Delay In Diagnosis Of Cancer Research Articles

Comparing cancer stage at diagnosis between migrants and non-migrants: a meta-analysis.

Migrants face barriers accessing healthcare, risking delays in cancer diagnosis. Diagnostic delays result in later stage diagnosis which is associated with poorer cancer survival. This review aims to compare the differences in cancer stage at diagnosis between migrants and non-migrants. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of three databases from 2000 to 2023 for studies conducted in OECD countries that compared stage at diagnosis between migrants and non-migrants. Meta-analysis compared odds ratios (OR) for early (stage I and II) stage at diagnosis. The Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Exposure tool was used to assess study quality. 41 of the 11,549 studies identified were included; 34 studies had suitable data for meta-analysis. Overall, migrants were significantly less likely to be diagnosed with early stage cancer compared with non-migrants (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.78-0.91). This difference was maintained across cancer types, although only statistically significant for breast (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.70-0.87) and prostate cancer (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.85-0.99). Published studies indicate that migrants are less likely to be diagnosed with early stage cancer. Variation by cancer type, study location and region of origin highlights the need for further research to understand these differences.

Factors influencing delay in cancer diagnosis: a qualitative study in Chile, Colombia and Ecuador

Abstract Background Although the greatest delays in cancer diagnosis in Latin America occur in the provider interval, little is known about related factors. This study, part of EquityCancer-LA, aims to analyse the factors influencing access to cancer diagnosis from key stakeholders’ perspective in healthcare networks of Chile, Colombia, and Ecuador. Methods A qualitative, descriptive-interpretative study was conducted in two networks per country in 2023, using semi-structured individual interviews (n = 114) with a criterion sample of primary care (PC) (n = 40) and secondary/tertiary hospitals (n = 44) health/administrative professionals, managers, and policy makers (n = 30). Thematic analysis was performed, segmented by country. Results The analysis revealed interacting factors that cause cumulative delays, with differences between countries. In all, participants identified networks structural characteristics (deficits in diagnostic resources; geographical accessibility), organizational factors (long waiting times, especially after referral), and limited knowledge of PC doctors, which all lead to delayed referral. In Chile and Colombia, barriers related to care rationing/prioritization policies hampered access to tests, and in Chile, increased delays for non-prioritized conditions. Barriers related to the health system organization also emerged: in Chile, problems related to private services subcontracting and the voucher system for using them; in Colombia, the management of care by insurers (authorizations; fragmented and short-term contracting of providers); and in Ecuador, health system underfunding. The barriers mostly affected the elderly, those with low socioeconomic status, limited social support networks, and rural areas residents. Conclusions The results reveal significant barriers in access to timely cancer diagnosis, which can and should be addressed with specific cancer diagnosis policies and general measures that strengthen public healthcare systems and networks. Key messages • Key health system factors influencing provider delays in cancer diagnosis are identified. • Evidence is provided for the design of policies to improve timely cancer diagnosis in studied countries.

Clinical coordination in cancer diagnosis: healthcare stakeholders’ viewpoints in Latin America

Abstract Background Delays in diagnosis contribute to increasing cancer mortality rates in Latin American countries due to, among others, highly fragmented healthcare systems. The objective of this study, part of a larger research project (EquityCancer-LA), was to analyze cross-level coordination during cancer diagnosis and factors influencing it from healthcare stakeholders’ perspectives in Chile, Colombia, and Ecuador. Methods This descriptive-interpretative qualitative study was based on 114 semi-structured individual interviews in 2022-23 using a criterion sample of health professionals from primary care (PC) (n = 40) and secondary care (SC) (n = 44) as well as managers and policy makers (n = 30) from two public healthcare networks in each country. Sample reached saturation. A thematic analysis was conducted first by country and then comparatively, guided by the theoretical framework of clinical coordination. Results In all countries, informants highlighted limited cross-level exchange of information and limited coordination of clinical management, delays in referral, and long waiting times after referral, leading to diagnostic delays. Factors hindering coordination differed across countries: structural (insufficient personnel, access to diagnostic tests in PC); organizational (limited/inadequate coordination mechanisms, e.g. shared clinical records; poor working conditions); and health professional characteristics (limited knowledge and skills among PC doctors). Direct feedback was emphasized to facilitate coordination of cancer diagnosis: virtual joint clinical conferences in Chile, co-location of PC and SC in Colombia, and informal networks (based on personal contacts) in Ecuador. Conclusions The findings underscore the critical coordination problems contributing to delays in cancer diagnosis. Addressing these challenges requires strategic interventions aimed at strengthening primary care and fostering cross-level coordination. Key messages • Cancer diagnosis in Latin America suffers from coordination deficits due to structural, organizational, and professional factors. • Strengthening primary care and cross-level coordination is needed.

