OBJECTIVE: To assess data quality of cancer registrations for Indigenous Australians and produce reliable national Indigenous cancer incidence statistics. METHODS: Completeness of Indigenous identification was assessed for the eight Australian cancer registries using an innovative indirect assessment method based on registry-specific registration rates for smoking-related cancers. National age-standardised incidence rates and rate ratios (Indigenous:non-Indigenous) were calculated for all cancers combined and 26 individual cancer sites. Multivariate regression analysis was used to investigate trends in Indigenous cancer incidence by time or remoteness of residence, and whether the incidence rate ratio (Indigenous:non-Indigenous) was different in younger than older age-groups. RESULTS: Four registries covering 84% of the Indigenous population had sufficiently complete Indigenous identification to be included in analysis. Compared to other Australians, Indigenous Australians had much higher incidence of lung and other smoking-related cancers, cervix, uterus and liver cancer, but much lower incidence of breast, prostate, testis, colorectal and brain cancer, melanoma of skin, lymphoma and leukaemia. Incidence was higher in remote areas for some cancers (including several smoking-related cancers) but lower for others. The incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for smoking-related cancers were higher in younger than older people. CONCLUSIONS: Indigenous Australians have a different pattern of incidence of specific cancers than other Australians and large geographical variations for several cancers. IMPLICATIONS: All cancer registries need to further improve Indigenous identification, but national Indigenous cancer incidence statistics can, and should, be regularly reported. Tobacco control is a critical cancer-control issue for Indigenous Australians.
OBJECTIVE: To assess data quality of cancer registrations for Indigenous Australians and produce reliable national Indigenous cancer incidence statistics. METHODS: Completeness of Indigenous identification was assessed for the eight Australian cancer registries using an innovative indirect assessment method based on registry-specific registration rates for smoking-related cancers. National age-standardised incidence rates and rate ratios (Indigenous:non-Indigenous) were calculated for all cancers combined and 26 individual cancer sites. Multivariate regression analysis was used to investigate trends in Indigenous cancer incidence by time or remoteness of residence, and whether the incidence rate ratio (Indigenous:non-Indigenous) was different in younger than older age-groups. RESULTS: Four registries covering 84% of the Indigenous population had sufficiently complete Indigenous identification to be included in analysis. Compared to other Australians, Indigenous Australians had much higher incidence of lung and other smoking-related cancers, cervix, uterus and liver cancer, but much lower incidence of breast, prostate, testis, colorectal and brain cancer, melanoma of skin, lymphoma and leukaemia. Incidence was higher in remote areas for some cancers (including several smoking-related cancers) but lower for others. The incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for smoking-related cancers were higher in younger than older people. CONCLUSIONS: Indigenous Australians have a different pattern of incidence of specific cancers than other Australians and large geographical variations for several cancers. IMPLICATIONS: All cancer registries need to further improve Indigenous identification, but national Indigenous cancer incidence statistics can, and should, be regularly reported. Tobacco control is a critical cancer-control issue for Indigenous Australians.
Authors: Mia Shepherdson; Shalem Leemaqz; Gurmeet Singh; Courtney Ryder; Shahid Ullah; Karla Canuto; Joanne P Young; Timothy J Price; Ross A McKinnon; Stephen J Pandol; Claire T Roberts; Savio George Barreto Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-06-10 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Jennifer C Rodger; Rajah Supramaniam; Alison J Gibberd; David P Smith; Bruce K Armstrong; Anthony Dillon; Dianne L O'Connell Journal: BJU Int Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Lisa J Whop; Abbey Diaz; Peter Baade; Gail Garvey; Joan Cunningham; Julia M L Brotherton; Karen Canfell; Patricia C Valery; Dianne L O'Connell; Catherine Taylor; Suzanne P Moore; John R Condon Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-02-12 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Audra de Witt; Frances C Cunningham; Ross Bailie; Christina M Bernardes; Veronica Matthews; Brian Arley; Judith A Meiklejohn; Gail Garvey; Jon Adams; Jennifer H Martin; Euan T Walpole; Daniel Williamson; Patricia C Valery Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2017-08-07
Authors: Emma V Taylor; Marilyn Lyford; Michele Holloway; Lorraine Parsons; Toni Mason; Sabe Sabesan; Sandra C Thompson Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2021-05-24 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: John R Condon; Xiaohua Zhang; Peter Baade; Kalinda Griffiths; Joan Cunningham; David M Roder; Michael Coory; Paul L Jelfs; Tim Threlfall Journal: Popul Health Metr Date: 2014-01-31
Authors: Lisa J Whop; Peter Baade; Gail Garvey; Joan Cunningham; Julia M L Brotherton; Kamalini Lokuge; Patricia C Valery; Dianne L O'Connell; Karen Canfell; Abbey Diaz; David Roder; Dorota M Gertig; Suzanne P Moore; John R Condon Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-04-11 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Lisa J Whop; Gail Garvey; Peter Baade; Joan Cunningham; Kamalini Lokuge; Julia M L Brotherton; Patricia C Valery; Dianne L O'Connell; Karen Canfell; Abbey Diaz; David Roder; Dorota Gertig; Suzanne P Moore; John R Condon Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-04-11 Impact factor: 6.860