↓ Skip to main content

Age at cancer diagnosis, amenability to medical interventions, and racial/ethnic disparities in cancer mortality

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Causes & Control, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
Title
Age at cancer diagnosis, amenability to medical interventions, and racial/ethnic disparities in cancer mortality
Published in
Cancer Causes & Control, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10552-016-0729-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Parisa Tehranifar, Abhishek Goyal, Jo C. Phelan, Bruce G. Link, Yuyan Liao, Xiaozhou Fan, Manisha Desai, Mary Beth Terry

Abstract

Racial disparities in cancer mortality may be greater for cancers that are amenable to available early detection and treatment (amenability level). We investigated whether these patterns vary by age at cancer diagnosis. Using 5-year relative survival rates (5Y-RSR), we classified 51 cancer sites into least amenable, partly amenable, and mostly amenable cancers (<40 %, 40-69 %, ≥70 % 5-YRS, respectively). We examined whether racial disparities in mortality rates (African-Americans, Asian/Pacific Islanders, Hispanics, whites), as estimated through Cox regression models, were modified by age at diagnosis and amenability level in 516,939 cancer cases diagnosed in 1995-1999. As compared with whites, all racial minority groups experienced higher cancer mortality rates in the youngest age group of 20-34 years. African-Americans and Hispanics diagnosed with partly and mostly amenable cancers had higher mortality rates relative to whites with cancers of the same amenability levels; further, these differences decreased in magnitude or reversed in direction with increasing age. In contrast, the racial differences in mortality were smaller and remained fairly constant across age groups for least amenable cancers. For example, in the youngest (20-34) and oldest (80-99) age groups, the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for African-Americans versus whites with least amenable cancers were, respectively, 1.26 (95 % CI 1.02, 1.55) and 0.90 (95 % CI 0.85, 0.96), while the HRs for African-Americans versus whites with mostly amenable cancers were 2.77 (95 % CI 2.38, 3.22) and 1.07 (95 % CI 0.98, 1.17). Cancer survival disadvantage for racial minorities is larger in younger age groups for cancers that are more amenable to medical interventions.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 16%
Student > Master 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Other 2 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 15 48%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 13%
Social Sciences 3 10%
Computer Science 2 6%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 16 52%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 March 2016.
All research outputs
#21,358,731
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Causes & Control
#1,984
of 2,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#260,554
of 303,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Causes & Control
#22
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,187 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 303,646 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.