Treatment breakdown for colon cancers

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Variations in Cancer Surgery Across the East Midlands and North Trent EMPHIN Forum (Apr 2010) Carolynn Gildea Trent Cancer Registry.
Advertisements

National Cancer Intelligence Network data usage 17 November 2015 – Veronique Poirier – Principal Cancer Analyst – NCIN.
Why Late Diagnosis of HIV? Dr Faiza Khan Consultant in Public Health Kent County Council.
National Cancer Intelligence Network Outcome and the effect of age in 1318 patients with synovial sarcoma: Report from the National Cancer Intelligence.
How clinicians use data to make an impact on clinical outcomes Andrew Brodbelt Consultant Neurosurgeon and Clinical Director of Neurosurgery, The Walton.
South East Public Health Observatory Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES) Isobel Perry - Senior Public Health Intelligence Analyst - SEPHO Day 2 – Session.
South West Public Health Observatory South West Regional Public Health Group Opportunities for future analysis by SWPHO Sean McPhail South West Public.
Routes to Diagnosis of Cancer in London, Katherine Henson, NCRAS, Presentation for London Public Health Knowledge and Intelligence Network.
South West Public Health Observatory The changing casemix of prostate cancer patients and prostatectomies in the South West Sean McPhail.
Midland Cancer Network 2012 Clinical Performance Conference.
How clinicians use data to make an impact on clinical outcomes Dr Mick Peake Clinical Lead, National Cancer Intelligence Network Consultant & Senior Lecturer.
A ssociation of Public Health Observatories Hospital Activity data Roy Maxwell SWPHO & Bristol University Dr Richard Wilson Sandwell PCT.
South West Public Health Observatory South West Regional Public Health Group Impact of urological cancer, by stage at diagnosis Sean McPhail 1, David Gillatt.
Cheshire and Merseyside Strategic Clinical Networks Local Issues and Challenges 22 nd May 2015.
Prostate cancer and socio-economic deprivation When PCTs are ranked according to their income score using the Indices of Multiple Deprivation (IMD)* there.
Scottish Renal Cancer Forum National Meeting 31st March 2016 Renal cancer survival Period of diagnosis: Roger Black.
South West Public Health Observatory South West Regional Public Health Group Overview of Neuro-oncology in the South West Sean McPhail South West Public.
Alfredo Addeo Lung NSSG 15th November 2016
How clinicians use data to make an impact on clinical outcomes
Fig. 1 Frequency distribution of initial palliative treatment modalities used. EBRT, external beam radiotherapy. Initial palliative treatment modality.
Oesophago–Gastric Cancer
Delivery of systemic therapy in Gloucestershire for NSCLC
National Oesophago–Gastric Cancer Audit 2015.
Curative treatment rates for patients diagnosed with
Patterns of psychiatric hospital admission for schizophrenia and related psychosis in England: A retrospective cross-sectional survey Thompson A. D.¹,
WALES BREAST CANCER CLINICAL AUDIT (WBCCA) MDT DATA FOR PATIENTS DIAGNOSED in 2009, 2010 and 2011 Llandudno General Hospital (BCUHB) MDT.
(95% confidence interval)
Segmented analysis of prostate cancer pathway from referral to treatment: This work was carried out in partnership between the Transforming.
Oesophago–Gastric Cancer
Surgical Cancer Treatment
WALES BREAST CANCER CLINICAL AUDIT (WBCCA) MDT DATA FOR PATIENTS DIAGNOSED in 2009, 2010 and 2011 Singleton Breast Cancer (ABMUHB) MDT.
Dr James Carlton, Medical Adviser
Healthy London Partnership
Treatment breakdown for prostate cancers
Treatment breakdown for breast cancers
Treatment breakdown for NSCLC cancers
Treatment breakdown for salivary gland cancers
S1316 analysis details Garnet Anderson Katie Arnold
Treatment breakdown for kidney cancers
Treatment breakdown for liver cancers
Treatment breakdown for larynx cancers
Treatment breakdown for stomach cancers
Segmented analysis of the lung cancer median pathway from referral to treatment: This work was carried out in partnership between the Transforming.
Treatment breakdown for oropharynx cancers
Treatment breakdown for bladder cancers
Treatment breakdown for oesophagus cancers
Treatment breakdown for pancreatic cancers
Dr Nikki Coghill1,2, Dr Ludivine Garside1, Amanda Chappell 3
National Cancer Diagnosis Audit
Treatment breakdown for oral cavity cancers
Treatment breakdown for uterine cancers
Treatment breakdown for rectum cancers
Treatment breakdown for SCLC cancers
Treatment breakdown for hypopharynx cancers
Treatment breakdown for cervical cancers
Treatment breakdown for ovary cancers
National Oesophago-Gastric Cancer Audit 2018 Annual Report: Slide set
Tuberculosis in Wales Annual Report 2018 Data to the end of 2017
(95% confidence interval)
Treatment breakdown for other head and neck cancers
Treatment breakdown for vulva cancers
Local Alcohol Profiles for England phe. org
2017/18 National Diabetes Audit Cambridgeshire and Peterborough CCG local summary Public Health Intelligence, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough : April 2019.
Comparing the multiple sources of cancer treatment data
NAACCR/IACR Combined Annual Conference 2019
THE LANCET Oncology Volume 19, No. 1, p27–39, January 2018
Dataset Description Time Period Accident & Emergency
DRAFT Granta Data pack January 2019.
Tuberculosis in Wales Annual Report 2017 Data to the end of 2016
Representativeness of linked cancer registry and dispensed prescription data as compared with cancer registry data alone, by key patient and tumour characteristics.
Presentation transcript:

Treatment breakdown for colon cancers This work has been produced as part of the Cancer Research UK - Public Health England Partnership. Contributors are listed at the end.

Methods 1) These slides present the numbers and percentages of tumours diagnosed in England in 2013 - 2015 recorded as receiving radiotherapy, chemotherapy or tumour resection. The results are presented by year, stage at diagnosis, age, sex, deprivation, ethnicity, and comorbidities. The stage distribution is presented, followed by  the treatment breakdown (independently and in combinations) for each variable. This work uses data collected by the NHS, as part of the care and support of cancer patients. Detail on methodology is described in the SOP and workbook (here) and summarised below: These proportions are unadjusted, so patterns may be caused by differences in stage, deprivation, age, sex, ethnicity, comorbidities or other factors, such as patient choice. Datasets used to capture treatment information include cancer registration data, the Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy dataset (SACT), RadioTherapy DataSet (RTDS), and inpatient Hospital Episode Statistics (HES). A tumour resection is an attempt to surgically remove the whole of the primary tumour. Radiotherapy includes both curative and palliative teletherapy procedures, and excludes brachytherapy and contact radiotherapy. Chemotherapy includes both curative and palliative chemotherapy, and excludes hormonal therapy, and other supportive drugs such as zoledronic acid, pamidronate, and denosumab.

Methods 2) On the graphs which display combinations of treatments received, one of the categories is ‘Other care’. ‘Other care’ represents the group of patients who had no record of chemotherapy, tumour resection, or radiotherapy in the time frame assessed. This may include patients who received other treatments (such as hormonal therapy or management of symptoms), treatment outside of the time frame assessed, treatment in a private setting, or there may be data missing from the datasets used. The patient's Charlson comorbidity score was derived from Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES) and Cancer Registry data combined, and looks from 27 months to 3 months before the patient's cancer diagnosis. The patient’s age group was based on the age of the patient when they were diagnosed with the tumour. The patient’s income deprivation quintile was allocated by linking the patient’s postcode to their 2011 ONS census lower super output area (LSOA). This was then linked to the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government 2015 income deprivation quintile for that LSOA. Treatments occurring in the period from 1 month before diagnosis to either 6, 9, 12, 15 or 18 months after diagnosis are displayed. The time period within which most patients' first course of treatment occurred varies by cancer site and treatment type. Therefore, an appropriate time period for each cancer site has been chosen using a data-driven approach in consultation with clinicians (see SOP for more information).

Summary of key results Stage: The pattern of treatment at various stages is as expected, with virtually no use of radiotherapy (and most likely for recto-sigmoid tumours), and high use of chemotherapy for stage 3 tumours. The drop in resections for stage 4 is perhaps greater than expected, which is mirrored by a high proportion receiving ‘other care’ (when looking at combinations of treatment). For advanced stage tumours, there is more of a balance between the proportion receiving tumour resection alone and tumour resection with chemotherapy. Age: There is generally a drop in the proportion of tumours treated with chemotherapy, which is steeper than expected from a clinical perspective. The proportion of tumours being resected is highest in the 60-69 age band (65% of those under 50 years, 74% 50-59, 77% 60-69, 72% 70-79, 49% 80+). Sex: Although not stark differences, females receive lower chemotherapy (30% F, 33% M) and lower resections (64% F, 67% M) than males, and the reasons why are not clear. Deprivation: Patients in the most deprived quintile are receiving lower chemotherapy (30% most, 33% least deprived), and lower resections (62% most, 68% least deprived). This may be related to different comorbidity distributions between the deprivation quintiles, as these results are unadjusted. Ethnicity: Non-White patients have a higher proportion of chemotherapy compared to White patients (31% White, 41% non-White). When looking at combinations of treatment, non-white patients have a lower proportion of ‘other care’, and a higher ‘resection and chemo’ proportion. These results may be driven by different age distributions.

Cohort for colon cancers

By diagnosis year

By diagnosis year

By diagnosis year

By stage

By stage

By stage

By age

By age

By age

By sex

By sex

By sex

By deprivation quintile

By deprivation quintile

By deprivation quintile

By broad ethnic group

By broad ethnic group

By broad ethnic group

By comorbidity score

By comorbidity score

By comorbidity score

Acknowledgements Public Health England and Cancer Research UK would like to thank the following analysts who developed this workbook: Dr. Sean McPhail, Dr. Katherine Henson, Anna Fry, Becky White We would like to thank the following analysts who contributed to the work: Clare Pearson, Sabrina Sandhu, Carolynn Gildea, Jess Fraser, Michael Wallington, Cong Chen We would also like to thank the following clinicians and analysts who offered feedback on this workbook or helped improve the tumour resections data featured in it: Dr. Andy Nordin, Mr. Kieran Horgan, Mr. Ravinder Vohra, Prof. Mick Peake, Prof. Eva Morris, Mr. Keith Roberts, Mr. Graham Putnam, Dr. Roland Valori, Prof. Hemant Kocher, Mr. Roger Kockelbergh, Prof. Paul Finan