Elsevier

The Lancet

Volume 383, Issue 9916, 8–14 February 2014, Pages 564-573
The Lancet

Series
Cancer survival: global surveillance will stimulate health policy and improve equity

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62225-4Get rights and content

Summary

Millions of people will continue to be diagnosed with cancer every year for the foreseeable future. These patients all need access to optimum health care. Population-based cancer survival is a key measure of the overall effectiveness of health systems in management of cancer. Survival varies very widely around the world. Global surveillance of cancer survival is needed, because unless these avoidable inequalities are measured, and reported on regularly, nothing will be done explicitly to reduce them.

Introduction

In September, 2011, the UN General Assembly in New York held its first high-level meeting on non-communicable diseases (NCDs). The governments of 113 countries set new strategic objectives for worldwide control of these diseases. The declaration1 emphasised the need for wider research and better policy for the prevention and control of all NCDs, including cancer, because of their rapidly growing effect on public health, especially in developing countries.

In 2008, about 12·7 million people were diagnosed with cancer around the world, and 7·6 million people died from it. More than half (56%) of those who were diagnosed in 2008 and almost 64% of those who died from cancer were living in low-income and middle-income countries.2 In 2010, about 8 million people died from cancer, a 38% increase since 1990.3 Even conservative projections suggest that more than 20 million people will be diagnosed with cancer every year by 2030, with more than 13 million cancer deaths.4 The increase in the number of patients with cancer will arise mainly from population growth and ageing of the population, but in many countries the risk of developing cancer at a given age (age-specific risk) will also rise. All three factors will affect poor countries more than rich ones. Without global policy initiatives, the disparity between the growing cancer burden and the capacity of poorer countries to deal with it can be expected to widen.

After the World Health Assembly in 2012, the governments of 119 countries unanimously agreed a set of 25 indicators and a voluntary global target to reduce premature deaths in people aged 30–69 years from all NCDs by 25% by 2025.5 This target would represent a reduction of about 1·5 million from the predicted 6 million premature cancer deaths each year by 2025. Achievement of this target will need more effective prevention, to reduce incidence, and more effective health systems, to improve survival.

Only population-based cancer registries can indicate whether these two requirements are being met. In 2010, however, WHO assessed the capacity for prevention and control of NCD in 185 countries. Less than half (48%) even had national reporting of mortality. Population-based cancer registries were active in just 17% of low-income countries and 79% of high-income countries, but barely a third (36%) had published a report in the previous 3 years.6 Only 21% of the world's population was covered by cancer registration in 2006.7 At a global level, therefore, reliable and up-to-date information on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival remains scarce.

In this Series paper I cover the need for investment in cancer control, the role of health systems, and the public health usefulness of trends and inequalities in cancer survival. I also cover estimation of the proportion of patients with cancer in a given population who can be deemed to have been cured, and avoidable premature deaths arising from inequalities in survival, before addressing the need for continuous global surveillance of cancer survival as one of the metrics for improvement of cancer control.

Section snippets

Investing in cancer control

Prevention will always be preferable to cure, especially for diseases with such high morbidity and lethality. When the causes are known, however, the latency between exposure and disease for many cancers is measured in decades, and for about half of all cancers the causes are still unknown. For primary prevention, long-term investment is needed to reduce age-specific cancer risks for future populations, but research is under-funded. The US National Cancer Institute is the largest cancer

Health systems, cancer survival, and equity

The millions of cancer patients who will be diagnosed every year for the foreseeable future need access to optimum treatment, wherever they live, to improve their chances of survival. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 25) states: “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of

Variation in survival

There is huge global inequity in access to cancer treatment. For example, radiotherapy can cure some cancers and is a crucial component of therapy for up to half of all cancers; however, although 56% of cancer patients live in low-income and middle-income countries, these countries have only 30% of the world's radiotherapy facilities. 30 countries in Africa and Asia do not have a single radiotherapy machine.18 Within Europe, variation in cancer treatment is wide,19 and variation in survival is

Useful or futile?

Is it useful to identify differences in cancer survival between countries, between regions within a country, or between populations defined by racial or ethnic group or socioeconomic status? Does it have any effect on health policy or the public, especially if the countries being compared have widely different economic development, some of them extremely poor, others with civil conflicts?

Population-based survival is an estimate of the probability of survival after the background mortality that

Cancer control plans

The availability of systematic information on international differences and trends in cancer survival will challenge the myth, prevalent in many countries,17 that cancer is uniformly fatal. When members of the public see that people can survive cancer, this damaging misconception can be corrected, and more patients will be prompted to seek and complete treatment. This aim is one of the goals of the World Cancer Declaration (panel 1).

Equally, international comparisons can challenge the

Inequalities in survival and avoidable premature deaths

Equal treatment for a given cancer should yield equal outcome, irrespective of race,64 geography, or socioeconomic status.65 Racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic differences in survival reflect differences in access to the best health services for minority populations, whether for black people in the USA,66 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia,67 or Māori in New Zealand.68

The wider effect on public health of cancer survival disparities can contribute to the formulation of

The proportion of patients who are cured

Identification of individual cancer patients who might be judged clinically cured is difficult. In the public-health context, however, the proportion of all cancer patients in the population who can be regarded as cured can be estimated from the point where a curve of relative (or net) survival reaches a plateau. This point indicates that, as a group, the patients who have survived up to that time after cancer diagnosis no longer have significant excess mortality over that of the general

Global surveillance of cancer survival

At the World Cancer Congress in Geneva in 2008, the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) called for 11 ambitious goals to be achieved by 2020, and updated the World Cancer Declaration17 to include: “there will be major improvements in cancer survival…in all countries”. The UICC is committed to providing progress reports every 2 years. Global surveillance of cancer survival will support several of the goals in the UICC World Cancer Declaration (panel 1).

Reliable information on global

References (90)

  • R Sankaranarayanan et al.

    Cancer survival in Africa, Asia, and Central America: a population-based study

    Lancet Oncol

    (2010)
  • P Farmer et al.

    Expansion of cancer care and control in countries of low and middle income: a call to action

    Lancet

    (2010)
  • K Sikora et al.

    Essential drugs for cancer therapy: a World Health Organization consultation

    Ann Oncol

    (1999)
  • I Corazziari et al.

    Standard cancer patient population for age standardising survival ratios

    Eur J Cancer

    (2004)
  • JB Cookson

    Cancer survival

    Lancet

    (2000)
  • P Autier et al.

    Cancer survival statistics should be viewed with caution

    Lancet Oncol

    (2007)
  • MP Coleman et al.

    Cancer survival in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and the UK, 1995-2007 (the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership): an analysis of population-based cancer registry data

    Lancet

    (2011)
  • F Berrino et al.

    Survival for eight major cancers and all cancers combined for European adults diagnosed in 1995-99: results of the EUROCARE-4 study

    Lancet Oncol

    (2007)
  • M Sant et al.

    EUROCARE-4. Survival of cancer patients diagnosed in 1995–1999: results and commentary

    Eur J Cancer

    (2009)
  • A Verdecchia et al.

    Recent cancer survival in Europe: a 2000–02 period analysis of EUROCARE-4 data

    Lancet Oncol

    (2007)
  • B Rachet et al.

    Population-based cancer survival trends in England and Wales up to 2007: an assessment of the NHS cancer plan for England

    Lancet Oncol

    (2009)
  • L Ellis et al.

    How many deaths would be avoidable if socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival in England were eliminated? A national population-based study, 1996–2006

    Eur J Cancer

    (2012)
  • S Francisci et al.

    The cure of cancer: a European perspective

    Eur J Cancer

    (2009)
  • BO Anderson et al.

    Optimisation of breast cancer management in low-resource and middle-resource countries: executive summary of the Breast Health Global Initiative consensus, 2010

    Lancet Oncol

    (2011)
  • HE Karim-Kos et al.

    Recent trends of cancer in Europe: a combined approach of incidence, survival and mortality for 17 cancer sites since the 1990s

    Eur J Cancer

    (2008)
  • Political declaration of the High-level Meeting of the General Assembly on the Prevention and Control of Non-communicable Diseases. A/66/L.1

  • A Jemal et al.

    Global cancer statistics

    CA Cancer J Clin

    (2011)
  • Report of the Formal Meeting of Member States to conclude the work on the comprehensive global monitoring framework, including indicators, and a set of voluntary global targets for the prevention and control of noncommunicable diseases

    (Nov 21, 2012)
  • Assessing national capacity for the prevention and control of noncommunicable diseases: report of the 2010 global survey

    (2013)
  • DM Parkin

    The evolution of the population-based cancer registry

    Nat Rev Cancer

    (2006)
  • T O'Callaghan

    Introduction: the prevention agenda

    Nature

    (2011)
  • OW Brawley et al.

    How we do harm: a doctor breaks ranks about being sick in America

    (2012)
  • S Eckhouse et al.

    A survey of public funding of cancer research in the European Union

    PLoS Med

    (2006)
  • RG Feachem et al.

    Getting more for their dollar: a comparison of the NHS with California's Kaiser Permanente

    BMJ

    (2002)
  • FM Knaul et al.

    Investing in cancer care and control

  • N Keating et al.

    Evidence for decision-making: stregthening health information systems and the research base

  • World Cancer Declaration

    UICC

    (2010)
  • Inequity in cancer care: a global perspective. IAEA Human Health Reports No. 3

    (2011)
  • A Micheli et al.

    European health systems and cancer care

    Ann Oncol

    (2003)
  • RG Roetzheim et al.

    Effects of health insurance and race on colorectal cancer treatments and outcomes

    Am J Public Health

    (2000)
  • Obama: health-care reform, part two

    Lancet Oncol

    (2012)
  • P Baili et al.

    Life tables for world-wide comparison of relative survival for cancer (CONCORD study)

    Tumori

    (2008)
  • V Beral et al.

    UK cancer survival statistics

    BMJ

    (2010)
  • LM Woods et al.

    Evidence against the proposition that “UK cancer survival statistics are misleading”: simulation study with National Cancer Registry data

    BMJ

    (2011)
  • K Beniaiche

    La déficience de notre système de santé est à l'origine du taux de survie si bas [in French]

    El Watan [Algeria]

    (Nov 30, 2012)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text