Connecticut Tumor Registry

Hartford, CT, United States

Connecticut Tumor Registry

Hartford, CT, United States
Time filter
Source Type

Geller A.C.,Harvard University | Clapp R.W.,Boston University | Sober A.J.,Massachusetts General Hospital | Gonsalves L.,Connecticut Tumor Registry | And 6 more authors.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | Year: 2013

Purpose Melanoma is the most commonly fatal form of skin cancer, with nearly 50,000 annual deaths worldwide. We sought to assess long-term trends in the incidence and mortality of melanoma in a state with complete and consistent registration. Methods We used data from the Connecticut Tumor Registry, the original National Cancer Institute SEER site, to determine trends in invasive melanoma (1950-2007), in situ melanoma (1973-2007), tumor thickness (1993-2007), mortality (1950-2007), and mortality to incidence (1950-2007) among the 19,973 and 3,635 Connecticut residents diagnosed with invasive melanoma (1950-2007) and who died as a result of melanoma (1950-2007), respectively. Main outcome measures included trends in incidence and mortality by age, sex, and birth cohort. Results In the initial period (1950-1954), a diagnosis of invasive melanoma was rare, with 1.9 patient cases per 100,000 for men and 2.6 patient cases per 100,000 for women. Between 1950 and 2007, overall incidence rates rose more than 17-fold in men (1.9 to 33.5 per 100,000) and more than nine-fold in women (2.6 to 25.3 per 100,000). During these six decades, mortality rates more than tripled in men (1.6 to 4.9 per 100,000) and doubled in women (1.3 to 2.6 per 100,000). Mortality rates were generally stable or decreasing in men and women through age 54 years. Conclusion Unremitting increases in incidence and mortality of melanoma call for a nationally coordinated effort to encourage and promote innovative prevention and early-detection efforts. © 2013 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Engels E.A.,U.S. National Cancer Institute | Pfeiffer R.M.,U.S. National Cancer Institute | Fraumeni Jr. J.F.,U.S. National Cancer Institute | Kasiske B.L.,Minneapolis Medical Research Foundation | And 19 more authors.
JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association | Year: 2011

Context: Solid organ transplant recipients have elevated cancer risk due to immunosuppression and oncogenic viral infections. Because most prior research has concerned kidney recipients, large studies that include recipients of differing organs can inform cancer etiology. Objective: To describe the overall pattern of cancer following solid organ transplantion. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cohort study using linked data on solid organ transplant recipients from the US Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (1987-2008) and 13 state and regional cancer registries. Main Outcome Measures: Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) and excess absolute risks (EARs) assessing relative and absolute cancer risk in transplant recipients compared with the general population. Results: The registry linkages yielded data on 175 732 solid organ transplants (58.4% for kidney, 21.6% for liver, 10.0% for heart, and 4.0% for lung). The overall cancer risk was elevated with 10 656 cases and an incidence of 1375 per 100 000 person-years (SIR, 2.10 [95% CI, 2.06-2.14]; EAR, 719.3 [95% CI, 693.3-745.6] per 100 000 person-years). Risk was increased for 32 different malignancies, some related to known infections (eg, anal cancer, Kaposi sarcoma) and others unrelated (eg, melanoma, thyroid and lip cancers). The most common malignancies with elevated risk were non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n=1504; incidence: 194.0 per 100 000 person-years; SIR, 7.54 [95% CI, 7.17-7.93]; EAR, 168.3 [95% CI, 158.6-178.4] per 100 000 person-years) and cancers of the lung (n=1344; incidence: 173.4 per 100 000 person-years; SIR, 1.97 [95% CI, 1.86-2.08]; EAR, 85.3 [95% CI, 76.2-94.8] per 100 000 person-years), liver (n=930; incidence: 120.0 per 100 000 person-years; SIR, 11.56 [95% CI, 10.83-12.33]; EAR, 109.6 [95% CI, 102.0-117.6] per 100 000 person-years), and kidney (n=752; incidence: 97.0 per 100 000 person-years; SIR, 4.65 [95% CI, 4.32- 4.99]; EAR, 76.1 [95% CI, 69.3-83.3] per 100 000 person-years). Lung cancer risk was most elevated in lung recipients (SIR, 6.13 [95% CI, 5.18-7.21]) but also increased among other recipients (kidney: SIR, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.34-1.59]; liver: SIR, 1.95 [95% CI, 1.74-2.19]; and heart: SIR, 2.67 [95% CI, 2.40-2.95]). Liver cancer risk was elevated only among liver recipients (SIR, 43.83 [95% CI, 40.90-46.91]), who manifested exceptional risk in the first 6 months (SIR, 508.97 [95% CI, 474.16-545.66]) and a 2-fold excess risk for 10 to 15 years thereafter (SIR, 2.22 [95% CI, 1.57-3.04]). Among kidney recipients, kidney cancer risk was elevated (SIR, 6.66 [95% CI, 6.12- 7.23]) and bimodal in onset time. Kidney cancer risk also was increased in liver recipients (SIR, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.40-2.29]) and heart recipients (SIR, 2.90 [95% CI, 2.32- 3.59]). Conclusion: Compared with the general population, recipients of a kidney, liver, heart, or lung transplant have an increased risk for diverse infection-related and unrelated cancers. ©2011 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

Mai P.L.,U.S. National Institutes of Health | Garceau A.O.,U.S. National Institutes of Health | Graubard B.I.,U.S. National Institutes of Health | Dunn M.,Westat Inc. | And 6 more authors.
Journal of the National Cancer Institute | Year: 2011

Background Knowledge of family cancer history is essential for estimating an individual's cancer risk and making clinical recommendations regarding screening and referral to a specialty cancer genetics clinic. However, it is not clear if reported family cancer history is sufficiently accurate for this purpose. Methods In the population-based 2001 Connecticut Family Health Study, 1019 participants reported on 20 578 first-degree relatives (FDR) and second-degree relatives (SDR). Of those, 2605 relatives were sampled for confirmation of cancer reports on breast, colorectal, prostate, and lung cancer. Confirmation sources included state cancer registries, Medicare databases, the National Death Index, death certificates, and health-care facility records. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated for reports on lung, colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer and after stratification by sex, age, education, and degree of relatedness and used to estimate report accuracy. Pairwise t tests were used to evaluate differences between the two strata in each stratified analysis. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results Overall, sensitivity and positive predictive value were low to moderate and varied by cancer type: 60.2% and 40.0%, respectively, for lung cancer reports, 27.3% and 53.5% for colorectal cancer reports, 61.1% and 61.3% for breast cancer reports, and 32.0% and 53.4% for prostate cancer reports. Specificity and negative predictive value were more than 95% for all four cancer types. Cancer history reports on FDR were more accurate than reports on SDR, with reports on FDR having statistically significantly higher sensitivity for prostate cancer than reports on SDR (58.9% vs 21.5%, P =. 002) and higher positive predictive value for lung (78.1% vs 31.7%, P <. 001), colorectal (85.8% vs 43.5%, P =. 004), and breast cancer (79.9% vs 53.6%, P =. 02). Conclusion sGeneral population reports on family history for the four major adult cancers were not highly accurate. Efforts to improve accuracy are needed in primary care and other health-care settings in which family history is collected to ensure appropriate risk assessment and clinical care recommendations. © The Author 2011. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

Wideroff L.,U.S. National Cancer Institute | Garceau A.O.,U.S. National Cancer Institute | Greene M.H.,U.S. National Cancer Institute | Dunn M.,Westat Inc. | And 6 more authors.
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention | Year: 2010

Background: Although family history of cancer is widely ascertained in research and clinical care, little is known about assessment methods, accuracy, or other quality measures. Given its widespread use in cancer screening and surveillance, better information is needed about the clarity and accuracy of family history information reported in the general population. Methods: This telephone survey in Connecticut examined coherence and completeness of reports from 1,019 respondents about 20,504 biological relatives. Results: Of 2,657 cancer reports, 97.7% were judged consistent with malignancy (versus benign or indeterminate conditions); 79% were site specific, 10.1% had unspecified cancer sites, and 8.6% had "ill-defined" sites. Only 6.1% of relatives had unknown histories. Unknown histories and ambiguous sites were significantly higher for second-degree relatives. The adjusted percentage of first-degree relative reports with ambiguous sites increased with decreasing education and African-American race of survey respondents, and with deceased vital status of relatives. Ambiguous second-degree relative reports were also associated with deceased vital status and with male gender of respondents. Conclusions: These findings suggest that family history of cancer reports from the general population are generally complete and coherent. Impact: Strategies are needed to improve site specificity and thus maximize the utility of such information in primary care settings. ©2010 AACR.

Moran M.S.,Yale University | Moran M.S.,Yale New Haven Hospital | Moran M.S.,William W Backus Hospital | Gonsalves L.,Connecticut Tumor Registry | And 2 more authors.
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Year: 2011

South Asians from India and Pakistan represent one of the fastest growing immigrant populations in the US, yet there are limited data assessing breast cancers for this distinct ethnic sub-group. The aim of this study was to analyze clinical-pathologic, treatment and outcome characteristics of U.S.-residing Indian-Pakistani (IP) versus non-Hispanic white (NHW) female breast cancer patients to assess if any differences/disparities exist. The study cohort consisted of 2,393 IP and 555,832 NHW women (diagnosed 1988-2006) in the SEER database. Differences between the two populations were analyzed using chi-squared and multivariate regression analysis. Age-adjusted incidence, mortality, and relative survival rates were calculated for the two groups. Significant differences in the characteristics of the IP cohort's invasive disease included: younger median age at presentation; larger tumor size; higher stage, higher grade, more involved lymph-nodes, and more hormone receptor negative disease (all P < 0.01). The age-adjusted incidence and breast cancer mortality were lower in IP women. The relative survival at 5 years was statistically significant at 84% for IP versus 89% for NHW women, but was not significantly different on multivariate analysis (P > 0.05). Within each stage (Tis, I, II), there were no disparities in the rate of breast conservation surgery (BCS) or in the percentage of patients receiving adjuvant radiation after BCS for the 2 cohorts. Post-mastectomy radiation was delivered significantly more often in stage I/II IP patients undergoing mastectomy. In conclusion, this analysis suggests that while there appear to be significant differences in the features of breast cancers of US-residing IP women, no disparities were noted in the rates of breast conserving surgery or adjuvant radiation, as seen in some other ethnicities. The more aggressive clinical-pathologic features stage-for-stage in IP women may partially explain the more frequent use of post-mastectomy RT in this patient population. These findings warrant further investigation. © 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.

PubMed | Connecticut Tumor Registry
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Cancer epidemiology | Year: 2013

For myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) (formerly known as preleukemia), a diverse group of myeloid neoplasms usually involving anemia in elderly persons, trends in U.S. death rates apparently have not been reported.Trends in annual age-standardized rates per 100,000 from 1999 to 2009 were examined for MDS using multiple causes vs. underlying cause alone, coded on death certificates for U.S. residents.The death rate (all ages combined) for MDS increased from 1999 to 2009, from 1.62 to 1.84 using underlying cause alone and from 2.89 to 3.27 using multiple causes. Rates using multiple causes were about 80% higher than those based on underlying cause alone. From 2001 to 2004 the rate for MDS using underlying cause alone (but not using multiple causes) declined, accompanied by an increase in the rate for deaths from leukemia as underlying cause with mention of MDS; this trend coincided with the advent of the 2001 World Health Organizations reclassification of certain MDS as leukemia. The MDS rate for age 65+ years increased after 2005, whereas the rate for age 25-64 years was low but declined from 2001 to 2003 and then stabilized. For deaths with MDS coded as other than underlying cause, rates did not decline for deaths from each of the two most common causes (i.e., cardiovascular diseases and leukemia).Evidence for decreases in MDS-related mortality rates was limited; the increase at age 65+ years is consistent with increases in incidence rates reported from cancer registries. Using multiple causes of death vs. only the underlying cause results in substantially higher MDS-related death rates, shows the impact of changes in the classification of myeloid neoplasms and emphasizes the importance of reducing cardiovascular disease mortality in MDS patients.

Loading Connecticut Tumor Registry collaborators
Loading Connecticut Tumor Registry collaborators