Interventions to improve timely cancer diagnosis: an integrative review.

Cancer will affect more than one in three U.S. residents in their lifetime, and although the diagnosis will be made efficiently in most of these cases, roughly one in five patients will experience a delayed or missed diagnosis. In this integrative review, we focus on missed opportunities in the diagnosis of breast, lung, and colorectal cancer in the ambulatory care environment. From a review of 493 publications, we summarize the current evidence regarding the contributing factors to missed or delayed cancer diagnosis in ambulatory care, as well as evidence to support possible strategies for intervention. Cancer diagnoses are made afterfollow-up of a positive screening test or an incidental finding, or most commonly, by following up and clarifying non-specific initial presentations to primary care. Breakdowns and delays are unacceptably common in each of these pathways, representing failures to follow-up on abnormal test results, incidental findings, non-specific symptoms, or consults. Interventions aimed at 'closing the loop' represent an opportunity to improve the timeliness of cancer diagnosis and reduce the harm from diagnostic errors. Improving patient engagement, using 'safety netting,' and taking advantage of the functionality offered through health information technology are all viable options to address these problems.

Diagnostic process of cancer in a health system without gatekeeping: a single centre survey analysis.

It is essential to increase the rates of early diagnosis in cancer control, and the diagnostic process needs to be improved to achieve this goal. Previous studies showed that in countries where there is a gatekeeping system, there might be a delay in cancer diagnosis. Our aim is to examine the process of cancer diagnosis in a healthcare system without gatekeeping. A quantitative descriptive study has been conducted in various outpatient clinics of Pendik Training and Research Hospital, between 1 February and 31 May 2019, with individuals aged over 18 and diagnosed with cancer in the last six months. The data was collected through a questionnaire filled in by face-to-face interview method. Patient's socio-economic characteristics, their symptoms at the time of the diagnosis and the diagnosis process were questioned. The median diagnostic interval was 30 days (min-max 1-365), and the median patient interval was 60 (1-600) days. Patients pointed out that the diagnostic tests, especially the pathology reporting process, caused the diagnostic interval to be prolonged. Of the patients, 84% (n 135) stated that they did not consider their symptoms as a sign of serious illness. The patient interval was shortest with symptoms of haematuria and haematochezia and longest with dysuria and change in bladder habit. The study examined the diagnosis process in our health system, where patients can apply for health services at any stage. The results showed that there were no superior outcomes to those observed in primary care-led health systems. Patients reported that waiting times for medical tests led to prolongation of the diagnosis time. Cancer awareness of patients should also be increased to shorten patient admission times.

Application of a digital quality measure for cancer diagnosis in Epic Cosmos.

