Primary middle ear Epstein‐Barr virus‐related lymphoepithelial carcinoma: Case reports and systematic review

Matthew P. A. Clark,B. Westerberg,K. Berean

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.20692

IF: 2.97

2009-10-29

The Laryngoscope

Abstract:To report two cases of primary lymphoepithelial carcinoma in the middle ear and to determine the optimal treatment for such lesions.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

In vivo regeneration of insulin-producing beta-cells.

H. Jun

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3271-3_27

Advances in experimental medicine and biology

Abstract:
Global surveillance of cancer survival 1995-2009: analysis of individual data for 25,676,887 patients from 279 population-based registries in 67 countries (CONCORD-2)

Claudia Allemani,Hannah K Weir,Helena Carreira,Rhea Harewood,Devon Spika,Xiao-Si Wang,Finian Bannon,Jane V Ahn,Christopher J Johnson,Audrey Bonaventure,Rafael Marcos-Gragera,Charles Stiller,Gulnar Azevedo e Silva,Wan-Qing Chen,Olufemi J Ogunbiyi,Bernard Rachet,Matthew J Soeberg,Hui You,Tomohiro Matsuda,Magdalena Bielska-Lasota,Hans Storm,Thomas C Tucker,Michel P Coleman,CONCORD Working Group

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62038-9

2015-03-14

Abstract:Background: Worldwide data for cancer survival are scarce. We aimed to initiate worldwide surveillance of cancer survival by central analysis of population-based registry data, as a metric of the effectiveness of health systems, and to inform global policy on cancer control. Methods: Individual tumour records were submitted by 279 population-based cancer registries in 67 countries for 25·7 million adults (age 15-99 years) and 75,000 children (age 0-14 years) diagnosed with cancer during 1995-2009 and followed up to Dec 31, 2009, or later. We looked at cancers of the stomach, colon, rectum, liver, lung, breast (women), cervix, ovary, and prostate in adults, and adult and childhood leukaemia. Standardised quality control procedures were applied; errors were corrected by the registry concerned. We estimated 5-year net survival, adjusted for background mortality in every country or region by age (single year), sex, and calendar year, and by race or ethnic origin in some countries. Estimates were age-standardised with the International Cancer Survival Standard weights. Findings: 5-year survival from colon, rectal, and breast cancers has increased steadily in most developed countries. For patients diagnosed during 2005-09, survival for colon and rectal cancer reached 60% or more in 22 countries around the world; for breast cancer, 5-year survival rose to 85% or higher in 17 countries worldwide. Liver and lung cancer remain lethal in all nations: for both cancers, 5-year survival is below 20% everywhere in Europe, in the range 15-19% in North America, and as low as 7-9% in Mongolia and Thailand. Striking rises in 5-year survival from prostate cancer have occurred in many countries: survival rose by 10-20% between 1995-99 and 2005-09 in 22 countries in South America, Asia, and Europe, but survival still varies widely around the world, from less than 60% in Bulgaria and Thailand to 95% or more in Brazil, Puerto Rico, and the USA. For cervical cancer, national estimates of 5-year survival range from less than 50% to more than 70%; regional variations are much wider, and improvements between 1995-99 and 2005-09 have generally been slight. For women diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2005-09, 5-year survival was 40% or higher only in Ecuador, the USA, and 17 countries in Asia and Europe. 5-year survival for stomach cancer in 2005-09 was high (54-58%) in Japan and South Korea, compared with less than 40% in other countries. By contrast, 5-year survival from adult leukaemia in Japan and South Korea (18-23%) is lower than in most other countries. 5-year survival from childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia is less than 60% in several countries, but as high as 90% in Canada and four European countries, which suggests major deficiencies in the management of a largely curable disease. Interpretation: International comparison of survival trends reveals very wide differences that are likely to be attributable to differences in access to early diagnosis and optimum treatment. Continuous worldwide surveillance of cancer survival should become an indispensable source of information for cancer patients and researchers and a stimulus for politicians to improve health policy and health-care systems. Funding: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer (Toronto, Canada), Cancer Focus Northern Ireland (Belfast, UK), Cancer Institute New South Wales (Sydney, Australia), Cancer Research UK (London, UK), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Atlanta, GA, USA), Swiss Re (London, UK), Swiss Cancer Research foundation (Bern, Switzerland), Swiss Cancer League (Bern, Switzerland), and University of Kentucky (Lexington, KY, USA).
Colon and rectal cancer survival in seven high-income countries 2010–2014: variation by age and stage at diagnosis (the ICBP SURVMARK-2 project)

Marzieh Araghi,Melina Arnold,Mark J Rutherford,Marianne Grønlie Guren,Citadel J Cabasag,Aude Bardot,Jacques Ferlay,Hanna Tervonen,Lorraine Shack,Ryan R Woods,Nathalie Saint-Jacques,Prithwish De,Carol McClure,Gerda Engholm,Anna T Gavin,Eileen Morgan,Paul M Walsh,Christopher Jackson,Geoff Porter,Bjorn Møller,Oliver Bucher,Michael Eden,Dianne L O’Connell,Freddie Bray,Isabelle Soerjomataram

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2020-320625

IF: 24.5

2020-06-01

Gut

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.

gastroenterology & hepatology
National comparisons of lung cancer survival in England, Norway and Sweden 2001-2004: differences occur early in follow-up

