Population-based cancer survival trends in England and Wales up to 2007: an assessment of the NHS cancer plan for England

Rachet, Bernard; Maringe, Camille; Nur, Ula; Quaresma, Manuela; Shah, Anjali; Woods, Laura; Ellis, Libby; Walters, Sarah; Forman, David; Steward, John; Coleman, Michel P

doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(09)70028-2

Cited by 158 publications

(142 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

140

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Among patients diagnosed with cancers of the colon, rectum, kidney and uterus, the annual number of avoidable deaths increased over time, despite substantial improvements in survival. 5 This is due to an increase in incidence combined with either a static or widening deficit in survival between affluent and deprived. In 2004-2006, colon cancer was the second largest contributor to the total number of avoidable deaths.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4 Recent observations suggest there has been a modest acceleration of the previous upward trend in survival in England since implementation of the NHS Cancer Plan. 5 However, there is little evidence that the Cancer Plan has been effective in reducing socioeconomic inequalities in short-term survival in the period up to 2006. 2 Inequalities in short-term survival between rich and poor were still large for many cancers among patients diagnosed in 2006.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How many deaths would be avoidable if socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival in England were eliminated? A national population-based study, 1996–2006

Ellis

Coleman

Rachet

2012

European Journal of Cancer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ellis, L; Coleman, MP; Rachet, B (2011) How many deaths would be avoidable if socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival in England were eliminated? A national population-based study, 1996-2006. European journal of cancer (Oxford, England , 48 (2 This study aims to quantify the public health impact of these inequalities by estimating the number of cancer-related deaths that would be avoidable if all patients were to have the same survival as the most affluent patients. MethodsNational Cancer Registry data for all adults diagnosed with one of 21 common cancers in England were used to estimate relative survival. We estimated the number of excess (cancer-related) deaths that would be avoidable within three years after diagnosis if relative survival for patients in all deprivation groups were as high as the most affluent group. ResultsFor patients diagnosed during [2004][2005][2006] 7122 of the 64,940 excess deaths a year (11%) would have been avoidable if three-year survival for all patients had been as high as in the most affluent group. The annual number of avoidable deaths fell from 8435 (13%) a year for patients diagnosed during 1996-2000. Over 60% of the total number of avoidable deaths occurred within six months after diagnosis and approximately 70% occurred in the two most deprived groups. ConclusionThe downward trend in the annual number of avoidable deaths reflects more an improvement in survival in England overall, rather than a narrowing of the deficit in cancer survival between rich and poor. The lack of any substantial change in the percentage of avoidable excess deaths highlights the persistent nature of the deficit in survival between affluent and deprived groups.248 words

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How many deaths would be avoidable if socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival in England were eliminated? A national population-based study, 1996–2006

Ellis

Coleman

Rachet

2012

European Journal of Cancer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another study 25 looked at outcomes before and after the implementation of the U.K. National Health Service cancer plan for England in 2000 and found significant improvements in mean annual survival for cervical (p < 0.05), endometrial (p < 0.01), and ovarian cancer (p < 0.01) between 2001 and 2006.…”

Section: Survival Outcomes By Hospital Typementioning

confidence: 99%

The Optimal Organization of Gynecologic Oncology Services: A Systematic Review

Fung-Kee-Fung

Biagi²,

Colgan

et al. 2015

Current Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2 As such, most estimates of survival from laryngeal cancer exclude women. Relative survival was approximately 85% at one year and 66% at five years for men diagnosed during [2001][2002][2003] in England (with similar estimates for Wales), 3 and there has been very little improvement since the late 1980s. 4 There is also a marked socioeconomic gradient in survival from laryngeal cancer.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trends and inequalities in laryngeal cancer survival in men and women: England and Wales 1991–2006

Ellis¹,

Rachet²,

Birchall³

et al. 2012

Oral Oncology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Laryngeal cancer in men is a relatively common malignancy, with a marked socioeconomic gradient in survival between affluent and deprived patients. Cancer of the larynx in women is rare. Survival tends to lower than for men, and little is known about the association between deprivation and survival in women with laryngeal cancer. This paper explores the trends and socio-economic inequalities in laryngeal cancer survival in women, with comparison to men. Materials and MethodsWe examined relative survival among men and women diagnosed with laryngeal cancer in England and Wales during 1991-2006, followed up to 31 December 2007. We estimated the difference in survival between the most deprived and most affluent groups (the 'deprivation gap') at 1 and 5 years after diagnosis, for each sex, anatomical subsite and calendar period. ResultsFive year survival for all laryngeal cancers combined was up to 8% lower in women than in men. This difference is only partially explained by the differential distribution of anatomical subsites in men and women. Disparities in survival between men and women were also present within specific subsites. In contrast to men, there was little evidence of a consistent deprivation gap in survival for women at any of the anatomical subsites. ConclusionThe stark socioeconomic inequalities in laryngeal cancer survival in men do not appear to be replicated in women. The origins of the socio-economic inequalities in survival among men, and the disparities in survival between men and women at specific tumour subsites remains unclear.246 words

show abstract

Population-based cancer survival trends in England and Wales up to 2007: an assessment of the NHS cancer plan for England

Cited by 158 publications

References 14 publications

How many deaths would be avoidable if socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival in England were eliminated? A national population-based study, 1996–2006

How many deaths would be avoidable if socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival in England were eliminated? A national population-based study, 1996–2006

The Optimal Organization of Gynecologic Oncology Services: A Systematic Review

Trends and inequalities in laryngeal cancer survival in men and women: England and Wales 1991–2006

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About