Cancer Registry of Norway

IMPORTANCE: Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide. Current estimates on the burden of cancer are needed for cancer control planning. OBJECTIVE: To estimate mortality, incidence, years lived with disability (YLDs), years of life lost (YLLs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 32 cancers in 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2015. EVIDENCE REVIEW: Cancer mortality was estimated using vital registration system data, cancer registry incidence data (transformed to mortality estimates using separately estimated mortality to incidence [MI] ratios), and verbal autopsy data. Cancer incidence was calculated by dividing mortality estimates through the modeled MI ratios. To calculate cancer prevalence, MI ratios were used to model survival. To calculate YLDs, prevalence estimates were multiplied by disability weights. The YLLs were estimated by multiplying age-specific cancer deaths by the reference life expectancy. DALYs were estimated as the sum of YLDs and YLLs. A sociodemographic index (SDI) was created for each location based on income per capita, educational attainment, and fertility. Countries were categorized by SDI quintiles to summarize results. FINDINGS: In 2015, there were 17.5 million cancer cases worldwide and 8.7 million deaths. Between 2005 and 2015, cancer cases increased by 33%, with population aging contributing 16%, population growth 13%, and changes in age-specific rates contributing 4%. For men, the most common cancer globally was prostate cancer (1.6 million cases). Tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer was the leading cause of cancer deaths and DALYs in men (1.2 million deaths and 25.9 million DALYs). For women, the most common cancer was breast cancer (2.4 million cases). Breast cancer was also the leading cause of cancer deaths and DALYs for women (523 000 deaths and 15.1 million DALYs). Overall, cancer caused 208.3 million DALYs worldwide in 2015 for both sexes combined. Between 2005 and 2015, age-standardized incidence rates for all cancers combined increased in 174 of 195 countries or territories. Age-standardized death rates (ASDRs) for all cancers combined decreased within that timeframe in 140 of 195 countries or territories. Countries with an increase in the ASDR due to all cancers were largely located on the African continent. Of all cancers, deaths between 2005 and 2015 decreased significantly for Hodgkin lymphoma (-6.1% [95% uncertainty interval (UI), -10.6% to -1.3%]). The number of deaths also decreased for esophageal cancer, stomach cancer, and chronic myeloid leukemia, although these results were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: As part of the epidemiological transition, cancer incidence is expected to increase in the future, further straining limited health care resources. Appropriate allocation of resources for cancer prevention, early diagnosis, and curative and palliative care requires detailed knowledge of the local burden of cancer. The GBD 2015 study results demonstrate that progress is possible in the war against cancer. However, the major findings also highlight an unmet need for cancer prevention efforts, including tobacco control, vaccination, and the promotion of physical activity and a healthy diet.

