Determining the cancer diagnostic interval using administrative data in a cohort of patients with pancreatic cancer.

336 Background: Pancreatic cancer is a leading cause of cancer death, largely due to vague presenting symptoms and late stage at diagnosis. Population-based administrative data can be a valuable resource for studying the diagnostic interval. The objective of this study was to determine the first encounter in the diagnostic interval and to calculate that interval in a cohort of patients with pancreatic cancer using an empirical approach. Methods: This is a retrospective, cohort study of patients diagnosed with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) from 2007 – 2015 in Alberta, Canada. We used the Alberta Cancer Registry (ACR), physician billing claims, hospital discharge and emergency room visits to identify health encounters that occurred more frequently in the 3 months prior to diagnosis compared to those in the 3-24 months prior to diagnosis. We used statistical control charts to define the lookback period for each encounter category and identify the earliest encounter that represented the start of the diagnostic interval (index contact date). The end of the interval was the diagnosis date. Quantile regression was used to determine factors associated with the diagnostic interval. Results: We identified 3142 patients with PDAC. Median age of diagnosis was 71 (IQR 61-80). We identified an index contact date in 96.5% of the patients. The median length of the diagnostic interval was 76 days (IQR 21-191; 90th percentile 276 days). A higher Elixhauser comorbidity score (+18.57 days/ 1 point increase, 95% CI 16.07-21.07, p < 0.001) and stage 3 disease (+22.55 days, 95% CI 5.02-40.08, p = 0.01) was associated with a longer diagnostic interval. Conclusions: In this cohort of patients with pancreatic cancer, there was a wide range in the diagnostic interval with 10% of patients having a diagnostic interval approaching one year. Diagnostic interval research using administrative databases can understand variations in diagnosis times, can inform early detection efforts and can improve quality of care.

RARE-01. ASSESSING THE SYMPTOM DIAGNOSTIC INTERVAL FOR CHILDREN WITH CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM TUMOURS

Background Diagnostic delays in pediatric neuro-oncology is a subject of distress for families and providers. We aimed to evaluate the symptom diagnostic interval (SDI) and influencing variables for children with CNS tumors. Methods This retrospective study analyzed 210 patients diagnosed from 2001–2018 and managed at the tertiary care facility in Halifax, Canada. SDI was defined as time from first symptom until tissue diagnosis or, if not available, imaging diagnosis. Non-parametric tests were used to compare SDI between groups. Results Median SDI was 12.4 weeks (IQR 4.3–30), longer than 7 other studies of 1308 children reporting medians of 4.5–10 weeks (p &lt; 0.01). Most common tumors and their median SDI included low-grade glioma (LGG) (n=97, 46%; 17.9 weeks), medulloblastoma (n=31, 15%; 8.7 weeks), high-grade glioma (HGG) and DIPG (n=23, 11%; 5.6 weeks), and ependymoma (n=13, 6%; 13.6 weeks). The most common initial reported symptom included headache (n=63; 30%), nausea/vomiting (n=27, 18%), seizure (n=24, 12%), and visual impairment (n=13, 6.3%). Patients aged 0–3 years had a shorter SDI than patients 10 years and older (SDI 8.7 vs 14.6 weeks; p = 0.03). Tumor category showed longer SDI for LGG versus HGG (p = 0.003), DIPG (p = 0.02), medulloblastoma (p = 0.03) and other embryonal tumors (p = 0.03). Longer SDI was not associated with increased risk of disease progression for LGG (p = 0.93), medulloblastoma (p = 0.89), or ependymoma (p = 0.5). No difference in SDI was found with regard to diagnosis era, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or distance to the tertiary care facility. Conclusion SDI at our centre is longer than previously reported studies. SDI is linked to tumor biology and its relevance within specific tumor groups deserves further investigation given it doesn’t appear to predict tumor progression/recurrence, yet families and providers feel distress when delays in diagnosis are perceived.

Determining the cancer diagnostic interval using administrative data in a cohort of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

e13551 Background: PDAC is a leading cause of cancer death that is often diagnosed at an advanced stage. Population-based administrative data can be a valuable resource for studying the diagnostic interval, defined as the time from the first related healthcare encounter to cancer diagnosis. The objective of this study was to determine the diagnostic interval in a cohort of patients with PDAC using an empirical approach. Methods: This is a retrospective, cohort study of patients diagnosed with PDAC from 2007 – 2015 in Alberta, Canada. We used the Alberta Cancer Registry, physician billing claims, hospital discharge and emergency room visits to identify and categorize cancer-related healthcare encounters before diagnosis. We used statistical control charts to define the lookback period for each encounter category and used these lookback periods to identify the earliest encounter that represented the start of the diagnostic interval (index contact date). The end of the interval was the diagnosis date. Quantile regression was used to determine factors associated with the diagnostic interval. Results: We identified 3,142 patients with PDAC. Median age of diagnosis was 71 (IQR 61-80). We identified an index contact date and thus a diagnostic interval in 96.5% of patients. The median diagnostic interval length was 76 days (IQR 21-191; 90th percentile 276 days). A higher Elixhauser comorbidity score (+18.57 days/ 1 point increase, 95% CI 16.07-21.07, p<0.001) and stage 3 disease compared to stage 2 disease (+22.55 days, 95% CI 5.02-40.08, p=0.01) were associated with a longer diagnostic interval. Conclusions: In this cohort of patients with PDAC, there was a wide range in the diagnostic interval with 10% of patients having a diagnostic interval of approximately 9 months. Diagnostic interval research using administrative databases can understand variations in diagnosis times and can inform early detection efforts by identifying where and in whom delays may occur.

Predictors of timely diagnostic follow-up after an abnormal Pap test among Hispanic women seeking care in El Paso, Texas

Background Diagnostic follow-up of women with an abnormal Pap test is necessary to resolve the risk developing cervical cancer. The purpose of this study is to describe patient characteristics associated with timely receipt of a diagnostic colposcopy after an abnormal Pap test among Hispanic women in El Paso, a Texas-Mexico border city. Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review of Hispanic patients seen at an academic colposcopy clinic following an abnormal Pap test. An optimal diagnostic interval to colposcopy was based on a National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) quality indicator and was defined as receipt of colposcopy within 90 days or less from the date of an abnormal Pap test. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated by building a generalized linear model fit using a Poisson distribution, log link, and robust variance. Results Overall, 177 of the 270 women (65.6%) received follow-up within an optimal diagnostic interval. After adjusting for other variables in the model, women who were 30 years of age or older were 32% more likely to have an optimal interval than younger women (adjusted RR = 1.32, P < 0.01). High school graduates were less likely than more educated women to have an optimal interval (adjusted RR = 0.68, P < 0.01). Participation in the NBCCEDP was not associated with receipt of follow-up within an optimal diagnostic interval. Conclusions Compared with women with greater educational attainment, high school graduates were less likely to receive follow-up within an optimal diagnostic interval, as were younger (≤ 30 years) women compared with older women. Participation in the NBCCEDP was not associated with receipt of care within an optimal diagnostic interval.

The route to diagnosis of sarcoma patients: Results from an interview study in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom

Introduction Sarcomas are rare tumours. Early diagnosis is challenging, but important for local control and potentially survival and quality of life(QoL). We investigated (1)the route to diagnosis (RtD) experienced by sarcoma patients, including factors contributing to the length of the RtD from patients’ perspective; (2)the impact of the RtD on QoL and care satisfaction; and (3)differences in aims 1–2 between English and Dutch patients. Methods Fifteen sarcoma patients from The Royal Marsden Hospital, United Kingdom, and Radboud University Medical Centre, The Netherlands, were interviewed, exploring RtD experiences. Interviews were analysed according to qualitative content analysis. Results The main themes were: patient interval, diagnostic interval, reflection on the RtD and recommendations for improvement. Patient interval was long if symptoms were attributed as benign, did not interfere with daily life or were expected to cease. An incorrect working diagnosis, ineffective process of additional investigations, long referral times and lack of a lead clinician lengthened the diagnostic interval. Long waiting times, false reassurance and inadequate information provision led to dissatisfaction and a high emotional burden. Factors for improvement included increasing awareness of patients and healthcare providers, empowering patients, and having a lead clinician. Conclusion The RtD of sarcoma patients is complex. Increasing awareness of patients and healthcare providers may contribute to shorten the RtD.

EPID-06. DIAGNOSTIC INTERVAL TIME OF PEDIATRIC CNS TUMORS: A REPORT OF THE CANCER IN YOUNG PEOPLE IN CANADA (CYP-C) DATABASE

INTRODUCTION CNS tumors are the second most common neoplasm in children and have historically been associated with longer time to diagnosis. Data on the time-to-diagnosis for Canadian children with CNS tumors are limited and outdated. We aimed at evaluating the diagnostic interval time(DIT) for Canadian children, and identifying factors possibly associated with prolonged DIT. METHODS Using the CYP-C database, we analyzed data from children &lt;15 years, diagnosed with CNS tumors between 2001–2015. DIT was defined as time in weeks, elapsed from the first contact with a healthcare provider to confirming diagnosis. We described DIT according to patient’s demographics, socioeconomic, geographic factors as well as tumor-related criteria. RESULTS Patients from all Canadian provinces, except Ontario, had available timepoints to calculate DIT. The cohort included 842 patients. Mean DIT for all patients was 11.7 weeks(median 1.4). Gliomas had the longest mean DIT and embryonal tumors had the shortest(14.6 and 3.6 weeks p&lt;0.01). ATRT and medulloblastoma had a mean DIT of 1.3 and 4.3 weeks respectively. DIT for HGG was shorter than for LGG (6.4 versus 16.1 weeks, p&lt;0.01). Metastatic disease, infratentorial tumors, or age £36 months had significantly shorter DIT (5.6 vs 12.4 vs 18.4, 7.4 vs 13.1 and 8.6). Sex, annual income(QAIPPE), and distance from tertiary center did not influence DIT. CONCLUSION The current diagnostic interval time for pediatric CNS tumors in Canada is 11.7 weeks(median 1.4weeks). These results only reflect the healthcare system’s contribution toward diagnosis confirmation, but not the patient interval before seeking medical attention.

