Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Limited utility despite accuracy of the national SEER dataset for the study of craniopharyngioma

  • Clinical Study
  • Published:
Journal of Neuro-Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Craniopharyngioma is histologically benign and associated with high survival rates but poor quality of life. The SEER Program is among the most cited data sources regarding malignancies in the United States. SEER began collecting data regarding craniopharyngiomain 2004. SEER-STAT v7.0.5 was utilized to identify patients (January 1, 2004–December 31, 2008) with ICD-O-3 codes for craniopharyngioma. Age was categorized into 3 groups: ≤19, 20–34, and ≥35 years, as was surgical intervention: none, subtotal resection, and gross total/radical resection. Demographic, initial treatment, and follow-up data were collected. 635/662 (95.9 %) patients had complete data. Incidence per million patient-years by age group was 1.9, 1.1, and 1.9, respectively (p < 0.0001). There was bimodal incidence, with peaks at 5–9 and 60–74 years. Surgery occurred in 528 patients (83.1 %), without association between age group and extent of surgery (p = 0.14). Radiation was delivered in 139 (21.9 %) cases, with no association between treatment and extent of surgery (p = 0.73) or age group (p = 0.14). Median follow-up was 23 months. Overall and Cause-specific Survival were 87.9 and 94.5 %, respectively. Neither was associated with extent of surgery but both were positively associated with radiation (p = 0.0003 and 0.0007, respectively). There was no difference in OS or CSS when comparing STR ± RT versus GTR alone (p = 0.38 and 0.56, respectively). SEER provides reliable demographic and survival data regarding craniopharyngioma. SEER’s focus on mortality statistics limits utility for outcomes studies in tumors with high survival rates, such as craniopharyngioma. Initial treatment data from SEER varies somewhat from current literature, meriting further investigation.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anderson CA, Wilkening GN, Filley CM, Reardon MS, Kleinschmidt-DeMasters BK (1997) Neurobehavioral outcome in pediatric craniopharyngioma. Pediatr Neurosurg 26(5):255–260

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Crom DB, Smith D, Xiong Z, Onar A, Hudson MM, Merchant TE et al (2010) Health status in long-term survivors of pediatric craniopharyngiomas. J Neurosci Nurs 42(6):323

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Duff JM, Meyer FB, Ilstrup DM, Laws ERJ, Schleck CD, Scheithauer BW (2000) Long-term outcomes for surgically resected craniopharyngiomas. Neurosurgery 46(2):291

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Foreman NK, Faestel PM, Pearson J, Disabato J, Poole M, Wilkening G et al (1999) Health status in 52 long-term survivors of pediatric brain tumors. J Neurooncol 41(1):47–53

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Al-Mefty O (2010) Less is less. J Neurosurg 6(5):401–402 discussion: 402

    Google Scholar 

  6. Caldarelli M, Massimi L, Tamburrini G, Cappa M, Di Rocco C (2005) Long-term results of the surgical treatment of craniopharyngioma: the experience at the Policlinico Gemelli, Catholic University, Rome. Childs Nerv Syst 21(8–9):747–757

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Elliott RE, Hsieh K, Hochm T, Belitskaya-Levy I, Wisoff J, Wisoff JH (2010) Efficacy and safety of radical resection of primary and recurrent craniopharyngiomas in 86 children. J Neurosurg Pediatr 5(1):30–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Müller HL, Gebhardt U, Schröder S, Pohl F, Kortmann R-D, Faldum A et al (2010) Analyses of treatment variables for patients with childhood craniopharyngioma—results of the multicenter prospective trial KRANIOPHARYNGEOM 2000 after three years of follow-up. Horm Res Paediatr 73(3):175–180

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Van Effenterre R, Boch A-L (2002) Craniopharyngioma in adults and children: a study of 122 surgical cases. J Neurosurg 97(1):3–11

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Zuccaro G (2005) Radical resection of craniopharyngioma. Childs Nerv Syst 21(8–9):679–690

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fraioli MF, Santoni R, Fraioli C, Contratti F (2006) “Conservative” surgical approach and early postoperative radiotherapy in a patient with a huge cystic craniopharyngioma. Childs Nerv Syst 22(2):151–155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kalapurakal JA (2005) Radiation therapy in the management of pediatric craniopharyngiomas—a review. Childs Nerv Syst 21(8–9):808–816

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kalapurakal JA, Goldman S, Hsieh YC, Tomita T, Marymont MH (2003) Clinical outcome in children with craniopharyngioma treated with primary surgery and radiotherapy deferred until relapse. Med Pediatr Oncol 40(4):214–218

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kiehna EN, Merchant TE (2010) Radiation therapy for pediatric craniopharyngioma. Neurosurg Focus 28(4):E10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lin LL, El Naqa I, Leonard JR, Park TS, Hollander AS, Michalski JM et al (2008) Long-term outcome in children treated for craniopharyngioma with and without radiotherapy. J Neurosurg Pediatr 1(2):126–130

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Marchal JC, Klein O, Thouvenot P, Bernier V, Moret C, Chastagner P (2005) Individualized treatment of craniopharyngioma in children: ways and means. Childs Nerv Syst 21(8–9):655–659

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pierre-Kahn A, Recassens C, Pinto G, Thalassinos C, Chokron S, Soubervielle JC et al (2005) Social and psycho-intellectual outcome following radical removal of craniopharyngiomas in childhood. A prospective series. Childs Nerv Syst 21(8–9):817–824

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Sainte-Rose C, Puget S, Wray A, Zerah M, Grill J, Brauner R et al (2005) Craniopharyngioma: the pendulum of surgical management. Childs Nerv Syst 21(8–9):691–695

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Schubert T, Trippel M, Tacke U, van Velthoven V, Gumpp V, Bartelt S et al (2009) Neurosurgical treatment strategies in childhood craniopharyngiomas: is less more? Childs Nerv Syst 25(11):1419–1427

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Varlotto JM, Flickinger JC, Kondziolka D, Lunsford L, Deutsch M (2002) External beam irradiation of craniopharyngiomas: long-term analysis of tumor control and morbidity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 54(2):492–499

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. List of SEER Registries—About SEER. http://seer.cancer.gov/registries/list.html. Accessed 3 May 2012

  22. Olson SH, Atoria CL, Cote ML, Cook LS, Rastogi R, Soslow RA et al (2012) The impact of race and comorbidity on survival in endometrial cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 21(5):753–760

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Cahill KS, Claus EB (2011) Treatment and survival of patients with nonmalignant intracranial meningioma: results from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program of the National Cancer Institute. J Neurosurg 115(2):259–267

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Catalano PJ, Ayanian JZ, Weeks JC, Kahn KL, Landrum MB, Zaslavsky AM, Lee J, Pendergast J, Harrington DP (2012) Representativeness of participants in the cancer care outcomes research and surveillance consortium relative to the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program. Med Care. doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e318222a711

  25. Cheng L, Swartz M, Zhao H, Kapadia A, Lai D, Rowan P et al (2012) Hazard of recurrence among women after primary breast cancer treatment—a 10-year follow-up using data from SEER-medicare. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 21(5):800–809

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Jagsi R, Abrahamse P, Hawley ST, Graff JJ, Hamilton AS, Katz SJ (2012) Underascertainment of radiotherapy receipt in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry data. Cancer 118(2):333–341

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Johnson TV, Hsiao W, Delman KA, Canter DJ, Master VA (2012) Scrotal cancer survival is influenced by histology: a SEER study. World J Urol. doi:10.1007/s00345-012-0834-0

  28. O’Neill CB, Atoria CL, O’Reilly EM, LaFemina J, Henman MC, Elkin EB (2012) Costs and trends in pancreatic cancer treatment. Cancer. doi:10.1002/cncr.27490

  29. Ramanah R, Lesieur B, Ballester M, Darai E, Rouzier R (2012) Trends in treatment and survival of late-stage squamous cell vulvar carcinomas: analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Int J Gynecol Cancer 22(5):854–859

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Selvanathan SK, Hammouche S, Salminen HJ, Jenkinson MD (2011) Outcome and prognostic features in anaplastic ganglioglioma: analysis of cases from the SEER database. J Neurooncol 105(3):539–545

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Zippin C, Lum D, Hankey BF (1995) Completeness of hospital cancer case reporting from the SEER Program of the National Cancer Institute. Cancer 76(11):2343–2350

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Johnson DR, O’Neill BP (2012) Glioblastoma survival in the United States before and during the temozolomide era. J Neurooncol 107(2):359–364

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Mishra MV, Andrews DW, Glass J, Evans JJ, Dicker AP, Shen X et al (2012) Characterization and outcomes of optic nerve gliomas: a population-based analysis. J Neurooncol 107(3):591–597

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Selvanathan SK, Hammouche S, Smethurst W, Salminen HJ, Jenkinson MD (2012) Outcome and prognostic features in adult pineoblastomas: analysis of cases from the SEER database. Acta neurochir 154(5):863–869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Nattinger AB, McAuliffe TL, Schapira MM (1997) Generalizability of the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results registry population: factors relevant to epidemiologic and health care research. J Clin Epidemiol 50(8):939–945

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Public Law 107–260: Benign Brain Tumor Cancer Registries Amendment Act 2002 (http://training.seer.cancer.gov/ brain/non-malignant/history/public.html). Accessed 30 January 2012

  37. Bunin GR, Surawicz TS, Witman PA, Preston-Martin S, Davis F, Bruner JM (1998) The descriptive epidemiology of craniopharyngioma. J Neurosurg 89(4):547–551

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Nielsen EH, Feldt-Rasmussen U, Poulsgaard L, Kristensen LØ, Astrup J, Jørgensen JO et al (2011) Incidence of craniopharyngioma in Denmark (n = 189) and estimated world incidence of craniopharyngioma in children and adults. J Neurooncol 104(3):755–763

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Müller HL (2011) Consequences of craniopharyngioma surgery in children. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 96(7):1981–1991

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Crotty TB, Scheithauer BW, Young WF, Davis DH, Shaw EG, Miller GM et al (1995) Papillary craniopharyngioma: a clinicopathological study of 48 cases. J Neurosurg 83(2):206–214

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Schoenfeld A, Pekmezci M, Barnes MJ, Tihan T, Gupta N, Lamborn KR et al (2012) The superiority of conservative resection and adjuvant radiation for craniopharyngiomas. J Neurooncol 108(1):133–139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Komotar RJ, Roguski M, Bruce JN (2009) Surgical management of craniopharyngiomas. J Neurooncol 92(3):283–296

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. National Cancer Institute. SEER: Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program Brochure (2006) 1–16. http://seer.cancer.gov/about/factsheets/. Accessed 31 January 2012

  44. Gautier A, Godbout A, Grosheny C, Tejedor I, Coudert M, Courtillot C et al (2012) Markers of recurrence and long-term morbidity in craniopharyngioma: a systematic analysis of 171 patients. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 97(4):1258–1267

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Laffond C, Dellatolas G, Alapetite C, Puget S, Grill J, Habrand JL et al (2012) Quality-of-life, mood and executive functioning after childhood craniopharyngioma treated with surgery and proton beam therapy. Brain Inj 26(3):270–281

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Müller HL, Gebhardt U, Teske C, Faldum A, Zwiener I, Warmuth-Metz M et al (2011) Post-operative hypothalamic lesions and obesity in childhood craniopharyngioma: results of the multinational prospective trial KRANIOPHARYNGEOM 2000 after 3-year follow-up. Eur J Endocrinol 165(1):17–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Elliott RE, Sands SA, Strom RG, Wisoff JH (2010) Craniopharyngioma clinical status scale: a standardized metric of preoperative function and posttreatment outcome. Neurosurg Focus 28(4):E2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Gleeson H, Amin R, Maghnie M (2008) “Do no harm”: management of craniopharyngioma. Eur J Endocrinol 159(Suppl 1):S95–S99

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Sands SA, Milner JS, Goldberg J, Mukhi V, Moliterno JA, Maxfield C et al (2005) Quality of life and behavioral follow-up study of pediatric survivors of craniopharyngioma. J Neurosurg 103(4 Suppl):302–311

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Müller HL (2010) Childhood craniopharyngioma—current concepts in diagnosis, therapy and follow-up. Nat Rev Endocrinol 6(11):609–618

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by NIH/NCRR Colorado CTSI Grant Number UL1 RR025780. Contents are the authors’ sole responsibility and do not necessarily represent official NIH views.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no financial conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pediatric Neurosurgery, Children’s Hospital Colorado, University of Colorado Denver, 13123 E. 16th Ave, Box 330, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA

    Todd C. Hankinson, Michael H. Handler & Brent R. O’neill

  2. Children’s Outcomes Research Program, University of Colorado Denver, 13199 E. Montview Blvd, Suite 300, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA

    Todd C. Hankinson, Michelle R. Torok & Brenda L. Beaty

  3. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado Denver, Anschutz Cancer Pavilion, 1665 Aurora Court, Suite 1032, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA

    Emma C. Fields & Arthur K. Liu

  4. Division Neuro-oncology, Department of Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital Colorado, University of Colorado Denver, 13123 E. 16th Ave, Box 115, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA

    Nicholas K. Foreman

Authors
  1. Todd C. Hankinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emma C. Fields
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michelle R. Torok
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Brenda L. Beaty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michael H. Handler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Nicholas K. Foreman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Brent R. O’neill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Arthur K. Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Todd C. Hankinson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hankinson, T.C., Fields, E.C., Torok, M.R. et al. Limited utility despite accuracy of the national SEER dataset for the study of craniopharyngioma. J Neurooncol 110, 271–278 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-012-0966-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-012-0966-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation