Socioeconomic environment and disparities in cancer survival for 19 solid tumor sites: An analysis of the French Network of Cancer Registries (FRANCIM) data

Social inequalities are concerning along the cancer continuum. In France, social gradient in health is particularly marked but little is known about social gradient in cancer survival. We aimed to investigate the influence of socioeconomic environment on cancer survival, for all cancers reported in the French Network of Cancer Registries. We analyzed 189,657 solid tumors diagnosed between 2006 and 2009, recorded in 18 registries. The European Deprivation Index (EDI), an ecological index measuring relative poverty in small geographic areas, assessed social environment. The EDI was categorized into quintiles of the national distribution. One- and five-year age-standardized net survival (ASNS) were estimated for each solid tumor site and deprivation quintile, among men and among women. We found that 5-year ASNS was lower among patients living in the most deprived areas compared to those living in the least deprived ones for 14/16 cancers among men and 16/18 cancers among women. The extent of cancer survival disparities according to deprivation varied substantially across the cancer sites. The reduction in ASNS between the least and the most deprived quintile reached 34% for liver cancer among men and 59% for bile duct cancer among women. For pancreas, stomach and esophagus cancer (among men), and ovary and stomach cancer (among women), deprivation gaps were larger at 1-year than 5-year survival. In conclusion, survival was worse in the most deprived areas for almost all cancers. Our results from population-based cancer registries data highlight the need for implementing actions to reduce social inequalities in cancer survival in France.     

Changes in cancer incidence attributable to tobacco smoking in Germany, 1999–2008

Tobacco smoking, a major cancer risk factor, is very common in Germany as in many other high‐income countries. Few studies have assessed the burden of tobacco‐associated cancer incidence in the German population. We calculated the proportion of cancers attributable to tobacco smoking to estimate the burden of tobacco‐associated cancer in 1999 and 2008. Smoking prevalence was determined from national surveys of a representative sample of the German population in 1998 and 2008–2011, and data on relative risks were obtained from meta‐analyses. Cancer incidence for the years 1999 and 2008 was estimated by the German Centre for Cancer Registry Data at the Robert Koch Institute. We estimate that 72,208 incident cancer cases were attributable to tobacco smoking in Germany in 2008, an increase of >6,200 cases over 1999 levels. Among the cases in 2008 were 55,057 cases among men (22.8% (95% CI, 21.3–24.1) of all new cases) and 17,151 cases among women (7.9% (95% CI, 7.21–8.68) of all new cases). The highest proportions attributable to smoking were estimated for cancer of the lung, larynx, pharynx and the lower urinary tract. Tobacco smoking is currently responsible for more than one in five cancer cases among men and nearly 1 in 12 among women. Considering the increasing trends in cancer incidence and, until very recently, rising prevalence of smoking among women, it can be expected that the number of tobacco‐attributable cancer cases will rise further.     

The population impact of familial cancer,a major cause of cancer

The population attributable fraction (PAF) defines the proportion of a disease that would be prevented if the exposure to a particular risk factor was avoided. Familial risk is a known risk factor for many cancers, but an unbiased estimation of the PAF for familial risk requires a large study population to include rare cancers. PAFs and their corresponding standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were calculated for familial relative risk among first‐degree relatives (FDRs) and second‐degree relatives (SDRs) diagnosed with the same (concordant) invasive or in situ cancers. Calculations were based on the Swedish Family‐Cancer Database considering 8,148,737 individuals. To assess environmental effects, PAFs were also calculated for concordant cancers among spouses. Almost all cancers showed a significant familial risk. The highest PAFs were found for the common cancers of the prostate (13.94%), breast (7.46%) and colorectum (6.78%) among the FDRs. In the FDRs, the overall PAF for any concordant cancer was 4.20%, but in the SDRs, it was only 0.34%. The overall PAFs for in situ cancers were 0.86% and 0.56% for the FDRs and SDRs, respectively. The overall independent familial PAF was 5.96% for the invasive and in situ cancers in the FDRs and SDRs. The cancers between spouses yielded an overall PAF of 0.14%. For esophageal cancer, the risk among spouses was higher than the familial risk. Our study shows that the overall familial PAF of 5.96%, although underestimated for sex‐specific cancers, ranks as the third most common population burden after tobacco smoking and unhealthy diet.     

Trends in cancer incidence by socioeconomic deprivation in Germany in 2007 to 2018: An ecological registry-based study

Age-standardized cancer incidence has decreased over the last years for many cancer sites in developed countries. Whether these trends led to narrowing or widening socioeconomic inequalities in cancer incidence is unknown. Using cancer registry data covering 48 million inhabitants in Germany, the ecological association between age-standardized total and site specific (colorectal, lung, prostate and breast) cancer incidence in 2007 to 2018 and a deprivation index on district level (aggregated to quintiles) was investigated. Incidence in the most and least deprived districts were compared using Poisson models. Average annual percentage changes (AAPCs) and differences in AAPCs between deprivation quintiles were assessed using Joinpoint regression analyses. Age-standardized incidence decreased strongly between 2007 and 2018 for total cancer and all cancer sites (except female lung cancer), irrespective of the level of deprivation. However, differences in the magnitude of trends across deprivation quintiles resulted in increasing inequalities over time for total cancer, colorectal and lung cancer. For total cancer, the incidence rate ratio between the most and least deprived quintile increased from 1.07 (95% confidence interval: 1.01-1.12) to 1.23 (1.12-1.32) in men and from 1.07 (1.01-1.13) to 1.20 (1.14-1.26) in women. Largest inequalities were observed for lung cancer with 82% (men) and 88% (women) higher incidence in the most vs the least deprived regions in 2018. The observed increase in inequalities in cancer incidence is in alignment with trends in inequalities in risk factor prevalence and partly utilization of screening. Intervention programs targeted at socioeconomically deprived and urban regions are highly needed.     

Socioeconomic Inequality in the Prevalence of Smoking and Smokeless Tobacco use in India

Background: Tobacco consumption has been identified as the single biggest cause of inequality in morbidityand mortality. Understanding pattern of socioeconomic equalities in tobacco consumption in India will help indesigning targeted public health control measures. Materials and Methods: Nationally representative data fromthe India Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS) conducted in 2009-2010 was analyzed. The survey providedinformation on 69,030 respondents aged 15 years and above. Data were analyzed according to regions forestimating prevalence of current tobacco consumption (both smoking and smokeless) across wealth quintiles.Multiple logistic regression analysis predicted the impact of socioeconomic determinants on both forms of currenttobacco consumption adjusting for other socio-demographic variables. Results: Trends of smoking and smokelesstobacco consumption across wealth quintiles were significant in different regions of India. Higher prevalenceof smoking and smokeless tobacco consumption was observed in the medium wealth quintiles. Risk of tobaccoconsumption among the poorest compared to the richest quintile was 1.6 times higher for smoking and 3.1 timeshigher for smokeless forms. Declining odds ratios of both forms of tobacco consumption with rising educationwere visible across regions. Poverty was a strong predictor in north and south Indian region for smoking and inall regions for smokeless tobacco use. Conclusions: Poverty and poor education are strong risk factors for bothforms of tobacco consumption in India. Public health policies, therefore, need to be targeted towards the poorand uneducated.     

Changing socioeconomic inequalities in cancer incidence and mortality: Cohort study with 54 million person‐years follow‐up 1981–2011

Cancer is increasingly responsible for the mortality gap between high and low socioeconomic position groups in high‐income countries. This study investigates which cancers are contributing more to socioeconomic gaps in mortality and how this changes over time.New Zealand census data from 1981, 1986, 1991, 1996, 2001 and 2006, were linked to three to five years of subsequent mortality and cancer registrations, resulting in 54 and 42 million years of follow‐up cancer incidence and mortality, respectively. Age‐ and ethnicity‐standardised cancer mortality rates and the slope index of inequality (SII) by income were calculated.The contribution of cancer to absolute inequalities (SII) in mortality increased from 16 to 27% for men and from 12 to 31% for women from 1981–84 to 2006–11, peaking in 1991–94 for men and in 1996–99 for women and then levelling off, parallel to peaks in lung cancer inequalities. Lung cancer was the largest driver of cancer inequality trends (49% of the cancer mortality gap in 1981–84 to 33% in 2006–11 for men and 32 to 33% for women) followed by colorectal cancer in men (2 to 11%) and breast cancer in women (declining from 44 to 13%). Women in the lowest income quintile experienced no decline in cancer mortality.The contribution of cancer to income inequalities in all‐cause mortality has expanded in this high‐income country. Action to address socioeconomic inequalities should prioritise equitable tobacco control, obesity control and improved access to cancer screening, early diagnosis and high quality treatment for those with the lowest incomes.     

Attributable causes of cancer in Japan in 2005--systematic assessment to estimate current burden of cancer attributable to known preventable risk factors in Japan

BackgroundTo contribute to evidence-based policy decision making for national cancer control, we conducted a systematic assessment to estimate the current burden of cancer attributable to known preventable risk factors in Japan in 2005.MethodsWe first estimated the population attributable fractions (PAFs) of each cancer attributable to known risk factors from relative risks derived primarily from Japanese pooled analyses and large-scale cohort studies and the prevalence of exposure in the period around 1990. Using nationwide vital statistics records and incidence estimates, we then estimated the attributable cancer incidence and mortality in 2005.ResultsIn 2005, ∼55% of cancer among men was attributable to preventable risk factors in Japan. The corresponding figure was lower among women, but preventable risk factors still accounted for nearly 30% of cancer. In men, tobacco smoking had the highest PAF (30% for incidence and 35% for mortality, respectively) followed by infectious agents (23% and 23%). In women, in contrast, infectious agents had the highest PAF (18% and 19% for incidence and mortality, respectively) followed by tobacco smoking (6% and 8%).ConclusionsIn Japan, tobacco smoking and infections are major causes of cancer. Further control of these factors will contribute to substantial reductions in cancer incidence and mortality in Japan.     

Socioeconomic inequalities in alcohol related cancer mortality among men: To what extent do they differ between Western European populations?

We aim to study socioeconomic inequalities in alcohol related cancers mortality [upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) (oral cavity, pharynx, larynx, oesophagus and liver)] in men and to investigate whether the contribution of these cancers to socioeconomic inequalities in cancer mortality differs within Western Europe. We used longitudinal mortality datasets, including causes of death. Data were collected during the 1990s among men aged 30-74 years in 13 European populations [Madrid, the Basque region, Barcelona, Turin, Switzerland (German and Latin part), France, Belgium (Walloon and Flemish part, Brussels), Norway, Sweden, Finland]. Socioeconomic status was measured using the educational level declared at the census at the beginning of the follow-up period. We conducted Poisson regression analyses and used both relative [Relative index of inequality (RII)] and absolute (mortality rates difference) measures of inequality. For UADT cancers, the RII's were above 3.5 in France, Switzerland (both parts) and Turin whereas for liver cancer they were the highest (around 2.5) in Madrid, France and Turin. The contribution of alcohol related cancer to socioeconomic inequalities in cancer mortality was 29-36% in France and the Spanish populations, 17-23% in Switzerland and Turin, and 5-15% in Belgium and the Nordic countries. We did not observe any correlation between mortality rates differences for lung and UADT cancers, confirming that the pattern found for UADT cancers is not only due to smoking. This study suggests that alcohol use substantially influences socioeconomic inequalities in male cancer mortality in France, Spain and Switzerland but not in the Nordic countries and nor in Belgium.     

Socioeconomic deprivation and cancer survival in Germany: An ecological analysis in 200 districts in Germany

Although socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival have been demonstrated both within and between countries, evidence on the variation of the inequalities over time past diagnosis is sparse. Furthermore, no comprehensive analysis of socioeconomic differences in cancer survival in Germany has been conducted. Therefore, we analyzed variations in cancer survival for patients diagnosed with one of the 25 most common cancer sites in 1997–2006 in ten population‐based cancer registries in Germany (covering 32 million inhabitants). Patients were assigned a socioeconomic status according to the district of residence at diagnosis. Period analysis was used to derive 3‐month, 5‐year and conditional 1‐year and 5‐year age‐standardized relative survival for 2002–2006 for each deprivation quintile in Germany. Relative survival of patients living in the most deprived district was compared to survival of patients living in all other districts by model‐based period analysis. For 21 of 25 cancer sites, 5‐year relative survival was lower in the most deprived districts than in all other districts combined. The median relative excess risk of death over the 25 cancer sites decreased from 1.24 in the first 3 months to 1.16 in the following 9 months to 1.08 in the following 4 years. Inequalities persisted after adjustment for stage. These major regional socioeconomic inequalities indicate a potential for improving cancer care and survival in Germany. Studies on individual‐level patient data with access to treatment information should be conducted to examine the reasons for these socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival in more detail.     

