Caac 21660

CA CANCER J CLIN 2021;0:1–41
Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of

Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185
Countries
1
Hyuna Sung, PhD ; Jacques Ferlay, MSc, ME2; Rebecca L. Siegel, MPH 1
; Mathieu Laversanne, MSc2;
Isabelle Soerjomataram, MD, MSc, PhD ; Ahmedin Jemal, DMV, PhD ; Freddie Bray, BSc, MSc, PhD2
2 1
1
Surveillance and Health Equity
Science, American Cancer Society,
Atlanta, Georgia; 2 Section of Cancer Abstract: This article provides an update on the global cancer burden using the
Surveillance, International Agency for GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the
Research on Cancer, Lyon, France. International Agency for Research on Cancer. Worldwide, an estimated 19.3 million
Additional supporting information may be new cancer cases (18.1 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and almost 10.0
found online in the Supporting Information million cancer deaths (9.9 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) occurred
section at the end of the article.
in 2020. Female breast cancer has surpassed lung cancer as the most commonly
Corresponding Author: Freddie Bray, diagnosed cancer, with an estimated 2.3 million new cases (11.7%), followed by lung
BSc, MSc, PhD, Section of Cancer
Surveillance, International Agency for
(11.4%), colorectal (10.0 %), prostate (7.3%), and stomach (5.6%) cancers. Lung can-
Research on Cancer, 150, cours Albert cer remained the leading cause of cancer death, with an estimated 1.8 million deaths
Thomas, F-69372 Lyon Cedex 08, France (18%), followed by colorectal (9.4%), liver (8.3%), stomach (7.7%), and female breast
([email protected]).
(6.9%) cancers. Overall incidence was from 2-fold to 3-fold higher in transitioned ver-
DISCLOSURES: Hyuna Sung, Rebecca L. sus transitioning countries for both sexes, whereas mortality varied <2-fold for men
Siegel, and Ahmedin Jemal are employed
by the American Cancer Society,
and little for women. Death rates for female breast and cervical cancers, however,
which receives grants from private were considerably higher in transitioning versus transitioned countries (15.0 vs 12.8
and corporate foundations, including per 100,000 and 12.4 vs 5.2 per 100,000, respectively). The global cancer burden
foundations associated with companies in
the health sector for research outside of is expected to be 28.4 million cases in 2040, a 47% rise from 2020, with a larger
the submitted work. They are not funded increase in transitioning (64% to 95%) versus transitioned (32% to 56%) countries due
by or key personnel for any of these to demographic changes, although this may be further exacerbated by increasing
grants, and their salary is solely funded
through American Cancer Society funds. risk factors associated with globalization and a growing economy. Efforts to build a
The remaining authors report no conflicts sustainable infrastructure for the dissemination of cancer prevention measures and
of interest. provision of cancer care in transitioning countries is critical for global cancer control.
Where authors are identified as personnel CA Cancer J Clin 2021;0:1-41. © 2021 American Cancer Society.
of the International Agency for Research
on Cancer/World Health Organization,
the authors alone are responsible for Keywords: burden, cancer, epidemiology, incidence, mortality
the views expressed in this article,
and they do not necessarily represent
the decisions, policy, or views of the
International Agency for Research on
Cancer/World Health Organization.
Introduction
Cancer ranks as a leading cause of death and an important barrier to increasing life
doi: 10.3322/caac.21660. Available online
at cacancerjournal.com expectancy in every country of the world.1 According to estimates from the World
Health Organization (WHO) in 2019,2 cancer is the first or second leading cause
of death before the age of 70 years in 112 of 183 countries and ranks third or fourth
in a further 23 countries (Fig. 1). Cancer’s rising prominence as a leading cause of
death partly reflects marked declines in mortality rates of stroke and coronary heart
disease, relative to cancer, in many countries.1
Overall, the burden of cancer incidence and mortality is rapidly growing world-
wide; this reflects both aging and growth of the population as well as changes in the
prevalence and distribution of the main risk factors for cancer, several of which are
associated with socioeconomic development.3,4 The extent to which the position of
cancer as a cause of premature death reflects national levels of social and economic
development can be seen by comparing the maps in Figure 1 and Figure 2A, the
latter depicting the 4-tier Human Development Index (HDI) based on the United
Nation’s 2019 Human Development Report.5
In this article, we examine the cancer burden worldwide in 2020 based on
the GLOBOCAN estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the
International Agency for Research on Cancer.6 The estimates provided herein do
VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2021 1
Global Cancer Statistics 2020
Ranking of cancer
Premature mortality (0-69)
No data Not applicable
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever Data source: GHE 2020
on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, Map production: CSU
or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted and dashed lines on maps represent approximate border lines World Health Organization
for which there may not yet be full agreement. © WHO 2020. All rights reserved
FIGURE 1. National Ranking of Cancer as a Cause of Death at Ages <70 Years in 2019. The numbers of countries represented in each ranking group are
included in the legend. Source: World Health Organization.
not reflect the impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome graphic visualization of the GLOBOCAN database for 185
coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus responsible for countries and 36 cancers (as well as all cancers combined),
coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19),7,8 as they are based by age and sex. The profile of cancer, globally and by world
on extrapolations of cancer data collected in earlier years be- region, is built up using the best available sources of can-
fore the pandemic. Although the full extent of the impact of cer incidence and mortality data within a given country.
the COVID-19 pandemic in different world regions is cur- Therefore, the validity of the national estimates depends on
rently unknown, delays in diagnosis and treatment associ- the degree of representativeness and quality of the source in-
ated with the concerns of individuals, health system closures, formation. The methods used to compile the 2020 estimates
including suspension of screening programs, and reduced are largely based on those developed previously, with an em-
availability of and access to care are expected to cause a phasis on the use of short-term predictions and the use of
short-term decline in cancer incidence followed by increases modelled mortality-to-incidence ratios, where applicable.19
in advanced-stage diagnoses and cancer mortality in some The estimates are available in the GCO for 36 cancer
settings.9-13 types, based on codes from the International Statistical
As with previous reports,14-17 the primary focus is on Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems
a description of the cancer incidence and mortality at the 10th Revision (ICD-10), including nonmelanoma skin
global level and an assessment of the geographic variabil- cancer (NMSC) (C44, excluding basal cell carcinomas for
ity observed across 20 predefined world regions (Fig. 2B). incidence).19 Together with all cancers combined, cancer-
We describe the magnitude and distribution of the disease specific estimates are provided for 185 countries or territo-
overall and for the major cancer types in 2020, commenting ries worldwide by sex and by 18 age groups (ages 0-4, 5-9,
briefly on the associated risk factors and prospects for pre- …, 80-84, and ≥85 years).
vention of the major cancers observed worldwide, and end- The number of new cancer cases and cancer deaths
ing with a prediction of the magnitude of the disease in 2040 were extracted from the GLOBOCAN 2020 database for
on the basis of global demographic projections. all cancers combined (ICD-10 codes C00-C97) and for
36 cancer types: lip, oral cavity (C00-C06), salivary glands
Data Sources and Methods (C07-C08), oropharynx (C09-C10), nasopharynx (C11),
The sources and methods used in compiling the hypopharynx (C12-C13), esophagus (C15), stomach
GLOBOCAN estimates for 2020 are described online at (C16), colon (C18), rectum (C19-C20), anus (C21), liver
the Global Cancer Observatory (GCO) (gco.iarc.fr).18 (C22, including intrahepatic bile ducts), gallbladder (C23),
The GCO website includes facilities for the tabulation and pancreas (C25), larynx (C32), lung (C33-C34, including
2 CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

Human Development Index (% of population)

Very High HDI (20.1%) High HDI (37.3%) Medium HDI (29.9%) Low HDI (12.7%)
World area (% of population)

Americas (13.1%) Africa (17.2%) Europe (9.7%) Asia (59.5%) Oceania (0.5%)
Northern (4.7%) Northern (3.2%) Western (2.5%) Western (3.6%) Australia/New Zealand (0.4%)
Central (2.3%) Western (5.1%) Northern (1.4%) South Central (25.8%) Melanesia (0.1%)
inc. India (17.7%)
Caribbean (0.6%) Middle (2.3%) Southern (2.0%) Micronesia/Polynesia (0.01%)
Eastern (21.5%)
South (5.5%) Eastern (5.7%) Eastern (3.8%) inc. China (18.6%)
Southern (0.9%) South-Eastern (8.6%)
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever Data source: UNDP
on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, Map production: IARC
FIGURE 2. (A) The 4-Tier Human Development Index (HDI) and (B) 20 Areas of the World. The sizes of the respective populations are included in the legend.
Source: United Nations Procurement Division/United Nations Development Program.
trachea and bronchus), melanoma of skin (C43), NMSC thyroid (C73), Hodgkin lymphoma (C81), non-Hodgkin
(C44, excluding basal cell carcinoma for incidence), me- lymphoma (C82-C86, C96), multiple myeloma (C88 and
sothelioma (C45), Kaposi sarcoma (C46), female breast C90, including immunoproliferative diseases), and leu-
(C50), vulva (C51), vagina (C52), cervix uteri (C53), cor- kemia (C91-C95). For the purposes of consistency with
pus uteri (C54), ovary (C56), penis (C60), prostate (C61), previous exercises,6 we combine colon, rectum, and anus
testis (C62), kidney (C64-C65, including renal pelvis), as colorectal cancer (C18-C21); NMSC (C44, exclud-
bladder (C67), brain, central nervous system (C70-C72), ing basal cell carcinoma for incidence) is included in the

overall estimation of the total cancer burden, unless other- TABLE 1. New Cases and Deaths for 36 Cancers and All
wise stated, and is included within the other category when Cancers Combined in 2020
making comparisons of the relative magnitude of different NO. OF NEW CASES (% NO. OF NEW DEATHS
cancer types. CANCER SITE OF ALL SITES) (% OF ALL SITES)
Further details of definitions and methods are pro- Female breast 2,261,419 (11.7) 684,996 (6.9)
vided in the Supporting Materials. In brief, we present Lung 2,206,771 (11.4) 1,796,144 (18.0)
age-standardized incidence or mortality rates (ASR) per Prostate 1,414,259 (7.3) 375,304 (3.8)
100,000 person-years based on the 1966 Segi-Doll World Nonmelanoma of skin a
1,198,073 (6.2) 63,731 (0.6)
standard population20 and the cumulative risk of devel-
Colon 1,148,515 (6.0) 576,858 (5.8)
oping or dying from cancer before age 75 years, assuming
Stomach 1,089,103 (5.6) 768,793 (7.7)
the absence of competing causes of death, expressed as a
Liver 905,677 (4.7) 830,180 (8.3)
percentage. These indicators allow comparisons between
Rectum 732,210 (3.8) 339,022 (3.4)
populations that are not influenced by differences in their
age structures, and they are presented for the major cancer Cervix uteri 604,127 (3.1) 341,831 (3.4)
types globally and across 20 aggregated regions, as defined Esophagus 604,100 (3.1) 544,076 (5.5)
by the United Nations Population Division (Fig. 2B). We Thyroid 586,202 (3.0) 43,646 (0.4)
also characterize the burden according to the 4-tier HDI Bladder 573,278 (3.0) 212,536 (2.1)
(Fig. 2A) to further assess the cancer burden according Non-Hodgkin 544,352 (2.8) 259,793 (2.6)
to a binary proxy of development (low and medium HDI lymphoma
vs high and very high HDI). Finally, we also provide a Pancreas 495,773 (2.6) 466,003 (4.7)
prediction of the future burden of cancer in 2040 based Leukemia 474,519 (2.5) 311,594 (3.1)
on demographic projections, assuming that national rates Kidney 431,288 (2.2) 179,368 (1.8)
estimated in 2020 remain constant. Throughout, we use Corpus uteri 417,367 (2.2) 97,370 (1.0)
the terms transitioning, emerging, and lower HDI coun- Lip, oral cavity 377,713 (2.0) 177,757 (1.8)
tries/economies as synonyms for nations classified as low Melanoma of skin 324,635 (1.7) 57,043 (0.6)
or medium HDI, and we use transitioned or higher HDI Ovary 313,959 (1.6) 207,252 (2.1)
countries/economies for those classified as high or very high
Brain, nervous system 308,102 (1.6) 251,329 (2.5)
HDI.
Larynx 184,615 (1.0) 99,840 (1.0)
Multiple myeloma 176,404 (0.9) 117,077 (1.2)
Results
Nasopharynx 133,354 (0.7) 80,008 (0.8)
Distribution of Cases and Deaths by World Region
Gallbladder 115,949 (0.6) 84,695 (0.9)
and Cancer Types
Oropharynx 98,412 (0.5) 48,143 (0.5)
There were an estimated 19.3 million new cases (18.1 mil-
lion excluding NMSC, except basal cell carcinoma) and Hypopharynx 84,254 (0.4) 38,599 (0.4)
10 million cancer deaths (9.9 million excluding NMSC, Hodgkin lymphoma 83,087 (0.4) 23,376 (0.2)
except basal cell carcinoma) worldwide in 2020 (Table 1). Testis 74,458 (0.4) 9334 (0.1)
Figure 3 presents the distribution of all-cancer incidence Salivary glands 53,583 (0.3) 22,778 (0.2)
and mortality according to world region for both sexes Anus 50,865 (0.3) 19,293 (0.2)
combined and separately for men and women. For both Vulva 45,240 (0.2) 17,427 (0.2)
sexes combined, one-half of all cases and 58.3% of cancer Penis 36,068 (0.2) 13,211 (0.1)
deaths are estimated to occur in Asia in 2020 (Fig. 3A), Kaposi sarcoma 34,270 (0.2) 15,086 (0.2)
where 59.5% of the global population resides (Fig. 2B). Mesothelioma 30,870 (0.2) 26,278 (0.3)
Europe accounts for 22.8% of the total cancer cases and
Vagina 17,908 (0.1) 7995 (0.1)
19.6% of the cancer deaths, although it represents 9.7%
All sites excluding 18,094,716 9,894,402
of the global population, followed by the Americas’ 20.9% nonmelanoma skin
of incidence and 14.2% of mortality worldwide. In con- All sites 19,292,789 9,958,133
trast to other regions, the share of cancer deaths in Asia a
New cases exclude basal cell carcinoma, whereas deaths include all types of
(58.3%) and Africa (7.2%) are higher than the share of nonmelanoma skin cancer.
incidence (49.3% and 5.7%, respectively) because of the Source: GLOBOCAN 2020.
different distribution of cancer types and higher case fatal-

ity rates in these regions. and separately, with NMSC included within the other cat-
Figure 4 shows the top 10 cancer types for estimated egory. For both sexes combined, the top 10 cancer types
cases and deaths worldwide for men and women, combined account for >60% of the newly diagnosed cancer cases and
(A) Both sexes

Incidence Mortality
Africa
5.7%
Middle Eastern
Western
Africa
Southern
Northern 7.2% Americas
Americas 14.2%
Middle Eastern
South 20.9% Western Southern
Eastern Northern Northern
Central Central
Northern Caribbean
Caribbean
South
Eastern South
South
Western
Northern
China Western Southern Europe

China 19.6%
Eastern
Asia Northern Asia
49.3% 58.3%
Southern Oceania
Europe 0.7%
India
Eastern
Eastern 22.8% Western
South
Eastern Central
India
Oceania
South Central Western1.3%
19.3 million 9.9 million
new cases deaths
(B) Males
Incidence Mortality
Africa
4.7%
Middle Eastern
Western Southern
Africa
Northern 5.9% Americas
Americas
South 20.8%
Middle Eastern
Western
13.2%
Eastern Southern
Northern Northern Central
Central Northern Caribbean
Caribbean
South
Eastern South
Western
South
Northern
China
Southern
Europe
Asia Western 19.6%
49.9% Asia China Eastern
Northern 60.6%
Southern
Oceania
Europe 0.7%
India
Eastern
Eastern 23.3% Eastern South
Western
Central
India
Oceania
South Central Western 1.3%
new cases deaths
(C) Females
Incidence Mortality
Africa
6.9%
Middle Eastern
Western
Northern
Southern
Americas Africa
20.9% 8.7% Americas
Northern
Middle Eastern 15.4%
South Central Western Southern
Eastern Northern Central
Caribbean Northern Caribbean
South South
South Eastern
Western
Western
Northern Europe
Asia China Southern 19.7%
China
48.6%
Northern Asia Eastern
55.5%
Southern Europe Oceania
22.3% 0.7%
India
Eastern Eastern Western
Eastern South
Central
India
Oceania
South Central Western 1.3%
new cases deaths
FIGURE 3. Distribution of Cases and Deaths by World Area in 2020 for (A) Both Sexes, (B) Men, and (C) Women. For each sex, the area of the pie chart reflects
the proportion of the total number of cases or deaths. Source: GLOBOCAN 2020.
>70% of the cancer deaths. Female breast cancer is the prostate (7.3%), and stomach (5.6%) cancers. Lung cancer
most commonly diagnosed cancer (11.7% of total cases), is the leading cause of cancer death (18.0% of the total
closely followed by lung (11.4%), colorectal (10.0%), cancer deaths), followed by colorectal (9.4%), liver (8.3%),

