Verknüpfung von Abrechnungsdaten gesetzlicher Krankenkassen mit Daten epidemiologischer Krebsregister: länderspezifische Möglichkeiten und Limitationen

HINTERGRUND: In den letzten Jahren wird verstärkt gefordert, Forschungsdaten gemäß den sog. FAIR-Prinzipien für eine Nachnutzung aufzubereiten. Dadurch könnten zukünftige Projekte auf einer breiteren Datengrundlage durchgeführt sowie durch Verknüpfung verschiedener Datenquellen neue Fragestellungen untersucht werden. FRAGESTELLUNG: Eruiert werden soll, inwieweit Abrechnungsdaten gesetzlicher Krankenversicherungen mit den Daten der Landeskrebsregister (LKR) überregional verknüpft werden können, um die in den Abrechnungsdaten fehlenden Informationen zu Krebserkrankungen ergänzen und die Validität der dortigen Angaben zur Tumordiagnose beurteilen zu können. Der Fokus liegt dabei auf der Beschreibung der länderspezifischen Anforderungen für einen solchen Datenabgleich. MATHERIAL UND METHODEN: Als Datenquellen wurden die Pharmakoepidemiologische Forschungsdatenbank GePaRD des Leibniz-Instituts für Präventionsforschung und Epidemiologie – BIPS und sechs Krebsregister herangezogen. Zur Verknüpfung wurden vergleichend das logistisch aufwendige direkte Linkage- und ein weniger aufwendiges indirektes Linkage-Verfahren angewandt. Dazu mussten für GePaRD und für jedes LKR die Genehmigungen der jeweils zuständigen Behörde eingeholt werden. ERGEBNISSE: Hinsichtlich der Verknüpfung von LKR-Daten mit GePaRD zeigten sich gravierende Unterschiede in der Datenbereitstellung (vollständige Ablehnung bis hin zu einer unkomplizierten Umsetzung). DISKUSSION: In Deutschland müssen einheitliche Rahmenbedingungen geschaffen werden, um eine angemessene Nachnutzung und eine Verknüpfung von personenbezogenen Gesundheitsdaten zu Forschungszwecken im Sinne der FAIR-Prinzipien zu ermöglichen. Bezüglich der Verknüpfung von LKR-Daten mit anderen Datenquellen könnte das neue Gesetz zur Zusammenführung von Krebsregisterdaten Abhilfe schaffen.BACKGROUND: In recent years, there has been an increasing demand for the reuse of research data in accordance with the so-called FAIR principles. This would allow researchers to conduct projects on a broader data basis and to investigate new research questions by linking different data sources. OBJECTIVES: We explored if nationwide linking of claims data from statutory health insurances (SHI) with data from population-based cancer registries can be used to obtain additional information on cancer that is missing in claims data and to assess the validity of SHI tumour diagnoses. This paper focuses on describing the specific requirements of German federal states for such data linkage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Pharmacoepidemiological Research Database GePaRD at the Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology – BIPS and six cancer registries were used as data sources. The logistically complex direct linkage was compared with a less complex indirect linkage. For this purpose, permission had to be obtained for GePaRD and for each cancer registry from the respective responsible authority. RESULTS: Regarding the linkage of cancer registry data with GePaRD, the cancer registries showed profound differences in the modalities for data provision, ranging from a complete rejection to an uncomplicated implementation of linkage procedures. DISCUSSION: In Germany, a consistent legal framework is needed to adequately enable the reuse and record linkage of personal health data for research purposes according to the FAIR principles. The new law on the consolidation of cancer registry data could provide a remedy regarding the linkage of cancer registry data with other data sources

Worldwide trends in population-based survival for children, adolescents, and young adults diagnosed with leukaemia, by subtype, during 2000–14 (CONCORD-3): analysis of individual data from 258 cancer registries in 61 countries

Background: Leukaemias comprise a heterogenous group of haematological malignancies. In CONCORD-3, we analysed data for children (aged 0–14 years) and adults (aged 15–99 years) diagnosed with a haematological malignancy during 2000–14 in 61 countries. Here, we aimed to examine worldwide trends in survival from leukaemia, by age and morphology, in young patients (aged 0–24 years). Methods: We analysed data from 258 population-based cancer registries in 61 countries participating in CONCORD-3 that submitted data on patients diagnosed with leukaemia. We grouped patients by age as children (0–14 years), adolescents (15–19 years), and young adults (20–24 years). We categorised leukaemia subtypes according to the International Classification of Childhood Cancer (ICCC-3), updated with International Classification of Diseases for Oncology, third edition (ICD-O-3) codes. We estimated 5-year net survival by age and morphology, with 95% CIs, using the non-parametric Pohar-Perme estimator. To control for background mortality, we used life tables by country or region, single year of age, single calendar year and sex, and, where possible, by race or ethnicity. All-age survival estimates were standardised to the marginal distribution of young people with leukaemia included in the analysis. Findings: 164 563 young people were included in this analysis: 121 328 (73·7%) children, 22 963 (14·0%) adolescents, and 20 272 (12·3%) young adults. In 2010–14, the most common subtypes were lymphoid leukaemia (28 205 [68·2%] patients) and acute myeloid leukaemia (7863 [19·0%] patients). Age-standardised 5-year net survival in children, adolescents, and young adults for all leukaemias combined during 2010–14 varied widely, ranging from 46% in Mexico to more than 85% in Canada, Cyprus, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, and Australia. Individuals with lymphoid leukaemia had better age-standardised survival (from 43% in Ecuador to ≥80% in parts of Europe, North America, Oceania, and Asia) than those with acute myeloid leukaemia (from 32% in Peru to ≥70% in most high-income countries in Europe, North America, and Oceania). Throughout 2000–14, survival from all leukaemias combined remained consistently higher for children than adolescents and young adults, and minimal improvement was seen for adolescents and young adults in most countries. Interpretation: This study offers the first worldwide picture of population-based survival from leukaemia in children, adolescents, and young adults. Adolescents and young adults diagnosed with leukaemia continue to have lower survival than children. Trends in survival from leukaemia for adolescents and young adults are important indicators of the quality of cancer management in this age group