Search

Background: Selected molecular biomarkers were incorporated into the US cancer registry reporting for patients with brain tumors beginning in 2018. We investigated the completeness and validity of these variables and described the epidemiology of molecularly defined brain tumor types., Methods: Brain tumor patients with histopathologically confirmed diagnosis in 2018 were identified within the Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States and NCI's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Incidence databases. The brain molecular markers (BMM) site-specific data item was assessed for coding completeness and validity. 1p/19q status, MGMT promoter methylation, WHO grade data items, and new ICD-O-3 codes were additionally evaluated. These data were used to profile the characteristics and age-adjusted incidence rates per 100 000 population of molecularly defined brain tumors with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI)., Results: BMM completeness across the applicable tumor types was 75%-92% and demonstrated favorable coding validity. IDH-wildtype glioblastomas' incidence rate was 1.74 (95% CI: 1.69-1.78), as compared to 0.14 for WHO grade 2 (95% CI: 0.12-0.15), 0.15 for grade 3 (95% CI: 0.14-0.16), and 0.07 for grade 4 (95% CI: 0.06-0.08) IDH-mutant astrocytomas. Irrespective of WHO grade, IDH mutation prevalence was highest in adolescent and young adult patients, and IDH-mutant astrocytomas were more frequently MGMT promoter methylated. Among pediatric-type tumors, the incidence rate was 0.06 for H3K27M-mutant diffuse midline gliomas (95% CI: 0.05-0.07), 0.03 for SHH-activated/TP53-wildtype medulloblastomas (95% CI: 0.02-0.03), and <0.01 for both C19MC-altered embryonal tumor with multilayered rosettes and RELA-fusion ependymomas., Conclusions: Our findings illustrate the success of developing a dedicated, integrated diagnosis variable, which provides critical molecular information about brain tumors related to accurate diagnosis., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology 2022.)

Cancer stage at diagnosis is important information for management and treatment of individual patients as well as in epidemiological studies to evaluate effectiveness of health care system in managing cancer patients. Population-based studies to examine international disparities on cancer survival by stage, however, has been challenging due to the lack of international standardization on recording stage information and variation in stage completeness across regions and countries. The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) previously assessed the availability and comparability of staging information for colorectal, lung, female breast and ovarian cancers. Stage conversion algorithms were developed to aggregate and map all stage information into a single staging system to allow international comparison by stage at diagnosis. In this article, we developed stage conversion algorithms for three additional cancers, namely oesophageal, gastric and pancreatic cancers. We examined all stage information available, evaluated stage completeness, applied each stage conversion algorithm, and assessed the magnitude of misclassification using data from six Canadian cancer registries (Alberta, Manitoba, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Saskatchewan). In addition, we discussed five recommendations for registries to improve international cancer survival comparison by stage: (a) improve collection and completeness of staging data; (b) promote a comparable definition for stage at diagnosis; (c) promote the use of a common stage classification system; (d) record versions of staging classifications and (e) use multiple data sources for valid staging data., (© 2021 UICC.)

Cancer surveillance is critical for monitoring the burden of cancer and the progress in cancer control. The accuracy of these data is important for decision makers and others who determine resource allocation for cancer prevention and research. In the United States, cancer registration is conducted according to uniform data standards, which are updated and maintained by the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Underlying cancer registration efforts is a firm commitment to ensure that data are accurate, complete, and reflective of current clinical practices. Cancer registries ultimately depend on medical records that are generated for individual patients by clinicians to record newly diagnosed cases. For the cancer registration of brain and other CNS tumors, the Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States is the self-appointed guardian of these data. In 2017, the Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States took the initiative to promote the inclusion of molecular markers found in the 2016 WHO Classification of Tumours of the Central Nervous System into information collected by cancer registries. The complexities of executing this latest objective are presented according to the cancer registry standard-setting organizations whose collection practices for CNS tumors are directly affected.