Lars Holmberg,Fredrik Sandin,Freddie Bray,Mike Richards,James Spicer,Mats Lambe,Asa Klint,Mick Peake,Trond-Eirik Strand,Karen Linklater,David Robinson,Henrik Møller

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/thx.2009.124222

Thorax

Abstract:BACKGROUND Countries with a similar expenditure on healthcare within Europe exhibit differences in lung cancer survival. Survival in lung cancer was studied in 2001-2004 in England, Norway and Sweden. METHODS Nationwide cancer registries in England, Norway and Sweden were used to identify 250 828 patients with lung cancer from England, 18 386 from Norway and 24 886 from Sweden diagnosed between 1996 and 2004, after exclusion of patients registered through death certificate only or with missing, zero or negative survival times. 5-Year relative survival was calculated by application of the period approach. The excess mortality between the countries was compared using a Poisson regression model. RESULTS In all subcategories of age, sex and follow-up period, the 5-year survival was lower in England than in Norway and Sweden. The age-standardised survival estimates were 6.5%, 9.3% and 11.3% for men and 8.4%, 13.5% and 15.9% for women in the respective countries in 2001-2004. The difference in excess risk of dying between the countries was predominantly confined to the first year of follow-up. The relative excess risk ratio during the first 3 months of follow-up comparing England with Norway 2001-2004 varied between 1.23 and 1.46, depending on sex and age, and between 1.56 and 1.91 comparing England with Sweden. CONCLUSION Access to healthcare and population awareness are likely to be major reasons for the differences, but it cannot be excluded that diagnostic and therapeutic activity play a role. Future improvements in lung cancer management may be seen early in follow-up.
Have the recent advancements in cancer therapy and survival benefitted patients of all age groups across the Nordic countries? NORDCAN survival analyses 2002-2021

Anna L.V. Johansson,Simon M. Kønig,Siri Larønningen,Gerda Engholm,Niels Kroman,Karri Seppä,Nea Malila,Bjarni Á. Steig,Eva Maria Gudmundsdóttir,Elínborg J. Ólafsdóttir,Frida E. Lundberg,Therese M.-L. Andersson,Paul C. Lambert,Mats Lambe,David Pettersson,Bjarte Aagnes,Søren Friis,Hans Storm

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/1651-226x.2024.35094

IF: 4.311

2024-04-10

Acta Oncologica

Abstract:Background: Since the early 2000s, overall and site-specific cancer survival have improved substantially in the Nordic countries. We evaluated whether the improvements have been similar across countries, major cancer types, and age groups. Material and methods: Using population-based data from the five Nordic cancer registries recorded in the NORDCAN database, we included a cohort of 1,525,854 men and 1,378,470 women diagnosed with cancer (except non-melanoma skin cancer) during 2002–2021, and followed for death until 2021. We estimated 5-year relative survival (RS) in 5-year calendar periods, and percentage points (pp) differences in 5-year RS from 2002–2006 until 2017–2021. Separate analyses were performed for eight cancer sites (i.e. colorectum, pancreas, lung, breast, cervix uteri, kidney, prostate, and melanoma of skin). Results: Five-year RS improved across nearly all cancer sites in all countries (except Iceland), with absolute differences across age groups ranging from 1 to 21 pp (all cancer sites), 2 to 20 pp (colorectum), -1 to 36 pp (pancreas), 2 to 28 pp (lung), 0 to 9 pp (breast), -11 to 26 pp (cervix uteri), 2 to 44 pp (kidney), -2 to 23 pp (prostate) and -3 to 30 pp (skin melanoma). The oldest patients (80–89 years) exhibited lower survival across all countries and sites, although with varying improvements over time. Interpretation: Nordic cancer patients have generally experienced substantial improvements in cancer survival during the last two decades, including major cancer sites and age groups. Although survival has improved over time, older patients remain at a lower cancer survival compared to younger patients.

oncology
Comparison of liver cancer incidence and survival by subtypes across seven high‐income countries

Mark J. Rutherford,Melina Arnold,Aude Bardot,Jacques Ferlay,Prithwish De,Hannah Tervonen,Alana Little,Oliver Bucher,Nathalie St Jacques,Anna Gavin,Gerda Engholm,Bjørn Møller,Dianne L. O'Connell,Neil Merrett,Donald Maxwell Parkin,Freddie Bray,Isabelle Soerjomataram

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.33767

2021-09-14

International Journal of Cancer

Abstract:International comparison of liver cancer survival has been hampered due to varying standards and degrees for morphological verification and differences in coding practices. This paper aims to compare liver cancer survival across the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership's (ICBP) jurisdictions whilst trying to ensure that the estimates are comparable through a range of sensitivity analyses. Liver cancer incidence data from 21 jurisdictions in 7 countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom) were obtained from population-based registries for 1995-2014. Cases were categorised based on histological classification, age-groups, basis of diagnosis and calendar period. Age-standardised incidence rate (ASR) per 100,000 and net survival at 1, and 3 years after diagnosis were estimated. Liver cancer incidence rates increased over time across all ICBP jurisdictions, particularly for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with the largest relative increase in the UK, increasing from 1.3 to 4.4 per 100,000 person-years between 1995 and 2014. Australia had the highest age-standardised 1- and 3- year net survival for all liver cancers combined (48.7% and 28.1% respectively) in the most recent calendar period, which was still true for morphologically verified tumours when making restrictions to ensure consistent coding and classification. Survival from liver cancers is poor in all countries. The incidence of HCC is increasing alongside the proportion of non-microscopically verified cases over time. Survival estimates for all liver tumours combined should be interpreted in this context. Care is needed to ensure that international comparisons are performed on appropriately comparable patients, with careful consideration of coding practice variations.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

oncology
Exploring international differences in ovarian cancer treatment: a comparison of clinical practice guidelines and patterns of care

Charles H Norell,John Butler,Rhonda Farrell,Alon Altman,James Bentley,Citadel J Cabasag,Paul A Cohen,Scott Fegan,Michael Fung-Kee-Fung,Charlie Gourley,Neville F Hacker,Louise Hanna,Claus Kim Høgdall,Gunnar Kristensen,Janice Kwon,Orla McNally,Gregg Nelson,Andy Nordin,Dearbhaile O'Donnell,Tine Schnack,Peter H Sykes,Ewa Zotow,Samantha Harrison

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2020-001403

2020-08-11

International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer

Abstract:Introduction The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership demonstrated international differences in ovarian cancer survival, particularly for women aged 65–74 with advanced disease. These findings suggest differences in treatment could be contributing to survival disparities. Objective To compare clinical practice guidelines and patterns of care across seven high-income countries. Methods A comparison of guidelines was performed and validated by a clinical working group. To explore clinical practice, a patterns of care survey was developed. A questionnaire regarding management and potential health system-related barriers to providing treatment was emailed to gynecological specialists. Guideline and survey results were crudely compared with 3-year survival by ‘distant’ stage using Spearman’s rho. Results Twenty-seven guidelines were compared, and 119 clinicians completed the survey. Guideline-related measures varied between countries but did not correlate with survival internationally. Guidelines were consistent for surgical recommendations of either primary debulking surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery with the aim of complete cytoreduction. Reported patterns of surgical care varied internationally, including for rates of primary versus interval debulking, extensive/‘ultra-radical’ surgery, and perceived barriers to optimal cytoreduction. Comparison showed that willingness to undertake extensive surgery correlated with survival across countries (r s =0.94, p=0.017). For systemic/radiation therapies, guideline differences were more pronounced, particularly for bevacizumab and PARP (poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase) inhibitors. Reported health system-related barriers also varied internationally and included a lack of adequate hospital staffing and treatment monitoring via local and national audits. Discussion Findings suggest international variations in ovarian cancer treatment. Characteristics relating to countries with higher stage-specific survival included higher reported rates of primary surgery; willingness to undertake extensive/ultra-radical procedures; greater access to high-cost drugs; and auditing.
Trends in lung cancer survival in the Nordic countries 1990–2016: The NORDCAN survival studies

Frida E. Lundberg,Simon Ekman,Anna L.V. Johansson,Gerda Engholm,Helgi Birgisson,Elínborg J. Ólafsdóttir,Lina Steinrud Mørch,Tom Børge Johannesen,Therese M.-L. Andersson,David Pettersson,Karri Seppä,Anni Virtanen,Mats Lambe,Paul C. Lambert

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2024.107826

IF: 6.081

2024-05-24

Lung Cancer

Abstract:Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate if the previously reported improvements in lung cancer survival were consistent across age at diagnosis and by lung cancer subtypes. Materials and methods Data on lung cancers diagnosed between 1990 and 2016 in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden were obtained from the NORDCAN database. Flexible parametric models were used to estimate age-standardized and age-specific relative survival by sex, as well as reference-adjusted crude probabilities of death and life-years lost. Age-standardised survival was also estimated by the three major subtypes; adenocarcincoma, squamous cell and small-cell carcinoma. Results Both 1- and 5-year relative survival improved continuously in all countries. The pattern of improvement was similar across age groups and by subtype. The largest improvements in survival were seen in Denmark, while improvements were comparatively smaller in Finland. In the most recent period, age-standardised estimates of 5-year relative survival ranged from 13% to 26% and the 5-year crude probability of death due to lung cancer ranged from 73% to 85%. Across all Nordic countries, survival decreased with age, and was lower in men and for small-cell carcinoma. Conclusion Lung cancer survival has improved substantially since 1990, in both women and men and across age. The improvements were seen in all major subtypes. However, lung cancer survival remains poor, with three out of four patients dying from their lung cancer within five years of diagnosis.

oncology,respiratory system
Changing cancer survival in China during 2003-15: a pooled analysis of 17 population-based cancer registries.

Hongmei Zeng,Wanqing Chen,Rongshou Zheng,Siwei Zhang,John S Ji,Xiaonong Zou,Changfa Xia,Kexin Sun,Zhixun Yang,He Li,Ning Wang,Renqiang Han,Shuzheng Liu,Huizhang Li,Huijuan Mu,Yutong He,Yanjun Xu,Zhentao Fu,Yan Zhou,Jie Jiang,Yanlei Yang,Jianguo Chen,Kuangrong Wei,Dongmei Fan,Jian Wang,Fangxian Fu,Deli Zhao,Guohui Song,Jianshun Chen,Chunxiao Jiang,Xin Zhou,Xiaoping Gu,Feng Jin,Qilong Li,Yanhua Li,Tonghao Wu,Chunhua Yan,Jianmei Dong,Zhaolai Hua,Peter Baade,Freddie Bray,Ahmedin Jemal,Xue Qin Yu,Jie He

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30127-X

2018-01-01

Abstract:BACKGROUND:From 2003 to 2005, standardised 5-year cancer survival in China was much lower than in developed countries and varied substantially by geographical area. Monitoring population-level cancer survival is crucial to the understanding of the overall effectiveness of cancer care. We therefore aimed to investigate survival statistics for people with cancer in China between 2003 and 2015. METHODS:We used population-based data from 17 cancer registries in China. Data for the study population was submitted by the end of July 31, 2016, with follow-up data on vital status obtained on Dec 31, 2015. We used anonymised, individual cancer registration records of patients (aged 0-99 years) diagnosed with primary, invasive cancers from 2003 to 2013. Patients eligible for inclusion had data for demographic characteristics, date of diagnosis, anatomical site, morphology, behaviour code, vital status, and last date of contact. We analysed 5-year relative survival by sex, age, and geographical area, for all cancers combined and 26 different cancer types, between 2003 and 2015. We stratified survival estimates by calendar period (2003-05, 2006-08, 2009-11, and 2012-15). FINDINGS:There were 678 842 records of patients with invasive cancer who were diagnosed between 2003 and 2013. Of these records, 659 732 (97·2%) were eligible for inclusion in the final analyses. From 2003-05 to 2012-15, age-standardised 5-year relative survival increased substantially for all cancers combined, for both male and female patients, from 30·9% (95% CI 30·6-31·2) to 40·5% (40·3-40·7). Age-standardised 5-year relative survival also increased for most cancer types, including cancers of the uterus (average change per calendar period 5·5% [95% CI 2·5-8·5]), thyroid (5·4% [3·2-7·6]), cervix (4·5% [2·9-6·2]), and bone (3·2% [2·1-4·4]). In 2012-15, age-standardised 5-year survival for all patients with cancer was higher in urban areas (46·7%, 95% CI 46·5-47·0) than in rural areas (33·6%, 33·3-33·9), except for patients with oesophageal or cervical cancer; but improvements in survival were greater for patients residing in rural areas than in urban areas. Relative survival decreased with increasing age. The increasing trends in survival were consistent with the upward trends of medical expenditure of the country during the period studied. INTERPRETATION:There was a marked overall increase in cancer survival from 2003 to 2015 in the population covered by these cancer registries in China, possibly reflecting advances in the quality of cancer care in these areas. The survival gap between urban and rural areas narrowed over time, although geographical differences in cancer survival remained. Insight into these trends will help prioritise areas that need increased cancer care. FUNDING:National Key R&D Program of China, PUMC Youth Fund and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, and Major State Basic Innovation Program of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences.
Use of radiotherapy in patients with oesophageal, stomach, colon, rectal, liver, pancreatic, lung, and ovarian cancer: an International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) population-based study

Sean McPhail,Matthew E Barclay,Ruth Swann,Shane A Johnson,Riaz Alvi,Andriana Barisic,Oliver Bucher,Nicola Creighton,Cheryl A Denny,Ron A Dewar,David W Donnelly,Jeff J Dowden,Laura Downie,Norah Finn,Anna T Gavin,Steven Habbous,Dyfed W Huws,S Eshwar Kumar,Leon May,Carol A McClure,David S Morrison,Bjørn Møller,Grace Musto,Yngvar Nilssen,Nathalie Saint-Jacques,Sabuj Sarker,Lorraine Shack,Xiaoyi Tian,Robert JS Thomas,Haiyan Wang,Ryan R Woods,Hui You,Bin Zhang,Georgios Lyratzopoulos,ICBP Module 9 Radiotherapy Group,Damien Bennett,John Butler,David A Cameron,Cindy Chew,Tom Crosby,Brooke Filsinger,Christian J Finley,Katharina Forster,Sharon Fung,Bo Green,Elba Gomez-Navas,Eric Gutierrez,Jihee Han,Samantha Harrison,Mark Lawler,Alana L Little,Jason R Pantarotto,Stuart J Peacock,Isabelle Ray-Coquard,Catherine S Thomson,Janet L Warlow,Emma Whitfield

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(24)00032-9

IF: 54.433

2024-03-01

The Lancet Oncology

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).

oncology
Socio-demographic variation in stage at diagnosis of breast, bladder, colon, endometrial, lung, melanoma, prostate, rectal, renal and ovarian cancer in England and its population impact

M. E. Barclay,G. A. Abel,David. C. Greenberg,B. Rous,G. Lyratzopoulos

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-021-01279-z

IF: 9.075

2021-02-09

British Journal of Cancer

Abstract:Abstract Background Stage at diagnosis strongly predicts cancer survival and understanding related inequalities could guide interventions. Methods We analysed incident cases diagnosed with 10 solid tumours included in the UK government target of 75% of patients diagnosed in TNM stage I/II by 2028. We examined socio-demographic differences in diagnosis at stage III/IV vs. I/II. Multiple imputation was used for missing stage at diagnosis (9% of tumours). Results Of the 202,001 cases, 57% were diagnosed in stage I/II (an absolute 18% ‘gap’ from the 75% target). The likelihood of diagnosis at stage III/IV increased in older age, though variably by cancer site, being strongest for prostate and endometrial cancer. Increasing level of deprivation was associated with advanced stage at diagnosis for all sites except lung and renal cancer. There were, inconsistent in direction, sex inequalities for four cancers. Eliminating socio-demographic inequalities would translate to 61% of patients with the 10 studied cancers being diagnosed at stage I/II, reducing the gap from target to 14%. Conclusions Potential elimination of socio-demographic inequalities in stage at diagnosis would make a substantial, though partial, contribution to achieving stage shift targets. Earlier diagnosis strategies should additionally focus on the whole population and not only the high-risk socio-demographic groups.

oncology
Socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival in England and Wales

M P Coleman,P Babb,A Sloggett,M Quinn,B De Stavola

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(20010101)91:1+<208::aid-cncr6>3.0.co;2-e

IF: 6.9209

2001-01-01

Cancer

Abstract:Background: Cancer survival often has been reported as lower for the poor than the rich, but, to the authors' knowledge, systematic national estimates of deprivation gradients in survival over long periods of time have not been available. Methods: The authors estimated national population-based survival rates for almost 3 million people who were diagnosed with 1 of 58 types of cancers (47 in adults, 11 in children) in England and Wales during the 20-year period 1971-1990 and followed through December 31, 1995. Cancer patients were assigned by their address at diagnosis to 1 of 5 categories (quintiles of the national distribution) of material deprivation by using a standard index derived from census data on unemployment, car ownership, household overcrowding, and social class that was available for all 109,000 census tracts in Great Britain. The authors used relative survival rates: the ratio of observed survival among the cancer patients to the survival that would have been expected if they had had the same background mortality as the general population. Background mortality differed widely among socioeconomic categories, and the authors constructed life tables from raw national mortality data by gender, single year of age, calendar period of death, and socioeconomic category to adjust for it. The authors used variance-weighted least squares regression to estimate both time trends in age standardized survival and socioeconomic gradients in survival. The number of avoidable deaths was estimated from the observed mortality excess compared with the expected mortality in each group of patients. Results: Survival rose steadily for most cancers over 25 years to 1995 in England and Wales, but inequalities in survival between patients living in rich and poor areas were geographically widespread and persistent over this period of time. These patterns existed for 44 of 47 adult cancers examined but not for 11 childhood cancers. These inequalities in survival represented more than 2500 deaths that would have been avoided each year if all cancer patients had had the same chance of surviving up to 5 years after diagnosis as patients in the most affluent group. Conclusions: The largest national cancer survival study has provided strong evidence of systematic disadvantage in outcome among patients who lived in poorer districts compared with those who lived in wealthier districts.
The Fluctuating Incidence, Improved Survival of Patients with Breast Cancer, and Disparities by Age, Race, and Socioeconomic Status by Decade, 1981-2010

Guanming Lu,Jie Li,Shuncong Wang,Jian Pu,Huanhuan Sun,Zhongheng Wei,Yanfei Ma,Jun Wang,Haiqing Ma

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/cmar.s173099

2018-01-01

Cancer Management and Research

Abstract:Purpose: Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer-related deaths among women worldwide. However, the data on breast cancer incidence and survival over a long period, especially the dynamic changes in the role of race and socioeconomic status (SES), are scant. Materials and methods: To evaluate treatment outcomes of patients with breast cancer over the past 3 decades, the data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries were used to assess the survival of patients with breast cancer. Period analysis was used to analyze the incidence and survival trend; survival was evaluated by the relative survival rates (RSRs) and Kaplan-Meier analyses. The HRs for age, race, stage, and SES were assessed by Cox regression. Results: A total of 433,366 patients diagnosed with breast cancer between 1981 and 2010 were identified from the original nine SEER registries. The incidences of breast cancer in each decade were 107.1 per 100,000, 117.5 per 100,000, and 109.8 per 100,000. The 10-year RSRs improved each decade, from 70.8% to 81.5% to 85.6% (P<0.0001). The lower survival in black race and high-poverty group is confirmed by Kaplan-Meier analyses and RSRs. Furthermore, Cox regression analyses demonstrated that age, race, SES, and stage are independent risk factors for patients with breast cancer in each decade. Conclusion: The current data demonstrated a fluctuating incidence trend with improving survival rates of patients with breast cancer over the past 3 decades. In addition, the survival disparity exists among different races, ages, SESs, and stages.
Impact of cancer diagnosis on life expectancy by area-level socioeconomic groups in New South Wales, Australia: a population-based study

Md Mijanur Rahman,Michael David,David Goldsbury,Karen Canfell,Kou Kou,Paramita Dasgupta,Peter Baade,Xue Qin Yu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2024.0166

2024-08-29

Cancer Biology and Medicine

Abstract:Objective: Improvement in cancer survival over recent decades has not been accompanied by a narrowing of socioeconomic disparities. This study aimed to quantify the loss of life expectancy (LOLE) resulting from a cancer diagnosis and examine disparities in LOLE based on area-level socioeconomic status (SES). Methods: Data were collected for all people between 50 and 89 years of age who were diagnosed with cancer, registered in the NSW Cancer Registry between 2001 and 2019, and underwent mortality follow-up evaluations until December 2020. Flexible parametric survival models were fitted to estimate the LOLE by gender and area-level SES for 12 common cancers. Results: Of 422,680 people with cancer, 24% and 18% lived in the most and least disadvantaged areas, respectively. Patients from the most disadvantaged areas had a significantly greater average LOLE than patients from the least disadvantaged areas for cancers with high survival rates, including prostate [2.9 years (95% CI: 2.5–3.2 years) vs. 1.6 years (95% CI: 1.3–1.9 years)] and breast cancer [1.6 years (95% CI: 1.4–1.8 years) vs. 1.2 years (95% CI: 1.0–1.4 years)]. The highest average LOLE occurred in males residing in the most disadvantaged areas with pancreatic [16.5 years (95% CI: 16.1–16.8 years) vs. 16.2 years (95% CI: 15.7–16.7 years)] and liver cancer [15.5 years (95% CI: 15.0–16.0 years) vs. 14.7 years (95% CI: 14.0–15.5 years)]. Females residing in the least disadvantaged areas with thyroid cancer [0.9 years (95% CI: 0.4–1.4 years) vs. 0.6 years (95% CI: 0.2–1.0 years)] or melanoma [0.9 years (95% CI: 0.8–1.1 years) vs. 0.7 years (95% CI: 0.5–0.8 years)] had the lowest average LOLE. Conclusions: Patients from the most disadvantaged areas had the highest LOLE with SES-based differences greatest for patients diagnosed with cancer at an early stage or cancers with higher survival rates, suggesting the need to prioritise early detection and reduce treatment-related barriers and survivorship challenges to improve life expectancy.

oncology,medicine, research & experimental
Cancer incidence and survival for 11 cancers in the Commonwealth: a simulation-based modelling study

Zachary J Ward,Qassi Gaba,Rifat Atun

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(24)00336-X

Abstract:Background: The number of new cancer cases in Commonwealth countries rose by 35% between 2008 and 2018, but progress in cancer control has been slow in many low-income and lower-middle-income member states. We aimed to examine cancer outcomes and priority areas in the Commonwealth to provide insight and guidance on prioritisation of efforts to improve cancer survival and make the best use of scarce resources. Methods: We adapted a previously developed microsimulation model of global cancer survival for 11 cancer sites (oesophagus, stomach, colon, rectum, anus, liver, pancreas, lung, breast, cervix uteri, and prostate). All 56 Commonwealth countries were included and classified based on the 2020 World Bank Income groups (low-income, lower-middle-income, upper-middle-income, and high-income countries) and Commonwealth geographical areas. We modelled the number of incident cancer cases in each Commonwealth country in 2020, based on age group-specific estimates of incidence rates from GLOBOCAN 2020. We simulated 5-year net survival for each patient, accounting for the stage at diagnosis (I-IV), availability of specific treatment and imaging modalities, and quality of care (based on residual differences in expected versus observed survival after accounting for the availability and effectiveness of treatment and imaging modalities). We also simulated counterfactual policy scenarios, in which we scaled up various aspects of cancer care to the mean level of high-income countries to estimate the comparative effectiveness of different policies. Findings: Incident cancers in the Commonwealth accounted for an estimated 14·3% of global diagnosed cancer cases in 2020 among the 11 cancers modelled (1 610 000 Commonwealth cases [95% UI 1 556 000-1 674 000] of 11 227 000 global cases [11 069 000-11 406 000]) and are estimated to increase to 17·3% in 2050 due to population growth (3 330 000 [3 154 000-3 539 000] of 19 308 000 [18 706 000-19 911 000]). The 5-year net survival across 11 cancers combined in 2020 was 30·7% (95% UI 22·4-38·6) in Commonwealth countries, ranging from 4·1% (0·04-15·2) in low-income countries, 17·8% (3·7-30·9) in lower-middle-income countries, 33·1% (23·7-46·0) in upper-middle-income countries, to 59·0% (57·8-60·2) in high-income countries. Among single treatment policies, scaling up access to radiotherapy had the largest survival impact in low-income countries, surgery had the largest impact in lower-middle-income and upper-middle-income countries, and targeted therapy had the largest impact in high-income countries. By geographical area, improving radiotherapy availability was estimated to have the largest impact in Africa, surgery in Asia, targeted therapy in the Caribbean and the Americas and Europe, and quality of care in the Pacific Commonwealth countries. Comparing packages of scaling up the availability of all treatment modalities versus imaging modalities, expanding availability of imaging yielded the largest benefits in high-income countries, and in the Caribbean and the Americas, Europe, and the Pacific, whereas expanding treatment yielded larger benefits in all other income groups and geographical areas. Interpretation: We found large variation in 5-year net survival, with a nearly 15-times difference in cancer survival by country income group within the Commonwealth. Efforts to improve the availability of treatment and imaging modalities and quality of care will be crucial to reduce these disparities, with specific priorities of scale-up policies varying by setting. The Commonwealth could leverage a broad range of knowledge and resources and have an important role in supporting member countries with setting-specific priorities to improve cancer outcomes. Funding: Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health.
Survival trends for patients diagnosed with cutaneous malignant melanoma in the Nordic countries 1990-2016: The NORDCAN survival studies

Frida E Lundberg,Helgi Birgisson,Gerda Engholm,Elínborg J Ólafsdóttir,Lina Steinrud Mørch,Tom Børge Johannesen,David Pettersson,Mats Lambe,Karri Seppä,Paul C Lambert,Anna L V Johansson,Lisbet Rosenkrantz Hölmich,Therese M-L Andersson,Frida E. Lundberg,Elínborg J. Ólafsdóttir,Paul C. Lambert,Anna L.V. Johansson,Therese M.-L. Andersson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2024.113980

IF: 10.002

2024-05-01

European Journal of Cancer

Abstract:BACKGROUND: The survival in patients diagnosed with cutaneous malignant melanoma (CMM) has improved in the Nordic countries in the last decades. It is of interest to know if these improvements are observed in all ages and for both women and men.METHODS: Patients diagnosed with CMM in the Nordic countries in 1990-2016 were identified in the NORDCAN database. Flexible parametric relative survival models were fitted, except for Iceland where a non-parametric Pohar-Perme approach was used. A range of survival metrics were estimated by sex, both age-standardised and age-specific.RESULTS: The 5-year relative survival improved in all countries, in both women and men and across age. While the improvement was more pronounced in men, women still had a higher survival at the end of the study period. The survival was generally high, with age-standardised estimates of 5-year relative survival towards the end of the study period ranging from 85% in Icelandic men to 95% in Danish women. The age-standardised and reference-adjusted 5-year crude probability of death due to CMM ranged from 5% in Danish and Swedish women to 13% in Icelandic men.CONCLUSION: Although survival following CMM was relatively high in the Nordic countries in 1990, continued improvements in survival were observed throughout the study period in both women and men and across age.

oncology
Mortality from leading cancers in districts of England from 2002 to 2019: a population-based, spatiotemporal study

Theo Rashid,James E Bennett,David C Muller,Amanda J Cross,Jonathan Pearson-Stuttard,Perviz Asaria,Hima Iyathooray Daby,Daniela Fecht,Bethan Davies,Majid Ezzati

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(23)00530-2

Abstract:Background: Cancers are the leading cause of death in England. We aimed to estimate trends in mortality from leading cancers from 2002 to 2019 for the 314 districts in England. Methods: We did a high-resolution spatiotemporal analysis of vital registration data from the UK Office for National Statistics using data on all deaths from the ten leading cancers in England from 2002 to 2019. We used a Bayesian hierarchical model to obtain robust estimates of age-specific and cause-specific death rates. We used life table methods to calculate the primary outcome, the unconditional probability of dying between birth and age 80 years by sex, cancer cause of death, local district, and year. We reported Spearman rank correlations between the probability of dying from a cancer and district-level poverty in 2019. Findings: In 2019, the probability of dying from a cancer before age 80 years ranged from 0·10 (95% credible interval [CrI] 0·10-0·11) to 0·17 (0·16-0·18) for women and from 0·12 (0·12-0·13) to 0·22 (0·21-0·23) for men. Variation in the probability of dying was largest for lung cancer among women, being 3·7 times (95% CrI 3·2-4·4) higher in the district with the highest probability than in the district with the lowest probability; and for stomach cancer for men, being 3·2 times (2·6-4·1) higher in the district with the highest probability than in the one with the lowest probability. The variation in the probability of dying was smallest across districts for lymphoma and multiple myeloma (95% CrI 1·2 times [1·1-1·4] higher in the district with the highest probability than the lowest probability for women and 1·2 times [1·0-1·4] for men), and leukaemia (1·1 times [1·0-1·4] for women and 1·2 times [1·0-1·5] for men). The Spearman rank correlation between probability of dying from a cancer and district poverty was 0·74 (95% CrI 0·72-0·76) for women and 0·79 (0·78-0·81) for men. From 2002 to 2019, the overall probability of dying from a cancer declined in all districts: the reductions ranged from 6·6% (95% CrI 0·3-13·1) to 30·1% (25·6-34·5) for women and from 12·8% (7·1-18·8) to 36·7% (32·2-41·2) for men. However, there were increases in mortality for liver cancer among men, lung cancer and corpus uteri cancer among women, and pancreatic cancer in both sexes in some or all districts with posterior probability greater than 0·80. Interpretation: Cancers with modifiable risk factors and potential for screening for precancerous lesions had heterogeneous trends and the greatest geographical inequality. To reduce these inequalities, factors affecting both incidence and survival need to be addressed at the local level. Funding: Wellcome Trust, Imperial College London, UK Medical Research Council, and the National Institute of Health Research.
Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, 1975-2014, Featuring Survival

Ahmedin Jemal,Elizabeth M Ward,Christopher J Johnson,Kathleen A Cronin,Jiemin Ma,Blythe Ryerson,Angela Mariotto,Andrew J Lake,Reda Wilson,Recinda L Sherman,Robert N Anderson,S Jane Henley,Betsy A Kohler,Lynne Penberthy,Eric J Feuer,Hannah K Weir

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djx030

2017-09-01

Abstract:Background: The American Cancer Society (ACS), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR) collaborate to provide annual updates on cancer occurrence and trends in the United States. This Annual Report highlights survival rates. Data were from the CDC- and NCI-funded population-based cancer registry programs and compiled by NAACCR. Trends in age-standardized incidence and death rates for all cancers combined and for the leading cancer types by sex were estimated by joinpoint analysis and expressed as annual percent change. We used relative survival ratios and adjusted relative risk of death after a diagnosis of cancer (hazard ratios [HRs]) using Cox regression model to examine changes or differences in survival over time and by sociodemographic factors. Results: Overall cancer death rates from 2010 to 2014 decreased by 1.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.8 to -1.8) per year in men, by 1.4% (95% CI = -1.4 to -1.3) per year in women, and by 1.6% (95% CI = -2.0 to -1.3) per year in children. Death rates decreased for 11 of the 16 most common cancer types in men and for 13 of the 18 most common cancer types in women, including lung, colorectal, female breast, and prostate, whereas death rates increased for liver (men and women), pancreas (men), brain (men), and uterine cancers. In contrast, overall incidence rates from 2009 to 2013 decreased by 2.3% (95% CI = -3.1 to -1.4) per year in men but stabilized in women. For several but not all cancer types, survival statistically significantly improved over time for both early and late-stage diseases. Between 1975 and 1977, and 2006 and 2012, for example, five-year relative survival for distant-stage disease statistically significantly increased from 18.7% (95% CI = 16.9% to 20.6%) to 33.6% (95% CI = 32.2% to 35.0%) for female breast cancer but not for liver cancer (from 1.1%, 95% CI = 0.3% to 2.9%, to 2.3%, 95% CI = 1.6% to 3.2%). Survival varied by race/ethnicity and state. For example, the adjusted relative risk of death for all cancers combined was 33% (HR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.32 to 1.34) higher in non-Hispanic blacks and 51% (HR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.46 to 1.56) higher in non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native compared with non-Hispanic whites. Conclusions: Cancer death rates continue to decrease in the United States. However, progress in reducing death rates and improving survival is limited for several cancer types, underscoring the need for intensified efforts to discover new strategies for prevention, early detection, and treatment and to apply proven preventive measures broadly and equitably.
Novel 5-substituted, 2,4-diaminofuro[2,3-d]pyrimidines as multireceptor tyrosine kinase and dihydrofolate reductase inhibitors with antiangiogenic and antitumor activity.

A. Gangjee,Yibin Zeng,M. Ihnat,Linda A. Warnke,D. Green,R. Kisliuk,F. Lin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BMC.2005.04.087

IF: 3.461

2005-09-15

Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry

Abstract:
A cryostat approach to ultrathin ‘dry’ frozen sections for electron microscopy: a morphological and X‐ray analytical study

T. Appleton

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2818.1974.tb03913.x

IF: 1.9522

1974-01-01

Journal of Microscopy

Abstract:Conventional preparative procedures for the examination of tissues in the electron microscope involve the use of fixatives, dehydration in alcohol or acetone, embedding in plastics and staining. Such procedures remove soluble components and are therefore often unsuitable for chemical analysis of naturally occurring electrolytes. Ultrathin frozen sections of unfixed, unembedded biological tissue can be cut onto dry glass knives, freeze‐dried and viewed in the electron microscope without staining. Morphological detail is sufficient to identify cell types and ultrastructure. X‐ray microanalysis in the analytical electron microscope (EMMA‐4) has shown that highly soluble electrolytes can be detected and that intracellular compartments are retained.

Primary middle ear Epstein‐Barr virus‐related lymphoepithelial carcinoma: Case reports and systematic review

In vivo regeneration of insulin-producing beta-cells.

Global surveillance of cancer survival 1995-2009: analysis of individual data for 25,676,887 patients from 279 population-based registries in 67 countries (CONCORD-2)

Colon and rectal cancer survival in seven high-income countries 2010–2014: variation by age and stage at diagnosis (the ICBP SURVMARK-2 project)

National comparisons of lung cancer survival in England, Norway and Sweden 2001-2004: differences occur early in follow-up

Have the recent advancements in cancer therapy and survival benefitted patients of all age groups across the Nordic countries? NORDCAN survival analyses 2002-2021

Comparison of liver cancer incidence and survival by subtypes across seven high‐income countries

Exploring international differences in ovarian cancer treatment: a comparison of clinical practice guidelines and patterns of care

Trends in lung cancer survival in the Nordic countries 1990–2016: The NORDCAN survival studies

Changing cancer survival in China during 2003-15: a pooled analysis of 17 population-based cancer registries.

Use of radiotherapy in patients with oesophageal, stomach, colon, rectal, liver, pancreatic, lung, and ovarian cancer: an International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) population-based study

Socio-demographic variation in stage at diagnosis of breast, bladder, colon, endometrial, lung, melanoma, prostate, rectal, renal and ovarian cancer in England and its population impact

Socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival in England and Wales

The Fluctuating Incidence, Improved Survival of Patients with Breast Cancer, and Disparities by Age, Race, and Socioeconomic Status by Decade, 1981-2010

Impact of cancer diagnosis on life expectancy by area-level socioeconomic groups in New South Wales, Australia: a population-based study

Cancer incidence and survival for 11 cancers in the Commonwealth: a simulation-based modelling study

Survival trends for patients diagnosed with cutaneous malignant melanoma in the Nordic countries 1990-2016: The NORDCAN survival studies

Mortality from leading cancers in districts of England from 2002 to 2019: a population-based, spatiotemporal study

Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, 1975-2014, Featuring Survival

Novel 5-substituted, 2,4-diaminofuro[2,3-d]pyrimidines as multireceptor tyrosine kinase and dihydrofolate reductase inhibitors with antiangiogenic and antitumor activity.

A cryostat approach to ultrathin ‘dry’ frozen sections for electron microscopy: a morphological and X‐ray analytical study