A national quality improvement effort: Cancer registry data

212 Background: The ability to link cancer registry data to clinical and administrative data sets for quality improvement has long been desired. We sought to integrate registry data into a central data warehouse in an effort to make available for the first time consistent and reliable diagnosis and staging data to a broad hospital user group. Methods: After a short period of data analysis, the tables for Cancer Registry data (Oracle) were modeled. The source data (SQL Server) was conformed and integrated using an ETL tool (Informatica). All ETL QA work was performed with SQL queries. Cancer registry data was integrated into reporting architecture (Microstrategy) to facilitate design of standardized and ad hoc reports. Results: 140 distinct fields on demographics, staging (clinical, pathological, collaborative), site specific categories, diagnosis, and treatment were integrated into the Dana-Farber Analytics Reporting Tool (DART) for historic Cancer Registry data beginning with January 2010 newly diagnosed cancers. All Cancer Registry data and patient files (new and old) are updated in DART on a monthly basis. Conclusions: Individuals across the hospital now have the ability to link clinical and administrative data from our EMR, institutional QI data from varied systems, and pharmacy data to Cancer Registry data in the DART tool. One example of the integration of these multiple data sets is the linkage of staging data from the Cancer Registry data set and time to referral data from the administrative data set by patient MRN. As DFCI aims to cohort its patients based on their primary diagnosis for quality improvement and other internal reporting needs, the ability to analyze patients in this way becomes critical. This project sets an example for other centers as they integrate Cancer Registry data into user friendly business intelligence systems to help meet federal reporting mandates and aid internal improvement work. [Table: see text]

Download Full-text

German oncology certification system for colorectal cancer – relative survival rates of a single certified centre vs. national and international registry data

Innovative Surgical Sciences ◽

10.1515/iss-2021-0002 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 0 (0) ◽

Author(s):

Maximilian Richter ◽

Lena Sonnow ◽

Amir Mehdizadeh-Shrifi ◽

Axel Richter ◽

Rainer Koch ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Colorectal Cancer ◽

Rectal Cancer ◽

International Comparison ◽

Cancer Registry ◽

Survival Data ◽

Survival Rates ◽

Relative Survival ◽

Registry Data ◽

Cancer Registry Data ◽

Colon And Rectal Cancer

Abstract Objectives To evaluate how the certification of specialised Oncology Centres in Germany affects the relative survival of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) by means of national and international comparison. Methods Between 2007 and 2013, 675 patients with colorectal cancer, treated at the Hildesheim Hospital, an academic teaching hospital of the Hannover Medical School (MHH), were included. A follow-up of the entire patient group was performed until 2014. To obtain international data, a SEER-database search was done. The relative survival of 148,957 patients was compared to our data after 12, 36 and 60 months. For national survival data, we compared our rates with 41,988 patients of the Munich Cancer Registry (MCR). Results Relative survival at our institution tends to be higher in advanced tumour stages compared to national and international cancer registry data. Nationally we found only little variation in survival rates for low stages CRC (UICC I and II), colon, and rectal cancer. There were notable variations regarding relative survival rates for advanced CRC tumour stages (UICC IV). These variations were even more distinct for rectal cancer after 12, 36 and 60 months (Hildesheim Hospital: 89.9, 40.3, 30.1%; Munich Cancer Registry (MCR): 65.4, 28.7, 16.6%). The international comparison of CRC showed significantly higher relative survival rates for patients with advanced tumour stages after 12 months at our institution (77 vs. 54.9% for UICC IV; raw p<0.001). Conclusions Our findings suggest that patients with advanced tumour stages of CRC and especially rectal cancer benefit most from a multidisciplinary and guidelines-oriented treatment at Certified Oncology Centres. For a better evaluation of cancer treatment and improved national and international comparison, the creation of a centralised national cancer registry is necessary.

Download Full-text