scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

American Cancer Society

NonprofitAtlanta, Georgia, United States
About: American Cancer Society is a nonprofit organization based out in Atlanta, Georgia, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Cancer & Population. The organization has 1339 authors who have published 3700 publications receiving 688166 citations. The organization is also known as: American Cancer Society, ACS & American Society for the Control of Cancer.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The proportion of cancer deaths attributable to cigarette smoking varies substantially across states and is highest in the South, where up to 40% ofcancer deaths in men are caused by smoking.
Abstract: Importance State-specific information about the health burden of smoking is valuable because state-level initiatives are at the forefront of tobacco control. Smoking-attributable cancer mortality estimates are currently available nationally and by cancer, but not by state. Objective To calculate the proportion of cancer deaths among adults 35 years and older that were attributable to cigarette smoking in 2014 in each state and the District of Columbia. Design, Setting, and Participants The population-attributable fraction (PAF) of cancer deaths due to cigarette smoking was computed using relative risks for 12 smoking-related cancers (acute myeloid leukemia and cancers of the oral cavity and pharynx; esophagus; stomach; colorectum; liver; pancreas; larynx; trachea, lung, and bronchus; cervix uteri; kidney and renal pelvis; and urinary bladder) from large US prospective studies and state-specific smoking prevalence data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Main Outcomes and Measures The PAF of cancer deaths due to cigarette smoking in each US state and the District of Columbia. Results We estimate that at least 167 133 cancer deaths in the United States in 2014 (28.6% of all cancer deaths; 95% CI, 28.2%-28.8%) were attributable to cigarette smoking. Among men, the proportion of cancer deaths attributable to smoking ranged from a low of 21.8% in Utah (95% CI, 19.9%-23.5%) to a high of 39.5% in Arkansas (95% CI, 36.9%-41.7%), but was at least 30% in every state except Utah. Among women, the proportion ranged from 11.1% in Utah (95% CI, 9.6%-12.3%) to 29.0% in Kentucky (95% CI, 27.2%-30.7%) and was at least 20% in all states except Utah, California, and Hawaii. Nine of the top 10 ranked states for men and 6 of the top 10 ranked states for women were located in the South. In men, smoking explained nearly 40% of cancer deaths in the top 5 ranked states (Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Kentucky). In women, smoking explained more than 26% of all cancer deaths in the top 5 ranked states, which included 3 Southern states (Kentucky, Arkansas, and Tennessee), and 2 Western states (Alaska and Nevada). Conclusions and Relevance The proportion of cancer deaths attributable to cigarette smoking varies substantially across states and is highest in the South, where up to 40% of cancer deaths in men are caused by smoking. Increasing tobacco control funding, implementing innovative new strategies, and strengthening tobacco control policies and programs, federally and in all states and localities, might further increase smoking cessation, decrease initiation, and reduce the future burden of morbidity and mortality associated with smoking-related cancers.

102 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
03 May 2021
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined the association between race/ethnicity and rejection of COVID-19 vaccine trial participation and vaccine uptake and investigated whether racial/ethnic group-based medical mistrust is a potential mediator of this association.
Abstract: Importance: The impact of COVID-19 in the US has been far-reaching and devastating, especially in Black populations. Vaccination is a critical part of controlling community spread, but vaccine acceptance has varied, with some research reporting that Black individuals in the US are less willing to be vaccinated than other racial/ethnic groups. Medical mistrust informed by experiences of racism may be associated with this lower willingness. Objective: To examine the association between race/ethnicity and rejection of COVID-19 vaccine trial participation and vaccine uptake and to investigate whether racial/ethnic group-based medical mistrust is a potential mediator of this association. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional survey study was conducted from June to December 2020 using a convenience sample of 1835 adults aged 18 years or older residing in Michigan. Participants were recruited through community-based organizations and hospital-academic networks. Main Outcomes and Measures: Separate items assessed whether respondents, if asked, would agree to participate in a research study to test a COVID-19 vaccine or to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Participants also completed the suspicion subscale of the Group-Based Medical Mistrust Scale. Results: Of the 1835 participants, 1455 (79%) were women, 361 (20%) men, and 19 (1%) other gender. The mean (SD) age was 49.4 (17.9) years, and 394 participants (21%) identified as Black individuals. Overall, 1376 participants (75%) reported low willingness to participate in vaccine trials, and 945 (52%) reported low willingness to be vaccinated. Black participants reported the highest medical mistrust scores (mean [SD], 2.35 [0.96]) compared with other racial/ethnic groups (mean [SD] for the total sample, 1.83 [0.91]). Analysis of path models revealed significantly greater vaccine trial and vaccine uptake rejection among Black participants (vaccine trial: B [SE], 0.51 [0.08]; vaccine uptake: B [SE], 0.51 [0.08]; both P < .001) compared with the overall mean rejection. The association was partially mediated by medical mistrust among Black participants (vaccine trial: B [SE], 0.04 [0.01]; P = .003; vaccine uptake: B [SE], 0.07 [0.02]; P < .001) and White participants (vaccine trial: B [SE], -0.06 [0.02]; P = .001; vaccine uptake: B [SE], -0.10 [0.02]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of US adults, racial/ethnic group-based medical mistrust partially mediated the association between individuals identifying as Black and low rates of acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine trial participation and actual vaccination. The findings suggest that partnerships between health care and other sectors to build trust and promote vaccination may benefit from socially and culturally responsive strategies that acknowledge and address racial/ethnic health care disparities and historical and contemporary experiences of racism.

102 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Overall, no significant increase in risk was observed, but a small effect among heavy drinkers cannot be ruled out, and associations were noted for wine or beer intake.
Abstract: The literature has consistently reported no association between low to moderate alcohol consumption and pancreatic cancer; however, a few studies have shown that high levels of intake may increase risk. Most single studies have limited power to detect associations even in the highest alcohol intake categories or to examine associations by alcohol type. We analyzed these associations using 1,530 pancreatic cancer cases and 1,530 controls from the Pancreatic Cancer Cohort Consortium (PanScan) nested case-control study. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated using unconditional logistic regression, adjusting for potential confounders. We observed no significant overall association between total alcohol (ethanol) intake and pancreatic cancer risk (OR = 1.38, 95% CI = 0.86-2.23, for 60 or more g/day vs. >0 to <5 g/day). A statistically significant increase in risk was observed among men consuming 45 or more grams of alcohol from liquor per day (OR = 2.23, 95% CI = 1.02-4.87, compared to 0 g/day of alcohol from liquor, P-trend = 0.12), but not among women (OR = 1.35, 95% CI = 0.63-2.87, for 30 or more g/day of alcohol from liquor, compared to none). No associations were noted for wine or beer intake. Overall, no significant increase in risk was observed, but a small effect among heavy drinkers cannot be ruled out.

102 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Together, the mapping study and functional analyses implicate regulation of expression of MSMB as a plausible mechanism accounting for the association identified at this locus with prostate cancer risk.
Abstract: Two recent genome-wide association studies have independently identified a prostate cancer susceptibility locus on chromosome 10q11.2. The most significant single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) marker reported, rs10993994, is 57 bp centromeric of the first exon of the MSMB gene, which encodes β-microseminoprotein (prostatic secretory protein 94). In this study, a fine-mapping analysis using HapMap SNPs was conducted across a ≈65-kb region (chr10: 51168330–51234020) flanking rs10993994 with 13 tag SNPs in 6,118 prostate cancer cases and 6,105 controls of European origin from the Cancer Genetic Markers of Susceptibility (CGEMS) project. rs10993994 remained the most strongly associated marker with prostate cancer risk [P = 8.8 × 10−18; heterozygous odds ratio (OR) = 1.20, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11–1.30; homozygous OR = 1.64, 95% CI: 1.47–1.86 for the adjusted genotype test with 2 df]. In follow-up functional analyses, the T variant of rs10993994 significantly affected expression of in vitro luciferase reporter constructs. In electrophoretic mobility shift assays, the C allele of rs10993994 preferentially binds to the CREB transcription factor. Analysis of tumor cell lines with a CC or CT genotype revealed a high level of MSMB gene expression compared with cell lines with a TT genotype. These findings were specific to the alleles of rs10993994 and were not observed for other SNPs determined by sequence analysis of the proximal promoter. Together, our mapping study and functional analyses implicate regulation of expression of MSMB as a plausible mechanism accounting for the association identified at this locus. Further investigation is warranted to determine whether rs10993994 alone or in combination with additional variants contributes to prostate cancer susceptibility.

