Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Population Health Metrics 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research

Methodological choices affect cancer incidence rates: a cohort study

Authors: Hannah L. Brooke, Mats Talbäck, Maria Feychting, Rickard Ljung

Published in: Population Health Metrics | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Incidence rates are fundamental to epidemiology, but their magnitude and interpretation depend on methodological choices. We aimed to examine the extent to which the definition of the study population affects cancer incidence rates.

Methods

All primary cancer diagnoses in Sweden between 1958 and 2010 were identified from the national Cancer Register. Age-standardized and age-specific incidence rates of 29 cancer subtypes between 2000 and 2010 were calculated using four definitions of the study population: persons resident in Sweden 1) based on general population statistics; 2) with no previous subtype-specific cancer diagnosis; 3) with no previous cancer diagnosis except non-melanoma skin cancer; and 4) with no previous cancer diagnosis of any type. We calculated absolute and relative differences between methods.

Results

Age-standardized incidence rates calculated using general population statistics ranged from 6% lower (prostate cancer, incidence rate difference: -13.5/100,000 person-years) to 8% higher (breast cancer in women, incidence rate difference: 10.5/100,000 person-years) than incidence rates based on individuals with no previous subtype-specific cancer diagnosis. Age-standardized incidence rates in persons with no previous cancer of any type were up to 10% lower (bladder cancer in women) than rates in those with no previous subtype-specific cancer diagnosis; however, absolute differences were <5/100,000 person-years for all cancer subtypes.

Conclusions

For some cancer subtypes incidence rates vary depending on the definition of the study population. For these subtypes, standardized incidence ratios calculated using general population statistics could be misleading. Moreover, etiological arguments should be used to inform methodological choices during study design.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Rothman KJ. Epidemiology: an introduction. Oxford University Press. 2012. Rothman KJ. Epidemiology: an introduction. Oxford University Press. 2012.
3.
go back to reference Forman D. International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization, International Association of Cancer Research. Cancer incidence in five continents: Volume X. IARC scientific publications no. 164. 2014. Forman D. International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization, International Association of Cancer Research. Cancer incidence in five continents: Volume X. IARC scientific publications no. 164. 2014.
4.
go back to reference Doubeni CA, Laiyemo AO, Major JM, et al. Socioeconomic status and the risk of colorectal cancer An Analysis of More Than a Half Million Adults in the National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study. Cancer. 2012;118(14):3636–44. doi:10.1002/Cncr.26677.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Doubeni CA, Laiyemo AO, Major JM, et al. Socioeconomic status and the risk of colorectal cancer An Analysis of More Than a Half Million Adults in the National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study. Cancer. 2012;118(14):3636–44. doi:10.​1002/​Cncr.​26677.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
6.
8.
17.
go back to reference Hulegardh E, Nilsson C, Lazarevic V, et al. Characterization and prognostic features of secondary acute myeloid leukemia in a population-based setting: a report from the Swedish Acute Leukemia Registry. Am J Hematol. 2015;90(3):208–14. doi:10.1002/ajh.23908.CrossRefPubMed Hulegardh E, Nilsson C, Lazarevic V, et al. Characterization and prognostic features of secondary acute myeloid leukemia in a population-based setting: a report from the Swedish Acute Leukemia Registry. Am J Hematol. 2015;90(3):208–14. doi:10.​1002/​ajh.​23908.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Methodological choices affect cancer incidence rates: a cohort study
Authors
Hannah L. Brooke
Mats Talbäck
Maria Feychting
Rickard Ljung
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Population Health Metrics / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1478-7954
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12963-017-0120-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Population Health Metrics 1/2017 Go to the issue