Evaluation of Data Quality of Four New Population Based Cancer Registries (PBCRs) in Chandigarh and Punjab, North India- A Quality Control Study

Quality assessment of a rural population-based cancer registry (PBCR) at Ratnagiri, Maharashtra, India for the years 2017-18

Background

Cancer registries are valuable resources for cancer control and research. To justify their purpose, their data should be of satisfactory quality by being comparable internationally, complete in their coverage, valid in their values and timely in reporting. This study aimed to assess the quality of the Ratnagiri Population Based Cancer Registry's data for the years 2017-18 across the four dimensions of data quality.

Methods

Regarding comparability, the registry procedure was reviewed vis-à-vis the rules they follow for cancer registry operation. We have used four methods for validity: re-abstraction and re-coding, diagnostic criteria methods- like the percentage of microscopically verified (MV%) and of death certificate only (DCO%) cases, missing information like proportion of cases of primary site unknown (PSU%) and internal validity. Semi-quantitative methods were employed for assessing completeness. Timeliness for all years of registry functioning was assessed qualitatively.

Results

The overall accuracy rate of the registry was found to be 91.1% (94.7% for demographic and 88% for tumour details). Mortality to incidence ratios were found to be 0.50 for females and 0.59 for males. MV% was found to be 90.8% for males and 91.5% for females. The average number of sources per case was found to be 1.5. DCO% was found to be 2.7%. PSU% was 7.4%.

Conclusion

We have positive results regarding the data's validity and comparability, but there is scope for improvement concerning completeness. Continuous training of the registry personnel and monitoring of the registry is recommended.

Differences in the incidence and mortality of digestive cancer between Global Cancer Observatory 2020 and Global Burden of Disease 2019

The burden of digestive cancers is increasing worldwide. The Global Cancer Observatory (GLOBOCAN) 2020 and the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2019 are two primary cancer databases, which have a significant impact on policy formulation and resource allocation. We aim to compare the incidence and mortality of digestive cancers between them. Digestive cancer (esophageal, stomach, colorectal, liver, gallbladder and pancreatic cancer) incidence was obtained from the Cancer Today and GBD 2019 result tool. The top five countries with the most or minor difference between GLOBOCAN 2020 and GBD 2019 in age-standardized incidence rates (ASIRs) of digestive cancers were identified. A systematic search on the incidence of specific digestive cancer in selected countries from PubMed and Embase was conducted, and 20 of 281 publications were included. The most significant differences in digestive cancers incidence were commonly found in Asian countries (70%), particularly Indonesia, Vietnam and Myanmar, located in Southeast Asia. The ASIRs for most digestive cancers, except liver cancer, in GLOBOCAN 2020 were higher than those in GBD 2019. Gallbladder cancer had the highest average ratio, followed by liver cancer. The most commonly used standard population was Segi's standard population, followed by the World Health Organization standard population. The data sources nor the processing methods of GLOBOCAN 2020 and GBD 2019 were not similar. Low- and middle-income countries without population-based cancer registries were more likely to have selection bias in data collection and amplify regional variations of etiological factors. Better judgments on the quality of cancer data can be made.

REPCAN: Guideline for REporting Population-based CANcer Registry Data

Background: The objective of this study was to develop a guideline on how to report result of a population-based cancer registry. Methods: The guideline's development involved a core working committee and a scientific committee comprising experts from diverse domains. The process comprised three steps: 1) a comprehensive review of existing tools and guidelines and the development of the initial draft of the guideline based on a review of literature, 2) refinement items through several rounds of focus group discussion among the core group, and development initial draft, and 3) Evaluation of the initial draft by scientific committee members. Items in the guideline were organized to accommodate reports of population-based cancer registries as a scientific manuscript. Results: The core committee developed 47 items distributed in the major heading of a scientific manuscript presented as a checklist. The evaluation of the scientific committee led to a consensus on the majority of the items included in the checklist. Among 10 committee members, 7 provided unreserved approval, validating each item's necessity, applicability, and comprehensibility in the checklist. Feedback from the remaining 3 members was carefully analyzed and integrated to enhance the guideline's robustness. Incorporating feedback, a first final draft was presented in a meeting of scientific and core working committee members. Collaborative discussion ensured clarity of expression for each items and a final checklist was developed. Conclusion: The guideline abbreviated as REPCAN offers a standardized framework for reporting population-based cancer registry, fostering transparency, comparability, and comprehensive data presentation. The guideline encourages flexibility while promoting comprehensive and robust reporting practices.

Epidemiology of rare cancers in India and South Asian countries - remembering the forgotten

Background

Rare cancers (RCs) are challenging to manage and are "forgotten cancers" though they collectively constitute a significant proportion of all cancers (∼20%). As a first step towards streamlining care, there is an unmet need to map the epidemiology of RCs in South Asian Association for Regional Collaboration (SAARC) countries.

Methods

The authors collected data from 30 Population-Based Cancer Registries (PBCR) of India and the published national registries of Nepal, Bhutan and Sri Lanka (SL) and compared them with the standard RARECAREnet RC list.

Findings

With the standard definition of crude incidence rates (CR) ≤6/100,0000 per population, 67.5%, 68.3%, 62.3% and 37% of all incident cancers qualify as RCs in India, Bhutan, Nepal and SL, respectively. An arbitrary cut-off CR ≤3 appears more appropriate with 43%, 39.5%, 51.8% and 17.2% of cancers identified as RCs, respectively, due to the lower cancer incidence.There are similarities and notable differences between the RC lists of the SAARC region with that of the European RC list. Oral cavity cancers are rare in Europe, while pancreas, rectum, urinary bladder and melanomas are common. In addition, uterine, colon and prostatic cancers are rare in India, Nepal and Bhutan. In SL, thyroid cancer is common. There are gender-related and regional differences in RC trends in the SAARC countries.

Interpretation

There is an unmet need in SAARC nations to capture epidemiological nuances in rare cancers. Understanding the unique issues in the developing world may guide policymakers to adopt appropriate measures to improve RC care and tailor public health interventions.

Funding

None.

Overall survival of prostate cancer from Sangrur and Mansa cancer registries of Punjab state, India

Introduction

There is a scarcity of population-based prostate cancer survival data in India. We assessed the population-based, overall survival of patients with prostate cancer from the Sangrur and Mansa cancer registries of the Punjab state, India.

Methods

In the year 2013-2016, a total of 171 prostate cancer cases were registered in these two registries. Based on these registries, survival analysis was performed using the date of diagnosis as the starting date and the last follow-up date being December 31, 2021 or the date of death. Survival was calculated using STATA software. Relative survival was calculated using the Pohar Perme method.

Results

Follow up was available for all the registered cases. Of the 171 cases, 41 (24%) were alive and 130 (76.0%) were dead. Of the prescribed treatments, 106 (62.7%) cases completed the treatment and 63 (37.3%) cases did not complete the treatment. Overall, 5-year age-standardized prostate cancer relative survival was 30.3%. Patients who completed the treatment had a 7.8 times higher 5-year relative survival (45.5%) compared to those who did not (5.8%). The difference between the two groups is statistically significant (hazard ratio 0.16, 95% confidence interval [0.10-0.27]).

Conclusion

To improve survival, we need to raise awareness in the community and among primary physicians so that prostate cancer cases can reach the hospital early and should be treated effectively. The cancer center should develop the systems in their hospital so that there will be no hurdles to the patients in treatment completion. We found a low overall relative survival among patients of prostate cancer in these two registries. Patients who received treatment had a significantly higher survival.

Ovarian cancer: A report from population-based cancer registry at central rural India

INTRODUCTION

Ovarian neoplasms affect a huge part of the female population and, simultaneously, have the worst prognosis among all gynecological malignancies. In most of the population-based cancer registries (PBCR) in India, ovarian cancer is the third leading site of cancer among women, trailing behind cervix and breast cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In the present study, we have summarized the number of new cases of ovarian malignancy and its profile observed in the PBCR in central India during 7 years.

REPORTS

During a 7-year duration (2010-2016), 6,515 cancer patients were recorded at PBCR, and 228 cases were of ovarian malignancy. It was observed that most of the cases in this study were in 41-50 years of life. The age-standardized incidence rate of ovarian cancers in the present study was 4.61 per 100,000, and the crude incidence rate was 5.08 per 100,000. The crude mortality rate and age-standardized mortality rate of ovarian cancer were 2.3 and 2.02 per 100,000, respectively. Serous carcinoma was our study's most common histological subtype (43.75%), followed by mucinous carcinoma.

CONCLUSION

A steady increase has been observed in the incidence of ovarian cancer in several registries. A significant goal in managing ovarian cancer is to develop an effective test to detect the disease at its earlier stages, resulting in reduced mortality.