102 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Sonja I. Berndt1, Nicola J. Camp2, Christine F. Skibola3, Christine F. Skibola4, Joseph Vijai5, Zhaoming Wang1, Jian Gu6, Alexandra Nieters7, Rachel S. Kelly8, Rachel S. Kelly9, Karin E. Smedby10, Alain Monnereau11, Alain Monnereau12, Wendy Cozen13, Angela Cox14, Sophia S. Wang15, Qing Lan1, Lauren R. Teras16, Moara Machado17, Moara Machado1, Meredith Yeager1, Angela Brooks-Wilson18, Angela Brooks-Wilson19, Patricia Hartge1, Mark P. Purdue, Brenda M. Birmann9, Claire M. Vajdic20, Pierluigi Cocco21, Yawei Zhang22, Graham G. Giles23, Graham G. Giles24, Anne Zeleniuch-Jacquotte25, Charles E. Lawrence26, Rebecca Montalvan26, Laurie Burdett1, Amy Hutchinson1, Yuanqing Ye6, Timothy G. Call27, Tait D. Shanafelt27, Anne J. Novak27, Neil E. Kay27, Mark Liebow27, Julie M. Cunningham27, Cristine Allmer27, Henrik Hjalgrim28, Hans-Olov Adami10, Hans-Olov Adami9, Mads Melbye28, Mads Melbye29, Bengt Glimelius30, Ellen T. Chang29, Ellen T. Chang31, Martha Glenn2, Karen Curtin2, Lisa A. Cannon-Albright32, Lisa A. Cannon-Albright2, W. Ryan Diver16, Brian K. Link33, George J. Weiner33, Lucia Conde4, Lucia Conde3, Paige M. Bracci34, Jacques Riby4, Jacques Riby3, Donna K. Arnett4, Degui Zhi4, Justin M. Leach4, Elizabeth A. Holly34, Rebecca D. Jackson35, Lesley F. Tinker36, Yolanda Benavente37, Núria Sala37, Delphine Casabonne, Nikolaus Becker38, Paolo Boffetta39, Paul Brennan40, Lenka Foretova, Marc Maynadié41, James McKay40, Anthony Staines42, Kari G. Chaffee27, Sara J. Achenbach27, Celine M. Vachon27, Lynn R. Goldin1, Sara S. Strom6, Jose F. Leis27, J. Brice Weinberg43, Neil E. Caporaso1, Aaron D. Norman27, Anneclaire J. De Roos36, Anneclaire J. De Roos44, Lindsay M. Morton1, Richard K. Severson45, Elio Riboli8, Paolo Vineis8, Rudolph Kaaks38, Giovanna Masala, Elisabete Weiderpass, María Dolores Chirlaque, Roel Vermeulen46, Ruth C. Travis47, Melissa C. Southey24, Roger L. Milne23, Roger L. Milne24, Demetrius Albanes1, Jarmo Virtamo48, Stephanie J. Weinstein1, Jacqueline Clavel11, Jacqueline Clavel12, Tongzhang Zheng22, Theodore R. Holford22, Danylo J. Villano5, Ann Maria5, John J. Spinelli18, Randy D. Gascoyne18, Joseph M. Connors18, Kimberly A. Bertrand9, Edward Giovannucci9, Peter Kraft9, Anne Kricker49, Jenny Turner50, Maria Grazia Ennas21, Giovanni Maria Ferri51, Lucia Miligi, Liming Liang9, Baoshan Ma52, Baoshan Ma9, Jinyan Huang9, Simon Crouch53, Ju-Hyun Park54, Nilanjan Chatterjee1, Kari E. North55, John A. Snowden14, Josh Wright14, Joseph F. Fraumeni1, Kenneth Offit5, Xifeng Wu6, Silvia de Sanjosé37, James R. Cerhan27, Stephen J. Chanock1, Nathaniel Rothman1, Susan L. Slager27 
National Institutes of Health1, University of Utah2, University of California, Berkeley3, University of Alabama at Birmingham4, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center5, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center6, University of Freiburg7, Imperial College London8, Harvard University9, Karolinska Institutet10, Paris Descartes University11, Sorbonne12, University of Southern California13, University of Sheffield14, City of Hope National Medical Center15, American Cancer Society16, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais17, University of British Columbia18, Simon Fraser University19, University of New South Wales20, University of Cagliari21, Yale University22, Cancer Council Victoria23, University of Melbourne24, New York University25, Westat26, Mayo Clinic27, Statens Serum Institut28, Stanford University29, Uppsala University30, Exponent31, Veterans Health Administration32, University of Iowa33, University of California, San Francisco34, Ohio State University35, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center36, University of Barcelona37, German Cancer Research Center38, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai39, International Agency for Research on Cancer40, University of Burgundy41, Dublin City University42, Duke University43, Drexel University44, Wayne State University45, Utrecht University46, University of Oxford47, National Institute for Health and Welfare48, University of Sydney49, Macquarie University50, University of Bari51, Dalian Maritime University52, University of York53, Dongguk University54, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill55
TL;DR: Pathway analyses of new and known CLL loci consistently show a strong role for apoptosis, providing further evidence for the importance of this biological pathway in CLL susceptibility.
Abstract: Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is a common lymphoid malignancy with strong heritability. To further understand the genetic susceptibility for CLL and identify common loci associated with risk, we conducted a meta-analysis of four genome-wide association studies (GWAS) composed of 3,100 cases and 7,667 controls with follow-up replication in 1,958 cases and 5,530 controls. Here we report three new loci at 3p24.1 (rs9880772, EOMES, P=2.55 × 10(-11)), 6p25.2 (rs73718779, SERPINB6, P=1.97 × 10(-8)) and 3q28 (rs9815073, LPP, P=3.62 × 10(-8)), as well as a new independent SNP at the known 2q13 locus (rs9308731, BCL2L11, P=1.00 × 10(-11)) in the combined analysis. We find suggestive evidence (P<5 × 10(-7)) for two additional new loci at 4q24 (rs10028805, BANK1, P=7.19 × 10(-8)) and 3p22.2 (rs1274963, CSRNP1, P=2.12 × 10(-7)). Pathway analyses of new and known CLL loci consistently show a strong role for apoptosis, providing further evidence for the importance of this biological pathway in CLL susceptibility.

102 citations


Authors

Showing all 1345 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Walter C. Willett3342399413322
Meir J. Stampfer2771414283776
Frank B. Hu2501675253464
David J. Hunter2131836207050
Edward Giovannucci2061671179875
Irving L. Weissman2011141172504
Bernard Rosner1901162147661
Susan E. Hankinson15178988297
Paolo Boffetta148145593876
Jeffrey A. Bluestone14351577080
Richard D. Smith140118079758
Garth D. Illingworth13750561793
Brian E. Henderson13771269921
Ahmedin Jemal132500380474
Michael J. Thun12939279051
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
92.5K papers, 4.7M citations

89% related

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
65.3K papers, 4.4M citations

89% related

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
30.9K papers, 2.2M citations

88% related

Mayo Clinic
169.5K papers, 8.1M citations

86% related

University of California, San Francisco
186.2K papers, 12M citations

85% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
202312
20228
2021202
2020239
2019222
2018194