How representative are the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) Program cancer data of the United States?

2004 ◽  
Vol 15 (10) ◽  
pp. 1027-1034 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ray M. Merrill ◽  
Kirk A. Dearden
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Seer Program ◽  
Cancer Data ◽  
End Results

Quality Control of Data in a Large-Scale Cancer Register Program

1966 ◽  
Vol 05 (02) ◽  
pp. 67-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. I. Lourie ◽  
W. Haenszeland
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Quality Control ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
The United States ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Related Data ◽  
Cancer Register ◽  
Independent Review ◽  
End Results

Quality control of data collected in the United States by the Cancer End Results Program utilizing punchcards prepared by participating registries in accordance with a Uniform Punchcard Code is discussed. Existing arrangements decentralize responsibility for editing and related data processing to the local registries with centralization of tabulating and statistical services in the End Results Section, National Cancer Institute. The most recent deck of punchcards represented over 600,000 cancer patients; approximately 50,000 newly diagnosed cases are added annually.Mechanical editing and inspection of punchcards and field audits are the principal tools for quality control. Mechanical editing of the punchcards includes testing for blank entries and detection of in-admissable or inconsistent codes. Highly improbable codes are subjected to special scrutiny. Field audits include the drawing of a 1-10 percent random sample of punchcards submitted by a registry; the charts are .then reabstracted and recoded by a NCI staff member and differences between the punchcard and the results of independent review are noted.

Disparities in Patterns of Conventional Versus Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy in the Treatment of Spine Metastasis in the United States

2020 ◽  
pp. 082585972098220
Author(s):  
Ellen Kim ◽  
Shearwood McClelland ◽  
Jerry J. Jaboin ◽  
Albert Attia
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Private Insurance ◽  
Spinal Metastases ◽  
The United States ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
Beam Radiation ◽  
Cancer Data ◽  
Spine Metastases ◽  
Population Type

Introduction: The improved survival of patients even with metastatic cancer has led to an increase in the incidence of spine metastases, suggesting the need for a more aggressive palliative treatment than conventional external beam radiation therapy (cEBRT). Consequently, spinal stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has increased in popularity over the past decade. However, there has been no comparison of patterns of usage of cEBRT versus SBRT in the treatment of spinal metastases in the US. Methods: The National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) from 2004-2013 was used for analysis. cEBRT was defined as 30 Gy in 10 fractions, 20 Gy in 5 fractions, or 8 Gy in 1 fraction. SBRT was defined as 25-32 Gy infive5 fractions, 24-32 Gy in 4 fractions, 20-32 Gy in three fractions, 14-32 Gy in 2 fractions, or 14-24 Gy in 1 fraction. Single and multivariable associations between patient demographic and cancer characteristics and type of radiation were performed. Results: From 2004-2013, 23,181 patients with spinal metastases in the United States received cEBRT, while 1,030 received SBRT as part of their first course of treatment. Most patients (88%) received 10 fractions of radiation. Multivariable analysis suggested that non-Medicare or private insurance (adjusted OR 0.4-0.7), African-American race (adjusted OR = 0.8, 95%CI = 0.7-1.0), age 65+ (adjusted OR = 0.8), living in a region with lower population (adjusted OR 0.7), earlier year of diagnosis (OR = 0.9), and receiving treatment in a non-academic/research facility (adjusted OR 0.6) were associated with cEBRT. After controlling for other variables, regional education level was no longer significantly associated with cEBRT. Conclusions: Most patients with spine metastases were treated with cEBRT, usually with 10 fractions. Receipt of SBRT was significantly associated with race, insurance, geography, population, type of treatment facility, and year of diagnosis, even after controlling for other factors. These findings raise questions about disparities in access to and delivery of care that deserve further investigation.

