EUROCOURSE recipe for cancer surveillance by visible population-based cancer RegisTrees® in Europe: From roots to fruits

Use Cases Requiring Privacy-Preserving Record Linkage in Paediatric Oncology

Large datasets in paediatric oncology are inherently rare. Therefore, it is paramount to fully exploit all available data, which are distributed over several resources, including biomaterials, images, clinical trials, and registries. With privacy-preserving record linkage (PPRL), personalised or pseudonymised datasets can be merged, without disclosing the patients' identities. Although PPRL is implemented in various settings, use case descriptions are currently fragmented and incomplete. The present paper provides a comprehensive overview of current and future use cases for PPRL in paediatric oncology. We analysed the literature, projects, and trial protocols, identified use cases along a hypothetical patient journey, and discussed use cases with paediatric oncology experts. To structure PPRL use cases, we defined six key dimensions: distributed personalised records, pseudonymisation, distributed pseudonymised records, record linkage, linked data, and data analysis. Selected use cases were described (a) per dimension and (b) on a multi-dimensional level. While focusing on paediatric oncology, most aspects are also applicable to other (particularly rare) diseases. We conclude that PPRL is a key concept in paediatric oncology. Therefore, PPRL strategies should already be considered when starting research projects, to avoid distributed data silos, to maximise the knowledge derived from collected data, and, ultimately, to improve outcomes for children with cancer.

Relationship between socioeconomic status and prostate cancer (incidence, aggressiveness, treatment with curative intent, and mortality): a spatial analysis using population-based cancer registry data

BACKGROUND

Morbidity and mortality associated with prostate cancer in a given geographic area might be related to the level of socioeconomic deprivation. The Somme area (a region of northern France) is considered economically disadvantaged, with major territorial disparities. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the socioeconomic level on prostate cancer, using data from a population-based cancer registry.

METHODS

The source of data on cases of prostate cancer between 2006 and 2010 was the Somme cancer registry (Amiens, France). Socioeconomic status was measured according to the European Deprivation Index (EDI), which was used to classify each geographical "IRIS" unit (the smallest sub-municipal geographical entity for which French census data are available) according to its level of social deprivation. For spatial analysis, we considered a hierarchical generalized linear model.

RESULTS

In the spatial analysis, prostate cancer incidence was higher in the less disadvantaged areas and treatment frequency with curative intent was lower in the most disadvantaged areas. Cancer aggressiveness and mortality were higher in the most disadvantaged areas: relative risk (RR) = 1.36; 95% CI: [1.09; 1.73] and RR=3.09 [1.70; 5.59], respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our results evidenced a significant association between socioeconomic deprivation and prostate cancer, with worse outcomes among men with the lowest socioeconomic status.

Does access to care play a role in liver cancer survival? The ten-year (2006-2015) experience from a population-based cancer registry in Southern Italy

Background

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most frequent primary invasive cancer of the liver. During the last decade, the epidemiology of HCC has been continuously changing in developed countries, due to more effective primary prevention and to successful treatment of virus-related liver diseases.

The study aims to examine survival by level of access to care in patients with HCC, for all patients combined and by age.

Methods

We included 2018 adult patients (15–99 years) diagnosed with a primary liver tumour, registered in the Palermo Province Cancer Registry during 2006–2015, and followed-up to 30 October 2019. We obtained a proxy measure of access to care by linking each record to the Hospital Discharge Records and the Ambulatory Discharge Records.

We estimated net survival up to 5 years after diagnosis by access to care (“easy access to care” versus “poor access to care”), using the Pohar-Perme estimator. Estimates were age-standardised using International Cancer Survival Standard (ICSS) weights. We also examined survival by access to care and age (15–64, 65–74 and ≥ 75 years).

