Trends and inequalities in laryngeal cancer survival in men and women: England and Wales 1991-2006.

Laryngeal cancer in men is a relatively common malignancy, with a marked socioeconomic gradient in survival between affluent and deprived patients. Cancer of the larynx in women is rare. Survival tends to lower than for men, and little is known about the association between deprivation and survival in women with laryngeal cancer. This paper explores the trends and socio-economic inequalities in laryngeal cancer survival in women, with comparison to men. We examined relative survival among men and women diagnosed with laryngeal cancer in England and Wales during 1991-2006, followed up to 31 December 2007. We estimated the difference in survival between the most deprived and most affluent groups (the 'deprivation gap') at one and five years after diagnosis, for each sex, anatomical subsite and calendar period. Five year survival for all laryngeal cancers combined was up to 8% lower in women than in men. This difference is only partially explained by the differential distribution of anatomical subsites in men and women. Disparities in survival between men and women were also present within specific subsites. In contrast to men, there was little evidence of a consistent deprivation gap in survival for women at any of the anatomical subsites. The stark socioeconomic inequalities in laryngeal cancer survival in men do not appear to be replicated in women. The origins of the socio-economic inequalities in survival among men, and the disparities in survival between men and women at specific tumour subsites remains unclear

Global Trends in Survival From Astrocytic Tumors in Adolescents and Young Adults: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Brain tumors represent an important cause of cancer-related death in adolescents and young adults. Most are diagnosed in low-income and middle-income countries. We aimed to conduct the first, to our knowledge, systematic review of time trends and geographical variation in survival in this age group. METHODS: We included observational studies describing population-based survival from astrocytic tumors in patients aged 15-39 years. We queried 6 electronic databases from database inception to December 31, 2019. This review is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42018111981. RESULTS: Among 5640 retrieved records, 20 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. All but 1 study focused on high-income countries. Five-year survival from astrocytoma (broad morphology group) mostly varied between 48.0% and 71.0% (1973-2004) without clear trends or geographic differences. Adolescents with astrocytoma had better outcomes than young adults, but survival values were similar when nonmalignant tumors were excluded. During 2002-2007, 5-year survival for World Health Organization grade I-II tumors was in the range of 72.6%-89.1% in England, Germany, and the United States but lower in Southeastern Europe (59.0%). Five-year survival for anaplastic astrocytoma varied between 39.6% and 55.4% (2002-2007). Five-year survival from glioblastoma was in the range of 14.2%-23.1% (1991-2009). CONCLUSIONS: Survival from astrocytic tumors remained somewhat steady over time, with little change between 1973 and 2009. Survival disparities were difficult to examine, because nearly all the studies were conducted in affluent countries. Studies often adopted the International Classification of Childhood Cancer, which, however, did not allow to accurately describe variation in survival. Larger studies are warranted, including underrepresented populations and providing more recent survival estimates

Which indicators of early cancer diagnosis from population-based data sources are associated with short-term mortality and survival?

BACKGROUND: A key component of recent English cancer policy is the monitoring of trends in early diagnosis of cancer. Early diagnosis can be defined by the disease stage at diagnosis or by other indicators derived from electronic health records. We evaluate the association between different early diagnosis indicators and survival, and discuss the implementation of the indicators in surveillance of early diagnosis. METHODS: We searched the PubMed database and grey literature to identify early diagnosis indicators and evaluate their association with survival. We analysed cancer registrations for 355,502 cancer patients diagnosed in England during the period 2009-2013, and quantified the association between each early diagnosis indicator and 30-day mortality and five-year net survival. RESULTS: Each incremental difference in stage (I-IV) predicts lower 5-year survival, so prognostic information is lost in comparisons which use binary stage indicators. Patients without a recorded stage have high risk of death shortly following diagnosis and lower 5-year survival. Emergency presentation is independently associated with lower five-year survival. Shorter intervals between first symptoms and diagnosis are not consistently associated with improved survival, potentially due to confounding from tumour characteristics. INTERPRETATION: Contrary to current practice, we recommend that all the stage information should be used in surveillance. Patients missing stage should also be included to minimise bias. Combined data on stage and emergency presentation could be used to create summary prognostic measures. More work is needed to create statistics based on the diagnostic interval that will be useful for surveillance

The impact of age at diagnosis on socioeconomic inequalities in adult cancer survival in England.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the age at which persistent socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival become apparent may help motivate and support targeting of cancer site-specific interventions, and tailoring guidelines to patients at higher risk. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analysed data on more than 40,000 patients diagnosed in England with one of three common cancers in men and women, breast, colon and lung, 2001-2005 with follow-up to the end of 2011. We estimated net survival for each of the five deprivation categories (affluent, 2, 3, 4, deprived), cancer site, sex and age group (15-44, 45-54, 55-64, and 65-74 and 75-99 years). RESULTS: The magnitude and pattern of the age specific socioeconomic inequalities in survival was different for breast, colon and lung. For breast cancer the deprivation gap in 1-year survival widened with increasing age at diagnosis, whereas the opposite was true for lung cancer, with colon cancer having an intermediate pattern. The 'deprivation gap' in 1-year breast cancer survival widened steadily from -0.8% for women diagnosed at 15-44 years to -4.8% for women diagnosed at 75-99 years, and was the widest for women diagnosed at 65-74 years for 5- and 10-year survival. For colon cancer in men, the gap was widest in patients diagnosed aged 55-64 for 1-, 5- and 10-year survival. For lung cancer, the 'deprivation gap' in survival in patients diagnoses aged 15-44 years was more than 10% for 1-year survival in men and for 1- and 5-year survival in women. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that reduction of socioeconomic inequalities in survival will require updating of current guidelines to ensure the availability of optimal treatment and appropriate management of lung cancer patients in all age groups and older patients in deprived groups with breast or colon cancer

How Do Biological Characteristics of Primary Intracranial Tumors Affect Their Clinical Presentation in Children and Young Adults?

We demonstrated the pattern in presentation of primary intracranial tumors in a population-based cohort of patients aged 0-24 years identified from the National Cancer Registry for England, using linked medical records from primary care and hospitals. We used generalized additive models to estimate temporal changes in presentation rates. Borderline and malignant tumors presented at a similar rate in primary care (6.4 and 6.6 consultations per 100 patients each month) and in hospital (3.4 and 3.6). Benign tumors presented earlier but less frequently (rate = 4.4 and rate ratio = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.60-0.93, in primary care; rate = 2.6 and rate ratio = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.77-0.89, in hospital). Many tumors began presenting shortly before their diagnosis, but less aggressive tumors were likely to present earlier in primary care. Earlier detection of less aggressive tumors in primary care may reduce the risk of complications and morbidity among survivors

Pattern of symptoms and signs of primary intracranial tumours in children and young adults: a record linkage study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the age pattern and temporal evolution of symptoms and signs of intracranial tumours in children and young adults before diagnosis. DESIGN AND SETTING: A record linkage study using population-based data from the National Cancer Registry, linked to Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) and Hospital Episode Statistics (HES). PATIENT COHORT: Patients aged 0-24 years when diagnosed with a primary intracranial tumour between 1989 and 2006 in England. METHODS: Linked records of relevant symptoms and signs in primary care and hospitals were extracted from CPRD (1989-2006, 181 patients) and HES (1997-2006, 3959 patients). Temporal and age-specific changes in presentation rates before diagnosis of an intracranial tumour, for each of eight symptom groups, were estimated in generalised additive models. RESULTS: All symptoms presented with increasing frequency until eventual diagnosis. The frequency of presentation of raised intracranial pressure (ICP) to hospitals rose rapidly to 36.4 per 100 person-months (95% CI 34.6 to 38.4) in the final month before diagnosis in the entire cohort. Clinical features in primary care were less specific: the main features were visual disturbance (rate: 0.49 per 100 person-months; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.72) in newborns to 4-year-olds, headache in 5-year-olds to 11-year-olds (0.64; 0.47 to 0.88), 12-year-olds to 18-year-olds (1.59; 1.21 to 2.08) and 19-year-olds to 24-year-olds (2.44; 1.71 to 3.49). The predominant features at hospital admission were those of raised ICP: between 1.17 per 100 person-months (95% CI 1.08 to 1.26) in newborns to 4-year-olds and 0.77 (0.67 to 0.88) in 19-year-olds to 24-year-olds. CONCLUSIONS: Non-localising symptoms and signs were more than twice as common as focal neurological signs. An intracranial tumour should be considered in patients with relevant symptoms that do not resolve or that progress rapidly

Impact of national cancer policies on cancer survival trends and socioeconomic inequalities in England, 1996-2013: population based study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of the NHS Cancer Plan (2000) and subsequent national cancer policy initiatives in improving cancer survival and reducing socioeconomic inequalities in survival in England. DESIGN: Population based cohort study. SETTING: England. POPULATION: More than 3.5 million registered patients aged 15-99 with a diagnosis of one of the 24 most common primary, malignant, invasive neoplasms between 1996 and 2013. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Age standardised net survival estimates by cancer, sex, year, and deprivation group. These estimates were modelled using regression model with splines to explore changes in the cancer survival trends and in the socioeconomic inequalities in survival. RESULTS: One year net survival improved steadily from 1996 for 26 of 41 sex-cancer combinations studied, and only from 2001 or 2006 for four cancers. Trends in survival accelerated after 2006 for five cancers. The deprivation gap observed for all 41 sex-cancer combinations among patients with a diagnosis in 1996 persisted until 2013. However, the gap slightly decreased for six cancers among men for which one year survival was more than 65% in 1996, and for cervical and uterine cancers, for which survival was more than 75% in 1996. The deprivation gap widened notably for brain tumours in men and for lung cancer in women. CONCLUSIONS: Little evidence was found of a direct impact of national cancer strategies on one year survival, and no evidence for a reduction in socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival. These findings emphasise that socioeconomic inequalities in survival remain a major public health problem for a healthcare system founded on equity

Fleshing out the data: when epidemiological researchers engage with patients and carers. Learning lessons from a patient involvement activity.

Patient and public involvement and engagement has become an essential element of health research, ensuring aims and outputs are worthwhile and relevant. However, research involving secondary data analyses does not present immediately obvious ways to involve patients and the public. Innovative approaches to ensure their involvement is meaningful and effective are required.The Cancer Survival Group cohosted a full-day meeting with the National Cancer Research Institute Consumer Forum-a group of patients and carers. This included the Forum's 'Dragons' Den': a small-group session in which their members provided insight, advice and ideas on current or planned research in the Cancer Survival Group.We investigated this activity as an example of effective patient involvement, with the aim of developing broad recommendations to improve epidemiological/quantitative research by involving patients and carers as directly as possible.In addition to quantitative data captured through evaluation forms completed after the event, we used semistructured interviews of a sample of participants to evaluate the effectiveness of the session and to learn lessons. The interviews were analysed to identify broad or recurrent themes and recommendations.Feedback was overwhelmingly positive, and some impacts on the research projects were identified. Interviewees commented on overall expectations and experiences, as well as specifics of room layout, timing of the session, composition of groups, effectiveness of the facilitation and content of discussions.We present a summary of our findings as a guide for other researchers, including recommendations for improvement gleaned from the interviews. The value to researchers of hosting and participating in such activities was clear. We developed recommendations that should help to improve future events for ourselves and for others who wish to conduct similar activities, which in turn may lead to more concrete benefits for research and patients

Geographical variation in cancer survival in England, 1991–2006: an analysis by Cancer Network

BACKGROUND: Reducing geographical inequalities in cancer survival in England was a key aim of the Calman-Hine Report (1995) and the NHS Cancer Plan (2000). This study assesses whether geographical inequalities changed following these policy developments by analysing the trend in 1-year relative survival in the 28 cancer networks of England. METHODS: Population-based age-standardised relative survival at 1 year is estimated for 1.4 million patients diagnosed with cancer of the oesophagus, stomach, colon, lung, breast (women) or cervix in England during 1991-2006 and followed up to 2007. Regional and deprivation-specific life tables are built to adjust survival estimates for differences in background mortality. Analysis is divided into three calendar periods: 1991-5, 1996-2000 and 2001-6. Funnel plots are used to assess geographical variation in survival over time. RESULTS: One-year relative survival improved for all cancers except cervical cancer. There was a wide geographical variation in survival with generally lower estimates in northern England. This north-south divide became less marked over time, although the overall number of cancer networks that were lower outliers compared with the England value remained stable. Breast cancer was the only cancer for which there was a marked reduction in geographical inequality in survival over time. CONCLUSION: Policy changes over the past two decades coincided with improved relative survival, without an increase in geographical variation. The north-south divide in relative survival became less pronounced over time but geographical inequalities persist. The reduction in geographical inequality in breast cancer survival may be followed by a similar trend for other cancers, provided government recommendations are implemented similarly

National survey of British public's views on use of identifiable medical data by the National Cancer Registry

This article has been made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund and is available from the specified link - Copyright @ 2006, BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.Objectives To describe the views of the British public on the use of personal medical data by the National Cancer Registry without individual consent, and to assess the relative importance attached by the public to personal privacy in relation to public health uses of identifiable health data.Design Cross sectional, face to face interview survey.Setting England, Wales, and Scotland.Participants 2872 respondents, 97% of those who took part in the Office for National Statistics' omnibus survey, a national multistage probability sample in March and April 2005 (response rates 62% and 69%, respectively).Results 72% (95% confidence interval 70% to 74%) of all respondents did not consider any of the following to be an invasion of their privacy by the National Cancer Registry: inclusion of postcode, inclusion of name and address, and the receipt of a letter inviting them to a research study on the basis of inclusion in the registry. Only 2% (2% to 3%) of the sample considered all of these to amount to an invasion of privacy. Logistic regression analysis showed that the proportions not concerned about invasion of privacy varied significantly by country, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and housing tenure, although in all subgroups examined most respondents had no concerns. 81% (79% to 83%) of all respondents said that they would support a law making cancer registration statutory.Conclusions Most of the British public considers the confidential use of personal, identifiable patient information by the National Cancer Registry for the purposes of public health research and surveillance not to be an invasion of privacy