Search

Background Foreign-born populations in the United States have markedly increased, yet cancer trends remain unexplored. Survey-based Population-Adjusted Rate Calculator (SPARC) is a new tool for evaluating nativity differences in cancer mortality. Methods Using SPARC, we calculated 3-year (2016-2018) age-adjusted mortality rates and rate ratios for common cancers by sex, age group, race and ethnicity, and nativity. Trends by nativity were examined for the first time for 2006-2018. Traditional cancer statistics draw populations from decennial censuses. However, nativity-stratified populations are from the American Community Surveys, thus involve sampling errors. To rectify this, SPARC employed bias-corrected estimators. Death counts came from the National Vital Statistics System. Results Age-adjusted mortality rates were higher among US-born populations across nearly all cancer types, with the largest US-born, foreign-born difference observed in lung cancer among Black women (rate ratio = 3.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.37 to 4.00). The well-documented White–Black differences in breast cancer mortality existed mainly among US-born women. For all cancers combined, descending trends were more accelerated for US-born compared with foreign-born individuals in all race and ethnicity groups with changes ranging from –2.6% per year in US-born Black men to stable (statistically nonsignificant) among foreign-born Black women. Pancreas and liver cancers were exceptions with increasing, stable, or decreasing trends depending on nativity and race and ethnicity. Notably, foreign-born Black men and foreign-born Hispanic men did not show a favorable decline in colorectal cancer mortality. Conclusions Although all groups show beneficial cancer mortality trends, those with higher rates in 2006 have experienced sharper declines. Persistent disparities between US-born and foreign-born individuals, especially among Black people, necessitate further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Genetic simulation programs are used to model data under specified assumptions to facilitate the understanding and study of complex genetic systems. Standardized data sets generated using genetic simulation are essential for the development and application of novel analytical tools in genetic epidemiology studies. With continuing advances in high-throughput genomic technologies and generation and analysis of larger, more complex data sets, there is a need for updating current approaches in genetic simulation modeling. To provide a forum to address current and emerging challenges in this area, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) sponsored a workshop, entitled "Genetic Simulation Tools for Post-Genome Wide Association Studies of Complex Diseases" at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Maryland on March 11-12, 2014. The goals of the workshop were to (1) identify opportunities, challenges, and resource needs for the development and application of genetic simulation models; (2) improve the integration of tools for modeling and analysis of simulated data; and (3) foster collaborations to facilitate development and applications of genetic simulation. During the course of the meeting, the group identified challenges and opportunities for the science of simulation, software and methods development, and collaboration. This paper summarizes key discussions at the meeting, and highlights important challenges and opportunities to advance the field of genetic simulation.

Joinpoint regression can model trends in time-specific estimates from aggregated data. These methods have been developed mainly for nonsurvey data such as cancer registry data assuming that the time-specific estimates are uncorrelated from time point to time point. This independence assumption can be violated for trends in time-specific estimates from complex survey samples due to using the same primary sampling units across time and, therefore, the full variance–covariance matrix of the time-specific estimates should be incorporated into the regression model fitting. This article extends these joinpoint methods for analyzing complex survey data within the National Cancer Institute's Joinpoint software and empirically compares the extended method to existing methods for analyses of time trends in three surveys. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Selecting the number of change points in segmented line regression is an important problem in trend analysis, and there have been various approaches proposed in the literature. We first study the empirical properties of several model selection procedures and propose a new method based on two Schwarz type criteria, a classical Bayes Information Criterion (BIC) and the one with a harsher penalty than BIC ( BIC 3 ). The proposed rule is designed to use the former when effect sizes are small and the latter when the effect sizes are large and employs the partial R 2 to determine the weight between BIC and BIC 3 . The proposed method is computationally much more efficient than the permutation test procedure that has been the default method of Joinpoint software developed for cancer trend analysis, and its satisfactory performance is observed in our simulation study. Simulations indicate that the proposed method performs well in keeping the probability of correct selection at least as large as that of BIC 3 , whose performance is comparable to that of the permutation test procedure, and improves BIC 3 when it performs worse than BIC. The proposed method is applied to the U.S. prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Selection of candidates for lung cancer screening based on individual risk has been proposed as an alternative to criteria based on age and cumulative smoking exposure (pack-years). Nine previously established risk models were assessed for their ability to identify those most likely to develop or die from lung cancer. All models considered age and various aspects of smoking exposure (smoking status, smoking duration, cigarettes per day, pack-years smoked, time since smoking cessation) as risk predictors. In addition, some models considered factors such as gender, race, ethnicity, education, body mass index, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, emphysema, personal history of cancer, personal history of pneumonia, and family history of lung cancer. Methods and findings Retrospective analyses were performed on 53,452 National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) participants (1,925 lung cancer cases and 884 lung cancer deaths) and 80,672 Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO) ever-smoking participants (1,463 lung cancer cases and 915 lung cancer deaths). Six-year lung cancer incidence and mortality risk predictions were assessed for (1) calibration (graphically) by comparing the agreement between the predicted and the observed risks, (2) discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC]) between individuals with and without lung cancer (death), and (3) clinical usefulness (net benefit in decision curve analysis) by identifying risk thresholds at which applying risk-based eligibility would improve lung cancer screening efficacy. To further assess performance, risk model sensitivities and specificities in the PLCO were compared to those based on the NLST eligibility criteria. Calibration was satisfactory, but discrimination ranged widely (AUCs from 0.61 to 0.81). The models outperformed the NLST eligibility criteria over a substantial range of risk thresholds in decision curve analysis, with a higher sensitivity for all models and a slightly higher specificity for some models. The PLCOm2012, Bach, and Two-Stage Clonal Expansion incidence models had the best overall performance, with AUCs >0.68 in the NLST and >0.77 in the PLCO. These three models had the highest sensitivity and specificity for predicting 6-y lung cancer incidence in the PLCO chest radiography arm, with sensitivities >79.8% and specificities >62.3%. In contrast, the NLST eligibility criteria yielded a sensitivity of 71.4% and a specificity of 62.2%. Limitations of this study include the lack of identification of optimal risk thresholds, as this requires additional information on the long-term benefits (e.g., life-years gained and mortality reduction) and harms (e.g., overdiagnosis) of risk-based screening strategies using these models. In addition, information on some predictor variables included in the risk prediction models was not available. Conclusions Selection of individuals for lung cancer screening using individual risk is superior to selection criteria based on age and pack-years alone. The benefits, harms, and feasibility of implementing lung cancer screening policies based on risk prediction models should be assessed and compared with those of current recommendations., Author(s): Kevin ten Haaf 1,*, Jihyoun Jeon 2, Martin C. Tammemägi 3, Summer S. Han 4,5, Chung Yin Kong 6, Sylvia K. Plevritis 4, Eric J. Feuer 7, Harry J. [...]