The effect of wait times on oncological outcomes from periampullary adenocarcinomas

Trends in and Prognostic Significance of Time to Treatment in Pancreatic Cancer: A Population-Based Study

INTRODUCTION

The association of time to treatment (TTT) with survival remains unclear in pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). In this study, we evaluate the recent trends in TTT, causes for delay, and its effect on survival.

METHODS

We included patients with PDAC of all stages from the National Cancer Database (2004-2020) who underwent either surgery or chemotherapy/radiotherapy (CT/RT). TTT was defined as the duration between tissue diagnosis and first treatment. Linear regression (β) was used to study the temporal trends in time delay.

RESULTS

A total of 239,638 patients were included. The median TTT was 25 days. Using multivariable analysis, we found that increasing age (OR 1.48), female gender (OR 1.04), Black race (OR 1.3), lower educational status (OR 1.2), Medicaid, Medicare insurance, and uninsured (OR 1.2, 1.5, and 1.2, respectively), treatment at academic centers (OR 1.3), higher Charlson-Deyo comorbidity index (OR 1.2), and CT/RT (OR 1.5) were associated with increased TTT. There was a steady rise in median TTT from 21 to 28 days between 2004 and 2020 (β = 0.3), suggestive of a worsening trend. Concurrently, there was an increasing trend in utilization of neoadjuvant CT/RT between 2004 and 2020 in early-stage PDAC. On Cox regression, TTT delay was associated with poor overall survival in stage I-IV patients (HR 1.1, 1.1, 1.09, and 1.53, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Delayed treatment approaching 2 months was observed in 10% of the population. The rising temporal trend in TTT may be attributed to the increasing shift toward neoadjuvant CT/RT in early-stage PDAC and/or the increasing use of tissue biopsy prior to surgery.

An analysis of time to treatment in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Currently, no guidelines exist regarding the appropriate time from diagnosis to treatment among pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients. Herein, we aim to define the median time to treatment in pancreatic adenocarcinoma, factors associated with treatment delay, and prognostic significance.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients, stage I-IV, at a tertiary referral center (2017-2020). We subdivided time to treatment (days) into 4 components: (1) Ti: symptom onset to initial provider evaluation, (2) Tii: initial provider evaluation to diagnosis, (3) Tiii: diagnosis to specialist consultation, (4) Tiv: specialist visit to treatment.

RESULTS

In total, 217 patients met the inclusion criteria. The median Ti, Tii, Tiii, and Tiv were 20, 12, 4, and 14 days, respectively. The total time to treatment was 75 days. Patients with weight loss had longer Ti (β = 108.6). More frequent hospitalizations (β = 19.5) and misdiagnosis (β = 33.4) were associated with longer Tii. Patients with a history of malignancy (β = 15) or active treatment of a second disease (β = 19.4) had longer Tiii. Poor performance status (β = 6.2) or private insurance (β = 50.2) were associated with a longer Tiv. Black patients had longer Ti+ii+iii+iv (β = 100). Time to treatment was not associated with overall survival (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

It takes a median time of less than a month for a patient with pancreatic adenocarcinoma to start treatment, even after they visit a primary provider. The greatest opportunity to shorten the overall time to treatment is by having patients seek medical attention earlier (Ti).

Impact of multicentre diagnostic workup in patients with pancreatic cancer on repeated diagnostic investigations, time-to-diagnosis and time-to-treatment: A nationwide analysis

BACKGROUND

Due to the centralization of pancreatic surgery, patients with suspected pancreatic cancer may undergo diagnostic workup in both a non-pancreatic centre and a pancreatic centre, i.e. multicentre workup. This retrospective study assessed whether multicentre diagnostic workup is associated with repeated diagnostics, delayed time-to-diagnosis, delayed time-to-treatment, survival and whether variation existed among pancreatic cancer networks.

METHODS

This nationwide study included all patients diagnosed with non-metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in 2015, registered by the Netherlands Cancer Registry. A delayed time-to-diagnosis was defined as ≥3 weeks from initial hospital visit to final diagnosis. A delayed time-to-treatment was defined as ≥6 weeks from the first hospital visit to start of first tumour treatment. Multilevel logistic regression analyses and survival analyses were performed.

RESULTS

In total, 931 patients with non-metastatic PDAC were included. Overall, 175 patients (19%) underwent a multicentre diagnostic workup, which was significantly associated with repeated diagnostic investigations (OR = 6.31, 95% CI 4.13-9.64, P < 0.0001), a delayed time-to-diagnosis (OR = 2.66 95% CI 1.74-4.06, P < 0.001), and a delayed time-to-treatment (OR = 1.93 95% CI 1.12-3.31, P = 0.02), but not with decreased survival (HR = 1.09 95% CI 0.83-1.44; P = 0.532). Variation in outcomes per network was observed, especially for time-to-treatment, though the ICC was not statistically significant (P = 0.065).

