Description and predictors of hospital costs of oesophageal cancer during the first year following diagnosis in Northern Ireland

The cost-effectiveness of novel interventions in the treatment of cancer is well researched; however, relatively little attention is paid to the cost of many aspects of routine care. Oesophageal cancer is the ninth most common cancer in the UK and sixth most common cause of cancer death. It usually presents late and has a poor prognosis. The hospital costs incurred by oesophageal cancer patients diagnosed in Northern Ireland in 2005 (n = 198) were determined by review of medical records. The average cost of hospital care per patient in the 12 months from presentation was £7847. Variations in total hospital costs by age at diagnosis, gender, cancer stage, histological type, mortality at 1 year, co-morbidity count and socio-economic status were analysed using multiple regression analyses. Higher costs were associated with earlier stages of cancer and cancer stage remained a significant predictor of costs after controlling for cancer type, patient age and mortality at 1 year. Thus, although early detection of cancer usually improves survival, this would mean increased costs in the first year. Deprivation achieved borderline significance with those from more deprived areas having lower resource consumption relative to the more affluent. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Breast cancer survival and stage at diagnosis in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK, 2000-2007:A population-based study

Background: We investigate whether differences in breast cancer survival in six high-income countries can be explained by differences in stage at diagnosis using routine data from population-based cancer registries. Methods: We analysed the data on 257 362 women diagnosed with breast cancer during 2000-7 and registered in 13 population-based cancer registries in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK. Flexible parametric hazard models were used to estimate net survival and the excess hazard of dying from breast cancer up to 3 years after diagnosis.Results:Age-standardised 3-year net survival was 87-89% in the UK and Denmark, and 91-94% in the other four countries. Stage at diagnosis was relatively advanced in Denmark: only 30% of women had Tumour, Nodes, Metastasis (TNM) stage I disease, compared with 42-45% elsewhere. Women in the UK had low survival for TNM stage III-IV disease compared with other countries. Conclusion: International differences in breast cancer survival are partly explained by differences in stage at diagnosis, and partly by differences in stage-specific survival. Low overall survival arises if the stage distribution is adverse (e.g. Denmark) but stage-specific survival is normal; or if the stage distribution is typical but stage-specific survival is low (e.g. UK). International differences in staging diagnostics and stage-specific cancer therapies should be investigated. © 2013 Cancer Research UK. All rights reserved.

Predictions of survival up to 10 years after diagnosis for European women with breast cancer in 2000-2002

Few studies have addressed longer-term survival for breast cancer in European women. We have made predictions of 10-year survival for European women diagnosed with breast cancer in 2000-2002. Data for 114,312 adult women (15-99 years) diagnosed with a first primary malignant cancer of the breast during 2000-2002 were collected in the EUROCARE-4 study from 24 population-based cancer registries in 14 European countries. We estimated relative survival at 1, 5, and 10 years after diagnosis for women who were alive at some point during 2000-2002, using the period approach. We also estimated 10-year survival conditional on survival to 1 and 5 years after diagnosis. Ten-year survival exceeded 70% in most regions, but was only 54% in Eastern Europe, with the highest value in Northern Europe (about 75%). Ten-year survival conditional on survival for 1 year was 2-6% higher than 10-year survival in all European regions, and geographic differences were smaller. Ten-year survival for women who survived at least 5 years was 88% overall, with the lowest figure in Eastern Europe (79%) and the highest in the UK (91%). Women aged 50-69 years had higher overall survival than older and younger women (79%). Six cancer registries had adequate information on stage at diagnosis; in these jurisdictions, 10-year survival was 89% for local, 62% for regional and 10% for metastatic disease. Data on stage are not collected routinely or consistently, yet these data are essential for meaningful comparison of population-based survival, which provides vital information for improving breast cancer control. What's new? Policy-makers and health-care planners need accurate data on long-term survival to improve cancer control. This Europe-wide study of 10-year survival identified low survival in Eastern Europe for women with breast cancer in 2000-2002, and wide variation by age at diagnosis. Data on stage at diagnosis are crucial for meaningful comparison of population-based survival, and fundamental for improving breast cancer control, but our analyses confirmed that stage data are not collected routinely or consistently Copyright © 2012 UICC.

