Direct access CT for suspicion of brain tumour: an analysis of referral pathways in a population-based patient group

• Main Authors: K. Zienius, Ip Chak-Lam, J. Park, M. Ozawa, W. Hamilton, D. Weller, D. Summers, L. Porteous, S. Mohiuddin, E. Keeney, W. Hollingworth, Y. Ben-Shlomo, R. Grant, P. M. Brennan
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2019-08-01
• Series: BMC Family Practice
• Subjects: Brain tumor; Brain cancer; Early diagnosis of cancer; Primary health care; General practice; CT scan
• Online Access: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12875-019-1003-y

Abstract Background Brain tumour patients see their primary care doctor on average three or more times before diagnosis, so there may be an opportunity to identify ‘at risk’ patients earlier. Suspecting a brain tumour diagnosis is difficult because brain tumour-related symptoms are typically non-specific. Methods We explored the predictive value of referral guidelines (Kernick and NICE 2005) for brain imaging where a tumour is suspected, in a population-based patient group referred for direct access CT of the head. A consensus panel reviewed whether non-tumour findings were clinically important or whether further investigation was necessary. Results Over a 5-year period, 3257 head scans were performed; 318 scans were excluded according to pre-specified criteria. 53 patients (1.8%) were reported to have intracranial tumours, of which 42 were significant (diagnostic yield of 1.43%). There were no false negative CT scans for tumour. With symptom-based referral guidelines primary care doctors can identify patients with a 3% positive predictive value (PPV). 559 patients had non-tumour findings, 31% of which were deemed clinically significant. In 34% of these 559 patients, referral for further imaging and/or specialist assessment from primary care was still thought warranted. Conclusion Existing referral guidelines are insufficient to stratify patients adequately based on their symptoms, according to the likelihood that a tumour will be found on brain imaging. Identification of non-tumour findings may be significant for patients and earlier specialist input into interpretation of these images may be beneficial. Improving guidelines to better identify patients at risk of a brain tumour should be a priority, to improve speed of diagnosis, and reduce unnecessary imaging and costs. Future guidelines may incorporate groups of symptoms, clinical signs and tests to improve the predictive value.