Cargando…

Impact of socioeconomic inequalities on geographic disparities in cancer incidence: comparison of methods for spatial disease mapping

BACKGROUND: The reliability of spatial statistics is often put into question because real spatial variations may not be found, especially in heterogeneous areas. Our objective was to compare empirically different cluster detection methods. We assessed their ability to find spatial clusters of cancer...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Goungounga, Juste Aristide, Gaudart, Jean, Colonna, Marc, Giorgi, Roch
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5059978/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27729017
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0228-x
_version_ 1782459517440622592
author Goungounga, Juste Aristide
Gaudart, Jean
Colonna, Marc
Giorgi, Roch
author_facet Goungounga, Juste Aristide
Gaudart, Jean
Colonna, Marc
Giorgi, Roch
author_sort Goungounga, Juste Aristide
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The reliability of spatial statistics is often put into question because real spatial variations may not be found, especially in heterogeneous areas. Our objective was to compare empirically different cluster detection methods. We assessed their ability to find spatial clusters of cancer cases and evaluated the impact of the socioeconomic status (e.g., the Townsend index) on cancer incidence. METHODS: Moran’s I, the empirical Bayes index (EBI), and Potthoff-Whittinghill test were used to investigate the general clustering. The local cluster detection methods were: i) the spatial oblique decision tree (SpODT); ii) the spatial scan statistic of Kulldorff (SaTScan); and, iii) the hierarchical Bayesian spatial modeling (HBSM) in a univariate and multivariate setting. These methods were used with and without introducing the Townsend index of socioeconomic deprivation known to be related to the distribution of cancer incidence. Incidence data stemmed from the Cancer Registry of Isère and were limited to prostate, lung, colon-rectum, and bladder cancers diagnosed between 1999 and 2007 in men only. RESULTS: The study found a spatial heterogeneity (p < 0.01) and an autocorrelation for prostate (EBI = 0.02; p = 0.001), lung (EBI = 0.01; p = 0.019) and bladder (EBI = 0.007; p = 0.05) cancers. After introduction of the Townsend index, SaTScan failed in finding cancers clusters. This introduction changed the results obtained with the other methods. SpODT identified five spatial classes (p < 0.05): four in the Western and one in the Northern parts of the study area (standardized incidence ratios: 1.68, 1.39, 1.14, 1.12, and 1.16, respectively). In the univariate setting, the Bayesian smoothing method found the same clusters as the two other methods (RR >1.2). The multivariate HBSM found a spatial correlation between lung and bladder cancers (r = 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: In spatial analysis of cancer incidence, SpODT and HBSM may be used not only for cluster detection but also for searching for confounding or etiological factors in small areas. Moreover, the multivariate HBSM offers a flexible and meaningful modeling of spatial variations; it shows plausible previously unknown associations between various cancers. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12874-016-0228-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5059978
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50599782016-10-17 Impact of socioeconomic inequalities on geographic disparities in cancer incidence: comparison of methods for spatial disease mapping Goungounga, Juste Aristide Gaudart, Jean Colonna, Marc Giorgi, Roch BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: The reliability of spatial statistics is often put into question because real spatial variations may not be found, especially in heterogeneous areas. Our objective was to compare empirically different cluster detection methods. We assessed their ability to find spatial clusters of cancer cases and evaluated the impact of the socioeconomic status (e.g., the Townsend index) on cancer incidence. METHODS: Moran’s I, the empirical Bayes index (EBI), and Potthoff-Whittinghill test were used to investigate the general clustering. The local cluster detection methods were: i) the spatial oblique decision tree (SpODT); ii) the spatial scan statistic of Kulldorff (SaTScan); and, iii) the hierarchical Bayesian spatial modeling (HBSM) in a univariate and multivariate setting. These methods were used with and without introducing the Townsend index of socioeconomic deprivation known to be related to the distribution of cancer incidence. Incidence data stemmed from the Cancer Registry of Isère and were limited to prostate, lung, colon-rectum, and bladder cancers diagnosed between 1999 and 2007 in men only. RESULTS: The study found a spatial heterogeneity (p < 0.01) and an autocorrelation for prostate (EBI = 0.02; p = 0.001), lung (EBI = 0.01; p = 0.019) and bladder (EBI = 0.007; p = 0.05) cancers. After introduction of the Townsend index, SaTScan failed in finding cancers clusters. This introduction changed the results obtained with the other methods. SpODT identified five spatial classes (p < 0.05): four in the Western and one in the Northern parts of the study area (standardized incidence ratios: 1.68, 1.39, 1.14, 1.12, and 1.16, respectively). In the univariate setting, the Bayesian smoothing method found the same clusters as the two other methods (RR >1.2). The multivariate HBSM found a spatial correlation between lung and bladder cancers (r = 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: In spatial analysis of cancer incidence, SpODT and HBSM may be used not only for cluster detection but also for searching for confounding or etiological factors in small areas. Moreover, the multivariate HBSM offers a flexible and meaningful modeling of spatial variations; it shows plausible previously unknown associations between various cancers. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12874-016-0228-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-10-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5059978/ /pubmed/27729017 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0228-x Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Goungounga, Juste Aristide
Gaudart, Jean
Colonna, Marc
Giorgi, Roch
Impact of socioeconomic inequalities on geographic disparities in cancer incidence: comparison of methods for spatial disease mapping
title Impact of socioeconomic inequalities on geographic disparities in cancer incidence: comparison of methods for spatial disease mapping
title_full Impact of socioeconomic inequalities on geographic disparities in cancer incidence: comparison of methods for spatial disease mapping
title_fullStr Impact of socioeconomic inequalities on geographic disparities in cancer incidence: comparison of methods for spatial disease mapping
title_full_unstemmed Impact of socioeconomic inequalities on geographic disparities in cancer incidence: comparison of methods for spatial disease mapping
title_short Impact of socioeconomic inequalities on geographic disparities in cancer incidence: comparison of methods for spatial disease mapping
title_sort impact of socioeconomic inequalities on geographic disparities in cancer incidence: comparison of methods for spatial disease mapping
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5059978/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27729017
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0228-x
work_keys_str_mv AT goungoungajustearistide impactofsocioeconomicinequalitiesongeographicdisparitiesincancerincidencecomparisonofmethodsforspatialdiseasemapping
AT gaudartjean impactofsocioeconomicinequalitiesongeographicdisparitiesincancerincidencecomparisonofmethodsforspatialdiseasemapping
AT colonnamarc impactofsocioeconomicinequalitiesongeographicdisparitiesincancerincidencecomparisonofmethodsforspatialdiseasemapping
AT giorgiroch impactofsocioeconomicinequalitiesongeographicdisparitiesincancerincidencecomparisonofmethodsforspatialdiseasemapping