CONCLUSION

Multicentre diagnostic workup for patients with PDAC is associated with repeated diagnostic investigations, a delayed time-to-diagnosis and delayed time-to-treatment compared to patients with monocentre workup. To reduce costs and improve treatment times, efforts should be made to improve network coordination, for example via network care pathways.

Time interval from last visit to imaging diagnosis influences outcome in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A regional population-based study on linked medico-administrative and clinical data

Background:

Excessive waiting time intervals for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with pancreatic cancer can influence their prognosis but they remain unclear. The objective was to describe time intervals from the medical visit to diagnostic imaging and to treatment and their prognostic impact in pancreatic cancer in one French region.

Methods:

This retrospective observational multicentre study included all patients with pancreatic cancer seen for the first time in 2017 in multidisciplinary team meetings (MTMs), where clinical data were collected. A probabilistic matching with the medico-administrative data from the French national healthcare database (Système National des Données de Santé) was performed to define the care pathway from clinical presentation to the beginning of treatment. Median key time intervals were estimated for both resected and unresected tumours. Factors associated with 1-year survival were studied using Cox model.

Results:

A total of 324 patients (88% of total patients with MTM presentation) were matched and included: male 54%, mean age 72 years ±9.2, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS > 1 19.5%, metastatic disease at diagnosis 47.4%, tumour resection 16%. At 1 year, 57% had died (65% in the unresected group and 17% in the resected group). The median time interval from the medical visit to diagnostic imaging was 15 days [Q1–Q3: 8–44]. After imaging, median time intervals to definite diagnosis and to first treatment were 11 and 20 days, respectively. Significant prognostic factors associated with the risk of death at 1 year were ECOG PS > 1 (hazard ratio (HR) 2.1 [1.4–3.0]), metastasis (HR 2.7 [1.9–3.9]), no tumour resection (HR 2.7 [1.3–5.6]) and time interval between the medical visit and diagnostic imaging ⩾25 days (HR 1.7 [1.2–2.3]).

Conclusion:

Delay in access to diagnostic imaging impacted survival in patients with pancreatic cancer, regardless of whether tumour resection had been performed.

Time to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Initiation Is not Associated With Survival in Pancreatic Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Not all patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) tolerate multiagent neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). We utilized institutional data and the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to investigate if time from diagnosis to NAC initiation is associated with survival.

METHODS

Patients who received NAC and underwent pancreatectomy at our institution (2010-2021) or within the NCDB (2010-2016) were identified. Time from diagnosis to NAC was grouped: <21, 21-35, and >35 d. Recurrence-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) was compared.

RESULTS

At our institution, 122 patients received NAC before pancreatectomy (<21 d: n = 36; 21-35 d: n = 61; >35 d: n = 25). Demographics, performance status, and anatomic resectability were similar. There was no difference in RFS (13.3 versus 12.4 versus 11.9 mo) or OS (26.7 versus 25.8 versus 26.1 mo) based on NAC timing. Patients who received FOLFIRINOX had an improvement in RFS (14.4 versus 12.2 versus 6.8 mo, P = 0.05) and OS (39.2 versus 21.4 versus 17.3 mo, P = 0.01) compared to gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel or other regimens. Within the NCDB, 6713 patients were included (<21 d: n = 2087; 21-35 d: n = 2656; >35 d: n = 1970). There was no difference in OS (21.6 versus 20.9 versus 22.2 mo). Multiagent NAC was associated with improved OS compared to single-agent (22.6 versus 18.8 mo, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Delay in NAC initiation for PDAC is not associated with survival. Patient optimization could be considered with the goal of improving tolerance of multiagent chemotherapy.

Time to Surgery Does Not Affect Overall or Disease-Free Survival of Patients with Primary Resectable PDAC

(1) Background: Delay in therapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) may contribute to a worse outcome. The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic value of time from diagnosis to surgery in patients undergoing upfront surgery for primarily resectable pancreatic carcinoma. (2) Methods: This retrospective single-center study included 214 patients who underwent primary resection of PDAC from January 2000 to December 2018 at University Hospital Erlangen. Using a minimum p-value approach, patients were stratified according to time to surgery (TtS) into two groups: TtS ≤ 23 days and TtS > 23 days. Postoperative outcome and long-term survival were compared. (3) Results: Median TtS was 25 days. The best cut-off for TtS was determined as 23 days. There were no differences regarding postoperative outcome or overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) (OS: 23.8 vs. 20.4 months, p = 0.210, respectively, and DFS: 15.8 vs. 13.6 months, p = 0.187). Multivariate analysis revealed age, lymph node metastasis, tumor differentiation and resection status as significant independent prognostic predictors for OS and DFS. (4) Conclusions: A delay of surgery > 23 days after first diagnosis does not affect overall or disease-free survival of patients with primary resectable PDAC. However, the psychological impact of a delay to patients waiting for surgery should not be underestimated.