Poor Survival for US Pacific Islander Cancer Patients: Evidence From the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Database: 1991 to 2004

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (36) ◽  
pp. 5738-5741 ◽  
Author(s):  
William B. Goggins ◽  
Grace K.C. Wong
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
African Americans ◽  
Native Americans ◽  
Cancer Survival ◽  
The United States ◽  
Native Hawaiians ◽  
Targeted Interventions ◽  
Female Breast ◽  
Cause Specific Survival ◽  
End Results

Purpose Although racial and ethnic differences in cancer survival in the United States have been studied extensively, little is known about cancer survival in US Pacific Islanders (PIs), a fast-growing and economically disadvantaged minority group. Methods Using data from the US National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries, we compared cause-specific and all-cause survival for female breast, prostate, lung, colorectal, stomach and liver cancer for Native Hawaiians, Samoans, other PIs (including Tongans, Guamanians, and others), African Americans, and Native Americans with non-Hispanic whites using Cox proportional hazards models. Separate models were fitted adjusting for demographic factors only and demographic and disease severity variables. Results Among all groups, Samoans were the most likely to present with advanced disease and had the worst cause-specific survival for all sites considered. Samoans had particularly poor results (adjusted for demographic variables only) for female breast (relative risk [RR] = 3.05; 95% CI, 2.31 to 4.02), colorectal (RR = 1.82; 95% CI, 1.37 to 2.41) and prostate (RR = 4.82; 95% CI, 3.38 to 6.88) cancers. Native Hawaiians and other PIs also had significantly worse cause-specific survival than did non-Hispanic whites for most sites, but generally had better survival than African Americans or Native Americans. Conclusion Much of the survival disadvantage for PI groups appears to be a result of late diagnosis, and thus targeted interventions have much potential to reduce cancer mortality in this group. More research is needed to find explanations for the particularly poor cancer survival for Samoans in the United States.

Contemporary Trends and End-Results of National Institute of Health Grant Funding to Departments of Urology in the United States: A 10-year Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nizar Hakam ◽  
Michael Sadighian ◽  
Behnam Nabavizadeh ◽  
Natalie Rios ◽  
Gregory Amend ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Grant Funding ◽  
End Results

Outcome of Myelodysplastic Syndromes Over Time in the United States: A National Cancer Data Base Study From 2004-2013

2019 ◽  
Vol 94 (8) ◽  
pp. 1467-1474 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aref Al-Kali ◽  
Darci Zblewski ◽  
James M. Foran ◽  
Mrinal S. Patnaik ◽  
Beth R. Larrabee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Data Base ◽  
Myelodysplastic Syndromes ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Cancer Data Base ◽  
Cancer Data ◽  
Base Study ◽  
Over Time

Current and Future Utilization of Services From Medical Oncologists

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (19) ◽  
pp. 3242-3247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joan L. Warren ◽  
Angela B. Mariotto ◽  
Angela Meekins ◽  
Marie Topor ◽  
Martin L. Brown
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Population Projections ◽  
Cancer Site ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Medical Oncologists ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Initial Care ◽  
Number Of Visits ◽  
End Results

Purpose There is limited information on the current use of oncologists and projections of future need. This analysis assesses current utilization patterns and projects the number of people with cancer and their use of oncologists’ services through 2020. Methods Data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries and Medicare physician claims were used to estimate oncologists’ services from 1998 to 2003. We estimated the portion of patients with cancer who saw an oncologist, the mean number of visits, and the clinical setting where care was provided. Care was divided into initial, continuing, and last-year-of-life phases. Projections for future number of patients with cancer and visits were calculated by applying incidence and prevalence rates derived from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data to census population projections through 2020. Results The percentage of patients who saw an oncologist was 47% during the initial-care phase, 36% during the continuing-care phase, and 70% in the last year of life. The number of visits varied by age, sex, cancer site, and phase. The total number of cancer patients in the United States is projected to increase 55%, from 11.8 million in 2005 to 18.2 million in 2020. Total oncology visits are projected to increase from 38 million in 2005 to 57 million in 2020. Conclusion Utilization of oncologists’ services will increase appreciably between 2005 and 2020; this will be driven predominantly by an increase in survivors of cancer and by the aging of the population. The United States may face an acute shortage of medical oncologists if efforts are not taken to meet this growing need.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document