Document dKvdg95Z5zxee5kZXvyJKdbB

I 1 INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION old riogebury roao, daimbury, ct dsbi7 To tN--npJ GOHC (See Attached List) Dtvwon Location Area Copy to J. B. Browning T. W. Carmody W. E. Chambers J. V. Murray - February 24, 1984 HS & EAOriginating Qapt An* P2 SuDtact NCI Publication on Cancer Mortality and Trends Communication Number 2 We received the attached documents after the February 22, 1984 communi cation. Attached are: National Cancer Institute (NCI) notes to reporters and science writers. Dr. Susan Austin's review of the Doll and Peto epidemiology book entitled The Causes of Cancer. Dr. Thomas Mason of the NCI Environmental Branch who is the co-author of the publication has established an NCI contact for further information: Linda Anderson 301/496-6641 Office of Cancer Communication In the event you are contacted for an interpretation of the data, you may want to refer the requestor directly to Ms. Anderson. We presently have at Danbury, P-2, a full set of the NCI data and a second set will be in the epidemiology section of P-2. RRR/pob Attachment R. R. Rankin UCC 100105 NCI Notes to Reporters and Science Writers * - * * 2/23/84 A new reference on trend* for oncer deaths by county shows that vermll oncer death rates would hare declined over the years 1950-1979 for most of the aale population of the United States* if it weren't for Increases In lung and other.smoking-related oncers* Overall rates for females decreased In spite of a -large Increase In lung oocsr, because of decreasing death rates for other types of oncer* Over the three deodes* lung oncer death rates for white males rose 116 percent; for white females the rate went up 199 percent; for noswhlte males* up 185 percent; and for nonwhite femalesf up 188 percent* There were also increases In death rates for other smolting-related oncers such as esophageal and laryngeal oncers* Excluding lung oncer* death rates for all other oncers decreased for white males 5 percent; for white females the rate went down 12 percent; and for nonwhite females* down 13 percent* The rata for nonwhite malss Increased 15 percent* UCC 100106 These trends are consistent with other statistical analyses on cancer death rates* The data appear In U.S. Cancer Mortality Kates and Trends; 1950-1979, published by the Environmental Protection Agency (SPA) In collaboration with the National Cancer Institute (NCI)* tinder an Interagency agreement with E?A for collaborative research, NCI provided funds to print the reference book. The three--eolume reference provides researchers with data that should help to design studies exploring environmental factors that may contribute to cancer causation* The data were obtained from HHS' National Center for Health Statistics, and are baeed on death certificates. Death rates (deaths per 100,000 population) were computed separately for whites end nonwhitee by sex. Average annual death rates were calculated for all cancers combined and separately f r each of 34 cancer sites for the three decades: 1950-1939, 1960-1969, and 1970-1979. Nates were computed for 3,065 counties In 49 states. Nates for Alaska are given for the entire state but not by county. Data were adjusted to correspond with the age distribution of the U.S. population in 1970, to provide for comparability with NCI's network of population-based cancer regis tries. The new publication also gives the percent changes in death rates between each decade, and the percentile ranking of the counties according to rates for the latest daesde, 1970-1979. The statistical significance of the number of deaths reported In a given decade is noted In the tables. Dr. Thomas Mason, of the NCI's Environmental Epidemiology Branch and a co-author of the reference, emphasized, "the data need to be interpreted cau tiously. The summary statistics such as percent changes or percentile rankings do not, by themselves, tell scientists or the public what is happen- 2 UCC 100107 lag co a cancer race. Changes in death rates over tlae as veil as rates for counties are Influenced by aany factors. Regional differences In diagnostic accuracy and reporting practices as veil as changes in incidence rates (number of newly diagnosed cases per 100,000 population), earlier detection, and Improved treatment and survival all affect death rates for cancer." For example, death rates at the national level for pancreatic cancer Increased for whites and nonwhites of both sexes, but the Increases occurred mainly between the 1950s and 1960s, suggesting that the upward trend may at least partly reflect underdiagnosis of the cancer In earlier years. Death rates Increased 17 percent for white males between the 1950s and 1960s, but did not change between the 1960s and 1970s. For nonwhite males, rates Increased 38 percent between the 1950s and 1960s, and dropped 1 percent between the 1960s end 1970s. Female breast cancer affords another example. "The Incidence of breast cancer increased over the three decades," he said, "but death rates remain d fairly level, probably reflecting earlier diagnosis and improved treatment "Even greeter caution must be exercised," Dr. Mason said, "when one attempts to Interpret data for an individual county or a group of counties. A number of counties are identified as having an above-average number of reported deaths that is statistically significant but nevertheless could be due to chance alone. In this reference volume, 5 percent of all counties could fall into this category." "Nevertheless," Dr. Mason said, "the tabulations should serve to Identify counties or groups of counties with unusual cancer mortality patterns, which may In turn provide etlologlc clues. However, simply identifying a cancer death rate In the 90th percentile (a rate greater than 90 percent of all counties) Is not sufficient to Identify It as an area warranting additional 3 UCC 100108 study* The number of persons effected, the change In the rate over time, end the consistency with ocher observations must ell be considered* Similarities between the patterns of cancer end the distribution of suspected risk factors for large groups of counties ere particularly helpful in designating high-risk eomminltles where epidemiologic investigations may help is the detection of carcinogenic hazzarde." It should also be emphasized, he said, that an association between patterns of cancer and some environment or other factor does not prove causation* "Whether changing characteristics of the United States population such as in diet, occupation, and residence, are leading to increasing or decreasing rates of cancer ean be evaluated only through epidemiologic studies that collect information on Individuals." Earlier research by NCI, which showed differences in the geographic distributions of specific cancers, has prompted a number of field studies in high-risk areas which in some eases identified the causes for these excesses, he said* "Often Chase studies simply confirm what we already know about eaaear risks; in a faw cases, these studies pinpointed local factors. It is hoped that the careful use of the data presented in this three-volume work will result in a number of comparable studies that will improve our understanding of the causes of cancer*" Cancers for which death rates Increased between Che 1950s and 1970s Include: Colon--Increased 17 percent for white males, up 61 percent for nonwhite males, and up 24 percent for nonwhite females. However, the rate dropped 9 percent for white females* Melanoma--increased 88 percent among white males, up 51 percent among white females, up 49 percent among nonwhite males, and up 15 percent among nonwhite females* 4 UCC 100109 Multiple myeloma--increased 85 percent for vhlte males, up 78 percent for white females, up 141 percent for nonwhite males, and up 140 percent for nonwhite females* Ovarian--Increased 3 percent for white females and 6 percent for nonwhite females. 'Prostate-Increased 30 percent for nonwhite males, but It decreased 2 percent for vhlte males. Esophageal--increased 53 percent for nonwhite males and 65 percent for nonuhlte females. However, rates for white males remained fairly level, decreasing 1 percent, and they decreased 38 percent for females. Laryngeal--Increased 5 percent for white males, up 53 percent for white females, up 68 percent for nonwhlte males, and up 54 percent for nonwhite females. Kates decreased for: Stomach--decreased 56 percent for vhlte males, down 60 percent for vhlte females, down 44 percent for nonwhlte males, and down 48 percent for nonwhlte females. Kectumr-decreased 36 percent for vhlte males, down 44 percent for vhlte females, down 19 percent for nonwhlte males, and down .38 percent for nonwhlte females. Bladder--decreased 1 percent among white males, down 27 percent among white females, and down 14 percent among nonwhlte women. However, the rate increased 7 percent for nonwhlte males. Uterine corpus (endometrium)--decreased 46 percent for white females and decreased 57 percent for nonwhlte females. Uterine cervix--decreased 54 percent for white females and 52 percent for nonwhlte females. 5 UCC 100110 Bona--^decreased 41 percent for white stoles* down 43 percent for white females,' down 32 percent for nonwhite males, end 46 percent for nonwhite females. Vhen the publlcetlon la released, a Halted number of copies will be available for the news aedla from NCI's Office of Cancer Communications, Bldg. 31, Boom 1041.9,. Betheada, Maryland 20205. The publication may be purchased from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Order number: 055000-00234-7. Cost: $45, payable in advance by check or money order. ucc loom 6