Cancer diagnostic tools to aid decision-making in primary care: mixed-methods systematic reviews and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Tools based on diagnostic prediction models are available to help general practitioners diagnose cancer. It is unclear whether or not tools expedite diagnosis or affect patient quality of life and/or survival.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to evaluate the evidence on the validation, clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and availability and use of cancer diagnostic tools in primary care.

METHODS

Two systematic reviews were conducted to examine the clinical effectiveness (review 1) and the development, validation and accuracy (review 2) of diagnostic prediction models for aiding general practitioners in cancer diagnosis. Bibliographic searches were conducted on MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science) in May 2017, with updated searches conducted in November 2018. A decision-analytic model explored the tools' clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in colorectal cancer. The model compared patient outcomes and costs between strategies that included the use of the tools and those that did not, using the NHS perspective. We surveyed 4600 general practitioners in randomly selected UK practices to determine the proportions of general practices and general practitioners with access to, and using, cancer decision support tools. Association between access to these tools and practice-level cancer diagnostic indicators was explored.

RESULTS

Systematic review 1 - five studies, of different design and quality, reporting on three diagnostic tools, were included. We found no evidence that using the tools was associated with better outcomes. Systematic review 2 - 43 studies were included, reporting on prediction models, in various stages of development, for 14 cancer sites (including multiple cancers). Most studies relate to QCancer^® (ClinRisk Ltd, Leeds, UK) and risk assessment tools.

DECISION MODEL

In the absence of studies reporting their clinical outcomes, QCancer and risk assessment tools were evaluated against faecal immunochemical testing. A linked data approach was used, which translates diagnostic accuracy into time to diagnosis and treatment, and stage at diagnosis. Given the current lack of evidence, the model showed that the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic tools in colorectal cancer relies on demonstrating patient survival benefits. Sensitivity of faecal immunochemical testing and specificity of QCancer and risk assessment tools in a low-risk population were the key uncertain parameters.

SURVEY

Practitioner- and practice-level response rates were 10.3% (476/4600) and 23.3% (227/975), respectively. Cancer decision support tools were available in 83 out of 227 practices (36.6%, 95% confidence interval 30.3% to 43.1%), and were likely to be used in 38 out of 227 practices (16.7%, 95% confidence interval 12.1% to 22.2%). The mean 2-week-wait referral rate did not differ between practices that do and practices that do not have access to QCancer or risk assessment tools (mean difference of 1.8 referrals per 100,000 referrals, 95% confidence interval -6.7 to 10.3 referrals per 100,000 referrals).

LIMITATIONS

There is little good-quality evidence on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of diagnostic tools. Many diagnostic prediction models are limited by a lack of external validation. There are limited data on current UK practice and clinical outcomes of diagnostic strategies, and there is no evidence on the quality-of-life outcomes of diagnostic results. The survey was limited by low response rates.

CONCLUSION

The evidence base on the tools is limited. Research on how general practitioners interact with the tools may help to identify barriers to implementation and uptake, and the potential for clinical effectiveness.

FUTURE WORK

Continued model validation is recommended, especially for risk assessment tools. Assessment of the tools' impact on time to diagnosis and treatment, stage at diagnosis, and health outcomes is also recommended, as is further work to understand how tools are used in general practitioner consultations.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017068373 and CRD42017068375.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 66. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Prognostic Impact of Time to Surgery in Patients With Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVES

Some studies suggested the importance of performing pancreatoduodenectomy expeditiously in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This study aimed to assess the prognostic value of time to surgery in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for PDAC.

METHODS

All PDAC patients who underwent upfront pancreatoduodenectomy were collected (2000-2015). Diagnosis date was the computed tomography scan date where a suspicious pancreatic head lesion was observed. Survival analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier method. Cox model was used to find predictive factors of survival.

RESULTS

A total of 192 patients underwent pancreatoduodenectomy. The median time to surgery was 27 days (interquartile range, 17-40 days). The best dichotomous threshold for 24-month overall survival (OS) was 30 days. The median OS was similar between groups with time to surgery of fewer than 30 days and time to surgery of 30 days or more (25 vs 21 months, P = 0.609). Similar results were found for median recurrence-free survivals (19 vs 15 months, P = 0.561). On Cox regressions, time to surgery was not associated with shorter OS. Only lymph node invasion and adjuvant chemotherapy were independent OS predictors (hazard ratio, 2.610, P = 0.006, and hazard ratio, 2.042, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Delaying surgery 30 days or more after diagnostic computed tomography scan was not associated with poorer OS and recurrence-free survival. Moreover, time to surgery was not prognostic of OS.

Survival Advantage of Upfront Surgery for Pancreatic Head Cancer Without Preoperative Biliary Drainage

Introduction

Level 1 evidence from randomized trials demonstrates less complication when jaundiced patients with resectable pancreatic cancer proceed directly to surgery, rather than undergo preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) first. Although "fast track" surgery significantly increases the resectability rate, it is unknown whether this translates into a survival benefit. This study evaluated the effect of upfront surgery on long-term survival using an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis.

Methods

Patients were identified from a prospectively maintained database, stratified according to whether or not they underwent PBD.

Results

Among 157 patients, 84 (54%) underwent PBD. Of these, 73% underwent surgery, compared to 100% of those without PBD (p<0.001). Reasons for not undergoing surgery were progression of cancer (N=11), progressive frailty (N=5), or PBD-related complication (N=7). In those who underwent surgery, PBD was associated with a longer time from diagnosis to surgery (median: 59 vs. 14 days, p<0.001), and a higher rate of unresectable cancer at surgery (26% vs. 3%, p<0.001). On an ITT basis, patients treated with PBD had significantly shorter survival, at a median of 15 vs. 19 months (HR: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.07-2.37, p=0.023). However, for the subset of patients who underwent resection, survival was similar in the two groups (HR: 1.07, 95% CI: 0.66-1.73, p=0.773).

Conclusions

A reduced time to surgery with avoidance of PBD offers survival benefit. This is only appreciated on ITT analysis, which includes patients who are initially considered candidates for surgery, but ultimately do not undergo surgery. Considering this 'hidden' cohort of patients is important when considering optimal pathways for the treatment of resectable pancreatic cancer.

Impact of time interval between multidisciplinary team meeting and intended pancreatoduodenectomy on oncological outcomes

BACKGROUND

Dutch guidelines indicate that treatment of pancreatic head and periampullary malignancies should be started within 3 weeks of the multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting. This study aimed to assess the impact of time to surgery on oncological outcomes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective population-based cohort study of patients with pancreatic head and periampullary malignancies included in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients scheduled for pancreatoduodenectomy and who were discussed in an MDT meeting from May 2012 to December 2016 were eligible. Time to surgery was defined as days between the final preoperative MDT meeting and surgery, categorized in tertiles (short interval, 18 days or less; intermediate, 19-32 days; long, 33 days or more). Oncological outcomes included overall survival, resection rate and R0 resection rate.

RESULTS

A total of 2027 patients were included, of whom 677, 665 and 685 had a short, intermediate and long time interval to surgery respectively. Median time to surgery was 25 (i.q.r. 14-36) days. Longer time to surgery was not associated with overall survival (hazard ratio 0·99, 95 per cent c.i. 0·87 to 1·13; P = 0·929), resection rate (relative risk (RR) 0·96, 95 per cent c.i. 0·91 to 1·01; P = 0·091) or R0 resection rate (RR 1·01, 0·94 to 1·09; P = 0·733). Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and a long time interval had a lower resection rate (RR 0·92, 0·85 to 0·99; P = 0·029).

DISCUSSION

A longer time interval between the last MDT meeting and pancreatoduodenectomy did not decrease overall survival.

Time intervals to diagnosis and chemotherapy do not influence survival outcome in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The effect of treatment delay on survival in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains unclear.

AIMS

This study aimed to assess the prognostic impact of time to diagnosis and chemotherapy in advanced PDAC and factors influencing the time intervals.

METHODS

advanced PDAC patients receiving chemotherapy in five centers in the decade 2007-2016 were included. Key time points during care pathway from clinical presentation to beginning of chemotherapy were retrospectively collected. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard model was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 409 patients were included (mean age 66.1 ± 10.3 years; 250 metastatic (61%); 139 received FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy (34%). The median overall survival (OS) was 7.2 months. The median times from first symptoms and from first specialist visit to the beginning of chemotherapy were respectively 100 days and 47 days. None of time intervals was significantly associated with OS. Significant prognostic factors were FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy (HR 0.6 [0.5-0.8]; P < 0.001), metastasis (HR 1.6 [1.3-2.0]; P = 0.001), WHO PS ≥ 2 (HR 1.6 [1.2-2.1]; P < 0.001) and acute pancreatitis as first symptom (HR 2.9 [1.7-4.9]; P < 0.001). Jaundice shortened time to diagnosis (P < 0.001). Acute pancreatitis (P < 0.001) and diabetes (P = 0.01) increased time to treatment.

CONCLUSION

Wait times from clinical presentation to beginning of chemotherapy do not influence survival in advanced PDAC.

Impact of surgical wait times on oncologic outcomes in resectable pancreas adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Timely surgical resection in patients with suspected or diagnosed pancreas adenocarcinoma is an essential part of care. We hypothesized that longer surgical wait time was associated with worse oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of patients (N = 144) with resectable pancreas adenocarcinoma was divided into four wait time groups (<4, 4-8, 8-12, and >12 weeks), defined from the time of diagnosis on cross-sectional imaging. Overall and recurrence-free survival were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression. A higher rate of conversion to palliative bypass in patients waiting over 4 weeks was observed and further analyzed using post-hoc multivariate regression.

RESULTS

On multivariable analysis, longer wait time was associated with improved overall (HR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.28-0.85) and recurrence-free survival (HR 0.29, 95% CI: 0.15-0.56) in >12 weeks compared to <4 weeks group. On post-hoc analysis, longer wait time over 8 weeks was positively associated with palliative bypass (OR 5.33, 95% CI: 1.32-27.88).

CONCLUSION

Wait time over 8 weeks was associated with a higher rate of palliative bypass. There was an improvement in overall and recurrence-free survival in patients who waited over 12 weeks, likely due to selection bias.

Effect of time to surgery in resectable pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Achieving surgical resection is essential if patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) have a chance for cure. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of time to surgery on resection rates in patients with resectable PDAC.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to identify studies reporting times to surgery and resection rates. Meta-regression models were then produced to assess the relationship between time to surgery and resection rates, using both intra- and inter-study comparisons.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies were included, comprising n = 2171 patients, with a pooled resection rate of 76%. Intra-study meta-analysis of the five studies that reported comparisons between patients with vs. without preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) or with long vs. short delays to surgery found earlier surgery to be associated with a significantly higher rate of resection (pooled odds ratio 1.93, 95% CI: 1.25-2.97, P = 0.003). Inter-study meta-regression across all studies found a tendency for resection rates to decline with increasing time from CT or ERCP to surgery (gradient - 0.13 log-odds per week, 95% CI - 0.28, 0.03, P = 0.100), although this did not reach statistical significance, in part due to considerable heterogeneity between studies.

CONCLUSION

Pathways to reduce the time to surgery, primarily by avoiding PBD, demonstrate significantly greater resection rates. Early surgery, including avoidance of PBD, not only provides patients with the benefit of avoiding harm associated with PBD but also with a greater chance of undergoing resection.

The frequency, nature and impact of GP-assessed avoidable delays in a population-based cohort of cancer patients

BACKGROUND

There is a growing emphasis on the speed of diagnosis as an aspect of cancer prognosis. While epidemiological data in the last decade have quantified diagnostic timeliness and its variation, whether and how often prolonged diagnostic intervals can be considered avoidable is unknown.

METHODS

We used data from the English National Cancer Diagnosis Audit (NCDA) on 17,042 patients diagnosed with cancer in 2014. Participating primary care physicians were asked to identify delays in diagnosis that they deemed avoidable, together with the 'setting' of the avoidable delay and key attributable factors. We used descriptive analysis and regression frameworks to assess validity and examine variation in the frequency and nature of avoidable delays.

RESULTS

Among 14,259 patients, 24% were deemed to have had an avoidable delay to their diagnosis. Patients with a reported avoidable delay had a longer median diagnostic interval (92 days) than those without (30 days). Of all avoidable delays, 13% were deemed to have occurred pre-consultation, 49% within primary care, and 38% within secondary care. Avoidable delays were mostly attributed to the test request/performance phase (25%). Multimorbidity was associated with greater odds of avoidable delay (OR for 3+ vs no comorbidity: 1.43 (95% CI 1.25-1.63)), with heterogeneous associations with cancer site.

CONCLUSION

We have shown that GP-identified instances of avoidable delay have construct validity. Whilst the causes of avoidable diagnostic delays are multi-factorial and occur in different settings and phases of the diagnostic process, their analysis can guide improvement initiatives and enable the examination of any prognostic implications.

Benefits Of Timely Care In Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review To Navigate Through The Contradictory Evidence

The evidence base of policies that improve the timeliness of cancer care is under ongoing debate. Pancreatic cancer is frequently diagnosed in a stage when curative therapy is not feasible; hence, it is an important target for timelier healthcare interventions. The objectives of our research were to identify all clinical studies on pancreatic cancer care delays via a systematic literature review, to assess the study methodologies for possible biases, to conclude on the available evidence, and to formulate research recommendations on evidence gaps. Nineteen studies were identified and eight reported multivariate analyses. Although many sources of bias shifted the results towards negative or paradoxical findings, a statistically significant association of shorter delays with better clinical outcomes was demonstrated in the majority of studies reporting multivariate analyses. Noninferiority analyses were not published. Further efforts to provide timely care for pancreatic cancer patients are encouraged, and studies on the associations of delay with patient experience and healthcare resource utilization are warranted.

Waiting time to surgery and pancreatic cancer survival: A nationwide population-based cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The effect of waiting time to surgery on survival in pancreatic cancer patients is unclear. We examined this association in a nationwide population-based cohort study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A nationwide population-based cohort study of all patients undergoing surgery for pancreatic cancer (resection or a palliative procedure) registered in the Danish Pancreatic Cancer Database from May 2011 to May 2016. We defined waiting time to surgery in two ways: 1) from the date of entry into the National Cancer Pathway to the date of surgery and 2) from the date of the last preoperative computed tomography (CT) or positron emission tomography (PET-CT) scan to the date of surgery. Waiting time was grouped into three groups: <28 days (<4 weeks), 28-55 days (4-8 weeks), and ≥56 days (≥8 weeks). We calculated median survival with associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for patients undergoing resection and for patients undergoing a palliative procedure.

