The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Disparities by Race, Age, and Sex in the Improvement of Survival for Major Cancers: Results From the National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program in the United States, 1990 to 2010
Open accessAbstract
IMPORTANCE: Substantial progress has been made in cancer diagnosis and treatment, resulting in a steady improvement in cancer survival. The degree of improvement by age, race, and sex remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the degree of survival improvement over time by age, race, and sex in the United States. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Longitudinal analyses of cancer follow-up data from 1990 to 2010, from 1.02 million patients who had been diagnosed as having cancer of the colon or rectum, breast, prostate, lung, liver, pancreas, or ovary from 1990 to 2009 and who were included in 1 of 9 population-based registries of the National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for cancer-specific death were estimated for patients diagnosed as having any of these cancers during 1995 to 1999, 2000 to 2004, and 2005 to 2009, compared with those diagnosed in 1990 to 1994. RESULTS: Significant improvements in survival were found for cancers of the colon or rectum, breast, prostate, lung, and liver. Improvements were more pronounced for younger patients. For patients aged 50 to 64 years and diagnosed from 2005 to 2009, adjusted HRs (95% CIs) were 0.57 (95% CI, 0.55-0.60), 0.48 (95% CI, 0.45-0.51), 0.61 (95% CI, 0.57-0.69), and 0.32 (95% CI, 0.30-0.36), for cancer of the colon or rectum, breast, liver, and prostate, respectively, compared with the same age groups of patients diagnosed during 1990 to 1994. However, the corresponding HRs (95% CIs) for elderly patients (those 75-85 years old) were only 0.88 (95% CI, 0.84-0.92), 0.88 (95% CI, 0.82-0.95), 0.76 (95% CI, 0.69-0.84), and 0.65 (95% CI, 0.61-0.70), for the same 4 cancer sites, respectively. A similar, although weaker, age-related period effect was observed for lung and pancreatic cancers. The adjusted HRs (95% CIs) for lung cancer were 0.75 (95% CI, 0.73-0.77) and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.81-0.86), respectively, for patients aged 50 to 64 years and 75 to 85 years diagnosed between 2005 and 2009, compared with the same age groups of patients diagnosed between 1990 and 1994 (0.73 [95% CI, 0.69-0.77] and 0.90 [95% CI, 0.85-0.95], respectively. Compared with whites or Asians, African Americans experienced greater improvement in prostate cancer survival. From 1990 to 2009, ovarian cancer survival declined among African Americans but improved among whites. No apparent sex difference in the degree of improvement for any non-sex-specific cancer was noted. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Younger patients experienced greater benefit from recent oncology advances than elderly patients. African Americans experienced poorer survival than whites for all cancers, and the racial difference decreased for prostate cancer but increased for ovarian cancer. Identifying factors associated with varied improvement in cancer survival can inform future improvements in cancer care for all.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
El-Serag, H. B. (2011) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra1001683 · Cited by 3,529
Cited by
Siegel, R. L., Miller, K. D., & Jemal, A. (2018) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.21442 · Cited by 16,579
Siegel, R. L., Miller, K. D., & Jemal, A. (2016) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.21332 · Cited by 16,003
Siegel, R. L., Miller, K. D., & Jemal, A. (2017) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.21387 · Cited by 14,712
Mohile, S. G., Dale, W., Somerfield, M. R., Schonberg, M. A., Boyd, C. M., Burhenn, P. S., Canin, B., Cohen, H. J., Holmes, H. M., Hopkins, J. O., et al. (2018) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2018.78.8687 · Cited by 1,479
Loree, J. M., Anand, S., Dasari, A., Unger, J. M., Gothwal, A., Ellis, L. M., Varadhachary, G., Kopetz, S., Overman, M. J., & Raghav, K. (2019) · JAMA Oncology · doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.1870 · Cited by 570
Metadata
- Authors
- Zeng, C., Wen, W., Morgans, A. K., Pao, W., Shu, X.-O., & Zheng, W.
- Venue
- JAMA Oncology
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2015-04-01
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 88
- ISSN
- 2374-2437 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2112644144
- Cited by
- 321
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 13.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Disparities by Race, Age, and Sex in the Improvement of Survival for Major Cancers: Results From the National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program in the United States, 1990 to 2010. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jamaoncol.2014.161
- The paper
- Zeng, C., Wen, W., Morgans, A. K., Pao, W., Shu, X.-O., & Zheng, W. (2015). Disparities by Race, Age, and Sex in the Improvement of Survival for Major Cancers: Results From the National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program in the United States, 1990 to 2010. JAMA Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2014.161
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.