Evidence Hub

Delays in the diagnosis of oesophagogastric cancer: a consecutive case series

Martin IG, Young S, Sue-Ling H, Johnston D

BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 1997

115 participants · 66 citations

Abstract

Objectives: To examine the time taken to diagnose oesophageal or gastric cancer, identify the source of delay, and assess its clinical importance.

Design: Study of all new patients presenting to one surgical unit with carcinoma of the oesophagus or stomach.

Setting: University department of surgery in a large teaching hospital.

Subjects: 115 consecutive patients (70 men, mean age 66 years) with carcinoma of the oesophagus (27) or stomach (88).

Main outcome measures: Interval from the onset of symptoms to histological diagnosis, final pathological stage of the tumour, and whether potentially curative resection was possible.

Results: The median delay from first symptoms to histological diagnosis was 17 weeks (range 1 to 168 weeks). 25% (29/115) of patients had a delay of over 28 weeks (median 39 weeks). Total delay was made up of the following components: delay in consulting a doctor (29%), delay in referral (23%), delay in being seen at hospital (16%), and delay in establishing the diagnosis at the hospital (32%). No relation was found between delay in diagnosis and tumour stage in patients with gastric cancer, but for oesophageal cancer those with stage I and II disease were diagnosed within 7 weeks compared with 21 weeks (P < 0.02) for those with stage III and IV disease.

Conclusions: Long delays still occur in the diagnosis of patients with cancer of the stomach or oesophagus. Streamlined referral and investigation pathways are needed if patients with gastric and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 115 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free