BACKGROUND: With the increasing number and diversity of cancer survivors, studies of survivors' physical, emotional, and social health and well being are of growing importance. Population-based cancer registries, which collect data on incident cases, can play an important role in quality-of-life (QoL) studies. In this review, the authors provide an overview of QoL studies that have used cancer registry data in this emerging area of research. METHODS: Publication databases were searched for relevant peer-reviewed original articles published between 2001 and mid-2011. Inclusion criteria were articles published in English that used cancer registries as the sampling frame and/or that used registry data in analyses with QoL data. All included articles were assessed on the quality of information provided, cancer registry procedures, and study design. RESULTS: In total, 173 articles from 13 countries were reviewed, and a large proportion were from the United States (n = 72) and Europe (n = 70). Fourteen different malignancies were studied, and the most frequent were breast cancer. Most studies focused on adult survivors, and only 4 focused on the elderly (aged >70 years). Of the reviewed articles, 110 (64%) provided a good amount of information on the cancer registry. Information less frequently reported included mainly follow-up of vital status and characteristics of respondents/nonrespondents. CONCLUSIONS: QoL studies increasingly use population-based registries, which provide important clinical variables and an excellent sampling frame for identifying subgroups. Until now, most studies have tended to focus on more prevalent cancers, and surprisingly few studies have focused on QoL of elderly survivors, who remain understudied in clinical trials.
BACKGROUND: With the increasing number and diversity of cancer survivors, studies of survivors' physical, emotional, and social health and well being are of growing importance. Population-based cancer registries, which collect data on incident cases, can play an important role in quality-of-life (QoL) studies. In this review, the authors provide an overview of QoL studies that have used cancer registry data in this emerging area of research. METHODS: Publication databases were searched for relevant peer-reviewed original articles published between 2001 and mid-2011. Inclusion criteria were articles published in English that used cancer registries as the sampling frame and/or that used registry data in analyses with QoL data. All included articles were assessed on the quality of information provided, cancer registry procedures, and study design. RESULTS: In total, 173 articles from 13 countries were reviewed, and a large proportion were from the United States (n = 72) and Europe (n = 70). Fourteen different malignancies were studied, and the most frequent were breast cancer. Most studies focused on adult survivors, and only 4 focused on the elderly (aged >70 years). Of the reviewed articles, 110 (64%) provided a good amount of information on the cancer registry. Information less frequently reported included mainly follow-up of vital status and characteristics of respondents/nonrespondents. CONCLUSIONS: QoL studies increasingly use population-based registries, which provide important clinical variables and an excellent sampling frame for identifying subgroups. Until now, most studies have tended to focus on more prevalent cancers, and surprisingly few studies have focused on QoL of elderly survivors, who remain understudied in clinical trials.
Authors: Devesh Oberoi; Victoria M White; John F Seymour; H Miles Prince; Simon Harrison; Michael Jefford; Ingrid Winship; David Hill; Damien Bolton; Anne Kay; Jeremy Millar; Nicole Wong Doo; Graham Giles Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-06-30 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: T G Smith; M E Dunn; K Y Levin; S P Tsakraklides; S A Mitchell; L V van de Poll-Franse; K C Ward; C L Wiggins; X C Wu; M Hurlbert; N K Aaronson Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2019-08-09 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Nora K Horick; Adoma Manful; Jan Lowery; Susan Domchek; Patricia Moorman; Constance Griffin; Kala Visvanathan; Claudine Isaacs; Anita Y Kinney; Dianne M Finkelstein Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2016-10-19 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: N Corsini; J Fish; I Ramsey; G Sharplin; I Flight; R Damarell; B Wiggins; C Wilson; D Roder; M Eckert Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2017-04-03 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Manfred E Beutel; Sabine Fischbeck; Harald Binder; Maria Blettner; Elmar Brähler; Katharina Emrich; Peter Friedrich-Mai; Barbara H Imruck; Veronika Weyer; Sylke R Zeissig Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-01-23 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Kate Breckenridge; Hillary L Bekker; Elizabeth Gibbons; Sabine N van der Veer; Denise Abbott; Serge Briançon; Ron Cullen; Liliana Garneata; Kitty J Jager; Kjersti Lønning; Wendy Metcalfe; Rachael L Morton; Fliss E M Murtagh; Karl Prutz; Susan Robertson; Ivan Rychlik; Steffan Schon; Linda Sharp; Elodie Speyer; Francesca Tentori; Fergus J Caskey Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2015-05-16 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: F J Drummond; H Kinnear; C Donnelly; E O'Leary; K O'Brien; R M Burns; A Gavin; L Sharp Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2015-04-17 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Laura Ashley; Helen Jones; James Thomas; Alex Newsham; Amy Downing; Eva Morris; Julia Brown; Galina Velikova; David Forman; Penny Wright Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2013-10-25 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Neil K Aaronson; Vittorio Mattioli; Ollie Minton; Joachim Weis; Christoffer Johansen; Susanne O Dalton; Irma M Verdonck-de Leeuw; Kevin D Stein; Catherine M Alfano; Anja Mehnert; Angela de Boer; Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse Journal: EJC Suppl Date: 2014-05-29