National Cancer Action Team

London, United Kingdom

National Cancer Action Team

London, United Kingdom
Time filter
Source Type

Boggon R.,Datalink | Boggon R.,University Utrecht | Van Staa T.P.,Datalink | Van Staa T.P.,University Utrecht | And 6 more authors.
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety | Year: 2013

Purpose: Large electronic datasets are increasingly being used to evaluate healthcare delivery. The aim of this study was to compare information held by cancer registries with that of the General Practice Research Database (GPRD). Methods: A convenience sample of 101020 patients aged 40+ years drawn from GPRD formed the primary data source. This cohort was derived from a larger sample originally established for a cohort study of diabetes. GPRD records were linked with those from cancer registries in the National Cancer Data Repository (NCDR). Concordance between the two datasets was then evaluated. For cases recorded only on one dataset, validation was sought from other datasets (Hospital Episode Statistics and death registration) and by detailed analysis of a subset of GPRD records. Results: A total of 5797 cancers (excluding non-melanomatous skin cancer) were recorded on GPRD. Of these cases, 4830 were also recorded on NCDR (concordance rate of 83.3%). Of the 976 cases recorded on GPRD but not on NCDR, 528 were present also in the hospital records or death certificates. Of the 341 cases recorded on NCDR but not on GPRD, 307 were recorded in these other two datasets. Rates of concordance varied by cancer type. Cancer registries recorded larger numbers of patients with lung, colorectal, and pancreatic cancers, whereas GPRD recorded more haematological cancers and melanomas. As expected, GPRD recorded significantly more non-melanomatous skin cancer. Concordance decreased with increasing age. Conclusion: Although concordance levels were reasonably high, the findings from this study can be used to direct efforts for better recording in both datasets. © 2012 Crown.

Murray C.J.L.,University of Washington | Richards M.A.,National Cancer Action Team | Newton J.N.,University of Manchester | Fenton K.A.,Public Health England | And 36 more authors.
The Lancet | Year: 2013

Background The UK has had universal free health care and public health programmes for more than six decades. Several policy initiatives and structural reforms of the health system have been undertaken. Health expenditure has increased substantially since 1990, albeit from relatively low levels compared with other countries. We used data from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2010 (GBD 2010) to examine the patterns of health loss in the UK, the leading preventable risks that explain some of these patterns, and how UK outcomes compare with a set of comparable countries in the European Union and elsewhere in 1990 and 2010. Methods We used results of GBD 2010 for 1990 and 2010 for the UK and 18 other comparator nations (the original 15 members of the European Union, Australia, Canada, Norway, and the USA; henceforth EU15+). We present analyses of trends and relative performance for mortality, causes of death, years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs), disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), and healthy life expectancy (HALE). We present results for 259 diseases and injuries and for 67 risk factors or clusters of risk factors relevant to the UK. We assessed the UK's rank for age-standardised YLLs and DALYs for their leading causes compared with EU15+ in 1990 and 2010. We estimated 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) for all measures. Findings For both mortality and disability, overall health has improved substantially in absolute terms in the UK from 1990 to 2010. Life expectancy in the UK increased by 4•2 years (95% UI 4•2-4•3) from 1990 to 2010. However, the UK performed significantly worse than the EU15+ for age-standardised death rates, age-standardised YLL rates, and life expectancy in 1990, and its relative position had worsened by 2010. Although in most age groups, there have been reductions in age-specific mortality, for men aged 30-34 years, mortality rates have hardly changed (reduction of 3•7%, 95% UI 2•7-4•9). In terms of premature mortality, worsening ranks are most notable for men and women aged 20-54 years. For all age groups, the contributions of Alzheimer's disease (increase of 137%, 16-277), cirrhosis (65%, -15 to 107), and drug use disorders (577%, 71-942) to premature mortality rose from 1990 to 2010. In 2010, compared with EU15+, the UK had significantly lower rates of age-standardised YLLs for road injury, diabetes, liver cancer, and chronic kidney disease, but significantly greater rates for ischaemic heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lower respiratory infections, breast cancer, other cardiovascular and circulatory disorders, oesophageal cancer, preterm birth complications, congenital anomalies, and aortic aneurysm. Because YLDs per person by age and sex have not changed substantially from 1990 to 2010 but age-specific mortality has been falling, the importance of chronic disability is rising. The major causes of YLDs in 2010 were mental and behavioural disorders (including substance abuse; 21•5% [95 UI 17•2-26•3] of YLDs), and musculoskeletal disorders (30•5% [25•5-35•7]). The leading risk factor in the UK was tobacco (11•8% [10•5-13•3] of DALYs), followed by increased blood pressure (9•0 % [7•5-10•5]), and high body-mass index (8•6% [7•4-9•8]). Diet and physical inactivity accounted for 14•3% (95% UI 12•8-15•9) of UK DALYs in 2010. Interpretation The performance of the UK in terms of premature mortality is persistently and significantly below the mean of EU15+ and requires additional concerted action. Further progress in premature mortality from several major causes, such as cardiovascular diseases and cancers, will probably require improved public health, prevention, early intervention, and treatment activities. The growing burden of disability, particularly from mental disorders, substance use, musculoskeletal disorders, and falls deserves an integrated and strategic response. Funding Bill &Melinda Gates Foundation.

Round C.E.,University of Cambridge | Williams M.V.,University of Cambridge | Mee T.,University of Surrey | Kirkby N.F.,University of Surrey | And 3 more authors.
Clinical Oncology | Year: 2013

Aims: This paper compares the predictions of radiotherapy demand for England from the Malthus model with those from the earlier National Radiotherapy Advisory Group (NRAG) model, from the international literature and also with observed radiotherapy usage in England as a whole as recorded in the English radiotherapy dataset (RTDS). Materials and methods: We reviewed the evidence base for radiotherapy for each type and stage of cancer using national and international guidelines, meta-analyses, systematic reviews and key clinical trials. Twenty-two decision trees were constructed and radiotherapy demand was calculated using English cancer incidence data for 2007, 2008 and 2009, accurate to the Primary Care Trust (PCT) level (population 91500-1282384). The stage at presentation was obtained from English cancer registry data. In predictive mode, the model can take account of changes in cancer incidence as the population grows and ages. Results: The Malthus model indicates reduced indications for radiotherapy, principally for lung cancer and rarer tumours. Our estimate of the proportion of patients who should receive radiotherapy at some stage of their illness is 40.6%. This is lower than previous estimates of about 50%. Nevertheless, the overall estimate of demand in terms of attendances is similar for the NRAG and Malthus models. The latter models that 48827 attendances should have been delivered per million population in 2011. National data from RTDS show 32071 attendances per million in 2011. A 50% increase in activity would be required to match estimated demand. This underprovision extends across all cancers and represents reduced access and the use of dose fractionation at odds with international norms of evidence-based practice. By 2016, demand is predicted to grow to about 55206 attendances per million and by 2020 to 60057. Discussion: Services have increased their activity by 14% between 2006 and 2011, but estimated demand has increased by 11%. Access remains low and English radiotherapy dose fractionation still does not comply with international evidence-based practice. © 2013 The Royal College of Radiologists.

Forbes L.J.L.,King's College London | Warburton F.,King's College London | Richards M.A.,National Cancer Action Team | Richards M.A.,Care Quality Commission | Ramirez A.J.,King's College London
British Journal of Cancer | Year: 2014

Background: Delay in symptomatic presentation leading to advanced stage at diagnosis may contribute to poor cancer survival. To inform public health approaches to promoting early symptomatic presentation, we aimed to identify risk factors for delay in presentation across several cancers.Methods:We surveyed 2371 patients with 15 cancers about nature and duration of symptoms using a postal questionnaire. We calculated relative risks for delay in presentation (time from symptom onset to first presentation >3 months) by cancer, symptoms leading to diagnosis and reasons for putting off going to the doctor, controlling for age, sex and deprivation group.Results:Among 1999 cancer patients reporting symptoms, 21% delayed presentation for >3 months. Delay was associated with greater socioeconomic deprivation but not age or sex. Patients with prostate (44%) and rectal cancer (37%) were most likely to delay and patients with breast cancer least likely to delay (8%). Urinary difficulties, change of bowel habit, systemic symptoms (fatigue, weight loss and loss of appetite) and skin symptoms were all common and associated with delay. Overall, patients with bleeding symptoms were no more likely to delay presentation than patients who did not have bleeding symptoms. However, within the group of patients with bleeding symptoms, there were significant differences in risk of delay by source of bleeding: 35% of patients with rectal bleeding delayed presentation, but only 9% of patients with urinary bleeding. A lump was a common symptom but not associated with delay in presentation. Twenty-eight percent had not recognised their symptoms as serious and this was associated with a doubling in risk of delay. Embarrassment, worry about what the doctor might find, being too busy to go to the doctor and worry about wasting the doctor's time were also strong risk factors for delay, but were much less commonly reported (<6%).Interpretation:Approaches to promote early presentation should aim to increase awareness of the significance of cancer symptoms and should be designed to work for people of the lowest socioeconomic status. In particular, awareness that rectal bleeding is a possible symptom of cancer should be raised. © 2014 Cancer Research UK. All rights reserved.

Meechan D.,Trent Cancer Registry | Gildea C.,Trent Cancer Registry | Hollingworth L.,Trent Cancer Registry | Richards M.A.,National Cancer Action Team | And 2 more authors.
British Journal of General Practice | Year: 2012

Background: A 2-Week Wait (2WW) referral pathway for earlier diagnosis of suspected cancer was introduced in England in 2000. Nevertheless, a significant proportion of patients with cancer are diagnosed by other routes (detection rate), only a small proportion of 2WW referrals have cancer (conversion rate) and there is considerable between-practice variation. Aim: This study examined use by practices of the 2WW referral in relation to all cancer diagnoses. Design and setting: A cross-sectional analysis of data extracted from the Cancer Waiting Times Database for all 2WW referrals in 2009 and for all patients receiving a first definitive treatment in the same year. Method: The age standardised referral ratio, conversion rate, and detection rate were calculated for all practices in England and the correlation coefficient for each pair of measures. The median detection rate was calculated for each decile of practices ranked by conversion rate and vice versa, performing nonparametric tests for trend in each case. Results: Data for 8049 practices, 865 494 referrals, and 224 984 cancers were analysed. There were significant correlations between referral ratio and conversion rate (inverse) and detection rate (direct). There was also a direct correlation between conversion and detection rates. There was a significant trend in conversion rate for deciles of detection rate, and vice versa, with a marked difference between the lowest and higher deciles. Conclusion: There is a consistent relationship between 2WW referral conversion rate and detection rate that can be interpreted as representing quality of clinical practice. The 2WW referral rate should not be a measure of quality of clinical care. ©British Journal of General Practice.

Moran B.J.,Hampshire Hospitals Foundation Trust | Holm T.,Karolinska Institutet | Brannagan G.,Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust | Chave H.,Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust | And 10 more authors.
Colorectal Disease | Year: 2014

Aim: Adenocarcinoma of the lower rectum is clinically challenging because of the need to choose between a wide excision to achieve oncological clearance, on the one hand, and sphincter conservation to maintain anal function, on the other. The English National Low Rectal Cancer Development Programme (LOREC) was developed under the auspices of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland and the English National Cancer Action Team to improve the outcome of low rectal cancer in England. Method: LOREC was initiated focusing on preoperative imaging, selective neoadjuvant therapy, optimal surgical treatment and detailed pathological assessment of the excised specimen. Its key elements were 1-day multidisciplinary team (MDT) workshops, cadaveric surgical training, surgical mentoring, pathological audit and radiological workshops. Results: Overall, 147 (89.6%) of 164 MDTs from 151 National Health Service (NHS) Trusts (some with two MDTs) in England participated in 15 workshops in Basingstoke or Leeds. In addition, 112 surgeons attended a 1-day cadaveric training programme in Bristol, Newcastle or Nottingham, with the main focus on extralevator abdominoperineal excision and pelvic reconstruction, with input from anatomists and from colorectal and plastic surgeons. Conclusion: Optimal staging, selective preoperative chemoradiotherapy and precise surgery were considered as crucial to improve the outcome for patients with low rectal cancer. © 2013 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.

Jefford M.,Australian Cancer Survivorship Center chard Pratt Legacy | Jefford M.,University of Melbourne | Rowland J.,U.S. National Cancer Institute | Grunfeld E.,Ontario Cancer Institute | And 4 more authors.
British Journal of Cancer | Year: 2013

Increasing cancer incidence together with improved survival rates are contributing to the growing number of cancer survivors. Survivors may encounter a range of potential effects as a result of the cancer itself or cancer treatments. Traditionally, the major focus of follow-up care has been on detection of cancer recurrence; however, the efficacy of such strategies is questionable. Traditional follow-up frequently fails to identify or adequately address many survivors' concerns. Aftercare needs to be planned to enable better outcomes for survivors, while using scarce health-care resources efficiently. This review focuses on provision of survivorship care, rather than on research. England's National Cancer Survivorship Initiative has developed principles for improved care of those living with and beyond cancer. These include risk-stratified pathways of care, the use of treatment summaries and care plans, information and education to enable choice and the confidence to self manage, rapid re-access to specialist care, remote monitoring and well-coordinated care. Many of these principles are relevant internationally, though preferred models of care will depend on local circumstances. © 2013 Cancer Research UK. All rights reserved.

Hoskin P.J.,Mount Vernon Cancer Center | Forbes H.,Clatterbridge Center for Oncology | Ball C.,Clatterbridge Center for Oncology | Riley D.,Network Intelligence | Cooper T.,National Cancer Action Team
Clinical Oncology | Year: 2013

Aims, Materials and method: Data in the national radiotherapy dataset for England for 2009-2011 is based upon downloads of activity from every linear accelerator in the country through its oncology management system linked to the local patient administration system to give a full overview of each patient episode. Results: An analysis of this dataset shows that there is still a considerable variation in radiotherapy activity across the country, with a two-fold variation between the most and least active networks. Lower activity is seen in London and the southeast compared with the rest of the country, but when the data are split between the north and south of the country, no such variation is seen. Activity is higher in smaller centres and non-teaching centres. About half of all treatment is palliative and this proportion does not vary with geography, although there is considerable variation between individual centres in the proportion of radical radiotherapy given. There is a trend towards less use of radiotherapy, both radical and palliative, in the more deprived population groups, although no change in the relative use of palliative and radical treatment. Conclusion: It is important to emphasise that these data currently reflect activity patterns only and do not reflect quality of care or treatment outcomes, which will be achieved by linkage with cancer registry data in the future. © 2013 The Royal College of Radiologists.

Elliss-Brookes L.,Avon | McPhail S.,Network Intelligence | Ives A.,South West Public Health Observatory | Greenslade M.,South West Public Health Observatory | And 3 more authors.
British Journal of Cancer | Year: 2012

Background: Cancer survival in England is lower than the European average, which has been at least partly attributed to later stage at diagnosis in English patients. There are substantial regional and demographic variations in cancer survival across England. The majority of patients are diagnosed following symptomatic or incidental presentation. This study defines a methodology by which the route the patient follows to the point of diagnosis can be categorised to examine demographic, organisational, service and personal reasons for delayed diagnosis. Methods: Administrative Hospital Episode Statistics data are linked with Cancer Waiting Times data, data from the cancer screening programmes and cancer registration data. Using these data sets, every case of cancer registered in England, which was diagnosed in 2006-2008, is categorised into one of eight Routes to Diagnosis. Results: Different cancer types show substantial differences between the proportion of cases that present by each route, in reasonable agreement with previous clinical studies. Patients presenting via Emergency routes have substantially lower 1-year relative survival. Conclusion: Linked cancer registration and administrative data can be used to robustly categorise the route to a cancer diagnosis for all patients. These categories can be used to enhance understanding of and explore possible reasons for delayed diagnosis. © 2012 Cancer Research UK.

Simpson J.C.,University College London | Moonesinghe S.R.,University College London | Moonesinghe S.R.,National Health Research Institute | Grocott M.P.W.,University College London | And 9 more authors.
British Journal of Anaesthesia | Year: 2015

Background The UK Department of Health Enhanced Recovery Partnership Programme collected data on 24 513 surgical patients in the UK from 2009-2012. Enhanced Recovery is an approach to major elective surgery aimed at minimizing perioperative stress for the patient. Previous studies have shown Enhanced Recovery to be associated with reduced hospital length of stay and perioperative morbidity. Methods In this national clinical audit, National Health Service hospitals in the UK were invited to submit patient-level data. The data regarding length of stay and compliance with each element of Enhanced Recovery protocols for colorectal, orthopaedic, urological and gynaecological surgery patients were analysed. The relationship between Enhanced Recovery protocol compliance and length of stay was measured. Results From 16 267 patients from 61 hospital trusts, three out of four surgical specialties showed Enhanced Recovery, compliance being weakly associated with shorter length of stay (correlation coefficients -0.18, -0.14, -0.25 in colorectal, orthopaedics and gynaecology respectively). At a cut-off of 80% compliance, good compliance was associated with two, one and three day reductions in median length of stay respectively in colorectal, orthopaedic and urological surgeries, with no saving in gynaecology. Conclusions This study is the largest assessment of the relationship between Enhanced Recovery protocol compliance and outcome in four surgical specialties. The data suggest that higher compliance with an Enhanced Recovery protocol has a weak association with shorter length of stay. This suggests that changes in process, resulting from highly protocolised pathways, may be as important in reducing perioperative length of stay as any individual element of Enhanced Recovery protocols in isolation. © 2015 The Author 2015.

Loading National Cancer Action Team collaborators
Loading National Cancer Action Team collaborators