AUTORES: Daniel J Klionsky1745,1749*, Kotb Abdelmohsen840, Akihisa Abe1237, Md Joynal Abedin1762, Hagai Abeliovich425,
\nAbraham Acevedo Arozena789, Hiroaki Adachi1800, Christopher M Adams1669, Peter D Adams57, Khosrow Adeli1981,
\nPeter J Adhihetty1625, Sharon G Adler700, Galila Agam67, Rajesh Agarwal1587, Manish K Aghi1537, Maria Agnello1826,
\nPatrizia Agostinis664, Patricia V Aguilar1960, Julio Aguirre-Ghiso784,786, Edoardo M Airoldi89,422, Slimane Ait-Si-Ali1376,
\nTakahiko Akematsu2010, Emmanuel T Akporiaye1097, Mohamed Al-Rubeai1394, Guillermo M Albaiceta1294,
\nChris Albanese363, Diego Albani561, Matthew L Albert517, Jesus Aldudo128, Hana Alg€ul1164, Mehrdad Alirezaei1198,
\nIraide Alloza642,888, Alexandru Almasan206, Maylin Almonte-Beceril524, Emad S Alnemri1212, Covadonga Alonso544,
\nNihal Altan-Bonnet848, Dario C Altieri1205, Silvia Alvarez1497, Lydia Alvarez-Erviti1395, Sandro Alves107,
\nGiuseppina Amadoro860, Atsuo Amano930, Consuelo Amantini1554, Santiago Ambrosio1458, Ivano Amelio756,
\nAmal O Amer918, Mohamed Amessou2089, Angelika Amon726, Zhenyi An1538, Frank A Anania291, Stig U Andersen6,
\nUsha P Andley2079, Catherine K Andreadi1690, Nathalie Andrieu-Abadie502, Alberto Anel2027, David K Ann58,
\nShailendra Anoopkumar-Dukie388, Manuela Antonioli832,858, Hiroshi Aoki1791, Nadezda Apostolova2007,
\nSaveria Aquila1500, Katia Aquilano1876, Koichi Araki292, Eli Arama2098, Agustin Aranda456, Jun Araya591,
\nAlexandre Arcaro1472, Esperanza Arias26, Hirokazu Arimoto1225, Aileen R Ariosa1749, Jane L Armstrong1930,
\nThierry Arnould1773, Ivica Arsov2120, Katsuhiko Asanuma675, Valerie Askanas1924, Eric Asselin1867, Ryuichiro Atarashi794,
\nSally S Atherton369, Julie D Atkin713, Laura D Attardi1131, Patrick Auberger1787, Georg Auburger379, Laure Aurelian1727,
\nRiccardo Autelli1992, Laura Avagliano1029,1755, Maria Laura Avantaggiati364, Limor Avrahami1166, Suresh Awale1986,
\nNeelam Azad404, Tiziana Bachetti568, Jonathan M Backer28, Dong-Hun Bae1933, Jae-sung Bae677, Ok-Nam Bae409,
\nSoo Han Bae2117, Eric H Baehrecke1729, Seung-Hoon Baek17, Stephen Baghdiguian1368,
\nAgnieszka Bagniewska-Zadworna2, Hua Bai90, Jie Bai667, Xue-Yuan Bai1133, Yannick Bailly884,
\nKithiganahalli Narayanaswamy Balaji473, Walter Balduini2002, Andrea Ballabio316, Rena Balzan1711, Rajkumar Banerjee239,
\nG abor B anhegyi1052, Haijun Bao2109, Benoit Barbeau1363, Maria D Barrachina2007, Esther Barreiro467, Bonnie Bartel997,
\nAlberto Bartolom e222, Diane C Bassham550, Maria Teresa Bassi1046, Robert C Bast Jr1273, Alakananda Basu1798,
\nMaria Teresa Batista1578, Henri Batoko1336, Maurizio Battino970, Kyle Bauckman2085, Bradley L Baumgarner1909,
\nK Ulrich Bayer1594, Rupert Beale1553, Jean-Fran¸cois Beaulieu1360, George R. Beck Jr48,294, Christoph Becker336,
\nJ David Beckham1595, Pierre-Andr e B edard749, Patrick J Bednarski301, Thomas J Begley1135, Christian Behl1419,
\nChristian Behrends757, Georg MN Behrens406, Kevin E Behrns1627, Eloy Bejarano26, Amine Belaid490,
\nFrancesca Belleudi1041, Giovanni B enard497, Guy Berchem706, Daniele Bergamaschi983, Matteo Bergami1401,
\nBen Berkhout1441, Laura Berliocchi714, Am elie Bernard1749, Monique Bernard1354, Francesca Bernassola1880,
\nAnne Bertolotti791, Amanda S Bess272, S ebastien Besteiro1351, Saverio Bettuzzi1828, Savita Bhalla913,
\nShalmoli Bhattacharyya973, Sujit K Bhutia838, Caroline Biagosch1159, Michele Wolfe Bianchi520,1378,1381,
\nMartine Biard-Piechaczyk210, Viktor Billes298, Claudia Bincoletto1314, Baris Bingol350, Sara W Bird1128, Marc Bitoun1112,
\nIvana Bjedov1258, Craig Blackstone843, Lionel Blanc1183, Guillermo A Blanco1496, Heidi Kiil Blomhoff1812,
\nEmilio Boada-Romero1297, Stefan B€ockler1464, Marianne Boes1423, Kathleen Boesze-Battaglia1835, Lawrence H Boise286,287,
\nAlessandra Bolino2063, Andrea Boman693, Paolo Bonaldo1823, Matteo Bordi897, J€urgen Bosch608, Luis M Botana1308,
\nJoelle Botti1375, German Bou1405, Marina Bouch e1038, Marion Bouchecareilh1331, Marie-Jos ee Boucher1901,
\nMichael E Boulton481, Sebastien G Bouret1926, Patricia Boya133, Micha€el Boyer-Guittaut1345, Peter V Bozhkov1141,
\nNathan Brady374, Vania MM Braga469, Claudio Brancolini1997, Gerhard H Braus353, Jos e M Bravo-San Pedro299,393,508,1374,
\nLisa A Brennan322, Emery H Bresnick2022, Patrick Brest490, Dave Bridges1939, Marie-Agn es Bringer124, Marisa Brini1822,
\nGlauber C Brito1311, Bertha Brodin631, Paul S Brookes1872, Eric J Brown352, Karen Brown1690, Hal E Broxmeyer480,
\nAlain Bruhat486,1339, Patricia Chakur Brum1893, John H Brumell446, Nicola Brunetti-Pierri315,1171,
\nRobert J Bryson-Richardson781, Shilpa Buch1777, Alastair M Buchan1819, Hikmet Budak1022, Dmitry V Bulavin118,505,1789,
\nScott J Bultman1792, Geert Bultynck665, Vladimir Bumbasirevic1470, Yan Burelle1356, Robert E Burke216,217,
\nMargit Burmeister1750, Peter B€utikofer1473, Laura Caberlotto1987, Ken Cadwell896, Monika Cahova112, Dongsheng Cai24,
\nJingjing Cai2099, Qian Cai1018, Sara Calatayud2007, Nadine Camougrand1343, Michelangelo Campanella1700,
\nGrant R Campbell1525, Matthew Campbell1249, Silvia Campello556,1876, Robin Candau1769, Isabella Caniggia1983,
\nLavinia Cantoni560, Lizhi Cao116, Allan B Caplan1656, Michele Caraglia1051, Claudio Cardinali1043, Sandra Morais Cardoso1579, Jennifer S Carew208, Laura A Carleton874, Cathleen R Carlin101, Silvia Carloni2002,
\nSven R Carlsson1267, Didac Carmona-Gutierrez1643, Leticia AM Carneiro312, Oliana Carnevali971, Serena Carra1318,
\nAlice Carrier120, Bernadette Carroll900, Caty Casas1324, Josefina Casas1116, Giuliana Cassinelli324, Perrine Castets1462,
\nSusana Castro-Obregon214, Gabriella Cavallini1841, Isabella Ceccherini568, Francesco Cecconi253,555,1884,
\nArthur I Cederbaum459, Valent ın Ce~na199,1281, Simone Cenci1323,2064, Claudia Cerella444, Davide Cervia1996,
\nSilvia Cetrullo1478, Hassan Chaachouay2028, Han-Jung Chae187, Andrei S Chagin634, Chee-Yin Chai626,628,
\nGopal Chakrabarti1502, Georgios Chamilos1601, Edmond YW Chan1142, Matthew TV Chan181, Dhyan Chandra1003,
\nPallavi Chandra548, Chih-Peng Chang818, Raymond Chuen-Chung Chang1653, Ta Yuan Chang345, John C Chatham1434,
\nSaurabh Chatterjee1910, Santosh Chauhan527, Yongsheng Che62, Michael E Cheetham1263, Rajkumar Cheluvappa1783,
\nChun-Jung Chen1153, Gang Chen598,1676, Guang-Chao Chen9, Guoqiang Chen1078, Hongzhuan Chen1077, Jeff W Chen1514,
\nJian-Kang Chen370,371, Min Chen249, Mingzhou Chen2104, Peiwen Chen1823, Qi Chen1674, Quan Chen172,
\nShang-Der Chen138, Si Chen325, Steve S-L Chen10, Wei Chen2125, Wei-Jung Chen829, Wen Qiang Chen979, Wenli Chen1113,
\nXiangmei Chen1133, Yau-Hung Chen1157, Ye-Guang Chen1250, Yin Chen1447, Yingyu Chen953,955, Yongshun Chen2135,
\nYu-Jen Chen712, Yue-Qin Chen1145, Yujie Chen1208, Zhen Chen339, Zhong Chen2123, Alan Cheng1702,
\nChristopher HK Cheng184, Hua Cheng1728, Heesun Cheong814, Sara Cherry1836, Jason Chesney1703,
\nChun Hei Antonio Cheung817, Eric Chevet1359, Hsiang Cheng Chi140, Sung-Gil Chi656, Fulvio Chiacchiera308,
\nHui-Ling Chiang958, Roberto Chiarelli1826, Mario Chiariello235,567,577, Marcello Chieppa835, Lih-Shen Chin290,
\nMario Chiong1285, Gigi NC Chiu878, Dong-Hyung Cho676, Ssang-Goo Cho650, William C Cho982, Yong-Yeon Cho105,
\nYoung-Seok Cho1064, Augustine MK Choi2095, Eui-Ju Choi656, Eun-Kyoung Choi387,400,685, Jayoung Choi1563,
\nMary E Choi2093, Seung-Il Choi2116, Tsui-Fen Chou412, Salem Chouaib395, Divaker Choubey1574, Vinay Choubey1936,
\nKuan-Chih Chow822, Kamal Chowdhury730, Charleen T Chu1856, Tsung-Hsien Chuang827, Taehoon Chun657,
\nHyewon Chung652, Taijoon Chung978, Yuen-Li Chung1194, Yong-Joon Chwae18, Valentina Cianfanelli254,
\nRoberto Ciarcia1775, Iwona A Ciechomska886, Maria Rosa Ciriolo1876, Mara Cirone1042, Sofie Claerhout1694,
\nMichael J Clague1698, Joan Cl aria1457, Peter GH Clarke1687, Robert Clarke361, Emilio Clementi1045,1398, C edric Cleyrat1781,
\nMiriam Cnop1366, Eliana M Coccia574, Tiziana Cocco1459, Patrice Codogno1375, J€orn Coers271, Ezra EW Cohen1533,
\nDavid Colecchia235,567,577, Luisa Coletto25, N uria S Coll123, Emma Colucci-Guyon516, Sergio Comincini1829,
\nMaria Condello578, Katherine L Cook2073, Graham H Coombs1929, Cynthia D Cooper2076, J Mark Cooper1395,
\nIsabelle Coppens601, Maria Tiziana Corasaniti1387, Marco Corazzari485,1884, Ramon Corbalan1566,
\nElisabeth Corcelle-Termeau251, Mario D Cordero1899, Cristina Corral-Ramos1289, Olga Corti507,1109, Andrea Cossarizza1767,
\nPaola Costelli1993, Safia Costes1518, Susan L Cotman721, Ana Coto-Montes946, Sandra Cottet566,1688, Eduardo Couve1301,
\nLori R Covey1015, L Ashley Cowart762, Jeffery S Cox1536, Fraser P Coxon1427, Carolyn B Coyne1846, Mark S Cragg1919,
\nRolf J Craven1679, Tiziana Crepaldi1995, Jose L Crespo1300, Alfredo Criollo1285, Valeria Crippa558, Maria Teresa Cruz1576,
\nAna Maria Cuervo26, Jose M Cuezva1277, Taixing Cui1907, Pedro R Cutillas987, Mark J Czaja27, Maria F Czyzyk-Krzeska1572,
\nRuben K Dagda2068, Uta Dahmen1404, Chunsun Dai800, Wenjie Dai1187, Yun Dai2059, Kevin N Dalby1940,
\nLuisa Dalla Valle1822, Guillaume Dalmasso1340, Marcello D’Amelio557, Markus Damme188, Arlette Darfeuille-Michaud1340,
\nCatherine Dargemont950, Victor M Darley-Usmar1433, Srinivasan Dasarathy205, Biplab Dasgupta202, Srikanta Dash1254,
\nCrispin R Dass242, Hazel Marie Davey8, Lester M Davids1560, David D avila227, Roger J Davis1731, Ted M Dawson604,
\nValina L Dawson606, Paula Daza1898, Jackie de Belleroche470, Paul de Figueiredo1180,1182,
\nRegina Celia Bressan Queiroz de Figueiredo135, Jos e de la Fuente1023, Luisa De Martino1775,
\nAntonella De Matteis1171, Guido RY De Meyer1443, Angelo De Milito631, Mauro De Santi2002,