Missed and delayed cancer diagnoses are common, harmful, and often preventable. We previously validated a digital quality measure (dQM) of emergency presentation (EP) of lung cancer in 2 US health systems. This study aimed to apply the dQM to a new national electronic health record (EHR) database and examine demographic associations. We applied the dQM (emergency encounter followed by new lung cancer diagnosis within 30 days) to Epic Cosmos, a deidentified database covering 184 million US patients. We examined dQM associations with sociodemographic factors. The overall EP rate was 19.6%. EP rate was higher in Black vs White patients (24% vs 19%, P < .001) and patients with younger age, higher social vulnerability, lower-income ZIP code, and self-reported transport difficulties. We successfully applied a dQM based on cancer EP to the largest US EHR database. This dQM could be a marker for sociodemographic vulnerabilities in cancer diagnosis.

The Concept of Health Debt Incurred during the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Example of Basal Cell Skin Cancer Diagnosis in Lower Silesia.

Introduction: This study explores the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis of basal cell carcinoma (BCC) in Lower Silesia, Poland, comparing pre-pandemic, pandemic, and post-pandemic periods. It investigates how different medical facilities adapted to the pandemic's challenges and the subsequent implications for cancer diagnosis. Methods: Data from histopathology and cytology laboratories were analyzed, focusing on BCC diagnoses from 2018 to 2022. This study included various medical centers categorized by size and source of implementation. Statistical analyses were conducted to compare diagnoses before, during, and after the pandemic. Results: During the initial wave of the pandemic, there was a significant reduction in newly diagnosed BCC cases, followed by a surge post-pandemic. Larger medical centers adapted more effectively, while district hospitals faced challenges. Private practices maintained stable diagnosis rates. The increase in diagnoses post-pandemic suggests a backlog of undiagnosed cases during the pandemic. Discussion: Challenges in accessing healthcare during the pandemic led to delayed cancer diagnoses. Larger medical centers were better equipped to handle the crisis, while district hospitals struggled. Private practices maintained stability, possibly due to pre-scheduled appointments. Recommendations include public education on symptom recognition and standardizing histopathological evaluation protocols. Conclusions: Despite data limitations, this study provides valuable insights into the pandemic's impact on cancer diagnosis, highlighting the need for proactive measures in future health crises to ensure timely detection and treatment of cancer cases.

BEFORE &amp; AFTER: THE EVALUATION OF THE EFFECT OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ON CANCER PATIENTS IN PALLIATIVE CARE CENTER

OBJECTIVE: In addition to the high risk of death from COVID-19 infection in cancer patients, delays in cancer diagnosis may result in delayed treatment of cancer patients. The study aimed to evaluate the changes in the characteristics of cancer patients, such as diagnosis, stage and prognosis, between the pre-pandemic and post-pandemic one-year periods in Turkey. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The records of patients who received palliative treatment in the palliative service between March 11, 2019 and March 11, 2021 were reviewed retrospectively. Age, gender, diagnosis, type of diagnosis, type of treatment, place of arrival to the palliative service, and way of discharge were retrospectively scanned from patient files. The first hospitalizations were evaluated in patients with recurrent hospitalizations. Patients with inadequate patient records were excluded from the study. RESULTS: The proportion of patients diagnosed with cancer radiologically has increased. While radiological findings of cancer were detected in 9.1 percent of patients in the pre-pandemic period, this rate was 16.2 percent in the post-pandemic period. When the patients were evaluated in terms of the oncological treatment they received before inpatient palliative care, a significant difference was found (p=0.002). This difference was due to the increase in the proportion of patients who were not suitable for oncological treatment after the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: We believe that the pandemic had great effects on newly diagnosed patients and patients in need of palliative care services. In the present study, we observed an increase in cancer patients who were radiologically diagnosed with cancer and treated in palliative care services in the post-pandemic period.

CT-Guided Core Needle Biopsy of Pulmonary Lesions Associated With Cystic Airspaces: A Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND. Concern may exist that pulmonary lesions associated with cystic airspaces are at risk of increased biopsy complications or lower biopsy accuracy given challenges in targeting tissue abutting or intermingled with the cystic airspaces. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and diagnostic performance of CT-guided core needle biopsy (CNB) of pulmonary lesions associated with cystic airspaces. METHODS. This retrospective study included 90 patients (median age, 69.5 years; 28 women, 62 men) who underwent CT-guided CNB of pulmonary lesions associated with cystic airspaces (based on review of procedural images) from February 2010 to December 2022 and a matched control group (2:1 ratio) of 180 patients (median age, 68.0 years; 56 women, 124 men) who underwent CNB of noncystic noncavitary lesions during the same period. The groups were compared in terms of complications, nondiagnostic biopsies (i.e., nonspecific benignities, atypical cells, or insufficient specimens), and CNB diagnostic performance for detecting malignancy using as reference the final diagnosis from a joint review of all available records. For lesions associated with cystic airspaces that underwent surgical resection after CNB, histologic slides were reviewed to explore the nature of the cystic airspace. RESULTS. The final diagnosis was malignant in 90% (81/90) of lesions associated with cystic airspaces and 92% (165/180) of noncystic noncavitary lesions. Patients with lesions associated with cystic airspaces and patients with noncystic noncavitary lesions showed no significant difference in frequency of complications (overall: 40% [36/90] vs 38% [68/180], p = .79; major: 4% [4/90] vs 6% [10/180], p = .78; minor: 36% [32/90] vs 32% [58/180], p = .59), frequency of nondiagnostic biopsies (12% [11/90] vs 9% [16/180], p = .40), or diagnostic performance (accuracy: 94% [85/90] vs 97% [175/180], p = .50; sensitivity: 94% [76/81] vs 97% [160/165], p = .50; specificity: 100% [9/9] vs 100% [15/15]; p > .99), respectively. All false-negative results for malignancy in both groups occurred in patients with nondiagnostic CNB results. Among lesions associated with cystic airspaces that were resected after CNB (all malignant), the cystic airspaces most commonly represented tumor degeneration (22/31 [71%]). CONCLUSION. CT-guided CNB is safe and accurate for assessing pulmonary lesions associated with cystic airspaces. CLINICAL IMPACT. CNB may help avoid a missed or delayed cancer diagnosis in pulmonary lesions with cystic airspaces.

Do Behavioral Characteristics Influence the Breast Cancer Diagnosis Delay? Evidence From French Retrospective Data

ObjectivesThis study aimed to analyze the behavioral determinants of breast cancer (BC) diagnosis delays in France. To do so, we investigated whether time discounting, risk tolerance, and personality traits influenced the BC diagnosis delay of patients. MethodsWe used original retrospective data collected on 2 large online patient networks from 402 women diagnosed of BC. The BC diagnosis delay was measured by the difference between the date of diagnosis and the date of first symptoms. Time discounting and risk tolerance are measured with both self-reported questions and hypothetical lotteries. Personality traits are measured with the 10-item Big Five indicator. Ordinary least square and probit models were used to analyze whether these behavioral characteristics influenced the BC diagnosis delay. ResultsResults showed that risk tolerance and time discounting were not significantly associated with the BC diagnosis delay. However, we found a longer diagnosis delay for women with a neuroticism personality trait (standardized coefficients ranged from 0.104 [P-value = .036] to 0.090 [P-value = .065]). ConclusionsOverall, our findings underline the need for an increased consideration of cancer screening public health policy for women with mental vulnerabilities since such vulnerabilities were found to be highly correlated with a neuroticism personality trait.

Cancer screening in sexual and gender minority populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

10540 Background: The sexual and gender minority (SGM) populations experience a greater cancer burden than their heterosexual or cisgender counterparts. Screening rates for cancer within this cohort are frequently suboptimal, highlighting notable deficiencies in screening recommendations. Inadequate culturally competent care and screening guidelines may contribute to delays in cancer diagnosis and treatment, ultimately impacting survival and quality of life. We sought to investigate the existing disparities in cancer screening among SGM populations. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the cancer screening rates in SGM. The SGM population included in this study were gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgender men, and transgender women. Two reviewers conducted a systematic search of numerous databases, including PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL, and then extracted relevant information from eligible studies. For this study, we conducted a meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Pooled estimates of the odds ratio were calculated for any combination of outcomes and population when at least two studies had relevant data. Study heterogeneity was assessed using I² statistics. Meta-regression, accounting for the study weight, year, and latitude, was performed on variables potentially associated with heterogeneity. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality of selected studies. Results: We analyzed data from a total of 60 eligible studies with 65,315 patients. Pooled analysis showed that sexual minority groups were at lower risk for cancer screening such as breast cancer screening (OR: 0.79, 95% CI, 0.75-0.82; Chi2=835.23; p&lt;0.001; I2=97%), cervical cancer screening (OR: 0.62, 95% CI, 0.56-0.72; Chi2=926.23; p&lt;0.001; I2=96%), colorectal cancer screening (OR: 0.51, 95% CI, 0.45-0.61; Chi2=3272.21; p&lt;0.001; I2=98%), and prostate cancer screening (OR: 0.71, 95% CI, 0.63-0.82; Chi2=1282.92; p&lt;0.001; I2=99%). The prevalence of lung cancer (p&lt;0.001) and anal cancer screening (p&lt;0.001) were also lower in sexual minority groups. The analysis also showed no small study effects (Egger test: 1.33; 95% CI: −5.42, −0.63; p=0.182). All the subgroups (geographical location, screening procedure, screening period) had high between-study heterogeneity. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that cancer screening rates for breast, cervical, colorectal, prostate, lung, and anal cell cancer are significantly lower in SGM populations and emphasize the urgent need for targeted interventions, culturally competent care, and inclusive screening guidelines to address these disparities. Understanding and addressing these issues are crucial for reducing delays in cancer diagnosis and improving survival and quality of life for SGM population. Further research and comprehensive strategies are warranted to bridge these gaps in cancer screening accessibility and uptake.

Analyzing influential factors in suboptimal cervical cancer screening rates at Kline Health Center and implementing a subsequent initiative for improvement.

e23252 Background: The UPMC-Kline Health Center (KHC) in Harrisburg, PA, shows a lower cervical cancer screening rate compared to the general population in the USA (57.08% vs 78%, respectively, based on the Medical Group Fiscal Year 2023 Internal Quality Measures). To understand this gap, we distributed a comprehensive questionnaire to patients, aiming to pinpoint factors contributing to the lower screening rate and plan targeted interventions for improvement. Methods: We randomly distributed questionnaires to female patients aged 21 to 61 during appointment check-in at the KHC, considering our linguistically diverse patient population with surveys available in Spanish, English, and Nepali. Given the diverse linguistic landscape of our patient population, we prepared questionnaires in Spanish, English, and Nepali. The survey aims to identify and address specific clinic-related problems, with a follow-up assessment after a few months to gauge improvements following interventions targeting the underlying causes of screening gaps. Results: Over a three-month span, 65 questionnaires were completed. Among the participants, 38% (25 patients - 7 white/Caucasian, 11 black/African American, 1 Asian, 7 others; 12 Hispanic, 13 non-Hispanic) revealed that they had not undergone screening within the past three years. The analysis of this subgroup unveiled significant issues: 84% (21/25) did not receive paperwork to schedule the test, 88% (22/25) were not contacted to schedule the test, 76% (19/25) did not receive reminder notifications before appointments, and 72%(18/25) expressed concerns about the lack of insurance coverage for costs. Furthermore, 76% (19/25) indicated the requirement to pay a co-pay, and an equal percentage reported difficulties in obtaining the screening test. Additionally, 72%(18/25) mentioned that their healthcare providers did not discuss the screening's importance, while 76%(19/25) noted their providers did not explain the purpose of the test. Conclusions: These findings underscore critical gaps in communication, accessibility, and cost-related barriers to cervical cancer screening at KHC. This ongoing quality improvement project, scheduled for data recollection in a few months, encompasses proposed interventions such as automated reminders, technology integration for communication, and distributing flyers in clinic and waiting areas to foster open communication and address inadequate discussions about the importance of screening. The aim is to improve patient awareness, engagement, and ultimately prevent delayed cancer diagnoses. KHC is committed to enhancing the cervical cancer screening rate to minimize the likelihood of delayed cancer diagnoses.

