L H Pobereskin1, J B Chadduck. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Derriford Hospital, Plymouth PL6 8DH, UK. louis.pobereskin@phnt.swest.nhs.uk
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To define the incidence of brain tumours in Devon and Cornwall and to discover which case finding methods are the most fruitful. To examine what happens to patients after the diagnosis of a brain tumour. METHODS: The primary method of case ascertainment was a review of all CT with contrast and MRI of the head performed on the population of Devon and Cornwall between 1 April 1992 and 31 March 1997. Secondary sources included registrations with the South and West Cancer Intelligence Unit and a search for all patients either admitted to hospital with a brain tumour or operated on for a brain tumour during the same period. RESULTS: 16,923 scans were reviewed of which 8774 (52%) were normal. The scan review found 2483 incident intracranial tumours, of which 861 were metastases. Secondary sources of case ascertainment disclosed 46 further cases. Cases were missed by the scan review mainly for technical reasons and only three patients were found who were diagnosed by non-imaging methods. The incidence of primary intracranial tumours standardised to the population of England and Wales was higher than any previously reported (21.04 (17.18-25.62)/100,000 person-years). Overall, 21% of cases were not admitted to hospital. The categories least likely to be admitted were those with sellar and cranial nerve tumours. Those not admitted to hospital were significantly older than those who were. CONCLUSION: One fifth of patients are not admitted to hospital after the diagnosis of a brain tumour and incidence studies must use case finding methods which will capture these cases. An audit of imaging results provides almost complete case ascertainment. This study shows that the incidence of primary brain tumours is considerably higher than previously thought. Official figures from the cancer intelligence units significantly underestimate brain tumour incidence, especially for benign tumours.
OBJECTIVE: To define the incidence of brain tumours in Devon and Cornwall and to discover which case finding methods are the most fruitful. To examine what happens to patients after the diagnosis of a brain tumour. METHODS: The primary method of case ascertainment was a review of all CT with contrast and MRI of the head performed on the population of Devon and Cornwall between 1 April 1992 and 31 March 1997. Secondary sources included registrations with the South and West Cancer Intelligence Unit and a search for all patients either admitted to hospital with a brain tumour or operated on for a brain tumour during the same period. RESULTS: 16,923 scans were reviewed of which 8774 (52%) were normal. The scan review found 2483 incident intracranial tumours, of which 861 were metastases. Secondary sources of case ascertainment disclosed 46 further cases. Cases were missed by the scan review mainly for technical reasons and only three patients were found who were diagnosed by non-imaging methods. The incidence of primary intracranial tumours standardised to the population of England and Wales was higher than any previously reported (21.04 (17.18-25.62)/100,000 person-years). Overall, 21% of cases were not admitted to hospital. The categories least likely to be admitted were those with sellar and cranial nerve tumours. Those not admitted to hospital were significantly older than those who were. CONCLUSION: One fifth of patients are not admitted to hospital after the diagnosis of a brain tumour and incidence studies must use case finding methods which will capture these cases. An audit of imaging results provides almost complete case ascertainment. This study shows that the incidence of primary brain tumours is considerably higher than previously thought. Official figures from the cancer intelligence units significantly underestimate brain tumour incidence, especially for benign tumours.
Authors: F G Davis; N Malinski; W Haenszel; J Chang; J Flannery; S Gershman; R Dibble; D D Bigner Journal: Neuroepidemiology Date: 1996 Impact factor: 3.282
Authors: M R Tola; I Casetta; E Granieri; L Pinna; V Veronesi; R Tamarozzi; G Trapella; V C Monetti; E Paolino; V Govoni Journal: Acta Neurol Scand Date: 1994-11 Impact factor: 3.209
Authors: Paula de Robles; Kirsten M Fiest; Alexandra D Frolkis; Tamara Pringsheim; Callie Atta; Christine St Germaine-Smith; Lundy Day; Darren Lam; Nathalie Jette Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2014-10-13 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Sumia Ali; Gwendalyn D King; James F Curtin; Marianela Candolfi; Weidong Xiong; Chunyan Liu; Mariana Puntel; Queng Cheng; Jesus Prieto; Antoni Ribas; Jerzy Kupiec-Weglinski; Nico van Rooijen; Hans Lassmann; Pedro R Lowenstein; Maria G Castro Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2005-08-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Emily A J Sehmer; G J Hall; David C Greenberg; Catherine O'Hara; Sarah C Wallingford; Karen A Wright; Adèle C Green Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 12.300