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
    • Reviewing
  • 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
    • Reviewing
  • 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

Cancer Surveillance Research

State Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Mortality Patterns in the United States

Deepa Naishadham, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Rebecca Siegel, Vilma Cokkinides and Ahmedin Jemal
Deepa Naishadham
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rebecca Siegel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Vilma Cokkinides
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ahmedin Jemal
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0250 Published July 2011
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality rates have been decreasing for many decades in the United States, with the decrease accelerating in the most recent time period. The extent to which this decrease varies across states and its influence on the geographic patterns of rates is unknown.

Methods: We analyzed the temporal trend in age-standardized CRC death rates for each state from 1990 to 2007 using joinpoint regression. We also examined the change in death rates between 1990–1994 and 2003–2007 using rate ratios with 95% confidence intervals and illustrated the change in pattern using maps. The relationship between the change in mortality rates and CRC screening rates for 2004 by state was examined using Pearson's correlation.

Results: CRC mortality rates significantly decreased in all states except Mississippi between 1990 and 2007 based on the joinpoint model. The decrease in death rates between 1990–1994 and 2003–2007 ranged from 9% in Alabama to greater than 33% in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York, and Alaska; Mississippi and Wyoming showed no significant decrease. Generally, the northeastern states showed the largest decreases, whereas southern states showed the smallest decreases. The highest CRC mortality rates shifted from the northeastern states during 1990 to 1994 to the southern states along the Appalachian corridor during 2003 to 2007. The decrease in CRC mortality rates by state correlated strongly with uptake of screening (r = −0.65, P < 0.0001).

Conclusions: Progress in reducing CRC mortality varies across states, with the Northeast showing the most progress and the South showing the least progress.

Impact: These findings highlight the need for wider dissemination of CRC screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 20(7); 1296–302. ©2011 AACR.

Introduction

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer death for both men and women in the United States (1). Death rates for CRC have been decreasing in the United States for the past several decades, with the decrease accelerating in the most recent time period (2, 3). The death rate decreased by 3% per year from 2003 to 2007, compared with less than 2% annually in years prior (3). This accelerated decrease in the most recent time period is thought to largely reflect increased uptake of CRC screening (2). However, the extent to which this decrease varies across states and its influence on the geographic patterns of CRC mortality rates are not documented in the peer review literature. To this end, we analyzed temporal trends in age-standardized CRC death rates from 1990 through 2007 by state and the change in geographic patterns of rates for 2 time intervals, 1990–1994 and 2003–2007. We also examined whether there was an association between the decrease in death rates and screening uptake by state.

Materials and Methods

Mortality data for cancers of the colon and rectum from 1990 through 2007 for each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia were obtained from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Result (SEER) mortality database as reported by the National Center for Health Statistics (4). Rates were extracted using SEER*Stat software (5) and they were age standardized to the 2000 U.S. standard population and expressed per 100,000 population. Trends in the age-standardized rates from 1990 through 2007 were described using a joinpoint regression model, which involves fitting a series of joined straight lines on a log scale to the annual age-standardized rates (6). We allowed a maximum of 2 joinpoints. Trends are expressed as the annual percentage changes (APC), which are the slopes of the line segment. For each state, we also calculated the change in death rates between the 1990–1994 and 2003–2007 using rate ratio (2003–2007 to 1999–1994), with 95% CI (7). All statistical tests were 2 sided (P < 0.05).

To examine changes in geographic patterns of CRC death rates between 1990–1994 and 2003–2007, we created U.S. state maps using ArcGIS, ESRI (8). For each time interval, age-standardized rates for each state were sorted in descending order of rates and grouped into 6 categories. The highest and lowest categories are approximately the 10th and 90th percentiles, whereas the remaining states were divided into 4 equivalent groups. The color gradient in the maps reflect the CRC burden, with states with the highest CRC mortality rate assigned the darkest color.

State-level CRC screening data for adults aged 50 and older in 2004 was obtained from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS; ref. 9), an annual, cross-sectional, population-based survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CRC screening uptake was defined as the percentage of people reporting a fecal occult blood test within the past year or a sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy in the past 10 years. The relationship between screening rates for 2004 and the percentage change in death rates from 1990–1994 to 2003–2007 by state was examined by Pearson's correlation (10) using the statistical software SAS version 9.2 (11).

In supplemental analyses, we calculated changes in CRC incidence and mortality rates between 1992–1995 and 2004–2007 for 12 SEER cancer registries (Atlanta, Connecticut, Detroit, Hawaii, Iowa, New Mexico, San Francisco-Oakland, Seattle-Puget Sound, Utah, Los Angeles, San Jose-Monterey, and Rural Georgia) because trends in mortality rates are affected by incidence. We then examined the relationship between the changes in incidence and mortality rates by Pearson's correlation (10). We also examined temporal trends in CRC death rates from 1990 to 2007 and the change in death rates between 1990–1994 and 2003–2007 for non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks, and Hispanics by state. This restricted the analysis to 38 states with complete Hispanic ethnicity information on death certificates for each year included in this study (5). In addition, states with less than 4 recorded deaths from CRC in any of the study years (1990–2007) were excluded from the trend analyses because of the National Centers for Health and Statistics' confidentiality requirement. This further reduced the number of states available for the trend analysis to 27 states for non-Hispanic blacks and 13 for Hispanics. Similarly, states with less than 25 deaths in either of the 2 time intervals, 1990–1994 and 2003–2007, were excluded from the analyses of change in death rates between the 2 time periods, which restricted this analysis to 31 states for non-Hispanic blacks and 17 states for Hispanics. All 38 states were available for the analyses for non-Hispanic whites. Using partial correlation analyses, we assessed the effects of state differences in percentage of rural residents and percentage of Hispanic or non-Hispanic black populations on the relationship between changes in percentage death rates over the 2 time periods and screening rates for all races combined (11).

Results

CRC mortality rates decreased significantly in all states except Mississippi between 1990 and 2007 according to joinpoint modeling (Table 1). The decrease in death rates between 1990–1994 and 2003–2007 ranged from 9% in Alabama to greater than 33% in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York, and Alaska, with Mississippi and Wyoming showing no significant decrease. Generally, the northeastern states showed the largest decreases, whereas the southern states showed the smallest decreases.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

CRC death rates and trends by state, United States, 1990–2007

Figure 1 illustrates the extremes of variation in state trends in CRC mortality rates from 1990 to 2007. Whereas the decrease in CRC mortality rates in New York and Massachusetts accelerated from about 2.5% per year in the 1990s to 4% to 5% in the 2000s, rates in Mississippi and Alabama showed little or no decrease during the entire time period (Table 1). Supplemental analysis showed that state trends for non-Hispanic whites and non-Hispanic blacks are generally similar (Supplementary Table S1A and B). Rates decreased significantly for all 38 states in non-Hispanic whites and for 20 of the 27 states for non-Hispanic blacks. For both non-Hispanic whites and blacks, CRC mortality trends were more favorable in Massachusetts and less favorable in Alabama. For Hispanics, rates decreased for 6 of the 13 states considered in the analysis (Supplementary Table S1C).

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Trends in CRC mortality rates for selected states, 1990–2007.

Figure 2 shows state variations in CRC death rates during 1990–1994 and 2003–2007. During 1990 to 1994, the highest CRC mortality rates were found in the northeast and north central parts of the country, and the lowest rates were in the west and south. In contrast, during 2003 to 2007, the highest CRC mortality rates were found in southern states along the Appalachian corridor, including West Virginia, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Louisiana. The change in CRC mortality rates from 1990–1994 to 2003–2007 by state was highly correlated (r = −0.65, P < 0.0001) with the percent of adults aged 50 and older who were current with CRC screening in 2004 (Fig. 3). The association was slightly attenuated (r = −0.59, P < 0.0001) when we accounted for state differences in percentage of rural residents. In a supplemental analysis, we also found that the change in incidence and mortality rates from 1992–1995 to 2003–2007 within each cancer registry are strongly correlated (r = 0.86, P = 0.0003; Supplementary Fig.).

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

CRC death rates by state, 1990–1994 and 2003–2007.

Figure 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3.

Relationship between percent change in CRC death rates and percentage screened, adults aged 50 and older.

Discussion

There are considerable geographic disparities in overall CRC mortality trends during 1990 to 2007, with states in the northeast showing the largest declines and states in the south showing the smallest declines. The highest CRC death rates shifted from the northeastern states in the early 1990s to the southern states along the Appalachian corridor in the mid 2000s. These findings are consistent with higher CRC incidence and mortality rates in Appalachia compared with the rest of the United States (12–14).

Reasons for such disparities may include state differences in uptake of screening, treatment, and known risk factors. Screening for CRC detects adenomas for removal before they develop into cancer as well as detecting cancers at an early stage of the disease (15–17). Generally, the uptake of CRC screening is lower and the proportion of late stage CRC cases are higher in southern states compared with other regions (18, 19). We found that screening rates by state were strongly correlated with the decrease in CRC mortality rates (r = −0.65, P < 0.0001). Compared with other geographic areas, southern states have a larger proportion of the population that is poor and uninsured, among whom screening rates are lower. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2007, 18.8% and 18.5% of the population in Mississippi and Louisiana, respectively, were uninsured compared with 5.4% in Massachusetts (20). Over 20% of the population in Mississippi was below the poverty line in 2007, compared with the national average of 13% (21). Higher death rates in the Appalachian region have also been noted for cervical cancer (22–25), which has a similar window of opportunity for prevention and early detection through screening.

Timely treatment is an important factor for survival following a CRC diagnosis. Several studies have shown that people with lower socioeconomic status (SES) delay treatment for CRC due to a host of factors, including lack of knowledge, referral bias, inadequate health insurance, and limited access to health care facilities (26–28). Although data on regional variations in CRC treatment are limited, CRC patients residing in rural areas or poorer neighborhoods are less likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy than patients residing in urban or more affluent areas (29, 30). A recent study reported that women with early stage breast cancer in rural Appalachia are less likely than those in other regions to receive adjuvant chemotherapy following breast conserving surgery (31).

While obesity and smoking increase the risk of CRC (32, 33), use of menopausal hormone therapy and aspirin and other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs decrease risk (34, 35). Generally, prevalence of obesity has been much higher in the southern states (36) and progress in reducing smoking prevalence has been slower in southern states, compared with northeastern and western states (37). These trends may have attenuated the decrease in CRC death rates in these states. The use of menopausal hormone therapy among women has generally been higher in the southern and western states than in the northeastern states (38). Nevertheless, the decrease in CRC death rates for men and women by state were strongly and positively correlated (r = 0.76, P < 0.0001), suggesting that the trends were unlikely to be driven by sex-specific factors that affect CRC occurrence or survival.

The relatively higher proportion of blacks in southern states is another factor that may have contributed to the less favorable trend in reducing CRC mortality for all races combined in this region. Nationally, reduction in CRC death rates has been much slower in blacks than in whites (39), partly because blacks are more likely to have lower SES, which is associated with poorer access to treatment and preventive services (26), to have higher risk perception to interventions (29, 40, 41), are less likely to be screened or referred for CRC screening by their physicians (42, 43). However, the direction of the trend in CRC death rates within each state was generally similar in non-Hispanic blacks and non-Hispanic whites, though the magnitude of the trend varied for some states (Supplementary Table S1A and B). Particularly, the CRC mortality pattern for non-Hispanic whites was generally similar to those of all races (Table 1). For example, the highest CRC death rates in all races and in non-Hispanic whites occurred in Appalachian states, including West Virginia, Kentucky, and Ohio. Accounting for state differences in the proportion of non-Hispanic black population slightly strengthened the association (r = −0.53 to r = −0.58) between percentage change in death rates and CRC screening rates for all races combined in the 38 states that met high quality data for information on Hispanic ethnicity. Reasons for the relatively high rates in Nevada in the most recent time period are unknown but may in part reflect the low colorectal screening rate in the state; Nevada had the sixth lowest CRC screening rate by state in 2004 (9).

The less favorable CRC trend in many states for Hispanics may in part reflect the lower prevalence of screening in this population (9, 44). According to 2008 NHIS data, about 37% of Hispanic adults 50 year or older were current with their CRC screening compared with 56% of non-Hispanic whites and 49% of non-Hispanic blacks(45). About 40% of Hispanics are foreign born (46), and CRC cancer screening rates for immigrants who resided fewer than 10 years in the United States are half as high as for those born in United States (45). Despite the slow progress in reducing CRC mortality death rates, rates in Hispanics are lower than non-Hispanic whites and blacks due, in part, to lower prevalence of known risk factors for CRC, such as smoking, and a higher prevalence of protective factors, such as a vegetable and legume–based diet (47–49). However, it is noteworthy that Hispanic subpopulations vary substantially by state distribution and CRC burden (50–54). Cubans have the highest CRC rates and predominantly reside in the south (Florida), whereas Mexicans have the lowest CRC rates and mainly reside in the southwest regions (50). Similar to non-Hispanic blacks, accounting for state differences in the proportion of Hispanic population did not affect the correlation (r = −0.53) between change in death rates and screening rates for all races combined.

A limitation of our study is its ecological nature, and we can only speculate about the factors that have contributed to state differences in the progress against CRC. Inaccuracies in underlying cause of death from death certificates according to International Classification of Diseases (ICD) are potential limitations in the interpretation of mortality trends. The concordance between the underlying cause of death from death certificates and cancer diagnosis recorded in population-based cancer registries for CRC in the United States is about 87% according to ICD-10 and 95% according to ICD-9 (55). However, the extent of variations in accuracy of underlying cause of death for CRC across states is unknown. The analysis by Hispanic ethnicity could also be affected by inaccuracies in race/ethnicity classification in death certificates and census estimates (56). Finally, screening rates by state are based on BRFSS, a telephone survey with low response rates that does not discern between screening and diagnostic procedures (57, 58). However, BRFSS is the only data source for screening prevalence by state.

In conclusion, progress in reducing CRC mortality rates varies significantly across states, with those in the Northeast showing the most progress and those in the South showing the least progress. As a result, the highest burden of CRC mortality shifted from the Northeast in the early 1990s to the southern states along the Appalachian corridor in the mid 2000s. Improving screening rates through state-specific initiatives and/or expansion of the Colorectal Cancer Control Program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (59) to the Appalachian region and certain southern states could lessen the disproportionately high burden of CRC in these states.

Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest

No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Priti Bandi for her assistance in providing summarized screening data extracted from the BRFSS.

Footnotes

  • Note: Supplementary data for this article are available at Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention Online (http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/).

  • Received March 9, 2011.
  • Revision received May 11, 2011.
  • Accepted May 12, 2011.
  • ©2011 American Association for Cancer Research.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Jemal A,
    2. Siegel R,
    3. Xu J,
    4. Ward E
    . Cancer statistics, 2010. CA Cancer J Clin 2010;60:277–300.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Edwards BK,
    2. Ward E,
    3. Kohler BA,
    4. Eheman C,
    5. Zauber AG,
    6. Anderson RN,
    7. et al.
    Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2006, featuring colorectal cancer trends and impact of interventions (risk factors, screening, and treatment) to reduce future rates. Cancer 2010;116:544–73.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Altekruse SF,
    2. Kosary CL,
    3. Krapcho M,
    4. Neyman N,
    5. Aminou R,
    6. Waldron W,
    7. et al.
    editors. Cancer statistics review SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2007. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 2010.
  4. 4.↵
    Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program. SEER*Stat Database: Mortality–All COD, Aggregated With State, Total U.S. (1969–2007) <Katrina/Rita Population Adjustment>, National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program, Cancer Statistics Branch, released June 2010. Underlying mortality data provided by NCHS.
  5. 5.↵
    Surveillance Research Program, National Cancer Institute SEER*Stat software. version 6.6.2.
  6. 6.↵
    1. Kim HJ,
    2. Fay MP,
    3. Feuer EJ,
    4. Midthune DN
    . Permutation tests for joinpoint regression with applications to cancer rates. Stat Med 2000;19:335–51.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Tiwari RC,
    2. Li Y,
    3. Zhaohui Zou
    . Interval estimation for ratios of correlated age-adjusted rates. J Data Sc 2010;8:471–82.
    OpenUrl
  8. 8.↵
    1. Environmental Science and Research Institute (ESRI) ArcGIS and ArcMap [software]
    . Version 9.3.1. Redlands, CA; 2009.
  9. 9.↵
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
    . Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. BRFSS for screening rates. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, CDC.
  10. 10.↵
    1. Pearson K
    . Determination of the coefficient of correlation. Science 1909;30:23–5.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    SAS [Software] Version 9.2.0.0. Cary, NC: SII; 2003–2008.
  12. 12.↵
    1. Wingo PA,
    2. Tucker TC,
    3. Jamison PM,
    4. Martin H,
    5. McLaughlin C,
    6. Bayakly R,
    7. et al.
    Cancer in Appalachia, 2001–2003. Cancer 2008;112:181–92.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
    . Cancer death rates-Appalachia. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2002;51:527–9.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Armstrong LR,
    2. Thompson T,
    3. Hall HI,
    4. Coughlin SS,
    5. Steele B,
    6. Rogers JD
    . Colorectal carcinoma mortality among Appalachian men and women, 1969–1999. Cancer 2004;101:2851–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Levin B,
    2. Lieberman DA,
    3. McFarland B,
    4. Andrews KS,
    5. Brooks D,
    6. Bond J,
    7. et al.
    Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. Gastroenterology 2008;134:1570–95.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Lieberman D
    . Screening/early detection model for colorectal cancer. Why screen? Cancer 1994;74:2023–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Citarda F,
    2. Tomaselli G,
    3. Capocaccia R,
    4. Barcherini S,
    5. Crespi M
    . Efficacy in standard clinical practice of colonoscopic polypectomy in reducing colorectal cancer incidence. Gut 2001;48:812–5.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    1. Henley SJ,
    2. King JB,
    3. German RR,
    4. Richardson LC,
    5. Plescia M
    . Surveillance of screening-detected cancers (colon and rectum, breast, and cervix)–United States, 2004–2006. MMWR Surveill Summ 2010;59:1–25.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Weir HK,
    2. Thun MJ,
    3. Hankey BF,
    4. Ries LA,
    5. Howe HL,
    6. Wingo PA,
    7. et al.
    Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2000, featuring the uses of surveillance data for cancer prevention and control. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:1276–99.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.↵
    1. U.S. Census Bureau
    . Uninsured Population 2007. Available from: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/hlthins/data/historical/files/hihistt4.xls.
  21. 21.↵
    1. U.S. Census Bureau
    . Poverty data 2007. Available from: http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/acs-09.pdf.
  22. 22.↵
    1. Devesa SS,
    2. Grauman DJ,
    3. Blot WJ,
    4. Pennello GA,
    5. Hoover RN,
    6. Fraumeni JF Jr,
    7. et al.
    Atlas of cancer mortality in the United States 1950–94. Washington, DC: U.S. Govt Print Off; 1999. Bethesda, MD: NIH, National Cancer Institute; 1999.
  23. 23.↵
    1. Friedell GH,
    2. Tucker TC,
    3. McManmon E,
    4. Moser M,
    5. Hernandez C,
    6. Nadel M
    . Incidence of dysplasia and carcinoma of the uterine cervix in an Appalachian population. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992;84:1030–2.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Lyttle NL,
    2. Stadelman K
    . Assessing awareness and knowledge of breast and cervical cancer among Appalachian women. Prev Chronic Dis 2006;3:A125.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Behringer B,
    2. Friedell GH
    . Appalachia: where place matters in health. Prev Chronic Dis 2006;3:A113.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Le H,
    2. Ziogas A,
    3. Lipkin SM,
    4. Zell JA
    . Effects of socioeconomic status and treatment disparities in colorectal cancer survival. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers Prev 2008;17:1950–62.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. 27.↵
    1. Mandelblatt J,
    2. Andrews H,
    3. Kao R,
    4. Wallace R,
    5. Kerner J
    . The late-stage diagnosis of colorectal cancer: demographic and socioeconomic factors. Am J Public Health 1996;86:1794–7.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Edwards BK,
    2. Brown ML,
    3. Wingo PA,
    4. Howe HL,
    5. Ward E,
    6. Ries LA,
    7. et al.
    Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2002, featuring population-based trends in cancer treatment. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:1407–27.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. 29.↵
    1. Hao Y,
    2. Landrine H,
    3. Jemal A,
    4. Ward KC,
    5. Bayakly AR,
    6. Young JL Jr,
    7. et al.
    Race, neighbourhood characteristics and disparities in chemotherapy for colorectal cancer. J Epidemiol Community Health 2011;65:211–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. 30.↵
    1. Tropman SE,
    2. Hatzell T,
    3. Paskett E,
    4. Ricketts T,
    5. Cooper MR,
    6. Aldrich T
    . Colon cancer treatment in rural North and South Carolina. Cancer Detect Prev 1999;23:428–34.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    1. Dragun AE,
    2. Huang B,
    3. Tucker TC,
    4. Spanos WJ
    . Disparities in the application of adjuvant radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery for early stage breast cancer: impact on overall survival. Cancer 2010 Dec 14. [Epub ahead of print].
  32. 32.↵
    1. Biku J,
    2. John AMA,
    3. Andrew Poullis,
    4. Michael Anthony Mendall
    . Chronic subclinical bowel inflammation may explain increased risk of colorectal cancer in obese people. Gut 2007;56:1034–5.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  33. 33.↵
    1. Calle EE,
    2. Rodriguez C,
    3. Walker-Thurmond K,
    4. Thun MJ
    . Overweight, obesity, and mortality from cancer in a prospectively studied cohort of U.S. adults. N Engl J Med 2003;348:1625–38.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    1. Grodstein F,
    2. Martinez ME,
    3. Platz EA,
    4. Giovannucci E,
    5. Colditz GA,
    6. Kautzky M,
    7. et al.
    Postmenopausal hormone use and risk for colorectal cancer and adenoma. Ann Intern Med 1998;128:705–12.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  35. 35.↵
    1. Hoffmeister M,
    2. Raum E,
    3. Krtschil A,
    4. Chang-Claude J,
    5. Brenner H
    . No evidence for variation in colorectal cancer risk associated with different types of postmenopausal hormone therapy. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2009;86:416–24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. 36.↵
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Differences in prevalence of obesity among black, white and hispanic adults—United States, 2006–2008. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2009;58:740–4.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  37. 37.↵
    1. Jemal A,
    2. Thun MJ,
    3. Ries LA,
    4. Howe HL,
    5. Weir HK,
    6. Center MM,
    7. et al.
    Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2005, featuring trends in lung cancer, tobacco use, and tobacco control. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008;100:1672–94.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. 38.↵
    1. Keating NL,
    2. Cleary PD,
    3. Rossi AS,
    4. Zaslavsky AM,
    5. Ayanian JZ
    . Use of hormone replacement therapy by postmenopausal women in the United States. Ann Intern Med 1999;130:545–53.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  39. 39.↵
    1. Irby K,
    2. Anderson WF,
    3. Henson DE,
    4. Devesa SS
    . Emerging and widening colorectal carcinoma disparities between Blacks and Whites in the United States (1975–2002). Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15:792–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. 40.↵
    1. Cheng X,
    2. Chen VW,
    3. Steele B,
    4. Ruiz B,
    5. Fulton J,
    6. Liu L,
    7. et al.
    Subsite-specific incidence rate and stage of disease in colorectal cancer by race, gender, and age group in the United States, 1992–1997. Cancer 2001;92:2547–54.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. 41.↵
    1. Ward SH,
    2. Lin K,
    3. Meyer B,
    4. Bass SB,
    5. Parameswaran L,
    6. Gordon TF,
    7. et al.
    Increasing colorectal cancer screening among African Americans, linking risk perception to interventions targeting patients, communities and clinicians. J Natl Med Assoc 2008;100:748–58.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  42. 42.↵
    1. Agrawal S,
    2. Bhupinderjit A,
    3. Bhutani MS,
    4. Boardman L,
    5. Nguyen C,
    6. Romero Y,
    7. et al.
    Colorectal cancer in African Americans. Am J Gastroenterol 2005;100:515–23; discussion 4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. 43.↵
    1. White A,
    2. Vernon SW,
    3. Franzini L,
    4. Du XL
    . Racial and ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer screening persisted despite expansion of Medicare's Screening Reimbursement. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2011;20:811–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  44. 44.↵
    1. Reyes-Ortiz CA,
    2. Eschbach K,
    3. Zhang DD,
    4. Goodwin JS
