CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 139Global Cancer Incidence and ScreeningHealth disparities and outcomesColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Differences in cancer incidence by broad ethnic group in England, 2013–2017

Open access
Delon, Christine, Brown, Katrina F., Payne, Nick W. S., Kotrotsios, Yannis, Vernon, Sally, Shelton, Jon·2022·British Journal of Cancer
DOI 10.1038/s41416-022-01718-5PMC PMC9174248
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background: Cancer incidence variation between population groups can inform public health and cancer services. Previous studies have shown cancer incidence rates vary by ethnic group in England. Since their publication, the completeness of ethnicity recording in cancer data has improved, and relevant inequalities (e.g. risk factor prevalence and healthcare access) may have changed. Methods: Age-standardised incidence rates were calculated for Asian, Black, Mixed/Multiple and White ethnic groups in England in 2013–2017, using almost 3 million diagnoses across 31 cancer sites. Rate ratios were calculated with the White ethnic group as reference. Sensitivity analyses used imputed ethnicity for cases with missing data and perturbed population estimates. Results: Incidence rates for most cancer sites and ethnic group and sex combinations were lower in non-White minority ethnic groups compared with the corresponding White group, with particularly low rate ratios (below 0.5) for melanoma skin cancer and some smoking-related cancers (lung, bladder and oesophageal cancers). Exceptions included prostate cancer (2.1 times higher in males of Black ethnicity), myeloma (2.7–3.0 times higher in people of Black ethnicity), several gastrointestinal cancers (1.1–1.9 times higher in people of Black ethnicity, 1.4–2.2 times higher in people of Asian ethnicity), Hodgkin lymphoma (1.1 times higher in males of Asian ethnicity, 1.3 times higher in males of Black ethnicity) and thyroid cancers (1.4 times higher in people of Asian ethnicity, 1.2 times higher in people of Black ethnicity). Sensitivity analyses did not materially alter these results (rate ratios changed by a maximum of 12 percentage points, the direction and significance of results were unchanged in all but two cancer site/sex/ethnic group combinations). Conclusions: People of non-White minority ethnicity in England generally have lower cancer risk than the White population, though there are a number of notable exceptions. These results should galvanise efforts to better understand the reasons for this variation, and the possible impact on cancer services, patient experiences and outcomes.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41416-022-01718-5

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Rate ratios not reported for cancer site/sex/broad ethnic group combinations with fewer than 100 cases over the 5-year study period. *Sex-specific rate ratio. Rate ratios of age-standardised incidence rates for persons (A), females (B) and males (C), by cancer site, for Asian, Black and Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups with reference to the White ethnic group.
Fig. 1 Rate ratios not reported for cancer site/sex/broad ethnic group combinations with fewer than 100 cases over the 5-year study period. *Sex-specific rate ratio. Rate ratios of age-standardised incidence rates for persons (A), females (B) and males (C), by cancer site, for Asian, Black and Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups with reference to the White ethnic group.CC BY · PubMed Central

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Show all 54 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–139 of 139

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Delon, C., Brown, K. F., Payne, N. W. S., Kotrotsios, Y., Vernon, S., & Shelton, J.
Affiliations
  • Cancer Research UK (GB)
  • NHS Digital (GB)
Corresponding author
Delon, Christine
ORCID
Venue
British Journal of Cancer
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2022-03-02
Volume
126
Issue
12
Pages
1765-1773
ISSN
  • 0007-0920 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-1827
DOI
10.1038/s41416-022-01718-5
PMC
PMC9174248
OpenAlex
W4214903413
Cited by
137
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 8
FWCI
12.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • British Journal of Cancer (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Keywords
cancer incidence, ethnic disparities, ethnic minorities, Asian ethnicity, Black ethnicity, melanoma, tobacco-related cancer, prostate cancer, multiple myeloma, Hodgkin's disease, thyroid cancer, gastrointestinal cancer, lung cancer, bladder cancer, esophageal cancer, England
MeSH terms
Ethnicity, Gastrointestinal Neoplasms, Humans, Male, Minority Groups, Risk Factors, Incidence

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