Back

The impact of morbidity burden on cancer diagnosis; a retrospective cohort study in England

Wiering, B.; Mounce, L. T.; Price, S. J.; Shotter, D.; Valderas, J. M.; Merriel, S. W.; Moore, S.; Farmer, L.; Von Wagner, C.; Payne, R. A.; Renzi, C.; Lyratzopoulos, G.; Hamilton, W.; Abel, G. A.

2025-08-29 primary care research
10.1101/2025.08.28.25334632 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundExpediting cancer diagnosis is a priority in many countries. The rising prevalence of chronic conditions may complicate the cancer diagnostic process. We investigated whether patients with pre-existing morbidity were more likely to experience disadvantage in cancer diagnostic outcomes and processes. MethodsWe used linked primary, secondary care, and cancer registration data for patients aged 40+ years diagnosed with incident cancer in England during 2012-2018. The Cambridge Multimorbidity Score quantified morbidity burden. Logistic regressions investigated whether morbidity burden was associated with stage at diagnosis, 30-day all-cause mortality, emergency presentation- or urgent suspected cancer referral route to diagnosis. Results288,297 patients were included. Decreasing morbidity burden was associated with an increased likelihood of advanced-stage diagnosis (e.g. high burden vs. no burden aOR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.7-0.75, p<0.0001). There were u-shaped relationships between morbidity burden, emergency diagnoses and 30-day mortality, with those with high or no morbidity burden most likely to be diagnosed as an emergency and to die within 30 days after diagnosis. Diagnoses via urgent suspected cancer referrals decreased with increasing morbidity burden. Associations varied across cancer sites, though higher morbidity burden was not associated with advanced stage for any cancer. ConclusionContrary to expectations, not having pre-existing morbidities was associated with an increased risk of advanced-stage diagnosis and emergency presentations. This may reflect heightened surveillance of patients with morbidity being protective against later advanced-stage cancer diagnoses. These findings highlight the need for robust cancer surveillance processes and good comprehensive care that considers cancer alongside wider aspects of health.

Published in Cancer Epidemiology · not in our set (fewer than 10 published preprints to learn from) · training set

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
British Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.6%
2
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.5%
3
British Journal of General Practice
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.2%
4
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.9%
5
BJGP Open
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.4%
6
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 27%
6.4%
50% of probability mass above
7
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 3%
6.4%
8
International Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.0%
9
The Lancet Infectious Diseases
71 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.6%
10
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
11
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
12
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
13
Journal of Personalized Medicine
28 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
14
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 62%
1.5%
15
Annals of Oncology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.3%
16
ERJ Open Research
44 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.2%
17
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
18
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
19
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
13 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
20
Journal of General Internal Medicine
20 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
21
EClinicalMedicine
21 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
22
Health Expectations
12 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
23
BMJ Open Respiratory Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
24
International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
21 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
25
Annals of Internal Medicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%
26
Public Health Nutrition
14 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
27
eClinicalMedicine
55 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
28
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
29
JAMA
17 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
30
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%