Article

Cancer Survivors: A Booming Population

Office of Cancer Survivorship, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA.
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention (Impact Factor: 4.32). 10/2011; 20(10):1996-2005. DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0729
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In this first article of what is planned to be an annual series, we examine the history of cancer prevalence reporting and the role that these annual figures play in guiding the direction of cancer control research, and specifically the science of cancer survivorship. For this inaugural year, we focus on the confluence of the growing number of survivors and population aging, and the impact these combined trends will have on cancer survivorship in the future.
State or metro area-level cancer incidence and prevalence data were collected from 9 registries via the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. The complete prevalence method was used to estimate prevalence for 2008 and the Prevalence, Incidence Approach Model method was used to project prevalence data through 2020, assuming flat cancer incidence and survival trends but dynamic U.S. population projections.
As of January 2008, the number of cancer survivors is estimated at 11.9 million. Approximately 60% of cancer survivors are age 65 or older, and by the year 2020, it is estimated that 63% of cancer survivors will be age 65 or older.
Improved survival and population aging converge to generate a booming population of older adult cancer survivors, many of whom have multiple complex health conditions and unique survivorship needs. This demographic shift has important implications for future health care needs and costs of the U.S. population.
The findings provide information critical for guiding cancer prevention and control research and service provision.

1 Follower
 · 
171 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Against the background of cancer as a contemporary public health challenge, this article presents a selective overview of psychological science contributions to cancer control research, practice, and policy. Initial contributions were circumscribed to awareness campaigns and the assessment of emotional responses to diagnosis and treatment. As evidence linking certain behaviors to cancer risk and outcomes accumulated, psychology emerged as a "hub science" in the Nation's cancer control program. Despite substantial accomplishments, new societal trends further challenge our ability to reduce risk, incidence, and deaths from cancer and enhance quality of life for cancer survivors. Evidence generated from psychological research conducted within each cell of Pasteur's quadrant continues to be relevant and necessary for effective 21st-century approaches to cancer prevention and control at the individual, clinical, and population levels. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
    American Psychologist 02/2015; 70(2):61-74. DOI:10.1037/a0038873 · 6.87 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We discuss the role of implementation science in cancer and summarize the need for this perspective. Following a summary of key implementation science principles and lessons learned, we review the literature on implementation of cancer prevention and control activities across the continuum from prevention to palliative care. We identified 10 unique relevant reviews, four of which were specific to cancer. Multicomponent implementation strategies were found to be superior to single-component interventions, but it was not possible to draw conclusions about specific strategies or the range of conditions across which strategies were effective. Particular gaps identified include the need for more studies of health policies and reports of cost, cost-effectiveness, and resources required. Following this review, we summarize the types of evidence needed to make research findings more actionable and discuss emerging implementation science opportunities for psychological research on cancer prevention and control. These include innovative study designs (i.e., rapid learning designs, simulation modeling, comparative effectiveness, pragmatic studies, mixed-methods research) and measurement science (i.e., development of context-relevant measures; practical, longitudinal measures to gauge improvement; cost-effectiveness data; and harmonized patient report data). We conclude by identifying a few grand challenges for psychologists that if successfully addressed would accelerate integration of evidence into cancer practice and policy more consistently and rapidly. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
    American Psychologist 02/2015; 70(2):211-220. DOI:10.1037/a0036107 · 6.87 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Breast cancer places a heavy burden on the Australian healthcare system, but information about the actual number of women living with breast cancer and their current or future health service needs is limited. We used existing population-based data and innovative statistical methods to address this critical research question in a well-defined geographic region. Methods Breast cancer data from the New South Wales (NSW) Central Cancer Registry and PIAMOD (Prevalence and Incidence Analysis MODel) software were used to project future breast cancer prevalence in NSW. Parametric models were fitted to incidence and survival data, and the modelled incidence and survival estimates were then used to estimate current and future prevalence. To estimate future healthcare requirements the projected prevalence was then divided into phases of care according to the different stages of the survivorship trajectory. Results The number of women in NSW living with a breast cancer diagnosis had increased from 19,305 in 1990 to 48,754 in 2007. This number is projected to increase further to 68,620 by 2017. The majority of these breast cancer survivors will require continued monitoring (31,974) or will be long-term survivors (29,785). About 9% will require active treatment (either initial therapy, or treatment for subsequent metastases or second cancer) and 1% will need end of life care due to breast cancer. Conclusions Extrapolating these projections to the national Australian population would equate to 209,200 women living with breast cancer in Australia in 2017, many of whom will require active treatment or post-treatment monitoring. Thus, careful planning and development of a healthcare system able to respond to this increased demand is required.
    BMC Cancer 12/2014; 2014, 14:936:936. DOI:10.1186/1471-2407-14-936 · 3.32 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
64 Downloads
Available from
May 26, 2014