Two men smiling in an office environment.

Discovering the causes of cancer and informing the means for prevention

Featured news & research.

Zhiwei Liu, Ph.D.

Dr. Liu investigated the role of infection and immune response and cancer risk.

Smoke stacks emit smoke in an industrial setting on a clear, sunny day.

Jessica Madrigal investigates differences in burden of carcinogenic pollution

photograph of two Black women talking, a doctor and patient

Breast cancer risk prediction improved with addition of a polygenic risk score.

Our Research

Series of colorful images linked together in a circle.

Our scientists (epidemiologists, geneticists, biostatisticians, and clinicians) form interdisciplinary teams to study complex questions often in collaboration with scientists around the world.

  • What We Study
  • Who We Study
  • How We Study
  • Active Clinical Studies
  • Interdisciplinary Working Groups
  • Public Health Impact of DCEG Research

Join the DCEG Team

DCEG employees talking in a hallway.

Browse a range of opportunities for every career stage: tenure-eligible senior investigator, staff scientist, postdoctoral fellow, and more.

  • Careers at DCEG
  • Commitment to Equity & Inclusion
  • Apply to Be a Fellow
  • Advantages of a DCEG Fellowship
  • Meet Current Fellows
  • Clinical Investigator Development Program

Research Tools

Collection of tools used for analysis.

We have created many tools for study design and planning, analysis, and risk assessment.

 Two women research team studying DNA mutations.

Exposure assessment tools and methods developed by DCEG experts to measure exposures for diet and activity, occupation and environment, radiation, and more.

Series of brain scans from a neurological test.

NCIDose is a collection of medical radiation dosimetry tools developed by medical physicists.

Connect with Us

Man using a tablet computer to read online news.

Subscribe to our newsletter, Linkage, published March, July, and November with longer-format articles and summaries of research and staff news from DCEG.

Young woman using a mobile phone.

Follow us on LinkedIn for research stories, career and fellowship opportunities, and more.

Row of people sitting at a conference.

DCEG sponsors seminars by in-house experts, lectures by visiting scholars, and informal meetings—all on a wide range of scientific topics.

research in cancer epidemiology

Diversity and Inclusion

DCEG is committed to the recruitment, retention, and development of a diverse group of investigators and trainees.

Multiple journals on a shelf.

DCEG Publications

Search a complete library of our published research, including papers in journals not indexed in PubMed and books.

research in cancer epidemiology

DCEG's Commitment to Training

Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention

The  Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention  program at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health is one of the first comprehensive academic programs in the world dedicated to the training of cancer epidemiologists.

research in cancer epidemiology

Prospective and Current Students

News from the school.

Mental health and climate change

Mental health and climate change

Public health history course holds lessons for today

Public health history course holds lessons for today

Training humanitarian response leaders in the Middle East and Africa

Training humanitarian response leaders in the Middle East and Africa

Toward better births

Toward better births

Cancer Epidemiology Research

Current projections indicate that the burden of cancer will increase from 10 million new cases globally in 2000, to 15 million in 2020. This public health burden will necessitate further research into the etiology and prevention of cancer. The primary goal of the Cancer Epidemiology Program is to develop new knowledge relevant to cancer etiology, diagnosis, prognosis, and prevention using interdisciplinary and epidemiologic approaches. The cancer epidemiology faculty have developed a rich research program including diverse cancers (breast, prostate, colon, head and neck, childhood, melanoma, esophageal, and bladder) and exposures (lifestyle, diet, genes, tumor biology, occupational and environmental, health care, screening, socioeconomic factors). Research spans etiology, survivorship, comparative effectiveness, and access to health care, with many studies emphasizing health disparities, especially among African-Americans. Several population-based studies in North Carolina have yielded high impact findings and contribute to large international consortia. Students in the cancer epidemiology program receive training in epidemiologic methods, biostatistics, related substantive areas, and cancer biology. Outside the classroom, students obtain an appreciation for interdisciplinary, collaborative research by working with diverse and strong faculty in the department, school, and Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center .

Learning Objectives

  • Understand cancer statistics and the descriptive epidemiology of cancer;
  • Understand known risk factors and gaps in knowledge for the major cancers;
  • Understand the pathobiology of cancer;
  • Apply epidemiologic methods in the design, conduct, and analysis of cancer research studies;
  • Apply critical thinking in the review of projects and publications in cancer epidemiology;
  • Appreciate the interdisciplinary aspect of cancer including the contributions of basic sciences, clinical medicine, health services research, and the social sciences to the understanding of cancer etiology and progression;
  • Appreciate methods for cancer risk assessment and screening;
  • Appreciate the role and interdisciplinary methods of cancer control and prevention.
  • Appreciate the practical aspects of conducting research in cancer epidemiology

Program Courses

  • EPID 770: Cancer Epidemiology and Pathogenesis ( Dr. Eboneé Butler )
  • EPID 771: Cancer Epidemiology Methods ( Hazel Nichols )
  • EPID 775: Advanced Cancer Epidemiology ( Andy Olshan )

Related Courses

  • EPID 772: Cancer Prevention and Control
  • PATH 225: Cancer Pathology
  • EPID 742: Integrating Biomarkers into Population-Based Research
  • EPID 743: Genetic Epidemiology
  • EPID 745: Molecular Techniques for Public Health Research
  • EPID 785: Environmental Epidemiology
  • EPID 815: Diet and Cancer
  • EPID 826 Introduction to Social Epidemiology

Core Faculty – Research Projects

Dr. Jeannette Bensen : North Carolina-Louisiana Prostate Cancer Study (PCaP), Carolina Breast Cancer Study, and UNC Cancer Survivorship Cohort.-->

Dr. Kathleen Conway-Dorsey : Genes, Environment and Melanoma (GEM) study,  Carolina Breast Cancer Study (CBCS), I-SPY InterSPORE Breast Cancer Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Trial, Mayo Clinic Benign Breast Disease study, and Carolina Head and Neck Cancer CHANCE) Study.-->

Dr. Eboneé Butler : North Carolina-Louisiana Prostate Cancer Study (PCaP), Carolina Breast Cancer Study.

Dr. Marc Emerson : Carolina Breast Cancer Study, Carolina Head and Neck Cancer Study.

Dr. Lawrence S. Engel : GuLF STUDY, and an international study examining blood levels of organochlorines and aflatoxin adducts in relation to risk of primary liver cancer.

Dr. Marilie D. Gammon : Long Island Breast Cancer Study Project, Barrett's and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Consortium (BEACON). -->

Dr. Jennifer Lund : SEER-Medicare, UNC Integrated Cancer Information and Surveillance System (ICISS), and other health care claims databases.

Dr. Hazel Nichols : Carolina Endometrial Cancer Study, UNC Cancer Survivorship Cohort, Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) Cancer Horizon Study, AYA Valuing Opinions and Insight from Cancer Experiences (VOICE) Study, SEER-linked data.

Dr. Andrew Olshan : Carolina Head and Neck Cancer Study (CHANCE), Carolina Breast Cancer Study (CBCS), and NENA childhood neuroblastoma study.

Dr. Charles Poole : Epidemiologic methods in cancer epidemiology.

Dr. David B. Richardson : Studies of cancer among nuclear workers at several U.S. Department of Energy facilities, cancer among the Japanese survivors of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. (Not taking students for Fall 2022) -->

Dr. Whitney Robinson : Carolina Breast Cancer Study. (Not taking students for Fall 2022) -->

Dr. Jennifer Smith : Cervical Cancer-Free Coalition, international studies of HPV and cervical disease.

Dr. Til Stürmer : SEER-Medicare, UNC Integrated Cancer Information and Surveillance System (ICISS), and other health care claims databases.

Dr. Caroline Thompson : SEER-Medicare, UNC Cancer Information & Population Health Resource (CIPHR), UNC Carolina Data Warehouse for Health (CDW-H), California Teachers Study.

Dr. Melissa Troester : Carolina Breast Cancer Study, Normal Breast Study.

Selected Collaborative Groups at UNC

  • Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center
  • Carolina Population Center
  • Center for Environmental Health and Susceptibility
  • UNC Center for Gastrointestinal Biology and Disease
  • Carolina Center for Genome Sciences
  • Biostatistics
  • City and Regional Planning

Selected Research Projects

  • Carolina Breast Cancer Study
  • North Carolina Colon Cancer Study
  • Genetic Epidemiology of Melanoma Study
  • Carolina Mammography Study
  • Carolina Head and Neck Cancer Study
  • UNC Health Registry
  • Neuroblastoma Epidemiology in North America (NENA) study
  • North Carolina-Louisiana Prostate Cancer Study
  • Long Island Breast Cancer Study
  • The AMBER Consortium
  • UNC Breast Cancer SPORE

The UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center is a cancer research and treatment center at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Serving patients at the N.C. Basnight Cancer Hospital, UNC Lineberger is the only public comprehensive cancer center in the state of North Carolina.

The Carolina Population Center brings together a remarkable group of faculty fellows who address pressing research questions about population dynamics, fertility, health, mortality, migration, and the environment.

The UNC Center for Environmental Health and Susceptibility (CEHS) facilitates collaborations by funding university infrastructure to support scientific equipment, facilities, and other resources that can be shared among environmental health researchers.

The Institute for Global Health and Infectious Diseases is a research engine for global health innovation and pan-university collaboration, transforming health in North Carolina and around the world through research, training and service.

For more than 30 years, the Injury Prevention Research Center has been combining innovative science in injury and violence prevention with collaborative evidence-based action in the form of programs, practices, and policies.

The Center for Pharmacoepidemiology provides a unique forum to generate innovative, evidence-based solutions to challenges related to comparative effectiveness research and evaluation of the safety of drugs and devices in real-world clinical settings.

Radon-associated cardiovascular risks highlight need for household testing

Information for:.

  • Program Finder
  • Admissions Services
  • Course Directory
  • Academic Calendar
  • Hybrid Campus
  • Lecture Series
  • Convocation
  • Strategy and Development
  • Implementation and Impact
  • Integrity and Oversight
  • In the School
  • In the Field
  • In Baltimore
  • Resources for Practitioners
  • Articles & News Releases
  • In The News
  • Statements & Announcements
  • At a Glance
  • Student Life
  • Strategic Priorities
  • Inclusion, Diversity, Anti-Racism, and Equity (IDARE)
  • What is Public Health?

Cancer Epidemiology

  • Initiatives
  • Statement Denouncing Racism
  • Job Openings
  • Goal of the Track
  • Curriculum and Faculty
  • Social Epidemiology Courses
  • Social Epidemiology Faculty
  • Guidelines for Writing Statement of Objectives
  • Comorbid Patterns with Alcohol Use Disorders
  • Guaranteed Income and Health Consortium
  • Stylish Man/Stylish Living Study
  • The Chennai HIV, Hepatitis C and EERal Study (CHHEERS)
  • Translational Epidemiology Initiative
  • Internalizing Symptoms and Alcohol Involvement
  • Pediatric Antiretroviral Therapy (PART) Study in Rural Zambia
  • Department Leadership
  • News Releases By Year
  • Make a Gift

Our vision is to reduce cancer incidence, mortality and morbidity in the U.S. and globally, by conducting cutting edge epidemiological research and training the next generation of population-based scientists.

Cancer Epi Research Day

This is an exciting time in the field of Cancer Epidemiology as technological advancements have led to more precise measurements of exposures, the creation of large more complex databases, and the development of new analytic methods. The Cancer Epidemiology faculty at Johns Hopkins conduct a wide range of public health research that covers the entire cancer continuum including cancer etiology, early detection, cancer prevention, control, surveillance, survivorship and disparities of a number of cancers. There is a strong emphasis on translational epidemiology and team science, both within Johns Hopkins (including collaboration with investigators at the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center ) and other institutes as well as nationally and internationally. Many of the faculty are also involved in large international consortia efforts and have access to a variety of data.

Cancer Epi Journal Club

The Cancer Epidemiology track offers a rich, vibrant and dynamic environment for masters and doctoral students, and post-doctoral fellows to actively participate, learn, explore, and conduct cancer related population-based and clinical research. The track has a long and successful history of training masters and doctoral students and post-doctoral fellows. Past students continue to conduct population-based cancer research and have made successful transitions to positions in academia, government and private sector organizations . Funding opportunities are available and students are strongly encouraged to apply. The Cancer Epidemiology track also has a T32 fellowship sponsored by the National Cancer Institute.

We hope you will consider applying to our program!

  • Current Research
  • Curriculum and Faculty

Please read our guidelines before visiting Rutgers Cancer Institute. | COVID-19: What Cancer Patients Should Know

Cancer Epidemiology and Health Outcomes

Administration.

LaTasha Maloney (732) 507-3987 [email protected]

Susan Fenker [email protected]

Vanessa Johnson [email protected]

Research Coordinator / Research Teaching Specialists

Dhanya Chanumolu

Graduate Fellows

Marley Perlstein

Post-doctoral Fellow

Dr. Diaz

Carola Sanchez Diaz, PhD [email protected]  

Graduate Students

Tina Dharamdasani  [email protected]

Raven

Medical Students

Kate Kim

Internal Medicine Resident

Jasmine Tomita-Barber

Loading metrics

Open Access

Policy Forum

Policy Forum articles provide a platform for health policy makers from around the world to discuss the challenges and opportunities in improving health care to their constituencies.

See all article types »

Cancer systems epidemiology: Overcoming misconceptions and integrating systems approaches into cancer research

Affiliation HealthPartners Institute, Bloomington, Minnesota, United States of America

ORCID logo

Affiliations HealthPartners Institute, Bloomington, Minnesota, United States of America, University of Minnesota, School of Public Health, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States of America

Affiliations Department of Biomedical Data Science, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire, United States of America, Baylor College of Medicine, Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, Houston, Texas, United States of America

Affiliation Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America

Affiliations Center for Advanced Technology and Communication in Health (CATCH), CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York City, New York, United States of America, Public Health Informatics, Computational, and Operations Research (PHICOR), CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York City, New York, United States of America

* E-mail: [email protected]

  • Patricia L. Mabry, 
  • Nicolaas P. Pronk, 
  • Christopher I. Amos, 
  • John S. Witte, 
  • Patrick T. Wedlock, 
  • Sarah M. Bartsch, 
  • Bruce Y. Lee

PLOS

Published: June 17, 2022

  • https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004027
  • Reader Comments

Fig 1

Citation: Mabry PL, Pronk NP, Amos CI, Witte JS, Wedlock PT, Bartsch SM, et al. (2022) Cancer systems epidemiology: Overcoming misconceptions and integrating systems approaches into cancer research. PLoS Med 19(6): e1004027. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004027

Copyright: © 2022 Mabry et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: This work was supported in part by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Common Fund and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health ( https://ncats.nih.gov ) via award number U54TR004279 (BYL), the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) ( https://www.ahrq.gov ) via grant 1R01HS028165 (BYL), United States Agency for International Development (USAID) ( https://www.usaid.gov/GlobalDevLab/MERLIN/SPACES-MERL ) under agreement number AID-OAA-A-15-00064 (BYL), the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) ( https://www.nichd.nih.gov ) via grant U01HD086861 and 5R01HD086013-02 (BYL), the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) ( https://www.nigms.nih.gov ) as part of the Models of Infectious Disease Agent Study (MIDAS) network under grant R01GM127512 (BYL), and by the National Science Foundation ( https://www.nsf.gov ) via award 2054858 (BYL). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: PLM sits on the Board of Directors as Board Chair of Computer Simulation and Advance Research Technologies (since 2019), a non-profit with charity status in Australia and is an Advisory Board member to the Systems-science Informed Public Health Economic Research for Non-communicable Disease Prevention Consortium (SIPHER, since 2019), a research project based in the United Kingdom and funded by the UK Prevention Research Partnership. PLM is PI on a project entitled, SCISIPBIO: Constructing Heterogeneous Scholarly Graphs to Examine Social Capital During Mentored K Awardees Transition to Research Independence: Explicating a Matthew Mechanism, funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation. JSW is a co-founder of Avail Bio and is paid expert work from Pfizer and Sanofi.

Abbreviations: CISNET, Cancer Intervention and Surveillance modeling Network; NCI, National Cancer Institute; QALY, quality-adjusted life year; USPSTF, US Preventative Services Task Force

Summary points

  • While traditional epidemiological approaches have helped generate important insights about cancer prevention and treatment, they have important limitations and alone cannot bridge the gaps that continue to exist in cancer research and knowledge.
  • One shortcoming is the failure to fully account for and characterize the complexity of various systems (e.g., biological, behavioral, social, environmental, and economic) that can lead to cancer and are affected by cancer.
  • Systems approaches can help researchers, clinicians, and other decision makers better understand complex systems and address these systems at many levels, ranging from the cellular to the societal scale.
  • Systems mapping can shed light on otherwise hidden mental models, and dynamic modeling can enable virtual experimentation—the systematic exploration of counterfactual scenarios not observable in the real world.
  • We present and discuss 14 common misconceptions that will need to be overcome in order for systems epidemiology to realize its potential role in cancer prevention and control.
  • Examples of systems approaches applied to cancer-related research topics are given to illustrate the utility of systems approaches to transform cancer epidemiology to cancer systems epidemiology.

Background and significance

Many traditional epidemiological methods are regression-based and attempt to find associations between certain risk factors (e.g., smoking, diet, physical activity) and disease outcomes (e.g., cancer). While these methods help identify factors to explore further, they are not equipped to uncover the complex systems and processes that underlie cancer. That is, they are not designed to really examine the complex mechanisms and interactions among multiple independent variables (e.g., biological, behavioral, social, economic), which play out over time to affect health. Gaining a more complete understanding of these complex systems requires a new approach. Thus, there is a need for more systems science approaches (e.g., systems epidemiology), which can help better untangle the complexity in systems [ 1 , 2 ]. As part of the PLOS Collection “Cancer Systems Epidemiology Insights and Future Opportunities,” which covers many of the topics discussed in the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Workshop to Facilitate Cancer Systems Epidemiology Research and exemplifies the opportunities and uses of systems epidemiology approaches in cancer research [ 3 ], we describe systems science approaches and how they can be utilized in cancer research, present common misconceptions that must be overcome for systems epidemiology to realize its potential for cancer epidemiology, and describe how greater use of systems epidemiology can transform cancer research.

Traditional cancer epidemiology top-down approaches have helped identify important associations

Epidemiology has been defined as “the study of the distribution and determinants of health-related states or events in specified populations, and the application of this study to the control of health problems [ 4 ].” Traditional epidemiological methods tend to be more top-down approaches, in which predefined designs and analytical approaches are applied to datasets. This paradigm often starts with sets of data on a disease in a specific population and tries to determine associations between risk factors and diseases and then draws inferences from the associations. This approach includes descriptive statistics of the datasets and domain-limited statistical methods to identify potential associations and trends such as linear regression, logistic regression, and survival analysis. Such methods are useful for evaluating the extent to which a variety of exposures are associated with health outcomes of interest.

Inferential statistics have helped generate important insights about cancer prevention and treatment. For example, exploring the causal role that cigarette smoking has in increasing lung cancer risk helped to develop modern statistical approaches for inference in chronic disease epidemiology and has greatly reduced cancer burden [ 5 ]. While such correlations and associations certainly do not prove cause-and-effect, they can suggest that a factor may be involved in the causal pathway of cancer, whether it is a direct cause or a sign that something else is happening. Despite their value, traditional approaches have limitations and alone cannot bridge the gaps that continue to exist in cancer research and knowledge.

Systems epidemiology bottom-up approaches can help better understand complex mechanisms

While traditional methods help show possible associations, systems epidemiology methods are more bottom-up, aiming to rebuild the systems of interest and untangle the actual mechanisms and causal pathways involved. Such pathways may be complex, nonlinear, and dynamic, potentially spanning multiple levels, scales, and sectors. Systems epidemiology methods attempt to represent complex systems in somewhat simplified forms, distilling them to their essential elements and processes, stripping away the noise and making the system easier to understand. They can also allow for virtual testing of different circumstances, interventions, and policies that may not be possible or practical in the real-life system.

One common set of systems approaches are systems maps/diagrams that visually represent components of the system and their relationships with each other. These can show how different people’s conceptualizations or mental models of the system may be similar versus different and then identify a more comprehensive representation of the system. They can also serve as blueprints to develop subsequent systems models.

A systems map becomes a systems model when one adds quantitative representations (e.g., mathematical equations) of the relationships and processes that link the different components in the system. Once these equations are established, data are used to populate, calibrate, and validate the model. Thus, the model begins with the understanding/conceptualization of the system and not necessarily with a particular dataset. These equations can represent a situation at a particular point in time or simulate what happens over time, making it a dynamic simulation model. The equations can use specific values for a deterministic model or incorporate variability and uncertainty, making it stochastic.

Since systems models aim to recreate the system, they are quite different from traditional statistical models that try to identify associations and trends and potentially extrapolate them (Ip and colleagues describe additional differences [ 6 ]). The latter starts with the data and then identifies patterns or trends in the data according to statistical properties subject to pre-identified assumptions. Systems models are also different from other computer-driven approaches that start first with the data, such as machine learning categorization and automated feature selection, and then try to find associations and trends in the data.

Population of a systems model consists of establishing values for each parameter in each equation. Once the model is populated, calibration entails adjusting the values so that the model fits the right constraints and assumptions. Model validation determines how well the model represents what it is supposed to represent [ 7 ]. This includes face validity (experts evaluate model structure, data sources, assumptions, and results), criterion validity (how well the model can recreate real-world datasets), and convergence/divergence validity (how similar are model results to other ways of calculating such results when they should be similar and how different are they when they should differ) [ 7 ]. A key aspect of systems modeling is performing sensitivity analyses, which explore the effects of varying key model parameters. Sensitivity analyses can help reveal the major drivers or key relationships that explain observed outcomes.

A systems model can serve as a virtual laboratory to test different possibilities. Such virtual experimentation has advantages over real-world experimentation. Real-world experimentation can take considerably more time, effort, and resources. It may not even be ethical or feasible. For example, running simulations can allow you to go back in time to see what could have happened or go forward in time to see what may happen. Conducting virtual experimentation first can guide the design of real-world experiments so that these are done much more effectively and efficiently. Dynamic models can also be reverse-engineered to estimate resource requirements and their amount and type of intervention(s) necessary to achieve a desired outcome in a specified timeframe [ 8 ], and can be used to evaluate the utility of existing interventions compared to a counterfactual in which they were not implemented. By representing the actual processes in a system, simulation experiments can reveal potential unintended consequences of a policy or intervention.

Ideally, systems mapping and modeling should proceed in an iterative manner as illustrated by Fig 1 . One does not need to come up with a perfect representation of the system at the beginning. Instead, the initial systems map and model can be a rough approximation that in turn can identify the knowledge and data gaps to then guide study designs and data collection. Once such studies and data collection yield more insights and data, the systems map and model can be updated accordingly, leading to more cycles of further refining both the systems map and model as well as the studies, data collection, and insights. This iterative process can help move toward better understanding of the system.

thumbnail

  • PPT PowerPoint slide
  • PNG larger image
  • TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004027.g001

Growing use of systems epidemiology methods in health research

There are already examples of how researchers and decision makers (e.g., stakeholders, regulators, program managers, organizational leaders, government leaders) have used such systems methods at different stages for research and decision-making, from conceptualization to development to the real-world (as Fig 2 illustrates) [ 9 – 16 ]. For example, computational models have helped demonstrate relationships and effects that traditional methods may have missed [ 17 ], such as how smoking cessation treatment policies resulted in the largest reductions in smoking prevalence, followed by cigarette tax increases, smoke-free air laws, and educational policies but that implementing these all in combination yielded a significantly larger reduction than any single one alone [ 10 ]. As another example, models have helped decision makers better understand the impact and cost of physical inactivity rates among youth and revealed how the type and intensity of physical activity could significantly affect the results clinical outcomes and costs [ 13 ]. Computational models have also helped show how distributing vaccines to lower income neighborhoods first during a pandemic could be more beneficial to society [ 15 ] and how cooperation among healthcare facilities in a region can lead to better overall control of an antibiotic-resistant pathogen [ 16 ].

thumbnail

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004027.g002

Systems epidemiology applications in cancer research

There are examples of systems methods assisting with cancer-related research. Initiatives such as the NCI’s Cancer Systems Biology Consortium [ 18 ] and Integrative Cancer Biology Program [ 19 ] have generated new insights. For example, systems approaches have made substantial progress in characterizing the genetics of cancer and contributions of individual intracellular pathways involved in tumor initiation and progression [ 20 ]. They have also provided a better understanding the drivers of tumor growth and cancer development and progression [ 21 – 23 ] as well as identifying possible cancer treatments for novel combination therapies [ 24 ].

In the field of cancer epidemiology, systems approaches have been used to inform a variety of policy making such as helping guide recommendations for cancer screening. For example, collaborative systems modeling has been used to inform the US Preventative Services Task Force’s (USPSTF) breast cancer screening recommendations [ 25 ]. Within the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance modeling Network (CISNET), 6 independently developed models evaluated mammography screening strategies in the U.S. population and helped inform decisions being made about various screening strategies [ 26 ]. Data used in CISNET models included age-specific breast cancer incidence, digital mammography performance characteristics, ER/HER2-specific treatment effects, and average and comorbidity-specific non-breast cancer causes of death, among others. Outputs of these models include reduction in mortality, breast cancer deaths averted, life-years and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained and the number of screenings, false-positive screens, benign biopsies, and overdiagnosed cases (that is, cases that would not have been clinically detected in the absence of screening due to lack of progression or death). The results of these systems models showed that biennial screening strategies are the most efficient and that digital mammography screening of average-risk women aged 40 to 50 years modestly lowers mortality and extends the length of life [ 26 ]. These CISNET systems models have continued to inform policy making and to investigate emerging issues in breast cancer control including legislation about the risks of undergoing mammography on long-term breast cancer outcomes, impact of comorbidities on when screening should stop and on overdiagnosis, and the costs and benefits of transitioning to digital screening [ 25 ]. Further, CISNET models of other common cancers have shed light on the relevance of exposures such as smoking intervention in reducing lung cancer burden [ 27 ] and colorectal screening for reducing colon cancer development [ 28 ].

Additionally, the amount of whole-genome tumor sequence and biological annotation datasets have been rapidly increasing in size, number, and content. With this growth, there is a need for a systems epidemiology approach to integrate functionality across databases, methods, and analyses. An example is the development and application of software that uses a systems approach to manage, annotate, and analyze cancer mutations (using tumor data across dozens of studies and tissue types) [ 29 ]. This approach uses information from multiple different annotation sources to differentiate tumor mutations that are drivers from passengers; the drivers are then retained in a novel panel for sequencing in cell-free DNA [ 30 ]. By incorporating multiple levels of information (whole-genome sequence data), this approach outperformed conventional sequencing panel methods (e.g., based on frequency of observed mutations) in an application to prostate cancer [ 30 , 31 ].

Barriers to greater use of systems epidemiology in cancer research

However, existing efforts have only scratched the surface of what systems epidemiology can do for cancer prevention and treatment. Use of systems epidemiology approaches has been limited by common misconceptions, such as those listed in Table 1 , lack of training, lack of funding, lack of awareness, and institutional and professional inertia. Few universities offer systems epidemiology training programs. Systems epidemiology requires crossing over many traditional disciplines that often are siloed off from each other such as those of programmers, modelers, epidemiologists, clinicians, and policy makers. Many funding mechanisms and scientific review processes still focus on more established traditional approaches [ 32 ]. Change in general can take time. Of course, the extent to which systems epidemiology can be used depends on how well the different mechanisms involved in cancer biology and epidemiology are elucidated, how well the maps and models can represent these mechanisms, and how much the scientific community accepts such representations. These are far from unsurmountable challenges and, in fact, can grow more and more achievable with time.

thumbnail

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004027.t001

Greater use of systems epidemiology can transform cancer research

Our society is at an inflection point where there is now more data from different, disparate, and wide-ranging sources and there is wide availability of analytic tools with greater computational resources and power. We are no longer limited to analyzing a single dataset or study population at a time. Systems epidemiology methods can help link different, disparate data and make better use of data that may have been viewed as imperfect in the past. While research in the past several decades has resulted in more effective prevention and treatment measures, there are a number of areas where progress has stalled. For example, some cancers (e.g., skin, liver) have been on the rise and others (e.g., pancreatic, liver, esophageal) continue to have poor cure rates [ 33 ]. This suggests that the causal pathways may be more complex than realized and that key factors and processes are not being addressed. With a greater understanding of the capabilities of systems epidemiology and a greater investment of resources, it is our hope that systems epidemiology may be able to better elucidate these causal pathways and lead to more effective prevention and treatment measures. Moreover, significant disparities exist in many cancer diagnoses and outcomes and risk, and the course of cancer can vary substantially among different people and populations. Therefore, one-size-fits-all approaches that are driven by standard designs and analytical approaches may not work adequately. Systems epidemiology can help identify and develop more tailored approaches and move toward precision medicine for cancer prevention and treatment. In addition, even when cancer treatments are effective, they can have risks and side effects. Systems epidemiology can help elucidate what may be leading to these risks and side effects and help develop better treatments. Finally, with a greater recognition of the many existing constraints, systems epidemiology can help decision makers such as clinicians, public health officials, policy makers, and third-party payers prioritize initiatives, save time, effort, and money, and better allocate limited resources among different cancer research, prevention, and treatment options.

Systems epidemiology methods, such as mapping and dynamic simulation modeling, are designed to gain understanding of complex phenomena through simplified representation and virtual experimentation. These methods have proven to be valuable complements to other methods of inquiry in other health domains but have been underutilized to date in cancer epidemiology. With increasing availability of high-performance computers and sophisticated analytical tools, systems epidemiology has enormous potential to expand research on cancer prevention, treatment, and control by helping untangle the complexities in cancer epidemiology. The benefits of using systems epidemiology include a better understanding of a problem’s impact over time, identification of leverage points for intervening in the system, and trade-offs and consequences of policy decisions. When adopting systems epidemiology methods, researchers should be aware of the common misconceptions that need to be overcome. Systems epidemiology can transform cancer research by helping identify and develop more tailored approaches to move toward precision medicine for cancer prevention and treatment.

Acknowledgments

This manuscript is based on the presentations by the authors at the Workshop to Facilitate Cancer Systems Epidemiology Research from February 29 to March 1, 2019 in Bethesda, Maryland.

The authors of this manuscript are solely responsible for its content. Statements in the manuscript do not necessarily represent the official views of, or imply endorsement by, the National Institute of Health, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, or US Health and Human Services.

  • 1. Meadows DH. Thinking in systems: A primer. Chelsea Green Publishing; 2008.
  • View Article
  • PubMed/NCBI
  • Google Scholar
  • 4. Last J. A dictionary of epidemiology. Oxford University Press; 2001.
  • 11. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. U of M TCORS: Center for the Assessment of the Public Health Impact of Tobacco Regulations 2018. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/research/u-m-tcors-center-assessment-public-health-impact-tobacco-regulations .
  • 14. Natonal Collaborative on Childhood Obesity Research. NCCOR Envision. Available from: https://www.nccor.org/envision/about.html .
  • 18. Cancer Systems Biology Consortium (CSBC) [cited 2022 Jan 31]. Available from: https://csbconsortium.org .
  • 19. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research at MIT. Available from: https://ki.mit.edu .
  • 28. Zauber AG, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Knudsen AB, Wilschut J, van Ballegooijen M, Kuntz KM. Evaluating Test Strategies for Colorectal Cancer Screening-Age to Begin, Age to Stop, and Timing of Screening Intervals: A Decision Analysis of Colorectal Cancer Screening for the US Preventive Services Task Force from the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET). U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Evidence Syntheses, formerly Systematic Evidence Reviews. Rockville (MD) 2009.
  • 33. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2019. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society; 2019.

Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries

Affiliations.

  • 1 Surveillance and Health Equity Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia.
  • 2 Section of Cancer Surveillance, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
  • PMID: 33538338
  • DOI: 10.3322/caac.21660

This article provides an update on the global cancer burden using the GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Worldwide, an estimated 19.3 million new cancer cases (18.1 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and almost 10.0 million cancer deaths (9.9 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) occurred in 2020. Female breast cancer has surpassed lung cancer as the most commonly diagnosed cancer, with an estimated 2.3 million new cases (11.7%), followed by lung (11.4%), colorectal (10.0 %), prostate (7.3%), and stomach (5.6%) cancers. Lung cancer remained the leading cause of cancer death, with an estimated 1.8 million deaths (18%), followed by colorectal (9.4%), liver (8.3%), stomach (7.7%), and female breast (6.9%) cancers. Overall incidence was from 2-fold to 3-fold higher in transitioned versus transitioning countries for both sexes, whereas mortality varied <2-fold for men and little for women. Death rates for female breast and cervical cancers, however, were considerably higher in transitioning versus transitioned countries (15.0 vs 12.8 per 100,000 and 12.4 vs 5.2 per 100,000, respectively). The global cancer burden is expected to be 28.4 million cases in 2040, a 47% rise from 2020, with a larger increase in transitioning (64% to 95%) versus transitioned (32% to 56%) countries due to demographic changes, although this may be further exacerbated by increasing risk factors associated with globalization and a growing economy. Efforts to build a sustainable infrastructure for the dissemination of cancer prevention measures and provision of cancer care in transitioning countries is critical for global cancer control.

Keywords: burden; cancer; epidemiology; incidence; mortality.

© 2021 American Cancer Society.

  • Africa / epidemiology
  • Americas / epidemiology
  • Asia / epidemiology
  • Databases, Factual
  • Developed Countries / statistics & numerical data*
  • Developing Countries / statistics & numerical data*
  • Global Health / statistics & numerical data*
  • Internationality
  • Neoplasms / epidemiology*
  • Neoplasms / mortality
  • Oceania / epidemiology
  • Population Dynamics*
  • Risk Factors
  • Sex Distribution

Advertisement

Epidemiology and Prevention

Population-level studies that investigate the genetic and environmental risk factors of cancer and their application in disease prevention and interception

Tweets by @CRC_AACR

Topics in Epidemiology and Prevention

  • Gene polymorphisms
  • Reproductive
  • Inflammation
  • Epigenetics
  • Radiation exposure
  • Carcinogen exposure
  • Viral infection
  • Tobacco use
  • Electronic cigarettes
  • Behavioral epidemiology
  • Cancer Disparities
  • Occupational epidemiology
  • Expand/Collapse Section EPIDEMIOLOGY
  • Carcinogen metabolism polymorphisms
  • Cell growth and development polymorphisms
  • Immune response polymorphisms
  • Familial and hereditary cancers
  • Expand/Collapse Section METHODOLOGY AND MODELING
  • In vitro models in prevention
  • Animal models of prevention
  • Clinical prevention studies
  • Biological mechanisms in prevention
  • Cancer risk assessment
  • Identification of new risk factors
  • Early detection
  • Personalized cancer prevention
  • Pre-neoplasia
  • Biomarkers and intervention
  • Cancer surveillance and screening
  • Chemoprevention
  • Immunoprevention

Affiliations

  • OnlineFirst
  • Journal Archive
  • Journal Alerts
  • Info for Authors
  • Submit an Article
  • About the Journal

AACR Journals

  • Blood Cancer Discovery
  • Cancer Discovery
  • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
  • Cancer Immunology Research
  • Cancer Prevention Research
  • Cancer Research
  • Cancer Research Communications
  • Clinical Cancer Research
  • Molecular Cancer Research
  • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
  • Info for Advertisers
  • Information for Institutions/Librarians

research in cancer epidemiology

  • Privacy Policy
  • Copyright © 2023 by the American Association for Cancer Research.

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

research in cancer epidemiology

Research Resources for Cancer Epidemiology and Genomics

The Epidemiology and Genomics Research Program (EGRP) has compiled collections of research tools and resources that are freely available through NCI, other institutes and centers at NIH, as well as NIH-funded research projects and partnering organizations.

research in cancer epidemiology

Featured Resources

Cancer epidemiology descriptive cohort database.

The Cancer Epidemiology Descriptive Cohort Database (CEDCD) contains information about cohort studies that follow groups of persons over time for cancer incidence, mortality, and other health outcomes.

Automated Self-Administered 24-hour (ASA24®) Dietary Assessment Tool

The Automated Self-Administered 24-hour (ASA24®) Dietary Assessment Tool is a free, web-based tool that enables multiple, automatically coded, self-administered 24-hour diet recalls and/or single or multi-day food records for epidemiologic, intervention, behavioral, or clinical research.

Human Health Exposure Analysis Resource (HHEAR)

HHEAR provides researchers access to high-quality, exposure-assessment services including, state of the art laboratory analysis of biological and environmental samples, statistical analysis, and expert consultation on exposure analysis, study design, and data analysis and interpretation.

Healthy Eating Index (HEI)

The HEI is a scoring metric that can be used to determine overall diet quality, as well as the quality of several dietary components. HEI–2020 is the most recent version of the index for the American population age 2 years and older, and new in 2023 is the HEI-Toddlers-2020, which was created to align with new dietary recommendations for infants and toddlers in the 2020-2025  Dietary Guidelines for Americans .

DNA Sequencing and Genotyping Services

Thirteen institutes at the NIH, including NCI, support a contract with the Center for Inherited Disease Research at The Johns Hopkins University that offers investigators access to next generation sequencing, genotyping, and statistical genetics services at a reduced cost.

research in cancer epidemiology

Biospecimen Resources for Population Scientists

Biospecimen sharing policies and request forms from population-based studies and potential sources of biospecimens.

research in cancer epidemiology

Cancer Epidemiology Cohorts

EGRP-supported cancer epidemiology cohorts (CECs), relevant funding opportunities, research resources, and publications.

research in cancer epidemiology

NCI Cohort Consortium

Details about the NCI Cohort Consortium, a collaborative network of investigators representing cohort studies from around the world.

research in cancer epidemiology

Cancer Registry Resources

Compilation of resources provides links to information on cancer statistics, such as incidence, mortality, and the prevalence of certain risk factors.

research in cancer epidemiology

Consortia to Advance Collaboration in Epidemiologic and Cancer Research

National and international research consortia focusing on interdisciplinary and translational research to understand determinants of health in human populations which may influence cancer risk.

research in cancer epidemiology

Dietary Assessment Resources

Data collection resources and tools, food composition databases, diet analysis tools, surveys and resources for dietary monitoring.

research in cancer epidemiology

Genomic Summary Results for Cancer Research Studies

Resources for investigators to find and make publicly available genomic summary results data from cancer research studies.

research in cancer epidemiology

Geospatial Approaches

Resources for interactive mapping, exploring, and downloading, geographically based cancer related information

research in cancer epidemiology

Physical Activity Research Resources

National surveys, databases, and methodological reviews related to measures of physical activity for use in human research.

research in cancer epidemiology

Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program, SEER-Medicare datasets, cancer survivor prevalence data, and Cancer Trends Progress Report.

research in cancer epidemiology

Surveys containing information which may be useful for cancer epidemiology and genomics studies, including behavioral risk factors, health information, medical care, and more.

research in cancer epidemiology

Video Library

A library of videos created by NCI and featured by the Epidemiology and Genomics Research Program.

Skip to content

  • Our Faculty

Educational Programs

News & events, epidemiology, cancer epidemiology.

The Cancer Training Program in the Department of Epidemiology is home to an NCI-funded training grant, a T32 program, which is a collaboration among the School’s Departments of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Environmental Health Sciences. This program supports four trainees, all postdoctoral, all engaged in cancer-related studies and research. Weekly seminars bring all the participants together for presentations by the trainees, and the diversity of the group leads to significant cross-fertilization and sharing of ideas. There are also predoctoral trainees in cancer-related population sciences who participate in the T32 program's activitives but are supported through other mechanisms, such as graduate research assistant fellowships, fellowships from our CTSA program, or by F31 fellowships from the NCI.

Research projects include studies in molecular, lifecourse, and global cancer epidemiology; the projects capitalize on the resources of numerous local and international epidemiologic studies that include risk-factor data on nearly 1,000,000 individuals and large biorepositories of blood, urine, and tissue specimens of breast, lung, liver, and several other cancers. A large research group is also studying health services and outcomes research in cancer, racial disparities, and treatment issues. Several faculty members work on cancer prevention, including lifestyle and vitamin supplements, as well as cancer survivorship and palliative care. Emphasis is placed on learning clinical and pathologic principles of cancer, as well as an appreciation of advanced biostatistical methods.

Interested candidates should send a CV and letter of interest to:

Alfred I. Neugut, MD, PhD Myron M. Studner Professor of Cancer Research Professor of Epidemiology Mailman School of Public Health Columbia University 722 West 168th Street, Room 725 New York, NY 10032

Mary Beth Terry, PhD Professor of Epidemiology Mailman School of Public Health Columbia University 722 West 168th Street, Room 725 New York, NY 10032

For postdoctoral applicants, we review applications on a rolling basis throughout the year.

Affiliations/Partnerships

  • Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center (HICCC)
  • NIEHS Center for Environmental Health in Northern Manhattan
  • Pancreas Center
  • Department of Biostatistics
  • Department of Environmental Health Sciences
  • Robert Wood Johnson Health & Society Scholars
  • Center for the Study of Social Inequalities and Health

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • Cancers (Basel)

Logo of cancers

A Review of Colorectal Cancer in Terms of Epidemiology, Risk Factors, Development, Symptoms and Diagnosis

Tomasz sawicki.

1 Department of Human Nutrition, Faculty of Food Sciences, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Słoneczna 45F, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland; [email protected] (M.R.); [email protected] (A.D.); [email protected] (E.N.); [email protected] (K.E.P.)

Monika Ruszkowska

Anna danielewicz, ewa niedźwiedzka, tomasz arłukowicz.

2 Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Collegium Medicum, University of Warmia and Mazury, 10-900 Olsztyn, Poland; lp.nytzslo.ssw@zciwokulrat

Katarzyna E. Przybyłowicz

Simple summary.

According to the available data, colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignant neoplasms. Depending on the location, type of cancer or gender, it is ranked 2nd to 4th in terms of incidence in the world. CRC, year by year, shows an increasing tendency in terms of both morbidity and deaths. Many factors may be responsible for the development of this disease, including genetic and environmental factors. Considering all the aspects, we made efforts to systematize the available literature data in terms of epidemiology, risk factors, type and nature of symptoms, development stages, available and future diagnosis of colorectal cancer.

This review article contains a concise consideration of genetic and environmental risk factors for colorectal cancer. Known risk factors associated with colorectal cancer include familial and hereditary factors and lifestyle-related and ecological factors. Lifestyle factors are significant because of the potential for improving our understanding of the disease. Physical inactivity, obesity, smoking and alcohol consumption can also be addressed through therapeutic interventions. We also made efforts to systematize available literature and data on epidemiology, diagnosis, type and nature of symptoms and disease stages. Further study of colorectal cancer and progress made globally is crucial to inform future strategies in controlling the disease’s burden through population-based preventative initiatives.

1. Introduction

The most common cancer diagnosed in both sexes is lung cancer (11.6% of the total cases), followed by breast cancer in women (11.6%) and prostate cancer in men (7.1%). Colorectal cancer (CRC) is third in terms of recognition (6.1%) and second in terms of mortality (9.2%). It is estimated that by the year 2035, the total number of deaths from rectal and colon cancer will increase by 60% and 71.5%, respectively [ 1 ]. These figures may differ from country to country depending on the degree of economic development. Therefore, the disease is widely recognized as a marker of the country’s socioeconomic development [ 2 ]. The increase in morbidity is also influenced by lifestyle, body fatness and dietary patterns [ 3 ]. There is convincing evidence that physical activity has a protective effect. The risk of developing the disease is increased by more frequent red and processed meat and alcohol drinks [ 2 , 4 ]. The progress of civilization and economic development, apart from improving socioeconomic conditions, also causes a change in dietary patterns, referred to as the westernization of the lifestyle. This means higher consumption of animal fats, processed meats, refined grains or sweets, a low supply of dietary fibers, fruits, vegetables and low physical activity. The occurrence of overweight or obesity is often the result of such a lifestyle [ 5 ]. Overweight and obesity are associated with an increased risk of many civilization diseases. Visceral obesity has been reported to adversely affect the prognosis of CRC in men [ 6 ]. About a quarter of a contributor to genetic predisposition. The development time of CRC usually lasts from several to several years; therefore, it is very important to diagnose it early in developing the disease. Based on follow-up examinations and nutrition prevention based on a balanced diet, secondary prevention is also important [ 7 ].

Considering all the aspects, we made efforts to systematize the available literature data in terms of epidemiology, risk factors, type and nature of symptoms, stages of development and available diagnosis of colorectal cancer.

2. Epidemiology

Colorectal cancer is the third most popular occurring cancer in men and the second most commonly occurring cancer in women. There were over 1.9 million new cases in 2020 [ 3 , 8 ]. Colorectal cancer is the second most common cause of death from cancer, estimated to be responsible for almost 935,000 cancer deaths [ 3 ]. Globally it is one of the cancers whose incidence is increasing comprising 11% of all cancer diagnoses [ 9 ]. According to GLOBOCAN 2020 data there is a broad geographic variation in CRC incidence and mortality among various countries of the world ( Figure 1 ) [ 10 , 11 ]. It has been recognized that the most significant increase in CRC incidence and mortality occurs in medium and high human development index (HDI) countries that are adopting the “western” way of life [ 9 , 10 ]. Developed countries are at the highest risk of colon cancer. Obesity, sedentary lifestyle, red meat consumption, alcohol and tobacco are considered the driving factors behind the growth of CRC [ 3 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 ]. Therefore, colorectal cancer is a disease of developed countries with a western lifestyle [ 12 , 13 ]. Factors that influence life expectancy, including health-related behaviors (smoking, obesity and exercise) and social factors (education, income and government expenditure on health), profoundly impact cancer development. Life expectancy levels must be considered when developing strategies to prevent and treat cancer [ 12 , 13 ]. Interesting data comes from study conducted that in 2007 to 2016, 2006 to 2015 or 2005 to 2014, depending on the data’s availability, colon cancer incidence increased in 10 of 36 countries analyzed (all in Asia or Europe); India had the most significant increase, followed by Poland [ 3 , 11 ]. All 10 of these countries have medium to high (HDI) scores. Six countries had a decrease in colon cancer incidence; these countries had the highest HDI scores; the United States had the most significant reduction, followed by Israel. Seven countries (including all countries from Northern America) had a decrease in incidence among persons older than 50 [ 9 , 10 , 11 ]. Eight countries had an increase in colon cancer incidence among persons younger than 50 years, including the United Kingdom and India. Countries with a decreased or stable incidence among persons 50 years or older but a significant increase in persons younger than 50 years included Germany, Australia, the United States, Sweden, Canada and the United Kingdom [ 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 ]. The decline in the incidence of CRC was recorded only in Italy among people under the age of 50. Among women, 12 of 36 countries (all from Asia and Europe) had an increase in colon cancer incidence, and seven countries had a decrease; India had the most significant growth, followed by Slovenia [ 9 , 10 ]. Many works have attracted attention that colorectal cancer survival depends on the stage at which it is diagnosed, with later-stage diagnosis having lower survival [ 2 , 3 , 8 , 9 ]. The five-year survival rate is 90 percent for colorectal cancers diagnosed at an early stage compared with 13 percent for those diagnosed later. At age 0–74, the cumulative risk of dying from colon cancer is 0.65% among men and 0.45% among women [ 3 , 8 , 11 ]. Age-standardized (world) mortality rates per 100,000 of CRC in both sexes is 8.9 [ 3 ].

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cancers-13-02025-g001.jpg

Standardized incidence and mortality rates for CRC for both sexes in 2020, per 100,000.

In recent years, the global burden of CRC will increase by 60%, to over 2.2 million new cases and 1.1 million deaths by 2030. Such a significant increase will be the result of economic development, an economic transformation consisting in the transition from low-to-medium-HDI nations and generational changes in developed countries. Many research studies emphasize that this increase is also the result of environmental changes, such as a more sedentary lifestyle, abnormal bony weight (obesity), consumption of highly processed food, alcohol, red meat consumption and an increase in overall life expectancy [ 2 , 9 , 10 ]. With the best scientific understanding in mind, an updated study of the current patterns and temporal trends of CRC from a global perspective is critical to developing future strategies for prevention and treatment programs to reduce disease incidence. Many research works emphasize the need to allocate resources for health education focused on CRC risk factors and to formulate screening programs using the latest scientific reports in the aspect of public health.

3. Risk Factors

Multiple factors have been implicated in the development of colorectal cancer ( Figure 2 ). It was demonstrated that individuals are at increased risk for CRC if they (or their relatives) have had cancer, a history of colon polyps, inflammatory bowel diseases, diabetes mellitus or cholecystectomy. Lifestyle factors also play important roles in CRC etiology. The evidence shows that overweight and obesity, physical inactivity, cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption and inappropriate dietary patterns (a diet low in fiber, fruits, vegetables, calcium and dietary products and high in red and processed meat) increase CRC risk. In addition, gut microbiome, age, gender and race and socioeconomical status are known to influence colorectal cancer risk.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cancers-13-02025-g002.jpg

The main risk factors associated with colorectal cancer.

3.1. Family and Personal Medical History

3.1.1. family history and genetics.

A family history of colorectal cancer significantly increased the risk of developing colorectal cancer. This phenomenon shares both inherited genetic predisposition and lifestyle factors. The information relevant for future colorectal cancer occurrence, among other, include: (i) the generational distance of the relatives to the individuals at risk; (ii) the age at which the first-degree relatives developed colorectal cancer; (iii) the number of family members diagnosed with colorectal cancer; (iv) family co-occurrence of other neoplasms (e.g., endometrial, ovarian and urinary tract, pancreatic) and (v) personal history of cancer. Previous studies indicated that people with one affected first-degree relatives (parents, siblings and children) have, on average, two times higher risk of CRC in comparison to those with no family history. The risk of CRC development is significantly higher if a relative is diagnosed before the age of 60. Moreover, a higher number of affected relatives (not only first-degree but also second- and third-degree) also increases the disease risk [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ].

It is estimated that 2–8% of colorectal cancer cases arise as a result of inherited syndromes. The two most common hereditary syndromes that predispose for colorectal cancer development are hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC), also known as Lynch syndrome, and familial adenomatous polyposis coli (FAP). HNPCC is an autosomal dominant disease caused by mutations in genes known as mismatch repair errors. Proteins encoded by these genes are responsible for reaper errors in DNA that occur during cell division. Most cases of HNPCC are associated with mutations in MLH1 and MSH2 genes. However, there are several other genes mutations in which give rise to HNPCC (e.g., MSH6, MLH3, TGBR2, PMS1 and PMS2). Patients with HNPCC have about 20% risk of developing CRC by the age of 50 and about 80% risk of developing CRC by the age of 85 [ 15 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ].

Similar to HNPCC, FAP also presents an autosomal dominant pattern of heredity. It is caused by adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) gene defects. APC is classified as a tumor suppressor gene. It encodes a protein that plays a significant role in regulating DNA replication and cell division. Individuals with FAP start to develop hundreds or even thousands of colon polyps in their mid-teens and, with high-probability, most of these colon polyps evolve into cancer. It is assumed that almost all patients with the earlier unrecognized and untreated FAP syndrome will be diagnosed with colorectal cancer before the age of 35–40 [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 ].

The increased risk of CRC development is also linked with the occurrence of Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, Juvenile polyposis syndrome, PTEN hamartoma tumors syndrome and MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP) [ 21 ].

3.1.2. Inflammatory Bowel Disease (Crohn’s Disease; Ulcerative Colitis)

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is ranked as the third-highest risk condition for the development of colorectal cancer, behind HNPCC and FAP. IBD is a group of chronic and incurable diseases, which affect the immune system of the gastrointestinal tract and, in consequence, lead to the development of uncontrolled inflammation. The two major forms of IBD are Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis. The etiology of IBD is unknown, it is considered that the development of IBD is a result of interactions between genetic, immunological and environmental factors [ 20 , 23 ]. Due to the fact that chronic inflammation promotes tumor growth and progression, individuals with IBD have about 2–6 times higher risk of developing CRC in comparison to healthy individuals. The risk of CRC increases with the duration of IBD and the anatomic extent and severity of the disease [ 14 , 24 , 25 ].

3.1.3. Colon Polyps

Colon polyps (precancerous neoplastic lesions) are defined as an abnormal growth of tissue projecting from a mucous layer of the colon. They are histologically classified into two main categories: non-neoplastic (hamartomatous, hyperplastic and inflammatory polyps) and neoplastic (adenomatous, Figure 3 ). The adenomatous polyps are of great importance because they harbor the potential to become malignant. It is estimated that about 95% of colorectal cancer is developed from adenomatous polyps. Despite the fact that almost all cancer arises from adenomas, it is estimated that only about 5% of polyps progress to colorectal cancer [ 16 , 26 ]. The period for the transition of adenomatous polyps into invasive adenocarcinoma is 5–15 years and the risk of malignant transformation increases with polyp size, degree of dysplasia and the age of individuals. Polyps greater than 1–2 cm in diameter, a high degree of dysplasia and increasing age are unfavorable prognostic factors. Due to the fact that approximately 40% of people at the age of 50 or older have one or more adenomatous polyps, it is of great importance to identify these polyps and remove them prior to cancer transition [ 14 , 26 ].

