Klabunde C.N.,U.S. National Cancer Institute |
Cronin K.A.,U.S. National Cancer Institute |
Breen N.,U.S. National Cancer Institute |
Waldron W.R.,Management Information Services Inc. |
And 2 more authors.
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention | Year: 2011
Background: Evaluating trends in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening use is critical for understanding screening implementation, and whether population groups targeted for screening are receiving it, consistent with guidelines. This study examines recent national trends in CRC test use, including among vulnerable populations. Methods: We used the 2000, 2003, 2005, and 2008 National Health Interview Survey to examine national trends in CRC screening use overall and for fecal occult blood test (FOBT), sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy. We also assessed trends by race/ethnicity, educational attainment, income, time in the United States, and access to health care. Results: During 2000 to 2008, significant declines in FOBT and sigmoidoscopy use and significant increases in colonoscopy use and in the percentages of adults up-to-date with CRC screening occurred overall and for most population subgroups. Subgroups with consistently lower rates of colonoscopy use and being up-to-date included Hispanics; people with minimal education, low income, or no health insurance; recent immigrants; and those with no usual source of care or physician visits in the past year. Among up-to-date adults, there were few subgroup differences in the type of test by which they were up-to-date (i.e., FOBT, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy). Conclusions: Although use of CRC screening and colonoscopy increased among U.S. adults, including those from vulnerable populations, 45% of adults aged 50 to 75 - or nearly 35 million people - were not up-todate with screening in 2008. Impact: Continued monitoring of CRC screening rates among population subgroups with consistently low utilization is imperative. Improvement in CRC screening rates among all population groups in the United States is still needed. ©2011 AACR.
Siegel R.,Surveillance Research |
Desantis C.,Surveillance Research |
Virgo K.,Health Services Research |
Stein K.,Cancer and Aging Research |
And 15 more authors.
CA Cancer Journal for Clinicians | Year: 2012
Although there has been considerable progress in reducing cancer incidence in the United States, the number of cancer survivors continues to increase due to the aging and growth of the population and improvements in survival rates. As a result, it is increasingly important to understand the unique medical and psychosocial needs of survivors and be aware of resources that can assist patients, caregivers, and health care providers in navigating the various phases of cancer survivorship. To highlight the challenges and opportunities to serve these survivors, the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute estimated the prevalence of cancer survivors on January 1, 2012 and January 1, 2022, by cancer site. Data from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries were used to describe median age and stage at diagnosis and survival; data from the National Cancer Data Base and the SEER-Medicare Database were used to describe patterns of cancer treatment. An estimated 13.7 million Americans with a history of cancer were alive on January 1, 2012, and by January 1, 2022, that number will increase to nearly 18 million. The 3 most prevalent cancers among males are prostate (43%), colorectal (9%), and melanoma of the skin (7%), and those among females are breast (41%), uterine corpus (8%), and colorectal (8%). This article summarizes common cancer treatments, survival rates, and posttreatment concerns and introduces the new National Cancer Survivorship Resource Center, which has engaged more than 100 volunteer survivorship experts nationwide to develop tools for cancer survivors, caregivers, health care professionals, advocates, and policy makers. CA Cancer J Clin 2012. Published 2012 American Cancer Society. © Published 2012 American Cancer Society, Inc.
Hadley J.,George Mason University |
Yabroff K.R.,U.S. National Cancer Institute |
Barrett M.J.,Management Information Services Inc. |
Penson D.F.,Vanderbilt University |
And 2 more authors.
Journal of the National Cancer Institute | Year: 2010
BackgroundUsing observational data to assess the relative effectiveness of alternative cancer treatments is limited by patient selection into treatment, which often biases interpretation of outcomes. We evaluated methods for addressing confounding in treatment and survival of patients with early-stage prostate cancer in observational data and compared findings with those from a benchmark randomized clinical trial.MethodsWe selected 14302 early-stage prostate cancer patients who were aged 66-74 years and had been treated with radical prostatectomy or conservative management from linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data from January 1, 1995, through December 31, 2003. Eligibility criteria were similar to those from a clinical trial used to benchmark our analyses. Survival was measured through December 31, 2007, by use of Cox proportional hazards models. We compared results from the benchmark trial with results from models with observational data by use of traditional multivariable survival analysis, propensity score adjustment, and instrumental variable analysis.ResultsProstate cancer patients receiving conservative management were more likely to be older, nonwhite, and single and to have more advanced disease than patients receiving radical prostatectomy. In a multivariable survival analysis, conservative management was associated with greater risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.27 to 2.00) and all-cause mortality (HR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.35 to 1.59) than radical prostatectomy. Propensity score adjustments resulted in similar patient characteristics across treatment groups, although survival results were similar to traditional multivariable survival analyses. Results for the same comparison from the instrumental variable approach, which theoretically equalizes both observed and unobserved patient characteristics across treatment groups, differed from the traditional multivariable and propensity score results but were consistent with findings from the subset of elderly patient with early-stage disease in the trial (ie, conservative management vs radical prostatectomy: for prostate cancer-specific mortality, HR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.08 to 6.73; for all-cause mortality, HR = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.46 to 2.59).ConclusionInstrumental variable analysis may be a useful technique in comparative effectiveness studies of cancer treatments if an acceptable instrument can be identified. © 2010 The Author.
Waters E.A.,Health Science University |
McNeel T.S.,Management Information Services Inc. |
Stevens W.M.,U.S. National Cancer Institute |
Freedman A.N.,U.S. National Cancer Institute
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Year: 2012
Two selective estrogen receptor modulators, tamoxifen and raloxifene, have been shown in randomized clinical trials to reduce the risk of developing primary invasive breast cancer in high-risk women. In 1998, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) used these studies as a basis for approving tamoxifen for primary breast chemoprevention in both premenopausal and postmenopausal women at high risk. In 2007, the FDA approved raloxifene for primary breast cancer chemoprevention for postmenopausal women. Data from the year 2010 National Health Interview Survey were analyzed to estimate the prevalence of tamoxifen and raloxifene use for chemoprevention of primary breast cancers among U.S. women. Prevalence of use of chemopreventive agents for primary tumors was 20,598 (95 % CI, 518-114,864) for U.S. women aged 35-79 for tamoxifen. Prevalence was 96,890 (95 % CI, 41,277-192,391) for U.S. women aged 50-79 for raloxifene. Use of tamoxifen and raloxifene for prevention of primary breast cancers continues to be low. In 2010, women reporting medication use for breast cancer chemoprevention were primarily using the more recently FDA approved drug raloxifene. Multiple possible explanations for the low use exist, including lack of awareness and/or concern about side effects among primary care physicians and patients. © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC(outside the USA) 2012.
Mariotto A.B.,U.S. National Cancer Institute |
Robin Yabroff K.,U.S. National Cancer Institute |
Shao Y.,Management Information Services Inc. |
Feuer E.J.,U.S. National Cancer Institute |
Brown M.L.,U.S. National Cancer Institute
Journal of the National Cancer Institute | Year: 2011
Background Current estimates of the costs of cancer care in the United States are based on data from 2003 and earlier. However, incidence, survival, and practice patterns have been changing for the majority of cancers. Method sCancer prevalence was estimated and projected by phase of care (initial year following diagnosis, continuing, and last year of life) and tumor site for 13 cancers in men and 16 cancers in women through 2020. Cancer prevalence was calculated from cancer incidence and survival models estimated from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program data. Annualized net costs were estimated from recent SEER-Medicare linkage data, which included claims through 2006 among beneficiaries aged 65 years and older with a cancer diagnosis. Control subjects without cancer were identified from a 5% random sample of all Medicare beneficiaries residing in the SEER areas to adjust for expenditures not related to cancer. All cost estimates were adjusted to 2010 dollars. Different scenarios for assumptions about future trends in incidence, survival, and cost were assessed with sensitivity analysis. Results Assuming constant incidence, survival, and cost, we projected 13.8 and 18.1 million cancer survivors in 2010 and 2020, respectively, with associated costs of cancer care of 124.57 and 157.77 billion 2010 US dollars. This 27% increase in medical costs reflects US population changes only. The largest increases were in the continuing phase of care for prostate cancer (42%) and female breast cancer (32%). Projections of current trends in incidence (declining) and survival (increasing) had small effects on 2020 estimates. However, if costs of care increase annually by 2% in the initial and last year of life phases of care, the total cost in 2020 is projected to be $173 billion, which represents a 39% increase from 2010. Conclusion sThe national cost of cancer care is substantial and expected to increase because of population changes alone. Our findings have implications for policy makers in planning and allocation of resources. © 2010 The Author.
