Dataset Information

Cancer rates not explained by smoking: a county-level analysis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Debates over the importance of "lifestyle" versus "environment" contributions to cancer have been going on for over 40?years. While it is clear that cigarette smoking is the most significant cancer risk factor, the contributions of occupational and environmental carcinogens in air, water and food remain controversial. In practice, most cancer prevention messaging focuses on reducing cigarette smoking and changing other personal behaviors with little mention of environmental chemicals, despite widespread exposure to many known carcinogens. To inform decision-making on cancer prevention priorities, we evaluated the potential impact of smoking cessation on cancer rates. METHODS:Using cancer incidence data from 612 counties in the SEER database, and county-level smoking prevalences, we investigated the impact of smoking cessation on incidence for 12 smoking-related cancer types, 2006-2016. A multilevel mixed-effects regression model quantified the association between county-level smoking prevalence and cancer incidence, adjusting for age, gender and variability over time and among counties. We simulated complete smoking cessation and estimated the effects on county-level cancer rates. RESULTS:Regression models showed the expected strong association between smoking prevalence and cancer incidence. Simulating complete smoking cessation, the incidence of the 12 smoking-related cancer types fell by 39.8% (54.9% for airways cancers; 28.9% for non-airways cancers). And, while the actual rates of smoking-related cancers from 2006 to 2016 declined (annual percent change (APC)?=?-?0.8, 95% CI?=?-?1.0 to -?0.5%), under the scenario of smoking elimination, the trend in cancer incidence at these sites was not declining (APC?=?-?0.1, 95% CI?=?-?0.4 to +?0.1%). Not all counties were predicted to benefit equally from smoking elimination, and cancer rates would fall less than 10% in some counties. CONCLUSIONS:Smoking prevention has produced dramatic reductions in cancer in the US for 12 major types. However, we estimate that eliminating smoking completely would not affect about 60% of cancer cases of the 12 smoking-related types, leaving no improvement in the incidence trend from 2006 to 2016. We conclude that cancer prevention strategies should focus not only on lifestyle changes but also the likely contributions of the full range of risk factors, including environmental/occupational carcinogens.

SUBMITTER: Myers DJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7276087 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cancer rates not explained by smoking: a county-level analysis.

Myers Douglas J DJ Hoppin Polly P Jacobs Molly M Clapp Richard R Kriebel David D

Environmental health : a global access science source 20200606 1

<h4>Background</h4>Debates over the importance of "lifestyle" versus "environment" contributions to cancer have been going on for over 40 years. While it is clear that cigarette smoking is the most significant cancer risk factor, the contributions of occupational and environmental carcinogens in air, water and food remain controversial. In practice, most cancer prevention messaging focuses on reducing cigarette smoking and changing other personal behaviors with little mention of environmental ch ...[more]

PMID: 32505184

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceHealth departments can be grouped together based on sociodemographic characteristics of the population served. Comparisons within these groups can then help with monitoring and improving the health of their populations.ObjectiveTo compare county-level percentile rankings on outcomes of smoking, motor vehicle crash deaths, and obesity within sociodemographic peer clusters vs nationwide rankings.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional, population-based study of demographic and health data from the 2014 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and the 2016 Robert Wood Johnson Foundation County Health Rankings data set was conducted at 3139 of 3143 US counties and county-equivalents. Four locations were excluded due to incomplete data. Data analysis was conducted between January and August 2017.ExposuresRandom forest algorithms were used to identify sociodemographic characteristics most associated with the outcomes of interest. These characteristics were race and ethnicity, educational attainment, age, marital status, employment status, sex, and health insurance status. k-means clustering was used to cluster counties based on these sociodemographic characteristics and the percentage of the county classified as rural.Main outcomes and measuresCounty-level smoking prevalence, motor vehicle crash death rate, and obesity prevalence. County percentile rankings on the outcomes of interest were compared in the national context and the within-cluster context.ResultsA total of 318?856?967 individuals (mean [SD] individuals per county, 101?579.2 [326?315]; 161?911?910 women [50.8%]) were represented by the 3139 counties used in this analysis. Eight distinct sociodemographic clusters throughout the United States were found. Cluster-specific percentile rankings for both smoking prevalence and motor vehicle crash death rates improved more than 70 percentile points for several counties in the rural, American Indian cluster compared with the nationwide percentiles. Conversely, the young, urban, middle to high socioeconomic status cluster included counties with cluster-specific percentile rankings that declined by 60 percentile points or more compared with the nationwide rankings for all 3 outcomes of interest.Conclusions and relevanceComparing county health outcomes on a nationwide or statewide basis fails to adequately account for sociodemographic context. Clustering counties by sociodemographic factors related to the outcome of interest allows a better understanding of other factors that may be shaping the prevalence of health outcomes. These groupings may also aid learning exchange.

