Validity of self reported diagnoses of cancer in a major Spanish prospective cohort study

Navarro, Carmen

doi:10.1136/jech.2005.039131

Cited by 44 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, this study shows a moderately high sensitivity for prostate cancer, possibly reflecting an increased public awareness of prostate cancer within the last decade 18 . Our study demonstrated much higher sensitivity for bowel cancer as compared to previous studies in Spain (17.4%) 19 and Japan (14%) 20 . This may be due to the nation‐wide implementation of bowel cancer awareness by health authorities as it is the second most common cancer in Australia 13…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 63%

The validity of self‐reported cancer in an Australian population study

Loh

Harding

Koshkina

et al. 2014

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A ccurate and current estimates of cancer incidence and prevalence are required to quantify the health burden of cancer and to direct current and future allocation of health care funds. 1 In recent decades, cancer registries have become the most accurate source of cancer data.2 However, the acquisition of cancer registry data is not always feasible for use in epidemiological studies, as data linkage to the registry can be costly and time consuming. In particular, there may be ethical restrictions on the use of cancer data or data may only be provided in an aggregated fashion. As an alternative, collection of cancer data by self-report may be a reasonable surrogate to cancer registry data. However, before self-reported cancer data can be used in research, it is important to know the accuracy of such data compared to that recorded on registries, as well as the patient characteristics that predict accurate self-reports.The sensitivity of self-reported cancer data compared to cancer data obtained from a registry has been assessed in several studies in other developed countries, and ranges from 61% to 90%, varying considerably by cancer site. High sensitivities have been observed for self-reported breast (85.4-90%), prostate (78.9%), and lung cancers (74.1%), while low sensitivity has been observed for self-reported bowel cancer (16%-60.4%) and melanoma of the skin (53%). 1,3-5 However, only a few large population-based studies have evaluated the characteristics of people who self-report wrongly. 6,7 Furthermore, the findings from these studies may not be generalisable to the Australian context, as they only include women and were conducted in other countries. Given the differences in health care systems between countries, the validity of self-reported cancer may be different in Australia.In Australia, cancer is a notifiable disease by law and detailed cancer data are routinely collected by the state and territory cancer registries. The cancer data are then collated by the Australian Cancer Database (ACD), a national registry established in 1983. The objective of this study is to determine the validity of self-reported all-cause and site-specific cancer in a national, population- AbstractObjective: The aim of this study is to determine the validity of self-reported cancer data by comparing it to the Australian Cancer Database (ACD).Methods: Self-reported data were obtained from the Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle (AusDiab) study, which were then linked to the ACD up until 31 December 2010. Positive predictive value, negative predictive value, sensitivity and specificity were calculated. Cohen's kappa coefficient (ĸ) was also calculated to assess the agreement between self-reported cancer and the ACD. Logistic regression was used to examine the determinants associated with false negative and false positive reporting. Results:The overall sensitivity of self-report cancer was 71.1%, and sensitivities showed great variation by cancer site. Higher sensitivities were observed for breast (90.7%), bowel (77.8%) a...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 63%

The validity of self‐reported cancer in an Australian population study

Loh

Harding

Koshkina

et al. 2014

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such documentation was obtained for only 34 (25.6%) of the CCa cases, but these records confirmed 97% of the CCa diagnoses in this subset. Previous studies have found from 17 – 100% of self-reported CCa52,53 and 48 – 93% of first-degree relative-reported CCa were confirmed by medical records54,55. Therefore, there may be individuals with CCa that were missed or, more rarely, individuals with an incorrect assignment of CCa.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Genome-wide linkage analyses of hereditary prostate cancer families with colon cancer provide further evidence for a susceptibility locus on 15q11–q14

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The search for susceptibility loci in hereditary prostate cancer (HPC) is challenging due to locus and disease heterogeneity. One approach to reduce disease heterogeneity is to stratify families based on the occurrence of multiple cancer types. This method may increase power for detecting susceptibility loci, including those with pleiotropic effects. We have completed a genome-wide SNP linkage analysis of 96 HPC families, each of which has one or more first-degree relatives with colon cancer (CCa), and further analyzed the subset of families with two or more CCa cases (n=27). When only a prostate cancer (PCa) phenotype was considered affected, we observed suggestive evidence for linkage (LOD≥1.86) at 15q14, 18q21 and 19q13 in all families, and at 1p32 and 15q11-q14 in families with two or more CCa cases. When both the PCa and CCa phenotypes were considered affected, suggestive evidence for linkage was observed at 11q25, 15q14 and 18q21 in all families, and at 1q31, 11q14, and 15q11-14 in families with two or more CCa cases. The strongest linkage signal was identified at 15q14 when both the PCa and CCa phenotypes were considered affected in families with two or more CCa cases (recessive HLOD=3.88). These results provide further support for the presence of HPC susceptibility loci on chromosomes 11q14, 15q11-q14 and 19q13 and highlight loci at 1q31, 11q, 15q14 and 18q21 as having possible pleiotropic effects. This study demonstrates the benefit of utilizing a comprehensive family cancer history to create more genetically homogenous subsets of HPC families for linkage analyses.

show abstract

“…However, this means that our cancer variable is most likely conservative. The validity of self-reported cancer is likely to vary based on the cancer type diagnosed, and tends towards an underreporting of cancers, given the high levels of specificity reported in studies comparing self-reports to registry data [31]. Indeed in studies where cancer registry data have been compared to self-reported information individuals tend to underreport rather than overreport cancer history, and variation in inaccurate cancer reporting varied considerably by cancer type [32].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The probability of misreporting cancer, both over-reporting and under-reporting, has been associated with socio-demographic characteristics: gender, age, BMI, size of household, place of birth, smoking, social participation, educational level, type of employment, alcohol consumption and poor well-being [34]. The sensitivity of self-reported cancer is also likely to be higher among respondents with a high level of education [31]. Stavrou et al have demonstrated a good level of sensitivity and specificity for self-reported cancer diagnoses in a cohort of older women in Australia, comparing self-reports to registry data [35].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Childhood adversity as a risk for cancer: findings from the 1958 British birth cohort study

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTo analyse whether Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) are associated with an increased risk of cancer.MethodsThe National child development study (NCDS) is a prospective birth cohort study with data collected over 50 years. The NCDS included all live births during one week in 1958 (n = 18558) in Great Britain. Self-reported cancer incidence was based on 444 participants reporting having had cancer at some point and 5694 reporting never having cancer. ACE was measured using reports of: 1) child in care, 2) physical neglect, 3) child’s or family’s contact with the prison service, 4) parental separation due to divorce, death or other, 5) family experience of mental illness & 6) family experience of substance abuse. The resulting variable had three categories, no ACEs/ one ACE/ 2 + ACEs and was used to test for a relationship with cancer. Information on socioeconomic characteristics, pregnancy and birth were extracted as potential confounders. Information on adult health behaviours, socioeconomic environment, psychological state and age at first pregnancy were added to the models. Multivariate models were run using multiply-imputed data to account for missing data in the cohort.ResultsThe odds of having a cancer before 50 y among women increased twofold for those who had 2+ ACEs versus those with no ACEs, after adjusting for adult factors and early life confounders (OR: 2.1, 95% CI: 1.42-3.21, p < 0.001).ConclusionThese findings suggest that cancer risk may be influenced by exposure to stressful conditions and events early on in life. This is potentially important in furthering our understanding of cancer aetiology, and consequently in redirecting scientific research and developing appropriate prevention policies.

show abstract

Validity of self reported diagnoses of cancer in a major Spanish prospective cohort study

Cited by 44 publications

References 29 publications

The validity of self‐reported cancer in an Australian population study

The validity of self‐reported cancer in an Australian population study

Genome-wide linkage analyses of hereditary prostate cancer families with colon cancer provide further evidence for a susceptibility locus on 15q11–q14

Childhood adversity as a risk for cancer: findings from the 1958 British birth cohort study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About