Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39560783›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2024

Diagnostic trajectories of patients with rare cancer in the Netherlands: results from a nationwide cross-sectional survey.

Catarina S Padilla, Eline de Heus, Milou J P Reuvers, Marga Schrieks, Vivian Engelen, Dirk Grunhagen, Margot E T Tesselaar, Winette T A van der Graaf, Saskia F A Duijts, Olga Husson

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. "The uncharted waters of completely not knowing what's next": rare cancer patients' experiences regarding navigating uncertainty.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. AI-assisted multimodal data integration for precision oncology.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026
    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.

Catarina S PadillaDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Eline de HeusDepartment of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Milou J P ReuversDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Marga SchrieksDivision Internal Medicine and Dermatology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Vivian EngelenDutch Federation of Cancer Patients Organisations, Nederlandse Federatie Van Kankerpatiëntenorganisaties, NFK), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Dirk GrunhagenDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Margot E T TesselaarDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Winette T A van der GraafDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Saskia F A DuijtsDepartment of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Olga HussonDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. o.husson@erasmusmc.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diagnosing rare cancers is challenging and often leads to prolonged diagnostic trajectories. This study investigated the diagnostic trajectory of patients with rare cancers in The Netherlands. Data from 1541 patients were recruited via patient advocacy in a national online survey on their diagnostic trajectory, such as first general practitioner (GP) consultation to hospital referral and number of hospital visits before final diagnosis. Differences between solid vs. non-solid tumours and EURACAN domains were explored. Diagnostic timelines varied from less than 3 months to over 12 months. Most patients (76.0%) first consulted their GP before going to a hospital. 76.3% of all patients were referred to a hospital within less than 3 months. 32.1% reported receiving an incorrect diagnosis, and 44.6% of them underwent treatment or medication for the (perceived) incorrect diagnosis. Patients with solid vs. non-solid rare cancers trajectories differed significantly for treatment hospital, route to diagnosis, correctness of initial diagnosis, and number of hospital visits before correct diagnosis (all p < 0.001). Patients with neuroendocrine (NET; 21.7%) and endocrine tumours (17.5%) experienced longer GP-to-hospital visit waiting times. Patients with non-solid cancers often received a correct diagnosis after one hospital visit (75%) when compared with patients with solid cancer (2+ = 57.7%). Those with rare skin cancer and non-cutaneous melanoma, head and neck, and thoracic cancer visited multiple hospitals before an accurate diagnosis (56.7%, 53.8%, and 50.0%). Patients with rare cancers face significant challenges with diagnostic delays and inaccuracies. Researching symptom signatures and investing in regional clinical networks might improve diagnostic timelines.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsRare DiseasesReferral and ConsultationAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesDelayed DiagnosisDiagnostic ErrorsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsSurveys and QuestionnairesDiagnostic trajectoryHealthcarePatient experienceRare cancersTreatment trajectory

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.