scholarly journals Future incidence and mortality of colorectal carcinoma in the United States: an updated overview of risk factors and preventative measures

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hassam Ali
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Colorectal Carcinoma ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fiber Intake ◽  
Additional Risk ◽  
Screening Guidelines ◽  
Percent Change ◽  
Preventative Measures ◽  
Incidence And Mortality ◽  
Visualization Tools

According to the Global Cancer Observatory (GLOBOCAN) 2020, colorectal carcinoma (CRC) was the second leading cause of cancer death globally. Current literature utilizes reported databases such as Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) to better understand the epidemiology of CRC. The global cancer observatory’s “Cancer Tomorrow” data visualization tools was used to predict the future incidence and mortality of colorectal cancers until 2030 as a guided tool to look over ways to reduce incidence by controlling risk factors of CRC. The total number of CRC is expected to rise by 2030, with a percent change of 17.3%. The expected percent change in colon cancer is more than rectal cancer (19.8% vs. 11.6%). The estimated number of deaths secondary to CRC is expected to increase in 2030, an estimated percent change of 22.2%. The incidence and mortality rate was higher in men vs. women; however, the gap seems to be closing on trend analysis. Major risk factors for CRC include familial syndromes, family history, race, gender, obesity, diet, alcohol, and smoking. Risk can be reduced by exercise and dietary changes, fiber intake, vitamin D, calcium, and minerals. Individualized screening based on age, gender, and additional risk factors could be an option that needs further comparative data to propose a definitive benefit over established screening guidelines.

Characteristics of Hepatitis B virus induced Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Egyptian patients

QJM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 114 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eman Mahmoud Fathy Barakat ◽  
Khalid Mahmoud AbdAlaziz ◽  
Mohamed Mahmoud Mahmoud El Tabbakh ◽  
Mohamed Kamal Alden Ali
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Risk Factor ◽  
Hepatitis C ◽  
Hepatitis B ◽  
The United States ◽  
Age Difference ◽  
Co Morbidity ◽  
Incidence And Mortality

Abstract Background Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver malignancy and is a leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. In the United States, HCC is the ninth leading cause of cancer deaths. Despite advances in prevention techniques, screening, and new technologies in both diagnosis and treatment, incidence and mortality continue to rise. Cirrhosis remains the most important risk factor for the development of HCC regardless of etiology. Hepatitis B and C are independent risk factors for the development of cirrhosis. Alcohol consumption remains an important additional risk factor in the United States as alcohol abuse is five times higher than hepatitis C. Diagnosis is confirmed without pathologic confirmation. Screening includes both radiologic tests, such as ultrasound, computerized tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging, and serological markers such as αfetoprotein at 6-month interval. Aim To compare characteristics and behavior of Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in chronic HCV patients and HVB patients Patients and Methods The current study was conducted on patients with de HCC presented at HCC clinic, Tropical medicine department Ain Shams University Hospitals between December 2017 and D ecember 2018, aged (18-70 years old) . Results eline characteristics of study population shown in Table 1 at enrolment, including gender, Education status, co-morbidity, underlying presence or absence of cirrhosis, Child-Pugh class of patients infected with viral hepatitis, and alpha-fetoprotein levels. Male proportion observed to be predominant in both HCV (62%) and HBV (75.4%) infected HCC population. Overall prevalence of HCV and HBV in patients having HCC was 65.95% and 34.04%, respectively. Presence of underlying liver cirrhosis was more significantly associated with HCV seropositives as compared to HBV seropositive patients (p0.05). Table 2 shows comparison of means between HCV and HBV seropositive patients with HCC. In univariate analysis, mean age difference (11.6 years), and total bilirubin levels (-1.91mg/dl) were the only statistically significant observations noted among HCV-HCC group (p = 0.05) Conclusion Hepatocellular carcinoma is mainly caused by Hepatitis C and Hepatitis B viruses, but latter showed predominance, comparatively worldwide and correlated HBV directly as a cause of HCC rather than HCV whose relation with HCC is still unclear (Shepard et al., 2006; Di Bisceglie, 2009). Because of the geographical differences and risk factors, the epidemiological burden of HCV and HBV has been observed different in different areas of the world. In developing countries due to high burden of HCV infection as compared to HBV such as in Taiwan (HCV 17.0%, HBV 13.8%) (Kao et al., 2011), Guam (HCV 19.6%, HBV 18%) (Haddock et al., 2013), and Pakistan (HCV 4.8%, HBV 2.5%) (Rehman et al., 1996; Raza et al., 2007; Qureshi et al., 2010; Butt et al., 2012;) will possibly

