Referral to medical oncologists: are there barriers at the gate?

Why do delays to diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer occur? A mixed methods study of insights from Australian clinicians

AIMS

Delays in lung cancer diagnosis and treatment can impact survival. We explored reasons for delays experienced by patients with lung cancer to identify themes and strategies for improvement.

METHODS

We used national timeframe recommendations and standardized definitions to identify General Practitioners and specialists caring for 34 patients who experienced delays in our previous Medicare data linkage study. Clinicians participated in a survey and interview, including qualitative (exploratory, open-ended questions) and quantitative (rating scales) components. Exploratory content analysis, cross-case triangulation, and descriptive statistics were performed. Krippendorff's coefficient was used to assess level of agreement between clinicians and patients, and among clinicians, on perceived delays.

RESULTS

Overall, 27 out of 50 (54%) eligible clinicians participated (including 11 respiratory physicians and seven medical oncologists). Dominant themes for perceived causes of delay included referral barriers, limited General Practitioner (GP) awareness of subtle clinical presentations, insufficient radiology interpretation, and lack of cancer coordinators. "Unavoidable" delays may occur due to clinical circumstances. Awareness and uptake of referral and timeframe guidelines were low, with clinicians using professional networks over guidelines. There was no consistent agreement on perceived delays between patients and clinicians, and among clinicians (Krippendorff's coefficient .03 [P = .8]).

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies for minimizing avoidable delays include efficient GP to specialist referral and more lung cancer coordinators to assist with patient expectations and waitlist management. Clinicians' reliance on experience, rather than guidelines, indicates need to review guideline utility. Raising awareness of benchmarks and unavoidable barriers may recalibrate perceptions of "delays" to diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer.

Association between the availability of medical oncologists and initiation of chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer

PURPOSE

Although the number of medical oncologists (MOs) has steadily increased over time, and adjuvant chemotherapy provides significant survival benefit for patients with stage III colon cancer, many patients still do not receive chemotherapy. Uneven geographic distribution of MOs may contribute to decreasing access to cancer care. This study explored the association of MO availability by hospital service area (HSA) of patient residence and access to chemotherapy treatment.

METHODS

Using the linked SEER-Medicare database, the study identified 9,262 patients who were age ≥66 years and underwent colectomy for stage III colon cancer diagnosed from 2000 to 2005. MOs were identified by physician specialty codes. HSAs are geographic areas that are relatively self-contained with respect to routine hospital care. Multivariate logistic regression was used to investigate the association between MO availability by HSA of patient residence and initiation of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Within 3 months after colectomy, 5,622 patients (60.7%) initiated chemotherapy. Adjusting for clinical and patient characteristics, patients residing in an HSA with ≥ one MO had an increased likelihood of initiating chemotherapy within 3 months after colectomy compared with those living in areas with no MOs (one to two MOs: OR, 1.451 [P < .01]; three to eight MOs: OR, 1.497 [P < .01]; ≥ nine MOs: OR, 1.322 [P < .01]).

CONCLUSION

Results suggest that the availability of ≥ one MO within the HSA in which a patient resides was associated with greater access to chemotherapy after surgery.

Referral patterns and adjuvant chemotherapy use in patients with stage II colon cancer

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the actual rate of use of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colon cancer and about referral patterns that give patients access to this treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We searched the tumor registry at Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas to identify patients with stage II colon cancer who underwent resection between 1995 and 2003. The rates of referral to medical oncology and adjuvant chemotherapy use were calculated and potential predictive variables were analyzed using univariate and multivariate techniques.

RESULTS

We identified 287 patients with stage II colon cancer. A total of 160 patients (56%) were referred to a medical oncologist. Eighty patients (28%) received adjuvant chemotherapy. Age < 50 years, private insurance status, lower comorbidity score, higher T stage, and poor tumor differentiation were significant predictors of adjuvant chemotherapy use (P <or= .05).

CONCLUSION

Variability and controversy exist over the use of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage II colon cancer. Our study suggests many patients are not referred to a medical oncologist and may not be fully informed of all treatment options. Referral patterns become more important as a better understanding of recurrence risk is achieved and patient selection for adjuvant chemotherapy is optimized.

The role of the surgeon in whether patients with lymph node-positive colon cancer see a medical oncologist

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy improves survival for patients with stage III colon cancer, but some older patients with lymph node-positive colon cancer do not see a medical oncologist and, thus, do not receive adjuvant chemotherapy.

METHODS

To evaluate the role of the surgeon in determining referrals to medical oncology among patients with stage III colon cancer, the authors conducted a retrospective cohort study of 6158 patients aged >or=66 years who were diagnosed with stage III colon cancer from 1992 through 1999 by using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked database. Multilevel analysis was used to simultaneously model variations in patients' seeing a medical oncologist at the patient and surgeon levels.

RESULTS

Twenty-one percent of the total variance in seeing a medical oncologist was attributable to the surgeon after adjusting for available patient, tumor, and surgeon characteristics. The individual surgeon characteristics that significantly predicted whether the patient saw a medical oncologist were year since graduation (<or=10 years vs >20 years; hazard ratio [HR], 1.60; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.19-2.16), practicing in a teaching hospital (yes vs. no: HR; 1.30; 95% CI, 1.07-1.58), and volume of patients with colon cancer (<30 patients vs >or=121 patients; HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.46-0.94). Surgeon sex, race, board certification, and type of practice were not independent predictors of medical oncology referral.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons accounted for approximately 20% of the variation in patients seeing a medical oncologist. Interventions at the level of the surgeon may be appropriate to improve the care of patients with colon cancer.