Dataset Information

Pathology-confirmed versus non pathology-confirmed cancer diagnoses: incidence, participant characteristics, and survival.

ABSTRACT: Cancer diagnoses which are not confirmed by pathology are often under-registered in cancer registries compared to pathology-confirmed diagnoses. It is unknown how many patients have a non pathology-confirmed cancer diagnosis, and whether their characteristics and survival differ from patients with a pathology-confirmed diagnosis. Participants from the prospective population-based Rotterdam Study were followed between 1989 and 2013 for the diagnosis of cancer. Cancer diagnoses were classified into pathology-confirmed versus non pathology-confirmed (i.e., based on imaging or tumour markers). We compared participant characteristics and the distribution of cancers at different sites. Furthermore, we investigated differences in overall survival using survival curves adjusted for age and sex. During a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 10.7 (6.3-15.9) years, 2698 out of 14,024 participants were diagnosed with cancer, of which 316 diagnoses (11.7%) were non pathology-confirmed. Participants with non pathology-confirmed diagnoses were older, more often women, and had a lower education. Most frequently non pathology-confirmed cancer sites included central nervous system (66.7%), hepato-pancreato-biliary (44.5%), and unknown primary origin (31.2%). Survival of participants with non pathology-confirmed diagnoses after 1 year was lower compared to survival of participants with pathology-confirmed diagnoses (32.6% vs. 63.4%; risk difference of 30.8% [95% CI 25.2%; 36.2%]). Pathological confirmation of cancer is related to participant characteristics and cancer site. Furthermore, participants with non pathology-confirmed diagnoses have worse survival than participants with pathology-confirmed diagnoses. Missing data on non pathology-confirmed diagnoses may result in underestimation of cancer incidence and in an overestimation of survival in cancer registries, and may introduce bias in aetiological research.

SUBMITTER: van der Willik KD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7320936 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) after degenerative meniscus tears is one of the most frequently performed surgeries in orthopaedics. Although several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been published that showed no clear benefit compared with sham treatment or non-surgical treatment, the incidence of APM remains high. The common perception by most orthopaedic surgeons is that there are subgroups of patients that do need APM to improve, and they argue that each study sample of the existing trials is not representative for the day-to-day patients in the clinic. Therefore, the objective of this individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) is to assess whether there are subgroups of patients with degenerative meniscus lesions who benefit from APM in comparison with non-surgical or sham treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:An existing systematic review will be updated to identify all RCTs worldwide that evaluated APM compared with sham treatment or non-surgical treatment in patients with knee symptoms and degenerative meniscus tears. Time and effort will be spent in contacting principal investigators of the original trials and encourage them to collaborate in this project by sharing their trial data. All individual participant data will be validated for missing data, internal data consistency, randomisation integrity and censoring patterns. After validation, all datasets will be combined and analysed using a one-staged and two-staged approach. The RCTs' characteristics will be used for the assessment of clinical homogeneity and generalisability of the findings. The most important outcome will be the difference between APM and control groups in knee pain, function and quality of life 2 years after the intervention. Other outcomes of interest will include the difference in adverse events and mental health. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:All trial data will be anonymised before it is shared with the authors. The data will be encrypted and stored on a secure server located in the Netherlands. No major ethical concerns remain. This IPDMA will provide the evidence base to update and tailor diagnostic and treatment protocols as well as (international) guidelines for patients for whom orthopaedic surgeons consider APM. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42017067240.

Project description:AimsThe prognosis and quality of life of heart failure patients is determined to a significant extent by co-morbidities. New data suggest that heart failure may be associated with an increased incidence of cancer. The present retrospective study investigates this association in a large collective of outpatients with heart failure.Methods and resultsThis retrospective cohort study assessed the incidence of cancer in patients with an initial diagnosis of heart failure and a matched non-heart failure cohort in 1274 general practices in Germany between January 2000 and December 2018. The study is based on the Disease Analyser database (IQVIA), which contains drug prescriptions, diagnoses, and basic medical and demographic data. Hazard regression models were used to study the association between heart failure and the incidences of different cancers. A total of 100 124 patients with heart failure and 100 124 patients without heart failure were included in the analysis. Patients were matched individually by sex, age, diabetes, obesity, and yearly consultation frequency. Within the 10 year observation period, 25.7% of patients with heart failure and 16.2% of patients without heart failure had been diagnosed with cancer (log-rank P < 0.001). These proportions were 28.6% vs. 18.8% in female and 23.2% vs. 13.8% in male patients. Heart failure was significantly associated with the incidence of cancer [hazard ratio (HR), 95% confidence interval: 1.76, 1.71-1.81; P < 0.001 in total; HR: 1.85, 1.77-1.92, P < 0.001 in women; HR: 1.69, 1.63-1.76, P < 0.001 in men]. A significant association was found between heart failure and all cancer sites assessed. The strongest association was observed for cancer of lip, oral cavity, and pharynx (HR: 2.10, 95% confidence interval: 1.66-2.17; P < 0.001), followed by respiratory organs (HR: 1.91, 1.74-2.10; P < 0.001) and genital organs of female patients (HR: 1.86, 1.56-2.17; P < 0.001). The association for skin tumours was 1.83 (1.72-1.94; P < 0.001), for cancer of lymphoid and haematopoietic tissue 1.77 (1.63-1.91; P < 0.001), for cancer of the digestive tract 1.75 (1.64-1. 87; P < 0.001), for breast cancer 1.67 (1.52-1.84; P < 0.001), for cancer of the genitourinary tract 1.64 (1.48-1.81; P < 0.001), and for male genital organ cancer 1.52 (1.40-1.66; P < 0.001).ConclusionsOur study indicates that heart failure patients experience a significantly higher incidence of cancer during the course of the disease.

Dataset Information

Pathology-confirmed versus non pathology-confirmed cancer diagnoses: incidence, participant characteristics, and survival.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets