Completeness of TNM staging of small-cell and non-small-cell lung cancer in the Danish cancer registry, 2004–2009

Objective We examined the completeness of TNM staging of small-cell (SCLC) and nonsmall- cell (NSCLC) lung cancer in the national Danish Cancer Registry (DCR) and whether staging varied by year of diagnosis, gender, age, degree of comorbidity, or presence of histopathological diagnosis. Methods We identified all patients with SCLCs and NSCLCs registered in the DCR during 2004–2009 and examined the completeness of their TNM registrations. Completeness was defined as the number of recorded individuals with TNM divided by the total number of patients. Completeness was calculated for TNM, T, N, and M individually, overall, and by year of diagnosis, gender, age at diagnosis, and comorbidity. Data regarding comorbidity was obtained from the Danish National Patient Register (DNPR). We performed separate analyses for patients with a histopathologically verified diagnosis of NSCLC. Finally, we designed an algorithm to categorize tumors with missing TNM components as limited, extensive, or distant disease. Results Overall TNM staging completeness was 77.5% (95% confidence interval (CI): 76.1%–78.8%) for SCLC and 77.9% (95% CI: 77.3%–78.4%) for NSCLC. Completeness did not vary by gender and increased during the study period. The proportion of staged patients was lower among patients above 80 years of age or with medium to high levels of comorbidity. Conclusion Overall TNM completeness for SCLC and NSCLC in the Danish Cancer Registry is high, but decreases with increasing levels of comorbidity and at ages greater than 80 years. Researchers should be aware of these potential sources of bias.

[1]  B. Bjerregaard,et al.  The Danish Pathology Register , 2011, Scandinavian journal of public health.

[2]  J. Coebergh,et al.  Effect of comorbidity on the treatment and prognosis of elderly patients with non-small cell lung cancer , 2004, Thorax.

[3]  Cary P Gross,et al.  NCI SEER public-use data: applications and limitations in oncology research. , 2009, Oncology.

[4]  J. Blanco,et al.  Age, comorbidity, treatment decision and prognosis in lung cancer. , 2008, Age and ageing.

[5]  C. Balch,et al.  AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 6th ed , 2002 .

[6]  K. Helweg-larsen The Danish Register of Causes of Death , 2011, Scandinavian journal of public health.

[7]  Michael Simoff,et al.  Impact of comorbidity on lung cancer survival , 2003, International journal of cancer.

[8]  J. Rose,et al.  Complexity of care needs and unstaged cancer in elders: a population-based study. , 2007, Cancer detection and prevention.

[9]  R. Merrill,et al.  Unstaged cancer in the United States: a population-based study , 2011, BMC Cancer.

[10]  E. Felip,et al.  Early stage and locally advanced (non-metastatic) non-small-cell lung cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. , 2010, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[11]  C. Pedersen,et al.  The Danish Civil Registration System , 2011, Scandinavian journal of public health.

[12]  A. Bogers,et al.  Charlson comorbidity index as a predictor of long-term outcome after surgery for nonsmall cell lung cancer. , 2005, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[13]  Kenji Eguchi,et al.  A Japanese Lung Cancer Registry Study: Prognosis of 13,010 Resected Lung Cancers , 2008, Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

[14]  Martin Kulldorff,et al.  Missing stage and grade in Maryland prostate cancer surveillance data, 1992-1997. , 2006, American journal of preventive medicine.

[15]  H. Storm,et al.  The Danish Cancer Registry--history, content, quality and use. , 1997, Danish medical bulletin.

[16]  Timothy L Lash,et al.  The predictive value of ICD-10 diagnostic coding used to assess Charlson comorbidity index conditions in the population-based Danish National Registry of Patients , 2011, BMC medical research methodology.

[17]  Marianne Lundkjær Gjerstorff,et al.  The Danish Cancer Registry , 2011, Scandinavian journal of public health.

[18]  L. Holmberg,et al.  The completeness of the Swedish Cancer Register – a sample survey for year 1998 , 2009, Acta oncologica.

[19]  C. Mathers,et al.  Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008 , 2010, International journal of cancer.

[20]  Elsebeth Lynge,et al.  The Danish National Patient Register , 2011, Scandinavian journal of public health.

[21]  C. Mackenzie,et al.  A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. , 1987, Journal of chronic diseases.

[22]  J. Shih,et al.  The Prognostic Value of the Simplified Comorbidity Score in the Treatment of Small Cell Lung Carcinoma , 2011, Journal of Thoracic Oncology.

[23]  Cristián Zegers Ariztía,et al.  Manual , 2002 .

[24]  E. Felip,et al.  Small-cell lung cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. , 2010, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[25]  C. Compton,et al.  AJCC Cancer Staging Manual , 2002, Springer New York.