Cancer patient survival in Estonia 1995–2009: Time trends and data quality

BackgroundSurvival from most cancers in Estonia has been consistently below European average. The objective of this study was to examine recent survival trends in Estonia and to quantify the effect on survival estimates of the temporary disruption of the Estonian Cancer Registry (ECR) practices in 2001–2007 when death certificates could not be used for case ascertainment.Patients and methodsECR data on all adult cases of 16 common cancers diagnosed in Estonia during 1995–2008 and followed up for vital status until 2009 were used to estimate relative survival ratios (RSR). We used cohort analysis for patients diagnosed in 1995–1999 and 2000–2004; and period hybrid approach to obtain the most recent estimates (2005–2009). We compared five-year RSRs calculated from data sets with and without death certificate initiated (DCI) cases.ResultsA total of 64 328 cancer cases were included in survival analysis. Compared with 1995–1999, five-year age-standardized RSR increased 20 percent units for prostate cancer, reaching 76% in 2005–2009. A rise of 10 percent units or more was also seen for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (five-year RSR 51% in 2005–2009), and cancers of rectum (49%), breast (73%) and ovary (37%). The effect of including/excluding DCI cases from survival analysis was small except for lung and pancreatic cancers.ConclusionsRelative survival continued to increase in Estonia during the first decade of the 21st century, although for many cancers, a gap between Estonia and more affluent countries still exists. Cancer control efforts should aim at the reduction of risk factors amenable to primary prevention, but also at the improvement of early diagnosis and ensuring timely and optimal care to all cancer patients.     

Effects of the length of central cancer registry operations on identification of subsequent cancers and on survival estimates

BackgroundPopulation-based cancer survival analyses have traditionally been based on the first primary cancer. Recent studies have brought this practice into question, arguing that varying registry reference dates affect the ability to identify earlier cancers, resulting in selection bias. We used a theoretical approach to evaluate the extent to which the length of registry operations affects the classification of first versus subsequent cancers and consequently survival estimates.MethodsSequence number central was used to classify tumors from the New York State Cancer Registry, diagnosed 2001–2010, as either first primaries (value = 0 or 1) or subsequent primaries (≥2). A set of three sequence numbers, each based on an assumed reference year (1976, 1986 or 1996), was assigned to each tumor. Percent of subsequent cancers was evaluated by reference year, cancer site and age. 5-year relative survival estimates were compared under four different selection scenarios.ResultsThe percent of cancer cases classified as subsequent primaries was 15.3%, 14.3% and 11.2% for reference years 1976, 1986 and 1996, respectively; and varied by cancer site and age. When only the first primary was included, shorter registry operation time was associated with slightly lower 5-year survival estimates. When all primary cancers were included, survival estimates decreased, with the largest decreases seen for the earliest reference year.ConclusionsRegistry operation length affected the identification of subsequent cancers, but the overall effect of this misclassification on survival estimates was small. Survival estimates based on all primary cancers were slightly lower, but might be more comparable across registries.     

Impact of using multiple causes of death codes to compute site-specific, death certificate-based cancer mortality statistics in the United States

Background: Cancer mortality statistics, an important indicator for monitoring cancer burden, are traditionally restricted to instances when cancer is determined to be the underlying cause of death (UCD) based on information recorded on standard certificates of death. This study's objective was to determine the impact of using multiple causes of death codes to compute site-specific cancer mortality statistics. Methods: The state cancer registries of California, Colorado and Idaho provided linked cancer registry and death certificate data for individuals who died between 2002 and 2004, had at least one cancer listed on their death certificate and were diagnosed with cancer between 1993 and 2004. These linked data were used to calculate the site-specific proportion of cancers not selected as the UCD (non-UCD) among all cancer-related deaths (any mention on the death certificate). In addition, the retrospective concordance between the death certificate and the population-based cancer registry, measured as confirmations rates, was calculated for deaths with cancer as the UCD, as a non-UCD, and for any mention. Results: Overall, non-UCD deaths comprised 9.5 percent of total deaths; 11 of the 79 cancer sites had proportions greater than 3 standard deviations from 9.5 percent. The confirmation rates for UCD and for any mention did not differ significantly for any of the cancer sites. Conclusion and impact: The site-specific variation in proportions and rates suggests that for a few cancer sites, death rates might be computed for both UCD and any mention of the cancer site on the death certificate. Nevertheless, this study provides evidence that, in general, restricting to UCD deaths will not under report cancer mortality statistics.     

Epidemiology of malignant peritoneal mesothelioma: A population-based study

BackgroundMalignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPeM) is a rare cancer of the mesothelial cells in the peritoneum with poor prognosis. Earlier reports from other countries indicate an incidence of 0.2–3 new cases per million per year. No previous studies have examined the national epidemiology of MPeM in Nordic countries. This study aimed to clarify the epidemiology of MPeM in Finland over a 12-year period.MethodsThe data consisted of cancer notifications, laboratory notifications, and death certificate information in the Finnish Cancer Registry (FCR) and Statistics Finland (SF) of all MPeM patients from 2000 to 2012 in Finland. We also collected data on occupational disease compensations from the Workers’ Compensation Center (WCC) of Finland. Any missing information was collected from the respective patient’s file of every patient obtained from health institutions that had treated the patients.ResultsBetween January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2012, 90 new MPeM cases (56 males, 34 females) occurred in Finland. Median annual incidence was four new cases, which corresponded to 0.74 new cases per million per year. MPeM was deemed an occupational disease in 21 patients (23.3%). 71 patients (78.9%) of whom had a known cause of death, with a median survival of 4 months. The number of deaths linked to other disease than mesothelioma was 28/74 (37.8%).ConclusionsOur study indicates that MPeM in Finland is rare and fatal, which is in accordance with previous reports from other countries. MPeM is also a fatal disease, since most of the patients died due to MPeM.     

Accuracy of industry and occupation on death certificates of electric utility workers: implications for epidemiologic studies of magnetic fields and cancer

A substantial epidemiologic literature has relied on occupation and industry information from death certificates to make inferences about the association of electric and magnetic field exposure with cancer, but the validity of the occupational data on death certificates is questionable. We compared occupation and industry information from death certificates to company work histories for 793 electric utility workers who died from brain cancer (n=143), leukemia (n=156), lung cancer (n=246, randomly sampled), and non-cancer causes (n=248, randomly sampled). Nearly 75% of death certificates correctly indicated utility industry employment and of those, 48% matched the longest held occupation derived from company work histories. Hence, only 36% matched on both industry and occupation. We computed odds ratios relating occupations involving magnetic field exposure to brain cancer and leukemia both for the occupation listed on the death certificate and for the longest-held occupation based on company records in order to examine the impact of exposure misclassification based on reliance on the death certificate information. For brain cancer, the odds ratio was 1.2 based on death certificates and 1.7 based on company work history, suggesting some attenuation due to misclassification. For leukemia, death certificate information yielded an odds ratio of 0.9, whereas company work histories yielded an odds ratio of 1.3. Although work histories are limited to the period of employment in a specific company, these data suggest that there is substantial misclassification in use of death certificate information on industry and occupation of utility workers, as found in other industries. The limited quality of occupation and industry information on death certificates argues against relying on such information to evaluate modest associations with mortality.     

Cancer incidence in Iran in 2014: Results of the Iranian National Population-based Cancer Registry

BackgroundWe aimed to report, for the first time, the results of the Iranian National Population-based Cancer Registry (INPCR) for the year 2014.MethodsTotal population of Iran in 2014 was 76,639,000. The INPCR covered 30 out of 31 provinces (98% of total population). It registered only cases diagnosed with malignant new primary tumors. The main sources for data collection included pathology center, hospitals as well as death registries. Quality assessment and analysis of data were performed by CanReg-5 software. Age standardized incidence rates (ASR) (per 100,000) were reported at national and subnational levels.ResultsOverall, 112,131 new cancer cases were registered in INPCR in 2014, of which 60,469 (53.9%) were male. The diagnosis of cancer was made by microscopic confirmation in 76,568 cases (68.28%). The ASRs of all cancers were 177.44 and 141.18 in male and female, respectively. Cancers of the stomach (ASR = 21.24), prostate (18.41) and colorectum (16.57) were the most common cancers in men and the top three cancers in women were malignancies of breast (34.53), colorectum (11.86) and stomach (9.44). The ASR of cervix uteri cancer in women was 1.78. Our findings suggested high incidence of cancers of the esophagus, stomach and lung in North/ North West of Iran.ConclusionOur results showed that Iran is a medium-risk area for incidence of cancers. We found differences in the most common cancers in Iran comparing to those reported for the World. Our results also suggested geographical diversities in incidence rates of cancers in different subdivisions of Iran.     

The completeness and timeliness of cancer registration and the implications for measuring cancer burden

BackgroundPopulation based cancer registration provides a critical role in disease surveillance in terms of incidence, survival, cancer cluster investigations and prevalence trends, and therefore high levels of completeness and timeliness are required. This study estimates completeness and variation between early and late registrations in the N. Ireland Cancer Registry (NICR) and assesses the implications for reporting cancer incidence and for registry-based research.MethodsTwo main approaches assessed completeness. For the period 2010–2012, incidence reported in the first year of data publication was compared to incidence reported in subsequent years until 2015. Demographic characteristics and survival of incident cases ascertained before the first publication year were compared to those ascertained in subsequent years. The flow method approach was used to estimate completeness annually after the incident year.ResultsOverall incidence for all cancers increased between the first year of data publication and subsequent years up to 2015, irrespective of year of diagnosis. Late registrations had poorer survival. The flow method approach estimated the completeness of case ascertainment of NICR data to be 96% complete at five years for all cancers combined.ConclusionThe estimated completeness levels for the NICR are comparable to other high quality cancer registries internationally. While data timeliness has little impact on incidence estimates, delays in registration may have implications for specific research studies into incidence and survival. This means that improvements in the timeliness of reporting should be a target for all registries but not at the expense of completeness.     

Five year cancer incidence in Calabar,Nigeria (2009–2013)

Cancer incidence rates are presented for the Calabar Cancer Registry, a population-based cancer registry (PBCR) covering the population of two Local Government Areas (LGAs) of Calabar the capital of Cross-River State, Nigeria. (375,196 inhabitants in 2006). During the period 2009–2013, a total of 719 new cases were registered comprising 320 men (an age standardised incidence rate (ASR) of 78.8 per 100,000) and 399 women (ASR of 86.9 per 100,000).Breast and cervical cancers account for 60.4% of all cancers in women, with breast cancer (ASR 35 per 100,000) almost twice as common as cervix cancer (ASR 21 per 100,000) and occurring in rather younger women. Prostate cancer was the most common cancer in men (ASR 50.8 per 100,000).Hodgkin’s lymphoma was common in both sexes, and there were moderate numbers of HIV-related cancers recorded (Kaposi sarcoma, non Hodgkin lymphoma, and squamous cell carcinomas of conjunctiva).     

Problems in determining the incidence of cervical cancer.

Since cancer registries have different recording practices, the incidence rates that they report must be compared with caution. Indexes of reliability of recording indicated that in 1971 the reported incidence of cervical cancer in Ontario was too high. In 1971 Ontario used a method of passive reporting of cancer cases: the Ontario Cancer Registry linked hospital reports, death certificates and reports from the Ontario Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation''s treatment centres to produce a single record for each case. Pathological confirmation was requested for cases thus recorded by the registry. In 26% of cases a diagnosis other than cervical cancer was indicated. With these cases omitted, the incidence rate became 15.1/100 000, as opposed to the 20.5/100 000 reported by the registry.     

An audit of cancer of unknown primary notifications: A cautionary tale for population health research using cancer registry data

Background: Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is a common cancer yet little is known about the reliability of incidence data. Methods: We audited 574 CUP (C80.9) diagnoses (median age 81 years) registered by the New South Wales (NSW) Central Cancer Registry (2004–2007) in a cohort of Australian Government Department of Veterans’ Affairs clients. The registry did not clarify diagnoses with notifiers during this period due to interpretation of privacy legislation. For the audit, current registry practice was applied by seeking additional information from CUP notifiers and reclassifying diagnoses as necessary. In addition, clinicopathological characteristics were extracted from notifications. Fisher's exact test and Student's t-test were used to compare the demographic and clinicopathological characteristics of the CUP subgroups. Age/sex-standardised CUP incidence rates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated, standardised to the 2001 Australian population. Results: 172 (30.0%) cases were reclassified to a known primary site, mostly cutaneous, and nine (1.6%) were found to be non-malignant diagnoses. After the audit the age/sex-standardised CUP incidence rates decreased from 26.0 (95% CI 21.2–30.8) to 15.9 (95% CI 12.5–19.3) per 100,000 person-years. Of the 393 remaining CUP cases, 202 (51%) were registered on the basis of a clinical diagnosis (46 by death certificate only) and 191 (49%) by pathological diagnosis (79 by cytology alone). Compared to cases with a pathological diagnosis, cases with a clinical diagnosis were older (85.6 vs. 82.0 years, p < 0.001), and the reported number and location of metastases differed (p < 0.001); metastatic sites were more likely to be unspecified for clinical diagnoses (36.1% vs. 4.2%). Conclusions: Cancer registry processes can markedly influence CUP incidence. Future population-based CUP research should take this into account, and consider stratification by basis of diagnosis due to differences in patient and tumour characteristics.     

Impact of variation in cancer registration practice on observed international cancer survival differences between International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) jurisdictions

BackgroundInternational cancer survival comparisons use cancer registration data to report cancer survival, which informs the development of cancer policy and practice. Studies like the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) have a duty to understand how registration differences impact on survival prior to drawing conclusions.MethodsKey informants reported differences in registration practice for capturing incidence date, death certificate case handling and registration of multiple primary tumours. Sensitivity analyses estimated their impact on one-year survival using baseline and supplementary cancer registration data from England and Sweden.ResultsVariations in registration practice accounted for up to a 7.3 percentage point difference between unadjusted (estimates from previous ICBP survival data) and adjusted (estimates recalculated accounting for registration differences) one-year survival, depending on tumour site and jurisdiction.One-year survival estimates for four jurisdictions were affected by adjustment: New South Wales, Norway, Ontario, Sweden. Sweden and Ontario’s survival reduced after adjustment, yet they remained the jurisdictions with the highest survival for breast and ovarian cancer respectively. Sweden had the highest unadjusted lung cancer survival of 43.6% which was adjusted to 39.0% leaving Victoria and Manitoba with the highest estimate at 42.7%. For colorectal cancer, Victoria’s highest survival of 85.1% remained unchanged after adjustment.ConclusionPopulation-based cancer survival comparisons can be subject to registration biases that may impact the reported ‘survival gap’ between populations. Efforts should be made to apply consistent registration practices internationally. In the meantime, survival comparison studies should provide acknowledgement of or adjustment for the registration biases that may affect their conclusions.     

Accuracy and completeness of the New Zealand Cancer Registry for staging of invasive breast cancer

PurposePopulation based cancer registries are an invaluable resource for monitoring incidence and mortality for many types of cancer. Research and healthcare decisions based on cancer registry data rely on the case completeness and accuracy of recorded data. This study was aimed at assessing completeness and accuracy of breast cancer staging data in the New Zealand Cancer Registry (NZCR) against a regional breast cancer register.MethodologyData from 2562 women diagnosed with invasive primary breast cancer between 1999 and 2011 included in the Waikato Breast Cancer Register (WBCR) were used to audit data held on the same individuals by the NZCR. WBCR data were treated as the benchmark.ResultsOf 2562 cancers, 315(12.3%) were unstaged in the NZCR. For cancers with a known stage in the NZCR, staging accuracy was 94.4%. Lower staging accuracies of 74% and 84% were noted for metastatic and locally invasive (involving skin or chest wall) cancers, respectively, compared with localized (97%) and lymph node positive (94%) cancers. Older age (>80 years), not undergoing therapeutic surgery and higher comorbidity score were significantly (p < 0.01) associated with unstaged cancer. The high proportion of unstaged cancer in the NZCR was noted to have led to an underestimation of the true incidence of metastatic breast cancer by 21%. Underestimation of metastatic cancer was greater for Māori (29.5%) than for NZ European (20.6%) women. Overall 5-year survival rate for unstaged cancer (NZCR) was 55.9%, which was worse than the 5-year survival rate for regional (77.3%), but better than metastatic (12.9%) disease.ConclusionsUnstaged cancer and accuracy of cancer staging in the NZCR are major sources of bias for the NZCR based research. Improving completeness and accuracy of staging data and increasing the rate of TNM cancer stage recording are identified as priorities for strengthening the usefulness of the NZCR.     

Improving the reporting of cancer-specific mortality and survival in research using cancer registry data

Population-based registries are increasingly used in cancer research. In such studies, cancer-specific mortality or survival is frequently used as the primary outcome. To determine whether a putative cancer was part of the causal chain of events leading to death, cancer registries primarily rely on death certificates. Hence, they depend on the subjective interpretation of information available to medical examiners at the time of death. Misclassification may occur: studies report misclassification of cancer as a cause of death in 15%–35% of death certificates based on evaluation by expert panels and/or autopsy reports. Further misclassification may occur when coding death causes in the cancer registry. Researchers should be aware of potential misclassification bias when using cancer registry data. Differential misclassification may bias the results towards or away from the null hypothesis, depending on whether there is relative over- or under-reporting of cancer-related deaths in one group. Strategies to improve reporting of cancer-specific survival/mortality include (1) describing the procedure used to identify cancer-specific deaths; (2) considering the use of multiple definitions of cancer-related deaths (strict/liberal definitions of cancer-specific deaths, and/or addition of relative survival as an outcome); and (3) reporting cancer-specific survival/mortality together with the objectively measured parameters overall survival or all-cause mortality.     

Reliability of recording uterine cancer in death certification in France and age-specific proportions of deaths from cervix and corpus uteri

French uterine cancer recordings in death certificates include 60% of "uterine cancer, Not Otherwise Specified (NOS)"; this hampers the estimation of mortalities from cervix and corpus uteri cancers. The aims of this work were to study the reliability of uterine cancer recordings in death certificates using a case matching with cancer registries and estimate age-specific proportions of deaths from cervix and corpus uteri cancers among all uterine cancer deaths by a statistical approach that uses incidence and survival data. Deaths from uterine cancer between 1989 and 2001 were extracted from the French National database of causes of death and case-to-case matched to women diagnosed with uterine cancer between 1989 and 1997 in 8 cancer registries. Registry data were considered as "gold-standard". Among the 1825 matched deaths, cancer registries recorded 830 cervix and 995 corpus uteri cancers. In death certificates, 5% and 40% of "true" cervix cancers were respectively coded "corpus" and "uterus, NOS" and 5% and 59% of "true" corpus cancers respectively coded "cervix" and "uterus, NOS". Miscoding cervix cancers was more frequent at advanced ages at death and in deaths at home or in small urban areas. Miscoding corpus cancers was more frequent in deaths at home or in small urban areas. From the statistical method, the estimated proportion of deaths from cervix cancer among all uterine cancer deaths was higher than 95% in women aged 30-40 years old but declined to 35% in women older than 70 years. The study clarifies the reason for poor encoding of uterus cancer mortality and refines the estimation of mortalities from cervix and corpus uteri cancers allowing future studies on the efficacy of cervical cancer screening.     

Active follow-up versus passive linkage with cancer registries for case ascertainment in a cohort

BackgroundAscertaining incident cancers is a critical component of cancer-focused epidemiologic cohorts and of cancer prevention trials. Potential methods: for cancer case ascertainment include active follow-up and passive linkage with state cancer registries. Here we compare the two approaches in a large cancer screening trial.MethodsThe Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial enrolled 154,955 subjects at ten U.S. centers and followed them for all-cancer incidence. Cancers were ascertained by an active follow-up process involving annual questionnaires, retrieval of records and medical record abstracting to ascertain and confirm cancers. For a subset of centers, linkage with state cancer registries was also performed. We assessed the agreement of the two methods in ascertaining incident cancers from 1993 to 2009 in 80,083 subjects from six PLCO centers where cancers were ascertained both by active follow-up and through linkages with 14 state registries.ResultsThe ratio (times 100) of confirmed cases ascertained by registry linkage compared to active follow-up was 96.4 (95% CI: 95.1–98.2). Of cancers ascertained by either method, 86.6% and 83.5% were identified by active follow-up and by registry linkage, respectively. Of cancers missed by active follow-up, 30% were after subjects were lost to follow-up and 16% were reported but could not be confirmed. Of cancers missed by the registries, 27% were not sent to the state registry of the subject’s current address at the time of linkage.ConclusionLinkage with state registries identified a similar number of cancers as active follow-up and can be a cost-effective method to ascertain incident cancers in a large cohort.     

Increased incidence of rare cancers and varied age distributions by cancer group: A population-based cancer registry study in Hiroshima Prefecture,Japan

BackgroundEpidemiological characteristics of many types of rare cancers are limited especially in Asia. Therefore, this study aimed to describe the burden and changing time trends of rare cancers in Hiroshima, Japan.MethodsThe internationally agreed RARECAREnet list of rare cancers was used to identify patients diagnosed with cancers from 2005 to 2015 who were registered in the Hiroshima Prefecture Cancer Registry. Quality indicators specific to rare cancers were assessed by cancer grouping. Crude incidence rates (IRs) and age-standardized rates (ASRs) were calculated for 216 single cancers (rare and common) included in the list. A joinpoint regression was used to analyze age distribution and time trends in the ASRs for 12 internationally agreed rare cancer families. Quality indicators, ASRs, and IRs in Japan were identified to examine IR differences and the effects on data accuracy.ResultsThe 231,328 cases were used to calculate the IRs of each cancer. Epithelial tumors in rare families increased with age, but nonepithelial tumors occurred at any age. The proportion of rare cancer families to total cancers was stable. The time trend for families of head and neck cancers (annual percent change and 95 % confidence interval: 2.4 %; 1.2–3.7 %), neuroendocrine tumors (6.6 %; 5.1–8.1 %), and hematological cancers (4.3 %; 3.2–5.5 %) markedly increased.ConclusionThe ASRs of several rare cancers increased because of increased knowledge of these diseases, improved diagnostic techniques, and aggressive diagnoses.     

Causes of death in men with prostate cancer: Results from the Danish Prostate Cancer Registry (DAPROCAdata)

BackgroundCurrent knowledge of the validity of registry data on prostate cancer-specific death is limited. We aimed to determine the underlying cause of death among Danish men with prostate cancer, to estimate the level of misattribution of prostate cancer death, and to examine the risk of death from prostate cancer when accounting for competing risk of death.Material and methodsWe investigated a nationwide cohort of 15,878 prostate cancer patients diagnosed in 2010–2014; with 3343 deaths occurring through 2016. Blinded medical chart review was carried out for 670 deaths and compared to the national cause of death registry. Five death categories were defined: 1) prostate cancer-specific death, 2) other unspecified urological cancer death, 3) other cancer death 4) cardiovascular disease death, and 5) other causes of death. Competing risk analyses compared Cox cause-specific and Fine-Gray regression models.ResultsChart review attributed 51.2% of deaths to prostate cancer, 17.0% to cardiovascular disease, and 16.7% to other causes. The Danish Register of Causes of Death attributed 71.7% of deaths to prostate cancer when including all registered contributing causes of death, and 57.0% of deaths when including only the primary registered cause of death. The probability of death by prostate cancer was 10% at 2-year survival.ConclusionsMore than half of the deceased men in our study cohort died of their prostate cancer disease within a mean of 2.4 years of follow up. Data from the death registry is prone to misclassification, potentially overestimating the proportion of deaths from prostate cancer.     

Progress in cancer survival across last two decades: A nationwide study of over 1.2 million Polish patients diagnosed with the most common cancers

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to estimate the high incidence cancers survival in Poland between 2000 and 2018, with the following aim to monitor the national polish cancer control program 2020–2030 effectiveness. We calculated survival in cancer of lung, breast, prostate, colon, rectum, ovarian, cervical cancers, and skin melanoma.MethodsData were obtained from the Polish Cancer Registry (PLCR). We estimated age-standardized 5-year net survival (NS) with the life table method and the Pohar-Perme estimator using the International Cancer Survival Standard weights. The corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated with log transformation.ResultsOverall, 1,288,944 high incidence cancer cases were included in the study (622,486 men and 666,458 women). In 2015–2018 age-standardized 5-year NS was 85.2% (95% CI = 84.6% to 85.8%) in prostate cancer, 80.0% (79.5% to 80.4%) breast cancer, 77.3%(76.4% to 78.1%) melanoma, 58.5% (57.5% to 59.5%) cervical cancer, 57.9% (57.3% to 58.5%) colon cancer, 52.1% (51.3% to 52.9%) rectal cancer, 43.3% (42.4% to 44.3%) ovarian cancer, and 17.8% (17.4% to 18.1%) for lung cancer. Between the 2000–2004 and 2015–2018 the highest increase in survival was noted for prostate cancer (14.6% points [pp]; from 70.6% to 85.2%) and the lowest for lung cancer (4.5 pp; from 13.3% to 17.8%).ConclusionCancer survivorship has been consistently improving during the last two decades. Notwithstanding these overall encouraging results, more extraordinary efforts are needed to close the cancer survival gap in Poland.     

