Claudia Allemani

EUROCARE-3: survival of cancer patients diagnosed 1990–94—results and commentary

EUROCARE-4 analysed about three million adult cancer cases from 82 cancer registries in 23 European countries, diagnosed in 1995-1999 and followed to December 2003. For each cancer site, the mean European area-weighted observed and relative survival at 1-, 3-, and 5-years by age and sex are presented. Country-specific 1- and 5-year relative survival is also shown, together with 5-year relative survival conditional to surviving 1-year. Within-country variation in survival is analysed for selected cancers. Survival for most solid cancers, whose prognosis depends largely on stage at diagnosis (breast, colorectum, stomach, skin melanoma), was highest in Finland, Sweden, Norway and Iceland, lower in the UK and Denmark, and lowest in the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovenia. France, Switzerland and Italy generally had high survival, slightly below that in the northern countries. There were between-region differences in the survival for haematologic malignancies, possibly due to differences in the availability of effective treatments. Survival of elderly patients was low probably due to advanced stage at diagnosis, comorbidities, difficult access or lack of availability of appropriate care. For all cancers, 5-year survival conditional to surviving 1-year was higher and varied less with region, than the overall relative survival.

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)

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).

Incidence of hematologic malignancies in Europe by morphologic subtype: results of the HAEMACARE project

Changing definitions and classifications of hematologic malignancies (HMs) complicate incidence comparisons. HAEMACARE classified HMs into groupings consistent with the latest World Health Organization classification and useful for epidemiologic and public health purposes. We present crude, age-specific and age-standardized incidence rates for European HMs according to these groupings, estimated from 66,371 lymphoid malignancies (LMs) and 21,796 myeloid malignancies (MMs) registered in 2000-2002 by 44 European cancer registries, grouped into 5 regions. Age-standardized incidence rates were 24.5 (per 100,000) for LMs and 7.55 for MMs. The commonest LMs were plasma cell neoplasms (4.62), small B-cell lymphocytic lymphoma/chronic lymphatic leukemia (3.79), diffuse B-cell lymphoma (3.13), and Hodgkin lymphoma (2.41). The commonest MMs were acute myeloid leukemia (2.96), other myeloproliferative neoplasms (1.76), and myelodysplastic syndrome (1.24). Unknown morphology LMs were commonest in Northern Europe (7.53); unknown morphology MMs were commonest in Southern Europe (0.73). Overall incidence was lowest in Eastern Europe and lower in women than in men. For most LMs, incidence was highest in Southern Europe; for MMs incidence was highest in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Differences in diagnostic and registration criteria are an important cause of incidence variation; however, different distribution of HM risk factors also contributes. The quality of population-based HM data needs further improvement.

Breast Carcinoma Survival in Europe and the United States: A Population-Based Study

Breast carcinoma survival rates were found to be higher in the U.S. than in Europe.

Survival trends in European cancer patients diagnosed from 1988 to 1999.

We analysed data from 49 cancer registries in 18 European countries over the period 1988-1999 to delineate time trends in cancer survival. Survival increased in Europe over the study period for all cancer sites that were considered. There were major survival increases in 5 year age-adjusted relative survival for prostate (from 58% to 79%), colon and rectum (from 48% to 54% men and women), and breast (from 74% to 83%). Improvements were also significant for stomach (from 22% to 24%), male larynx (from 62% to 64%), skin melanoma (from 78% to 83%), Hodgkin disease (from 77% to 83%), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (from 49% to 56%), leukaemias (from 37% to 42%), and for all cancers combined (from 34% to 39% in men, and from 52% to 59% in women). Survival did not change significantly for female larynx, lung, cervix or ovary. The largest increases in survival typically occurred in countries with the lowest survival, and contributed to the overall reduction of survival disparities across Europe over the study period. Differences in the extent of PSA testing and mammographic screening, and increasing use of colonoscopy and faecal blood testing together with improving cancer care are probably the major underlying reasons for the improvements in survival for cancers of prostate, breast, colon and rectum. The marked survival improvements in countries with poor survival may indicate that these countries have made efforts to adopt the new diagnostic procedures and the standardised therapeutic protocols in use in more affluent countries.

The cancer survival gap between elderly and middle-aged patients in Europe is widening

The present study is aimed to compare survival and prognostic changes over time between elderly (70-84 years) and middle-aged cancer patients (55-69 years). We considered seven cancer sites (stomach, colon, breast, cervix and corpus uteri, ovary and prostate) and all cancers combined (but excluding prostate and non-melanoma skin cancers). Five-year relative survival was estimated for cohorts of patients diagnosed in 1988-1999 in a pool of 51 European populations covered by cancer registries. Furthermore, we applied the period-analysis method to more recent incidence data from 32 cancer registries to provide 1- and 5-year relative survival estimates for the period of follow-up 2000-2002. A significant survival improvement was observed from 1988 to 1999 for all cancers combined and for every cancer site, except cervical cancer. However, survival increased at a slower rate in the elderly, so that the gap between younger and older patients widened, particularly for prostate cancer in men and for all considered cancers except cervical cancer in women. For breast and prostate cancers, the increasing gap was likely attributable to a larger use of, respectively, mammographic screening and PSA test in middle-aged with respect to the elderly. In the period analysis of the most recent data, relative survival was much higher in middle-aged patients than in the elderly. The differences were higher for breast and gynaecological cancers, and for prostate cancer. Most of this age gap was due to a very large difference in survival after the 1st year following the diagnosis. Differences were much smaller for conditional 5-year relative survival among patients who had already survived the first year. The increase of survival in elderly men is encouraging but the lesser improvement in women and, in particular, the widening gap for breast cancer suggest that many barriers still delay access to care and that enhanced prevention and clinical management remain major issues.

Breast cancer survival and stage at diagnosis in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK, 2000-2007: A population-based study

Background:We investigate whether differences in breast cancer survival in six high-income countries can be explained by differences in stage at diagnosis using routine data from population-based cancer registries.Methods:We analysed the data on 257 362 women diagnosed with breast cancer during 2000–7 and registered in 13 population-based cancer registries in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK. Flexible parametric hazard models were used to estimate net survival and the excess hazard of dying from breast cancer up to 3 years after diagnosis.Results:Age-standardised 3-year net survival was 87–89% in the UK and Denmark, and 91–94% in the other four countries. Stage at diagnosis was relatively advanced in Denmark: only 30% of women had Tumour, Nodes, Metastasis (TNM) stage I disease, compared with 42–45% elsewhere. Women in the UK had low survival for TNM stage III–IV disease compared with other countries.Conclusion:International differences in breast cancer survival are partly explained by differences in stage at diagnosis, and partly by differences in stage-specific survival. Low overall survival arises if the stage distribution is adverse (e.g. Denmark) but stage-specific survival is normal; or if the stage distribution is typical but stage-specific survival is low (e.g. UK). International differences in staging diagnostics and stage-specific cancer therapies should be investigated.

Time trends of breast cancer survival in Europe in relation to incidence and mortality.

Increasing breast cancer survival, observed in most western countries, is not easily interpreted: it could be due to better treatment, more effective treatment due to earlier diagnosis or simply lead‐time bias. Increased diagnostic activity (e.g., screening) can inflate both incidence and survival. To understand interrelations between incidence, mortality and survival trends and their consequences, we analyzed survival trends in relation to mortality and incidence. Starting with observed survival from EUROCARE, mortality from WHO and using the MIAMOD method, we estimated breast cancer incidence trends from 1970 to 2005 in 10 European countries. To smooth out peaks in incidence and survival due to early diagnosis activity, survival trends were assumed similar to those observed by EUROCARE in 1983–1994. The following patterns emerged: (1) increasing survival with increasing incidence and declining or stable mortality (Sweden, Finland); (2) slight survival increase, marked incidence increase and slight mortality decrease (Denmark, the Netherlands and France); (3) increasing survival, marked decrease in mortality and tendency to incidence stabilization (UK); (4) marked survival increase, steady or decreasing mortality and moderate increases in incidence (Spain, Italy); (5) stable survival, increasing incidence and mortality (Estonia). In most countries survival increased, indicating a real advantage for patients when accompanied by decreasing or stable mortality, and attributable to improved cancer care (Sweden, UK, France, Italy and Spain). In Finland (with high survival), the Netherlands and Denmark, increasing mortality and incidence indicate increasing breast cancer risk, probably related to life‐style factors. In Estonia, low and stable survival in the context of increasing incidence and mortality suggests inadequate care.

Long-term survival expectations of cancer patients in Europe in 2000–2002

Period analysis has been shown to provide more up-to-date estimates of long-term cancer survival rates than traditional cohort-based analysis. Here, we provide detailed period estimates of 5- and 10-year relative survival by cancer site, country, sex and age for calendar years 2000-2002. In addition, pan-European estimates of 1-, 5- and 10-year relative survival are provided. Overall, survival estimates were mostly higher than previously available cohort estimates. For most cancer sites, survival in countries from Northern Europe, Central Europe and Southern Europe was substantially higher than in the United Kingdom and Ireland and in countries from Eastern Europe. Furthermore, relative survival was also better in female than in male patients and decreased with age for most cancer sites.

Incidence, survival and prevalence of myeloid malignancies in Europe

BACKGROUND The Surveillance of Rare Cancers in Europe (RARECARE) project aims at increasing knowledge of rare cancers in Europe. This manuscript describes the epidemiology of myeloid malignancies (MMs), taking into account the morphological characterisation of these tumours. METHODS We used data gathered by RARECARE on cancer patients diagnosed from 1995 to 2002 and archived in 64 European population-based cancer registries, followed up to 31st December 2003 or later. RESULTS The overall annual crude incidence of MMs was 8.6 per 100,000. Acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) and myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) were most common, with incidence rates of 3.7 and 3.1 per 100,000 year respectively, followed by 1.8 for myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms (MD/MPN) and 0.1 for histiocytic and dendritic cell neoplasms (HDCN). The 5-year relative survival rate ranged from 18% for chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia, 19% for AML, 29% for MDS and 44% for chronic myeloid leukaemia to relatively favourable rates for MPN (62%) and HDCN (83%). Total number of new cases of MMs in the EU27 is estimated at 43,000 annually, total number of prevalent cases (1st January 2008) at 189,000 cases. CONCLUSION MMs form a large variety of rare entities with specific characteristics. Collection of detailed information (immunophenotype, genetic abnormalities, molecular data and clinical data) and an up-to-date classification system is essential for their surveillance, especially now that more and more targeted therapies are being introduced.