Validity of the stage of lung cancer in records of the Maastricht cancer registry, The Netherlands

Schouten, Leo J.; Langendijk, Johannes A.; Jäger, J; Brandt, Piet A. van den

doi:10.1016/s0169-5002(97)00654-5

Cited by 9 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our study suggests that if four‐level stage is required for research purposes, then there would be a misclassification of stage of at least 20% using pathology records or GPs. The results for pathology extractions are similar to those reported elsewhere for colorectal cancer 6 and other cancers 7–9,21 . Using simulation analyses, Yu and colleagues 6 suggested that this imprecision could make previously significant area‐specific variation non‐significant.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

“…However, clinical stage is not routinely collected by population‐based cancer registries in Australia or overseas. Some population‐based registries, such as the SEER program, 4 EUROCARE 5 and the New South Wales cancer registry in Australia, 6 report a summary measure of stage that is based on information from pathology reports or medical records, however error rates between 12 and 35% for prostate, lung and breast cancers have been reported 7–10 …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reliability of collecting colorectal cancer stage information from pathology reports and general practitioners in Queensland

Krnjacki

Baade

Lynch

et al. 2008

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To investigate the reliability of collecting colorectal stage information from pathology reports and general practitioners in Queensland, Australia. Methods: A longitudinal study of colorectal cancer survivors conducted in 2003 and 2004 (n=1966, response rate=57%) obtained stage information from clinical specialists (n=1334), general practitioners (GP) (n=1417) and by extracting stage from pathology reports (n=1484). Reliability of stage information was determined by comparing stage from GPs and pathology reports with that reported by the clinical specialists, using a weighted kappa. Results: GPs and pathology reports each had a similar level of agreement with clinical specialists, with kappa scores of 0.77 (0.75‐0.80) (n=1042) and 0.78 (0.75‐0.81) (n=1152), respectively. Results were similar when restricting to records staged by all three methods (n=847). GPs had similar levels of agreement with clinical specialists within each stage, although pathology reports tended to under‐stage patients in Stage D (0.37). Collapsing stage into two categories (A or B, C or D) increased the reliability estimates from the pathology reports to 0.91 (0.88‐0.93), but there was little change in GP estimates 0.79 (0.75‐0.83). Conclusions: Extractions from pathology reports are a valid source of broad stage information for colorectal cancer. Implications: In the absence of clinical stage data, access to pathology records by population‐based cancer registries enables a more accurate assessment of survival inequalities in colorectal cancer survival.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability of collecting colorectal cancer stage information from pathology reports and general practitioners in Queensland

Krnjacki

Baade

Lynch

et al. 2008

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies of the stage recorded by population‐based cancer registries for specific cancer types have usually compared the registry stage with more accurate staging information from other sources such as medical records. Such studies report error rates of 12–35% for individual stage categories in cancers of the prostate, lung and breast in the USA and Europe 3, 4, 5, 6…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Misclassification of colorectal cancer stage and area variation in survival

O’Connell

Gibberd

et al. 2007

Intl Journal of Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We previously investigated the impact of health area of residence on colon and rectal cancer survival by estimating area-specific relative excess risk of death (RER), stratified by stage at diagnosis. The aims of this study were to quantify errors in colorectal cancer stage obtained from an Australian population-based cancer registry and assess the potential impact of errors in stage on these estimates. For a subset of cases, we compared the cancer registry stage with that from a survey of treating surgeons. We then randomly reallocated all cases to a simulated "corrected" stage according to the estimated misclassification probabilities and repeated the analysis of area variation stratified by simulated stage 1,000 times. We found 70% agreement between the Registry and Survey stage. This reallocation of the Registry cases by stage resulted in substantial variation in area-specific RERs across the simulated samples. Area variation in survival for localized colon and localized rectal cancer, which were previously statistically significant when classified using Registry stage, appeared no longer to be so. Misclassification of cancer registry stage can have an important impact on estimates of spatial variation in stage-specific colon and rectal cancer survival. If population-based cancer registry data are to be effectively used in evaluating and improving cancer care, the quality of the stage data may need to be improved.

show abstract

“…. Age (years) Figure 3. Age distribution of (A) fatal cases of gastroenteritis (36) and (B) patients with renal cell cancer (37) in The Netherlands. (40).…”

Section: Risk Characterizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Balancing the risks and benefits of drinking water disinfection: disability adjusted life-years on the scale.

Havelaar

Hollander

Teunis

et al. 2000

Environ Health Perspect

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To evaluate the applicability of disability adjusted life-years (DALYs) as a measure to compare positive and negative health effects of drinking water disinfection, we conducted a case study involving a hypothetical drinking water supply from surface water. This drinking water supply is typical in The Netherlands. We compared the reduction of the risk of infection with Cryptosporidium parvum by ozonation of water to the concomitant increase in risk of renal cell cancer arising from the production of bromate. We applied clinical, epidemiologic, and toxicologic data on morbidity and mortality to calculate the net health benefit in DALYs. We estimated the median risk of infection with C parvum as 10-3/person-year. Ozonation reduces the median risk in the baseline approximately 7-fold, but bromate is produced in a concentration above current guideline levels. However, the health benefits of preventing gastroenteritis in the general population and premature death in patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome outweigh health losses by premature death from renal cell cancer by a factor of > 10. The net benefit is approximately 1 DALY/million person-years. The application of DALYs in principle allows us to more explicitly compare the public health risks and benefits of different management options. In practice, the application of DALYs may be hampered by the substantial degree of uncertainty, as is typical for risk assessment. Key work: bromate, Cryptosporidium parvum, disinfection, drinkmg water, ozone, quality of life, risk assessment. Environ Health Perspect 108: 315-321 (2000).[Online 21 February 2000] htp:/lle/hpnetl.nie,hs.nih.gov/docs/2OOO/108p315-321havelaar/abstract.htmIThe microbiologic safety of drinking water is of paramount importance to public health (1). Source protection is generally accepted as the primary strategy to obtain microbiologically safe drinking water. However, many sources (surface waters in particular) are highly polluted and need extensive treatment before distribution to the consumer. Chemical disinfection is prominent in these treatment schemes. Highly oxidizing chemicals such as chlorine and ozone kill a variety of pathogenic microorganisms during treatment, and chlorine is applied in many countries as an additional safeguard in the distribution system. An important drawback of the use of these chemicals is the generation of disinfection by-products, which have suspected adverse effects on human health. This situation calls for a formal quantitative framework to compare the positive and negative health effects of drinking water disinfection and to assist in the design and operation of treatment plants (2).Microbiologic risks are expressed as the annual individual probability of infection for a given consumption of drinking water. Chemical risks related to genotoxic carcinogens are usually associated with an increase in cancer incidence attributable to a lifetime exposure. The public health impact of these disease end points is very different and cannot be compared directly. Hen...

show abstract

Validity of the stage of lung cancer in records of the Maastricht cancer registry, The Netherlands

Cited by 9 publications

References 2 publications

Reliability of collecting colorectal cancer stage information from pathology reports and general practitioners in Queensland

Reliability of collecting colorectal cancer stage information from pathology reports and general practitioners in Queensland

Misclassification of colorectal cancer stage and area variation in survival

Balancing the risks and benefits of drinking water disinfection: disability adjusted life-years on the scale.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About