Search

Background: We sought to examine the lack of paid sick leave among working cancer survivors by sociodemographic/socioeconomic and employment characteristics and its association with preventive services use in the United States., Methods: Working cancer survivors (ages 18-64 years; n=7,995; weighted n=3.43 million) were identified using 2001-2018 National Health Interview Survey data. Adjusted prevalence of lack of paid sick leave by sociodemographic and socioeconomic characteristics, as well as job sector, working hours, and employer size, were generated using multivariable logistic regression models. Separate analyses examined the associations of lack of paid sick leave with use of various preventive services., Results: Of all working cancer survivors, 36.4% lacked paid sick leave (n=2,925; weighted n=1.25 million), especially those working in food/agriculture/construction/personal services occupations or industries (ranging from 54.9% to 88.5%). In adjusted analyses, working cancer survivors with lower household income (<200% of the federal poverty level, 48.7%), without a high school degree (43.3%), without health insurance coverage (70.6%), and who were self-employed (89.5%), were part-time workers (68.2%), or worked in small businesses (<50 employees, 48.8%) were most likely to lack paid sick leave. Lack of paid sick leave was associated with lower use of influenza vaccine (ages 18-39 years, 21.3% vs 33.3%; ages 40-49 years, 25.8% vs 38.3%; ages 50-64 years, 46.3% vs 52.4%; P<.001 for all), cholesterol screening (ages 18-39 years, 43.1% vs 62.5%; P<.05), and blood pressure check (ages 18-39 years, 43.1% vs 62.5%; P<.05) compared with survivors having paid sick leave., Conclusions: In the United States, more than one-third of all working cancer survivors and more than half of survivors working for small employers and in certain occupations/industries lack paid sick leave. Survivors with lower household income or educational attainment are particularly vulnerable. Moreover, lack of paid sick leave is associated with lower use of some recommended preventive services, suggesting that ensuring working cancer survivors have access to paid sick leave may be an important mechanism for reducing health disparities.

Background: Cancer survivors represent a population with high health care needs. If and how cancer survivors were affected by the first year of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic are largely unknown., Methods: Using data from the nationwide, population-based Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (2017-2020), the authors investigated changes in health-related measures during the COVID-19 pandemic among cancer survivors and compared them with changes among adults without a cancer history in the United States. Sociodemographic and health-related measures such as insurance coverage, employment status, health behaviors, and health status were self-reported. Adjusted prevalence ratios of health-related measures in 2020 versus 2017-2019 were calculated with multivariable logistic regressions and stratified by age group (18-64 vs. ≥65 years)., Results: Among adults aged 18-64 years, the uninsured rate did not change significantly in 2020 despite increases in unemployment. The prevalence of unhealthy behaviors, such as insufficient sleep and smoking, decreased in 2020, and self-rated health improved, regardless of cancer history. Notably, declines in smoking were larger among cancer survivors than nonelderly adults without a cancer history. Few changes were observed for adults aged ≥65 years., Conclusions: Further research is needed to confirm the observed positive health behavior and health changes and to investigate the role of potential mechanisms, such as the national and regional policy responses to the pandemic regarding insurance coverage, unemployment benefits, and financial assistance. As polices related to the public health emergency expire, ongoing monitoring of longer term effects of the pandemic on cancer survivorship is warranted., (© 2022 American Cancer Society.)

In this report, the authors provide comprehensive and up-to-date US data on disparities in cancer occurrence, major risk factors, and access to and utilization of preventive measures and screening by sociodemographic characteristics. They also review programs and resources that have reduced cancer disparities and provide policy recommendations to further mitigate these inequalities. The overall cancer death rate is 19% higher among Black males than among White males. Black females also have a 12% higher overall cancer death rate than their White counterparts despite having an 8% lower incidence rate. There are also substantial variations in death rates for specific cancer types and in stage at diagnosis, survival, exposure to risk factors, and receipt of preventive measures and screening by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and geographic location. For example, kidney cancer death rates by sex among American Indian/Alaska Native people are ≥64% higher than the corresponding rates in each of the other racial/ethnic groups, and the 5-year relative survival for all cancers combined is 14% lower among residents of poorer counties than among residents of more affluent counties. Broad and equitable implementation of evidence-based interventions, such as increasing health insurance coverage through Medicaid expansion or other initiatives, could substantially reduce cancer disparities. However, progress will require not only equitable local, state, and federal policies but also broad interdisciplinary engagement to elevate and address fundamental social inequities and longstanding systemic racism., (© 2021 The Authors. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

The Hispanic/Latino population is the second largest racial/ethnic group in the continental United States and Hawaii, accounting for 18% (60.6 million) of the total population. An additional 3 million Hispanic Americans live in Puerto Rico. Every 3 years, the American Cancer Society reports on cancer occurrence, risk factors, and screening for Hispanic individuals in the United States using the most recent population-based data. An estimated 176,600 new cancer cases and 46,500 cancer deaths will occur among Hispanic individuals in the continental United States and Hawaii in 2021. Compared to non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs), Hispanic men and women had 25%-30% lower incidence (2014-2018) and mortality (2015-2019) rates for all cancers combined and lower rates for the most common cancers, although this gap is diminishing. For example, the colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence rate ratio for Hispanic compared with NHW individuals narrowed from 0.75 (95% CI, 0.73-0.78) in 1995 to 0.91 (95% CI, 0.89-0.93) in 2018, reflecting delayed declines in CRC rates among Hispanic individuals in part because of slower uptake of screening. In contrast, Hispanic individuals have higher rates of infection-related cancers, including approximately two-fold higher incidence of liver and stomach cancer. Cervical cancer incidence is 32% higher among Hispanic women in the continental US and Hawaii and 78% higher among women in Puerto Rico compared to NHW women, yet is largely preventable through screening. Less access to care may be similarly reflected in the low prevalence of localized-stage breast cancer among Hispanic women, 59% versus 67% among NHW women. Evidence-based strategies for decreasing the cancer burden among the Hispanic population include the use of culturally appropriate lay health advisors and patient navigators and targeted, community-based intervention programs to facilitate access to screening and promote healthy behaviors. In addition, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer trends and disparities in the Hispanic population should be closely monitored., (© 2021 The Authors. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Cancer prevention and early detection efforts are central to reducing cancer burden. Herein, we present estimates of cancer risk factors and screening tests in 2018 and 2019 among US adults, with a focus on smoking cessation. Cigarette smoking reached a historic low in 2019 (14.2%) partly because 61.7% (54.9 million) of all persons who had ever smoked had quit. Yet, the quit ratio was <45% among lower-income, uninsured, and Medicaid-insured persons, and was <55% among Black, American Indian/Alaska Native, lower-educated, lesbian, gay or bisexual, and recent immigrant persons, and in 12 of 17 Southern states. Obesity levels remain high (2017-2018: 42.4%) and were disproportionately higher among Black (56.9%) and Hispanic (43.7%) women. HPV vaccination in adolescents 13 to 17 years remains underutilized and over 40% were not up-to-date in 2019. Cancer screening prevalence was suboptimal in 2018 (colorectal cancer ≥50 years: 65.6%; breast ≥45 years: 63.2%; cervical 21-65 years: 83.7%), especially among uninsured adults (colorectal: 29.8%; breast: 31.1%). This snapshot of cancer prevention and early detection measures was mixed, and substantial racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities persisted. However, gains could be accelerated with targeted interventions to increase smoking cessation in under-resourced populations, stem the obesity epidemic, and improve screening and HPV vaccination coverage., (©2021 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Alcohol consumption is an established risk factor for several cancer types, but there are no contemporary published estimates of the state-level burden of cancer attributed to alcoholic beverage consumption. Such estimates are needed to inform public policy and cancer control efforts. We estimated the proportion and number of incident cancer cases and cancer deaths attributable to alcohol consumption by sex in adults aged ≥30 years in all 50 states and the District of Columbia in 2013-2016., Methods: Age-, sex-, and state-specific cancer incidence and mortality data (2013-2016) were obtained from the US Cancer Statistics database. State-level, self-reported age and sex stratified alcohol consumption prevalence was estimated using the 2003-2006 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys and adjusted with state sales data., Results: The proportion of alcohol-attributable incident cancer cases ranged from 2.9 % (95 % confidence interval: 2.7 %-3.1 %) in Utah to 6.7 % (6.4 %-7.0 %) in Delaware among men and women combined, from 2.7 % (2.5 %-3.0 %) in Utah to 6.3 % (5.9 %-6.7 %) in Hawaii among men, and from 2.7 % (2.4 %-3.0 %) in Utah to 7.7 % (7.2 %-8.3 %) in Delaware among women. The proportion of alcohol-attributable cancer deaths also varied considerably across states: from 1.9 % to 4.5 % among men and women combined, from 2.1% to 5.0% among men, and from 1.4 % to 4.4 % among women. Nationally, alcohol consumption accounted for 75,199 cancer cases and 18,947 cancer deaths annually., Conclusion: Alcohol consumption accounts for a considerable proportion of cancer incidence and mortality in all states. Implementing state-level policies and cancer control efforts to reduce alcohol consumption could reduce this cancer burden., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: This study examined associations of both medical and nonmedical financial hardships with healthcare utilization and self-rated health among cancer survivors., Methods: The National Health Interview Survey (2013-2017) was used to identify cancer survivors (aged 18-64 years: n=4,939; aged ≥65 years: n=6,972). A total of 4 levels of medical financial hardship intensities were created with measures from material, psychological, and behavioral domains. A total of 5 levels of nonmedical financial hardship intensities were created with measures in food insecurity and worry about other economic needs (e.g., housing expenses). Generalized ordinal logistic regression examined associations between medical and nonmedical financial hardship intensities and emergency department visits, use of preventive services and cancer screenings, and self-rated health. All analyses were performed in 2019., Results: In adjusted analyses, cancer survivors with higher medical financial hardship intensity (Level 4 vs Level 1; aged 18-64 years: 42% vs 26.2%, p<0.001; aged ≥65 years: 37.6% vs 24.3%, p=0.001) and higher nonmedical financial hardship intensity (Level 5 vs Level 1; aged 18-64 years: 37.2% vs 27.9%, p=0.011) had more emergency department visits. Moreover, cancer survivors with higher medical financial hardship intensity had lower influenza vaccine (Level 4 vs Level 1; aged 18-64 years: 45.6% vs 52.5%, p=0.036; aged ≥65 years: 64.6% vs 75.6%, p=0.008) and lower breast cancer screening levels (Level 4 vs Level 1; 46.8% vs 61.2%, p=0.001). Similar patterns were found between higher financial hardship intensities and worse self-rated health., Conclusions: Higher medical and nonmedical financial hardships are independently associated with more emergency department visits, lower receipt of some preventive services, and worse self-rated health in cancer survivors. With growing healthcare costs, unmet medical and nonmedical financial needs may worsen health disparities among cancer survivors., (Copyright © 2020 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Lack of health insurance coverage is strongly associated with poor cancer outcomes in the United States. The uninsured are less likely to have access to timely and effective cancer prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment, survivorship, and end-of-life care than their counterparts with health insurance coverage. On March 23, 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) was signed into law, representing the largest change to health care delivery in the United States since the introduction of the Medicare and Medicaid programs in 1965. The primary goals of the ACA are to improve health insurance coverage, the quality of care, and patient outcomes, and to maintain or lower costs by catalyzing changes in the health care delivery system. In this review, we describe the main components of the ACA, including health insurance expansions, coverage reforms, and delivery system reforms, provisions within these components, and their relevance to cancer screening and early detection, care, and outcomes. We then highlight selected, well-designed studies examining the effects of the ACA provisions on coverage, access to cancer care, and disparities throughout the cancer control continuum. Finally, we identify research gaps to inform evaluation of current and emerging health policies related to cancer outcomes., (© 2020 American Cancer Society.)

A summary evaluation of the 2015 American Cancer Society (ACS) challenge goal showed that overall US mortality from all cancers combined declined 26% over the period from 1990 to 2015. Recent research suggests that US cancer mortality can still be lowered considerably by applying known interventions broadly and equitably. The ACS Board of Directors, therefore, commissioned ACS researchers to determine challenge goals for reductions in cancer mortality by 2035. A statistical model was used to estimate the average annual percent decline in overall cancer death rates among the US general population and among college-educated Americans during the most recent period. Then, the average annual percent decline in the overall cancer death rates of college graduates was applied to the death rates in the general population to project future rates in the United States beginning in 2020. If overall cancer death rates from 2020 through 2035 nationally decline at the pace of those of college graduates, then death rates in 2035 in the United States will drop by 38.3% from the 2015 level and by 54.4% from the 1990 level. On the basis of these results, the ACS 2035 challenge goal was set as a 40% reduction from the 2015 level. Achieving this goal could lead to approximately 1.3 million fewer cancer deaths than would have occurred from 2020 through 2035 and 122,500 fewer cancer deaths in 2035 alone. The results also show that reducing the prevalence of risk factors and achieving optimal adherence to evidence-based screening guidelines by 2025 could lead to a 33.5% reduction in the overall cancer death rate by 2035, attaining 85% of the challenge goal., (© 2019 American Cancer Society.)

Overall cancer death rates in the United States have declined since 1990. The decline could be accelerated by eliminating socioeconomic and racial disparities in major risk factors and screening utilization. We provide an updated review of the prevalence of modifiable cancer risk factors, screening, and vaccination for U.S. adults, focusing on differences by educational attainment and race/ethnicity. Individuals with lower educational attainment have higher prevalence of modifiable cancer risk factors and lower prevalence of screening versus their more educated counterparts. Smoking prevalence is 6-fold higher among males without a high school (HS) education than female college graduates. Nearly half of women without a college degree are obese versus about one third of college graduates. Over 50% of black and Hispanic women are obese compared with 38% of whites and 15% of Asians. Breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening utilization is 20% to 30% lower among those with

The prevalence of excess body weight and the associated cancer burden have been rising over the past several decades globally. Between 1975 and 2016, the prevalence of excess body weight in adults-defined as a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25 kg/m 2 -increased from nearly 21% in men and 24% in women to approximately 40% in both sexes. Notably, the prevalence of obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m 2 ) quadrupled in men, from 3% to 12%, and more than doubled in women, from 7% to 16%. This change, combined with population growth, resulted in a more than 6-fold increase in the number of obese adults, from 100 to 671 million. The largest absolute increase in obesity occurred among men and boys in high-income Western countries and among women and girls in Central Asia, the Middle East, and North Africa. The simultaneous rise in excess body weight in almost all countries is thought to be driven largely by changes in the global food system, which promotes energy-dense, nutrient-poor foods, alongside reduced opportunities for physical activity. In 2012, excess body weight accounted for approximately 3.9% of all cancers (544,300 cases) with proportion varying from less than 1% in low-income countries to 7% or 8% in some high-income Western countries and in Middle Eastern and Northern African countries. The attributable burden by sex was higher for women (368,500 cases) than for men (175,800 cases). Given the pandemic proportion of excess body weight in high-income countries and the increasing prevalence in low- and middle-income countries, the global cancer burden attributable to this condition is likely to increase in the future. There is emerging consensus on opportunities for obesity control through the multisectoral coordinated implementation of core policy actions to promote an environment conducive to a healthy diet and active living. The rapid increase in both the prevalence of excess body weight and the associated cancer burden highlights the need for a rejuvenated focus on identifying, implementing, and evaluating interventions to prevent and control excess body weight., (© 2018 American Cancer Society.)

From the mid-20th century, accumulating evidence has supported the introduction of screening for cancers of the cervix, breast, colon and rectum, prostate (via shared decisions), and lung. The opportunity to detect and treat precursor lesions and invasive disease at a more favorable stage has contributed substantially to reduced incidence, morbidity, and mortality. However, as new discoveries portend advancements in technology and risk-based screening, we fail to fulfill the greatest potential of the existing technology, in terms of both full access among the target population and the delivery of state-of-the art care at each crucial step in the cascade of events that characterize successful cancer screening. There also is insufficient commitment to invest in the development of new technologies, incentivize the development of new ideas, and rapidly evaluate promising new technology. In this report, the authors summarize the status of cancer screening and propose a blueprint for the nation to further advance the contribution of screening to cancer control., (© 2019 American Cancer Society.)

Cancer is the leading cause of death among Hispanics/Latinos, who represent the largest racial/ethnic minority group in the United States, accounting for 17.8% (57.5 million) of the total population in the continental United States and Hawaii in 2016. In addition, more than 3 million Hispanic Americans live in the US territory of Puerto Rico. Every 3 years, the American Cancer Society reports on cancer occurrence, risk factors, and screening for Hispanics in the United States based on data from the National Cancer Institute, the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. For the first time, contemporary incidence and mortality rates for Puerto Rico, which has a 99% Hispanic population, are also presented. An estimated 149,100 new cancer cases and 42,700 cancer deaths will occur among Hispanics in the continental United States and Hawaii in 2018. For all cancers combined, Hispanics have 25% lower incidence and 30% lower mortality compared with non-Hispanic whites, although rates of infection-related cancers, such as liver, are up to twice as high in Hispanics. However, these aggregated data mask substantial heterogeneity within the Hispanic population because of variable cancer risk, as exemplified by the substantial differences in the cancer burden between island Puerto Ricans and other US Hispanics. For example, during 2011 to 2015, prostate cancer incidence rates in Puerto Rico (146.6 per 100,000) were 60% higher than those in other US Hispanics combined (91.6 per 100,000) and 44% higher than those in non-Hispanic whites (101.7 per 100,000). Prostate cancer is also the leading cause of cancer death among men in Puerto Rico, accounting for nearly 1 in 6 cancer deaths during 2011-2015, whereas lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death among other US Hispanic men combined. Variations in cancer risk are driven by differences in exposure to cancer-causing infectious agents and behavioral risk factors as well as the prevalence of screening. Strategies for reducing cancer risk in Hispanic populations include targeted, culturally appropriate interventions for increasing the uptake of preventive services and reducing cancer risk factor prevalence, as well as additional funding for Puerto Rico-specific and subgroup-specific cancer research and surveillance., (© 2018 American Cancer Society.)

Timely follow-up for positive cancer screening results remains suboptimal, and the evidence base to inform decisions on optimizing the timeliness of diagnostic testing is unclear. This systematic review evaluated published studies regarding time to follow-up after a positive screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancers. The quality of available evidence was very low or low across cancers, with potential attenuated or reversed associations from confounding by indication in most studies. Overall, evidence suggested that the risk for poorer cancer outcomes rises with longer wait times that vary within and across cancer types, which supports performing diagnostic testing as soon as feasible after the positive result, but evidence for specific time targets is limited. Within these limitations, we provide our opinion on cancer-specific recommendations for times to follow-up and how existing guidelines relate to the current evidence. Thresholds set should consider patient worry, potential for loss to follow-up with prolonged wait times, and available resources. Research is needed to better guide the timeliness of diagnostic follow-up, including considerations for patient preferences and existing barriers, while addressing methodological weaknesses. Research is also needed to identify effective interventions for reducing wait times for diagnostic testing, particularly in underserved or low-resource settings. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:199-216. © 2018 American Cancer Society., (© 2018 American Cancer Society.)

Contemporary information on the fraction of cancers that potentially could be prevented is useful for priority setting in cancer prevention and control. Herein, the authors estimate the proportion and number of invasive cancer cases and deaths, overall (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancers) and for 26 cancer types, in adults aged 30 years and older in the United States in 2014, that were attributable to major, potentially modifiable exposures (cigarette smoking; secondhand smoke; excess body weight; alcohol intake; consumption of red and processed meat; low consumption of fruits/vegetables, dietary fiber, and dietary calcium; physical inactivity; ultraviolet radiation; and 6 cancer-associated infections). The numbers of cancer cases were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Cancer Institute; the numbers of deaths were obtained from the CDC; risk factor prevalence estimates were obtained from nationally representative surveys; and associated relative risks of cancer were obtained from published, large-scale pooled analyses or meta-analyses. In the United States in 2014, an estimated 42.0% of all incident cancers (659,640 of 1570,975 cancers, excluding nonmelanoma skin cancers) and 45.1% of cancer deaths (265,150 of 587,521 deaths) were attributable to evaluated risk factors. Cigarette smoking accounted for the highest proportion of cancer cases (19.0%; 298,970 cases) and deaths (28.8%; 169,180 deaths), followed by excess body weight (7.8% and 6.5%, respectively) and alcohol intake (5.6% and 4.0%, respectively). Lung cancer had the highest number of cancers (184,970 cases) and deaths (132,960 deaths) attributable to evaluated risk factors, followed by colorectal cancer (76,910 cases and 28,290 deaths). These results, however, may underestimate the overall proportion of cancers attributable to modifiable factors, because the impact of all established risk factors could not be quantified, and many likely modifiable risk factors are not yet firmly established as causal. Nevertheless, these findings underscore the vast potential for reducing cancer morbidity and mortality through broad and equitable implementation of known preventive measures. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:31-54. © 2017 American Cancer Society., (© 2017 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Sub-Saharan African-born blacks (ABs) are one of the fastest-growing populations in the United States. However, to the authors' knowledge, data regarding the cancer burden in this group are lacking, which would inform targeted cancer prevention and control., Methods: The authors calculated age-standardized proportional incidence ratios (PIRs) comparing the frequency of the top 15 cancers in ABs with that of US-born non-Hispanic blacks (USBs) by sex and region of birth using incidence data for 2000 through 2012 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER 17) program., Results: Compared with USBs, ABs had significantly higher PIRs of infection-related cancers (liver, stomach, and Kaposi sarcoma), blood cancers (leukemia and non-Hodgkin lymphoma), prostate cancer, and thyroid cancers (females only). For example, the PIR for Kaposi sarcoma in AB versus USB women was 12.06 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 5.23-18.90). In contrast, ABs had lower PIRs for smoking-related and colorectal cancers (eg, for lung cancer among men, the PIR was 0.30 [95% CI, 0.27-0.34]). Furthermore, cancer occurrence in ABs versus USBs varied by region of birth. For example, the higher PIRs for liver cancer noted among male ABs (PIR, 3.57; 95% CI, 1.79-5.35) and for thyroid cancer in female ABs (PIR, 3.03; 95% CI, 2.03-4.02) were confined to Eastern African-born blacks, whereas the higher PIR for prostate cancer (PIR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.78, 2.02) was confined to Western African-born blacks., Conclusions: The cancer incidence profile of ABs is different from that of USBs and varies by region of birth, suggesting differences in environmental, cultural, social, and genetic factors. The findings of the current study could stimulate etiologic research and help to inform targeted interventions. Cancer 2017;123:3116-24. © 2017 American Cancer Society., (© 2017 American Cancer Society.)

Much of the suffering and death from cancer could be prevented by more systematic efforts to reduce tobacco use and obesity, improve diet, and increase physical activity and use of established vaccines and screening tests. Monitoring the prevalence of cancer risk factors and preventive tests helps guide cancer prevention and early detection efforts. We provide an updated review, using data through 2015, of the prevalence of major risk factors, cancer screening, and vaccination for U.S. adults and youth. Cigarette smoking among adults decreased to 15.3% in 2015 but remains higher among lower socioeconomic persons (GED: 34.1%, graduate degree: 3.7%), with considerable state variation (Utah: 9.1%, Kentucky: 26.0%). The prevalence of obesity among both adults (37.7%) and adolescents (20.6%) remains high, particularly among black women (57.2%), and ranges from 20.2% (Colorado) to 36.2% (Louisiana) among adults. Pap testing remains the most commonly utilized cancer screening test (81.4%). While colorectal cancer screening has increased, only 62.6% are up-to-date with recommendations. Cancer screening is lowest among the uninsured and varies across states. Despite some improvements, systematic efforts to further reduce the suffering and death from cancer should be enhanced. Continued investment in surveillance of cancer prevention and early detection metrics is also needed. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(8); 1192-208. ©2017 AACR ., (©2017 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Importance: State-specific information about the health burden of smoking is valuable because state-level initiatives are at the forefront of tobacco control. Smoking-attributable cancer mortality estimates are currently available nationally and by cancer, but not by state., Objective: To calculate the proportion of cancer deaths among adults 35 years and older that were attributable to cigarette smoking in 2014 in each state and the District of Columbia., Design, Setting, and Participants: The population-attributable fraction (PAF) of cancer deaths due to cigarette smoking was computed using relative risks for 12 smoking-related cancers (acute myeloid leukemia and cancers of the oral cavity and pharynx; esophagus; stomach; colorectum; liver; pancreas; larynx; trachea, lung, and bronchus; cervix uteri; kidney and renal pelvis; and urinary bladder) from large US prospective studies and state-specific smoking prevalence data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System., Main Outcomes and Measures: The PAF of cancer deaths due to cigarette smoking in each US state and the District of Columbia., Results: We estimate that at least 167 133 cancer deaths in the United States in 2014 (28.6% of all cancer deaths; 95% CI, 28.2%-28.8%) were attributable to cigarette smoking. Among men, the proportion of cancer deaths attributable to smoking ranged from a low of 21.8% in Utah (95% CI, 19.9%-23.5%) to a high of 39.5% in Arkansas (95% CI, 36.9%-41.7%), but was at least 30% in every state except Utah. Among women, the proportion ranged from 11.1% in Utah (95% CI, 9.6%-12.3%) to 29.0% in Kentucky (95% CI, 27.2%-30.7%) and was at least 20% in all states except Utah, California, and Hawaii. Nine of the top 10 ranked states for men and 6 of the top 10 ranked states for women were located in the South. In men, smoking explained nearly 40% of cancer deaths in the top 5 ranked states (Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Kentucky). In women, smoking explained more than 26% of all cancer deaths in the top 5 ranked states, which included 3 Southern states (Kentucky, Arkansas, and Tennessee), and 2 Western states (Alaska and Nevada)., Conclusions and Relevance: The proportion of cancer deaths attributable to cigarette smoking varies substantially across states and is highest in the South, where up to 40% of cancer deaths in men are caused by smoking. Increasing tobacco control funding, implementing innovative new strategies, and strengthening tobacco control policies and programs, federally and in all states and localities, might further increase smoking cessation, decrease initiation, and reduce the future burden of morbidity and mortality associated with smoking-related cancers.

In this article, the American Cancer Society provides the estimated number of new cancer cases and deaths for blacks in the United States and the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, survival, screening, and risk factors for cancer. Incidence data are from the National Cancer Institute, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries, and mortality data are from the National Center for Health Statistics. Approximately 189,910 new cases of cancer and 69,410 cancer deaths will occur among blacks in 2016. Although blacks continue to have higher cancer death rates than whites, the disparity has narrowed for all cancers combined in men and women and for lung and prostate cancers in men. In contrast, the racial gap in death rates has widened for breast cancer in women and remained level for colorectal cancer in men. The reduction in overall cancer death rates since the early 1990s translates to the avoidance of more than 300,000 deaths among blacks. In men, incidence rates from 2003 to 2012 decreased for all cancers combined (by 2.0% per year) as well as for the top 3 cancer sites (prostate, lung, and colorectal). In women, overall rates during the corresponding time period remained unchanged, reflecting increasing trends in breast cancer combined with decreasing trends in lung and colorectal cancer rates. Five-year relative survival is lower for blacks than whites for most cancers at each stage of diagnosis. The extent to which these disparities reflect unequal access to health care versus other factors remains an active area of research. Progress in reducing cancer death rates could be accelerated by ensuring equitable access to prevention, early detection, and high-quality treatment. CA Cancer J Clin 2016;66:290-308. © 2016 American Cancer Society., (© 2016 American Cancer Society, Inc.)

Each year the American Cancer Society (ACS) publishes a summary of its guidelines for early cancer detection, data and trends in cancer screening rates, and select issues related to cancer screening. In this issue of the journal, we summarize current ACS cancer screening guidelines, including the update of the breast cancer screening guideline, discuss quality issues in colorectal cancer screening and new developments in lung cancer screening, and provide the latest data on utilization of cancer screening from the National Health Interview Survey., (© 2016 American Cancer Society.)

Cancer is the leading cause of death among Hispanics/Latinos, who represent the largest racial/ethnic minority group in the United States, accounting for 17.4% (55.4 million/318 million) of the total US population in 2014. Every 3 years, the American Cancer Society reports on cancer statistics for Hispanics based on incidence data from the National Cancer Institute, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries and mortality data from the National Center for Health Statistics. Among Hispanics in 2015, there will be an estimated 125,900 new cancer cases diagnosed and 37,800 cancer deaths. For all cancers combined, Hispanics have 20% lower incidence rates and 30% lower death rates compared with non-Hispanic whites (NHWs); however, death rates are slightly higher among Hispanics during adolescence (aged 15-19 years). Hispanic cancer rates vary by country of origin and are generally lowest in Mexicans, with the exception of infection-associated cancers. Liver cancer incidence rates in Hispanic men, which are twice those in NHW men, doubled from 1992 to 2012; however, rates in men aged younger than 50 years declined by 43% since 2003, perhaps a bellwether of future trends for this highly fatal cancer. Variations in cancer risk between Hispanics and NHWs, as well as between subpopulations, are driven by differences in exposure to cancer-causing infectious agents, rates of screening, and lifestyle patterns. Strategies for reducing cancer risk in Hispanic populations include increasing the uptake of preventive services (e.g., screening and vaccination) and targeted interventions to reduce obesity, tobacco use, and alcohol consumption., (© 2015 American Cancer Society.)

Much of the suffering and death from cancer could be prevented by more systematic efforts to reduce tobacco use, improve diet, increase physical activity, reduce obesity, and expand the use of established screening tests. Monitoring the prevalence of cancer risk factors and screening is important to measure progress and strengthen cancer prevention and early detection efforts. In this review article, we provide recent prevalence estimates for several cancer risk factors, including tobacco, obesity, physical activity, nutrition, ultraviolet radiation exposure as well as human papillomavirus and hepatitis B vaccination coverage and cancer screening prevalence in the United States. In 2013, cigarette smoking prevalence was 17.8% among adults nationally, but ranged from 10.3% in Utah to 27.3% in West Virginia. In addition, 15.7% of U.S. high school students were current smokers. In 2011-2012, obesity prevalence was high among both adults (34.9%) and adolescents (20.5%), but has leveled off since 2002. About 20.2% of high school girls were users of indoor tanning devices, compared with 5.3% of boys. In 2013, cancer screening prevalence ranged from 58.6% for colorectal cancer to 80.8% for cervical cancer and remains low among the uninsured, particularly for colorectal cancer screening where only 21.9% of eligible adults received recommended colorectal cancer screening., (©2015 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Context: Prior studies reported associations of cancer center facility type and case volume with cancer outcomes (such as survival) and treatment-related processes (such as treatment with chemotherapy, surgery, or radiotherapy)., Objective: To determine whether facility characteristics are associated with use of broad (lumped) vs narrow (split) diagnoses in cancer pathology., Design: We examined associations of facility characteristics and prevalence of broad diagnoses that might adversely affect treatment decisions (based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network treatment guidelines) in National Cancer Data Base records for patients diagnosed from 2004-2008. Logistic regression was used to determine whether associations of facility type and volume with prevalence of broad diagnoses were independent of patient demographic/socioeconomic factors., Results: Among 10 high incidence cancer sites, 5 had a prevalence of broad diagnoses exceeding 6%. For 4 of these, use of broad diagnoses was independently lower in NCI (National Cancer Institute)- designated comprehensive programs than in community programs, with multivariate prevalence ratios (PR) as low as 0.46 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.35-0.59) for uterine corpus cancers and 0.49 (95% CI 0.44-0.55) for kidney and renal pelvis cancers. Differences between low- and high-volume facilities were observed for 4 of the 5 sites, with multivariate PR as low as 0.67 (95% CI 0.59-0.77) and 0.72 (95% CI 0.63-0.82) for cancers of the uterine corpus and lung, respectively., Conclusion: Prevalence of broad cancer diagnoses varies independently by cancer site/type, facility type, and facility volume. Broader diagnoses tend to be used most often by community cancer centers and low-volume centers. This association has implications for use of registry data in pathology quality assessment and quality improvement.

Prior studies have demonstrated that individuals without health insurance are less likely to have a usual source of health care and receive preventive services including cancer screening and are more likely to be diagnosed at late stages of cancer. To examine the potential impact of health care reform on stage at diagnosis, we analyzed the relationship between stage at diagnosis and insurance status for patients who were nearly elderly (55-64 years old) and younger elderly (65-74 years old). We examined patients diagnosed with 8 common cancers from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2007, using data from the National Cancer Database, a hospital-based cancer registry jointly sponsored by the American Cancer Society and the American College of Surgeons, which includes approximately 70% of all malignant cancers in the United States treated at 1400 facilities throughout the United States. Cancer site-specific multivariable log binomial models were used to generate risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) estimates for advanced stage of disease at diagnosis (stage III or IV vs stage I) by insurance category, controlling for age, race/ethnicity, and area level education. The final analytic cohort contained 843,177 patients. For each cancer site, uninsured and Medicaid-insured patients had the highest proportion of American Joint Committee on Cancer stages III and IV cancers at diagnosis, and those with private insurance and Medicare plus supplemental insurance the lowest. Risk ratios (95% CI) for uninsured patients compared with privately insured patients were 1.75 (1.64-1.86) for prostate, 1.12 (1.11-1.14) for lung/bronchus, 2.08 (1.98-2.17) for breast, 1.25 (1.22-1.27) for colorectal, 1.51 (1.40-1.64) for uterine corpus, 1.91 (1.73-2.12) for urinary bladder, 1.80 (1.62-2.01) for melanoma, and 1.37 (1.24-1.51) for thyroid cancers. Lower RRs (95% CI) observed for patients with Medicare coverage alone were 1.23 (1.17-1.29) for prostate, 1.05 (1.03-1.06) for lung/bronchus, 1.41 (1.33-1.48) for breast, 1.08 (1.05-1.10) for colorectal, 1.20 (1.11-1.31) for uterine corpus, 1.54 (1.40-1.70) for urinary bladder, 1.13 (1.01-1.26) for melanoma, and 1.10 (1.01-1.21) for thyroid. In contrast, there was no significant difference between RRs of late-stage diagnosis for any cancer site for patients insured by Medicare Advantage programs. If health care reform extends coverage to a large proportion of adults who are currently uninsured and provides benefits equal to or better than Medicare coverage, the proportion of patients diagnosed with late-stage cancer is likely to decrease, particularly in subpopulations with low rates of coverage.

Background: During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, US unemployment rates rose to historic highs, and they remain nearly double those of prepandemic levels. Employers are the most common source of health insurance among nonelderly adults. Thus, job loss may lead to a loss of health insurance and reduce access to cancer screening. This study examined associations between unemployment, health insurance, and cancer screening to inform the pandemic's potential impacts on early cancer detection. Methods: Up‐to‐date and past‐year breast, cervical, colorectal, and prostate cancer screening prevalences were computed for nonelderly respondents (aged <65 years) with 2000‐2018 National Health Interview Survey data. Multivariable logistic regression models with marginal probabilities were used to estimate unemployed‐versus‐employed unadjusted and adjusted prevalence ratios. Results: Unemployed adults (2000‐2018) were 4 times more likely to lack insurance than employed adults (41.4% vs 10.0%; P <.001). Unemployed adults had a significantly lower up‐to‐date prevalence of screening for cervical cancer (78.5% vs 86.2%; P <.001), breast cancer (67.8% vs 77.5%; P <.001), colorectal cancer (41.9 vs 48.5%; P <.001), and prostate cancer (25.4% vs 36.4%; P <.001). These differences were eliminated after accounting for health insurance coverage. Conclusions: Unemployment was adversely associated with up‐to‐date cancer screening, and this was fully explained by a lack of health insurance. Ensuring the continuation of health insurance coverage after job loss may mitigate the pandemic's economic distress and future economic downturns' impact on cancer screening. Unemployment is adversely associated with up‐to‐date cancer screening, and this is fully explained by a lack of health insurance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In the United States, colorectal cancer incidence has increased in adults under age 55. Although debate remains about whether this rise is a result of increased detection because of more colonoscopy utilization, population-based trends in colonoscopy among this age group are unknown. We examined changes in colonoscopy rates, as well as colorectal cancer incidence, among adults aged 40–54, using nationally representative data. Methods: Recent (past year) colonoscopy rates were computed among 53,175 respondents aged 40–54 in National Health Interview Survey data from 2000 through 2015 by five-year age group. Colorectal cancer incidence rates and incidence rate ratios were estimated from 18 population-based Surveillance Epidemiology and End Result registries during the same period. Results: Among respondents aged 40–44, past-year colonoscopy rates were stable during 2000–2015, and ranged from 2.3% to 3.5% (p -value for trend = 0.771). In contrast, colonoscopy rates increased from 2.5% in 2000 to 5.2% in 2015 among ages 45–49, and from 5.0% to 14.1% in ages 50–54 (test for trend p -values < 0.001). During 2000–2015, colorectal cancer incidence rates increased by 28% in people aged 40–44 (incidence rate ratio = 1.28, 95% CI 1.20, 2.37), 15% in those aged 45–49 (incidence rate ratio = 1.15, 95%CI 1.10, 1.21), and 17% in those aged 50–54 (incidence rate ratio = 1.17, 95%CI 1.13, 1.21), respectively. Conclusion: Increases in colonoscopy rates were confined to ages 45–54, whereas colorectal cancer incidence rates rose in those aged 40–44, 45–49, and 50–54. Colonoscopy trends do not fully align with colorectal cancer incidence patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE Each year, the American Cancer Society publishes a summary of its guidelines for early cancer detection, data and trends in cancer screening rates, and select issues related to cancer screening. In this issue of the journal, the authors summarize current American Cancer Society cancer screening guidelines, describe an update of their guideline for using human papillomavirus vaccination for cancer prevention, describe updates in US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations for breast and colorectal cancer screening, discuss interim findings from the UK Collaborative Trial on Ovarian Cancer Screening, and provide the latest data on utilization of cancer screening from the National Health Interview Survey. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:100-121. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Each year, the American Cancer Society (ACS) publishes a summary of its guidelines for early cancer detection along with a report on data and trends in cancer screening rates and select issues related to cancer screening. In this issue of the journal, we summarize current ACS cancer screening guidelines. The latest data on utilization of cancer screening from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) also is described, as are several issues related to screening coverage under the Affordable Care Act, including the expansion of the Medicaid program. CA Cancer J Clin 2015;65:30-54. © 2015 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]