4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Has survival improved for nasopharyngeal carcinoma in the United States?

期刊

OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY
卷 132, 期 2, 页码 303-308

出版社

MOSBY, INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.otohns.2004.09.018

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the epidemiologic patterns and survival rates for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma over the last three decades. METHODS: The National Cancer Institute (NCI) Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program tumor registries were used to identify patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma in the United States from 1973 to 1999. Incidence and survival rates for each decade were then determined according to age, gender, race, histological type, and stage using the SEER statistical program. RESULTS. From 1973 to 1999, 4680 cases of patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma in the United States were sampled by the NCI /SEER database. Overall incidence rates for each decade essentially remained unchanged over time (0.7/100,000). Asians exhibited the highest incidence rates (3.0-4.2), followed by blacks (0.7-1.1) and then whites (0.4-0.7). In contrast, survival rates have gradually improved over time for all stages and histological types (35.7% 5-year survival in the 1970s vs. 44.1% in the 1980, and 51% in the 1990s). With respect to race, Asians demonstrated the best 5-year survival rate (62.9%) followed by whites (42.6%) and then blacks (36.2%). However, this may be due to histology, because Asians were also found to have a greater proportion of World Health Organization (WHO) type III cases (27.6%) in comparison to the other 2 groups (22.4% for blacks and 15% for whites). CONCLUSIONS: Although the incidence rates of nasopharyngeal carcinoma have remained essentially unchanged in the United States in the last 3 decades, survival rates for each stage and histological subtype have exhibited considerable improvement over time. The higher survival rates in Asians may be partially attributed to the more favorable histology (type III) often seen in this group. EBM rating: B-3.

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

4.5
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