BACKGROUND: Suboptimal diet is an important preventable risk factor for non-communicable diseases (NCDs); however, its impact on the burden of NCDs has not been systematically evaluated. This study aimed to evaluate the consumption of major foods and nutrients across 195 countries and to quantify the impact of their suboptimal intake on NCD mortality and morbidity. METHODS: By use of a comparative risk assessment approach, we estimated the proportion of disease-specific burden attributable to each dietary risk factor (also referred to as population attributable fraction) among adults aged 25 years or older. The main inputs to this analysis included the intake of each dietary factor, the effect size of the dietary factor on disease endpoint, and the level of intake associated with the lowest risk of mortality. Then, by use of disease-specific population attributable fractions, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), we calculated the number of deaths and DALYs attributable to diet for each disease outcome. FINDINGS: In 2017, 11 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 10-12) deaths and 255 million (234-274) DALYs were attributable to dietary risk factors. High intake of sodium (3 million [1-5] deaths and 70 million [34-118] DALYs), low intake of whole grains (3 million [2-4] deaths and 82 million [59-109] DALYs), and low intake of fruits (2 million [1-4] deaths and 65 million [41-92] DALYs) were the leading dietary risk factors for deaths and DALYs globally and in many countries. Dietary data were from mixed sources and were not available for all countries, increasing the statistical uncertainty of our estimates. INTERPRETATION: This study provides a comprehensive picture of the potential impact of suboptimal diet on NCD mortality and morbidity, highlighting the need for improving diet across nations. Our findings will inform implementation of evidence-based dietary interventions and provide a platform for evaluation of their impact on human health annually. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

<h3>Importance</h3> Cancer and other noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are now widely recognized as a threat to global development. The latest United Nations high-level meeting on NCDs reaffirmed this observation and also highlighted the slow progress in meeting the 2011 Political Declaration on the Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases and the third Sustainable Development Goal. Lack of situational analyses, priority setting, and budgeting have been identified as major obstacles in achieving these goals. All of these have in common that they require information on the local cancer epidemiology. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study is uniquely poised to provide these crucial data. <h3>Objective</h3> To describe cancer burden for 29 cancer groups in 195 countries from 1990 through 2017 to provide data needed for cancer control planning. <h3>Evidence Review</h3> We used the GBD study estimation methods to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). Results are presented at the national level as well as by Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a composite indicator of income, educational attainment, and total fertility rate. We also analyzed the influence of the epidemiological vs the demographic transition on cancer incidence. <h3>Findings</h3> In 2017, there were 24.5 million incident cancer cases worldwide (16.8 million without nonmelanoma skin cancer [NMSC]) and 9.6 million cancer deaths. The majority of cancer DALYs came from years of life lost (97%), and only 3% came from years lived with disability. The odds of developing cancer were the lowest in the low SDI quintile (1 in 7) and the highest in the high SDI quintile (1 in 2) for both sexes. In 2017, the most common incident cancers in men were NMSC (4.3 million incident cases); tracheal, bronchus, and lung (TBL) cancer (1.5 million incident cases); and prostate cancer (1.3 million incident cases). The most common causes of cancer deaths and DALYs for men were TBL cancer (1.3 million deaths and 28.4 million DALYs), liver cancer (572 000 deaths and 15.2 million DALYs), and stomach cancer (542 000 deaths and 12.2 million DALYs). For women in 2017, the most common incident cancers were NMSC (3.3 million incident cases), breast cancer (1.9 million incident cases), and colorectal cancer (819 000 incident cases). The leading causes of cancer deaths and DALYs for women were breast cancer (601 000 deaths and 17.4 million DALYs), TBL cancer (596 000 deaths and 12.6 million DALYs), and colorectal cancer (414 000 deaths and 8.3 million DALYs). <h3>Conclusions and Relevance</h3> The national epidemiological profiles of cancer burden in the GBD study show large heterogeneities, which are a reflection of different exposures to risk factors, economic settings, lifestyles, and access to care and screening. The GBD study can be used by policy makers and other stakeholders to develop and improve national and local cancer control in order to achieve the global targets and improve equity in cancer care.

<h3>Importance</h3> Liver cancer is among the leading causes of cancer deaths globally. The most common causes for liver cancer include hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and alcohol use. <h3>Objective</h3> To report results of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2015 study on primary liver cancer incidence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 195 countries or territories from 1990 to 2015, and present global, regional, and national estimates on the burden of liver cancer attributable to HBV, HCV, alcohol, and an “other” group that encompasses residual causes. <h3>Design, Settings, and Participants</h3> Mortality was estimated using vital registration and cancer registry data in an ensemble modeling approach. Single-cause mortality estimates were adjusted for all-cause mortality. Incidence was derived from mortality estimates and the mortality-to-incidence ratio. Through a systematic literature review, data on the proportions of liver cancer due to HBV, HCV, alcohol, and other causes were identified. Years of life lost were calculated by multiplying each death by a standard life expectancy. Prevalence was estimated using mortality-to-incidence ratio as surrogate for survival. Total prevalence was divided into 4 sequelae that were multiplied by disability weights to derive years lived with disability (YLDs). DALYs were the sum of years of life lost and YLDs. <h3>Main Outcomes and Measures</h3> Liver cancer mortality, incidence, YLDs, years of life lost, DALYs by etiology, age, sex, country, and year. <h3>Results</h3> There were 854 000 incident cases of liver cancer and 810 000 deaths globally in 2015, contributing to 20 578 000 DALYs. Cases of incident liver cancer increased by 75% between 1990 and 2015, of which 47% can be explained by changing population age structures, 35% by population growth, and −8% to changing age-specific incidence rates. The male-to-female ratio for age-standardized liver cancer mortality was 2.8. Globally, HBV accounted for 265 000 liver cancer deaths (33%), alcohol for 245 000 (30%), HCV for 167 000 (21%), and other causes for 133 000 (16%) deaths, with substantial variation between countries in the underlying etiologies. <h3>Conclusions and Relevance</h3> Liver cancer is among the leading causes of cancer deaths in many countries. Causes of liver cancer differ widely among populations. Our results show that most cases of liver cancer can be prevented through vaccination, antiviral treatment, safe blood transfusion and injection practices, as well as interventions to reduce excessive alcohol use. In line with the Sustainable Development Goals, the identification and elimination of risk factors for liver cancer will be required to achieve a sustained reduction in liver cancer burden. The GBD study can be used to guide these prevention efforts.

