Search

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The National Cancer Institute's cancer incidence estimates through 2015 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries' November 2017 submission are released in April 2018.Methods: Early estimates (February 2017) of cancer incidence rates and trends from the SEER 18 registries for diagnoses in 2000 through 2015 were evaluated with a revised delay-adjustment model, which was used to adjust for the undercount of cases in the early release. For the first time, early estimates were produced for race (whites and blacks) along with estimates for new sites: the oral cavity and pharynx, leukemia, and myeloma.Results: Model validation comparing delay-adjusted rates and trends through 2014 and using 2016 submissions showed good agreement. Differences in trends through 2015 in comparison with those through 2014 were evident. The rate of female breast cancer rose significantly from 2004 to 2015 by 0.3% per year (annual percent change [APC] = 0.3%); the prior trend through 2014 (the same magnitude) was not yet significant. The female colon and rectum cancer trend for whites became flat after previously declining. Lung and bronchus cancer for whites showed a significant decline (APC for males = -2.3%, 2012-2015; APC for females = -0.7%, 2011-2015). Thyroid cancer for black females changed from a continuous rise to a flat final segment (APC = 1.6%, not significant, 2011-2015). Both kidney and renal pelvis cancer (APC = 1.5%, 2011-2015) and childhood cancers (APC = 0.5%, 2000-2015) for white males showed a significant rise in the final segments from previously flat trends. Kidney and renal pelvis cancer for black males showed a change from a significant rise to a flat trend.Conclusions: The early release of SEER data continues to be useful as a preliminary estimate of the most current cancer incidence trends. Cancer 2018;124:2192-204. © 2018 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) demonstrated that prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening significantly reduced prostate cancer mortality (rate ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.91). The US Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) trial indicated no such reduction but had a wide 95% CI (rate ratio for prostate cancer mortality, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.87-1.36). Standard meta-analyses are unable to account for key differences between the trials that can impact the estimated effects of screening and the trials' point estimates.Methods: The authors calibrated 2 microsimulation models to individual-level incidence and mortality data from 238,936 men participating in the ERSPC and PLCO trials. A cure parameter for the underlying efficacy of screening was estimated by the models separately for each trial. The authors changed step-by-step major known differences in trial settings, including enrollment and attendance patterns, screening intervals, PSA thresholds, biopsy receipt, control arm contamination, and primary treatment, to reflect a more ideal protocol situation and differences between the trials.Results: Using the cure parameter estimated for the ERSPC, the models projected 19% to 21% and 6% to 8%, respectively, prostate cancer mortality reductions in the ERSPC and PLCO settings. Using this cure parameter, the models projected a reduction of 37% to 43% under annual screening with 100% attendance and biopsy compliance and no contamination. The cure parameter estimated for the PLCO trial was 0.Conclusions: The observed cancer mortality reduction in screening trials appears to be highly sensitive to trial protocol and practice settings. Accounting for these differences, the efficacy of PSA screening in the PLCO setting is not necessarily inconsistent with ERSPC results. Cancer 2018;124:1197-206. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cancer incidence rates and trends for cases diagnosed through 2014 using data reported to the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program in February 2016 and a validation of rates and trends for cases diagnosed through 2013 and submitted in February 2015 using the November 2015 submission are reported. New cancer sites include the pancreas, kidney and renal pelvis, corpus and uterus, and childhood cancer sites for ages birth to 19 years inclusive.Methods: A new reporting delay model is presented for these estimates for more consistent results with the model used for the usual November SEER submissions, adjusting for the large case undercount in the February submission. Joinpoint regression methodology was used to assess trends. Delay-adjusted rates and trends were checked for validity between the February 2016 and November 2016 submissions.Results: Validation revealed that the delay model provides similar estimates of eventual counts using either February or November submission data. Trends declined through 2014 for prostate and colon and rectum cancer for males and females, male and female lung cancer, and cervical cancer. Thyroid cancer and liver and intrahepatic bile duct cancer increased. Pancreas (male and female) and corpus and uterus cancer demonstrated a modest increase. Slight increases occurred for male kidney and renal pelvis, and for all childhood cancer sites for ages birth to 19 years.Conclusions: Evaluating early cancer data submissions, adjusted for reporting delay, produces timely and valid incidence rates and trends. The results of the current study support using delay-adjusted February submission data for valid incidence rate and trend estimates over several data cycles. Cancer 2017;123:2524-34. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This article presents a first look at rates and trends for cases in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program diagnosed through 2013 using the February 2015 submission, and a validation of rates and trends from the February 2014 submission using the subsequent November 2014 submission. To the authors' knowledge, this is the second time SEER has published trends based on the early February submission. Three new cancer sites were added: cervix, thyroid, and liver/ intrahepatic bile duct.Methods: A reporting delay model adjusted for the undercount of cases, which is substantially larger for the February than the subsequent November submission, was used. Joinpoint regression methodology was used to assess trends. Delay-adjusted rates and trends were checked to assess validity between the February and November 2014 submissions.Results: The validation of rates and trends from the February and November 2014 submissions demonstrated even better agreement than the previously reported comparison between the February and November 2013 submissions, thereby affording additional confidence that the delay-adjusted February submission data can be used to produce valid estimates of incidence trends. Trends for cases diagnosed through 2013 revealed more rapid declines in female colon and rectal cancer and prostate cancer. A plateau in female melanoma trends and a slowing of the increases in thyroid cancer and male liver/intrahepatic bile duct cancer trends were observed.Conclusions: Analysis of early cancer data submissions can provide a preliminary indication of differences in incidence trends with an additional year of data. Although the delay adjustment correction adjusts for underreporting of cases, caution should be exercised when interpreting the results in this early submission. Cancer 2016;122:1579-87. © 2016 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND The National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program collects and publishes population-based cancer incidence data from registries covering approximately 28% () of the US population. SEER incidence rates are released annually in April from data submitted the prior November. The time needed to identify, consolidate, clean, and submit data requires the latest diagnosis year included to be 3 years before release. Approaches, opportunities, and cautions for an earlier release of data based on a February submission are described. METHODS First, cases submitted in February for the latest diagnosis year represented 92% to 98% of those in the following November submission. A reporting delay model was used to statistically adjust counts in recent diagnosis years for cases projected in the future. February submissions required larger adjustment factors than November submissions. Second, trends were checked to assess the validity. RESULTS Most cancer sites had similar annual percent change (APC) trends for February and November 2013. Male colon and rectum cancer and female lung and bronchus cancer showed an acceleration in declining APC trends only in February. Average annual percent change (AAPC) trends for the 2 submissions were similar for all sites. CONCLUSIONS For the first time, preliminary 2012 incidence rates, based on February submissions, are provided. An accelerated decline starting in 2008 for male colon and rectum cancer rates and male lung cancer rates did not persist when 2012 data were added. An earlier release of SEER data is possible. Caution must be exercised when one is interpreting changing trends. Use of the more conservative AAPC is advised. Cancer 2015;121:2053-2062. © 2015 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) demonstrated that low-dose computed tomography screening is an effective way of reducing lung cancer (LC) mortality. However, optimal screening strategies have not been determined to date and it is uncertain whether lighter smokers than those examined in the NLST may also benefit from screening. To address these questions, it is necessary to first develop LC natural history models that can reproduce NLST outcomes and simulate screening programs at the population level. METHODS Five independent LC screening models were developed using common inputs and calibration targets derived from the NLST and the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO). Imputation of missing information regarding smoking, histology, and stage of disease for a small percentage of individuals and diagnosed LCs in both trials was performed. Models were calibrated to LC incidence, mortality, or both outcomes simultaneously. RESULTS Initially, all models were calibrated to the NLST and validated against PLCO. Models were found to validate well against individuals in PLCO who would have been eligible for the NLST. However, all models required further calibration to PLCO to adequately capture LC outcomes in PLCO never-smokers and light smokers. Final versions of all models produced incidence and mortality outcomes in the presence and absence of screening that were consistent with both trials. CONCLUSIONS The authors developed 5 distinct LC screening simulation models based on the evidence in the NLST and PLCO. The results of their analyses demonstrated that the NLST and PLCO have produced consistent results. The resulting models can be important tools to generate additional evidence to determine the effectiveness of lung cancer screening strategies using low-dose computed tomography. Cancer 2014;120:1713-1724. © 2014 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Over the past several decades, the incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) has rapidly increased. The purpose of this analysis was to examine temporal trends in EAC incidence and mortality within the US population and, in addition, to explore these trends within subgroups of the population. METHODS: The National Cancer Institute (NCI) Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER 9) data were used to examine incidence and incidence-based (IB) mortality in EAC from 1975 to 2009. Secular trends in incidence and IB mortality by cancer stage, sex, and race were further characterized using the NCI's Joinpoint Regression program. RESULTS: Based on SEER 9 data, EAC incidence and IB mortality continues to increase in the United States. However, since the mid-1990s, the overall rate of increase in both EAC incidence and IB mortality appears to be slowing. In addition, in early-stage cancers, there is a noticeable leveling off of IB mortality rates and divergence from incidence starting in the late 1990s. Over the study period, the average annual percentage increase in incidence was 6.1% in men and 5.9% in women. CONCLUSIONS: EAC incidence and IB mortality rates continue to rise in the United States, although at a slower rate in more recent years. In early-stage cancers, IB mortality and incidence rates have diverged primarily because IB mortality rates have plateaued beginning in the late 1990s. Although EAC continues to be less common in women, the rate of increase in EAC incidence is similar in both sexes. Cancer 2013. © 2012 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer mortality rates in the United States declined by >40% between 1991 and 2005. The impact of changes in primary treatment and adjuvant and neoadjuvant hormone therapy on this decline is unknown. METHODS: The authors applied 3 independently developed models of prostate cancer natural history and disease detection under common assumptions about treatment patterns, treatment efficacy, and survival in the population. Primary treatment patterns were derived from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry; data on the frequency of hormone therapy were obtained from the CaPSURE (Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor) database; and treatment efficacy was based on estimates from randomized trials and comparative effectiveness studies of treatment alternatives. The models projected prostate cancer mortality without prostate-specific antigen screening and in the presence and absence of treatment benefit. The impact of primary treatment was expressed as a fraction of the difference between observed mortality and projected mortality in the absence of treatment benefit. RESULTS: The 3 models projected that changes in treatment explained 22% to 33% of the mortality decline by 2005. These contributions were accounted for mostly by surgery and radiation therapy, which increased in frequency until the 1990s, whereas hormone therapies contributed little to the mortality decline by 2005. Assuming that treatment benefit was less for older men, changes in treatment explained only 16% to 23% of the mortality decline by 2005. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in primary treatment explained a minority of the observed decline in prostate cancer mortality. The remainder of the decline probably was because of other interventions, such as prostate-specific antigen screening and advances in the treatment of recurrent and progressive disease. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Population-based cancer registries that include patient follow-up generally provide information regarding net survival (ie, survival associated with the risk of dying of cancer in the absence of competing risks). However, registry data also can be used to calculate survival from cancer in the presence of competing risks, which is more clinically relevant. METHODS: Statistical methods were developed to predict the risk of death from cancer and other causes, as well as natural life expectancy if the patient did not have cancer based on a profile of prognostic factors including characteristics of the cancer, demographic factors, and comorbid conditions. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program database was used to calculate the risk of dying of cancer. Because the risks of dying of cancer versus other causes are assumed to be independent conditional on the prognostic factors, a wide variety of independent data sources can be used to calculate the risk of death from other causes. Herein, the risk of death from other causes was estimated using SEER and Medicare claims data, and was matched to the closest fitting portion of the US life table to obtain a 'health status-adjusted age.' RESULTS: A nomogram was developed for prostate cancer as part of a Web-based Cancer Survival Query System that is targeted for use by physicians and patients to obtain information on a patient's prognosis. More nomograms currently are being developed. CONCLUSIONS: Nomograms of this type can be used as one tool to assist cancer physicians and their patients to better understand their prognosis and to weigh alternative treatment and palliative strategies. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND. The current study was undertaken to evaluate the spatiotemporal projection models applied by the American Cancer Society to predict the number of new cancer cases. METHODS. Adaptations of a model that has been used since 2007 were evaluated. Modeling is conducted in 3 steps. In step I, ecologic predictors of spatiotemporal variation are used to estimate age-specific incidence counts for every county in the country, providing an estimate even in those areas that are missing data for specific years. Step II adjusts the step I estimates for reporting delays. In step III, the delay-adjusted predictions are projected 4 years ahead to the current calendar year. Adaptations of the original model include updating covariates and evaluating alternative projection methods. Residual analysis and evaluation of 5 temporal projection methods were conducted. RESULTS. The differences between the spatiotemporal model-estimated case counts and the observed case counts for 2007 were < 1%. After delays in reporting of cases were considered, the difference was 2.5% for women and 3.3% for men. Residual analysis indicated no significant pattern that suggested the need for additional covariates. The vector autoregressive model was identified as the best temporal projection method. CONCLUSIONS. The current spatiotemporal prediction model is adequate to provide reasonable estimates of case counts. To project the estimated case counts ahead 4 years, the vector autoregressive model is recommended to be the best temporal projection method for producing estimates closest to the observed case counts. Cancer 2012;. © 2012 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: A study was undertaken to evaluate the temporal projection methods that are applied by the American Cancer Society to predict 4-year-ahead projections. METHODS: Cancer mortality data recorded in each year from 1969 through 2007 for the United States overall and for each state from the National Center for Health Statistics was obtained. Based on the mortality data through 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003, Projections were made 4 years ahead to estimate the expected number of cancer deaths in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, respectively, in the United States and in each state, using 5 projection methods. These predictive estimates were compared to the observed number of deaths that occurred for all cancers combined and 47 cancer sites at the national level, and 21 cancer sites at the state level. RESULTS: Among the models that were compared, the joinpoint regression model with modified Bayesian information criterion selection produced estimates that are closest to the actual number of deaths. Overall, results show the 4-year-ahead projection has larger error than 3-year-ahead projection of death counts when the same method is used. However, 4-year-ahead projection from the new method performed better than the 3-year-ahead projection from the current state-space method. CONCLUSIONS: The Joinpoint method with modified Bayesian information criterion model has the smallest error of all the models considered for 4-year-ahead projection of cancer deaths to the current year for the United States overall and for each state. This method will be used by the American Cancer Society to project the number of cancer deaths starting in 2012. Cancer 2012; © 2012 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the breast cancer survivors in the U.S. It says that there are 2,477,847 breast cancer survivors in the country. It also says that breast cancer continues to place a significant burden on the country's health care system. It further states that the U.S. public health programs have developed effective breast cancer screening techniques, minimizing the toxic effects of treatment and decreasing cancer recurrence.

The article discusses the findings of a clinical study that was conducted to examine the effect of treatment advances on the survival of patients with late-stage ovarian, colorectal and testicular cancers. It states that survival cure models were utilized to estimate the gain in life expectancy (GLE) accredited to a rise in the number of cured patients and to the survival of uncured patients. The study found that treatment improvement for ovarian cancer resulted in a total GLE of 2 years while the cure rate in colorectal cancer rose from 29% to 47%.

The article presents a study which determined the extent of any racial disparity in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) use by reconstructing patterns of PSA testing between black and white men in the U.S. The study used data from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey to model the adoption of PSA and to estimate the distribution of age at first test. It was found that 45% of white men and 43% of black men within ages 40-84 years had at least one PSA test by the year 2000.