4.7 Article

Suicide and cancer: a gender-comparative study

期刊

ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY
卷 18, 期 2, 页码 381-387

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdl385

关键词

cancer; gender; suicide

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Persons with cancer commit suicide more frequently than those without, and males generally commit suicide more frequently than females. A population-based analysis of cancer patients was carried out here, comparing suicide risk between the genders, to elucidate the features specific to each gender. Patients and methods: A total of 1.3 million cancer cases from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program were analyzed. Cox proportional hazards models were fitted to personal, tumor-related, and social variates. Results: A total of 265 female and 1307 male suicides were enumerated, reflecting 0.04% and 0.19% from each gender, and providing an overall hazard ratio for male suicide of 6.2 [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.4-7.1]. Females with colorectal (P = 0.01) and cervical (P < 0.0001) cancers showed decreased suicide rates. Males with head and neck cancers (P < 0.0001) and myeloma (P = 0.02) had increased rates, whereas rates were decreased in males with lung cancer (P = 0.01), liver (P = 0.01), brain tumors (P = 0.04), and leukemia (P = 0.007). The hazard ratio associated for male suicide with distant metastasis was 2.84 (95% CI 2.49-3.24); for married status, 0.46 (95% CI 0.39-0.54); and for African-American ancestry, 0.24 (95% CI 0.17-0.34)-comparable ratios were seen here for female suicides. In head and neck cancers, with both genders analyzed together, the suicide hazard was increased if surgery was contraindicated (3.0, 95% CI 1.3-6.8), but not if refused. Conclusions: The high-risk patient was male, with head and neck cancer or myeloma, advanced disease, little social or cultural support, and limited treatment options. Oncologists and allied health professionals should be aware of the potential for suicide in cancer patients and their associated risk factors.

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