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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |