Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25479696›Full record

ArticleLancet (London, England)2015

40-year trends in an index of survival for all cancers combined and survival adjusted for age and sex for each cancer in England and Wales, 1971-2011: a population-based study.

Manuela Quaresma, Michel P Coleman, Bernard Rachet

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Lancet (London, England), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT06642870 (Rare Autoimmune Self-management Programme Development), which is not on this map. Cited by 251 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
251citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06642870 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Rare Autoimmune Self-management Programme Development

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of the West of EnglandRan2024 to 2026Enrolled360ConditionsSystemic Lupus Erthematosus, Systemic Vasculitis, Inflammatory Myositis, Systemic Sclerosis (SSc)ArmsNon-interventional study
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

251 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. [Ovarian tissue cryopreservation and transplantation: a review of clinical progress in fertility preservation].Zhejiang da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Zhejiang University. Medical sciences · 2025
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Patient expectations about the oncologic benefit of pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association · 2025
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

191 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Manuela QuaresmaCancer Research UK Cancer Survival Group, Department of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK. Electronic address: manuela.quaresma@lshtm.ac.uk.
Michel P ColemanCancer Research UK Cancer Survival Group, Department of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Bernard RachetCancer Research UK Cancer Survival Group, Department of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 11700Cancer Research UK 18348Cancer Research UK 18525Cancer Research UK C1336/A11700Cancer Research UK C7923/A18348
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAssessment of progress in cancer control at the population level is increasingly important. Population-based survival trends provide a key insight into the overall effectiveness of the health system, alongside trends in incidence and mortality. For this purpose, we aimed to provide a unique measure of cancer survival.

methodsIn this observational study, we analysed trends in survival with population-based data for 7·2 million adults diagnosed with a first, primary, invasive malignancy in England and Wales during 1971-2011 and followed up to the end of 2012. We constructed a survival index for all cancers combined using data from the National Cancer Registry and the Welsh Cancer Intelligence and Surveillance Unit. The index is designed to be independent of changes in the age distribution of patients with cancer and of changes in the proportion of lethal cancers in each sex. We analysed trends in the cancer survival index at 1, 5, and 10 years after diagnosis for the selected periods 1971-72, 1980-81, 1990-91, 2000-01, 2005-06, and 2010-11. We also estimated trends in age-sex-adjusted survival for each cancer. We define the difference in net survival between the oldest (75-99 years) and youngest (15-44 years) patients as the age gap in survival. We evaluated the absolute change (%) in the age gap since 1971.

findingsThe overall index of net survival increased substantially during the 40-year period 1971-2011, both in England and in Wales. For patients diagnosed in 1971-72, the index of net survival was 50% at 1 year after diagnosis. 40 years later, the same value of 50% was predicted at 10 years after diagnosis. The average 10% survival advantage for women persisted throughout this period. Predicted 10-year net survival adjusted for age and sex for patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2011 ranged from 1·1% for pancreatic cancer to 98·2% for testicular cancer. Net survival for the oldest patients (75-99 years) was persistently lower than for the youngest (15-44 years), even after adjustment for the much higher mortality from causes other than cancer in elderly people.

interpretationThese findings support substantial increases in both short-term and long-term net survival from all cancers combined in both England and Wales. The net survival index provides a convenient, single number that summarises the overall patterns of cancer survival in any one population, in each calendar period, for young and old men and women and for a wide range of cancers with very disparate survival. The persistent sex difference is partly due to a more favourable cancer distribution in women than men. The very wide differences in survival for different cancers, and the persistent age gap in survival, suggest the need for renewed efforts to improve cancer outcomes. Future monitoring of the cancer survival index will not be possible unless the current crisis of public concern about sharing of individual data for public health research can be resolved.

fundingCancer Research UK.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge DistributionEnglandFemaleHumansIncidenceMaleMortalityNeoplasmsRegistriesSex DistributionSurvival AnalysisWales

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.