MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7101443373 · doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckaf161.936

Changing burden of adult early-onset cancers: a population-based study

2025· article· en· W7101443373 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Public Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpidemiologyCancerIncidence (geometry)Public healthAbsolute risk reductionStandardized rateExcess mortalityCancer incidence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Adult early-onset cancers, i.e., diagnosed before the age of 50, appear to be rising globally, raising major concerns among the public and health authorities. However, distinctions between trends in the absolute numbers of cases, crude rates, and age-standardized rates are often unclear. Comparisons with later-onset cancers are also often missing, making it difficult to assess age-specific patterns. We described long-term changes in the burden of adult early-onset cancers, compared to later-onset cancers, from 1982 to 2021 in Switzerland. Methods We used population-based data from the Swiss National Institute for Cancer Epidemiology and Registration. We included all primary invasive malignant cancers from 1982 to 2021, except non-melanoma skin cancer. Adult early-onset cancers were defined as cancer diagnoses or deaths between ages 20 to 49, and later-onset at the age of 50 or older. We calculated absolute numbers, crude rates, and age-standardized incidence (ASIR) and mortality (ASMR) rates per 100,000, stratified by sex. Relative changes in ASIR and ASMR were assessed from 1982 to 2021. Results In 2021, early-onset cancers accounted for 10% of 48,850 diagnosed cases, compared to 13% in 1982. From 1982 to 2021, the absolute number of new early-onset cases increased by 56% compared to 111% for later-onset cases. The ASIR increased similarly for early- (+13%) and later-onset cancers (+12%). Among men, the ASIR was stable for early- (-0.2%) and increased for later-onset cancers (+5%). Among women, the ASIR rose similarly for early- (+22%) and later-onset cancers (+26%). The ASMR dropped by 64% for early-onset and by 41% for later-onset cancers. Conclusions Early-onset cancers showed a smaller rise in the absolute number of new cases compared to later-onset cancers, while the increase in age-standardized incidence rates was similar in both groups. Mortality rates have greatly decreased, showing substantial progress in fighting the disease. Key messages • Long-term changes in cancer trends were not specific to early-onset cancers, and these cancers still represent a minor portion of the overall cancer burden. • Distinguishing between absolute numbers and age-standardized cancer rates is essential to accurately assess the changing burden of cancer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Public Health→Same topicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management→French-language works237,207→