RESUMO
We report a cohort study of survival of patients with lung cancer presenting to a single multidisciplinary team between 1997 and 2011, according to symptoms at presentation. The overall median survival of the 3800 lung cases was 183 days (95% CI 171 to 195). There was a statistically significant difference in survival between the 12 symptom groups identified both without and with adjustment for the prognostic variables of age, gender and histology (P<0.001). Compared with the cough-alone symptom group, the risks of dying or HRs were significantly higher for the groups presenting with breathlessness (HR 1.86, 95% CI 1.54 to 2.24, n=359), systemic symptoms (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.45, n=95), weight loss (HR 2.46, 95% CI 1.90 to 3.18, n=106), chest pain (HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.56 to 2.45, n=159), cough with breathlessness (HR 1.59 95% CI 1.28 to 1.98, n=177), neurological symptoms (HR 3.07, 95% CI 2.45 to 3.84, n=155) and other symptom combinations (HR 2.05, 95% CI 1.75 to 2.40, n=1963). Cough may deserve particular prominence in public health campaigns.
Assuntos
Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/complicações , Neoplasias Pulmonares/complicações , Carcinoma de Pequenas Células do Pulmão/complicações , Avaliação de Sintomas , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/diagnóstico , Dor no Peito/etiologia , Tosse/etiologia , Dispneia/etiologia , Feminino , Hemoptise/etiologia , Humanos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso/etiologia , Prognóstico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Carcinoma de Pequenas Células do Pulmão/diagnóstico , Taxa de Sobrevida , Redução de PesoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Poor U.K. lung cancer survival rates may, in part, be due to late diagnosis. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of a mixed-method community-based social marketing intervention on lung cancer diagnoses. METHODS: A public awareness campaign in conjunction with brief intervention training in general practices was piloted in six localities with a high lung cancer incidence. End points were self-reported awareness of lung cancer symptoms; intention to seek healthcare; chest x-ray referral rates in primary care; secular trends in the incidence of lung cancer and stage at diagnosis, compared before and after the intervention. RESULTS: 21% (128/600) (95% CI 18% to 25%) of the targeted population recalled something about the campaign. Compared with a responder in the control area, the odds of a responder in the intervention area saying that they would visit their general practitioner and request a chest x-ray for a cough was 1.97 times (95% CI 1.18 to 3.31, p=0.01). Primary care chest x-ray referral rates increased by 20% in the targeted practices in the year following the intervention compared with a 2% fall in the control practices. The difference was highly significant, with an incidence rate ratio of 1.22 (95% CI 1.12 to 1.33, p=0.001). There was a 27% increase in lung cancer diagnoses in the intervention area compared with a fall in the control area. The incidence rate ratio was 1.42 (95% CI 0.83 to 2.44 p=0.199). CONCLUSION: This is encouraging early evidence that an awareness and early recognition initiative may facilitate lung cancer diagnosis.