The UK sits at the bottom of a major league table for cancer survival in high-income countries, researchers have warned.

While survival rates are improving for patients across the UK, the country still performs worst for key cancers including bowel, lung and pancreatic.

Cancer Research UK, which manages the analysis published in the journal Lancet Oncology, said the Government must correct staff shortages across the NHS and address late diagnosis.

The study looked at 3.9 million cancer cases between 1995 and 2014 in seven comparable high-income countries with universal healthcare (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the UK).

The data covered seven cancers – of the oesophagus, stomach, colon (bowel), rectum, pancreas, lung and ovary.

It showed that cancer survival one year after diagnosis and at the five-year mark has improved across all seven types of cancer in the UK over the last 20 years.

For example, five-year survival for rectal cancer in the UK has risen by 14 percentage points since 1995, from 48% to 62%.

The UK also has one of the highest increases in five-year survival – almost 12 percentage points – across all countries for bowel cancer.

One-year survival for lung, ovarian and oesophageal cancer has also increased by around 15 percentage points in the last 20 years.

However, the UK has still not caught up with other countries, and sits at the bottom of the league table for five out of the seven cancers.

Between 2010 and 2014, the UK had the lowest five-year survival rate for stomach cancer (20.8%), while Australia had the highest (32.8%).

Some 70.8% of patients in Australia lived for at least five years after diagnosis with bowel cancer (highest), but the UK was the lowest at 58.9%.

Australia also had the highest survival (70.8%) for rectal cancer, while the UK had the lowest (62.1%).

Meanwhile, pancreatic cancer had the lowest five-year survival of all – ranging from 7.9% in the UK (lowest) to 14.6% in Australia (highest).

For lung cancer, Canada had the highest five-year survival (21.7%) while the UK had the lowest (14.7%).

The authors of the study said the differences between the countries was partly explained by how quickly patients get a diagnosis and then prompt access to effective treatment.

Cancer Research UK’s clinical adviser, John Butler, who co-authored the study and is a consultant surgeon at the Royal Marsden Hospital in London, said: “There isn’t one specific reason why survival in the UK has improved – it’s a combination of many different factors.

“Over the last 20 years we have seen improvements in cancer planning, development of national cancer strategies and the roll-out of new diagnostic and treatment services.

“For lung, ovarian, and oesophageal cancer in particular, survival has increased largely because the quality of surgery has radically improved, and more surgery is taking place than before.

“More people are being looked after by specialist teams, rather than surgeons who aren’t experts in that area.

“But, while we’re still researching what can be done to close the survival gap between countries, we know continued investment in early diagnosis and cancer care plays a big part.

“Despite our changes, we’ve made slower progress than others.”

Sara Hiom, Cancer Research UK’s director of early diagnosis, said: “While we’re on the right track, the numbers show we can certainly do better.

“We will not see the necessary improvements in diagnosis and access to treatment unless we have enough of the right staff across our NHS.

“Cancer Research UK has been calling for staff shortages to be addressed because, quite simply, it will give people a better chance of surviving their cancer.

“If we are to achieve world-class cancer outcomes in the UK, then we need to see comparable investment in the NHS and the systems and innovations that support it.

“It’s never been a more crucial time for the Government to put new money where it matters.”

Lead author Dr Melina Arnold, from the International Agency for Research on Cancer, said: “While cancer survival and prognosis continue to improve across these high-income countries, the disparities we see are likely due to stage of the disease at diagnosis, the time it takes to get effective treatment and the effect of other concomitant health conditions.”

Data shows that three-quarters of NHS services are failing to treat cancer patients quickly enough.

Hospitals are meant to start treatment within 62 days of an urgent referral by a GP in 85% of cases.

But 94 out of 131 cancer services in England failed to do that during 2018-19 - compared with 36 five years ago, BBC analysis has found.