Cervical Cancer Screening Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

2004 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
pp. 570 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Current Method ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cervical Cytology ◽  
Screening Guidelines ◽  
Incidence And Mortality ◽  
Recent Version ◽  
Cytology Screening

Despite a significant decrease in the incidence and mortality of cervical carcinoma in the United States, 10,520 women are expected to develop the disease in 2004, with 3,900 expected deaths. Because cervical cytology screening is the current method for early detection of this neoplasm, the purpose of the NCCN Cervical Cancer Screening Guidelines is to provide direction for the evaluation and management of cervical cytology. For the most recent version of the guidelines, please visit NCCN.org

Risk Factors and Individual Probabilities of Melanoma for Whites

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (12) ◽  
pp. 2669-2675 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eunyoung Cho ◽  
Bernard A. Rosner ◽  
Diane Feskanich ◽  
Graham A. Colditz
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Relative Risk ◽  
Risk Model ◽  
Fold Increase ◽  
The United States ◽  
Hair Color ◽  
Discriminatory Accuracy ◽  
Incidence And Mortality ◽  
History Of ◽  
Incident Cases

Purpose Incidence and mortality of cutaneous melanoma is rising rapidly in the United States; therefore, identifying risk factors for melanoma and integrating them into a clinical and population risk estimation tool may help guide prevention efforts and identify participants for preventive interventions. Methods We examined risk factors for melanoma in three large prospective studies of women and men. We observed 152,949 women and 25,206 men free of cancer at baseline for up to 14 years. Results A total of 535 incident cases of invasive melanoma (444 women and 91 men) were included in the analysis. We combined the three studies to examine risk factors and to build a risk model to calculate melanoma risk score. Older age, male sex, family history of melanoma, higher number of nevi, history of severe sunburn, and light hair color were each associated with significantly elevated risk of melanoma and were included in the final risk prediction. Participants at the highest decile of risk had a more than three-fold increase in risk of melanoma compared with those in the lowest decile (observed relative risk, 3.61; expected relative risk, 4.20). The measure of discriminatory accuracy as summarized by an age-and sex-adjusted concordance statistic of 0.62 (95% CI, 0.58 to 0.65) indicated that the model had reasonable ability to differentiate those who will develop melanoma and those who will remain free from the disease. Conclusion We identified several risk factors for melanoma and developed statistical models with adequate performance and discriminatory accuracy.

scholarly journals Colorectal cancer screening and prevention: A brief review of the current guidelines and modalities

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 097-103
Author(s):  
Ashan T Hatharasinghe ◽  
Ike R Ogbu ◽  
Abdul G Gheriani ◽  
George A Trad ◽  
Andre E Manov
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Occult Blood ◽  
Fecal Occult Blood Testing ◽  
The United States ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Fecal Occult Blood ◽  
Fecal Occult ◽  
Preventative Measures ◽  
Screening And Prevention

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a frequently addressed topic in primary care. Recent studies have been published detailing modifiable risk factors for CRC, as well as preventative measures. Providers must be up to date on screening recommendations and modalities. Colonoscopy is the preferred method of screening for CRC, and the screening recommendations in the United States were recently updated in 2020. It is also common for the practitioner to encounter patients who refuse colonoscopy but are willing to undergo alternative methods of testing. The COVID pandemic has also placed a burden on hospital resources, and colonoscopy may not be logistically feasible in some healthcare settings. Therefore, awareness of the guidelines for the various alternative modalities, along with their respective guidelines for frequency of screening is critical. This article provides a brief review of the risk factors associated with colon cancer, the screening modalities (including colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, CT colonography, fecal immunohistochemical testing (FIT), guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing (gFOBT), multi target stool DNA testing (MTs-DNA), and others) and the most recent screening recommendations for the general population.

