ArticleLancet (London, England)2011
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.
Article in Lancet (London, England), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 517 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
517 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 1,123 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mortality rate and predictors of colorectal cancer patients in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Evaluating the Educational Value of Cancer Registries - a Systematic Review and Thematic Analysis.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2024Pooled it
- Observed and relative survival trends of lung cancer: A systematic review of population-based cancer registration data.Thoracic cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Survival rate of colorectal cancer in China: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Economic evaluations of mammography to screen for breast cancer in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review.Journal of global health · 2022Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence Techniques That May Be Applied to Primary Care Data to Facilitate Earlier Diagnosis of Cancer: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Physical activity interventions for disease-related physical and mental health during and following treatment in people with non-advanced colorectal cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Hypermethylation of tumor suppressor genes is a risk factor for poor prognosis in ovarian cancer: A meta-analysis.Medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Survival Rate of Colorectal Cancer in Iran: A Systematic Review and Meta-AnalysisAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2019Pooled it
- Patient and carer perceived barriers to early presentation and diagnosis of lung cancer: a systematic review.BMC cancer · 2019Pooled it
- Factors influencing harmonized health data collection, sharing and linkage in Denmark and Switzerland: A systematic review.PloS one · 2019Pooled it
- A systematic review of health promotion interventions to increase breast cancer screening uptake: from the last 12 years.European journal of public health · 2018Pooled it
- Variations in outcomes by residential location for women with breast cancer: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2018Pooled it
- Five-year cost-effectiveness analysis of the European Fans in Training (EuroFIT) physical activity intervention for men versus no intervention.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2020Trial
- Likelihood of Breast Screening Uptake among Reproductive-aged Women in Ethiopia: A Baseline Survey for Randomized Controlled Trial.Ethiopian journal of health sciences · 2019Trial
- Harmonization Framework for Translating Clinical Cancer Staging Systems for Public Health and Surveillance Use in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Validation Using Indian Cancer Registry Data.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Use of population-based cancer registry data to evaluate organized breast cancer screening programmes in Europe by mode of detection: a scoping review.European journal of public health · 2026Article
- Observational
- Community pharmacy and lung cancer: a service innovation pilot using community pharmacy across Leeds to signpost patients with symptoms of possible lung cancers towards a patient self-request chest X-ray service.BMJ open respiratory research · 2026Article
- Endoscopic ultrasound in differentiation of solid pancreatic head lesions: A single centre experience.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2026Article
457 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
24 authors at 20 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCancer survival is a key measure of the effectiveness of health-care systems. Persistent regional and international differences in survival represent many avoidable deaths. Differences in survival have prompted or guided cancer control strategies. This is the first study in a programme to investigate international survival disparities, with the aim of informing health policy to raise standards and reduce inequalities in survival.
methodsData from population-based cancer registries in 12 jurisdictions in six countries were provided for 2·4 million adults diagnosed with primary colorectal, lung, breast (women), or ovarian cancer during 1995-2007, with follow-up to Dec 31, 2007. Data quality control and analyses were done centrally with a common protocol, overseen by external experts. We estimated 1-year and 5-year relative survival, constructing 252 complete life tables to control for background mortality by age, sex, and calendar year. We report age-specific and age-standardised relative survival at 1 and 5 years, and 5-year survival conditional on survival to the first anniversary of diagnosis. We also examined incidence and mortality trends during 1985-2005.
findingsRelative survival improved during 1995-2007 for all four cancers in all jurisdictions. Survival was persistently higher in Australia, Canada, and Sweden, intermediate in Norway, and lower in Denmark, England, Northern Ireland, and Wales, particularly in the first year after diagnosis and for patients aged 65 years and older. International differences narrowed at all ages for breast cancer, from about 9% to 5% at 1 year and from about 14% to 8% at 5 years, but less or not at all for the other cancers. For colorectal cancer, the international range narrowed only for patients aged 65 years and older, by 2-6% at 1 year and by 2-3% at 5 years.
interpretationUp-to-date survival trends show increases but persistent differences between countries. Trends in cancer incidence and mortality are broadly consistent with these trends in survival. Data quality and changes in classification are not likely explanations. The patterns are consistent with later diagnosis or differences in treatment, particularly in Denmark and the UK, and in patients aged 65 years and older.
fundingDepartment of Health, England; and Cancer Research UK.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.