Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, part 2: Early assessment of the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on cancer diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: With access to cancer care services limited because of coronavirus disease 2019 control measures, cancer diagnosis and treatment have been delayed. The authors explored changes in the counts of US incident cases by cancer type, age, sex, race, and disease stage in 2020. METHODS: Data were extracted from selected US population-based cancer registries for diagnosis years 2015-2020 using first-submission data from the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. After a quality assessment, the monthly numbers of newly diagnosed cancer cases were extracted for six cancer types: colorectal, female breast, lung, pancreas, prostate, and thyroid. The observed numbers of incident cancer cases in 2020 were compared with the estimated numbers by calculating observed-to-expected (O/E) ratios. The expected numbers of incident cases were extrapolated using Joinpoint trend models. RESULTS: The authors report an O/E ratio <1.0 for major screening-eligible cancer sites, indicating fewer newly diagnosed cases than expected in 2020. The O/E ratios were lowest in April 2020. For every cancer site except pancreas, Asians/Pacific Islanders had the lowest O/E ratio of any race group. O/E ratios were lower for cases diagnosed at localized stages than for cases diagnosed at advanced stages. CONCLUSIONS: The current analysis provides strong evidence for declines in cancer diagnoses, relative to the expected numbers, between March and May of 2020. The declines correlate with reductions in pathology reports and are greater for cases diagnosed at in situ and localized stage, triggering concerns about potential poor cancer outcomes in the coming years, especially in Asians/Pacific Islanders. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: To help control the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), health care organizations suspended nonessential medical procedures, including preventive cancer screening, during early 2020. Many individuals canceled or postponed cancer screening, potentially delaying cancer diagnosis. This study examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of newly diagnosed cancer cases in 2020 using first-submission, population-based cancer registry database. The monthly numbers of newly diagnosed cancer cases in 2020 were compared with the expected numbers based on past trends for six cancer sites. April 2020 had the sharpest decrease in cases compared with previous years, most likely because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, part 1: National cancer statistics.

BACKGROUND: The American Cancer Society, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Cancer Institute, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries collaborate to provide annual updates on cancer occurrence and trends in the United States. METHODS: Data on new cancer diagnoses during 2001-2018 were obtained from the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries' Cancer in North America Incidence file, which is comprised of data from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-funded and National Cancer Institute-funded, population-based cancer registry programs. Data on cancer deaths during 2001-2019 were obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics' National Vital Statistics System. Five-year average incidence and death rates along with trends for all cancers combined and for the leading cancer types are reported by sex, racial/ethnic group, and age. RESULTS: Overall cancer incidence rates were 497 per 100,000 among males (ranging from 306 among Asian/Pacific Islander males to 544 among Black males) and 431 per 100,000 among females (ranging from 309 among Asian/Pacific Islander females to 473 among American Indian/Alaska Native females) during 2014-2018. The trend during the corresponding period was stable among males and increased 0.2% on average per year among females, with differing trends by sex, racial/ethnic group, and cancer type. Among males, incidence rates increased for three cancers (including pancreas and kidney), were stable for seven cancers (including prostate), and decreased for eight (including lung and larynx) of the 18 most common cancers considered in this analysis. Among females, incidence rates increased for seven cancers (including melanoma, liver, and breast), were stable for four cancers (including uterus), and decreased for seven (including thyroid and ovary) of the 18 most common cancers. Overall cancer death rates decreased by 2.3% per year among males and by 1.9% per year among females during 2015-2019, with the sex-specific declining trend reflected in every major racial/ethnic group. During 2015-2019, death rates decreased for 11 of the 19 most common cancers among males and for 14 of the 20 most common cancers among females, with the steepest declines (>4% per year) reported for lung cancer and melanoma. Five-year survival for adenocarcinoma and neuroendocrine pancreatic cancer improved between 2001 and 2018; however, overall incidence (2001-2018) and mortality (2001-2019) continued to increase for this site. Among children (younger than 15 years), recent trends were stable for incidence and decreased for mortality; and among, adolescents and young adults (aged 15-39 years), recent trends increased for incidence and declined for mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer death rates continued to decline overall, for children, and for adolescents and young adults, and treatment advances have led to accelerated declines in death rates for several sites, such as lung and melanoma. The increases in incidence rates for several common cancers in part reflect changes in risk factors, screening test use, and diagnostic practice. Racial/ethnic differences exist in cancer incidence and mortality, highlighting the need to understand and address inequities. Population-based incidence and mortality data inform prevention, early detection, and treatment efforts to help reduce the cancer burden in the United States.

Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, part II: Progress toward Healthy People 2020 objectives for 4 common cancers.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Cancer Society, the National Cancer Institute, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries collaborate to provide annual updates on cancer occurrence and trends in the United States and to address a special topic of interest. Part I of this report focuses on national cancer statistics, and part 2 characterizes progress in achieving select Healthy People 2020 cancer objectives. METHODS: For this report, the authors selected objectives-including death rates, cancer screening, and major risk factors-related to 4 common cancers (lung, colorectal, female breast, and prostate). Baseline values, recent values, and the percentage change from baseline to recent values were examined overall and by select sociodemographic characteristics. Data from national surveillance systems were obtained from the Healthy People 2020 website. RESULTS: Targets for death rates were met overall and in most sociodemographic groups, but not among males, blacks, or individuals in rural areas, although these groups did experience larger decreases in rates compared with other groups. During 2007 through 2017, cancer death rates decreased 15% overall, ranging from -4% (rural) to -22% (metropolitan). Targets for breast and colorectal cancer screening were not yet met overall or in any sociodemographic groups except those with the highest educational attainment, whereas lung cancer screening was generally low (<10%). Targets were not yet met overall for cigarette smoking, recent smoking cessation, excessive alcohol use, or obesity but were met for secondhand smoke exposure and physical activity. Some sociodemographic groups did not meet targets or had less improvement than others toward reaching objectives. CONCLUSIONS: Monitoring trends in cancer risk factors, screening test use, and mortality can help assess the progress made toward decreasing the cancer burden in the United States. Although many interventions to reduce cancer risk factors and promote healthy behaviors are proven to work, they may not be equitably applied or work well in every community. Implementing cancer prevention and control interventions that are sustainable, focused, and culturally appropriate may boost success in communities with the greatest need, ensuring that all Americans can access a path to long, healthy, cancer-free lives.

Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, part I: National cancer statistics.

BACKGROUND: The American Cancer Society, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Cancer Institute, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries collaborate to provide annual updates on cancer occurrence and trends in the United States. METHODS: Data on new cancer diagnoses during 2001 through 2016 were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-funded and National Cancer Institute-funded population-based cancer registry programs and compiled by the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Data on cancer deaths during 2001 through 2017 were obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics' National Vital Statistics System. Trends in incidence and death rates for all cancers combined and for the leading cancer types by sex, racial/ethnic group, and age were estimated by joinpoint analysis and characterized by the average annual percent change during the most recent 5 years (2012-2016 for incidence and 2013-2017 for mortality). RESULTS: Overall, cancer incidence rates decreased 0.6% on average per year during 2012 through 2016, but trends differed by sex, racial/ethnic group, and cancer type. Among males, cancer incidence rates were stable overall and among non-Hispanic white males but decreased in other racial/ethnic groups; rates increased for 5 of the 17 most common cancers, were stable for 7 cancers (including prostate), and decreased for 5 cancers (including lung and bronchus [lung] and colorectal). Among females, cancer incidence rates increased during 2012 to 2016 in all racial/ethnic groups, increasing on average 0.2% per year; rates increased for 8 of the 18 most common cancers (including breast), were stable for 6 cancers (including colorectal), and decreased for 4 cancers (including lung). Overall, cancer death rates decreased 1.5% on average per year during 2013 to 2017, decreasing 1.8% per year among males and 1.4% per year among females. During 2013 to 2017, cancer death rates decreased for all cancers combined among both males and females in each racial/ethnic group, for 11 of the 19 most common cancers among males (including lung and colorectal), and for 14 of the 20 most common cancers among females (including lung, colorectal, and breast). The largest declines in death rates were observed for melanoma of the skin (decreasing 6.1% per year among males and 6.3% among females) and lung (decreasing 4.8% per year among males and 3.7% among females). Among children younger than 15 years, cancer incidence rates increased an average of 0.8% per year during 2012 to 2016, and cancer death rates decreased an average of 1.4% per year during 2013 to 2017. Among adolescents and young adults aged 15 to 39 years, cancer incidence rates increased an average of 0.9% per year during 2012 to 2016, and cancer death rates decreased an average of 1.0% per year during 2013 to 2017. CONCLUSIONS: Although overall cancer death rates continue to decline, incidence rates are leveling off among males and are increasing slightly among females. These trends reflect population changes in cancer risk factors, screening test use, diagnostic practices, and treatment advances. Many cancers can be prevented or treated effectively if they are found early. Population-based cancer incidence and mortality data can be used to inform efforts to decrease the cancer burden in the United States and regularly monitor progress toward goals.

GIScience and cancer: State of the art and trends for cancer surveillance and epidemiology.

Maps are well recognized as an effective means of presenting and communicating health data, such as cancer incidence and mortality rates. These data can be linked to geographic features like counties or census tracts and their associated attributes for mapping and analysis. Such visualization and analysis provide insights regarding the geographic distribution of cancer and can be important for advancing effective cancer prevention and control programs. Applying a spatial approach allows users to identify location-based patterns and trends related to risk factors, health outcomes, and population health. Geographic information science (GIScience) is the discipline that applies Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and other spatial concepts and methods in research. This review explores the current state and evolution of GIScience in cancer research by addressing fundamental topics and issues regarding spatial data and analysis that need to be considered. GIScience, along with its health-specific application in the spatial epidemiology of cancer, incorporates multiple geographic perspectives pertaining to the individual, the health care infrastructure, and the environment. Challenges addressing these perspectives and the synergies among them can be explored through GIScience methods and associated technologies as integral parts of epidemiologic research, analysis efforts, and solutions. The authors suggest GIScience is a powerful tool for cancer research, bringing additional context to cancer data analysis and potentially informing decision-making and policy, ultimately aimed at reducing the burden of cancer.

Disparities in breast cancer subtypes among women in the lower Mississippi Delta Region states.

PURPOSE: To describe and elucidate rates in breast cancer incidence by subtype in the federally designated Mississippi Delta Region, an impoverished region across eight Southern/Midwest states with a high proportion of Black residents and notable breast cancer mortality disparities. METHODS: Cancer registry data from seven LMDR states (Missouri was not included because of permission issues) were used to explore breast cancer incidence differences by subtype between the LMDR's Delta and non-Delta Regions and between White and Black women within the Delta Region (2012-2014). Overall and subtype-specific age-adjusted incidence rates and rate ratios were calculated. Multilevel negative binomial regression models were used to evaluate how individual-level and area-level factors, like race/ethnicity and poverty level, respectively, affect rates of breast cancers by subtype. RESULTS: Women in the Delta Region had higher rates of triple-negative breast cancer, the most aggressive subtype, than women in the non-Delta (17.0 vs. 14.4 per 100,000), but the elevated rate was attenuated to non-statistical significance in multivariable analysis. Urban Delta women also had higher rates of triple-negative breast cancer than non-Delta urban women, which remained in multivariable analysis. In the Delta Region, Black women had higher overall breast cancer rates than their White counterparts, which remained in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: Higher rates of triple-negative breast cancer in the Delta Region may help explain the Region's mortality disparity. Further, an important area of future research is to determine what unaccounted for individual-level or social area-level factors contribute to the elevated breast cancer incidence rate among Black women in the Delta Region.

Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, part I: National cancer statistics.

