Article

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

Maria Sklodowska Curie Memorial Cancer Centre, Gleiwitz, Silesian Voivodeship, Poland
The Lancet Oncology (Impact Factor: 24.73). 10/2007; 8(9):773-83. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(07)70245-0
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT 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.
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.
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.
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.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Stefano Rosso, Mar 21, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
117 Views
  • Source
    • "In Europe, the 5-year survival rate varies considerably according to anatomic site, 63.1% for cancer of the larynx, 48.5% for oral cavity, 39.8% for oropharynx and 25.5% for hypopharynx cancer [21]. About 40–60% of HNC patients develop recurrences, and around 20% of HNCs develop second primary cancer (SPC), both being associated with poorer survival [22]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether demographics, lifestyle habits, clinical data and alcohol dehydrogenase polymorphisms rs1229984 and rs1573496 associated with first primary head and neck (HNC) are associated with overall survival, recurrence, and second primary cancer (SPC). We conducted a follow-up study in five centres including 801 cases. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for overall survival, recurrence and SPC. Five-years overall survival was 62% for HNC cases, 55% for oral cavity, 53% for oropharynx, 41% for hypopharynx, and 71% for larynx. Predictors of survival were older ages (HR=1.18 for 5 years increase; CI: 1.07-1.30), higher tumour stage (HR=4.16; CI: 2.49-6.96), and high alcohol consumption (HR=3.93; CI: 1.79-8.63). A combined therapy (HR=3.29; CI: 1.18-9.13) was associated with a worst prognosis for oral cavity cancer. The only predictor was higher tumour stage (HR=2.25; CI: 1.26-4.03) for recurrence, and duration of smoking (HR=1.91; CI: 1.00-3.68) for SPC. ADH1B rs1229984 polymorphism HRs for HNC and oesophageal cancer death and for alcohol related cancer death were 0.67 (95% CI: 0.42-1.08), and 0.64 (95% CI: 0.40-1.03), respectively. The survival expectation differs among HNC sites. Increasing age and stage, and high alcohol consumption were unfavourable predictors of HNC survival overall. Duration of tobacco consumption before the first primary tumour was a risk factor for SPC. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
    Cancer Epidemiology 03/2015; 51(5). DOI:10.1016/j.canep.2015.02.004 · 2.56 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "In Europe, the 5-year survival rate varies considerably according to anatomic site, 63.1% for cancer of the larynx, 48.5% for oral cavity, 39.8% for oropharynx and 25.5% for hypopharynx cancer [21]. About 40–60% of HNC patients develop recurrences, and around 20% of HNCs develop second primary cancer (SPC), both being associated with poorer survival [22]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether demographics, lifestyle habits, clinical data and alcohol dehydrogenase polymorphisms rs1229984 and rs1573496 associated with first primary head and neck (HNC) are associated with overall survival, recurrence, and second primary cancer (SPC). Methods: We conducted a follow-up study in five centres including 801 cases. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for overall survival, recurrence and SPC. Results: Five-years overall survival was 62% for HNC cases, 55% for oral cavity, 53% for oropharynx, 41% for hypopharynx, and 71% for larynx. Predictors of survival were older ages (HR = 1.18 for 5 years increase; CI: 1.07–1.30), higher tumour stage (HR = 4.16; CI: 2.49–6.96), and high alcohol consumption (HR = 3.93; CI: 1.79–8.63). A combined therapy (HR = 3.29; CI: 1.18–9.13) was associated with a worst prognosis for oral cavity cancer. The only predictor was higher tumour stage (HR = 2.25; CI: 1.26–4.03) for recurrence, and duration of smoking (HR = 1.91; CI: 1.00–3.68) for SPC. ADH1B rs1229984 polymorphism HRs for HNC and oesophageal cancer death and for alcohol related cancer death were 0.67 (95% CI: 0.42–1.08), and 0.64 (95% CI: 0.40–1.03), respectively. Conclusions: The survival expectation differs among HNC sites. Increasing age and stage, and high alcohol consumption were unfavourable predictors of HNC survival overall. Duration of tobacco consumption before the first primary tumour was a risk factor for SPC.
  • Source
    • "More than half of European patients diagnosed with cancer survive 5 years or longer after their primary diagnosis [1]. A disease-free status, however, is not synonymous with a life free of physical and psychosocial health problems related to the cancer and its treatment. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The population of cancer survivors has grown steadily over the past several decades. Surviving cancer, however, is not synonymous with a life free of problems related to the disease and its treatment. In this paper we provide a brief overview of selected physical and psychosocial health problems prevalent among cancer survivors, namely pain, fatigue, psychological distress and work participation. We also address issues surrounding self-management and e-Health interventions for cancer survivors, and programmes to encourage survivors to adopt healthier lifestyles. Finally, we discuss approaches to assessing health-related quality of life in cancer survivors, and the use of cancer registries in conducting psychosocial survivorship research. We highlight research and practice priorities in each of these areas. While the priorities vary per topic, common themes that emerged included: (1) Symptoms should not be viewed in isolation, but rather as part of a cluster of interrelated symptoms. This has implications for both understanding the aetiology of symptoms and for their treatment; (2) Psychosocial interventions need to be evidence-based, and where possible should be tailored to the needs of the individual cancer survivor. Relatively low cost interventions with self-management and e-Health elements may be appropriate for the majority of survivors, with resource intensive interventions being reserved for those most in need; (3) More effort should be devoted to disseminating and implementing interventions in practice, and to evaluating their cost-effectiveness; and (4) Greater attention should be paid to the needs of vulnerable and high-risk populations of survivors, including the socioeconomically disadvantaged and the elderly.
    EJC Supplements 06/2014; 12(1). DOI:10.1016/j.ejcsup.2014.03.005 · 9.39 Impact Factor
Show more