Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27340367›Full record

ArticleSarcoma2016

A Comprehensive Single Institutional Review of 2 Years in a Designated Fast-Track Sarcoma Diagnostic Clinic Linked with a Sarcoma Specialist Advisory Group: Meeting the Target but Failing the Task?

Zoltan Szucs, Dochka Davidson, Han Hsi Wong, Gail Horan, Philip W P Bearcroft, Ian Grant, Robert Grimer, Melanie A Hopper, Helen Hatcher, Helena Earl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sarcoma, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Assessing Sarcoma Awareness Among the General Population in Minnesota: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study from the Minnesota State Fair in 2015 and 2022.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Zoltan SzucsCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8080-3545
Dochka DavidsonCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK.
Han Hsi WongCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK.
Gail HoranCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK.
Philip W P BearcroftCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK.
Ian GrantCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK.
Robert GrimerThe Royal Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and Sarcoma SAG, Bristol Road, South Birmingham B31 2AP, UK.
Melanie A HopperCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK.
Helen HatcherCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK.
Helena EarlCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK; University of Cambridge Department of Oncology and NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Box 277, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background. National guidelines prompted the implementation of a designated two-week wait referral pathway to facilitate the early diagnosis of sarcomas, to improve treatment outcomes. Methods. Patients referred to the Cambridge Sarcoma Diagnostic Clinic between January 2013 and December 2014 were identified through the electronic appointments system. Information was retrospectively retrieved about patient characteristics and details of the diagnostic pathway. Results. 17.3% of patients referred (69/397) were diagnosed with a malignancy. Of these, 59.3% (41/69) had primary sarcomas, 17.4% (12/69) had metastatic cancer, and 23.2% (16/69) had a different primary malignancy. 15% of the 41 sarcomas were <5 cm, 34% in the 5-10 cm range, and 51% >10 cm. Sarcomas diagnosed through this clinic represented 13% (41/315) of sarcomas managed at the centre during the same 2 years. Conclusion. While we achieved the target of 10% (41/397) sarcoma diagnosis rate in the rapid access clinic, only 15% of these were <5 cm better prognosis lesions. This calls into question the "real world" impact of such diagnostic clinics on early diagnosis of sarcomas. In order to enhance generic cancer diagnostic skills, training in these diagnostic clinics could be usefully integrated into national training curricula for both surgical and nonsurgical oncologists.

Identifiers

PMID27340367
PMCPMC4909914

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.