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 to provide annual updates on cancer occurrence and trends in the United States. METHODS: Incidence data were obtained from the CDC-funded and NCI-funded population-based cancer registry programs and compiled by NAACCR. Data on cancer deaths were obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics National Vital Statistics System. Trends in age-standardized incidence and death rates for all cancers combined and for the leading cancer types by sex, race, and ethnicity were estimated by joinpoint analysis and expressed as the annual percent change. Stage distribution and 5-year survival by stage at diagnosis were calculated for breast cancer, colon and rectum (colorectal) cancer, lung and bronchus cancer, and melanoma of the skin. RESULTS: Overall cancer incidence rates from 2008 to 2014 decreased by 2.2% per year among men but were stable among women. Overall cancer death rates from 1999 to 2015 decreased by 1.8% per year among men and by 1.4% per year among women. Among men, incidence rates during the most recent 5-year period (2010-2014) decreased for 7 of the 17 most common cancer types, and death rates (2011-2015) decreased for 11 of the 18 most common types. Among women, incidence rates declined for 7 of the 18 most common cancers, and death rates declined for 14 of the 20 most common cancers. Death rates decreased for cancer sites, including lung and bronchus (men and women), colorectal (men and women), female breast, and prostate. Death rates increased for cancers of the liver (men and women); pancreas (men and women); brain and other nervous system (men and women); oral cavity and pharynx (men only); soft tissue, including heart (men only); nonmelanoma skin (men only); and uterus. Incidence and death rates were higher among men than among women for all racial and ethnic groups. For all cancer sites combined, black men and white women had the highest incidence rates compared with other racial groups, and black men and black women had the highest death rates compared with other racial groups. Non-Hispanic men and women had higher incidence and mortality rates than those of Hispanic ethnicity. Five-year survival for cases diagnosed from 2007 through 2013 ranged from 100% (stage I) to 26.5% (stage IV) for female breast cancer, from 88.1% (stage I) to 12.6% (stage IV) for colorectal cancer, from 55.1% (stage I) to 4.2% (stage IV) for lung and bronchus cancer, and from 99.5% (stage I) to 16% (stage IV) for melanoma of the skin. Among children, overall cancer incidence rates increased by 0.8% per year from 2010 to 2014, and overall cancer death rates decreased by 1.5% per year from 2011 to 2015. CONCLUSIONS: For all cancer sites combined, cancer incidence rates decreased among men but were stable among women. Overall, there continue to be significant declines in cancer death rates among both men and women. Differences in rates and trends by race and ethnic group remain. Progress in reducing cancer mortality has not occurred for all sites. Examining stage distribution and 5-year survival by stage highlights the potential benefits associated with early detection and treatment. Cancer 2018;124:2785-2800. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, part II: Recent changes in prostate cancer trends and disease characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Temporal trends in prostate cancer incidence and death rates have been attributed to changing patterns of screening and improved treatment (mortality only), among other factors. This study evaluated contemporary national-level trends and their relations with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing prevalence and explored trends in incidence according to disease characteristics with stage-specific, delay-adjusted rates. METHODS: Joinpoint regression was used to examine changes in delay-adjusted prostate cancer incidence rates from population-based US cancer registries from 2000 to 2014 by age categories, race, and disease characteristics, including stage, PSA, Gleason score, and clinical extension. In addition, the analysis included trends for prostate cancer mortality between 1975 and 2015 by race and the estimation of PSA testing prevalence between 1987 and 2005. The annual percent change was calculated for periods defined by significant trend change points. RESULTS: For all age groups, overall prostate cancer incidence rates declined approximately 6.5% per year from 2007. However, the incidence of distant-stage disease increased from 2010 to 2014. The incidence of disease according to higher PSA levels or Gleason scores at diagnosis did not increase. After years of significant decline (from 1993 to 2013), the overall prostate cancer mortality trend stabilized from 2013 to 2015. CONCLUSIONS: After a decline in PSA test usage, there has been an increased burden of late-stage disease, and the decline in prostate cancer mortality has leveled off. Cancer 2018;124:2801-2814. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

The relationship between cancer incidence, stage and poverty in the United States.

We extend a prior analysis on the relation between poverty and cancer incidence in a sample of 2.90 million cancers diagnosed in 16 US states plus Los Angeles over the 2005-2009 period by additionally considering stage at diagnosis. Recognizing that higher relative disparities are often found among less-common cancer sites, our analysis incorporated both relative and absolute measures of disparities. Fourteen of the 21 cancer sites analyzed were found to have significant variation by stage; in each instance, diagnosis at distant stage was more likely among residents of high-poverty areas. If the incidence rates found in the lowest-poverty areas for these 21 cancer sites were applied to the entire country, 18,000 fewer distant-stage diagnoses per year would be expected, a reduction of 8%. Conversely, 49,000 additional local-stage diagnoses per year would be expected, an increase of 4%. These figures, strongly influenced by the most common sites of prostate and female breast, speak to the trade-offs inherent in cancer screening. Integrating the type of analysis presented here into routine cancer surveillance activities would permit a more complete understanding of the dynamic nature of the relationship between socioeconomic status and cancer incidence.

Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, 1975-2012, featuring the increasing incidence of liver cancer.

