BACKGROUND The impact of cancer on socioeconomic outcomes is attracting attention as the number of survivors of cancer in young age continues to rise. This study examines economic independence in a national cohort of survivors of cancer at a young age in Norway. METHODS Through the linkage of several national registries, the study cohort comprised 1,212,013 individuals born in Norway during 1965 through 1985, of which 5440 had received a cancer diagnosis before age 25 years. Follow-up was through 2007, and the main outcomes were receipt of governmental financial assistance, employment, income, and occupation. Analytic methods included Cox proportional hazard regression, log-binomial regression, and quantile regression models. RESULTS Individuals in the cancer survivor group had an increased probability of receiving governmental financial assistance (men: hazard ratio [HR], 1.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-1.5; women: HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.3-1.6) and of not being employed (men: HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2-1.7; women: HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2-1.6) compared with those in the noncancer group. Income discrepancies were particularly pronounced for survivors of central nervous system tumors. There was no difference in representation in higher skilled occupations. CONCLUSIONS Survivors of cancer at a young age in Norway had an increased risk of being economically dependent and unemployed. This was evident in several tumor groups and was most pronounced in female survivors. There were only small differences in income or representation in higher skilled occupations for most employed survivors compared with the noncancer group. The current results are important for understanding the impact of a cancer diagnosis at a young age on subsequent job market outcomes
BACKGROUND: The impact of cancer on socioeconomic outcomes is attracting attention as the number of survivors of cancer in young age continues to rise. This study examines economic independence in a national cohort of survivors of cancer at a young age in Norway. METHODS: Through the linkage of several national registries, the study cohort comprised 1,212,013 individuals born in Norway during 1965 through 1985, of which 5440 had received a cancer diagnosis before age 25 years. Follow-up was through 2007, and the main outcomes were receipt of governmental financial assistance, employment, income, and occupation. Analytic methods included Cox proportional hazard regression, log-binomial regression, and quantile regression models. RESULTS: Individuals in the cancer survivor group had an increased probability of receiving governmental financial assistance (men: hazard ratio [HR], 1.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-1.5; women: HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.3-1.6) and of not being employed (men: HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2-1.7; women: HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2-1.6) compared with those in the noncancer group. Income discrepancies were particularly pronounced for survivors of central nervous system tumors. There was no difference in representation in higher skilled occupations. CONCLUSIONS: Survivors of cancer at a young age in Norway had an increased risk of being economically dependent and unemployed. This was evident in several tumor groups and was most pronounced in female survivors. There were only small differences in income or representation in higher skilled occupations for most employed survivors compared with the noncancer group. The current results are important for understanding the impact of a cancer diagnosis at a young age on subsequent job market outcomes. ; publishedVersion
Publisher's version (útgefin grein) ; Background The Nordic countries have commonalities in gender equality, economy, welfare, and health care, but differ in culture and lifestyle, which might create country-wise health differences. This study compared life expectancy, disease burden, and risk factors in the Nordic region.Methods Life expectancy in years and age-standardised rates of overall, cause-specific, and risk factor-specific estimates of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) were analysed in the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2017. Data were extracted for Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden (ie, the Nordic countries), and Greenland, an autonomous area of Denmark. Estimates were compared with global, high-income region, and Nordic regional estimates, including Greenland.Findings All Nordic countries exceeded the global life expectancy; in 2017, the highest life expectancy was in Iceland among females (85·9 years [95% uncertainty interval [UI] 85·5–86·4] vs 75·6 years [75·3–75·9] globally) and Sweden among males (80·8 years [80·2–81·4] vs 70·5 years [70·1–70·8] globally). Females (82·7 years [81·9–83·4]) and males (78·8 years [78·1–79·5]) in Denmark and males in Finland (78·6 years [77·8–79·2]) had lower life expectancy than in the other Nordic countries. The lowest life expectancy in the Nordic region was in Greenland (females 77·2 years [76·2–78·0], males 70·8 years [70·3–71·4]). Overall disease burden was lower in the Nordic countries than globally, with the lowest age-standardised DALY rates among Swedish males (18 555·7 DALYs [95% UI 15 968·6–21 426·8] per 100 000 population vs 35 834·3 DALYs [33 218·2–38 740·7] globally) and Icelandic females (16 074·1 DALYs [13 216·4–19 240·8] vs 29 934·6 DALYs [26 981·9–33 211·2] globally). Greenland had substantially higher DALY rates (26 666·6 DALYs [23 478·4–30 218·8] among females, 33 101·3 DALYs [30 182·3–36 218·6] among males) than the Nordic countries. Country variation was primarily due to differences in causes that largely contributed to DALYs through mortality, such as ischaemic heart disease. These causes dominated male disease burden, whereas non-fatal causes such as low back pain were important for female disease burden. Smoking and metabolic risk factors were high-ranking risk factors across all countries. DALYs attributable to alcohol use and smoking were particularly high among the Danes, as was alcohol use among Finnish males.Interpretation Risk factor differences might drive differences in life expectancy and disease burden that merit attention also in high-income settings such as the Nordic countries. Special attention should be given to the high disease burden in Greenland. ; This study was funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The authors wish to thank Jonas Minet Kinge (Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway) for valuable input regarding socioeconomic differences in life expectancy in the Nordic countries. CRC has received research funding from Svenska Läkaresällskapet (SLS-779681), Tysta Skolan, Hörselforskningsfonden (#503), the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No 72204655 and the GENDERNET Co-Plus Fund (GNP-182). JJC acknowledges grant support from the Swedish Research Council (grant number 2019-01059). JMcG is supported by the Danish National Research Foundation (Niels Bohr Professorship), and is employed by The Queensland Centre for Mental Health Research which receives core funding from the Queensland Health. STS is currently funded by a grant from Region Zealand and a grant from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (grant agreement No 801790). OP-R has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 837180. TL is supported by the Academy of Finland (Grant #319200). Where authors are identified as personnel of the International Agency for Research on Cancer/WHO, the authors alone are responsible for the views expressed in this Article and they do not necessarily represent the decisions, policy, or views of the International Agency for Research on Cancer/WHO. ; "Peer Reviewed"
Importance Cancer and other noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are now widely recognized as a threat to global development. The latest United Nations high-level meeting on NCDs reaffirmed this observation and also highlighted the slow progress in meeting the 2011 Political Declaration on the Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases and the third Sustainable Development Goal. Lack of situational analyses, priority setting, and budgeting have been identified as major obstacles in achieving these goals. All of these have in common that they require information on the local cancer epidemiology. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study is uniquely poised to provide these crucial data. Objective To describe cancer burden for 29 cancer groups in 195 countries from 1990 through 2017 to provide data needed for cancer control planning. Evidence Review We used the GBD study estimation methods to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). Results are presented at the national level as well as by Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a composite indicator of income, educational attainment, and total fertility rate. We also analyzed the influence of the epidemiological vs the demographic transition on cancer incidence. Findings In 2017, there were 24.5 million incident cancer cases worldwide (16.8 million without nonmelanoma skin cancer [NMSC]) and 9.6 million cancer deaths. The majority of cancer DALYs came from years of life lost (97%), and only 3% came from years lived with disability. The odds of developing cancer were the lowest in the low SDI quintile (1 in 7) and the highest in the high SDI quintile (1 in 2) for both sexes. In 2017, the most common incident cancers in men were NMSC (4.3 million incident cases); tracheal, bronchus, and lung (TBL) cancer (1.5 million incident cases); and prostate cancer (1.3 million incident cases). The most common causes of cancer deaths and DALYs for men were TBL cancer (1.3 million deaths and 28.4 million DALYs), liver cancer (572 000 deaths and 15.2 million DALYs), and stomach cancer (542 000 deaths and 12.2 million DALYs). For women in 2017, the most common incident cancers were NMSC (3.3 million incident cases), breast cancer (1.9 million incident cases), and colorectal cancer (819 000 incident cases). The leading causes of cancer deaths and DALYs for women were breast cancer (601 000 deaths and 17.4 million DALYs), TBL cancer (596 000 deaths and 12.6 million DALYs), and colorectal cancer (414 000 deaths and 8.3 million DALYs). Conclusions and Relevance The national epidemiological profiles of cancer burden in the GBD study show large heterogeneities, which are a reflection of different exposures to risk factors, economic settings, lifestyles, and access to care and screening. The GBD study can be used by policy makers and other stakeholders to develop and improve national and local cancer control in order to achieve the global targets and improve equity in cancer