Yu M.,U.S. National Cancer Institute |
Tatalovich Z.,U.S. National Cancer Institute |
Gibson J.T.,Management Information Services Inc. |
Cronin K.A.,U.S. National Cancer Institute
Cancer Causes and Control | Year: 2014
Purpose: The lack of individual socioeconomic status (SES) information in cancer registry data necessitates the use of area-based measures to investigate health disparities. Concerns about confidentiality, however, prohibit publishing patients' residential locations at the subcounty level. We developed a census tract-based composite SES index to be released in place of individual census tracts to minimize the risk of disclosure. Methods: Two SES indices based on the measures identified in the literature were constructed using factor analysis. The analyses were repeated using the data from the 2000 decennial census and 2005-2009 American Community Survey to create the indices at two time points, which were linked to 2000-2009 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry data to estimate incidence and survival rates. Results: The two indices performed similarly in stratifying census tracts and detecting socioeconomic gradients in cancer incidence and survival. The gradient in the incidence is positive for breast and prostate, and negative for lung cancers, in all races, although the level varies. The positive gradient in survival is more salient for regional-staged breast, colorectal, and lung cancers. Conclusions: The census tract-based SES index provides a valuable tool for monitoring the disparities in cancer burdens while avoiding potential identity disclosure. This index, divided into tertiles and quintiles, is now available to the researchers on request. © 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.
Parsons H.M.,Management Information Services Inc.
Medical Care | Year: 2015
INTRODUCTION:: Many health services researchers are interested in assessing long term, individual physician treatment patterns, particularly for cancer care. In 2007, Medicare changed the physician identifier used on billed services from the Unique Physician Identification Number (UPIN) to the National Provider Identifier (NPI), precluding the ability to use Medicare claims data to evaluate individual physician treatment patterns across this transition period. METHODS:: Using the 2007–2008 carrier (physician) claims from the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) cancer registry-Medicare data and Medicare’s NPI and UPIN Directories, we created a crosswalk that paired physician NPIs included in SEER-Medicare data with UPINs. We evaluated the ability to identify an NPI-UPIN match by physician sex and specialty. RESULTS:: We identified 470,313 unique NPIs in the 2007–2008 SEER-Medicare carrier claims and found a UPIN match for 90.1% of these NPIs (n=423,842) based on 3 approaches: (1) NPI and UPIN coreported on the SEER-Medicare claims; (2) UPINs reported on the NPI Directory; or (3) a name match between the NPI and UPIN Directories. A total of 46.6% (n=219,315) of NPIs matched to the same UPIN across all 3 approaches, 34.1% (n=160,277) agreed across 2 approaches, and 9.4% (n=44,250) had a match identified by 1 approach only. NPIs were paired to UPINs less frequently for women and primary care physicians compared with other specialists. DISCUSSION:: National Cancer Institute has created a crosswalk resource available to researchers that links NPIs and UPINs based on the SEER-Medicare data. In addition, the documented process could be used to create other NPI-UPIN crosswalks using data beyond SEER-Medicare. Copyright © 2015 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Hirsch R.L.,Management Information Services Inc.
Journal of Fusion Energy | Year: 2016
A fundamental revamping of magnetic plasma fusion research is needed, because the current focus of world fusion research—the ITER-tokamak concept—is virtually certain to be a commercial failure. Towards that end, a number of technological considerations are described, believed important to successful fusion research. Beyond critical attention to plasma physics challenges, there must be a much sharper focus on electric utility acceptance criteria, which strongly reflect the public interest. While the ITER-tokamak experience has provided important understanding of a variety of technology issues, it is expensive and time-consuming. Engineers with commercial-world experience must become involved in future fusion research and must have a major influence on program decision-making and evaluation. Fusion engineers will have to be imaginative while being rooted in an understanding of fission reactor development, nuclear regulation, and electric utility realities, the proper consideration of which will impact fusion program success. Properly developed, fusion power holds great promise as an attractive electric power source for the long-term future. © 2016 Springer Science+Business Media New York
Katki H.A.,U.S. National Institutes of Health |
Kinney W.K.,Kaiser Permanente |
Fetterman B.,Kaiser Permanente |
Lorey T.,Kaiser Permanente |
And 6 more authors.
