The United States Cancer Statistics (USCS) online databases in WONDER provide cancer incidence and mortality data for the United States for the years since 1999, by year, state and metropolitan areas (MSA), age group, race, ethnicity, sex, childhood cancer classifications and cancer site. Report case counts, deaths, crude and age-adjusted incidence and death rates, and 95% confidence intervals for rates. The USCS data are the official federal statistics on cancer incidence from registries having high-quality data and cancer mortality statistics for 50 states and the District of Columbia. USCS are produced by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI), in collaboration with the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR). Mortality data are provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), National Vital Statistics System (NVSS).

Source: https://ourworldindata.org/cancer

The dataset titled "Cancer Types Causing Death," sourced from Our World in Data, provides a comprehensive overview of global cancer mortality trends. According to the dataset, lung cancer leads as the most fatal cancer worldwide, with approximately 1.8 million deaths in 2022, accounting for 18.7% of all cancer-related fatalities . Following lung cancer, colorectal cancer ranks second, causing about 900,000 deaths (9.3%), while liver cancer and breast cancer account for 760,000 (7.8%) and 670,000 (6.9%) deaths, respectively. Stomach cancer also remains a significant cause of death, with 660,000 fatalities (6.8%) .

The dataset highlights that lung cancer's prevalence is closely linked to tobacco use, particularly in regions like Asia. In contrast, breast cancer predominantly affects women, while colorectal cancer impacts both genders equally. Notably, the dataset indicates a decline in age-standardized death rates for certain cancers, such as stomach cancer, due to improved hygiene, sanitation, and antibiotic treatments targeting Helicobacter pylori infections . Our World in Data

Additionally, the dataset underscores the global disparity in cancer mortality, with approximately 70% of cancer deaths occurring in low- and middle-income countries . This disparity is attributed to factors like limited access to early detection, treatment, and preventive measures. The dataset serves as a valuable resource for understanding the global burden of cancer and the need for targeted public health interventions. World Health Organization

Analysis of ‘🎗️ Cancer Rates by U.S. State’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://www.kaggle.com/yamqwe/cancer-rates-by-u-s-statee on 13 February 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

About this dataset

In the following maps, the U.S. states are divided into groups based on the rates at which people developed or died from cancer in 2013, the most recent year for which incidence data are available.

The rates are the numbers out of 100,000 people who developed or died from cancer each year.

Incidence Rates by State
The number of people who get cancer is called cancer incidence. In the United States, the rate of getting cancer varies from state to state.

• *Rates are per 100,000 and are age-adjusted to the 2000 U.S. standard population.

• ‡Rates are not shown if the state did not meet USCS publication criteria or if the state did not submit data to CDC.

• †Source: U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group. United States Cancer Statistics: 1999–2013 Incidence and Mortality Web-based Report. Atlanta (GA): Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and National Cancer Institute; 2016. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/uscs.

Death Rates by State
Rates of dying from cancer also vary from state to state.

• *Rates are per 100,000 and are age-adjusted to the 2000 U.S. standard population.

• †Source: U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group. United States Cancer Statistics: 1999–2013 Incidence and Mortality Web-based Report. Atlanta (GA): Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and National Cancer Institute; 2016. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/uscs.

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/data/state.htm

This dataset was created by Adam Helsinger and contains around 100 samples along with Range, Rate, technical information and other features such as: - Range - Rate - and more.

How to use this dataset

• Analyze Range in relation to Rate
• Study the influence of Range on Rate
• More datasets

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit Adam Helsinger

Start A New Notebook!

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

Annual percent change and average annual percent change in age-standardized cancer mortality rates since 1984 to the most recent data year. The table includes a selection of commonly diagnosed invasive cancers and causes of death are defined based on the World Health Organization International Classification of Diseases, ninth revision (ICD-9) from 1984 to 1999 and on its tenth revision (ICD-10) from 2000 to the most recent year.

Two datasets that explore causes of death due to cancer in South Africa, drawing on data from the Revised Burden of Disease estimates for the Comparative Risk Factor Assessment for South Africa, 2000.

The number and percentage of deaths due to cancer by cause are ranked for persons, males and females in the tables below.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer in SA accounting for 17% of all cancer deaths. This is followed by oesophagus Ca which accounts for 13%, cervix cancer accounting for 8%, breast cancer accounting for 8% and liver cancer which accounts for 6% of all cancers. Many more males suffer from lung and oesophagus cancer than females.

Age-standardised rate of mortality from oral cancer (ICD-10 codes C00-C14) in persons of all ages and sexes per 100,000 population.RationaleOver the last decade in the UK (between 2003-2005 and 2012-2014), oral cancer mortality rates have increased by 20% for males and 19% for females1Five year survival rates are 56%. Most oral cancers are triggered by tobacco and alcohol, which together account for 75% of cases2. Cigarette smoking is associated with an increased risk of the more common forms of oral cancer. The risk among cigarette smokers is estimated to be 10 times that for non-smokers. More intense use of tobacco increases the risk, while ceasing to smoke for 10 years or more reduces it to almost the same as that of non-smokers3. Oral cancer mortality rates can be used in conjunction with registration data to inform service planning as well as comparing survival rates across areas of England to assess the impact of public health prevention policies such as smoking cessation.References:(1) Cancer Research Campaign. Cancer Statistics: Oral – UK. London: CRC, 2000.(2) Blot WJ, McLaughlin JK, Winn DM et al. Smoking and drinking in relation to oral and pharyngeal cancer. Cancer Res 1988; 48: 3282-7. (3) La Vecchia C, Tavani A, Franceschi S et al. Epidemiology and prevention of oral cancer. Oral Oncology 1997; 33: 302-12.Definition of numeratorAll cancer mortality for lip, oral cavity and pharynx (ICD-10 C00-C14) in the respective calendar years aggregated into quinary age bands (0-4, 5-9,…, 85-89, 90+). This does not include secondary cancers or recurrences. Data are reported according to the calendar year in which the cancer was diagnosed.Counts of deaths for years up to and including 2019 have been adjusted where needed to take account of the MUSE ICD-10 coding change introduced in 2020. Detailed guidance on the MUSE implementation is available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/causeofdeathcodinginmortalitystatisticssoftwarechanges/january2020Counts of deaths for years up to and including 2013 have been double adjusted by applying comparability ratios from both the IRIS coding change and the MUSE coding change where needed to take account of both the MUSE ICD-10 coding change and the IRIS ICD-10 coding change introduced in 2014. The detailed guidance on the IRIS implementation is available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/impactoftheimplementationofirissoftwareforicd10causeofdeathcodingonmortalitystatisticsenglandandwales/2014-08-08Counts of deaths for years up to and including 2010 have been triple adjusted by applying comparability ratios from the 2011 coding change, the IRIS coding change and the MUSE coding change where needed to take account of the MUSE ICD-10 coding change, the IRIS ICD-10 coding change and the ICD-10 coding change introduced in 2011. The detailed guidance on the 2011 implementation is available at https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20160108084125/http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/classifications/international-standard-classifications/icd-10-for-mortality/comparability-ratios/index.htmlDefinition of denominatorPopulation-years (aggregated populations for the three years) for people of all ages, aggregated into quinary age bands (0-4, 5-9, …, 85-89, 90+)

This data shows premature deaths (Age under 75) from all Cancers, numbers and rates by gender, as 3-year moving-averages. Cancers are a major cause of premature deaths. Inequalities exist in cancer rates between the most deprived areas and the most affluent areas. Directly Age-Standardised Rates (DASR) are shown in the data (where numbers are sufficient) so that death rates can be directly compared between areas. The DASR calculation applies Age-specific rates to a Standard (European) population to cancel out possible effects on crude rates due to different age structures among populations, thus enabling direct comparisons of rates. A limitation on using mortalities as a proxy for prevalence of health conditions is that mortalities may give an incomplete view of health conditions in an area, as ill-health might not lead to premature death. Data source: Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID), indicator ID 40501, E05a. This data is updated annually.

AbstractIn Italy, approximately 400.000 new cases of malignant tumors are recorded every year. The average of annual deaths caused by tumors, according to the Italian Cancer Registers, is about 3.5 deaths and about 2.5 per 1,000 men and women respectively, for a total of about 3 deaths every 1,000 people. Long-term (at least a decade) and spatially detailed data (up to the municipality scale) are neither easily accessible nor fully available for public consultation by the citizens, scientists, research groups, and associations. Therefore, here we present a ten-year (2009–2018) database on cancer mortality rates (in the form of Standardized Mortality Ratios, SMR) for 23 cancer macro-types in Italy on municipal, provincial, and regional scales. We aim to make easily accessible a comprehensive, ready-to-use, and openly accessible source of data on the most updated status of cancer mortality in Italy for local and national stakeholders, researchers, and policymakers and to provide researchers with ready-to-use data to perform specific studies. Methods For a given locality, year, and cause of death, the SMR is the ratio between the observed number of deaths (Om) and the number of expected deaths (Em): SMR = Om/Em (1) where Om should be an available observational data and Em is estimated as the weighted sum of age-specific population size for the given locality (ni) per age-specific death rates of the reference population (MRi): Em = sum(MRi x ni) (2) MRi could be provided by a public health organization or be estimated as the ratio between the age-specific number of deaths of reference population (Mi) to the age-specific reference population size (Ni): MRi = Mi/Ni (3) Thus, the value of Em is weighted by the age distribution of deaths and population size. SMR assumes value 1 when the number of observed and expected deaths are equal. Following eqns. (1-3), the SMR was computed for single years of the period 2009-2018 and for single cause of death as defined by the International ICD-10 classification system by using the following data: age-specific number of deaths by cause of reference population (i.e., Mi) from the Italian National Institute of Statistics (ISTAT, (http://www.istat.it/en/, last access: 26/01/2022)); age-specific census data on reference population (i.e., Ni) from ISTAT; the observed number of deaths by cause (i.e., Om) from ISTAT; the age-specific census data on population (ni); the SMR was estimated at three different level of aggregation: municipal, provincial (equivalent to the European classification NUTS 3) and regional (i.e., NUTS2). The SMR was also computed for the broad category of malignant tumors (i.e. C00-C979, hereinafter cancer macro-type C), and for the broad category of malignant tumor plus non-malignant tumors (i.e. C00-C979 plus D0-D489, hereinafter cancer macro-type CD). Lower 90% and 95% confidence intervals of 10-year average values were computed according to the Byar method.

This table contains 26010 series, with data for years 1996 - 1996 (not all combinations necessarily have data for all years). This table contains data described by the following dimensions (Not all combinations are available): Geography (170 items: Canada; Newfoundland and Labrador; Health and Community Services St. John's Region; Newfoundland and Labrador; Health and Community Services Eastern Region; Newfoundland and Labrador ...), Sex (3 items: Both sexes; Females; Males ...), Selected causes of death (ICD-9) (17 items: Total; all causes of death; Colorectal cancer; Lung cancer; All malignant neoplasms (cancers) ...), Characteristics (3 items: Mortality; Low 95% confidence interval; mortality; High 95% confidence interval; mortality ...).

MMWR Surveillance Summary 66 (No. SS-1):1-8 found that nonmetropolitan areas have significant numbers of potentially excess deaths from the five leading causes of death. These figures accompany this report by presenting information on potentially excess deaths in nonmetropolitan and metropolitan areas at the state level. They also add additional years of data and options for selecting different age ranges and benchmarks. Potentially excess deaths are defined in MMWR Surveillance Summary 66(No. SS-1):1-8 as deaths that exceed the numbers that would be expected if the death rates of states with the lowest rates (benchmarks) occurred across all states. They are calculated by subtracting expected deaths for specific benchmarks from observed deaths. Not all potentially excess deaths can be prevented; some areas might have characteristics that predispose them to higher rates of death. However, many potentially excess deaths might represent deaths that could be prevented through improved public health programs that support healthier behaviors and neighborhoods or better access to health care services. Mortality data for U.S. residents come from the National Vital Statistics System. Estimates based on fewer than 10 observed deaths are not shown and shaded yellow on the map. Underlying cause of death is based on the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) Heart disease (I00-I09, I11, I13, and I20–I51) Cancer (C00–C97) Unintentional injury (V01–X59 and Y85–Y86) Chronic lower respiratory disease (J40–J47) Stroke (I60–I69) Locality (nonmetropolitan vs. metropolitan) is based on the Office of Management and Budget’s 2013 county-based classification scheme. Benchmarks are based on the three states with the lowest age and cause-specific mortality rates. Potentially excess deaths for each state are calculated by subtracting deaths at the benchmark rates (expected deaths) from observed deaths. Users can explore three benchmarks: “2010 Fixed” is a fixed benchmark based on the best performing States in 2010. “2005 Fixed” is a fixed benchmark based on the best performing States in 2005. “Floating” is based on the best performing States in each year so change from year to year. SOURCES CDC/NCHS, National Vital Statistics System, mortality data (see http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/deaths.htm); and CDC WONDER (see http://wonder.cdc.gov). REFERENCES Moy E, Garcia MC, Bastian B, Rossen LM, Ingram DD, Faul M, Massetti GM, Thomas CC, Hong Y, Yoon PW, Iademarco MF. Leading Causes of Death in Nonmetropolitan and Metropolitan Areas – United States, 1999-2014. MMWR Surveillance Summary 2017; 66(No. SS-1):1-8. Garcia MC, Faul M, Massetti G, Thomas CC, Hong Y, Bauer UE, Iademarco MF. Reducing Potentially Excess Deaths from the Five Leading Causes of Death in the Rural United States. MMWR Surveillance Summary 2017; 66(No. SS-2):1–7.

What are Cancer Statistics in US States?

The circled group of good survivors has genetic indicators of poor survivors (i.e. low ESR1 levels, which is typically the prognostic indicator of poor outcomes in breast cancer) – understanding this group could be critical for helping improve mortality rates for this disease. Why this group survived was quickly analysed by using the Outcome Column (here Event Death - which is binary - 0,1) as a Data Lens (which we term Supervised vs Unsupervised analyses).

How to use this dataset

• A network was built using only gene expression with 272 breast cancer patients (as rows), and 1570 columns.

• Metadata includes patient info, treatment, and survival.

• Each node is a group of patients similar to each other. Flares (left) represent sub-populations that are distinct from the larger population. (One differentiating factor between the two flares is estrogen expression (low = top flare, high = bottom flare)).

• A bottom flare is a group of patients with 100% survival. The top flare shows a range of survival – very poor towards the tip (red), and very good near the base (circled).

Acknowledgments

When we use this dataset in our research, we credit the authors as :

• License : CC BY 4.0.

• This data set is taken from https://query.data.world/s/yi422lv7mkhnydnt4ixrfujmoaglpk .

The main idea for uploading this dataset is to practice data analysis with my students, as I am working in college and want my student to train our studying ideas in a big dataset, It may be not up to date and I mention the collecting years, but it is a good resource of data to practice

Worldwide, breast cancer is the most common type of cancer in women and the second highest in terms of mortality rates.Diagnosis of breast cancer is performed when an abnormal lump is found (from self-examination or x-ray) or a tiny speck of calcium is seen (on an x-ray). After a suspicious lump is found, the doctor will conduct a diagnosis to determine whether it is cancerous and, if so, whether it has spread to other parts of the body. This breast cancer dataset was obtained from the University of Wisconsin Hospitals, Madison from Dr. William H. Wolberg.

BackgroundVery few studies have been published on the causes of death of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). We sought to explore the mortality patterns of contemporary UTUC survivors.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study involving patients with upper urinary tract carcinoma from the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (2000 and 2015). We used standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) to compare death rates among patients with UTUC in the general population and excess absolute risks (EARs) to quantify the disease-specific death burden.ResultsA total of 10,179 patients with UTUC, including 7,133 who died, were included in our study. In total, 302 (17.17%) patients with the localized disease died of UTUC; however, patients who died from other causes were 4.8 times more likely to die from UTUC (n = 1,457 [82.83%]). Cardiovascular disease was the most common non-cancer cause of death (n = 393 [22.34% of all deaths]); SMR, 1.22; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 1.1–1.35; EAR, 35.96). A total of 4,046 (69.99%) patients with regional stage died within their follow-up, 1,413 (34.92%) of whom died from UTUC and 1,082 (26.74%) of whom died from non-cancer causes. UTUC was the main cause of death (SMR, 242.48; 95% CI, 230–255.47; EAR, 542.47), followed by non-tumor causes (SMR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.11–1.25; EAR, 63.74). Most patients (94.94%) with distant stage died within 3 years of initial diagnosis. Although UTUC was the leading cause of death (n = 721 [54.29%]), these patients also had a higher risk of death from non-cancer than the general population (SMR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.67–2.56; EAR, 288.26).ConclusionsNon-UTUC deaths accounted for 82.48% of UTUC survivors among those with localized disease. Patients with regional/distant stages were most likely to die of UTUC; however, there is an increased risk of dying from non-cancer causes that cannot be ignored. These data provide the latest and most comprehensive assessment of the causes of death in patients with UTUC.

This table contains 33048 series, with data for years 2000/2002 - 2010/2012 (not all combinations necessarily have data for all years), and was last released on 2016-03-16. This table contains data described by the following dimensions (Not all combinations are available): Geography (36 items: Total, census metropolitan areas; St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador; Halifax, Nova Scotia;Moncton, New Brunswick; ...), Sex (3 items: Both sexes; Males; Females), Indicators (2 items: Mortality; Potential years of life lost), Selected causes of death (ICD-10) (17 items: Total, all causes of death; All malignant neoplasms (cancers); Colorectal cancer; Lung cancer; ...), Characteristics (9 items: Number; Low 95% confidence interval, number; High 95% confidence interval, number; Rate; ...).

Data comes from two different sources. Population-based lung cancer incidence rates for the period 2010-2014 (most updated data) were abstracted from National Cancer Institute state cancer profiles (Schwartz et al. 1996).This national county-level database of cancer data is collected by state public health surveillance systems. The domain specific county level environmental quality index (EQI) data for the period 2000-2005 were abstracted from United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) profile. Complete descriptions of the datasets used in the EQI are provided in Lobdell’s paper (Lobdell 2011). Data were merged based on the Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) code. Out of 3144 counties in United States this study has available information for 2602 counties: Data was not available for four states namely Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota and Nevada due to state legislation and regulations which prohibit the release of county-level data to outside entities, county whose lung cancer mortality information is missing were omitted from the data set, the Union county, Florida is an outlier in terms of mortality information which was deleted from the data set, in the process of local control analysis this study experiences two (cluster 28 and 29) non-informative clusters (non-informative cluster is one for which either treatment or control group information is missing). For analysis, non-informative clusters information was deleted from the data set. Three types of variables are used in this study: (i) lung cancer mortality as an outcome variable (ii) binary treatment indicator is the PM2.5 high (greater than 10.59 mg/m3) vs. low (less than 10.59 mg/m3) (iii) three potential X confounder for clustering namely land EQI, sociodemographic EQI and built EQI. For each index, higher values correspond to poorer environmental quality (Jagai et al. 2017). As PM2.5 is one of the indicators for measuring air EQI, that is why we do not consider the air EQI to avoid confounding effects.

BACKGROUND Comprehensive analyses of statistical data on breast cancer incidence, mortality, and associated risk factors are of great value for decision-making related to reducing the disease burden of breast cancer. METHODS: Based on data from the Annual Report of China Tumour Registry and the Global Burden of Disease (GBD), we conducted summary and trend analyses of incidence and mortality rates of breast cancer in Chinese women from 2014 to 2018 for urban and rural areas in the whole, eastern, central, and western parts of the country, and projected the incidence and mortality rates of breast cancer for 2019 in comparison with the GBD 2019 estimates. And the comparative risk assessment framework estimated risk factors contributing to breast cancer deaths and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) from GBD. RESULTS: The Annual Report of the Chinese Tumour Registry showed that showed that the mortality rate of breast cancer declined and the incidence rate remained largely unchanged from 2014 to 2018. There was a significant increasing trend in incidence rates among urban and rural women in eastern China and rural women in central China, whereas there was a significant decreasing trend in mortality rates among rural women in China. The two data sources have some differences in their predictions of breast cancer in China in 2019. The GBD data estimated the age-standard DALYs rates of high body-mass index, high fasting plasma glucose and diet high in red meat, which are the top three risk factors attributable to breast cancer in Chinese women, to be 29.99/100,000, 13.66/100,000 and 13.44/100,000, respectively. Conclusion: The trend of breast cancer incidence and mortality rates shown in the Annual Report of China Tumour Registry indicates that China has achieved remarkable results in reducing the burden of breast cancer, but there is still a need to further improve breast cancer screening and early diagnosis and treatment, and to improve the system of primary prevention. The GBD database provides risk factors for breast cancer in the world, Asia, and China, and lays the foundation for research on effective measures to reduce the burden of breast cancer.

Cervical Cancer Risk Factors for Biopsy: This Dataset is Obtained from UCI Repository and kindly acknowledged! This file contains a List of Risk Factors for Cervical Cancer leading to a Biopsy Examination! About 11,000 new cases of invasive cervical cancer are diagnosed each year in the U.S. However, the number of new cervical cancer cases has been declining steadily over the past decades. Although it is the most preventable type of cancer, each year cervical cancer kills about 4,000 women in the U.S. and about 300,000 women worldwide. In the United States, cervical cancer mortality rates plunged by 74% from 1955 - 1992 thanks to increased screening and early detection with the Pap test. AGE Fifty percent of cervical cancer diagnoses occur in women ages 35 - 54, and about 20% occur in women over 65 years of age. The median age of diagnosis is 48 years. About 15% of women develop cervical cancer between the ages of 20 - 30. Cervical cancer is extremely rare in women younger than age 20. However, many young women become infected with multiple types of human papilloma virus, which then can increase their risk of getting cervical cancer in the future. Young women with early abnormal changes who do not have regular examinations are at high risk for localized cancer by the time they are age 40, and for invasive cancer by age 50. SOCIOECONOMIC AND ETHNIC FACTORS Although the rate of cervical cancer has declined among both Caucasian and African-American women over the past decades, it remains much more prevalent in African-Americans -- whose death rates are twice as high as Caucasian women. Hispanic American women have more than twice the risk of invasive cervical cancer as Caucasian women, also due to a lower rate of screening. These differences, however, are almost certainly due to social and economic differences. Numerous studies report that high poverty levels are linked with low screening rates. In addition, lack of health insurance, limited transportation, and language difficulties hinder a poor woman’s access to screening services. HIGH SEXUAL ACTIVITY Human papilloma virus (HPV) is the main risk factor for cervical cancer. In adults, the most important risk factor for HPV is sexual activity with an infected person. Women most at risk for cervical cancer are those with a history of multiple sexual partners, sexual intercourse at age 17 years or younger, or both. A woman who has never been sexually active has a very low risk for developing cervical cancer. Sexual activity with multiple partners increases the likelihood of many other sexually transmitted infections (chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis).Studies have found an association between chlamydia and cervical cancer risk, including the possibility that chlamydia may prolong HPV infection. FAMILY HISTORY Women have a higher risk of cervical cancer if they have a first-degree relative (mother, sister) who has had cervical cancer. USE OF ORAL CONTRACEPTIVES Studies have reported a strong association between cervical cancer and long-term use of oral contraception (OC). Women who take birth control pills for more than 5 - 10 years appear to have a much higher risk HPV infection (up to four times higher) than those who do not use OCs. (Women taking OCs for fewer than 5 years do not have a significantly higher risk.) The reasons for this risk from OC use are not entirely clear. Women who use OCs may be less likely to use a diaphragm, condoms, or other methods that offer some protection against sexual transmitted diseases, including HPV. Some research also suggests that the hormones in OCs might help the virus enter the genetic material of cervical cells. HAVING MANY CHILDREN Studies indicate that having many children increases the risk for developing cervical cancer, particularly in women infected with HPV. SMOKING Smoking is associated with a higher risk for precancerous changes (dysplasia) in the cervix and for progression to invasive cervical cancer, especially for women infected with HPV. IMMUNOSUPPRESSION Women with weak immune systems, (such as those with HIV / AIDS), are more susceptible to acquiring HPV. Immunocompromised patients are also at higher risk for having cervical precancer develop rapidly into invasive cancer. DIETHYLSTILBESTROL (DES) From 1938 - 1971, diethylstilbestrol (DES), an estrogen-related drug, was widely prescribed to pregnant women to help prevent miscarriages. The daughters of these women face a higher risk for cervical cancer. DES is no longer prsecribed.

Death rate has been age-adjusted by the 2000 U.S. standard population. Single-year data are only available for Los Angeles County overall, Service Planning Areas, Supervisorial Districts, City of Los Angeles overall, and City of Los Angeles Council Districts.Lung cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related death in the US. People who smoke have the greatest risk of lung cancer, though lung cancer can also occur in people who have never smoked. Most cases are due to long-term tobacco smoking or exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke. Cities and communities can take an active role in curbing tobacco use and reducing lung cancer by adopting policies to regulate tobacco retail; reducing exposure to secondhand smoke in outdoor public spaces, such as parks, restaurants, or in multi-unit housing; and improving access to tobacco cessation programs and other preventive services.For more information about the Community Health Profiles Data Initiative, please see the initiative homepage.

PurposeThe risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality in patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa) by risk stratification remains unclear. The aim of this study was to determine the risk of CVD death in patients with localized PCa by risk stratification.Patients and methodsPopulation-based study of 340,806 cases in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database diagnosed with localized PCa between 2004 and 2016. The proportion of deaths identifies the primary cause of death, the competing risk model identifies the interaction between CVD and PCa, and the standardized mortality rate (SMR) quantifies the risk of CVD death in patients with PCa.ResultsCVD-related death was the leading cause of death in patients with localized PCa, and cumulative CVD-related death also surpassed PCa almost as soon as PCa was diagnosed in the low- and intermediate-risk groups. However, in the high-risk group, CVD surpassed PCa approximately 90 months later. Patients with localized PCa have a higher risk of CVD-related death compared to the general population and the risk increases steadily with survival (SMR = 4.8, 95% CI 4.6–5.1 to SMR = 13.6, 95% CI 12.8–14.5).ConclusionsCVD-related death is a major competing risk in patients with localized PCa, and cumulative CVD mortality increases steadily with survival time and exceeds PCa in all three stratifications (low, intermediate, and high risk). Patients with localized PCa have a higher CVD-related death than the general population. Management of patients with localized PCa requires attention to both the primary cancer and CVD.

Death rate of a population adjusted to a standard age distribution. As most causes of death vary significantly with people's age and sex, the use of standardised death rates improves comparability over time and between countries, as they aim at measuring death rates independently of different age structures of populations. The standardised death rates used here are calculated on the basis of a standard European population (defined by the World Health Organization). Detailed data for 65 causes of death are available in the database (under the heading 'Data').