Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

International comparisons of survival from lung cancer: pitfalls and warnings

Nature Clinical Practice Oncology volume 4, pages 570–577 (2007)Cite this article

Abstract

Population-based survival data can provide valuable comparative data on outcome but should be interpreted with caution. Differences in data collection and analysis, patient and tumor characteristics and treatment options can have an impact on reported results. Ideally, data from the whole population, including clinical-only diagnoses, should be reported and the methods of case identification described. The relative survival rates should preferably be given. Data on patient characteristics such as age, sex, ethnicity and socioeconomic deprivation should be described, together with tumor details such as pathology and clinical stage. Whenever possible, details on the use of treatments should be reported.

Key Points

  • Population-based survival data can provide valuable information for comparisons of cancer care

  • Methods of data collection and reporting can vary considerably, so differences in these methods should be noted

  • Relative survival should be calculated and reported

  • Patient-related factors such as sex, age, ethnicity and socioeconomic deprivation should be reported

  • Differences in tumor-related factors such as pathology and stage can have an impact on survival

  • The number and type of staging tests performed can influence the recorded distribution of cancer stages in a population

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gadgeel SM et al. (2001) Impact of race in lung cancer: analysis of temporal trends from a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Chest 120: 55–63

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Gregor A et al. (2001) Management and survival of patients with lung cancer in Scotland diagnosed in 1995: results of a national population based study. Thorax 56: 212–217

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Black R et al. (1999) Interpretation of population-based cancer survival data. In Cancer survival in Developing Countries (vol 145) 13–17 (Eds Sankaranarayanan R, Black RJ, Parkin DM) Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer

    Google Scholar 

  4. Capocaccia R et al. (2003) The EUROCARE-3 database: methodology of data collection, standardisation, quality control and statistical analysis. Ann Oncol 14: 14–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Fry WA et al. (1999) Ten-year survey of lung cancer treatment and survival in hospitals in the United States: a national cancer data base report. Cancer 86: 1867–1876

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ries LAG et al. (eds) (2007) SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2004, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD [http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2004/]. Based on November 2006 SEER data submission (accessed August 2007)

  7. Butler CA et al. (2005) Do differences in data reporting contribute to variation in lung cancer survival? J Natl Cancer Inst 97: 1385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fu JB et al. (2005) Lung cancer in women: analysis of the national Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Chest 127: 768–777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Foegle J et al. (2005) Non-small-cell lung cancer in a French department (1982–1997): management and outcome. Br J Cancer 92: 459–466

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Mennecier B et al. (2003) Women and small cell lung cancer: social characteristics, medical history, management and survival: a retrospective study of all the male and female cases diagnosed in Bas-Rhin (eastern France) between 1981 and 1994. Lung Cancer 42: 141–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Robinson DM et al. (2007) Interpreting international comparisons of cancer survival: the effects of incomplete registration and the presence of death certificate only cases on survival estimates. Eur J Cancer 43: 909–913

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Campling BG et al. (2005) A population-based study of lung carcinoma in Pennsylvania: comparison of Veterans Administration and civilian populations. Cancer 104: 833–840

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cartman ML et al. (2002) Lung cancer: district active treatment rates affect survival. J Epidemiol Community Health 56: 424–429

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Demeter SJ et al. (2003) The descriptive epidemiology of primary lung cancer in an Alberta cohort with a multivariate analysis of survival to two years. Can Respir J 10: 435–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Laskin JJ et al. (2004) Population-based outcomes for small cell lung cancer: impact of standard management policies in British Columbia. Lung Cancer 43: 7–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lebitasy M et al. (2001) Progress in the management and outcome of small-cell lung cancer in a French region from 1981 to 1994. Br J Cancer 85: 808–815

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Makitaro R et al. (2002) Prospective population-based study on the survival of patients with lung cancer. Eur Respir J 19: 1087–1092

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Richardson GE et al. (2000) Reported management of lung cancer in Victoria in 1993: comparison with best practice. Anti-Cancer Council of Victoria Lung Cancer Study Group. Med J Aust 172: 321–324

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Vinod SK et al. (2004) Comparison of patterns of care in lung cancer in three area health services in New South Wales, Australia. Intern Med J 34: 677–683

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Stockton D (2001). Cancer survival in Scotland: understanding social variations [thesis]. London: University of London