The Lancet Oncology | Year: 2011
Background: Concurrent testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) and cervical cytology (co-testing) is an approved alternative to cytology alone in women aged 30 years and older. We aimed to assess the safety in routine clinical practice of 3-year screening intervals for women testing negative for HPV with normal cytology and to assess if co-testing can identify women at high risk of cervical cancer or cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN3) or worse over 5 years. Methods: We assessed the 5-year cumulative incidence, starting in 2003-05, of cervical cancer and CIN3 or worse for 331 818 women aged 30 years and older who enrolled in co-testing at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (Berkeley, CA, USA) and had adequate enrolment co-test results. Follow-up continued until Dec 31, 2009. We defined cumulative incidence to include prevalence at enrolment and incidence after enrolment. Prevalence at enrolment was defined as the ratio of women diagnosed with each outcome on the biopsy visit immediately after their enrolment screening visit to the total enrolled women. At screening visits only HPV test and Pap smear samples were collected, and at biopsy visits colposcopically directed biopsies were taken. To estimate post-enrolment incidence, we used Weibull survival models. Findings: In 315 061 women negative by HPV testing, the 5-year cumulative incidence of cancer was 3·8 per 100 000 women per year, slightly higher than for the 306 969 who were both negative by HPV and Pap testing (3·2 per 100 000), and half the cancer risk of the 319 177 who were negative by Pap testing (7·5 per 100 000). 313 465 (99·5%) women negative by HPV testing had either normal cytology or equivocal abnormalities. Abnormal cytology greatly increased cumulative incidence of CIN3 or worse over 5 years for the 16 757 positive by HPV testing (12·1% vs 5·9%; p<0·0001). By contrast, although statistically significant, abnormal cytology did not increase 5-year risk of CIN3 or worse for women negative by HPV testing to a substantial level (0·86% vs 0·16%; p=0·004). 12 208 (73%) of the women positive by HPV testing had no cytological abnormality, and these women had 258 (35%) of 747 CIN3 or worse, 25 (29%) of 87 cancers, and 17 (63%) of 27 adenocarcinomas. Interpretation: For women aged 30 years and older in routine clinical practice who are negative by co-testing (both HPV and cytology), 3-year screening intervals were safe because a single negative test for HPV was sufficient to reassure against cervical cancer over 5 years. Incorporating HPV testing with cytology also resulted in earlier identification of women at high risk of cervical cancer, especially adenocarcinoma. Testing for HPV without adjunctive cytology might be sufficiently sensitive for primary screening for cervical cancer. Funding: Intramural Research Program of the US National Cancer Institute/NIH/DHHS, and the American Cancer Society. © 2011 Elsevier Ltd.
Siegel R.,Surveillance and Health Services Research |
Ma J.,Surveillance and Health Services Research |
Ma J.,Brigham and Women's Hospital |
Zou Z.,Management Information Services Inc. |
Jemal A.,Surveillance and Health Services Research
CA Cancer Journal for Clinicians | Year: 2014
Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths that will occur in the United States in the current year and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival. Incidence data were collected by the National Cancer Institute, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries and mortality data were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. A total of 1,665,540 new cancer cases and 585,720 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States in 2014. During the most recent 5 years for which there are data (2006-2010), delay-adjusted cancer incidence rates declined slightly in men (by 0.6% per year) and were stable in women, while cancer death rates decreased by 1.8% per year in men and by 1.4% per year in women. The combined cancer death rate (deaths per 100,000 population) has been continuously declining for 2 decades, from a peak of 215.1 in 1991 to 171.8 in 2010. This 20% decline translates to the avoidance of approximately 1,340,400 cancer deaths (952,700 among men and 387,700 among women) during this time period. The magnitude of the decline in cancer death rates from 1991 to 2010 varies substantially by age, race, and sex, ranging from no decline among white women aged 80 years and older to a 55% decline among black men aged 40 years to 49 years. Notably, black men experienced the largest drop within every 10-year age group. Further progress can be accelerated by applying existing cancer control knowledge across all segments of the population. CA Cancer J Clin 2014;64:9-29. © 2014 American Cancer Society, Inc. © 2014 American Cancer Society, Inc.