Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39054298›Full record

ArticleBJGP open2024

A scoping review of unexpected weight loss and cancer: risk, guidelines, and recommendations for follow-up in primary care.

Javiera Martinez-Gutierrez, Lucas De Mendonca, Philip Ly, Alex Lee, Barbara Hunter, Jo-Anne Manski-Nankervis, Sophie Chima, Deborah Daly, George Fishman, Fong Seng Lim and 4 more

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

14 authors.

Javiera Martinez-GutierrezDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia javiera.martinez@unimelb.edu.au.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2493-9974
Lucas De MendoncaDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Philip LyThe Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia.
Alex LeeDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Barbara HunterDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Jo-Anne Manski-NankervisDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Sophie ChimaDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1746-5851
Deborah DalyDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
George FishmanPrimary Care Collaborative Cancer Clinical Trials Group (PC4), Melbourne, Australia.
Fong Seng LimSingapore Primary Care Cancer Network (SPriNT), Singapore, Singapore.
Benny WangSingapore Primary Care Cancer Network (SPriNT), Singapore, Singapore.
Craig NelsonWestern Health Chronic Disease Alliance, Western Health Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Brian NicholsonNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences. University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Jon EmeryDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCancer diagnoses often begin with consultations with GPs, but the non-specific nature of symptoms can lead to delayed diagnosis. Unexpected weight loss (UWL) is a common non-specific symptom linked to undiagnosed cancer, yet guidelines for its diagnostic assessment in general practice lack consistency.

aimTo synthesise evidence on the association between UWL and cancer diagnosis, and to review clinical guidelines and recommendations for assessing patients with UWL. DESIGN &

settingSystematic search and analysis of studies conducted in primary care.

methodFour databases were searched for peer-reviewed literature from 2012 to 2023. Two reviewers conducted all the steps. A narrative review was conducted detailing the evidence for UWL as a risk factor for undiagnosed cancer, existing clinical guidance, and recommended diagnostic approach.

resultsWe included 25 studies involving 916 092 patients; 92% provided strong evidence of an association between UWL and undiagnosed cancer. The National Institute for Health Care and Excellence (NICE) Cancer Guideline in the UK was frequently cited. General suggestions encompassed regular weight monitoring, family history, risk factor evaluation, additional signs and symptoms, and a comprehensive physical examination. Commonly recommended pathology tests included C-reactive protein (CRP), complete blood count, alkaline phosphatase, and thyroid-stimulating hormone. Immunochemical faecal occult blood test, abdominal ultrasound, and chest X-ray were also prevalent. One large cohort study provided age, sex, and differential diagnosis-specific recommendations.

conclusionThis evidence review informs recommendations for investigating patients with UWL and will contribute to a computer decision support tool implementation in primary care, enhance UWL assessment, and potentially facilitate earlier cancer diagnosis.

Indexed as

CancerGeneral practitionersPreventionPrimary healthcareScreening

Identifiers

PMID39054298
PMCPMC11687243

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.