9887basem aldeek some%final epidemiological aspects about cancer in king saudi[1]1 [autosaved]
Post on 19-Jun-2015
75 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
By
Basem Salama Eldeek MSc,MD,MHPE
Associate prof of community medicine Faculty of medicine king Abdulaziz university,KSA
And mansoura university ,Egypt.
Acknowledgement
• The study of the factors affecting cancer, as a way to
infer possible trends and causes.
• The study of cancer epidemiology uses epidemiological
methods to find the cause of cancer and to identify and
develop improved treatments.
• This area of study must contend with problems of
• lead time bias
• length time bias.
• Lead time bias is the concept that early
diagnosis may artificially inflate the
survival statistics of a cancer, without
really improving the natural history of
the disease.
• Length bias is the concept that slower growing, more indolent tumors are more likely to be
diagnosed by screening tests, but improvements in
diagnosing more cases of indolent cancer may not
translate into better patient outcomes after the
implementa t ion o f sc reen ing p rograms .
• A similar epidemiological concern is overdiagnosis,
the tendency of screening tests to diagnose diseases
that may not actually impact the patient's longevity.
This problem especially applies to prostate cancer
and PSA screening.
• Some cancer researchers have argued that negative
cancer clinical trials lack sufficient statistical power
to discover a benefit to treatment.
• Observational epidemiological studies that show
associations between risk factors and specific
cancers mostly serve to generate hypotheses
• Randomized controlled trials then test whether
hypotheses generated by epidemiological studies
and laboratory research actually result in reduced
cancer incidence and mortality.
• Programmatic trials.
Robert A. Weinberg, "If we lived long enough, sooner or later we all would get cancer."[10]
• Over a third of cancer deaths worldwide are due to potentially
modifiable risk factors
§ Tobacco smoking, lung cancer, mouth, and throat cancer;
§ Drinking alcohol, oral, esophageal, breast, and other cancers;
§ A diet low in fruit and vegetables,
§ Physical inactivity, colon, breast,
§ Obesity, is associated with colon, breast, endometrial
§ Sexual transmission of human papillomavirus, which causes
cervical cancer &anal cancer.
• Men with cancer are twice as likely as women to have a
modifiable risk factor .[11]
• lifestyle and environmental factors known to affect
cancer risk .
• use of exogenous hormones (e.g.,
hormone replacement therapy causes breast cancer)
• exposure to ionizing radiation and ultraviolet radiation,
and certain occupational and chemical exposures.
• Every year, at least 200,000 people die worldwide from
cancer related to their workplace.[12]
• Millions of workers run the risk of developing cancers
such as pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma from
inhaling asbestos fibers, or leukemia from exposure to
benzene .[12]
• It is estimated that approximately 20,000 cancer deaths
and 40,000 new cases of cancer each year in the U.S. are
attributable to occupation.[13]
• The Saudi Cancer Registry (SCR) of Saudi Arabia is
a population-based registry established in 1992
under the the Ministry of Health (MOH) by the
order of His Excellency the Minister of Health.
• The SCR commenced reporting cancer cases from
01 January 1994.
Objec'ves:
• The primary goal of the SCR is to define the
population-based incidence of cancer in Saudi
Arabia. Additional objectives include programs
for early detection and cancer screening, as well
as cancer research projects.
Saudi Cancer Registry has eleven reports .
§ 1994 Summary Report,
§ 1994-1996 Incidence Report,
§ 1997-1998 Incidence Report,
§ 1999-2000 Incidence Report,
§ 2001 Incidence Report,
§ 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006,
§ 2007and Incidence Reports.
Cancer report Total reporting cancer cases
Estimated population at
K S A
Absolute incidence
1994-‐1996 23092 14089156 54.36 per 1000000
1997-‐1998 14529 15121791 48.03 per 1000000
1999-‐2000 14856 15588805 47.06 per 1000000
2001 5616 16056470 34.72 per 1000000
2002 5876 15612781 37.63 per 1000000
2003 8840 16109198 54.78 per 1000000
2004 9381 16527340 56.76 per 1000000
2005 10513 16945484 62.47 per 1000000
2006 11040 17270181 63.92 per 1000000
2007 12,309 17493364 70.63 per 1000000
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75 Absolute incidence
absolute incidence
94 95 96 97 98 99 20 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Thyroid C 73
5.5 5.3 4.6 5 5.7 5.4 4.8 4.6 4.7 6.1 5.7 6.4 6.5 6.6
Colon C18 2.2 2.7 2.6 2.2 2.2 2.9 2.6 3.4 3.1 4.2 4.3 4.3 5.3 4.8
NHL C82,85,96 4.3 4.2 4.1 4 5 4.3 4.1 4.4 4.4 5 5 5.3 4.8 5.1
94 95 96 97 98 99 20 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Leukemia C92,94 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.9 1.6 2 1.5
Hodgkin C81 1.4 1.3 1 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.6 1.6
stomach C16 2.4 2.4 2.1 1.8 2 1.9 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.7 2.7 2.5
liver C22
3.9 3.1 3.3 2.9 3.8 2.7 3.2 2.7 2.8 3.3 2.9 3.1 3.1 2.6
94 95 96 97 98 99 20 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Breast C50
13.4 13 13.4 13.3 14.3 12.6 13.7 12.1 13.9 14.6 16.5 18.7 18.1 21.6
Corpus uteri C54
2.1 1.4 1.4 1.6 2 1.6 2.5 2.1 2.2 2.8 2.9 3.6 3.6 4
Corpus cervix C53
2.4 2.2 2.5 2.3 2.9 2 1.9 2 1.8 1.9 2 2.1 1.6 1.9
Ovary C56
2.9 3 2.7 3.1 3.1 2.2 2.2 2.4 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.9 3 2.6
§ The total number of cancer incident cases reported to
the SCR was 12,309.
§ Overall cancer was slightly more among women than
men.
§ Cancers affected 5,982 (48.6%) males and 6,321
(51.4%) females with a male to female ratio of 95:100.
§ 9,347 cases were reported among Saudis,
§ 2,590 among Non-Saudis.
• 11,651 cases were analyzed, of which 9,124 (78.3%) were Saudis and 2,527 (21.7%) were Non-Saudis.
Among the Saudis • 4,351 (47.7%) were male • 4,773 (52.3%) were female. • The male to female ratio
• was 91:100. 47%
53%
proportion
Males
Female
Confirmation of Diagnosis of malignancy
• Histologically in 86.2% of the cases.
• Haematological & cytologically in 8% of cases.
• Clinically confirmed cases were 0.3%.
• Radiologically confirmed cases were 2%.
• Cases confirmed by Death Certificate Only were
2.7% .
• The method of diagnosis was unknown for 0.8%
of the cases.
Age adjusted rate (ASR) of all cancers among Saudi Population
47 48 49 50 51 52 53
total Men Women
CIR
CIR per 100,000
Total 52.3%
Men 49.4 %
women 51.5%
Age adjusted rate (ASR) of all cancers among Saudi Population
77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85
Total Men Women
ASR
ASR per 100,000
Total 82.1
Men 80
women 84.2
The age-specific incidence rate (AIR) increased with
age for gender.
After the age of 64 years, the increase was nearly one and one half fold for males
compared to females.
The median age at diagnosis is was 59 years for men and
50 years for women
§ Riyadh Region 108.5/100,000
§ Tabuk Region 105.0/100,000 § Eastern Region
104.4/100,000 § Makkah Region
89.3/100,000 § Madinah Region
73.8/100,000.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
ASR
ASR
Percentage distribu'on of most frequent type of cancer by gender 2007 age (0-‐14 year)Saudi children
Percentage distribu'on of most frequent type of cancer by gender( above 14 years) 2007 Saudi Adult
Percentage distribu'on of most frequent type of cancer by age and gender 2007
Percentage distribu'on of most frequent type of cancer by gender 2007
Percentage distribu'on of most frequent type of cancer by gender 2007 age (15-‐29 year)
Percentage distribu'on of most frequent type of cancer by gender 2007 age (30-‐44 year)
Percentage distribu'on of most frequent type of cancer by gender 2007 age (45-‐59 year)
Percentage distribu'on of most frequent type of cancer by gender 2007 age (60-‐74 year)
Percentage distribu'on of most frequent type of cancer by gender 2007 age (75+year)
Males
Females
Specific cancer common in female
Males and 6.6 / 100,000 females
Preventive oncology
Summary Of Primary Preventive Actions
Prospects seem bright for ultimately preventing many
cancers. There is already much that can be done:
1. Quit smoking and use of tobacco in any from, and
encourage all nonusers not to start (especially the young).
2. Stop alcohol.
3. Control exposures to known carcinogens in the
workplace.
4. Reduce exposures outside the workplace to known
carcinogens such as arsenic, chromium, nickel, vinyl
chloride, and asbestos.
5. Restrict use of drugs that are known/suspected to be
carcinogenic.
6. Prudent use of diagnostic x-rays.
7. Avoid excess exposure to sunlight, especially for fair
skinned persons, and encourage use of protective
creams and sunscreen.
8. Avoid giving estrogens to pregnant women. Use the
lowest dose necessary and include a progestin in the
regimen.
Summary Of Primary Preventive Actions
5. Restrict use of drugs that are known/suspected to be
carcinogenic.
6. Prudent use of diagnostic x-rays.
7. Avoid excess exposure to sunlight, especially for fair
skinned persons, and encourage use of protective
creams and sunscreen.
8. Avoid giving estrogens to pregnant women. Use the
lowest dose necessary and include a progestin in the
regimen.
Summary Of Primary Preventive Actions
Screening for cancer
SCREENING AND 2 RY PREVENTION
• By means of early detection followed by
definitive treatment.
• Screening is one component of early
detection Secondary prevention can be
achieved only if there is a stage of that
cancer that is amenable to cure, and if
there are means of detecting the cancer
at that stage.
Natural history of a disease over time, including the pre-clinical stage in which a screening test can detect the
presence of disease.
A screening test can identify diseased individuals before Detection by routine diagnosis (Occurance of symptoms).
Treatment at the time of detection by screening, as opposed to the time of routine diagnosis, results in an improved chance of survival.
Biologic onset of disease
Disease detectable by screening
Detection by Screening test
Detectable by routine methods
Death
treatment
The clinical decision-making is based on probability.
Probability of breast cancer (percent)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Before mammogram
After positive mammogram
After positive FNA results
0.3 13 64
Diagnostic test (screening test) is to move the estimated probability of the presence of a disease toward either end of probability scale, thereby providing information that will alter subsequent diagnostic or treatment plans.
Bias in Screening lead-time bias
DN
A d
amage
Can
cer begins
Can
cer first screen
detectable
Lead time
Death
Patient diagnosed from clinical symptoms
Apparent survival
Apparent survival Patient diagnosed by screening
Lead time
Lead time bias is an increase in survival as measured From detection of disease to death, without lengthening of life.
Advanced Uses of Screening Tests
-To Determine the probability that a disease is present’
-To assess the severity of an illness’ -To predict the disease outcome’ -To monitor response to therapy’ -To estimate the probability of an outcome.
Evaluation of a screening Test.
Evaluation of a Diagnostic Test.
Truth (gold standard) Test results (Screening
test)
No disease Disease
b False-positive
Non diseased+ positive test
a True positive
Disease present +test positive
Positive
d True negative Non diseased with
negative test
c False-
negative Have the disease
with negative test results
Negative
Evaluation of a Diagnostic Test. Sensitivity and Specificity
Sensitivity and specificity are descriptors of
the accuracy of a test.
The sensitivity of a test is defined as the percentage of persons with the disease of interest who have positive test results: few false positive
Sensitivity = X 100 = a/a + c X100 = 14/14+1 X100 = 93 %
True positives
True positive+ false negatives
Evaluation of a Diagnostic Test. Sensitivity and Specificity
Specificity of a test is defined as the percentage of persons without the disease of interest who have negative test results
It is the ability of the test to rule out the non-diseased few false negative
Specificity = X 100 = d /d + b X 100 = 91/91+8 X100 = 92 %
True negatives
True negatives + false-positives
Evaluation of a Diagnostic Test.
Total
Surgical biopsy FNA results
No cancer Cancer 22 8
False-positive
14 True
positive
Positive
92 91 True
negative
1 False-
negative
Negative
114 99 15 Total
Sensitivity = 14/14+1 X100 = 93 %
Specificity = 91/91+8 X100
= 92 %
Positive and Negative Predictive Value
Two measures concerning the estimation of the probability of the presence or absence of disease are the positive predictive value (PV+) and the negative predictive value (PV-).
The PV+ is defined as the percentage of who actually have the disease of interest to persons with positive test results (allow us to estimate how likely it is the disease of interest is present if the test is positive).
PV+= X 100 = a/a + b X100 = 14/ 14+8 X100 = 64 %
True positives
True positives +false positives
Positive and Negative Predictive Value
The PV- is defined as the percentage of who do not have the disease of interest to persons with negative test results :
PV- = X 100 = d/ d + c X100 = 91 /91+1 X100 = 99 %
True negatives
True negatives + false negatives
Likelihood Ratios (LR)
Likelihood Ratios LR + Likelihood Ratios LR -
Likelihood Ratios An LR+ of 1, indicates a test of no value in sorting
out persons with and without disease.
The larger the LR+more than 1 , the stronger the association between having a positive test result and having the disease.
LR+ of more than 10 is an indication of a test of high diagnostic value.
The smaller the LR- value, the better the diagnostic value of the test.
An LR- of 0.1 or less is an indication of a good diagnostic test.
1. WHO Disease and injury country esHmates". World Health OrganizaHon. 2009. hMp://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/esHmates_country/en/index.html. Retrieved Nov. 11, 2009.
2. Brawley OW (2004). "Prostate cancer screening: clinical applicaHons and challenges". Urol. Oncol. 22 (4): 353–7. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2004.04.014. PMID 15283896.
3. Bedard PL, Krzyzanowska MK, PinHlie M, Tannock IF (2007). "StaHsHcal power of negaHve randomized controlled trials presented at American Society for Clinical Oncology annual meeHngs". J. Clin. Oncol. 25 (23): 3482–7. doi:10.1200/JCO.2007.11.3670. PMID 17687153.
4. SEER Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results". hMp://seer.cancer.gov/. Retrieved 2007-‐11-‐02.
5. Furlow, B, Accuracy of US cancer surveillance under threat Lancet Oncology 2007; 8:762-‐763. Retrieved 2007-‐11-‐01.
6. Saudi cancer register incidence repor,t1994-‐1996. 7. Saudi cancer register incidence report,1997-‐1998. 8. Saudi cancer register incidence report,1999-‐2000.
9.
References
References 9-‐Saudi cancer register incidence report ,2003.
10-‐Saudi cancer register incidence report,2004.
11-‐Saudi cancer register incidence report,2005.
12-‐Saudi cancer register incidence report,2006.
13-‐Saudi cancer register incidence report,2007. 14-‐States and V.A. at Odds on Cancer Data (10 October 2007). New York
Times. Retrieved 2007-‐11-‐01. 15-‐NegaHve Impact of HIPAA on PopulaHon-‐Based Cancer Registry
Research: Update of a Brief Survey (14 June 2007). IOM Presenta=on. Retrieved 2007-‐11-‐01.
16-‐Cancer Facts and Figures 2012". Journalist's Resource.org. hMp://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/health/cancer-‐facts-‐figures-‐2012/.
top related