4.3 Article

Spatial and Temporal Analysis of Lung Cancer in Shenzhen, 2008-2018

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18010026

Keywords

cancer registry; incidence rate; lung cancer; spatial autocorrelation; temporal trend

Funding

  1. Sanming Project of Medicine in Shenzhen [SZSM201911015]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province [2020A1515011478]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigated the temporal trend and spatial distribution of lung cancer incidence in Shenzhen from 2008 to 2018. The average crude incidence rate of lung cancer was 27.1 (1/100,000) with an increasing trend in adenocarcinoma in females. Spatial autocorrelation analysis identified high incidence rate clustering areas in Shenzhen.
Lung cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in China. The incidence trend and geographical distribution of lung cancer in southern China have not been reported. The present study explored the temporal trend and spatial distribution of lung cancer incidence in Shenzhen from 2008 to 2018. The lung cancer incidence data were obtained from the registered population in the Shenzhen Cancer Registry System between 2008 and 2018. The standardized incidence rates of lung cancer were analyzed by using the joinpoint regression model. The Moran's I method was used for spatial autocorrelation analysis and to further draw a spatial cluster map in Shenzhen. From 2008 to 2018, the average crude incidence rate of lung cancer was 27.1 (1/100,000), with an annual percentage change of 2.7% (p < 0.05). The largest average proportion of histological type of lung cancer was determined as adenocarcinoma (69.1%), and an increasing trend was observed in females, with an average annual percentage change of 14.7%. The spatial autocorrelation analysis indicated some sites in Shenzhen as a high incidence rate spatial clustering area. Understanding the incidence patterns of lung cancer is useful for monitoring and prevention.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available