Search

This study aims to quantify Black-White inequities in cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality among US survivors of 18 adult-onset cancers and the extent to which these inequities are explained by differences in socio-economic and clinical factors.Survivors of cancers diagnosed at ages 20-64 years during 2007-16 were identified from 17 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results registries. Associations between race and CVD mortality were examined using proportional hazards models. Mediation analyses were performed to quantify the contributions of potential mediators, including socio-economic [health insurance, neighbourhood socio-economic status (nSES), rurality] and clinical (stage, surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy) factors.Among 904 995 survivors, 10 701 CVD deaths occurred (median follow-up, 43 months). Black survivors were more likely than White survivors to die from CVD for all 18 cancers with hazard ratios ranging from 1.30 (95% CI = 1.15-1.47) for lung cancer to 4.04 for brain cancer (95% CI = 2.79-5.83). The total percentage mediations (indirect effects) ranged from 24.8% for brain (95% CI=-5.2-59.6%) to 99.8% for lung (95% CI = 61.0-167%) cancers. Neighbourhood SES was identified as the strongest mediator for 14 cancers with percentage mediations varying from 25.0% for kidney cancer (95% CI = 14.1-36.3%) to 63.5% for lung cancer (95% CI = 36.5-108.7%). Insurance ranked second for 12 cancers with percentage mediations ranging from 12.3% for leukaemia (95% CI = 0.7-46.7%) to 31.3% for thyroid cancer (95% CI = 10.4-82.7%).Insurance and nSES explained substantial proportions of the excess CVD mortality among Black survivors. Mitigating the effects of unequal access to care and differing opportunities for healthy living among neighbourhoods could substantially reduce racial inequities in CVD mortality among cancer survivors.

Cancer statistics for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) (aged 15-39 years) are often presented in aggregate, masking important heterogeneity. The authors analyzed population-based cancer incidence and mortality for AYAs in the United States by age group (ages 15-19, 20-29, and 30-39 years), sex, and race/ethnicity. In 2020, there will be approximately 89,500 new cancer cases and 9270 cancer deaths in AYAs. Overall cancer incidence increased in all AYA age groups during the most recent decade (2007-2016), largely driven by thyroid cancer, which rose by approximately 3% annually among those aged 20 to 39 years and 4% among those aged 15 to 19 years. Incidence also increased in most age groups for several cancers linked to obesity, including kidney (3% annually across all age groups), uterine corpus (3% in the group aged 20-39 years), and colorectum (0.9%-1.5% in the group aged 20-39 years). Rates declined dramatically for melanoma in the group aged 15 to 29 years (4%-6% annually) but remained stable among those aged 30 to 39 years. Overall cancer mortality declined during 2008 through 2017 by 1% annually across age and sex groups, except for women aged 30 to 39 years, among whom rates were stable because of a flattening of declines in female breast cancer. Rates increased for cancers of the colorectum and uterine corpus in the group aged 30 to 39 years, mirroring incidence trends. Five-year relative survival in AYAs is similar across age groups for all cancers combined (range, 83%-86%) but varies widely for some cancers, such as acute lymphocytic leukemia (74% in the group aged 15-19 years vs 51% in the group aged 30-39 years) and brain tumors (77% vs 66%), reflecting differences in histologic subtype distribution and treatment. Progress in reducing cancer morbidity and mortality among AYAs could be addressed through more equitable access to health care, increasing clinical trial enrollment, expanding research, and greater alertness among clinicians and patients for early symptoms and signs of cancer. Further progress could be accelerated with increased disaggregation by age in research on surveillance, etiology, basic biology, and survivorship.

BACKGROUND: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network and American Society of Clinical Oncology recommend consideration of the use of echocardiography 6 to 12 months after completion of anthracycline-based chemotherapy in at-risk populations. Assessment of BNP (B-type natriuretic peptide) has also been suggested by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Failure Society of America for the identification of Stage A (at risk) heart failure patients. The real-world frequency of the use of these tests in patients after receipt of anthracycline therapy, however, has not been studied previously. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this retrospective study, using administrative claims data from the OptumLabs Data Warehouse, we identified 31 447 breast cancer and lymphoma patients (age ≥18 years) who were treated with an anthracycline in the United States between January 1, 2008 and January 31, 2018. Continuous medical and pharmacy coverage was required for at least 6 months before the initial anthracycline dose and 12 months after the final dose. Only 36.1% of patients had any type of cardiac surveillance (echocardiography, BNP, or cardiac imaging) in the year following completion of anthracycline therapy (29.7% echocardiography). Surveillance rate increased from 37.5% in 2008 to 42.7% in 2018 (25.6% in 2008 to 40.5% echocardiography in 2018). Lymphoma patients had a lower likelihood of any surveillance compared with patients with breast cancer (odds ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.74-0.85]; P50% rate of surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of survivors of breast cancer and lymphoma who have received anthracycline-based chemotherapy do not undergo cardiac surveillance after treatment, including those with a history of cardiovascular comorbidities, such as heart failure.

Breast cancer survivorship guidelines recommend at least annual follow-up visits, yet the degree to which this occurs in clinical practice is uncertain. Claims data from a US commercial insurance database (OptumLabs) were used to identify women treated with curative intent surgery for newly diagnosed breast cancer between 2006 and 2014. In 25 035 women, median follow-up was 3 years. In the second year after surgery, 9.6% of the patients did not visit a primary care provider, an oncologist, or a surgeon (guideline-nonadherent). The guideline-nonadherent proportion increased from 7.8% in women diagnosed in 2006 to 12.2% in those diagnosed in 2014 (two-sided Wald P

Background: Individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, or gender‐nonconforming (LGBTQ+) experience discrimination and minority stress that may lead to elevated cancer risk. Methods: In the absence of population‐based cancer occurrence information for this population, this article comprehensively examines contemporary, age‐adjusted cancer risk factor and screening prevalence using data from the National Health Interview Survey, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, and National Youth Tobacco Survey, and provides a literature review of cancer incidence and barriers to care. Results: Lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults are more likely to smoke cigarettes than heterosexual adults (16% compared to 12% in 2021–2022), with the largest disparity among bisexual women. For example, 34% of bisexual women aged 40–49 years and 24% of those 50 and older smoke compared to 12% and 11%, respectively, of heterosexual women. Smoking is also elevated among youth who identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual (4%) or transgender (5%) compared to heterosexual or cisgender (1%). Excess body weight is elevated among lesbian and bisexual women (68% vs. 61% among heterosexual women), largely due to higher obesity prevalence among bisexual women (43% vs. 38% among lesbian women and 33% among heterosexual women). Bisexual women also have a higher prevalence of no leisure‐time physical activity (35% vs. 28% among heterosexual women), as do transgender individuals (30%–31% vs. 21%–25% among cisgender individuals). Heavier alcohol intake among lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals is confined to bisexual women, with 14% consuming more than 7 drinks/week versus 6% of heterosexual women. In contrast, prevalence of cancer screening and risk reducing vaccinations in LGBTQ+ individuals is similar to or higher than their heterosexual/cisgender counterparts except for lower cervical and colorectal cancer screening among transgender men. Conclusions: People within the LGBTQ+ population have a higher prevalence of smoking, obesity, and alcohol consumption compared to heterosexual and cisgender people, suggesting a higher cancer burden. Health systems have an opportunity to help inform these disparities through the routine collection of information on sexual orientation and gender identity to facilitate cancer surveillance and to mitigate them through education to increase awareness of LGBTQ+ health needs. Minority stress and health care discrimination experienced by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and gender‐nonconforming (LGBTQ+) individuals can influence cancer occurrence and outcomes. The authors investigated prevalence and disparities in major cancer risk factors and screening by sexual orientation and gender identity and conducted a literature review describing health care challenges faced by LGBTQ+ communities and opportunities for improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2018, the authors reported estimates of the number and proportion of cancers attributable to potentially modifiable risk factors in 2014 in the United States. These data are useful for advocating for and informing cancer prevention and control. Herein, based on up‐to‐date relative risk and cancer occurrence data, the authors estimated the proportion and number of invasive cancer cases (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancers) and deaths, overall and for 30 cancer types among adults who were aged 30 years and older in 