Estimation of the Ecological Fallacy in the Geographical Analysis of the Association of Socio-Economic Deprivation and Cancer Incidence

Ecological deprivation indices at the level of spatial units are often used to measure and monitor inequalities in health despite the possibility of ecological fallacy. For the purpose of this study, the European Deprivation Index (EDI) was used, which is based on Townsend theorization of relative deprivation. The Slovenian version of EDI (SI-EDI) at the aggregated level (SI-EDI-A) was calculated to the level of the national assembly polling stations. The SI-EDI was also calculated at the individual level (SI-EDI-I) by the method that represents a methodological innovation. The degree of ecological fallacy was estimated with the Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curves. By calculating the area under the ROC curve, the ecological fallacy was evaluated numerically. Agreement between measuring deprivation with SI-EDI-A and SI-EDI-I was analysed by graphical methods and formal testing. The association of the socio-economic status and the cancer risk was analysed in all first cancer cases diagnosed in Slovenia at age 16 and older in the period 2011⁻2013. Analysis was done for each level separately, for SI-EDI-I and for SI-EDI-A. The Poisson regression model was implemented in both settings but adapted specifically for aggregated and individual data. The study clearly shows that ecological fallacy is unavoidable. However, although the association of cancer incidence and socio-economic deprivation at individual and aggregated levels was not the same for all cancer sites, the results were very similar for the majority of investigated cancer sites and especially for cancers associated with unhealthy lifestyles. The results confirm the assumptions from authors’ previous research that using the level of the national assembly polling stations would be the acceptable way to aggregate data when explaining inequalities in health in Slovenia in ecological studies

Corrigendum to: Dermatoscopic Features of Basal Cell Carcinoma

Basal cell carcinoma is the most common type of non-melanoma skin cancers, frequently observed in fair-skinned individuals. The major risk factors for developing basal cell carcinoma are environmental exposures, phenotypic and genetic traits, and immunosuppression. The diagnosis of basal cell carcinoma is based upon clinical examination and dermatoscopy findings and finally confirmed by histopathological analysis. There are five main clinicopathologic types of basal cell carcinoma, specifically, superficial, nodular, pigmented, morpheaform, and fibroepithelial variant. The dermatoscopic feature of all BCC is the absence of a pigment network. Dermatoscopy structures are further classified as vascular, pigment-related, and non-vascular/non-pigment-related structures. Vascular structures include arborizing vessels and short fine telangiectasias, while pigmented structures comprise maple leaf-like areas, spoke-wheel areas, multiple blue-gray globules, in-focus dots, and concentric structures. Additional structures such as ulcerations, multiple small erosions, multiple aggregated yellow-white globules, shiny white-red structureless areas, and white streaks are considered non-vascular/non-pigmented structures. As treatment options highly depend on the type of BCC, dermatoscopy is of great value in management strategy, assessment of margins, and evaluation of response to non-ablative therapies

Socioeconomic inequalities in cancer incidence in Europe: a comprehensive review of population-based epidemiological studies

Since the end of the previous century, there has not been a comprehensive review of European studies on socioeconomic inequality in cancer incidence. In view of recent advances in data source linkage and analytical methods, we aimed to update the knowledge base on associations between location-specific cancer incidence and individual or area-level measures of socio-economic status (SES) among European adults

Improved Survival after Breast-Conserving Therapy Compared with Mastectomy in Stage I-IIA Breast Cancer

: In the current study, we sought to compare survival outcomes after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) or mastectomy alone in patients with stage I-IIA breast cancer, whose tumors are typically suitable for both locoregional treatments. The study cohort consisted of 1360 patients with stage I-IIA (T1-2N0 or T0-1N1) breast cancer diagnosed between 2001 and 2013 and treated with either BCT (n = 1021, 75.1%) or mastectomy alone (n = 339, 24.9%). Median follow-ups for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were 6.9 years (range, 0.3-15.9) and 7.5 years (range, 0.2-25.9), respectively. Fifteen (1.1%), 14 (1.0%) and 48 (3.5%) patients experienced local, regional, and distant relapse, respectively. For the whole cohort of patients, the estimated 5-year DFS and OS were 96% and 97%, respectively. After stratification based on the type of local treatment, the estimated 5-year DFS for BCT was 97%, while it was 91% (p < 0.001) for mastectomy-only treatment. Inverse probability of treatment weighting matching based on confounding confirmed that mastectomy was associated with worse DFS (HR 2.839, 95% CI 1.760-4.579, p < 0.0001), but not with OS (HR 1.455, 95% CI 0.844-2.511, p = 0.177). In our study, BCT was shown to have improved disease-specific outcomes compared to mastectomy alone, emphasizing the important role of adjuvant treatments, including postoperative radiation therapy, in patients with early-stage breast cancer at diagnosis

Trends in population-based cancer survival in Slovenia

The aim of our study was to describe the survival of Slovenian cancer patients diagnosed in the last twenty years. An insight is given into the improvement made in different cancer types, population groups and prognostic factors

Impact of COVID-19 on cancer diagnosis and management in Slovenia – preliminary results

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the provision and use of healthcare services throughout the world. In Slovenia, an epidemic was officially declared between mid-March and mid-May 2020. Although all non-essential health care services were put on hold by government decree, oncological services were listed as an exception. Nevertheless, as cancer control depends also on other health services and additionally major changes in people’s behaviour likely occurred, we aimed to analyse whether cancer diagnosis and management were affected during the COVID-19 epidemic in Slovenia

Up-to-date estimates of breast cancer survival for the years 2000-2004 in 11 European countries: The role of screening and a comparison with data from the United States

We investigated survival in breast cancer patients by age group, focussing on those covered by screening programmes, using data from 12 European population-based cancer registries participating in the European Network for Indicators on Cancer Survival Working Group.We calculated period estimates of 5-year relative survival for 2000-2004 and examined the change in survival estimates for four age groups between 1990-1994 and 2000-2004. Trends in age specific incidence, survival and mortality were additionally compared to those in the United States based on results from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) programme.Breast cancer survival uniformly increased particularly in areas with lower breast cancer survival for patients diagnosed in 1990-1994. With the exception of Geneva, Scotland and Estonia, the rise in survival was always larger among the younger age groups than in the 70+ age group and the age-gradient widened over time. The 5-year relative survival of patients aged 70 and above in the European registries was at least 7 percentage points lower than the 5-year relative survival of patients in the same age group in the US in 2000-2004. During the study period, incidence increased in all age groups and populations with a few exceptions, an observation paralleled by declining mortality.Results showed that some of the geographical differences in overall survival are even larger when considering age groups, in particular between Western and Eastern European countries. Furthermore, some of the differences in survival within the Northern and Western European areas could be due to variations in the implementation of screening programmes rather than economic inequalities

Long-term survival and cure fraction estimates for childhood cancer in Europe (EUROCARE-6): results from a population-based study

Background: The EUROCARE-5 study revealed disparities in childhood cancer survival among European countries, giving rise to important initiatives across Europe to reduce the gap. Extending its representativeness through increased coverage of eastern European countries, the EUROCARE-6 study aimed to update survival progress across countries and years of diagnosis and provide new analytical perspectives on estimates of long-term survival and the cured fraction of patients with childhood cancer. Methods: In this population-based study, we analysed 135 847 children (aged 0–14 years) diagnosed during 2000–13 and followed up to the end of 2014, recruited from 80 population-based cancer registries in 31 European countries. We calculated age-adjusted 5-year survival differences by country and over time using period analysis, for all cancers combined and for major cancer types. We applied a variant of standard mixture cure models for survival data to estimate the cure fraction of patients by childhood cancer and to estimate projected 15-year survival. Findings: 5-year survival for all childhood cancer combined in Europe in 2010–14 was 81% (95% CI 81–82), showing an increase of three percentage points compared with 2004–06. Significant progress over time was observed for almost all cancers. Survival remained stable for osteosarcomas, Ewing sarcoma, Burkitt lymphoma, non-Hodgkin lymphomas, and rhabdomyoscarcomas. For all cancers combined, inequalities still persisted among European countries (with age-adjusted 5-year survival ranging from 71% [95% CI 60–79] to 87% [77–93]). The 15-year survival projection for all patients with childhood cancer diagnosed in 2010–13 was 78%. We estimated the yearly long-term mortality rate due to causes other than the diagnosed cancer to be around 2 per 1000 patients for all childhood cancer combined, but to approach zero for retinoblastoma. The cure fraction for patients with childhood cancer increased over time from 74% (95% CI 73–75) in 1998–2001 to 80% (79–81) in 2010–13. In the latter cohort, the cure fraction rate ranged from 99% (95% CI 74–100) for retinoblastoma to 60% (58–63) for CNS tumours and reached 90% (95% CI 87–93) for lymphoid leukaemia and 70% (67–73) for acute myeloid leukaemia. Interpretation: Childhood cancer survival is increasing over time in Europe but there are still some differences among countries. Regular monitoring of childhood cancer survival and estimation of the cure fraction through population-based registry data are crucial for evaluating advances in paediatric cancer care. Funding: European Commission