11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Comorbidity and the diagnosis of symptomatic-but-as-yet-undiagnosed cancer

      editorial

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Multimorbidity is the norm of modern medicine. We know that multimorbidity affects healthcare use and outcomes, 1 but we don’t know how the presence of pre-existing conditions can influence the diagnosis of new illness. Cancer typically affects older patients, and presents with symptoms of relatively low specificity that are shared between different conditions. Timely diagnosis is important, 2 , 3 but missed or delayed diagnoses are common. 4 Might the presence of chronic conditions help us understand why the diagnosis of patients with symptomatic-but-as-yet-undiagnosed cancer is delayed? Carney et al, in this issue of the BJGP, shed light on this complex question in the context of the diagnosis of bladder cancer. 5 MECHANISMS BY WHICH COMORBIDITY MAY INFLUENCE THE DIAGNOSIS OF CANCER Pre-existing chronic conditions may act as ‘competing demands’ that prevent the investigation of new presenting symptoms or offer ‘alternative explanations’ for them. 6 , 7 For cancers of specific organs or systems, different morbidities can be categorised into those with unrelated symptomatology and those with shared symptoms. For patients with symptomatic-but-as-yet-undiagnosed bladder cancer, Carney et al consider that previous urinary tract infections, prostatitis, and nephrolithiasis can offer alternative explanations for their symptoms. Similar considerations may apply to other ‘dyads’ of specific cancer sites and chronic conditions, for example, lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or colorectal cancer and inflammatory bowel disease. It can be difficult to distinguish between a genuinely pre-existing morbidity and a cancer initially misdiagnosed as a chronic condition. The study by Carney et al highlights that when using electronic health records, careful consideration is needed regarding the time when morbidities were first recorded, ideally handling the months before the diagnosis of cancer differently from earlier periods. Such analyses can also indicate possible opportunities for earlier diagnosis in subgroups of comorbid patients who are at greater risk of repeat presentations with cancer-related symptoms before an emergency cancer diagnosis. 8 Chronic conditions offering ‘alternative explanations’ were found to be associated with a higher risk of diagnosis of advanced stage bladder cancer. 5 The study by Carney et al did not directly examine the ‘surveillance effect’ hypothesis, where chronic disease monitoring for underlying morbidities might lead to earlier detection of new illness through more frequent contacts with healthcare professionals. 6 , 8 – 10 However, some of the study findings would be consistent with such a mechanism. It is important to explore if the association between morbidity and stage at diagnosis is causal. And, if so, how it may be mediated through management decisions and intervals to testing. Given the possible mechanisms involved and that morbidity-specific effects might vary in their size and direction by cancer site, symptoms, and patient characteristics, future studies will require large patient numbers. The study by Carney et al represents a welcome addition to the evidence base. 6 – 8 , 11 Most previous studies lacked a clear hypothesis on responsible mechanisms and did not consider the type of presenting symptoms or underlying conditions. They often defined morbidity only using summary measures, such as the Charlson Comorbidity Index, and used secondary care data, which will underestimate the true breadth and prevalence of certain morbidities. 6 FUTURE DIRECTIONS Focusing on specific cancer sites and chronic conditions helps illuminate the relationship between morbidity, the diagnostic process, and its outcomes. Because many patients will have multiple chronic conditions, future research should explore if effects vary across different morbidity clusters. 1 Encompassing prescription history into such inquiries is also important, as certain pharmacological treatments for managing chronic diseases, such as aspirin, 12 can influence cancer incidence, and possibly cancer aggressiveness. Large longitudinal studies based on electronic health records offer promise for shedding light in this complex area. Examining different steps along the diagnostic pathway is essential for developing appropriate interventions, bearing in mind that morbidities can influence timely access to appropriate investigations even after referral to hospital services. 13 Cognitive and emotional factors may influence decisions on use of invasive investigations in patients with serious cardiac or respiratory morbidities. Comorbidities may also affect patients’ symptom appraisal and help-seeking behaviour. 9 , 10 When assessing trade-offs between risks and benefits, preferences and tolerance of uncertainty, by both patients and doctors, can be important; therefore, greater understanding of shared decision- making in the management of patients with multimorbidity is needed. Risk-stratification tools that take chronic morbidities and their treatments into account can be developed, enhancing currently available generic instruments, to support clinicians in the decision-making process when evaluating the possibility of cancer in symptomatic patients with multiple morbidities.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Is increased time to diagnosis and treatment in symptomatic cancer associated with poorer outcomes? Systematic review

