Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
EURSUP-586; No. of Pages 4 EUROPEAN UROLOGY SUPPLEMENTS XXX (2010) XXX–XXX available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Men’s Health and the Excess Burden of Cancer in Men Alan K. White a, Catherine S. Thomson b, David Forman c, Siegfried Meryn d,* a Centre for Men’s Health, Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds, UK b Statistical Information Team, Cancer Research UK, London, UK c National Cancer Intelligence Network and Cancer Epidemiology Group, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK d International Society for Men’s Health and Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria Article info Abstract Keywords: Men Gender Help-seeking Sex-associated Differences Survival Delay Cancer Context: Men seem to be at greater risk of both developing and dying from those cancers that should affect men and women equally. Objective: In this review, we argue for a more proactive approach to be adopted in relation to men’s increased susceptibility to cancer. Evidence acquisition: Cancer data from Cancer Research UK and the UK National Cancer Intelligence Network were reviewed. Evidence synthesis: In the United Kingdom, men have a 69% higher mortality rate and a 62% higher incidence rate for the major cancers, which should affect men and women equally. The rate of premature death is correspondingly high, with more than 37 000 additional years of life presumably lost for working-age men (15–64 yr) as a result of death from cancer. This pattern is repeated elsewhere but has received little attention. Conclusions: It is unclear why men are at greater risk, but a more proactive approach should be taken to identify this issue as worthy of exploration and to reach out to men at risk. # 2010 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. * Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (S. Meryn). 1. Introduction Based on consideration of the current burden of cancer among men estimated from the latest statistics in the United Kingdom, the European Union, and the United States, we argue that services should target men more effectively. This argument is based on men’s increased likelihood (1) of developing those cancers that should affect men and women equally, (2) of having lower survival in younger years compared with women, and (3) of having a higher rate of premature death. This increased risk is compounded by the possibility that men delay seeking both preventive health care services and early appointments following onset of symptoms. It is suggested that burden of death from cancer would be reduced with heightened surveillance and more rapid access to health care and treatment. 2. Cancer burden For urologic cancers that are not sex specific, a gendered dimension remains to the likelihood of developing the cancer and of dying prematurely. A recent analysis in the United Kingdom suggested that men have a nearly three-fold higher rate of death from bladder cancer and twice as high a rate of death from kidney cancer than women [1]. This trend extends beyond the urologic cancers to the majority of cancers that should affect men and women equally. The same study highlighted that for all cancers except nonmelanoma skin cancer, breast cancer, and the sex-specific cancers, men had a 69% higher rate of death and a 62% higher incidence rate when considering all ages (Tables 1 and 2). When considering the total cancer burden, men still seem to have a disadvantage. In considering deaths in the 1569-9056/$ – see front matter # 2010 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.eursup.2010.03.003 Please cite this article in press as: White AK, et al. Men’s Health and the Excess Burden of Cancer in Men. Eur Urol Suppl (2010), doi:10.1016/j.eursup.2010.03.003 EURSUP-586; No. of Pages 4 2 EUROPEAN UROLOGY SUPPLEMENTS XXX (2010) XXX–XXX Table 1 – Rate* ratio of male to female cancer mortality, United Kingdom 2007 ICD-10 code C00–C97 C00–C97 C00–C97 C00–C97 C15 C16 C18–C21 C22 C25 C33–C34 C43 C64–C66 C67 C70–C72 C82–C85 C90 C91–C95 excluding excluding excluding excluding Site description C44 C44 and C33–C34 C44, C50, C51–C58, C60–C63 C44, C33–C34, C50, C51–C58, C60–C63 and C68 and C96 