Factors Contributing to Delayed Diagnosis of Gynecological Cancer in Karachi, Pakistan
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70749/ijbr.v3i7.2070Keywords:
gynecological cancer in Pakistan; diagnostic delay; social and financial barriers; healthcare access; women’s health; public health responseAbstract
Background: Survival outcomes for gynecological cancers including ovarian, cervical, endometrial, vulvar, and vaginal cancers remain poor in Pakistan, largely due to late diagnosis and treatment. This study explored the main reasons behind diagnostic delays, with particular attention to financial, social, and healthcare-related barriers, and placed these findings in context with international data. Methods: We carried out a cross-sectional survey among 250 women who had been diagnosed with gynecological cancers within the past five years at hospitals in Karachi. Participants were selected through convenience sampling and completed a structured questionnaire covering their background, awareness of cancer symptoms, healthcare access, and barriers to diagnosis. The data was collected during November 2024 to May 2025 and were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and logistic regression to identify the strongest predictors of delayed diagnosis. Results: Six out of ten women reported facing delays in diagnosis. The most frequent reasons were financial difficulties (60%) and long waiting times in hospitals (55%), followed by lack of referral to specialists (32%). Although most participants (70%) had some awareness of cancer symptoms, very few (20%) had undergone screening. Women from rural areas and lower-income households experienced longer delays, often linked to limited health facilities and social stigma. Regression analysis showed that financial barriers (OR = 2.5, CI = 1.8–3.7) and waiting times (OR = 1.8, CI = 1.3–2.5) were the strongest contributors. Conclusion: The delays we observed in diagnosing gynecological cancers in Pakistan cannot be pinned on a single cause. They stem from a web of challenges, financial pressures, gaps in healthcare services, limited awareness, and the weight of cultural stigma. Addressing them will require more than just one solution. Public education must be expanded so that women and their families recognize early warning signs, while hospitals need better resources and faster referral pathways. At the same time, financial support for patients is essential, because cost alone often keeps women away from timely care. Other countries, including the UK and USA, have shown that structured referral systems can reduce delays; with adaptation to local realities, similar approaches could strengthen cancer care in Pakistan and give women a better chance at survival.
Downloads
References
1. Williams P, Murchie P, Bond C. Patient and primary care delays in the diagnostic pathway of gynaecological cancers: a systematic review of influencing factors. British Journal of General Practice [Internet]. 2019 Feb 1;69(679):e106–11.
https://bjgp.org/content/69/679/e106
2. Gaitskell K, Hermon C, Barnes I, Pirie K, Floud S, Green J, et al. Ovarian cancer survival by stage, histotype, and pre-diagnostic lifestyle factors, in the prospective UK Million Women Study. Cancer Epidemiology [Internet]. 2022 Feb 1;76:102074.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canep.2021.102074
3. Gu B, Shang X, Yan M, Li X, Wang W, Wang Q, et al. Variations in incidence and mortality rates of endometrial cancer at the global, regional, and national levels, 1990–2019. Gynecologic Oncology. 2021 Feb;161(2).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.01.036
4. Smith RA, Andrews KS, Brooks D, Fedewa SA, Manassaram‐Baptiste D, Saslow D, et al. Cancer screening in the United States, 2019: A review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians [Internet]. 2019 Mar 15;69(3):184–210.
https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21557
5. Joachim C, Véronique-Baudin J, Desroziers L, Édouard Chatignoux, Belliardo S, Plenet J, et al. Gynaecological cancer in Caribbean women: data from the French population-based cancer registries of Martinique, Guadeloupe and French Guiana (2007–2014). BMC Cancer. 2020 Jul 10;20(1).
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-07128-1
6. Tullio Golia D’Augè, Giannini A, Giorgio Bogani, Camilla Di Dio, Antonio Simone Laganà, Violante Di Donato, et al. Prevention, Screening, Treatment and Follow-Up of Gynecological Cancers: State of Art and Future Perspectives. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2023 Aug 2;50(8):160–0.
https://doi.org/10.31083/j.ceog5008160
7. Forner DM. Characteristics and survival of primary vaginal malignancy: an analysis of the German nationwide cancer registry data. Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology. 2022 Mar 21;
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-022-03982-7
8. Hong K, Liu Y, Yin H, Huang K, Pu XL, Zhu ZX. Identifying Factors Contributing to Delayed Diagnosis of Ovarian Cancer: A Comprehensive Analysis. International Journal of Women s Health. 2024 Sep 1;Volume 16:1463–73.
https://doi.org/10.2147/ijwh.s473381
9. Manzoor H, Hamida Naheed, Ahmad K, Iftikhar S, Asif M, Shuja J, et al. Pattern of gynaecological malignancies in south western region of Pakistan: An overview of 12 years. Biomedical Reports. 2017 Sep 28;7(5):487–91.
https://doi.org/10.3892/br.2017.993
10. Tabassum S, Masood AI, Khakwani M. Pattern of female gynecological malignancies in south Punjab Region of Pakistan: An overview of 5 years. The Professional Medical Journal. 2021 Jan 10;28(01):90–5.
https://doi.org/10.29309/tpmj/2021.28.01.4665
11. Funston G, O’Flynn H, Ryan NAJ, Hamilton W, Crosbie EJ. Recognizing Gynecological Cancer in Primary Care: Risk Factors, Red Flags, and Referrals. Advances in Therapy. 2018 Mar 7;35(4):577–89.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-018-0683-3
12. Laudicella M, Walsh B, Burns E, Smith PC. Cost of care for cancer patients in England: evidence from population-based patient-level data. British Journal of Cancer. 2016 Apr 12;114(11):1286–92.
https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2016.77
13. Sishir Doddi, Salichs O, Mahika Mushuni, Siddharth Kunte. Demographic disparities in trend of gynecological cancer in the United States. Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology. 2023 Jul 3;149(13):11541–7.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-023-05030-4
14. Acuti Martellucci C, Delsoz M, Qaderi S, Madadi S, Bhandari D, Ozaki A, et al. Delay in Diagnosis of Cervical Cancer in Afghanistan: A Pilot Cross-Sectional Survey. Frontiers in Reproductive Health. 2021 Dec 9;3.
https://doi.org/10.3389/frph.2021.783271
15. Mathew A, George PS, Ramadas K, Mathew BS, Kumar A, Roshni S, et al. Sociodemographic Factors and Stage of Cancer at Diagnosis: A Population-Based Study in South India. Journal of Global Oncology. 2019 Nov;(5):1–10.
https://doi.org/10.1200/jgo.18.00160
16. Shoukat H, Aslam U, Jamil F, Aslam M, Javed F, Sadiq N. Frequency of Different Gynecological Cancers in Suspected Cases of Gynecological Cancers Presenting at Sheikh. Pakistan journal of medical and sciences [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2025 Jan 18];15(2):399.
https://pjmhsonline.com/2021/feb/399.pdf
17. Wasim T, Mushtaq J, Wasim AZ, Raana G e. Gynecological malignancies at tertiary care hospital, Pakistan: A five-year review. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences. 2021 Feb 20;37(3).
https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.37.3.3596
18. R. Sankaranarayanan, K. Ramadas, Frie KG, Qiao YL. Challenges for Breast and Gynecological Cancer Control by Early Detection in Less-Developed Countries. Springer eBooks. 2013 Jan 1;215–27.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1876-4_12
19. Boding SA, Hutchinson A, Webb SN. Factors that Influence Self-Identity in Women Who Have Undergone Gynecological Cancer Treatment. Women’s Reproductive Health. 2022 Oct 3;10(3):402–19.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Indus Journal of Bioscience Research

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.