Download View web only data 248KB

Appendix Table A. Studies describing timeliness of care, the relationship between timeliness and one or more outcomes, and/or an
intervention to improve timeliness of care in lung cancer.
Author
Country
Study
period
Dransfield et al. [1]
2006
Finlay et al. [2]
2002
US
VA facility
US
1999-2003
Liu et al. [3]
2004
Quarterman et al. [4]
2003
Riedel et al. [5]
2006
US
Hawaii
US
VA facility
US
VA facility
1995-2001
Bardell et al. [6]
2006
Johnston et al. [7]
2004
Liberman et al. [8]
2006
Simunovic et al. [9]
2005
Canada
1984-2000
Canada
1992-2000
Canada
1993-2002
Canada
1993-2000
Billing et al. [10]
1996
UK
1993
Boszuk et al. [11]
2001
Campbell et al. [12]
2002
UK
1998
Scotland
1995-1996
Comber et al. [13]
2005
Ireland
1999
1992-1996
1989-1999
1999-2003
n
Advanced
stage*
Cell type†
180
10%‡§
NSCLC
42
73%
Retrospective review of patients diagnosed at single
center, identified through a cancer registry.
Retrospective review of stage I and II surgical patients
treated at single center.
Retrospective comparison of patients managed through a
multidisciplinary clinic and patients managed through
conventional subspecialty referral patterns.
CANADA
Retrospective review of patients undergoing surgical
resection, identified through cancer registry.
Retrospective review of patients referred for radiotherapy,
identified through cancer registry.
Retrospective review of surgical patients treated at single
center.
Retrospective review of surgical patients identified
through hospital discharge and insurance databases.
UK and IRELAND
Retrospective review of patients diagnosed at single
center.
1394
70%
82% NSCLC
16% SCLC
2% Other
NSCLC
84
0%‡
NSCLC
345
54%
81% NSCLC
11% SCLC
8% Other
4366
NR
NSCLC
2725
79%
NR
256
25%‡
NSCLC
7716
NR
NR
38
30%‡
Retrospective review of patients diagnosed at single
center.
Retrospective review of patients diagnosed in region,
random sample identified through cancer registry.
189
76%
82% NSCLC
3% SCLC
16% Other
NSCLC
1314
65%
Retrospective review of patients diagnosed in Ireland,
identified through cancer registry.
NR
NR
Study design
UNITED STATES
Retrospective review of patients managed through a lung
mass clinic.
Retrospective case-control study of Asian patients treated
at single center.
63% NSCLC
14% SCLC
23% Other
NR
Corner et al. [14]
2005
UK
NR
Retrospective review of patients managed at two cancer
centers.
22
68%
Cullen et al. [15]
2004
Ireland
2001-2002
Retrospective review of patients treated at single center.
118
81%
Davison et al. [16]
2004
Deegan et al. [17]
1998
Devbhandari et al.
[18] 2007
UK
2000-2001
62
NR
UK
1996
92
NR
NR
UK
2003-2004
Retrospective review of patients presented during
teleconference multidisciplinary meetings.
Prospective review of multidisciplinary team at single
center.
Prospective review of patients managed at single center.
68% NSCLC
18% SCLC
14% Other
78% NSCLC
14% SCLC
8% Other
NR
247
78%
Dische et al. [19]
1996
Fergusson et al. [20]
1996
UK
1993-1994
484
NR
Scotland
1991-1992
Retrospective review of patients undergoing radiotherapy
at 14 centers.
Prospective review of patients managed by
multidisciplinary team.
622
NR
Gregor et al. [21]
2001
Scotland
1995
Retrospective review of patients identified through cancer
registry.
3855
64%
Kesson et al. [22]
1998
Scotland
1991-1992
Retrospective review of patients in single city, random
sample identified through cancer registry.
262
NR
Krishnasamy et al.
[23] 2001
UK,
Ireland
1995
Retrospective review of patients identified through cancer
registry, able to return completed questionnaire.
