scholarly journals Interhospital referral of colorectal cancer patients: a Dutch population-based study

Author(s):  
A. K. Warps ◽  
◽  
M. P. M. de Neree tot Babberich ◽  
E. Dekker ◽  
M. W. J. M. Wouters ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose Interhospital referral is a consequence of centralization of complex oncological care but might negatively impact waiting time, a quality indicator in the Netherlands. This study aims to evaluate characteristics and waiting times of patients with primary colorectal cancer who are referred between hospitals. Methods Data were extracted from the Dutch ColoRectal Audit (2015-2019). Waiting time between first tumor-positive biopsy until first treatment was compared between subgroups stratified for referral status, disease stage, and type of hospital. Results In total, 46,561 patients were included. Patients treated for colon or rectal cancer in secondary care hospitals were referred in 12.2% and 14.7%, respectively. In tertiary care hospitals, corresponding referral rates were 43.8% and 66.4%. Referred patients in tertiary care hospitals were younger, but had a more advanced disease stage, and underwent more often multivisceral resection and simultaneous metastasectomy than non-referred patients in secondary care hospitals (p<0.001). Referred patients were more often treated within national quality standards for waiting time compared to non-referred patients (p<0.001). For referred patients, longer waiting times prior to MDT were observed compared to non-referred patients within each hospital type, although most time was spent post-MDT. Conclusion A large proportion of colorectal cancer patients that are treated in tertiary care hospitals are referred from another hospital but mostly treated within standards for waiting time. These patients are younger but often have a more advanced disease. This suggests that these patients are willing to travel more but also reflects successful centralization of complex oncological patients in the Netherlands.

2021 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. e50-e51
Author(s):  
Abhitesh Singh ◽  
Anshul Jain ◽  
Dillip Muduly ◽  
Mahesh Sultania ◽  
Jyoti Ranjan Swain ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. 664-671 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Ignacio Arraras Urdaniz ◽  
Ruth Vera García ◽  
Maite Martínez Aguillo ◽  
Ana Manterola Burgaleta ◽  
Fernando Arias de la Vega ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 265-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ratheesh Raman ◽  
Ravikanth Kongara ◽  
Viswakalyan Kotapalli ◽  
Swarnalata Gowrishankar ◽  
Regulagadda A Sastry ◽  
...  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. e0260088
Author(s):  
David E. Goldsbury ◽  
Eleonora Feletto ◽  
Marianne F. Weber ◽  
Philip Haywood ◽  
Alison Pearce ◽  
...  

Introduction Colorectal cancer (CRC) care costs the Australian healthcare system more than any other cancer. We estimated costs and days in hospital for CRC cases, stratified by site (colon/rectal cancer) and disease stage, to inform detailed analyses of CRC-related healthcare. Methods Incident CRC patients were identified using the Australian 45 and Up Study cohort linked with cancer registry records. We analysed linked hospital admission records, emergency department records, and reimbursement records for government-subsidised medical services and prescription medicines. Cases’ health system costs (2020 Australian dollars) and hospital days were compared with those for cancer-free controls (matched by age, sex, geography, smoking) to estimate excess resources by phase of care, analysed by sociodemographic, health, and disease characteristics. Results 1200 colon and 546 rectal cancer cases were diagnosed 2006–2013, and followed up to June 2016. Eighty-nine percent of cases had surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy, and excess costs were predominantly for hospitalisations. Initial phase (12 months post-diagnosis) mean excess health system costs were $50,434 for colon and $60,877 for rectal cancer cases, with means of 16 and 18.5 excess hospital days, respectively. The annual continuing mean excess costs were $6,779 (colon) and $8,336 (rectal), with a mean of 2 excess hospital days each. Resources utilised (costs and days) in these phases increased with more advanced disease, comorbidities, and younger age. Mean excess costs in the year before death were $74,952 (colon) and $67,733 (rectal), with means of 34 and 30 excess hospital days, respectively–resources utilised were similar across all characteristics, apart from lower costs for cases aged ≥75 at diagnosis. Conclusions Health system costs and hospital utilisation for CRC care are greater for people with more advanced disease. These findings provide a benchmark, and will help inform future cost-effectiveness analyses of potential approaches to CRC screening and treatment.


2015 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 193-198
Author(s):  
Joanna Berska ◽  
Jolanta Bugajska ◽  
Diana Hodorowicz-Zaniewska ◽  
Krystyna Sztefko

Background: Vitamin D insufficiency may increase risk and/or progression of cancer. Vitamin D acts through a nuclear receptor (VDR) which binding to vitamin D response elements causes changes in many genes expression. The aim: to assess the serum concentration of 25-hydroxycholecalciferol (25(OH)D3) and tissue VDR expression in colorectal cancer patients in relation to disease stage, tumor localization and disease progression. Material & Methods: The study group consisted of 39 patients with colorectal cancer (mean age 65,5±6,8 yrs, 23/16 male/female) and a control group consisted of 25 patients (mean age 51,0±6,9 yrs; 8/17 male/female) without gastrointestinal disease and without neoplasm. Serum level of 25(OH)D3 was measured by HPLC/UV. RNA was isolated from homogenized normal colonic mucosa and tumor tissue then RT-PCR was performed. Results: The mean serum concentration of 25(OH)D3 was lower in the colorectal cancer patients as compared to the control group. The difference was significantly lower only for the patients with the early stages of the disease (p<0.02) and for the patients with tumor present in rectum (p<0.03). Higher VDR expression in tumor tissue than in normal colonic mucosa was observed. For the patients with the early stages of the disease (stage A, B1, B2) higher expression of VDR as compared to the patients with advanced stages (stage C1, C2, D) was noticed. Moreover, VDR expression was higher in tumor tissue obtained from disease-free patients as compared to the patients with disease progression noted one-year-follow-up (p<0.04). Conclusion: Antitumor effect of vitamin D depends on VDR expression in tumor tissue.


2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 398-409
Author(s):  
David W. Borowski ◽  
Sarah Cawkwell ◽  
Syed M. Amir Zaidi ◽  
Matthew Toward ◽  
Nicola Maguire ◽  
...  

Purpose Higher caseloads are associated with better outcomes for many conditions treated in secondary and tertiary care settings, including colorectal cancer (CRC). There is little known whether such volume-outcome relationship exist in primary care settings. The purpose of this paper is to examine general practitioner (GP) CRC-specific caseload for possible associations with referral pathways, disease stage and CRC patients’ overall survival. Design/methodology/approach The paper retrospectively analyses a prospectively maintained CRC database for 2009-2014 in a single district hospital providing bowel cancer screening and tertiary rectal cancer services. Findings Of 1,145 CRC patients, 937 (81.8 per cent) were diagnosed as symptomatic cancers. In total, 210 GPs from 44 practices were stratified according to their CRC caseload over the study period into low volume (LV, 1-4); medium volume (MV, 5-7); and high volume (HV, 8-21 cases). Emergency presentation (LV: 49/287 (17.1 per cent); MV: 75/264 (28.4 per cent); HV: 105/386 (27.2 per cent); p=0.007) and advanced disease at presentation (LV: 84/287 (29.3 per cent); MV: 94/264 (35.6 per cent); HV: 144/386 (37.3 per cent); p=0.034) was more common amongst HV GPs. Three-year mortality risk was significantly higher for HV GPs (MV: (hazard ratio) HR 1.185 (confidence interval=0.897-1.566), p=0.231, and HV: HR 1.366 (CI=1.061-1.759), p=0.016), but adjustment for emergency presentation and advanced disease largely accounted for this difference. There was some evidence that HV GPs used elective cancer pathways less frequently (LV: 166/287 (57.8 per cent); MV: 130/264 (49.2 per cent); HV: 182/386 (47.2 per cent); p=0.007) and more selectively (CRC/referrals: LV: 166/2,743 (6.1 per cent); MV: 130/2,321 (5.6 per cent); HV: 182/2,508 (7.3 per cent); p=0.048). Originality/value Higher GP CRC caseload in primary care may be associated with advanced disease and poorer survival; more work is required to determine the reasons and to develop targeted intervention at local level to improve elective referral rates.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document