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cancers-13-02025-g003.jpg

Representative histopathological appearance of adenomatous ( A , B ) and serrated ( C , D ) changes in the colon.

3.1.4. Diabetes Mellitus

Diabetes mellitus is a metabolic disorder characterized by chronic hyperglycemia, which results from defects in insulin secretion and/or action. It is estimated that around 460 million people globally are currently suffering from diabetes and the number will continue to grow. Epidemiological data indicate that diabetes is an independent risk factor for several gastrointestinal cancers, including colorectal cancer [ 27 , 28 ]. Individuals with type 2 diabetes have about two-three times greater risk of developing colorectal cancer in comparison to the non-diabetic population [ 29 , 30 ]. The development of colorectal cancer is thought to be related to an increase in insulin concentration and an inflammatory condition associated with the disease. Hyperinsulinemia may contribute to colorectal cancerogenesis directly by stimulating colonic cell proliferation and indirectly by increasing the level of insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1). IGF-1 is a mitogenic factor that enhances cell growth and decreases cell death [ 27 , 31 ]. Moreover, chronic inflammation associated with diabetes favors carcinogenesis, malignant transformation, tumor growth, invasion and metastasis through the action of proinflammatory cytokines, such as tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) and interleukin-6 (Il-6) [ 31 , 32 ].

3.1.5. Cholecystectomy

The possible association between cholecystectomy, the surgical removal of the gallbladder from the body and subsequent colorectal cancer incidence has still not been firmly established or refuted. The results from some studies indicated an increased risk of CRC development after cholecystectomy [ 33 , 34 , 35 ], whereas others have reported no increased risk [ 36 , 37 , 38 ]. The possible increased risk of CRC after cholecystectomy is thought to be associated with changes in the secretion and composition of bile acids. Under physiological conditions bile acids are released periodically in response to food intake. In the absence of a gallbladder, there is a continuous flow of bile to the intestine, which results in increased bacterial biotransformation of bile acids into secondary bile acids. The secondary bile acids have the potential to generate reactive oxygen and nitrogen species, disturb the cell membrane and induce DNA damage and apoptosis in the colonic mucosa cells, which increase the risk of developing colon carcinomas [ 39 , 40 ].

3.2. Lifestyle

3.2.1. dietary patterns.

  • Diet high in red and processed meat

According to the International Agency for Research on Cancer Group, red meat and processed meat were classified as probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A) and carcinogenic to humans (Group 1), respectively. Red meat is defined as the meat derived from the muscle of farm animals (e.g., beef, lamb, game and pork). Processed meat refers to the meat that has been preserved by curing, salting, smoking or adding chemical preservatives in order to improve favor or extend the shelf life. Studies have shown that regular consumption of red and processed meat is an important risk factor for the development of colorectal cancer [ 20 , 41 ]. It is estimated that the risk of CRC may increase by about 17% for every 100 grams portion of red meat and by approximately 18% for every 50 grams of processed meat eaten daily [ 42 , 43 , 44 ]. The exact mechanism by which consumption of red and processed meat may contribute to the development of colorectal cancer is still under investigation. Several factors that are believed to influence the occurrence of cancer are heterocyclic amines (HACs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and N-nitroso compounds (NOCs)—harmful substances that may be produced during high-temperature or open-fire cooking of meat (e.g., pan-frying, grilling and roasting). HACs are formed during the specific reaction of free amino acids, carbohydrates and creatinine or creatine (substances found in muscle). PAHs, in turn, are formed when fat and juice from meat come into contact with open flames. The smoke that contains PAHs attaches to the surface of the cooked meat. HACs and PAHs are considered genotoxic substances that have the potential to cause point mutations (deletions, insertions and substitutions) and, in consequence, initiate the process of carcinogenesis. Similarly, NOCs (nitrosamine and nitrosamide) are potent carcinogenic agents that can react with DNA. These substances are synthesized from amines or amides and oxides of nitrogen (nitrites or nitrates, i.e., substances used as a food additive to inhibit the growth of bacteria and gives the meat the desirable cured) during high-heat cooking of processed meat [ 45 , 46 ]. The other factor that is believed to contribute to the malignant transformation of colon cells is heme, an iron-containing porphyrin presents in large amounts in red meat. It was demonstrated that heme increases oxidative stress and induce lipid peroxidation of intestinal cells. Reactive oxygen species contribute to DNA damage and gene mutations. Reactive lipid peroxides, in turn, exert a cytotoxic effect on epithelial cells. The damage of the cell surface results in hyperproliferation of the cells and leads to epithelial hyperplasia, which may evolve to dysplasia and cancer. In addition, heme irons stimulate the endogenous formation of the above-mentioned NOCs and induce alternation in the gut microbiota leading to a state of dysbiosis [ 5 , 41 , 44 ]. It should be also emphasized that consumption of high-fat red and processed meat contributes to obesity, insulin resistance and an increase of bile acid secretion, which acts as an aggressive surfactant for the mucosa and increase the risk of developing colorectal cancer.

  • Diet low in fiber, fruits and vegetables

It was shown that the high consumption of dietary fiber could reduce the risk of colorectal cancer development by up to 50% [ 14 ]. However, currently available results of epidemiologic studies not unequivocally support the protective effects of fiber against CRC and the precise mechanism of anticancer fiber action has not been clearly established. The potential mechanism of the protective effect of fiber consumption on CRC development includes: (i) reduction of transit time for stool throughout the colon and, in consequence, reduction of contact between potential carcinogenic substances and colonic epithelium, (ii) increase in the amount of water in fecal content and thus dilution of carcinogens and procarcinogens present in fecal, (iii) binding sterols and bile acids metabolites, which may be implicated in carcinogenesis, and (iv) stimulation the growth of beneficial gut microbiota, which, in turn, ferment fiber and produce short-chain fatty acids—substances suggested to exert tumor-suppressive effects. Therefore, dietary guidelines recommend people consume at least 20–30 g of fiber per day [ 5 , 16 , 17 , 41 ]. Naturally great sources of fiber are fruits and vegetables. In addition to fiber intake, consumption of fruits and vegetables provides a large number of bioactive compounds, such as vitamins, minerals, folate, plant sterols and protease inhibitors. Many of these compounds exhibit potent antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties, which could inhibit DNA and cellular damage. The results from several studies demonstrated that a high intake of fruits and vegetables may be linked with a lower CRC risk development [ 17 , 24 , 41 ].

  • Diet low in calcium, vitamin D and dairy products

According to the World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research [ 41 ], the high consumption of dairy products (in particular milk) is probably inversely associated with the risk of developing colorectal cancer. The suggested protective effect of dairy products has been largely attributed to their content of calcium. It was demonstrated that calcium binds secondary bile acids and fatty acids diminishing their ability to modify intestinal mucosa and, in consequence, limiting their carcinogenic potential. Moreover, calcium was found to inhibit proliferation and to induce apoptosis of tumor cells and reduce distinct patterns of mutation in proto-oncogene KRAS [ 5 , 41 , 47 ]. In addition to calcium, the other milk component, i.e., vitamin D is also suggested to play a beneficial role against CRC development. The roles of vitamin D and calcium are closely related since the primary function of vitamin D is the maintenance of calcium homeostasis by enhancing its intestinal absorption. It is hypothesized that the anticancer effect of vitamin D may be a result of the increased level of serum calcium concentration. It should be emphasized, however, that vitamin D exerts many other physiological functions that may play an important part in cancer control. The results of the studies showed that vitamin D alters the expression of a variety of genes involved in the regulation of growth, proliferation, differentiation and apoptosis of epithelial cells. Moreover, it exhibits anti-inflammatory action, improved immune function and inhibits angiogenesis [ 48 , 49 ]. Due to the fact that the major source of vitamin D for humans is skin exposure to sunlight, there are some studies to determine if the distribution of colorectal cancer incidence depends on amounts of natural light. It was demonstrated the colorectal cancer mortality rates were higher in the northern regions of the United States and Europe. It is assumed that people who live at higher latitudes are exposed to less amount of solar ultraviolet-B dose, synthesize less vitamin D and therefore have a higher risk of developing and die from colorectal cancer [ 48 ]. On the other hand, the results of the study performed in Norway showed that there is no significant north–south gradient for the death rate for colon cancer. However, the survival rate of colon cancer depended on the season of diagnosis and was the lowest in the cancers diagnosed in the autumn. Recent meta-analyses of prospective cohorts demonstrated that, regardless of geographic location, higher serum vitamin D level was related to a statistically significant, substantially lower colorectal cancer risk in women and non-statistically significant lower risk in men [ 50 ]. According to World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research [ 41 ], the evidence for vitamin D was limited and there is a need to perform research assessing the anticancer activity of vitamin D.

3.2.2. Overweight and Obesity

A condition of abnormal or excessive fat accumulation (overweight and obesity) is a convincing risk factor for the development of colorectal cancer. Overweight/obese men and women have about 50% and 20% greater risk of developing colorectal cancer in comparison to people with normal weight, respectively. It is estimated that an overall CRC risk increase by 3% for every five kilograms of weight gain [ 17 , 20 ]. The mechanisms underlying the induction of carcinogenesis in overweight/obese people are not fully understood and still under intense study. Adipose tissue is an endocrine organ that plays a crucial role in the regulation of energy intake and inflammatory response. It was found that abnormal or excessive fat accumulation causes alternations in adipose tissue hormone and cytokine secretions. Adipose tissue of overweight/obese people release more factors (e.g., leptin, resistin, TNF-α, IL-1, IL-6, IL-7 and IL-8), which are known to exhibit mitogenic effects on epithelial cells, inhibit apoptosis of the cells, promote oxidative stress, suppress immune response and reduce the activity of IGF-1 axis and have been associated with cancer development and progression [ 5 , 41 , 51 ].

3.2.3. Physical Inactivity

Epidemiological data indicate that an increasing colorectal cancer incidence in developed and developing countries may be the result of a sedentary lifestyle. It is estimated that physically inactive people have up to 50% higher risk of developing colorectal cancer in comparison to the most physically active ones [ 17 , 52 ]. Regular physical exercises have been shown to improve immune system function, reduce inflammation, reduce stress, optimize metabolic rate, help regulate hormone level and prevent obesity and, as a result, may help protect against cancer development [ 47 ].

3.2.4. Cigarette Smoking

Tobacco smoke is an established risk factor for the development of many types of cancer, including colorectal cancer. The results of the studies indicated that people who smoke cigarettes have to 2–3-fold increase risk for developing CRC in comparison to non-smokers and the risk increases with dose and duration of exposure [ 31 ]. In addition, it is considered that cigarette smoking is attributed to up to 12% of colorectal cancer deaths [ 16 ]. Tobacco smoke contains a mixture of thousand chemicals, over 60 of which are well-established carcinogens (e.g., N-nitrosamines, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, aromatic amines, aldehydes and metals) that are known to damage DNA. Mutations in colorectal epithelial cells may lead to polyposis development, which, in turn, may transit into invasive adenocarcinoma [ 53 ].

3.2.5. Alcohol Consumption

Alcohol intake is one of the major contributors to colorectal cancer development. It is estimated that the consumption of 2–3 drinks daily increases the risk of CRC by about 20%, whereas drinking more than three alcoholic beverages increases this risk by about 40% [ 17 , 20 ]. Individuals who are used to drink four and more drinks every day increase their chance of developing colorectal cancer for up to 52% [ 54 ]. To date, the various mechanism by which alcohol may induce carcinogenesis have been proposed. They include the production of reactive oxygen species and nitrogen species (during the oxidative metabolism of ethanol), production of mutagenic acetaldehyde (the first metabolite of ethanol), depletion of S-adenosylmethionine (epigenetic alternations), inactivation of the tumor suppressor genes, hormonal imbalance, reduction in folate concentration and impairment of retinoic acid metabolism [ 47 , 55 ].

3.3. Others

3.3.1. gut microbiota.

Recently, a growing number of studies indicated that gut microbiota may be a key factor that contributed to the development of many pathological processes, including cancer. The gut microbiota (microbiome) comprises a large population of diverse microorganisms (bacteria, viruses, fungi and protozoa) inhabiting the gastrointestinal tract of humans. In healthy people, the microbiome is involved in nutrient metabolism and absorption, drug metabolism and elimination of xenobiotics. In addition, normal gut microbiota participates in the maintenance of intestinal barrier integrity, protects against pathogens and plays an important role in immunomodulation. According to the latest research that explored the microbiome of the individuals with colorectal cancer, alternation in the composition and functionality of the normal gut microbiota may lead to initiation, promotion and progression of this cancer. It was demonstrated that toxic metabolites of bacteria cause DNA damage, affect cell cycles, stimulate immune response and lead to disturbance of the intestinal barrier function. As a result, impaired intestinal microbiota homeostasis contributes to the development of the microenvironment favorable to develop colorectal cancer [ 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 ].

Due to the fact that about 90% of all new cases of colorectal cancer occurring in individuals over 50 years old, older age is considered to be one of the most significant factors influencing the risk of developing colorectal cancer [ 14 , 16 ]. It is estimated that people after the age of 65 have about three times greater risk to develop colorectal cancer in comparison to those at the age of 50–64 and about 30 times greater risk than people at the age of 25–49 [ 20 ]. The average age at diagnosis is 68 and 72 years old for men and women, respectively. The fact that colorectal cancer is the age-related disease is particularly evident in the developed countries where the rate of colorectal cancer is the highest. The number of colorectal cancer incidence in these countries is associated, among others, with longer life expectancy and, in consequence, increase number of old people in the population [ 61 ]. It should be emphasized, however, that the results of the newest studies indicated that the incidences of colorectal cancer rise among young adults (20–49 years old) in the United States and Europe [ 62 , 63 ]. Currently, it is recommended to begin screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged more than 50 years. According to the authors of the studies, if the mentioned trend continues, screening guidelines should be reconsidered.

3.3.3. Gender and Race

According to the American Cancer Society, men have about 30% higher risk of developing colorectal cancer in comparison to women. In addition, men who are diagnosed with colorectal cancer have a worse prognosis and approximately 40% higher mortality compared to women [ 17 ]. On the other hand, women are more prone to develop right-sided colon cancer, which is often diagnosed at a more advanced stage and seemed more aggressive than left-sided tumors [ 64 , 65 ]. The reasons for sex disparity are not fully understood, it is considered that they may be related to the differences in the exposure to risk factors (e.g., alcohol and tobacco), dietary patterns and sex hormones [ 17 , 47 ].

The incidence of colorectal cancer varied substantially by race also. The non-Hispanic Black individuals experience one of the highest incidence rates of all racial groups. It is estimated that colorectal cancer incidence rate in non-Hispanic Blacks is approximately 50% higher than in Asians/Pacific Islanders and about 20% higher than in non-Hispanic Whites [ 17 , 66 ].

3.3.4. Socioeconomics Factors

It is believed that people with low socioeconomic status (SES) generally have a higher risk of developing cancer than those with high SES. This may be explained in part by limited access to health care services and high-quality treatment resources and unhealthy dietary habits, sedentary lifestyle and smoking in the low socioeconomic status population [ 16 , 67 ]. It should be emphasized, however, that the results concerning the association of SES with the incidences of colorectal cancer are inconsistent. In North America, people with low SES exhibited a higher incidence of colorectal cancer in comparison to people with high SES, contrary, in Europe, high SES groups often show a higher risk of developing colorectal cancer. Therefore, there is a need to perform additional studies in order to establish the impact of socioeconomic status on colorectal cancer occurrence [ 68 ].

4. Development Factors

The formation of CRC consists of the stages of initiation, promotion and progression. Initiation involves irreversible genetic damage that predisposes the intestinal mucosa’s affected epithelial cells to subsequent neoplastic transformation [ 69 ]. In the promotion phase, the initiated cells multiply, generating abnormal growth (cancer). In contrast, benign cancer cells turn into malignant ones during the progression stage and acquire aggressive features and metastatic potential [ 24 ]. A crucial part of most CRC carcinogenesis steps is the presence of a benign precursor lesion, defined as a polyp (defined as abnormal growth on the colon mucosa growing in its lumen). Another type of lesions identified in the large intestine lumen is adenomatous polyps (adenomas, Figure 4 ) and serrated polyps, which are the direct precursors of most cancers [ 20 , 70 ]. Advanced adenomas (≥1 cm in diameter) with or without diversity have a significantly higher risk of cancer progression (from 30 to 50%) than non-advanced adenomas (1%). Moreover, advanced adenomas characterizing the higher transition rates to cancer, increasing with age [ 71 , 72 ]. The other changes in the gut wall, such as polished polyps, represent a group of heterogeneous lesions, which include: hyperplastic polyp, traditional serrated adenoma, sessile serrated adenoma and mixed polyp [ 73 ]. They combine the toothed morphological appearance of hyperplastic polyps and dysplastic features of adenomas, and these changes are precursors to approximately 10–15% of sporadic CRC. However, the most common lesion present in the gut is a hyperplastic polyp (80–90%) [ 53 ]. The research showed that the hyperplastic polyps (especially large and/or in the proximal colon) could pass in the CRC as part of a serrated pathway through traditional serrated adenoma or serrated sessile adenoma [ 74 ]. Undoubtedly, the process of CRC carcinogenesis is quite slow, starting with a slight inflammation, then through the development of adenomatous polyps in the epithelium, and finally, the development of adenocarcinoma ( Figure 5 ) [ 75 ]. Moreover, the process is driven by the accumulation of mutations and genetic changes and takes 10–15 years, but maybe faster in some conditions, e.g., in patients with Lynch syndrome [ 76 ].

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cancers-13-02025-g004.jpg

Selected endoscopic images of adenomas and CRC at different stages. ( A )—Tubular adenoma; ( B )—tubulo-villous adenoma; ( C )—sedentary serrated adenoma (SSA) without dysplasia; ( D )—tubular adenocarcinoma, grade 1 and ( E )—tubular adenocarcinoma, grade 2.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cancers-13-02025-g005.jpg

Representative histopathological appearance of adenocarcinoma in the colon.

About 20% of CRC is associated with hereditary syndromes such as familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), Lynch syndrome (HNPCC), mutation-related polyposis MUTYH (MAP) and hamartomatous polyposis syndromes (Peutz-Jeghers, juvenile polyposis and Cowden disease) [ 51 , 77 , 78 ]. In the case of HNPCC, one allele of the DNA repair gene, while in FAP, one allele of the adenomatous polyposis tumor suppressor (APC) gene is inactivated by the germline [ 77 ]. Moreover, about 80% of people with FAP have an affected parent, including about 20% of cases are de novo mutations. It is estimated that 95% of people with FAP develop adenoma as early as 35 [ 78 ]. A colectomy is then indicated, recommended when more than 20–30 adenomas have been designed, or multiple adenomas with advanced histology have developed. HNPCC is associated with pathogenic variants of the MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2 and EPCAM genes, and is also characterized by an increased risk of CRC, the pathological feature of which is the presence of mucinous adenocarcinoma (lifetime risk at 52–82%, mean age at diagnosis 44–61 years) [ 23 , 79 ]. Moreover, this neoplasm may predispose to asynchronous or metachronous colorectal neoplasm [ 68 ].

CRC may also arise in the inflammatory pathway in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, particularly ulcerative colitis. In these patients, from the absence of dysplasia, through dysplasia for an indefinite period, low-grade dysplasia, to high-grade changes towards neoplastic transformation, finally, CRC occurs [ 24 ].

The most commonly affected genes in the CIN pathway (the chromosomal instability pathway) are APC, p53 and K-ras, which are responsible for the adenocarcinoma sequence pathway. Changes within these genes lead to mutational activation of oncogenes or inactivation of tumor suppressors, which consequently causes malignant transformation. CIN pathway is responsible for 70–85% of all CRC cases [ 80 , 81 , 82 ]. Apart from the mechanisms related to chromosomal instability (CIN) and microsatellite instability (MSI—microsatellite instability), a third one should be mentioned, related to the methylator phenotype (CIMP—CpG island methylator phenotype) [ 83 , 84 ]. It is associated with hypermethylation of numerous gene promoters (including MLH1), the V300E mutation in the BRAF gene, and loss of TP53 and p16 functions. These disorders cause silencing of suppressor genes and thus disturbances in the MMR system’s functioning, the occurrence of MSI and the state of hypermutation. This mechanism is most often observed in the development of serrated architectural lesions, most often in women in the colon’s proximal part [ 85 ].

As mentioned above, CRC is a non-homogeneous disease entity. Individual cases differ in location, degree of histological malignancy or the type of neoplasm. However, the most exciting thing is the multilevel molecular complexity. The consensus developed in 2015 by the CRC Subtyping Consortium identified four molecular subtypes of colorectal cancer (CMS): CMS1—MSI-immune activation, CMS2—canonical, CMS3—metabolic and CMS4—mesenchymal. The classification is of practical importance: individual subtypes differ in their clinical course and respond differently to chemotherapeutic and biological treatment. This may determine the selection of the optimal, individualized therapeutic strategy for each patient and is also a helpful predictive and prognostic tool. Perhaps the most promising is the application of these phenomena to molecular screening for colorectal cancer [ 86 ].

In 10% of all colorectal cancers, serrated adenocarcinomas develop by replacing adenomatous polyps with serrated polyps on the so-called serrated lesion pathway, showing the presence of the BRAF mutation and epigenetic silencing of various genes, but without APC gene involvement, as is the case in other pathways. Another mechanism leading to CRC is microsatellite instability (MSI), caused by the disruption of DNA repair genes [ 44 , 80 , 87 ]. The inherited genetic predisposition and exposure to environmental factors may work together to form adenomas and cancer based on synergy [ 44 ]. However, most CRCs are sporadic, meaning that patients do not have a genetic burden, and the development of this type of cancer is linked to lifestyle and environmental factors. Moreover, long-term exposure to carcinogens may promote oxidative stress. Oxidative stress can be increasing DNA damage by generating sequential accumulation of somatic mutations, leading to genome instability [ 44 ].

5. Symptoms

CRC may be suspected when some of the lower gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms are present. National Institute for Health and Professional Excellence has published guidelines on which basis health practitioners may identify patients with a high CRC probability. Suspected CRC recognition and referral for future diagnosis are related to the occurrence of rectal bleeding, abdominal mass, abdominal pain, change in bowel habit, unexplained weight loss and iron-deficiency anemia [ 88 ]. However, some non-site-specific symptoms, such as unexplained appetite loss and deep vein thrombosis, should be mentioned. For these symptoms, an assessment for additional symptoms, signs or findings may help clarify which cancer is most likely to be carried out and offer urgent investigation or a suspected cancer pathway referral [ 89 ].

In some research the usefulness of symptoms of detecting CRC has been evaluated. They present single signs or symptoms that have low utility (sensitivity and specificity) for the CRC diagnosis. Moreover, both positive and negative likelihood ratios (PLR and NLR) confirm the presence or lack of symptoms does not significantly modify the probability of CRC detection [ 90 , 91 , 92 ]. Nevertheless, in clinical practice, according to many guidelines, colonoscopy is performed in patients with bowel signs and symptoms suspected of CRC [ 88 ]. However, some studies suggest that co-occurrence of some symptoms may enhance the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity for colorectal cancer. [ 90 , 91 ], e.g., the presence of a palpable abdominal mass on examination and a report of dark red rectal bleeding [ 90 ] or rectal bleeding and weight loss and change in bowel habit [ 92 ].

In the context of CRC treatment, patients who have been diagnosed before they had symptoms of CRC (or these were the first symptoms) and the disease was detected at an early stage have a much better prognosis. For this reason, all alarming symptoms that may suggest CRC should encourage the patient to see a doctor urgently and have colorectal diagnostic tests done [ 93 ].

6. Diagnostic

For individuals suspected of having CRC, primary care physicians should carry out a physical examination of the abdomen and analyze the health history to diagnose. The suspicion of CRC on physical examination and subject examination indicates that the patient is referred to a gastroenterology clinic. During the visit, the doctor should consult patients in terms of family history, consider assessing risk factors, and then choose an appropriate optical and/or imaging diagnosis method. Another pathway for detecting CRC is various screening programs (pilot, opportunistic or organized) placed worldwide [ 94 ]. Despite a higher number of programs, the participation ranged from 16.1% to 68.2% [ 95 ]. The programs mostly include individuals aged 50–75 years with wide variations in screening practices depending on the protocols resulting from the study stage, colonoscopy capacities and financial resources. Screening programs are implemented more frequently in Western countries with higher CRC prevalence with a different type of test. Most of screening diagnostic methods include fecal immunochemical test for hemoglobin (FIT), guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT), (optical) colonoscopy (OC), flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) and digital rectal exam (DRE) [ 94 ].

Assessment of family history of cancer in first (FDR), second (SDR) and third-degree relatives is essential to obtain detailed information in the diagnosis process [ 96 ]. Taken information should include relative consanguinity, age at cancer diagnosis, current age or age and cause of death, type of cancer, its medical case history and ethnicity. Research provides that the risk of CRC is the highest, along with patients with FDRs with CRC [ 96 ]. Additionally, the number and degree of relatives determine the screening pathway for CRC diagnosis. In case of one FDR with CRC or more than one FDRs with advanced adenoma was reported, the patient is examined by colonoscopy every 5–10 years or FIT every 1–2 year begins at the age of 40–50 years or 10 years earlier than FDR age of diagnosis. In case of more than one FDRs or SDRs with CRC or polyps and more than two FDRs with CRC is reported in the patients’ family history, the colonoscopy should be done every 5 years beginning at the age of 40 or 10 years earlier than the age of FDR diagnosis [ 97 ]. Other information should include potential determinants such as non-paternity or born resulting from sperm/egg donors. Suppose suspected CRC, syndromes and other syndrome-specific features are diagnosed in personal or family history (e.g., Lynch syndrome, familial adenomatous polyposis, MUTYH-associated polyposis and hamartomatous polyposis syndromes). In that case, the patient should follow high-risk guidelines, and the surveillance should be started by age 20–25 [ 98 , 99 ]. Additionally, in any patient with suspected colorectal cancer, it is recommended to pay attention to peripheral lymphadenopathy, hepatomegaly, a palpable abdominal tumor and the presence of ascites.

The fecal occult blood test is the first-choice screening test in primary care. However, it has been recommended for their implementation to refer patients with low-risk bowel symptoms but has not been recommended for all symptomatic patients [ 88 ]. For CRC screening and detection of occult bleeding, high-sensitivity, guaiac-based (HSgFOBT) or immunochemical-based (FIT) tests are recommended [ 99 ]. gFOBT is not specific to human hemoglobin, and some foods or drugs can affect the results of this test; therefore, it requires some restriction to comply before tested [ 98 ]. FIT measures the amount of human-specific hemoglobin in a feces sample and is recommended in place of gFOBT for patients with low-risk CRC symptoms. NICE guidelines recommend it for the patient with unexplained changes in bowel habits and iron deficiency anemia (patients aged 60 and over, even in the absence of iron deficiency) for use in primary care or screening for suspected CRC [ 88 ]. FIT may help effectively excluded CRC among symptomatic patients [ 100 ] and, in conjunction with clinical assessment, may safely and objectively determine individual risk of CRC for further decisions about urgent or routine management [ 101 ]. Moreover, FIT is preferable to the gFOBT in terms of the detection rate, positive predictive value and participation rate [ 102 ]. Recent meta-analyses confirm that quantitative FIT is highly sensitive for CRC detection [ 103 ] and indicated that at a cut-off around 10 μg Hb/g faces has the potential to rule out CRC correctly and decrease colonoscopy rate in 75–80% of symptomatic patients [ 104 ]. Recommendation to routinely perform FIT in primary care in individuals with unexplained symptoms but no rectal bleeding who do not meet criteria for suspected CRC is currently not sufficiently evidenced [ 88 ]. However, recent research indicates that FIT performs exceptionally well to triage patients with low-risk CRC symptoms [ 105 ].

Endoscopy (colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy and rectoscope) is the basis for a diagnosis of CRC. It allows tumors to be detected, samples to be taken, and the rest of the bowel to be inspected. Flexible sigmoidoscopy allows visualization of the left-side colon and, if necessary and possible, remove polyps. It does not require thorough patient preparation for the examination as colonoscopy and can be performed by physicians and non-physicians [ 98 ]. Diagnosis by colonoscopy is the procedure with the highest sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer. Colonoscopy makes it possible to assess the entire large intestine and the terminal part of the small intestine. During the examination, it is possible to take a biopsy and then have the material evaluated histopathologically [ 106 ]. High-quality baseline colonoscopy has to meet adequate bowel preparation criteria, complete examination to the cecum, attention to complete polyp excision and performed by a colonoscopist with acceptable adenoma detection rate [ 107 ]. Further scheduling of surveillance colonoscopies depends on the results of the number and size of polyps and adenomas detected during baseline colonoscopy [ 107 ]. New methods such as artificial intelligence are implemented in colonoscopy to support and improve its effectiveness in detecting and assessing colorectal polyps. A computer-aided diagnostic system (CAD) that uses deep-learning technology can accurately determine polyp histology (from 63.8–71.8% to 82.7–84.2%) and may facilitate endoscopist diagnosis [ 108 ]. Additionally, results of deep neural network demonstrated better polyps detection with using narrow-band imaging than white light endoscopy (WLE) (accuracy 95% vs. 74%) and using the two-channel red plus green images than full-color WLE images (74% vs.91%) [ 109 ].

As invasive endoscopy tools are the ideal methods for detecting cancer at an earlier curable stage and removing the precancerous adenomas, some non-invasive methods are accessible to the whole visualization colon with good sensitivity and specificity; however, it does not allow biopsy during imaging. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) can be used as an alternative to colonoscopy in screening patients at moderate CRC risk when conventional colonoscopy cannot be performed or is contraindicated or rejected by patients. First-generation CCE has low-quality evidence that would deceive a good sensitivity and specificity for detecting CRC polyps and has a good safety profile [ 110 ]. However, the sensitivity in the detection of polyps >6 mm and >10 mm increased substantially between the development of its first-generation and second-generation [ 111 ], which has a wider angle of view and an adaptive frame rate dependent on the speed of passage of the capsule into the colon [ 112 ]. Despite CEE having a good accuracy in detecting polyps and colorectal cancer among high- and middle-risk patients [ 113 ], it is not recommended as a first-line screening or diagnostic method for CRC [ 114 ].

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is a non-invasive, rapid radiographic imagining test. The patient’s preparation for the examination is the same as for colonoscopy, and the examination itself is not very pleasant due to the discomfort caused by the insufflation procedure [ 106 ]. High-quality evidence supports its strong recommendation as an acceptable and equally sensitive radiological examination alternative for the CRC diagnosis for patients with and without alarm symptoms [ 111 ]. This method’s overall sensitivity is comparable to that of colonoscopy but is significantly lower for detecting polyps <8 mm [ 106 ].

Routine imaging-based diagnosis often limits the detection of cancer due to its small size or difficulty in separating it from soft tissues, which is particularly important for diagnosing metastases and assessing response to treatment [ 115 ]. A clinical challenge important for selecting and planning an appropriate management and treatment strategy is to perform a comprehensive clinical analysis that includes the use of the most recent imaging techniques combined with the assessment of tumor biomarkers and genetic features of the tumor [ 115 ]. The detection level of most conventional imagining techniques is insufficient to detect metastases. New techniques such as diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI) or fibroblast activation protein inhibitor–positron emission tomography (FAPI-PET) is prospective due to high specificity and sensitivity, also in the case of extraperitoneal lesions [ 115 , 116 , 117 , 118 ].

An important marker that was supposed to help detect or predict the stadium of CRC is the carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) concentration. A study in patients with abdominal symptoms, who have been ruled out after a complete colonoscopy, provides that CEA should not be considered to assist in the triage of patients with CRC [ 119 ]. The correlation between CEA levels and level of the tumor differentiation, diameter and staging is weak. In the majority of patients with and without colorectal cancer CEA levels may be within normal limits. Therefore, on this basis, it would not be ruled out the colorectal cancer diagnosis, and these patients should be investigated in detail [ 120 ]. Additionally, the preoperative serum level cannot indicate the specific stage and histopathological size of the CRC [ 121 ]. However, the CEA seems to be of substantial importance as a predictive and prognostic marker of relevance for choosing targeted therapy and for overall and progression-free survival in some types of CRC [ 122 , 123 , 124 ].

Once CRC is confirmed by histopathological examination, further diagnosis is determined individually depending on its findings. Additional diagnostics include imaging studies to assess the local stage, the presence of enlarged lymph nodes and distant metastases and the risk of obstruction. Additionally, based on the presence or absence of specific genetic biomarkers, individualized chemotherapy can be introduced, the efficacy of which may be higher compared to a standard procedure. In colon and rectal cancer appropriate for resection (non-metastatic), chest, abdominal, pelvic computed tomography (CT), pelvic magnetic resonance imagining (MRI), complete blood count, chemistry profile and CEA, enterostomal therapist as indicated for the preoperative marking of the site [ 125 ] and in rectal cancer proctoscopy endorectal ultrasound (if MRI is contraindicated or for superficial lesions) have to be considered [ 99 ]. In both colon and rectal cancer, the positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) scan is not indicated, and in appropriate patients, fertility risk should be discussed [ 99 , 126 ]. In case of suspicion or proven metastatic synchronous adenocarcinoma (any T or N, and M1) the diagnosis should be extended by determination of tumor gene status for KRAS and B-RAF mutation and/or HER2 amplifications, testing microsatellite instability (MSI) and mismatch repair (MMR) and consider PET-CT scan (skull base to mid-thigh) and MRI od liver [ 99 , 125 ].

KRAS and BRAF encode a small G protein and a Ser/Thr protein kinase. They take part in regulating the mitogenic signaling cascade of the RAS/RAF/mitogenic-activated protein kinase (MAPK) or PI3K (phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase) pathways, which are activated by the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). EGFR is responsible for stimulates critical processes involved in tumor growth and progression, including proliferation, angiogenesis, invasion and metastasis [ 127 ]. Mutations in the KRAS and B-RAF genes lead to hence constitutive activation of RAS/RAF proteins despite EGFR activation is blocked, and are considered to be an early event in CRC carcinogenesis with presence in about 20–50% cases [ 127 , 128 ]. A polymorphic tandem repeats of short nucleotide sequences distributed through the genome are microsatellites. These sequences are particularly prone to mutation due to polymerase errors, leading to frameshifts and base-pair substitutions during replication of DNA, resulting in shortening or extension of microsatellite regions in neoplastic cells. Mutation or silencing of MMR genes (such as MSH2, MSH6, PMS2 and MLH1) may cause MSI [ 129 , 130 , 131 ]. Patients with advanced CRC lacking KRAS or B-RAF mutations will prefer anti-EGFR therapy. In contrast, standard therapy based on 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) will be predisposed by testing for the presence or absence of chromosome deletions 18q and determining the tumor phenotype based on microsatellite instability (MSI) or microsatellite stability (MSS) [ 128 , 129 , 130 ].

In recent years, researchers have been working extensively to identify new biomarkers for the non-invasive diagnosis of CRC. Still, they currently may be considered as universal one about to predict the risk of invasion, metastasis occurrence or resistance to specific therapeutic regimens [ 132 ] and can be successfully translated into clinical practice [ 133 ]. There are a vast number of candidates for diagnostic biomarkers, depending on their types.

Abnormally methylated genes may affect the function of DNA repair (MGMT), apoptosis (BNIP3, DAPK and PCDH10), cell migration (vimentin and TIMP3), proliferation (CDKN2A, IGF2, MYOD1, RARβ2, SFRP1 and SFRP2), and differentiation (NDRG4), transcriptional regulation (GATA4 and TFAP2E) and others, and support prediction of clinical outcomes, such as treatment and survival prognosis, metastasis occurrence and therapy-resistant [ 134 , 135 ].

Protein biomarkers allow detecting CRC (MST1, serpin family, SEPT 9, leucine-rich alpha-2-glycoprotein 1, EGFR and inter-alpha-trypsin inhibitor heavy-chain family member 4) [ 133 , 136 ], staging existing cancer [ 137 ] and predict response for specific treatment (pEGFR for cetuximab response and PCBP1 and Cdk5 for oxaliplatin resistance) [ 133 ].

Detection of tumor circulating DNA (ctDNA) from dead cancer cells in body fluids may be applied to diagnosis, determine cancer type and grade, prognosis reoccurrence and treatment response [ 138 ]. Liquid biopsies like ctDNA are useful in detecting local tumors and distant metastatic, their types and non-invasive procedure [ 138 , 139 ]. However, these examinations are much adequate for high mutational burden tumors and associated with high false-positive/negative results [ 139 ]. The recent systematic review indicates that epigenetic ctDNA markers are potentially the most promising blood-based assay for CRC detection [ 140 ], and a high sensitivity and specificity screening test ctDNA SEPT9 methylation was approved to use. It is superior to CEA and FIT tests in asymptomatic population screening [ 141 ] and may be effectively used to exclude normal subjects [ 142 ].

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are non-coding, endogenous, single-stranded RNA of 18–25 nucleotides length and can adversely regulate gene expression in the mechanism promoting the inhibition at the translation level or leading to the degradation of target mRNAs [ 143 ]. Differential expressions of various exosomal miRNAs, both alone and in panels, may constitute a potential biomarker for CRC diagnosis, making possible earlier diagnoses and a more personalized approach. Their role in clinical practice can be associated with diagnostic (miR-329, miR-181a, miR-199b, miR-382, miR-215 and miR-21), also in the early-stage (miR-125a-3p, miR-320c and miRNA-486-5p), prognostic (miR-181a-5p, miR-18a-5p and miR-18b-5p), tumor growth (miR-21, miR-23a, miR-92a and miR-1246) or predictive risk for high risk adenomas to transform in CRC (miR-21, miR-29a, miR-92a and miR-135b) and prognosis place of metastasis (miR-548c-5p and miR-328), predictive for adjuvant treatment and recurrence (miR-4772-3p) or stratification for chemotherapy (miR-21) [ 144 ]. Circulating miRNAs as novel biomarkers remain several challenges to be overcome before their clinical application. A further investigation regarding the origin and biological function of miRNAs is needed. Additionally, an explanation of the mechanisms through which miRNAs might be involved in the resistance to chemotherapy and other targeted therapies is required [ 145 ].

There has been an increased attempt to clarify the relationships between gut microbiota and colorectal cancer. Research results indicate that assessing different microbiota-related biomarkers may be a helpful non-invasive tool in CRC preventing, diagnosing and even treating. Some reviews and meta-analyses reported that specific species and gut bacterial dysbiosis might be related to CRC occurrence and observed in CRC patients and animal models [ 146 ]. As mentioned above, gut dysbiosis with high pathogenic microbiota metabolic activity may lead to deconjugation of bile acids and an increase in the level of secondary bile acids, e.g., deoxycholic acid, with an exert carcinogenic activity. Additionally, procarcinogenic and enterotoxin metabolites, such as sulfides, ammonia, phenols and nitrosamines, produced on the path of bacterial protein fermentation, amino acids degradation or reduction of dietary sulfate might be involved in CRC development [ 146 ]. In addition, gut microbes’ metabolic products may trigger inflammation response, produce reactive oxygen species, toxins or mediators (such as tumor necrosis factor alfa, interleukin-6 and cytokines), which may cause DNA damage and induced dysfunction or damage to epithelial cells [ 58 ]. High prevalence of Fusobacterium nucleatum [ 147 ], Parvimonas micra ATCC 33270, Streptococcus anginosus , Parabacteroides distasonis and other members of Proteobacteria were detected in samples of CRC and adenomas patients and present high discriminatory capacity in diagnosis [ 148 ]. In turn, bacterial as F. nucleatum [ 149 , 150 , 151 ] and Bacteroides fragilis were related with worse prognosis, while Faecalibacterium prausnitzii were common in the survival group [ 150 ]. A fascinating insight is that in F. nucleatum and B. fragilis high abundance group, KRAS and BRAF expression were more noticeable [ 150 ]. Recent work has suggested that fecal microbial composition and metabolites can module the response to chemotherapy or immunotherapy [ 152 ]. These opportunities might be related to stem cell transplantation’s effectiveness and modulating response to immunotherapy and treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Microbial manipulation in the clinical setting by administrating targeted design probiotics may reduce proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines and locally alter immunity that positively impacts cancer therapies results [ 152 ]. Promising results are presented in the work of Poore et al. [ 153 ], in which using blood microbial DNA allows high cancer type discrimination between cancer and healthy patients. Assessment of microbial blood-based DNA in patients’ plasma, soon, may become a tool with a great potential for scheduling adequate treatment and expected therapeutic response [ 139 ]. However, there is insufficient evidence to recommend a microbiome-based test in place currently-used FIT or gFOBT as a non-invasive and inexpensive diagnostic tool in population-based screening programs [ 154 ]. Due to wide variability in bacterial species that may cause CRC, experts representing various fields need to collaborate to develop an inhibition strategy before progression to the neoplastic stage.

7. Conclusions

Further clinical studies are needed to understand the mechanisms of carcinogenesis, the impact of lifestyle, behavioral, environmental and genetic factors, or the synergistic action of the different aspects to increase preventive/treatment efficacy and patient survival with CRC.

Moreover, researchers are still searching for new tumor markers useful for diagnosis in primary and secondary care, but despite promising results, the evidence to date is insufficient. The ongoing research is critical to developing future strategies to control the burden of this disease through population-based prevention initiatives and demonstrates areas for further improvements in multidisciplinary cooperation.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, T.S.; writing—original draft preparation, T.S., M.R., A.D., E.N., T.A., K.E.P.; writing—review and editing, T.S., M.R., A.D.; visualization, T.S., M.R., T.A.; supervision, T.A., K.E.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • View all journals
  • Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts
  • Review Article
  • Published: 21 July 2023

The global burden of lung cancer: current status and future trends

  • Amanda Leiter   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9072-5512 1 ,
  • Rajwanth R. Veluswamy 2 , 4 &
  • Juan P. Wisnivesky 3  

Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology volume  20 ,  pages 624–639 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

6602 Accesses

23 Citations

6 Altmetric

Metrics details

  • Cancer epidemiology
  • Health policy
  • Non-small-cell lung cancer
  • Public health

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. However, lung cancer incidence and mortality rates differ substantially across the world, reflecting varying patterns of tobacco smoking, exposure to environmental risk factors and genetics. Tobacco smoking is the leading risk factor for lung cancer. Lung cancer incidence largely reflects trends in smoking patterns, which generally vary by sex and economic development. For this reason, tobacco control campaigns are a central part of global strategies designed to reduce lung cancer mortality. Environmental and occupational lung cancer risk factors, such as unprocessed biomass fuels, asbestos, arsenic and radon, can also contribute to lung cancer incidence in certain parts of the world. Over the past decade, large-cohort clinical studies have established that low-dose CT screening reduces lung cancer mortality, largely owing to increased diagnosis and treatment at earlier disease stages. These data have led to recommendations that individuals with a high risk of lung cancer undergo screening in several economically developed countries and increased implementation of screening worldwide. In this Review, we provide an overview of the global epidemiology of lung cancer. Lung cancer risk factors and global risk reduction efforts are also discussed. Finally, we summarize lung cancer screening policies and their implementation worldwide.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death globally, with incidence and mortality trends varying greatly by country and largely reflecting differences in tobacco smoking trends.

Cigarette smoking is the most prevalent lung cancer risk factor, although environmental exposures, such as biomass fuels, asbestos, arsenic and radon, are all important lung factor risk factors with levels of exposure that vary widely across the globe.

Lung cancer incidence and mortality rates are highest in economically developed countries in which tobacco smoking peaked several decades ago, although these rates have mostly now peaked and are declining.

Reductions in lung cancer mortality in economically developed countries reflect decreased incidence (mirroring declines in tobacco smoking) and improvements in treatment of patients with advanced-stage disease, including immunotherapies and targeted therapies.

In low-income and middle-income countries at the later stages of the tobacco epidemic, both lung cancer incidence and mortality are increasing, thus highlighting the importance of tobacco mitigation policies for reducing the global burden of lung cancer.

Low-dose CT-based lung cancer screening reduces lung cancer mortality, although adoption of lung cancer screening programmes has been slow, with limited uptake compared with other cancer screening programmes.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 print issues and online access

195,33 € per year

only 16,28 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

research in cancer epidemiology

Sung, H. et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J. Clin. 71 , 209–249 (2021).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Travis, W. D., Brambilla, E., Burke, A. P., Marx, A. & Nicholson, A. G. WHO Classification of Tumours of the Lung, Pleura, Thymus and Heart (IARC, 2015).

Schabath, M. B. & Cote, M. L. Cancer progress and priorities: lung cancer. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 28 , 1563–1579 (2019).

Article   Google Scholar  

Lortet-Tieulent, J. et al. International trends in lung cancer incidence by histological subtype: adenocarcinoma stabilizing in men but still increasing in women. Lung Cancer 84 , 13–22 (2014).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Wakelee, H. A. et al. Lung cancer incidence in never smokers. J. Clin. Oncol. 25 , 472–478 (2007).

United Nations Development Programme. Human development report 2021-22. UNDP http://report.hdr.undp.org (2022).

Jemal, A., Ma, J., Rosenberg, P. S., Siegel, R. & Anderson, W. F. Increasing lung cancer death rates among young women in southern and midwestern states. J. Clin. Oncol. 30 , 2739–2744 (2012).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Jemal, A. et al. Higher lung cancer incidence in young women than young men in the united states. N. Engl. J. Med. 378 , 1999–2009 (2018).

Islami, F. et al. Proportion and number of cancer cases and deaths attributable to potentially modifiable risk factors in the United states. CA Cancer J. Clin. 68 , 31–54 (2018).

Siegel, D. A., Fedewa, S. A., Henley, S. J., Pollack, L. A. & Jemal, A. Proportion of never smokers among men and women with lung cancer in 7 US states. JAMA Oncol. 7 , 302–304 (2021).

Sakoda, L. C. et al. Trends in smoking-specific lung cancer incidence rates within a US integrated health system, 2007-2018. Chest https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2023.03.016 (2023).

Pelosof, L. et al. Proportion of never-smoker non-small cell lung cancer patients at three diverse institutions. J. Natl Cancer Inst. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djw295 (2017).

Meza, R., Meernik, C., Jeon, J. & Cote, M. L. Lung cancer incidence trends by gender, race and histology in the United States, 1973-2010. PLoS ONE 10 , e0121323 (2015).

Haiman, C. A. et al. Ethnic and racial differences in the smoking-related risk of lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 354 , 333–342 (2006).

Murphy, S. E. Biochemistry of nicotine metabolism and its relevance to lung cancer. J. Biol. Chem. 296 , 100722 (2021).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Siegel, R. L., Miller, K. D., Fuchs, H. E. & Jemal, A. Cancer statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J. Clin. 71 , 7–33 (2021).

Siegel, R. L., Miller, K. D., Fuchs, H. E. & Jemal, A. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J. Clin. 72 , 7–33 (2022).

Howlader, N. et al. The effect of advances in lung-cancer treatment on population mortality. N. Engl. J. Med. 383 , 640–649 (2020).

Singh, G. K. & Jemal, A. Socioeconomic and racial/ethnic disparities in cancer mortality, incidence, and survival in the United States, 1950-2014: over six decades of changing patterns and widening inequalities. J. Environ. Public Health 2017 , 2819372 (2017).

Blom, E. F., Ten Haaf, K., Arenberg, D. A. & de Koning, H. J. Disparities in receiving guideline-concordant treatment for lung cancer in the United States. Ann. Am. Thorac. Soc. 17 , 186–194 (2020).

Sineshaw, H. M. et al. County-level variations in receipt of surgery for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer in the United States. Chest 157 , 212–222 (2020).

GBD 2019 Tobacco Collaborators. Spatial, temporal, and demographic patterns in prevalence of smoking tobacco use and attributable disease burden in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet 397 , 2337–2360 (2021).

Allemani, C. et al. Global surveillance of trends in cancer survival 2000-14 (CONCORD-3): analysis of individual records for 37 513 025 patients diagnosed with one of 18 cancers from 322 population-based registries in 71 countries. Lancet 391 , 1023–1075 (2018).

Jani, C. et al. Lung cancer mortality in Europe and the USA between 2000 and 2017: an observational analysis. ERJ Open. Res. https://doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00311-2021 (2021).

Malvezzi, M. et al. European cancer mortality predictions for the year 2023 with focus on lung cancer. Ann. Oncol. 34 , 410–419 (2023).

Carioli, G. et al. European cancer mortality predictions for the year 2020 with a focus on prostate cancer. Ann. Oncol. 31 , 650–658 (2020).

Alves, L., Bastos, J. & Lunet, N. Trends in lung cancer mortality in Portugal (1955-2005). Rev. Port. Pneumol. 15 , 575–587 (2009).

Martínez, C., Guydish, J., Robinson, G., Martínez-Sánchez, J. M. & Fernández, E. Assessment of the smoke-free outdoor regulation in the WHO European region. Prev. Med. 64 , 37–40 (2014).

Forsea, A. M. Cancer registries in Europe – going forward is the only option. Ecancermedicalscience 10 , 641 (2016).

Cho, B. C. et al. Genomic landscape of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in East Asia using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in clinical practice. Curr. Oncol. 29 , 2154–2164 (2022).

Mathias, C. et al. Lung cancer in Brazil. J. Thorac. Oncol. 15 , 170–175 (2020).

Souza, M. C., Vasconcelos, A. G. & Cruz, O. G. Trends in lung cancer mortality in Brazil from the 1980s into the early 21st century: age-period-cohort analysis. Cad. Saude Publica 28 , 21–30 (2012).

Jiang, D. et al. Trends in cancer mortality in China from 2004 to 2018: a nationwide longitudinal study. Cancer Commun. 41 , 1024–1036 (2021).

Parascandola, M. & Xiao, L. Tobacco and the lung cancer epidemic in China. Transl. Lung Cancer Res. 8 , S21–S30 (2019).

Hosgood, H. D. 3rd et al. In-home coal and wood use and lung cancer risk: a pooled analysis of the International Lung Cancer Consortium. Env. Health Perspect. 118 , 1743–1747 (2010).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Kurmi, O. P., Arya, P. H., Lam, K. B., Sorahan, T. & Ayres, J. G. Lung cancer risk and solid fuel smoke exposure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. Respir. J. 40 , 1228–1237 (2012).

Qiu, A. Y., Leng, S., McCormack, M., Peden, D. B. & Sood, A. Lung effects of household air pollution. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. Pract. 10 , 2807–2819 (2022).

Zhang, M. et al. Trends in smoking prevalence in urban and rural China, 2007 to 2018: findings from 5 consecutive nationally representative cross-sectional surveys. PLoS Med. 19 , e1004064 (2022).

Pineros, M., Znaor, A., Mery, L. & Bray, F. A global cancer surveillance framework within noncommunicable disease surveillance: making the case for population-based cancer registries. Epidemiol. Rev. 39 , 161–169 (2017).

Wei, W. et al. Cancer registration in China and its role in cancer prevention and control. Lancet Oncol. 21 , e342–e349 (2020).

Mathur, P. et al. Cancer statistics, 2020: report from National Cancer Registry Programme, India. JCO Glob. Oncol. 6 , 1063–1075 (2020).

Nath, A., Sathishkumar, K., Das, P., Sudarshan, K. L. & Mathur, P. A clinicoepidemiological profile of lung cancers in India – results from the National Cancer Registry Programme. Indian J. Med. Res. 155 , 264–272 (2022).

Singh, N. et al. Lung cancer in India. J. Thorac. Oncol. 16 , 1250–1266 (2021).

Kaur, H. et al. Evolving epidemiology of lung cancer in India: reducing non-small cell lung cancer–not otherwise specified and quantifying tobacco smoke exposure are the key. Indian J. Cancer 54 , 285–290 (2017).

Mohan, A. et al. Clinical profile of lung cancer in North India: a 10-year analysis of 1862 patients from a tertiary care center. Lung India 37 , 190–197 (2020).

Shaikh, R., Janssen, F. & Vogt, T. The progression of the tobacco epidemic in India on the national and regional level, 1998-2016. BMC Public Health 22 , 317 (2022).

India State-Level Disease Burden Initiative Cancer Collaborators. The burden of cancers and their variations across the states of India: the Global Burden of Disease Study 1990–2016. Lancet Oncol. 19 , 1289–1306 (2022).

Google Scholar  

& Piñeros, M. et al. An updated profile of the cancer burden, patterns and trends in Latin America and the Caribbean. Lancet Reg. Health Am. 13 , 100294 (2022).

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Raez, L. E. et al. The burden of lung cancer in Latin-America and challenges in the access to genomic profiling, immunotherapy and targeted treatments. Lung Cancer 119 , 7–13 (2018).

Pakzad, R., Mohammadian-Hafshejani, A., Ghoncheh, M., Pakzad, I. & Salehiniya, H. The incidence and mortality of lung cancer and their relationship to development in Asia. Transl. Lung Cancer Res. 4 , 763–774 (2015).

Hamdi, Y. et al. Cancer in Africa: the untold story. Front. Oncol. 11 , 650117 (2021).

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. What are the risk factors for lung cancer? CDC https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/lung/basic_info/risk_factors.htm (2022).

Peto, R. et al. Smoking, smoking cessation, and lung cancer in the UK since 1950: combination of national statistics with two case-control studies. Br. Med. J. 321 , 323–329 (2000).

Boffetta, P. et al. Cigar and pipe smoking and lung cancer risk: a multicenter study from Europe. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 91 , 697–701 (1999).

Pednekar, M. S., Gupta, P. C., Yeole, B. B. & Hébert, J. R. Association of tobacco habits, including bidi smoking, with overall and site-specific cancer incidence: results from the Mumbai cohort study. Cancer Causes Control. 22 , 859–868 (2011).

Proctor, R. N. The history of the discovery of the cigarette–lung cancer link: evidentiary traditions, corporate denial, global toll. Tob. Control. 21 , 87–91 (2012).

Doll, R. & Hill, A. B. The mortality of doctors in relation to their smoking habits. Br. Med. J. 1 , 1451 (1954).

US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Smoking and health: report of the Advisory Committee to the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service (US Public Health Service, 1964).

Brawley, O. W., Glynn, T. J., Khuri, F. R., Wender, R. C. & Seffrin, J. R. The first Surgeon General’s report on smoking and health: the 50th anniversary. CA Cancer J. Clin. 64 , 5–8 (2014).

WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. 2021 global progress report on implementation of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC, 2022).

Oberg, M., Jaakkola, M. S., Woodward, A., Peruga, A. & Prüss-Ustün, A. Worldwide burden of disease from exposure to second-hand smoke: a retrospective analysis of data from 192 countries. Lancet 377 , 139–146 (2011).

Office on Smoking and Health. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: a Report of the Surgeon General (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2006).

Yousuf, H. et al. Estimated worldwide mortality attributed to secondhand tobacco smoke exposure, 1990-2016. JAMA Netw. Open 3 , e201177 (2020).

Bracken-Clarke, D. et al. Vaping and lung cancer – a review of current data and recommendations. Lung Cancer 153 , 11–20 (2021).

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Trends in tobacco use among youth. CDC https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/trends-in-tobacco-use-among-youth.html (2022).

Sindelar, J. L. Regulating vaping – policies, possibilities, and perils. N. Engl. J. Med. 382 , e54 (2020).

Campus, B., Fafard, P., St Pierre, J. & Hoffman, S. J. Comparing the regulation and incentivization of e-cigarettes across 97 countries. Soc. Sci. Med. 291 , 114187 (2021).

Bruce, N. et al. Does household use of biomass fuel cause lung cancer? A systematic review and evaluation of the evidence for the GBD 2010 study. Thorax 70 , 433–441 (2015).

Woolley, K. E. et al. Effectiveness of interventions to reduce household air pollution from solid biomass fuels and improve maternal and child health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review protocol. Syst. Rev. 10 , 33 (2021).

Johnston, F. H. et al. Estimated global mortality attributable to smoke from landscape fires. Environ. Health Perspect. 120 , 695–701 (2012).

Korsiak, J. et al. Long-term exposure to wildfires and cancer incidence in Canada: a population-based observational cohort study. Lancet Planet. Health 6 , e400–e409 (2022).

Rousseau, M.-C., Straif, K. & Siemiatycki, J. IARC carcinogen update. Environ. Health Perspect. 113 , A580–A581 (2005).

Yuan, T., Zhang, H., Chen, B., Zhang, H. & Tao, S. Association between lung cancer risk and inorganic arsenic concentration in drinking water: a dose-response meta-analysis. Toxicol. Res. 7 , 1257–1266 (2018).

Shankar, S., Shanker, U. & Shikha Arsenic contamination of groundwater: a review of sources, prevalence, health risks, and strategies for mitigation. Sci. World J. 2014 , 304524 (2014).

D’Ippoliti, D. et al. Arsenic in drinking water and mortality for cancer and chronic diseases in central Italy, 1990-2010. PLoS ONE 10 , e0138182 (2015).

Ferdosi, H. et al. Arsenic in drinking water and lung cancer mortality in the United States: an analysis based on US counties and 30 years of observation (1950-1979). J. Environ. Public Health 2016 , 1602929 (2016).

Ferreccio, C. et al. Arsenic, tobacco smoke, and occupation: associations of multiple agents with lung and bladder cancer. Epidemiol 24 , 898–905 (2013).

Wu, M. M., Kuo, T. L., Hwang, Y. H. & Chen, C. J. Dose-response relation between arsenic concentration in well water and mortality from cancers and vascular diseases. Am. J. Epidemiol. 130 , 1123–1132 (1989).

Oberoi, S., Barchowsky, A. & Wu, F. The global burden of disease for skin, lung, and bladder cancer caused by arsenic in food. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 23 , 1187–1194 (2014).

UNICEF. Arsenic Primer: Guidance on the Investigation and Mitigation of Arsenic Contamination (UNICEF, 2018).

Turner, M. C. et al. Radon and lung cancer in the American Cancer Society Cohort. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 20 , 438–448 (2011).

Ngoc, L. T. N., Park, D. & Lee, Y. C. Human health impacts of residential radon exposure: updated systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control studies. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 20 , 97 (2012).

Shan, X. et al. A global burden assessment of lung cancer attributed to residential radon exposure during 1990-2019. Indoor Air 32 , e13120 (2022).

World Health Organization. WHO Handbook on Indoor Radon: a Public Health Perspective (WHO, 2009).

US Environmental Protection Agency. The national radon action plan – a strategy for saving lives. EPA https://www.epa.gov/radon/national-radon-action-plan-strategy-saving-lives (2023).

IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. A Review of Human Carcinogens. Part F: Chemical Agents and Related Occupations (IARC, 2012).

Pira, E., Donato, F., Maida, L. & Discalzi, G. Exposure to asbestos: past, present and future. J. Thorac. Dis. 10 , S237–S245 (2018).

Villeneuve, P. J., Parent, M., Harris, S. A. & Johnson, K. C. Occupational exposure to asbestos and lung cancer in men: evidence from a population-based case-control study in eight Canadian provinces. BMC Cancer 12 , 595 (2012).

Lash, T. L., Crouch, E. A. & Green, L. C. A meta-analysis of the relation between cumulative exposure to asbestos and relative risk of lung cancer. Occup. Environ. Med. 54 , 254–263 (1997).

Nelson, H. H. & Kelsey, K. T. The molecular epidemiology of asbestos and tobacco in lung cancer. Oncogene 21 , 7284–7288 (2002).

Markowitz, S. B., Levin, S. M., Miller, A. & Morabia, A. Asbestos, asbestosis, smoking, and lung cancer. New findings from the North American Insulator cohort. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 188 , 90–96 (2013).

Mossman B. T., Gualtieri A. F. in Occupational Cancers (eds.Anttila S. & Boffetta P.) 239–256 (Springer, 2020).

Thives, L. P., Ghisi, E., Thives Júnior, J. J. & Vieira, A. S. Is asbestos still a problem in the world? A current review. J. Environ. Manag. 319 , 115716 (2022).

Benbrahim-Tallaa, L. et al. Carcinogenicity of diesel-engine and gasoline-engine exhausts and some nitroarenes. Lancet Oncol. 13 , 663–664 (2012).

Ge, C. et al. Diesel engine exhaust exposure, smoking, and lung cancer subtype risks. a pooled exposure-response analysis of 14 case-control studies. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 202 , 402–411 (2020).

Garshick, E. et al. Lung cancer and elemental carbon exposure in trucking industry workers. Env. Health Perspect. 120 , 1301–1306 (2012).

Silverman, D. T. et al. The diesel exhaust in miners study: a nested case-control study of lung cancer and diesel exhaust. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 104 , 855–868 (2012).

Vermeulen, R. et al. Exposure-response estimates for diesel engine exhaust and lung cancer mortality based on data from three occupational cohorts. Environ. Health Perspect. 122 , 172–177 (2024).

Young, R. P. et al. COPD prevalence is increased in lung cancer, independent of age, sex and smoking history. Eur. Respir. J. 34 , 380–386 (2009).

de Torres, J. P. et al. Lung cancer in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-incidence and predicting factors. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 184 , 913–919 (2011).

Durham, A. L. & Adcock, I. M. The relationship between COPD and lung cancer. Lung Cancer 90 , 121–127 (2015).

Young, R. P. et al. Individual and cumulative effects of GWAS susceptibility loci in lung cancer: associations after sub-phenotyping for COPD. PLoS ONE 6 , e16476 (2011).

Saber Cherif, L. et al. The nicotinic receptor polymorphism rs16969968 is associated with airway remodeling and inflammatory dysregulation in COPD patients. Cells 11 , 2937 (2022).

Sigel, K., Makinson, A. & Thaler, J. Lung cancer in persons with HIV. Curr. Opin. Hiv. AIDS 12 , 31–38 (2017).

Shiels, M. S., Cole, S. R., Mehta, S. H. & Kirk, G. D. Lung cancer incidence and mortality among HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected injection drug users. J. Acquir. Immune Defic. Syndr. 55 , 510–515 (2010).

Sigel, K. et al. HIV as an independent risk factor for incident lung cancer. AIDS 26 , 1017–1025 (2012).

Engels, E. A. et al. Elevated incidence of lung cancer among HIV-infected individuals. J. Clin. Oncol. 24 , 1383–1388 (2006).

Chaturvedi, A. K. et al. Elevated risk of lung cancer among people with AIDS. AIDS 21 , 207–213 (2007).

Kirk, G. D. et al. HIV infection is associated with an increased risk for lung cancer, independent of smoking. Clin. Infect. Dis. 45 , 103–110 (2007).

Parker, M. S., Leveno, D. M., Campbell, T. J., Worrell, J. A. & Carozza, S. E. AIDS-related bronchogenic carcinoma: fact or fiction? Chest 113 , 154–161 (1998).

Patel, P. et al. Incidence of types of cancer among HIV-infected persons compared with the general population in the United States, 1992-2003. Ann. Intern. Med. 148 , 728–736 (2008).

Winstone, T. A., Man, S. F., Hull, M., Montaner, J. S. & Sin, D. D. Epidemic of lung cancer in patients with HIV infection. Chest 143 , 305–314 (2013).

Hessol, N. A. et al. Lung cancer incidence and survival among HIV-infected and uninfected women and men. AIDS 29 , 1183–1193 (2015).

Bearz, A. et al. Lung cancer in HIV positive patients: the GICAT experience. Eur. Rev. Med. Pharmacol. Sci. 18 , 500–508 (2014).

CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

O’Connor, E. A. et al. Vitamin and mineral supplements for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and cancer: updated evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 327 , 2334–2347 (2022).

Wei, X. et al. Diet and risk of incident lung cancer: a large prospective cohort study in UK Biobank. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 114 , 2043–2051 (2021).

Xue, X. J. et al. Red and processed meat consumption and the risk of lung cancer: a dose-response meta-analysis of 33 published studies. Int. J. Clin. Exp. Med. 7 , 1542–1553 (2014).

Vieira, A. R. et al. Fruits, vegetables and lung cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann. Oncol. 27 , 81–96 (2016).

Amararathna, M., Johnston, M. R. & Rupasinghe, H. P. V. Plant polyphenols as chemopreventive agents for lung cancer. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 17 , 1352 (2016).

Alsharairi, N. A. The effects of dietary supplements on asthma and lung cancer risk in smokers and non-smokers: a review of the literature. Nutrients 11 , 725 (2016).

The Lung Cancer Cohort Consortium.Circulating folate, vitamin B6, and methionine in relation to lung cancer risk in the Lung Cancer Cohort Consortium (LC3). J. Natl Cancer Inst. 110 , 57–67 (2018).

Slatore, C. G., Littman, A. J., Au, D. H., Satia, J. A. & White, E. Long-term use of supplemental multivitamins, vitamin C, vitamin E, and folate does not reduce the risk of lung cancer. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 177 , 524–530 (2008).

Verbeek, J. H. et al. An approach to quantifying the potential importance of residual confounding in systematic reviews of observational studies: a GRADE concept paper. Environ. Int. 157 , 106868 (2021).

Cortés-Jofré, M., Rueda, J. R., Asenjo-Lobos, C., Madrid, E. & Bonfill Cosp, X. Drugs for preventing lung cancer in healthy people. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 3 , Cd002141 (2020).

PubMed   Google Scholar  

The Alpha-Tocopherol Beta Carotene Cancer Prevention Study Group. The effect of vitamin E and beta carotene on the incidence of lung cancer and other cancers in male smokers. N. Engl. J. Med. 330 , 1029–1035 (1994).

Omenn, G. S. et al. Effects of a combination of beta carotene and vitamin A on lung cancer and cardiovascular disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 334 , 1150–1155 (1996).

Pearson-Stuttard, J. et al. Worldwide burden of cancer attributable to diabetes and high body-mass index: a comparative risk assessment. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 6 , e6–e15 (2018).

Lennon, H., Sperrin, M., Badrick, E. & Renehan, A. G. The obesity paradox in cancer: a review. Curr. Oncol. Rep. 18 , 56 (2016).

Duan, P. et al. Body mass index and risk of lung cancer: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis. Sci. Rep. 5 , 16938 (2015).

Ardesch, F. H. et al. The obesity paradox in lung cancer: associations with body size versus body shape. Front. Oncol. 10 , 591110 (2020).

Yu, D. et al. Overall and central obesity and risk of lung cancer: a pooled analysis. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 110 , 831–842 (2018).

Leiter, A. et al. Assessing the association of diabetes with lung cancer risk. Transl. Lung Cancer Res. 10 , 4200–4208 (2021).

Yi, Z. H. et al. Association between diabetes mellitus and lung cancer: meta-analysis. Eur. J. Clin. Invest. 50 , e13332 (2020).

Carreras-Torres, R. et al. Obesity, metabolic factors and risk of different histological types of lung cancer: a Mendelian randomization study. PLoS ONE 12 , e0177875 (2017).

Dziadziuszko, R., Camidge, D. R. & Hirsch, F. R. The insulin-like growth factor pathway in lung cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol. 3 , 815–818 (2008).

Li, S. et al. Coexistence of EGFR with KRAS, or BRAF, or PIK3CA somatic mutations in lung cancer: a comprehensive mutation profiling from 5125 Chinese cohorts. Br. J. Cancer 110 , 2812–2820 (2014).

Kris, M. G. et al. Using multiplexed assays of oncogenic drivers in lung cancers to select targeted drugs. JAMA 311 , 1998–2006 (2014).

Zhang, Y. L. et al. The prevalence of EGFR mutation in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget 7 , 78985–78993 (2016).

Swanton, C. & Govindan, R. Clinical implications of genomic discoveries in lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 374 , 1864–1873 (2016).

AACR Project GENIE Consortium et al. AACR Project Genie: Powering precision medicine through an international consortium. Cancer Discov. 7 , 818–831 (2017).

Dogan, S. et al. Molecular epidemiology of EGFR and KRAS mutations in 3,026 lung adenocarcinomas: higher susceptibility of women to smoking-related KRAS-mutant cancers. Clin. Cancer Res. 18 , 6169–6177 (2012).

Etzel, C. J., Amos, C. I. & Spitz, M. R. Risk for smoking-related cancer among relatives of lung cancer patients. Cancer Res. 63 , 8531–8535 (2003).

Matakidou, A., Eisen, T. & Houlston, R. S. Systematic review of the relationship between family history and lung cancer risk. Br. J. Cancer 93 , 825–833 (2005).

Coté, M. L. et al. Increased risk of lung cancer in individuals with a family history of the disease: a pooled analysis from the International Lung Cancer Consortium. Eur. J. Cancer 48 , 1957–1968 (2012).

Mucci, L. A. et al. Familial risk and heritability of cancer among twins in Nordic countries. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 315 , 68–76 (2016).

Caron, O., Frebourg, T., Benusiglio, P. R., Foulon, S. & Brugières, L. Lung adenocarcinoma as part of the Li–Fraumeni syndrome spectrum: preliminary data of the LIFSCREEN randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 3 , 1736–1737 (2017).

Gazdar, A. et al. Hereditary lung cancer syndrome targets never smokers with germline EGFR gene T790M mutations. J. Thorac. Oncol. 9 , 456–463 (2014).

McKay, J. D. et al. Large-scale association analysis identifies new lung cancer susceptibility loci and heterogeneity in genetic susceptibility across histological subtypes. Nat. Genet. 49 , 1126–1132 (2017).

Klein, R. J. & Gümüş, Z. H. Are polygenic risk scores ready for the cancer clinic? – a perspective. Transl. Lung Cancer Res. 11 , 910–919 (2022).

Hung, R. J. et al. Assessing lung cancer absolute risk trajectory based on a polygenic risk model. Cancer Res. 81 , 1607–1615 (2021).

Dai, J. et al. Identification of risk loci and a polygenic risk score for lung cancer: a large-scale prospective cohort study in Chinese populations. Lancet Respir. Med. 7 , 881–891 (2019).

Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program. SEER*Stat Database: Incidence – SEER Research Data, 8 Registries, Nov 2021 Sub (1975-2020) – Linked To County Attributes – Time Dependent (1990–2020) Income/Rurality, 1969–2020 Counties. https://seer.cancer.gov/statistics-network/explorer (National Cancer Institute, 2023).

Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program. SEER*Stat Database: Mortality – All COD, Aggregated With State, Total U.S. (1969-2020), Katrina/Rita Population Adjustment. https://seer.cancer.gov/statistics-network/explorer (National Cancer Institute, 2022).

Paci, E. et al. Mortality, survival and incidence rates in the ITALUNG randomised lung cancer screening trial. Thorax 72 , 825–831 (2017).

Infante, M. et al. Long-term follow-up results of the DANTE trial, a randomized study of lung cancer screening with spiral computed tomography. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 191 , 1166–1175 (2015).

Saghir, Z. et al. CT screening for lung cancer brings forward early disease. The randomised Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial: status after five annual screening rounds with low-dose CT. Thorax 67 , 296–301 (2012).

Becker, N. et al. Lung cancer mortality reduction by LDCT screening – results from the randomized German LUSI trial. Int. J. Cancer 146 , 1503–1513 (2020).

de Koning, H. J. et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with volume CT screening in a randomized trial. N. Engl. J. Med. 382 , 503–513 (2020).

Aberle, D. R. et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N. Engl. J. Med. 365 , 395–409 (2011).

Krist, A. H. et al. Screening for lung cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 325 , 962–970 (2021).

Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. Recommendations on screening for lung cancer. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 188 , 425–432 (2016).

Oudkerk, M. et al. European position statement on lung cancer screening. Lancet Oncol. 18 , e754–e766 (2017).

UK National Screening Committee. Adult screening programme: lung cancer. GOV.UK https://view-health-screening-recommendations.service.gov.uk/lung-cancer/ (2022).

Bach, P. B. et al. Benefits and harms of CT screening for lung cancer: a systematic review. JAMA 307 , 2418–2429 (2012).

Japan Radiological Society The Japanese imaging guideline 2013. Japan Radiological Society http://www.radiology.jp/content/files/diagnostic_imaging_guidelines_2013_e.pdf (2013).

Zhou, Q. et al. China national lung cancer screening guideline with low-dose computed tomography (2018 version) [Chinese]. Zhongguo Fei Ai Za Zhi 21 , 67–75 (2018).

Jang, S. H. et al. The Korean guideline for lung cancer screening. J. Korean Med. Assoc. 58 , 291–301 (2015).

Triphuridet, N. & Henschke, C. Landscape on CT screening for lung cancer in Asia. Lung Cancer 10 , 107–124 (2019).

Sagawa, M., Nakayama, T., Tanaka, M., Sakuma, T. & Sobue, T. A randomized controlled trial on the efficacy of thoracic CT screening for lung cancer in non-smokers and smokers of <30 pack-years aged 50–64 years (JECS study): research design. Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol. 42 , 1219–1221 (2012).

dos Santos, R. S. et al. Do current lung cancer screening guidelines apply for populations with high prevalence of granulomatous disease? Results from the first Brazilian lung cancer screening trial (BRELT1). Ann. Thorac. Surg. 101 , 481–486 (2016).

Ministéro Saúde. Protocolos clínicos e diretrizes terapêuticas em oncologia. Ministéro Saúde https://www.gov.br/saude/pt-br/assuntos/protocolos-clinicos-e-diretrizes-terapeuticas-pcdt/arquivos/2014/livro-pcdt-oncologia-2014.pdf (2014).

Toumazis, I. et al. Cost-effectiveness evaluation of the 2021 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation for lung cancer screening. JAMA Oncol. 7 , 1833–1842 (2021).

Criss, S. D., Sheehan, D. F., Palazzo, L. & Kong, C. Y. Population impact of lung cancer screening in the United States: projections from a microsimulation model. PLoS Med. 15 , e1002506 (2018).

Kee, D., Wisnivesky, J. & Kale, M. S. Lung cancer screening uptake: analysis of BRFSS 2018. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 36 , 2897–2899 (2021).

Cao, W. et al. Uptake of lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography in China: a multi-centre population-based study. EClinicalMedicine 52 , 101594 (2022).

Quaife, S. L. et al. Lung screen uptake trial (LSUT): randomized controlled clinical trial testing targeted invitation materials. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 201 , 965–975 (2020).

National Cancer Institute. Breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers – early detection summary table. NIH https://progressreport.cancer.gov/tables/breast-cervical (2022).

Jonnalagadda, S. et al. Beliefs and attitudes about lung cancer screening among smokers. Lung Cancer 77 , 526–531 (2012).

Carter-Harris, L., Ceppa, D. P., Hanna, N. & Rawl, S. M. Lung cancer screening: what do long-term smokers know and believe? Health Expect. 20 , 59–68 (2017).

Gesthalter, Y. B. et al. Evaluations of implementation at early-adopting lung cancer screening programs: lessons learned. Chest 152 , 70–80 (2017).

Medicare. Lung cancer screenings. Medicare.gov https://www.medicare.gov/coverage/lung-cancer-screenings (2023).

Carter-Harris, L. & Gould, M. K. Multilevel barriers to the successful implementation of lung cancer screening: Why does it have to be so hard? Ann. Am. Thorac. Soc. 14 , 1261–1265 (2017).

Modin, H. E. et al. Pack-year cigarette smoking history for determination of lung cancer screening eligibility. comparison of the electronic medical record versus a shared decision-making conversation. Ann. Am. Thorac. Soc. 14 , 1320–1325 (2017).

American Lung Association. State of lung cancer. American Lung Association https://www.lung.org/research/state-of-lung-cancer (2022).

Jia, Q., Chen, H., Chen, X. & Tang, Q. Barriers to low-dose CT lung cancer screening among middle-aged Chinese. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020 17 , 7107 (2020).

Novellis, P. et al. Lung cancer screening: who pays? Who receives? The European perspectives. Transl. Lung Cancer Res. 10 , 2395–2406 (2021).

Crosbie, P. A. et al. Implementing lung cancer screening: baseline results from a community-based ‘Lung Health Check’ pilot in deprived areas of Manchester. Thorax 74 , 405–409 (2019).

Verghese, C., Redko, C. & Fink, B. Screening for lung cancer has limited effectiveness globally and distracts from much needed efforts to reduce the critical worldwide prevalence of smoking and related morbidity and mortality. J. Glob. Oncol. 4 , 1–7 (2018).

Shankar, A. et al. Feasibility of lung cancer screening in developing countries: challenges, opportunities and way forward. Transl. Lung Cancer Res. 8 , S106–S121 (2019).

Fitzgerald, R. C., Antoniou, A. C., Fruk, L. & Rosenfeld, N. The future of early cancer detection. Nat. Med. 28 , 666–677 (2022).

Liu, M. C., Oxnard, G. R., Klein, E. A., Swanton, C. & Seiden, M. V. Sensitive and specific multi-cancer detection and localization using methylation signatures in cell-free DNA. Ann. Oncol. 31 , 745–759 (2020).

Hubbell, E., Clarke, C. A., Aravanis, A. M. & Berg, C. D. Modeled reductions in late-stage cancer with a multi-cancer early detection test. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 30 , 460–468 (2021).

Hackshaw, A. et al. Estimating the population health impact of a multi-cancer early detection genomic blood test to complement existing screening in the US and UK. Br. J. Cancer 125 , 1432–1442 (2021).

Mouritzen, M. T. et al. Nationwide survival benefit after implementation of first-line immunotherapy for patients with advanced NSCLC – real world efficacy. Cancers 13 , 4846 (2021).

Smeltzer, M. P. et al. The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer global survey on molecular testing in lung cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol. 15 , 1434–1448 (2020).

Febbraro, M. et al. Barriers to access: global variability in implementing treatment advances in lung cancer. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. Educ. Book 42 , 1–7 (2022).

US Environmental Protection Agency. Learn about impacts of diesel exhaust and the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA). EPA https://www.epa.gov/dera/learn-about-impacts-diesel-exhaust-and-diesel-emissions-reduction-act-dera (2023).

Ervik, M. et al. Global Cancer Observatory: Cancer Over Time ( International Agency for Research on Cancer, accessed 1 May 2022); https://gco.iarc.fr/overtime .

Soda, M. et al. Identification of the transforming EML4–ALK fusion gene in non-small-cell lung cancer. Nature 448 , 561–566 (2007).

Shaw, A. T. et al. Clinical features and outcome of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer who harbor EML4-ALK. J. Clin. Oncol. 27 , 4247–4253 (2009).

Kim, H. R. et al. Distinct clinical features and outcomes in never-smokers with nonsmall cell lung cancer who harbor EGFR or KRAS mutations or ALK rearrangement. Cancer 118 , 729–739 (2012).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Bone Diseases, Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA

Amanda Leiter

Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA

Rajwanth R. Veluswamy

Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA

Juan P. Wisnivesky

Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors made a substantial contribution to all aspects of the preparation of this manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amanda Leiter .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

R.V. has acted as an adviser and/or consultant to AstraZeneca, Beigene, BerGenBio, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Novartis, Novocure and Regeneron, and has received research grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Onconova Therapeutics. J.P.W. has acted as an adviser and/or consultant to Atea, Banook, PPD and Sanofi and has received research grants from Arnold Consultants, Regeneron and Sanofi. A.L. declares no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information.

Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology thanks D. Christiani and the other, anonymous reviewers for the peer-review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Leiter, A., Veluswamy, R.R. & Wisnivesky, J.P. The global burden of lung cancer: current status and future trends. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 20 , 624–639 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41571-023-00798-3

Download citation

Accepted : 20 June 2023

Published : 21 July 2023

Issue Date : September 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41571-023-00798-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Advancing accuracy in breath testing for lung cancer: strategies for improving diagnostic precision in imbalanced data.

  • Ke-Cheng Chen
  • Shuenn-Wen Kuo
  • Hsiao-Yu Yang

Respiratory Research (2024)

Lung cancer in patients who have never smoked — an emerging disease

  • Jaclyn LoPiccolo
  • Alexander Gusev
  • Pasi A. Jänne

Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology (2024)

Developing a clinical-radiomic prediction model for 3-year cancer-specific survival in lung cancer patients treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy

  • Bao-Tian Huang
  • Pei-Xian Lin

Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology (2024)

Circulating cytokine signatures as a soluble biomarker of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy in non-small-cell lung cancer

  • Tetsuro Sasada

Genes & Immunity (2023)

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Cancer newsletter — what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly.

research in cancer epidemiology

IMAGES

  1. (PDF) A quick guide to cancer epidemiology

    research in cancer epidemiology

  2. epidemiology of lung cancer 2021 American cancer society 2021

    research in cancer epidemiology

  3. (PDF) The Epidemiology of Cancer

    research in cancer epidemiology

  4. Epidemiology of breast cancer

    research in cancer epidemiology

  5. Incidence and mortality of different types of cancer in both men and

    research in cancer epidemiology

  6. How do the distribution of cancer looks like (Epidemiology)?

    research in cancer epidemiology

COMMENTS

  1. Expanding Research in Cancer Epidemiology in Journal of Clinical

    Cancer epidemiology is the study of the causes of cancer and the evaluation of outcomes in defined population groups. As a population science, epidemiology plays an important role in cancer prevention and control with discoveries leading to improved guidelines, practices, and policies with wide-reaching public health impact.

  2. Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics

    Research Tools. We have created many tools for study design and planning, analysis, and risk assessment. Exposure assessment tools and methods developed by DCEG experts to measure exposures for diet and activity, occupation and environment, radiation, and more. NCIDose is a collection of medical radiation dosimetry tools developed by medical ...

  3. Cancer epidemiology

    Cancer epidemiology is the study of the distribution and determinants of the likelihood of cancer development. Cancer epidemiology can be used to identify events that increase or decrease...

  4. Volume 33 Issue 2

    The authors focused on patients diagnosed with female breast cancer, chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), colon and rectum cancer, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), lung cancer, or melanoma between 1975 and 2018 from nine SEER cancer registries. Over 2 million patients were diagnosed with one of the six cancers between 1975 and 2018.

  5. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention

    Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention publishes articles featuring population-based research on cancer etiology, prevention, surveillance, survivorship, and cancer health disparities—with a particular focus on articles with a transdisciplinary approach. Read More About the Journal Editor-in-Chief Elizabeth A. Platz View Full Editorial Board

  6. Increase in the Life Expectancy of Patients with Cancer in the United

    ©2023 American Association for Cancer Research. 2023. American Association for Cancer Research. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev (2024) 33 (2): 196-205. ... (DLBCL), lung cancer, or melanoma between 1975 and 2018 from nine Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries. Life expectancies for patients with cancer ages 50+ were ...

  7. Cancer Epidemiology

    Cancer Epidemiology publishes original research, prioritizing studies that contribute new information about cancer causes, prevention and control. As such, the journal's scope covers all aspects of cancer epidemiology including studies of: • Risk factors for cancer initiation, development, and prognosis • Early detection, prevention, and screening

  8. Global Cancer Observatory

    Comparable cancer statistics for Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, the Faroe Islands, and Greenland. The Global Cancer Observatory (GCO) is an interactive web-based platform presenting global cancer statistics to inform cancer control and research.

  9. Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention

    The Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention program at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health is one of the first comprehensive academic programs in the world dedicated to the training of cancer epidemiologists. About

  10. Cancer Epidemiology Research

    The cancer epidemiology faculty have developed a rich research program including diverse cancers (breast, prostate, colon, head and neck, childhood, melanoma, esophageal, and bladder) and exposures (lifestyle, diet, genes, tumor biology, occupational and environmental, health care, screening, socioeconomic factors).

  11. Cancer epidemiology

    Cancer epidemiology. Cancer is one of leading causes of mortality worldwide. Therefore, understanding incidence and mortality trends for each cancer is a public health priority in many countries ...

  12. Cancer Epidemiology

    The Cancer Epidemiology faculty at Johns Hopkins conduct a wide range of public health research that covers the entire cancer continuum including cancer etiology, early detection, cancer prevention, control, surveillance, survivorship and disparities of a number of cancers. There is a strong emphasis on translational epidemiology and team ...

  13. Epidemiological science and cancer control

    INTRODUCTION. Epidemiology provides information on the distribution of cancer in a population and on cancer determinants and then applies this knowledge to disease control 1.Cancer surveillance, a key attribute of epidemiology and public health practice, provides intelligence data on the burden of different types of cancer in a specified population and, through evidence-based health programs ...

  14. Cancer epidemiology

    In this Review, the authors describe the global epidemiology of lung cancer, and how changes in exposures, socioeconomic status, public health interventions and better treatment strategies are...

  15. Cancer Biology, Epidemiology, and Treatment in the 21st Century

    Currently, cancer is one of the illnesses that causes more deaths worldwide. 5 According to data reported in 2020 by the World Health Organization (WHO), cancer is the second cause of death throughout the world, with 10 million deaths. 6 Clearly, cancer is still a leading problem worldwide.

  16. Cancer Epidemiology and Health Outcomes

    Dr. Stroup's expertise in cancer surveillance and descriptive epidemiology has led to research that not only advances methods to assess the burden of disease in large geographically-defined populations, but has led to a growing disparities research portfolio to identify special populations that might be at greater risk for cancer or are underser...

  17. Cancer systems epidemiology: Overcoming misconceptions and ...

    Systems epidemiology can transform cancer research by helping identify and develop more tailored approaches to move toward precision medicine for cancer prevention and treatment. Acknowledgments This manuscript is based on the presentations by the authors at the Workshop to Facilitate Cancer Systems Epidemiology Research from February 29 to ...

  18. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and

    This article provides an update on the global cancer burden using the GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Worldwide, an estimated 19.3 million new cancer cases (18.1 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and almo …

  19. Epidemiology and Prevention

    Pain and Its Association with Survival for Black and White Individuals with Advanced Prostate Cancer in the United States. Emily M. Rencsok, Natalie Slopen et al. Bone pain is a well-known quality-of-life detriment for individuals with prostate cancer and is associated with survival. This study expands previous work into racial differences in ...

  20. Research Resources for Cancer Epidemiology

    Research Resources for Cancer Epidemiology and Genomics. The Epidemiology and Genomics Research Program (EGRP) has compiled collections of research tools and resources that are freely available through NCI, other institutes and centers at NIH, as well as NIH-funded research projects and partnering organizations.

  21. Cancer Epidemiology

    The Cancer Training Program in the Department of Epidemiology is home to an NCI-funded training grant, a T32 program, which is a collaboration among the School's Departments of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Environmental Health Sciences. This program supports four trainees, all postdoctoral, all engaged in cancer-related studies and research.

  22. A Review of Colorectal Cancer in Terms of Epidemiology, Risk Factors

    Colorectal cancer is a major global health challenge that requires updated knowledge and evidence-based interventions. This article provides a comprehensive review of the epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of colorectal cancer, with a focus on the molecular and genetic aspects. It also discusses the current challenges and future directions for colorectal cancer ...

  23. Cancer

    WHO, through its cancer research agency, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), maintains a classification of cancer-causing agents. The incidence of cancer rises dramatically with age, most likely due to a build-up of risks for specific cancers that increase with age. The overall risk accumulation is combined with the tendency ...

  24. Cancer Epidemiology Program

    Members of the Cancer Epidemiology Program conduct multidisciplinary research that spans the cancer continuum from bench to bedside to population. Aims. Research encompasses three broad aims that often directly addresses cancers heavily impacting Moffitt's catchment area. Scientific Highlights.

  25. The global burden of lung cancer: current status and future trends

    Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. However, lung cancer incidence and mortality rates differ substantially across the world, reflecting varying patterns of tobacco ...