Cargando…

Gut feeling for the diagnosis of cancer in general practice: a diagnostic accuracy review

OBJECTIVES: Diagnostic delay in cancer is a challenge in primary care. Although screening tests are effective in diagnosing some cancers such as breast, colorectal and cervical cancers, symptom-based cancer diagnosis is often difficult due to its low incidence in primary care and the influence of pa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yao, Masahiro, Kaneko, Makoto, Watson, Jessica, Irving, Greg
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10423799/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37567752
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-068549
_version_ 1785089527167057920
author Yao, Masahiro
Kaneko, Makoto
Watson, Jessica
Irving, Greg
author_facet Yao, Masahiro
Kaneko, Makoto
Watson, Jessica
Irving, Greg
author_sort Yao, Masahiro
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Diagnostic delay in cancer is a challenge in primary care. Although screening tests are effective in diagnosing some cancers such as breast, colorectal and cervical cancers, symptom-based cancer diagnosis is often difficult due to its low incidence in primary care and the influence of patient anxiety, doctor–patient relationship and psychosocial context. A general practitioner’s gut feeling for cancer may play a role in the early diagnosis of cancer in primary care where diagnostic resources are limited. The aim of this study is to summarise existing evidence about the test accuracy of gut feeling (index test) in symptomatic adult patients presenting to general practice, compared with multidisciplinary team-confirmed diagnosis of cancer (reference standard). DESIGN: Diagnostic accuracy review following Cochrane methods was performed. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Medion databases. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Cross-sectional, cohort and randomised studies of test accuracy that compared gut feeling (index test) with an appropriate cancer diagnosis (reference standard). No language or publication status restrictions were applied. We included all studies published before 25 March 2022. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Methodological quality was appraised, using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) criteria. Meta-analysis with hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) models was used. RESULTS: Of 1286 potentially relevant studies identified, six met the inclusion criteria. For two of the six studies, data could not be extracted despite contacting authors. No studies satisfied all QUADAS-2 criteria. After meta-analysis of data from the remaining studies, the summary point of HSROC had a sensitivity of 0.40 (95% CI: 0.28, 0.53) and a specificity of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.75, 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Gut feeling for cancer when used in symptomatic adult patients in general practice has a relatively low sensitivity and high specificity. When the prevalence of cancer in the symptomatic population presenting in general practice exceeds 1.15%, the performance of gut feeling reaches the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence 3% positive predictive value threshold for action, which recommends urgent access to specialist care and further investigations. The findings support the continued and expanded use of gut feeling items in referral pathways.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10423799
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104237992023-08-15 Gut feeling for the diagnosis of cancer in general practice: a diagnostic accuracy review Yao, Masahiro Kaneko, Makoto Watson, Jessica Irving, Greg BMJ Open General practice / Family practice OBJECTIVES: Diagnostic delay in cancer is a challenge in primary care. Although screening tests are effective in diagnosing some cancers such as breast, colorectal and cervical cancers, symptom-based cancer diagnosis is often difficult due to its low incidence in primary care and the influence of patient anxiety, doctor–patient relationship and psychosocial context. A general practitioner’s gut feeling for cancer may play a role in the early diagnosis of cancer in primary care where diagnostic resources are limited. The aim of this study is to summarise existing evidence about the test accuracy of gut feeling (index test) in symptomatic adult patients presenting to general practice, compared with multidisciplinary team-confirmed diagnosis of cancer (reference standard). DESIGN: Diagnostic accuracy review following Cochrane methods was performed. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Medion databases. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Cross-sectional, cohort and randomised studies of test accuracy that compared gut feeling (index test) with an appropriate cancer diagnosis (reference standard). No language or publication status restrictions were applied. We included all studies published before 25 March 2022. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Methodological quality was appraised, using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) criteria. Meta-analysis with hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) models was used. RESULTS: Of 1286 potentially relevant studies identified, six met the inclusion criteria. For two of the six studies, data could not be extracted despite contacting authors. No studies satisfied all QUADAS-2 criteria. After meta-analysis of data from the remaining studies, the summary point of HSROC had a sensitivity of 0.40 (95% CI: 0.28, 0.53) and a specificity of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.75, 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Gut feeling for cancer when used in symptomatic adult patients in general practice has a relatively low sensitivity and high specificity. When the prevalence of cancer in the symptomatic population presenting in general practice exceeds 1.15%, the performance of gut feeling reaches the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence 3% positive predictive value threshold for action, which recommends urgent access to specialist care and further investigations. The findings support the continued and expanded use of gut feeling items in referral pathways. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-08-11 /pmc/articles/PMC10423799/ /pubmed/37567752 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-068549 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle General practice / Family practice
Yao, Masahiro
Kaneko, Makoto
Watson, Jessica
Irving, Greg
Gut feeling for the diagnosis of cancer in general practice: a diagnostic accuracy review
title Gut feeling for the diagnosis of cancer in general practice: a diagnostic accuracy review
title_full Gut feeling for the diagnosis of cancer in general practice: a diagnostic accuracy review
title_fullStr Gut feeling for the diagnosis of cancer in general practice: a diagnostic accuracy review
title_full_unstemmed Gut feeling for the diagnosis of cancer in general practice: a diagnostic accuracy review
title_short Gut feeling for the diagnosis of cancer in general practice: a diagnostic accuracy review
title_sort gut feeling for the diagnosis of cancer in general practice: a diagnostic accuracy review
topic General practice / Family practice
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10423799/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37567752
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-068549
work_keys_str_mv AT yaomasahiro gutfeelingforthediagnosisofcanceringeneralpracticeadiagnosticaccuracyreview
AT kanekomakoto gutfeelingforthediagnosisofcanceringeneralpracticeadiagnosticaccuracyreview
AT watsonjessica gutfeelingforthediagnosisofcanceringeneralpracticeadiagnosticaccuracyreview
AT irvinggreg gutfeelingforthediagnosisofcanceringeneralpracticeadiagnosticaccuracyreview