IMPORTANCE: The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019 (GBD 2019) provided systematic estimates of incidence, morbidity, and mortality to inform local and international efforts toward reducing cancer burden. OBJECTIVE: To estimate cancer burden and trends globally for 204 countries and territories and by Sociodemographic Index (SDI) quintiles from 2010 to 2019. EVIDENCE REVIEW: The GBD 2019 estimation methods were used to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in 2019 and over the past decade. Estimates are also provided by quintiles of the SDI, a composite measure of educational attainment, income per capita, and total fertility rate for those younger than 25 years. Estimates include 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs). FINDINGS: In 2019, there were an estimated 23.6 million (95% UI, 22.2-24.9 million) new cancer cases (17.2 million when excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and 10.0 million (95% UI, 9.36-10.6 million) cancer deaths globally, with an estimated 250 million (235-264 million) DALYs due to cancer. Since 2010, these represented a 26.3% (95% UI, 20.3%-32.3%) increase in new cases, a 20.9% (95% UI, 14.2%-27.6%) increase in deaths, and a 16.0% (95% UI, 9.3%-22.8%) increase in DALYs. Among 22 groups of diseases and injuries in the GBD 2019 study, cancer was second only to cardiovascular diseases for the number of deaths, years of life lost, and DALYs globally in 2019. Cancer burden differed across SDI quintiles. The proportion of years lived with disability that contributed to DALYs increased with SDI, ranging from 1.4% (1.1%-1.8%) in the low SDI quintile to 5.7% (4.2%-7.1%) in the high SDI quintile. While the high SDI quintile had the highest number of new cases in 2019, the middle SDI quintile had the highest number of cancer deaths and DALYs. From 2010 to 2019, the largest percentage increase in the numbers of cases and deaths occurred in the low and low-middle SDI quintiles. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The results of this systematic analysis suggest that the global burden of cancer is substantial and growing, with burden differing by SDI. These results provide comprehensive and comparable estimates that can potentially inform efforts toward equitable cancer control around the world.

BACKGROUND: Helicobacter pylori infection is a risk factor for gastric adenocarcinoma. We examined whether this infection is also a risk factor for primary gastric non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. METHODS: This nested case-control study involved two large cohorts (230,593 participants). Serum had been collected from cohort members and stored, and all subjects were followed for cancer. Thirty-three patients with gastric non-Hodgkin's lymphoma were identified, and each was matched to four controls according to cohort, age, sex, and date of serum collection. For comparison, 31 patients with nongastric non-Hodgkin's lymphoma from one of the cohorts were evaluated, each of whom had been previously matched to 2 controls. Pathological reports and specimens were reviewed to confirm the histologic type of the tumor. Serum samples from all subjects were tested for H. pylori IgG by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. RESULTS: Thirty-three cases of gastric non-Hodgkin's lymphoma occurred a median of 14 years after serum collection. Patients with gastric lymphoma were significantly more likely than matched controls to have evidence of previous H. pylori infection (matched odds ratio, 6.3; 95 percent confidence interval, 2.0 to 19.9). The results were similar in both cohorts. Among the 31 patients with nongastric lymphoma, a median of six years had elapsed between serum collection and the development of disease. No association was found between nongastric non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and previous H. pylori infection (matched odds ratio, 1.2; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.5 to 3.0). CONCLUSIONS: Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma affecting the stomach, but not other sites, is associated with previous H. pylori infection. A causative role for the organism is plausible, but remains unproved.

Lists of authors and their affiliations appear in the online version of the paper Breast cancer risk is influenced by rare coding variants in susceptibility genes, such as BRCA1, and many common, mostly non-coding variants. However, much of the genetic contribution to breast cancer risk remains unknown. Here we report the results of a genome-wide association study of breast cancer in 122,977 cases and 105,974 controls of European ancestry and 14,068 cases and 13,104 controls of East Asian ancestry 1 . We identified 65 new loci that are associated with overall breast cancer risk at P < 5 10 -8 . The majority of credible risk single-nucleotide polymorphisms in these loci fall in distal regulatory elements, and by integrating in silico data to predict target genes in breast cells at each locus, we demonstrate a strong overlap between candidate target genes and somatic driver genes in breast tumours. We also find that heritability of breast cancer due to all single-nucleotide polymorphisms in regulatory features was 2-5-fold enriched relative to the genomewide average, with strong enrichment for particular transcription factor binding sites. These results provide further insight into genetic susceptibility to breast cancer and will improve the use of genetic risk scores for individualized screening and prevention.

Importance: The increasing burden due to cancer and other noncommunicable diseases poses a threat to human development, which has resulted in global political commitments reflected in the Sustainable Development Goals as well as the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Action Plan on Non-Communicable Diseases. To determine if these commitments have resulted in improved cancer control, quantitative assessments of the cancer burden are required. Objective: To assess the burden for 29 cancer groups over time to provide a framework for policy discussion, resource allocation, and research focus. Evidence Review: Cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) were evaluated for 195 countries and territories by age and sex using the Global Burden of Disease study estimation methods. Levels and trends were analyzed over time, as well as by the Sociodemographic Index (SDI). Changes in incident cases were categorized by changes due to epidemiological vs demographic transition. Findings: In 2016, there were 17.2 million cancer cases worldwide and 8.9 million deaths. Cancer cases increased by 28% between 2006 and 2016. The smallest increase was seen in high SDI countries. Globally, population aging contributed 17%; population growth, 12%; and changes in age-specific rates, -1% to this change. The most common incident cancer globally for men was prostate cancer (1.4 million cases). The leading cause of cancer deaths and DALYs was tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer (1.2 million deaths and 25.4 million DALYs). For women, the most common incident cancer and the leading cause of cancer deaths and DALYs was breast cancer (1.7 million incident cases, 535 000 deaths, and 14.9 million DALYs). In 2016, cancer caused 213.2 million DALYs globally for both sexes combined. Between 2006 and 2016, the average annual age-standardized incidence rates for all cancers combined increased in 130 of 195 countries or territories, and the average annual age-standardized death rates decreased within that timeframe in 143 of 195 countries or territories. Conclusions and Relevance: Large disparities exist between countries in cancer incidence, deaths, and associated disability. Scaling up cancer prevention and ensuring universal access to cancer care are required for health equity and to fulfill the global commitments for noncommunicable disease and cancer control.

IMPORTANCE: Leisure-time physical activity has been associated with lower risk of heart-disease and all-cause mortality, but its association with risk of cancer is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of leisure-time physical activity with incidence of common types of cancer and whether associations vary by body size and/or smoking. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We pooled data from 12 prospective US and European cohorts with self-reported physical activity (baseline, 1987-2004). We used multivariable Cox regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals for associations of leisure-time physical activity with incidence of 26 types of cancer. Leisure-time physical activity levels were modeled as cohort-specific percentiles on a continuous basis and cohort-specific results were synthesized by random-effects meta-analysis. Hazard ratios for high vs low levels of activity are based on a comparison of risk at the 90th vs 10th percentiles of activity. The data analysis was performed from January 1, 2014, to June 1, 2015. EXPOSURES: Leisure-time physical activity of a moderate to vigorous intensity. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Incident cancer during follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 1.44 million participants (median [range] age, 59 [19-98] years; 57% female) and 186 932 cancers were included. High vs low levels of leisure-time physical activity were associated with lower risks of 13 cancers: esophageal adenocarcinoma (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.37-0.89), liver (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.55-0.98), lung (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.71-0.77), kidney (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.70-0.85), gastric cardia (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64-0.95), endometrial (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68-0.92), myeloid leukemia (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.70-0.92), myeloma (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.72-0.95), colon (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.77-0.91), head and neck (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.78-0.93), rectal (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.80-0.95), bladder (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.82-0.92), and breast (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.87-0.93). Body mass index adjustment modestly attenuated associations for several cancers, but 10 of 13 inverse associations remained statistically significant after this adjustment. Leisure-time physical activity was associated with higher risks of malignant melanoma (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.16-1.40) and prostate cancer (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.03-1.08). Associations were generally similar between overweight/obese and normal-weight individuals. Smoking status modified the association for lung cancer but not other smoking-related cancers. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Leisure-time physical activity was associated with lower risks of many cancer types. Health care professionals counseling inactive adults should emphasize that most of these associations were evident regardless of body size or smoking history, supporting broad generalizability of findings.

IMPORTANCE: The 2008 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans recommended a minimum of 75 vigorous-intensity or 150 moderate-intensity minutes per week (7.5 metabolic-equivalent hours per week) of aerobic activity for substantial health benefit and suggested additional benefits by doing more than double this amount. However, the upper limit of longevity benefit or possible harm with more physical activity is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the dose-response association between leisure time physical activity and mortality and define the upper limit of benefit or harm associated with increased levels of physical activity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We pooled data from 6 studies in the National Cancer Institute Cohort Consortium (baseline 1992-2003). Population-based prospective cohorts in the United States and Europe with self-reported physical activity were analyzed in 2014. A total of 661,137 men and women (median age, 62 years; range, 21-98 years) and 116,686 deaths were included. We used Cox proportional hazards regression with cohort stratification to generate multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs. Median follow-up time was 14.2 years. EXPOSURES: Leisure time moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The upper limit of mortality benefit from high levels of leisure time physical activity. RESULTS: Compared with individuals reporting no leisure time physical activity, we observed a 20% lower mortality risk among those performing less than the recommended minimum of 7.5 metabolic-equivalent hours per week (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.78-0.82]), a 31% lower risk at 1 to 2 times the recommended minimum (HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.67-0.70]), and a 37% lower risk at 2 to 3 times the minimum (HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.62-0.65]). An upper threshold for mortality benefit occurred at 3 to 5 times the physical activity recommendation (HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.59-0.62]); however, compared with the recommended minimum, the additional benefit was modest (31% vs 39%). There was no evidence of harm at 10 or more times the recommended minimum (HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.59-0.78]). A similar dose-response relationship was observed for mortality due to cardiovascular disease and to cancer. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Meeting the 2008 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans minimum by either moderate- or vigorous-intensity activities was associated with nearly the maximum longevity benefit. We observed a benefit threshold at approximately 3 to 5 times the recommended leisure time physical activity minimum and no excess risk at 10 or more times the minimum. In regard to mortality, health care professionals should encourage inactive adults to perform leisure time physical activity and do not need to discourage adults who already participate in high-activity levels.

