The reliability of multi-source data linkage for population-based cancer survival estimates: A study in a metropolitan cancer registry of China

Abstract

Background: Population-based cancer survival is a key metric in evaluating the overall effectiveness of health services and cancer control activities. Advancement in information technology enables accurate vital status tracking through multi-source data linkage. However, its reliability for survival estimates in China is unclear.

Methods: We analyzed data from Dalian Cancer Registry to evaluate the reliability of multi-source data linkage for population-based cancer survival estimates in China. Newly diagnosed cancer patients in 2015 were included and followed until June 2021. We conducted single-source data linkage by linking patients to Dalian Vital Statistics System, and multi-source data linkage by further linking to Dalian Household Registration System and the hospital medical records. Patient vital status was subsequently determined through active follow-up via telephone calls, referred to as comprehensive follow-up, which served as the gold standard. Using the cohort method, we calculated 5-year observed survival and age-standardized relative survival for 20 cancer types and all cancers combined.

Results: Compared to comprehensive follow-up, single-source data link-age overestimated 5-year observed survival by 3.2% for all cancers combined, ranging from 0.1% to 8.6% across 20 cancer types. Multi-source data linkage provided a relatively complete patient vital status, with an observed survival estimate of only 0.3% higher for all cancers, ranging from 0% to 1.5% across 20 cancer types.

Conclusion: Multi-source data linkage contributes to reliable population-based cancer survival estimates in China. Linkage of multiple databases might be of great value in improving the efficiency of follow-up and the quality of survival data for cancer patients in developing countries.

Keywords

follow-up strategy / survival estimates / multi-source data linkage / population-based cancer registry

References

[1] Gil F, Miranda-Filho A, Uribe-Perez C, et al. Impact of the management and proportion of lost to follow-up cases on cancer survival estimates for small population-based cancer registries. J Cancer Epidemiol. 2022;2022:9068214.

[2] Wei W, Zeng H, Zheng R, et al. Cancer registration in China and its role in cancer prevention and control. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(7):e342-e349.

[3] Henson KE, Elliss-Brookes L, Coupland VH, et al. Data resource profile: national cancer registration dataset in england. Int J Epidemiol. 2020;49(1):16-16h.

[4] Gjerstorff ML. The Danish Cancer Registry. Scand J Pub Health. 2011;39(7_suppl):42-45.

[5] White MC, Babcock F, Hayes NS, et al. The history and use of cancer registry data by public health cancer control programs in the United States. Cancer. 2017;123(S24):4969-4976.

[6] U. S. National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute. Cancer Patient Follow-up. 2023. Accessed April 24, 2024. Via “The Cancer Patient Follow-Up module” in the “National Cancer Institute SEER Training Modules” website.

[7] Parkin DM, Whelan SL, Ferlay J, Teppo L, Thomas DB. Cancer Incidence in Five Continents. Vo. VIII. International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2002.

[8] Zeng X, Adair T, Wang L, et al. Measuring the completeness of death registration in 2844 Chinese counties in 2018. BMC Med. 2020;18(1):176.

[9] Behera P, Patro BK. Population based cancer registry of India—the challenges and opportunities. Asian Pacific J Cancer Prevent. 2018;19(10):2885-2889.

[10] Foerster M, Anele A, Adisa C, et al. Few losses to follow-up in a sub-Saharan African cancer cohort via active mobile health follow-up. Am J Epidemiol. 2020;189(10):1185-1196.

[11] Yu L, Liu L, Mu H, et al. Analysis of bias in cancer survival in population assessed by simple passive follow-up. Chin J Cancer PreTreat. 2015;22(6):407-411.

[12] Swaminathan R. Lack of active follow-up of cancer patients in Chennai, India: implications for population-based survival estimates. Bull World Health Organ. 2008;86(7):509-515.

[13] Pinsky PF, Yu K, Black A, Huang WY, Prorok PC. Active follow-up versus passive linkage with cancer registries for case ascertainment in a cohort. Cancer Epidemiol. 2016;45:26-31.

[14] Pakilit AT, Kahn BA, Petersen L, Abraham LS, Greendale GA, Ganz PA. Making effective use of tumor registries for cancer survivorship research. Cancer. 2001;92(5):1305-1314.

[15] Weir HK, Johnson CJ, Mariotto AB, et al. Evaluation of North American Association of Central Cancer Registries’ (NAACCR) data for use in population-based cancer survival studies. JNCI Monographs. 2014;2014(49):198-209.

[16] Bray F, Colombet M, Aitken JF, et al. Cancer Incidence in Five Continents. IARC Scientific Publication No. 155. XII. International Agency for Research on Cancer;2002.

[17] Zeng H, Chen W, Zheng R, et al. Changing cancer survival in China during 2003–15: a pooled analysis of 17 population-based cancer registries. Lancet Glob Health. 2018;6(5):e555-e567.

[18] Fu R, Sun K, Wang X, et al. Survival differences between the USA and an urban population from China for all cancer types and 20 individual cancers: a population-based study. Lancet Reg Health Western Paci. 2023;37:100799.

[19] Wang X, Fu R, Lin H, et al. Comprehensive follow-up analysis of new cancer cases in urban areas of Dalian, Liaoning Province in 2015. China Cancer. 2022;31(5):348-354.

[20] Zhang L, Lin H, Wang J, Wang S, Zhao P, Wang H. Construction of cancer registration report and medical record management information sharing system in Dalian. China Cancer. 2012;21(2):103-105.

[21] Li R, Abela L, Moore J, et al. Control of data quality for population-based cancer survival analysis. Cancer Epidemiol. 2014;38(3):314-320.

[22] Perme MP, Stare J, Estève J. On estimation in relative survival. Biometrics. 2012;68(1):113-120.

[23] Dickman PW, Coviello E. Estimating and modeling relative survival. Stata J Promot Communicat On Statist Stata. 2015;15(1):186-215.

[24] Corazziari I, Quinn M, Capocaccia R. Standard cancer patient population for age standardising survival ratios. Eur J Cancer. 2004;40(15):2307-2316.

[25] An L, Zheng R, Zhang S, Yang J, Sun K, Zeng H. Elandt-Johnson model to calculate the principle of the complete life table methodology and its application in the life table of Chinese population. Chin J Health Sta. 2019;36(5):768-773.

[26] Pokhrel A, Dyba T, Hakulinen T. A Greenwood formula for standard error of the age-standardised relative survival ratio. Eur J Cancer. 2008;44(3):441-447.

[27] Brenner H, Hakulinen T. Implications of incomplete registration of deaths on long-term survival estimates from population-based cancer registries. Int J Cancer. 2009;125(2):432-437.

[28] Andersson TML, Myklebust TÅ, Rutherford MJ, et al. Five ways to improve international comparisons of cancer survival: lessons learned from ICBP SURVMARK-2. Br J Cancer. 2022;126(8):1224-1228.

[29] Zhou H. [The stability of China’s population flow pattern and its implications: based on the data of the 7th National Population Census Bulletin]. Chin J Popul Sci. 2021;3:28-41.

[30] Sankaranarayanan R, Swaminathan R, Brenner H, et al. Cancer survival in Africa, Asia, and Central America: a population-based study. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(2):165-173.

[31] Yang L, Wang N, Zhu WX, Xing XM, Sun TT. [The analysis of the active follow-up study of registered cancer patients between 2002 and 2005 in urban areas of Beijing]. Zhonghua yu fang yi xue za zhi. 2012;46(07):604-606.

[32] Stanley CC, Westmoreland KD, Itimu S, et al. Quantifying bias in survival estimates resulting from loss to follow-up among children with lymphoma in Malawi. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2017;64(6):e26370.

[33] Semeere A, Freeman E, Wenger M, et al. Updating vital status by tracking in the community among patients with epidemic Kaposi sarcoma who are lost to follow-up in sub-Saharan Africa. BMC Cancer. 2017;17(1):611.

[34] Ayako O, Matthew B, Cong C, Takahiro H. Impact of loss-to-follow-up on cancer survival estimates for small populations, a simulation study using Hospital-Based Cancer Registries in Japan. BMJ Open. 2019;10(1):e033510.

[35] Peres SV, Latorre MD, Tanaka LF, et al. Quality and completeness improvement of the Population-based Cancer Registry of São Paulo: linkage technique use. Rev Bras Epidemiol. 2016;19(4):753-765.

[36] Andrew NE, Sundararajan V, Thrift AG, et al. Addressing the challenges of cross-jurisdictional data linkage between a national clinical quality registry and government-held health data. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2016;40(5):436-442.

[37] Chong K, Maida J, Ong HI, et al. Cancer incidence and out-comes registries in an Australian context: a systematic review. ANZ J Surg. 2023;93(10):2314-2336.

[38] Haneef R, Delnord M, Vernay M, et al. Innovative use of data sources: a cross-sectional study of data linkage and artificial intelligence practices across European countries. Arch Public Health. 2020;78(1):55.

[39] Alkhalawi E, Allemani C, Al-Zahrani AS, Coleman MP. How does linkage to the national death index affect population-based net survival estimates for women. Gulf J Oncol. 2023;1(41):17-22.

[40] Phillips M, Molnár-Gábor F, Korbel JO, et al. Genomics data sharing needs an international code of conduct. Nature. 2020;578(7793):31-33.

[41] Ramsey I, Corsini N, Hutchinson A, Marker J, Eckert M. Challenges and opportunities for using population health data to investigate cancer survivors’ quality of life in Australia. Qual Life Res. 2022;31(10):2977-2983.

[42] Sriram V, Bennett S, Raman VR, Sheikh K. Developing the National Knowledge Platform in India: a policy and institutional analysis. Health Res Policy Syst. 2018;16(1):13.

[43] Zeng H, Liu Y, Wang L, et al. National Cancer Data Linkage Platform of China: design, methods, and application. China CDC Wkly. 2022;4(13):271-275.

[44] Mboya IB, Teleka S, Kagoye S, Mosha NR, Safari WC. Longitudinal record linkage in sub-Saharan Africa countries: recommendations for healthcare research. Disc Pub Health. 2024;21:12.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2024 The Author(s). Malignancy Spectrum published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Higher Education Press.