| Literature DB >> 35638100 |
Kang Xiao1, Ming-Fan Pang2, Yue-Qiao Zhao2, Li-Ping Gao1, Yue-Zhang Wu1, Yuan Wang1, Qi Shi1,3, Xiao-Ping Dong1,2,3,4,5.
Abstract
Human prion diseases (PrDs) are a group of transmissible neurodegenerative diseases that can be clarified as sporadic, genetic and iatrogenic forms. In this study, we have analysed the time and geographic distributions of 2011 PrD cases diagnosed by China National Surveillance for Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CNS-CJD) since 2006, including 1792 sporadic CJD (sCJD) cases and 219 gPrD cases. Apparently, the cases numbers of both sCJD and gPrD increased along with the surveillance years, showing a stepping up every five years. The geographic distributions of the PrDs cases based on the permanent residences were wide, distributing in 30 out of 31 provincial-level administrative divisions in Chinese mainland. However, the case numbers in the provincial level varied largely. The provinces in the eastern part of China had much more cases than those in the western part. Normalized the case numbers with the total population each province revealed higher incidences in six provinces. Further, the resident and referring places of all PrD cases were analysed, illustrating a clear concentrating pattern of referring in the large metropolises. Five provincial-level administrative divisions reported more PrD cases from other provinces than the local ones. Particularly, BJ reported not only more than one-fourth of all PrDs cases in Chinese mainland but also 3.64-fold more PrDs cases from other provinces than its local ones. We believed that good medical resources, well-trained programmes and knowledge of PrDs in the clinicians and the CDC staffs contributed to well-referring PrD cases in those large cities.Entities:
Keywords: Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease; Prion disease; case referring; geographic difference; surveillance
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35638100 PMCID: PMC9176242 DOI: 10.1080/19336896.2022.2080921
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Prion ISSN: 1933-6896 Impact factor: 2.547
Figure 1.The numbers of the diagnosed PrD cases and the referring provinces from 2006 to 2019. A. sCJD cases. B. gPrD cases. Yellow curves with Orange points represent the numbers of PrD cases (showing in right Y axis). Light blue columns represent the numbers of referring provinces (showing in left Y axis). The surveillance years are indicated in X axis.
Figure 2.The numbers of the reported PrD cases and the referring years of various provinces. A. sCJD cases. B. gPrD cases. Yellow curves with Orange points represent the numbers of PrD cases (showing in right Y axis). Light blue columns represent the numbers of referring years (showing in left Y axis). The provinces in abbreviation are indicated in X axis.
Number of cases with prion diseases in the permanent resident places and referring places
| Province | Residents (Mil.) | sCJD | gPrD | Total PrD | Ratio of PrD cases/population (Mil.) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Referring | Resident | Difference | Referring | Resident | Difference | Referring | Resident | Difference | |||
| Number (%) | Number (%) | Number | Number (%) | Number (%) | Number | Number (%) | Number (%) | Number | |||
| Beijing (BJ) | 21.7 | 468 (26.2%) | 106 (5.9%) | 362 | 81 (38.4%) | 13 (5.9%) | 68 | 553 (27.5%) | 119 (5.9%) | 434 | 5.48 |
| Henan (HA) | 95.6 | 190 (10.6%) | 212 (11.8%) | −22 | 28 (12.8%) | 34 (15.1%) | −5 | 218 (10.8%) | 245 (12.2%) | −27 | 2.56 |
| Shanghai (SH) | 24.2 | 139 (7.8%) | 81 (4.5%) | 58 | 8 (3.7%) | 6 (2.7%) | 2 | 147 (7.3%) | 87 (4.3%) | 60 | 3.60 |
| Guangdong (GD) | 111.7 | 135 (7.5%) | 117 (6.5%) | 18 | 16 (7.3%) | 14 (6.4%) | 2 | 151 (7.5%) | 131 (6.5%) | 20 | 1.17 |
| Shandong (SD) | 100.0 | 86 (4.8%) | 143 (8.0%) | −57 | 12 (5.5%) | 24 (11.0%) | −12 | 98 (4.9%) | 167 (8.3%) | −69 | 1.67 |
| Shaanxi (SN) | 38.4 | 79 (4.4%) | 61 (3.4%) | 18 | 5 (2.3%) | 5 (2.3%) | 0 | 84 (4.2%) | 66 (3.3%) | 18 | 1.95 |
| Chongqing (CQ) | 30.5 | 70 (3.9%) | 52 (2.9%) | 18 | 6 (2.7%) | 3 (1.4%) | 3 | 76 (3.8%) | 55 (2.7%) | 21 | 1.80 |
| Zhejiang (ZJ) | 56.6 | 65 (3.6%) | 82 (4.6%) | −17 | 4 (1.8%) | 11 (5.0%) | −7 | 69 (3.4%) | 93 (4.6%) | −24 | 1.64 |
| Sichuan (SC) | 83.0 | 63 (3.5%) | 77 (4.3%) | −14 | 7 (3.2%) | 7 (3.2%) | 0 | 70 (3.5%) | 84 (4.2%) | −14 | 1.01 |
| Fujian (FJ) | 39.1 | 54 (3.0%) | 61 (3.4%) | −7 | 3 (1.4%) | 3 (1.4%) | 0 | 57 (2.8%) | 64 (3.2%) | −7 | 1.64 |
| Jilin (JL) | 27.2 | 52 (2.9%) | 51 (2.8%) | 1 | 8 (3.7%) | 9 (4.1%) | −1 | 60 (3.0%) | 60 (3.0%) | 0 | 2.21 |
| Hebei (HE) | 75.2 | 48 (2.7%) | 128 (7.1%) | −80 | 3 (1.4%) | 21 (9.6%) | −18 | 51 (2.5%) | 149 (7.4%) | −98 | 1.98 |
| Jiangsu (JS) | 80.3 | 45 (2.5%) | 69 (3.9%) | −24 | 2 (0.91%) | 5 (2.3%) | −3 | 47 (2.3%) | 74 (3.7%) | −27 | 0.92 |
| Tianjin (TJ) | 15.6 | 41 (2.3%) | 41 (2.3%) | 0 | 9 (4.1%) | 11 (5.0%) | −2 | 50 (2.5%) | 52 (2.6%) | −2 | 3.33 |
| Guizhou (GZ) | 35.8 | 35 (2.0%) | 40 (2.2%) | −5 | 2 (0.91%) | 4 (1.8%) | −2 | 37 (1.8%) | 44 (2.2%) | −7 | 1.23 |
| Hubei (HB) | 59.0 | 30 (1.7%) | 36 (2.0%) | −6 | 2 (0.91%) | 4 (1.8%) | −2 | 32 (1.6%) | 40 (2.0%) | −8 | 0.68 |
| Anhui (AH) | 62.5 | 27 (1.5%) | 64 (3.6%) | −37 | 5 (2.3%) | 9 (4.1%) | −4 | 32 (1.6%) | 73 (3.6%) | −41 | 1.17 |
| Liaoning (LN) | 43.7 | 25 (1.4%) | 44 (2.5%) | −19 | 1 (0.46%) | 3 (1.4%) | −2 | 26 (1.3%) | 47 (2.3%) | −21 | 1.08 |
| Gansu (GS) | 26.3 | 23 (1.3%) | 39 (2.2%) | −16 | 2 (0.91%) | 4 (1.8%) | −2 | 25 (1.2%) | 43 (2.1%) | −18 | 1.63 |
| Hunan (HN) | 68.6 | 22 (1.2%) | 26 (1.5%) | −4 | 2 (0.91%) | 1 (0.46%) | 1 | 24 (1.2%) | 27 (1.3%) | −3 | 0.39 |
| Jiangxi (JX) | 46.2 | 20 (1.1%) | 36 (2.0%) | −16 | 3 (1.4%) | 9 (4.1%) | −6 | 23 (1.1%) | 45 (2.2%) | −22 | 0.97 |
| Xinjiang (XJ) | 24.4 | 19 (1.1%) | 24 (1.3%) | −5 | 1 (0.46%) | 2 (0.91%) | −1 | 20 (0.99%) | 26 (1.3%) | −6 | 1.07 |
| Yunnan (YN) | 48.0 | 17 (0.95%) | 24 (13.4%) | −7 | 2 (0.91%) | 2 (0.91%) | 0 | 19 (0.94%) | 26 (1.3%) | −7 | 0.54 |
| Shanxi (SX) | 37.0 | 16 (0.89%) | 58 (3.2%) | −42 | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (1.4%) | −3 | 16 (0.80%) | 61 (3.0%) | −45 | 1.65 |
| Heilongjiang (HL) | 37.9 | 8 (0.44%) | 45 (2.5%) | −37 | 2 (0.91%) | 4 (1.8%) | −2 | 10 (0.50%) | 49 (2.4%) | −39 | 1.29 |
| Guangxi (GX) | 48.9 | 5 (0.28%) | 12 (0.67%) | −7 | 1 (0.46%) | 1 (0.46%) | 0 | 6 (0.30%) | 13 (0.65%) | −7 | 0.27 |
| Ningxia (NX) | 6.8 | 4 (0.22%) | 7 (0.39%) | −3 | 1 (0.46%) | 1 (0.46%) | 0 | 5 (0.25%) | 8 (0.40%) | −3 | 1.18 |
| Hainan (HI) | 9.3 | 3 (0.17%) | 6 (0.33%) | −3 | 1 (0.46%) | 2 (0.91%) | −1 | 4 (0.20%) | 8 (0.40%) | −4 | 0.86 |
| Neimenggu (NM) | 25.3 | 2 (0.11%) | 33 (1.8%) | −31 | 0 (0.0%) | 6 (2.7%) | −6 | 2 (0.10%) | 39 (1.9%) | −37 | 1.54 |
| Qinghai (QH) | 6.0 | 0 (0%) | 2 (0.11%) | −2 | 0(0.0%) | 1 (0.46%) | −1 | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (0.15%) | −3 | 0.50 |
| Outside | / | / | 6 (0.33%) | / | / | 1 (0.46%) | / | / | 7 (3.5%) | / | / |
| Total | / | 1792 | 1792 | / | 219 | 219 | / | 2011 | 2011 | / | / |
Figure 3.Geographic distributions of PrD cases in the provincial-level administrative divisions of Chinese mainland. A. based on the permanent resident places. B. based on the referring places.
Figure 4.Distributions of PrD cases based on the resident places (left) and referring places (right) of various provinces in Chinese mainland. A. sCJD cases. B. gPrD cases.