Temporal trends in net and crude probability of death from cancer and other causes in the Australian population, 1984–2013

BackgroundWhile net probabilities of death in the relative survival framework ignore competing causes of death, crude probabilities allow estimation of the real risk of cancer deaths. This study quantifies temporal trends in net and crude probabilities of death.MethodsAustralian population-based cohort of 2,015,903 people aged 15-89 years, diagnosed with a single primary invasive cancer from 1984 to 2013 with mortality follow-up to 31 December 2014. Survival was analyzed with the cohort method. Flexible parametric relative survival models were used to estimate both probability measures by diagnosis year for all cancers and selected leading sites.ResultsFor each site, excess mortality rates reduced over time, especially for prostate cancer. While both the 10-year net and crude probability of cancer deaths decreased over time, specific patterns varied. For example, the crude probability of lung cancer deaths for males aged 50 years decreased from 0.90 (1984) to 0.79 (2013); whereas the corresponding probabilities for kidney cancer were 0.64 and 0.18 respectively. Patterns for crude probabilities of competing deaths were relatively constant. Although for younger patients, both net and crude measures were similar, crude probability of competing deaths increased with age, hence for older ages net and crude measures were different except for lung and pancreas cancers.ConclusionsThe observed reductions in probabilities of death over three decades for Australian cancer patients are encouraging. However, this study also highlights the ongoing mortality burden following a cancer diagnosis, and the need for continuing efforts to improve cancer prevention, diagnosis and treatment.     

Partner status and survival after cancer: A competing risks analysis

ObjectiveThe survival benefits of having a partner for all cancers combined is well recognized, however its prognostic importance for individual cancer types, including competing mortality causes, is less clear. This study was undertaken to quantify the impact of partner status on survival due to cancer-specific and competing mortality causes.MethodsData were obtained from the population-based Queensland Cancer Registry on 176,050 incident cases of ten leading cancers diagnosed in Queensland (Australia) from 1996 to 2012. Flexible parametric competing-risks models were used to estimate cause-specific hazards and cumulative probabilities of death, adjusting for age, stage (breast, colorectal and melanoma only) and stratifying by sex.ResultsBoth unpartnered males and females had higher total cumulative probability of death than their partnered counterparts for each site. For example, the survival disadvantage for unpartnered males ranged from 3% to 30% with higher mortality burden from both the primary cancer and competing mortality causes. The cause-specific age-adjusted hazard ratios were also consistent with patients without a partner having increased mortality risk although the specific effect varied by site, sex and cause of death. For all combined sites, unpartnered males had a 46%, 18% and 44% higher risk of cancer-specific, other cancer and non-cancer mortality respectively with similar patterns for females. The higher mortality risk persisted after adjustment for stage.ConclusionsIt is important to better understand the mechanisms by which having a partner is beneficial following a cancer diagnosis, so that this can inform improvements in cancer management for all people with cancer.     

Breast and colorectal cancer recurrence-free survival estimates in the US: Modeling versus active data collection

BackgroundA modeling method was developed to estimate recurrence-free survival using cancer registry survival data. This study aims to validate the modeled recurrence-free survival against “gold-standard” estimates from data collected by the National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR) Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (PCOR) project.MethodsWe compared 5-year metastatic recurrence-free survival using modeling and empirical estimates from the PCOR project that collected disease-free status, tumor progression and recurrence for colorectal and female breast cancer cases diagnosed in 2011 in 5 U.S. state registries. To estimate empirical recurrence-free survival, we developed an algorithm that combined disease-free, recurrence, progression, and date information from NPCR-PCOR data. We applied the modeling method to relative survival for patients diagnosed with female breast and colorectal cancer in 2000–2015 in the SEER-18 areas.ResultsWhen grouping patients with stages I-III, the 5-year metastatic recurrence-free modeled and NPCR-PCOR estimates are very similar being respectively, 90.2 % and 88.6 % for female breast cancer, 74.6 % and 75.3 % for colon cancer, and 68.8 % and 68.5 % for rectum cancer. In general, the 5-year recurrence-free NPCR-PCOR and modeled estimates are still similar when controlling by stage. The modeled estimates, however, are not as accurate for recurrence-free survival in years 1–3 from diagnosis.ConclusionsThe alignment between NPCR-PCOR and modeled estimates supports their validity and provides robust population-based estimates of 5-year metastatic recurrence-free survival for female breast, colon, and rectum cancers. The modeling approach can in principle be extended to other cancer sites to provide provisional population-based estimates of 5-year recurrence free survival.     

Trends in stage-specific population-based survival of cancer patients in the Czech Republic in the period 2000–2008

BackgroundThe objective of this study was to assess trends in overall and in stage-specific 5-year relative survival rates of the Czech cancer patients between periods 2000–2004 and 2005–2008.MethodsAll Czech cancer patients diagnosed between 1995 and 2008 were included in the analysis. Period analysis was employed to calculate 5-year relative survival for 21 cancers.ResultsSignificant improvements in crude 5-year relative survival for 14 of 21 assessed types of cancer, including the most frequent diagnoses, such as, colorectal, prostate, breast, lung, kidney, pancreatic, and bladder cancer and melanoma, were identified. Moreover, in case of colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer, improvement in stage-specific 5-year relative survival was confirmed as statistically significant for all clinical stages. No diagnosis showed significant decrease in the 5-year relative survival. However, the 5-year relative survival remained poor in patients with metastatic cancers at diagnosis, particularly in case of liver, pancreatic, lung, and oesophageal cancer.ConclusionsThe cancer-specific outcomes in the Czech Republic are improving. Nevertheless, despite the overall significant improvement in 5-year relative survival of most of the cancer diagnoses, the high proportion of patients primarily diagnosed with metastatic cancer still represents a substantial challenge for prevention and early detection.     

Socioeconomic status and cancer survival in Brazil: Analysis of population data from the municipalities of Aracaju and Curitiba, 1996–2012

IntroductionThe association between socioeconomic status and cancer prognosis has been demonstrated in several countries. Despite the existence of indirect evidence of this phenomenon in Brazil, few studies in this regard are available.ObjectivesThe objective of the present study is to analyse socioeconomic related survival gaps for patients diagnosed with breast, cervical, lung, prostate, and colorectal cancer in the cities of Aracaju (SE) and Curitiba (PR).MethodsUsing population-based data, we estimated net survival by tumour site, year of diagnosis, socioeconomic status and local of residence. Net survival estimation was done with multilevel parametric model allowing flexible spline functions do estimate excess mortality hazards.Results28,005 cases were included in survival analysis. Five-year net survival showed positive association with SES. Intermunicipal survival gaps favouring Aracaju where prominent for breast (reaching 16,1% in 5 years)ObjectivesStudy the impact of socioeconomic factors on cancer survival in two Brazilian capitals. Methods: Survival analysis using population-based cancer data including patients diagnosed with breast, lung, prostate, cervical and colorectal cancer between 1996 and 2012 in Aracaju and Curitiba. Outcomes were excessive mortality hazard (EMH) and 5- and 8-years net survival (NS). The association of race/skin color and socioeconomic level (SES) with EMH and net survival were analyzed using a multilevel regression model with flexible splines.Results28,005 cases were included, 6636 from Aracaju and 21,369 from Curitiba. NS for all diseases studied increased more prominently for Curitiba population. We observed NS gap between the populations of Aracaju and Curitiba that increased or remained stable during the study period, with emphasis on the growth of the difference in NS of lung and colon cancer (among men). Only for cervical cancer and prostate cancer there was a reduction in the intermunicipal gaps. 5-year NS for breast cancer in Aracaju ranged from 55.2% to 73.4% according to SES. In Curitiba this variation was from 66.5% to 83.8%.ConclusionThe results of the present study suggests widening of socioeconomic and regional inequalities in the survival of patients with colorectal, breast, cervical, lung and prostate cancers in Brazil during the 1990 s and 2000 s     

Time-to-cure and cure proportion in solid cancers in France. A population based study

BackgroundIn cancer care, the cure proportion (P) and time-to-cure (TTC) are important indicators for practitioners, patients, and healthcare policy makers. The recent definition of TTC as the time at which the probability of belonging to the cured group reaches 95% was used for the first time.MethodsThe data stem from the common database of French cancer registries including 335,358 solid tumours diagnosed between 1995 and 2009 at 27 sites. P and TTC were estimated through a flexible parametric net survival cure model for each cancer site, sex, and age at diagnosis with acceptable assumption of cure (excess mortality rate ≤0.05).ResultsTTC was ≤5 years and P was >80% for skin melanoma and thyroid and testis cancers. It was 0 for testis cancer in men <55 and for thyroid cancer in men <45 and women <65. TTC was between 5 and 10 years for all digestive cancers except small intestine and all gynaecologic cancers except breast. It was ≥10 years in prostate, breast, and urinary tract. The range of P according to age and sex was 37–79% for urinary tract 72–88% for prostate and breast, 4–16% for pancreatic and 47–62% for colorectal cancer.ConclusionTime-to-cure was estimated for the first time from a large national database and individual probabilities of cure. It was 0 in the younger patients with testis or thyroid cancer and <12 years in most cancer sites. These results should help improve access to credit and insurance for patients still alive past the estimated TTCs.     

Risk of prostate cancer among cancer survivors in the Netherlands

BackgroundIn parallel with increasing numbers of cancer patients and improving cancer survival, the occurrence of second primary cancers becomes a relevant issue. The aim of our study was to evaluate risk of prostate cancer as second primary cancer in a population-based setting.MethodsData from the Netherlands Cancer Registry were used to estimate standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for prostate cancer as second primary cancer. The effect of time since first cancer diagnosis, specific first cancer sites, age, and pelvic radiotherapy was taken into account.ResultsOut of 551,553 male patients diagnosed with a first primary cancer between 1989 and 2008, 9243 patients were subsequently diagnosed with prostate cancer. Overall, cancer survivors showed an increased risk (SIR 1.3, 95% CI 1.2–1.3) of prostate cancer. The increased prostate cancer risk was limited to the first year of follow-up for the majority of the specific first cancer sites. More than 10 years after the first cancer diagnosis, only melanoma patients were at increased risk (SIR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2–1.9), while patients with head or neck cancers were at decreased risk (SIR 0.7, 95% CI 0.5–0.9) of being diagnosed with prostate cancer. Patients who underwent primary pelvic radiotherapy for their first cancer had a decreased risk of prostate cancer in the long term (SIR 0.5, 95% CI 0.4–0.6).ConclusionsOur data showed that cancer survivors have an increased prostate cancer risk in the first year following a first cancer diagnosis, which is most likely the result of active screening or incidental detection.     

Adjusting for the proportion of cancer deaths in the general population when using relative survival: a sensitivity analysis

Background: Relative survival is an extensively used method in population based cancer studies as it provides a measure of survival without the need for accurate cause of death information. It gives an estimate for the probability of dying from cancer in the absence of other causes by estimating the excess mortality in the study population when compared to an external group. The external group is usually the general population within a country or state and mortality estimates are taken from national life tables that are broken down by age, sex, calendar year and, where applicable, race/ethnicity. One potential bias when using relative survival that is most often overlooked occurs when there are a high proportion of deaths due to a specific cancer in the external group. Methods: This paper uses data from the Finnish Cancer Registry to illustrate, through the use of a simple sensitivity analysis, the impact that specific cancer deaths in the population mortality figures can have on the estimate of relative survival. Results: We found that when examining specific diseases such as breast cancer and colon cancer, the proportion of deaths due to these specific cancers in the general population is so small in comparison to the total mortality that they make little difference to the relative survival estimates. However, prostate cancer proved to be an exception to this. For all cancer sites combined the sensitivity analysis illustrates a major limitation for this type of analysis, particularly with the older age groups. Conclusion: We recommend that, with a classification of diseases as wide as all cancer sites, relative survival should not be used without appropriate adjustment.     

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.     

Older cancer patients in cancer clinical trials are underrepresented. Systematic literature review of almost 5000 meta- and pooled analyses of phase III randomized trials of survival from breast,prostate and lung cancer

BackgroundOlder people represent increasing proportions of the population with cancer. To understand the representivity of cancer treatments in older people, we performed a systematic literature review using PRISMA guidelines of the age distribution of clinical trial participants for three leading cancer types, namely breast, prostate, and lung.MethodsWe used PubMed to identify articles detailing meta or pooled-analyses of phase III, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of survival for breast, prostate and lung cancer, published ≤5 years from 2016. We compared the age distribution of participants to that of these cancers for “More developed regions”.Results4993 potential papers were identified, but only three papers on breast cancer, three on lung cancer, and none on prostate cancer presented the age distribution of their participants. Except for one paper of breast cancer, participants ≥70 years in all other papers were underrepresented.ConclusionsWe recommend the age distribution of patients be clearly reported in all clinical trials, as per guidelines. Clinical trials ought to be more representative of the populations most affected by the disease for which treatments are being tested. This should lead to better knowledge of effectiveness of treatments and better translation of trial results to optimal care of older cancer patients.     

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.     

Whole-population trends in pathology-confirmed cancer incidence in Northern Ireland,Scotland and Wales during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: A retrospective observational study

IntroductionThe COVID-19 epidemic interrupted normal cancer diagnosis procedures. Population-based cancer registries report incidence at least 18 months after it happens. Our goal was to make more timely estimates by using pathologically confirmed cancers (PDC) as a proxy for incidence. We compared the 2020 and 2021 PDC with the 2019 pre-pandemic baseline in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland (NI).MethodsNumbers of female breast (ICD-10 C50), lung (C33–34), colorectal (C18–20), gynaecological (C51–58), prostate (C61), head and neck (C00-C14, C30–32), upper gastro-intestinal (C15–16), urological (C64–68), malignant melanoma (C43), and non-melanoma skin (NMSC) (C44) cancers were counted. Multiple pairwise comparisons generated incidence rate ratios (IRR).ResultsData were accessible within 5 months of the pathological diagnosis date. Between 2019 and 2020, the number of pathologically confirmed malignancies (excluding NMSC) decreased by 7315 (14.1 %). Scotland experienced early monthly declines of up to 64 % (colorectal cancers, April 2020 versus April 2019). Wales experienced the greatest overall change in 2020, but Northern Ireland experienced the quickest recovery. The pandemic's effects varied by cancer type, with no significant change in lung cancer diagnoses in Wales in 2020 (IRR 0.97 (95 % CI 0.90–1.05)), followed by an increase in 2021 (IRR 1.11 (1.03–1.20).ConclusionPDC are useful in reporting cancer incidence quicker than cancer registrations. Temporal and geographical differences between participating countries mirrored differences in responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, indicating face validity and the potential for quick cancer diagnosis assessment. To verify their sensitivity and specificity against the gold standard of cancer registrations, however, additional research is required.     

Impact of comorbidity on survival by tumour location: Breast,colorectal and lung cancer (2000–2014)

BackgroundTo assess the impact of comorbidity, measured by the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), on survival in breast, colorectal and lung cancer.MethodsWe identified 3455 breast cancer, 3336 colorectal cancer and 2654 lung cancer patients through the Hospital del Mar cancer registry. The prevalence of comorbidities according to the CCI was calculated. Kaplan-Meier curves and the log-rank test were used to compare survival curves for each cancer location. Cox regression was used to calculate survival hazard ratios and 1-, 3- and 5-year mortality rate ratios adjusted by age, sex, CCI, place of first consultation, stage, treatment and period of diagnosis.ResultsThe overall unadjusted 5-year follow-up survival proportion was 82.6% for breast cancer, 55.7% for colorectal cancer, and 16.3% for lung cancer. Overall survival was associated with CCI ≥ 3 in breast cancer (HR: 2.33 95%CI: 1.76–3.08), colorectal cancer (HR: 1.39; 95%CI: 1.13–1.70) and lung cancer (HR: 1.22; 95%CI: 1.06–1.40). In breast cancer, the higher the CCI, the higher the adjusted mortality rate ratio and differences were greater in 5-year than in 1-year follow-up survival.ConclusionsComorbidity is a significant predictor of overall survival in cancer patients; however, it has a stronger impact on survival in breast cancer than in colorectal and lung cancer.     

Differences in cancer incidence by age at diagnosis between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people for cancer types included in Australian national screening programs

BackgroundThis study examined age distributions and age-specific incidence of screened cancers by Aboriginal status in New South Wales (NSW) to consider the appropriateness of screening target age ranges.MethodsThe NSW Cancer Registry identified invasive (female) breast, cervical and bowel cancers in people diagnosed in 2001–2014.ResultsAboriginal people were younger at diagnosis with higher proportions of breast and bowel cancers diagnosed before the screening target age range (<50 years) compared with non-Aboriginal people (30.6% vs. 22.8%, and 17.3% vs. 7.3%, respectively). Age-specific incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were lower/similar for breast and bowel cancers in younger and higher in older Aboriginal than non-Aboriginal people. All age-specific cervical cancer IRRs were higher for Aboriginal compared with non-Aboriginal people.ConclusionAlthough higher proportions of breast and colorectal cancers were diagnosed before screening commencement age in Aboriginal people, this does not necessarily indicate a need for earlier screening commencement. Other aspects needing consideration include benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness.     

The validity of cancer information on death certificates in Norway and the impact of death certificate initiated cases on cancer incidence and survival

BackgroundDeath certificates are an important source of information for cancer registries. The aim of this study was to validate the cancer information on death certificates, and to investigate the effect of including death certificate initiated (DCI) cases in the Cancer Registry of Norway when estimating cancer incidence and survival.MethodsAll deaths in Norway in the period 2011–2015 with cancer mentioned on the death certificates were linked to the cancer registry. Notifications not registered from other sources were labelled death certificate notifications (DCNs), and considered as either cancer or not, based on available information in the registry or from trace-back to another source.ResultsFrom the total of 65 091 cancers mentioned on death certificates in the period 2011–2015, 58,425 (89.8%) were already in the registry. Of the remaining 6 666 notifications, 2 636 (2 129 with cancer as underlying cause) were not regarded to be new cancers, which constitutes 4.0% of all cancers mentioned on death certificates and 39.5% of the DCNs. Inclusion of the DCI cases increased the incidence of all cancers combined by 2.6%, with largest differences for cancers with poorer prognosis and for older age groups. Without validation, including the 2 129 disregarded death certificates would over-estimate the incidence by 1.3%. Including DCI cases decreased the five-year relative survival estimate for all cancer sites combined with 0.5% points.ConclusionIn this study, almost 40% of the DCNs were regarded not to be a new cancer case, indicating unreliability of death certificate information for cancers that are not already registered from other sources. The majority of the DCNs where, however, registered as new cases that would have been missed without death certificates. Both including and excluding the DCI cases will potentially bias the survival estimates, but in different directions. This biases were shown to be small in the Cancer Registry of Norway.     

