Lung Cancer
Volume 72, Issue 1 , Pages 16-22, April 2011

Lung cancer in England: Information from the National Lung Cancer Audit (LUCADA)

  • Anna L. Rich

      Affiliations

    • Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: Clinical Sciences Building, City Campus, Hucknall Road, Nottingham, NG5 1PB, United Kingdom. Tel.: +44 115 823 1349; fax: +44 115 823 1946.
  • ,
  • Laila J. Tata

      Affiliations

    • Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom
  • ,
  • Rosamund A. Stanley

      Affiliations

    • The NHS Information Centre, 1 Trevelyan Square, Leeds, LS1 6AE, United Kingdom
  • ,
  • Catherine M. Free

      Affiliations

    • University Hospitals of Leicester, Glenfield Hospital, Groby Road, Leicester, LE3 9QP, United Kingdom
  • ,
  • Michael D. Peake

      Affiliations

    • Clinical Effectiveness & Evaluation Unit, Royal College of Physicians, 11 St. Andrew's Place, Regent's Park, London, NW1 4LE, United Kingdom
  • ,
  • David R. Baldwin

      Affiliations

    • Nottingham University Hospitals, City campus, Hucknall Road, Nottingham, NG5 1PB, United Kingdom
  • ,
  • Richard B. Hubbard

      Affiliations

    • Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom

Received 12 April 2010; received in revised form 1 July 2010; accepted 6 July 2010. published online 05 August 2010.

Abstract 

Aims

Our aims were to determine whether the information in the National Lung Cancer Audit database (LUCADA) is influenced by the completeness of reporting and to describe the current socio-demographics and survival of people with lung cancer in England.

Methods

Using national registry data as a gold standard we stratified NHS Trusts into quartiles on the basis of their patient ascertainment. We assessed the distribution of patient features across these quartiles using Cox and logistic regression. We then examined overall survival and access to treatment.

Results

We analysed data for 60,059 patients whose data were entered between 2004 and 2008. There was little variation in key patient features, treatment and median survival across quartiles of data completeness. Socio-economic disadvantage did not influence survival or access to surgery but was related to a decreased use of chemotherapy.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that LUCADA accurately describes people in England who are diagnosed with lung cancer and can therefore be used to drive health care improvements. Individual patient socio-economic status does not affect survival and has only a limited impact on access to treatment and so NHS Trust level factors should be studied to explain the previously published regional variations in these outcomes.

Keywords: Epidemiology, Lung cancer, Audit, Survival

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 This work is attributed to Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham.

PII: S0169-5002(10)00334-X

doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2010.07.002

Lung Cancer
Volume 72, Issue 1 , Pages 16-22, April 2011