Estimating the Burden of Cancers Attributable to Smoking Using Disability Adjusted Life Years in Indonesia

Tobacco use is a well-established risk factor for many types of cancers. Recent data on selected cancer incidence and mortality related to smoking in the Indonesian population are provided in this study. Morbidity and mortality data were derived from GLOBOCAN 2012 and the population attributable fraction (PAF) was estimated using the standard methodology developed by the World Health Organization. Using these data, we calculated disability adjusted life year (DALY) values for smoking-related cancer. The DALY was estimated by summation of the years lived with disability (YLD) and years life lost due to premature death (YLL). The cancer cases related to smoking in Indonesia numbered 45,132, accounting for 35,580 cancer deaths. The morbidity and mortality of lung cancer can be considered as the highest priority in both men and women. Furthermore the greatest YLD due to smoking in Indonesian men and women were from pancreas and lung cancers. For YLL among men, the highest years lost were from lung and liver cancers. On the other hand, among women lung oral cavity and lip were most important. Based on the DALY indicator, burden priorities for Indonesian men were lung cancer (298,980), liver cancer (60,367), and nasopharynx (46,185), while among Indonesian women they were lung cancer (34,119), cervix uteri (9,213) and pancreas cancer (5,433). In total, Indonesian burden of cancers attributed to smoking was 638,682 DALY. This study provides evidence about the burden of cancers caused by smoking as a rational basis for initiating national tobacco control policies in Indonesia.     

The causes of cancer in France

Background: While external factors are responsible for manyhuman cancers, precise estimates of the contribution of knowncarcinogens to the cancer burden in a given population havebeen scarce. Methods: We estimated the proportion of cancer deaths whichoccurred in France in 2000 attributable to known risk factors,based on data on frequency of exposure around 1985. Results: In 2000, tobacco smoking was responsible for 23.9%of cancer deaths (33.4% in men and 9.6% in women), alcohol drinkingfor 6.9% (9.4% in men and 3.0% in women) and chronic infectionsfor 3.7%. Occupation is responsible for 3.7% of cancer deathsin men; lack of physical activity, overweight/obesity and useof exogenous hormones are responsible for 2%–3% of cancerdeaths in women. Other risk factors, including pollutants, areresponsible for <1% of cancer deaths. Thus, known risk factorsexplain 35.0% of cancer deaths, and 15.0% among never smokers. Conclusions: While cancer mortality is decreasing in France,known risk factors of cancer explain only a minority of cancers,with a predominant role of tobacco smoking. Key words: alcohol, epidemiology, lifestyle factors, smoking Received for publication June 19, 2008. Accepted for publication July 30, 2008.     

Burden of Cancers Related to Smoking among the Indonesian Population: Premature Mortality Costs and Years of Potential Life Lost

Background: As smoking is the leading preventable cause of multiple diseases and premature cancer deaths,estimating the burden of cancer attributable to smoking has become the standard in documenting the adverseimpact of smoking. In Indonesia, there is a dearth of studies assessing the economic costs of cancers related tosmoking. This study aimed to estimate indirect mortality costs of premature cancer deaths and years of potentiallife lost (YPLL) attributable to smoking among the Indonesian population. Materials and Methods: A prevalencebased method was employed. Using national data, we estimated smoking-attributable cancer mortality in 2013.Premature mortality costs and YPLL were estimated by calculating number of cancer deaths, life expectancy,annual income, and workforce participation rate. A human capital approach was used to calculate the presentvalue of lifetime earnings (PVLE). A discount rate of 3% was applied. Results: The study estimated that smokingattributable cancer mortality was 74,440 (30.6% of total cancer deaths), comprised of 95% deaths in men and 5%in women. Cancers attributed to smoking wereresponsible for 1,207,845 YPLL. Cancer mortality costs causedby smoking accounted for USD 1,309 million in 2013. Among all cancers, lung cancer is the leading cause ofdeath and economic burden. Conclusions: Cancers related to smoking pose an enormous economic burden inIndonesia. Therefore, tobacco control efforts need to be prioritized in order to prevent more losses to the nation.The data of this study are important for advocating national tobacco control policy.     

Smokeless tobacco‐associated cancers: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of Indian studies

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has concluded that there is sufficient evidence in humans for the carcinogenicity of smokeless tobacco (SLT) for mouth, oesophagus and pancreas, based largely on Western studies. We wanted to confirm this by conducting a systematic review using Indian studies because India faces the biggest brunt of SLT‐attributable health effects. A systematic search was conducted for published and unpublished studies. Two authors independently reviewed the studies and extracted data. Summary odds ratio (OR) for each cancer type was calculated using fixed and random effects model. The population attributable fraction (PAF) method was used to calculate the attributable burden of incident cases. A significant association was found for oral—5.55 (5.07, 6.07), pharyngeal—2.69 (2.28, 3.17), laryngeal—2.84 (2.18, 3.70), oesophageal—3.17 (2.76, 3.63) and stomach—1.26 (1.00, 1.60) cancers. But in random effects model, laryngeal—1.79 (0.70, 4.54) and stomach—1.31 (0.92, 1.87) cancers became non‐significantly associated. Gender‐wise analysis revealed that women had a higher risk (OR = 12.0 vs. 5.16) of oral but a lower risk (1.9 vs. 4.5) of oesophageal cancer compared with men. For oral cancer, studies that adjusted for smoking, alcohol and other factors reported a significantly lower OR compared with studies that adjusted for smoking only or smoking and alcohol only (3.9 vs. 8.4). The annual number of attributable cases was calculated as 49,192 (PAF = 60%) for mouth, 14,747 (51%) for pharynx, 11,825 (40%) for larynx, 14,780 (35%) for oesophagus and 3,101 (8%) for stomach.     

How many cancer cases and deaths are potentially preventable? Estimates for Australia in 2013

Cancer is a leading cause of disease burden in Australia, particularly fatal burden, accounting for an estimated thirty percent of deaths. Many cancers develop because of exposure to lifestyle and environmental factors that are potentially modifiable. We aimed to quantify the proportions and numbers of cancer deaths and cases in Australia in 2013 attributable to 20 modifiable factors in eight broad groupings that are established causes of cancer, namely: tobacco smoke (smoking and second‐hand), dietary factors (low intake of fruit, non‐starchy vegetables and dietary fibre; and high intake of red and processed meat), overweight/obesity, alcohol, physical inactivity, solar ultraviolet radiation, infections (seven agents), and reproductive factors (lack of breastfeeding, menopausal hormone therapy use, combined oral contraceptive use). We estimated population attributable fractions (PAF) using standard formulae incorporating exposure prevalence and relative risk data. Of all cancer deaths in Australia in 2013, approximately 38% overall (males 41%, females 34%) could be attributed to the factors assessed; the corresponding PAF for cancer cases was 33% (males 34%, females 32%). Tobacco smoke was the leading cause of cancer deaths and cases, with PAFs of 23 and 13%, respectively, followed by dietary factors (5% deaths/5% cases), overweight/obesity (5%/4%) and infections (5%/3%). Cancer sites with the highest numbers of potentially preventable deaths/cases were lung (n = 6,776/9,272), colorectum (n = 1,974/7,380) and cutaneous melanoma (n = 1,390/7,918). We estimate that about 16,700 cancer deaths and 41,200 cancer cases could be prevented in Australia each year if people's exposures to 20 causal factors were aligned with levels recommended to minimise cancer risk.     

Population attributable risk of tobacco and alcohol for upper aerodigestive tract cancer

Tobacco and alcohol are major risk factors for upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) cancer and significant variation is observed in UADT cancer rates across Europe. We have estimated the proportion of UADT cancer burden explained by tobacco and alcohol and how this varies with the incidence rates across Europe, cancer sub-site, gender and age. This should help estimate the minimum residual burden of other risk factors to UADT cancer, including human papillomavirus. We analysed 1981 UADT cancer cases and 1993 controls from the ARCAGE multicentre study. We estimated the population attributable risk (PAR) of tobacco alone, alcohol alone and their joint effect. Tobacco and alcohol together explained 73% of UADT cancer burden of which nearly 29% was explained by smoking alone, less than 1% due to alcohol on its own and 44% by the joint effect of tobacco and alcohol. Tobacco and alcohol together explained a larger proportion of hypopharyngeal/laryngeal cancer (PAR=85%) than oropharyngeal (PAR=74%), esophageal (PAR=67%) and oral cancer (PAR=61%). Tobacco and alcohol together explain only about half of the total UADT cancer burden among women. Geographically, tobacco and alcohol explained a larger proportion of UADT cancer in central (PAR=84%) than southern (PAR=72%) and western Europe (PAR=67%). While the majority of the UADT cancers in Europe are due to tobacco or the joint effect of tobacco and alcohol, our results support a significant role for other risk factors in particular, for oral and oropharyngeal cancers and also for UADT cancers in southern and western Europe.     

Attributable deaths of liver cancer in China

ObjectiveThere is little information about contributions of the well-known risk factors to the liver cancer burden. We conducted a comparative study to estimate the liver cancer burden attributable to major risk factors.MethodsLiver cancer deaths for adults were estimated from 978 county-level surveillance points in China in 2014. Risk factors were identified from the International Agency for Research on Cancer and the World Cancer Research Fund International. Population attributable fraction (PAF) by age, sex, and province was calculated using multiple formulas.ResultsIn total, 72.4% of liver cancer deaths could be attributable to the studied risk factors. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) was responsible for the largest fraction of liver cancer burden in both genders (PAF=55.6% in males, PAF=46.5% in females). PAFs for liver cancer burden attributable to smoking (15.7% vs. 4.8%), and alcohol drinking (10.3% vs. 1.6%) were significantly higher in males than in females. The burden of HBV-attributable deaths was the highest in Qinghai province. ConclusionsHBV still contributes to the majority of liver cancer burden than any other risk factors. Targeted preventive measures should be implemented based on the degree of contributions of risk factors to liver cancer deaths.     

Differences in site-specific cancer incidence by individual- and area-level income in Canada from 2006 to 2015

Income, a component of socioeconomic status, influences cancer risk as a social determinant of health. We evaluated the independent associations between individual- and area-level income and site-specific cancer incidence in Canada. We used data from the 2006 and 2011 Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohorts, which are probabilistically linked datasets constituted by 5.9 million and 6.5 million respondents of the 2006 Canadian long-form census and 2011 National Household Survey, respectively. Individuals were linked to the Canadian Cancer Registry through 2015. Individual-level income was derived using after-tax household income adjusted for household size. Annual tax return postal codes were used to assign area-level income quintiles to individuals for each year of follow-up. We calculated age-standardized incidence rates (ASIR) and rate ratios for cancers overall and by site. We conducted multivariable negative binomial regression to adjust these rates for other demographic and socioeconomic variables. Individuals of lower individual- and area-level income had higher ASIRs compared to those in the wealthiest income quintile for head and neck, oropharyngeal, esophageal, stomach, colorectal, anal, liver, pancreas, lung, cervical and kidney and renal pelvis cancers. Conversely, individuals of wealthier individual- and area-level income had higher ASIRs for melanoma, leukemia, Hodgkin's lymphoma, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, breast, uterine, prostate and testicular cancers. Most differences in site-specific incidence by income quintile remained after adjustment. Although Canada's publicly funded healthcare system provides universal coverage, inequalities in cancer incidence persist across individual- and area-level income gradients. Our estimates suggest that individual- and area-level income affect cancer incidence through independent mechanisms.     

Population attributable proportion and number of cancer cases attributed to potentially modifiable risk factors in Iran in 2020

In the current study, we aimed to calculate the fraction of cancer attributable to modifiable risk factors in Iran in 2020. Population attributable fractions (PAFs) were calculated for established cancer risk factors using three data sources: the national cancer incidence reports, relative risks extracted from global and national meta-analyses, and exposure prevalence from national/subnational population-based surveys. In addition to overall cancers, the PAFs were estimated separately for each cancer site among men and women. Overall, 32.6% of cancers in 2020 in Iran were attributable to known risk factors. The PAF in men (40.2%) was twice as high as in women (21.1%). Cigarette smoking (15.4%), being overweight (5.0%), opium use (3.9%) and H. pylori infection (3.8%) were the leading causes of cancers. For men, the highest PAFs belonged to cigarette smoking (26.3%), opium use (6.8%) and being overweight (3.1%), while for women, the highest PAFs belonged to being overweight (7.2%), H. pylori infection (2.7%) and cigarette smoking (2.7%). Among Iranian men and women, the PAFs of waterpipe smoking were 2% and 0.9%, respectively. A third of incident cancers in Iran are due to modifiable exposures, mainly cigarette smoking, being overweight, and H. pylori infection. Opium consumption and waterpipe smoking collectively accounted for 8.8% of cancer occurrence in men and 1.3% in women in Iran. These emerging risk factors should be taken into consideration in future PAF studies.     

Socioeconomic differences in selection for liver resection in metastatic colorectal cancer and the impact on survival

Background

Socioeconomic inequalities in colorectal cancer (CRC) survival are well recognised. The aim of this study was to describe the impact of socioeconomic deprivation on survival in patients with synchronous CRC liver-limited metastases, and to investigate if any survival inequalities are explained by differences in liver resection rates.