Staging practices and breast cancer stage among population-based registries in the MENA region

BackgroundAvailability of stage information by population-based cancer registries (PBCR) remains scarce for diverse reasons. Nevertheless, stage is critical cancer control information particularly for cancers amenable to early detection. In the framework of the Global Initiative for Cancer Registry Development (GICR), we present the status of stage data collection and dissemination among registries in the Middle East and Northern Africa (MENA) region as well as the stage distribution of breast cancer patients.MethodsA web-based survey exploring staging practices and breast cancer stage was developed and sent to 30 PBCR in 18 countries of the MENA region.ResultsAmong 23 respondent PBCR, 21 collected stage data, the majority (80%) for all cancers. Fourteen registries used a single classification (9 TNM and 5 SEER), 7 used both staging systems in parallel. Out of 12,888 breast cancer patients (seven registries) 27.7% had unknown TNM stage (11.1% in Oman, 46% in Annaba). When considering only cases with known stage, 65.3% were early cancers (TNM I+II), ranging from 57.9% in Oman to 83.3% in Batna (Algeria), and 9.9% were stage IV cancers. Among the nine registries providing SEER Summary stage for breast cancer cases, stage was unknown in 19% of the cases, (0 in Bahrain, 39% in Kuwait). Stage data were largely absent from the published registry reports.ConclusionDespite wide stage data collection by cancer registries, missing information and low dissemination clearly limit informing efforts on early detection. The use of two classification systems in parallel implies additional workload and might undermine completeness. The favourable results of early cancer (TNM I+II) in two thirds of breast cancer patients needs to be interpreted with caution and followed up in time. Although efforts to improve quality of stage data are needed, our findings are particularly relevant to the WHO Global Breast Cancer Initiative.     

Incidence and relative survival of pancreatic adenocarcinoma and pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms in Germany, 2009–2018. An in-depth analysis of two population-based cancer registries

BackgroundPancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms are categorized as neuroendocrine tumors and neuroendocrine carcinomas. Until now, cancer registry reporting of pancreatic cancers does not include a stratification by these two subgroups. We studied the incidence and survival of pancreatic cancer with a special focus on pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms.MethodsWe analyzed data from the population-based cancer registries of North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW) and Saarland (SL), Germany, of the years 2009–2018. We included primary malignant pancreatic tumors and report morphology-specific age-standardized (World Standard population) incidence rates for ages 0–79 years and age-standardized relative survival (period approach, ICSS standard). All analyses were restricted to non-death certificate only cases.ResultsWe analyzed 23,037 patients with a newly diagnosed primary pancreatic cancer. Among morphologically specified cancers, adenocarcinoma (92 %) and neuroendocrine neoplasms (7 %) were the most common morphologies. The age-standardized incidence rates of adenocarcinoma, neuroendocrine tumors and neuroendocrine carcinomas were 4.0–5.5 (in NRW and SL), 0.1–0.3, and 0.1–0.3 per 100,000 person-years, respectively. Neuroendocrine tumors had the highest age-standardized 5-year relative survival with 75.5 % (standard error, SE 2.3) in NRW and 90.6 % (SE 10.2) in SL followed by neuroendocrine carcinomas (NRW: 30.0 %, SE 3.1; SL: 32.3 %, SE 8.7) and adenocarcinomas (NRW: 11.3 %, SE 0.4; SL: 10.2 %, SE 1.5).DiscussionThe distinction between neuroendocrine tumors and neuroendocrine carcinomas by the WHO divides neuroendocrine neoplasms into two prognostically clearly distinct subgroups that should be separately analyzed in terms of survival. The first year after diagnosis of pancreatic cancer is the most critical year in terms of survival.