Five ways to improve international comparisons of cancer survival: lessons learned from ICBP SURVMARK-2

Comparisons of population-based cancer survival between countries are important to benchmark the overall effectiveness of cancer management. The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) Survmark-2 study aims to compare survival in seven high-income countries across eight cancer sites and...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	British journal of cancer 2022-05, Vol.126 (8), p.1224-1228
Main Authors:	Andersson, Therese M-L, Myklebust, Tor Åge, Rutherford, Mark J, Møller, Bjørn, Arnold, Melina, Soerjomataram, Isabelle, Bray, Freddie, Parkin, D Maxwell, Lambert, Paul C
Format:	Article
Language:	eng
Subjects:	Benchmarking Cancer Humans Incidence Medicin och hälsovetenskap Multiple primary tumors Neoplasms - epidemiology Registries Survival
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	Comparisons of population-based cancer survival between countries are important to benchmark the overall effectiveness of cancer management. The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) Survmark-2 study aims to compare survival in seven high-income countries across eight cancer sites and explore reasons for the observed differences. A critical aspect in ensuring comparability in the reported survival estimates are similarities in practice across cancer registries. While ICBP Survmark-2 has shown these differences are unlikely to explain the observed differences in cancer-specific survival between countries, it is important to keep in mind potential biases linked to registry practice and understand their likely impact. Based on experiences gained within ICBP Survmark-2, we have developed a set of recommendations that seek to optimally harmonise cancer registry datasets to improve future benchmarking exercises. Our recommendations stem from considering the impact on cancer survival estimates in five key areas: (1) the completeness of the registry and the availability of registration sources; (2) the inclusion of death certification as a source of identifying cases; (3) the specification of the date of incidence; (4) the approach to handling multiple primary tumours and (5) the quality of linkage of cases to the deaths register. These recommendations seek to improve comparability whilst maintaining the opportunity to understand and act upon international variations in outcomes among cancer patients.
ISSN:	0007-0920 1532-1827 1532-1827