209
NR
Laroche et al. [24]
1998
UK
1995
275
20%‡§
Leary et al. [25]
2005
Lee et al.[26]
2002
Lewis et al. [27]
2005
UK
2001-2004
NR
NR
UK
1997-1998
90
NR
NR
UK
1999-2002
Randomized trial of centralized diagnostic process for
patients with suspected lung cancer, evaluated at single
center
Retrospective audit of patients treated at single
cardiothoracic center, followed by nurse-led intervention.
Retrospective review of patients with possible lung
cancer admitted to single facility.
Retrospective review of patients referred to single
specialty facility.
69% NSCLC
13% SCLC
18% Other
NSCLC
Other
62% NSCLC
20% SCLC
18% Other
58% NSCLC
24% SCLC
18% Other
53% NSCLC
14% SCLC
33% Other
65% NCSLC
28% SCLC
7% Other
66% NSCLC
10% SCLC
24% Other
NR
1044
65%
Lim et al. [28]
1999
UK
1996
Retrospective review of patients referred for chest x-ray
at single facility, found to have a mass concerning for
malignancy.
27
NR
80% NSCLC
15% SCLC
5% Other
NR
Melling et al. [29]
2002
UK
1993
Retrospective review of patients in single region,
identified through cancer registry.
362
NR
51% NSCLC
17% SCLC
32% Other
51% NSCLC
14% SCLC
35% Other
NR
Murray et al. [30]
2003
UK
1998-2001
88
60%‡
Neal et al. [31]
2007
O’Rourke et al. [32]
2000
Spurgeon et al. [33]
2000
UK
2000-2001
303
50%‡
UK
1999
29
52%
UK
1997
767
NR
96% NSCLC
3% Other
NR
Aragoneses et al.
[34] 2002
Bjerager et al. [35]
2006
Buccheri et al. [36]
2004
Spain
1993-1997
1082
0%‡
NSCLC
Denmark
2003
84
NR
NR
Italy
1989-2002
Randomized trial of centralized diagnostic process for
patients with suspected lung cancer, evaluated at single
center.
Retrospective review of patients diagnosed within a
single National Health Service trust.
Prospective review of patients referred for radiotherapy at
single center.
Retrospective review of patients identified through acute
care hospitals.
EUROPEAN UNION (excluding the UK and Ireland)
Retrospective review of stage I and II surgical patients,
identified through cancer registry.
Retrospective review of patients diagnosed in single
county, identified through county registers.
Retrospective review of patients diagnosed at single
center.
1277
77%
Christensen et al.
[37] 1997
Koyi et al. [38]
2002
Denmark
1994-1995
172
60%
Sweden
1997-1998
Retrospective review of patients admitted for surgery at
single center.
Prospective review of patients diagnosed at single center.
68% NSCLC
11% SCLC
21% Other
NR
134
79%
Leo et al. [39]
2007
Maansson et al. [40]
1999
Myrdal et al. [41]
2004
Pita-Fernandez et al.
[42] 2003
Ringbaek et al. [43]
1999
France
2003-2004
344
74%
Sweden
1980-1984
39
NR
NR
Sweden
1995-1999
466
60%
NSCLC
Spain
1997-1998
378
60%‡
Denmark
1991-1993
Prospective review of patients managed by a single
multidisciplinary team.
Retrospective review of patients in single county,
identified through cancer registry.
Retrospective review of patients diagnosed in two
healthcare regions.
Retrospective review of patients diagnosed at single
center.
Retrospective review of patients diagnosed at single
center.
52% NSCLC
14%SCLC
34% Other
NR
467
45%§
Salomaa et al. [44]
2005
Finland
2001
Retrospective review of patients diagnosed at single
center.
132
67%‡||
Strojan et al. [45]
Slovenia
1981-1993
Retrospective review of patients treated with radiotherapy
48
65%
88% NSCLC
12% SCLC
58% NSCLC
12% SCLC
30% Other
69% NSCLC
19% SCLC
12% Other
58% NSCLC
1997
for superior sulcus tumors at single center.