  21. Bossard N et al. (2006) Survival of cancer patients in France: a population-based study from The Association of the French Cancer Registries (FRANCIM). Eur J Cancer 43: 149–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. McDavid K et al. (2003) Cancer survival in Kentucky and health insurance coverage. Arch Intern Med 163: 2135–2144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Jack RH et al. (2003) Geographical inequalities in lung cancer management and survival in South East England: evidence of variation in access to oncology services? Br J Cancer 88: 1025–1031

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Talback M et al. (2003) Cancer survival in Sweden 1960–1998: developments across four decades. Acta Oncol 42: 637–659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Vinod SK et al. (2003) Lung cancer patterns of care in southwestern Sydney, Australia. Thorax 58: 690–694

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Yeole B (2005) Respiratory cancer population-based survival in Mumbai, India. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 6: 449–454

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Janssen-Heijnen ML et al. (2005) Age and co-morbidity in cancer patients: a population-based approach. Cancer Treat Res 124: 89–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Swerdlow AJ et al. (1998) Trends in cancer incidence and mortality in Scotland: description and possible explanations. Br J Cancer 77 (Suppl 3): S1–S54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Janssen-Heijnen M et al. (2005) Prognostic impact of increasing age and co-morbidity in cancer patients: a population-based approach. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 55: 231–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Bach P et al. (1999) Racial differences in the treatment of early-stage lung cancer. N Engl J Med 341: 1198–1205

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Potosky AL et al. (2004) Population variations in the initial treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 22: 3261–3268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Clegg LX et al. (2002) Cancer survival among US whites and minorities: a SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) Program population-based study. Arch Intern Med 162: 1985–1993

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wisnivesky J et al. (2005) Ethnic disparities in the treatment of stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 71: 1158–1163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Tammemagi CM et al. (2004) In lung cancer patients, age, race-ethnicity, gender and smoking predict adverse comorbidity, which in turn predicts treatment and survival. J Clin Epidemiol 57: 597–609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Mulligan C et al. (2006) Unlimited access to care: effect on racial disparity and prognostic factors in lung cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 15: 25–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Lathan C et al. (2006) The effect of race on invasive staging and surgery in non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 24: 413–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kabat G et al. (1991) Comparison of smoking habits of blacks and whites in a case-control study. Am J Public Health 81: 1483–1486

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Shigematsu H et al. (2005) Clinical and biological features associated with epidermal growth factor receptor gene mutations in lung cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 97: 339–346

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Tsukuma H et al. (2006) Survival of cancer patients diagnosed between 1993 and 1996: a collaborative study of population-based cancer registries in Japan. Jpn J Clin Oncol 36: 602–607

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Coleman MP et al. (2004) Trends and socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival in England and Wales up to 2001. Br J Cancer 90: 1367–1373

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Boyd C et al. (1999) Associations between community income and cancer survival in Ontario, Canada, and the United States. J Clin Oncol 17: 2244–2255

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Gorey KM et al. (1997) An international comparison of cancer survival: Toronto, Ontario, and Detroit, Michigan metropolitan areas. Am J Public Health 87: 1156–1163

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Gorey KM et al. (2000) An international comparison of cancer survival: relatively poor areas of Toronto, Ontario and three US metropolitan areas. J Public Health Med 22: 343–348

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Tammemagi CM et al. (2004) Smoking and lung cancer survival: the role of comorbidity and treatment. Chest 125: 27–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Park S et al. (2006) Impact of prediagnosis smoking, alcohol, obesity, and insulin resistance on survival in male cancer patients: National Health Insurance Corporation Study. J Clin Oncol 24: 5017–5024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Skuladottir H et al. (2006) Does high intake of fruit and vegetables improve lung cancer survival? Lung Cancer 51: 267–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Janssen-Heijnen ML et al. (2001) Trends in incidence and prognosis of the histological subtypes of lung cancer in North America, Australia, New Zealand and Europe. Lung Cancer 31: 123–137

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Devesa SS et al. (2005) International lung cancer trends by histologic type: male:female differences diminishing and adenocarcinoma rates rising. Int J Cancer 117: 294–299

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Strand T et al. (2006) Survival after resection for primary lung cancer: a population-based study of 3211 resected patients. Thorax 61: 710–715

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Goya T et al. (2005) Prognosis of 6644 resected non-small cell lung cancers in Japan: a Japanese lung cancer registry study. Lung Cancer 50: 227–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Janssen-Heijnen M et al. (2001) Is there a common etiology for the rising incidence of and decreasing survival with adenocarcinoma of the lung? Epidemiology 12: 256–258

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Janssen-Heijnen M et al. (1998) Divergent changes in survival for histological types of non-small-cell lung cancer in the southeastern area of The Netherlands since 1975. Br J Cancer 77: 2053–2057