2019 in the United States, that were attributable to potentially modifiable risk factors. These included cigarette smoking; second‐hand smoke; excess body weight; alcohol consumption; consumption of red and processed meat; low consumption of fruits and vegetables, dietary fiber, and dietary calcium; physical inactivity; ultraviolet radiation; and seven carcinogenic infections. Numbers of cancer cases and deaths were obtained from data sources with complete national coverage, risk factor prevalence estimates from nationally representative surveys, and associated relative risks of cancer from published large‐scale pooled or meta‐analyses. In 2019, an estimated 40.0% (713,340 of 1,781,649) of all incident cancers (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancers) and 44.0% (262,120 of 595,737) of all cancer deaths in adults aged 30 years and older in the United States were attributable to the evaluated risk factors. Cigarette smoking was the leading risk factor contributing to cancer cases and deaths overall (19.3% and 28.5%, respectively), followed by excess body weight (7.6% and 7.3%, respectively), and alcohol consumption (5.4% and 4.1%, respectively). For 19 of 30 evaluated cancer types, more than one half of the cancer cases and deaths were attributable to the potentially modifiable risk factors considered in this study. Lung cancer had the highest number of cancer cases (201,660) and deaths (122,740) attributable to evaluated risk factors, followed by female breast cancer (83,840 cases), skin melanoma (82,710), and colorectal cancer (78,440) for attributable cases and by colorectal (25,800 deaths), liver (14,720), and esophageal (13,600) cancer for attributable deaths. Large numbers of cancer cases and deaths in the United States are attributable to potentially modifiable risk factors, underscoring the potential to substantially reduce the cancer burden through broad and equitable implementation of preventive initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Community health centers (CHCs) provide historically marginalized populations with primary care, including cancer screening. Previous studies have reported that women living in rural areas are less likely to be up to date with cervical cancer screening than women living in urban areas. However, little is known about rural–urban differences in cervical cancer screening in CHCs and the contributing factors, and whether such differences changed during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Methods: Using 8‐year pooled Uniform Data System (2014‐2021) data and Oaxaca‐Blinder decomposition, the extent to which CHC‐ and catchment area–level characteristics explained rural‐urban differences in up‐to‐date cervical cancer screening was estimated. Results: Up‐to‐date cervical cancer screening was lower in rural CHCs than urban CHCs (38.2% vs 43.0% during 2014–2019), and this difference increased during the pandemic (43.5% vs 49.0%). The rural–urban difference in cervical cancer screening in 2014–2019 was mostly explained by differences in CHC‐level proportions of patients with limited English proficiency (55.9%) or income below the poverty level (12.3%) and females aged 21 to 64 years (9.8%), and catchment area–level's unemployment (3.4%) and primary care physician density (3.2%). However, Medicaid (–48.5%) or no insurance (–19.6%) counterbalanced the differences between rural–urban CHCs. The contribution of these factors to rural–urban differences in cervical cancer screening generally increased in 2020–2021. Conclusions: Rural–urban differences in cervical cancer screening were mostly explained by multiple CHC‐level and catchment area–level characteristics. The findings call for tailored interventions, such as providing resources and language services, to improve cancer screening utilization among uninsured, Medicaid, and patients with limited English proficiency in rural CHCs. The proportion of females who were up to date with cervical cancer screening was lower in rural community health centers (CHCs) than in urban CHCs, both before and during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Several factors contributed to the rural–urban difference, including proportion of patients with limited English proficiency, Medicaid or no health insurance, income below the federal poverty level at the CHC level, and unemployment rate and primary care physician density in the CHC's catchment area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundTreatment-related toxicity can vary substantially between chemotherapy regimens. In this study we evaluated the frequency of outpatient office visits among a cohort of early stage breast cancer survivors after completion of 4 different adjuvant chemotherapy regimens to better understand how differences in toxicities between regimens might affect health care use.Materials and methodsWe analyzed administrative claims data from a US commercial insurance database (OptumLabs) to identify women who received adjuvant doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC), AC followed or preceded by docetaxel or paclitaxel (AC-T), AC concurrent with docetaxel or paclitaxel (TAC), or docetaxel/cyclophosphamide (TC) between 2008 and 2014. We compared mean numbers of visits per patient (adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, region, year, surgery type, radiation, chronic conditions, and previous hospitalizations) across the different regimens (TC = reference) for 12 months, starting 4 months after the end of chemotherapy.ResultsIn 6247 eligible patients, the mean adjusted number of outpatient visits per patient was significantly higher in patients who received AC-T (8.1) or TAC (7.3) than TC (6.5) or AC (6.0; P < .001 for comparisons of AC-T and TAC with TC), primarily because of differences in Medical Oncology visits. Approximately 40% did not see a primary care provider at all during this time frame.ConclusionsAC-T and TAC are associated with more subsequent outpatient visits than TC. Visits to primary care providers are infrequent during the year after completion of chemotherapy.

Divergent trends of breast cancer incidence by subtype have been reported in the United States and elsewhere; however, it remains unknown whether this trend has continued until the era of the COVID‐19 pandemic. Using high‐quality population‐based cancer registry data, representing 83% of the US population, this study examined breast cancer incidence rates by estrogen receptor (ER) status in women aged 20–84 years from 2004 to 2020. The incidence rate of ER‐positive cancer increased by 1.75% per year from 2004 to 2009 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.26%–3.15%) and has slowed to a 0.87% annual increase (95% CI = 0.41%–1.03%) from 2009 to 2019, followed by a 10.2% reduction from 2019 to 2020. Trends were generally similar across race and ethnicity, although young women (20–49 years), Asian or Pacific Islander, and Hispanic women experienced steady increases until 2019. The incidence rate of ER‐negative cancer decreased by 3.13% annually (95% CI = −4.2% to −2.55%) from 2004 to 2012, and the decrease stabilized from 2012 to 2019 (annual percent change: 0.55%; 95% CI = −1.30% to 0.92%), followed by a 6.0% reduction from 2019 to 2020, with trends generally consistent by age and across racial and ethnic groups. The stabilization of the steep decline in ER‐negative cancer suggests a departure from the encouraging trajectories projected in earlier studies. Coupled with the deceleration in the rise of ER‐positive cancer, the latest trend signals a potential stabilization in the previous rise of the proportional burden of ER‐positive cancer. Understanding the impact of the pandemic on each subtype of breast cancer individually may provide a more comprehensive insight into its long‐term sequelae on survival and mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients with hematologic malignancies are at increased risk of adverse COVID‐19 outcomes; nonetheless, only sparse population‐based data are available on mortality related to hematologic cancers during the pandemic. Number of deaths and age‐standardized mortality rates for specific hematologic malignancies selected either as the underlying cause of death (UCOD), or mentioned in death certificates (multiple causes of death‐MCOD) were extracted from the US National Center for Health Statistics, CDC WONDER Online Database. Joinpoint analysis was applied to identify changes in mortality trends from 1999 to 2021, and to estimate the annual percent change with 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) across time segments. Among the most common malignancies, chronic lymphocytic leukemia showed marked peaks in the monthly number of deaths attributed to COVID‐19 during epidemic waves; acute myeloid leukemia showed the least variation, and non‐Hodgkin lymphoma and multiple myeloma were characterized by an intermediate pattern. Age‐standardized death rates relying solely on the UCOD did not show significant variations during pandemic years. By contrast, rates based on MCOD increased by 14.0% (CI, 10.2–17.9%) per year for chronic lymphocytic leukemia, by 5.1% (CI, 3.1–7.2%) for non‐Hodgkin lymphoma and by 3.2% (CI, 0.3–6.1%) per year for multiple myeloma. Surveillance of mortality based on MCOD is warranted to accurately measure the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic and of other epidemics, including seasonal flu, on patients with hematologic malignancies, and to assess the effects of vaccination campaigns and other preventive measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents global cancer statistics by world region for the year 2022 based on updated estimates from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). There were close to 20 million new cases of cancer in the year 2022 (including nonmelanoma skin cancers [NMSCs]) alongside 9.7 million deaths from cancer (including NMSC). The estimates suggest that approximately one in five men or women develop cancer in a lifetime, whereas around one in nine men and one in 12 women die from it. Lung cancer was the most frequently diagnosed cancer in 2022, responsible for almost 2.5 million new cases, or one in eight cancers worldwide (12.4% of all cancers globally), followed by cancers of the female breast (11.6%), colorectum (9.6%), prostate (7.3%), and stomach (4.9%). Lung cancer was also the leading cause of cancer death, with an estimated 1.8 million deaths (18.7%), followed by colorectal (9.3%), liver (7.8%), female breast (6.9%), and stomach (6.8%) cancers. Breast cancer and lung cancer were the most frequent cancers in women and men, respectively (both cases and deaths). Incidence rates (including NMSC) varied from four‐fold