Lung cancer survival and stage at diagnosis in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK:A population-based study, 2004-2007

Background: The authors consider whether differences in stage at diagnosis could explain the variation in lung cancer survival between six developed countries in 2004-2007. Methods: Routinely collected population-based data were obtained on all adults (15-99 years) diagnosed with lung cancer in 2004-2007 and registered in regional and national cancer registries in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK. Stage data for 57 352 patients were consolidated from various classification systems. Flexible parametric hazard models on the log cumulative scale were used to estimate net survival at 1 year and the excess hazard up to 18 months after diagnosis. Results: Age-standardised 1-year net survival from non-small cell lung cancer ranged from 30% (UK) to 46% (Sweden). Patients in the UK and Denmark had lower survival than elsewhere, partly because of a more adverse stage distribution. However, there were also wide international differences in stage-specific survival. Net survival from TNM stage I non-small cell lung cancer was 16% lower in the UK than in Sweden, and for TNM stage IV disease survival was 10% lower. Similar patterns were found for small cell lung cancer. Conclusions: There are comparability issues when using population-based data but, even given these constraints, this study shows that, while differences in stage at diagnosis explain some of the international variation in overall lung cancer survival, wide disparities in stage-specific survival exist, suggesting that other factors are also important such as differences in treatment. Stage should be included in international cancer survival studies and the comparability of population-based data should be improved.

Stage at diagnosis and colorectal cancer survival in six high-income countries:A population-based study of patients diagnosed during 2000-2007

Background. Large international differences in colorectal cancer survival exist, even between countries with similar healthcare. We investigate the extent to which stage at diagnosis explains these differences. Methods. Data from population-based cancer registries in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK were analysed for 313 852 patients diagnosed with colon or rectal cancer during 2000-2007. We compared the distributions of stage at diagnosis. We estimated both stage-specific net survival and the excess hazard of death up to three years after diagnosis, using flexible parametric models on the log-cumulative excess hazard scale. Results. International differences in colon and rectal cancer stage distributions were wide: Denmark showed a distribution skewed towards later-stage disease, while Australia, Norway and the UK showed high proportions of 'regional' disease. One-year colon cancer survival was 67% in the UK and ranged between 71% (Denmark) and 80% (Australia and Sweden) elsewhere. For rectal cancer, one-year survival was also low in the UK (75%), compared to 79% in Denmark and 82-84% elsewhere. International survival differences were also evident for each stage of disease, with the UK showing consistently lowest survival at one and three years. Conclusion. Differences in stage at diagnosis partly explain international differences in colorectal cancer survival, with a more adverse stage distribution contributing to comparatively low survival in Denmark. Differences in stage distribution could arise because of differences in diagnostic delay and awareness of symptoms, or in the thoroughness of staging procedures. Nevertheless, survival differences also exist for each stage of disease, suggesting unequal access to optimal treatment, particularly in the UK. © 2013 Informa Healthcare.

Stage at diagnosis and ovarian cancer survival:Evidence from the international cancer benchmarking partnership

Objective: We investigate what role stage at diagnosis bears in international differences in ovarian cancer survival. Methods: Data from population-based cancer registries in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, and the UK were analysed for 20,073 women diagnosed with ovarian cancer during 2004-07. We compare the stage distribution between countries and estimate stage-specific one-year net survival and the excess hazard up to 18 months after diagnosis, using flexible parametric models on the log cumulative excess hazard scale. Results: One-year survival was 69% in the UK, 72% in Denmark and 74-75% elsewhere. In Denmark, 74% of patients were diagnosed with FIGO stages III-IV disease, compared to 60-70% elsewhere. International differences in survival were evident at each stage of disease; women in the UK had lower survival than in the other four countries for patients with FIGO stages III-IV disease (61.4% vs. 65.8-74.4%). International differences were widest for older women and for those with advanced stage or with no stage data. Conclusion: Differences in stage at diagnosis partly explain international variation in ovarian cancer survival, and a more adverse stage distribution contributes to comparatively low survival in Denmark. This could arise because of differences in tumour biology, staging procedures or diagnostic delay. Differences in survival also exist within each stage, as illustrated by lower survival for advanced disease in the UK, suggesting unequal access to optimal treatment. Population-based data on cancer survival by stage are vital for cancer surveillance, and global consensus is needed to make stage data in cancer registries more consistent. © 2012 Elsevier Inc.

The role of private care in the interval between diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer in Northern Ireland: an analysis of Registry data

Objective: To examine the differences in the interval between diagnosis and initiation of treatment among women with breast cancer in Northern Ireland.

Design: A cross-sectional observational study.
Setting: All breast cancer care patients in the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry in 2006.
Participants: All women diagnosed and treated for breast cancer in Northern Ireland in 2006.
Main outcome measure: The number of days between diagnosis and initiation of treatment for breast cancer.

Results: The mean (median) interval between diagnosis and initiation of treatment among public patients was 19 (15) compared with 14 (12) among those whose care involved private providers. The differences between individual public providers were as marked as those between the public and private sector - the mean (median) ranging between 14 (12) and 25 (22) days. Multivariate models revealed that the differences were evident when a range of patient characteristics were controlled for including cancer stage.

Conclusions: A relatively small number of women received care privately in Northern Ireland but experienced shorter intervals between diagnosis and initiation of treatment than those who received care wholly in the public system. The variation among public providers was as great as that between the public and private providers. The impact of such differences on survival and in light of waiting time targets introduced in Northern Ireland warrants investigation.

Augmentation mammoplasty: effect on diagnosis of breast cancer

Breast augmentation for cosmetic purposes is an increasingly common procedure in the USA and UK. In the USA in 2003, a total of 254 140 breast augmentation procedures were carried out [American Society of Plastic Surgeons, http://www.plasticsurgery.org/newsroom/ Procedural-Statistics-Press-Kit-Index.cfm9-1-2005; 2006.(1)]. It has been previously estimated that between 1 and 1.5 million women in the USA have prosthetic breast implants [Cook RR, Delongchamp RR, Woodbury M, et at. The prevalence of women with breast implants in the United States, 1989. J Clin Epidemiol 1995;48:519-25.(2)]. The UK National Breast Implant Registry has recorded a rise in the numbers of women receiving breast implants, with over 13 000 procedures registered in 2001; an estimated 77% of these were for cosmetic purposes. No association has been found between the presence of breast implants in a breast and an increased risk of breast cancer, and this subject has been comprehensively reviewed elsewhere [Hoshaw SJ, Klein PJ, Clark BD, et al. Breast implants and cancer: causation, delayed detection, and survival. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001; 107:1393-407.(3)]. However, as the population of women with breast implants ages, an increasing number of them will develop breast cancer; a reflection of the fact that the incidence of the disease increases with increasing age. Debate continues on the effect of breast implants on the efficacy of mammography in diagnosing breast cancer, and the role of other imaging techniques for this purpose, as well as the limitations that the presence of implants place on percutaneous biopsy techniques. We review the Literature on the radiological and tissue diagnosis of breast cancer in women with a history of previous augmentation mammaplasty. (c) 2007 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

A critical ethnography of communication processes involving the management of oral chemotherapeutic agents by patients with a primary diagnosis of colorectal cancer: study protocol

Aim
To describe the protocol used to examine the processes of communication between health professionals, patients and informal carers during the management of oral chemotherapeutic medicines to identify factors that promote or inhibit medicine concordance.

Background
Ideally communication practices about oral medicines should incorporate shared decision-making, two-way dialogue and an equality of role between practitioner and patient. While there is evidence that healthcare professionals are adopting these concordant elements in general practice there are still some patients who have a passive role during consultations. Considering oral chemotherapeutic medications, there is a paucity of research about communication practices which is surprising given the high risk of toxicity associated with chemotherapy.

Design
A critical ethnographic design will be used, incorporating non-participant observations, individual semi-structured and focus-group interviews as several collecting methods.

Methods
Observations will be carried out on the interactions between healthcare professionals (physicians, nurses and pharmacists) and patients in the outpatient departments where prescriptions are explained and supplied and on follow-up consultations where treatment regimens are monitored. Interviews will be conducted with patients and their informal carers. Focus-groups will be carried out with healthcare professionals at the conclusion of the study. These several will be analysed using thematic analysis. This research is funded by the Department for Employment and Learning in Northern Ireland (Awarded February 2012).

Discussion
Dissemination of these findings will contribute to the understanding of issues involved when communicating with people about oral chemotherapy. It is anticipated that findings will inform education, practice and policy.