The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership: An international collaboration to inform cancer policy in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom

Abstract

The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) was initiated by the Department of Health in England to study international variation in cancer survival, and to inform policy to improve cancer survival. It is a research collaboration between twelve jurisdictions in six countries: Australia (New South Wales, Victoria), Canada (Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario), Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Wales). Leadership is provided by policymakers, with academics, clinicians and cancer registries forming an international network to conduct the research. The project currently has five modules examining: (1) cancer survival, (2) population awareness and beliefs about cancer, (3) attitudes, behaviours and systems in primary care, (4) delays in diagnosis and treatment, and their causes, and (5) treatment, co-morbidities and other factors. These modules employ a range of methodologies including epidemiological and statistical analyses, surveys and clinical record audit. The first publications have already been used to inform and develop cancer policies in participating countries, and a further series of publications is under way. The module design, governance structure, funding arrangements and management approach to the partnership provide a case study in conducting international comparisons of health systems that are both academically and clinically robust and of immediate relevance to policymakers.

The expanding role of primary care in cancer control

“…281 Cross-national audit is a powerful tool to illuminate variations in care that could be addressed with specifi c interventions at the primary care-specialist interface. The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP; see Part 8) 282 has illustrated large variations between countries in national guidelines and patterns of cancer care and highlighted what countries can learn from each other. Eff ective audit and education need to extend beyond clinical content to the nature of care pathways, quality and governance mechanisms, and quality-enhancing practices such as access to clinical trials.…”

“…Increased attention to the diagnostic pathway and role of primary care has led to the formation of the ICBP project, which involved 12 jurisdictions in six countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and the UK). 282 ICBP is a comparative multimodular study that aims to deepen epidemiological evidence and complement it with studies of variation in psychosocial or health-care factors. ICBP evidence so far has supported variation in survival between jurisdictions.…”

Awareness of cancer symptoms and anticipated patient interval for healthcare seeking. A comparative study of Denmark and Sweden

“…The ICBP examines international variations in cancer survival and possible reasons for these variations in Australia, Canada, England, Northern Ireland, Wales, Norway, Sweden and Denmark. Module 2 was designed to specifically explore differences in population awareness and beliefs about cancer [13]. In Denmark and Sweden, the target was to include 1000 respondents 30-49 years of age and 2000 respondents aged 50 from each country.…”

“…Many of the potential explanations above are the focus of further in-depth research in the ICBP and are currently being studied. Thus, Module 4 of the ICBP is testing the hypothesis that differences in the diagnostic interval can contribute to the difference in cancer outcomes by closely exploring cancer patient pathways in among other Denmark and Sweden, and Module 5 seeks to investigate the effect of comorbidity on cancer survival [13]. Differences in the screening program in Denmark and Sweden have also been mentioned as a possible factor for the survival disparity [20].…”

Cancer survival in Europe, 1999–2007: Doing better, feeling worse?

“…The EUROCARE findings also inspired the promotion of High Resolution (HR) studies for many neoplasms [11,12], and the development of studies aimed to investigate between-and within-country cancer survival inequalities [13,14].…”