Cancer morbidity trends and regional differences in England-A Bayesian analysis.

Reliable modelling of the dynamics of cancer morbidity risk is important, not least due to its significant impact on healthcare and related policies. We identify morbidity trends and regional differences in England for all-cancer and type-specific incidence between 1981 and 2016. We use Bayesian mod...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ayşe Arık, Erengul Dodd, George Streftaris
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2020-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232844
id doaj-6051133ebcaf4095a0267bb20a232285
record_format Article
spelling doaj-6051133ebcaf4095a0267bb20a2322852021-03-03T21:47:04ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032020-01-01155e023284410.1371/journal.pone.0232844Cancer morbidity trends and regional differences in England-A Bayesian analysis.Ayşe ArıkErengul DoddGeorge StreftarisReliable modelling of the dynamics of cancer morbidity risk is important, not least due to its significant impact on healthcare and related policies. We identify morbidity trends and regional differences in England for all-cancer and type-specific incidence between 1981 and 2016. We use Bayesian modelling to estimate cancer morbidity incidence at various age, year, gender, and region levels. Our analysis shows increasing trends in most rates and marked regional variations that also appear to intensify through time in most cases. All-cancer rates have increased significantly, with the highest increase in East, North West and North East. The absolute difference between the rates in the highest- and lowest-incidence region, per 100,000 people, has widened from 39 (95% CI 33-45) to 86 (78-94) for females, and from 94 (85-104) to 116 (105-127) for males. Lung cancer incidence for females has shown the highest increase in Yorkshire and the Humber, while for males it has declined in all regions with the highest decrease in London. The gap between the highest- and lowest-incidence region for females has widened from 47 (42-51) to 94 (88-100). Temporal change in in bowel cancer risk is less manifested, with regional heterogeneity also declining. Prostate cancer incidence has increased with the highest increase in London, and the regional gap has expanded from 33 (30-36) to 76 (69-83). For breast cancer incidence the highest increase has occurred in North East, while the regional variation shows a less discernible increase. The analysis reveals that there are important regional differences in the incidence of all-type and type-specific cancers, and that most of these regional differences become more pronounced over time. A significant increase in regional variation has been demonstrated for most types of cancer examined here, except for bowel cancer where differences have narrowed.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232844
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Ayşe Arık
Erengul Dodd
George Streftaris
spellingShingle Ayşe Arık
Erengul Dodd
George Streftaris
Cancer morbidity trends and regional differences in England-A Bayesian analysis.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Ayşe Arık
Erengul Dodd
George Streftaris
author_sort Ayşe Arık
title Cancer morbidity trends and regional differences in England-A Bayesian analysis.
title_short Cancer morbidity trends and regional differences in England-A Bayesian analysis.
title_full Cancer morbidity trends and regional differences in England-A Bayesian analysis.
title_fullStr Cancer morbidity trends and regional differences in England-A Bayesian analysis.
title_full_unstemmed Cancer morbidity trends and regional differences in England-A Bayesian analysis.
title_sort cancer morbidity trends and regional differences in england-a bayesian analysis.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2020-01-01
description Reliable modelling of the dynamics of cancer morbidity risk is important, not least due to its significant impact on healthcare and related policies. We identify morbidity trends and regional differences in England for all-cancer and type-specific incidence between 1981 and 2016. We use Bayesian modelling to estimate cancer morbidity incidence at various age, year, gender, and region levels. Our analysis shows increasing trends in most rates and marked regional variations that also appear to intensify through time in most cases. All-cancer rates have increased significantly, with the highest increase in East, North West and North East. The absolute difference between the rates in the highest- and lowest-incidence region, per 100,000 people, has widened from 39 (95% CI 33-45) to 86 (78-94) for females, and from 94 (85-104) to 116 (105-127) for males. Lung cancer incidence for females has shown the highest increase in Yorkshire and the Humber, while for males it has declined in all regions with the highest decrease in London. The gap between the highest- and lowest-incidence region for females has widened from 47 (42-51) to 94 (88-100). Temporal change in in bowel cancer risk is less manifested, with regional heterogeneity also declining. Prostate cancer incidence has increased with the highest increase in London, and the regional gap has expanded from 33 (30-36) to 76 (69-83). For breast cancer incidence the highest increase has occurred in North East, while the regional variation shows a less discernible increase. The analysis reveals that there are important regional differences in the incidence of all-type and type-specific cancers, and that most of these regional differences become more pronounced over time. A significant increase in regional variation has been demonstrated for most types of cancer examined here, except for bowel cancer where differences have narrowed.
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232844
work_keys_str_mv AT aysearık cancermorbiditytrendsandregionaldifferencesinenglandabayesiananalysis
AT erenguldodd cancermorbiditytrendsandregionaldifferencesinenglandabayesiananalysis
AT georgestreftaris cancermorbiditytrendsandregionaldifferencesinenglandabayesiananalysis
_version_ 1714815155709149184