ArticleCancer epidemiology2016
Trends in mouth cancer incidence in Mumbai, India (1995-2009): An age-period-cohort analysis.
Article in Cancer epidemiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transporter Associated with Antigen Processing Proteins (TAP-1 and TAP-2) Gene Expression of MHC-I Downregulated in Oral Squamous Cell CarcinomaEndocrine, metabolic & immune disorders drug targets · 2026Article
- CEACAM1 as a molecular target in oral cancer.Aging · 2023Article
- Mortality from oral and oropharyngeal cancer: age-period-cohort effect, Brazil, 1983-2017.Revista de saude publica · 2021Article
- Article
- Economic evaluation of Mumbai and its satellite cancer registries: Implications for expansion of data collection.Cancer epidemiology · 2016Article
- Occurrence and Distribution of Cancers with Emphasis Upon Oral Cancers in Registered Oncology Institutes of South India - A Retrospective Study.Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social MedicineArticle
- Human papillomavirus in head and neck cancer in India: Current status and consensus recommendations.South Asian journal of cancerReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDespite tobacco control and health promotion efforts, the incidence rates of mouth cancer are increasing across most regions in India. Analysing the influence of age, time period and birth cohort on these secular trends can point towards underlying factors and help identify high-risk populations for improved cancer control programmes.
methodsWe evaluated secular changes in mouth cancer incidence among men and women aged 25-74 years in Mumbai between 1995 and 2009 by calculating age-specific and age-standardized incidence rates (ASR). We estimated the age-adjusted linear trend for annual percent change (EAPC) using the drift parameter, and conducted an age-period-cohort (APC) analysis to quantify recent time trends and to evaluate the significance of birth cohort and calendar period effects.
resultsOver the 15-year period, age-standardized incidence rates of mouth cancer in men in Mumbai increased by 2.7% annually (95% CI:1.9 to 3.4), p<0.0001) while rates among women decreased (EAPC=-0.01% (95% CI:-0.02 to -0.002), p=0.03). APC analysis revealed significant non-linear positive period and cohort effects in men, with higher effects among younger men (25-49 years). Non-significant increasing trends were observed in younger women (25-49 years).
conclusionsAPC analyses from the Mumbai cancer registry indicate a significant linear increase of mouth cancer incidence from 1995 to 2009 in men, which was driven by younger men aged 25-49 years, and a non-significant upward trend in similarly aged younger women. Health promotion efforts should more effectively target younger cohorts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.