| 1. |
- Berglund, Anders, et al.
(author)
-
Social differences in lung cancer management and survival in South East England : a cohort study
- 2012
-
In: BMJ Open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 2:3, s. e001048-
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- OBJECTIVE:To examine possible social variations in lung cancer survival and assess if any such gradients can be attributed to social differences in comorbidity, stage at diagnosis or treatment.DESIGN:Population-based cohort identified in the Thames Cancer Registry.SETTING:South East England.PARTICIPANTS:15 582 lung cancer patients diagnosed between 2006 and 2008.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Stage at diagnosis, surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy and survival.RESULTS:The likelihood of being diagnosed as having early-stage disease did not vary by socioeconomic quintiles (p=0.58). In early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer, the likelihood of undergoing surgery was lowest in the most deprived group. There were no socioeconomic differences in the likelihood of receiving radiotherapy in stage III disease, while in advanced disease and in small-cell lung cancer, receipt of chemotherapy differed over socioeconomic quintiles (p<0.01). In early-stage disease and following adjustment for confounders, the HR between the most deprived and the most affluent group was 1.24 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.56). Corresponding estimates in stage III and advanced disease or small-cell lung cancer were 1.16 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.34) and 1.12 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.20), respectively. In early-stage disease, the crude HR between the most deprived and the most affluent group was approximately 1.4 and constant through follow-up, while in patients with advanced disease or small-cell lung cancer, no difference was detectable after 3 months.CONCLUSION:We observed socioeconomic variations in management and survival in patients diagnosed as having lung cancer in South East England between 2006 and 2008, differences which could not fully be explained by social differences in stage at diagnosis, co-morbidity and treatment. The survival observed in the most affluent group should set the target for what is achievable for all lung cancer patients, managed in the same healthcare system.
|
|
| 2. |
- Holmberg, Lars, et al.
(author)
-
National comparisons of lung cancer survival in England, Norway and Sweden 2001-2004 : differences occur early in follow-up
- 2010
-
In: Thorax. - : BMJ. - 0040-6376 .- 1468-3296. ; 65:5, s. 436-441
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND Countries with a similar expenditure on healthcare within Europe exhibit differences in lung cancer survival. Survival in lung cancer was studied in 2001-2004 in England, Norway and Sweden. METHODS Nationwide cancer registries in England, Norway and Sweden were used to identify 250 828 patients with lung cancer from England, 18 386 from Norway and 24 886 from Sweden diagnosed between 1996 and 2004, after exclusion of patients registered through death certificate only or with missing, zero or negative survival times. 5-Year relative survival was calculated by application of the period approach. The excess mortality between the countries was compared using a Poisson regression model. RESULTS In all subcategories of age, sex and follow-up period, the 5-year survival was lower in England than in Norway and Sweden. The age-standardised survival estimates were 6.5%, 9.3% and 11.3% for men and 8.4%, 13.5% and 15.9% for women in the respective countries in 2001-2004. The difference in excess risk of dying between the countries was predominantly confined to the first year of follow-up. The relative excess risk ratio during the first 3 months of follow-up comparing England with Norway 2001-2004 varied between 1.23 and 1.46, depending on sex and age, and between 1.56 and 1.91 comparing England with Sweden. CONCLUSION Access to healthcare and population awareness are likely to be major reasons for the differences, but it cannot be excluded that diagnostic and therapeutic activity play a role. Future improvements in lung cancer management may be seen early in follow-up.
|
|
| 3. |
- Lambert, Paul C, et al.
(author)
-
Quantifying differences in breast cancer survival between England and Norway
- 2011
-
In: Cancer Epidemiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 1877-7821 .- 1877-783X. ; 35:6, s. 526-533
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Survival from breast cancer is lower in the UK than in some other European countries. We compared survival in England and Norway by age and time from diagnosis. METHODS: We included 303,648 English and 24,919 Norwegian cases of breast cancer diagnosed 1996-2004 using flexible parametric relative survival models, enabling improved quantification of differences in survival. Crude probabilities were estimated to partition the probability of death due to all causes into that due to cancer and other causes and to estimate the number of "avoidable" deaths. RESULTS: England had lower relative survival for all ages with the difference increasing with age. Much of the difference was due to higher excess mortality in England in the first few months after diagnosis. Older patients had a higher proportion of deaths due to other causes. At 5 years post diagnosis, a woman aged 85 in England had probabilities of 0.35 of dying of cancer and 0.32 of dying of other causes, whilst in Norway they were 0.26 and 0.35. By eight years the number of "avoidable" all-cause deaths in England was 1020 with the number of "avoidable" breast cancer related deaths 1488. CONCLUSION: Lower breast cancer survival in England is mainly due to higher mortality in the first year after diagnosis. Crude probabilities aid our understanding of the impact of disease on individual patients and help assess different treatment options.
|
|
| 4. |
- Liu, Xiaoqian, et al.
(author)
-
Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of Stem Cell injections for symptomatic relief and strUctural improvement in people with Tibiofemoral knee OsteoaRthritis : Protocol for a randomised placebo-controlled trial (the SCUlpTOR trial)
- 2021
-
In: BMJ Open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 11:11
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Introduction Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a highly prevalent disabling joint disease. Intra-articular stem cell therapy is increasingly being used for treating KOA with little high-quality evidence to support its use. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells (Cymerus MSCs) for treating symptomatic tibiofemoral KOA and improving knee structure over 24 months. Methods and analysis The Stem Cell injections for symptomatic relief and strUctural improvement in people with Tibiofemoral knee OsteoaRthritis study is a phase III, multi-centre, parallel, superiority, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, which will be conducted in Sydney and Hobart, Australia. 440 participants (220 per arm) aged over 40 years with painful KOA and mild to moderate structural change on X-ray (Kellgren and Lawrence grade 2 or 3) with medial minimum joint space width between 1 and 4 mm in the study knee will be recruited from the community and randomly allocated to receive either intra-articular MSCs or saline at baseline, week 3 and week 52. The coprimary outcomes will be the proportion of participants achieving patient-acceptable symptom state for knee pain at 24 months and quantitative central medial femorotibial compartment cartilage thickness change from baseline to 24 months. Main secondary outcomes include change in knee pain, Patient Global Assessment, physical function, quality of life and other structural changes. Additional data for cost-effectiveness analysis will also be recorded. Adverse events will be monitored throughout the study. The primary analysis will be conducted using modified intention-to-treat. Ethics and dissemination This protocol has been approved by The University of Sydney (USYD) Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) #: 2020/119 and The University of Tasmania (UTAS) HREC #: H0021868. All participants will be required to provide informed consent. Dissemination will occur through conferences, social media, and scientific publications.
|
|
| 5. |
- Moller, Henrik, et al.
(author)
-
Recent childbirth is an adverse prognostic factor in breast cancer and melanoma, but not in Hodgkin lymphoma
- 2013
-
In: European Journal of Cancer. - : Elsevier BV. - 0959-8049 .- 1879-0852. ; 49:17, s. 3686-3693
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: The relationship between gestation, childbirth and cancer prognosis is unknown for most cancers (e. g. Hodgkin lymphoma), whereas a body of evidence exists for melanoma and breast cancer. Methods: The national cancer registration and hospital discharge data for women in England (1998-2007) were linked, and the records for Hodgkin lymphoma, melanoma and breast cancer were indexed as to whether women had delivered a child in separate time periods prior to their cancer diagnosis. Survival analyses were conducted in order to characterise prognosis in relation to childbirth, with statistical adjustment for age and (where possible) stage. Findings: For melanoma and breast cancer, survival was strongly reduced in women who gave birth in the year prior to cancer diagnosis. The age-adjusted hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were 2.06 (1.42-3.01) for melanoma and 1.84 (1.64-2.06) for breast cancer. The associations were only slightly attenuated by further adjustment for tumour stage. For breast cancer, the excess death rate in women with a recent childbirth peaked at 2 years and remained elevated for 6 to 8 years. Previous childbirth had no overall effect on the outcome of Hodgkin lymphoma. Interpretation: Melanoma and breast cancer prognosis are adversely affected by recent gestation and childbirth in a way that is not due to stage of the cancer, but rather to inherent biological properties of the tumours. Possible biological mechanisms include immunosuppression (melanoma), the hormonal milieu in gestation and a tumour promoting microenvironment post-partum (breast cancer).
|
|
| 6. |
- Morris, Eva J. A., et al.
(author)
-
A population-based comparison of the survival of patients with colorectal cancer in England, Norway and Sweden between 1996 and 2004
- 2011
-
In: Gut. - : BMJ. - 0017-5749 .- 1468-3288. ; 60:8, s. 1087-1093
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective To examine differences in the relative survival and excess death rates of patients with colorectal cancer in Norway, Sweden and England. Methods All individuals diagnosed with colorectal cancer (ICD10 (International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision) C18-C20) between 1996 and 2004 in England, Norway and Sweden were included in this population-based study of patients with colorectal cancer. The main outcome measures were 5-year cumulative relative period of survival and excess death rates stratified by age and period of follow-up. Results The survival of English patients with colorectal cancer was significantly lower than was observed in both Norway and Sweden. Five-year age-standardised colon cancer relative survival was 51.1% (95% CI 50.1% to 52.0%) in England compared with 57.9% (95% CI 55.2% to 60.5%) in Norway and 59.9% (95% CI 57.7% to 62.0%) in Sweden. Five-year rectal cancer survival was 52.3% (95% CI 51.1% to 53.5%) in England compared with 60.7% (95% CI 57.0% to 64.2%) and 59.8% (95% CI 56.9% to 62.6%) in Norway and Sweden, respectively. The lower survival for colon cancer in England was primarily due to a high number of excess deaths among older patients in the first 3 months after diagnosis. In patients with rectal cancer, excess deaths remained elevated until 2 years of follow-up. If the lower excess death rate in Norway applied in the English population, then 890 (13.6%) and 654 (16.8%) of the excess deaths in the colon and rectal cancer populations, respectively, could have been prevented at 5 years follow-up. Most of these avoidable deaths occurred shortly after diagnosis. Conclusions There was significant variation in survival between the countries, with the English population experiencing a poorer outcome, primarily due to a relatively higher number of excess deaths in older patients in the short term after diagnosis. It seems likely, therefore, that in England a greater proportion of the population present with more rapidly fatal disease (especially in the older age groups) than in Norway or Sweden.
|
|
| 7. |
- Möller, Henrik, et al.
(author)
-
Breast cancer survival in England, Norway and Sweden : a population-based comparison
- 2010
-
In: International Journal of Cancer. - : Wiley. - 0020-7136 .- 1097-0215. ; 127:11, s. 2630-2638
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Several international studies have found that survival from breast cancer is lower in the United Kingdom than in some other European countries. We have compared breast cancer survival between the national populations of England, Norway and Sweden, with a view to identifying subsets of patients with particularly good or adverse survival outcomes. We extracted cases of breast cancer in women diagnosed 1996-2004 from the national cancer registries of the 3 countries. The study comprised 303,657 English cases, 24,919 Norwegian cases and 57,512 cases from Sweden. Follow-up was in 2001-2004. The main outcome measures were 5-year cumulative relative survival and excess death rates, stratified by age and period of follow-up. In comparison with Norway and Sweden, the excess mortality in England was particularly pronounced in the first month and in the first year after diagnosis, and generally more marked in the oldest age groups. Compared with Norwegian patients, 81% of the excess deaths in the English patients occurred in the first 2 years after diagnosis. Our findings emphasise the importance of awareness of symptoms and early detection as the main strategy to improve breast cancer survival in the United Kingdom.
|
|
| 8. |
- Møller, Henrik, et al.
(author)
-
Colorectal cancer survival in socioeconomic groups in England : Variation is mainly in the short term after diagnosis
- 2012
-
In: European Journal of Cancer. - : Elsevier BV. - 0959-8049 .- 1879-0852. ; 48:1, s. 46-53
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The objective of this study was to examine differences in cancer survival between socioeconomic groups in England, with particular attention to survival in the short term of follow-up. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individuals diagnosed with colorectal cancer between 1996 and 2004 in England were identified from cancer registry records. Five-year cumulative relative survival and excess death rates were computed. RESULTS: For colon cancer there was a very high excess death rate in the first month of follow-up, and the excess death rate was highest in the socioeconomically deprived groups. In subsequent periods, excess mortality rates were much lower and there was less socioeconomic variation. The pattern of variation in excess death rates was generally similar in rectal cancer but the socioeconomic difference in death rates persisted several years longer. If the excess death rates in the entire colorectal cancer patient population were the same as those observed in the most affluent socioeconomic quintile, the annual reduction would be 360 deaths in colon cancer and 336 deaths in rectal cancer patients. These deaths occurred almost entirely in the first month and the first year after diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Recent developments in the national cancer control agenda have included an increasing emphasis on outcome measures, with short-term cancer survival an operational measure of variation and progress in cancer control. In providing clues to the nature of the survival differences between socioeconomic groups, the results presented here give strong support for this strategy.
|
|
