ArticleThe Lancet. Oncology2019
Progress in cancer survival, mortality, and incidence in seven high-income countries 1995-2014 (ICBP SURVMARK-2): a population-based study.
Article in The Lancet. Oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 578 papers, 8 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
578 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Program Guidelines for the National Lung Cancer Screening Program: Targeted Lung Cancer Screening in High-Risk Individuals in Australia.The Medical journal of Australia · 2026Guideline
- Time-dynamic perspectives on cancer therapy-related cardiotoxicity: a systematic review and time-course evidence synthesis for multibiomarker monitoring.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Optimizing post-acute care inpatient rehabilitation for patients with brain metastasis: A systematic review of functional outcomes.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy enhances survival outcomes in primary ovarian cancer following cytoreductive surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review of smartphone applications for cancer survivors.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2024Pooled it
- Prevalence of opioid misuse in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.British journal of cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Baduanjin exercise for negative emotion of patients undergoing chemotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Laparoscopic Versus Open Gastrectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2024Pooled it
- AI-based chest X-ray prioritization in the lung cancer diagnostic pathway: the LungIMPACT randomized controlled trial.Nature medicine · 2026Trial
- Evaluating the efficacy of photobiomodulation therapy in the management of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy: a pilot trial (NEUROLIGHT trial).Lasers in medical science · 2026Trial
- Non-invasive diagnosis of esophageal cancer by a simplified circulating cell-free DNA methylation assay targeting OTOP2 and KCNA3: a double-blinded, multicenter, prospective study.Journal of hematology & oncology · 2024Trial
- Data resource profile: National Cancer Registry Ireland.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2026Article
- Global burden of esophageal cancer attributable to smoking and alcohol, 1990-2021, with projections to 2040: a population-based analysis of the global burden of disease study 2021.Annals of medicine · 2026Observational
- Impact of a recent cancer diagnosis on bleeding risk after myocardial infarction.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2026Article
- Possible Links Between PMInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Review
- Predictors of dysfunction in fully versus partially covered self-expanding metal stents for malignant esophageal strictures: a 10-year multicenter study.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Observational
- Clinical Interchangeability of 22C3 and 28 - 8 PD-L1 assays for patient selection in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Article
- Article
- Temporal and socioeconomic trends in hospital admissions for miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy in England, 2004-2024: a nationwide study.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Article
518 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
38 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPopulation-based cancer survival estimates provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of cancer services and can reflect the prospects of cure. As part of the second phase of the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP), the Cancer Survival in High-Income Countries (SURVMARK-2) project aims to provide a comprehensive overview of cancer survival across seven high-income countries and a comparative assessment of corresponding incidence and mortality trends.
methodsIn this longitudinal, population-based study, we collected patient-level data on 3·9 million patients with cancer from population-based cancer registries in 21 jurisdictions in seven countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, and the UK) for seven sites of cancer (oesophagus, stomach, colon, rectum, pancreas, lung, and ovary) diagnosed between 1995 and 2014, and followed up until Dec 31, 2015. We calculated age-standardised net survival at 1 year and 5 years after diagnosis by site, age group, and period of diagnosis. We mapped changes in incidence and mortality to changes in survival to assess progress in cancer control.
findingsIn 19 eligible jurisdictions, 3 764 543 cases of cancer were eligible for inclusion in the study. In the 19 included jurisdictions, over 1995-2014, 1-year and 5-year net survival increased in each country across almost all cancer types, with, for example, 5-year rectal cancer survival increasing more than 13 percentage points in Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. For 2010-14, survival was generally higher in Australia, Canada, and Norway than in New Zealand, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. Over the study period, larger survival improvements were observed for patients younger than 75 years at diagnosis than those aged 75 years and older, and notably for cancers with a poor prognosis (ie, oesophagus, stomach, pancreas, and lung). Progress in cancer control (ie, increased survival, decreased mortality and incidence) over the study period was evident for stomach, colon, lung (in males), and ovarian cancer.
interpretationThe joint evaluation of trends in incidence, mortality, and survival indicated progress in four of the seven studied cancers. Cancer survival continues to increase across high-income countries; however, international disparities persist. While truly valid comparisons require differences in registration practice, classification, and coding to be minimal, stage of disease at diagnosis, timely access to effective treatment, and the extent of comorbidity are likely the main determinants of patient outcomes. Future studies are needed to assess the impact of these factors to further our understanding of international disparities in cancer survival.
fundingCanadian Partnership Against Cancer; Cancer Council Victoria; Cancer Institute New South Wales; Cancer Research UK; Danish Cancer Society; National Cancer Registry Ireland; The Cancer Society of New Zealand; National Health Service England; Norwegian Cancer Society; Public Health Agency Northern Ireland, on behalf of the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry; The Scottish Government; Western Australia Department of Health; and Wales Cancer Network.
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.