An analysis of factors contributing to low colonoscopy rates at Kline Health Center in comparison to the national average in the USA (according to the internal quality measures of the medical group fiscal year 2023) and a follow-up initiative to improve colon cancer screening participation.

e23244 Background: The UPMC-Kline Health Center (KHC) located in Harrisburg, PA, has a lower colon cancer screening rate compared to the general patient population in the USA (26.03% vs 78%, respectively, according to the Medical Group Fiscal Year 2023 Internal Quality Measures). To understand the reasons behind this disparity, a comprehensive questionnaire was conducted aiming to identify factors contributing to the lower colonoscopy screening rate and to implement targeted interventions to improve the situation. Methods: Surveys were distributed to eligible patients aged 45 to 75 at the clinic, considering linguistic diversity by preparing questionnaires in Spanish, English, and Nepali. Distribution, randomized and conducted by medical assistants, aims to identify and address specific clinic-related issues. Subsequent assessment, after a few months, will determine improvements resulting from interventions targeting the underlying causes of screening gaps. Results: Over a three-month period, a total of 77 questionnaires were completed and collected. We analyzed responses from 33 patients (42%, 14 females, and 19 males; 16 white/Caucasian, 14 black/African American, 2 Asian, 1 other; 8 Hispanic/Latino, 25 non-Hispanic/Latino) who had not undergone a colonoscopy in the past 10 years. Findings revealed that 72% (24/33) of patients reported not receiving paperwork for scheduling, while 72% (24/33) were not contacted to schedule the test. Additionally, 78% (26/33) of patients did not receive a reminder call or message before their scheduled appointments. 51% (17/33) of patients highlighted a lack of insurance coverage for costs, with 63% (21/33) indicating the need for a co-pay. 57% (19/33) of patients reported difficulties in obtaining the screening test. 51% (17/33) of patients mentioned that their healthcare provider discussed the importance of the screening test, and 54% (18/33) of patients noted that their providers explained the purpose of the test. Conclusions: The survey identifies scheduling, communication, and cost-related barriers to colon cancer screening at KHC. Proposed interventions, including the implementation of automated reminders, integrating technology to facilitate communication, and incorporating flyers within the clinic and patient waiting areas. This quality improvement project is ongoing, with data scheduled for recollection in a few months. These measures are anticipated to foster improvements, aiding more patients in preventing delayed cancer diagnoses. KHC aims to create a patient-friendly environment by addressing scheduling inefficiencies, improving communication, and tackling financial concerns for timely and accessible colon cancer screenings.

Development and Implementation of a Digital Quality Measure of Emergency Cancer Diagnosis.

Missed and delayed cancer diagnoses are common, harmful, and often preventable. Automated measures of quality of cancer diagnosis are lacking but could identify gaps and guide interventions. We developed and implemented a digital quality measure (dQM) of cancer emergency presentation (EP) using electronic health record databases of two health systems and characterized the measure's association with missed opportunities for diagnosis (MODs) and mortality. On the basis of literature and expert input, we defined EP as a new cancer diagnosis within 30 days after emergency department or inpatient visit. We identified EPs for lung cancer and colorectal cancer (CRC) in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and Geisinger from 2016 to 2020. We validated measure accuracy and identified preceding MODs through standardized chart review of 100 records per cancer per health system. Using VA's longitudinal encounter and mortality data, we applied logistic regression to assess EP's association with 1-year mortality, adjusting for cancer stage and demographics. Among 38,565 and 2,914 patients with lung cancer and 14,674 and 1,649 patients with CRCs at VA and Geisinger, respectively, our dQM identified EPs in 20.9% and 9.4% of lung cancers, and 22.4% and 7.5% of CRCs. Chart reviews revealed high positive predictive values for EPs across sites and cancer types (72%-90%), and a substantial percent represented MODs (48.8%-84.9%). EP was associated with significantly higher odds of 1-year mortality for lung cancer and CRC (adjusted odds ratio, 1.78 and 1.83, respectively, 95% CI, 1.63 to 1.86 and 1.61 to 2.07). A dQM for cancer EP was strongly associated with both mortality and MODs. The findings suggest a promising automated approach to measuring quality of cancer diagnosis in US health systems.

Altered serum metabolome as an indicator of paraneoplasia or concomitant cancer in patients with rheumatic disease

ObjectivesA timely diagnosis is imperative for curing cancer. However, in patients with rheumatic musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) or paraneoplastic syndromes, misleading symptoms frequently delay cancer diagnosis. As metabolic remodelling characterises both...

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on incidence gap in screen-detectable cancers: a cohort study in Greater Poland, Poland.

The global COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on healthcare systems. This study aimed to assess the incidence gap in screening-detectable cancers in the Greater Poland (Poland) in 2020. Data on breast, cervix uteri, and colorectal cancer cases diagnosed from 2010 to 2020 were obtained from the regional cancer registry. Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) and incidence rate differences (IRD) were calculated to estimate the change in incident cancer cases during the pandemic. The number of observed cases was extracted from the registry database. Simple linear regression analysis was used to predict the expected number of incident cancer cases in 2020 and the age-standardized incidence rate based on registry data from the preceding ten years (2010-2019). In 2020, the registered number of incident female breast cancer cases decreased by 12% [SIR 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.88-0.92, observed: 1,848, expected: 2,101], resulting in an IRD of -6.3 per 100 K. The number of registered cervical cancers decreased by 15% (SIR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.73-0.98, observed: 181, expected: 213), with an IRD of -0.8 per 100 K. For colorectal cancer, there was a 16% decrease in new cases among females (SIR 0.84, 95% CI: 0.78-0.90) and a 15% decrease among males (SIR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.80-0.91), resulting in IRDs of -3.04 and -5.29 per 100K, respectively. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a significant, 15% decrease in newly diagnosed screening-detectable cancer cases in 2020. Further studies are needed to investigate the impact of delayed cancer diagnoses on stage at diagnosis and survival rates.

MRI of the Lactating Breast.

The breasts undergo marked physiologic changes during lactation that can make conventional imaging evaluation with mammography and US challenging. MRI can be a valuable diagnostic aid to differentiate physiologic and benign processes from malignancy in patients who are lactating. In addition, MRI may allow more accurate delineation of disease involvement than does conventional imaging and assists in locoregional staging, screening of the contralateral breast, assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and surgical planning. Although the American College of Radiology recommends against patients undergoing contrast-enhanced MRI during pregnancy because of fetal safety concerns, contrast-enhanced MRI is safe during lactation. As more women delay childbearing, the incidence of pregnancy-associated breast cancer (PABC) and breast cancer in lactating women beyond the 1st year after pregnancy is increasing. Thus, MRI is increasingly being performed in lactating women for diagnostic evaluation and screening of patients at high risk. PABC is associated with a worse prognosis than that of non-PABCs, with delays in diagnosis contributing to an increased likelihood of advanced-stage disease at diagnosis. Familiarity with the MRI features of the lactating breast and the appearance of various pathologic conditions is essential to avoid diagnostic pitfalls and prevent delays in cancer diagnosis and treatment. The authors review clinical indications for breast MRI during lactation, describe characteristic features of the lactating breast at MRI, and compare MRI features of a spectrum of benign and malignant breast abnormalities. ©RSNA, 2024 Test Your Knowledge questions for this article are available in the supplemental material. See the invited commentary by Chikarmane in this issue.

Impact of the Sars-Cov-2 outbreak on the initial clinical presentation of new solid cancer diagnoses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic might have delayed cancer diagnosis and management. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the initial tumor stage of new cancer diagnoses before and after the pandemic.MethodsWe systematically reviewed articles that compared the tumor stage of new solid cancer diagnoses before and after the initial pandemic waves. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis to compare the rate of metastatic tumors and the distribution of stages at diagnosis. Subgroup analyses were performed by primary tumor site and by country.ResultsFrom 2,013 studies published between January 2020 and April 2022, we included 58 studies with 109,996 patients. The rate of metastatic tumors was higher after the COVID-19 outbreak than before (pooled OR: 1.29 (95% CI, 1.06-1.57), I2: 89% (95% CI, 86-91)). For specific cancers, common ORs reached statistical significance for breast (OR: 1.51 (95% CI 1.07-2.12)) and gynecologic (OR: 1.51 (95% CI 1.04-2.18)) cancers, but not for other cancer types. According to countries, common OR (95% CI) reached statistical significance only for Italy: 1.55 (1.01-2.39) and Spain:1.14 (1.02-1.29). Rates were comparable for stage I-II versus III-IV in studies for which that information was available, and for stages I-II versus stage III in studies that did not include metastatic patients.ConclusionsDespite inter-study heterogeneity, our meta-analysis showed a higher rate of metastatic tumors at diagnosis after the pandemic. The burden of social distancing policies might explain those results, as patients may have delayed seeking care.

The impact of COVID-19 on 2020 monthly incidence trends of primary brain and other CNS tumors.

To mitigate disease spread, restrictions implemented in the United States surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic created an environment that led to delays in cancer diagnosis. The data needed to accurately analyze the impact of the pandemic on brain and CNS tumor incidence has not been available until now. Utilizing incidence data from the Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States (CBTRUS) we analyzed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary brain and other CNS tumor incidence for the first year of the pandemic. Monthly age-adjusted incidence rates and incidence trends for 2019 and 2020 were determined for age at diagnosis, sex, race, ethnicity, diagnostic confirmation, behavior, tumor histopathology, and county-level urbanization. Monthly incidence rate ratios comparing 2020 and 2019 were evaluated for the same factors. Overall, there was a notable decrease in incidence rates in March-May 2020 when compared to 2019. These decreases were driven by nonmalignant tumors, with a 50% incidence decrease between March 2020 and 2019. Individuals who were Black had a larger incidence decrease in early 2020 than individuals who were White. Radiographically confirmed tumors saw larger incidence decreases than histologically confirmed tumors. There were no changes in monthly incidence of glioblastoma in 2020 compared to 2019. These data provide evidence that disruptions in medical care, such as governmental and health care mandates, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an overall decreased incidence of primary brain tumors in early 2020.

What would primary care practitioners do differently after a delayed cancer diagnosis? Learning lessons from their experiences

Objective Diagnosis of cancer is challenging in primary care due to the low incidence of cancer cases in primary care practice. A prolonged diagnostic interval may be due to doctor, patient or system factors, or may be due to the characteristics of the cancer itself. The objective of this study was to learn from Primary Care Physicians’ (PCP) experiences of incidents when they had failed to think of, or act on, a cancer diagnosis. Design A qualitative, online survey eliciting PCP narratives. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. Setting and subjects A primary care study, with narratives from 159 PCPs in 23 European countries. Main outcome measures PCPs’ narratives on the question ‘If you saw this patient with cancer presenting in the same way today, what would you do differently? Results The main themes identified were: thinking broadly; improvement in communication and clinical management; use of other available resources and ‘I wouldn’t do anything differently’. Conclusion (Implications) To achieve more timely cancer diagnosis, PCPs need to provide a long-term, holistic and active approach with effective communication, and to ensure shared decision-making, follow-up and continuing re-assessment of the patients’ clinical conditions.