Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,625

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Current cancer situation in China: good or bad news from the 2018 Global Cancer Statistics?

Open access
Feng, Rui‐Mei, Zong, Yi‐Nan, Cao, Su‐Mei, Xu, Rui‐Hua·2019·Cancer Communications

Abstract

Cancer is the leading cause of death in China and depicting the cancer pattern of China would provide basic knowhows on how to tackle it more effectively. In this study we have reviewed several reports of cancer burden, including the Global cancer statistics 2018 and Cancer statistics in China, 2015, along with the GLOBCAN 2018 online database, to investigate the differences of cancer patterns between China, the United States (USA) and the United Kingdom (UK). An estimated 4.3 million new cancer cases and 2.9 million new cancer deaths occurred in China in 2018. Compared to the USA and UK, China has lower cancer incidence but a 30% and 40% higher cancer mortality than the UK and USA, among which 36.4% of the cancer‐related deaths were from the digestive tract cancers (stomach, liver, and esophagus cancer) and have relatively poorer prognoses. In comparison, the digestive cancer deaths only took up ≤ 5% of the total cancer deaths in either USA or UK. Other reasons for the higher mortality in China may be the low rate of early‐stage cancers at diagnosis and non‐uniformed clinical cancer treatment strategies performed by different regions. China is undergoing the cancer transition stage where the cancer spectrum is changing from developing country to developed country, with a rapidly increase cancer burden of colorectal, prostate, female breast cancers in addition to a high occurrence of infection‐related and digestive cancers. The incidence of westernized lifestyle‐related cancers in China (i.e. colorectal cancer, prostate, bladder cancer) has risen but the incidence of the digestive cancers has decreased from 2000 to 2011. An estimated 40% of the risk factors can be attributed to environmental and lifestyle factors either in China or other developed countries. Tobacco smoking is the single most important carcinogenic risk factor in China, contributing to ~ 24.5% of cancers in males. Chronic infection is another important preventable cancer contributor which is responsible for ~ 17% of cancers. Comprehensive prevention and control strategies in China should include effective tobacco‐control policy, recommendations for healthier lifestyles, along with enlarging the coverage of effective screening, educating, and vaccination programs to better sensitize greater awareness control to the general public.

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 · 10.1186/s40880-019-0368-6

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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 3 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Feng, R., Zong, Y., Cao, S., & Xu, R.
Venue
Cancer Communications
Published
2019-04-29
Volume
39
Issue
1
Pages
1-12
ISSN
  • 1000-467X (ISSN-L)
  • 2523-3548
OpenAlex
W2943606118
Cited by
1,625
References
3
FWCI
100.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

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.