    . Neighborhood composition and cancer among Hispanics: tumor stage and size at time of diagnosis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008;17:2931–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  45. 45.↵
    Cancer Prevention & Early Detection Facts and Figures, American Cancer Society. 2010.
  46. 46.↵
    1. U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey
    . Race and Hispanic origin of the foreign-born population in the United States. 2007.
  47. 47.↵
    1. Marin G,
    2. Perez-Stable EJ
    . Effectiveness of disseminating culturally appropriate smoking-cessation information: Programa Latino Para Dejar de Fumar. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1995:155–63.
  48. 48.↵
    1. From the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
    . Response to increases in cigarette prices by race/ethnicity, income, and age groups–United States, 1976–1993. JAMA 1998;280:1979–80.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  49. 49.↵
    1. Flood A,
    2. Rastogi T,
    3. Wirfalt E,
    4. Mitrou PN,
    5. Reedy J,
    6. Subar AF,
    7. et al.
    Dietary patterns as identified by factor analysis and colorectal cancer among middle-aged Americans. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008;88:176–84.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  50. 50.↵
    1. Pinheiro PS,
    2. Sherman RL,
    3. Trapido EJ,
    4. Fleming LE,
    5. Huang Y,
    6. Gomez-Marin O,
    7. et al.
    Cancer incidence in first generation U.S. Hispanics: Cubans, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, and new Latinos. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009;18:2162–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  51. 51.↵
    1. Martinez-Tyson D,
    2. Pathak EB,
    3. Soler-Vila H,
    4. Flores AM
    . Looking under the Hispanic umbrella: cancer mortality among Cubans, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans and other Hispanics in Florida. J Immigr Minor Health 2009;11:249–57.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  52. 52.↵
    1. Soto-Salgado M,
    2. Suarez E,
    3. Calo W,
    4. Cruz-Correa M,
    5. Figueroa-Valles NR,
    6. Ortiz AP
    . Incidence and mortality rates for colorectal cancer in Puerto Rico and among Hispanics, non-Hispanic whites, and non-Hispanic blacks in the United States, 1998–2002. Cancer 2009;115:3016–23.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  53. 53.↵
    1. Howe HL,
    2. Wu X,
    3. Ries LA,
    4. Cokkinides V,
    5. Ahmed F,
    6. Jemal A,
    7. et al.
    Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2003, featuring cancer among U.S. Hispanic/Latino populations. Cancer 2006;107:1711–42.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  54. 54.↵
    1. Bureau UC
    . US Census Bureau. [cited 2010]. Available from: http://www.census.gov/.
  55. 55.↵
    1. German RR,
    2. Fink AK,
    3. Heron M,
    4. Stewart SL,
    5. Johnson CJ,
    6. Finch JL,
    7. et al.
    The accuracy of cancer mortality statistics based on death certificates in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol 2011;35:126–31.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  56. 56.↵
    1. Arias E,
    2. Schauman WS,
    3. Eschbach K,
    4. Sorlie PD,
    5. Backlund E
    . The validity of race and Hispanic origin reporting on death certificates in the United States. Vital Health Stat 2 2008;1–23.
  57. 57.↵
    1. Mokdad AH,
    2. Stroup DF,
    3. Giles WH
    . Public health surveillance for behavioral risk factors in a changing environment. Recommendations from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Team. MMWR Recomm Rep 2003;52:1–12.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  58. 58.↵
    1. Shapiro JA,
    2. Seeff LC,
    3. Nadel MR
    . Colorectal cancer-screening tests and associated health behaviors. Am J Prev Med 2001;21:132–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  59. 59.↵
    1. CDC
    . Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP). Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, CDC. National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control; 2010. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/crccp/about.htm.
PreviousNext
Back to top
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention: 20 (7)
July 2011
Volume 20, Issue 7
  • 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.
State Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Mortality Patterns in the United States
(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
State Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Mortality Patterns in the United States
Deepa Naishadham, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Rebecca Siegel, Vilma Cokkinides and Ahmedin Jemal
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev July 1 2011 (20) (7) 1296-1302; DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0250

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
State Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Mortality Patterns in the United States
Deepa Naishadham, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Rebecca Siegel, Vilma Cokkinides and Ahmedin Jemal
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev July 1 2011 (20) (7) 1296-1302; DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0250
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
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Advertisement

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Stomach Cancer Trends among Circumpolar Nations.
  • Insurance Status and HCC Survival
  • U.S. Pediatric CNS Tumor Trends
Show more Cancer Surveillance Research
  • 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