• R Doll and J Boreham.
• Epidemiological Studies Unit, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Infirmary, Unit Harkness Building, OX2 6HE Oxford, UK. secretary@ctsu.ox.ac.uk
• Br. J. Cancer. 2005 Apr 11;92(7):1329-35.

AbstractComparisons of survival rates of given diseases with different treatments or in different places often gave misleading results until the introduction of controlled trials. Recent reports of relatively low survival rates following the treatment of cancer in the UK compared to the rates in other countries, not based on controlled trials, may consequently be misleading. Their validity has, therefore, been tested by comparing the levels and trends in mortality--the ultimate criterion by which the success or failure of any system of care can be judged. For this purpose, rates and trends in rates over 20-50 years have been compared in five European countries of similar economic status (France, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the UK). The UK rates are not generally worse than those in the other countries and are sometimes better. Exceptions were cancer of the lung, large bowel, and breast, the first of which is explained by differences in the prevalence of smoking.

24 keywords...

hide…