The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the funders. Data for this research was provided by MEASURE Evaluation, funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of USAID, the US Government, or MEASURE Evaluation. The Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics granted the researchers access to relevant data in accordance with licence no. SLN2014-3-170, after subjecting data to processing aiming to preserve the confidentiality of individual data in accordance with the General Statistics Law-2000. The researchers are solely responsible for the conclusions and inferences drawn upon available data. ; Background Assessments of age-specific mortality and life expectancy have been done by the UN Population Division, Department of Economics and Social Affairs (UNPOP), the United States Census Bureau, WHO, and as part of previous iterations of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD). Previous iterations of the GBD used population estimates from UNPOP, which were not derived in a way that was internally consistent with the estimates of the numbers of deaths in the GBD. The present iteration of the GBD, GBD 2017, improves on previous assessments and provides timely estimates of the mortality experience of populations globally. Methods The GBD uses all available data to produce estimates of mortality rates between 1950 and 2017 for 23 age groups, both sexes, and 918 locations, including 195 countries and territories and subnational locations for 16 countries. Data used include vital registration systems, sample registration systems, household surveys (complete birth histories, summary birth histories, sibling histories), censuses (summary birth histories, household deaths), and Demographic Surveillance Sites. In total, this analysis used 8259 data sources. Estimates of the probability of death between birth and the age of 5 years and between ages 15 and 60 years are generated and then input into a model life table system to produce complete life tables for all locations and years. Fatal discontinuities and mortality due to HIV/AIDS are analysed separately and then incorporated into the estimation. We analyse the relationship between age-specific mortality and development status using the Socio-demographic Index, a composite measure based on fertility under the age of 25 years, education, and income. There are four main methodological improvements in GBD 2017 compared with GBD 2016: 622 additional data sources have been incorporated; new estimates of population, generated by the GBD study, are used; statistical methods used in different components of the analysis have been further standardised and improved; and the analysis has been extended backwards in time by two decades to start in 1950. Findings Globally, 18·7% (95% uncertainty interval 18·4–19·0) of deaths were registered in 1950 and that proportion has been steadily increasing since, with 58·8% (58·2–59·3) of all deaths being registered in 2015. At the global level, between 1950 and 2017, life expectancy increased from 48·1 years (46·5–49·6) to 70·5 years (70·1–70·8) for men and from 52·9 years (51·7–54·0) to 75·6 years (75·3–75·9) for women. Despite this overall progress, there remains substantial variation in life expectancy at birth in 2017, which ranges from 49·1 years (46·5–51·7) for men in the Central African Republic to 87·6 years (86·9–88·1) among women in Singapore. The greatest progress across age groups was for children younger than 5 years; under-5 mortality dropped from 216·0 deaths (196·3–238·1) per 1000 livebirths in 1950 to 38·9 deaths (35·6–42·83) per 1000 livebirths in 2017, with huge reductions across countries. Nevertheless, there were still 5·4 million (5·2–5·6) deaths among children younger than 5 years in the world in 2017. Progress has been less pronounced and more variable for adults, especially for adult males, who had stagnant or increasing mortality rates in several countries. The gap between male and female life expectancy between 1950 and 2017, while relatively stable at the global level, shows distinctive patterns across super-regions and has consistently been the largest in central Europe, eastern Europe, and central Asia, and smallest in south Asia. Performance was also variable across countries and time in observed mortality rates compared with those expected on the basis of development. Interpretation This analysis of age-sex-specific mortality shows that there are remarkably complex patterns in population mortality across countries. The findings of this study highlight global successes, such as the large decline in under-5 mortality, which reflects significant local, national, and global commitment and investment over several decades. However, they also bring attention to mortality patterns that are a cause for concern, particularly among adult men and, to a lesser extent, women, whose mortality rates have stagnated in many countries over the time period of this study, and in some cases are increasing. ; Research reported in this publication was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the University of Melbourne, Public Health England, the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health (award P30AG047845), and the National Institute of Mental Health of the National Institutes of Health (award R01MH110163). ; Peer reviewed