          Background: It is unclear whether more timely cancer diagnosis brings favourable outcomes, with much of the previous evidence, in some cancers, being equivocal. We set out to determine whether there is an association between time to diagnosis, treatment and clinical outcomes, across all cancers for symptomatic presentations. Methods: Systematic review of the literature and narrative synthesis. Results: We included 177 articles reporting 209 studies. These studies varied in study design, the time intervals assessed and the outcomes reported. Study quality was variable, with a small number of higher-quality studies. Heterogeneity precluded definitive findings. The cancers with more reports of an association between shorter times to diagnosis and more favourable outcomes were breast, colorectal, head and neck, testicular and melanoma. Conclusions: This is the first review encompassing many cancer types, and we have demonstrated those cancers in which more evidence of an association between shorter times to diagnosis and more favourable outcomes exists, and where it is lacking. We believe that it is reasonable to assume that efforts to expedite the diagnosis of symptomatic cancer are likely to have benefits for patients in terms of improved survival, earlier-stage diagnosis and improved quality of life, although these benefits vary between cancers.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effects of regular aspirin on long-term cancer incidence and metastasis: a systematic comparison of evidence from observational studies versus randomised trials.

            Long-term follow-up of randomised trials of aspirin in prevention of vascular events showed that daily aspirin reduced the incidence of colorectal cancer and several other cancers and reduced metastasis. However, statistical power was inadequate to establish effects on less common cancers and on cancers in women. Observational studies could provide this information if results can be shown to be reliable. We therefore compared effects of aspirin on risk and outcome of cancer in observational studies versus randomised trials. For this systematic review, we searched for case-control and cohort studies published from 1950 to 2011 that reported associations between aspirin use and risk or outcome of cancer. Associations were pooled across studies by meta-analysis and stratified by duration, dose, and frequency of aspirin use and by stage of cancer. We compared associations from observational studies with the effect of aspirin on 20-year risk of cancer death and on metastasis in the recent reports of randomised trials. In case-control studies, regular use of aspirin was associated with reduced risk of colorectal cancer (pooled odds ratio [OR] 0·62, 95% CI 0·58-0·67, p(sig)<0·0001, 17 studies), with little heterogeneity (p(het)=0·13) in effect between studies, and good agreement with the effect of daily aspirin use on 20-year risk of death due to colorectal cancer from the randomised trials (OR 0·58, 95% CI 0·44-0·78, p(sig)=0·0002, p(het)=0·45). Similarly consistent reductions were seen in risks of oesophageal, gastric, biliary, and breast cancer. Overall, estimates of effect of aspirin on individual cancers in case-control studies were highly correlated with those in randomised trials (r(2)=0·71, p=0·0006), with largest effects on risk of gastrointestinal cancers (case-control studies, OR 0·62, 95% CI 0·55-0·70, p<0·0001, 41 studies; randomised trials, OR 0·54, 95% CI 0·42-0·70, p<0·0001). Estimates of effects in cohort studies were similar when analyses were stratified by frequency and duration of aspirin use, were based on updated assessments of use during follow-up, and were appropriately adjusted for baseline characteristics. Although fewer observational studies stratified analyses by the stage of cancer at diagnosis, regular use of aspirin was associated with a reduced proportion of cancers with distant metastasis (OR 0·69, 95% CI 0·57-0·83, p(sig)<0·0001, p(het)=0·89, five studies), but not with any reduction in regional spread (OR 0·98, 95% CI 0·88-1·09, p(sig)=0·71, p(het)=0·88, seven studies), consistent again with the findings in randomised trials. Observational studies show that regular use of aspirin reduces the long-term risk of several cancers and the risk of distant metastasis. Results of methodologically rigorous studies are consistent with those obtained from randomised controlled trials, but sensitivity is particularly dependent on appropriately detailed recording and analysis of aspirin use. None. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found

              Comorbid chronic diseases and cancer diagnosis: disease-specific effects and underlying mechanisms

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Principal Clinical Research Fellow
                Role: Professor of Cancer Epidemiology
                Journal
                Br J Gen Pract
                Br J Gen Pract
                bjgp
                bjgp
                The British Journal of General Practice
                Royal College of General Practitioners
                0960-1643
                1478-5242
                September 2020
                19 August 2020
                19 August 2020
                : 70
                : 698
                : e598-e599
                Affiliations
                Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, University College London, London, UK.
                ECHO Group, University College London, London, UK.
                Author notes
                ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Georgios Lyratzopoulos Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London WC1E 7HB, UK. Email: y.lyratzopoulos@ 123456ucl.ac.uk
                Article
                10.3399/bjgp20X712193
                7449439
                32855148
                e3be466f-a786-410b-885c-2b39b207e036
                ©The Authors

                This article is Open Access: CC BY 4.0 licence ( http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/).

                History
                Categories
                Editorials

                Comments

                Comment on this article