| Literature DB >> 32214176 |
Sumaira Mubarik1, Fang Wang1, Muhammad Fawad2,3, Yafeng Wang1, Ishfaq Ahmad4, Chuanhua Yu5,6.
Abstract
The current study aimed to explore some important insights into the breast cancer mortality (BCM) trends and projections among four Asian countries by using five advanced stochastic mortality models. BCM data over 28 years from 1990-2017 with ages 20-84 were retrieved from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study 2017 for four Asian countries, namely, China, India, Pakistan, and Thailand. Five stochastic mortality models with the family of generalized age-period-cohort were implemented to find the present and future BCM trends in these four Asian countries. Based on Cairns-Blake-Dowd (CBD) model and Lee-Carter model (LCM), overall, results revealed that BCM increased with the passage of time. Aging factor was the most influential factor of elevated BCM in each Asian country under consideration. Projection of BCM showed that mortality rates might continue to grow with time, especially in older ages in each Asian country under study. The highest forecasted BCM rates were observed in Pakistan as compared to other countries. The obvious increase in BCM suggested that earlier tactics should be implemented to reduce the subsequent morbidity and mortality due to breast cancer. The last but not least, some additional tactics to mitigate the BCM in older ages must be adopted.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32214176 PMCID: PMC7096499 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-62393-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Trends of BCM rates by age, period, and cohort for four Asian countries from 1990 to 2017. response: BCM rates (per 100,000).
Figure 2Growth of BCM in Asian women separately for each country aged 20 to 84 for the years 1990 to 2017.
Figure 3Estimation of the (a) LCM (b) APC (c) CBD (d) M7 and (e) RH model parameters for four Asian countries.
Average root mean square error (ARMSE) of five methods over the ages 20–84 separately for four Asian countries.
| Countries | Stochastic Mortality-GAPC Models | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LCM (95% EI) | APC (95% EI) | CBD (95% EI) | M7 (95% EI) | RH (95% EI) | |
| China | 9.24 (8.21–10.26) | 9.37 (8.09–10.64) | 9.45 (8.31–10.58) | 9.37 (8.09–10.64) | |
| India | 8.94 (7.98–9.90) | 9.45 (8.31–10.58) | 9.45 (8.31–10.58) | 9.45 (8.31–10.58) | |
| Pakistan | 7.82 (6.96–8.68) | 8.83 (7.63–10.02) | 8.83 (7.63–10.02) | 8.83 (7.63–10.02) | |
| Thailand | 9.17 (8.00–10.33) | 9.17 (8.00–10.33) | 9.17 (8.00–10.33) | 9.17 (8.00–10.33) | |
Note: EI = 95% Error Interval.
Average root mean square error (ARMSE) of five methods over the years 1990–2017 for four Asian countries.
| Countries | Stochastic Mortality-GAPC Models | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LCM (95% EI) | APC (95% EI) | CBD (95% EI) | M7 (95% EI) | RH (95% EI) | |
| China | 9.38 A (9.34–9.42) | 9.58 A (9.41–9.74) | 8.92B (8.90–8.94) | 9.13B (9.10–9.16) | 9.57 A (9.40–9.74) |
| India | 9.07B (9.05–9.09) | 9.13 A (9.10–9.16) | 8.67 C (8.64–8.70) | 9.13 A (9.10–9.16) | 9.13 A (9.10–9.16) |
| Pakistan | 7.93B (7.87–7.99) | 8.44 A (8.39 8.48) | 7.60 C (7.55–7.64) | 8.44 A (8.39–8.48) | 8.44 A (8.39–8.48) |
| Thailand | 9.57 A (9.40–9.73) | 8.91B (8.87–8.95) | 8.59 C (8.56–8.62) | 8.91B (8.87–8.95) | 8.91B (8.87–8.95) |
Note: Means that do not share a letter are significantly different, EI = 95% Error Interval.
Tukey HSD, Multiple comparisons of Average RMSE, mean difference p-values.
| China | India | Pakistan | Thailand | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LCM | APC | CBD | M7 | LCM | APC | CBD | M7 | LCM | APC | CBD | M7 | LCM | APC | CBD | M7 | |
| APC | 0.082 | 0.048* | 0.000** | 0.000** | ||||||||||||
| CBD | 0.000** | 0.000** | 0.000** | 0.000** | 0.000** | 0.000** | 0.000** | 0.000** | ||||||||
| M7 | 0.016* | 0.000** | 0.055 | 0.048* | 1.000 | 0.000** | 0.000** | 1.000 | 0.000** | 0.000** | 1.000 | 0.000** | ||||
| RH | 0.089 | 1.000 | 0.000** | 0.000** | 0.048* | 1.000 | 0.000** | 1.000 | 0.000** | 1.000 | 0.000** | 1.000 | 0.000** | 1.000 | 0.000** | 1.000 |
Note: *p values are significant at 5% level of significance for that pair, **p values are significant at 1% level of significance for that pair.
Figure 4Forecast of the BCM index using the CBD model and LCM model for (1990–2030) period by countries. Shades represent 80% and 95% prediction intervals.
Figure 5Forecast of the BCM rates (per 100 000) using the LCM and CBD model for (1990–2030) period by age and countries. Actual rate (red dot ◦), fitted rate (black line-) and forecast rate (blue dashed line–).