Oliver Waddell, Andrew McCombie, Tamara Glyn, John Pearson, Jacqueline Keenan, Frank Frizelle
{"title":"The pathway to diagnosis of early-onset colorectal cancer: exploring diagnostic intervals and their effect on outcomes.","authors":"Oliver Waddell, Andrew McCombie, Tamara Glyn, John Pearson, Jacqueline Keenan, Frank Frizelle","doi":"10.1080/14796694.2025.2526319","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Early-onset colorectal cancer, diagnosed before 50 years (EOCRC), is rising. Previous studies suggest younger patients experience longer diagnostic intervals potentially contributing to poorer outcomes.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>A prospective cohort study comparing EOCRC patients in Canterbury, Aotearoa New Zealand, with a control group of late-onset patients (65+ years, LOCRC). Pathways to diagnosis and diagnostic intervals were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-three consecutive EOCRC patients were compared 64 LOCRC patients. The younger cohort was more likely to have advanced disease (stage four in 32% v 17%). Pathways to diagnosis were comparable between the groups (<i>p</i> > 0.05). EOCRC patients, however, visited their GP more frequently before diagnosis (<i>p</i> = 0.04), and 40% had an appraisal interval (time from symptoms to seeking medical advice) exceeding 3 months compared to 26% of LOCRC patients, though this was not significant (<i>p</i> = 0.146). Stage four EOCRCs were less likely to have appraisal intervals >3 months (OR 0.28, <i>p</i> = 0.046).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Pathways to diagnosis were similar between EOCRC and LOCRC patients. Shorter diagnostic intervals were associated with advanced disease, indicating that shortening diagnostic intervals alone may not improve outcomes. Diagnosing CRC prior to symptoms develop (screening) is likely the best way to improve outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":12672,"journal":{"name":"Future oncology","volume":" ","pages":"2471-2482"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12330238/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Future oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14796694.2025.2526319","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Early-onset colorectal cancer, diagnosed before 50 years (EOCRC), is rising. Previous studies suggest younger patients experience longer diagnostic intervals potentially contributing to poorer outcomes.
Research design and methods: A prospective cohort study comparing EOCRC patients in Canterbury, Aotearoa New Zealand, with a control group of late-onset patients (65+ years, LOCRC). Pathways to diagnosis and diagnostic intervals were compared.
Results: Sixty-three consecutive EOCRC patients were compared 64 LOCRC patients. The younger cohort was more likely to have advanced disease (stage four in 32% v 17%). Pathways to diagnosis were comparable between the groups (p > 0.05). EOCRC patients, however, visited their GP more frequently before diagnosis (p = 0.04), and 40% had an appraisal interval (time from symptoms to seeking medical advice) exceeding 3 months compared to 26% of LOCRC patients, though this was not significant (p = 0.146). Stage four EOCRCs were less likely to have appraisal intervals >3 months (OR 0.28, p = 0.046).
Conclusion: Pathways to diagnosis were similar between EOCRC and LOCRC patients. Shorter diagnostic intervals were associated with advanced disease, indicating that shortening diagnostic intervals alone may not improve outcomes. Diagnosing CRC prior to symptoms develop (screening) is likely the best way to improve outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Future Oncology (ISSN 1479-6694) provides a forum for a new era of cancer care. The journal focuses on the most important advances and highlights their relevance in the clinical setting. Furthermore, Future Oncology delivers essential information in concise, at-a-glance article formats - vital in delivering information to an increasingly time-constrained community.
The journal takes a forward-looking stance toward the scientific and clinical issues, together with the economic and policy issues that confront us in this new era of cancer care. The journal includes literature awareness such as the latest developments in radiotherapy and immunotherapy, concise commentary and analysis, and full review articles all of which provide key findings, translational to the clinical setting.