Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


UK 'trailing other countries on cancer survival rates'

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 17 July 2008
By LYNDSAY MOSS
SURVIVAL rates from cancer in the UK, including Scotland, are significantly lower than other countries around the world, a study revealed yesterday.
The journal Lancet Oncology published the results of the first worldwide analysis of cancer survival rates, finding wide variations between countries.

The highest survival rates in the 31 nations studied were found in the United States, Japan an
d France, while the lowest were in countries such as Algeria, Slovakia and Poland.

The countries of the UK came in the bottom half of the table, but experts said many of the nations did not collect data as comprehensively as the UK, making comparisons misleading.

They also said that since the time the figures were collected – from patients diagnosed in 1990-94 and followed up to 1999 – treatments had vastly improved and more recent data would reveal more favourable results for the UK.

The figures for breast cancer showed Scotland ranked 21st in the countries studied with a five-year survival rate of 70.6 per cent – compared to more than 80 per cent in the US and Canada.

On prostate cancer, Scotland came 17th with a five-year survival of 54.2 per cent, compared to more than 90 per cent in the US. But while the UK collects figures on all cancer patients, the US collects data for less than half, while France collects data for just over 5 per cent.

Professor Michel Coleman, lead researcher from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said the study showed wide differences between countries, and also between black and white people in the US.

He added: "Most of the wide variation in survival is likely due to differences in access to diagnostic and treatment services, and factors such as tumour biology, state at diagnosis or compliance with treatment."

Lesley Walker, from Cancer Research UK, said some of the data used in the study was almost two decades old and the "use of more recent data would mean the gap (between Britain and other countries] is closed significantly".





The full article contains 346 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 16 July 2008 9:16 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

eric,

lothian 17/07/2008 07:58:14
Thia isnt new ,This is common knowledge wordwide,
2

Mrs Numpty,

East Susex 17/07/2008 15:58:56
In Northen Ireland the majority are Unionists, therefore they get preferential treatment, stinks dont it.
3

Proximaking,

Aberdeen 17/07/2008 17:33:52
It's because we have a trades union in charge in this country that looks out for doctors rather than patients, .... the BMA. What other trades union was ever allowed to run its industry apart from that other upper-middle class bastion of "excellence" the Law society? Get the BMA out of medical decision making and get engineers in as they do everywhere that the best results are being obtained and get the doctors down to the average wage of this country as they are in all the countries with the best results. High wages for doctors = low patient care because doctors think they are better than those they work for. The equation is blindingly obvious and blindingly true. It is long past time we stopped accepting that the mugs at the bottom are expected to work to support a lazy minority at the top whose only claim to fame was learning by rote. Give me an engineer who has been taught to question and think for him or herself any day of the week.
4

Willie Mor,

17/07/2008 21:56:09
According to the Lancet the UK five-year survival for prostarte cancer is 54.2 per cent, compared to more than 90 per cent in the US.

As Gordon Brown said some years ago when he added 25 to the total wage bill of the UK, he wan't the NHS to be the best insurance policy in the world.

Seems that like the economy, this too is an illusion.
5

Willie Mor,

17/07/2008 21:58:07
Sorry 25 was intended to be 2% ( National Insuarnce Contribution)
6

Dr JS,

ABERDEEN 18/07/2008 11:38:46
Proximaking at number 3

I have a better suggestion. Why do we not pay our doctors nothing at all?

Afterall they are serving humanity and seem only to get things wrong most of the time? If they get a diagnosis right and do manage to help some unfortunate soul, then they can be paid by "personal satisfaction" of having "made a difference"

Yep this would surely guarantee that we continue to get the highest calibre graduates into the medical profession. "SOMETHING FOR NOTHING" great British mantra!!! Pay them zero and they will come flocking in their thousands to enter this "already heavily subscribed profession"!!!!!!!


You clearly know NOTHING about medical graduates and medical training. I defy you to suggest that anybody entering higher training and obtaining a CCT in medicine, surgery, etc, has done so "by rote learning"!!!!! You simple are deluded to think that one is able to pass, MRCGP, MRCP, MRCS, etc etc by simple parrot fashion recital. These exams require application of knowledge, and years of training to pass. They are widely acknowledged to be some of the most difficult post graduate examinations in the world!!!!

You seem to forget that More than 1.44 million graduates have left the UK to look for more highly paid jobs in countries such as the United States, Canada and Australia. That far outweighs 1.26 million immigrant graduates in the UK, leaving a net "brain loss" of some 200,000 people.

The findings fuel concerns that Britain's failure to defend its medical science, manufacturing and university base is pushing highly skilled workers overseas and risks damaging long-term productivity.

Perhaps by paying medics "low wages" you may precipitate an even greater brain drain and as a result get better care!! yes that makes sense. Bravo old chap.....













7

Dr JS,

aberdeen 18/07/2008 12:18:01
Your diatribe , seems only to expose, how much of a simpleton you really are!


As for the BMA ( for whom I have no love as I am not a member). They dont have a great deal to say re. provision of care for cancer.

The guidelines that doctors follow regarding cancer care are evidence based (ie based on scientific trials) and are written by groups such as SIGN, NICE etc.

If there is a discrepancy in survival rates, we need to carry out a study as to why! remember herceptin et al? sometimes care provision is politically determined and that my friend has nowt to do with pay rates which you seem so infuriated about!

I suggest you learn something before you post, and if you think you can perform better than our doctors, why dont you prove yourself at medical school first....thats if you can make the grade.







 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.