVR), relapse, non-response and the costs per cured patient were specified for genotype and treatment setting. Determinants of costs were determined by multivariate linear regression., Results: The mean 'real-life' treatment costs excluding side effects for genotype 1/4 and genotype 2/3 were approximately € 12,900 and € 9900 for all patients, € 15,500 and € 10,100 for treatment resulting in SVR and € 16,800 and € 12,100 for relapse, respectively. Costs per cured patient were € 28,500 and € 15,400 respectively. The costs of non-response were approximately € 8000 for all genotypes. Costs of side effects can be high and are mainly caused by incidental treatment for neutropenia. Medication is the main component of treatment costs. Treatment costs were higher in the academic setting due to longer duration and higher costs of side effects. Regression analysis confirms duration as the main determinant of treatment costs excluding side effects., Conclusion: The 'real-life' costs of treatment are mainly determined by treatment duration, medication costs and costs of side effects. The costs of unsuccessful treatment are considerable as are the costs of side effects. Therefore, future research should aim at increasing SVR rates, reducing treatment duration and preventing side effects.