All cancers except NMSC All cancers except NMSC and lung cancer All cancers except NMSC, breast, and sex specific All cancers except NMSC, breast, lung, and sex specific Oesophagus Stomach Colorectum and anus Liver Pancreas Lung Malignant melanoma of skin Kidney, other and unspecified urinary organs Bladder Brain and CNS Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma Multiple myeloma Leukaemia Mortality rate ratios All ages 15–64 yr 1.38 1.31 1.69 1.71 2.68 2.32 1.56 1.99 1.27 1.65 1.46 2.07 2.94 1.52 1.57 1.39 1.79 1.05 0.98 1.60 1.69 3.63 1.92 1.48 2.20 1.44 1.38 1.40 2.18 2.34 1.56 1.64 1.24 1.57 >65 yr 1.57 1.51 1.73 1.72 2.33 2.46 1.59 1.90 1.20 1.78 1.53 2.03 3.08 1.54 1.54 1.44 1.91 CNS = central nervous system; ICD = International Classification of Diseases [19]; NMSC = nonmelanoma skin cancer. European age-standardised rates. * United Kingdom in 2007, cancer accounted for 29% of total mortality for men compared to 25% in women; when translated into age-standardized rates, the contrast is more profound, with death rates of 211.3 males and 153.1 females per 100 000 cancer cases [1]. This pattern is replicated elsewhere, with correspondingly higher rates for men in the United States [2]. The effect of the increased cancer incidence and rate of premature mortality can be seen clearly (Table 3) in the mean age of death and the estimated years of life lost for the working-age man (15–64 yr). The mean age of death for the same group of cancers is approximately 3 yr earlier for men in the United Kingdom, and an additional 37 000 yr of life are presumably lost as a result of the higher rate of premature death [3]. 3. Cancer survival Cancer survival also has a gendered component. Micheli et al found significant advantages for women in cancers of the head and neck, oesophagus, stomach and pancreas, salivary glands, colon and rectum, lung, pleura, bone, skin (melanoma), kidney, brain, and thyroid as well as in Hodgkin’s disease and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma [4]. They found significant advantages for men in cancers of the biliary tract and bladder and in leukaemia, despite men’s continued higher rate of premature death. Micheli et al found that women in each age class had significantly higher survival than men for all cancers combined; however, this advantage reduced progressively with age, from +12.0% points at 15–44 yr to +1.3% points at 75–99 yr. Table 2 – Rate* ratio of male to female cancer incidence, United Kingdom 2007 ICD-10 code C00–C97 C00–C97 C00–C97 C00–C97 C15 C16 C18–C21 C22 C25 C33–C34 C43 C64–C66 C67 C70–C72 C82–C85 C90 C91–C95 excluding excluding excluding excluding and C68 and C96 Site description C44 C44 and C33–C34 C44, C50, C51–C58, C60–C63 C44, C33–C34, C50, C51–C58, C60–C63 All cancers except NMSC All cancers except NMSC and lung cancer All cancers except NMSC, breast, and sex specific All cancers except NMSC, breast, lung, and sex specific Oesophagus Stomach Colorectum and anus Liver Pancreas Lung Malignant melanoma of skin Kidney, other and unspecified urinary organs Bladder Brain and CNS Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma Multiple myeloma Leukaemia Incidence rate ratios All ages 15–64 yr 1.16 1.10 1.62 1.61 2.48 2.48 1.54 2.21 1.27 1.64 0.92 1.99 3.30 1.53 1.39 1.52 1.72 0.80 0.76 1.44 1.45 3.01 2.44 1.40 2.35 1.38 1.37 0.76 2.01 2.75 1.58 1.36 1.54 1.56 >65 yr 1.57 1.53 1.77 1.77 2.22 2.50 1.62 2.18 1.21 1.80 1.42 2.05 3.54 1.52 1.40 1.52 1.99 CNS = central nervous system; ICD = International Classification of Diseases [19]; NMSC = nonmelanoma skin cancer. European age-standardised rates. * Please cite this article in press as: White AK, et al. Men’s Health and the Excess Burden of Cancer in Men. Eur Urol Suppl (2010), doi:10.1016/j.eursup.2010.03.003 EURSUP-586; No. of Pages 4 3 EUROPEAN UROLOGY SUPPLEMENTS XXX (2010) XXX–XXX Table 3 – Years of life lost, England and Wales, 2007 ICD-10 code C15 C16 C18–C21 C22 C25 C33–C34 C43 C64 C67 C71 C82–C85 C90 C91–C95 Site description Oesophagus Stomach Colorectum and anus Liver Pancreas Lung Malignant melanoma of skin Kidney Bladder Brain Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma Multiple myeloma Leukaemia Mean age at death Male Female 71 74 73 