to five‐fold across world regions, from over 500 in Australia/New Zealand (507.9 per 100,000) to under 100 in Western Africa (97.1 per 100,000) among men, and from over 400 in Australia/New Zealand (410.5 per 100,000) to close to 100 in South‐Central Asia (103.3 per 100,000) among women. The authors examine the geographic variability across 20 world regions for the 10 leading cancer types, discussing recent trends, the underlying determinants, and the prospects for global cancer prevention and control. With demographics‐based predictions indicating that the number of new cases of cancer will reach 35 million by 2050, investments in prevention, including the targeting of key risk factors for cancer (including smoking, overweight and obesity, and infection), could avert millions of future cancer diagnoses and save many lives worldwide, bringing huge economic as well as societal dividends to countries over the forthcoming decades. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite decades of declining mortality rates, lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer death in the United States. This article examines lung cancer incidence, stage at diagnosis, survival, and mortality using population‐based data from the National Cancer Institute, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Over the past 5 years, declines in lung cancer mortality became considerably greater than declines in incidence among men (5.0% vs. 2.6% annually) and women (4.3% vs. 1.1% annually), reflecting absolute gains in 2‐year relative survival of 1.4% annually. Improved outcomes likely reflect advances in treatment, increased access to care through the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and earlier stage diagnosis; for example, compared with a 4.6% annual decrease for distant‐stage disease incidence during 2013–2019, the rate for localized‐stage disease rose by 3.6% annually. Localized disease incidence increased more steeply in states with the highest lung cancer screening prevalence (by 3%–5% annually) than in those with the lowest (by 1%–2% annually). Despite progress, disparities remain. For example, Native Americans have the highest incidence and the slowest decline (less than 1% annually among men and stagnant rates among women) of any group. In addition, mortality rates in Mississippi and Kentucky are two to three times higher than in most western states, largely because of elevated historic smoking prevalence that remains. Racial and geographic inequalities highlight longstanding opportunities for more concerted tobacco‐control efforts targeted at high‐risk populations, including improved access to smoking‐cessation treatments and lung cancer screening, as well as state‐of‐the‐art treatment. Recent declines in lung cancer mortality have outpaced those for incidence, reflecting gains in relative survival that are partly due to recent shifts to earlier stage at diagnosis. Persistent racial and geographic disparities reflect longstanding opportunities for public health intervention to reduce smoking and improve health care access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cancer is the leading cause of death among Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders (AANHPIs). In this report, the American Cancer Society presents AANHPI cancer 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 AANHPIs in 2016, there will be an estimated 57,740 new cancer cases and 16,910 cancer deaths. While AANHPIs have 30% to 40% lower incidence and mortality rates than non-Hispanic whites for all cancers combined, risk of stomach and liver cancers is double. The male-to-female incidence rate ratio among AANHPIs declined from 1.43 (95% confidence interval, 1.36-1.49) in 1992 to 1.04 (95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.07) in 2012 because of declining prostate and lung cancer rates in males and increasing breast cancer rates in females. The diversity within the AANHPI population is reflected in the disparate cancer risk by subgroup. For example, the overall incidence rate in Samoan men (526.5 per 100,000) is more than twice that in Asian Indian/Pakistani men (216.8). Variations in cancer rates in AANHPIs are related to differences in behavioral risk factors, use of screening and preventive services, and exposure to cancer-causing infections. Cancer-control strategies include improved use of vaccination and screening; interventions to increase physical activity and reduce excess body weight, tobacco use, and alcohol consumption; and subgroup-level research on burden and risk factors. CA Cancer J Clin 2016;66:182-202. © 2016 American Cancer Society.