Falling bladder cancer incidence from 1990 to 2009 is not producing universal mortality improvements

Objective

The objective of this article is to obtain up-to-date epidemiological statistics of bladder cancer in England.

Methods

We collected incidence from the National Cancer Data Repository (NCDR), survival from the national Cancer Information System (CIS), ethnicity information from the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), mortality and smoking rates from the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

Results

Incidence of bladder cancer has fallen continuously. Mortality has reduced less, leading to worsening survival. Bladder cancer mainly affects men, the most deprived, and the elderly. The gender gap is decreasing, and the deprivation gap is unchanged. Mortality is unchanged in the youngest, oldest and least deprived females. Mortality has recently increased in the oldest males. The highest incidence and mortality is found in industrial areas. This study is limited by i) its retrospective design using existing databases, allowing identification of associations and statistical differences, but not causation; and ii) very restricted ethnicity data.

onclusion

Reductions in bladder cancer incidence and mortality in England coincide with a decrease in high-risk occupations and public health measures to reduce smoking. Some risk factors in modern living may as yet be unidentified. It remains paramount to ensure equity of access and treatment regardless of gender, age, region and social deprivation to further improve mortality.

The impact of socio-economic deprivation on incidence, treatment and mortality from prostate cancer in England, 1990–2010

Objective:

To explore any association between socio-economic deprivation and prostate cancer diagnosis and/or treatment.

Patients and methods:

Data was extracted as follows: We gained the incident cases and staging from the National Cancer Data Repository, survival from the Cancer Information System, mortality from the Office for National Statistics, treatment data from Hospital Episode Statistics and National Clinical Analysis and Specialised Applications Team. Our analysis regarding socio-economic deprivation was controlled for age distribution.

Results:

We recorded 518,453 diagnoses of prostate cancer; 174,579 prostate cancer deaths; 33,889 prostatectomies and 21,351 radiotherapy treatments. Incidence is increasing in all groups, but the highest is amongst the least deprived. Mortality is decreasing, with survival consistently better in the least deprived. Prostatectomies are more frequent in the least deprived; however, this gap is narrowing.

Conclusions:

Prostate cancer incidence, survival and treatment are associated with socio-economic deprivation. Prostatectomy rates show a decrease in the gap of inequality. Multiple potential confounding factors, such as rates of prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing and access to health care are associated with socio-economic deprivation. The unifying influences of Improving Outcomes Guidance and the National Treatment Guidelines are intended to counteract the above inequalities. Particularly in prostate cancer, where long-term gain depends on multiple factors, individualised treatment decisions are paramount.

Management of prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is diagnosed in 37 000 new patients a year, and causes 10 000 deaths each year in the UK (Cancer Research UK, 2011). Diagnoses are increasingly the result of screening using measurement of prostate- specific antigen levels. The natural history of early disease is unclear. Autopsy studies before prostate-specific antigen screening showed an actual latent prevalence (not diagnosed during life) of around 30% at the age of 50 years and 75% at the age of 80 years, and many of these demonstrated local invasion (Franks, 1954). One of the main current challenges in urology is distinguishing indolent prostate cancers from potentially lethal ones. The specificity of the prostate-specific antigen test for clinically significant disease remains disappointingly low and population screening is not encouraged (Ilic et al, 2011). However, prostate-specific antigen testing is often done in good faith, but pre-test counselling is essential. Thus, prostate-specific antigen testing should only be undertaken by the patient's GP or on the advice of a urologist.