Are non-cancer diagnoses missed opportunities in diagnosing cancer? Observational case-control studies

Background Initial non-cancer diagnoses that plausibly explain cancer symptoms may be underexplored missed opportunities in cancer diagnosis. Aim To characterise "interim diagnoses" representing potential missed opportunities to diagnose cancer; namely, non-cancer conditions diagnosed before cancer that are associated both with cancer and better and/or worse cancer outcomes. Design and Setting Observational case-control and case-only analyses of registry-linked Clinical Practice Research Datalink data from English primary care. Methods Cancer cases (cancer registry diagnoses, 1/1/2012-31/12/2018) were matched to cancer-free controls on birth year, gender and general practice. Incident non-cancer diagnoses sharing cancer symptoms were sought in the year before the case's diagnosis. Conditional logistic regression characterised non-cancer diagnoses associated with cancer (Bonferroni-corrected p<0.05). Associations between non-cancer diagnoses and cancer outcomes were tested using logistic regression (stage, route to diagnosis) and parametric regression accelerated failure-time models (1-year survival). Results Analyses of 223,422 patients yielded evidence of 37 "interim diagnoses" across 7 cancer sites that were consistently associated with worse (n=18) or better (n=8) cancer outcomes, or a mixture of worse and better outcomes within or between cancer sites (n=11). For example, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, gastritis, oesophagitis, or peptic ulcer were associated with worse outcomes in pancreatic, colorectal and ovarian cancers, with better outcomes in stomach cancer, and a mixture in oesophageal cancer. Conclusion We characterise 37 "interim" diagnoses as potential missed opportunities in cancer diagnosis. Safety-netting around these non-cancer diagnoses, focussing on management of clinical uncertainty and robust patient follow-up, may help avoid missed opportunities to diagnose cancer and improve outcomes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
British Journal of General Practice
Published
2026-11-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp.2026.0314
Primary Topic
Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Are non-cancer diagnoses missed opportunities in diagnosing cancer? Observational case-control studies

Mel Ramasawmy, Luke T. A. Mounce, Sarah J Price, Brian David Nicholson et al.
3 links
British Journal of General Practice
Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
article

Are non-cancer diagnoses missed opportunities in diagnosing cancer? Observational case-control studies

Mel Ramasawmy, Luke T. A. Mounce, Sarah J Price, Brian David Nicholson, Georgia Bell Black, Claire Friedemann Smith, Gary Abel, Anne E. Spencer, Fiona Mary Walter, Esther Nansubuga, Suzanne Emilie Scott, Deepthi Lavu, B. Wiering, Richard David Neal, William Trevor Hamilton, Sarah F. Moore, Luke Robles, Angela King, Georgina Laity
article en

Abstract

Background Initial non-cancer diagnoses that plausibly explain cancer symptoms may be underexplored missed opportunities in cancer diagnosis. Aim To characterise "interim diagnoses" representing potential missed opportunities to diagnose cancer; namely, non-cancer conditions diagnosed before cancer that are associated both with cancer and better and/or worse cancer outcomes. Design and Setting Observational case-control and case-only analyses of registry-linked Clinical Practice Research Datalink data from English primary care. Methods Cancer cases (cancer registry diagnoses, 1/1/2012-31/12/2018) were matched to cancer-free controls on birth year, gender and general practice. Incident non-cancer diagnoses sharing cancer symptoms were sought in the year before the case's diagnosis. Conditional logistic regression characterised non-cancer diagnoses associated with cancer (Bonferroni-corrected p<0.05). Associations between non-cancer diagnoses and cancer outcomes were tested using logistic regression (stage, route to diagnosis) and parametric regression accelerated failure-time models (1-year survival). Results Analyses of 223,422 patients yielded evidence of 37 "interim diagnoses" across 7 cancer sites that were consistently associated with worse (n=18) or better (n=8) cancer outcomes, or a mixture of worse and better outcomes within or between cancer sites (n=11). For example, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, gastritis, oesophagitis, or peptic ulcer were associated with worse outcomes in pancreatic, colorectal and ovarian cancers, with better outcomes in stomach cancer, and a mixture in oesophageal cancer. Conclusion We characterise 37 "interim" diagnoses as potential missed opportunities in cancer diagnosis. Safety-netting around these non-cancer diagnoses, focussing on management of clinical uncertainty and robust patient follow-up, may help avoid missed opportunities to diagnose cancer and improve outcomes.

British Journal of General Practice
Queen Mary University of London (GB), University of Exeter (GB), University of Oxford (GB)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon