Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

How representative are the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) Program cancer data of the United States?

  • Published:
Cancer Causes & Control Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective: Data from the 11s Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results tumor registries cover 14% of the US population and are often used to provide national estimates of cancer incidence and survival. Cancer mortality data for the US and for SEER are compared to assess the representation of SEER to the US.

Methods: Comparisons between US and SEER cancer mortality were made for 16 of the leading causes of cancer death. Cancer site-specific comparisons were also made by race and sex. In addition, tobacco-related cancers were considered. Analyses were performed for the years when all 11 SEER registries were included in the SEER program. Poisson regression was used to estimate site-specific cancer mortality rate ratios between the US and SEER.

Results: Cancer site-specific mortality rates derived from SEER data tend to under-represent the US cancer mortality experience for white males and females and black males. Under-representation is observed across the majority of SEER registries, with the highest amount of under representation in Utah and New Mexico. Under-representation of SEER data compared with US data is noticeably greater among tobacco-related cancers, particularly in Utah and New Mexico.

Conclusion: For certain cancer sites, particularly tobacco-related cancers, the SEER coverage population is not representative of the US population.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jemal A, Tiwari RC, Murray T, Ghafoor A, Samuels A, Ward E, Feuer EJ, Thun MJ (2004) Cancer statistics, 2004. CA Cancer J Clin 54: 8–29.

    Google Scholar 

  2. National Center for Health Statistics. Mortality Data from the National Vital Statistics System. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ nchs/about/major/dvs/desc.htm.

  3. Merrill RM, Capocaccia R, Feuer EJ, Mariotto A (2000) Cancer prevalence estimates based on tumour registry data in the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER)program. Int J Epidemiol 29: 197–207.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ries LAG, Eisner MP, Kosary CL, Hankey BF, Miller BA, Clegg L, Mariotto A, Fay MP, Feuer EJ, Edwards BK eds. (2003) SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2000, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD;Available at: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/ 1975_2000, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  5. National Program of Cancer Registries, Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Prevention and Control, 2004. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/npcr/.

  6. Ries LA, Wingo PA, Miller DS, Howe HL, Weir HK, Rosenberg HM, Vernon SW, Cronin K, Edwards BK (2000) The annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1973–1997, with a special section on colorectal cancer. Cancer 15: 398–424.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Howe HL, Wingo PA, Thun MJ, Ries LA, Rosenberg HM, Feigal EG, Edwards BK (2001) Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer (1973–1998), featuring cancers with recent increasing trends. J Natl Cancer Inst 93: 824–842.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Weir HK, Thun MJ, Hankey BF, Ries LA, Howe HL, Wingo PA, Jemal A, Ward E, Anderson RN, Edwards BK (2003) Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2000, featuring the uses of surveillance data for cancer prevention and control. J Natl Cancer Inst 95: 1276–1299.

    Google Scholar 

  9. US Cancer Statistics Working Group. United States Cancer Statistics:1999 Incidence. Atlanta (GA): Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute;2002.

    Google Scholar 

  10. US Cancer Statistics Working Group. United States Cancer Statistics:2000 Incidence. Atlanta (GA): Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute;2003.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Wingo PA, Jamison PM, Hiatt RA, Weir HK, Gargiullo PM, Hutton M et al. (2003) Building the infrastructure for nationwide cancer surveillance and control-a comparison between the national program of cancer registries (NPCR)and the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER)program (United States). Cancer Causes Contr 14: 175–193.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Frey CM, McMillen MM, Cowan CD, Horm JW, Kessler LG (1992) Representativeness of the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program data:recent trends in cancer epidemiology. J Natl Cancer Inst 84: 872–877.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Dorn HF (1994) Illness from cancer in the United States. Public Health Rep 59: 33–48, 65–77, 97–115.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Dorn HF, Culter SJ (1959) Morbidity from cancer in the United States. Public Health Serv Monogr 56: 1–207.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cutler SJ, Young JL Jr, eds. (1975) Third national cancer survey: incidence data. Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 41: 1–454.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Cutler SJ, Ederer F, eds. (1961) End results and mortality trends in cancer:part 1. End results in cancer. Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 6: 1–129.

    Google Scholar 

  17. SEER. Characteristics of the SEER population compared with the total United State population. National Cancer Institute. Avail-able at: http://www.seer.cancer.gov/registries/characteristics.html.

