Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
The bowel cancer awareness campaign 'Be Clear on Cancer': sustained increased pressure on resources and over-accessed by higher social grades with no increase in cancer detected.AIM: To evaluate the impact of the national 'Be Clear on Cancer' bowel cancer reminder campaign on service and diagnosis at a single UK institution. Secondly, to evaluate the socio-economic background of patients referred before and after the reminder campaign compared with the regional demographic. METHOD: Suspected cancer 2-week wait patients in the 3 months precampaign, postcampaign and after the reminder campaign were included. Demographics, investigations and diagnosis were recorded. The postcode was used to allocate a National Readership Survey social grade. RESULTS: Three hundred and eighty-three referrals were received in the 3 months precampaign, 550 postcampaign and 470 postreminder campaign. There were significant increases in the monthly referral rates following the campaign (P <0.001 in both the post- and postreminder periods). Significantly more patients from social grades AB and C1C2 than expected from regional demographics were referred precampaign and after the reminder campaign (P < 0.001 in each case). There were no significant differences between the proportions of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer in the three study periods (P = 0.710). CONCLUSION: The 'Be Clear on Cancer' bowel cancer campaign has had a significant sustained impact on resources. It has failed to increase referrals among lower socio-economic grades, leading to an increase in 'worried well' referrals and no change in numbers, or the stage, of colorectal cancers diagnosed.
-
Does the character of the hospital of primary management influence outcomes in patients treated for presumed early stage endometrial cancer and atypical endometrial hyperplasia: a comparison of outcomes from a cancer unit and cancer centre.A retrospective study from 2015 to 2020 comparing overall survival (OS) outcomes of a cancer unit and centre for presumed early stage endometrial cancers is presented. Cancer centres manage these presumed early endometrial cancer (EC) in situations of complex co-morbidities, surgical challenges as well as their own local unit patients. Our analysis compares 138 patients at KMH (unit) and 282 patients at RDH (centre) on OS, patient demographics, grading histology and final histology. Patients with presumed early stage EC can be reassured regarding no difference in OS between the cancer unit and centre management (p = .05). However, rates of minimal access surgery were higher at the cancer centre compared to the unit (93.2% versus 68.1%). The rates of upstaged disease were 4% and 8.8% at the cancer unit and centre respectively (p = .096). Sentinel node biopsy and genomic assessment may change future thresholds for centre-level management due to rates of upstaged disease.Impact StatementWhat is already known on this subject? Presumed lower risk endometrial cancers (endometrioid grades 1 and 2) have a rate of occult nodal involvement of only 1.4%. The BGCS does not recommend lymphadenectomy for low-risk endometrial cancers. These low-risk endometrial cancers should be managed with a hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-ophrectomy via minimal access surgery. In view of the low rates of occult nodal involvement in low-risk endometrial cancer, surgery can be offered at a cancer unit.What do the results of this study add? Our study demonstrates there is no disadvantage in overall survival in the surgical management of presumed low-risk endometrial cancers at cancer units and centres. However, cancer centres have higher rates of minimal access to surgery despite managing a more elderly population. Our rates of upstaged disease of 4% and 8.8% at the cancer unit and centre indicate a potential benefit of pelvic lymph node assessment.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Sentinel lymph node biopsy does not have the surgical morbidity associated with systematic lymph node dissection. Therefore, when applied to presumed early stage endometrial cancer, there are potential changes in the threshold for centre-level management to improve overall survival.
-
Are people with mesothelioma who respond to the English Cancer Patient Experience Survey representative of the national mesothelioma population? A data comparison with cancer registry patients from the National Lung Cancer AuditIntroduction: More than 2,700 people are diagnosed with mesothelioma each year in the UK. Survival from mesothelioma is poor and to ensure service users' perspectives are incorporated in designing the most effective strategies to improve healthcare in England, the English Cancer Patient Experience Survey (CPES) is carried out annually in people diagnosed with cancer. We assessed whether the mesothelioma population responding to the English CPES is representative of the national mesothelioma population. Method(s): Data from all people in England from the National Cancer Registry defined as having an incident mesothelioma diagnosis (2009-2015) were included. Data were linked across multiple sources including CPES. Using multivariable logistic regression, clinical and sociodemographic characteristics were compared between CPES respondents with mesothelioma and all people with mesothelioma in England. Result(s): We identified 15,587 people diagnosed with mesothelioma, of which 1,597 (10.3%) were included in CPES. Adjusted odds ratios showed that representation in CPES decreased with older age, later stage, worse performance status, multiple comorbidities or emergency presentation at diagnosis. Gender was reasonably represented, although people with non-white ethnicity and from more deprived socioeconomic groups were underrepresented. lung cancer nurse specialist assessment was not associated with inclusion in CPES, however, having a lung cancer nurse specialist present at diagnosis was. Representation in CPES was highest for people who had chemo-radiotherapy (fully adjusted odds ratio 6.52 (95% confidence interval 5.34-7.96). Conclusion(s): Responses were included across all sociodemographic and clinical groups, but there was unbalanced representation when compared with the national mesothelioma population. Patients who do not receive anti-cancer treatment are particularly under-represented. It is important to consider the impact of person characteristics on CPES representation when using cancer experiences to plan service management. Copyright © 2022
