Long-term time trends in incidence, survival and mortality of lymphomas by subtype among adults in Manitoba, Canada: a population-based study using cancer registry data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine 30-year time trends in incidence, survival and mortality of lymphomas by subtype in Manitoba, Canada. METHODS: Lymphoma cases diagnosed between 1984 and 2013 were classified according to the 2008 WHO classification system for lymphoid neoplasms. Death data (1984-2014) were obtained from the Manitoba Vital Statistics Agency. To examine time trends in incidence and mortality, we used joinpoint regression to estimate annual percentage change and average annual percentage change. Age-period-cohort modelling was conducted to measure the effects of age, period and cohort on incidence and mortality time trends. We estimated age-specific and standardised 5-year relative survival and used Poisson regression model to test time trends in relative survival. RESULTS: Total Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) incidence in men and women was stable during the study period. Age-standardised total non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) incidence increased by 4% annually until around 2000, and the trend varied by sex and NHL subtype. Total HL mortality continuously declined (by 2.5% annually in men and by 2.7% annually in women), while total NHL mortality increased (by 4.4% annually in men until 1998 and by 3.2% annually in women until 2001) and then declined (by 3.6% annually in men and by 2.5% annually in women). Age-standardised 5-year relative survival for HL improved from 72.6% in 1984-1993 to 85.8% in 2004-2013, and for NHL from 57.0% in 1984-1993 to 67.5% in 2004-2013. Survival improvement was also noted for NHL subtypes, although the extent varied, with the greatest improvement for follicular lymphoma (from 65.3% in 1984-1993 to 87.6% in 2004-2013). CONCLUSIONS: Time trends were generally consistent with those reported in other jurisdictions in total HL and NHL incidence, but were unique in incidence for HL and for NHL subtypes chronic/small lymphocytic leukaemia/lymphoma, diffuse large B cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma. Survival improvements and mortality reductions were seen for HL and NHL in both sexes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".