Trends in incidence of thick, thin and in situ melanoma in Europe.

BACKGROUND: We analysed trends in incidence for in situ and invasive melanoma in some European countries during the period 1995-2012, stratifying for lesion thickness. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Individual anonymised data from population-based European cancer registries (CRs) were collected and combined in a common database, including information on age, sex, year of diagnosis, histological type, tumour location, behaviour (invasive, in situ) and lesion thickness. Mortality data were retrieved from the publicly available World Health Organization database. RESULTS: Our database covered a population of over 117 million inhabitants and included about 415,000 skin lesions, recorded by 18 European CRs (7 of them with national coverage). During the 1995-2012 period, we observed a statistically significant increase in incidence for both invasive (average annual percent change (AAPC) 4.0% men; 3.0% women) and in situ (AAPC 7.7% men; 6.2% women) cases. DISCUSSION: The increase in invasive lesions seemed mainly driven by thin melanomas (AAPC 10% men; 8.3% women). The incidence of thick melanomas also increased, although more slowly in recent years. Correction for lesions of unknown thickness enhanced the differences between thin and thick cases and flattened the trends. Incidence trends varied considerably across registries, but only Netherlands presented a marked increase above the boundaries of a funnel plot that weighted estimates by their precision. Mortality from invasive melanoma has continued to increase in Norway, Iceland (but only for elder people), the Netherlands and Slovenia.

Completeness and timeliness: Cancer registries could/should improve their performance.

UNLABELLED: Cancer registries must provide complete and reliable incidence information with the shortest possible delay for use in studies such as comparability, clustering, cancer in the elderly and adequacy of cancer surveillance. Methods of varying complexity are available to registries for monitoring completeness and timeliness. We wished to know which methods are currently in use among cancer registries, and to compare the results of our findings to those of a survey carried out in 2006. METHODS: In the framework of the EUROCOURSE project, and to prepare cancer registries for participation in the ERA-net scheme, we launched a survey on the methods used to assess completeness, and also on the timeliness and methods of dissemination of results by registries. We sent the questionnaire to all general registries (GCRs) and specialised registries (SCRs) active in Europe and within the European Network of Cancer Registries (ENCR). RESULTS: With a response rate of 66% among GCRs and 59% among SCRs, we obtained data for analysis from 116 registries with a population coverage of ∼280 million. The most common methods used were comparison of trends (79%) and mortality/incidence ratios (more than 60%). More complex methods were used less commonly: capture-recapture by 30%, flow method by 18% and death certificate notification (DCN) methods with the Ajiki formula by 9%. The median latency for completion of ascertainment of incidence was 18 months. Additional time required for dissemination was of the order of 3-6 months, depending on the method: print or electronic. One fifth (21%) did not publish results for their own registry but only as a contribution to larger national or international data repositories and publications; this introduced a further delay in the availability of data. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer registries should improve the practice of measuring their completeness regularly and should move from traditional to more quantitative methods. This could also have implications in the timeliness of data publication.