Search

Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence rates have been decreasing in the United States (US), but there is limited information about differences in these improvements among individuals from different racial and ethnic subgroups across different regions of the US.Methods Data from the National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR) and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) databases were used to examine trends in CRC incidence from 2001 to 2020 using a population-based retrospective cohort study. We obtained annual estimates of CRC incidence and used meta-regression analyses via weighted linear models to identify main effects and interactions that explained differences in CRC incidence trends among groups defined by race/ethnicity and US region while also considering CRC stage and sex. To summarize overall trends over time in incidence rates for specific racial and ethnic groups within and across US regions, we obtained average annual percentage change (AAPC) estimates.Results The greatest differences in CRC incidence trends were among groups defined by race/ethnicity and US region. Non-Hispanic Black (NHB) persons had the largest declines in CRC incidence, with AAPC estimates ranging from −2.27 (95% CI: −2.49 to −2.06) in the South to −3.03 (95% CI: −3.59 to −2.47) in the West, but had higher-than-average incidence rates at study end. The AAPC estimate for American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN) persons suggested no significant change over time (AAPC: −0.41, 95% CI: −2.51 to 1.73).Conclusion CRC incidence trends differ among racial/ethnic groups residing in different US regions. Notably, CRC incidence rates have not changed noticeably for AIAN persons from 2001-2020. These findings highlight the importance of reinvigorating collaborative efforts to develop geographic and population-specific screening and preventative approaches to reduce the CRC burden experienced by Native American communities and members of other minoritized groups.

Introduction Survival following colorectal cancer (CRC) has improved in the US since 1975, but there is limited information on stage-specific survival trends among racial and ethnic subgroups.Objectives The purpose of this study was to estimate and compare trends in 1- and 5-year CRC cause-specific survival in the United States by both stage and race/ethnicity.Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study of individuals diagnosed with CRC using the 1992-2018 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. We estimated and compared time trends in 1- and 5-year survival for CRC stage by race/ethnicity.Results Data from 399 220 individuals diagnosed with CRC were available. There were significant differences in stage-specific 1-year survival trends by race and ethnicity. Differences were most notable for distant stage CRC: survival probabilities increased most consistently for non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN) and Black (NHB) persons, but their trend lines were lower than those of Hispanic, and non-Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander (API) and White (NHW) persons, whose initially greater gains appear to be slowing. Although the data do not support significant racial/ethnic differences in 5-year CRC survival trends by stage, AIAN and NHB persons have the lowest average survival probabilities for multiple CRC stages, and no racial/ethnic group has 5-year survival probabilities above 20% for distant-stage CRC.Conclusion Although there has been an overall improvement in adjusted CRC-specific survival probabilities since 1992, AIAN and NHB persons continue to experience worse prognosis than those of other races/ethnicities. This highlights the importance of reinvigorating efforts to understand the causes of mortality in CRC, including those which may differ according to an individual’s race or ethnicity.

This study presents black-white breast cancer statistics, tumor histology and receptor status, and treatment patterns for all ages and by age groups (<40, 40-49, and ≥50).

The unequal burden of cancer in minority and underserved communities nationally and in Maryland is a compelling crisis. The Maryland Special Populations Cancer Research Network (MSPN) developed an infrastructure covering Maryland's 23 jurisdictions and Baltimore City through formal partnerships between the University of Maryland School of Medicine, University of Maryland Statewide Health Network, University of Maryland Eastern Shore, and community partners in Baltimore City, rural Eastern Shore, rural Western Maryland, rural Southern Maryland, and Piscataway Conoy Tribe and statewide American Indians. Guided by the community‐based participatory framework, the MSPN undertook a comprehensive assessment (of needs, strengths, and resources available) that laid the foundation for programmatic efforts in community‐initiated cancer awareness and education, research, and training. The MSPN infrastructure was used to implement successful and innovative community‐based cancer education interventions and technological solutions; conduct education and promotion of clinical trials, cancer health disparities research, and minority faculty cancer research career development; and leverage additional resources for sustainability. MSPN engaged in informed advocacy among decision‐ and policymakers at state and national levels, and its community‐based clinical trials program was recognized by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services as a Best Practice Award. The solutions to reduce and eliminate cancer health disparities are complex and require comprehensive and focused multidisciplinary cancer health disparities research, training, and education strategies implemented through robust community–academic partnerships. Cancer 2006. © American Cancer Society.

Background.Little is known about breast cancer screening practices or predictors of age-specific screening for Samoan women.

The Healthy People 2000report set the objective of increasing the percentage of women 40 or older who had ever received a mammogram and clinical breast examination to 80% by the year 2000. The report used a baseline of 36% for all American women and 20% for Hispanic women. The purpose of this study was to compare baseline estimates with data obtained in five Hispanic communities.

Our objective was to examine the demographic and other predictors of fatalistic beliefs among Latinas (Hispanic women) and Anglo (non-Hispanic Caucasian) women and to assess the impact of these beliefs on the use of cervical cancer screening services.

Background There is a paucity of data about cancer among American-Samoans, the largest Pacific Islander group after Hawaiians This study provides the first data on the incidence and relative risk for all cancers among American-Samoans on the US mainland and in Hawaii. Methods The University of Southern California Cancer Surveillance Program and the Hawaii Tumor Registry, two population-based cancer surveillance programmes, provided archival data on American-Samoans residing in Los Angeles County, California and in Hawaii, respectively. Results There were significant differences in the incidence and age-adjusted site-specific relative risk of cancers between Amencan-Samoans, Hawaiians, and Anglos (non-Hispanic whites). In Hawaii, American-Samoans diagnosed with cancer compared with Hawaiians had a higher age-adjusted site-specific relative nsk for cancers of the nasopharynx (especially males), liver, prostate, thyroid, and blood (especially females) and a lower relative risk for cancers of the colon, rectum (especially males), lung (especially females) and breast Furthermore, compared with Anglos diagnosed with cancer in Hawaii, American-Samoans had a higher relative risk for cancers of the nasopharynx (especially males), stomach, liver, lung (especially males), corpus uteri, thyroid and blood, and a lower relative risk for cancers of the colon, skin, breast, testes, cervix uten, bladder (especially males), and lymph nodes. A relatively similar profile of cancer distribution and relative risk was observed among American-Samoans and Anglos diagnosed with cancer in California. Conclusions. The data provide baseline information which has Important implications for future cancer control research and prevention in this population. Conclusions The data provide baseline information which has important implications for future cancer control research and prevention in this population.