OBJECTIVE: To examine differences in the relative survival and excess death rates of patients with colorectal cancer in Norway, Sweden and England. METHODS: All individuals diagnosed with colorectal cancer (ICD10 (International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision) C18-C20) between 1996 and 2004 in England, Norway and Sweden were included in this population-based study of patients with colorectal cancer. The main outcome measures were 5-year cumulative relative period of survival and excess death rates stratified by age and period of follow-up. RESULTS: The survival of English patients with colorectal cancer was significantly lower than was observed in both Norway and Sweden. Five-year age-standardised colon cancer relative survival was 51.1% (95% CI 50.1% to 52.0%) in England compared with 57.9% (95% CI 55.2% to 60.5%) in Norway and 59.9% (95% CI 57.7% to 62.0%) in Sweden. Five-year rectal cancer survival was 52.3% (95% CI 51.1% to 53.5%) in England compared with 60.7% (95% CI 57.0% to 64.2%) and 59.8% (95% CI 56.9% to 62.6%) in Norway and Sweden, respectively. The lower survival for colon cancer in England was primarily due to a high number of excess deaths among older patients in the first 3 months after diagnosis. In patients with rectal cancer, excess deaths remained elevated until 2 years of follow-up. If the lower excess death rate in Norway applied in the English population, then 890 (13.6%) and 654 (16.8%) of the excess deaths in the colon and rectal cancer populations, respectively, could have been prevented at 5 years follow-up. Most of these avoidable deaths occurred shortly after diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: There was significant variation in survival between the countries, with the English population experiencing a poorer outcome, primarily due to a relatively higher number of excess deaths in older patients in the short term after diagnosis. It seems likely, therefore, that in England a greater proportion of the population present with more rapidly fatal disease (especially in the older age groups) than in Norway or Sweden.
OBJECTIVE: To examine differences in the relative survival and excess death rates of patients with colorectal cancer in Norway, Sweden and England. METHODS: All individuals diagnosed with colorectal cancer (ICD10 (International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision) C18-C20) between 1996 and 2004 in England, Norway and Sweden were included in this population-based study of patients with colorectal cancer. The main outcome measures were 5-year cumulative relative period of survival and excess death rates stratified by age and period of follow-up. RESULTS: The survival of English patients with colorectal cancer was significantly lower than was observed in both Norway and Sweden. Five-year age-standardised colon cancer relative survival was 51.1% (95% CI 50.1% to 52.0%) in England compared with 57.9% (95% CI 55.2% to 60.5%) in Norway and 59.9% (95% CI 57.7% to 62.0%) in Sweden. Five-year rectal cancer survival was 52.3% (95% CI 51.1% to 53.5%) in England compared with 60.7% (95% CI 57.0% to 64.2%) and 59.8% (95% CI 56.9% to 62.6%) in Norway and Sweden, respectively. The lower survival for colon cancer in England was primarily due to a high number of excess deaths among older patients in the first 3 months after diagnosis. In patients with rectal cancer, excess deaths remained elevated until 2 years of follow-up. If the lower excess death rate in Norway applied in the English population, then 890 (13.6%) and 654 (16.8%) of the excess deaths in the colon and rectal cancer populations, respectively, could have been prevented at 5 years follow-up. Most of these avoidable deaths occurred shortly after diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: There was significant variation in survival between the countries, with the English population experiencing a poorer outcome, primarily due to a relatively higher number of excess deaths in older patients in the short term after diagnosis. It seems likely, therefore, that in England a greater proportion of the population present with more rapidly fatal disease (especially in the older age groups) than in Norway or Sweden.
Authors: Nina Ommundsen; Torgeir B Wyller; Arild Nesbakken; Marit S Jordhøy; Arne Bakka; Eva Skovlund; Siri Rostoft Journal: Oncologist Date: 2014-10-29
Authors: Richard F A Logan; Julietta Patnick; Claire Nickerson; Lynn Coleman; Matt D Rutter; Christian von Wagner Journal: Gut Date: 2011-12-07 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: O Majek; A Gondos; L Jansen; K Emrich; B Holleczek; A Katalinic; A Nennecke; A Eberle; H Brenner Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2012-05-03 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Helen G Coleman; Maurice B Loughrey; Liam J Murray; Brian T Johnston; Anna T Gavin; Martha J Shrubsole; Shivaram K Bhat; Patrick B Allen; Vivienne McConnell; Marie M Cantwell Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2015-06-16 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: A Downing; A Aravani; U Macleod; S Oliver; P J Finan; J D Thomas; P Quirke; J R Wilkinson; E J A Morris Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2013-01-03 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: E J A Morris; L E Whitehouse; T Farrell; C Nickerson; J D Thomas; P Quirke; M D Rutter; C Rees; P J Finan; J R Wilkinson; J Patnick Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2012-07-31 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: O Dejardin; B Rachet; E Morris; V Bouvier; V Jooste; R Haynes; E G Coombes; D Forman; A P Jones; A M Bouvier; G Launoy Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2013-02-07 Impact factor: 7.640