71 71 73 66 71 77 61 71 74 71 77 77 77 74 75 74 69 73 80 63 75 76 74 Years lost (thousands) 15–64 yr Male Female 10 5 14 5 7 25 6 5 2 15 7 2 9 3 3 11 2 5 20 4 3 1 11 4 1 7 ICD = International Classification of Diseases [19]. It is possible to surmise that the cause of this increased risk of developing and dying from these non–sex-specific cancers is a combination of multiple factors, including lifestyle (eg, smoking, alcohol, diet [5]), central obesity [6], germline (impact of inherited and acquired genetic mutations [7,8]), female biological advantage [9], and health behaviour factors (eg, delay in presenting with symptoms) [10,11]. 4. Men and help seeking The issue of help seeking is complex. Although there is evidence that men delay for some conditions (eg, mental health problems) [12], limited evidence shows this propensity with regard to cancer symptoms. Macintyre and colleagues [13], in a review of the Scottish Twenty-07 study, found no concrete evidence that men were less willing to report health-related symptoms or to seek health care, and there was no difference in the degree of suffering that men experience prior to seeking help in comparison to women. Reviewing the same data set, Wyke and colleagues [14] presented the respondents with a checklist of 33 symptoms of minor illness and asked if at any time over the previous month the respondents had experienced any of the symptoms and whether they had consulted a general practitioner. The researchers found that although women were more likely to have consulted a general practitioner for at least one of the symptoms, there was no difference in consultation rates when only those who had reported symptoms within the last month were included in the analysis, suggesting that men and women respond similarly to the experience of symptoms. Adamson and colleagues [15] found no significant difference between men and women in the likelihood of either group seeking health care advice based on socioeconomic and ethnic background. A recent systematic review on delayed presentation and referral of symptomatic cancer showed evidence that men delayed seeking help with bladder cancer and other urologic cancers but did not delay for digestive tract cancers or lung cancer [16]. Few screening programmes are aimed at both men and women, but bowel cancer screening is an exception. Use of colorectal cancer screening has been seen to be lower in men with regard to the faecal occult blood test but higher in men for flexible sigmoidoscopy [17]. The data are still inconclusive as to whether men have a significant disadvantage with regard to delaying help seeking when they have cancer symptoms, but there is evidence that men are not seeking preventive health care appointments. In the United States, women are more likely to receive preventive health care services from primary care specialists than age-matched controls in men above the age of 15 yr. The data include multiple visits for antenatal care in the peak years of female fertility, between 15 and 44, but even after these data are subtracted, the rate of visits for preventive health care remains much higher for women than for men (54.8 visits per 100 females per year compared to 34.6 visits per 100 males per year) [18]. This trend is compounded by the fact that a much larger percentage of men has admitted to having no regular and definable access to health care (21.8% of men compared to 11.6% of women). 5. Conclusions Men have an increased risk of developing and dying prematurely from those cancers that should affect men and women equally. It is not clear if men have a tendency to delay seeking help compared with women. Studies should be focused on why men are not exceeding women in their medical consultations if they are at so much greater risk. Absence of men from preventive health services and a lack of recognition of the need to reach out to men to ensure that cancers are either prevented or at least are picked up and treated aggressively at the first opportunity should be the absolute minimum requirement to try and reduce the burden of cancer death in men. Conflicts of interest The authors have nothing to disclose. Please cite this article in press as: White AK, et al. Men’s Health and the Excess Burden of Cancer in Men. Eur Urol Suppl (2010), doi:10.1016/j.eursup.2010.03.003 EURSUP-586; No. of Pages 4 4 EUROPEAN UROLOGY SUPPLEMENTS XXX (2010) XXX–XXX Funding support [7] Levy-Lahad E, Friedman E. Cancer risks among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Br J Cancer 2007;96:11–5. None. [8] Ewis AA, Lee J, Naroda T, et al. Prostate cancer incidence varies among males from different Y-chromosome lineages. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2006;9:303–9. Acknowledgements [9] Bouman A, Schipper M, Heineman MJ, et al. Gender difference in the non-specific and specific immune response in humans. Am J Reprod The authors acknowledge the support of Jon Shelton, Cheryl Livings, and Joanna Meadows, all from Cancer Research UK, who helped assemble the data and results. Immunol 2004;52:19–26. [10] All Party Parliamentary Group on Cancer. Report of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Cancer’s inquiry into inequalities in cancer. Macmillan Cancer Support Web site. http://www.macmillan.org.uk/ Documents/GetInvolved/Campaigns/APPG/BritainAgainstCancer References [1] National Cancer Intelligence Network; Cancer Research UK; Centre for Men’s Health at Leeds Metropolitan University; Men’s Health Forum. 2009/CancerInequalitiesReport.pdf. Published December 2009. [11] White AK. Men and cancer. In: Kirby R, Carson C, White AK, Kirby M, eds. Men‘s health, 3rd ed.. London, UK: Informa Healthcare; 2009. p. 3–16. The excess burden of cancer in men in the UK, 2009. Cancer Research [12] Möller-Leimkühler AM. Barriers to help seeking by men: a review of UK Web site. http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/prod_consump/ sociocultural and clinical literature with particular reference to groups/cr_common/@nre/@sta/documents/generalcontent/ crukmig_ 1000ast-2748.pdf. [2] US Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for depression. J Affect Disord 2002;71:1–9. [13] Macintyre S, Ford G, Hunt K. Do women ‘over-report’ morbidity? Men’s and women’s responses to structured prompting on a stan- Health Statistics. Health, United States, 2008 [with chartbook]. dard question on long standing illness. Soc Sci Med 1999;48:89–98. DHHS Publication No. 2009-1232. Centers for Disease Control [14] Wyke SK, Hunt K, Ford G. Gender differences in consulting a general and Prevention Web site. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/ practitioner for common symptoms of minor illness. Soc Sci Med hus08.pdf. Published March 2009. 1998;46:901–6. [3] UK Office for National Statistics. Mortality statistics: deaths regis- [15] Adamson J, Ben-Shlomo Y, Chaturvedi N, Donovan J. Ethnicity, tered in 2007. UK National Statistics Web site. http://www.statistics. socio-economic position and gender—do they affect reported gov.uk/downloads/theme_health/DR2007/DR_07_2007.pdf. Crown copyright is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO under the terms of the Click Use licence. health-care seeking behaviour? Soc Sci Med 2003;57:895–904. [16] Macleod U, Mitchell ED, Burgess C, Macdonald S, Ramire ZAJ. Risk factors for delayed presentation and referral of symptomatic can- [4] Micheli A, Ciampichinia R, Oberaignerb W, et al. The advantage of cer: evidence for common cancers. Br J Cancer 2009;101:S92–101. women in cancer survival: an analysis of EUROCARE-4 data. Eur J [17] Weller DP, Campbell C. Uptake in cancer screening programmes: a Cancer 2009;45:1017–27. [5] Danaei G, Lawes CM, Vander Hoorn S, Murray CJL, Ezzati M. Causes of cancer in the world: comparative risk assessment of nine behavioural and environmental risk factors. Lancet 2006;366: 1784–93. [6] Haslam D, James W. Obesity. Lancet 2005;366:1197–209. priority in cancer control. Br J Cancer 2009;101:S55–9. [18] Woodwell DA, Cherry DK. National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS): 2002 summary. Adv Data 2004, 1–44. [19] World Health Organisation. International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th rev., vol. 1–3. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organisation; 1992–94. Please cite this article in press as: White AK, et al. Men’s Health and the Excess Burden of Cancer in Men. Eur Urol Suppl (2010), doi:10.1016/j.eursup.2010.03.003