BACKGROUND: Annual updates on cancer occurrence and trends in the United States are provided through an ongoing collaboration among 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). This annual report highlights the increasing burden of liver and intrahepatic bile duct (liver) cancers. METHODS: Cancer incidence data were obtained from the CDC, NCI, and NAACCR; data about cancer deaths were obtained from the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). Annual percent changes in incidence and death rates (age-adjusted to the 2000 US Standard Population) for all cancers combined and for the leading cancers among men and women were estimated by joinpoint analysis of long-term trends (incidence for 1992-2012 and mortality for 1975-2012) and short-term trends (2008-2012). In-depth analysis of liver cancer incidence included an age-period-cohort analysis and an incidence-based estimation of person-years of life lost because of the disease. By using NCHS multiple causes of death data, hepatitis C virus (HCV) and liver cancer-associated death rates were examined from 1999 through 2013. RESULTS: Among men and women of all major racial and ethnic groups, death rates continued to decline for all cancers combined and for most cancer sites; the overall cancer death rate (for both sexes combined) decreased by 1.5% per year from 2003 to 2012. Overall, incidence rates decreased among men and remained stable among women from 2003 to 2012. Among both men and women, deaths from liver cancer increased at the highest rate of all cancer sites, and liver cancer incidence rates increased sharply, second only to thyroid cancer. Men had more than twice the incidence rate of liver cancer than women, and rates increased with age for both sexes. Among non-Hispanic (NH) white, NH black, and Hispanic men and women, liver cancer incidence rates were higher for persons born after the 1938 to 1947 birth cohort. In contrast, there was a minimal birth cohort effect for NH Asian and Pacific Islanders (APIs). NH black men and Hispanic men had the lowest median age at death (60 and 62 years, respectively) and the highest average person-years of life lost per death (21 and 20 years, respectively) from liver cancer. HCV and liver cancer-associated death rates were highest among decedents who were born during 1945 through 1965. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, cancer incidence and mortality declined among men; and, although cancer incidence was stable among women, mortality declined. The burden of liver cancer is growing and is not equally distributed throughout the population. Efforts to vaccinate populations that are vulnerable to hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection and to identify and treat those living with HCV or HBV infection, metabolic conditions, alcoholic liver disease, or other causes of cirrhosis can be effective in reducing the incidence and mortality of liver cancer. Cancer 2016;122:1312-1337. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Leading Causes of Cancer Mortality - Caribbean Region, 2003-2013.

Cancer is one of the leading causes of deaths worldwide (1); in 2012, an estimated 65% of all cancer deaths occurred in the less developed regions of the world (2). In the Caribbean region, cancer is the second leading cause of mortality, with an estimated 87,430 cancer-related deaths reported in 2012 (3). The Pan American Health Organization defines the Caribbean region as a group of 27 countries that vary in size, geography, resources, and surveillance systems.* CDC calculated site- and sex-specific proportions of cancer deaths and age-standardized mortality rates (ASMR) for 21 English- and Dutch-speaking Caribbean countries, the United States, and two U.S. territories (Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands [USVI]), using the most recent 5 years of mortality data available from each jurisdiction during 2003-2013. The selection of years varied by availability of the data from the countries and territories in 2015. ASMR for all cancers combined ranged from 46.1 to 139.3 per 100,000. Among males, prostate cancers were the leading cause of cancer deaths, followed by lung cancers; the percentage of cancer deaths attributable to prostate cancer ranged from 18.4% in Suriname to 47.4% in Dominica, and the percentage of cancer deaths attributable to lung cancer ranged from 5.6% in Barbados to 24.4% in Bermuda. Among females, breast cancer was the most common cause of cancer deaths, ranging from 14.0% of cancer deaths in Belize to 29.7% in the Cayman Islands, followed by cervical cancer. Several of the leading causes of cancer deaths in the Caribbean can be reduced through primary and secondary preventions, including prevention of exposure to risk factors, screening, early detection, and timely and effective treatment.

Use of attribute association error probability estimates to evaluate quality of medical record geocodes.

BACKGROUND: The utility of patient attributes associated with the spatiotemporal analysis of medical records lies not just in their values but also the strength of association between them. Estimating the extent to which a hierarchy of conditional probability exists between patient attribute associations such as patient identifying fields, patient and date of diagnosis, and patient and address at diagnosis is fundamental to estimating the strength of association between patient and geocode, and patient and enumeration area. We propose a hierarchy for the attribute associations within medical records that enable spatiotemporal relationships. We also present a set of metrics that store attribute association error probability (AAEP), to estimate error probability for all attribute associations upon which certainty in a patient geocode depends. METHODS: A series of experiments were undertaken to understand how error estimation could be operationalized within health data and what levels of AAEP in real data reveal themselves using these methods. Specifically, the goals of this evaluation were to (1) assess if the concept of our error assessment techniques could be implemented by a population-based cancer registry; (2) apply the techniques to real data from a large health data agency and characterize the observed levels of AAEP; and (3) demonstrate how detected AAEP might impact spatiotemporal health research. RESULTS: We present an evaluation of AAEP metrics generated for cancer cases in a North Carolina county. We show examples of how we estimated AAEP for selected attribute associations and circumstances. We demonstrate the distribution of AAEP in our case sample across attribute associations, and demonstrate ways in which disease registry specific operations influence the prevalence of AAEP estimates for specific attribute associations. CONCLUSIONS: The effort to detect and store estimates of AAEP is worthwhile because of the increase in confidence fostered by the attribute association level approach to the assessment of uncertainty in patient geocodes, relative to existing geocoding related uncertainty metrics.

Combining Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) with a Random-Sample Survey to Assess Smoking Prevalence in an Under-Served Community.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: The authors would like to thank Laura McClure for her help with the manuscript submission, the Liberty City Community Health Advisory Board for its collaboration on this study, as well as the survey interviewers, and the survey participants. INTRODUCTION: Underserved communities might lag behind Healthy People 2010 objectives of smoking reduction because of smoking behavior disparities. This possibility was investigated through a random-sample survey conducted in a disenfranchised community in Miami-Dade County, Florida, using a Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) framework. The survey was triggered by our finding that this community had higher than expected incidence of tobacco-associated cancers. METHODS: Survey methods, resulting from a dialog between the Community Advisory Board and academic researchers, included: (a) surveying adult residents of a public housing complex located within the community; (b) probability sampling; (c) face-to-face interviews administered by trained community residents. 250 households were sampled from 750 addresses provided by the county Public Housing Agency. The completed surveys were reviewed by the academic team, yielding 204 questionnaires for the current analysis. RESULTS: Of the 204 respondents, 38% were current smokers. They estimated the percentages of smokers in their household and among their five best friends at 33% and 42%, respectively, and among adults and youth in the community at 72% and 53%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A mix of state-of-art methodology with CBPR principles is seldom encountered in the current literature. It allowed the research team to find a high smoking prevalence in an underserved community, twice the statewide and nationwide estimates. Similar or higher levels of smoking were perceived in respondent's entourage. Such disparity in smoking behavior, unlikely to result from self-selection bias because of our rigorous methodology, calls for community-specific tobacco control efforts commensurate to the magnitude of the problem.

The relationship between area poverty rate and site-specific cancer incidence in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between socioeconomic status and cancer incidence in the United States has not traditionally been a focus of population-based cancer surveillance systems. METHODS: Nearly 3 million tumors diagnosed between 2005 and 2009 from 16 states plus Los Angeles were assigned into 1 of 4 groupings based on the poverty rate of the residential census tract at time of diagnosis. The sex-specific risk ratio of the highest-to-lowest poverty category was measured using Poisson regression, adjusting for age and race, for 39 cancer sites. RESULTS: For all sites combined, there was a negligible association between cancer incidence and poverty; however, 32 of 39 cancer sites showed a significant association with poverty (14 positively associated and 18 negatively associated). Nineteen of these sites had monotonic increases or decreases in risk across all 4 poverty categories. The sites most strongly associated with higher poverty were Kaposi sarcoma, larynx, cervix, penis, and liver; those most strongly associated with lower poverty were melanoma, thyroid, other nonepithelial skin, and testis. Sites associated with higher poverty had lower incidence and higher mortality than those associated with lower poverty. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate the importance and relevance of including a measure of socioeconomic status in national cancer surveillance. Cancer 2014;120:2191-2198. © 2014 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society.

Linkage of 1986-2009 National Health Interview Survey with 1981-2010 Florida Cancer Data System.

BACKGROUND: National survey data linked with state cancer registry data has the potential to create a valuable tool for cancer prevention and control research. A pilot project-developed in a collaboration of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) and the Florida Cancer Data System (FCDS) at the University of Miami -links the records of the 1986-2009 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and the 1981-2010 FCDS. The project assesses the feasibility of performing a record linkage between NCHS survey data and a state-based cancer registry, as well as the value of the data produced. The linked NHIS-FCDS data allow researchers to follow NHIS survey participants longitudinally to examine factors associated with future cancer diagnosis, and to assess the characteristics and quality of life among cancer survivors. METHODS: This report provides a preliminary evaluation of the linked national and state cancer data and examines both analytic issues and complications presented by the linkage. CONCLUSIONS: Residential mobility and the number of years of data linked in this project create some analytic challenges and limitations for the types of analyses that can be conducted. However, the linked data set offers the ability to conduct analyses not possible with either data set alone.

Applying spatial analysis tools in public health: an example using SaTScan to detect geographic targets for colorectal cancer screening interventions.

Epidemiologists are gradually incorporating spatial analysis into health-related research as geocoded cases of disease become widely available and health-focused geospatial computer applications are developed. One health-focused application of spatial analysis is cluster detection. Using cluster detection to identify geographic areas with high-risk populations and then screening those populations for disease can improve cancer control. SaTScan is a free cluster-detection software application used by epidemiologists around the world to describe spatial clusters of infectious and chronic disease, as well as disease vectors and risk factors. The objectives of this article are to describe how spatial analysis can be used in cancer control to detect geographic areas in need of colorectal cancer screening intervention, identify issues commonly encountered by SaTScan users, detail how to select the appropriate methods for using SaTScan, and explain how method selection can affect results. As an example, we used various methods to detect areas in Florida where the population is at high risk for late-stage diagnosis of colorectal cancer. We found that much of our analysis was underpowered and that no single method detected all clusters of statistical or public health significance. However, all methods detected 1 area as high risk; this area is potentially a priority area for a screening intervention. Cluster detection can be incorporated into routine public health operations, but the challenge is to identify areas in which the burden of disease can be alleviated through public health intervention. Reliance on SaTScan's default settings does not always produce pertinent results.

Pancreatic cancer clusters and arsenic-contaminated drinking water wells in Florida.

BACKGROUND: We sought to identify high-risk areas of pancreatic cancer incidence, and determine if clusters of persons diagnosed with pancreatic cancer were more likely to be located near arsenic-contaminated drinking water wells. METHODS: A total of 5,707 arsenic samples were collected from December 2000 to May 2008 by the Florida Department of Health, representing more than 5,000 individual privately owned wells. During that period, 0.010 ppm (10 ppb) or greater arsenic levels in private well water were considered as the threshold based on standard of United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Spatial modeling was applied to pancreatic cancer cases diagnosed between 1998-2002 in Florida (n = 11,405). Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine if sociodemographic indicators, smoking history, and proximity to arsenic-contaminated well sites were associated with residence at the time of pancreatic cancer diagnosis occurring within versus outside a cluster. RESULTS: Spatial modeling identified 16 clusters in which 22.6% of all pancreatic cancer cases were located. Cases living within 1 mile of known arsenic-contaminated wells were significantly more likely to be diagnosed within a cluster of pancreatic cancers relative to cases living more than 3 miles from known sites (odds ratio = 2.1 [95% CI = 1.9, 2.4]). CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to arsenic-contaminated drinking water wells may be associated with an increased risk of pancreatic cancer. However, case-control studies are needed in order to confirm the findings of this ecological analysis. These cluster areas may be appropriate to evaluate pancreatic cancer risk factors, and to perform targeted screening and prevention studies.

The Burden of Rare Cancers in North America.

Background: Rare cancers are difficult to study owing to their infrequent diagnosis. Using aggregate incidence data from population-based cancer registries in Europe, the Surveillance of Rare Cancers in Europe project compiled a list of clinically relevant, topography and morphology defined rare cancers operationally defined as having a crude annual incidence rate of <6 per 100,000 persons. In 2020, this list of rare cancers was updated. The objective of this study was to assess the utility of a rare cancer recode variable for use in the Cancer in North America (CiNA) dataset and to provide a first look at the burden of rare cancers in Canada and the United States. Methods: Data were obtained from 62 registries in Canada and the United States that met North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR) high-quality data standards. The list of rare cancers was programmed as a Rare Cancer Classification variable within SEER*Stat. SEER*Stat was used to estimate case counts and crude and age-specific incidence rates per 100,000 for cancers diagnosed 2015-2019 by age at diagnosis, country, and country-specific geographic regions in Canada and the United States, and by race/ethnicity in the United States. Results: In Canada and the United States, 21% and 22% of all invasive cancers were classified as rare, respectively. The percentage of rare cancers ranged between 18% to 21% across geographic regions in Canada and the United States. Children (aged 0-14 years) had the highest percentage and lowest incidence rates of rare cancers. The percentage of rare cancers decreased, and incidence increased with increasing age. In the United States, Hispanics had the highest percentage (27%) and non-Hispanic Whites and non-Hispanic Blacks the lowest percentage (21%) of rare cancers. Conclusions: While individual rare cancers are infrequently diagnosed, in aggregate, they account for a substantial percentage of all cancers diagnosed in the population and pose a substantial public health burden. We report variations in percentage of rare cancers by age, and race/ethnicity (United States only). Such variations in the burden of these cancers may suggest possible areas for public health research.

The Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States Histopathological Grouping Scheme Provides Clinically Relevant Brain and Other Central Nervous System Categories for Cancer Registry Data.

Background: Brain and other central nervous system (CNS) tumors are a heterogenous collection of tumors, but they are generally reported in local and national cancer statistics as a single, large category. Although the collection of non-malignant brain and other CNS tumors has been mandated since diagnosis year 2004, these tumors are often excluded from standard statistical reports on cancer despite their burden on populations in the United States and Canada. The Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States (CBTRUS) historical and current histopathological grouping schemes have been developed in collaboration with neuropathologists to capture the diversity of these tumors in clinically relevant categories. The goal of this analysis was to test a new recode variable based on the CBTRUS histopathology grouping prior to releasing the variable for use in the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR) Cancer in North American (CiNA) data sets and by individual cancer registries. Methods: The CBTRUS histopathology grouping scheme variable was created and implemented in an evaluation CiNA data set. The accuracy of the variable's categories was evaluated. Counts and incidence rates were calculated using SEER*Stat. Results: Overall, 481,650 cases of brain and other CNS tumors meeting the CBTRUS definition were identified for diagnosis years 2015-2019 in the CiNA data set for the US and Canada, making these the sixth-most-common tumor as a group. Of the brain and other CNS tumor cases, approximately 29% were malignant (behavior code /3 in the International Classification of Diseases for Oncology, 3rd edition [ICD-O-3]) while about 71% were nonmalignant (ICD-O-3 behavior code /0 or /1). The overall age-adjusted annual incidence rate (AAAIR) of brain and other CNS tumors was 24.44 per 100,000 (95% CI, 24.37-24.51). The most common histopathologies were meningioma, of which approximately 99% were nonmalignant (AAAIR, 9.09 per 100,000; 95% CI, 9.05-9.13); tumors of the pituitary, of which about 99% were nonmalignant (AAAIR, 4.28 per 100,000; 95% CI, 4.25-4.31); and glioblastoma, of which 100% were malignant behavior (AAAIR, 3.20 per 100,000; 95% CI, 3.18-3.22). Conclusion: Brain and other CNS tumors make up an extremely diverse category that contributes substantially to the cancer burden in North America. The CBTRUS histopathology grouping variable provides clinically relevant groupings for analysis of these tumors in the NAACCR CiNA as well as by individual central cancer registry groups. We encourage the use of this variable to support more detailed analysis of this important group of tumors.

Determining Fitness for Use of SEER Cause-Specific Cause of Death in Analyses of Cause-Specific Survival.

Background: Net and crude cancer survival statistics can be calculated using cause of death or expected survival from life tables. In some instances, using cause of death information may be advantageous. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program cause-specific cause of death variable (North American Association of Central Cancer Registries [NAACCR] item #1914) designates that a patient died of their cancer. We evaluated how miss-ingness in NAACCR item #1914 impacted survival estimates to determine fitness for use in NAACCR Cancer in North America (CiNA) products. Methods: We used CiNA survival and prevalence data (November 2020 submission) to calculate 60-month cause-specific survival among persons aged 15-99 years at time of diagnosis using NAACCR item #1914. We treated missing/unknown causes of death in 3 ways: excluded from analysis, included as dead from this cancer, or included as censored at time of last follow-up. Autopsy/death-certificate-only cases were excluded from survival analyses. We calculated the proportion of deaths with unknown/missing cause of death by registry and demographic variables. Results: Generally, 60-month cause-specific survival estimates differed by <1% between the 3 approaches when NAACCR item #1914 was missing/unknown for <3% of deaths. When applying a <3% fit-for-use standard to SEER cause-specific cause of death, data from 34 registries were included in cause-specific survival analyses. The proportion of deaths with missing/unknown cause of death varied by primary site, age at diagnosis, race/ethnicity, year of diagnosis, and registry. Conclusion: We have identified missingness cut points for NAACCR item #1914, which strike a balance between scientific integrity and registry inclusiveness, to designate data in NAACCR CiNA data products as fit for use in cause-specific survival analyses.