Evaluating Early Case Capture of Pediatric Cancers in Seven Central Cancer Registries in the United States, 2013.

OBJECTIVE: Cancer is the second-leading cause of death in children, but incidence data are not available until two years after diagnosis, thereby delaying data dissemination and research. An early case capture (ECC) surveillance program was piloted in seven state cancer registries to register pediatric cancer cases within 30 days of diagnosis. We sought to determine the quality of ECC data and understand pilot implementation.
METHODS: We used quantitative and qualitative methods to evaluate ECC. We assessed data quality by comparing demographic and clinical characteristics from the initial ECC submission to a resubmission of ECC pilot data and to the most recent year of routinely collected cancer data for each state individually and in aggregate. We conducted telephone focus groups with registry staff to determine ECC practices and difficulties in August and September 2013. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded to identify themes.
RESULTS: Comparing ECC initial submissions with submissions for all states, ECC data were nationally representative for age (9.7 vs. 9.9 years) and sex (673 of 1,324 [50.9%] vs. 42,609 of 80,547 [52.9%] male cases), but not for primary site (472 of 1,324 [35.7%] vs. 27,547 of 80,547 [34.2%] leukemia/lymphoma cases), behavior (1,219 of 1,324 [92.1%] vs. 71,525 of 80,547 [88.8%] malignant cases), race/ethnicity (781 of 1,324 [59.0%] vs. 64,518 of 80,547 [80.1%] white cases), or diagnostic confirmation (1,233 of 1,324 [93.2%] vs. 73,217 of 80,547 [90.9%] microscopically confirmed cases). When comparing initial ECC data with resubmission data, differences were seen in race/ethnicity (808 of 1,324 [61.1%] vs. 1,425 of 1,921 [74.2%] white cases), primary site (475 of 1,324 [35.9%] vs. 670 of 1,921 [34.9%] leukemia/lymphoma cases), and behavior (1,215 of 1,324 [91.8%] vs. 1,717 of 1,921 [89.4%] malignant cases). Common themes from focus group analysis included implementation challenges and facilitators, benefits of ECC, and utility of ECC data.
CONCLUSIONS: ECC provided data rapidly and reflected national data overall with differences in several data elements. ECC also expanded cancer reporting infrastructure and increased data completeness and timeliness. Although challenges related to timeliness and increased work burden remain, indications suggest that researchers may reliably use these data for pediatric cancer studies.