Survival trends for primary liver cancer, 1995–2009: analysis of individual data for 578,740 patients from 187 population-based registries in 36 countries (CONCORD-2)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Primary liver cancer is the fifth most common cancer world-wide, and the second most common cause of death from cancer, with an estimated 841,100 new cases and 781,500 deaths each year. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) accounts for 60–80% of cases, and cholangiocarcinoma 10–40%. We examined global trends in survival for both these sub-types of liver cancer, by country, age, sex and calendar period. Methods: Data on 1,005,032 adults (aged 15–99 years) diagnosed with a primary, invasive malignant neoplasm of the liver or intrahepatic bile ducts between 1995 and 2009 were provided by 243 population-based cancer registries in 60 countries. Analysis was restricted to patients for whom the diagnosis of a primary malignancy had been confirmed by histological or cytological examination, or assignation of a specific morphology code, and to registries from which survival estimates were considered reliable. We estimated both five-year net survival and conditional five-year net survival, for patients who survived to the first anniversary of diagnosis. Funnel plots were used to examine international variation in survival and variation by age and morphology. Results: Data on 578,740 patients from 187 registries in 36 countries were included after quality control. For patients diagnosed during 2004–2009, the pooled estimate of age-standardised five-year net survival for liver cancer was 14.8% (range, 4.4–23.7%), higher than for patients diagnosed during 1995–2000 (11.0%). Survival for patients diagnosed with HCC during 2004–2009 (pooled estimate 17.4%, range 7.7–25.5%) was higher than for those with cholangiocarcinoma (8.4%, range 3.7–16.0%). Survival for patients diagnosed during 2004–2009 was higher in Canada, Italy, Japan, Taiwan and Korea (21.2–23.7%) than the pooled estimate for patients diagnosed some 10 years earlier (1995–2000; 11.0%). Conditional survival in 2004–2009 was also higher in New Zealand, Canada, Taiwan, Korea, and China (42.0–52.7%) than the pooled estimate for 1995–2000 (33.2%). Conclusions: Survival from primary cancers of the liver has increased, but it remains poor in most countries we have examined. International variation in survival highlights the potential to improve outcomes, but prevention must also remain a priority. There is a need for continued and expanded surveillance of survival, especially in low- and middle-income countries, to assess the impact of interventions in policy and treatment. Greater consistency in registration practice and coding of liver cancer would reduce the variation in data quality and further improve the comparability of survival estimates.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».