Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cancer Tsunami: Emerging Trends, Economic Burden, and Perioperative Implications

  • Cancer Anesthesia (B Riedel and V Gottumukkala, Section Editors)
  • Published:
Current Anesthesiology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

This review discusses global trends in cancer mortality and survival, the socioeconomic drivers of those trends, and recent innovations in cancer surgery.

Recent Findings

Cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide. Cancer, previously a disease primarily of wealthy countries, is rapidly becoming a leading cause of death in low- and middle-income countries. Major economic forces driving global cancer trends include aging, frailty, and obesity. Alcohol consumption, poor diet, and lack of exercise also contribute to cancer types associated with modifiable causes. Surgery is responsible for 65% of cancer care globally, providing an opportunity for anesthesiologists to improve that care. Anesthesiologists can contribute to cancer remission through perioperative interventions that reduce risk of metastasis and speed return to intended oncologic therapy.

Summary

Cancer surgery comprises a large proportion of anesthetic caseload. Good outcomes come from high-volume cancer centers using a multidisciplinary approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Meara JG, Leather AJM, Hagander L, Alkire BC, Alonso N, Ameh EA, et al. Global surgery 2030: evidence and solutions for achieving health, welfare, and economic development. Lancet. 2015;386:569–624.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. • World Health Organization. Global health estimates 2016: deaths by cause, age, sex, by country and by region, 2000–2016. 2018; http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/estimates/en/. Accessed 24 Aug 2018. Statistical estimates for 176 causes of death worldwide, grouped by gender, location, and year.

  3. • Naghavi M, Abajobir AA, Abbafati C, et al. Global, regional, and national age-sex specific mortality for 264 causes of death, 1980–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet (London, England). 2017;390:1151–210 Provides annual estimates for more causes of death than the WHO GHE grouped by age, gender, location, and year.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. World Health Organization. Projections of mortality and causes of death, 2015 and 2030: global summary projections - top 20 causes. 2013; http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/GHE_DthGlobal_Proj_2015_2030.xls. Accessed 24 Aug 2018.

  5. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray F. GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: IARC cancer base no. 11. 2013; http://globocan.iarc.fr. Accessed 24 Aug 2018.

  6. Center MM, Jemal A, Lortet-Tieulent J, Ward E, Ferlay J, Brawley O, et al. International variation in prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates. Eur Urol. 2012;61:1079–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. American Cancer Society. The burden: survivorship. 2014; http://canceratlas.cancer.org/the-burden/cancer-survivorship/. Accessed 24 Aug 2018.

  8. •• Allemani C, Matsuda T, Di Carlo V, et al. Global surveillance of trends in cancer survival 2000–14 (CONCORD-3): analysis of individual records for 37 513 025 patients diagnosed with one of 18 cancers from 322 population-based registries in 71 countries. Lancet. 2018;391:1023–75 Report of the third cycle of the CONCORD program to estimate worldwide cancer survival metrics. Survival is generally increasing in most countries, with increases of up to 5% for liver, pancreatic, and lung cancer.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. • Noone A, Howlader N, Krapcho M, et al. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2015, National Cancer Institute. 2018; https://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2015/. Accessed 24 Aug 2018. Comprehensive statistics for US cancer patients, including mortality and survivorship.

  10. Cancer Australia. 5-Year relative survival. 2018; https://ncci.canceraustralia.gov.au/outcomes/relative-survival-rate/5-year-relative-survival. Accessed 2 Oct 2018.

  11. Cancer Registry of Norway. Cancer in Norway 2016 - cancer incidence, mortality, survival and prevalence in Norway. Oslo: Cancer Registry of Norway; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Zeng H, Chen W, Zheng R, Zhang S, Ji JS, Zou X, et al. Changing cancer survival in China during 2003–15: a pooled analysis of 17 population-based cancer registries. Lancet Glob Health. 2018;6:e555–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Stewart BW, Wild CP, editors. World cancer report 2014. Lyon: WHO Press; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality. Total expenditures in millions by condition, United States, 1996–2015. Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. 2018; https://meps.ahrq.gov/mepstrends/hc_cond/. Accessed 24 Aug 2018.

  15. United Nations. World population prospects the 2017 revision key findings and advance tables. World Popul Prospect. 2017;2017:1–46.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (2018) Global burden of disease results tool. http://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-results-tool. Accessed 24 Aug 2018.

  17. Baijal P, Periyakoil V. Understanding frailty in cancer patients. Cancer J (United States). 2014;20:358–66.

    Google Scholar 

  18. •• Shahrokni A, Kim SJ, Bosl GJ, Korc-Grodzicki B. How we care for an older patient with cancer. J Oncol Pract. 2017;13:95–102 Describes the importance of the geriatric assessment in the colorectal cancer population. Includes a list of interventions by the authors’ geriatric service at each stage of perioperative care.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. •• Lauby-Secretan B, Scoccianti C, Loomis D, Grosse Y, Bianchini F, Straif K, et al. Body fatness and cancer--viewpoint of the IARC working group. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:794–8 Authoritative review of evidence for the association of obesity with site-specific cancer. The review found that 13 different cancers had sufficient evidence to say that they are associated with obesity.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. World Health Organization. Global health observatory data repository: prevalence of obesity among adults. 2017; http://apps.who.int/gho/data/view.main.REGION2480A. Accessed 24 Aug 2018.

  21. Steele CB, Thomas CC, Henley SJ, Massetti GM, Galuska DA, Agurs-Collins T, et al. Vital signs : trends in incidence of cancers associated with overweight and obesity — United States, 2005–2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017;66:1052–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. • Zheng Y, Manson JE, Yuan C, Liang MH, Grodstein F, Stampfer MJ, et al. Associations of weight gain from early to middle adulthood with major health outcomes later in life. JAMA - J Am Med Assoc. 2017;318:255Important analysis of two large cohort studies showing that weight gain during adulthood was associated with significantly increased risk of major chronic diseases, including cancer. Higher amounts of weight gain were associated with greater risks of major chronic diseases and a lower chance of healthy aging.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ng M, Freeman MK, Fleming TD, Robinson M, Dwyer-Lindgren L, Thomson B, et al. Smoking prevalence and cigarette consumption in 187 countries, 1980-2012. JAMA - J Am Med Assoc. 2014;311:183–92.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. • GBD 2016 Alcohol Collaborators. Alcohol use and burden: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016 for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2016. Lancet. 2018;6736:1–21 Controversial study calling for global reduction in alcohol consumption due to the number of annual global deaths that can be attributed to alcohol. Alcohol use was the leading risk factor in deaths among those aged 15–49. In the over 50-year-old population, cancers constituted a large proportion of alcohol-attributable deaths. The level of alcohol consumption that minimized harm was zero (95% CI 0.0–0.8) standard drinks per week.

    Google Scholar 

  25. World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research. Continuous update project report: diet, Nutrition, Physical Activity and Colorectal Cancer. 2018; https://www.wcrf.org/sites/default/files/Colorectal-cancer-report.pdf. Accessed 24 Aug 2018.

  26. Bouvard V, Baan R, Straif K, Grosse Y, Secretan B, el Ghissassi F, et al. A review of human carcinogens–part B: biological agents. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10:321–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Bray F, Jemal A, Grey N, Ferlay J, Forman D. Global cancer transitions according to the human development index (2008-2030): a population-based study. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:790–801.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. • Pearson-Stuttard J, Zhou B, Kontis V, Bentham J, Gunter MJ, Ezzati M. Worldwide burden of cancer attributable to diabetes and high body-mass index: a comparative risk assessment. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2018;6:e6–e15 Using GLOBOCAN and a review of articles associating high BMI and diabetes with site specific cancer, these researchers estimated the number of new cancer cases attributable to obesity and diabetes.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Islami F, Goding Sauer A, Miller KD, Siegel RL, Fedewa SA, Jacobs EJ, et al. Proportion and number of cancer cases and deaths attributable to potentially modifiable risk factors in the United States. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:31–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Weiser TG, Haynes AB, Molina G, Lipsitz SR, Esquivel MM, Uribe-Leitz T, et al. Size and distribution of the global volume of surgery in 2012. Bull World Health Organ. 2016;94:201–209F.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. •• Sullivan R, Alatise OI, Anderson BO, et al. Global cancer surgery: delivering safe, affordable, and timely cancer surgery. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:1193–224 Comprehensive look at the need for cancer surgery worldwide, presented by the Lancet Oncology Commission. Describes gaps in access to surgery, need for surgical personnel, and lack of key adjunct treatment modalities.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Shrime MG, Bickler SW, Alkire BC, Mock C. Global burden of surgical disease: an estimation from the provider perspective. Lancet Glob Health. 2015;3(Suppl 2):S8–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Rose J, Chang DC, Weiser TG, Kassebaum NJ, Bickler SW. The role of surgery in global health: analysis of United States inpatient procedure frequency by condition using the global burden of disease 2010 framework. PLoS One. 2014;9:e89693. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0089693.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. • Pfister DG, Rubin DM, Elkin EB, Neill US, Duck E, Radzyner M, et al. Risk adjusting survival outcomes in hospitals that treat patients with cancer without information on cancer stage. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1:1303–10Large differences in cancer survival exist for patients over 65 between different classes of hospitals within the USA, even after risk adjustment.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. • Sirohi B, Chalkidou K, Pramesh CS, et al. Developing institutions for cancer care in low-income and middle-income countries: from cancer units to comprehensive cancer centres. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19:e395–406Overview of cancer center development history and the current development of cancer centers in low- and middle-income countries.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Monk TG, Saini V, Weldon BC, Sigl JC. Anesthetic management and one-year mortality after noncardiac surgery. Anesth Analg. 2005;100:4–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Lindholm M-LL, Träff S, Granath F, Greenwald SD, Ekbom A, Lennmarken C, et al. Mortality within 2 years after surgery in relation to low intraoperative bispectral index values and preexisting malignant disease. Anesth Analg. 2009;108:508–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. •• Tohme S, Simmons RL, Tsung A. Surgery for cancer: a trigger for metastases. Cancer Res. 2017;77:1548–52 This review summarizes current research linking surgery, anesthesia, and inflammation to cancer recurrence.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Horowitz M, Neeman E, Sharon E, Ben-Eliyahu S. Exploiting the critical perioperative period to improve long-term cancer outcomes. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2015;12:213–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Musser JE, Assel MJ, Meeks JJ, Sjoberg DD, Vickers AJ, Coleman JA, et al. Ambulatory extended recovery: safely transitioning to overnight observation for minimally invasive prostatectomy. Urol Pract. 2015;2:121–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. • Chiu C, Aleshi P, Esserman LJ, Inglis-Arkell C, Yap E, Whitlock EL, et al. Improved analgesia and reduced post-operative nausea and vomiting after implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway for total mastectomy. BMC Anesthesiol. 2018;18:41 Study comparing mastectomy outcomes before and after implementation of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathway. The ERAS group had lower perioperative opioid consumption, lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, but no difference in length of stay.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. McEvoy MD, Wanderer JP, King AB, Geiger TM, Tiwari V, Terekhov M, Ehrenfeld JM, Furman WR, Lee LA, Sandberg WS. A perioperative consult service results in reduction in cost and length of stay for colorectal surgical patients: evidence from a healthcare redesign project. Perioper Med. 2016;1–10.

  43. Chapman JS, Roddy E, Ueda S, Brooks R, Chen L-L, Chen L-M. Enhanced recovery pathways for improving outcomes after minimally invasive gynecologic oncology surgery. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128:138–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. •• Aloia TA, Zimmitti G, Conrad C, Gottumukalla V, Kopetz S, Vauthey JN. Return to intended oncologic treatment (RIOT): a novel metric for evaluating the quality of oncosurgical therapy for malignancy. J Surg Oncol. 2014;110:107–14 Patients who failed to return to intended oncologic therapy had lower disease-free and overall survival. All patients who had minimally invasive surgery completed the intended oncologic therapy, versus only 75% of patients who had surgery via open approach.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Memeo R, de Blasi V, Adam R, et al. Postoperative infectious complications impact long-term survival in patients who underwent hepatectomies for colorectal liver metastases: a propensity score matching analysis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-018-3854-2.

  46. Tevis SE, Kohlnhofer BM, Stringfield S, Foley EF, Harms BA, Heise CP, et al. Postoperative complications in patients with rectal cancer are associated with delays in chemotherapy that lead to worse disease-free and overall survival. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56:1339–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Luc G, Durand M, Chiche L, Collet D. Major post-operative complications predict long-term survival after esophagectomy in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. World J Surg. 2015;39:216–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. • Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:7–30 Annual statement of trends in US cancer mortality and incidence, focusing on regional and racial disparities.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number P30CA008748. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anesthesiology & Critical Care, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY, 10065, USA

    Patrick J. McCormick

  2. Department of Anesthesiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA

    Patrick J. McCormick

Authors
  1. Patrick J. McCormick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick J. McCormick.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Patrick J. McCormick declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by the author.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Cancer Anesthesia

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

McCormick, P.J. Cancer Tsunami: Emerging Trends, Economic Burden, and Perioperative Implications. Curr Anesthesiol Rep 8, 348–354 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40140-018-0294-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40140-018-0294-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation