Skip to main content
  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

AACR logo

  • Register
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CEBP Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Progress and Priorities
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Disparities Collection
      • Editors' Picks
      • "Best of" Collection
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Informing Public Health Policy
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

User menu

  • Register
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CEBP Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Progress and Priorities
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Disparities Collection
      • Editors' Picks
      • "Best of" Collection
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Informing Public Health Policy
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

Letters to the Editor

Etiologic Conclusions from Similar Birth Cohort Effects

Andreas Stang and Karl-Heinz Jöckel
Andreas Stang
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Karl-Heinz Jöckel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0355 Published September 2006
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

To the Editors: We read with interest the recent article by Bray et al. (1) who studied age-cohort-period effects of incidence time trends of testicular cancer. They hypothesize “that similar temporal patterns in the cohort dimension imply that the etiologies of seminoma and nonseminoma are largely similar if not identical.” With the exception of Italy, they estimated similar birth cohort effects for seminoma and nonseminoma in several European countries.

We think that, from an epistemologic point of view, one cannot conclude that similar birth cohort effects by histologic subgroup imply similar etiologies. However, divergent birth cohort effects (given that classification errors and other biases did not occur) may imply different etiologies by subgroup. For example, smoking follows a strong birth cohort pattern in European populations. If cigarette smoke, a mixture of carcinogens, would contain a carcinogen A that specifically induced seminoma and carcinogen B that specifically induced nonseminoma, we would observe similar birth cohort effects, although the etiology differs by subgroup.

Bray et al. note that no etiologic difference “has been established with consistency.” They add that “difficulties in achieving sufficient statistical power to detect truly significant effects” make analytic studies problematic. However, Bray et al.'s own analyses do not provide information on the precision of estimates. For example, what is the precision of the incidence rate ratios by birth cohorts in the Czech Republic (Fig. 3)? Was the precision of their study high enough to conclude that these estimates are similar? In addition, we recalculated the incidence rate ratios (seminoma/nonseminoma) of the period 1994 to 1996 from Fig. 2. The ratios show a range of ∼1.14 (France) up to 1.75 (Italy). The scatter plot does not imply a linear relationship between the incidence of seminoma and nonseminoma.

One cannot ignore the available literature that gives clues to different etiologies of seminoma and nonseminoma, although risk factors of seminoma and nonseminoma may overlap in some instances (2-7). Incidence analyses of germ cell cancers among children (excluded by Bray et al.) indicate that, up to the age of 15 years, nonseminoma is almost the only gonadal germ cell tumors and shows an early peak among boys ages 0 to 4 years (8).

In conclusion, the observation of apparently similar subgroup-specific birth cohort effects estimated with unknown precision can neither logically nor empirically (as based on several published reports) lead to the conclusion that the etiologies of seminoma and nonseminoma are “largely similar if not identical.”

References

  1. ↵
    Bray F, Richiardi L, Ekbom A, et al. Do testicular seminoma and nonseminoma share the same etiology? Evidence from an age-period-cohort analysis of incidence trends in eight European countries. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15:652–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    Brown LM, Pottern LM, Hoover RN, Devesa SS, Aselton P, Flannery JT. Testicular cancer in the United States: trends in incidence and mortality. Int J Epidemiol 1986;15:164–70.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. Prener A, Hsieh CC, Engholm G, Trichopoulos D, Jensen OM. Birth order and risk of testicular cancer. Cancer Causes Control 1992;3:265–72.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. Akre O, Ekbom A, Hsieh CC, Trichopoulos D, Adami HO. Testicular nonseminoma and seminoma in relation to perinatal characteristics. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996;88:883–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. Stone JM, Cruickshank DG, Sandeman TF, Matthews JP. Trebling of the incidence of testicular cancer in Victoria, Australia (1950-1985). Cancer 1991;68:211–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. Stang A, Ahrens W, Bromen K, et al. Undescended testis and the risk of testicular cancer: importance of source and classification of exposure information. Int J Epidemiol 2001;30:1050–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    Bromen K, Stang A, Baumgardt-Elms C, et al. Testicular, other genital, and breast cancers in 1st degree relatives of testicular cancer patients and controls. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004;13:1316–24.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    McGlynn KA, Devesa SS, Sigurdson AJ, Brown LM, Tsao L, Tarone RE. Trends in the incidence of testicular germ cell tumors in the United States. Cancer 2003;97:63–70.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention: 15 (9)
September 2006
Volume 15, Issue 9
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)

Sign up for alerts

View this article with LENS

Open full page PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for sharing this Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Etiologic Conclusions from Similar Birth Cohort Effects
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Etiologic Conclusions from Similar Birth Cohort Effects
Andreas Stang and Karl-Heinz Jöckel
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev September 1 2006 (15) (9) 1752; DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0355

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Etiologic Conclusions from Similar Birth Cohort Effects
Andreas Stang and Karl-Heinz Jöckel
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev September 1 2006 (15) (9) 1752; DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0355
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Advertisement

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Copy Number Variation and Ovarian Cancer Risk—Letter
  • Genome-wide Analysis of Common Copy Number Variation and Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Risk—Response
  • Shift Work, Chronotype, and Cancer Risk—Response
Show more Letters to the Editor
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Privacy Policy
Facebook   Twitter   LinkedIn   YouTube   RSS

Articles

  • Online First
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Info for

  • Authors
  • Subscribers
  • Advertisers
  • Librarians

About Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Permissions
  • Submit a Manuscript
AACR logo

Copyright © 2021 by the American Association for Cancer Research.

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
eISSN: 1538-7755
ISSN: 1055-9965

Advertisement