Literature DB >> 14974762

A new method of predicting US and state-level cancer mortality counts for the current calendar year.

Ram C Tiwari1, Kaushik Ghosh, Ahmedin Jemal, Mark Hachey, Elizabeth Ward, Michael J Thun, Eric J Feuer.   

Abstract

Every January for more than 40 years, the American Cancer Society (ACS) has estimated the total number of cancer deaths that are expected to occur in the United States and individual states in the upcoming year. In a collaborative effort to improve the accuracy of the predictions, investigators from the National Cancer Institute and the ACS have developed and tested a new prediction method. The new method was used to create the mortality predictions for the first time in Cancer Statistics, 2004 and Cancer Facts & Figures 2004. The authors present a conceptual overview of the previous ACS method and the new state-space method (SSM), and they review the results of rigorous testing to determine which method provides more accurate predictions of the observed number of cancer deaths from the years 1997 to 1999. The accuracy of the methods was compared using squared deviations (the square of the predicted minus observed values) for each of the cancer sites for which predictions are published as well as for all cancer sites combined. At the national level, the squared deviations were not consistently lower for every cancer site for either method, but the average squared deviations (averaged across cancer sites, years, and sex) was substantially lower for the SSM than for the ACS method. During the period 1997 to 1999, the ACS estimates of deaths were usually greater than the observed numbers for all cancer sites combined and for several major individual cancer sites, probably because the ACS method was less sensitive to recent changes in cancer mortality rates (and associated counts) that occurred for several major cancer sites in the early and mid 1990s. The improved accuracy of the new method was particularly evident for prostate cancer, for which mortality rates changed dramatically in the late 1980s and early 1990s. At the state level, the accuracy of the two methods was comparable. Based on these results, the ACS has elected to use the new method for the annual prediction of the number of cancer deaths at the national and state levels.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14974762     DOI: 10.3322/canjclin.54.1.30

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin        ISSN: 0007-9235            Impact factor:   508.702


  8 in total

1.  Sex disparities in colorectal cancer incidence by anatomic subsite, race and age.

Authors:  Gwen Murphy; Susan S Devesa; Amanda J Cross; Peter D Inskip; Katherine A McGlynn; Michael B Cook
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2010-05-25       Impact factor: 7.396

2.  Cancer health disparities: what we have done.

Authors:  Nedra Lisovicz; Theresa Wynn; Mona Fouad; Edward E Partridge
Journal:  Am J Med Sci       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.378

3.  Bayesian Inference for General Gaussian Graphical Models With Application to Multivariate Lattice Data.

Authors:  Adrian Dobra; Alex Lenkoski; Abel Rodriguez
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2012-12-24       Impact factor: 5.033

4.  Age-Adjusted US Cancer Death Rate Predictions.

Authors:  Matthew J Hayat; Ram C Tiwari; Kaushik Ghosh; Mark Hachey; Ben Hankey; Rocky Feuer
Journal:  J Data Sci       Date:  2010-04-01

5.  Predicting US- and state-level cancer counts for the current calendar year: Part I: evaluation of temporal projection methods for mortality.

Authors:  Huann-Sheng Chen; Kenneth Portier; Kaushik Ghosh; Deepa Naishadham; Hyune-Ju Kim; Li Zhu; Linda W Pickle; Martin Krapcho; Steve Scoppa; Ahmedin Jemal; Eric J Feuer
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2012-01-06       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Predicting county-level cancer incidence rates and counts in the USA.

Authors:  Binbing Yu
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-05-13       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 7.  Cervical cancer screening, diagnosis and treatment interventions for racial and ethnic minorities: a systematic review.

Authors:  Susan B Glick; Amanda R Clarke; Anita Blanchard; Amy K Whitaker
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) for exploring spatial variability of lung and bronchus cancer (LBC) mortality rates in the contiguous USA.

Authors:  Zia U Ahmed; Kang Sun; Michael Shelly; Lina Mu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-12-16       Impact factor: 4.379

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.