Impact of hysterectomy and bilateral oophorectomy prevalence on rates of cervical, uterine, and ovarian cancer among American Indian and Alaska Native women, 1999–2004
- 223 Downloads
To present more accurate incidence rates of cervical, uterine, and ovarian cancer by geographic region in American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) women.
The authors used data from central cancer registries linked to Indian Health Service (IHS) patient registration database, the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, IHS National Data Warehouse, and the National Hospital Discharge Survey. Cancer incidence rates were adjusted for hysterectomy and oophorectomy prevalence and presented by region for non-Hispanic White (NHW) and AI/AN women.
AI/AN women had a higher prevalence of hysterectomy (23.1%) compared with NHW women (20.9%). Correcting cancer rates for population-at-risk significantly increased the cancer incidence rates among AI/AN women: 43% for cervical cancer, 67% for uterine cancer, and 37% for ovarian cancer. Risk-correction led to increased differences in cervical cancer incidence between AI/AN and NHW women in certain regions.
Current reporting of cervical, uterine, and ovarian cancer underestimates the incidence in women at risk and can affect the measure of cancer disparities. Improved cancer surveillance using methodology to correct for population-at-risk may better inform disease control priorities for AI/AN populations.
KeywordsHysterectomy American Indian/Alaska Native Cervical cancer Incidence
- 3.Cervical cancer screening guidelines. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/cervical/pdf/guidelines.pdf. Last accessed 10 June 2010
- 6.Keshavarz H, Hillis SD, Kieke BA, Marchbanks PA (2002) Hysterectomy surveillance—United States, 1994–1999. MMWR CDC Surveill Summ 51:1–8Google Scholar
- 13.Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Hysterectomy status by state, race/ethnicity, and age, 1996–2000. Survey Data, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers of Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services. Available from: http://www.nuff.org/health_hysterectomystatistics2.htm. Last accessed 10 June 2010
- 15.Fritz A, Percy C, Jack A (2000) International classification of diseases of oncology. World Health Organization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
- 16.US Cancer Statistics Working Group (2007) United States cancer statistics: 2004 incidence. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute, AtlantaGoogle Scholar
- 18.Centers for Disease Control, Prevention (2003) Public health surveillance for behavioral risk factors in a changing environment: recommendations from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Team. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 52:1–11Google Scholar
- 19.National Hospital Discharge Survey, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhds.htm. Last accessed 13 July 2011
- 20.National Data Warehouse, Indian Health Service. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhds.htm. Last accessed 13 July 2011
- 21.National Cancer Institute (2011) Surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) program. Statistical resources. US population data 1969–2004. Available from: http://seer.cancer.gov/resources. Last accessed 13 July 2011
- 22.Surveillance Research Program SEER*Stat software. National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program, Cancer Statistics Branch, Bethesda. Available from: http://www.seer.cancer.gov/seerstat. Last accessed 13 July 2011
- 23.Anderson R, Rosenberg H (1998) Age standardization of death rates: implementation of the year 2000 standard. Natl Vital Stat Rep 47(3):16Google Scholar
- 34.ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 109 (2009) Cervical cytology screening. Obstet Gynecol 114(6):1409–1420Google Scholar
- 38.US Cancer Statistics Working Group (2010) United States cancer statistics: 1999–2006 incidence and mortality web-based report. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and National Cancer Institute, Atlanta. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/uscs. Last accessed 10 June 2010
- 52.Lowder JL, Oliphant SS, Ghetti C, Burrows LJ, Meyn LA, Balk J (2010) Prophylactic bilateral oophorectomy or removal of remaining ovary at the time of hysterectomy in the United States, 1979–2004. Am J Obstet Gynecol 202(6):538.e1–538.e9Google Scholar
- 55.US Census Bureau (2009) USA quickfacts. Available from: http://www.quickfacts.census.gov. Last accessed 30 Oct 2009