  18. Percy C, Van Holten V, Muir C, eds. (1990) International Classification of Diseases for Oncology, 2nd edn. Geneva: World Health Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  19. US Public Health Service (1968) International Classification of Diseases, 8th Revision, adapted for use in the United States by the US Department of Health, Education and Welfare Public Health Service. Washington DC: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  20. American Medical Association (1997) International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification, 3rd edn, Vols 1–2. Dover, DE: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  21. World Health Organization (1992) International Statistical Clas-sification of Diseases and Related Health Problems:ICD 10. Vols 1–3. Geneva: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Shambaugh EM, Weiss MA, Axtell LM (1981) Summary Staging Guide for the Cancer Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)Program. US Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service. National Institutes of Health. NIH Publication No. 81–2313.

  23. United States Department of Health and Human Services, Reducing the Health Consequences of Smoking:25 Years of Progress. A Report of the Surgeon General, 1989, DHHS Publication No. (CDC)89–8411 (Rockville, Md.: Centers for Disease Control, Office on Smoking and Health, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  24. SEER*Stat 5.1, Released January (2004) National Cancer Insti-tute. Available at http://seer.cancer.gov/seerstat/.

  25. SEER*Stat Database:Mortality-All COD, Public-Use With State, Total US (1969–2000), National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program, Cancer Statistics Branch, released April 2003. Underlying mortality data provided by NCHS (www.cdc.gov/nchs).

  26. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)Program (www.seer.cancer.gov)SEER*Stat Database:Populations-Total US (1969–2000), National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program, Cancer Statistics Branch, released April 2003.

  27. McCullagh P, Nelder JA (1989) Generalized Linear Models, 2nd edn. London: Chapman Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Merrill RM, Hilton SC, Daniels M (2003) Impact of the LDS church 's health doctrine on deaths from diseases and conditions associated with cigarette smoking. Ann Epidemiol 13: 704–711.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Tobacco use-2002. Prevalence data. Behavior risk factor surveil-lance system. National Center for chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Available at http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/brfss/ list.asp?cat=TU&yr=2002& qkey=621&state=All.

  30. Health, United States, 2003. Table 60. p. 214. Available at http:// www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/pubs/pubd/hus/trendtables.htm.

  31. Merrill RM (2001) Demographics and health-related factors of men receiving prostate-specific antigen screening in Utah. Prev Med 33: 646–652.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Lemon S, Zapka J, Puleo E, Luckmann R, Chasan-Taber L (2001) Colorectal cancer screening participation:comparisons with mammography and prostate-specific antigen screening. Am J Public Health 91: 1264–1272.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Hofer T, Katz S (1996) Healthy behaviors among women in the United States and Ontario:the effect on use of preventive care. Am J Public Health 86: 1755–1759.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kiefe C, Williams O, Greenlund K, Ulene V, Gardin J, Raczynski J (1998) Health care access and seven-year change in cigarette smoking. The CARDIA Study. Am J Prev Med 15: 146–154.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Hambright TZ (1969) Comparability of marital status, race, nativity, and country of origin on the death certificate and matching census record. Vital Health Stat 2: 1–47.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Sorlie PD, Rogot E, Johnson NJ (1992) Validity of demographic characteristics on the death certificate. Epidemiology 3: 181–184.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Poe GS, Powell-Griner E, McLaughlin JK, Placek PJ, Thompson GB, Robinson K (1993) Comparability of the death certificate and the 1986 National Mortality Followback Survey. Vital Health Stat 2 (118):1–53. DHHS Publ. No. (PHS)94–1392.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Kircher T, Nelson J, Burdo H (1985) The autopsy as a measure of accuracy of the death certificate. N Engl J Med 313: 1263–1269.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Percy C, Stanek E 3rd, Gloeckler L (1981) Accuracy of cancer death certificates and its effect on cancer mortality statistics. Am J Public Health 71: 242–50.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Percy CL, Miller BA, Gloeckler Ries LA (1990) Effect of changes in cancer Classification and the certificates on trends in cancer mortality. Ann NY Acad Sci 609: 87–99.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Ray M. Merrill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kirk A. Dearden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Merrill, R.M., Dearden, K.A. How representative are the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) Program cancer data of the United States?. Cancer Causes Control 15, 1027–1034 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-004-1324-5

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-004-1324-5

Search

Navigation