| Literature DB >> 31870095 |
Jeff Yi-Fu Hwang1, Wei-Yen Lim2, Chuen Seng Tan1, Sheow Lei Lim3, John Chia4, Khuan Yew Chow5, Wen Yee Chay4.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We investigate ovarian cancer incidence between 1968 and 2012 in Singapore, a multiethnic Asian city state.Entities:
Keywords: Epidemiology; Singapore; ovarian carcinoma; period effect; reproductive factors
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31870095 PMCID: PMC7173386 DOI: 10.31557/APJCP.2019.20.12.3563
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Asian Pac J Cancer Prev ISSN: 1513-7368
Figure 1Age-Standardised Incidence and Mortality Rates of Ovarian Cancer in Singapore 1968-2012
Figure 2Age-Standardised Incidence of Ovarian Cancer by Ethnicity in Singapore 1968-2013
Figure 3Overall Age-Standardised Incidence of Ovarian Cancer by Subtype, in All Women, Chinese Women, Malay Women and Indian Women, with Total Fertility Rates, 1960-2010
Figure 4Stage of Diagnosis of Ovarian Cancer by Subtype in Singapore in Years 2003 to 2010
Age-Period-Cohort Modelling for All Ovarian Cancers Stratified by Ethnicity 1968-2012
| Model | Deviance statistic | Degrees of freedom | Deviance P | AIC | Model-building P1 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chinese females | Age | 321.59 | 96 | <0.0001 | 925.1 | |
| Age and drift | 132.11 | 95 | 0.0071 | 737.62 | <0.00001(drift vs age alone) | |
| Age and period | 98.92 | 88 | 0.2 | 718.43 | <0.00001 (period vs age alone) | |
| Age and cohort | 113.91 | 77 | 0.004 | 755.42 | <0.00001 (cohort vs age alone) | |
| Age, period, cohort | 84.57 | 70 | 0.1131 | 740.07 | 0.7055 (APC vs age period) | |
| Malay | Age | 113.96 | 96 | 0.1 | 507.57 | |
| Age and drift | 88.6 | 95 | 0.67 | 484.21 | <0.00001 (drift vs age alone) | |
| Age and period | 79.45 | 88 | 0.73 | 489.06 | <0.00001 (period vs age alone) | |
| Age and cohort | 67.44 | 78 | 0.8 | 497.05 | 0.0002 (cohort vs age alone) | |
| Age, period, cohort | 57.5 | 71 | 0.88 | 501.11 | 0.1869 (APC vs age period) | |
| 0.1923 (APC vs age cohort) | ||||||
| Indian | Age | 108.59 | 96 | 0.18 | 378.43 | |
| Age and drift | 104.84 | 95 | 0.23 | 376.68 | 0.0527 (drift vs age alone) | |
| Age and period | 99.22 | 88 | 0.19 | 385.06 | 0.3120 (period vs age alone) | |
| Age and cohort | 94.58 | 77 | 0.08 | 402.42 | 0.7830 (cohort vs age alone) | |
| Age, period, cohort | 89.11 | 70 | 0.0614 | 410.95 | 0.9282 (APC vs age period) |
1Model building: Model-building used a set of nested models: age alone, age and drift, age, drift and period, age, drift and cohort, and age, drift, period and cohort. “P values” refer to the p value for the likelihood ratio test comparing two models, one nested in the other; the models compared are in brackets. In the full APC model, the agegroup variable for the youngest agegroup was recoded to be identical to that for the next youngest agegroup.
Figure 5Age Specific Ovarian Cancer Incidence Rates by Period in All Women, Chinese Women, Malay Women and Indian Women, 1968-2012