scholarly journals Article Commentary: A commentary on “Risk Factors for Renal Cell Cancer in a Japanese Population

2009 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. CMO.S2926
Author(s):  
Esther Uña Cidon
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Renal Cell Cancer ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Japanese Population ◽  
Clinical Medicine ◽  
Cell Cancer ◽  
Epidemiological Studies ◽  
Additional Risk ◽  
Incidence And Mortality ◽  
Different Populations

The well-written and researched article reported in Clinical Medicine: Oncology by Dr. Washio and Dr. Mori entitled “Risk factors for renal cell cancer in a Japanese population” 1 makes evident the differences in incidence and mortality rates from renal cell carcinoma (RCC) between different populations and highlights the relevance of carrying out epidemiological studies, investigating additional risk factors which may explain the differences.

Identification of osteoporosis treatment gaps

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (10) ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Christopher Hemmer ◽  
Karen Moore
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Bone Health ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Fragility Fractures ◽  
Osteoporosis Treatment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Osteoporosis Prevention ◽  
Screening Guidelines ◽  
Screening And Identification ◽  
History Of

Background/aims Osteoporosis is implicated in over 8.9 million fragility fractures worldwide with a cost in the United States of America of 19 billion dollars. The number of osteoporosis-related fractures and the associated human and financial costs are projected to continue to rise as the American population ages (Zeldow, 2018). Screening and identification of patients with decreased bone density can prevent or delay the onset of this insidious condition. This study was developed to evaluate the following research questions: 1. Which risk factors are most strongly associated with the completion of Dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) screening? 2. When patients are provided instruction on osteoporosis screening guidelines from a health care provider, how likely are they to comply with DXA screening? 3. Which healthcare providers are providing instruction on osteoporosis guidelines to patients? Methods A 22-question osteoporosis survey addressing history of fracture, modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors, and compliance with recommendations was developed by the authors and distributed to a sample of 270 patients presenting to medical offices during a 1-month period in 2018. Results It was found that 49.26% (n=133) of patients reported they received counseling regarding osteoporosis prevention while 50.74% (n=137) of patients reported that bone health was never addressed by any healthcare provider. Those healthcare providers that did discuss bone health with their patients were noted to most frequently practice in the primary care setting 30.7% (n=83). Other healthcare providers patients identified in the survey as discussing bone health were specialists in orthopaedics at 8.5% (n=23), obstetrics/gynecology 7% (n=19), rheumatology 2.6% (n=7), oncology 2.9% (n=8), and endocrinology 1% (n=3). The risk factors most strongly associated with the completion of DXA screening in this survey were loss of height, fracture after 50 years of age, and oral corticosteroid use. Conclusions Osteoporosis is considered a ‘silent disease’ that often goes unrecognised by providers and patients until after fracture occurs. This study highlights the need for providers to educate on bone health and to find better ways to ensure patient compliance.

Anticoagulation for mechanical aortic valve replacement: an international survey

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
S Gupta ◽  
E Belley-Cote ◽  
C McEwen ◽  
W Hou ◽  
J Eikelboom ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Bleeding Event ◽  
The United States ◽  
Usual Practice ◽  
Additional Risk ◽  
Mechanical Aortic Valve ◽  
Mechanical Valves ◽  
Esc Guidelines

Abstract Introduction Mechanical valves are preferred over biologic valves in younger patients because they are more durable but require long-term anticoagulation which increases the risk of bleeding. For patients with a mechanical aortic valve, the ACCP guidelines recommend a target INR of 2.5 (range 2.0–3.0) for all patients, whereas the ACC/AHA and ESC guidelines recommend a higher target for selected patients with additional risk factors for thromboembolism (TE). Data supporting the guideline recommendations are largely historical and of low quality. Purpose We surveyed physicians who manage anticoagulation for patient with mechanical heart valves to determine their usual practice, perceptions regarding guideline recommendations, and interest in participating in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing lower with higher INR targets in patients with a mechanical aortic valve. Methods A 33-question web-based survey was sent to 75 cardiologists, cardiac surgeons and thrombosis specialists at centres in Canada and internationally (western Europe, South America, and the United States) who participated in previous anticoagulation trials led by investigators at McMaster University. Results Of the 55 respondents (73.3% response rate), 77.8% worked in academic teaching hospitals. Respondents had been in practice for a mean of 23.6 years; 40.9% followed AHA/ACC guidelines, 34.1% followed the ACCP guidelines and 22.7% followed the ESC guidelines. In patients with a mechanical aortic valve and no additional TE risk factors, 80% of respondents targeted an INR of 2.5 (range 2.0–3.0); among patients with additional TE risk factors, 48% targeted an INR of 2.5 (range 2.0–3.0) and 44% targeted an INR of 3.0 (range 2.5–3.5). With respect to guidelines: 57.1% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that that the evidence for the guidelines was contemporary, 53.1% agreed or strongly agreed that the evidence was derived from patients with modern bi-leaflet mechanical valves, and 57.2% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the evidence was not of high quality. A majority of respondents (65.9%) reported that they would accept an increase in TE risk to reduce the risk of a major bleeding event; 86.4% are willing to randomize patients with a mechanical aortic valve to a target INR of 2.0 (range 1.5–2.5) if they had no risk factors for TE and 36.4% would randomize patients to a target INR of 2.0 with additional risk factors for TE. Conclusions Clinicians who participated in the survey followed different guidelines and employed different INR targets for patients with a mechanical aortic valve. A majority of respondents would be willing to randomize these patients to lower INR targets. Mechanical Aortic Valves and INR Targets Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals The Silent Pandemic: The Psychological Burden on Frontline Healthcare Workers during COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Luise J. Froessl ◽  
Yazan Abdeen
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Psychological Impact ◽  
High Stress ◽  
Psychological Burden ◽  
Additional Risk ◽  
Frontline Workers ◽  
Preventative Measures ◽  
Frontline Healthcare Workers

This narrative review explores the full scope of harmful psychological effects of the COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease of 2019) pandemic on FLHCWs (Frontline healthcare workers). Additionally, we highlight the risk factors for worse outcomes. A literature review identified 24 relevant papers included in this synthesis. The majority of studies reported a high number of mental health conditions in HCWs (Healthcare workers) overall. Working in the frontline setting was repeatedly identified as an independent risk factor for poorer mental health. Additional risk factors, such as gender, occupational pressure, and low level of support from hospital administration, family, and the community, were also commonly identified. In the past, defined interventions have been shown to mitigate the psychological impact of high-stress situations on frontline workers. This review is aimed at identifying individuals at higher risk to help effectively target preventative measures in future stress situations in our healthcare system.

scholarly journals Pancreatic Cancer Related Health Disparities: A Commentary

Cancers ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Scarton ◽  
Saunjoo Yoon ◽  
Sungho Oh ◽  
Edward Agyare ◽  
Jose Trevino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Racial Disparities ◽  
The United States ◽  
Racial Groups ◽  
Effective Strategies ◽  
Incidence And Mortality ◽  
High Incidence ◽  
Blacks And Whites ◽  
Diabetes And Obesity

We summarize the risk factors that may significantly contribute to racial disparities in pancreatic cancer, which is now the third leading cause of cancer deaths and projected to be second around 2030 in 12 years. For decades, the incidence rate of pancreatic cancer among Blacks has been 30% to 70% higher than other racial groups in the United States and the 5-year survival rate is approximately 5%. Diabetes and obesity have been identified as potentially predisposing factors to pancreatic cancer and both are more common among Blacks. Smoking continues to be one of the most important risk factors for pancreatic cancer and smoking rates are higher among Blacks compared to other racial groups. The overall risk of pancreatic cancer due to changes in DNA is thought to be the same for most racial groups; however, DNA methylation levels have been observed to be significantly different between Blacks and Whites. This finding may underlie the racial disparities in pancreatic cancer. Identification and prevention of these factors may be effective strategies to reduce the high incidence and mortality rates for pancreatic cancer among Blacks.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document