Cargando…

Evidence against the proposition that “UK cancer survival statistics are misleading”: simulation study with National Cancer Registry data

Objectives To simulate each of two hypothesised errors in the National Cancer Registry (recording of the date of recurrence of cancer, instead of the date of diagnosis, for registrations initiated from a death certificate; long term survivors who are never notified to the registry), to estimate thei...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Woods, Laura M, Coleman, Michel P, Lawrence, Gill, Rashbass, Jem, Berrino, Franco, Rachet, Bernard
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3111483/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21659366
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d3399
_version_ 1782205637034246144
author Woods, Laura M
Coleman, Michel P
Lawrence, Gill
Rashbass, Jem
Berrino, Franco
Rachet, Bernard
author_facet Woods, Laura M
Coleman, Michel P
Lawrence, Gill
Rashbass, Jem
Berrino, Franco
Rachet, Bernard
author_sort Woods, Laura M
collection PubMed
description Objectives To simulate each of two hypothesised errors in the National Cancer Registry (recording of the date of recurrence of cancer, instead of the date of diagnosis, for registrations initiated from a death certificate; long term survivors who are never notified to the registry), to estimate their possible effect on relative survival, and to establish whether lower survival in the UK might be due to one or both of these errors. Design Simulation study. Setting National Cancer Registry of England and Wales. Population Patients diagnosed as having breast (women), lung, or colorectal cancer during 1995-2007 in England and Wales, with follow-up to 31 December 2007. Main outcome measure Mean absolute percentage change in one year and five year relative survival associated with each simulated error. Results To explain the differences in one year survival after breast cancer between England and Sweden, under the first hypothesis, date of diagnosis would have to have been incorrectly recorded by an average of more than a year for more than 70% of women known to be dead. Alternatively, under the second hypothesis, failure to register even 40% of long term survivors would explain less than half the difference in one year survival. Results were similar for lung and colorectal cancers. Conclusions Even implausibly extreme levels of the hypothesised errors in the cancer registry data could not explain the international differences in survival observed between the UK and other European countries.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3111483
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31114832011-06-27 Evidence against the proposition that “UK cancer survival statistics are misleading”: simulation study with National Cancer Registry data Woods, Laura M Coleman, Michel P Lawrence, Gill Rashbass, Jem Berrino, Franco Rachet, Bernard BMJ Research Objectives To simulate each of two hypothesised errors in the National Cancer Registry (recording of the date of recurrence of cancer, instead of the date of diagnosis, for registrations initiated from a death certificate; long term survivors who are never notified to the registry), to estimate their possible effect on relative survival, and to establish whether lower survival in the UK might be due to one or both of these errors. Design Simulation study. Setting National Cancer Registry of England and Wales. Population Patients diagnosed as having breast (women), lung, or colorectal cancer during 1995-2007 in England and Wales, with follow-up to 31 December 2007. Main outcome measure Mean absolute percentage change in one year and five year relative survival associated with each simulated error. Results To explain the differences in one year survival after breast cancer between England and Sweden, under the first hypothesis, date of diagnosis would have to have been incorrectly recorded by an average of more than a year for more than 70% of women known to be dead. Alternatively, under the second hypothesis, failure to register even 40% of long term survivors would explain less than half the difference in one year survival. Results were similar for lung and colorectal cancers. Conclusions Even implausibly extreme levels of the hypothesised errors in the cancer registry data could not explain the international differences in survival observed between the UK and other European countries. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2011-06-09 /pmc/articles/PMC3111483/ /pubmed/21659366 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d3399 Text en © Woods et al 2011 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode.
spellingShingle Research
Woods, Laura M
Coleman, Michel P
Lawrence, Gill
Rashbass, Jem
Berrino, Franco
Rachet, Bernard
Evidence against the proposition that “UK cancer survival statistics are misleading”: simulation study with National Cancer Registry data
title Evidence against the proposition that “UK cancer survival statistics are misleading”: simulation study with National Cancer Registry data
title_full Evidence against the proposition that “UK cancer survival statistics are misleading”: simulation study with National Cancer Registry data
title_fullStr Evidence against the proposition that “UK cancer survival statistics are misleading”: simulation study with National Cancer Registry data
title_full_unstemmed Evidence against the proposition that “UK cancer survival statistics are misleading”: simulation study with National Cancer Registry data
title_short Evidence against the proposition that “UK cancer survival statistics are misleading”: simulation study with National Cancer Registry data
title_sort evidence against the proposition that “uk cancer survival statistics are misleading”: simulation study with national cancer registry data
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3111483/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21659366
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d3399
work_keys_str_mv AT woodslauram evidenceagainstthepropositionthatukcancersurvivalstatisticsaremisleadingsimulationstudywithnationalcancerregistrydata
AT colemanmichelp evidenceagainstthepropositionthatukcancersurvivalstatisticsaremisleadingsimulationstudywithnationalcancerregistrydata
AT lawrencegill evidenceagainstthepropositionthatukcancersurvivalstatisticsaremisleadingsimulationstudywithnationalcancerregistrydata
AT rashbassjem evidenceagainstthepropositionthatukcancersurvivalstatisticsaremisleadingsimulationstudywithnationalcancerregistrydata
AT berrinofranco evidenceagainstthepropositionthatukcancersurvivalstatisticsaremisleadingsimulationstudywithnationalcancerregistrydata
AT rachetbernard evidenceagainstthepropositionthatukcancersurvivalstatisticsaremisleadingsimulationstudywithnationalcancerregistrydata