A proposal on cancer data quality checks: one common procedure for European cancer registries (version 1.1)

During the last two years the European Network of Cancer Registries (ENCR) and the European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC) have been working in preparing the 2015 ENCR-JRC call for data and developing the JRC-ENCR Quality Check software (QCS). The JRC Technical Report ‘A proposal on cancer data quality checks: one common procedure for European cancer registries’, published in November 2014, was the basis for preparing the 2015 data call protocol and developing the QCS. Nevertheless, there are some small differences in variables considered and their respective formats between the 2014 JRC Technical Report and the 2015 call for data protocol. In addition to that, quality checks for multiple primary tumours have been included in the QCS. Moreover, a few errors in the 2014 report were identified and were corrected in the present document. The objective of this addendum is to update version 1.0 of the JRC Technical Report ‘A proposal on cancer data quality checks: one common procedure for European cancer registries’ according to the 2015 ENCR-JRC call for data protocol, the QCS latest version and the feedback obtained from the users.JRC.F.1-Health in Societ

The diagnostic performance of CA125 for the detection of ovarian and non-ovarian cancer in primary care: a population-based cohort study

Background The serum biomarker Cancer Antigen 125 (CA125) is widely used as an investigation for possible ovarian cancer in symptomatic women presenting to primary care. However, its diagnostic performance in this setting is unknown. We evaluated the performance of CA125 in primary care for the detection of ovarian and non-ovarian cancers. Methods and findings We studied women in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink with a CA125 test performed between 1 May 2011 – 31 December 2014. Ovarian and non-ovarian cancers diagnosed in the year following CA125 testing were identified from the cancer registry. Women were categorised by age: <50 years and ≥50 years. Conventional measures of test diagnostic accuracy, including sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value, were calculated for the standard CA125 cut-off (≥35 U/ml). The probability of a woman having cancer at each CA125 level between 1-1000 U/ml was estimated using logistic regression. Cancer probability was also estimated on the basis of CA125 level and age in years using logistic regression. We identified CA125 levels equating to a 3% estimated cancer probability: the ‘risk threshold’ at which the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence advocates urgent specialist cancer investigation. 50,780 women underwent CA125 testing; 456 (0.9%) were diagnosed with ovarian cancer and 1321 (2.6%) with non-ovarian cancer. 3.4% of women <50 years and 15.2% of women ≥50 years with CA125 levels ≥35 U/ml, had ovarian cancer. 20.4% of women ≥50 years with a CA125 level ≥35 U/ml, who did not have ovarian cancer, were diagnosed with a non-ovarian cancer. A CA125 value of 53 U/ml equated to a 3% probability of ovarian cancer overall. This varied by age, with a value of 104 U/ml in 40-year-old women and 32 U/ml in 70-year-old women, equating to a 3% probability. The main limitations of our study were that we were unable to determine why CA125 tests were performed and that our findings are based solely on UK primary care data, so caution is need in extrapolating them to other healthcare settings. Conclusions CA125 is a useful test for ovarian cancer detection in primary care, particularly in women ≥50 years old. Clinicians should also consider non-ovarian cancers in women with high CA125 levels, especially if ovarian cancer has been excluded, in order to prevent diagnostic delay. Our results enable clinicians and patients to determine the estimated probability of ovarian cancer and all cancers at any CA125 level and age, which can be used to guide individual decisions on the need for further investigation or referral.National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) School of Primary Care Research [FR17 424]. Cancer Research UK [C8640/A23385]

Stage–specific incidence trends of renal cancers in the East of England, 1999–2016

Objectives: To determine stage-specific time-trends in renal cancer incidence. Methods: We used population-based East Anglia data 1999−2016 (population ∼2 million) on 5,456 primary renal cancer diagnoses, estimating stage-specific annual incidence using Poisson regression, allowing for changing time-trends, and adjusting for sex, age, and socioeconomic deprivation. Results: Renal cancer incidence increased from 9.8–16.4 cases per 100,000 during 1999−2016. Incidence of Stage I, II, and III cases increased over time, most steeply for Stage I, with annual Incidence Rate Ratio [IRR] for Stage I of 1.09 (95 % CI 1.07–1.12) during 1999−2010; and 1.03 (1.00–1.05) during 2011−2016. In contrast, the annual incidence of Stage IV renal cancer decreased during most years, IRR of 0.99 (0.98–1.00) during 2003−2016. Conclusion: The findings are consistent with both earlier detection of symptomatic renal cancer and increasing identification of asymptomatic lesions. However, the decreasing incidence of late-stage disease suggests genuine shifts towards earlier diagnosis

Sex Differences in Survival from Neuroendocrine Neoplasia in England 2012–2018:A Retrospective, Population-Based Study

Pre-clinical studies have suggested sex hormone signalling pathways may influence tumorigenesis in neuroendocrine neoplasia (NEN). We conducted a retrospective, population-based study to compare overall survival (OS) between males and females with NEN. A total of 14,834 cases of NEN diagnosed between 2012 and 2018, recorded in England’s National Cancer Registry and Analysis Service (NCRAS), were analysed. The primary outcome was OS with 5 years maximum follow-up. Multivariable analysis, restricted mean survival time and mediation analysis were performed. Appendiceal, pulmonary and early-stage NEN were most commonly diagnosed in females; stomach, pancreatic, small intestinal, colonic, rectal and later-stage NEN were more often diagnosed in males. Females displayed increased survival irrespective of the stage, morphology or level of deprivation. On average, they survived 3.62 (95% CI 1.73–5.90) to 10.26 (6.6–14.45) months longer than males; this was statistically significant in NEN of the lung, pancreas, rectum and stomach (p &lt; 0.001). The stage mediated improved survival in stomach, lung, and pancreatic NEN but not in rectal NEN. The reasons underlying these differences are not yet understood. Overall, females diagnosed with NEN tend to survive longer than males, and the stage at presentation only partially explains this. Future research, as well as prognostication and treatment, should consider sex as an important factor.</p

Pancreatic cancer incidence and survival and the role of specialist centres in resection rates in England, 2000 to 2014: A population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to compare population-based survival for exocrine pancreatic cancer in England in the 23 regions covered by specialist centres. The centres were initiated in 2001, covering populations of 2-4 million. METHODS: We examined incidence for adults diagnosed with a pancreatic exocrine cancer during 1995-2014 and age-standardised net survival up to five years after diagnosis for patients diagnosed during 2000-2013. We examined variation in regional resection rates and survival for patients diagnosed during 2010-2013. The data were extracted from the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service. RESULTS: Age-standardised annual incidence rates of exocrine pancreatic cancer increased from 17.1 per 100,000 during 1995-1999 to 18.7 during 2010-2014. Age-standardised one-year and five-year net survival increased from 17.9% and 3.6%, respectively, for 2000-2009, to 21.6% and 4.2% during 2010-2013. There were 2086 (8.9%) resections among 23,415 patients diagnosed with an exocrine tumour in 2010-2013. The proportion ranged from 5.1% to 19.6% between centres. Among resected patients, survival was 73.0% at one year and 20.2% at five years. Of the total 2118 resected patients, 18 (0.9%) were at stage 1; 34 (1.6%) at stage 2; 791 (37.3%) at stage 3 and 140 (6.6%) at stage 4, although 53.6% of stage information was missing. Five-year survival was 2.1% for those who were not resected. The number of resections performed in each centre was not correlated with one-year survival. CONCLUSIONS: Despite improvements in the management of pancreatic cancer in England with the introduction of specialist centres, resection rates remain relatively low, and survival remains lower than in comparably wealthy countries

Vet-ICD-O-Canine-1, a System for Coding Canine Neoplasms Based on the Human ICD-O-3.2

Cancer registries are fundamental tools for collecting epidemiological cancer data and developing cancer prevention and control strategies. While cancer registration is common in the human medical field, many attempts to develop animal cancer registries have been launched over time, but most have been discontinued. A pivotal aspect of cancer registration is the availability of cancer coding systems, as provided by the International Classification of Diseases for Oncology (ICD-O). Within the Global Initiative for Veterinary Cancer Surveillance (GIVCS), established to foster and coordinate animal cancer registration worldwide, a group of veterinary pathologists and epidemiologists developed a comparative coding system for canine neoplasms. Vet-ICD-O-canine-1 is compatible with the human ICD-O-3.2 and is consistent with the currently recognized classification schemes for canine tumors. It comprises 335 topography codes and 534 morphology codes. The same code as in ICD-O-3.2 was used for the majority of canine tumors showing a high level of similarity to their human counterparts (n = 408). De novo codes (n = 152) were created for specific canine tumor entities (n = 126) and topographic sites (n = 26). The Vet-ICD-O-canine-1 coding system represents a user-friendly, easily accessible, and comprehensive resource for developing a canine cancer registration system that will enable studies within the One Health space

Vet-ICD-O-Canine-1, a System for Coding Canine Neoplasms Based on the Human ICD-O-3.2.

Cancer registries are fundamental tools for collecting epidemiological cancer data and developing cancer prevention and control strategies. While cancer registration is common in the human medical field, many attempts to develop animal cancer registries have been launched over time, but most have been discontinued. A pivotal aspect of cancer registration is the availability of cancer coding systems, as provided by the International Classification of Diseases for Oncology (ICD-O). Within the Global Initiative for Veterinary Cancer Surveillance (GIVCS), established to foster and coordinate animal cancer registration worldwide, a group of veterinary pathologists and epidemiologists developed a comparative coding system for canine neoplasms. Vet-ICD-O-canine-1 is compatible with the human ICD-O-3.2 and is consistent with the currently recognized classification schemes for canine tumors. It comprises 335 topography codes and 534 morphology codes. The same code as in ICD-O-3.2 was used for the majority of canine tumors showing a high level of similarity to their human counterparts (n = 408). De novo codes (n = 152) were created for specific canine tumor entities (n = 126) and topographic sites (n = 26). The Vet-ICD-O-canine-1 coding system represents a user-friendly, easily accessible, and comprehensive resource for developing a canine cancer registration system that will enable studies within the One Health space

Global consultation on cancer staging: promoting consistent understanding and use

Disease burden is the most important determinant of survival in patients with cancer. This domain, reflected by the cancer stage and codified using the tumour-node-metastasis (TNM) classification, is a fundamental determinant of prognosis. Accurate and consistent tumour classification is required for the development and use of treatment guidelines and to enable clinical research (including clinical trials), cancer surveillance and control. Furthermore, knowledge of the extent and stage of disease is frequently important in the context of translational studies. Attempts to include additional prognostic factors in staging classifications, in order to facilitate a more accurate determination of prognosis, are often made with a lack of knowledge and understanding and are one of the main causes of the inconsistent use of terms and definitions. This effect has resulted in uncertainty and confusion, thus limiting the utility of the TNM classification. In this Position paper, we provide a consensus on the optimal use and terminology for cancer staging that emerged from a consultation process involving representatives of several major international organizations involved in cancer classification. The consultation involved several steps: a focused literature review; a stakeholder survey; and a consultation meeting. This aim of this Position paper is to provide a consensus that should guide the use of staging terminology and secure the classification of anatomical disease extent as a distinct aspect of cancer classification

Global consultation on cancer staging: promoting consistent understanding and use

Disease burden is the most important determinant of survival in patients with cancer. This domain, reflected by the cancer stage and codified using the tumour-node-metastasis (TNM) classification, is a fundamental determinant of prognosis. Accurate and consistent tumour classification is required for the development and use of treatment guidelines and to enable clinical research (including clinical trials), cancer surveillance and control. Furthermore, knowledge of the extent and stage of disease is frequently important in the context of translational studies. Attempts to include additional prognostic factors in staging classifications, in order to facilitate a more accurate determination of prognosis, are often made with a lack of knowledge and understanding and are one of the main causes of the inconsistent use of terms and definitions. This effect has resulted in uncertainty and confusion, thus limiting the utility of the TNM classification. In this Position paper, we provide a consensus on the optimal use and terminology for cancer staging that emerged from a consultation process involving representatives of several major international organizations involved in cancer classification. The consultation involved several steps: a focused literature review; a stakeholder survey; and a consultation meeting. This aim of this Position paper is to provide a consensus that should guide the use of staging terminology and secure the classification of anatomical disease extent as a distinct aspect of cancer classification