Cancer Referral Guidelines Research Articles

Adapting lung cancer symptom investigation and referral guidelines for general practitioners in Australia: Reflections on the utility of the ADAPTE framework

The ADAPTE framework was established to enhance efficiency in guideline development and to facilitate adaptation of high-quality clinical practice guidelines for a local context. It offers guideline developers a systematic methodology for guideline adaptation; however, the feasibility and usability of the process has not been widely evaluated. A pragmatic approach was undertaken throughout the evaluation of the ADATPE process throughout the development of a guide for general practitioners in Australia regarding the initial investigation of symptoms of lung cancer. At each step of the framework all members of the project team leading the development process reflected on the steps outlined in the ADAPTE. The reflections were collated into a lesson-learned log and analysed following completion of the project. Several opportunities for improvement were identified to improve usability and practicability of the ADAPTE framework. These items were both specific, in response to using steps and tools, and general issues concerned with the overall ADAPTE framework. Key challenges to using ADAPTE, highlighted in this study, were the lack of clarity about efficiency of the guideline adaptation process, level of assumed knowledge and expertise, and requirement of resources. In response to these challenges, modifications to the ADAPTE have been recommended. The ADAPTE framework offers an attractive alternative to de novo guideline synthesis in circumstances where high-quality, compatible guidelines already exist. Pending further evaluation, the modifications identified in this study may be applied to future versions of ADAPTE to improve usability and feasibility of the framework.

Screen‐detected colorectal cancers show improved cancer‐specific survival when compared with cancers diagnosed via the 2‐week suspected colorectal cancer referral guidelines

Biennial screening for colorectal cancer using faecal occult blood testing has been shown to reduce the relative risk of mortality from colorectal cancer. The Norwich screening centre commenced screening in July 2006 and so far has diagnosed over 350 patients with colorectal cancer. We compared the stage at diagnosis and cancer-specific mortality and survival in patients diagnosed through screening with a cohort of symptomatic patients with colorectal cancer within the same age range. A comparative analysis was undertaken of all screen-detected colorectal cancer patients diagnosed between July 2006 and December 2010, with an age-matched group of patients diagnosed in the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital through the 2-week suspected colorectal cancer guidelines. Three hundred and fifty-six cases of colorectal cancer were diagnosed through the screening programme, in patients with an age range of 60-79 years. In the same time period, 292 patients in the same age range were diagnosed with colorectal cancer through the 2-week suspected colorectal cancer pathway. Sixteen patients in the screening group had evidence of metastatic disease at presentation compared with 62 in the symptomatic group (χ(2) , P<0.001). The proportion of T1/T2 and Dukes A cancers was significantly greater in the screening group (χ(2) , P < 0.001). There were 21 colorectal cancer-related deaths in the screening group compared with 66 in the symptomatic group. Survival analysis curves showed significantly better survival in the screening group (log-rank analysis P<0.001). Screening for colorectal cancer identifies cancers at a significantly earlier stage than in symptomatic patients, with subsequent improvement in cancer-specific survival.

Urgent suspected cancer referrals from general practice: audit of compliance with guidelines and referral outcomes

Late diagnosis contributes to the UK having poorer cancer survival than many countries in Europe. Cancer referral guidelines help GPs decide which patients to refer urgently for further investigation. To examine primary care referral patterns, compliance with referral guidance, and eventual outcome for patients. Prospective audit within general practice in Scotland. GPs in Scotland reviewed all urgent suspected cancer referrals over a 6-month period. They noted the final diagnosis and assessed whether the referral was in accordance with agreed referral guidelines. A total of 18 775 urgent suspected cancer referrals were analysed from 516 GP practices. The referral rate ranged from 3.7 to 24.0 per 1000 per annum; 30.8% of referrals were for patients aged under 50 years, yet this age group accounts for only 11.1% of all diagnosed cancers; 10.3% of all urgent cancer referrals were for suspected melanoma, despite this cancer accounting for only 4.1% of new cancers. The proportion of patients subsequently diagnosed with cancer was greatest for leukaemia (61.7%), prostate (52.6%), and lung cancer referrals (39.7%), and lowest for melanoma (11.8%), oesophago-gastric (11.2%), brain (10.6%), and laryngeal cancer referrals (7.8%). Compliance with referral guidelines was 90.9%. A large proportion of referrals considered to be outside the guidelines still had a cancer diagnosed (urological 15.9%, lung 8.8%, colorectal 8.4%, and breast 6.4%). There is wide variation in GP referral rates for suspected cancer with a greater than expected proportion of referrals for younger people. Many referrals considered to be outside the national guidelines were diagnosed with cancer, suggesting factors other than those in referral guidelines alert GPs to the possibility of cancer.

Revised UK guidelines for the management of cutaneous melanoma 2010

These guidelines for the management of cutaneous melanoma present an evidence-based guidance for treatment, with identification of the strength of evidence available at the time of preparation of the guidelines, and a brief overview of epidemiology, diagnosis, investigation, and follow-up.

Inter general practice variability in use of referral guidelines for colorectal cancer

The Two-Week Wait (TWW) referral system for suspected colorectal cancers has a low yield. To examine this, we assessed the referral pattern of general practices within four primary care trusts and looked at the variability of yield of colorectal cancer amongst all TWW referrals and assessed the reasons for variability. A prospectively collected database of all colorectal cancers was examined for new cases diagnosed in the 12 months from April 1st 2004. Patients were cross-referenced via general practitioner (GP) codes to identify the referral origin. Reasons for the variability in referral patterns from each general practice were assessed in relation to TWW referrals, population demographics and through postal questionnaire of GPs. A total of 175 patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer were referred from 49 general practices. Whilst there was a positive correlation between the number of TWW referrals and colorectal cancer per 1000-practice population (P = 0.001; Spearman correlation coefficient r(s=0.447,) two-tailed), there was a big discrepancy between referrals and cancer diagnosed in many general practices. Twenty-six general practices (53%) had no colorectal cancer diagnosed via the TWW route and these practices had significantly lower utilization of the TWW referral pathway. In the postal survey, 22% of GPs were unaware of TWW clinics or colorectal cancer referral guidelines and only 8% of GPs knew the number of referral criteria. This study demonstrates wide variability within primary care, in the appropriate use of colorectal cancer referral guidelines. General practices should be targeted for education.

An audit of the UK national cancer referral guidelines for suspected oral mucosal malignancy

To carry out an in depth evaluation of the vocational training year.Qualitative structured focus groups and interviews.Three regional vocational training schemes in the south of England.Each scheme provided a group of six vocational dental practitioners (VDPs) who met with researchers at three points in the training year. Additionally one of the researchers interviewed advisers and trainers.and recommendations Possible improvements were identified in the appointment process, induction, tutorials, assessment of clinical knowledge, technical skill, social and communication skills and development of the skills of reflective practice.The vocational training year is a very good learning experience, which could be further enhanced to make it excellent.

Pitfalls in the construction of cancer guidelines demonstrated by the analyses of colorectal referrals

The aim of this study was to develop a system to compare and validate cancer referral guidelines, identifying the pitfalls in their development and provide a mechanism to evaluate their efficacy. 3302 patients referred from primary care with colorectal symptoms over a 3-year period were assessed. All participants had a comprehensive history obtained via a questionnaire that incorporated all colorectal symptoms. The questionnaires were completed prior to assessment at the hospital. All patients were then assessed at the Colorectal One Stop Clinic (CROSC), underwent investigation and diagnosis achieved. All data were entered into a databank. Current prioritisation guidelines and tools that are used to assess colorectal referrals were applied to this colorectal databank to test their efficacy for cancer detection and referral prioritisation. Sensitivity and specificity for cancer detection and referral rates were assessed. Cancer was detected in 156 patients (4.7%). All prioritisation models (NHS guidelines, Weighted Numerical Score [WNS], Netherlands, Harvard, Mersey, and Somerset) differentiated cancer from non-cancer patients. The use of a few symptoms as risk predictors (e.g. NHS guidelines) causes a decrease in specificity in contrast to a comprehensive risk tool, for example, the WNS at a score of 50 (NHS 54.1%, WNS 62.9%). This results in a significantly higher referral rate (NHS 47.6%, WNS 39.4%) and identifies fewer cancers (NHS 80.1%, WNS 85.9%). Non-evidence based modifications of the NHS guidelines (Somerset and Mersey) caused a further deterioration in specificity, which was reflected in an increased referral rate. Using the WNS, which is objective and a continuous scale, allows adaptation of the referral threshold, balancing sensitivity and specificity to the resources available within a hospital. For example, the WNS of > or = 40 has a sensitivity of 96.8% for cancer detection. Accurate prospective data collection into a data bank allows testing of referral guidelines as well as providing an adjunct to guideline construction.

A prospective audit of the implementation of the 2-week rule for assessment of suspected urological cancers.

All urology departments are under considerable pressure to comply with the UK Government's implementation of the 2-week rule for suspected cancer referrals. A prospective audit was planned to begin 6 months after introduction of cancer referral guidelines and a central data collection process, to investigate the local workload generated by these referrals, and compliance with the 2-week rule. Data were collected prospectively over an 8-week period. All referral letters were examined by an independent urologist for any of the criteria defined by the regional tumour working group as suspicious of urological cancer. For suspected cancer referrals, the patient journey was followed to assess efficiency of the referral process. Results were compared with figures for '2-week rule' referrals for the Trust obtained from the UK Department of Health (DoH) website. In all, 234 GP referrals were reviewed, 82 fitting regional criteria for suspected cancer. Of these, (i) 13% were either marked urgent with a clear statement of 'cancer' or included a clear request to be seen within 2 weeks; (ii) 23% included no implication of cancer; (iii) 72% were seen in haematuria clinic, median time to clinic visit being 56.5 days, none complying with the 2-week rule; and (iv) of referrals not seen in haematuria clinic, median time to clinic was 21 days, with 34% compliance. With more stringent definitions of a cancer referral, DoH figures for the Trust recorded just 18 referrals over 3 months, with 89% compliance. GP referral letters meeting guidelines for suspected cancer often failed to imply or mention this. Compliance with the 2-week rule was poor, especially for the haematuria clinic. This is variably attributable to wording of GP letters, communication issues, and the sheer load of patients to be seen. DoH criteria for cancer referrals grossly underestimate the true magnitude of workload demanded of the service.