XXXX prevalence in Central Europe: the EUROPREVAL Study.

@entity1 @entity263 @entity0 @entity5 @entity2 @entity1778 @entity978 @entity320
BACKGROUND: Information on @entity5 prevalence is either absent or largely unavailable for central European countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Austria, Germany, The Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and Switzerland cover a population of 13 million inhabitants. @entity5 registries in these countries supplied incidence and survival data for 465 000 cases of @entity5 . The prevalence of stomach, colon, rectum, lung, breast, cervix uteri, corpus uteri and @entity263 , as well as @entity320 , @entity978 , @entity1778 and all @entity5 combined was estimated for the end of 1992. RESULTS: A large heterogeneity was observed within central European countries. For all @entity5 combined, estimates ranged from 730 per 100 000 in Poland ( @entity1 ) to 3350 per 100 000 in Germany ( @entity1 ). Overall @entity5 prevalence was the highest in Germany and Switzerland, and the lowest in Poland and Slovenia. In Slovakia, prevalence was higher than average for @entity1 and lower than average for @entity1 . This was observed for almost all ages. As shown by incidence data, @entity0 was the most frequent @entity5 among @entity1 in all countries. Among @entity1 , @entity263 was the leading @entity5 in Germany, Austria and Switzerland, and @entity2 was the major @entity5 in Slovenia, Slovakia and Poland. The Netherlands had a high prevalence of both prostate and @entity2 . Time-related magnitude of prevalence within each country and the variability of such proportions across the countries has been estimated and @entity5 prevalence is given by time since diagnosis (1 year, 1-5 years, 5-10 years, >10 years) for each site. The weight of 1-year prevalence (248 per 100 000 among @entity1 and 253 per 100 000 among @entity1 ) was <15% of total prevalence. Prevalent cases between 1 and 5 years since diagnosis represented between 22% and 34% of the total prevalence. Prevalent cases diagnosed from 5 to 10 years before (335 per 100 000 for @entity1 and 505 per 100 000 for @entity1 ) represented between 17% and 23% of prevalent @entity5 . Finally, long-term @entity5 prevalence (diagnosed >10 years before), reflecting long-term survival, and number of @entity1 considered as cured from @entity5 were 490 per 100 000 for @entity1 and 1028 per 100 000 for @entity1 , with a range between 26% (The Netherlands, @entity1 ) and 50% (Slovakia, @entity1 ). CONCLUSION: It is clear from observing countries in Central Europe, that high @entity5 prevalence is associated with well-developed economies. This burden of @entity5 could be interpreted as a paradoxical effect of better treatments and thereby survival. It could also be taken as a sign for not being satisfied with the advances in treating @entity1 diagnosed with @entity5 , and for supporting more primary prevention.
