Search

IntroductionVariation in stage at diagnosis of childhood cancers (CC) may explain differences in survival rates observed across geographical regions. The BENCHISTA project aims to understand these differences and to encourage the application of the Toronto Staging Guidelines (TG) by Population-Based Cancer Registries (PBCRs) to the most common solid paediatric cancers.MethodsPBCRs within and outside Europe were invited to participate and identify all cases of Neuroblastoma, Wilms Tumour, Medulloblastoma, Ewing Sarcoma, Rhabdomyosarcoma and Osteosarcoma diagnosed in a consecutive three-year period (2014-2017) and apply TG at diagnosis. Other non-stage prognostic factors, treatment, progression/recurrence, and cause of death information were collected as optional variables. A minimum of three-year follow-up was required. To standardise TG application by PBCRs, on-line workshops led by six tumour-specific clinical experts were held. To understand the role of data availability and quality, a survey focused on data collection/sharing processes and a quality assurance exercise were generated. To support data harmonization and query resolution a dedicated email and a question-and-answers bank were created.Results67 PBCRs from 28 countries participated and provided a maximally de-personalized, patient-level dataset. For 26 PBCRs, data format and ethical approval obtained by the two sponsoring institutions (UCL and INT) was sufficient for data sharing. 41 participating PBCRs required a Data Transfer Agreement (DTA) to comply with data protection regulations. Due to heterogeneity found in legal aspects, 18 months were spent on finalizing the DTA. The data collection survey was answered by 68 respondents from 63 PBCRs; 44% of them confirmed the ability to re-consult a clinician in cases where stage ascertainment was difficult/uncertain. Of the total participating PBCRs, 75% completed the staging quality assurance exercise, with a median correct answer proportion of 92% [range: 70% (rhabdomyosarcoma) to 100% (Wilms tumour)].ConclusionDifferences in interpretation and processes required to harmonize general data protection regulations across countries were encountered causing delays in data transfer. Despite challenges, the BENCHISTA Project has established a large collaboration between PBCRs and clinicians to collect detailed and standardised TG at a population-level enhancing the understanding of the reasons for variation in overall survival rates for CC, stimulate research and improve national/regional child health plans.

ObjectivesTo describe the procedures to derive complete prevalence and several indicators of cancer cure from population-based cancer registries.Materials and methodsCancer registry data (47% of the Italian population) were used to calculate limited duration prevalence for 62 cancer types by sex and registry. The incidence and survival models, needed to calculate the completeness index (R) and complete prevalence, were evaluated by likelihood ratio tests and by visual comparison. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to explore the effect on the complete prevalence of using different R indexes. Mixture cure models were used to estimate net survival (NS); life expectancy of fatal (LEF) cases; cure fraction (CF); time to cure (TTC); cure prevalence, prevalent patients who were not at risk of dying as a result of cancer; and already cured patients, those living longer than TTC at a specific point in time. CF was also compared with long-term NS since, for patients diagnosed after a certain age, CF (representing asymptotical values of NS) is reached far beyond the patient’s life expectancy.ResultsFor the most frequent cancer types, the Weibull survival model stratified by sex and age showed a very good fit with observed survival. For men diagnosed with any cancer type at age 65–74 years, CF was 41%, while the NS was 49% until age 100 and 50% until age 90. In women, similar differences emerged for patients with any cancer type or with breast cancer. Among patients alive in 2018 with colorectal cancer at age 55–64 years, 48% were already cured (had reached their specific TTC), while the cure prevalence (lifelong probability to be cured from cancer) was 89%. Cure prevalence became 97.5% (2.5% will die because of their neoplasm) for patients alive >5 years after diagnosis.ConclusionsThis study represents an addition to the current knowledge on the topic providing a detailed description of available indicators of prevalence and cancer cure, highlighting the links among them, and illustrating their interpretation. Indicators may be relevant for patients and clinical practice; they are unambiguously defined, measurable, and reproducible in different countries where population-based cancer registries are active.

BackgroundIncreased success in the treatment of hematological cancers contributed to the increase of 5-year survival for most adolescent and young adults (AYAs) with these tumours. However, as 5-year survival increased, it became clear that AYA long-term survivors were at increased risk for severe late effects. Moreover, limited information on long-term cancer impact is available for AYAs, since most studies focused on children and adolescents. We aimed to assess various long-term outcomes on AYA survivors of hematological cancers.MethodsWe selected patients diagnosed with a first primary hematological cancer between 1997 and 2006, in the Italian nationwide population-based cohort of AYA cancer survivors (i.e. alive at least 5 years after cancer diagnosis). Long-term outcomes of interest were: second malignant neoplasms (SMNs), hospitalizations and overall mortality. We calculated standardized incidence ratios (SIRs), standardized hospitalization rate ratios (SHRs) and standardized mortality rate ratios (SMRs). To study morbidity patterns over time, we modeled observed incidence rates by fitting flexible parametric models for nonlinear patterns and we used linear regression for linear patterns.ResultsThe study cohort included 5,042 AYA hematological cancer survivors of which 1,237 and 3,805 had a leukaemia and lymphoma diagnosis, respectively. AYA survivors were at substantially increased risk for SMN (SIR=2.1; 95%CI=1.7; 2.6), hospitalisation (SHR=1.5; 95%CI=1.5; 1.6), and mortality (SMR=1.4; 95%CI=1.2; 1.6) with differences between leukaemia and lymphoma survivors. The highest excess risks of hospitalisations were for infectious diseases, respiratory diseases, and diseases of blood and blood-forming organs. The morbidity pattern differs over time by morbidity type.ConclusionsOur results support the need for strict follow-up plans for survivors, and call for further study to better personalised follow-up plans for AYA cancer survivors.

Background The real impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on overall mortality remains uncertain as surveillance reports have attributed a limited number of deaths to novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the outbreak. The aim of this study was to assess the excess mortality during the COVID-19 outbreak in highly impacted areas of northern Italy. Methods We analysed data on deaths that occurred in the first 4 months of 2020 provided by the health protection agencies (HPAs) of Bergamo and Brescia (Lombardy), building a time-series of daily number of deaths and predicting the daily standardised mortality ratio (SMR) and cumulative number of excess deaths through a Poisson generalised additive model of the observed counts in 2020, using 2019 data as a reference. Results We estimated that there were 5740 (95% credible set (CS) 5552–5936) excess deaths in the HPA of Bergamo and 3703 (95% CS 3535–3877) in Brescia, corresponding to a 2.55-fold (95% CS 2.50–2.61) and 1.93 (95% CS 1.89–1.98) increase in the number of deaths. The excess death wave started a few days later in Brescia, but the daily estimated SMR peaked at the end of March in both HPAs, roughly 2 weeks after the introduction of lockdown measures, with significantly higher estimates in Bergamo (9.4, 95% CI 9.1–9.7). Conclusion Excess mortality was significantly higher than that officially attributed to COVID-19, disclosing its hidden burden likely due to indirect effects on the health system. Time-series analyses highlighted the impact of lockdown restrictions, with a lower excess mortality in the HPA where there was a smaller delay between the epidemic outbreak and their enforcement.