Annals of Oncology Advance Access originally published online on August 13, 2007
Annals of Oncology 2007 18(9):1554-1560; doi:10.1093/annonc/mdm194
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2007 European Society for Medical Oncology
Timely disclosure of progress in childhood cancer survival by ‘period’ analysis in the Automated Childhood Cancer Information System
1 Data Analysis and Interpretation Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
2 Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
3 Clinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
4 Department of Preventive and Predictive Medicine, Epidemiology Unit, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori, Milano, Italy
* Correspondence to: Dr Eva Steliarova-Foucher, Data Analysis and Interpretation Group, 150 cours Albert Thomas, F-69372 Lyon Cedex 08, France. Tel: +33 (0)4 72 73 84 66; Fax: +33 (0)4 72 73 86 50; E-mail: steliarova{at}iarc.fr
Background: A few years ago, a new method of survival analysis, denoted ‘period’ analysis, was introduced to provide more up-to-date survival estimates of cancer patients.
Patients and methods: We evaluated the period survival method using the large database of the Automated Childhood Cancer Information System (ACCIS). Our evaluation is based on data from 35 191 children diagnosed with cancer in 13 European countries between 1975 and 1989 and followed for vital status until around 1999.
Results: Using the follow-up data available in 1989, 10-year survival for all children with cancer calculated by the period method for the 1985–89 period was 58%, while it was 43% when calculated by traditional ‘cohort’ life-table analysis (based on children diagnosed in 1975–79). The period method provided a better estimate of the true 10-year survival of 62%, observed 10 years later in the cohort of patients diagnosed in 1985–89. Similar results were observed for each of the common groups of childhood cancer.
Conclusion: Period analysis is especially useful for monitoring childhood cancer survival, because at a given point in time it provides more timely estimates of long-term survival expectations than the cohort life-table method. Using the ACCIS database, up-to-date estimates of period survival for childhood cancer are derived in subsequent papers in this journal.
Key words: cancer registries, childhood cancer, population-based, prognosis, survival
Received for publication November 17, 2006. Revision received April 3, 2007. Accepted for publication April 11, 2007.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  H. Brenner, E. Steliarova-Foucher, and V. Arndt Up-to-date monitoring of childhood cancer long-term survival in Europe: methodology and application to all forms of cancer combined Ann. Onc., September 1, 2007; 18(9): 1561 - 1568. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H Brenner, J. Coebergh, D. Parkin, I Izarzugaza, J Clavel, V Arndt, and E Steliarova-Foucher Up-to-date monitoring of childhood cancer long-term survival in Europe: leukaemias and lymphomas Ann. Onc., September 1, 2007; 18(9): 1569 - 1577. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|