RESULTS

We included 873 patients. Mean age was 67 years (range: 35-86 years). Resection was performed in 701 patients (80%); the remaining 172 patients (20%) underwent an explorative laparotomy or palliative surgery. 652 patients (75%) had a registration in the National Cancer Pathway (median waiting time: 31 days, and 818 patients (94%) had registration of a preoperative CT or PET-CT scan (median waiting time: 32 days). We saw similar resection rates (∼80%) and median survival (∼22 months) in all thee groups.

CONCLUSION

In this study, waiting time to surgery did not affect survival in patients undergoing surgery for pancreatic cancer.

The survival impact of surgical waiting time in patients with resectable pancreatic head cancer

Backgrounds/Aims

After centralization policy, clinical outcomes have been improved in patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer. However, centralization could exacerbate the prolongation of surgical waiting time. This study aims to investigate whether the shorter waiting time correlates with the better survival and to identify the major confounders that influence the association between those.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, a total 554 patients with pathologically confirmed pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were assessed the eligibility from 2014 through 2015. Patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, body-tail resection, total pancreatectomy and combined adjacent organ resection were excluded. All patients were divided into two groups by median waiting time, 21 days, defined as the date difference between initial imaging diagnosis and operation.

Results

Median overall survival did not differ between long and short waiting group (30.4 vs 24.8 months, p=0.35; HR=0.84, 95% CI=0.58-1.21). The proportion of cancer stage shifting, the difference between clinical and pathologic staging, did not differ depending on waiting time group (p=0.811 and 0.255, each of reviewers). Short waiting time was highly correlated with high initial clinical stage (Spearman correlation coefficients -0.201 (p=0.006) and -0.100 (p=0.175), each of reviewers).

Conclusions

Initial clinical stage had confounding effect on the association between waiting time and overall survival. Therefore, in evaluating centralization policy at the national level, evidence for maximum acceptable waiting time should be investigated in the near future with considering that surgical waiting time could be affected by initial clinical stage.

Time to Surgery: a Misguided Quality Metric in Early Stage Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

Longer time to surgery is associated with worse outcomes in several cancers. We sought to identify disparities in time from diagnosis to surgery in pancreatic cancer and whether delays to surgery correlated with worse survival.

METHODS

The US National Cancer Database (2003-2011) was reviewed for patients with clinical stages I-II pancreatic adenocarcinoma who underwent surgical resection. Patients who received neoadjuvant therapy were excluded. Linear regression, Kaplan-Meier analyses, and Cox regression were performed as 3-month landmark analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 14,807 patients included, 37.8% underwent resection ≤ 1 week, 13.7% 1-2 weeks, 25.4% 2-4 weeks, 19.5% 4-8 weeks, and 3.7% 8-12 weeks. Older age, Medicare coverage, greater distance from hospital, treatment at an academic center, and greater comorbidities were associated with increased time. After excluding patients treated within 1 week of diagnosis and controlling for patient, disease, and treatment characteristics, greater time was not associated with worse survival (2-4, HR 1.03, P = 0.399; 4-8, HR 0.98, P = 0.529; 8-12, P = 0.123).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with stages I-II pancreatic adenocarcinoma, there are disparities in surgical wait times. However, earlier initiation of surgical resection within 12 weeks of diagnosis is not associated with a survival benefit. This suggests that allowing time for confirmatory testing and optimization in preparation for surgery may not negatively impact survival.

Does the surgical waiting list affect pathological and survival outcome in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma?

BACKGROUND

High-volume centers have to deal with long surgical waiting-lists leading to a potential delay in treatment. This study assessed whether a longer time from diagnosis to surgery worsened pathological and survival outcomes in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients treated for resectable PDAC. Difference in size between preoperative CT-scan and specimen, pathological features, the rate of vascular and R1 resections as well as recurrence and survival were analyzed depending on the waiting time using a 30-day cut-off.

RESULTS

Waiting more than 30 days for surgery was associated with an increase in tumor size on specimen when compared with CT-scan (+3 vs. +1 mm, p = 0.04). T and N status, rate of vascular resection, grading, perineural and lymphovascular infiltration, and R1 rates did not differ between groups, as well as tumor recurrence (48.8% vs. 48.9%, p = 0.5) and survival (31 vs. 29 months, p = 0.7). For PDAC < 20 mm, waiting less than 30 days improved overall survival (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

The duration of the surgical waiting-list did not affect pathological features and survival. Delayed surgery was associated with increased cancer size on the specimen. However, surgery should not be delayed for PDACs < 20 mm as this may negatively affect the prognosis.

