An Audit of the Quality of Data in the National Cancer Registry, King Khaled University Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 2000: A Statistical Approach

2002 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 795-810
Author(s):  
Fayek El Khwsky ◽  
Nasser Al Hamdan ◽  
Dahish Agarem
2001 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-177
Author(s):  
Armando Rodríguez ◽  
Antonio Martín García

Cancer represents a health problem in Cuba, being the second cause of death in our country. The National Cancer Registry went created in 1964 as an instrument for the epidemiological study of this disease. In 1986, important changes were introduced in the National Cancer Registry regarding organization, process and validation of the information with the implementation of a new automation information system; in 1990 a PC version of the system was developed, and in 1992 the decentralization of the process of the information to all provinces of the country (fourteen provincial cancer registries) was accomplished. The data obtained through the registry shows as main sites of incidence: lung, skin and colon for both sexes; prostate and larynx for men, and breast and cervix uteri for women. As for mortality, lung and colon for both sexes, prostate for men and breast for women are the main sites. The improvement of the quality of the information of the registry has permitted the use of the data for carrying out investigations that help to plan and assess the National Cancer Control Program.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 5523
Author(s):  
WaleedA Altwaijri ◽  
ButhainaJ Yahya ◽  
LamaB Alasmari ◽  
RofanN Alsultan ◽  
ShoqM Alsuhaibani ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Humaid O. Al-Shamsi ◽  
◽  
Wael Shelpai ◽  

There is accumulating evidence that cancer incidence is increasing in younger adults. An earlier report indicating a higher incidence of breast and colorectal cancer in the younger population in the UAE. Open access data from the UAE National Cancer Registry (UAE-NCR) from the Ministry of Health and Prevention (MOHAP) for 2017 were extracted. Estimated data from the International. Agency for Research on Cancer ( IARC ) for Saudi Arabia, Canada, United Kingdom, China, and India for the year 2020 were also extracted and analyzed. When analyzing the 2017 UAE published data with restriction to the age group between 20-49 years of age for both UAE citizens and Non-UAE citizens, The data indicates that, the percentage of cancer incidence in this age group was 45.4% from total number of new malignant cancer cases in 2017, compared with 42.4% in 2015 and 42.7% in 2016. In females the percentage of cancer incidence in this age group was 51.3% from total number of new malignant cancer cases among females in 2017, and 38.3% among males in the same year, compared with 2016 data (49.5% among females and 34.9% among males) and 2015 data (49.9% among females and 34.1% among males), data indicates that, there is a clear trend for an increase in the incidence annual percent change in this age group by 3% (from 42.4% in 2015 to 45.4% in 2017). This increased persisted regardless of sex (males increased incidence by 4.2% from 34.1 % in 2015 to 38.3% in 2017 while in females increased incidence by 1.4% from 49.9% to 51.3%), which more females were diagnosed with cancer at the age of 20-49 than males between 2015 and 2017. When re-analyzing the 2017 data and restriction to the UAE citizens population only with the age group of 20-49, the percentage of cancer incidence remains high at 37.2% (42.4% among females and 28.9% among males). The percentage of cancer incidence in this age group between 20-49 years of age in Saudi Arabia is 39.49% which is comparable to the UAE, yet these incidence rates are extremely high compared with the following countries; Canada 8% (p < 0.005), USA 8.75% (p < 0.005) , United Kingdom 8.33% (p < 0.005), China 16.15% (p < 0.005) and India 26.75% (p < 0.005). The current data indicated an increase in the cancer incidence in the UAE in the age group of 20 – 49 years of age. The incidence is alarming and requires focused research to address potential risk factors. Cancer screening is a vital component in reducing cancer mortality, yet utility and cost-effectiveness has not been evaluated fully in the younger population. UAE-based research to evaluate screening due to the higher incidence may be required to be addressed. A more collaborative regional and global effort is a must to address this global alarming phenomenon.


Blood ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 104 (11) ◽  
pp. 3129-3129
Author(s):  
Karen Phekoo ◽  
Henrik Moller2 ◽  
Mike Richards ◽  
David Bevan3 ◽  
Don Gillett4 ◽  
...  

Abstract Haematological malignancies (HM) accounts for 7% of all cancers in England (DoH, 2003). However, concerns have been expressed regarding the quality of information from cancer registries (DoH, 2000, Haward, 2003) which sheds doubt on the validity of the data. Several initiatives have been undertaken to improve the quality of data (Cartwright et al., 1990, 1997, Clough et al., 1996, Taylor et al., 1998, Maynadie et al., 1996, Ong et al., 1997). These initiatives have been restricted in the range of diagnoses or have operated independently of national cancer registries (Phekoo et al., 2002). No studies have assessed the impact of incidence on survival rates. We present results of a collaboration designed to improve the quality of data and assess the impact on incidence and survival. A consensus dataset and database of HM was developed between the Thames Cancer Registry (TCR) and clinicians between 1999 and 2000 in South Thames (adult population 5.4 million). Clinicians identified and confirmed the diagnosis of patients whilst diagnostic data were collected by a dedicated team of data collectors. Clinicians validated their cases bi-annually. Incidence and survival of the study population for the period 1999–2000 following the collaboration were compared with the same population over the period 1994–1996 prior to the collaboration and with a control population (North Thames area, adult population 5.5 million), where TCR collected data but without any clinical collaboration, for the period 1999–2000. Statistical analyses: the statistical significance of the standardized rate ratio (SRR) was evaluated using the method of Jensen et al., (1991). The Kaplan-Meier survival curves were compared using the log-rank test. For the period 1994–1996 there were no differences in the SRR or survival estimates in any disorders between North and South Thames. A 43% increase in incidence occurred between 1994–1996 and 1999–2000 in South Thames compared to only 5% in North Thames over the same periods, mainly for CLL, MDS, PV, PT, IMF, MGUS and WM. Table I shows a statistically significant difference in the SRR between the North and South Thames during the period 1999–2000 for five conditions: CLL, MDS, PV, PT and WM. Three year survival for patients diagnosed between 1999 and 2000 were higher in South Thames than North Thames in four conditions: CLL (71% vs. 49%, p = 0.001), CML (50% vs. 30%, p = 0.001), MDS (45% vs. 27%, p &lt;0.001) and MM (39% vs. 28%, p &lt;0.001). No significant difference in incidence or survival were seen for acute leukaemia, NHL or HD. Table 1: Comparison of the age standardized rate between 1994–1996 and 1999–2000 in patients aged 16–85+ years 1994–1996 1999–2000 North Thames South Thames Comparison North Thames South Thames Comparison Subtypes ASR ASR SRR (95% CI) ASR ASR SRR (95% CI) CLL 4.28 4.76 0.89 (0.89–1.07) 3.78 6.58 0.57 (0.48–0.67) MDS 2.33 2.15 1.08 (0.80–1.46) 3.48 5.80 0.60 (0.50–0.71) PT 0.69 0.91 0.75 (0.50–1.13) 0.48 2.57 0.18 (0.13–0.26) PV 1.05 1.06 0.99 (0.69–1.41) 0.72 1.60 0.45 (0.31–0.63) WM 0.37 0.37 1.00 ( 0– 0) 0.33 0.98 0.33 (0.21–0.53) This study has shown that engaging clinicians have improved case ascertainment and that changes in incidence alone may affect outcome without significant differences in treatment. This study provides a benchmark of incidence and survival in the UK and a model for future collaborations.


2004 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 323-334
Author(s):  
F El Khwsky ◽  
M El Shazly ◽  
M Abd El-Halim ◽  
A Bassili ◽  
Karam Abd El-Hamid

2016 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 486-498 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nahla Khamis Ibrahim ◽  
Nujood Abdulwahed Alzahrani ◽  
Afnan Ateeg Batwie ◽  
Razan Abdulaziz Abushal ◽  
Ghazwa Ghazzay Almogati ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document