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Brooks D et al. (2007) Temporal trends in non-small cell lung cancer survival in Sweden. Br J Cancer 96: 519–522

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Fergusson RJ et al. (2003) Lung cancer: the importance of seeing a respiratory physician. Eur Respir J 21: 606–610

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Yanagisawa K et al. (2003) Molecular fingerprinting in human lung cancer. Clin Lung Cancer 5: 113–118

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Meyerson M et al. (2005) Genomic and proteomic profiling of lung cancers: lung cancer classification in the age of targeted therapy. J Clin Oncol 23: 3219–3226

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Zhu C et al. (2006) Immunohistochemical markers of prognosis in non-small cell lung cancer: a review and proposal for a multiphase approach to marker evaluation. J Clin Pathol 59: 790–800

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Xi L et al. (2005) Prediction of lymph node metastasis by analysis of gene expression profiles in primary lung adenocarcinomas. Clin Cancer Res 11: 4128–4135

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Moran CJ et al. (2002) RANTES expression is a predictor of survival in stage I lung adenocarcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 8: 3803–3812

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Potti A et al. (2006) A genomic strategy to refine prognosis in early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 355: 570–580

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Feinstein A et al. (1985) The Will Rogers phenomenon: stage migration and new diagnostic techniques as a source of misleading statistics for survival in cancer. N Engl J Med 312: 1604–1608

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Storm H et al. (1999) Do morphology and stage explain the inferior lung cancer survival in Denmark? Eur Respir J 13: 430–435

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Aragoneses F et al. (2002) Influence of delays on survival in the surgical treatment of bronchogenic carcinoma. Lung Cancer 36: 59–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Bozcuk H et al. (2001) Does treatment delay affect survival in non-small cell lung cancer? A retrospective analysis from a single UK centre. Lung Cancer 34: 243–252

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Quarterman R et al. (2003) Effect of preoperative delay on prognosis for patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 125: 108–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Buccheri G et al. (2004) Lung cancer: clinical presentation and specialist referral time. Eur Respir J 24: 898–904

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Myrdal G et al. (2004) Effect of delays on prognosis in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Thorax 59: 45–49

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Marcus P et al. (2000) Lung cancer mortality in the Mayo Lung Project: impact of extended follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst 92: 1308–1316

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Henschke C et al. (2006) Survival of patients with stage I lung cancer detected on CT screening. N Engl J Med 355: 1763–1771

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Patz EJ et al. (2004) Estimate of lung cancer mortality from low-dose spiral computed tomography screening trials: implications for current mass screening recommendations. J Clin Oncol 22: 2202–2206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Ramalingam S et al. (1998) Lung cancer in young patients: analysis of a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. J Clin Oncol 16: 651–657

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Mahmud SM et al. (2003) Patterns of initial management of lung cancer in the Republic of Ireland: a population-based observational study. Lung Cancer 41: 57–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Barbera L et al. (2003) Defining the need for radiotherapy for lung cancer in the general population: a criterion-based, benchmarking approach. Med Care 41: 1074–1085

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Delaney G et al. (2003) A model for decision making for the use of radiotherapy in lung cancer. Lancet Oncol 4: 120–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Erridge S et al. (2005) Lung cancer in South-East Scotland: has treatment and survival improved since 1995? Lung Cancer 49 (Suppl 2): S200

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. SC Erridge is Senior Lecturer in Radiation Oncology at the University of Edinburgh and Edinburgh Cancer Centre, Edinburgh,

    Sara C Erridge

  2. H Møller is Director of King's College London, Thames Cancer Registry and a Professor of Cancer Epidemiology at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and at King's College London, University of London, London,

    Henrik Møller

  3. A Price is Consultant Clinical Oncologist and Honorary Professor of Radiation Oncology at the University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh,

    Allan Price

  4. D Brewster is Consultant in Public Health Medicine at the NHS Information Services Division in Scotland, Director of the Scottish Cancer Registry, and Honorary Clinical Senior Lecturer at Edinburgh University, Edinburgh, UK.,

    David Brewster

Authors
  1. Sara C Erridge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Henrik Møller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Allan Price
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. David Brewster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sara C Erridge.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Table 1

Comparison of lung cancer population-based survival (DOC 171 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Erridge, S., Møller, H., Price, A. et al. International comparisons of survival from lung cancer: pitfalls and warnings. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 4, 570–577 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncponc0932

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncponc0932

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing