Search

As the burden of cancers impacting low- and middle-income countries is projected to increase, formation of strategic partnerships between institutions in high-income countries and low- and middle-income country institutions may serve to accelerate cancer research, clinical care, and training. As the US National Cancer Institute and its Center for Global Health continue to encourage cancer centers to join its global mission, academic cancer centers in the United States have increased their global activities. In 2015, the Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of California, San Francisco, responded to the call for international partnership in addressing the global cancer burden through the establishment of the Global Cancer Program as a priority initiative. In developing the Global Cancer Program, we galvanized institutional support to foster sustained, bidirectional, equitable, international partnerships in global cancer control. Our focus and intent in disseminating this commentary is to share experiences and lessons learned from the perspective of a US-based, National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center and to provide a roadmap for other high-income institutions seeking to strategically broaden their missions and address the complex challenges of global cancer control. Herein, we review the formative evaluation, governance, strategic planning, investments in career development, funding sources, program evaluation, and lessons learned. Reflecting on the evolution of our program during the first 5 years, we observed in our partners a powerful shift toward a locally driven priority setting, reduced dependency, and an increased commitment to research as a path to improve cancer outcomes in resource-constrained settings., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Adequate nutrition is central to well-being and health and can enhance recovery during illness. Although it is well known that malnutrition, both undernutrition and overnutrition, poses an added challenge for patients with cancer diagnoses, it remains unclear when and how to intervene and if such nutritional interventions improve clinical outcomes. In July 2022, the National Institutes of Health convened a workshop to examine key questions, identify related knowledge gaps, and provide recommendations to advance understanding about the effects of nutritional interventions. Evidence presented at the workshop found substantial heterogeneity among published randomized clinical trials, with a majority rated as low quality and yielding mostly inconsistent results. Other research cited trials in limited populations that showed potential for nutritional interventions to reduce the adverse effects associated with malnutrition in people with cancer. After review of the relevant literature and expert presentations, an independent expert panel recommends baseline screening for malnutrition risk using a validated instrument following cancer diagnosis and repeated screening during and after treatment to monitor nutritional well-being. Those at risk of malnutrition should be referred to registered dietitians for more in-depth nutritional assessment and intervention. The panel emphasizes the need for further rigorous, well-defined nutritional intervention studies to evaluate the effects on symptoms and cancer-specific outcomes as well as effects of intentional weight loss before or during treatment in people with overweight or obesity. Finally, although data on intervention effectiveness are needed first, robust data collection during trials is recommended to assess cost-effectiveness and inform coverage and implementation decisions., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press.)

The All of Us (AoU) Research Program is making available one of the largest and most diverse collections of health data in the US to researchers. Using the All of Us database, we evaluated family and personal histories of five common types of cancer in 89,453 individuals, comparing these data to 24,305 participants from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). Comparing datasets, we found similar family cancer history (33%) rates, but higher personal cancer history in the AoU dataset (9.2% in AoU vs. 5.11% in NHIS), Methodological (e.g. survey-versus telephone-based data collection) and demographic variability may explain these between-data differences, but more research is needed., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Keeler Bruce et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Epidemiologic evidence reporting the role of frailty in survival among older adults with a prior cancer diagnosis is limited., Methods: A total of 2050 older adults (≥60 years old) surviving for at least 1 year after a cancer diagnosis and 9474 older adults without a cancer history from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (1999-2014) were included for analysis. The exposure variable, a 45-item frailty index (FI), was categorized on the basis of validated cutoffs (FI ≤ 0.10 [fit], 0.10 < FI ≤ 0.21 [prefrail], and FI > 0.21 [frail]). All-cause mortality was ascertained via the National Death Index. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence interval (CIs) for the FI, and this was followed by restricted cubic splines depicting dose-response curves., Results: For older cancer survivors, the mean age at the baseline was 72.6 years (SD, 7.1 years); 5.9% were fit, 38.2% were prefrail, and 55.9% were frail. Older adults without a cancer history were slightly younger (mean age, 70.0 years) and less frail (47.9% were frail). At each level of the FI, cancer survivors (1.9 per 100 person-years for FI ≤ 0.10, 3.4 per 100 person-years for 0.10 < FI ≤ 0.21, and 7.5 per 100 person-years for FI > 0.21) had higher mortality than their cancer-free counterparts (1.4 per 100 person-years for FI ≤ 0.10, 2.4 per 100 person-years for 0.10 < FI ≤ 0.21, and 5.4 per 100 person-years for FI > 0.21). The multivariable model suggested a positive association between the FI and all-cause mortality for survivors (aHR for FI > 0.21 vs FI ≤ 0.10, 2.80; 95% CI, 1.73-4.53) and participants without a cancer history (aHR for FI > 0.21 vs FI ≤ 0.10, 2.75; 95% CI, 2.29-3.32). Restricted cubic splines indicated that all-cause mortality risk increased with the FI in a monotonic pattern., Conclusions: Frailty is associated with a higher risk of death in older cancer survivors and the elderly without a cancer history., (© 2022 American Cancer Society.)

New guidelines for Cancer Center Support Grants have recently been issued by the NCI that require increased attention to cancer center catchment areas and their community outreach and engagement activities [PAR-21-321]. Past experience with these requirements has engendered some confusion and frustration on the part of both researchers and reviewers that these new guidelines aim to dispel. In this commentary we, as experienced cancer center leaders in population sciences, offer our views on the most important aspects of the new guidelines and provide three examples of the kinds of programs that can apply cancer prevention and control research to improve cancer population health. With 71 NCI-Designated Cancer Centers in 36 states, the potential for broad impact on the reduction of the nation's cancer burden is enormous if the intended application of cancer center research to individuals and populations is fulfilled., (©2022 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Cancer incidence and mortality rates continue to rise globally, a trend mostly driven by preventable cancers occurring in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). There is growing concern that many LMICs are ill-equipped to cope with markedly increased burden of cancer due to lack of comprehensive cancer control programs that incorporate primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention strategies. Notably, few countries have allocated budgets to implement such programs. In this review, we utilize a socio-ecological framework to summarize primary (risk reduction), secondary (early detection), and tertiary (treatment and survivorship) strategies to reduce the cancer burden in these countries across the individual, organizational, community, and policy levels. We highlight strategies that center on promoting health behaviors and reducing cancer risk, including diet, tobacco, alcohol, and vaccine uptake, approaches to promote routine cancer screenings, and policies to support comprehensive cancer treatment. Consistent with goals promulgated by the United Nations General Assembly on Noncommunicable Disease Prevention and Control, our review supports the development and implementation of sustainable national comprehensive cancer control plans in partnership with local communities to enhance cultural relevance and adoption, incorporating strategies across the socio-ecological framework. Such a concerted commitment will be necessary to curtail the rising cancer and chronic disease burden in LMICs., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Akinyemiju, Ogunsina, Gupta, Liu, Braithwaite and Hiatt.)

The acute impact of climate change on human health is receiving increased attention, but little is known or appreciated about the effect of climate change on chronic diseases, particularly cancer. This Review provides a synopsis of what is known about climate change and the exposures it generates relevant to cancer. In the context of the world's cancer burden and the probable direction we could expect to follow in the absence of climate change, this scoping review of the literature summarises the effects that climate change is having on major cancers, from environmental exposures to ultraviolet radiation, air pollution, disruptions in the food and water supply, environmental toxicants, and infectious agents. Finally, we explore the effect of climate change on the possible disruption of health systems that have been essential to cancer control practice. We conclude with potential responses and opportunities for intervention., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Engaging diverse populations in biomedical research, including biospecimen donation, remains a national challenge. This study examined factors associated with an invitation to participate in biomedical research, intent to participate in biomedical research in the future, and participation in biomedical research and biospecimen donation among a diverse, multilingual, community-based sample across 3 distinct geographic areas., Methods: Three National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers engaged in community partnerships to develop and implement population health assessments, reaching a convenience sample of 4343 participants spanning their respective catchment areas. Data harmonization, multiple imputation, and multivariable logistic modeling were used., Results: African Americans, Hispanic/Latinos, and other racial minority groups were more likely to be offered opportunities to participate in biomedical research compared to whites. Access to care, history of cancer, educational level, survey language, nativity, and rural residence also influenced opportunity, intent, and actual participation in biomedical research., Conclusions: Traditionally underserved racial and ethnic groups reported heightened opportunity and interest in participating in biomedical research. Well-established community partnerships and long-standing community engagement around biomedical research led to a diverse sample being reached at each site and may in part explain the current study findings. However, this study illustrates an ongoing need to establish trust and diversify biomedical research participation through innovative and tailored approaches. National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers have the potential to increase opportunities for diverse participation in biomedical research through community partnerships and engagement. Additional work remains to identify and address system-level and individual-level barriers to participation in both clinical trials and biospecimen donation for research., (© 2020 American Cancer Society.)

Introduction: Cancer risk and screening data are limited in their ability to inform local interventions to reduce the burden of cancer in vulnerable populations. The San Francisco Health Information National Trends Survey was developed and administered to assess the use of cancer-related information among under-represented populations in San Francisco to provide baseline data for the San Francisco Cancer Initiative., Methods: The survey instrument was developed through consultation with research and community partners and translated into 4 languages. Participants were recruited between May and September 2017 through community-based snowball sampling with quotas to ensure adequate numbers of under-represented populations. Chi-square tests and multivariate logistic regression were used between 2018 and 2019 to assess differences in screening rates across groups and factors associated with cancer screening., Results: One thousand twenty-seven participants were recruited. Asians had lower rates of lifetime mammogram (p=0.02), Pap test (p<0.01), and prostate-specific antigen test (p=0.04) compared with non-Asians. Hispanics had higher rates of lifetime mammogram (p=0.02), lifetime Pap test (p=0.01), recent Pap test (p=0.03), and lifetime prostate-specific antigen test (p=0.04) compared with non-Hispanics. Being a female at birth was the only factor that was independently associated with cancer screening participation (AOR=3.17, 95% CI=1.40, 7.19)., Conclusions: Screening adherence varied by race, ethnicity, and screening type. A collaborative, community-based approach led to a large, diverse sample and may serve as a model for recruiting diverse populations to add knowledge about cancer prevention preferences and behaviors. Results suggest targeted outreach efforts are needed to address disparate cancer screening behaviors within this diverse population., (Copyright © 2019 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: There are clearly documented inequalities in cancer incidence by socioeconomic position, but it is unclear whether this is due primarily to differences in tobacco exposure and screening practices or to other factors., Methods: Our study included 741,373 incident cases of invasive cancer from 2008 to 2012 in California. We calculated age-standardized incidence rates across twelve categories of census tract poverty as a measure of socioeconomic position (SEP) for (1) all cancer sites combined, (2) sites not strongly related to tobacco use, (3) sites not related to screening, and (4) sites not related to tobacco use or screening., Results: There was higher cancer incidence among those living in areas with higher levels of poverty for sites not strongly related to tobacco use or screening, among Whites, Blacks, and Asians, but not among Latinos. Among Whites there was no relationship with census tract poverty at lower levels of poverty-the relationship with cancer incidence was primarily among those in higher poverty. For Blacks and Asians, there is a more linear relationship with cancer incidence across levels of poverty., Conclusions: SEP gradients in cancer incidence remain after exclusion of cancer sites strongly related to tobacco use and screening. Our findings demonstrate a need for research on other environmental and social causes of cancer where exposures are differentially distributed by SEP.

Active and secondhand tobacco exposures are major causes of cancer. Cancer prevention efforts are particularly relevant in resource-constrained settings in which significant barriers to early detection and cancer treatments contribute to poor outcomes. We assess the associations between exposure to household tobacco smoke and cancer morbidity and mortality. We used household data from Afghanistan Demographic and Health Survey, which was a national cross-sectional survey that applied a two-stage stratified random sampling technique in 2015 and 2016. We performed regression analysis to estimate associations between exposure to household tobacco smoke and cancer morbidity and mortality at the household level. Exposure to household tobacco smoke was significantly associated with household reports of a history of any cancer (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR): 1.90; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.44, 2.51), breast cancer (1.59; 1.00, 2.55), lung cancer (2.88; 1.58, 5.27), and liver cancer (2.56; 1.10, 5.96), compared to households with no tobacco smoke exposure. These associations persisted after controlling for household location, wealth index, type of cooking fuel used in house, and location of food preparation. Households in a rural location experienced significantly higher mortality of any cancer (4.40; 95% CI: 1.57, 12.38), breast cancer (2.91; 1.02, 8.25), and liver cancer (3.91; 1.29, 11.89) vs. those in an urban location. Exposure to household tobacco smoke is a risk factor for cancer morbidity in Afghanistan. Strategies to implement comprehensive smoking cessation and smoke free housing policies are urgently needed as primary cancer prevention strategy in Afghanistan and comparable resource-constrained settings., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The great potential for reducing the cancer burden and cancer disparities through prevention and early detection is unrealized at the population level. A new community-based coalition, the San Francisco Cancer Initiative (SF CAN), focuses on the city and county of San Francisco, where cancer is the leading cause of death. SF CAN is an integrated, cross-sector collaboration launched in November 2016. It brings together the San Francisco Department of Public Health; the University of California, San Francisco; major health systems; and community coalitions to exert collective impact. Its goals are to reduce the burden of five common cancers-breast, lung and other tobacco-related, prostate, colorectal, and liver-for which there are proven methods of prevention and detection, while reducing known disparities. We describe the infrastructure, coalition building, and early progress of this initiative, which may serve as a model for other municipalities.

Cancer disparities research is motivated by persistent inequities in cancer outcomes by race, ethnicity, social status, neighborhood location, and other subpopulation characteristics. These inequities have proven to be persistent and difficult to alter. Part of the reason for the frustration with slow progress is a lack of appreciation of the long-term nature of the undertaking. It is highly likely that the disparities observed in adulthood find their origins in young adulthood, if not earlier. A long-term perspective is needed, recognizing that successes may take many years to realize. This commentary presents the experience of the Center for Health And Risk in Minority youth and young adults project, which is a comprehensive center of excellence funded by the National Institute of Minority Health and Health Disparities for addressing disparities and chronic disease prevention in minority youth and young adults. The use of logic models is advanced for this kind of research because they can provide a theory of change and illustrate the course of knowledge translation over time. Logic models for cancer disparities research can place individual project activities in a realistic context that at one time indicates what is possible and reasonable to expect during the duration of a typical research project as well as the future steps that need to be taken on the way to an expected ultimate impact on cancer inequities., (Copyright © 2017 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Cancer control science has been evolving since it first became a focus for cancer research and program activities a century ago. The evolution of the field has responded to historical megatrends along the way that keep it relevant to the cancer-related needs of society. This commentary describes some of the key trends and developments now influencing cancer control and population sciences that reflect societal change and new tools and concepts in modern biomedical science. New directions include the impact of climate change, health care delivery research, the growth of population health science, data science, precision medicine, data sharing, implementation science, and new technologies, including social media and new geospatial methodologies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(8); 1165-9. ©2017 AACR ., (©2017 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Cancer centers, particularly those supported by the National Cancer Institute, are charged with reducing the cancer burden in their catchment area. However, methods to define both the catchment area and the cancer burden are diverse and range in complexity often based on data availability, staff resources, or confusion about what is required. This article presents a review of the current literature identifying 4 studies that have defined various aspects of the cancer burden in a defined geographical area and highlights examples of how some cancer centers and other health institutions have defined their catchment area and characterized the cancer burden within it. We then present a detailed case study of an approach applied by the University of California, San Francisco, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center to define its catchment area and its population cancer burden. We cite examples of how the Cancer Center research portfolio addresses the defined cancer burden. Our case study outlines a systematic approach to using publicly available data, such as cancer registry data, that are accessible by all cancer centers. By identifying gaps and formulating future research directions based on the needs of the population within the catchment area, epidemiologic studies and other types of cancer research can be directed to the population served. This review can help guide cancer centers in developing an approach to defining their own catchment area as mandated and applying research findings to this defined population., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The relationship of childhood socioeconomic position (SEP) to adult cancer has been inconsistent in the literature and there has been no review summarising the current evidence focused solely on cancer outcomes., Methods and Results: We performed a rapid review of the literature, which identified 22 publications from 13 studies, primarily in the UK and northern European countries that specifically analysed individual measures of SEP in childhood and cancer outcomes in adulthood. Most of these studies adjusted for adult SEP as a critical mediator of the relationship of interest., Conclusions: Results confirm that childhood socioeconomic circumstances have a strong influence on stomach cancer and are likely to contribute, along with adult circumstances, to lung cancer through cumulative exposure to smoking. There was also some evidence of increased risk of colorectal, liver, cervical and pancreatic cancers with lower childhood SEP in large studies, but small numbers of cancer deaths made these estimates imprecise. Gaps in knowledge and potential policy implications are presented., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)

The concept of translational cancer epidemiology has evolved since its early beginnings in 1937 with the establishment of the National Cancer Institute. Conceptual models of cancer control research have also evolved over the last 30 years, to the point where we now have 4 stages of translational research (T0-T4). The current review by Lam et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2015;181(7):451-458) covers cancer epidemiology research supported by the National Cancer Institute and a selected sample of the cancer epidemiology literature. It suggests that most cancer epidemiology in the last 10 years has been in pure discovery research. Current "drivers" of cancer epidemiology research, including new technologies, team science multilevel research, and knowledge integration, are not strongly represented in the review. However, the use of epidemiology in the latter stages of translation may not have been captured by the scope of this review. The closer epidemiologists get to advanced stages of translation, the more likely they are to work with investigators in other disciplines in other sectors of society. An argument can be made that regardless of whether this kind of research is not happening or was just missed by the current review, the field of cancer epidemiology can expand its scope and further evolve towards more effective applications in population health., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Despite recent increased attention to healthcare performance and the burden of disease from cancer, measures of quality of cancer care are not readily available. In 2013, the California HealthCare Foundation convened an expert workgroup to explore the potential for leveraging data in the California Cancer Registry (CCR), one of the world's largest population-based cancer registries, for measuring and improving the quality of cancer care. The workgroup assessed current registry operations, the value to be gained by linking CCR data with health insurance claims or encounter data and clinical data contained in health system electronic health records, and potential barriers to these linkages. The workgroup concluded that: 1) The CCR mandate should be expanded to include use of its data for quality of cancer care measurement and public reporting; and 2) a system should be developed to support linkage of registry data with both claims data and provider electronic health record data., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

In 2012, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) engaged the scientific community to provide a vision for cancer epidemiology in the 21st century. Eight overarching thematic recommendations, with proposed corresponding actions for consideration by funding agencies, professional societies, and the research community emerged from the collective intellectual discourse. The themes are (i) extending the reach of epidemiology beyond discovery and etiologic research to include multilevel analysis, intervention evaluation, implementation, and outcomes research; (ii) transforming the practice of epidemiology by moving toward more access and sharing of protocols, data, metadata, and specimens to foster collaboration, to ensure reproducibility and replication, and accelerate translation; (iii) expanding cohort studies to collect exposure, clinical, and other information across the life course and examining multiple health-related endpoints; (iv) developing and validating reliable methods and technologies to quantify exposures and outcomes on a massive scale, and to assess concomitantly the role of multiple factors in complex diseases; (v) integrating "big data" science into the practice of epidemiology; (vi) expanding knowledge integration to drive research, policy, and practice; (vii) transforming training of 21st century epidemiologists to address interdisciplinary and translational research; and (viii) optimizing the use of resources and infrastructure for epidemiologic studies. These recommendations can transform cancer epidemiology and the field of epidemiology, in general, by enhancing transparency, interdisciplinary collaboration, and strategic applications of new technologies. They should lay a strong scientific foundation for accelerated translation of scientific discoveries into individual and population health benefits.

It is becoming increasingly evident that early-life events and exposures have important consequences for cancer development later in life. However, epidemiological studies of early-life factors and cancer development later in life have had significant methodological challenges such as the long latency period, the distinctiveness of each cancer, and large number of subjects that must be studied, all likely to increase costs. These traditional hurdles might be mitigated by leveraging several existing large-scale prospective studies in the United States (US) and globally, as well as birth databases and birth cohorts, in order to launch both association and mechanistic studies of early-life exposures and cancer development later in life. Dedicated research funding will be needed to advance this paradigm shift in cancer research, and it seems justified by its potential to produce transformative understanding of how cancer develops over the life-course. This in turn has the potential to transform cancer prevention strategies through interventions in early-life rather than later in life, as is the current practice, where it is perhaps less effective.

Background: In recent decades, extensive resources have been invested to develop cellular, molecular and genomic technologies with clinical applications that span the continuum of cancer care., Methods: In December 2006, the National Cancer Institute sponsored the first workshop to uniquely examine the state of health services research on cancer-related cellular, molecular and genomic technologies and identify challenges and priorities for expanding the evidence base on their effectiveness in routine care., Results: This article summarizes the workshop outcomes, which included development of a comprehensive research agenda that incorporates health and safety endpoints, utilization patterns, patient and provider preferences, quality of care and access, disparities, economics and decision modeling, trends in cancer outcomes, and health-related quality of life among target populations., Conclusions: Ultimately, the successful adoption of useful technologies will depend on understanding and influencing the patient, provider, health care system and societal factors that contribute to their uptake and effectiveness in 'real-world' settings., (Copyright 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

To make further significant advances in cancer control research, a transdisciplinary science approach is needed that integrates the study of the biological nature of cancer and its clinical applications with the behavioral and social influences on cancer. More-effective interventions to reduce the burden of cancer can be developed and implemented by the adoption of a transdisciplinary research framework that takes into account the social determinants of cancer and seeks to discover interactions among social, environmental, behavioral, and biological factors in cancer etiology. This paper addresses two critical issues in the science of team science: (1) a cross-disciplinary, multilevel framework for organizing future research, and (2) a perspective that could aid in the translation and dissemination of cancer research findings in health care and public health practice. This conceptual framework is designed to encourage transdisciplinary research that will integrate social determinants into cancer research. The authors' goal is to promote a more complete understanding of the causes of cancer that will lead to the improved translation and implementation of the results of research.

Objective: This paper was prepared by the National Cancer Institute of Canada (NCIC) Working Group on Translational Research and Knowledge Transfer. The goal was to nurture common ground upon which to build a platform for translating what we know about cancer into what we do in practice and policy., Methods: Methods included expert panels, literature review, and concept mapping, to develop a framework that built on earlier cancer control conceptualizations of communications that have guided researchers and end users., Results: The concept of 'knowledge integration' is used to describe the resulting refinement and the nature of evidence necessary for decision-making to at the systems level. Current evidence for knowledge integration in cancer control is presented across the levels of individual, organizational and systems level interventions and across basic, clinical and population science knowledge bases., Conclusion: A systems-oriented approach to integrating evidence into action assists organizations to conduct research and policy and practice., Practice Implications: Practitioners can use this framework to understand the challenges of implementing and evaluating cancer control strategies.

Cancer surveillance is entering an exciting era where the scope of its activities will be expanded and the amount, quality, and depth of information on cancer will be richer and more readily available to practitioners, decision makers and the public. This future is being built on a solid history of accomplishment that has placed cancer foremost among all chronic diseases in the organization and implementation of a systematic and integrated monitoring enterprise that is of essential value in both clinical medicine and public health. The future of cancer surveillance will be driven not only by innovations in methods of cancer surveillance itself, but also by developments in information technology and communication and by revolutionary new tools used in the delivery of medical care. At the same time, it will be a challenge to ensure levels of privacy and confidentiality needed to maintain the public trust. In the Cancer Surveillance and Information Summit, a 2004 conference sponsored by C-Change, experts from the field and from allied and related disciplines in both the public and private sectors met to consider the future of the cancer surveillance enterprise. Seven recommendations, detailed in this article, emerged from the conference to guide future growth and development. Steps that can and should be taken by all individuals and groups involved in cancer surveillance were included. The shared view is that cancer surveillance and information is essential to fulfill a vision for a future where cancer is prevented, detected early, and either cured or managed successfully as a chronic illness.

Behaviors associated with cancer screening have been the focus of intensive research over the past 2 decades, primarily in the form of intervention trials to improve screening based in both clinical and community settings. Meta-analyses and literature reviews have synthesized and organized the resulting literature. From the accumulated work, this review distilled lessons learned from cancer screening intervention research in community settings. The authors posed the question, "What do we know about the development of effective community-based interventions (the level of good over harm achieved in real-world conditions)?" Framed around the concept of focal points (the simultaneous combination of target population, behavioral objective, and setting for an intervention), 13 lessons were derived. One lesson was cross-cutting, and the other lessons addressed the three focal-point components and the major intervention categories (access-enhancing strategies, mass media, small media, one-on-one and small-group education, and combinations of these categories). To build more systematically on existing research, recommendations are made for new directions in basic behavioral and intervention research.

Four phases in the evolution of cancer control frameworks are reviewed, highlighting how national Canadian and United States planning and implementation activities have built on each other's work to define and guide cancer control research. Hallmarks have come to be: (a) coordination of the cycle that applies research to practice and policy decisions; (b) synthesis of knowledge at each phase of cancer control framework; (c) a focus on populations and public health with feedback loops between fundamental and applied research; and (d) interdisciplinary integration of the biological, behavioral, social, and other population sciences. Current research priorities and initiatives based on the research framework now common to both Canada and the United States are described. We conclude by calling for an international forum for the systematic advancement of cancer control research, and closer ties between the cancer control communities in North America.

Objective: In preparation for jointly publishing official government cancer statistics, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI) compared incidence rates from NCI's Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program and CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR)., Methods: Data for 1999 covering 78% of the US population were obtained from SEER and selected NPCR registries that met high quality data criteria. Incidence rates (per 100,000 population) were age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population, and 95% gamma confidence intervals were estimated., Results: NPCR rates for all sites combined were higher than SEER rates (males: NPCR 553.6, SEER 538.7; females: NPCR 420.8, SEER 412.5), but rates for specific cancer sites varied by registry program. Rates for colon cancer (males: NPCR 47.0, SEER 42.7; females: NPCR 36.5, SEER 33.8) and tobacco-related cancers were higher in NPCR than SEER. In contrast, NPCR rates were lower than SEER rates for cancers of the female breast (NPCR 134.0, SEER 135.9), prostate (NPCR 162.0, SEER 170.2), and melanoma as well as for cancers more common among Asians and Pacific Islanders (e.g., stomach cancer)., Conclusions: Rate differences may arise from population differences in socio-demographic characteristics, screening use, health behaviors, exposure to cancer causing agents or registry operations factors.

The National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) has provided data about health behaviors at the national level since 1957. The 1987 and 1992 Cancer Control Supplements to the NHIS, along with other supplemental surveys administered intermittently on self-reported cancer-related behaviors, have contributed to important research and public health purposes. In this article, we reviewed 73 papers published between 1980 and 2001 that used NHIS data, including the first report from the 1998 NHIS, to examine what has been learned from past surveys. Our goal was to facilitate future analyses of recently released data on cancer screening practices from the Cancer Control Supplement to the 2000 NHIS, which is now known as the Cancer Control Module. We categorized the papers according to which of the following three study approaches they used: trends in screening rates, correlates of these rates with factors that may influence screening, and linkages or comparisons of NHIS data with other surveys or sources of information. We summarize knowledge gained in cancer screening for each of these three categories and identify areas that could benefit from more research. We highlight some of the new information available for the first time on the Cancer Control Module of the 2000 NHIS as fresh opportunities for cancer control research. Finally, we describe how the Cancer Control Supplements to the NHIS are integrated with the objectives of and developments in national cancer surveillance research that have emerged from federal planning efforts and collaborations with national partners in cancer surveillance in recent years.

Background: Research has been critical in understanding human behavior related to the early detection of cancer., Methods: Based on the literature and the author's experience, this paper reviews behavioral research accomplishments in the past decade and needs for the future., Results: Accomplishments have included an improved understanding of the barriers to screening, methods to improve the provision of tests by practitioners, and progress in the development and application of community interventions. Outstanding needs are summarized in 12 areas that include a continued focus on underserved populations and an examination of the use of screening tests in the presence of incomplete evidence of efficacy, translational research that explores the behavioral consequences of genetic susceptibility testing, continued development and use of computer-based technologies in the delivery of preventive services, and studies of the potential negative consequences of screening. Critical changes in the delivery of health care in the era of managed care call for increased behavioral research in health services and health care policy., Conclusion: Although this review of research needs is not exhaustive, it is clear that the challenges and opportunities for behavioral research are substantial, and this effort will be a critical part of the overall national research agenda for cancer control.

Folate deficiency causes massive incorporation of uracil into human DNA (4 million per cell) and chromosome breaks. The likely mechanism is the deficient methylation of dUMP to dTMP and subsequent incorporation of uracil into DNA by DNA polymerase. During repair of uracil in DNA, transient nicks are formed; two opposing nicks could lead to chromosome breaks. Both high DNA uracil levels and elevated micronucleus frequency (a measure of chromosome breaks) are reversed by folate administration. A significant proportion of the U.S. population has low folate levels, in the range associated with elevated uracil misincorporation and chromosome breaks. Such breaks could contribute to the increased risk of cancer and cognitive defects associated with folate deficiency in humans.

Background: Using the medical records of a large, prepaid health plan, our purpose was to assess the accuracy of self-reported data on cancer detection practices and to evaluate any differences in accuracy between Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites., Methods: Data were collected on six procedures: mammography, clinical breast examination, Pap smear, sigmoidoscopy, fecal occult blood tests, and digital rectal examination. We audited the medical records of 815 randomly selected Hispanic and 483 non-Hispanic white members of the Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program in Northern California. All responded to a telephone survey. Using a standardized form, we recorded any of the six target examinations that had been performed within 5 years of the telephone interview. We then compared the times of the most recent screening tests as reported in the telephone survey with those in the medical record., Results: For the 2 years before the telephone interview, self-reports for screening tests overestimated the actual rates at which these tests were performed as documented in the medical records. Lack of agreement between self-report and medical record audits was substantial for all screening procedures except sigmoidoscopy. Hispanic members had fewer procedures done for most tests, but the differences were not statistically significant. Overestimates in self-reported screening rates did not differ substantially between Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites., Conclusions: Self-reported data on early cancer detection procedures can substantially overestimate their occurrence among both non-Hispanic white and Hispanic populations. These findings confirm earlier findings for Pap smear and affect decisions on cancer prevention procedures that rely on the accuracy of self-reported data.

Objective: To evaluate self-reported use of cancer screening tests by Latino and Anglo prepaid health plan members, we conducted telephone interviews about the knowledge of, use of, and reason for Papanicolaou (Pap) smear, clinical breast examination, mammogram, rectal examination, fecal occult blood test, and sigmoidoscopy., Methods: Cross-sectional telephone survey of randomly selected Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program members in San Francisco and Alameda Counties, California. A total of 844 Latinos (432 men and 412 women) and 510 Anglos (208 men and 302 women), between 35 and 74 years of age, completed the interview., Results: Overall, 97.4% of Latinas reported having had at least one Pap smear compared with 99.7% of Anglo women; 90% in each group reported a Pap smear within 3 years. A clinical breast examination within 2 years was reported by 87% of Latina and 90% of Anglo women. Seventy-six percent of Latina and 85% of Anglo women aged 35 years or more reported having had at least one mammogram; and 65% of Latina and 75% of Anglo women reported a mammogram within 2 years. Among members 40 to 74 years of age, a lower proportion of Latinos compared with Anglos reported having had at least one digital rectal examination (67% vs 80%) and one fecal occult blood test (46% vs 54%); among those 50 to 74 years of age, fewer Latinos reported at least one sigmoidoscopy (29% vs 41%). After adjusting for age, education, employment, perceived health status, marital status, and county of residence, Latinos were significantly less likely to report having had at least one digital rectal examination (odds ratio; 0.60, 95% confidence interval, 0.45, 0.79), fecal occult blood test (odds ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.59-1.01), and sigmoidoscopy (odds ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.52, 0.95). After adjusting for the same variables, Latinos were more likely than Anglos to claim forgetfulness/carelessness (75% vs 60%; odds ratio, 1.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.41-2.40) as a reason for not obtaining cancer screening tests., Conclusion: These data suggest that, within this prepaid health plan without direct financial barriers to cancer screening services, Latinos are less likely than Anglos to obtain selected recommended cancer screening tests.

