Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

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.

Https

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.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2019 May 29;19(1):512.
doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-5719-9.

Geographical patterns of the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer in mainland Portugal municipalities (2007-2011)

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Geographical patterns of the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer in mainland Portugal municipalities (2007-2011)

R Roquette et al. BMC Cancer. .

Abstract

Background: Cancer is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the world. In Portugal, colorectal cancer is one of the most incident cancers; thus, it is crucial to act to fight it. Knowledge of the geographical distribution of the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer can facilitate the execution of these actions and make them more effective.

Methods: Our paper aims to describe and discuss the geographical patterns of colorectal cancer incidence and mortality in mainland Portugal municipalities (2007-2011). We used the Besag, York and Mollié (BYM) model to compute the relative risk (RR) and posterior probability (PP). We performed a cluster analysis with Global Moran's Index and Local Moran's Index (LISA). We ran a geographically weighted regression (GWR) to compare incidence and mortality patterns.

Results: Incidence and mortality have different distributions of RR values. The interval of RR concerning incidence was higher than the interval of RR concerning mortality. PP values reinforce the finding of higher heterogeneity of the incidence of colorectal cancer. The comparison of the cluster maps for incidence and mortality shows a few municipalities classified with the same cluster type in both maps. Additionally, the GWR results show that the percentage of RR mortality explained by RR incidence differs throughout mainland Portugal. From the comparison of our results with the prevalence of risk factors (at NUTS II level), the need to be aware of smoking habits, alcohol consumption and the unhealthy diet of the Portuguese population stands out.

Conclusions: There are differences in the geographical distribution of the RR incidence and RR mortality of colorectal cancer in mainland Portugal municipalities. Likewise, it is relevant to highlight the cluster of two municipalities with high RR values concerning colorectal cancer's incidence and mortality. Future research is necessary to explain the geographical differences in the distribution of colorectal cancer in mainland Portugal municipalities. Based on our findings, it may be interesting to examine the influence of smoking, alcohol consumption, diet and screening on colorectal cancer in greater detail. Additionally, it may be relevant to develop an analysis focused on municipalities where the incidence values explain the mortality values poorly (or well).

Keywords: BYM; Colorectal cancer; GWR; Geographical distribution; Incidence; Mortality; Spatial epidemiology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Methodological schema of data collection and geographical analysis
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
RR of colorectal cancer incidence (left maps) and mortality (right maps) in mainland Portugal, by sex
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Scatterplot of RR incidence (X-axis) and mortality (Y-axis) by municipality, in men (top) and women (bottom). (legend) The colours attributed to the points correspond to the NUT II (1989) of each municipality
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
PP of RR of colorectal cancer incidence (left maps) and mortality (right maps) > 1
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
LISA of RR of colorectal cancer incidence (left maps) and mortality (right maps), by sex
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Municipalities in high-high or low-low clusters in both incidence and mortality maps, among men (left) and women (right)
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Standard residuals from GWR between incidence and mortality RR in men (left) and women (right)
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
R2 from GWR between incidence RR and mortality RR in men (left) and women (right)

References

    1. Karim-Kos HE, de Vries E, Soerjomataram I, Lemmens V, Siesling S, Coebergh JWW. Recent trends of cancer in Europe: a combined approach of incidence, survival and mortality for 17 cancer sites since the 1990s. Eur J Cancer. 2008;44:1345–1389. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2007.12.015. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cotter J. Colorectal cancer: Portugal and the world. Acta Medica Port. 2013;26:485–486. - PubMed
    1. Bosetti C, Levi F, Rosato V, Bertuccio P, Lucchini F, Negri E, La Vecchia C. Recent trends in colorectal cancer mortality in Europe. Int J Cancer. 2011;129:180–191. doi: 10.1002/ijc.25653. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pinheiro P, Tyczynski J, Bray F, Amado J, Matos E, Miranda A, Limbert E. Cancer in Portugal. In: IARC, editor. IARC technical publication no 38. France, IARC, 2002. p. 72.
    1. Pinto CG, Paquete AT, Pissarra I. Colorectal cancer in Portugal. Eur J Health Econ. 2010;10:65. doi: 10.1007/s10198-009-0187-9. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types