Project description:ImportancePreterm birth is a leading cause of preventable neonatal morbidity and mortality. Preterm birth rates at the national level may mask important geographic variation in rates and trends at the county level.ObjectiveTo estimate age-standardized preterm birth rates by US county from 2007 to 2019.Design, setting, and participantsThis serial cross-sectional study used data from the National Center for Health Statistics composed of all live births in the US between 2007 and 2019. Data analyses were performed between March 22, 2022, and September 29, 2022.Main outcomes and measuresAge-standardized preterm birth (<37 weeks' gestation) and secondarily early preterm birth (<34 weeks' gestation) rates by county and year calculated with a validated small area estimation model (hierarchical bayesian spatiotemporal model) and percent change in preterm birth rates using log-linear regression models.ResultsBetween 2007 and 2019, there were 51 044 482 live births in 2383 counties. In 2007, the national age-standardized preterm birth rate was 12.6 (95% CI, 12.6-12.7) per 100 live births. Preterm birth rates varied significantly among counties, with an absolute difference between the 90th and 10th percentile counties of 6.4 (95% CI, 6.2-6.7). The gap between the highest and lowest counties for preterm births was 20.7 per 100 live births in 2007. Several counties in the Southeast consistently had the highest preterm birth rates compared with counties in California and New England, which had the lowest preterm birth rates. Although there was no statistically significant change in preterm birth rates between 2007 and 2019 at the national level (percent change, -5.0%; 95% CI, -10.7% to 0.9%), increases occurred in 15.4% (95% CI, 14.1%-16.9%) of counties. The absolute and relative geographic inequalities were similar across all maternal age groups. Higher quartile of the Social Vulnerability Index was associated with higher preterm birth rates (quartile 4 vs quartile 1 risk ratio, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.31-1.36), which persisted across the study period. Similar patterns were observed for early preterm birth rates.Conclusions and relevanceIn this serial cross-sectional study of county-level preterm and early preterm birth rates, substantial geographic disparities were observed, which were associated with place-based social disadvantage. Stability in aggregated rates of preterm birth at the national level masked increases in nearly 1 in 6 counties between 2007 and 2019.

Project description:BackgroundHousing instability is a key social determinant of health and has been linked to adverse short- and long-term health. Eviction reflects a severe form of housing instability and disproportionately affects minority and women residents in the USA; however, its relationship with mortality has not previously been described.ObjectiveTo evaluate the independent association of county-level eviction rates with all-cause mortality in the USA after adjustment for county demographic, socioeconomic, and health-related characteristics.DesignCross-sectional.ParticipantsSix hundred eighty-six US counties with available 2016 county-level eviction and mortality data.Exposure2016 US county-level eviction rate.Outcome2016 US county-level age-adjusted all-cause mortality.Key resultsAmong 686 counties (66.1 million residents, 50.5% [49.7-51.2] women, 2% [0.5-11.1] Black race) with available eviction and mortality data in 2016, we observed a significant and graded relationship between county-level eviction rate and all-cause mortality. Counties in the highest eviction tertile demonstrated a greater proportion of residents of Black race and women and a higher prevalence of poverty and comorbid health conditions. After adjustment for county-level sociodemographic traits and prevalent comorbid health conditions, age-adjusted all-cause mortality was highest among counties in the highest eviction tertile (Tertile 3 vs 1 (per 100,000 people) 33.57: 95% CI: 10.5-56.6 p=.004). Consistent results were observed in continuous analysis of eviction, with all-cause mortality increasing by 9.32 deaths per 100,000 people (4.77, 13.89, p<.0001) for every 1% increase in eviction rates. Significant interaction in the relationship between eviction and all-cause mortality was observed by the proportion of Black and women residents.ConclusionsIn this cross-sectional analysis, county-level eviction rates were significantly associated with all-cause mortality with the strongest effects observed among counties with the highest proportion of Black and women residents. State and federal protections from evictions may help to reduce the health consequences of housing instability and address disparities in health outcomes.

Dataset Information

Cancer rates not explained by smoking: a county-level analysis.

Publications

Cancer rates not explained by smoking: a county-level analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets