Delays in the Cancer Pathway from Symptom Onset to Initiation of Treatment – A Retrospective Study in Patients with Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Cancer patients may experience significant delays along the clinical pathway from the onset of symptoms to initiation of treatment. Few studies have examined the nature or the extent of these delays in patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL). Method: London Regional Cancer Program (LRCP) is a tertiary care centre with a referral base of 1.5 million people in Southwestern Ontario. In this study, the charts of all patients with newly diagnosed NHL that were seen at the LRCP between Jan 1 – Dec 31, 2004 were reviewed retrospectively in order to measure and document the amount of time spent at each stage of the cancer pathway. Key time intervals from symptom onset to initiation of treatment were recorded. Associations between the waiting times and clinical/sociodemographic factors were also explored. Results: The charts of 116 patients were reviewed. The median overall waiting time from symptom onset to the initiation of treatment was 137 days. Median waiting time for each interval in the pathway were as follows: from symptom onset to first visit with primary care physician: 17 days; from first visit with physician to surgical consultation: 28 days; from surgical consult to the definitive biopsy: 13 days; from definitive biopsy to pathological diagnosis: 10 days; from pathological diagnosis to hematology referral: −5 days; from hematology referral to hematology consultation: 8 days; from hematology consult to completion of staging: 8 days; and from final staging to initiation of treatment: 5 days. The time from symptom onset to treatment initiation varied somewhat by clinical factors such as gender, age, and presence of B-symptoms. Patients with B-symptoms experienced shorter delays (119 d) than patients without B-symptoms (154 d). Male patients had shorter pathway times (113 d) compared to female patients (138 d). Patients at the extremes of age (age 20–29 & age >80) tended to have shorter delays than patients between the ages of 30–79 (ages 20–29: 60d, age >80: 85d, ages 30–79:137 d). Whether patients were referred from London vs. from another municipality did not appear to influence delays (137 d). Conclusions: NHL patients are experiencing significant delays in the assessment and treatment of their cancer. Most prior studies have focused primarily on delays from the point of referral to a cancer specialist to initiation of treatment. The results from our study suggest that a significant proportion of the patient’s clinical path is being spent at the prediagnosis phase (from the time of first physician visit until pathological diagnosis, 57 days) as opposed to from the time of diagnosis until the initiation of treatment (18 days). Efforts to reduce delays at both the pre- and post-diagnosis phases of the patient path may reduce patient anxiety with subsequent improvements in quality of life. The clinical impact of these delays on patient outcome is uncertain and requires further study.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».