ArticleJornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia2022
Mesothelioma in a developing country: a retrospective analysis of the diagnostic process.
Article in Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mesothelioma diagnosis-still a challenge.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia · 2024Article
- Malignant mesothelioma tumours: molecular pathogenesis, diagnosis, and therapies accompanying clinical studies.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Malignant mesothelioma: health care awareness and preparedness.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia · 2022Article
- Mesothelioma and Social Security Benefits in Brazil: 2019 to 2021.Revista brasileira de medicina do trabalho : publicacao oficial da Associacao Nacional de Medicina do Trabalho-ANAMTReview
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the process of diagnosing patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) at a tertiary care hospital.
methodsThis was a retrospective study involving patients referred to a tertiary-care cancer center in Brazil between 2009 and 2020. The diagnostic process was divided into four steps: onset of symptoms, referral to a specialist visit, histopathological diagnosis, and beginning of treatment. The intervals between each phase and the factors for delays were evaluated. Data including clinical status, radiological examinations, staging, treatment modalities, and survival outcomes were collected.
resultsDuring the study period, 66 patients (mean age = 64 years) were diagnosed with MPM and underwent treatment. Only 27 (41%) of the patients had knowledge of prior exposure to asbestos. The median number of months (IQR) between the onset of symptoms and the first specialist visit, between the specialist visit and histopathological characterization, and between definite diagnosis and beginning of treatment was, respectively, 6.5 (2.0-11.4), 1.5 (0.6-2.1), and 1.7 (1.2-3.4). The knowledge of prior asbestos exposure was associated with a shorter time to referral to a specialist (median: 214 vs. 120 days; p = 0.04). A substantial number of nondiagnostic procedures and false-negative biopsy results (the majority of which involved the use of Cope needle biopsy) were found to be decisive factors for the length of waiting time. The mean overall survival was 11.9 months.
conclusionsThe unfamiliarity of health professionals with MPM and the patient's lack of knowledge of prior asbestos exposure were the major factors to cause a long time interval between the onset of symptoms and beginning of treatment. An overall survival shorter than 1 year is likely to have been due to the aforementioned delays.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.