Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Int J Cancer ; 155(2): 270-281, 2024 Jul 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38520231

RESUMEN

People alive many years after breast (BC) or colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnoses are increasing. This paper aimed to estimate the indicators of cancer cure and complete prevalence for Italian patients with BC and CRC by stage and age. A total of 31 Italian Cancer Registries (47% of the population) data until 2017 were included. Mixture cure models allowed estimation of net survival (NS); cure fraction (CF); time to cure (TTC, 5-year conditional NS >95%); cure prevalence (who will not die of cancer); and already cured (prevalent patients living longer than TTC). 2.6% of all Italian women (806,410) were alive in 2018 after BC and 88% will not die of BC. For those diagnosed in 2010, CF was 73%, 99% when diagnosed at stage I, 81% at stage II, and 36% at stages III-IV. For all stages combined, TTC was >10 years under 45 and over 65 years and for women with advanced stages, but ≤1 year for all BC patients at stage I. The proportion of already cured prevalent BC women was 75% (94% at stage I). Prevalent CRC cases were 422,407 (0.7% of the Italian population), 90% will not die of CRC. For CRC patients, CF was 56%, 92% at stage I, 71% at stage II, and 35% at stages III-IV. TTC was ≤10 years for all age groups and stages. Already cured were 59% of all prevalent CRC patients (93% at stage I). Cancer cure indicators by stage may contribute to appropriate follow-up in the years after diagnosis, thus avoiding patients' discrimination.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Neoplasias Colorrectales , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Sistema de Registros , Humanos , Femenino , Neoplasias Colorrectales/epidemiología , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Italia/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Mama/terapia , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Neoplasias de la Mama/mortalidad , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Prevalencia , Adulto , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Masculino
2.
Front Oncol ; 13: 1197942, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37305579

RESUMEN

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the functional characteristics of two computer-based systems for quality control of cancer registry data through analysis of their output differences. Methods: The study used cancer incidence data from 22 of the 49 registries of the Italian Network of Cancer Registries registered between 1986 and 2017. Two different data checking systems developed by the WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the Joint Research Center (JRC) with the European Network of Cancer Registries (ENCR) and routinely used by registrars were used to check the quality of the data. The outputs generated by the two systems on the same dataset of each registry were analyzed and compared. Results: The study included a total of 1,305,689 cancer cases. The overall quality of the dataset was high, with 86% (81.7-94.1) microscopically verified cases and only 1.3% (0.03-3.06) cases with a diagnosis by death certificate only. The two check systems identified a low percentage of errors (JRC-ENCR 0.17% and IARC 0.003%) and about the same proportion of warnings (JRC-ENCR 2.79% and IARC 2.42%) in the dataset. Forty-two cases (2% of errors) and 7067 cases (11.5% of warnings) were identified by both systems in equivalent categories. 11.7% of warnings related to TNM staging were identified by the JRC-ENCR system only. The IARC system identified mainly incorrect combination of tumor grade and morphology (72.5% of warnings). Conclusion: Both systems apply checks on a common set of variables, but some variables are checked by only one of the systems (for example, checks on patient follow-up and tumor stage at diagnosis are included by the JRC-ENCR system only). Most errors and warnings were categorized differently by the two systems, but usually described the same issues, with warnings related to "morphology" (JRC-ENCR) and "histology" (IARC) being the most frequent. It is important to find the right balance between the need to maintain high standards of data quality and the workability of such systems in the daily routine of the cancer registry.

3.
Front Oncol ; 13: 1168325, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37346072

RESUMEN

Objectives: To describe the procedures to derive complete prevalence and several indicators of cancer cure from population-based cancer registries. Materials and methods: Cancer registry data (47% of the Italian population) were used to calculate limited duration prevalence for 62 cancer types by sex and registry. The incidence and survival models, needed to calculate the completeness index (R) and complete prevalence, were evaluated by likelihood ratio tests and by visual comparison. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to explore the effect on the complete prevalence of using different R indexes. Mixture cure models were used to estimate net survival (NS); life expectancy of fatal (LEF) cases; cure fraction (CF); time to cure (TTC); cure prevalence, prevalent patients who were not at risk of dying as a result of cancer; and already cured patients, those living longer than TTC at a specific point in time. CF was also compared with long-term NS since, for patients diagnosed after a certain age, CF (representing asymptotical values of NS) is reached far beyond the patient's life expectancy. Results: For the most frequent cancer types, the Weibull survival model stratified by sex and age showed a very good fit with observed survival. For men diagnosed with any cancer type at age 65-74 years, CF was 41%, while the NS was 49% until age 100 and 50% until age 90. In women, similar differences emerged for patients with any cancer type or with breast cancer. Among patients alive in 2018 with colorectal cancer at age 55-64 years, 48% were already cured (had reached their specific TTC), while the cure prevalence (lifelong probability to be cured from cancer) was 89%. Cure prevalence became 97.5% (2.5% will die because of their neoplasm) for patients alive >5 years after diagnosis. Conclusions: This study represents an addition to the current knowledge on the topic providing a detailed description of available indicators of prevalence and cancer cure, highlighting the links among them, and illustrating their interpretation. Indicators may be relevant for patients and clinical practice; they are unambiguously defined, measurable, and reproducible in different countries where population-based cancer registries are active.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA