Accuracy Of Cancer Registration Research Articles

Incidence of Stomach Cancer in Oman and the Other Gulf Cooperation Council Countries

Stomach cancer is the most common cancer among males in Oman and the second most frequent among females from 1997 to 2007. Reports have suggested the rate is higher in Oman than in the other GCC countries. This study aims to describe the epidemiology of stomach cancer in Oman and to explore the apparent differences in the incidence of stomach cancer between Oman and the other Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries. Data were obtained from the Omani National Cancer Registry (1997 - 2007) and from Gulf Centre for Cancer Registration reports (1998 - 2004). The annual average age-adjusted incidence rates for stomach cancer in Oman were 10.1 per 100,000 for males and 5.6 per 100,000 for females between 1997 and 2007. The age-adjusted incidence varied by region within Oman, and the incidence rate was higher in Oman than in most other GCC countries between 1998 and 2004. Further investigation of the completeness and accuracy of cancer registration is essential for exploration of variations in stomach cancer rates in the GCC countries.

International differences in survival from colon cancer: more effective care versus less complete cancer registration.

Reporting of a recent international comparison of cancer survival rates has left an impression of inadequate treatment of patients in the UK but failed to address adequately the extent to which differences in survival may reflect variation in the completeness and accuracy of cancer registration. The aim of this study was to quantify the extent to which differences in registration practice may confound comparisons of survival from cancer of the colon. A cohort of incident cases of colon cancer identified from records held by the North Western Regional Cancer Registry was used to simulate the effects on survival of changes in clinical and registration factors. The survival curve produced after each simulation was compared with that for aggregated data from 21 European registries. The observed survival differences were not explained by more effective primary treatment or by misclassification of in situ cases as malignant disease, whereas the exclusion of cases with only a clinical diagnosis produced estimates close to those of the European cohort. The observed survival differentials may not be due to differences in the quality of care but may reflect the failure of some European registries to register all patients with advanced disease.

Completeness and Validity of Cancer Registration in a Major Public Referral Hospital in Saudi Arabia

The 1994 Saudi National Cancer Registry (NCR), a population-based registry, showed a crude incidence rate (CIR) of 39/100,000 for all cancers in the Saudi population. The low CIR suggested possible under-reporting, especially during the early years of operation. This study as aimed at estimating the number of missed cases due to under-reporting, and to assess the validity of reported data from a major public referral hospital in Riyadh city. We compared cancer cases from the three data sources: medical records (MR), which were the original source of NCR cases; pathology reports (PR); and death certificates (DC). We estimated the missing cancer cases using the capture-recapture method with log-linear models of Fienberg to correct for interdependency between the three data sources. To assess the validity of the data, we reabstracted records of about 8% (39/4760 of previously reported cases from the same hospital. A total of 811 cancer cases were reported through the three sources, i.e., MR 611 (75.3%), PR 639 (78.8%) and DC 204 (25.2%). After fitting a series of log-linear models to the three sources of data, the three sources were found to be statistically dependent. Capture-repcapture method indicated that 384 cases were missed, giving an estimation of 1195 cancer cases to be reported. Using these 1195 estimated cases; the estimated ascertainment rates were 51% for medical records, 53% for pathology reports, 17% for death certificates, and 68% for the aggregated registry. In the validity assessment, major disagreement between the abstracted and reabstracted data was found to be highest for stage of disease (44%), followed by histology code and behavior (25.6%). Minor disagreements were most common for date of diagnosis (36%) and grade (36%). Overall, agreements were highest for laterality (95%), followed by primary site codes (90%) and basis of diagnosis (85%). Agreement of tumor description variables (site, histology, behavior, and stage) was 57%. Cancer registration will require substantial improvements in both completeness of reporting and data quality at the hospital level. Use of multiple data sources and estimation of missed cases will help ensure completeness of case registration.

Towards achieving the Health of the nation target for cervical cancer: accuracy of cancer registration

To measure the accuracy of incidence rates for invasive cervical cancer derived from cancer registration data, a review of histopathology records was undertaken for all cases of invasive cervical cancer, a 20 per cent random sample of CIN 3 registrations and all cases of cancer of the uterus not otherwise specified (NOS) from Greater Manchester, which were registered by the North Western Regional Cancer Registry between 1988 and 1989. The subjects were 386 cases of invasive cervical cancer, 313 CIN 3 registrations and 69 cases of cancer of the uterus NOS. The main outcome measure was the incidence rate of invasive cervical cancer in Greater Manchester after adjusting for errors in cancer registration. It was found that 375 (97 per cent) of the 386 cases of invasive cervical cancer were verified against the original pathology report but 11 cases (3 per cent) had been registered as invasive cervical cancer in error. Nine cases of invasive cervical cancer were found to have been misclassified as CIN 3, and 10 cases as cancer of the uterus NOS. As the CIN 3 cases were a 20 per cent random sample of all CIN 3 registrations, the best estimate of the number of cases of invasive cervical cancer misclassified as CIN 3 is 45, which makes a total under-registration of 55 cases over the two-year period. After adjusting for under-and over-registration, the incidence rate of invasive cancer of the cervix in Greater Manchester for 1988-1989 increased from 16.5 to 18.1 per 100,000 population.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Accuracy of cancer registration.

In South Wales cancer registration is done principally by means of the Hospital Activity Analysis. Altogether 1460 hospital records of cancer patients (19% of the 1972 registrations received by May 1973) were studied and the principal items of information required for cancer registrations by the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys were copied and subsequently compared with the corresponding registrations at the Welsh Hospital Board's cancer bureau. Differences between these 're-registrations' and the original registrations were analysed item by item. There were 234 registrations with errors in the diagnostic summary (although 110 of these would cause misclassification only under the fourth digit of the ICD code), 164 with errors in date of birth (36 of which would cause classification in the wrong WHO age group) and 198 with errors in the date of registration (112 of which were wrongly ascribed to the year 1972). Error and omission rates were particularly high for NHS number, occupation, place of birth, and histology.