Results

Among the 2018 patients, 62.4% were morphologically verified and 37.6% clinically diagnosed. Morphologically verified tumours were more frequent in patients aged 65–74 years (41.6%), while tumours diagnosed clinically were more frequent in patients aged 75 years or over (50.2%). During 2006–2015, age-standardised net survival was higher among HCC patients with “easy access to care” than in those with “poor access to care” (68% vs. 48% at 1 year, 29% vs. 11% at 5 years; p < 0.0001). Net survival up to 5 years was higher for patients with “easy access to care” in each age group (p < 0.0001). Moreover, survival increased slightly for patients with easier access to care, while it remained relatively stable for patients with poor access to care.

Conclusions

During 2006–2015, 5-year survival was higher for HCC patients with easier access to care, probably reflecting progressive improvement in the effectiveness of health care services offered to these patients.

Our linkage algorithm could provide valuable evidence to support healthcare decision-making in the context of the evolving epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Is low survival for cancer in Eastern Europe due principally to late stage at diagnosis?

BACKGROUND

Cancer survival has persistently been shown to be worse for Eastern European and UK/Ireland patients than those of other European regions. This is often attributed to later stage at diagnosis. However, few stage-specific survival comparisons are available, so it is unclear whether poorer quality treatment or other factors also contribute. For the first time, European cancer registries have provided stage-at-diagnosis data to EUROCARE, enabling population-based stage-specific survival estimates across Europe.

DATA AND METHODS

In this retrospective observational study, stage at diagnosis (as TNM, condensed TNM, or Extent of Disease) was analysed for patients (≥15 years) from 15 countries grouped into 4 regions (Northern Europe: Norway; Central Europe: Austria, France, Germany, Switzerland, The Netherlands; Southern Europe: Croatia, Italy, Slovenia, and Spain; and Eastern Europe: Bulgaria, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, and Slovakia), diagnosed with 7 malignant cancers in 2000-2007, and followed to end of 2008. A new variable (reconstructed stage) was created which used all available stage information. Age-standardised 5-year relative survival (RS) by reconstructed stage was estimated and compared between regions. Excess risks of cancer death in the 5 years after diagnosis were also estimated, taking age, sex and stage into account.

RESULTS

Low proportions of Eastern European patients were diagnosed with local stage cancers and high proportions with metastatic stage cancers. Stage-specific RS (especially for non-metastatic disease) was generally lower for Eastern European patients. After adjusting for age, sex, and stage, excess risks of death remained higher for Eastern European patients than for European patients in general.

CONCLUSIONS

Late diagnosis alone does not explain worse cancer survival in Eastern Europe: greater risk of cancer death together with worse stage-specific survival suggest less effective care, probably in part because fewer resources are allocated to health care than in the rest of Europe. We recommend that Eastern European cancer registries and other involved bodies to draw attention to poor cancer survival, so as to stimulate research and inform policies to improve outcomes.

Bridging the gap between the randomised clinical trial world and the real world by combination of population-based registry and electronic health record data: A case study in haemato-oncology

Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) are considered the basis of evidence-based medicine. It is recognised more and more that application of RCT results in daily practice of clinical decision-making is limited because the RCT world does not correspond with the clinical real world. Recent strategies aiming at substitution of RCT databases by improved population-based registries (PBRs) or by improved electronic health record (EHR) systems to provide significant data for clinical science are discussed. A novel approach exemplified by the HemoBase haemato-oncology project is presented. In this approach, a PBR is combined with an advanced EHR, providing high-quality data for observational studies and support of best practice development. This PBR + EHR approach opens a perspective on randomised registry trials.

Breast cancer in South-Eastern European countries since 2000: Rising incidence and decreasing mortality at young and middle ages

BACKGROUND

Marked variations exist in the incidence and mortality trends of major cancers in South-Eastern European (SEE) countries which have now been detailed by age for breast cancer (BC) to seek clues for improvement.

METHODS

We brought together and analysed data from 14 cancer registries (CRs), situated in SEE countries or directly adjacent. Age-standardised rate at world standard (ASRw) and truncated incidence and mortality rates during 2000-2010 by year, and for four age groups, were calculated. Average annual percentage change of rates was estimated using Joinpoint regression.

RESULTS

Annual incidence rates increased significantly in countries and age groups, by 2-4% (15-39 years), 2-5% (40-49), 1-4% (50-69) and 1-6% (at 70+). Mortality rates decreased significantly in all age-groups in most countries, but increased up to 5% annually above age 55 in Ukraine, Serbia, Moldova and Cyprus. The BC data quality was evaluated by internationally agreed indicators which appeared suboptimal for Moldova, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Romania.

CONCLUSION

The observed variations of incidence trends reflect the influence of risk factors, as well as levels of early detection activities (screening). While mortality rates were mostly decreasing, probably due to improved cancer care and introduction of more effective systemic treatment regimens, the worrying increasing mortality trends in the 55-plus age groups in some countries have to be addressed by health professionals and policymakers. In order to assess and monitor the effects of cancer control activities in the region, the CRs need substantial investments.

Cancer Control in Central and Eastern Europe: Current Situation and Recommendations for Improvement

: The incidence of many cancers is higher in Western European (WE) countries, but mortality is frequently higher in Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries. A panel of oncology leaders from CEE countries participating in the South Eastern European Research Oncology Group (SEEROG) was formed in 2015, aiming to analyze the current status and trends of oncology care in CEE and to propose recommendations leading to improved care and outcomes. The SEEROG panel, meeting during the 11th Central European Oncology Congress, proposed the following: (a) national cancer control plans (NCCPs) required in all CEE countries, defining priorities in cancer care, including finance allocation considering limited health care budgets; (b) national cancer registries, describing in detail epidemiological trends; (c) efforts to strengthen comprehensive cancer centers; (d) that multidisciplinary care should be mandated by the NCCPs; (e) that smaller hospitals should be connected to multidisciplinary tumor boards via the Internet, providing access to specialized expertise; (f) nationwide primary prevention programs targeting smoking, obesity, and alcohol consumption and centrally evaluated secondary prevention programs for cervical, colorectal, and breast cancers; (g) prioritize education for all involved in cancer care, including oncology nurses, general practitioners, and palliative care providers; (h) establish outpatient care in day hospitals to reduce costs associated with the current inpatient model of care in CEE countries and to improve patients' quality of life; (i) long-term pharmacoeconomic evaluations of new therapies in CEE countries; (j) increase national oncology budgets in view of the higher mortality rates in CEE compared with WE countries; and (k) CEE countries urgently need help from the European Union to increase and monitor overall investment in cancer care.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Significant differences in cancer incidence and mortality have been observed between European countries. While the incidence of many cancer types is higher in Western European (WE) countries, the mortality is generally higher in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). The primary purpose of this review was to describe the current status and trends of oncology care in the CEE region, to raise awareness among physicians, regulators, and payers, and to propose the most needed changes in order to make the oncology care in CEE closer to the WE standards.

Cancer registries in Europe-going forward is the only option

Cancer registries (CR) are the fundamental source of objective cancer data, and thus are indispensable for the evaluation of the cancer burden and for design of effective cancer control plans. Their potential roles spread far beyond epidemiological research, from the exploration of the causes of cancer to health economics, from the evaluation of mass screening programmes to monitoring the quality and outcomes of health services, from addressing the inequalities in access to healthcare, to patients' quality of life analyses, from treatment safety to the development of biomarkers. In Europe, cancer registration is challenged by significant disparities in the quality and coverage of CRs, by insufficient harmonisation and comparability of procedures and data, by heterogeneous legislation that limits CR's abilities for networking, collaboration, and participation in research. These arise against the background of large variations in economical, regulatory, social, and cultural national contexts. Important steps have been taken at European Union (EU)-level in recent years towards mapping and understanding these challenges, identifying best practices and formulating sensible recommendations, and creating the policy frameworks and the tools for cooperation and information sharing. Yet, as cancer has now become the second cause of death in Europe, one third of the population still lacks quality cancer registration, mostly in the regions with lowest resources and health status. It is therefore imperative that the efforts to support the development of CRs continue, and that the wealth of knowledge and vision acquired in this area is transformed into action.

Improving structural development in oncology: transformation of theoretical health care standards and knowledge into a practical approach -- 2nd European Roundtable Meeting (ERTM), May 8, 2015, Berlin, Germany

PURPOSE

It is widely accepted that National Cancer Control Plans (NCCPs) are essential to improve cancer care. They often describe the structural requirements such as cancer centers, clinical cancer registries and quality control. During the 2nd European roundtable meeting, the implementation processes were analyzed and discussed.

RESULTS

Communication strategies between cancer registries and cancer centers need to be developed. Analyses and discussion of collected data have to be performed by multidisciplinary teams. This has to be followed by appropriate actions to improve quality of care. It is essential to describe the clinical procedures, organizational processes and communication between individuals and professional teams. The patients' perspectives have to be included in the development of cancer care networks. The patients' feedback on cancer care is a routine quality indicator.

CONCLUSION

NCCPs that include the description of structural requirements are important. In addition, it is essential to develop cancer care networks including multidisciplinary organizational processes to guarantee high quality. These have to consider patients preferences.

The need for radiotherapy in Europe in 2020: Not only data but also a cancer plan

BACKGROUND

Planning radiation oncology equipment and staffing is necessary in public healthcare systems in Europe.

METHODS

Three different data inputs were considered: evidence-based indications for radiotherapy, the incidence of cancer, and the stage at diagnosis of each cancer type, both the latter using population-based data from cancer registries. The availability of these data and the implications for the estimation of the proportion of new cancer patients who would need radiotherapy treatment at least once during the course of the disease is reviewed.

RESULTS

Depending on the frequency of cancers and the stage at diagnosis, it has been estimated that between 47% and 53% of incident cases among European countries would require external beam radiotherapy. When the actual data of utilization is compared with the evidence-based target, only one country in Europe has achieved full coverage.

CONCLUSION

It is argued that these should be considered the optimal proportions of cancer patients, but a more realistic policy target could be set at 80% or higher of the optimal proportion. This realistic target also takes into account the inherent uncertainties in the assessment of evidence, and other factors that influence clinical decision-making in cases of multi-morbidity or patient preferences. Other factors are associated with problems that should be dealt with in the framework of a cancer plan, such as accessibility, preference bias in physician evaluation of the indication or shortage of resources, and the impact of the reimbursement system. Finally, it is argued that a cancer plan is the framework for achieving policy targets in the appropriate coverage of the evidence-based indications for radiation oncology forecasts.

Registration of childhood cancer: Moving towards pan-European coverage?

Cancer is relatively rare in childhood, but it contributes considerably to childhood mortality, years of life lost per person and late effects in survivors. Large populations need to be covered to set up meaningful studies of these rare conditions. Cancer registries ensure cancer surveillance, thus providing the basis for research as well as policy decisions. In this paper we examine coverage of childhood population by cancer registries in Europe and encourage national cancer registration. Over 200 cancer registries in various stages of development were identified as collecting data on childhood cancer patients in Europe. They cover 52% of the childhood population in the World Health Organisation (WHO) European region and 83% in the European Union (EU). More than 80% of this coverage is ensured by nationwide data collection, which is ongoing in 29 European countries. Overall coverage of the childhood population could increase to around 98%, if the recently established cancer registries start producing results and others improve their quality and dissemination plans. Paediatric cancer registries are being established with increasing frequency even in the areas covered by general cancer registries, and they tend to be national. Compared with regional registration, national cancer registries are more cost-effective, record larger number of cases, they can achieve higher completeness, less biased incidence and survival estimates and they are conditioned for national and international research. National registration of childhood cancer should be the rule in Europe, so that accurate regional, nation-wide and international statistics can provide solid baselines for research, clinical practice and public health policy. Governmental support and stakeholders' involvement are indispensable to guarantee optimal data quality and completeness.