Diagnostic intervals and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) resectability: a single-center retrospective analysis

Background

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) often presents with nonspecific symptoms and the workup is not standardized. To study the impact of delays in diagnosis and in the initiation of treatment, we investigated the relationship between length of diagnostic intervals and surgical resectability.

Methods

We performed a retrospective chart review of patients evaluated for PDAC at Johns Hopkins in 2014. Data were collected on the patient (date of first symptoms-first medical appointment), diagnostic (first medical appointment-diagnosis of PDAC), and treatment (diagnosis of PDAC-1st day of treatment) time intervals, and the upfront treatment received. Asymptomatic patients diagnosed incidentally, or for whom records were incomplete, were excluded from analysis.

Results

Of 453 charts reviewed, 116 patients met inclusion criteria. The median patient interval was 14 days [interquartile range (IQR): 6-30 days], the median diagnostic interval was 22 days (IQR: 8-46 days), and the median treatment interval was 26 days (IQR: 15-35 days). Thirty-eight patients (33%) received upfront surgery and 78 (67%) received nonsurgical treatment. After adjusting for multiple factors, the odds of receiving surgery significantly increased for individuals with a patient interval of 30 days or less [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 3.41; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.08-13.20; P=0.050] and with a diagnostic interval of 60 days or less (aOR: 15.68; 95% CI: 2.95-291.00, P=0.009).

Conclusions

A patient interval less than 1 month and a diagnostic interval less than 2 months for symptomatic PDAC are associated with increased odds of upfront surgical resection. These data provide initial evidence that reducing diagnostic delays may lead to improved outcomes in PDAC.

Association of time-to-surgery with outcomes in clinical stage I-II pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated with upfront surgery

BACKGROUND

Time-to-surgery from cancer diagnosis has increased in the United States. We aimed to determine the association between time-to-surgery and oncologic outcomes in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma undergoing upfront surgery.

METHODS

The 2004-2012 National Cancer Database was reviewed for patients undergoing curative-intent surgery without neoadjuvant therapy for clinical stage I-II pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. A multivariable Cox model with restricted cubic splines was used to define time-to-surgery as short (1-14 days), medium (15-42), and long (43-120). Overall survival was examined using Cox shared frailty models. Secondary outcomes were examined using mixed-effects logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Of 16,763 patients, time-to-surgery was short in 34.4%, medium in 51.6%, and long in 14.0%. More short time-to-surgery patients were young, privately insured, healthy, and treated at low-volume hospitals. Adjusted hazards of mortality were lower for medium (hazard ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval, .90, 0.97) and long time-to-surgery (hazard ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval, 0.86, 0.96) than short. There were no differences in adjusted odds of node positivity, clinical to pathologic upstaging, being unresectable or stage IV at exploration, and positive margins. Medium time-to-surgery patients had higher adjusted odds (odds ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval, 1.03, 1.20) of receiving an adequate lymphadenectomy than short. Ninety-day mortality was lower in medium (odds ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval, 0.65, 0.85) and long time-to-surgery (odds ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval, 0.60, 0.88) than short.

CONCLUSION

In this observational analysis, short time-to-surgery was associated with slightly shorter OS and higher perioperative mortality. These results may suggest that delays for medical optimization and referral to high volume surgeons are safe.

Distinguishing Benign from Malignant Pancreatic and Periampullary Lesions Using Combined Use of ¹H-NMR Spectroscopy and Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry

Previous work demonstrated that serum metabolomics can distinguish pancreatic cancer from benign disease. However, in the clinic, non-pancreatic periampullary cancers are difficult to distinguish from pancreatic cancer. Therefore, to test the clinical utility of this technology, we determined whether any pancreatic and periampullary adenocarcinoma could be distinguished from benign masses and biliary strictures. Sera from 157 patients with malignant and benign pancreatic and periampullary lesions were analyzed using proton nuclear magnetic resonance (¹H-NMR) spectroscopy and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS). Multivariate projection modeling using SIMCA-P+ software in training datasets (n = 80) was used to generate the best models to differentiate disease states. Models were validated in test datasets (n = 77). The final ¹H-NMR spectroscopy and GC-MS metabolomic profiles consisted of 14 and 18 compounds, with AUROC values of 0.74 (SE 0.06) and 0.62 (SE 0.08), respectively. The combination of ¹H-NMR spectroscopy and GC-MS metabolites did not substantially improve this performance (AUROC 0.66, SE 0.08). In patients with adenocarcinoma, glutamate levels were consistently higher, while glutamine and alanine levels were consistently lower. Pancreatic and periampullary adenocarcinomas can be distinguished from benign lesions. To further enhance the discriminatory power of metabolomics in this setting, it will be important to identify the metabolomic changes that characterize each of the subclasses of this heterogeneous group of cancers.

Waiting Time from Diagnosis to Treatment has no Impact on Survival in Patients with Esophageal Cancer

Background

Waiting time from diagnosis to treatment has emerged as an important quality indicator in cancer care. This study was designed to determine the impact of waiting time on long-term outcome of patients with esophageal cancer who are treated with neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery or primary surgery.

Methods

Patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer at the University Medical Center Utrecht between 2003 and 2014 were included. Patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery and treated with primary surgery were separately analyzed. The influence of waiting time on survival was analyzed using Cox proportional hazard analyses. Kaplan–Meier curves for short (<8 weeks) and long (≥8 weeks) waiting times were constructed.

Results

A total of 351 patients were included; 214 received neoadjuvant treatment, and 137 underwent primary surgery. In the neoadjuvant group, the waiting time had no impact on disease-free survival (DFS) [hazard ratio (HR) 0.96, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.88–1.04; p = 0.312] or overall survival (OS) (HR 0.96, 95 % CI 0.88–1.05; p = 0.372). Accordingly, no differences were found between neoadjuvantly treated patients with waiting times of <8 and ≥8 weeks in terms of DFS (p = 0.506) and OS (p = 0.693). In the primary surgery group, the waiting time had no impact on DFS (HR 1.03, 95 % CI 0.95–1.12; p = 0.443) or OS (HR 1.06, 95 % CI 0.99–1.13; p = 0.108). Waiting times of <8 weeks versus ≥8 weeks did not result in differences regarding DFS (p = 0.884) or OS (p = 0.374).

Conclusions

In esophageal cancer patients treated with curative intent by either neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery or primary surgery, waiting time from diagnosis to treatment has no impact on long-term outcome.

Effect of treatment delay on survival in patients with cervical cancer: a historical cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of treatment delay on prognosis in patients with cervical cancer.

METHODS

The study group of this historic cohort study comprised 321 patients newly diagnosed with cervical cancer between 1999 and 2010. Time from diagnosis to treatment was analyzed both as a continuous variable and as a categorical variable in 3 groups that differed in waiting time between diagnosis and treatment initiation: 30 days or less (group 1, n = 134), 30 to 45 days (group 2, n = 86), and more than 45 days (group 3, n = 101). Associations between waiting time group, patients' characteristics, and disease outcome were investigated using t tests, analyses of variance and Cox regression analyses, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, and log-rank (Mantel-Cox) tests.

RESULTS

Time from diagnosis to treatment initiation, when analyzed as a continuous variable, was not a significant factor in survival. There were no between-group differences in age, smoking rate, marital status, gravidity, parity, tumor histology, or lymph node involvement. Early-stage disease and small tumor diameter were diagnosed most frequently in group 3. However, there was no significant between-group difference in 3-year survival rates (74.6%, 82.2%, and 80.8% in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively; P = 0.38). On multivariate analysis, only stage, histology, and lymph node involvement were significant prognostic factors for survival. Before starting treatment, 28 patients underwent ovarian preservation procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Longer waiting time from diagnosis to treatment was not associated with worse survival. Our findings imply that if patients desire fertility or ovarian preservation procedures before starting treatment, it is acceptable to allow time for them.

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.

Efficacy of a dual-ring wound protector for prevention of incisional surgical site infection after Whipple's procedure (pancreaticoduodenectomy) with preoperatively-placed intrabiliary stents: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Among surgical oncology patients, incisional surgical site infection is associated with substantially increased morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs. Moreover, while adults undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy with preoperative placement of an intrabiliary stent have a high risk of this type of infection, and wound protectors may significantly reduce its risk, no relevant studies of wound protectors yet exist involving this patient population. This study will evaluate the efficacy of a dual-ring wound protector for prevention of incisional surgical site infection among adults undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy with preoperatively-placed intrabiliary stents.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study will be a parallel, dual-arm, randomised controlled trial that will utilise a more explanatory than pragmatic attitude. All adults (≥18 years) undergoing a pancreaticoduodenectomy at the Foothills Medical Centre in Calgary, Alberta, Canada with preoperative placement of an intrabiliary stent will be considered eligible. Exclusion criteria will include patient age <18 years and those receiving long-term glucocorticoids. The trial will employ block randomisation to allocate patients to a commercial dual-ring wound protector (the Alexis Wound Protector) or no wound protector and the current standard of care. The main outcome measure will be the rate of surgical site infection as defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria within 30 days of the index operation date as determined by a research assistant blinded to treatment allocation. Outcomes will be analysed by a statistician blinded to allocation status by calculating risk ratios and 95% CIs and compared using Fisher's exact test.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This will be the first randomised trial to evaluate the efficacy of a dual-ring wound protector for prevention of incisional surgical site infection among patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. Results of this study are expected to be available in 2016/2017 and will be disseminated using an integrated and end-of-grant knowledge translation strategy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01836237.