Original paper
Substantial variation in therapy for colorectal cancer across Europe: EUROCARE analysis of cancer registry data for 1987

https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-8049(95)00642-7Get rights and content

Abstract

To provide a quantitative description of the treatments applied to malignant colorectal cancer across Europe, we analysed all cases (11 333) of colorectal cancer registered in 1987 by 15 Cancer Registries in eight European countries. In a third of cancer registries, therapy was known for all cases, in the others 1–15% of registrations lacked treatment information. Eighty per cent of all patients received surgical resection, ranging from 58% (Estonia) to 92% (Tarn). The proportion of resections decreased with advancing age (73%–85 for colon cancer; 70%–85 for rectal cancer for <65 years to > 74 years, respectively). Only 4% of colon cancer patients received adjuvant or palliative chemotherapy, range 1-12%. Sixteen per cent of rectal cancer patients received radiotherapy with great inter-registry variability (1–43%). Since the proportion of surgically resected patients correlated positively with the 5-year relative survival probability reported by the recently published EUROCARE study, this may be part of the explanation for the major differences in survival for these cancers among different European populations. The most likely determinant of this correlation is stage at diagnosis, but, quality of, and access to surgery, as well as access to endoscopy, may differ among countries and registry areas, and these may also contribute to inter-country survival differences.

References (9)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (40)

  • Improving cancer control in the European Union: Conclusions from the Lisbon round-table under the Portuguese EU Presidency, 2007

    2008, European Journal of Cancer
    Citation Excerpt :

    Survival patterns and trends by age, geography, socio-economic status (etc.) can provide useful indicators of the overall performance of a nation’s health system. Detection of survival that is too low should stimulate more in-depth studies to determine whether this is due to late diagnosis or to inadequate availability of (or poor access to) effective treatment.26–28 These activities are sufficient to justify the establishment and operation of a cancer registry or network of registries in any country.

  • Raltitrexed in the treatment of elderly patients with advanced colorectal cancer: An active and low toxicity regimen

    2002, European Journal of Cancer
    Citation Excerpt :

    In spite of the magnitude of the problem, the treatment of colorectal cancer in elderly patients remains a challenge. Several studies have shown that the proportion of patients with this tumour who are operated upon decreases with age (85% of patients under 65 years versus 70% of older patients) [4]. Furthermore, chemotherapy treatment is also used less frequently in the elderly compared with other age groups, both in the adjuvant [5] and the advanced settings [6].

  • Treatment outcome studies: Pitfalls in current methods and practice

    2002, European Journal of Cancer
    Citation Excerpt :

    If a registry does not differentiate these cases from invasive carcinoma, a too optimistic estimation of outcome will be obtained for the invasive carcinoma patients. In addition, the staging information routinely available to registries may be incomplete and insufficiently standardised, making more detailed comparisons not always possible [46]. The more accurately patients are staged, the more likely they are to be classified as inoperable or metastatic and therefore, stage by stage, outcome will improve (Will Rogers or stage-migration phenomenon) [30].

View all citing articles on Scopus

The EUROCARE working group for this study is: Estonia: T. Aareleid (Estonian Cancer Registry). Finland: T. Hakulinen (Finnish Cancer Registry). France: J. Faivre (Côte d'Or Digestive Cancer Registry), P. Grosclaude (Tarn Cancer Registry), D. Pottier (Calvados Digestive System Cancer Registry), N. Raverdy (Somme Cancer Registry), S. Schraub (Doubs Cancer Registry). Germany: H. Ziegler (Saarland Cancer Registry). Italy: F. Berrino (project leader), G. Gatta, M. Sant (Lombardy Cancer Registry). The Netherlands: J.W.W. Coebergh (Eindhoven Cancer Registry IKZ), R.A.M. Damhuis (Rotterdam Cancer Registry IKK). Poland: J. Pawlega (Cracow Cancer Registry). Switzerland: F. Comba (Genève Cancer Registry), J. Torhorst (Basel Cancer Registry). United Kingdom: J. Bell (Thames Cancer Registry), J. Youngson (Mersey Cancer Registry).

View full text