4.1 Article

Trends in the Incidence of 15 Common Cancers in Hong Kong, 1983-2008

Journal

ASIAN PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION
Volume 13, Issue 8, Pages 3911-3916

Publisher

ASIAN PACIFIC ORGANIZATION CANCER PREVENTION
DOI: 10.7314/APJCP.2012.13.8.3911

Keywords

Cancer; time trends; joinpoint analysis; age-standardized incidence rates; Hong Kong

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [91130009]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The objective of this study WAS to describe cancer incidence rates and trends among THE Hong Kong population for the period 1983-2008. Methods: Incident cases and population data from 1983 to 2008 were obtained from the Hong Kong Cancer Registry and the Census and Statistics Department, respectively. Age-standardized incidence rates (ASIR) were estimated and joinpoint regression was applied to detect significant changes in cancer morbidity. Results: For all cancers combined, the ASIR showed declining trends (1.37% in men, 0.94% in women), this also being the case for cancers of lung, liver, nasopharynx, stomach, bladder, oesophagus for both genders and cervix cancer for women. With cancer of thyroid, prostate, male colorectal, corpus uteri, ovary and female breast cancer an increase was evident throughout the period. The incidence for leukemia showed a stable trend since early 1990s, following an earlier decrease. Conclusions: Although overall cancer incidence rates and certain cancers showed declining trends, incidence trends for colorectal, thyroid and sex-related cancers continue to rise. These trends in cancer morbidity can be used as an important resource to plan and develop effective programs aimed at the control and prevention of the spread of cancer amongst the Hong Kong population. It is particularly useful in allowing projection of future burdens on the society with the increase in certain cancer incidences.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available