Abstract Objective: To assess whether mothers and fathers have a higher long term risk of death, particularly from cardiovascular disease and cancer, after the mother has had pre-eclampsia. Design: Population based cohort study of registry data. Subjects: Mothers and fathers of all 626 272 births that were the mothers' first deliveries, recorded in the Norwegian medical birth registry from 1967 to 1992. Parents were divided into two cohorts based on whether the mother had pre-eclampsia during the pregnancy. Subjects were also stratified by whether the birth was term or preterm, given that pre-eclampsia might be more severe in preterm pregnancies. Main outcome measures: Total mortality and mortality from cardiovascular causes, cancer, and stroke from 1967 to 1992, from data from the Norwegian registry of causes of death. Results: Women who had pre-eclampsia had a 1.2-fold higher long term risk of death (95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.37) than women who did not have pre-eclampsia. The risk in women with pre-eclampsia and a preterm delivery was 2.71-fold higher (1.99 to 3.68) than in women who did not have pre-eclampsia and whose pregnancies went to term. In particular, the risk of death from cardiovascular causes among women with pre-eclampsia and a preterm delivery was 8.12-fold higher (4.31 to 15.33). However, these women had a 0.36-fold (not significant) decreased risk of cancer. The long term risk of death was no higher among the fathers of the pre-eclamptic pregnancies than the fathers of pregnancies in which pre-eclampsia did not occur. Conclusions: Genetic factors that increase the risk of cardiovascular disease may also be linked to pre-eclampsia. A possible genetic contribution from fathers to the risk of pre-eclampsia was not reflected in increased risks of death from cardiovascular causes or cancer among fathers. What is already known on this topic Maternal and fetal genes (including those inherited from the father) may contribute to pre-eclampsia, which occurs in 3-5% of pregnancies One set of candidate genes for pre-eclampsia is the maternal genes for thrombophilia, which may increase the mother's risk of death from cardiovascular disease What this study adds Women who have pre-eclampsia during a pregnancy that ends in a preterm delivery have an eightfold higher risk of death from cardiovascular disease compared with women who do not have pre-eclampsia and whose pregnancy goes to term Fathers of pregnancies in which pre-eclampsia occurred have no increased risk of death from cardiovascular disease These results are compatible with maternal genes for thrombophilia having an effect on the risk of pre-eclampsia and of death from cardiovascular disease

The Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study (MoBa) was planned in the 1990s partly by researchers at the Medical Birth Registry of Norway (MBRN) 1 and partly by researchers at the National Institute of Public Health (from 2002 comprising MBRN as well as other institutions and renamed the Norwegian Institute of Public Health (NIPH). The study had a long planning phase involving many scientists who contributed ideas that helped to design questionnaires and to structure the biobank, which is described in detail elsewhere. 2 Collaboration was established with the Danish Birth Cohort Study, 3

NHIK 3025 cells were incubated with Photofrin II (PII) and/or tetra (3-hydroxyphenyl)porphyrin (3THPP) and exposed to light at either 400 or 420 nm, i.e. at the wavelengths of the maxima of the fluorescence excitation spectra of the two dyes. The kinetics of the photodegradation of the dyes were studied. When present separately in the cells the two dyes are photodegraded with a similar quantum yield. 3THPP is degraded 3-6 times more efficiently by light quanta absorbed by the fluorescent fraction of 3THPP than by light quanta absorbed by the fluorescent fraction of PII present in the same cells. The distance diffused by the reactive intermediate, supposedly mainly 1O2, causing the photodegradation was estimated to be on the order of 0.01-0.02 micron, which corresponds to a lifetime of 0.01-0.04 microsecond of the intermediate in the cells. PII has binding sites at proteins in the cells as shown by an energy transfer band in the fluorescence excitation spectrum at 290 nm. During light exposure this band decays faster than the Soret band of PII under the present conditions. Photoproducts (1O2 etc.) generated at one binding site contribute significantly in the destruction of remote binding sites.

BACKGROUND: Oncogenic human papillomaviruses (HPVs), especially HPV type 16 (HPV-16), cause anogenital epithelial cancers and are suspected of causing epithelial cancers of the head and neck. METHODS: To examine the relation between head and neck cancers and HPVs, we performed a nested case-control study within a joint Nordic cohort in which serum samples were collected from almost 900,000 subjects. Samples collected at enrollment from 292 persons in whom squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck developed, on average, 9.4 years after enrollment and from 1568 matched controls were analyzed for antibodies against HPV-16, HPV-18, HPV-33, and HPV-73 and for cotinine levels as a marker of smoking habits. Polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) analyses for HPV DNA were performed in tumor tissue from 160 of the study patients with cancer. RESULTS: After adjustment for cotinine levels, the odds ratio for squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck in subjects who were seropositive for HPV-16 was 2.2 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.4 to 3.4). No increased risk was observed for other HPV types. Fifty percent of oropharyngeal and 14 percent of tongue cancers contained HPV-16 DNA, according to PCR analysis. CONCLUSIONS: HPV-16 infection may be a risk factor for squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and United European Gastroenterology present a short list of key performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy. We recommend that endoscopy services across Europe adopt the following seven key performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy for measurement and evaluation in daily practice at a center and endoscopist level: <b>1</b> Rate of adequate bowel preparation (minimum standard 90 %); <b>2</b> Cecal intubation rate (minimum standard 90 %); <b>3</b> Adenoma detection rate (minimum standard 25 %); <b>4 </b>Appropriate polypectomy technique (minimum standard 80 %); <b>5</b> Complication rate (minimum standard not set); <b>6</b> Patient experience (minimum standard not set); <b>7</b> Appropriate post-polypectomy surveillance recommendations (minimum standard not set). Other identified performance measures have been listed as less relevant based on an assessment of their importance, scientific acceptability, feasibility, usability, and comparison to competing measures.

