Differences in treatment outcomes in selected cancers in Poland compared to other European countries in 2005–2009, based on CONCORD 2 study

Wstęp. Wskaźniki 5-letnich przeżyć populacyjnych obrazują poziom wyleczalności nowotworów złośliwych w populacji, a zatem są jednym z najważniejszych narzędzi do oceny efektywności walki z rakiem. Dzięki ujednoliconej metodologii ogólnoświatowego badania CONCORD 2 wskaźniki obliczone dla Polski można było porównać z innymi krajami Europy. Celem opracowania była ocena wyleczalności chorych na wybrane nowotwory w Polsce oraz w niektórych województwach na tle krajów europejskich. Materiał i metody. W analizach własnych wykorzystano wyniki badania CONCORD 2 obliczone na podstawie danych zgromadzonych przez populacyjne rejestry nowotworów chorych, u których rozpoznano nowotwór złośliwy w latach 2005–2009 i obserwowanych do końca 2009 roku. Z wyników wyodrębniono dane dotyczące Polski udostępnione dla celów CONCORD 2 przez Krajowy Rejestr Nowotworów oraz Wojewódzkie Biura Rejestracji Nowotworów w województwach: dolnośląskim, podkarpackim, świętokrzyskim i wielkopolskim. Wskaźniki 5-letnich przeżyć obliczono metodą estymacji Pohar Perme net survival. Wyniki. W Polsce u chorych na raka gruczołu krokowego (74%), piersi (74%), szyjki macicy (53%), okrężnicy (50%), odbytnicy (47%), jajnika (34%) i żołądka (19%) wskaźniki 5-letnich przeżyć należały do najniższych w Europie. Natomiast u chorych na białaczki (49%) i raka płuca (13%) przeżycia były na poziomie przeciętnych w Europie. Analiza według województw wykazała zróżnicowanie regionalne. Największe różnice dotyczyły białaczek w województwach dolnośląskim i świętokrzyskim (14%), raka gruczołu krokowego w wielkopolskim i świętokrzyskim (10%) oraz raka piersi w wielkopolskim i podkarpackim (6%), co wskazuje na zróżnicowanie w standardach profilaktyki i leczenia. Wnioski. Badanie wykazało zróżnicowanie wskaźnika 5-letnich przeżyć w Europie na niekorzyść Polski. W nowotworach dobrze rokujących takich jak: rak gruczołu krokowego, piersi, okrężnicy i odbytnicy wskaźniki należały do najniższych w Europie, natomiast u chorych na raka płuca oraz białaczki były na poziomie przeciętnych w Europie.  Background. The 5-year net survival rates show the outcomes of cancer treatment in population, therefore, they are one of the most important measures used to evaluate the effectiveness of cancer treatment. The standardized methodology in CONCORD 2 study of global cancer survival allows to compare the net survival in Poland with other European countries. The aim of this article was to assess the treatment in selected cancers in Poland and selected Polish voivodships in comparison to other European countries. Methods. In our analyses the CONCORD 2 results, based on the data from population-based Cancer Registries for patients diagnosed: 2005–2009 and followed up to 2009, were used. The results regarding Poland included the data previously provided by the National Cancer Registry and four Regional Cancer Registries: Greater Poland, Świętokrzyskie, Lower Silesia and Podkarpackie. The Pohar Perme’s method called net survival was used to calculate the 5-year survival. Results. The 5-year net survival in Poland was the lowest in Europe for patients diagnosed with prostate (74%), breast (74%), colon (50%), rectum (47%), stomach (19%), ovary (34%), cervical (53%) cancers. However, the survival for patients diagnosed with leukemias (49%) and lung cancer (13%) was on the average European level. The analysis of voivodships’ data proved the differences in the regions. The highest differences were for patients with leukemias in Lower Silesia and Świętokrzyskie (14%), prostate cancer in Greater Poland and Świętokrzyskie (10%), breast cancer in Greater Poland and Podkarpackie (6%), which showed differences in prevention and treatment standards. Conclusions. The study showed the differences in 5-year net survival rates in Europe, which were unfavourable for Poland. Cancers that have good prognosis such as: prostate, breast, colon and rectum had the lowest survival rates in Europe, however, patients with lung cancer and leukemias were on the average European level.

