OBJECTIVES: Cancer registries are increasingly mapping residences of patients at time of diagnosis, however, an accepted protocol for spatial analysis of these data is lacking. We undertook a public health practice-research partnership to develop a strategy for detecting spatial clusters of early stage breast cancer using registry data. METHODS: Spatial patterns of early stage breast cancer throughout Michigan were analyzed comparing several scales of spatial support, and different clustering algorithms. RESULTS: Analyses relying on point data identified spatial clusters not detected using data aggregated into census block groups, census tracts, or legislative districts. Further, using point data, Cuzick-Edwards' nearest neighbor test identified clusters not detected by the SaTScan spatial scan statistic. Regression and simulation analyses lent credibility to these findings. CONCLUSIONS: In these cluster analyses of early stage breast cancer in Michigan, spatial analyses of point data are more sensitive than analyses relying on data aggregated into polygons, and the Cuzick-Edwards' test is more sensitive than the SaTScan spatial scan statistic, with acceptable Type I error. Cuzick-Edwards' test also enables presentation of results in a manner easily communicated to public health practitioners. The approach outlined here should help cancer registries conduct and communicate results of geographic analyses.
OBJECTIVES:Cancer registries are increasingly mapping residences of patients at time of diagnosis, however, an accepted protocol for spatial analysis of these data is lacking. We undertook a public health practice-research partnership to develop a strategy for detecting spatial clusters of early stage breast cancer using registry data. METHODS: Spatial patterns of early stage breast cancer throughout Michigan were analyzed comparing several scales of spatial support, and different clustering algorithms. RESULTS: Analyses relying on point data identified spatial clusters not detected using data aggregated into census block groups, census tracts, or legislative districts. Further, using point data, Cuzick-Edwards' nearest neighbor test identified clusters not detected by the SaTScan spatial scan statistic. Regression and simulation analyses lent credibility to these findings. CONCLUSIONS: In these cluster analyses of early stage breast cancer in Michigan, spatial analyses of point data are more sensitive than analyses relying on data aggregated into polygons, and the Cuzick-Edwards' test is more sensitive than the SaTScan spatial scan statistic, with acceptable Type I error. Cuzick-Edwards' test also enables presentation of results in a manner easily communicated to public health practitioners. The approach outlined here should help cancer registries conduct and communicate results of geographic analyses.
Authors: C E Sabel; P J Boyle; M Löytönen; A C Gatrell; M Jokelainen; R Flowerdew; P Maasilta Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2003-05-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Gerard Rushton; Marc P Armstrong; Josephine Gittler; Barry R Greene; Claire E Pavlik; Michele M West; Dale L Zimmerman Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Nancy Krieger; Jarvis T Chen; Pamela D Waterman; David H Rehkopf; S V Subramanian Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Al Ozonoff; Thomas Webster; Veronica Vieira; Janice Weinberg; David Ozonoff; Ann Aschengrau Journal: Environ Health Date: 2005-09-15 Impact factor: 5.984
Authors: Oscar Zurriaga; Hermelinda Vanaclocha; Miguel A Martinez-Beneito; Paloma Botella-Rocamora Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2008-01-31 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Amin Bemanian; Laura D Cassidy; Raphael Fraser; Purushottam W Laud; Kia Saeian; Kirsten M M Beyer Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2019-09-17 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Adam S Vaughan; Michael R Kramer; Lance A Waller; Linda J Schieb; Sophia Greer; Michele Casper Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2015-02-19 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: A Ghenassia; J B Beuscart; G Ficheur; F Occelli; E Babykina; E Chazard; M Genin Journal: Int J Health Geogr Date: 2017-10-03 Impact factor: 3.918
Authors: Recinda L Sherman; Kevin A Henry; Stacey L Tannenbaum; Daniel J Feaster; Erin Kobetz; David J Lee Journal: Prev Chronic Dis Date: 2014-03-20 Impact factor: 2.830