Ichinohe et al. [46]
2006
Kanashiki et al. [47]
2003
Japan
1999-2004
Japan
1991-2001
Kashiwabara et al.
[48] 2003
Japan
1993-2001
Kashiwabara et al.
[49] 2002
Japan
1993-2000
Annakkaya et al.
[50]
2007
Conron et al. [51]
2007
Turkey
2002-2005
Australia
Loh et al. [52]
2006
Ozlu et al. [53]
2004
JAPAN
Retrospective review of patients referred to single facility
for radiotherapy for Pancoast tumor.
Retrospective review of patients diagnosed at single
center, detected by mass-screening.
2% SCLC
40% Other
48
92%
96% NSCLC
4% SCLC
94% NSCLC
4% SCLC
2% Other
92% NSCLC
8% SCLC
83
49%
Retrospective review of patients detected by massscreening, including patients who did not consult
physician for abnormal x-ray.
Retrospective review of patients detected by massscreening, including patients with tumors missed on
screening one year earlier.
OTHER COUNTRIES
Prospective review of patients treated at single center.
198
43%
143
34%
92% NSCLC
8% SCLC
103
78%
74% NSCLC
26% SCLC
2002-2004
Prospective review of patients managed through a single
multidisciplinary clinic.
257
49%‡
Malaysia
1996-2004
122
93%
Turkey
1992-1999
Retrospective review of patients managed at two specialty
hospitals.
Retrospective review of patients referred to two specialty
hospitals.
84% NSCLC
5% SCLC
11% Other
NSCLC
226
65%
79% NSCLC
16% SCLC
6% Other
NR = Not Reported.
*Percentage of patients with advanced stage among patients with lung cancer and stage recorded. Defined as stage III or IV, or
“regional spread” or “distant spread”, or “inoperable”. Patients with benign disease were not included in denominator. Not all
patients had stage recorded. Not all columns total 100% due to rounding. Patients were clinically staged unless noted otherwise.
†“Other” includes patients with a clinical diagnosis of lung cancer but no tissue diagnosis.
‡Pathologic stage reported.
§Percentage of operated patients only.
||Includes only Stage IIIB and IV.
Table A References
1
Dransfield MT, Lock BJ, Garver RI, Jr. Improving the lung cancer resection rate in the
US Department of Veterans Affairs Health System. Clin Lung Cancer 2006;7:268-72.
2
Finlay GA, Joseph B, Rodrigues CR, et al. Advanced presentation of lung cancer in
Asian immigrants: a case-control study. Chest 2002;122:1938-43.
3
Liu DM, Kwee SA. Demographic, treatment, and survival patterns for Native Hawaiians
with lung cancer treated at a community medical center from 1995 to 2001. Pac Health
Dialog 2004;11:139-45.
4
Quarterman RL, McMillan A, Ratcliffe MB, et al. Effect of preoperative delay on
prognosis for patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc
Surg 2003;125:108-13.
5
Riedel RF, Wang X, McCormack M, et al. Impact of a multidisciplinary thoracic
oncology clinic on the timeliness of care. J Thorac Oncol 2006;1:692-6.
6
Bardell T, Belliveau P, Kong W, et al. Waiting times for cancer surgery in Ontario: 19842000. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2006;18:401-9.
7
Johnston GM, MacGarvie VL, Elliott D, et al. Radiotherapy wait times for patients with a
diagnosis of invasive cancer, 1992-2000. Clin Invest Med 2004;27:142-56.
8
Liberman M, Liberman D, Sampalis JS, et al. Delays to surgery in non-small-cell lung
cancer. Can J Surg 2006;49:31-6.
9
Simunovic M, Theriault ME, Paszat L, et al. Using administrative databases to measure
waiting times for patients undergoing major cancer surgery in Ontario, 1993-2000. Can J
Surg 2005;48:137-42.
10
Billing JS, Wells FC. Delays in the diagnosis and surgical treatment of lung cancer.
Thorax 1996;51:903-6.
11
Bozcuk H, Martin C. Does treatment delay affect survival in non-small cell lung cancer?
A retrospective analysis from a single UK centre. Lung Cancer 2001;34:243-52.
12
Campbell NC, Elliott AM, Sharp L, et al. Impact of deprivation and rural residence on
treatment of colorectal and lung cancer. Br J Cancer 2002;87:585-90.
13
Comber H, Cronin DP, Deady S, et al. Delays in treatment in the cancer services: impact
on cancer stage and survival. Ir Med J 2005;98:238-9.
14
Corner J, Hopkinson J, Fitzsimmons D, et al. Is late diagnosis of lung cancer inevitable?
Interview study of patients' recollections of symptoms before diagnosis. Thorax
2005;60:314-9.
15
Cullen JP, Glynn C, Murtagh E, et al. Auditing a new lung cancer service. Ir Med J
2004;97:281-3.
16
Davison AG, Eraut CD, Haque AS, et al. Telemedicine for multidisciplinary lung cancer
meetings. J Telemed Telecare 2004;10:140-3.
17
Deegan PC, Heath L, Brunskill J, et al. Reducing waiting times in lung cancer. J R Coll
Physicians Lond 1998;32:339-43.
18
Devbhandari MP, Soon SY, Quennell P, et al. UK waiting time targets in lung cancer
treatment: are they achievable? Results of a prospective tracking study. J Cardiothorac
Surg 2007;2:5.
19
Dische S, Gibson D, Parmar M, et al. Time course from first symptom to treatment in
patients with non-small cell lung cancer referred for radiotherapy: a report by the
CHART Steering Committee. Thorax 1996;51:1262-5.
20
Fergusson RJ, Gregor A, Dodds R, et al. Management of lung cancer in South East
Scotland. Thorax 1996;51:569-74.
21
Gregor A, Thomson CS, Brewster DH, et al. Management and survival of patients with
lung cancer in Scotland diagnosed in 1995: results of a national population based study.
Thorax 2001;56:212-7.
22
Kesson E, Bucknall CE, McAlpine LG, et al. Lung cancer--management and outcome in
Glasgow, 1991-92. Br J Cancer 1998;78:1391-5.
23
Krishnasamy M, Wilkie E, Haviland J. Lung cancer health care needs assessment:
patients' and informal carers' responses to a national mail questionnaire survey. Palliat
Med 2001;15:213-27.
24
Laroche C, Wells F, Coulden R, et al. Improving surgical resection rate in lung cancer.
Thorax 1998;53:445-9.
25
Leary A, Corrigan P. Redesign of thoracic surgical services within a cancer networkusing an oncology focus to inform change. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2005;9:74-8.
26
Lee J, Marchbank A, Goldstraw P. Implementation of the British Thoracic Society
recommendations for organising the care of patients with lung cancer: the surgeon's
perspective. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2002;84:304-8.
27
Lewis NR, Le Jeune I, Baldwin DR. Under utilisation of the 2-week wait initiative for
lung cancer by primary care and its effect on the urgent referral pathway. Br J Cancer
2005;93:905-8.
28
Lim WS, Macfarlane JT, Deegan PC, et al. How do general practitioners respond to
reports of abnormal chest X-rays? J R Soc Med 1999;92:446-9.
29
Melling PP, Hatfield AC, Muers MF, et al. Lung cancer referral patterns in the former
Yorkshire region of the UK. Br J Cancer 2002;86:36-42.
30
Murray PV, O'Brien ME, Sayer R, et al. The pathway study: results of a pilot feasibility
study in patients suspected of having lung carcinoma investigated in a conventional chest
clinic setting compared to a centralised two-stop pathway. Lung Cancer 2003;42:283-90.
31
Neal RD, Allgar VL, Ali N, et al. Stage, survival and delays in lung, colorectal, prostate
and ovarian cancer: comparison between diagnostic routes. Br J Gen Pract 2007;57:2129.
32
O'Rourke N, Edwards R. Lung cancer treatment waiting times and tumour growth. Clin
Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2000;12:141-4.