BACKGROUND: Although second primary cancers are a leading cause of death among men with testicular cancer, few studies have quantified risks among long-term survivors. METHODS: Within 14 population-based tumor registries in Europe and North America (1943-2001), we identified 40,576 1-year survivors of testicular cancer and ascertained data on any new incident solid tumors among these patients. We used Poisson regression analysis to model relative risks (RRs) and excess absolute risks (EARs) of second solid cancers. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: A total of 2,285 second solid cancers were reported in the cohort. The relative risk and EAR decreased with increasing age at testicular cancer diagnosis (P < .001); the EAR increased with attained age (P < .001) but the excess RR decreased. Among 10-year survivors diagnosed with testicular cancer at age 35 years, the risk of developing a second solid tumor was increased (RR = 1.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.8 to 2.1). Risk remained statistically significantly elevated for 35 years (RR = 1.7, 95% CI = 1.5 to 2.0; P < .001). We observed statistically significantly elevated risks, for the first time, for cancers of the pleura (malignant mesothelioma; RR = 3.4, 95% CI = 1.7 to 5.9) and esophagus (RR = 1.7, 95% CI = 1.0 to 2.6). Cancers of the lung (RR = 1.5, 95% CI = 1.2 to 1.7), colon (RR = 2.0, 95% CI = 1.7 to 2.5), bladder (RR = 2.7, 95% CI = 2.2 to 3.1), pancreas (RR = 3.6, 95% CI = 2.8 to 4.6), and stomach (RR = 4.0, 95% CI = 3.2 to 4.8) accounted for almost 60% of the total excess. Overall patterns were similar for seminoma and nonseminoma patients, with lower risks observed for nonseminoma patients treated after 1975. Statistically significantly increased risks of solid cancers were observed among patients treated with radiotherapy alone (RR = 2.0, 95% CI = 1.9 to 2.2), chemotherapy alone (RR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.3 to 2.5), and both (RR = 2.9, 95% CI = 1.9 to 4.2). For patients diagnosed with seminomas or nonseminomatous tumors at age 35 years, cumulative risks of solid cancer 40 years later (i.e., to age 75 years) were 36% and 31%, respectively, compared with 23% for the general population. CONCLUSIONS: Testicular cancer survivors are at statistically significantly increased risk of solid tumors for at least 35 years after treatment. Young patients may experience high levels of risk as they reach older ages. The statistically significantly increased risk of malignant mesothelioma in testicular cancer survivors has, to our knowledge, not been observed previously in a cohort of patients treated with radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether women who deliver by cesarean section have an increased risk of urinary incontinence as compared with nulliparous women and whether women who deliver vaginally have an even higher risk. METHODS: We studied 15,307 women enrolled in the Epidemiology of Incontinence in the County of Nord-Trøndelag (EPINCONT) study, which involved a community-based cohort. The data base for this study was linked to data from the Medical Birth Registry of Norway. We included women who answered questions related to urinary incontinence, were younger than 65 years of age, and had had no deliveries, cesarean sections only, or vaginal deliveries only. RESULTS: The prevalence of any incontinence was 10.1 percent in the nulliparous group; age-standardized prevalences were 15.9 percent in the cesarean-section group and 21.0 percent in the vaginal-delivery group. Corresponding figures for moderate or severe incontinence were 3.7 percent, 6.2 percent, and 8.7 percent, respectively; figures for stress incontinence were 4.7 percent, 6.9 percent, and 12.2 percent, respectively; figures for urge incontinence were 1.6 percent, 2.2 percent, and 1.8 percent, respectively; and figures for mixed-type incontinence were 3.1 percent, 5.3 percent, and 6.1 percent, respectively. As compared with nulliparous women, women who had cesarean sections had an adjusted odds ratio for any incontinence of 1.5 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.2 to 1.9) and an adjusted odds ratio for moderate or severe incontinence of 1.4 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.0 to 2.1). Only stress and mixed-type incontinence were significantly associated with cesarean sections. The adjusted odds ratio for any incontinence associated with vaginal deliveries as compared with cesarean sections was 1.7 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.3 to 2.1), and the adjusted odds ratio for moderate or severe incontinence was 2.2 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.5 to 3.1). Only stress incontinence (adjusted odds ratio, 2.4; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.7 to 3.2) was associated with the mode of delivery. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of urinary incontinence is higher among women who have had cesarean sections than among nulliparous women and is even higher among women who have had vaginal deliveries. However, these findings should not be used to justify an increase in the use of cesarean sections.

Although colonoscopy is widely used as a screening test to detect colorectal cancer, its effect on the risks of colorectal cancer and related death is unclear.

Previous studies have suggested an association between exposure to 50-60 Hz magnetic fields (EMF) and childhood leukaemia. We conducted a pooled analysis based on individual records from nine studies, including the most recent ones. Studies with 24/48-hour magnetic field measurements or calculated magnetic fields were included. We specified which data analyses we planned to do and how to do them before we commenced the work. The use of individual records allowed us to use the same exposure definitions, and the large numbers of subjects enabled more precise estimation of risks at high exposure levels. For the 3203 children with leukaemia and 10 338 control children with estimated residential magnetic field exposures levels < 0.4 microT, we observed risk estimates near the no effect level, while for the 44 children with leukaemia and 62 control children with estimated residential magnetic field exposures >/= 0.4 microT the estimated summary relative risk was 2.00 (1.27-3.13), P value = 0.002). Adjustment for potential confounding variables did not appreciably change the results. For North American subjects whose residences were in the highest wire code category, the estimated summary relative risk was 1.24 (0.82-1.87). Thus, we found no evidence in the combined data for the existence of the so-called wire-code paradox. In summary, the 99.2% of children residing in homes with exposure levels < 0.4 microT had estimates compatible with no increased risk, while the 0.8% of children with exposures >/= 0.4 microT had a relative risk estimate of approximately 2, which is unlikely to be due to random variability. The explanation for the elevated risk is unknown, but selection bias may have accounted for some of the increase.