Treatments for Hodgkin lymphoma are associated with large relative risks of acute myeloid leukemia (AML), but there are few estimates of the excess absolute risk (EAR), a useful measure of disease burden. One-year Hodgkin lymphoma survivors (N = 35,511) were identified within 14 population-based cancer registries in Nordic countries and North America from January 1, 1970, through December 31, 2001. We used Poisson regression analysis to model the EAR of AML, per 10,000 person-years. A total of 217 Hodgkin lymphoma survivors were diagnosed with AML (10.8 expected; unadjusted EAR = 6.2; 95% confidence interval = 5.4 to 7.1). Excess absolute risk for AML was highest during the first 10 years after Hodgkin lymphoma diagnosis but remained elevated thereafter. In subsequent analyses, adjusted for time since Hodgkin lymphoma diagnosis and presented for the 5-9 year interval, the EAR was statistically significantly (P or = 35 age groups, respectively), which may be associated with modifications in chemotherapy.
Given the greatly elevated risks of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) observed in breast cancer patients who carry mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2, it is critical to determine the effectiveness of standard adjuvant therapies in preventing CBC in mutation carriers. The WECARE study is a matched, case-control study of 708 women with CBC as cases and 1,399 women with unilateral breast cancer (UBC) as controls, including 181 BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers. Interviews and medical record reviews provided detailed information on risk factors and breast cancer therapy. All study participants were screened for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations using denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography (DHPLC) to detect genetic variants in the coding and flanking regions of the genes. Conditional logistic regression was used to compare the risk of CBC associated with chemotherapy and tamoxifen in BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers and non-carriers. Chemotherapy was associated with lower CBC risk both in non-carriers (RR = 0.6 [95% CI: 0.5-0.7]) and carriers (RR = 0.5 [95% CI: 0.2-1.0]; P value = 0.04). Tamoxifen was associated with a reduced CBC risk in non-carriers (RR = 0.7 [95% CI: 0.6-1.0]; P value = 0.03). We observed a similar but non-significant reduction associated with tamoxifen in mutation carriers (RR = 0.7 [95% CI: 0.3-1.8]). The tests of heterogeneity comparing carriers to non-carriers did not provide evidence for a difference in the associations with chemotherapy (P value = 0.51) nor with tamoxifen (P value = 0.15). Overall, we did not observe a difference in the relative risk reduction associated with adjuvant treatment between BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers and non-carriers. However, given the higher absolute CBC risk in mutation carriers, the potentially greater impact of adjuvant therapy in reducing CBC risk among mutation carriers should be considered when developing treatment plans for these patients.
Thyroid ultrasound and fine-needle aspiration (FNA) have been implicated in the overdiagnosis of thyroid cancer. To study how the use of diagnostic tools impacts thyroid cancer incidence, we propose using physician age as a surrogate. We aimed to determine whether thyroid cancer incidence is higher in areas with a high density of young physicians compared with areas with a high density of older physicians.
SEER 13 database was used to determine thyroid cancer incidence. These data were linked to the Area Resource File data (2000), containing information on physician age at a county-specific level. Cohorts were divided by age based on the concentration of physicians within a population of 1,000,000 persons. The study period was divided into two time periods (1992-1995, 2006-2009).
The incidence of thyroid cancer was stable in areas with high concentrations of young and older physicians during the 1992-1995 time period [
Five-year average annual age-adjusted cancer incidence rates for Alaska Natives (Eskimos, Indians, and Aleuts) for the most recent period (1989-1993) are compared to rates of 20 years earlier. Rates for all cancers combined increased 28 and 25% in men and women, respectively, during the 25-year interval. Increases were seen in men in cancers of the lung, prostate, and colon and in women for cancers of the lung, breast, and corpus uteri. Rates are also compared to data from the the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program for United States whites. Rates for all cancers combined in Alaska Native women are now similar to those of United States whites, whereas rates in Alaska Native men are lower than the United States, but only 10% lower. Significant site-specific differences previously reported between Alaska Natives and United States whites persist.
Alaska Native Epidemiology Center, Office of Alaska Native Health Research, Division of Community Health Services, Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, 4000 Ambassador Dr., C-DCHS, Anchorage, AK 99508, USA. email@example.com
OBJECTIVES: This article compared mortality data (1999-2003) for Alaska Natives (AN), U.S. white residents (USW), and Alaska white residents (AKW), and examined changes in mortality rates from 1979 to 2003. METHODS: We used SEERStat* software from the National Cancer Institute to calculate age-adjusted mortality rates. RESULTS: The AN all-cause mortality rate was 40% higher (rate ratio [RR]=1.4) than the rate for both the USW and AKW populations. Based on comparisons with USW, the largest disparities in AN mortality were found for unintentional injuries (RR=3.0), suicide (RR=3.1), and homicide (RR=4.4). Disparities were also found for eight of the 10 leading causes of death, including cancer (AN/USW RR=1.3), cerebrovascular disease (RR=1.3), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (RR=1.4), pneumonia/influenza (RR=1.6), and chronic liver disease (RR=2.0). In contrast, the mortality rate for heart disease among AN was significantly lower (RR=0.9) than for USW, and lower-though not significantly lower-for diabetes. Findings were quite similar when rates for AN were compared with AKW. AKW also had high rates of unintentional injury mortality and suicide compared with USW, but the magnitude of the difference was much less for AKW. From 1979 to 2003, mortality rates among AN declined 16% for all causes, similar to the USW decline of 15%. CONCLUSIONS: Monitoring mortality rates and their trends is essential not only to understand the health status of a population but also to target areas for prevention and evaluate the impact of policy change or the effect of interventions over time.
This study of cancer survival compared adults in Toronto, Ontario and three US metropolitan areas: Seattle, Washington; San Francisco, California; and Hartford, Connecticut. It examined whether socioeconomic status has a differential effect on cancer survival in Canada and the United States.
The Ontario Cancer Registry and the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology and End
(SEER) programme provided a total of 23,437 and 37,329 population-based primary malignant cancer cases for the Toronto and US samples, respectively (1986-1988, followed until 1994). Census-based measures of socioeconomic status were used to ecologically control absolute income status.
Among residents of low-income areas, persons in Toronto experienced a 5 year survival advantage for 13 of 15 cancer sites [minimally one gender significant at 95 per cent confidence interval (CI)]. An aggregate 35 per cent survival advantage among the Canadian cohort was demonstrated (survival rate ratio (SRR) = 1.35, 95 per cent CI= 1.30-1.40), and this effect was even larger among younger patients not yet eligible for Medicare coverage in the United States (SRR = 1.46, 95 per cent CI = 1.40-1.52).
Systematically replicating a previous Toronto-Detroit comparison, this study's observed consistent pattern of Canadian survival advantage across various cancer sites suggests that their more equitable access to preventive and therapeutic health care services may be responsible for the difference.
This study examined whether socioeconomic status has a differential effect on the survival of adults diagnosed with cancer in Canada and the United States.
The Ontario Cancer Registry and the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program provided a total of 58,202 and 76,055 population-based primary malignant cancer cases for Toronto, Ontario, and Detroit, Mich, respectively. Socioeconomic data for each person's residence at time of diagnosis were taken from population censuses.
In the US cohort, there was a significant association between socioeconomic status and survival for 12 of the 15 most common cancer sites; in the Canadian cohort, there was no such association for 12 of the 15 sites. Among residents of low-income areas, persons in Toronto experienced a survival advantage for 13 of 15 cancer sites at 1- and 5-year follow-up. No such between-country differentials were observed in the middle- or high-income groups.
The consistent pattern of a survival advantage in Canada observed across various cancer sites and follow-up periods suggests that Canada's more equitable access to preventive and therapeutic health care services is responsible for the difference.
Cites: Cancer. 1992 Jul 15;70(2):402-91617590
Cites: Am J Public Health. 1997 Jul;87(7):1164-79240107
Cites: Ethn Dis. 1992 Winter;2(1):47-541458215
Cites: Am J Epidemiol. 1992 Dec 1;136(11):1327-371336931
Cites: Br J Cancer. 1993 Feb;67(2):351-78431365
Cites: Cancer Causes Control. 1993 May;4(3):209-158318637
Cites: Cancer. 1993 Aug 15;72(4):1165-708339209
Cites: Cancer. 1993 Nov 15;72(10):2974-88221564
Cites: J Natl Med Assoc. 1992 Aug;84(8):668-741507256
Cites: J Community Health. 1995 Aug;20(4):359-667593741
Cites: Am J Epidemiol. 1976 Feb;103(2):226-351251836
Cites: J Chronic Dis. 1984;37(3):183-936699124
Cites: Cancer. 1984 Dec 15;54(12):3085-946498786
Cites: Med J Aust. 1984 Nov 24;141(11):705-96094994
Cites: J Natl Cancer Inst. 1985 May;74(5):1001-63858570
Cites: Cancer. 1985 Jul 1;56(1):210-74005791
Cites: Am J Epidemiol. 1986 Apr;123(4):736-513953551
Cites: Am J Epidemiol. 1986 Jul;124(1):85-933717143
Cites: J Chronic Dis. 1986;39(8):631-423734019
Cites: Am J Public Health. 1986 Dec;76(12):1400-33777285
Cites: Am J Public Health. 1987 Jan;77(1):38-413789235
Cites: J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(1):65-733805235
Cites: J Epidemiol Community Health. 1987 Sep;41(3):204-93443812
BACKGROUND: The American Cancer Society (ACS), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR) collaborate annually to provide updated information regarding cancer occurrence and trends in the U.S. This year's report features a special section on cancer survival. METHODS: Information concerning cancer cases was obtained from the NCI, CDC, and NAACCR and information concerning recorded cancer deaths was obtained from the CDC. The authors evaluated trends in age-adjusted cancer incidence and death rates by regression models and described and compared survival rates over time and across racial/ethnic populations. RESULTS: Incidence rates for all cancers combined decreased from 1991 through 2001, but stabilized from 1995 through 2001 when adjusted for delay in reporting. The incidence rates for female lung cancer decreased (although not statistically significant for delay adjusted) and mortality leveled off for the first time after increasing for many decades. Colorectal cancer incidence rates also decreased. Death rates decreased for all cancers combined (1.1% per year since 1993) and for many of the top 15 cancers occurring in men and women. The 5-year relative survival rates improved for all cancers combined and for most, but not all, cancers over 2 diagnostic periods (1975-1979 and 1995-2000). However, cancer-specific survival rates were lower and the risk of dying from cancer, once diagnosed, was higher in most minority populations compared with the white population. The relative risk of death from all cancers combined in each racial and ethnic population compared with non-Hispanic white men and women ranged from 1.16 in Hispanic white men to 1.69 in American Indian/Alaska Native men, with the exception of Asian/Pacific Islander women, whose risk of 1.01 was similar to that of non-Hispanic white women. CONCLUSIONS: The continued measurable declines for overall cancer death rates and for many of the top 15 cancers, along with improved survival rates, reflect progress in the prevention, early detection, and treatment of cancer. However, racial and ethnic disparities in survival and the risk of death from cancer, and geographic variation in stage distributions suggest that not all segments of the U.S. population have benefited equally from such advances.
The objectives of this study were as follows: (1) to compare the magnitude of the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and cancer survival in the Canadian province of Ontario with that in the United States (U.S.), and (2) to compare cancer survival in communities with similar SES in Ontario and in the U.S.
The Ontario Cancer Registry provided information about all cases of invasive cancer diagnosed in Ontario from 1987 to 1992, and the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Registry (SEER) provided information about all cases diagnosed in the SEER regions of the U.S. during the same time period. Census data provided information about SES at the community level. The product-limit method was used to describe cause-specific survival. Cox proportional hazards models were used to describe the association between SES and the risk of death from cancer.
There were significant associations between SES and survival for most cancer sites in both the U.S. and Ontario, but the magnitude of the association was usually larger in the U.S. In the poorest communities, there were significant survival advantages in favor of cancer patients in Ontario for many disease groups, including cancers of the lung, head and neck region, cervix, and uterus. However, in upper- and middle-income communities, there were significant survival advantages in favor of the U.S. for all cases combined and for several individual diseases, including cancers of the breast, colon and rectum, prostate, and bladder.
The association between SES and cancer survival is weaker in Ontario than it is in the U.S. This is due to a combination of better survival among patients in the poorest communities and worse survival among patients in the wealthier communities of Ontario relative to those in the U.S.
OBJECTIVE: To assess breast cancer mortality rates among American Indian/Alaska Native women compared with non-Hispanic White women in the five years after diagnosis. METHODS: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data from 1973-1996 were used to compare survival in the two races, controlling for age, marital status, stage, and therapy. RESULTS: The adjusted relative hazard of death was 58% higher for American Indian/Alaska Native women than for non-Hispanic White women (HR = 1.58, 95% Cl 1.26-2.00). The survival disparity persisted even when limited to women who received definitive therapy, i.e. mastectomy with axillary node dissection or breast-conserving surgery with axillary node dissection and radiation treatment (HR = 1.88, 95% Cl 1.40-2.52). CONCLUSIONS: American Indian/Alaska Native women were at greater risk for breast cancer mortality than non-Hispanic White women, even when restricted to women who received definitive breast cancer therapy.