Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25172266›Full record

ArticleLung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2014

Patterns in lung cancer incidence rates and trends by histologic type in the United States, 2004-2009.

Keisha A Houston, S Jane Henley, Jun Li, Mary C White, Thomas B Richards

Open access · greenAbstract readHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Article in Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 123 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
123citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
14.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

123 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 221 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

63 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Keisha A HoustonDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), CDC 4770 Buford Highway NE, F-76 Chamblee, GA 30341, USA. Electronic address: kahouston@cdc.gov.
S Jane HenleyDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), CDC 4770 Buford Highway NE, F-76 Chamblee, GA 30341, USA. Electronic address: shenley@cdc.gov.
Jun LiDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), CDC 4770 Buford Highway NE, F-76 Chamblee, GA 30341, USA. Electronic address: jli14@cdc.gov.
Mary C WhiteDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), CDC 4770 Buford Highway NE, F-76 Chamblee, GA 30341, USA. Electronic address: mcwhite@cdc.gov.
Thomas B RichardsDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), CDC 4770 Buford Highway NE, F-76 Chamblee, GA 30341, USA. Electronic address: trichards@cdc.gov.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · US

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe examination of lung cancer by histology type is important for monitoring population trends that have implications for etiology and prevention, screening and clinical diagnosis, prognosis and treatment. We provide a comprehensive description of recent histologic lung cancer incidence rates and trends in the USA using combined population-based registry data for the entire nation. MATERIALS AND

methodsHistologic lung cancer incidence data was analyzed from CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR) and the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program. Standardized rates and trends were calculated for men and women by age, race/ethnicity, and U.S. Census region. Rate ratios were examined for differences in rates between men and women, and annual percent change was calculated to quantify changes in incidence rates over time.

resultsTrend analysis demonstrate that overall rates have decreased, but incidence has remained stable for women aged 50 or older. Adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma were the two most common histologic subtypes. Adenocarcinoma rates continued to increase in men and women, and squamous cell rates increased in women only. All histologic subtype rates for white women exceeded rates for black women. Histologic rates for black men exceeded those for white men, except for small cell carcinoma. The incidence rate for Hispanics was nearly half the rate for blacks and whites.

conclusionThe continuing rise in incidence of lung adenocarcinoma, the rise of squamous cell cancer in women, and differences by age, race, ethnicity and region points to the need to better understand factors acting in addition to, or in synergy with, cigarette smoking that may be contributing to observed differences in lung cancer histology.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHistory, 21st CenturyHumansIncidenceLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedOdds RatioRegistriesRisk FactorsSEER ProgramUnited StatesYoung AdultHistologic typeIncidenceLung cancerSurveillanceTime trendTumor registry

Identifiers

PMID25172266
PMCPMC5823254
OpenAlexW2042484209

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.