Reasons for low cervical cancer survival in new accession European Union countries: a EUROCARE-5 study.

PURPOSE: With better access to early diagnosis and appropriate treatment, cervical cancer (CC) burden decreased in several European countries. In Eastern European (EE) countries, which accessed European Union in 2004, CC survival was worse than in the rest of Europe. The present study investigates CC survival differences across five European regions, considering stage at diagnosis (local, regional and metastatic), morphology (mainly squamous versus glandular tumours) and patients' age. METHODS: We analysed 101,714 CC women diagnosed in 2000-2007 and followed-up to December 2008. Age-standardised 5-year relative survival (RS) and the excess risks of cancer death in the 5 years after diagnosis were computed. RESULTS: EE women were older and less commonly diagnosed with glandular tumours. Proportions of local stage cancers were similar across Europe, while morphology- and stage-specific RS (especially for non-metastatic disease) were lower in Eastern Europe. Adjusting for age and morphology, excess risk of local stage CC death for EE patients remained higher than that for other European women. CONCLUSION: Stage, age and morphology alone do not explain worse survival in Eastern Europe: less effective care may play a role, probably partly due to fewer or inadequate resources being allocated to health care in this area, compared to the rest of Europe

Colorectal cancer survival in the USA and Europe: a CONCORD high-resolution study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the extent to which stage at diagnosis and adherence to treatment guidelines may explain the persistent differences in colorectal cancer survival between the USA and Europe. DESIGN: A high-resolution study using detailed clinical data on Dukes' stage, diagnostic procedures, treatment and follow-up, collected directly from medical records by trained abstractors under a single protocol, with standardised quality control and central statistical analysis. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 21 population-based registries in seven US states and nine European countries provided data for random samples comprising 12 523 adults (15-99 years) diagnosed with colorectal cancer during 1996-1998. OUTCOME MEASURES: Logistic regression models were used to compare adherence to 'standard care' in the USA and Europe. Net survival and excess risk of death were estimated with flexible parametric models. RESULTS: The proportion of Dukes' A and B tumours was similar in the USA and Europe, while that of Dukes' C was more frequent in the USA (38% vs 21%) and of Dukes' D more frequent in Europe (22% vs 10%). Resection with curative intent was more frequent in the USA (85% vs 75%). Elderly patients (75-99 years) were 70-90% less likely to receive radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Age-standardised 5-year net survival was similar in the USA (58%) and Northern and Western Europe (54-56%) and lowest in Eastern Europe (42%). The mean excess hazard up to 5 years after diagnosis was highest in Eastern Europe, especially among elderly patients and those with Dukes' D tumours. CONCLUSIONS: The wide differences in colorectal cancer survival between Europe and the USA in the late 1990s are probably attributable to earlier stage and more extensive use of surgery and adjuvant treatment in the USA. Elderly patients with colorectal cancer received surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy less often than younger patients, despite evidence that they could also have benefited

Cancer survival in the elderly: Effects of socio-economic factors and health care system features (ELDCARE project)

The purpose of the ELDCARE project is to study differences in cancer survival for elderly patients by country, taking into account the socio-economic conditions and the characteristics of health care systems at the ecological level. Fifty-three European cancer registries, from 19 countries, participating in the EUROCARE 3 programme, collected information to compute relative survival on patients aged 65-84 years, diagnosed over the period 1990-1994. National statistics offices provided the macro-economic and labour force indicators (gross domestic product, total health expenditure, and proportion of people employed in the agriculture sector) as well as the features of national health care systems. Survival for several of the cancer sites had high positive Pearson's correlations (r) with the affluence indicators (usually r > 0.7), but survival for the poor prognosis cancers (lung, ovary, stomach) and for cervix uteri was not so well correlated. Among the medical resources considered, the number of computed tomography scanners was the variable most related to survival in the elderly; the number of total health practitioners in the country did not show any relationship. Survival was related to the marital status of elderly women more strongly than for men and younger people. The highest correlations of survival with the percentage of married elderly women in the population were for cancers of the rectum (r = 0.79) and breast (r = 0.66), while survival correlated negatively with the proportion of widows for most cancers. Being married or widowed is for elderly people, in particular elderly women, an important factor influencing psychological status, life habits and social relationships. Social conditions could play a major role in determining health outcomes, particularly in the elderly, by affecting access to health care and delay in diagnosis

Breast cancer survival in the US and Europe: a CONCORD high-resolution study.

Breast cancer survival is reportedly higher in the US than in Europe. The first worldwide study (CONCORD) found wide international differences in age-standardized survival. The aim of this study is to explain these survival differences. Population-based data on stage at diagnosis, diagnostic procedures, treatment and follow-up were collected for about 20,000 women diagnosed with breast cancer aged 15-99 years during 1996-98 in 7 US states and 12 European countries. Age-standardized net survival and the excess hazard of death up to 5 years after diagnosis were estimated by jurisdiction (registry, country, European region), age and stage with flexible parametric models. Breast cancers were generally less advanced in the US than in Europe. Stage also varied less between US states than between European jurisdictions. Early, node-negative tumors were more frequent in the US (39%) than in Europe (32%), while locally advanced tumors were twice as frequent in Europe (8%), and metastatic tumors of similar frequency (5-6%). Net survival in Northern, Western and Southern Europe (81-84%) was similar to that in the US (84%), but lower in Eastern Europe (69%). For the first 3 years after diagnosis the mean excess hazard was higher in Eastern Europe than elsewhere: the difference was most marked for women aged 70-99 years, and mainly confined to women with locally advanced or metastatic tumors. Differences in breast cancer survival between Europe and the US in the late 1990s were mainly explained by lower survival in Eastern Europe, where low healthcare expenditure may have constrained the quality of treatment

Lower incidence rates but thicker melanomas in Eastern Europe before 1992: A comparison with Western Europe

The objective of this study was to investigate the epidemiology of melanoma across Europe with regard to Breslow thickness and body-site distribution. Incidence data from Cancer Incidence in 5 Continents and the EUROCARE-melanoma database were used: 28 117 melanoma cases from 20 cancer registries in 12 European countries, diagnosed between 1978 and 1992. Regression analysis and general linear modelling were used to analyse the data. Melanomas in Eastern Europe were on average 1.4 mm thicker (P<0.05) than in Western Europe and appeared more often on the trunk. From 1978 to 1992, their Breslow thickness had decreased in Western but not Eastern Europe. There was a latitude gradient in incidence, with highest rates in southern regions in Eastern Europe and an inverse gradient in Western Europe, with highest rates in the North. Mortality:incidence ratios were less favourable in southern parts across Europe, especially in Eastern Europe. If Eastern European populations copy the sunbathing behaviour of the West it is likely that in the near future a higher melanoma incidence can be expected there

Survival for eight major cancers and all cancers combined for European adults diagnosed in 1995-99: results of the EUROCARE-4 study.

