963 resultados para Cancer registry completeness
Resumo:
Aim This study aimed to document developments in rectal cancer services in a UK population and evaluate changes in outcome over a 10-year period.
Method Patients diagnosed with primary rectal carcinoma in 1996, 2001 and 2006 were identified by the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry. Data were retrospectively collected on presentation, investigation, treatment and staging. Differences over the period were analysed using the chi-squared test; Kaplan–Meier and Cox regression tests were used for survival analysis.
Results After exclusions there were 636 patients, including 187 presenting in 1996, 203 in 2001 and 246 in 2006. The use of preoperative MRI of the rectum, endorectal ultrasound and abdominal CT increased during the study period. For patients treated by surgery, total mesorectal excision (TME) increased from 19% in 1996 to 64% in 2006 (P < 0.001). The use of radiotherapy (27% in 1996, 47% in 2006) and chemotherapy (21% in 1996, 32% in 2006) increased. The overall 5-year survival improved significantly between 1996 and 2006 from 34% in 1996 to 45% in 2006 (P = 0.02). Among patients having surgery, 5-year survival increased from 43% in 1996 to 63% in 2006 (P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that the improvement in survival was associated with TME and chemotherapy, while radiotherapy was not.
Conclusion Survival of patients with rectal cancer in Northern Ireland has improved significantly over the last decade, probably due to the increased use of TME and chemotherapy.
Keywords Surgery, rectum, oncology
What does this paper add to the literature?
This population-based study demonstrates a significant improvement in survival over recent years of rectal cancer patients in Northern Ireland. It concludes that surgical resection with TME and chemotherapy have had a significant impact on survival and that the improvement was not due to a stage-migration effect.
Resumo:
Background: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) are commonly prescribed to the growing number of cancer patients (more than two million in the UK alone) often to treat hypertension. However, increased fatal cancer in ARB users in a randomized trial and increased breast cancer recurrence rates in ACEI users in a recent observational study have raised concerns about their safety in cancer patients. We investigated whether ACEI or ARB use after breast, colorectal or prostate cancer diagnosis was associated with increased risk of cancer-specific mortality.
Methods: Population-based cohorts of 9,814 breast, 4,762 colorectal and 6,339 prostate cancer patients newly diagnosed from 1998 to 2006 were identified in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink and confirmed by cancer registry linkage. Cancer-specific and all-cause mortality were identified from Office of National Statistics mortality data in 2011 (allowing up to 13 years of follow-up). A nested case–control analysis was conducted to compare ACEI/ARB use (from general practitioner prescription records) in cancer patients dying from cancer with up to five controls (not dying from cancer). Conditional logistic regression estimated the risk of cancer-specific, and all-cause, death in ACEI/ARB users compared with non-users.
Results: The main analysis included 1,435 breast, 1,511 colorectal and 1,184 prostate cancer-specific deaths (and 7,106 breast, 7,291 colorectal and 5,849 prostate cancer controls). There was no increase in cancer-specific mortality in patients using ARBs after diagnosis of breast (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.06 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84, 1.35), colorectal (adjusted OR = 0.82 95% CI 0.64, 1.07) or prostate cancer (adjusted OR = 0.79 95% CI 0.61, 1.03). There was also no evidence of increases in cancer-specific mortality with ACEI use for breast (adjusted OR = 1.06 95% CI 0.89, 1.27), colorectal (adjusted OR = 0.78 95% CI 0.66, 0.92) or prostate cancer (adjusted OR = 0.78 95% CI 0.66, 0.92).
Conclusions: Overall, we found no evidence of increased risks of cancer-specific mortality in breast, colorectal or prostate cancer patients who used ACEI or ARBs after diagnosis. These results provide some reassurance that these medications are safe in patients diagnosed with these cancers.
Keywords: Colorectal cancer; Breast cancer; Prostate cancer; Mortality; Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers
Resumo:
Purpose: Aspirin use is associated with reduced risk of, and death from, prostate cancer. Our aim was to determine whether low-dose aspirin use after a prostate cancer diagnosis was associated with reduced prostate cancer-specific mortality.
Methods: A cohort of newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients (1998–2006) was identified in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (confirmed by cancer registry linkage). A nested case–control analysis was conducted using conditional logistic regression to compare aspirin usage in cases (prostate cancer deaths) with up to three controls (matched by age and year of diagnosis).
Results: Post-diagnostic low-dose aspirin use was identified in 52 % of 1,184 prostate cancer-specific deaths and 39 % of 3,531 matched controls (unadjusted OR 1.51, 95 % CI 1.19, 1.90; p < 0.001). After adjustment for confounders including treatment and comorbidities, this association was attenuated (adjusted OR 1.02 95 % CI 0.78, 1.34; p = 0.86). Adjustment for estrogen therapy accounted for the majority of this attenuation. There was also no evidence of dose–response association after adjustments. Compared with no use, patients with 1–11 prescriptions and 12 or more prescriptions had adjusted ORs of 1.07 (95 % CI 0.78, 1.47; p = 0.66) and 0.97 (95 % CI 0.69, 1.37; p = 0.88), respectively. There was no evidence of a protective association between low-dose aspirin use in the year prior to diagnosis and prostate cancer-specific mortality (adjusted OR 1.04 95 % CI 0.89, 1.22; p = 0.60).
Conclusion: We found no evidence of an association between low-dose aspirin use before or after diagnosis and risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality, after potential confounders were accounted for, in UK prostate cancer patients.