Initial symptoms and diagnostic delay in children with brain tumors at a single institution in Japan

Background A prolonged interval between onset of symptoms and diagnosis of childhood brain tumor is associated with worse neurological outcomes. The objectives of this study are to determine factors contributing to diagnostic delay and to find an interventional focus for further reduction in the interval between symptom onset and diagnosis in Japan. Methods We retrospectively analyzed 154 patients younger than 18 years with newly diagnosed brain tumors who visited our institution from January 2002 to March 2013. Results The median age at diagnosis was 6.2 years and the median total diagnostic interval (TDI) was 30 days. Patients with low-grade tumors and cerebral midline tumor location had significantly long TDI. Durations between the first medical consultation and diagnosis (diagnostic interval, DI) were exceedingly longer for patients with visual, hearing, or smelling abnormalities as the first symptom (median, 303 days). TDI and DI of patients who visited ophthalmologists or otolaryngologist for the first medical consultation were significantly longer. Among these patients, longer DI was associated with worse visual outcome. Conclusion Raising awareness of brain tumor diagnosis among ophthalmologists and otolaryngologists may reduce diagnostic delay and may improve the neurological impairment of children with brain tumors in Japan.

Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment Wait Times in Specialized Diagnostic Units Compared with Usual Care: A Population-Based Study

Background：Breast assessment sites (bass) were developed to provide expedited and coordinated care for patients being evaluated for breast cancer (bca) in Ontario. We compared the diagnostic and treatment intervals for patients diagnosed at a bas and for those diagnosed through a usual care (uc) route. Methods: This population-based, cross-sectional study of patients diagnosed with bca in Ontario during 2007–2015 used linked administrative data. “Diagnostic interval” was the time from the earliest cancer-related health care encounter before diagnosis to diagnosis; “treatment interval” was the time from diagnosis to treatment. Diagnosis at a (bas was determined from the patient’s biopsy and mammography institutions. Interval lengths for the (bas and uc groups were compared using multivariable quantile regression, stratified by detection method. Results: The diagnostic interval was shorter for patients who were (bas-diagnosed than for those who were uc-diagnosed, with adjusted median differences of −4.0 days [95% confidence interval (ci): −3.2 days to −4.9 days] for symptomatic patients and −5.4 days (95% ci: −4.7 days to −6.1 days) for screen-detected patients. That association was modified by stage at diagnosis, with larger differences in patients with early-stage cancers. In contrast, the treatment interval was longer in patients who were (bas-diagnosed than in those who were uc-diagnosed, with adjusted median differences of 4.2 days (95% ci: 3.8 days to 4.7 days) for symptomatic patients and 4.2 days (95% ci: 3.7 days to 4.8 days) for screen-detected patients. Conclusions: Diagnosis of bca through a (bas was associated with a shorter diagnostic interval, but a longer treatment interval. Although efficiencies in the diagnostic interval might help to reduce distress experienced by patients, the longer treatment intervals for patients who are (bas-diagnosed remain a cause for concern.

The Perceived Impact of Length of the Diagnostic Pathway Is Associated with Health-Related Quality of Life of Sarcoma Survivors: Results from the Dutch Nationwide SURVSARC Study

Background: Sarcoma patients often experience a long time to diagnosis, known as the total interval. This interval can be divided into the patient (time from symptoms to doctor consultation) and diagnostic intervals (time from first consultation to diagnosis). In other cancers, a long total interval has been associated with worse outcomes, but its effect on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) has never been investigated among sarcoma patients. This study investigates the association between (1) the actual time to diagnosis and HRQoL; (2) the perceived impact of the diagnostic interval length and HRQoL; (3) the actual length and perceived impact of the length and the HRQoL of sarcoma survivors. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed among sarcoma patients aged ≥18, diagnosed 2–10 years ago in the Netherlands. The participants completed a questionnaire on HRQoL, the time to diagnosis, the perceived impact of the diagnostic interval on HRQoL, and coping. Results: 1099 participants were included (response rate, 58%). The mean time since diagnosis was 67.4 months. More than half reported a patient (60%) or diagnostic interval (55%) ≥1 month. A third (31%) perceived a negative impact of the diagnostic interval length on HRQoL. Patient or diagnostic interval length was not associated with HRQoL. By contrast, participants perceiving a negative impact (32%) had lower HRQoL scores than those perceiving a positive (11%) or no impact (58%) (p = 0.000). This association remained significant in a multivariable model, in which maladaptive coping strategies and tumour characteristics were also found to be associated with HRQoL. Participants perceiving a negative impact of the length of the diagnostic interval related this to high psychological distress levels, more physical disabilities, and worse prognosis. Conclusion: The perceived impact of the diagnostic interval length was associated with the HRQoL of sarcoma survivors, whereas the actual length was not associated with HRQoL. Maladaptive coping strategies were independently associated with HRQoL. This offers opportunities for early intervention to improve HRQoL.