The global burden of cancer continues to increase largely because of the aging and growth of the world population alongside an increasing adoption of cancer-causing behaviors, particularly smoking, in economically developing countries. Based on the GLOBOCAN 2008 estimates, about 12.7 million cancer cases and 7.6 million cancer deaths are estimated to have occurred in 2008; of these, 56% of the cases and 64% of the deaths occurred in the economically developing world. Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer death among females, accounting for 23% of the total cancer cases and 14% of the cancer deaths. Lung cancer is the leading cancer site in males, comprising 17% of the total new cancer cases and 23% of the total cancer deaths. Breast cancer is now also the leading cause of cancer death among females in economically developing countries, a shift from the previous decade during which the most common cause of cancer death was cervical cancer. Further, the mortality burden for lung cancer among females in developing countries is as high as the burden for cervical cancer, with each accounting for 11% of the total female cancer deaths. Although overall cancer incidence rates in the developing world are half those seen in the developed world in both sexes, the overall cancer mortality rates are generally similar. Cancer survival tends to be poorer in developing countries, most likely because of a combination of a late stage at diagnosis and limited access to timely and standard treatment. A substantial proportion of the worldwide burden of cancer could be prevented through the application of existing cancer control knowledge and by implementing programs for tobacco control, vaccination (for liver and cervical cancers), and early detection and treatment, as well as public health campaigns promoting physical activity and a healthier dietary intake. Clinicians, public health professionals, and policy makers can play an active role in accelerating the application of such interventions globally.

/pdf/global-cancer-statistics-49zjx478re.pdf

Global cancer statistics

Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths that will occur in the United States and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival. Incidence data, available through 2015, were collected by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program; the National Program of Cancer Registries; and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data, available through 2016, were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2019, 1,762,450 new cancer cases and 606,880 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. Over the past decade of data, the cancer incidence rate (2006-2015) was stable in women and declined by approximately 2% per year in men, whereas the cancer death rate (2007-2016) declined annually by 1.4% and 1.8%, respectively. The overall cancer death rate dropped continuously from 1991 to 2016 by a total of 27%, translating into approximately 2,629,200 fewer cancer deaths than would have been expected if death rates had remained at their peak. Although the racial gap in cancer mortality is slowly narrowing, socioeconomic inequalities are widening, with the most notable gaps for the most preventable cancers. For example, compared with the most affluent counties, mortality rates in the poorest counties were 2-fold higher for cervical cancer and 40% higher for male lung and liver cancers during 2012-2016. Some states are home to both the wealthiest and the poorest counties, suggesting the opportunity for more equitable dissemination of effective cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment strategies. A broader application of existing cancer control knowledge with an emphasis on disadvantaged groups would undoubtedly accelerate progress against cancer.

https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.3322/caac.21551

Cancer statistics, 2019.

Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths that will occur in the United States and compiles the most recent data on population-based cancer occurrence. Incidence data (through 2016) were collected by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program; the National Program of Cancer Registries; and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data (through 2017) were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2020, 1,806,590 new cancer cases and 606,520 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. The cancer death rate rose until 1991, then fell continuously through 2017, resulting in an overall decline of 29% that translates into an estimated 2.9 million fewer cancer deaths than would have occurred if peak rates had persisted. This progress is driven by long-term declines in death rates for the 4 leading cancers (lung, colorectal, breast, prostate); however, over the past decade (2008-2017), reductions slowed for female breast and colorectal cancers, and halted for prostate cancer. In contrast, declines accelerated for lung cancer, from 3% annually during 2008 through 2013 to 5% during 2013 through 2017 in men and from 2% to almost 4% in women, spurring the largest ever single-year drop in overall cancer mortality of 2.2% from 2016 to 2017. Yet lung cancer still caused more deaths in 2017 than breast, prostate, colorectal, and brain cancers combined. Recent mortality declines were also dramatic for melanoma of the skin in the wake of US Food and Drug Administration approval of new therapies for metastatic disease, escalating to 7% annually during 2013 through 2017 from 1% during 2006 through 2010 in men and women aged 50 to 64 years and from 2% to 3% in those aged 20 to 49 years; annual declines of 5% to 6% in individuals aged 65 years and older are particularly striking because rates in this age group were increasing prior to 2013. It is also notable that long-term rapid increases in liver cancer mortality have attenuated in women and stabilized in men. In summary, slowing momentum for some cancers amenable to early detection is juxtaposed with notable gains for other common cancers.

https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.21590

Cancer statistics, 2020.

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 (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results [SEER] Program), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (National Program of Cancer Registries), and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2016, 1,685,210 new cancer cases and 595,690 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. Overall cancer incidence trends (13 oldest SEER registries) are stable in women, but declining by 3.1% per year in men (from 2009-2012), much of which is because of recent rapid declines in prostate cancer diagnoses. The cancer death rate has dropped by 23% since 1991, translating to more than 1.7 million deaths averted through 2012. Despite this progress, death rates are increasing for cancers of the liver, pancreas, and uterine corpus, and cancer is now the leading cause of death in 21 states, primarily due to exceptionally large reductions in death from heart disease. Among children and adolescents (aged birth-19 years), brain cancer has surpassed leukemia as the leading cause of cancer death because of the dramatic therapeutic advances against leukemia. Accelerating progress against cancer requires both increased national investment in cancer research and the application of existing cancer control knowledge across all segments of the population.

/pdf/cancer-statistics-2016-3jk3ht2xd2.pdf

Cancer statistics, 2016

Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths that will occur in the United States and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival. Incidence data, available through 2014, were collected by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program; the National Program of Cancer Registries; and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data, available through 2015, were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2018, 1,735,350 new cancer cases and 609,640 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. Over the past decade of data, the cancer incidence rate (2005-2014) was stable in women and declined by approximately 2% annually in men, while the cancer death rate (2006-2015) declined by about 1.5% annually in both men and women. The combined cancer death rate dropped continuously from 1991 to 2015 by a total of 26%, translating to approximately 2,378,600 fewer cancer deaths than would have been expected if death rates had remained at their peak. Of the 10 leading causes of death, only cancer declined from 2014 to 2015. In 2015, the cancer death rate was 14% higher in non-Hispanic blacks (NHBs) than non-Hispanic whites (NHWs) overall (death rate ratio [DRR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.13-1.15), but the racial disparity was much larger for individuals aged <65 years (DRR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.29-1.32) compared with those aged ≥65 years (DRR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.06-1.09) and varied substantially by state. For example, the cancer death rate was lower in NHBs than NHWs in Massachusetts for all ages and in New York for individuals aged ≥65 years, whereas for those aged <65 years, it was 3 times higher in NHBs in the District of Columbia (DRR, 2.89; 95% CI, 2.16-3.91) and about 50% higher in Wisconsin (DRR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.56-2.02), Kansas (DRR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.25-1.81), Louisiana (DRR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.38-1.60), Illinois (DRR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.39-1.57), and California (DRR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.38-1.54). Larger racial inequalities in young and middle-aged adults probably partly reflect less access to high-quality health care. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:7-30. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.21442

Cancer statistics, 2018

This paper is concerned with jobs for which nontrivial job-specific skills and task-specific knowledge evolve, in a learning by doing fashion, during the course of a worker's employment Otherwise qualified but inexperienced workers cannot be regarded as the equivalent of job incumbents under such circumstances The underlying factors that give rise to job idiosyncracies and the contractual properties of four alternative contracting modes for jobs of this kind are evaluated with the assistance of what we refer to as the "organizational failures framework" Individualistic contracting modes of the contingent claims contracting, spot contracting, and authority relation types are examined The implied demands on the rationality limits of human actors are shown to be severe and the associated costs of adapting to changing job and market circumstances are shown to be considerable for jobs of the idiosyncratic kind Collectivizing the employment agreement alleviates these conditions in that it serves to economize on transaction costs in both bounded rationality and attenuate opportunism The upshot is that "internal labor markets," which others have interpreted in mainly noneconomic terms, can be supplied with an efficiency rationale -- additionally if not instead

Understanding the employment relation: the analysis of idiosyncratic exchange

This paper investigates the economic implications of the hospital's internal organizations structure. It concludes: (1) The hospital is actually two separate firms -- a medical staff (or demand division) and an administration (or supply division). Each half of the organization has its own managers, objectives, pricing strategies and constraints. (2) Within this dual organization, the medical staff and administration have devised a complicated system of nonprice allocative rules. (3) This internal allocative scheme is subject to repeated breakdowns, especially when the medical staff's internal demands exceed the short-run capacity supplied by the administration. (4) Our current regulatory policy toward hospitals is almost exclusively directed at the supply side of the organization. Unless we revise our definition of "hospital" to include the doctor part of the firm, this policy is doomed to failure. (5) Ultimately, a rational public policy toward hospitals requires a change in the internal organization of the hospital itself.

The Internal Organization of Hospitals: Some Economic Implications

The purpose of this article is to define qualitative research, explain its design, explore its congruence with quantitative research, and provide examples of its applications in dietetics. Also, methods to ensure validity, reliability, and relevance are addressed. Readers will gain increased knowledge about qualitative research and greater competency in evaluating this type of research. The hope is that food and nutrition professionals will be inspired to conduct and publish qualitative research, adding to the body of peer-reviewed dietetics-related qualitative publications. This type of research must be methodically planned and implemented with attention to validity, reliability, and relevance. This rigorous approach boosts the probability that the research will add to the scientific literature and qualify for publication.

An Introduction to Qualitative Research for Food and Nutrition Professionals

This article defines qualitative research as applied in the field of dietetics to increase knowledge and competency in evaluating this type of research. The authors explain the design of qualitative studies, explore congruence with quantitative research, and provide examples of applications in dietetics, stressing the importance of ensuring validity and reliability of qualitative measures. The article aims to help food and nutrition professionals add to the body of peer-reviewed, dietetics-related qualitative publications.

We propose a class of Bayesian statistical methods for interspecies extrapolation of dose-response functions. The methods distinguish formally between the conventional sampling error within each dose-response experiment and a novel error of uncertain relevance between experiments. Through a system of hierarchical prior distributions similar to that of Lindley and Smith (1972), the dose-response data from many substances and species are used to estimate the interexperimental error. The data, the estimated error of interspecies extrapolation, and prior biological information on the relations between species or between substances each contribute to the posterior densities of human dose-response. We apply our methods to an illustrative problem in the estimation of human lung cancer risk from various environmental emissions.

Jeffrey E. Harris

Papers

Understanding the employment relation: the analysis of idiosyncratic exchange

The Internal Organization of Hospitals: Some Economic Implications

An Introduction to Qualitative Research for Food and Nutrition Professionals

An Introduction to Qualitative Research for Food and Nutrition Professionals

Bayes Methods for Combining the Results of Cancer Studies in Humans and other Species