Cancer registries enable cancer surveillance at the population level. These registries require significant human-time to read through many different parts of the electronic health record, including structured data and lengthy, free-text clinical reports, to abstract values for hundreds of required variables. Large language models (LLMs) offer the possibility to significantly improve this process by supporting and speeding up cancer registry data abstraction. However, it is unclear how well these models perform at real-world cancer registry abstraction involving multiple cancer types and large patient volumes. Here, we evaluate five foundational LLMs for their ability to reliably abstract cancer registry variables. We leverage hospital cancer registry data from a large regional health system as the ground truth and use LLMs to abstract from clinical reports eight registry variables for 5,939 patients with seven different cancer types. We use a zero-shot prompting strategy to compare LLM ability on commonly abstracted cancer variables with different data types. The results show that larger and more advanced models (Claude Sonnet 4.5, GPT-OSS-120b, GPT-OSS-20b) generally outperform smaller models (Gemma 12b, LLaMA 3.1 8b). The best performing models show F1 scores around 0.8 for cancer registry variables with low cardinality (grade, summary stage, laterality), with only slightly lower F1 scores for variables with high cardinality (primary site, regional nodes examined, regional nodes positive). On the more complex task of precise date extraction, all models showed decreased performance on both diagnosis and treatment dates (exact accuracy ~0.55 for the best performing models), which increased to ~0.85 for a tolerance within {+/-}30 days. These results quantify the performance of various models as well as the potential and limitations of LLMs in cancer registry abstraction tasks.