1 / 22

The best and the worst in Europe: what are they doing that we are not?

EBU TRAINING 18 June 2012 Ministry of Health, Rome, Italy. The best and the worst in Europe: what are they doing that we are not?. Silvia Francisci ISS Roma, Italy. Comparisons: why?.

adia
Download Presentation

The best and the worst in Europe: what are they doing that we are not?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EBU TRAINING 18 June 2012 Ministry of Health, Rome, Italy The best and the worst in Europe: what are they doing that we are not? Silvia Francisci ISS Roma, Italy

  2. Comparisons: why? Comparing the major cancer burden indicators in different countries for the various cancer types can give you an idea of where improvements could be made, and help to learn from the successes of other countries – What are they doing right that we are not? Comparing within a single country over time can show whether and how fast things are improving, which is important to evaluate how well cancer plans and policies are working

  3. Cancer burden indicators: Incidence, Mortality • Incidence rate is the number of new cancers of a specific site/type occurring in a specified population during a year, it is usually expressed as the number of cancers per 100,000 population at risk  represents a measure of risk in a population and depends on the distribution of risk factors • Mortality rate is the number of deaths, with cancer as the underlying cause of death, occurring in a specified population during a year. Cancer mortality is usually expressed as the number of deaths due to cancer per 100,000 population represents measure of final outcome and depends on timeliness of diagnosis/care and effectiveness of treatment

  4. Incidence and Mortality by country: Colorectal cancer Crude rates STD rates The effect of age structure adjustement on geographical ranking

  5. Arbyn, EJC 2009

  6. Mortality Incidence Risk increase or PSA effect?

  7. Cancer burden indicators: Survival • Cause of death known Cancer Specific Survival probability of surviving cancer after x years from diagnosis in a cohort of patients diagnosed in a period of time t • Cause of death unknown Relative Survival (RS) ratio of the observed survival in the patients group to the expected survival in a similar group in the population (same age, sex, year, area, socio-economic class etc…) • RS measures the extra-risk of dyingof cancer patients by removing the competitive mortality due to causes other than cancer. It approximates a NET SURVIVAL measure.

  8. EUROCARE-5 104 adult + 9 ChildhoodCRs About 21 milioncases in the DB National coverage in 20 countries: 140 millionpopulation Partialcoverage: Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, Poland, Romania: 113 millionpopulation (34% of the total) EUROCARE-5 Increased number of countries/registries, expecially eastern European countries

  9. Population-based cancer registry: data quality issues • Completeness of incidence • Completeness and quality of follow-up • Standard quality indicators (Death Certificate Only cases, Microscopically Verified, morphology NOS)  ensure comparability of results • Additional variables: stage at diagnosis, treatments  facilitate interpretation of results

  10. 5-year Relative Survival cohort 1995-99 all cancers Berrino F, Lancet Oncology (2007) – EUROCARE 4 STUDY

  11. 5-year RS Trend 1989-1998, all cancers, by country Verdecchia A, European Journal of Cancer (2009) – EUROCARE-4 STUDY

  12. Cancer burden indicators: PrevalenceThe number of surviving cancer patients in a population at a defined index date. Population Ageing Survival Incidence Prevalence

  13. Cancer burden indicators: Prevalence • Total (or complete) prevalence involves all survivors irrespectively of the date of diagnosis. • Partial (or Limited Duration)prevalence by years from diagnosis represents the number of survivors by limited disease duration. • 1-2 years LD patients under main treatment and rehabilitation • 3-5 years LD patients under clinical follow-up for recurrences and metastasis • 5-10 years LD patients that are possibly cured

  14. Prevalence in Italy (2006), Nordic countries (2006) and UK (2008) • Data sources: • Italy: PIO 7 project and ItalianAssociationofCancerRegistries. Prevalence date: 1-1-2006 • Nordiccountries: Engholm G, Ferlay J, Christensen N, Bray F, GjerstorffML, Klint A, Køtlum JE, Olafsdóttir E, Pukkala E, Storm HH (2010). NORDCAN-aNordictoolforcancer information, planning, qualitycontrol and research. ActaOncol. 2010 Jun;49(5):725-36. • UK: Maddams J, Brewster D, Gavin A, Steward J, Elliott J,Utley M, and Møller H. Cancer prevalence in the United Kingdom. Br J Cancer 2009 Aug 4;101(3):541-7

  15. Cancer burden indicators: cure fraction • Modelling survival allows to estimate another important indicator of cancer burden: the fraction of patients cured from the disease • Cure fraction P measures the proportion of patients which do not show an extra-risk of death with respect to a comparable groups in the general population (statistical definition of cure) • P is an indicator not influenced by lead time bias (diagnostic anticipation without real survival improvement)

  16. As cancer diagnostic procedures and treatments improve, the possibility of cure for many cancers becomes a reality. • The cure fraction (P), is the survival level as the curve (CRS) flattens • Higher survival levels correspond to wider cured fractions 55% cured 45% cured 35% cured

  17. Cure fraction colorectal cancer patients Colorectal cancer cure fraction is increasing over time On average 45% of patients are cured There is large variability across European countries Francisci et al. EJC (2009)

  18. Avoidable deaths Ellis, European Journal of Cancer 2012

  19. Avoidable deaths in England • Improvement in survival overall • Narrowing of the deficit between socio-economic groups (only 2% of reduction) Ellis, European Journal of Cancer 2012

  20. Discussion • The overall set of descriptive indicators provide a • comprehensive picture of cancer burden • The comprehensive description of cancer burden is important in order to inform health policy and to properly address cancer plans • Comparisons across Europe are needed in order to • validate national data • identify opportunities to improve health care • revise guidelines and practice patterns • increase our understanding of patient outcomes and economic consequences of different policies related to cancer screening, treatment, and programs of care

More Related