Paolo Boffetta1, Matteo Malvezzi1, Enrico Pira1, Eva Negri1, Carlo La Vecchia1. 1. Paolo Boffetta, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY; Matteo Malvezzi, Eva Negri, and Carlo La Vecchia, University of Milan, Milan; and Enrico Pira, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Abstract
Past analyses of mortality data from mesothelioma relied on unspecific codes, such as pleural neoplasms. We calculated temporal trends in age-specific mortality rates in Canada, the United States, Japan, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, the United Kingdom, and Australia on the basis of the 10th version of the International Classification of Diseases, which includes a specific code for mesothelioma. Older age groups showed an increase (in the United States, a weaker decrease) during the study period, whereas in young age groups, there was a decrease (in Poland, a weaker increase, starting, however, from low rates). Results were consistent between men and women and between pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma, although a smaller number of events in women and for peritoneal mesothelioma resulted in less precise results. The results show the heterogeneous effect of the reduction of asbestos exposure on different age groups; decreasing mortality in young people reflects reduced exposure opportunity, and increasing mortality in the elderly shows the long-term effect of early exposures.
Past analyses of mortality data from mesothelioma relied on unspecific codes, such as pleural neoplasms. We calculated temporal trends in age-specific mortality rates in Canada, the United States, Japan, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, the United Kingdom, and Australia on the basis of the 10th version of the International Classification of Diseases, which includes a specific code for mesothelioma. Older age groups showed an increase (in the United States, a weaker decrease) during the study period, whereas in young age groups, there was a decrease (in Poland, a weaker increase, starting, however, from low rates). Results were consistent between men and women and between pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma, although a smaller number of events in women and for peritoneal mesothelioma resulted in less precise results. The results show the heterogeneous effect of the reduction of asbestos exposure on different age groups; decreasing mortality in young people reflects reduced exposure opportunity, and increasing mortality in the elderly shows the long-term effect of early exposures.
Descriptive cancer epidemiology relies on data on cancer incidence, typically from
population-based cancer registries, and cancermortality, typically from national
statistics.[1] Data from cancer
registries are of better quality because they include histologic verification of most of
the patients; however, in the case of rare neoplasms, they are limited by the relatively
small size of many cancer registries. Mortality data rely on medical certification in
most countries, whose diagnostic accuracy is suboptimal.[2]Because the occurrence of mesothelioma is relatively rare in most populations, its
descriptive epidemiology is largely based on mortality data,[3] which are coded on the basis of subsequent versions of
the International Classification of Diseases (ICD).[4] Until the 10th revision of the ICD (ICD10), however,
mesothelioma was not associated with a specific code, and mesothelioma deaths were
classified under neoplasms of the pleura (ICD, 9th revision [ICD9] code 163), neoplasms
of the peritoneum (ICD9 code 158), and under other organs, such as the pericardium and
the tunica vaginalis, where mesothelioma rarely occurs. Other tumor types were also
included in these rubrics, complicating the use of mortality data to describe geographic
and temporal patterns of the disease.In ICD10,[5] a specific code was
introduced for mesothelioma (from any site), which enables more valid analyses of
mortality data from populations in which the new classification has been adopted; this
occurred in the late 1990s and early 2000s in many high-income countries. Because
mortality data on the basis of ICD10 have become available for a period of ≥ 15
years in several countries, we aimed to analyze international temporal patterns of
age-adjusted and age-specific trends in mesotheliomamortality.The WHO database (WHO Statistical Information System) provides official death
certification data for most cancer sites; we considered those for mesothelioma from the
first year of use of the ICD10 until the most recent year. We restricted the analysis to
selected high-income countries providing valid and consistent data on mesothelioma and
at least 15 million inhabitants (Canada [2000-2011], the United States [1999-2014],
Japan [1995-2013], France [2000-2013], Germany [1998-2014], Italy [2003-2012], the
Netherlands [1996-2013], Poland [1999-2014], the United Kingdom [2001-2013], and
Australia [1998-2014]). We considered deaths from all mesothelioma (ICD10 C45), as well
as from pleural mesothelioma (ICD10 C45.0) and peritoneal mesothelioma (ICD10 C45.1). In
the latter analysis, we attributed deaths from mesothelioma from unspecified sites
(ICD10 C45.9) to the pleura (85% in men, 73% in women) and peritoneum (7% in men, 18% in
women) on the basis of the distribution of the patients registered in the SEER program
during 2003 to 2008.[6]We computed age-specific mortality rates for each 5-year age group (from 0-4 to ≥
85 years) for each year and for the periods 2000 to 2004, 2005 to 2009, and 2013 (or
closest available year, 2011 in Canada, and 2012 in Italy). We calculated
age-standardized rates (world standard population) per 100,000 men and women, at all
ages, using the direct method, as well as for the age groups 35 to 54, 55 to 64, 65 to
74 and ≥ 75 years.[7] We also fit
a logarithmic Poisson count data joinpoint regression model to identify trend changes
for all ages and each age group.[8]Mortality rates for all mesotheliomas are reported in Figure 1; average annual percent changes are listed in Table 1; overall age-standardized rates in 2000 to
2004 and in 2013 are reported in Appendix Table
A1, and detailed results of the joinpoint analysis are reported in Appendix
Table A2. In 2000 to 2004, rates in men
were > 2 of 100,000 in the Netherlands, United Kingdom, and Australia; between
1.0 and 1.3 of 100,000 in France, Germany, and Italy; approximately 0.7 of 100,000 in
Canada and the United States; and < 0.5 of 100,000 in Japan and Poland. In 2013,
overall rates tended to decrease in the Netherlands, Australia, the United States, and
France (and to a small extent, in the United Kingdom) and tended to increase in Japan
and mostly in Poland (to reach 0.6 of 100,000). Overall female rates were lower, between
0.1 and 0.5 of 100,000, the highest one in 2000 to 2004 being in Italy, the United
Kingdom, and Australia. No appreciable change was observed between 2000 to 2004 and
2013, except in Poland, whose rates rose from 0.07 to 0.21 of 100,000; a small increase
was apparent in the United Kingdom and Australia as well.
Fig 1
Mesothelioma mortality rates on the basis of International Classification of
Diseases, 10th Revision, by gender, in selected countries, for all ages, and by
age group. ASR, age-standardized rate per 100,000. Men, squares; women,
circles.
Table 1
Average Annual Percent Change in Mesothelioma Mortality in Selected Countries, by
Gender, for All Ages, and by Age Group
Table A1
Mortality Rates per 100,000 From Mesothelioma at all Ages and by Age
Group, by Gender, in Selected Countries Around 2002 (2000-2004), 2007
(2005-2009), and in 2013 (or the last available), and Corresponding
Change in Rates
Table A2
Joinpoint Analysis of Mortality Rates From Mesothelioma in Men and Women
at All Ages and by Age Group in Selected Countries
Average Annual Percent Change in MesotheliomaMortality in Selected Countries, by
Gender, for All Ages, and by Age GroupMesotheliomamortality rates on the basis of International Classification of
Diseases, 10th Revision, by gender, in selected countries, for all ages, and by
age group. ASR, age-standardized rate per 100,000. Men, squares; women,
circles.The analysis by age group among men showed a consistent pattern in most countries in the
analysis: older age groups showed an increase (in the United States, a weaker decrease)
in mortality rates during the period of study, whereas in young age groups, there was a
decrease (in Poland, a weaker increase). The magnitude of the increase (in older age
groups) or the decrease (in younger age groups) varied across countries, as it varied
the years in which changes in trends were identified by the joinpoint analysis.The results of the age-specific analysis among women revealed a pattern similar to that
identified among men, with mortality trends being negative (or less positive) in the
young and positive (or less negative) in the elderly, although in some of the countries
(eg, Germany), this shift from negative across age groups was not monotonic, and the
absolute value of the change varied across countries.We repeated the analysis separating pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma (Appendix Figs A1 and A2; Appendix Table A3). Because
pleural mesothelioma deaths represented the vast majority of the total, trends and
patterns for this form of the disease paralleled those of the main analysis. The
assessment of trends of peritoneal mesothelioma among patients younger than 55 years of
age was hampered by a small number of deaths; in the other age groups, however, patterns
were similar to those observed for all forms of the disease.
Fig A1
Pleural mesothelioma mortality rates on the basis of the International
Classification of Diseases (10th revision) codes by gender in selected
countries, by all ages, and by age group. ASR, age-standardized rate per
100,000. Men, squares; women, circles.
Fig A2
Peritoneal mesothelioma mortality rates on the basis of the International
Classification of Diseases (10th revision) codes by gender in selected
countries, by all ages, and by age group. ASR, age-standardized rate per
100,000. Men, squares; women, circles.
Table A3
Mortality Rates per 100,000 From Pleural and Peritoneal Mesothelioma at
all Ages and by Age Group, by Gender, in Selected Countries, Around 2002
(2000-2004), 2007 (2005-2009), and in 2013 (or the last available), and
Corresponding Change in Rates
The analysis of trends in mortality from mesothelioma on the basis of ICD10 showed
variability in the absolute levels and in the presence and magnitude of an increasing
(or decreasing) trend. Despite this heterogeneity, a consistent pattern was shown in
that mesothelioma rates were decreasing among younger people, whereas they were still
increasing among older people. The only countries with a different pattern were the
United States (decrease in all age groups among men) and Poland (increase in all age
group and both sexes).The trends in age-adjusted rates are consistent with those reported in recent years for
individual countries on the basis of either mortality or incidence data, for example,
Australia,[9] Germany,[10] the United States,[6] and England.[11] An analysis of temporal trends in age-specific rates,
however, was reported only for 1998 to 2002 in southeast England[12]; its results were similar to ours,
although on the basis of small numbers.The decreases observed in the United States as contrasted with western Europe were
already observed in an analysis of trends between 1973 and 2003[13] and in an age-period-cohort analysis
of trends until the end of last century,[14] and are attributable to earlier control of asbestos (mainly
amphibole) exposure in the United States than in other high-income countries. Japan had
relatively low rates in middle-aged and elderly people in the early 2000s, but showed
appreciable increases over the calendar period considered, reflecting changes in
asbestos imports in the past in that country.[15] Poland started from extremely low rates, which were probably
real, because the validity of Polish cancer death certification has long been
acceptable.[16]Mesotheliomamortality rates were low in Eastern compared with Western Europe,[14] but show a tendency toward leveling or
even overcoming western European rates in younger generations. This likely reflects the
changing pattern and type of asbestos exposure in this region of the world.Given the strong relationship between asbestos exposure (mainly at the workplace) and
occurrence of mesothelioma,[17] and the
fact that the prevalence of occupational exposure has declined in the last decades
because of stricter regulations on asbestos use,[18] it is plausible that the results of our analysis represent the
effect of reduction of asbestos exposure in the younger age groups. The decline in
mortality rates among young people shows the benefit of reduced opportunity to
experience occupational exposure throughout the working life; in fact, these people were
born approximately in the 1950s and started their working life in the 1970s and 1980s,
when restrictive asbestos regulations were implemented. However, trends in the young age
groups should be interpreted with caution because of the small number of deaths in this
category. People ages 55 to 74 years, however, had a higher probability of exposure
during the early part of their working history, whereas those ≥ 75 years of age
experienced the full extent of the epidemic of asbestos exposure, at least during the
first part of their employment experience. This interpretation is consistent with a
predominant role of early exposure to asbestos in determining subsequent risk of
mesothelioma and with a modest role of subsequent quitting or continuing
exposure.[19] These results also
show the powerful effect of measures aimed at preventing asbestos exposure, which have
been implemented during the last decades: 2013 mortality rates in men ages 35 to 54
years were, in most countries, in the range 0.15 to 0.30 of 100,000, a level well below
those measured a decade earlier, and the decline is likely to continue in the coming
years.
Authors: Martin Lehnert; Klaus Kraywinkel; Evelyn Heinze; Thorsten Wiethege; Georg Johnen; Julia Fiebig; Thomas Brüning; Dirk Taeger Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2016-12-27 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Rosemary J Korda; Mark S Clements; Bruce K Armstrong; Susan M Trevenar; Elizabeth B Chalker; Leah A Newman; Martyn D Kirk Journal: Public Health Res Pract Date: 2016-09-30
Authors: S Jane Henley; Theodore C Larson; Manxia Wu; Vinicius C S Antao; Mary Lewis; Germania A Pinheiro; Christie Eheman Journal: Int J Occup Environ Health Date: 2013 Jan-Mar
Authors: Michele Carbone; Shreya Kanodia; Ann Chao; Aubrey Miller; Anil Wali; David Weissman; Alex Adjei; Francine Baumann; Paolo Boffetta; Brenda Buck; Marc de Perrot; A Umran Dogan; Steve Gavett; Alessandro Gualtieri; Raffit Hassan; Mary Hesdorffer; Fred R Hirsch; David Larson; Weimin Mao; Scott Masten; Harvey I Pass; Julian Peto; Enrico Pira; Ian Steele; Anne Tsao; Gavitt Alida Woodard; Haining Yang; Shakun Malik Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2016-08 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Lucian R Chirieac; Yin P Hung; Wai Chin Foo; Matthias D Hofer; Paul A VanderLaan; William G Richards; David J Sugarbaker; Raphael Bueno Journal: Cancer Date: 2019-08-07 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Cristina Bosetti; Eugenio Traini; Tahiya Alam; Christine A Allen; Giulia Carreras; Kelly Compton; Christina Fitzmaurice; Lisa M Force; Silvano Gallus; Giuseppe Gorini; James D Harvey; Jonathan M Kocarnik; Carlo La Vecchia; Alessandra Lugo; Mohsen Naghavi; Alyssa Pennini; Cristiano Piccinelli; Luca Ronfani; Rixing Xu; Lorenzo Monasta Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-12-16 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Pietro Apostoli; Paolo Boffetta; Massimo Bovenzi; Pier Luigi Cocco; Dario Consonni; Alfonso Cristaudo; Gianluigi Discalzi; Andrea Farioli; Maurizio Manno; Stefano Mattioli; Enrico Pira; Leonardo Soleo; Giuseppe Taino; Francesco Saverio Violante; Carlo Zocchetti Journal: Med Lav Date: 2019-12-17 Impact factor: 1.275