International audienceBACKGROUND: EUROCARE is the largest population-based cooperative study on survival of patients with cancer. The EUROCARE project aims to regularly monitor, analyse, and explain survival trends and between-country differences in survival. This report (EUROCARE-4) presents survival data for eight selected cancer sites and for all cancers combined, diagnosed in adult (aged >/=15 years) Europeans in 1995-99 and followed up until the end of 2003. METHODS: We analysed data from 83 cancer registries in 23 European countries on 2 699 086 adult cancer cases that were diagnosed in 1995-99 and followed up to December, 2003. We calculated country-specific and mean-weighted age-adjusted 5-year relative survival for eight major cancers. Additionally, case-mix-adjusted 5-year survival for all cancers combined was calculated by countries ranked by total national expenditure on health (TNEH). Changes to survival were analysed relative to cases diagnosed in 1990-94. FINDINGS: Mean age-adjusted 5-year relative survival for colorectal (53.8% [95% CI 53.3-54.1]), lung (12.3% [12.1-12.5]), breast (78.9% [78.6-79.2]), prostate (75.7% [75.2-76.2]), and ovarian (36.3% [35.7-37.0]) cancer was highest in Nordic countries (except Denmark) and central Europe, intermediate in southern Europe, lower in the UK and Ireland, and worst in eastern Europe. Survival for melanoma (81.6% [81.0-82.3]), cancer of the testis (94.2% [93.4-95.0]), and Hodgkin's disease (80.0% [79.0-81.0]) varied little with geography. All-cancer survival correlated with TNEH for most countries. Denmark and UK had lower all-cancer survival than countries with similar TNEH; Finland had high all-cancer survival, but moderate TNEH. Survival increased and intercountry survival differences narrowed between the data for 1990-94 and 1995-99 for, notably, Hodgkin's disease (range 66.1-82.9 [IQR 72.2-78.6] vs 74.0-83.9 [78.6-81.9]), colorectal (29.4-56.7 [45.8-54.1] vs 38.8-59.7 [50.7-57.5]), and breast (61.7-82.7 [72.3-78.3] vs 69.3-87.6 [76.6-82.7]) sites. INTERPRETATION: Increases in survival and decreases in geographic differences over time, which are mainly due to improvements in health-care services in countries with poor survival, might indicate better cancer care. Wealthy countries with high TNEH generally had good cancer outcomes, but those with conspicuously worse outcomes than those with similar TNEH might not be allocating health resources efficiently

Trends in cervical cancer survival in Europe, 1983-1994: a population-based study.

International audienceOBJECTIVE: To evaluate trends in survival from cervical cancer in Europe and in European countries participating in the EUROCARE study as a function of age, morphology and stage at diagnosis. METHODS: Relative survival and relative excess risk of death within 5 years of diagnosis, as a function of age, morphology and stage, among 73,022 women aged 15-99 years diagnosed during 1983-1994 and followed up to 1999 in each of 18 European countries participating in the EUROCARE study, using data from 34 population-based cancer registries. RESULTS: Overall five-year relative survival was 62%, rising by 2% during the period 1983-1994. The highest survival occurred in Northern and Western Europe and the lowest in Central Europe. Survival falls with age at diagnosis, but mainly for localised disease. Survival is higher for adenocarcinoma in younger women, but higher for squamous cell carcinoma in older women. The proportions of younger women, localised cancer and adenocarcinoma all increased. The main improvements in survival were for women under 65, and for metastatic disease. CONCLUSIONS: Survival in Europe has improved slowly but steadily, but the trend is not geographically uniform. Central European countries and the UK saw little or no improvement, and survival in those countries remains the lowest among participating countries in Europe. Further reduction of cervical cancer mortality in Europe may be expected from expansion of screening, and improvement in the treatment of older women, and of metastatic disease

Carcinoma of endocrine organs: results of the RARECARE project

The rarity or the asymptomatic character of endocrine tumours results in a lack of epidemiological studies on their incidence and survival patterns. The aim of this study was to describe the incidence, prevalence and survival of endocrine tumours using a large database, which includes cancer patients diagnosed from 1978 to 2002, registered in 89 population-based cancer registries (CRs) with follow-up until 31st December 2003. These data give an unique overview of the burden of endocrine carcinomas in Europe. A list of tumour entities based on the third International Classification of Diseases for Oncology was provided by the project Surveillance of rare cancer in Europe (RARECARE) project. Over 33,594 cases of endocrine carcinomas were analysed in this study. Incidence rates increased with age and were highest in patients 65 years of age or older. In 2003, more than 315,000 persons in the EU (27 countries) were alive with a past diagnosis of a carcinoma of endocrine organs. The incidence of pituitary carcinoma equalled four per 1,000,000 person years and showed the strongest decline in survival with increasing age. Thyroid cancer showed the highest crude incidence rates (four per 100,000 person years) and was the only entity with a gender difference: (female-to-male ratio: 2:9). Parathyroid carcinoma was the rarest endocrine entity with two new cases per 10,000,000 person years. For adrenal carcinoma, the most remarkable observations were a higher survival for women compared to men (40% compared to 32%, respectively) and a particularly low relative survival of 24% in patients 65 years of age or older. More high quality studies on rare cancers, with additional information, e.g. on stage and therapeutic approach, are needed and may be of help in partly explaining the observed variation in survival