Family history of non-hematologic cancers among Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia patients: a preliminary study

BackgroundLittle is known about the epidemiology and etiology of Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM). Despite several studies of the relation between family history and B-cell disorders and WM, family history of non-hematologic cancers has not been systematically investigated. We thus examined associations of family history of breast, colorectal, lung, ovarian, and prostate cancers with WM.MethodsAll probands aged 20–79 years with bone marrow biopsy-confirmed diagnosis of WM between May 1, 1999 and January 1, 2010 at the Bing Center for Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia were eligible for inclusion in our analysis. We reviewed medical records for eligible probands to determine family history of cancer (defined as a cancer diagnosis for ≥1 first-degree relative(s) of the proband). Using expected values constructed from the United States National Health Interview Survey, we estimated age- and race-standardized rate ratios (RRs) for family history of breast, colorectal, lung, ovarian, and prostate cancers by WM subtype.ResultsFamily history of prostate cancer had the largest overall rate ratio (RR = 1.4, 95% confidence limits [CL]: 1.1, 1.7), and among sporadic cases, family history of prostate and breast cancer had the largest rate ratios (prostate: RR = 1.3, 95% CL: 1.1, 1.7; breast: RR = 1.3, 95% CL: 1.2, 1.6).ConclusionOur study suggests that it may be worthwhile to pursue these associations in a case–control study with uniform selection and data collection for cases and controls, and at least some record-based information on family history.     

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.     

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.     

Profile of cancer in the Eastern Mediterranean region: The need for action

BackgroundMany countries in the Eastern Mediterranean region (EMR) are undergoing marked demographic and socioeconomic transitions that are increasing the cancer burden in region. We sought to examine the national cancer incidence and mortality profiles as a support to regional cancer control planning in the EMR.MethodsGLOBOCAN 2012 data were used to estimate cancer incidence and mortality by country, cancer type, sex and age in 22 EMR countries. We calculated age-standardized incidence and mortality rates (per 100,000) using direct method of standardization.ResultsThe cancer incidence and mortality rates vary considerably between countries in the EMR. Incidence rates were highest in Lebanon (204 and 193 per 100,000 in males and females, respectively). Mortality rates were highest in Lebanon (119) and Egypt (121) among males and in Somalia (117) among females. The profile of common cancers differs substantially by sex. For females, breast cancer is the most common cancer in all 22 countries, followed by cervical cancer, which ranks high only in the lower-income countries in the region. For males, lung, prostate, and colorectal cancer in combination represent almost 30% of the cancer burden in countries that have attained very high levels of human development.ConclusionsThe most common cancers are largely amenable to preventive strategies by primary and/or secondary prevention, hence a need for effective interventions tackling lifestyle risk factors and infections. The high mortality observed from breast and cervical cancer highlights the need to break the stigmas and improve awareness surrounding these cancers.     

Decreasing waiting time for treatment before and during implementation of cancer patient pathways in Norway

Background: In 2015, Norway implemented cancer patient pathways to reduce waiting times for treatment. The aims of this paper were to describe patterns in waiting time and their association with patient characteristics for colorectal, lung, breast and prostate cancers.Methods: National, population-based data from 2007 to 2016 were used. A multivariable quantile regression examined the association between treatment period, age, stage, sex, place of residence, and median waiting times.Results: Reduction in median waiting times for radiotherapy among colorectal, lung and prostate cancer patients ranged from 14 to 50 days. Median waiting time for surgery remained approximately 21 days for both colorectal and breast cancers, while it decreased by 7 and 36 days for lung and prostate cancers, respectively. The proportion of lung and prostate cancer patients with metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis decreased, while the proportion of colorectal patients with localised disease and patients with stage I breast cancer increased (p < 0.001). After adjusting for case-mix, a patient’s place of residence was significantly associated with waiting time for treatment (p < 0.001), however, differences in waiting time to treatment decreased over the study period.Conclusions: Between 2007 and 2016, Norway experienced improved stage distributions and consistently decreasing waiting times for treatment. While these improvements occurred gradually, no significant change was observed from the time of cancer patient pathway implementation.