Geographic clustering of testicular cancer incidence in the northern part of The Netherlands

Geographic variations in testicular cancer incidence may be caused by differences in environmental factors, genetic factors, or both. In the present study, geographic patterns of age-adjusted testicular cancer incidence rates (IRs) in 12 provinces in The Netherlands in the period 1989–1995 were analysed. In addition, the age-adjusted IR of testicular cancer by degree of urbanization was evaluated. Cancer incidence data were obtained from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The overall annual age-adjusted IR of testicular cancer in The Netherlands in the period 1989–1995 was 4.4 per 100 000 men. The province Groningen in the north of the country showed the highest annual IR with 5.8 per 100 000 men, which was higher (P < 0.05) than the overall IR in The Netherlands (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1–1.6). The highest IR in Groningen was seen for both seminomas and non-seminomas. In addition, Groningen showed the highest age-specific IRs in all relevant younger age groups (15–29, 30–44 and 45–59 years), illustrating the consistency of data. The province Friesland, also situated in the northern part of the country, showed the second highest IR of testicular cancer with 5.3 cases per 100 000 men per year (IRR 1.2, 95% Cl 1.0–1.5, not significant). This mainly resulted from the high IR of seminoma in Friesland. Analysis of age-adjusted IRs of testicular cancer by degree of urbanization in The Netherlands showed no urban–rural differences at analysis of all histological types combined, or at separate analyses of seminomas and non-seminomas. Geographic clustering of testicular cancer seems to be present in the rural north of The Netherlands with some stable founder populations, which are likely to share a relatively high frequency of genes from common ancestors including genes possibly related to testicular cancer. Although this finding does not exclude the involvement of shared environmental factors in the aetiology of testicular cancer, it may also lend support to a genetic susceptibility to testicular cancer development. Testicular cancer cases in stable founder populations seem particularly suitable for searching for testicular cancer susceptibility genes because such genes are likely to be more frequent among affected men in such populations. © 1999 Cancer Research Campaig

A prediction model for underestimation of invasive breast cancer after a biopsy diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ: based on 2892 biopsies and 589 invasive cancers

Background: Patients with a biopsy diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) might be diagnosed with invasive breast cancer at excision, a phenomenon known as underestimation. Patients with DCIS are treated based on the risk of underestimation or progression to invasive cancer. The aim of our study was to expand the knowledge on underestimation and to develop a prediction model. Methods: Population-based data were retrieved from the Dutch Pathology Registry and the Netherlands Cancer Registry for DCIS between January 2011 and June 2012. Results: Of 2892 DCIS biopsies, 21% were underestimated invasive breast cancers. In multivariable analysis, risk factors were high-grade DCIS (odds ratio (OR) 1.43, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05–1.95), a palpable tumour (OR 2.22, 95% CI: 1.76–2.81), a BI-RADS (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System) score 5 (OR 2.36, 95% CI: 1.80–3.09) and a suspected invasive component at biopsy (OR 3.84, 95% CI: 2.69–5.46). The predicted risk for underestimation ranged from 9.5 to 80.2%, with a median of 14.7%. Of the 596 invasive cancers, 39% had unfavourable features. Conclusions: The risk for an underestimated diagnosis of invasive breast cancer after a biopsy diagnosis of DCIS is considerable. With our prediction model, the individual risk of underestimation can be calculated based on routinely available preoperatively known risk factors (https://www.evidencio.com/models/show/1074)