Ka. Cronin et Ej. Feuer, Cumulative cause-specific mortality for cancer patients in the presence ofother causes: a crude analogue of relative survival, STAT MED, 19(13), 2000, pp. 1729-1740
Citations number
21
Categorie Soggetti
Research/Laboratory Medicine & Medical Tecnology","Medical Research General Topics
A common population-based cancer progress measure for net survival (surviva
l in the absence of other causes) of cancer patients is relative survival.
Relative survival is defined as the ratio of a population of observed survi
vors in a cohort of cancer patients to the proportion of expected survivors
in a comparable set of cancer-free individuals in the general public, thus
giving a measure of excess mortality due to cancer. Relative survival was
originally designed to address the question of whether or not there is evid
ence that patients have been cured. It has proven to be a useful survival m
easure in several areas, including the evaluation of cancer control efforts
and the application of cure models. However, it is not representative of t
he actual survival patterns observed in a cohort of cancer patients. This p
aper suggests a measure for cumulative crude tin the presence of other caus
es) cause-specific probability of death for a population diagnosed with can
cer. The measure does not use cause of death information which can be unrel
iable for population cancer registries. Point estimates and variances are d
erived for crude cause-specific probability of death using relative surviva
l instead of cause of death information. Examples are given for men diagnos
ed with localized prostate cancer over the age of 70 and women diagnosed wi
th regional breast cancer using Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results
(SEER) Program data. The examples emphasize the differences in crude and ne
t mortality measures and suggest areas where a crude measure is more inform
ative. Estimates of this type are especially important for older patients a
s new screening modalities detect cancers earlier and choice of treatment o
r even 'watchful waiting' become viable options. Published in 2000 by John
Wiley & Sons, Ltd.