Background: Self-reported data about the interval since last cancer screening are often used to determine whether individuals are due for periodic screening and to monitor adherence to guidelines for early cancer detection., Purpose: In a study conducted within the Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program, we examined the concordance of self-reported information and medical record documentation about recency of and reasons for six procedures for early cancer detection. We also assessed the concordance of population-level estimates of screening rates based on these two sources., Methods: Data were obtained from a mailed questionnaire or telephone interview completed by 779 men and women. The data from these randomly selected study participants (431 women and 348 men), who had been members of the health plan for the previous 5 years, were compared with information obtained from their medical charts. Intersource agreement about whether each procedure was done within the last 2 years was evaluated, with the medical record used as the gold standard. To assess the accuracy of patient self-reporting, we also calculated sensitivity, false-positive and false-negative results, and Kappa statistics., Results: Concordance between self-reported data and medical record documentation was greater for procedures that generated a test report (mammogram, Pap smear, fecal occult blood test, and sigmoidoscopy) than for those generating a physician's note (clinical breast examination and digital rectal examination). Kappa statistics showed a similar pattern. Sensitivity of self-reported data was more than 90% for mammogram, clinical breast examination, Pap smear, and fecal occult blood test and nearly 80% for sigmoidoscopy and digital rectal examination. However, false-positive results were above 40%, except for fecal occult blood test and sigmoidoscopy. For all six procedures, estimated population-level rates of screening within the past 2 years would have been significantly higher (P < .0001) if self-reported data were used instead of medical record audit data., Conclusions: Self-reported data may overestimate the percentage of the population that has been screened and underestimate the interval since the last cancer detection procedures., Implications: Such data should be used cautiously for clinical decision making, research, and surveillance activities at both individual and population levels. Also, comparability of data should be considered when population screening rates are evaluated on the basis of different data sources.

Objective: To collect information regarding knowledge about and attitudes toward cancer in a sample of adult health plan members, self-identified as Latino or Anglo., Design: Cross-sectional survey., Setting: Prepaid health plan., Respondents: A random sample of 844 Latinos (mean age, 50.5 years) and 510 Anglos (51.8 years) completed the interview., Main Outcome Measures and Results: Latinos were significantly more likely than Anglos to think that sugar substitutes (58% vs 42%), bruises from being hit (53% vs 34%), microwave ovens (47% vs 23%), eating pork (31% vs 11%), eating spicy foods (15% vs 8%), breast-feeding (14% vs 6%), and antibiotics (32% vs 12%) could cause cancer (P < .001 for each). Compared with Anglos, Latinos more often misidentified constant dizziness (39% vs 25%) and arthralgias (35% vs 20%) as being symptoms of cancer. A higher proportion of Latinos believed that having cancer is like getting a death sentence (46% vs 26%), that cancer is God's punishment (7% vs 2%), that there is very little one can do to prevent getting cancer (26% vs 18%), that it is uncomfortable to touch someone with cancer (13% vs 8%), and that they would rather not know if they had incurable cancer (35% vs 23%; P < .001 for each). Latino ethnicity was a significant predictor of these knowledge and attitude items in multivariate logistic regression models adjusted for sex, education, age, employment, marital status, county of residence, and self-perceived health status., Conclusions: We conclude that misconceptions about cancer are more prevalent among Latinos than Anglos and that selected attitudes about cancer among Latinos fit a cultural theme of fatalismo. These data can enable development of culturally appropriate cancer control interventions for Latinos.

The relation of serum cholesterol to the development of cancer remains unclear. We have examined the incidence of cancer in 160,135 men and women who were health plan members of the Northern California Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program (KPMCP) and who had a multiphasic health examination in the period 1964 through 1972. In addition to all cancer, we examined individually the nine most common cancers in men and the 12 most common in women. Cancer diagnoses (N = 7477) recorded by the State of California Resource for Cancer Epidemiology Section and the health plan hospital discharge file were used to calculate incidence by quintile of serum cholesterol. Multivariate analysis adjusted for race, education, smoking status, alcohol consumption, body mass index and, in women, for age at menarche, parity, and menopausal status. No strong or consistent relation of low cholesterol to cancer incidence was found. Of the 21 cancers examined, only lymphoma in men and cervical cancer had significantly elevated risks at the lowest quintile of serum cholesterol compared with risks in the highest quintile. Cancer incidence in the first 2 years after the cholesterol measurement was consistently higher among persons whose cholesterol levels were in the lowest quintile. This prospective study did not find evidence that low cholesterol increased the risk of cancer but supports the idea that preclinical cancer in some way lowers serum cholesterol.

We examined the hypothesis that low levels of serum uric acid are associated with elevated cancer risk. A subpopulation (163,830 members) of a large health maintenance organization was followed for a mean of 9.8 years after a multiphasic health checkup at which serum uric acid level was measured. Total cancer incidence as well as site-specific incidence (for lung, colon, and prostate cancer in men and lung, colon, breast, uterine, and cervical cancer in women) was ascertained from hospital discharge records and the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results program in the San Francisco-Oakland Bay area. Age-adjusted cancer incidence was not elevated in the lower deciles of serum uric acid level. After adjusting for age, race, education, smoking, alcohol consumption, and body mass, using proportional hazards models, the risk of cancer was not elevated at lower levels of uric acid. Our results suggest that if increased risk of cancer is associated with low serum uric acid, this risk is associated with serum uric levels below those commonly seen in human populations.