Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 148
Filter
Add more filters

Publication year range
1.
Lancet Oncol ; 25(3): 338-351, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38423048

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There are few data on international variation in chemotherapy use, despite it being a key treatment type for some patients with cancer. Here, we aimed to examine the presence and size of such variation. METHODS: This population-based study used data from Norway, the four UK nations (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales), eight Canadian provinces (Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, and Saskatchewan), and two Australian states (New South Wales and Victoria). Patients aged 15-99 years diagnosed with cancer in eight different sites (oesophageal, stomach, colon, rectal, liver, pancreatic, lung, or ovarian cancer), with no other primary cancer diagnosis occurring from within the 5 years before to 1 year after the index cancer diagnosis or during the study period were included in the study. We examined variation in chemotherapy use from 31 days before to 365 days after diagnosis and time to its initiation, alongside related variation in patient group differences. Information was obtained from cancer registry records linked to clinical or patient management system data or hospital administration data. Random-effects meta-analyses quantified interjurisdictional variation using 95% prediction intervals (95% PIs). FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2012, and Dec 31, 2017, of 893 461 patients with a new diagnosis of one of the studied cancers, 111 569 (12·5%) did not meet the inclusion criteria, and 781 892 were included in the analysis. There was large interjurisdictional variation in chemotherapy use for all studied cancers, with wide 95% PIs: 47·5 to 81·2 (pooled estimate 66·4%) for ovarian cancer, 34·9 to 59·8 (47·2%) for oesophageal cancer, 22·3 to 62·3 (40·8%) for rectal cancer, 25·7 to 55·5 (39·6%) for stomach cancer, 17·2 to 56·3 (34·1%) for pancreatic cancer, 17·9 to 49·0 (31·4%) for lung cancer, 18·6 to 43·8 (29·7%) for colon cancer, and 3·5 to 50·7 (16·1%) for liver cancer. For patients with stage 3 colon cancer, the interjurisdictional variation was greater than that for all patients with colon cancer (95% PI 38·5 to 78·4; 60·1%). Patients aged 85-99 years had 20-times lower odds of chemotherapy use than those aged 65-74 years, with very large interjurisdictional variation in this age difference (odds ratio 0·05; 95% PI 0·01 to 0·19). There was large variation in median time to first chemotherapy (from diagnosis date) by cancer site, with substantial interjurisdictional variation, particularly for rectal cancer (95% PI -15·5 to 193·9 days; pooled estimate 89·2 days). Patients aged 85-99 years had slightly shorter median time to first chemotherapy compared with those aged 65-74 years, consistently between jurisdictions (-3·7 days, 95% PI -7·6 to 0·1). INTERPRETATION: Large variation in use and time to chemotherapy initiation were observed between the participating jurisdictions, alongside large and variable age group differences in chemotherapy use. To guide efforts to improve patient outcomes, the underlying reasons for these patterns need to be established. FUNDING: International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (funded by the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Cancer Institute New South Wales, Cancer Research UK, Danish Cancer Society, National Cancer Registry Ireland, The Cancer Society of New Zealand, National Health Service England, Norwegian Cancer Society, Public Health Agency Northern Ireland on behalf of the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry, DG Health and Social Care Scottish Government, Western Australia Department of Health, and Public Health Wales NHS Trust).


Subject(s)
Colonic Neoplasms , Ovarian Neoplasms , Rectal Neoplasms , Female , Humans , Benchmarking , Colonic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Colonic Neoplasms/epidemiology , Liver , Lung , Ontario/epidemiology , Ovarian Neoplasms/drug therapy , Ovarian Neoplasms/epidemiology , State Medicine , Stomach , Victoria , Adolescent , Young Adult , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Male
2.
Lancet Oncol ; 25(3): 352-365, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38423049

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is little evidence on variation in radiotherapy use in different countries, although it is a key treatment modality for some patients with cancer. Here we aimed to examine such variation. METHODS: This population-based study used data from Norway, the four UK nations (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales), nine Canadian provinces (Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, and Saskatchewan), and two Australian states (New South Wales and Victoria). Patients aged 15-99 years diagnosed with cancer in eight different sites (oesophageal, stomach, colon, rectal, liver, pancreatic, lung, or ovarian cancer), with no other primary cancer diagnosis occurring within the 5 years before to 1 year after the index cancer diagnosis or during the study period were included in the study. We examined variation in radiotherapy use from 31 days before to 365 days after diagnosis and time to its initiation, alongside related variation in patient group differences. Information was obtained from cancer registry records linked to clinical or patient management system data, or hospital administration data. Random-effects meta-analyses quantified interjurisdictional variation using 95% prediction intervals (95% PIs). FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2012, and Dec 31, 2017, of 902 312 patients with a new diagnosis of one of the studied cancers, 115 357 (12·8%) did not meet inclusion criteria, and 786,955 were included in the analysis. There was large interjurisdictional variation in radiotherapy use, with wide 95% PIs: 17·8 to 82·4 (pooled estimate 50·2%) for oesophageal cancer, 35·5 to 55·2 (45·2%) for rectal cancer, 28·6 to 54·0 (40·6%) for lung cancer, and 4·6 to 53·6 (19·0%) for stomach cancer. For patients with stage 2-3 rectal cancer, interjurisdictional variation was greater than that for all patients with rectal cancer (95% PI 37·0 to 84·6; pooled estimate 64·2%). Radiotherapy use was infrequent but variable in patients with pancreatic (95% PI 1·7 to 16·5%), liver (1·8 to 11·2%), colon (1·6 to 5·0%), and ovarian (0·8 to 7·6%) cancer. Patients aged 85-99 years had three-times lower odds of radiotherapy use than those aged 65-74 years, with substantial interjurisdictional variation in this age difference (odds ratio [OR] 0·38; 95% PI 0·20-0·73). Women had slightly lower odds of radiotherapy use than men (OR 0·88, 95% PI 0·77-1·01). There was large variation in median time to first radiotherapy (from diagnosis date) by cancer site, with substantial interjurisdictional variation (eg, oesophageal 95% PI 11·3 days to 112·8 days; pooled estimate 62·0 days; rectal 95% PI 34·7 days to 77·3 days; pooled estimate 56·0 days). Older patients had shorter median time to radiotherapy with appreciable interjurisdictional variation (-9·5 days in patients aged 85-99 years vs 65-74 years, 95% PI -26·4 to 7·4). INTERPRETATION: Large interjurisdictional variation in both use and time to radiotherapy initiation were observed, alongside large and variable age differences. To guide efforts to improve patient outcomes, underlying reasons for these differences need to be established. FUNDING: International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (funded by the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Cancer Institute New South Wales, Cancer Research UK, Danish Cancer Society, National Cancer Registry Ireland, The Cancer Society of New Zealand, National Health Service England, Norwegian Cancer Society, Public Health Agency Northern Ireland on behalf of the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry, DG Health and Social Care Scottish Government, Western Australia Department of Health, and Public Health Wales NHS Trust).


Subject(s)
Ovarian Neoplasms , Rectal Neoplasms , Female , Humans , Male , Benchmarking , Colon , Liver , Lung , Ontario/epidemiology , State Medicine , Stomach , Victoria , Adolescent , Young Adult , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over
3.
Blood ; 140(12): 1335-1344, 2022 09 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35797471

ABSTRACT

Immune-mediated thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (iTTP) is characterized by recurring episodes of thrombotic microangiopathy, causing ischemic organ impairment. Black patients are overrepresented in iTTP cohorts in the United States, but racial disparities in iTTP outcome and response to therapy have not been studied. Using the United States Thrombotic Microangiopathies Consortium iTTP Registry, we evaluated the impact of race on mortality and relapse-free survival (RFS) in confirmed iTTP in the United States from 1995 to 2020. We separately examined the impact of rituximab therapy and presentation with newly diagnosed (de novo) or relapsed iTTP on RFS by race. A total of 645 participants with 1308 iTTP episodes were available for analysis. Acute iTTP mortality did not differ by race. When all episodes of iTTP were included, Black race was associated with shorter RFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.60; 95% CI, 1.16-2.21); the addition of rituximab to corticosteroids improved RFS in White (HR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.18-0.73) but not Black patients (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.71-1.31). In de novo iTTP, rituximab delayed relapse, but Black patients had shorter RFS than White patients, regardless of treatment. In relapsed iTTP, rituximab significantly improved RFS in White but not Black patients. Race affects overall relapse risk and response to rituximab in iTTP. Black patients may require closer monitoring, earlier retreatment, and alternative immunosuppression after rituximab treatment. How race, racism, and social determinants of health contribute to the disparity in relapse risk in iTTP deserves further study.


Subject(s)
Purpura, Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic , ADAMTS13 Protein , Adrenal Cortex Hormones , Humans , Purpura, Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic/therapy , Recurrence , Rituximab/therapeutic use
4.
CMAJ ; 196(18): E615-E623, 2024 May 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38740416

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cancer surveillance data are essential to help understand where gaps exist and progress is being made in cancer control. We sought to summarize the expected impact of cancer in Canada in 2024, with projections of new cancer cases and deaths from cancer by sex and province or territory for all ages combined. METHODS: We obtained data on new cancer cases (i.e., incidence, 1984-2019) and deaths from cancer (i.e., mortality, 1984-2020) from the Canadian Cancer Registry and Canadian Vital Statistics Death Database, respectively. We projected cancer incidence and mortality counts and rates to 2024 for 23 types of cancer, overall, by sex, and by province or territory. We calculated age-standardized rates using data from the 2011 Canadian standard population. RESULTS: In 2024, the number of new cancer cases and deaths from cancer are expected to reach 247 100 and 88 100, respectively. The age-standardized incidence rate (ASIR) and mortality rate (ASMR) are projected to decrease slightly from previous years for both males and females, with higher rates among males (ASIR 562.2 per 100 000 and ASMR 209.6 per 100 000 among males; ASIR 495.9 per 100 000 and ASMR 152.8 per 100 000 among females). The ASIRs and ASMRs of several common cancers are projected to continue to decrease (i.e., lung, colorectal, and prostate cancer), while those of several others are projected to increase (i.e., liver and intrahepatic bile duct cancer, kidney cancer, melanoma, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma). INTERPRETATION: Although the overall incidence of cancer and associated mortality are declining, new cases and deaths in Canada are expected to increase in 2024, largely because of the growing and aging population. Efforts in prevention, screening, and treatment have reduced the impact of some cancers, but these short-term projections highlight the potential effect of cancer on people and health care systems in Canada.


Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Registries , Humans , Canada/epidemiology , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/mortality , Male , Female , Incidence , Sex Distribution , Forecasting , Middle Aged , Aged , Age Distribution , Adult , Mortality/trends
5.
Int J Cancer ; 152(9): 1763-1777, 2023 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36533660

ABSTRACT

The aim of the study is to provide a comprehensive assessment of incidence and survival trends of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) by histological subtype across seven high income countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom). Data on invasive EOC diagnosed in women aged 15 to 99 years during 1995 to 2014 were obtained from 20 cancer registries. Age standardized incidence rates and average annual percentage change were calculated by subtype for all ages and age groups (15-64 and 65-99 years). Net survival (NS) was estimated by subtype, age group and 5-year period using Pohar-Perme estimator. Our findings showed marked increase in serous carcinoma incidence was observed between 1995 and 2014 among women aged 65 to 99 years with average annual increase ranging between 2.2% and 5.8%. We documented a marked decrease in the incidence of adenocarcinoma "not otherwise specified" with estimates ranging between 4.4% and 7.4% in women aged 15 to 64 years and between 2.0% and 3.7% among the older age group. Improved survival, combining all EOC subtypes, was observed for all ages combined over the 20-year study period in all countries with 5-year NS absolute percent change ranging between 5.0 in Canada and 12.6 in Denmark. Several factors such as changes in guidelines and advancement in diagnostic tools may potentially influence the observed shift in histological subtypes and temporal trends. Progress in clinical management and treatment over the past decades potentially plays a role in the observed improvements in EOC survival.


Subject(s)
Ovarian Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Aged , Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial/epidemiology , Incidence , Ovarian Neoplasms/pathology , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Norway/epidemiology , Registries
6.
Radiographics ; 43(10): e230014, 2023 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37708073

ABSTRACT

Physiologic changes that occur in the breast during pregnancy and lactation create challenges for breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Despite these challenges, imaging evaluation should not be deferred, because delayed diagnosis of pregnancy-associated breast cancer contributes to poor outcomes. Both screening and diagnostic imaging can be safely performed using protocols based on age, breast cancer risk, and whether the patient is pregnant or lactating. US is the preferred initial imaging modality for the evaluation of clinical symptoms in pregnant women, followed by mammography if the US findings are suspicious for malignancy or do not show the cause of the clinical symptom. Breast MRI is not recommended during pregnancy because of the use of intravenous gadolinium-based contrast agents. Diagnostic imaging for lactating women is the same as that for nonpregnant nonlactating individuals, beginning with US for patients younger than 30 years old and mammography followed by US for patients aged 30 years and older. MRI can be performed for high-risk screening and local-regional staging in lactating women. The radiologist may encounter a wide variety of breast abnormalities, some specific to pregnancy and lactation, including normal physiologic changes, benign disorders, and malignant neoplasms. Although most masses encountered are benign, biopsy should be performed if the imaging characteristics are suspicious for cancer or if the finding does not resolve after a short period of clinical follow-up. Knowledge of the expected imaging appearance of physiologic changes and common benign conditions of pregnancy and lactation is critical for differentiating these findings from pregnancy-associated breast cancer. ©RSNA, 2023 Online supplemental material is available for this article. Quiz questions for this article are available through the Online Learning Center.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Lactation , Pregnancy , Female , Humans , Adult , Breast , Mammography , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Biopsy
7.
Radiographics ; 43(5): e220145, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37104126

ABSTRACT

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is defined by the Kellogg Community Health Scholars Program as a collaborative process that equitably involves all partners in the research process and recognizes the unique strengths that each community member brings. The CBPR process begins with a research topic of importance to the community, with the goal of combining knowledge and action with social change to improve community health and eliminate health disparities. CBPR engages and empowers affected communities to collaborate in defining the research question; sharing the study design process; collecting, analyzing, and disseminating the data; and implementing solutions. A CBPR approach in radiology has several potential applications, including removing limitations to high-quality imaging, improving secondary prevention, identifying barriers to technology access, and increasing diversity in the research participation for clinical trials. The authors provide an overview with the definitions of CBPR, explain how to conduct CBPR, and illustrate its applications in radiology. Finally, the challenges of CBPR and useful resources are discussed in detail. ©RSNA, 2023 Quiz questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.


Subject(s)
Community-Based Participatory Research , Research Design , Humans , Community-Based Participatory Research/methods , Radiologists
8.
Curr Treat Options Oncol ; 24(9): 1293-1303, 2023 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37407888

ABSTRACT

OPINION STATEMENT: Patients with primary brain tumors are at a substantially elevated risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) compared to other disease states or other forms of malignancy. Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), often complicate the care of patients with primary brain tumors, and treatment may pose specific unique risks and considerations for management. This paper critically reviews the relevant literature and the most common treatment options in addition to a discussion regarding the relative risk considerations for neurooncology patients facing thromboembolic disease.


Subject(s)
Brain Neoplasms , Pulmonary Embolism , Venous Thromboembolism , Venous Thrombosis , Humans , Venous Thrombosis/diagnosis , Venous Thrombosis/etiology , Venous Thrombosis/therapy , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Venous Thromboembolism/diagnosis , Venous Thromboembolism/etiology , Venous Thromboembolism/therapy , Pulmonary Embolism/diagnosis , Pulmonary Embolism/etiology , Pulmonary Embolism/therapy , Brain Neoplasms/complications , Brain Neoplasms/therapy , Risk Factors
9.
Can Assoc Radiol J ; : 8465371231192277, 2023 Aug 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37619596

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the association between patient sociodemographic status and breast screening volumes (BSVs) during the COVID-19 pandemic in a large, population-based breast screening program that serves a provincial population of over 5 million. METHODS: All patients who completed breast screening between April 1st, 2017 and March 31st, 2021 were eligible to participate. An average of 3 annual periods between April 1st, 2017 and March 31st, 2020 were defined as the pre-COVID period while the period between April 1st, 2020 and March 31st, 2021 was defined as the COVID-impacted period. The Postal CodeOM Conversion File Plus was applied to map patient residential postal codes to 2016 census standard geographical areas, which provided information on community size, income quintile and dissemination areas. Dissemination areas were subsequently linked to the Canadian Index of Multiple Deprivation (CIMD). RESULTS: Overall BSV was reduced by 23.0% during the COVID-impacted period as compared to the pre-COVID period. Percent reductions in BSVs were greatest among younger patients aged 40 to 49 years (31.3%) and patients residing in communities with a population of less than 10,000 (27.0%). Percent reduction in BSV was greatest among patients in the lowest income quintile (28.1%). Percent reductions in BSVs were greatest for patients in the most deprived quintiles across all 4 dimensions of the CIMD. CONCLUSION: Disproportionate reductions in BSVs were observed during the COVID-19 pandemic among younger patients, patients residing in rural communities, patients in lower income quintiles, and patients in the most deprived quintiles across all 4 dimensions of the CIMD.

10.
Gut ; 71(8): 1532-1543, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34824149

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To provide the first international comparison of oesophageal and gastric cancer survival by stage at diagnosis and histological subtype across high-income countries with similar access to healthcare. METHODS: As part of the ICBP SURVMARK-2 project, data from 28 923 patients with oesophageal cancer and 25 946 patients with gastric cancer diagnosed during 2012-2014 from 14 cancer registries in seven countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the UK) were included. 1-year and 3-year age-standardised net survival were estimated by stage at diagnosis, histological subtype (oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) and oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)) and country. RESULTS: Oesophageal cancer survival was highest in Ireland and lowest in Canada at 1 (50.3% vs 41.3%, respectively) and 3 years (27.0% vs 19.2%) postdiagnosis. Survival from gastric cancer was highest in Australia and lowest in the UK, for both 1-year (55.2% vs 44.8%, respectively) and 3-year survival (33.7% vs 22.3%). Most patients with oesophageal and gastric cancer had regional or distant disease, with proportions ranging between 56% and 90% across countries. Stage-specific analyses showed that variation between countries was greatest for localised disease, where survival ranged between 66.6% in Australia and 83.2% in the UK for oesophageal cancer and between 75.5% in Australia and 94.3% in New Zealand for gastric cancer at 1-year postdiagnosis. While survival for OAC was generally higher than that for OSCC, disparities across countries were similar for both histological subtypes. CONCLUSION: Survival from oesophageal and gastric cancer varies across high-income countries including within stage groups, particularly for localised disease. Disparities can partly be explained by earlier diagnosis resulting in more favourable stage distributions, and distributions of histological subtypes of oesophageal cancer across countries. Yet, differences in treatment, and also in cancer registration practice and the use of different staging methods and systems, across countries may have impacted the comparisons. While primary prevention remains key, advancements in early detection research are promising and will likely allow for additional risk stratification and survival improvements in the future.


Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Esophageal Neoplasms , Stomach Neoplasms , Adenocarcinoma/diagnosis , Adenocarcinoma/epidemiology , Australia/epidemiology , Esophageal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Humans , Registries , Stomach Neoplasms/diagnosis , Stomach Neoplasms/epidemiology , Stomach Neoplasms/pathology
11.
Lancet Oncol ; 23(5): 587-600, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35397210

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Greater understanding of international cancer survival differences is needed. We aimed to identify predictors and consequences of cancer diagnosis through emergency presentation in different international jurisdictions in six high-income countries. METHODS: Using a federated analysis model, in this cross-sectional population-based study, we analysed cancer registration and linked hospital admissions data from 14 jurisdictions in six countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, New Zealand, Norway, and the UK), including patients with primary diagnosis of invasive oesophageal, stomach, colon, rectal, liver, pancreatic, lung, or ovarian cancer during study periods from Jan 1, 2012, to Dec 31, 2017. Data were collected on cancer site, age group, sex, year of diagnosis, and stage at diagnosis. Emergency presentation was defined as diagnosis of cancer within 30 days after an emergency hospital admission. Using logistic regression, we examined variables associated with emergency presentation and associations between emergency presentation and short-term mortality. We meta-analysed estimates across jurisdictions and explored jurisdiction-level associations between cancer survival and the percentage of patients diagnosed as emergencies. FINDINGS: In 857 068 patients across 14 jurisdictions, considering all of the eight cancer sites together, the percentage of diagnoses through emergency presentation ranged from 24·0% (9165 of 38 212 patients) to 42·5% (12 238 of 28 794 patients). There was consistently large variation in the percentage of emergency presentations by cancer site across jurisdictions. Pancreatic cancer diagnoses had the highest percentage of emergency presentations on average overall (46·1% [30 972 of 67 173 patients]), with the jurisdictional range being 34·1% (1083 of 3172 patients) to 60·4% (1317 of 2182 patients). Rectal cancer had the lowest percentage of emergency presentations on average overall (12·1% [10 051 of 83 325 patients]), with a jurisdictional range of 9·1% (403 of 4438 patients) to 19·8% (643 of 3247 patients). Across the jurisdictions, older age (ie, 75-84 years and 85 years or older, compared with younger patients) and advanced stage at diagnosis compared with non-advanced stage were consistently associated with increased emergency presentation risk, with the percentage of emergency presentations being highest in the oldest age group (85 years or older) for 110 (98%) of 112 jurisdiction-cancer site strata, and in the most advanced (distant spread) stage category for 98 (97%) of 101 jurisdiction-cancer site strata with available information. Across the jurisdictions, and despite heterogeneity in association size (I2=93%), emergency presenters consistently had substantially greater risk of 12-month mortality than non-emergency presenters (odds ratio >1·9 for 112 [100%] of 112 jurisdiction-cancer site strata, with the minimum lower bound of the related 95% CIs being 1·26). There were negative associations between jurisdiction-level percentage of emergency presentations and jurisdiction-level 1-year survival for colon, stomach, lung, liver, pancreatic, and ovarian cancer, with a 10% increase in percentage of emergency presentations in a jurisdiction being associated with a decrease in 1-year net survival of between 2·5% (95% CI 0·28-4·7) and 7·0% (1·2-13·0). INTERPRETATION: Internationally, notable proportions of patients with cancer are diagnosed through emergency presentation. Specific types of cancer, older age, and advanced stage at diagnosis are consistently associated with an increased risk of emergency presentation, which strongly predicts worse prognosis and probably contributes to international differences in cancer survival. Monitoring emergency presentations, and identifying and acting on contributing behavioural and health-care factors, is a global priority for cancer control. FUNDING: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer; Cancer Council Victoria; Cancer Institute New South Wales; Cancer Research UK; Danish Cancer Society; National Cancer Registry Ireland; The Cancer Society of New Zealand; National Health Service England; Norwegian Cancer Society; Public Health Agency Northern Ireland, on behalf of the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry; the Scottish Government; Western Australia Department of Health; and Wales Cancer Network.


Subject(s)
Ovarian Neoplasms , Rectal Neoplasms , Aged, 80 and over , Benchmarking , Canada , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Hospitals , Humans , Prognosis , Risk Factors , State Medicine , Victoria
12.
Int J Cancer ; 150(1): 28-37, 2022 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34449879

ABSTRACT

Despite improved survival rates, cancer remains one of the most common causes of childhood death. The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) showed variation in cancer survival for adults. We aimed to assess and compare trends over time in cancer mortality between children, adolescents and young adults (AYAs) and adults in the six countries involved in the ICBP: United Kingdom, Denmark, Australia, Canada, Norway and Sweden. Trends in mortality between 2001 and 2015 in the six original ICBP countries were examined. Age standardised mortality rates (ASR per million) were calculated for all cancers, leukaemia, malignant and benign central nervous system (CNS) tumours, and non-CNS solid tumours. ASRs were reported for children (age 0-14 years), AYAs aged 15 to 39 years and adults aged 40 years and above. Average annual percentage change (AAPC) in mortality rates per country were estimated using Joinpoint regression. For all cancers combined, significant temporal reductions were observed in all countries and all age groups. However, the overall AAPC was greater for children (-2.9; 95% confidence interval = -4.0 to -1.7) compared to AYAs (-1.8; -2.1 to -1.5) and adults aged >40 years (-1.5; -1.6 to -1.4). This pattern was mirrored for leukaemia, CNS tumours and non-CNS solid tumours, with the difference being most pronounced for leukaemia: AAPC for children -4.6 (-6.1 to -3.1) vs AYAs -3.2 (-4.2 to -2.1) and over 40s -1.1 (-1.3 to -0.8). AAPCs varied between countries in children for all cancers except leukaemia, and in adults over 40 for all cancers combined, but not in subgroups. Improvements in cancer mortality rates in ICBP countries have been most marked among children aged 0 to 14 in comparison to 15 to 39 and over 40 year olds. This may reflect better care, including centralised service provision, treatment protocols and higher trial recruitment rates in children compared to older patients.


Subject(s)
Benchmarking , Mortality/trends , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/mortality , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Australia/epidemiology , Canada/epidemiology , Child , Child, Preschool , Denmark/epidemiology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Incidence , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Norway/epidemiology , Prognosis , Survival Rate , Sweden/epidemiology , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Young Adult
13.
Br J Cancer ; 126(12): 1774-1782, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35236937

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The global burden of pancreatic cancer has steadily increased, while the prognosis after pancreatic cancer diagnosis remains poor. This study aims to compare the stage- and age-specific pancreatic cancer net survival (NS) for seven high-income countries: Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, and United Kingdom. METHODS: The study included over 35,000 pancreatic cancer cases diagnosed during 2012-2014, followed through 31 December 2015. The stage- and age-specific NS were calculated using the Pohar-Perme estimator. RESULTS: Pancreatic cancer survival estimates were low across all 7 countries, with 1-year NS ranging from 21.1% in New Zealand to 30.9% in Australia, and 3-year NS from 6.6% in the UK to 10.9% in Australia. Most pancreatic cancers were diagnosed with distant stage, ranging from 53.9% in Ireland to 83.3% in New Zealand. While survival differences were evident between countries across all stage categories at one year after diagnosis, this survival advantage diminished, particularly in cases with distant stage. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the importance of stage and age at diagnosis in pancreatic cancer survival. Although progress has been made in improving pancreatic cancer prognosis, the disease is highly fatal and will remain so without major breakthroughs in the early diagnosis and management.


Subject(s)
Pancreatic Neoplasms , Developed Countries , Humans , Pancreatic Neoplasms/epidemiology , Prognosis , Registries , United Kingdom/epidemiology
14.
Thorax ; 77(4): 378-390, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34282033

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer has a poor prognosis that varies internationally when assessed by the two major histological subgroups (non-small cell (NSCLC) and small cell (SCLC)). METHOD: 236 114 NSCLC and 43 167 SCLC cases diagnosed during 2010-2014 in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the UK were included in the analyses. One-year and 3-year age-standardised net survival (NS) was estimated by sex, histological type, stage and country. RESULTS: One-year and 3-year NS was consistently higher for Canada and Norway, and lower for the UK, New Zealand and Ireland, irrespective of stage at diagnosis. Three-year NS for NSCLC ranged from 19.7% for the UK to 27.1% for Canada for men and was consistently higher for women (25.3% in the UK; 35.0% in Canada) partly because men were diagnosed at more advanced stages. International differences in survival for NSCLC were largest for regional stage and smallest at the advanced stage. For SCLC, 3-year NS also showed a clear female advantage with the highest being for Canada (13.8% for women; 9.1% for men) and Norway (12.8% for women; 9.7% for men). CONCLUSION: Distribution of stage at diagnosis among lung cancer cases differed by sex, histological subtype and country, which may partly explain observed survival differences. Yet, survival differences were also observed within stages, suggesting that quality of treatment, healthcare system factors and prevalence of comorbid conditions may also influence survival. Other possible explanations include differences in data collection practice, as well as differences in histological verification, staging and coding across jurisdictions.


Subject(s)
Lung Neoplasms , Australia/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Ireland/epidemiology , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Male , Neoplasm Staging , Registries , Thorax/pathology
15.
CMAJ ; 194(17): E601-E607, 2022 05 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35500919

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Regular cancer surveillance is crucial for understanding where progress is being made and where more must be done. We sought to provide an overview of the expected burden of cancer in Canada in 2022. METHODS: We obtained data on new cancer incidence from the National Cancer Incidence Reporting System (1984-1991) and Canadian Cancer Registry (1992-2018). Mortality data (1984-2019) were obtained from the Canadian Vital Statistics - Death Database. We projected cancer incidence and mortality counts and rates to 2022 for 22 cancer types by sex and province or territory. Rates were age standardized to the 2011 Canadian standard population. RESULTS: An estimated 233 900 new cancer cases and 85 100 cancer deaths are expected in Canada in 2022. We expect the most commonly diagnosed cancers to be lung overall (30 000), breast in females (28 600) and prostate in males (24 600). We also expect lung cancer to be the leading cause of cancer death, accounting for 24.3% of all cancer deaths, followed by colorectal (11.0%), pancreatic (6.7%) and breast cancers (6.5%). Incidence and mortality rates are generally expected to be higher in the eastern provinces of Canada than the western provinces. INTERPRETATION: Although overall cancer rates are declining, the number of cases and deaths continues to climb, owing to population growth and the aging population. The projected high burden of lung cancer indicates a need for increased tobacco control and improvements in early detection and treatment. Success in breast and colorectal cancer screening and treatment likely account for the continued decline in their burden. The limited progress in early detection and new treatments for pancreatic cancer explains why it is expected to be the third leading cause of cancer death in Canada.


Subject(s)
Lung Neoplasms , Aged , Canada/epidemiology , Female , Forecasting , Humans , Incidence , Lung Neoplasms/epidemiology , Male , Registries
16.
J Cancer Educ ; 37(6): 1711-1718, 2022 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33961204

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of just-in-time teaching (JiTT) screencasts for graduate medical education on an inpatient adult hematology-oncology service (HOS) setting is not known. Our preceding pilot data identified six high-yield topics for this setting. The study objective was to evaluate screencast educational efficacy. METHODS: Internal medicine residents scheduled to start a rotation on the primary HOS of an academic medical center were eligible for this parallel, unblinded, randomized controlled trial with concealed allocation. Participants underwent block randomization to the usual educational curriculum either with or without access to a series of novel screencasts; all participants received an anonymous online end-of-rotation survey and a $20 gift certificate upon completion. The primary outcome was the change in attitude among learners, measured as their self-reported confidence for managing the clinical topics. RESULTS: From 12/9/2019 through 6/15/2020, accrual was completed with 67 of 78 eligible residents (86%) enrolled and randomized. Analysis was by intention-to-treat and participant response rate was 91%. Sixty-four percent of residents in the treatment arm rated their clinical management comfort level as "comfortable" or "very comfortable" versus 21% of residents in the usual education arm (p = 0.001), estimated difference = 43% (95% CI: 21-66%), using a prespecified cumulative cutoff score. Treatment arm participants reported that the screencasts improved medical oncology knowledge base (100%), would improve their care for cancer patients (92%), and had an enjoyable format (96%). CONCLUSION: Residents on a busy inpatient HOS found that a JiTT screencast increased clinical comfort level in the management of HOS-specific patient problems.


Subject(s)
Hematology , Internship and Residency , Adult , Humans , Inpatients , Education, Medical, Graduate , Hematology/education , Medical Oncology/education , Curriculum , Teaching
17.
Gut ; 70(2): 234-242, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32554620

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Survival from oesophageal cancer remains poor, even across high-income countries. Ongoing changes in the epidemiology of the disease highlight the need for survival assessments by its two main histological subtypes, adenocarcinoma (AC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). METHODS: The ICBP SURVMARK-2 project, a platform for international comparisons of cancer survival, collected cases of oesophageal cancer diagnosed 1995 to 2014, followed until 31st December 2015, from cancer registries covering seven participating countries with similar access to healthcare (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the UK). 1-year and 3-year age-standardised net survival alongside incidence rates were calculated by country, subtype, sex, age group and period of diagnosis. RESULTS: 111 894 cases of AC and 73 408 cases of SCC were included in the analysis. Marked improvements in survival were observed over the 20-year period in each country, particularly for AC, younger age groups and 1 year after diagnosis. Survival was consistently higher for both subtypes in Australia and Ireland followed by Norway, Denmark, New Zealand, the UK and Canada. During 2010 to 2014, survival was higher for AC compared with SCC, with 1-year survival ranging from 46.9% (Canada) to 54.4% (Ireland) for AC and 39.6% (Denmark) to 53.1% (Australia) for SCC. CONCLUSION: Marked improvements in both oesophageal AC and SCC survival suggest advances in treatment. Less marked improvements 3 years after diagnosis, among older age groups and patients with SCC, highlight the need for further advances in early detection and treatment of oesophageal cancer alongside primary prevention to reduce the overall burden from the disease.


Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/mortality , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/mortality , Esophageal Neoplasms/mortality , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Female , Global Health/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Registries , Retrospective Studies , Sex Factors , Socioeconomic Factors , Survival Analysis , Young Adult
18.
Gut ; 70(1): 114-126, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32482683

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: As part of the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) SURVMARK-2 project, we provide the most recent estimates of colon and rectal cancer survival in seven high-income countries by age and stage at diagnosis. METHODS: Data from 386 870 patients diagnosed during 2010-2014 from 19 cancer registries in seven countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the UK) were analysed. 1-year and 5-year net survival from colon and rectal cancer were estimated by stage at diagnosis, age and country, RESULTS: (One1-year) and 5-year net survival varied between (77.1% and 87.5%) 59.1% and 70.9% and (84.8% and 90.0%) 61.6% and 70.9% for colon and rectal cancer, respectively. Survival was consistently higher in Australia, Canada and Norway, with smaller proportions of patients with metastatic disease in Canada and Australia. International differences in (1-year) and 5-year survival were most pronounced for regional and distant colon cancer ranging between (86.0% and 94.1%) 62.5% and 77.5% and (40.7% and 56.4%) 8.0% and 17.3%, respectively. Similar patterns were observed for rectal cancer. Stage distribution of colon and rectal cancers by age varied across countries with marked survival differences for patients with metastatic disease and diagnosed at older ages (irrespective of stage). CONCLUSIONS: Survival disparities for colon and rectal cancer across high-income countries are likely explained by earlier diagnosis in some countries and differences in treatment for regional and distant disease, as well as older age at diagnosis. Differences in cancer registration practice and different staging systems across countries may have impacted the comparisons.


Subject(s)
Colonic Neoplasms/mortality , Colonic Neoplasms/pathology , Developed Countries , Rectal Neoplasms/mortality , Rectal Neoplasms/pathology , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Australia , Canada , Denmark , Female , Humans , Ireland , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , New Zealand , Norway , Survival Rate , United Kingdom
19.
Int J Cancer ; 149(5): 1013-1020, 2021 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33932300

ABSTRACT

Survival from lung cancer remains low, yet is the most common cancer diagnosed worldwide. With survival contrasting between the main histological groupings, small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), it is important to assess the extent that geographical differences could be from varying proportions of cancers with unspecified histology across countries. Lung cancer cases diagnosed 2010-2014, followed until 31 December 2015 were provided by cancer registries from seven countries for the ICBP SURVMARK-2 project. Multiple imputation was used to reassign cases with unspecified histology into SCLC, NSCLC and other. One-year and three-year age-standardised net survival were estimated by histology, sex, age group and country. In all, 404 617 lung cancer cases were included, of which 47 533 (11.7%) and 262 040 (64.8%) were SCLC and NSCLC. The proportion of unspecified cases varied, from 11.2% (Denmark) to 29.0% (The United Kingdom). After imputation with unspecified histology, survival variations remained: 1-year SCLC survival ranged from 28.0% (New Zealand) to 35.6% (Australia) NSCLC survival from 39.4% (The United Kingdom) to 49.5% (Australia). The largest survival change after imputation was for 1-year NSCLC (4.9 percentage point decrease). Similar variations were observed for 3-year survival. The oldest age group had lowest survival and largest decline after imputation. International variations in SCLC and NSCLC survival are only partially attributable to differences in the distribution of unspecified histology. While it is important that registries and clinicians aim to improve completeness in classifying cancers, it is likely that other factors play a larger role, including underlying risk factors, stage, comorbidity and care management which warrants investigation.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/mortality , International Classification of Diseases/trends , Lung Neoplasms/mortality , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Small Cell Lung Carcinoma/mortality , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/classification , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/pathology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , International Agencies , Lung Neoplasms/classification , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Small Cell Lung Carcinoma/classification , Small Cell Lung Carcinoma/pathology , Survival Rate , Young Adult
20.
Br J Cancer ; 124(5): 1026-1032, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33293692

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Data from population-based cancer registries are often used to compare cancer survival between countries or regions. The ICBP SURVMARK-2 study is an international partnership aiming to quantify and explore the reasons behind survival differences across high-income countries. However, the magnitude and relevance of differences in cancer survival between countries have been questioned, as it is argued that observed survival variations may be explained, at least in part, by differences in cancer registration practice, completeness and the availability and quality of the respective data sources. METHODS: As part of the ICBP SURVMARK-2 study, we used a simulation approach to better understand how differences in completeness, the characteristics of those missed and inclusion of cases found from death certificates can impact on cancer survival estimates. RESULTS: Bias in 1- and 5-year net survival estimates for 216 simulated scenarios is presented. Out of the investigated factors, the proportion of cases not registered through sources other than death certificates, had the largest impact on survival estimates. CONCLUSION: Our results show that the differences in registration practice between participating countries could in our most extreme scenarios explain only a part of the largest observed differences in cancer survival.


Subject(s)
Cancer Survivors/statistics & numerical data , Computer Simulation , Neoplasms/mortality , Population Surveillance , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Humans , International Agencies , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Prognosis , Survival Rate
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL