[Hepatic resections. Analysis of data from the Tumor Documentation Center in the state of Brandenburg, Germany, focusing on liver metastases of colorectal carcinoma]. / Kurative und diagnostische Resektionen an der Leber. Datenanalyse des Tumorzentrums Brandenburg unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Tumorentität kolorektales Karzinom.

BACKGROUND: Data from the Brandenburg Tumor Documentation Center (TDCB) in Germany were analyzed for an overview of the current treatment standards of liver surgery in that state. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The analysis was based on prospective data from a total of 37,165 patients diagnosed with malignant tumors between 1 January 1999 and 31 December 2004. Of these patients, 3,986 were diagnosed with liver metastases and 554 had primary tumors of the liver or bile duct. Liver metastases of colorectal carcinoma were reported in 1,299. RESULTS: Analysis confirmed that resection of colorectal metastases (51%) and primary liver or bile duct tumors (23.1%) is by far the most frequent indication for liver surgery. Liver metastasis was developed by 29.2% (n=1299) of patients with colorectal carcinoma. Of the patient total, 71.5% showed evidence of liver metastasis already present when colorectal carcinoma was diagnosed. Of 248 patients who had received liver surgery after diagnosis of liver metastases of a colorectal carcinoma, 114 (46%) underwent hepatic segment resection, which was thus performed in only 8.8% (n=114) of patients with liver metastases after colorectal carcinoma (n=1299). CONCLUSIONS: Since only 8.8% of those with liver metastases underwent curative hepatic segment resection, we can conclude that if patients and doctors were provided with adequate information on the curative potential of this surgical method along with regular consultations with surgeons experienced in liver surgery, the result on resection rates would be positive. Data from tumor documentation centers enable selective analysis of the oncological situation of specific diseases.

[The importance of the common cancer registry for the identification of cancer cases in the EPIC Potsdam-study -- results of the first record linkage]. / Die Rolle des Gemeinsamen Krebsregisters bei der Identifizierung von Krebsfällen in der EPIC-Potsdam-Studie -- Ergebnisse des ersten Datenabgleichs.

AIM: The follow-up of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)-Potsdam study has been identifying cancer diagnoses by an active follow-up through participant's self-report which is then confirmed by pathology registries or medical doctors. To utilise another source of information, a record linkage was performed with the Common Cancer Registry (CCR) of the states of Berlin, Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Saxony-Anhalt and of the free states Saxony and Thuringia in November 2001, using the EPIC-Potsdam database of compliant study participants at that point in time (n = 27 087). This methodological study compares data of identified cancer cases in the EPIC-Potsdam study with those generated through the record linkage. METHODS: The GKR identified 1468 study participants of the EPIC-Potsdam study. Cases (n = 108) with non-melanoma skin cancer were excluded. A separate analysis was done for prevalent (date of cancer diagnosis before baseline examination) and incident cancers (date of diagnosis after baseline examination). We examined how many subjects with at least one cancer were known to EPIC-Potsdam and the CCR, how many had been known only to the CCR and how many only to the EPIC-Potsdam study. Of incident cancer cases each diagnosis was counted. It was analyzed whether the diagnoses as they had been collected by EPIC-Potsdam were identified by the record linkage. Focus was on the diagnoses that had been unknown in EPIC-Potsdam before. The concordance of information from both sources was also considered. RESULTS: According to the record linkage, 1298 subjects with at least one prevalent cancer were identified in the EPIC-Potsdam cohort, 593 (46 %) of whom were identified in both data sources, 241 (19 %) were newly identified, and 464 (36 %) participants self-reported at least one prevalent tumour which was not identified through the record linkage. Seven tumours were diagnosed before 1961 (the CCR's computerised data are only available since 1961). Fifty-seven percent (n = 187) of all tumours which could not be identified in the cancer registry dated from 1990 - 1995. After completion of the record linkage a total of 582 medically verified incident cancer cases were identified. These comprised 397 medically verified cases that were identified in the EPIC-cohort study prior to the record linkage, 18 self-reported cases where the medical verification was pending, and 167 newly identified cases. Eighty-five of the latter cases have not been identified by other sources in the two following years after record linkage indicating that 15 % of the medically verified cases have been found solely through the linkage. CONCLUSION: The EPIC-Potsdam study had a significant benefit of the record linkage due to both the additional identification and verification of prevalent and incident cancer cases, as well as a timely advanced identification of incident diagnoses. The record linkage with the cancer registry improved the quality of the endpoint data of the EPIC-Potsdam study.