Predictors and consequences of different pathways to emergency diagnosis of cancer in England: Evidence from linked national audit and cancer registration data

Abstract

Background

Diagnosis of cancer soon after emergency care use is associated with adverse prognosis. We aimed to more precisely explore different definitions of emergency diagnosis.

Methods

For 43,383 patients in the National Cancer Diagnosis Audit and Routes to Diagnosis datasets, we defined two emergency care pathways: emergency referral (Type-A) and emergency hospital admission (Type-B). We examined patient and tumour factors associated with each pathway excluding the other, and in combination (Type-A+B), in particular their concordance and prognostic implications for short-term mortality.

Results

One in five patients (19 %) were diagnosed following emergency care use: 4 % through Type-A only, 7 % through Type-B only, and 8 % through Type-A+B. Higher co-morbidity, deprivation, advanced stage and certain cancer sites were associated with greater risk of emergency diagnosis. Concordance of emergency diagnosis pathway between Type-A and Type-B increased with age, co-morbidity and certain cancer sites. Patients with non-alarm symptoms were more likely to self-refer (Type-A) to an Emergency Department than patients with alarm symptoms. Associations with higher short-term mortality were strongest for Type-A+B.

Conclusions

We profile different pathways to emergency diagnosis and identify opportunities to improve diagnostic processes for these patients.