MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3192287945 · doi:10.1093/jjco/hyab138

Age-specific kidney and other urinary organs’ cancer incidence rate in the world

2021· article· en· W3192287945 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ayako Okuyama, Kumiko Saika

Bibliographic record

VenueJapanese Journal of Clinical Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)CancerKidney cancerCancer registryChinaDemographyGeographyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to make a comparison of the age-specific kidney and other urinary organs’ cancer incidence rate between Japan and other countries, we abstracted cancer incidence rate from the Cancer Incidence in Five Continents Vol. XI (CI5) (1). The International Agency for Research on Cancer provides the CI5 databases on the incidence of cancer recorded by cancerv registries (regional and national) worldwide. We used cancer incidence rate in five countries in Asia (China, India, Japan, Republic of Korea and Thailand), three countries in America (USA, Canada and Brazil), two countries in Oceania (Australia and New Zealand) and four countries in Europe (UK, France, Germany and Italy). Some countries have plural cancer registries and we aggregated the all registries to calculate the incidence rate in the countries from the CI5-XI database. The period of years at cancer diagnosis were from 2008 to 2012. Kidney and other urinary organs’ cancer were coded as C64-C66 and C68 based on ICD-10. Age-specific kidney and other urinary organs’ cancer incidence rate per 100 000 people in male. Age-specific kidney and other urinary organs’ cancer incidence rate per 100 000 people in female. Figure 1 shows the age-specific incidence rates of kidney and other urinary organs’ cancer in males by 5-year age groups for the selected countries. In general, cancer incidence rates of kidney and other urinary organs are higher in Europe, North America and Oceania, compared with countries in Asia. The incidence rates show a sharp increase until 70s in all the countries. In Europe, the trends of age-specific incidence rates are quite similar, that the rates become stable over 70 years of age. The age-specific incidence rates of the countries in America and Oceania also show similar trends, but the rate in Brazil is relatively low. When we look at the trends in Asia, trends of incidence rates in Japan, the Republic of Korea and China show increase until the age of 75–79 or 80–84 and then decrease or become stable, whereas that of Thailand shows increase with age and that of India shows high incidence rate only for those over 80 years of age compared with the other age groups. Figure 2 shows the age-specific incidence rates of kidney and other urinary organs’ cancer in females by 5-year age groups for the selected countries. In all the countries, the incidence rates for females are similar to those for males until the age of 40, and the rates for males are 1.5–2 times higher than that for females after the age of 40. Overall, cancer incidence rates were higher in Europe, America and Oceania, compared with the countries in Asia which is similar to the trend of males. In Europe, the trends of the age-specific incidence rates are similar among the selected countries. Incidence rates in Brazil tend to be lower than those in other countries in America and Oceania. In regards to the trends in Asia, the incidence rates for females in Japan and the Republic of Korea are higher than trends of other Asian countries. The incidence rates for female in Japan continue to increase with the age, whereas those in other countries increase until the age of 70 and then become stable as the same as trends of males. Note: Data were downloaded from the Global Cancer Observatory (GCO), which is an interactive web-based platform presenting global cancer statistics (https://gco.iarc.fr/). Responsibility for this presentation and interpretation lies with the authors of this article.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.386
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.246
GPT teacher head0.582
Teacher spread0.335 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJapanese Journal of Clinical OncologySame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207