33
Spurgeon P, Barwell F, Kerr D. Waiting times for cancer patients in England after
general practitioners' referrals: retrospective national survey. BMJ 2000;320:838-9.
34
Aragoneses FG, Moreno N, Leon P, et al. Influence of delays on survival in the surgical
treatment of bronchogenic carcinoma. Lung Cancer 2002;36:59-63.
35
Bjerager M, Palshof T, Dahl R, et al. Delay in diagnosis of lung cancer in general
practice. Br J Gen Pract 2006;56:863-8.
36
Buccheri G, Ferrigno D. Lung cancer: clinical presentation and specialist referral time.
Eur Respir J 2004;24:898-904.
37
Christensen ED, Harvald T, Jendresen M, et al. The impact of delayed diagnosis of lung
cancer on the stage at the time of operation. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1997;12:880-4.
38
Koyi H, Hillerdal G, Branden E. Patient's and doctors' delays in the diagnosis of chest
tumors. Lung Cancer 2002;35:53-7.
39
Leo F, Venissac N, Poudenx M, et al. Multidisciplinary management of lung cancer: how
to test its efficacy? J Thorac Oncol 2007;2:69-72.
40
Mansson J, Bjorkelund C, Hultborn R. Symptom pattern and diagnostic work-up of
malignancy at first symptom presentation as related to level of care. A retrospective study
from the primary health care centre area of Kungsbacka, Sweden. Neoplasma
1999;46:93-9.
41
Myrdal G, Lambe M, Hillerdal G, et al. Effect of delays on prognosis in patients with
non-small cell lung cancer. Thorax 2004;59:45-9.
42
Pita-Fernandez S, Montero-Martinez C, Pertega-Diaz S, et al. Relationship between
delayed diagnosis and the degree of invasion and survival in lung cancer. J Clin
Epidemiol 2003;56:820-5.
43
Ringbaek T, Borgeskov S, Lange P, et al. Diagnostic and therapeutic process and
prognosis in suspected lung cancer. Scand Cardiovasc J 1999;33:337-43.
44
Salomaa ER, Sallinen S, Hiekkanen H, et al. Delays in the diagnosis and treatment of
lung cancer. Chest 2005;128:2282-8.
45
Strojan P, Debevec M, Kovac V. Superior sulcus tumor (SST): management at the
Institute of Oncology in Ljubljana, Slovenia, 1981-1994. Lung Cancer 1997;17:249-59.
46
Ichinohe K, Takahashi M, Tooyama N. Delay by patients and doctors in treatment of
Pancoast tumor. Wien Klin Wochenschr 2006;118:405-10.
47
Kanashiki M, Satoh H, Ishikawa H, et al. Time from finding abnormality on massscreening to final diagnosis of lung cancer. Oncol Rep 2003;10:649-52.
48
Kashiwabara K, Koshi S, Itonaga K, et al. Outcome in patients with lung cancer found on
lung cancer mass screening roentgenograms, but who did not subsequently consult a
doctor. Lung Cancer 2003;40:67-72.
49
Kashiwabara K, Koshi S, Ota K, et al. Outcome in patients with lung cancer found
retrospectively to have had evidence of disease on past lung cancer mass screening
roentgenograms. Lung Cancer 2002;35:237-41.
50
Annakkaya AN, Arbak P, Balbay O, et al. Effect of symptom-to-treatment interval on
prognosis in lung cancer. Tumori 2007;93:61-7.
51
Conron M, Phuah S, Steinfort D, et al. Analysis of multidisciplinary lung cancer practice.
Intern Med J 2007;37:18-25.
52
Loh LC, Chan LY, Tan RY, et al. Effect of time delay on survival in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer--a Malaysian study. Asia Pac J Public Health 2006;18:69-71.
53
Ozlu T, Bulbul Y, Oztuna F, et al. Time course from first symptom to the treatment of
lung cancer in the Eastern Black Sea Region of Turkey. Med Princ Pract 2004;13:211-4.