4.7 Article

Incidence and disease burden of prostate cancer from 1990 to 2017: Results from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017

期刊

CANCER
卷 126, 期 9, 页码 1969-1978

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32733

关键词

estimated annual percentage change (EAPC); global burden of disease; incidence; mortality; prostate cancer

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background The patterns of the incidence and mortality of prostate cancer (PC) have been changing over the years. In addition, the unclear etiology of PC necessitates further studies into the geographic distribution and age composition of patients with PC. This study was aimed at examining the patterns of the epidemiology of PC to help policymakers to allocate the limited resources of the health care system accordingly. Methods Annual case data and age-standardized rates (ASRs) were obtained for the incidence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) of PC according to age from 1990 to 2017 and for 21 regions, including 195 countries and territories. The estimated annual percentage changes (EAPCs) of ASRs were calculated to evaluate the incidence and mortality trends of PC. Results Worldwide, the age-standardized incidence rate (ASIR) of PC increased from 30.5 cases per 100,000 population in 1990 to 37.9 cases per 100,000 population in 2017 with an EAPC of 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49-0.7), whereas the mortality decreased with an EAPC of -0.73 (95% CI, -0.80 to -0.67). The ASIR was positively associated with the sociodemographic index (SDI) in most regions, and the increase in the ASIR was steeper with a higher SDI. The proportion of patients younger than 65 years increased from 23.6% in 1990 to 27.3% in 2017. Conclusions The incidence of PC has been increasing globally, whereas its mortality and DALYs have been decreasing. These trends are particularly significant in developed regions and vary across geographic regions. Adjustments to the medical strategy by governments and medical institutions are required.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据