A Both sexes
Incidence Mortality
Female
breast
11.7%
Lung
Other Lung Other 18.0%
cancer 11.4% cancer
36.9% 29.2% Colorectum
9.4%
Colorectum
10.0% Leukemia
3.1% Liver
Cervix uteri
3.4%
8.3%
Prostate Prostate
7.3% 3.8% Stomach
Bladder Pancreas 7.7%
3.0% 4.7% Female
Thyroid Esophagus breast
3.0% Cervix uteri Stomach 5.5% 6.9%
Liver
3.1% 4.7% 5.6%
Esophagus
3.1%

new cases deaths
B Males
Incidence Mortality
Lung
14.3%
Other Other Lung
cancer cancer 21.5%
30.7% Prostate Non-Hodgkin 22.9%
14.1% lymphoma
2.7%
Liver
Bladder
2.9%
10.5%
Colorectum Leukemia
3.2%
Leukemia 10.6% Pancreas
2.7%
4.5%
Colorectum
Kidney
2.7% Esophagus
9.3%
Non-Hodgkin 6.8%
lymphoma Prostate Stomach
3.0%
Stomach 6.8% 9.1%
Esophagus
4.2% Bladder Liver 7.1%
4.4% 6.3%

new cases deaths
C Females
Incidence Mortality
Other Breast
cancer 24.5% Breast
Other 15.5%
28.9% cancer
25.4% Lung
Leukemia
13.7%
Colorectum 3.0%
Non-Hodgkin 9.4% Esophagus
lymphoma 3.8%
2.6% Ovary
Colorectum
Liver 4.7% 9.5%
3.0% Lung
Pancreas
Ovary 8.4% 4.9% Cervix uteri
3.4% Liver
Stomach 5.7% Stomach 7.7%
4.0% 6.0%
Corpus uteri
4.5% Thyroid Cervix uteri
6.5%
4.9%
new cases deaths
FIGURE 4. Distribution of Cases and Deaths for the Top 10 Most Common Cancers in 2020 for (A) Both Sexes, (B) Men, and (C) Women. For each sex, the
area of the pie chart reflects the proportion of the total number of cases or deaths; nonmelanoma skin cancers (excluding basal cell carcinoma for incidence)
are included in the “other” category. Source: GLOBOCAN 2020.
stomach (7.7%), and female breast (6.9%) cancers. Lung and colorectal cancer for incidence and liver and colorec-
cancer is the most frequently occurring cancer and the tal cancer for mortality. In women, breast cancer is the
leading cause of cancer death in men, followed by prostate most commonly diagnosed cancer and the leading cause

of cancer death, followed by colorectal and lung cancer for lung cancer in 36 countries, and colorectal cancer and liver
incidence, and vice versa for mortality. cancer each in 11 countries (Fig. 5A). With regard to mor-
tality (Fig. 6A), lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer
Global Cancer Patterns death in men in 93 countries, in part because of its high
Figures 5 and 6 show the most commonly diagnosed cancers fatality rate,21 followed by prostate cancer (48 countries)
and leading causes of cancer death, respectively, by sex at the and liver cancer (23 countries). In contrast to men, the most
national level. The maps reveal substantial global diversity in commonly diagnosed cancer in women is dominated by 2
leading cancer types, particularly for incidence in men (8 dif- cancer sites: breast cancer (159 countries) and cervical cancer
ferent cancer types) and for mortality in both men (8 types) (23 of 26 remaining countries) (Fig. 5B). The mortality pro-
and women (7 types). In men, prostate cancer is the most file in women is more heterogeneous (Fig. 6B), with breast
frequently diagnosed cancer in 112 countries, followed by and cervical cancer the leading causes of cancer death in 110
Incidence, males
Prostate (112) Stomach (7)
Lung (36) Lip, oral cavity (4)
Colorectum (11) Kaposi sarcoma (3)
Liver (11) Esophagus (1)
Incidence, females
Breast (159)
Cervix uteri (23)
Liver (1)
Lung (1)
Thyroid (1)
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever Data source: Globocan 2020
FIGURE 5. Most Common Type of Cancer Incidence in 2020 in Each Country Among (A) Men and (B) Women. The numbers of countries represented in each
ranking group are included in the legend. However, nonmelanoma skin cancer (excluding basal cell carcinoma), the most common type of cancer in Australia
and New Zealand among men and women and in the United States among men, was excluded when constructing the global maps. Source: GLOBOCAN 2020.

Mortality, males
Lung (93) Colorectum (5)
Prostate (48) Kaposi sarcoma (3)
Liver (23) Esophagus (2)
Stomach (10) Lip, oral cavity (1)
Mortality, females
Breast (110) Liver (5)
Cervix uteri (36) Stomach (3)
Lung (25) Esophagus (1)
Colorectum (5)
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever Data source: Globocan 2020
FIGURE 6. Most Common Type of Cancer Mortality by Country in 2020 Among (A) Men and (B) Women. The numbers of countries represented in each ranking
group are included in the legend. Source: GLOBOCAN 2020.
and 36 countries, respectively, followed by lung cancer in 25 Figures 7A and 7B show cancer incidence and mortal-
countries. ity ASRs in higher HDI versus lower HDI countries for
men and women, respectively, in 2020. For incidence in
Cancer Incidence and Mortality Patterns by the men (Fig. 7A), lung cancer ranks first (39 per 100,000)
4-Tier HDI and prostate cancer ranks second (37.5 per 100,000) in
Incidence rates increased with increasing HDI level, ranging higher HDI countries, and vice versa for lower HDI
from 104.3 and 128.0 per 100,000 in low HDI countries to countries (11.3 per 100,000 for prostate cancer and 10.3
335.3 and 267.6 per 100,000 in very high HDI countries for per 100,000 for lung cancer). These cancers were followed
men and women, respectively (Table 2). Mortality rates are by colorectal cancer (29 per 100,000) in higher HDI
about 2-fold higher in higher HDI countries (122.9-141.1 countries, largely reflecting the substantial contribution
per 100,000) versus lower HDI countries (76.7-78.0 per by the United States,22 and lip and oral cavity cancer
100,000) in men, whereas little variation exists across HDI (10.2 per 100,000) in lower HDI countries because of the
levels (67.0-88.4 per 100,000) in women (Table 2). high burden of the disease in India.23 In women (Fig. 7B),
TABLE 2. Incidence and Mortality Rates (Age-Standardized Rate, Cumulative Risk) for 24 World Areas and Sex for All Cancers Combined (Including Nonmelanoma Skin
Cancera) in 2020
INCIDENCE MORTALITY
MALES FEMALES MALES FEMALES
AGE-STANDARDIZED CUMULATIVE RISK, AGE-STANDARDIZED CUMULATIVE RISK, AGE-STANDARDIZED CUMULATIVE RISK, AGE-STANDARDIZED CUMULATIVE RISK,
WORLD AREA RATE (WORLD) AGES 0-74 YEARS, % RATE (WORLD) AGES 0-74 YEARS, % RATE (WORLD) AGES 0-74 YEARS, % RATE (WORLD) AGES 0-74 YEARS, %
Eastern Africa 112.9 11.91 148.1 15.12 82.5 8.71 102.4 11.02
Middle Africa 109.5 11.70 115.8 11.83 79.2 8.25 79.9 8.54
Northern Africa 145.7 15.14 140.1 14.17 104.6 10.43 77.6 8.06
Southern Africa 232.7 22.74 189.0 18.22 128.8 13.38 98.7 10.22
Western Africa 100.6 10.67 123.2 12.71 74.8 7.89 83.6 8.99
Caribbean 213.9 22.35 174.6 17.44 120.7 11.85 89.2 9.24
Central America 140.9 14.71 141.1 14.01 70.2 7.15 63.1 6.72
South America 217.1 22.09 192.2 18.79 104.9 10.59 82.1 8.51
Northern America 397.9 37.05 332.6 31.10 98.9 10.31 77.7 8.23
Eastern Asia 242.3 24.47 196.4 19.34 157.4 16.34 93.0 9.88
All but China 304.8 30.09 239.2 22.70 112.0 10.76 64.4 6.12
China 225.4 23.25 188.2 18.78 163.9 17.28 98.1 10.59
South-Eastern Asia 159.2 16.46 149.3 15.03 114.1 11.82 80.8 8.55
South Central Asia 103.2 11.13 102.5 10.78 71.2 7.88 63.1 6.95
All but India 122.8 12.97 110.7 11.60 86.2 9.25 68.5 7.49
India 95.7 10.44 99.3 10.47 65.4 7.37 61.0 6.74
Western Asia 198.3 20.77 162.3 16.38 123.5 13.09 79.1 8.38
Eastern Europe 293.8 30.47 220.9 22.18 165.6 18.24 88.7 9.79
Northern Europe 343.7 32.91 296.5 28.19 115.1 11.39 87.9 9.2
Southern Europe 317.8 31.31 249.9 23.85 126.9 13.19 76.3 8.07
Western Europe 365.3 34.90 294.3 27.85 127.1 13.00 83.9 8.84
Australia/New Zealand 494.2 44.37 405.2 36.45 100.7 9.76 73.1 7.38
Melanesia 192.6 20.62 202.5 19.59 125.3 13.21 118.3 12.12
Micronesia/Polynesia 239.5 25.18 206.5 20.62 152.3 16.24 109.4 11.58
Low HDI 104.3 11.04 128.0 13.10 78.0 8.14 88.4 9.46
Medium HDI 109.2 11.75 108.7 11.35 76.7 8.45 67.0 7.32
VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2021

High HDI 207.7 21.49 178.0 17.79 141.1 14.90 90.3 9.69
Very high HDI 335.3 32.64 267.6 25.75 122.9 12.67 80.0 8.37
World 222.0 22.60 186.0 18.55 120.8 12.59 84.2 8.86
a
Incidence excludes basal cell carcinoma, whereas mortality includes all types of nonmelanoma skin cancer.
Abbreviation: HDI, Human Development Index.
Source: GLOBOCAN 2020.
9
A High/Very high HDI Low/Medium HDI
39.0 10.3
Lung 31.6 9.4
37.5 11.3
Prostate 8.1 5.9
29.0 7.4
Colorectum 13.1 4.7
18.9 7.2
Stomach 12.6 6.4
16.8 6.9
Liver 15.1 6.7
10.3 6.4
Esophagus 8.9 6.0
11.7 3.1
Bladder 3.7 1.8
Male Lip, oral cavity

3.8
1.4 5.7
10.2
7.9 4.0
Non−Hodgkin lymphoma 3.4 2.5
7.6 3.8
Leukemia 4.4 3.0
7.8 1.8
Kidney 3.0 1.1
7.2 1.6
Pancreas 6.7 1.5
3.4 3.9
Larynx 1.7 2.5
4.7 2.4
Brain, nervous system 3.6 2.1
5.2 0.4
Melanoma of skin 0.9 0.2
60 40 20 0 20 40 60
Age−standardized (W) rate per 100,000, male
B High/Very high HDI Low/Medium HDI
55.9 29.7
Breast 12.8 15.0
11.3 18.8
Cervix uteri 5.2 12.4
20.0 5.4
Colorectum 8.4 3.3
18.2 4.2
Lung 13.7 3.8
14.3 2.6
Thyroid 0.5 0.5
11.1 3.0
Corpus uteri 2.1 1.0
7.1 5.8
Ovary 4.1 4.2
Female Stomach
8.0
5.4
4.0
3.5
5.8 3.2
Liver 5.3 3.1
5.4 2.9
Leukemia 2.9 2.2
5.5 2.8
Non−Hodgkin lymphoma 2.1 1.7
3.5 3.7
Esophagus 3.0 3.4
5.0 1.0
Pancreas 4.6 1.0
3.8 1.7
Brain, nervous system 2.8 1.4
1.7 3.6
Lip, oral cavity 0.6 2.2
60 40 20 0 20 40 60
Age−standardized (W) rate per 100,000, female

Incidence Mortality
FIGURE 7. Incidence and Mortality Age-Standardized Rates in High/Very High Human Development Index (HDI) Countries Versus Low/Medium HDI Countries
Among (A) Men and (B) Women in 2020. The 15 most common cancers in the world (W) are shown in descending order of the overall age-standardized rate
for both sexes combined. Source: GLOBOCAN 2020.
incidence rates for breast cancer far exceed those of other colorectal cancer (20 per 100,000) in transitioned coun-
cancers in both transitioned (55.9 per 100,000) and tries and cervical cancer (18.8 per 100,000) in transition-
transitioning (29.7 per 100,000) countries, followed by ing countries.

Cancer Incidence and Death Rates by Sex and Incidence rates are 88% higher in transitioned countries
World Region than in transitioning countries (55.9 and 29.7 per 100,000,
Worldwide, the incidence rate for all cancers combined was respectively) (Fig. 7B), with the highest incidence rates (>80
19% higher in men (222.0 per 100,000) than in women (186 per 100,000) in Australia/New Zealand, Western Europe
per 100,000) in 2020, although rates varied widely across re- (Belgium has the world’s highest incidence), Northern
gions. Among men, incidence rates ranged almost 5-fold, America, and Northern Europe and the lowest rates (<40
from 494.2 per 100,000 in Australia/New Zealand to 100.6 per 100,000) in Central America, Eastern and Middle
per 100,000 in Western Africa (Table 2); among women, rates Africa, and South Central Asia (Fig. 8). However, women
varied nearly 4-fold, from 405.2 per 100,000 in Australia/New living in transitioning countries have 17% higher mortal-
Zealand to 102.5 per 100,000 in South Central Asia. These ity rates compared with women in transitioned countries
variations largely reflect differences in exposure to risk factors (15.0 and 12.8 per 100,000, respectively) (Fig. 7B) because
and associated cancers (cancer mix) and barriers to high-quality of high fatality rates, with the highest mortality rates found
cancer prevention and early detection. For example, the highest in Melanesia, Western Africa, Micronesia/Polynesia, and
overall incidence rates in Australia/New Zealand are caused in the Caribbean (Barbados has the world’s highest mortality)
part by an elevated risk of NMSC because most of the popula- (Fig. 8).
tion is light-skinned, and excessive sun exposure is prevalent, in The elevated incidence rates in higher HDI countries
conjunction with increased detection of the disease. reflect a longstanding higher prevalence of reproductive
The gender gap for overall cancer mortality worldwide is and hormonal risk factors (early age at menarche, later age
twice that for incidence, with death rates 43% higher in men at menopause, advanced age at first birth, fewer number of
than in women (120.8 and 84.2 per 100,000, respectively) children, less breastfeeding, menopausal hormone therapy,
(Table 2), partly because of differences in the distribution of oral contraceptives) and lifestyle risk factors (alcohol intake,
the cancer types. Death rates per 100,000 persons varied from excess body weight, physical inactivity), as well as increased
165.6 per 100,000 in Eastern Europe to 70.2 per 100,000 in detection through organized or opportunistic mam-
Central America among men and from 118.3 per 100,000 mographic screening.24 An exceptionally high prevalence
in Melanesia to 63.1 per 100,000 in Central America and of mutations in high-penetrance genes, such as BRCA1 and
South Central Asia among women. Notably, the cumulative BRCA2 among women of Ashkenazi Jewish heritage (range,
risk of dying from cancer among women in 2020 was higher 1%-2.5%), in part accounts for the high incidence in Israel
in Eastern Africa (11.0%) than in Northern America (8.2%), and in certain European subpopulations.25
Western Europe (8.8%), and Australia/New Zealand (7.4%). Breast cancer incidence rates uniformly increased rapidly
Table 3 shows the number of newly diagnosed cancer during the 1980s and 1990s in many countries in Northern
cases and deaths, the incidence and mortality ASR, and the America, Oceania, and Europe, likely reflecting changes in
cumulative risk of developing and dying from cancer overall the prevalence of risk factors coupled with increased detec-
and for the 36 cancer types separately in men and women. tion through widespread uptake of mammographic screening.
One in 5 men or women develop the disease, and 1 in 8 men Then, during the early 2000s, incidence dropped or stabi-
and 1 in 11 women die from it. Below, we describe and dis- lized,26 which was largely attributed to a reduction in the use
cuss the variations in sex-specific incidence and mortality of menopausal hormone therapy and also possibly a plateau
rates by world region for 16 of these cancer types. in screening participation.27,28 Since 2007, there has been a
Female breast cancer slow upturn in incidence rates in the United States of <0.5%
Female breast cancer has now surpassed lung cancer as the annually,29 and moderate but significant increases have
leading cause of global cancer incidence in 2020, with an also been reported in many other countries in Europe and
estimated 2.3 million new cases, representing 11.7% of all Oceania.30 Findings from studies in the United States,31,32
cancer cases (Table 1, Fig. 4). It is the fifth leading cause of Denmark,33 Ireland,34 and Scotland35 using cancer regis-
cancer mortality worldwide, with 685,000 deaths. Among try data supplemented with tumor maker information have
women, breast cancer accounts for 1 in 4 cancer cases and found that increasing incidence is confined to estrogen re-
for 1 in 6 cancer deaths, ranking first for incidence in the ceptor-positive cancer, and the rates are falling for estrogen
vast majority of countries (159 of 185 countries) (Fig. 5B) receptor-negative cancers. Explanations include the obesity
and for mortality in 110 countries (Fig. 6B). There are ex- epidemic, given the stronger and more consistent associa-
ceptions, most notably in terms of deaths, with the dis- tion of excess body weight with estrogen receptor-positive
ease preceded by lung cancer in Australia/New Zealand, cancer,36-39 and the impact of mammographic screening,
Northern Europe, Northern America, and China (part of which preferentially detects slow-growing estrogen receptor-
Eastern Asia) and by cervical cancer in many countries in positive cancers.40,41 Countries in historically high-risk re-
sub-Saharan Africa. gions have benefited most from progress through several

12
TABLE 3. Incidence (Cases, Age-Standardized Rate, Cumulative Risk) and Mortality (Deaths, Age-Standardized Rate, Cumulative Risk) for 36 Cancers and All Cancers
Combined by Sex in 2020
INCIDENCE MORTALITY
AGE- CUMULATIVE AGE- CUMULATIVE AGE- CUMULATIVE AGE- CUMULATIVE

STANDARDIZED RISK, AGES STANDARDIZED RISK, AGES STANDARDIZED RISK, AGES STANDARDIZED RISK, AGES
CANCER SITE CASES RATE (WORLD) 0-74 YEARS, % CASES RATE (WORLD) 0-74 YEARS, % CASES RATE (WORLD) 0-74 YEARS, % CASES RATE (WORLD) 0-74 YEARS, %
Lip, oral cavity 264,211 6.0 0.68 113,502 2.3 0.26 125,022 2.8 0.32 52,735 1.0 0.12
CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

Salivary glands 29,694 0.7 0.07 23,889 0.5 0.05 13,353 0.3 0.03 9425 0.2 0.02
Oropharynx 79,045 1.8 0.22 19,367 0.4 0.05 39,590 0.9 0.11 8553 0.2 0.02
Nasopharynx 96,371 2.2 0.24 36,983 0.8 0.09 58,094 1.3 0.16 21,914 0.5 0.05
Hypopharynx 70,254 1.6 0.19 14,000 0.3 0.03 32,303 0.7 0.09 6296 0.1 0.01
Esophagus 418,350 9.3 1.15 185,750 3.6 0.44 374,313 8.3 1.01 169,763 3.2 0.38
Stomach 719,523 15.8 1.87 369,580 7.0 0.79 502,788 11.0 1.29 266,005 4.9 0.55
Colon 600,896 13.1 1.49 547,619 10.0 1.12 302,117 6.4 0.66 274,741 4.6 0.45
Rectum 443,358 9.8 1.18 288,852 5.6 0.65 204,104 4.4 0.50 134,918 2.4 0.26
Anus 21,706 0.5 0.06 29,159 0.6 0.07 9416 0.2 0.02 9877 0.2 0.02
Liver 632,320 14.1 1.65 273,357 5.2 0.60 577,522 12.9 1.49 252,658 4.8 0.55
Gallbladder 41,062 0.9 0.10 74,887 1.4 0.16 30,265 0.7 0.07 54,430 1.0 0.11
Pancreas 262,865 5.7 0.66 232,908 4.1 0.45 246,840 5.3 0.62 219,163 3.8 0.41
Larynx 160,265 3.6 0.45 24,350 0.5 0.06 85,351 1.9 0.23 14,489 0.3 0.03
Lung 1,435,943 31.5 3.78 770,828 14.6 1.77 1,188,679 25.9 3.08 607,465 11.2 1.34
Melanoma of skin 173,844 3.8 0.42 150,791 3.0 0.33 32,385 0.7 0.07 24,658 0.4 0.05
Nonmelanoma of skina 722,348 15.1 1.40 475,725 7.9 0.75 37,596 0.8 0.07 26,135 0.4 0.04
Mesothelioma 21,560 0.5 0.05 9310 0.2 0.02 18,681 0.4 0.04 7597 0.1 0.02
Kaposi sarcoma 23,413 0.5 0.05 10,857 0.3 0.02 9929 0.2 0.02 5157 0.1 0.01
Breast 2,261,419 47.8 5.20 684,996 13.6 1.49
Vulva 45,240 0.9 0.09 17,427 0.3 0.03
Vagina 17,908 0.4 0.04 7995 0.2 0.02
Cervix uteri 604,127 13.3 1.39 341,831 7.3 0.82
Corpus uteri 417,367 8.7 1.05 97,370 1.8 0.22
Ovary 313,959 6.6 0.73 207,252 4.2 0.49
Penis 36,068 0.8 0.09 13,211 0.3 0.03
Prostate 1,414,259 30.7 3.86 375,304 7.7 0.63
TABLE 3. (Continued)
INCIDENCE MORTALITY
AGE- CUMULATIVE AGE- CUMULATIVE AGE- CUMULATIVE AGE- CUMULATIVE

STANDARDIZED RISK, AGES STANDARDIZED RISK, AGES STANDARDIZED RISK, AGES STANDARDIZED RISK, AGES
CANCER SITE CASES RATE (WORLD) 0-74 YEARS, % CASES RATE (WORLD) 0-74 YEARS, % CASES RATE (WORLD) 0-74 YEARS, % CASES RATE (WORLD) 0-74 YEARS, %
Testis 74,458 1.8 0.14 9334 0.2 0.02

Kidney 271,249 6.1 0.70 160,039 3.2 0.36 115,600 2.5 0.28 63,768 1.2 0.12
Bladder 440,864 9.5 1.05 132,414 2.4 0.26 158,785 3.3 0.30 53,751 0.9 0.08
Brain, nervous system 168,346 3.9 0.40 139,756 3.0 0.31 138,277 3.2 0.34 113,052 2.4 0.26
Thyroid 137,287 3.1 0.33 448,915 10.1 1.02 15,906 0.3 0.04 27,740 0.5 0.05
Hodgkin lymphoma 48,981 1.2 0.10 34,106 0.8 0.07 14,288 0.3 0.03 9088 0.2 0.02
Non-Hodgkin 304,151 6.9 0.73 240,201 4.8 0.52 147,217 3.3 0.33 112,576 2.1 0.21
lymphoma
Multiple myeloma 98,613 2.2 0.25 77,791 1.5 0.17 65,197 1.4 0.15 51,880 0.9 0.10
Leukemia 269,503 6.3 0.59 205,016 4.5 0.41 177,818 4.0 0.38 133,776 2.7 0.26
All sites excluding non- 9,342,957 206.9 21.50 8,751,759 178.1 17.94 5,491,214 120.0 12.53 4,403,188 83.7 8.83
melanoma of skin
All sites 10,065,305 222.0 22.60 9,227,484 186.0 18.55 5,528,810 120.8 12.59 4,429,323 84.2 8.86
a
Incidence excludes basal cell carcinoma, whereas mortality includes all types of nonmelanoma skin cancer.
Source: GLOBOCAN 2020
VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2021

13
FIGURE 8. Region-Specific Incidence and Mortality Age-Standardized Rates for Female Breast Cancer in 2020. Rates are shown in descending order of the
world (W) age-standardized incidence rate, and the highest national age-standardized rates for incidence and mortality are superimposed. Source: GLOBOCAN
2020.
breakthroughs in effective treatment, with mortality rates and by 3% to 4% per year in South Africa (Eastern Cape)
decreasing since the late 1980s and the early 1990s.42,43 and Zimbabwe (Harare).44 Mortality rates in sub-Saharan
Incidence rates of breast cancer are rising fast in tran- African regions have increased simultaneously and rank now
sitioning countries in South America, Africa,44 and Asia45 in the world highest (Fig. 8), reflecting weak health infra-
as well as in high-income Asian countries ( Japan and the structure and subsequently poor survival outcomes. The
Republic of Korea),30 where rates are historically low. 5-year age-standardized relative survival in 12 sub-Saharan
Dramatic changes in lifestyle, sociocultural, and built African countries was 66% for cases diagnosed during 2008
environments brought about by growing economies and an through 2015, sharply contrasting with 85% to 90% for cases
increase in the proportion of women in the industrial work- diagnosed in high-income countries during 2010 through
force have had an impact on the prevalence of breast cancer 2014.46 The country-specific estimate was as low as 12%
risk factors—the postponement of childbearing and having in Uganda (Kyadondo) and 20% to 60% in South Africa
fewer children, greater levels of excess body weight and phys- (Eastern Cape), Kenya (Eldoret), and Zimbabwe (Harare),47
ical inactivity—and have resulted in a convergence toward comparable to 55% in the US state of Connecticut and 57%
the risk factor profile of western countries and narrowing in- in Norway during the late 1940s,48 3 decades before the
ternational gaps in breast cancer morbidity. introduction of mammography screening and modern
Some of the most rapid increases are occurring in therapies.
sub-Saharan Africa. Between the mid-1990s and the Low survival rates in sub-Saharan Africa are largely attrib-
mid-2010s, incidence rates increased by >5% per year in utable to late-stage presentation. According to a report sum-
Malawi (Blantyre), Nigeria (Ibadan), and the Seychelles marizing 83 studies across 17 sub-Saharan African countries,

77% of all staged cases were stage III/IV at diagnosis.49 2 times higher in men than in women, although the male-to-
Because organized, population-based mammography screen- female ratio varies widely across regions, ranging from 1.2 in
ing programs may not be cost effective or feasible in low- Northern America to 5.6 in Northern Africa (Fig. 9). Lung
resource settings,50 efforts to promote early detection through cancer incidence and mortality rates are 3 to 4 times higher in
improved breast cancer awareness and clinical breast examina- transitioned countries than in transitioning countries (Fig. 7);
tion by skilled health providers,51,52 followed by timely and this pattern may well change as the tobacco epidemic evolves
appropriate treatment, are essential components to improv- given that 80% of smokers aged ≥15 years resided in low-
ing survival.53 A recent study conducted in 5 sub-Saharan income and middle-income countries (LMICs) in 2016.72
African countries estimated that 28% to 37% of breast cancer Among men, lung cancer is the most commonly diag-
deaths in these countries could be prevented through earlier nosed cancer in 36 countries (Fig. 5A), while it is the leading
diagnosis of symptomatic disease and adequate treatment, cause of cancer death in 93 countries (Fig. 6A). The highest
with a fairly equal contribution of each.54 The Breast Health incidence rates are observed in Micronesia/Polynesia, Eastern
Global Initiative has established a series of evidence-based, and Southern Europe, Eastern Asia, and Western Asia, where
resource-stratified guidelines that supports phased implemen- Turkey has the highest rate among men globally (Fig. 9).
tation into real-world practice.55-57 Incidence rates remain generally low in Africa, although
Establishing primary prevention programs for breast they range from intermediate to high in both Southern and
cancer remains a challenge. Nevertheless, efforts to de- Northern regions. Among women, lung cancer is the leading
crease excess body weight and alcohol consumption and to cause of cancer death in 25 countries in Northern America,
encourage physical activity and breastfeeding may have an Oceania, and parts of Europe (Fig. 6B). The highest inci-
impact in stemming the incidence of breast cancer world- dence rates are in Northern America, Northern and Western
wide. Population-wide breast cancer screening programs aim Europe, Micronesia/Polynesia, and Australia/New Zealand,
to reduce breast cancer mortality through early detection and with Hungary having the highest country-specific rates
effective treatment.58-61 The WHO recommends organized, (Fig. 9). Rates are also high in Eastern Asia, largely reflecting
population-based mammography screening every 2 years for the high burden among Chinese women, which is thought
women at average risk for breast cancer aged 50 to 69 years to reflect high outdoor ambient air pollution and exposures
in well resourced settings.50 The current guidelines from the to other inhalable agents, such as household burning of
American Cancer Society recommend that women aged 45 solid fuels for heating and cooking given their low smoking
to 54 years should be screened annually, women aged 40 to 44 prevalence.73,74 The global proportion of lung cancer deaths
years should have the opportunity to begin annual screening, attributable to outdoor ambient PM2.5 (known as fine par-
women aged ≥55 years should transition to biennial screen- ticulate matter) air pollution was 14% in 2017, ranging from
ing or have the opportunity to continue screening annually, 4.7% in the United States to 20.5% in China.74
and women should continue screening as long as their overall International variation in lung cancer rates and trends
health is good and they have a life expectancy ≥10 years.62 largely reflects the maturity of the tobacco epidemic,75
Mammographic screening, however, has limitations, such as with patterns in mortality paralleling those in incidence be-
overdiagnosis and overtreatment.63-65 There are opportuni- cause of the high fatality rate. Smoking was first established
ties to improve the cost effectiveness and benefit-to-harm among men in several high-income countries, including
the United Kingdom, the United States, Finland, Australia,
ratio of screening by adopting a risk-stratified screening strat-
New Zealand, the Netherlands, Singapore, and, more re-
egy using existing and evolving risk prediction models.66-69
cently, Germany, Uruguay, and the remaining Nordic coun-
Ongoing screening trials are evaluating the clinical accept-
tries and was followed by a steep increase in lung cancer.76,77
ability and utility of risk-stratified screening programs in the
Subsequent declines in lung cancer followed peak smoking
general population.70,71
prevalence by several decades and were first observed in
Lung cancer young birth cohorts.78
With an estimated 2.2 million new cancer cases and 1.8 mil- In contrast, among women, the tobacco epidemic is less
lion deaths, lung cancer is the second most commonly diag- advanced and defined,75 and most countries are still ob-
nosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer death in 2020, serving a rising incidence of lung cancer.79 Only a relatively
representing approximately one in 10 (11.4%) cancers diag- few populations, eg, the United States and Switzerland,
nosed and one in 5 (18.0%) deaths (Table 1, Fig. 4). Lung show signs of a peak and stabilization or decline, albeit at
cancer is the leading cause of cancer morbidity and mortal- a slower pace compared with those in men.79,80 As a result
ity in men, whereas, in women, it ranks third for incidence, of this sex-specific trend, incidence rates among women
after breast and colorectal cancer, and second for mortality, are approaching or equaling those among men in several
after breast cancer. Incidence and mortality rates are roughly countries in Europe and Northern America.79 From 2006

Age-standardized (W) incidence rate per 100,000
Males Females
FIGURE 9. Region-Specific Incidence Age-Standardized Rates by Sex for Lung Cancer Among Men and Women in 2020. Rates are shown in
descending order of the world (W) age-standardized rate in men, and the highest national rates among men and women are superimposed. Source:
GLOBOCAN 2020.
to 2008, female incidence rates were even higher than male interventions to reduce the demand of tobacco, the WHO
incidence (ages 35-64 years) in Denmark, Iceland, and Framework Convention on Tobacco Control introduced the
Sweden.79 More recent studies revealed a higher female- MPOWER package, consisting of 6 policy intervention strat-
to-male incidence ratio in successively younger birth cohorts egies: Monitor tobacco use and prevention policies, Protect
in the United States81 and subsequently in more countries, people from tobacco smoke, Offer help to quit tobacco use,
including Canada, Denmark, Germany, New Zealand, the Warn about the dangers of tobacco, Enforce bans on tobacco
Netherlands,82 because of increasing incidence rates among advertising, promotion and sponsorship, and Raise taxes on
women in contrast to steep declines among men. The in- tobacco.85 Since its introduction by the WHO, progress has
creasing female-to-male incidence ratio, however, was not been substantial. In 2018, 65% of the world’s population in
fully explained by sex-specific differences in smoking be- 136 countries was covered by at least one select measure at a
haviour.81,82 In countries where the epidemic is at an ear- comprehensive level compared with 15% of the population
lier stage, including China, Indonesia, and several African in 43 countries in 2007.86 Furthermore, the prevalence of
countries, smoking has either peaked recently or continues tobacco use has declined in 116 countries, especially those
to increase,83 hence lung cancer rates will likely increase for with stronger implementation measures. In 2018, for the
at least the next few decades barring interventions to accel- first time, the number of men using tobacco globally began
erate smoking cessation or reduce initiation.84 to decline despite population growth, with the decline in the
With about two-thirds of lung cancer deaths worldwide number of female tobacco users continuing since 2000.87
attributable to smoking, the disease can be largely prevented However, progress is uneven, and there are 59 countries that
through effective tobacco-control policies and regulations. have yet to adopt a single MPOWER measure, 49 of which
To assist the country-level implementation of effective are LMICs.86

The survival of patients with lung cancer at 5 years after prevalence of excess body weight, which are independently
diagnosis is only 10% to 20% in most countries among associated with colorectal cancer risk.95 Additional risk fac-
those diagnosed during 2010 through 2014, although rates tors include heavy alcohol consumption, cigarette smoking,
are higher in Japan (33%), Israel (27%), and the Republic of and consumption of red or processed meat, whereas calcium
Korea (25%).46 Screening with low-dose computed tomog- supplements and adequate consumption of whole grains,
raphy (CT) for high-risk individuals (current and former fiber, and dairy products appear to decrease risk.96 Primary
heavy smokers) can help diagnose cancer early, when success- prevention remains the key strategy to reduce the increasing
ful treatment is more likely. The efficacy of annual low-dose global burden of colorectal cancer. The expense of mounting
CT screening in reducing lung cancer mortality has been a mass screening effort in most LMICs is not currently justi-
confirmed in several independent, international, randomized fied given the significant costs of colonoscopy and inadequate
controlled clinical trials.88-91 Recently, the Dutch-Belgian implementation of diagnostic and treatment services. Some
lung cancer screening trial reported that volume CT screen- evidence, however, suggests that colorectal cancer screening
ing, with the introduction of growth-rate assessment as an with more affordable and less invasive methods (guaiac test-
imaging biomarker for indeterminate tests, resulted in a lung ing and fecal immunochemical tests) may be cost-effective,
cancer mortality reduction at 10 years of follow-up of 24% at least in some settings of emerging economies, and offer
in men and 33% in women compared with no screening.91 options for control of the growing burden of the disease.97,98
This outcome was also accompanied by low referral rates for Declines in colorectal cancer incidence in some high-in-
additional assessments, resulting in significant reductions in cidence countries have been attributed to population-level
false-positive tests and unnecessary workup procedures.91 changes toward healthier lifestyle choices (eg, declines in
However, the translation of this benefit to the general popu- smoking) and the uptake of screening,94,99 although accel-
lation has proven challenging, likely impeding the implemen- erated progress since the early 2000s is chiefly attributed to
tation of lung cancer screening as part of a global strategy to increased colonoscopy screening and the removal of precur-
reduce the disease burden, at least in the near term. sor lesions.100-102 However, favorable trends for adults aged
≥50 years mask increasing rates of early-onset colorectal
Colorectal cancer
cancer (age at diagnosis <50 years) in many countries, in-
More than 1.9 million new colorectal cancer (including
cluding the United States, Canada, Australia, and 6 other
anus) cases and 935,000 deaths were estimated to occur in
high-income countries, with incidence rising by 1% to 4%
2020, representing about one in 10 cancer cases and deaths
per year.103-105 Although rising incidence in young birth co-
(Table 1). Overall, colorectal ranks third in terms of inci-
horts points to the influence of dietary patterns, excess body
dence, but second in terms of mortality (Fig. 4). Incidence
weight, and lifestyle factors, further research is needed to elu-
rates are approximately 4-fold higher in transitioned coun-
cidate specific underlying causal factors because information
tries compared with transitioning countries, but there is less
on risk factors is currently based almost exclusively on data
variation in the mortality rates because of higher fatality in
from older cohorts. To mitigate the rising burden of early-
transitioning countries (Fig. 7). There is an approximately
onset colorectal cancer, the American Cancer Society
9-fold variation in colon cancer incidence rates by world re-
lowered the recommended age for screening initiation for
gions, with the highest rates in European regions, Australia/
individuals at average risk from 50 to 45 years in 2018,106
New Zealand, and Northern America, with Hungary and
and, in October 2020, the US Preventive Services Task Force
Norway ranking first in men and women, respectively
concurred in a draft recommendation statement.107
(Fig. 10A). Rectal cancer incidence rates have a similar re-
gional distribution, although rates in Eastern Asia rank Prostate cancer
among the highest (Fig. 10B). Rates of both colon and rectal With an estimated almost 1.4 million new cases and 375,000
cancer incidence tend to be low in most regions of Africa deaths worldwide (Table 1), prostate cancer is the second
and in South Central Asia. most frequent cancer and the fifth leading cause of cancer
Colorectal cancer can be considered a marker of socio- death among men in 2020 (Fig. 4B). Incidence rates are
economic development, and, in countries undergoing major 3-fold higher in transitioned than in transitioning countries
transition, incidence rates tend to rise uniformly with in- (37.5 and 11.3 per 100,000, respectively), whereas mortal-
creasing HDI.92,93 Incidence rates have been steadily rising ity rates are less variable (8.1 and 5.9 per 100,000, respec-
in many countries in Eastern Europe, South Eastern and tively) (Fig. 7A). It is the most frequently diagnosed cancer
South Central Asia, and South America.22,94 The increase in men in over one-half (112 of 185) of the countries of the
in formerly low-risk and lower HDI countries likely reflects world (Fig. 5A). Incidence rates vary from 6.3 to 83.4 per
changes in lifestyle factors and diet, ie, shifts toward an in- 100,000 men across regions, with the highest rates found
creased intake of animal-source foods and a more sedentary in Northern and Western Europe, the Caribbean, Australia/
lifestyle, leading to decreased physical activity and increased New Zealand, Northern America, and Southern Africa

Males Females
Males Females
FIGURE 10. Region-Specific Incidence Age-Standardized Rates by Sex for Cancers of the (A) Colon and (B) Rectum (Including Anus) in 2020. Rates are shown
in descending order of the world (W) age-standardized rate among men, and the highest national rates among men and women are superimposed. Source:
GLOBOCAN 2020.
and the lowest rates in Asia and Northern Africa (Fig. 11). sub-Saharan Africa, and Micronesia/Polynesia. Prostate
Regional patterns of mortality rates do not follow those of cancer is the leading cause of cancer death among men
incidence, with the highest mortality rates in the Caribbean, in 48 countries, including many countries in sub-Saharan

Age-standardized (W) rate per 100,000
Incidence Mortality
FIGURE 11. Region-Specific Incidence and Mortality Age-Standardized Rates for Prostate Cancer in 2020. Rates are shown in descending order of the world
(W) age-standardized incidence rate, and the highest national age-standardized rates for incidence and mortality are superimposed. Source: GLOBOCAN 2020.
Africa, the Caribbean, and Central and South America (eg, a result of the widespread introduction of prostate-specific
Ecuador, Chile, and Venezuela), as well as Sweden (Fig. 6A). antigen (PSA) testing, allowing the detection of preclinical
For a disease as common as prostate cancer, relatively lit- cancers.111 The dramatic increases were followed by sharp
tle is known about its etiology. Established risk factors are reductions within a few years, likely reflecting a depletion of
limited to advancing age, family history of this malignancy, prevalent latent cancers in the general population. Further
and certain genetic mutations (eg, BRCA1 and BRCA2) declines in the late 2000s are attributed to a reduction in
and conditions (Lynch syndrome). Black men in the United the use of PSA testing,110-112 reflecting changes in the
States and the Caribbean have the highest incidence rates recommendations concerning PSA-based screening of as-
globally, supporting the role of Western African ances- ymptomatic men.113-116 In many countries in Northern and
try in modulating prostate cancer risk.108 There have been Western European, alongside a few in Southern and
few lifestyle and environmental factors identified to date Central America and Asia, less marked but similar pat-
for which the evidence is convincing, although this may be terns were observed, reflecting the later and more gradual
accumulating for smoking, excess body weight, and some adoption of PSA testing.110,111,117,118 In contrast, incidence
nutritional factors that may increase the risk of advanced rates continue to increase in China and countries in Eastern
prostate cancer.109 Europe (Belarus, Bulgaria, Slovakia).118 Rapidly increasing
International differences in prostate cancer diagnostic trends have been also found in sub-Saharan Africa, with
practices are likely the greatest contributor to the varia- annual increases ranging from 2% to 10% reported in 9
tion in prostate cancer incidence rates worldwide.110 In the countries (eg, South Africa, Kenya, Uganda, Mozambique,
United States, Canada, and Australia, there were rapid in- Zimbabwe) over the time period examined between 1995
creases in incidence rates in the late 1980s and early 1990s as and 2018.119 Reasons for the uniform rise are unclear but

are thought to primarily reflect increased awareness and Although stomach cancer is often reported as a single
improvements in the health care system, enabling a broader entity, it can generally be classified into two topographi-
use of PSA testing and possibly increased use of transure- cal subsites, the cardia (upper stomach) and noncardia
thral resections.119 (lower stomach). These entities differ in terms of risk fac-
Mortality rates for prostate cancer have decreased in tors, carcinogenesis, and epidemiologic patterns. Chronic
most high-income countries since the mid-1990s, includ- Helicobacter pylori infection is considered the principal cause
ing those in Northern America, Oceania, and Northern of noncardia gastric cancer, with almost all cases attributed
and Western Europe,111,117,120 likely reflecting advance- to this bacterium.127,128 The prevalence of H. pylori infec-
ments in treatment and earlier detection through increased tion is extraordinarily high, infecting 50% of the world’s
screening.121,122 During the same period, rates increased population,129 and its geographic variation correlates rea-
in many countries in Central and Eastern Europe, Asia, sonably with that of stomach cancer incidence. However,
and Africa111 and continued until recently in some coun- <5% of infected hosts will develop cancer, likely because of
tries (eg, Thailand, Bulgaria, and Ukraine),118 which differences in bacterial genetics, host genetics, age of infec-
may partly reflect an underlying rise in incidence trends tion acquisition, and environmental factors.130 Established
combined with limited access to PSA testing and effec- risk factors beyond H. pylori for noncardia gastric cancer
tive treatment. A more contemporary trend (2009-2013) include alcohol consumption, tobacco smoking, and foods
in high-resource countries signals stabilization of mor- preserved by salting.96 Low fruit intake and the high con-
tality declines (eg, the United States, Denmark, Norway, sumption of processed meat and of grilled or barbecued
Switzerland, Spain, Argentina, New Zealand, Israel, and meat and fish may increase the risk.96 Although cancers of
Japan), whereas decreasing trends continue in some coun- the gastric cardia in the presence of H. pylori infection show
tries (eg, the United Kingdom, Greece, Italy, Austria, an association with gastric atrophy, cardia cancer is not gen-
France, Germany, the Netherlands, Brazil, Canada, and erally associated with H. pylori infection131 and may even
Australia).118 In the United States, there has been an in- be inversely associated in some populations.132 Emerging
crease in regional and advanced-stage cancer diagnoses evidence suggests a dual etiology for cardia gastric cancer,
since around 2010123 and a concomitant increase in ad- with some cancers linked to H. pylori infection and some
vanced-stage death rates during 2012 through 2017.124 linked to excess body weight and gastroesophageal reflux
The current guideline from the American Cancer Society disease injury, resembling characteristics of esophageal ade-
recommends informed/shared decision-making (ie, an in- nocarcinoma (AC).133
dividual choice of men with their health care provider after Incidence and mortality rates of noncardia gastric cancer
receiving information about the uncertainties, risks, and have been steadily declining over the last one-half century
potential benefits associated with the screening) for PSA in most populations. The trends are attributed to the un-
testing in men at average risk, beginning at age 50 years.125 planned triumph of prevention, including a decreased preva-
In 2018, the US Preventive Services Task Force upgraded lence of H. pylori and improvements in the preservation and
its recommendation to informed decision for men aged 55 storage of foods.134 The historical trends in the incidence of
to 69 years126; the impact of this change on cancer rates is gastric cardia were largely reported in low-risk populations,
yet to be determined. in which the contribution of cardia versus noncardia gastric
cancer to the overall burden tends to be greatest; incidence
Stomach cancer rates increased from the 1960s to the 1980s in the United
Stomach cancer remains an important cancer worldwide and Kingdom135 and the United States136 and appeared to sta-
is responsible for over one million new cases in 2020 and an bilize during the more recent period in the United States137
estimated 769,000 deaths (equating to one in every 13 deaths and the Netherlands.138
globally), ranking fifth for incidence and fourth for mortal- Recent notable findings are the increase in the incidence
ity globally (Table 1, Fig. 4A). Rates are 2-fold higher in of stomach cancer (cardia and noncardia gastric cancers com-
men than in women. In men, it is the most commonly diag- bined) among young adults (aged <50 years) in both low-risk
nosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer death in several and high-risk countries, including the United States, Canada,
South Central Asian countries, including Iran, Afghanistan, the United Kingdom, Chile, and Belarus.139,140 A previous
Turkmenistan, and Kyrgyzstan (Figs. 5A and 6A). Incidence US study focusing on noncardia gastric cancer reported that
rates are highest in Eastern Asia ( Japan and Mongolia, the increases among young individuals was largely confined to
countries with the highest incidence in men and women, re- non-Hispanic Whites and people living in more affluent
spectively) and Eastern Europe,18 whereas rates in Northern counties.141,142 It has been postulated that the rising preva-
America and Northern Europe are generally low and equiva- lence of autoimmune gastritis and dysbiosis of the gastric mi-
lent to those seen across the African regions (Fig. 12). crobiome, possibly relevant to increased use of antibiotics and

Males Females
FIGURE 12. Region-Specific Incidence Age-Standardized Rates by Sex for Stomach Cancer in 2020. Rates are shown in descending order of the world (W)
age-standardized rate among men, and the highest national rates among men and women are superimposed. Source: GLOBOCAN 2020.
acid suppressants, may have contributed to the paradoxical in Mongolia, Thailand, Cambodia, Egypt, Guatemala
increase of stomach cancer among younger generations.141,142 among both men and women and in an additional 18 coun-
tries among men (Fig. 6).
Liver cancer
Primary liver cancer includes hepatocellular carcinoma
Primary liver cancer is the sixth most commonly diagnosed
cancer and the third leading cause of cancer death world- (HCC) (comprising 75%-85% of cases) and intrahepatic
wide in 2020, with approximately 906,000 new cases and cholangiocarcinoma (10%-15%), as well as other rare types.
830,000 deaths (Table 1, Fig. 4A). Rates of both incidence The main risk factors for HCC are chronic infection with
and mortality are 2 to 3 times higher among men than hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV), af-
among women in most regions (Fig. 13), and liver cancer latoxin-contaminated foods, heavy alcohol intake, excess
143
ranks fifth in terms of global incidence and second in terms body weight, type 2 diabetes, and smoking. The major
of mortality for men (Fig. 4B). Incidence rates among men risk factors vary from region to region. In most high-risk
are 2.4-fold greater in transitioned countries (Fig. 7), but HCC areas (China, the Republic of Korea, and sub-Saharan
the highest rates are observed mainly in transitioning coun- Africa), the key determinants are chronic HBV infection, af-
tries, with the disease being the most common cancer in 11 latoxin exposure, or both; whereas, in other countries ( Japan,
geographically diverse countries in Eastern Asia (Mongolia, Italy, and Egypt), HCV infection is likely the predominant
which has rates far exceeding any other country), South- cause. In Mongolia, HBV and HCV and co-infections of
Eastern Asia (eg, Thailand, Cambodia, and Viet Nam), HBV carriers with HCV or hepatitis delta viruses, as well as
and Northern and Western Africa (eg, Egypt and Niger) alcohol consumption, all contribute to the high burden.144
(Figs. 5A). Liver cancer is the leading cause of cancer death Although risk factors tend to vary substantially by geographic

Males Females
FIGURE 13. Region-Specific Incidence Age-Standardized Rates by Sex for Liver Cancer in 2020. Rates are shown in descending order of the world (W) age-
standardized rate among men, and the highest national rates among men and women are superimposed. Source: GLOBOCAN 2020.
region, major risk factors for cholangiocarcinoma include HCC incidence rates have sharply decreased since 2000,
liver flukes (eg, in the Northeast region of Thailand, where whereas primary liver cancer continues to rise.149
Opisthorchis viverrini is endemic),145 metabolic conditions The major risk factors appear to be in transition, with
(including obesity, diabetes, and nonalcoholic fatty liver the prevalence of HBV and HCV declining and excess
disease), excess alcohol consumption, and HBV or HCV body weight and diabetes increasing in many regions.151 In
infection.146-148 China, the rates of liver cancer have begun to plateau in re-
Incidence and mortality rates of liver cancer have de- cent birth cohorts, potentially offsetting the gains achieved
creased in many high-risk countries in Eastern and South- for the last 3 decades.149 Furthermore, incidence rates in
Eastern Asia, including China, Taiwan, the Republic of Korea, formerly low-risk countries—most countries across Europe,
the Philippines, since the late 1970s and in Japan since the Northern America, Australia/New Zealand, and South
1990s.94,149 Rates in Italy have also declined since 1995.94,149 America—have increased or stabilized at a higher level in
These trends likely reflect declines in the population sero- recent years,149,152 possibly caused in part by the changing
prevalence of HBV and HCV as well as a reduction in afla- prevalence of excess body weight and diabetes.
toxin exposure. Vaccination against HBV, which has been a Although the relevance of nonviral risk factors is becom-
major public health success, dramatically reduced the preva- ing more important on the burden of liver cancer, elimina-
lence of HBV infection and the incidence of HCC in high- tion of viral hepatitis remains the key strategy for primary
risk countries in Eastern Asia, where it was first introduced prevention of liver cancer globally, as HBV infection and
in the early 1980s.150 Although primary liver cancer trends HCV infection account for 56% and 20% of liver cancer
largely reflect those of HCC, there are notable exceptions; deaths worldwide, respectively.153 By the end of 2019,
in Thailand, where HCC accounts for <30% of liver cancer, 189 countries had introduced the HBV vaccine into

their national infant immunization programs, and global death among Bangladeshi men and women and among
coverage with 3 doses of hepatitis B vaccine was esti- Malawian men (Fig. 6).
mated at 85%.154 The global coverage of HBV birth- The geographic variation in esophageal cancer inci-
dose, however, was low at 43%, varying up to 84% in the dence substantially differs between the 2 most common
WHO Western Pacific region and falling to only 6% in histologic subtypes (squamous cell carcinoma [SCC] and
the WHO African region,155 where HBV predominates adenocarcinoma [AC]), which have quite different etiol-
as a cause of liver cancer.153 Countries with the high- ogies. The incidence of esophageal SCC in certain high-
est HCV prevalence are mainly LMICs in which a large risk areas in Asia (eg, China) is broadly in decline and
proportion of infections occur in the health care settings may have been preceded by economic gains and dietary
through unsafe injections and other invasive procedures.156 improvements, whereas, in several high-income countries
Enhancing infection control through safety measures, (eg, the United States, Australia, France, and the United
such as screening of transfusions, prevention of mother- Kingdom), the reductions are considered primarily due
to-child transmission, the provision of clean needles, and to declines in cigarette smoking.161 Heavy drinking and
infection control in health care facilities, is a key aspect of smoking and their synergistic effects are the major risk
HCV control.156 Currently, there is no vaccine available factors for SCC in western settings.161 However, in lower
to prevent HCV infection, although an 8-week to 12- income countries, including parts of Asia and sub-Saharan
week course of orally administered, direct-acting antiviral Africa, the major risk factors for SCC—which usually com-
agents appears to cure HCV infection in most instances.157 prises over 90% of all esophageal cancer cases—have yet
Yet chronic infections are usually asymptomatic, and to be elucidated, although dietary components (eg, nutri-
many infected persons remain undiagnosed; as of 2015, an tional deficiencies, nitrosamines) have been suspected.162
Additional suspected risk factors for SCC include betel
estimated 290 million individuals remained undiagnosed
quid chewing in the Indian subcontinent and consumption
worldwide.158 A policy shift toward treating all individuals
of pickled vegetables (eg, in China) and very hot food and
with HCV is expected to have the potential to decrease
beverages (eg, in Uruguay, Iran, and Tanzania).161
hepatitis-associated morbidity and mortality.158 However,
AC represents roughly two-thirds of esophageal cancer
challenges to ensuring widespread access to treatment in
cases in high-income countries, with excess body weight,
different settings vary.156 In most LMICs, affordability of
gastroesophageal reflux disease, and Barrett’s esophagus
viral testing and treatment is a major barrier,158,159 under-
among the key risk factors.161 Across high-income coun-
scoring the need for concerted and coordinated efforts by
tries, incidence rates of AC are thus rising rapidly in part
local governments, private and nonprivate public health or-
because of increased excess body weight and increasing gas-
ganizations, and industries to scale up screen-and-treat in-
troesophageal reflux disease and possibly because of decreas-
terventions for viral hepatitis.160 In high-income countries,
ing levels of chronic infection with H. pylori, which has been
those most at risk are often vulnerable populations, includ- inversely associated with AC.163 These trends are predicted
ing undocumented immigrants, injection drug users, those to continue in the near future, with AC surpassing SCC in
who have been incarcerated, and homeless and poor people, many high-income countries; excess body weight is likely to
who experience many barriers to health care access.158,159 be an increasingly important contributor to the future bur-
Esophageal cancer den of esophageal cancer.163
Esophageal cancer ranks seventh in terms of incidence Cervical cancer
(604,000 new cases) and sixth in mortality overall (544,000 Cervical cancer is the fourth most frequently diagnosed
deaths), the latter signifying that esophageal cancer is re- cancer and the fourth leading cause of cancer death in
sponsible for one in every 18 cancer deaths in 2020 (Fig. 4, women, with an estimated 604,000 new cases and 342,000
Table 1). Approximately 70% of cases occur in men, and there deaths worldwide in 2020 (Table 1, Fig. 4). Cervical can-
is a 2-fold to 3-fold difference in incidence and mortality cer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in 23 coun-
rates between the sexes (Table 3). Rates are higher in transi- tries (Fig. 5B) and is the leading cause of cancer death
tioned versus transitioning countries for men but compara- in 36 countries (Fig. 6B), with the vast majority of these
ble for women (Fig. 7).18,94 Eastern Asia exhibits the highest countries found in sub-Saharan Africa, Melanesia, South
regional incidence rates for both men and women, in part America, and South-Eastern Asia. The highest re-
because of the large burden in China, followed by Southern gional incidence and mortality is in sub-Saharan Africa
Africa, Eastern Africa, Northern Europe, and South Central (Fig. 15), with rates elevated in Eastern Africa (Malawi
Asia (Fig. 14). Cape Verde and Malawi have the highest has the world’s highest incidence and mortality rate),
incidence rates globally in men and women, respectively Southern Africa, and Middle Africa. Incidence rates are
(Fig. 14). Esophageal cancer is the leading cause of cancer 7 to 10 times lower in Northern America, Australia/New

FIGURE 14. Region-Specific Incidence Age-Standardized Rates by Sex for Esophageal Cancer in 2020. Rates are shown in descending order of the world (W)
Zealand, and Western Asia (Saudi Arabia and Iraq), with are ascribed to factors linked to either increasing aver-
mortality rates varying up to 18 times.18 age socioeconomic levels or a diminishing risk of per-
Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a necessary but not suf- sistent infection with high-risk HPV, resulting from
ficient cause of cervical cancer,164 with 12 oncogenic types improvements in genital hygiene, reduced parity, and a
classified as group 1 carcinogens by the International Agency diminishing prevalence of sexually transmitted disease.169
for Research on Cancer Monographs.165 Other important Cervical cancer screening programs hastened the declines
cofactors include some sexually transmittable infections upon their implementation in many countries in Europe,
(HIV and Chlamydia trachomatis), smoking, a higher number Oceania, and Northern America, despite the observations
of childbirths, and long-term use of oral contraceptives.166 of increasing risk among younger generations of women in
Rates remain disproportionately high in transitioning ver- some of these countries170,171 and also in Japan,172 which
sus transitioned countries (18.8 vs 11.3 per 100,000 for may in part reflect changing sexual behavior and increased
incidence; 12.4 vs 5.2 per 100,000 for mortality) (Fig. 7B). transmission of HPV that is insufficiently compensated
The HDI and poverty rates have been shown to account by cytologic screening.173,174 Rates have also decreased in
for >52% of global variance in mortality.167 This disparity countries in the Caribbean and Central and South America
exists even within high-income countries like the United (eg, Argentina, Chile, Costa Rica, Brazil, and Colombia)
States, where the cervical cancer death rate is 2-fold higher during the 2000s, although incidence rates remain high.175
among women residing in high-poverty versus low-poverty In the absence of effective screening, as in Eastern Europe
areas.168 and Central Asia, there have been rapid increases in pre-
Incidence and mortality rates have declined in most mature cervical cancer mortality in recent generations.176
areas of the world for the past few decades. The declines Perhaps most concerning are the uniform rises recently

Incidence Mortality
FIGURE 15. Region-Specific Incidence and Mortality Age-Standardized Rates for Cervical Cancer in 2020. Rates are shown in descending order of the world
(W) age-standardized incidence rate, and the highest national age-standardized rates for incidence and mortality are superimposed. Source: GLOBOCAN
2020.
reported in 7 of 8 sub-Saharan African countries, includ- reasonable uptake,181,182 and the WHO currently recom-
ing the Gambia, Kenya, Malawi, the Seychelles, South mends 2-dose vaccination of girls aged 9 to 13 years as a
Africa, Uganda, and Zimbabwe.177 best buy (ie, efficacious and cost-effective interventions).183
Cervical cancer is considered nearly completely pre- High-quality screening programs are also important to
ventable because of the highly effective primary (HPV prevent cervical cancer among unvaccinated women and
vaccine) and secondary (screening) prevention measures. for oncogenic subtypes not covered by the vaccine. The
However, these measures have not been equitably im- WHO recommends the screening of women aged 30 to
plemented across and within countries. As of May 2020, 49 years—either through visual inspection with acetic acid
<30% of LMICs had implemented national HPV vacci- in low-resource settings, a Papanicolaou test (cervical cy-
nation programs compared with >80% of high-income tology) every 3 to 5 years, or HPV testing every 5 years—
countries.178 Only 44% of women in LMICs have ever coupled with timely and efficacious treatment of precan-
been screened for cervical cancer, with the lowest preva- cerous lesions.183,184 Accumulated evidence supports the
lence among women in sub-Saharan Africa (country-level use of HPV-based tests for the detection of precancer-
median, 16.9%; range, 0.9%-50.8%),179 compared with ous lesions as a preferred test for primary screening,185
>60% in high-income countries. which can also offer opportunities of self-sampling to
In such regions, of critical importance is ensuring women who live in remote areas or who are reluctant to
that resource-dependent programs of screening and vac- undergo gynecologic examination.186 Studies suggested
cination are implemented to transform the situation.180 that self-sampled HPV testing can be cost effective,
HPV vaccination programs can reduce the long-term either as an addition to existing screening programs or
future burden of cervical cancer under the assumption of as a primary screening strategy, by increasing the level of

Males Females
FIGURE 16. Region-Specific Incidence Age-Standardized Rates by Sex for Thyroid Cancer in 2020. Rates are shown in descending order of the world (W) age-
standardized rate among men, and the highest national rates among men and women are superimposed. Source: GLOBOCAN 2020.
screening attendance, lowering the cost of testing, and at- rates and resources required to achieve the goal. Findings
tracting more never-screened or long-term underscreened from recent studies, however, suggest opportunities to pre-
women.187,188 Efforts are also needed to increase access to vent cervical cancer in resource-limited settings by adopting
treatment and palliative care among patients with invasive the combined vaccination and screening strategy, which has
tumors, particularly in transitioning countries.189,190 proven to be cost effective across several LMICs194-196 and
In 2018, given the substantial global burden of cervical is expected to expedite the realization of the goal within 11
cancer and the increasing inequity, the WHO Director- to 31 years in low HDI countries.192,193 The 2020 guideline
General made a call for global action toward the elimina- update from the American Cancer Society recommends that
tion of cervical cancer (≤4 per 100,000 women worldwide) women initiate cervical cancer screening at age 25 years and
through the triple-intervention strategy of: 1) vaccinating undergo primary HPV testing every 5 years through age 65
90% of all girls by age 15 years, 2) screening 70% of women years as a preferred option.197
twice in the age range of 35 to 45 years, and 3) treating at
least 90% of all precancerous lesions detected during screen- Thyroid cancer
ing.191 A modelling exercise predicts that implementing Thyroid cancer is responsible for 586,000 cases worldwide,
this strategy will result in more than 74 million cases and ranking in 9th place for incidence in 2020. The global inci-
more than 62 million deaths averted over the course of the dence rate in women of 10.1 per 100,000 is 3-fold higher
next century.192 This goal is projected to be achieved by than that in men (Table 3), and the disease represents one
2055 to 2059 in very high HDI countries, whereas, in low in every 20 cancers diagnosed among women (Fig. 4C).
HDI countries, it might take until the end of the 21st cen- Mortality rates from the disease are much lower, with rates
tury,193 mirroring the glaring gap in underlying incidence of 0.5 per 100,000 in women and 0.3 per 100,000 in men

Males Females
FIGURE 17. Region-Specific Incidence Age-Standardized Rates by Sex for Bladder Cancer in 2020. Rates are shown in descending order of the world (W)
and an estimated 44,000 deaths in both sexes combined. attributed to the progressively available and sensitive use of
Incidence rates are higher in transitioned countries than in ultrasonography, along with increased use of other diagnostic
transitioning countries, 4.0 times for men18 and 5.5 times imaging modalities,200,201 which have likely led to a massive
for women, although mortality rates, in contrast, are rather detection and diagnosis of a large reservoir of subclinical,
similar (Fig. 7). The highest incidence rates are found in indolent lesions of the thyroid that are known to exist in the
Northern America, Australia/New Zealand, Eastern Asia, general population.202,203 Among women, overdiagnosis was
and Southern Europe for both sexes and also in Micronesia/ estimated to account for 80% to 95% of newly diagnosed
Polynesia, and South America for women (Fig. 16). The cases from 2008 to 2012 in the Republic of Korea, Belarus,
highest global rates are estimated in Cyprus for both men China, Italy, Croatia, Slovakia, and France and from 50%
and women. to 70% in Denmark, Norway, Ireland, the United Kingdom,
The etiology of thyroid cancer is not well understood. and Japan.204 Patterns similar to those observed in women,
The only well established risk factor for thyroid cancer is although of a lower magnitude were observed in men
ionizing radiation, particularly when exposure is in child- (ie, the proportion attributable to overdiagnosis was approxi-
hood, although there is evidence that other factors (excess mately 10% lower in men than in women in each country).204
body weight, greater height, hormonal exposures, and cer- A growing understanding of the substantial impact
tain environmental pollutants) may play a role.198 Since of overdiagnosis and the indolent nature of small thyroid
the 1980s, rapid rises in incidence rates and comparatively cancers has led to modifications of national and interna-
stable or even declining mortality rates have been observed tional clinical practice guidelines,205,206 which recommend
in much of the world.198,199 The rapid increase of thyroid against screening for thyroid cancer and advocate active
cancer, particularly papillary thyroid cancer, has been largely surveillance for microcarcinoma.207,208 The global impact

FIGURE 18. Region-Specific Incidence Age-Standardized Rates by Sex for nonmelanoma Skin Cancer (Excluding Basal Cell Carcinoma). Rates are shown
in descending order of the world (W) age-standardized rate among men, and the highest national rates among men and women are superimposed. Source:
GLOBOCAN 2020.
of changing guidelines needs to be determined, although Bladder cancer

the significant decline in thyroid cancer incidence rates ob- Bladder cancer is the 10th most commonly diagnosed can-
served in the Republic of Korea since 2010203,209 and in cer worldwide, with approximately 573,000 new cases and
the United States since 2015210,211 suggest that greater ac- 213,000 deaths (Table 1). It is more common in men than in
ceptance of guidelines and adoption of active surveillance women, with respective incidence and mortality rates of 9.5
may already be mitigating some of the harms related to and 3.3 per 100,000 among men, which are approximately
overdiagnosis. 4 times those among women globally (Table 3). Thus the
In addition, the change in the prevalence of risk factors disease ranks higher among men, for whom it is the 6th
may also have partly contributed to the observed trend.212 most common cancer and the 9th leading cause of cancer
A study from the United States showed an increase in dis- death (Fig. 4B). Incidence rates in both sexes are highest in
tant-stage thyroid cancer diagnoses during 1993 through Southern Europe (Greece [with the highest incidence rate
2013, coinciding with a slow increase in overall mortal- among men globally], Spain, and Italy), Western Europe
ity.213 A study linking secular trends of thyroid cancer (Belgium and the Netherlands), and Northern America,
incidence in the United States to those of the prevalence although the highest global rates are in Hungary among
of obesity estimated that 16% of overall cancers and 63% women (Fig. 17).18
of large-size tumors diagnosed from 2013 to 2015 were The observed geographic and temporal patterns of
attributable to obesity,214 suggesting that controlling obe- bladder cancer incidence worldwide appear to reflect the
sity might help to prevent the development of thyroid prevalence of tobacco smoking, although infection with
cancer. Schistosoma haematobium (parts of Northern and sub-Saharan

Males Females
FIGURE 19. Region-Specific Incidence Age-Standardized Rates by Sex for Pancreatic Cancer in 2020. Rates are shown in descending order of the world (W)
Africa) and other risk factors (occupational exposures to ar- differences in coding and registration practices need to be
omatic amines and other chemicals affecting workers in the considered in terms of inclusion or otherwise of noninva-
painting, rubber, or aluminum industries and arsenic con- sive cancers.216,220,221 Because noninvasive cancers reflect a
tamination in drinking water) may be major causes in some large proportion of all bladder cancers222 and are commonly
populations.215,216 associated with a good prognosis, mortality rates may be of
Diverging incidence trends were observed by sex in many greater utility when comparing international and temporal
countries from the 1990s and the early 2010s, with stabi- variations and assessing overall progress in controlling the
lizing or declining rates in men but some increasing trends disease.216,220
seen for women (eg, Spain, the Netherlands, Germany, and
Belarus).216,217 With the rising smoking prevalence among Other cancers common in certain regions
women, 39% of bladder cancer cases among women were es- Nonmelanoma skin cancer is responsible for over one mil-
timated to be attributable to smoking in 2014 in the United lion new cases (excluding basal cell carcinoma) and 64,000
States, compared with 49% among men.218 Mortality rates deaths globally (Table 1), with incidence rates approximately
have been in decline mainly in the most developed settings 2 times higher among men than among women (Table 3).
due in part to improvements in treatment (eg, endoscopic It is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in Australia/
resection, adjuvant instillation of chemotherapy, and in- New Zealand where the rates are the world highest in both
travesical immunotherapy)219; the exceptions are countries men and women (Fig. 18). The overall melanoma incidence
undergoing rapid economic transition, including in Central in Australia has been decreasing since 2005 (−0.7% per
and South America; some Central, Southern, and Eastern year),223 in part reflecting some successes in mass media cam-
European countries; and the Baltic countries.216 Of note, paigns,224 accompanied by policies, supportive environments

Males Females
FIGURE 20. Region-Specific Incidence Age-Standardized Rates by sex for Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma in 2020. Rates are shown in descending order of the world
(W) age-standardized rate among men, and the highest national rates among men and women are superimposed. Source: GLOBOCAN 2020.
such as shade, and access to quality sun-protection products also be in play in some countries.94 Given that the rates
governed by national standards.225 Although incidence rates of this disease are rather stable relative to the declining
in New Zealand increased until the early 2010s, they are rates of breast cancer, it has been projected that pancreatic
projected to decline in the future,223 reflecting birth cohort cancer will surpass breast cancer as the third leading cause
effects in younger generations.226 A rapid decline in death of cancer death by 2025 in a study of 28 European
rates for melanoma has been reported in the United States countries.229
by 6.4% per year since 2013 through 2017 after the introduc- Non-Hodgkin lymphoma is responsible for 544,000 new
tion of new therapies, including immune checkpoint inhibi- cases and 260,000 deaths in 2020 (Table 1). Incidence rates
tors and targeted therapies for metastatic melanoma.227,228 are approximately 2-fold higher in transitioned countries
Pancreatic cancer accounts for almost as many deaths than in transitioning countries (Fig. 7). The highest inci-
(466,000) as cases (496,000) because of its poor prognosis dence rates are found in Australia/New Zealand, Northern
and is the seventh leading cause of cancer death in both America, and Europe, with Israel and Slovenia ranking first
sexes (Fig. 4). Rates are from 4-fold to 5-fold higher in for men and women, respectively (Fig. 20). In many coun-
higher HDI countries (Fig. 7), with the highest incidence tries in the high-risk regions, increasing incidence rates
rates in Europe, Northern America, and Australia/New during the 1980s and 1990s have plateaued in recent years.230
Zealand (Fig. 19). Both incidence and mortality rates ei- In the United States, this trend appeared in a similar fash-
ther have been stable or have slightly increased in many ion for both HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected individu-
countries, likely reflecting the increasing prevalence of obe- als, and reasons for the long-term increase in non-Hodgkin
sity, diabetes, and alcohol consumption, although improve- lymphoma incidence in the general population remain
ments in diagnostic and cancer registration practices may unknown.231

Incidence Mortality
FIGURE 21. Region-Specific Incidence and Mortality Age-Standardized Rates for Uterine Corpus Cancer in 2020. Rates are shown in descending order of the
world (W) age-standardized incidence rate, and the highest national age-standardized rates for incidence and mortality are superimposed. Source: GLOBOCAN
2020.
Uterine corpus cancer is the sixth most commonly diag- There are several cancers that, although not featured
nosed cancer in women, with 417,000 new cases and 97,000 among the top 10 cancers, are major cancers within certain
deaths in 2020 (Table 1). Incidence rates vary 10-fold across regions or specific countries. With approximately 34,000
world regions with the highest rates seen in Northern new cases and 15,000 deaths (Table 1), Kaposi sarcoma is
America, Europe, Micronesia/Polynesia, and Australia/New a relatively rare cancer worldwide but is endemic in several
Zealand and the lowest incidence rates in most African countries in Southern and Eastern Africa (Fig. 22) and
regions and South Central Asia (Fig. 21). Less regional is the leading cause of both cancer incidence and mor-
variation was seen for mortality rates, with the highest in tality among men in 2020 in Mozambique and Uganda
Eastern Europe, Micronesia/Polynesia, the Caribbean, and (Figs. 5A and 6A); rates are the highest worldwide in
Northern America. Incidence rates have increased or stabi- Mozambique for men and in Zambia for women (Fig.
lized since the late 1990s in many countries across regions, 22). Cancers of the lip and oral cavity cancers are highly
with South Africa and several countries in Asia showing the frequent in South Central Asia (eg, India, Sri Lanka, and
fastest increase.232 Birth cohort effects were most evident in Pakistan)18 as well as Melanesia (Papua New Guinea, with
Japan, the Philippines, Belarus, Singapore, India, Belarus, the highest incidence rate worldwide in both sexes) (Fig.
Lithuania, Costa Rica, and New Zealand,232 possibly in 23), reflecting the popularity of betel nut chewing.233 It
part reflecting increases in the prevalence of risk factors is also the leading cause of cancer death in India among
(eg, excess body weight, physical inactivity) in subsequently men (Fig. 6A). Incidence rates are also high in Eastern and
younger generations. Western Europe and in Australia/New Zealand and have

Males Females
FIGURE 22. Region-Specific Incidence Age-Standardized Rates by Sex for Kaposi Sarcoma in 2020. Rates are shown in descending order of the world (W)
age-standardized rate among men, and the highest national rates in men and women are superimposed. Source: GLOBOCAN 2020.
been linked to alcohol consumption, tobacco smoking, Although the burden of cancer increases substantially
HPV infection for cancers of the oropharyngeal region, at all HDI levels, the epidemiologic transition of cancer in
and to ultraviolet radiation from sunlight exposure for lip emerging HDI countries will likely to be most affected, in
cancer.233-236 which an increasing magnitude of the disease is paralleled by
a changing profile of common cancer types. Many countries
Future Burden of Cancer in 2040 classified with low and medium HDI levels are experiencing
Worldwide, an estimated 28.4 million new cancer cases (in- a marked increase in the prevalence of known cancer risk
cluding NMSC, except basal cell carcinoma) are projected to factors that prevail in high-income western countries (eg,
occur in 2040, a 47% increase from the corresponding 19.3 smoking, unhealthy diet, excess body weight, and physical
million cases in 2020, assuming that national rates estimated inactivity).4,92,237 A recurring observation is the ongoing dis-
in 2020 remain constant (Fig. 24). The relative magnitude placement of infection-related and poverty-related cancers
of increase is most striking in low HDI countries (95%) and (eg, cervix, liver, stomach) with cancers that are uniformly
in medium HDI countries (64%). In terms of the absolute common in the most developed countries (eg, breast, lung,
burden, the high HDI countries are expected to experience colorectum, prostate), requiring changes in the priorities in
the greatest increase in incidence, with 4.1 million new cases national cancer control strategies.93
more in 2040 compared with 2020. This projection is solely Increases in the incidence of these cancers will likely be
due to the growth and aging of the population and may be paralleled by increases in mortality rates, which have been
further exacerbated by an increasing prevalence of risk fac- observed for breast and colorectal cancer, unless resources
tors in many parts of the world. are placed within health services to appropriately treat and

Males Females
FIGURE 23. Region-Specific Incidence Age-Standardized Rates by Sex for Cancers of the Lip and Oral Cavity in 2020. Rates are shown in descending order
of the world (W) age-standardized rate among men, and the highest national rates among men and women are superimposed. Source: GLOBOCAN 2020.
FIGURE 24. Projected Number of New Cases for All Cancers Combined (Both Sexes Combined) in 2040 According to the 4-Tier Human Development Index
(HDI). Source: GLOBOCAN 2020.

manage the growing number of cancers.238 In addition to in Africa, the cumulative risk of death from cancer among
a residual burden of cancers associated with infections,84 women in 2020 is broadly comparable to the risks observed
the increasing burden of cancers associated with social and among women in Northern America and in the highest
economic transition may overwhelm health care systems in income countries of Europe. Therefore, efforts to build a
many lower income countries if left unchecked.239 Primary sustainable infrastructure for the dissemination of proven
prevention is a particularly effective way to control cancer, cancer prevention measures and the provision of cancer
up to half of all cancers are preventable.240 However, much care in transitioning countries are critical for global cancer
needs to be done to integrate current effective interven- control.
tions into existing health plans, while cultivating new in- The extraordinary diversity of cancer continues to offer
terventions that either tackle exposures that are increasing clues to the underlying causes but also reenforces the need for
globally or cancers for which prevention options remain a global escalation of efforts to control the disease. Packages
limited.241 of effective and resource-sensitive preventative and curative
interventions are available for cancer,183,242 and their tailored
Summary and Conclusions integration into health planning nationally can serve to re-
The GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates presented in this study duce the future burden and suffering from cancer worldwide,
indicate that there were 19.3 million new cases of cancer while narrowing the evident cancer inequities between tran-
and almost 10 million deaths from cancer in 2020. The sitioning and transitioned countries observed today. ■
disease is an important cause of morbidity and mortality
worldwide, in every world region, and irrespective of the Acknowledgements: We thank cancer registries worldwide for their continued
level of human development. It is worth reiterating that, collaboration; without their efforts, there would be no global cancer estimates.
References 7. Valencia DN. Brief review on COVID-19: 15. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J,
the 2020 pandemic caused by SARS- Ward E, Forman D. Global cancer statis-
1. Bray F, Laversanne M, Weiderpass E, CoV-2. Cureus. 2020;12:e7386. tics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61:69-90.
Soerjomataram I. The ever-increasing
8. World Health Organization (WHO). 16. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J,
importance of cancer as a leading cause
Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pan- Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global can-
of premature death worldwide. Cancer.
demic. WHO; 2020. Accessed November cer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin.
In press.
11, 2020. who.int/emergencies/disea 2015;65:87-108.
2. World Health Organization (WHO). ses/novel-coronavirus-2019 17. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel
Global Health Estimates 2020: Deaths
9. Corley DA, Sedki M, Ritzwoller DP, et RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer
by Cause, Age, Sex, by Country and
al. Cancer screening during COVID-19: statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of
by Region, 2000-2019. WHO; 2020.
a perspective from NCI’s PROSPR con- incidence and mortality worldwide for
Accessed December 11, 2020. who.int/
sortium. Gastroenterology. Published 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer
data/gho/data/theme s /morta l ity-and-
online October 21, 2020. doi:10.1053/j. J Clin. 2018;68:394-424.
globa l -healt h -estim a tes/ghe-leadi n g-
gastro.2020.10.030 18. Ferlay J, Ervik M, Lam F, et al, eds.
causes-of-death
10. Kutikov A, Weinberg DS, Edelman MJ, Global Cancer Observatory: Cancer
3. Omran AR. The epidemiologic transi-
Horwitz EM, Uzzo RG, Fisher RI. A Today. International Agency for Research
tion. A theory of the epidemiology of
war on two fronts: cancer care in the on Cancer; 2020. Accessed November 25,
population change. Milbank Mem Fund
time of COVID-19. Ann Intern Med. 2020. gco.iarc.fr/today
Q. 1971;49:509-538.
2020;172:756-758. 19. Ferlay J, Colombet M, Soerjomataram
4. Gersten O, Wilmoth JR. The cancer tran-
11. Dinmohamed AG, Visser O, Verhoeven I, et al. Estimating the global can-
sition in Japan since 1951. Demogr Res.
RHA, et al. Fewer cancer diagno- cer incidence and mortality in 2018:
2002;7:271-306.
ses during the COVID-19 epidemic GLOBOCAN sources and methods. Int J
5. United Nations Development Programme in the Netherlands. Lancet Oncol. Cancer. 2019;144:1941-1953.
(UNDP). Human Development Report 2020;21:750-751. 20. Doll R, Payne P, Waterhouse J, eds. Cancer
2019. Beyond Income, Beyond Averages,
12. Maringe C, Spicer J, Morris M, et al. Incidence in Five Continents: A Technical
Beyond Today: Inequalities in Human
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic Report. Springer-Verlag (for UICC); 1966.
Development in the 21st Century. UNDP;
2019. Accessed November 25, 2020. on cancer deaths due to delays in diag- 21. Arnold M, Rutherford MJ, Bardot A, et
hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-devel nosis in England, UK: a national, pop- al. Progress in cancer survival, mor-
opment-report-2019 ulation-based, modelling study. Lancet tality, and incidence in seven high-in-
Oncol. 2020;21:1023-1034. come countries 1995-2014 (ICBP
6. Ferlay J, Colombet M, Soerjomataram
I, et al. Global and Regional Estimates 13. Sharpless NE. COVID-19 and cancer. SURVMARK-2): a population-based
of the Incidence and Mortality for 38 Science. 2020;368:1290. study. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20:1493-1505.
Cancers: GLOBOCAN 2018. International 14. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. 22. Arnold M, Sierra MS, Laversanne M,
Agency for Research on Cancer/World Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F.
Health Organization; 2018. J Clin. 2005;55:74-108. Global patterns and trends in colorectal

cancer incidence and mortality. Gut. 35. Mesa-Eguiagaray I, Wild SH, Rosenberg 18 cancers from 322 population-based
2017;66:683-691. PS, et al. Distinct temporal trends in registries in 71 countries. Lancet.
23. Miranda-Filho A, Bray F. Global pat- breast cancer incidence from 1997 to 2018;391:1023-1075.
terns and trends in cancers of the 2016 by molecular subtypes: a popula-
47.
Joko-Fru WY, Miranda-Filho A,
lip, tongue and mouth. Oral Oncol. tion-based study of Scottish cancer regis- Soerjomataram I, et al. Breast cancer sur-
2020;102:104551. try data. Br J Cancer. 2020;123:852-859. vival in sub-Saharan Africa by age, stage
24. Brinton LA, Gaudet MM, Gierach GL. 36. Reeves GK, Pirie K, Beral V, Green J, at diagnosis and Human Development
Breast cancer. In: Thun M, Linet MS, Spencer E, Bull D. Cancer incidence and Index (HDI): a population-based registry
Cerhan JR, Haiman CA, Schottenfeld mortality in relation to body mass index study. Int J Cancer. 2020;146:1208-1218.
D, eds. Cancer Epidemiology and in the Million Women Study: cohort 48. Cutler SJ. International Symposium
Prevention. 4th ed. Oxford University study. BMJ. 2007;335:1134-1139. on End Results of Cancer Therapy.
Press; 2018:861-888. 37. Renehan AG, Tyson M, Egger M, Heller Computation of survival rates. Natl
RF, Zwahlen M. Body-mass index and Cancer Inst Monogr. 1964;15:381-385.
25. Metcalfe KA, Poll A, Royer R, et al.
Screening for founder mutations in incidence of cancer: a systematic re- 49. Jedy-Agba E, McCormack V, Adebamowo
BRCA1 and BRCA2 in unselected Jewish view and meta-analysis of prospec- C, Dos-Santos-Silva I. Stage at diagnosis
women. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:387-391. tive observational studies. Lancet. of breast cancer in sub-Saharan Africa:
2008;371:569-578. a systematic review and meta-analysis.
26. Torre LA, Islami F, Siegel RL, Ward
38. Munsell MF, Sprague BL, Berry DA, Lancet Glob Health. 2016;4:e923-e935.
EM, Jemal A. Global cancer in women:
burden and trends. Cancer Epidemiol Chisholm G, Trentham-Dietz A. Body 50. World Health Organization (WHO).
Biomarkers Prev. 2017;26:444-457. mass index and breast cancer risk ac- WHO Position Paper on Mammography
cording to postmenopausal estrogen-pro- Screening. WHO; 2014. Accessed
27. Rossouw JE, Anderson GL, Prentice
gestin use and hormone receptor status. December 14, 2020. paho.org/hq/dmdoc
RL, et al. Risks and benefits of estro-
Epidemiol Rev. 2014;36:114-136. uments/2015/WHO-ENG-Mammograph
gen plus progestin in healthy post-
39. Suzuki R, Orsini N, Saji S, Key TJ, Wolk y-Factsheet.pdf
menopausal women: principal results
from the Women’s Health Initiative A. Body weight and incidence of breast 51. Ngan TT, Nguyen NTQ, Van Minh H,
randomized controlled trial. JAMA. cancer defined by estrogen and proges- Donnelly M, O’Neill C. Effectiveness of
2002;288:321-333. terone receptor status—a meta-analysis. clinical breast examination as a ‘stand-
Int J Cancer. 2009;124:698-712. alone’ screening modality: an overview
28. Breen N, Gentleman JF, Schiller JS.
of systematic reviews. BMC Cancer.
Update on mammography trends: com- 40. Gilliland FD, Joste N, Stauber PM, et al.
2020;20:1070.
parisons of rates in 2000, 2005, and Biologic characteristics of interval and
2008. Cancer. 2011;117:2209-2218. screen-detected breast cancers. J Natl 52. Birnbaum JK, Duggan C, Anderson BO,
Cancer Inst. 2000;92:743-749. Etzioni R. Early detection and treatment
29. DeSantis CE, Ma J, Gaudet MM, et al.
strategies for breast cancer in low-in-
Breast cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer 41. Porter PL, El-Bastawissi AY, Mandelson
come and upper middle-income coun-
J Clin. 2019;69:438-451. MT, et al. Breast tumor characteristics as
tries: a modelling study. Lancet Glob
predictors of mammographic detection:
30. Heer E, Harper A, Escandor N, Sung H, Health. 2018;6:e885-e893.
comparison of interval- and screen-de-
McCormack V, Fidler-Benaoudia MM.
tected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 53. Anderson BO, Lipscomb J, Murillo RH,
Global burden and trends in premeno-
1999;91:2020-2028. Thomas DB. Chapter 3. Breast cancer.
pausal and postmenopausal breast can-
In: Gelband H, Jha P, Sankaranarayanan
cer: a population-based study. Lancet 42. Malvezzi M, Carioli G, Bertuccio P, et al.
R, Horton S, eds. Cancer: Disease
Glob Health. 2020;8:e1027-e1037. European cancer mortality predictions
Control Priorities. 3rd ed. Volume 3. The
for the year 2019 with focus on breast
31. Glass AG, Lacey JV, Carreon D, Hoover International Bank for Reconstruction
cancer. Ann Oncol. 2019;30:781-787.
RN. Breast cancer incidence, 1980-2006: and Development/The World Bank;
combined roles of menopausal hormone 43. Althuis MD, Dozier JM, Anderson 2015:45-68.
therapy, screening mammography, and WF, Devesa SS, Brinton LA. Global
54. McCormack V, McKenzie F, Foerster M,
estrogen receptor status. J Natl Cancer trends in breast cancer incidence and
et al. Breast cancer survival and survival
Inst. 2007;99:1152-1161. mortality 1973-1997. Int J Epidemiol.
gap apportionment in sub-Saharan Africa
32. Anderson WF, Katki HA, Rosenberg PS. 2005;34:405-412.
(ABC-DO): a prospective cohort study.
Incidence of breast cancer in the United 44. Joko-Fru WY, Jedy-Agba E, Korir A, et al. Lancet Glob Health. 2020;8:e1203-e1212.
States: current and future trends. J Natl The evolving epidemic of breast cancer
55. Anderson BO, Cazap E, El Saghir
Cancer Inst. 2011;103:1397-1402. in sub-Saharan Africa: results from the
NS, et al. Optimisation of breast can-
33. Anderson WF, Rosenberg PS, Petito L, et African Cancer Registry Network. Int J cer management in low-resource and
al. Divergent estrogen receptor-positive Cancer. 2020;147:2131-2141. middle-resource countries: executive
and -negative breast cancer trends and 45. Bray F, McCarron P, Parkin DM. The summary of the Breast Health Global
etiologic heterogeneity in Denmark. Int changing global patterns of female Initiative consensus, 2010. Lancet Oncol.
J Cancer. 2013;133:2201-2206. breast cancer incidence and mortality. 2011;12:387-398.
34. Mullooly M, Murphy J, Gierach GL, et Breast Cancer Res. 2004;6:229-239. 56. Dvaladze A, Duggan C, Anderson BO.
al. Divergent oestrogen receptor-specific 46. Allemani C, Matsuda T, Di Carlo V, et Phased implementation for breast cancer
breast cancer trends in Ireland (2004- al. Global surveillance of trends in can- management in low-income and mid-
2013): amassing data from independent cer survival 2000-14 (CONCORD-3): dle-income countries: a proposal for the
Western populations provide etiologic analysis of individual records for 37 strategic application of resource-strat-
clues. Eur J Cancer. 2017;86:326-333. 513 025 patients diagnosed with one of ified guidelines by the Breast Health

Global Initiative. Cancer. 2020;126(suppl cancer risk prediction models and pro- 82. Fidler-Benaoudia MM, Torre LA, Bray F,
10):2337-2338. jections for future risk stratification. J Ferlay J, Jemal A. Lung cancer incidence
57. Duggan C, Dvaladze A, Rositch AF, et al. Natl Cancer Inst. 2020;112:278-285. in young women vs. young men: a sys-
The Breast Health Global Initiative 2018 70. Antoniou A, Anton-Culver H, Borowsky tematic analysis in 40 countries. Int J
Global Summit on Improving Breast A, et al. A response to “Personalised Cancer. 2020;147:811-819.
Healthcare Through Resource-Stratified medicine and population health: breast 83. Jha P. Avoidable global cancer deaths
Phased Implementation: methods and and ovarian cancer.” Hum Genet. and total deaths from smoking. Nat Rev
overview. Cancer. 2020;126(suppl 2019;138:287-289. Cancer. 2009;9:655-664.
10):2339-2352. 71. Gierach GL, Choudhury PP, Garcia- 84. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Jemal A.
58. Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Closas M. Toward risk-stratified breast Cancer in Africa 2012. Cancer Epidemiol
Screening. The benefits and harms of cancer screening: considerations for Biomarkers Prev. 2014;23:953-966.
breast cancer screening: an independent changes in screening guidelines. JAMA 85. World Health Organization (WHO).
review. Lancet. 2012;380:1778-1786. Oncol. 2020;6:31-33. WHO Report on the Global Tobacco
59. Coldman A, Phillips N, Wilson C, et al. 72. World Health Organization (WHO). Epidemic, 2008—The MPOWER Package.
Pan-Canadian study of mammography WHO global report on trends in preva- WHO; 2008. Accessed November 25,
screening and mortality from breast can- lence of tobacco smoking 2000-2025. 2020. who.int/tobacco/mpower/2008/
cer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106:dju261. 2nd ed. WHO; 2018. Accessed December en/
60. Tabar L, Dean PB, Chen TH, et al. The 2, 2020. apps.who.int/iris/handl 86. World Health Organization (WHO).
incidence of fatal breast cancer measures e/10665/272694 WHO report on the global tobacco ep-
the increased effectiveness of therapy in 73. Mu L, Liu L, Niu R, et al. Indoor air pol- idemic 2019: offer help to quit tobacco
women participating in mammography lution and risk of lung cancer among use. WHO; 2020. Accessed November
screening. Cancer. 2019;125:515-523. Chinese female non-smokers. Cancer 21, 2020. who.int/tobacco/global_repor
61. International Agency for Research Causes Control. 2013;24:439-450. t/en/
on Cancer (IARC) Working Group on 74. Turner MC, Andersen ZJ, Baccarelli A, 87. World Health Organization (WHO).
the Evaluation of Cancer-Preventive et al. Outdoor air pollution and cancer: WHO global report on trends in prev-
Strategies. Breast Cancer Screening. an overview of the current evidence alence of tobacco use 2000-2025. 3rd
IARC Handbooks of Cancer Prevention. and public health recommendations. CA ed. WHO; 2019. Accessed November 2,
Volume 15. IARC Press; 2016. Cancer J Clin. 2020;70:460-479. 2020. who.int/publications/i/item/who-
62. Oeffinger KC, Fontham ET, Etzioni R, et 75. Thun M, Peto R, Boreham J, Lopez AD. globa l -repor t -on-trend s -in-preva l ence
al. Breast cancer screening for women at Stages of the cigarette epidemic on en- -of-tobacco-use-2000-2025-third-edition
average risk: 2015 guideline update from tering its second century. Tob Control. 88. National Lung Screening Trial Research
the American Cancer Society. JAMA. 2012;21:96-101. Team; Aberle DR, Adams AM, et al.
2015;314:1599-1614. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-
76. Parkin DM, Bray FI, Devesa SS. Cancer
63. Prasad V, Lenzer J, Newman DH. Why burden in the year 2000. The global dose computed tomographic screening.
cancer screening has never been shown picture. Eur J Cancer. 2001;37(suppl N Engl J Med. 2011;365:395-409.
to “save lives”—and what we can do 8):S4-S66. 89. National Lung Screening Trial Research
about it. BMJ. 2016;352:h6080. Team. Lung cancer incidence and mor-
77. Alonso R, Pineros M, Laversanne M,
64. Puliti D, Duffy SW, Miccinesi G, et al. et al. Lung cancer incidence trends tality with extended follow-up in the
Overdiagnosis in mammographic screen- in Uruguay 1990-2014: an age-peri- National Lung Screening Trial. J Thorac
ing for breast cancer in Europe: a litera- od-cohort analysis. Cancer Epidemiol. Oncol. 2019;14:1732-1742.
ture review. J Med Screen. 2012;19(suppl 2018;55:17-22. 90. Pastorino U, Silva M, Sestini S, et al.
1):42-56. Prolonged lung cancer screening reduced
78. Devesa SS, Blot WJ, Fraumeni JF Jr.
65. Michalopoulos D, Duffy SW. Estimation Declining lung cancer rates among 10-year mortality in the MILD trial: new
of overdiagnosis using short-term trends young men and women in the United confirmation of lung cancer screening
and lead time estimates uncontaminated States: a cohort analysis. J Natl Cancer efficacy. Ann Oncol. 2019;30:1162-1169.
by overdiagnosed cases: results from the Inst. 1989;81:1568-1571. 91. de Koning HJ, van der Aalst CM, de
Norwegian breast screening programme. Jong PA, et al. Reduced lung-cancer
79. Lortet-Tieulent J, Renteria E, Sharp
J Med Screen. 2016;23:192-202. mortality with volume CT screening
L, et al. Convergence of decreasing
66. Narod SA. Personalised medicine and male and increasing female incidence in a randomized trial. N Engl J Med.
population health: breast and ovarian rates in major tobacco-related cancers 2020;382:503-513.
cancer. Hum Genet. 2018;137:769-778. in Europe in 1988-2010. Eur J Cancer. 92. Bray F. Transitions in human develop-
67. Pashayan N, Morris S, Gilbert FJ, 2015;51:1144-1163. ment and the global cancer burden. In:
Pharoah PDP. Cost-effectiveness and 80. Thun MJ, Henley SJ, Travis WD. Lung Stewart BW, Wild CP, eds. World Cancer
benefit-to-harm ratio of risk-stratified cancer. In: Thun M, Linet MS, Cerhan Report 2014. WHO Press; 2014:42-55.
screening for breast cancer: a life-table JR, Haiman CA, Schottenfeld D, eds. 93. Fidler MM, Soerjomataram I, Bray F. A
model. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4:1504-1510. Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention. global view on cancer incidence and na-
68. Mukama T, Kharazmi E, Xing X, et al. 4th ed. Oxford University Press; 2018: tional levels of the Human Development
Risk-adapted starting age of screening 519-578. Index. Int J Cancer. 2016;139:2436-2446.
for relatives of patients with breast can- 81. Jemal A, Miller KD, Ma J, et al. Higher 94. Arnold M, Abnet CC, Neale RE, et al.
cer. JAMA Oncol. 2019;6:68-74. lung cancer incidence in young women Global burden of 5 major types of gas-
69. Pal Choudhury P, Wilcox AN, Brook MN, than young men in the United States. N trointestinal cancer. Gastroenterology.
et al. Comparative validation of breast Engl J Med. 2018;378:1999-2009. 2020;159:335-349.e15.

95. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Goding Sauer A, et 107. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Draft 119. Seraphin TP, Joko-Fru WY, Kamate B,
al. Colorectal cancer statistics, 2020. CA Recommendation Statement. Colorectal et al. Rising prostate cancer incidence
Cancer J Clin. 2020;70:145-164. Cancer: Screening. October 27, 2020. in sub-Saharan Africa: a trend analysis
96. World Cancer Research Fund/American Accessed November 2, 2020. uspre venti of data from the African Cancer Registry
Institute for Cancer Research. The veser v ices t askf o rce.org/uspst f /draft Network. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers
Continuous Update Project Expert Report -recommendation/colorectal-cancer-scree Prev. Published online October 8, 2020.
2018. Diet, Nutrition, Physical Activity ning3 doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-20-1005
and Cancer: Colorectal Cancer. Accessed 108. Rebbeck TR, Devesa SS, Chang BL, et al. 120. Wong MC, Goggins WB, Wang HH, et al.
October 23, 2020. wcrf.org/sites/default/ Global patterns of prostate cancer inci- Global incidence and mortality for pros-
files/Colorectal-cancer-report.pdf dence, aggressiveness, and mortality in tate cancer: analysis of temporal patterns
97. Sullivan T, Sullivan R, Ginsburg OM. men of African descent. Prostate Cancer. and trends in 36 countries. Eur Urol.
Chapter 12. Screening for cancer: con- 2013;2013:560857. 2016;70:862-874.
siderations for low- and middle-in-
109.
World Cancer Research Fund/ 121. Tsodikov A, Gulati R, Heijnsdijk EAM,
come countries. In: Gelband H, Jha P, American Institute for Cancer Research. et al. Reconciling the effects of screen-
Sankaranarayanan R, Horton S, eds. Continuous Update Project Expert Report ing on prostate cancer mortality in the
Cancer: Disease Control Priorities. 3rd 2018. Body fatness and weight gain and ERSPC and PLCO trials. Ann Intern Med.
ed. Volume 3. The International Bank the risk of cancer. Accessed October 27, 2017;167:449-455.
for Reconstruction and Development/ 2020. dietandcancerreport.org 122. Etzioni R, Tsodikov A, Mariotto A, et al.
The World Bank; 2015:211-222. 110. Zhou CK, Check DP, Lortet-Tieulent J, et Quantifying the role of PSA screening in
98. Navarro M, Nicolas A, Ferrandez A, al. Prostate cancer incidence in 43 pop- the US prostate cancer mortality decline.
Lanas A. Colorectal cancer popula- ulations worldwide: an analysis of time Cancer Causes Control. 2008;19:175-181.
tion screening programs worldwide in trends overall and by age group. Int J
123. Jemal A, Culp MB, Ma J, Islami F,
2016: an update. World J Gastroenterol. Cancer. 2016;138:1388-1400. Fedewa SA. Prostate cancer incidence 5
2017;23:3632-3642. 111. Center MM, Jemal A, Lortet-Tieulent J, years after US Preventive Services Task
99. Edwards BK, Ward E, Kohler BA, et al. et al. International variation in prostate Force recommendations against screen-
Annual report to the nation on the status cancer incidence and mortality rates. ing. J Natl Cancer Inst. Published online
of cancer, 1975-2006, featuring colorec- Eur Urol. 2012;61:1079-1092. May 20, 2020. doi:10.1093/jnci/djaa068
tal cancer trends and impact of inter- 112. Kvale R, Auvinen A, Adami HO, et al. 124. Fedewa SA, Ma J, Jemal A. Response
ventions (risk factors, screening, and Interpreting trends in prostate can- to Lehrer and Rheinstein. J Natl Cancer
treatment) to reduce future rates. Cancer. cer incidence and mortality in the five Inst. 2020;112:1069-1070.
2010;116:544-573. Nordic countries. J Natl Cancer Inst. 125. Wolf AM, Wender RC, Etzioni RB, et
100. Schreuders EH, Ruco A, Rabeneck L, et 2007;99:1881-1887. al. American Cancer Society guide-
al. Colorectal cancer screening: a global
113. US Preventive Services Task Force. line for the early detection of prostate
overview of existing programmes. Gut. Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. cancer: update 2010. CA Cancer J Clin.
2015;64:1637-1649. Preventive Services Task Force recom- 2010;60:70-98.
101. Siegel RL, Ward EM, Jemal A. Trends mendation statement. Ann Intern Med.
126. US Preventive Services Task Force,
in colorectal cancer incidence rates 2008;149:185-191. Grossman DC, Curry SJ, et al. Screening
in the United States by tumor location 114. Moyer VA; U.S. Preventive Services Task, for prostate cancer: US Preventive
and stage, 1992-2008. Cancer Epidemiol Force. Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Services Task Force recommendation
Biomarkers Prev. 2012;21:411-416. Preventive Services Task Force recom- statement. JAMA. 2018;319:1901-1913.
102. Keum N, Giovannucci E. Global burden mendation statement. Ann Intern Med.
127. Infection with Helicobacter pylori.
of colorectal cancer: emerging trends, risk 2012;157:120-134. IARC Monogr Eval Carcinog Risks Hum.
factors and prevention strategies. Nat Rev 115. Tikkinen KAO, Dahm P, Lytvyn L, et 1994;61:177-240.
Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;16:713-732. al. Prostate cancer screening with pros-
128. Plummer M, Franceschi S, Vignat J,
103. Siegel RL, Torre LA, Soerjomataram I, tate-specific antigen (PSA) test: a clinical Forman D, de Martel C. Global bur-
et al. Global patterns and trends in col- practice guideline. BMJ. 2018;362:k3581. den of gastric cancer attributable
orectal cancer incidence in young adults.
116. Zargar H, van den Bergh R, Moon to Helicobacter pylori. Int J Cancer.
Gut. 2019;68:2179-2185. D, Lawrentschuk N, Costello A, 2015;136:487-490.

104. Araghi M, Soerjomataram I, Bardot Murphy D. The impact of the United 129. Hooi JKY, Lai WY, Ng WK, et al. Global
A, et al. Changes in colorectal cancer States Preventive Services Task Force prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infec-
incidence in seven high-income coun- (USPTSTF) recommendations against tion: systematic review and meta-analy-
tries: a population-based study. Lancet prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing sis. Gastroenterology. 2017;153:420-429.
Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;4:511-518. on PSA testing in Australia. BJU Int. 130. Kidd M, Lastovica AJ, Atherton JC, Louw
105. Vuik FE, Nieuwenburg SA, Bardou M, et 2017;119:110-115. JA. Heterogeneity in the Helicobacter
al. Increasing incidence of colorectal can-
117. Bray F, Pineros M. Cancer patterns, pylori vacA and cagA genes: association
cer in young adults in Europe over the trends and projections in Latin America with gastroduodenal disease in South
last 25 years. Gut. 2019;68:1820-1826. and the Caribbean: a global context. Africa? Gut. 1999;45:499-502.
106. Wolf AMD, Fontham ETH, Church TR, Salud Publica Mex. 2016;58:104-117. 131. Koshiol J, Wei WQ, Kreimer AR, et al.
et al. Colorectal cancer screening for av- 118. Culp MB, Soerjomataram I, Efstathiou The gastric cardia is not a target for
erage-risk adults: 2018 guideline update JA, Bray F, Jemal A. Recent global pat- human papillomavirus-induced carcino-
from the American Cancer Society. CA terns in prostate cancer incidence and genesis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers
Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:250-281. mortality rates. Eur Urol. 2020;77:38-52. Prev. 2010;19:1137-1139.


132. Kamangar F, Dawsey SM, Blaser MJ, in Mongolia: results from the National 157. Sulkowski MS, Gardiner DF, Rodriguez-
et al. Opposing risks of gastric cardia Cancer Registry 2008-12. Int J Cancer. Torres M, et al. Daclatasvir plus sofos-
and noncardia gastric adenocarcino- 2017;140:302-309. buvir for previously treated or untreated
mas associated with Helicobacter py-
145. Prueksapanich P, Piyachaturawat P, chronic HCV infection. N Engl J Med.
lori seropositivity. J Natl Cancer Inst. Aumpansub P, Ridtitid W, Chaiteerakij 2014;370:211-221.
2006;98:1445-1452. R, Rerknimitr R. Liver fluke-associ- 158. Cooke GS, Andrieux-Meyer I, Applegate
133. de Martel C, Parsonnet J. Stomach can- ated biliary tract cancer. Gut Liver. TL, et al. Accelerating the elimination of
cer. In: Thun M, Linet MS, Cerhan JR, 2018;12:236-245. viral hepatitis: a Lancet Gastroenterology
Haiman CA, Schottenfeld D, eds. Cancer 146. Petrick JL, Yang B, Altekruse SF, et al. & Hepatology Commission. Lancet
Epidemiology and Prevention. 4th ed. Risk factors for intrahepatic and extrahe- Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;4:135-184.
Oxford University Press; 2018:593-610. patic cholangiocarcinoma in the United 159. Cox AL, El-Sayed MH, Kao JH, et al.
134. Howson CP, Hiyama T, Wynder EL. The States: a population-based study in SEER- Progress towards elimination goals for
decline in gastric cancer: epidemiology Medicare. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0186643. viral hepatitis. Nat Rev Gastroenterol
of an unplanned triumph. Epidemiol 147. Welzel TM, Mellemkjaer L, Gloria G, et Hepatol. 2020;17:533-542.
Rev. 1986;8:1-27. al. Risk factors for intrahepatic cholan- 160. Lemoine M, Shimakawa Y, Njie R, et
135. Powell J, McConkey CC. Increasing inci- giocarcinoma in a low-risk population: al. Acceptability and feasibility of a
dence of adenocarcinoma of the gastric a nationwide case-control study. Int J screen-and-treat programme for hepati-
cardia and adjacent sites. Br J Cancer. Cancer. 2007;120:638-641. tis B virus infection in The Gambia: the
1990;62:440-443.
148. Donato F, Gelatti U, Tagger A, et al. Prevention of Liver Fibrosis and Cancer

136. Devesa SS, Blot WJ, Fraumeni JF Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and in Africa (PROLIFICA) study. Lancet
Jr. Changing patterns in the inci- hepatitis C and B virus infection, alcohol Glob Health. 2016;4:e559-e567.
dence of esophageal and gastric car- intake, and hepatolithiasis: a case-con- 161. Blot WJ, Tarone RE. Esophageal can-
cinoma in the United States. Cancer. trol study in Italy. Cancer Causes Control. cer. In: Thun M, Linet MS, Cerhan JR,
1998;83:2049-2053. 2001;12:959-964. Haiman CA, Schottenfeld D, eds. Cancer
137. Sung H, Siegel RL, Rosenberg PS, Jemal 149. Petrick JL, Florio AA, Znaor A, et al. Epidemiology and Prevention. 4th ed.
A. Emerging cancer trends among young International trends in hepatocellular Oxford University Press; 2018:579-593.
adults in the USA: analysis of a popula- carcinoma incidence, 1978-2012. Int J 162. McCormack VA, Menya D, Munishi MO,
tion-based cancer registry. Lancet Public Cancer. 2020;147:317-330. et al. Informing etiologic research priori-
Health. 2019;4:e137-e147.
150. Chang MH, Chen CJ, Lai MS, et al. ties for squamous cell esophageal cancer
138. Dikken JL, Lemmens VE, Wouters MW, Universal hepatitis B vaccination in in Africa: a review of setting-specific ex-
et al. Increased incidence and survival Taiwan and the incidence of hepatocellular posures to known and putative risk fac-
for oesophageal cancer but not for gas- carcinoma in children. Taiwan Childhood tors. Int J Cancer. 2017;140:259-271.
tric cardia cancer in the Netherlands. Hepatoma Study Group [see comments]. 163. Arnold M, Laversanne M, Brown LM,
Eur J Cancer. 2012;48:1624-1632. N Engl J Med. 1997;336:1855-1859. Devesa SS, Bray F. Predicting the future
139. Arnold M, Park JY, Camargo MC, Lunet 151. Marengo A, Rosso C, Bugianesi E. Liver burden of esophageal cancer by histolog-
N, Forman D, Soerjomataram I. Is gastric cancer: connections with obesity, fatty ical subtype: international trends in in-
cancer becoming a rare disease? A global liver, and cirrhosis. Annu Rev Med. cidence up to 2030. Am J Gastroenterol.
assessment of predicted incidence trends 2016;67:103-117. 2017;112:1247-1255.
to 2035. Gut. 2020;69:823-829.
152. Florio AA, Ferlay J, Znaor A, et al.
164. Walboomers JMM, Jacobs MV, Manos
140. Heer EV, Harper AS, Sung H, Jemal A, Global trends in intrahepatic and ex- MM, et al. Human papillomavirus is a
Fidler-Benaoudia MM. Emerging cancer trahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in- necessary cause of invasive cervical can-
incidence trends in Canada: the growing cidence from 1993 to 2012. Cancer. cer worldwide. J Pathol. 1999;189:12-19.
burden of young adult cancers. Cancer. 2020;126:2666-2678. 165. IARC Working Group on the Evaluation
2020;126:4553-4562. 153. Plummer M, de Martel C, Vignat J, Ferlay of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans.

141. Anderson WF, Rabkin CS, Turner N, J, Bray F, Franceschi S. Global burden Human papillomaviruses. IARC Monogr
Fraumeni JF Jr, Rosenberg PS, Camargo of cancers attributable to infections in Eval Carcinog Risks Hum. 2007;90:1-636.
MC. The changing face of noncardia 2012: a synthetic analysis. Lancet Glob
166. Herrero R, Murillo R. Cervical can-
gastric cancer incidence among US Health. 2016;4:e609-e616. cer. In: Thun M, Linet MS, Cerhan JR,
non-Hispanic whites. J Natl Cancer Inst.
154. World Health Organization (WHO). Haiman CA, Schottenfeld D, eds. Cancer
2018;110:608-615. Hepatitis B 3rd dose (HepB3) immuni- Epidemiology and Prevention. 4th ed.
142. Camargo MC, Anderson WF, King JB, et zation coverage. Accessed October 28, Oxford University Press; 2018:925-946.
al. Divergent trends for gastric cancer 2020. who.int/gho/immunization/hepat
167. Singh GK, Azuine RE, Siahpush M.
incidence by anatomical subsite in US itis/en/ Global inequalities in cervical cancer
adults. Gut. 2011;60:1644-1649.
155. World Health Organization (WHO). incidence and mortality are linked to
143. Thomas London W, Petrick JL, McGlynn Immunization coverage. WHO; 2020. deprivation, low socioeconomic status,
KA. Liver cancer. In: Thun M, Linet MS, Accessed October 20, 2020. who.int/ and human development. Int J MCH
Cerhan JR, Haiman CA, Schottenfeld news-room/fact-sheet s /detai l /immun AIDS. 2012;1:17-30.
D, eds. Cancer Epidemiology and ization-coverage 168. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer
Prevention. 4th ed. Oxford University
156. Lanini S, Easterbrook PJ, Zumla A, statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin.
Press; 2018:635-660. Ippolito G. Hepatitis C: global epide- 2019;69:7-34.
144. Chimed T, Sandagdorj T, Znaor A, et miology and strategies for control. Clin
169. International Agency for Research on
al. Cancer incidence and cancer control Microbiol Infect. 2016;22:833-838. Cancer (IARC). IARC Handbooks of

Cancer Prevention. Volume 10. Cervix America and the Caribbean and Asia: re- the Lancet Commission report. Lancet.
Cancer Screening. IARC Press; 2005. gional inequalities and changing trends. 2018;391:1391-1454.
Accessed November 23, 2020. publicatio Int J Cancer. 2017;141:1997-2001.
191. World Health Organization (WHO).
ns.iarc.fr/Book-And-Report-Series/Iarc- 181. Palmer T, Wallace L, Pollock KG, et al. WHO Director-General calls for all coun-
Handbooks-Of-Cancer-Prevention/Cervi Prevalence of cervical disease at age tries to take action to help end the suf-
x-Cancer-Screening-2005 20 after immunisation with bivalent fering caused by cervical cancer. WHO;
170. Bray F, Carstensen B, Moller H, et al. HPV vaccine at age 12-13 in Scotland: 2018. Accessed October 26, 2020. who.
Incidence trends of adenocarcinoma of retrospective population study. BMJ. int/repro d ucti v ehea l th/call-to-actio
the cervix in 13 European countries. 2019;365:l1161. n-elimination-cervical-cancer/en/
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev.
182. Lei J, Ploner A, Elfstrom KM, et al.
192. Canfell K, Kim JJ, Brisson M, et al.
2005;14:2191-2199. HPV vaccination and the risk of in- Mortality impact of achieving WHO
171. Bray F, Loos AH, McCarron P, et al. vasive cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. cervical cancer elimination targets: a
Trends in cervical squamous cell carci- 2020;383:1340-1348. comparative modelling analysis in 78
noma incidence in 13 European coun- low-income and lower-middle-income

tries: changing risk and the effects of countries. Lancet. 2020;395:591-603.
‘Best buys’ and other recommended
screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers interventions for the prevention and
193. Brisson M, Kim JJ, Canfell K, et al.
Prev. 2005;14:677-686. control of noncommunicable diseases: Impact of HPV vaccination and cervical
172. Utada M, Chernyavskiy P, Lee WJ, et updated Appendix 3 of the Global Action screening on cervical cancer elimination:
al. Increasing risk of uterine cervical Plan for the Prevention and Control of a comparative modelling analysis in 78
cancer among young Japanese women: Noncommunicable Diseases 2013-2020. low-income and lower-middle-income
comparison of incidence trends in Japan, WHO; 2017. Accessed November 25, countries. Lancet. 2020;395:575-590.
South Korea and Japanese-Americans 2020. who.int/ncds/governance/appen
194. Canfell K, Shi JF, Lew JB, et al.
between 1985 and 2012. Int J Cancer. dix3-update/en/ Prevention of cervical cancer in rural
2019;144:2144-2152. China: evaluation of HPV vaccination

173. Castanon A, Sasieni P. Is the recent in- WHO guidelines for the use of thermal and primary HPV screening strategies.
crease in cervical cancer in women aged ablation for cervical pre-cancer lesions. Vaccine. 2011;29:2487-2494.
20-24 years in England a cause for con- WHO; 2019. Accessed November 23, 195. Campos NG, Sharma M, Clark A, et al.
cern? Prev Med. 2018;107:21-28. 2020. who.int/reproductivehealth/publi The health and economic impact of scal-
174. McDonald SA, Qendri V, Berkhof J, de catio n s/therm a l-ablat i on-for-cervi c al- ing cervical cancer prevention in 50 low-
Melker HE, Bogaards JA. Disease burden pre-cancer-lesions/en/ and lower-middle-income countries. Int J
of human papillomavirus infection in
185. Ronco G, Dillner J, Elfstrom KM, et Gynaecol Obstet. 2017;138(suppl 1):47-56.
the Netherlands, 1989-2014: the gap be- al. Efficacy of HPV-based screening 196. Bosch FX, Robles C, Diaz M, et al. HPV-
tween females and males is diminishing. for prevention of invasive cervical FASTER: broadening the scope for pre-
Cancer Causes Control. 2017;28:203-214. cancer: follow-up of four European vention of HPV-related cancer. Nat Rev
175. Pilleron S, Cabasag CJ, Ferlay J, et al. randomised controlled trials. Lancet. Clin Oncol. 2016;13:119-132.
Cervical cancer burden in Latin America 2014;383:524-532. 197. Fontham ETH, Wolf AMD, Church TR, et
and the Caribbean: where are we? Int J
186. Arbyn M, Smith SB, Temin S, et al. al. Cervical cancer screening for individ-
Cancer. 2020;147:1638-1648. Detecting cervical precancer and reach- uals at average risk: 2020 guideline up-

176. Bray F, Lortet-Tieulent J, Znaor A, ing underscreened women by using HPV date from the American Cancer Society.
Brotons M, Poljak M, Arbyn M. Patterns testing on self samples: updated me- CA Cancer J Clin. 2020;70:321-346.
and trends in human papillomavi- ta-analyses. BMJ. 2018;363:k4823. 198. Kitahara CM, Schneider AB, Brenner AV.
rus-related diseases in central and east-
187. Mezei AK, Armstrong HL, Pedersen Thyroid cancer. In: Thun M, Linet MS,
ern Europe and central Asia. Vaccine. HN, et al. Cost-effectiveness of cervical Cerhan JR, Haiman CA, Schottenfeld
2013;31(suppl 7):H32-H45. cancer screening methods in low- and D, eds. Cancer Epidemiology and
177. Jedy-Agba E, Joko WY, Liu B, et al. Trends middle-income countries: a systematic Prevention. 4th ed. Oxford University
in cervical cancer incidence in sub-Saha- review. Int J Cancer. 2017;141:437-446. Press; 2018:839-860.
ran Africa. Br J Cancer. 2020;123:148-154. 188. Malone C, Barnabas RV, Buist DSM, Tiro
199. Lortet-Tieulent J, Franceschi S, Dal
178. PATH. Global HPV Vaccine Introduction JA, Winer RL. Cost-effectiveness studies Maso L, Vaccarella S. Thyroid cancer
Overview: projected and current na- of HPV self-sampling: a systematic re- “epidemic” also occurs in low- and
tional introductions, demonstration/ view. Prev Med. 2020;132:105953. middle-income countries. Int J Cancer.
pilot projects, gender-neutral vaccina- 2019;144:2082-2087.
189. Holme F, Kapambwe S, Nessa A, Basu
tion programs, and global HPV vaccine P, Murillo R, Jeronimo J. Scaling up 200. Udelsman R, Zhang Y. The epidemic of
introduction maps (2006-2023). PATH; proven innovative cervical cancer thyroid cancer in the United States: the
2020. Accessed November 23, 2020. screening strategies: challenges and role of endocrinologists and ultrasounds.
path.org/resou r ces/globa l -hpv-vacci opportunities in implementation at the Thyroid. 2014;24:472-479.
ne-introduction-overview/ population level in low- and lower-middle- 201. Brito JP, Morris JC, Montori VM. Thyroid
179. Lemp JM, De Neve JW, Bussmann H, et income countries. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. cancer: zealous imaging has increased
al. Lifetime prevalence of cervical cancer 2017;138(suppl 1):63-68. detection and treatment of low risk tu-
screening in 55 low- and middle-income
190. Knaul FM, Farmer PE, Krakauer EL, mours. BMJ. 2013;347:f4706.
countries. JAMA. 2020;324:1532-1542. et al. Alleviating the access abyss in 202. Furuya-Kanamori L, Bell KJL, Clark J,

180. Vaccarella S, Laversanne M, Ferlay J, palliative care and pain relief-an im- Glasziou P, Doi SAR. Prevalence of dif-
Bray F. Cervical cancer in Africa, Latin perative of universal health coverage: ferentiated thyroid cancer in autopsy

studies over six decades: a meta-analy- trends (1995-2015). J Natl Cancer Inst. recent generations at higher or lower
sis. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:3672-3679. 2020;112:810-817. risk? Int J Cancer. 2013;132:385-400.
203. Ahn HS, Welch HG. South Korea’s thy-
215. Silverman DT, Koutros S, Figueroa 227. Berk-Krauss J, Stein JA, Weber J, Polsky
roid cancer “epidemic”—turning the JD, Prokunina-Olsson L, Rothman N. D, Geller AC. new systematic therapies
tide. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2389-2390. Bladder cancer. In: Thun M, Linet MS, and trends in cutaneous melanoma
204. Li M, Dal Maso L, Vaccarella S. Global Cerhan JR, Haiman CA, Schottenfeld deaths among US whites, 1986-2016. Am
trends in thyroid cancer incidence and D, eds. Cancer Epidemiology and J Public Health. 2020;110:731-733.
the impact of overdiagnosis. Lancet Prevention. 4th ed. Oxford University 228. Mason R, Au L, Ingles Garces A, Larkin
Diabetes Endocrinol. 2020;8:468-470. Press; 2018:977-996. J. Current and emerging systemic ther-
205. Panato C, Vaccarella S, Dal Maso L, et
216. Antoni S, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, apies for cutaneous metastatic mel-
al. Thyroid cancer incidence in India Znaor A, Jemal A, Bray F. Bladder can- anoma. Expert Opin Pharmacother.
between 2006 and 2014 and impact of cer incidence and mortality: a global 2019;20:1135-1152.
overdiagnosis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. overview and recent trends. Eur Urol.
229. Ferlay J, Partensky C, Bray F. More
2020;105:dgaa192. 2017;71:96-108. deaths from pancreatic cancer than
206. Togawa K, Ahn HS, Auvinen A, et al. 217. Teoh JYC, Huang J, Ko WYK, et al. Global breast cancer in the EU by 2017. Acta
Long-term strategies for thyroid health trends of bladder cancer incidence and Oncol. 2016;55:1158-1160.
monitoring after nuclear accidents: rec- mortality, and their associations with 230. Miranda-Filho A, Pineros M, Znaor A,
ommendations from an expert group tobacco use and gross domestic product Marcos-Gragera R, Steliarova-Foucher E,
convened by IARC. Lancet Oncol. per capita. Eur Urol. 2020;78:893-906. Bray F. Global patterns and trends in the
2018;19:1280-1283. 218. Islami F, Goding Sauer A, Miller KD, incidence of non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

207. US Preventive Services Task Force, et al. Proportion and number of can- Cancer Causes Control. 2019;30:489-499.
Bibbins-Domingo K, Grossman DC, cer cases and deaths attributable to 231. Shiels MS, Engels EA, Linet MS, et al. The
et al. Screening for thyroid cancer: potentially modifiable risk factors in epidemic of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in
US Preventive Services Task Force the United States. CA Cancer J Clin. the United States: disentangling the ef-
recommendation statement. JAMA. 2018;68:31-54. fect of HIV, 1992-2009. Cancer Epidemiol
2017;317:1882-1887. 219. Babjuk M, Burger M, Zigeuner R, et al. Biomarkers Prev. 2013;22:1069-1078.
208. Haugen BR, Alexander EK, Bible KC, et al. EAU guidelines on non-muscle-inva-
232. Lortet-Tieulent J, Ferlay J, Bray F,
2015 American Thyroid Association man- sive urothelial carcinoma of the blad- Jemal A. International patterns and
agement guidelines for adult patients with der: update 2013. Eur Urol. 2013;64: trends in endometrial cancer inci-
thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid 639-653. dence, 1978-2013. J Natl Cancer Inst.
cancer: the American Thyroid Association 220. Parkin DM. The global burden of urinary 2018;110:354-361.
Guidelines Task Force on Thyroid Nodules bladder cancer. Scand J Urol Nephrol 233. Gupta S, Gupta R, Sinha DN, Mehrotra R.
and Differentiated Thyroid Cancer. Suppl. 2008;218:12-20. Relationship between type of smokeless
Thyroid. 2016;26:1-133. 221. Public Health Scotland. Scottish Cancer tobacco and risk of cancer: a systematic
209. Jung KW, Won YJ, Kong HJ, Lee ES. Registry. Accessed December 9, 2020. review. Indian J Med Res. 2018;148:56-76.
Cancer statistics in Korea: incidence, isdscotland.org/Health-Topics/Cancer/
234. Bagnardi V, Rota M, Botteri E, et al.
mortality, survival, and prevalence in Scottish-Cancer-Registry.asp Alcohol consumption and site-specific
2016. Cancer Res Treat. 2019;51:417-430. 222. Nielsen ME, Smith AB, Meyer AM, et al. cancer risk: a comprehensive dose-re-

210. Shi LL, DeSantis C, Jemal A, Chen Trends in stage-specific incidence rates sponse meta-analysis. Br J Cancer.
AY. Changes in thyroid cancer inci- for urothelial carcinoma of the blad- 2015;112:580-593.
dence, post-2009 American Thyroid der in the United States: 1988 to 2006.
235. Han AY, Kuan EC, Mallen-St Clair
Association guidelines. Laryngoscope. Cancer. 2014;120:86-95. J, Alonso JE, Arshi A, St John MA.
2017;127:2437-2441.
223. Whiteman DC, Green AC, Olsen CM. Epidemiology of squamous cell car-

211. Kitahara CM, Sosa JA, Shiels MS. The growing burden of invasive mela- cinoma of the lip in the United States:
Influence of nomenclature changes noma: projections of incidence rates and a population-based cohort analysis.
on trends in papillary thyroid can- numbers of new cases in six suscepti- JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg.
cer incidence in the United States, ble populations through 2031. J Invest 2016;142:1216-1223.
2000 to 2017. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. Dermatol. 2016;136:1161-1171. 236. Rigel DS. Cutaneous ultraviolet exposure
2020;105:e4823-e4830. 224. Cancer Council Australia.Slip, Slop, Slap, and its relationship to the development
212. Kitahara CM, Sosa JA. Understanding Seek, Slide. Accessed December 3, 2020. of skin cancer. J Am Acad Dermatol.
the ever-changing incidence of thy- cancer.org.au/cancer-information/cause 2008;58(5 suppl 2):S129-S132.
roid cancer. Nat Rev Endocrinol. s-and-prevention/sun-safety/campaigns- 237. Maule M, Merletti F. Cancer transition
2020;16:617-618. and-events/slip-slop-slap-seek-slide and priorities for cancer control. Lancet
213. Lim H, Devesa SS, Sosa JA, Check D, 225. Iannacone MR, Green AC. Towards skin Oncol. 2012;13:745-746.
Kitahara CM. Trends in thyroid can- cancer prevention and early detection:
238. Lortet-Tieulent J, Georges D, Bray
cer incidence and mortality in the evolution of skin cancer awareness cam- F, Vaccarella S. Profiling global can-
United States, 1974-2013. JAMA. paigns in Australia. Melanoma Manag. cer incidence and mortality by socio-
2017;317:1338-1348. 2014;1:75-84. economic development. Int J Cancer.
214. Kitahara CM, Pfeiffer RM, Sosa JA, Shiels 226. Erdmann F, Lortet-Tieulent J, Schuz J, et 2020;147:3029-3036.
MS. Impact of overweight and obesity al. International trends in the incidence
239. Bray F, Jemal A, Torre LA, Forman
on US papillary thyroid cancer incidence of malignant melanoma 1953-2008—are D, Vineis P. Long-term realism and

cost-effectiveness: primary prevention 241. Thun MJ, Wild CP, Colditz G. Framework
242. Gelband H, Sankaranarayanan R,
in combatting cancer and associated in- for understanding cancer preven- Gauvreau CL, et al. Costs, affordability,
equalities worldwide. J Natl Cancer Inst. tion. In: Thun M, Linet MS, Cerhan and feasibility of an essential package of
2015;107:djv273. JR, Haiman CA, Schottenfeld D, eds. cancer control interventions in low-in-
240. Vineis P, Wild CP. Global cancer pat- Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention. come and middle-income countries: key
terns: causes and prevention. Lancet. 4th ed. Oxford University Press; 2018: messages from Disease Control Priorities,
2014;383:549-557. 1193-1204. 3rd edition. Lancet. 2016;387:2133-2144.

Caac 21660

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Caac 21660

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Caac 21660

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CA CANCER J CLIN 2021;0:1–41

Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of

No data Not applicable

2 CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

Human Development Index (% of population)

World area (% of population)

No data Not applicable

VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2021 3

different distribution of cancer types and higher case fatal-

(A) Both sexes

China Western Southern Europe

VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2021 5

19.3 million 9.9 million

10.1 million 5.5 million

6 CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

No data Not applicable

VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2021 7

No data Not applicable

MALES FEMALES MALES FEMALES

VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2021

A High/Very high HDI Low/Medium HDI

Male Lip, oral cavity

Age−standardized (W) rate per 100,000, male

B High/Very high HDI Low/Medium HDI

Age−standardized (W) rate per 100,000, female

10 CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2021 11

MALES FEMALES MALES FEMALES

AGE- CUMULATIVE AGE- CUMULATIVE AGE- CUMULATIVE AGE- CUMULATIVE

CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

MALES FEMALES MALES FEMALES

AGE- CUMULATIVE AGE- CUMULATIVE AGE- CUMULATIVE AGE- CUMULATIVE

Testis 74,458 1.8 0.14 9334 0.2 0.02

VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2021

14 CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2021 15

Age-standardized (W) incidence rate per 100,000

16 CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2021 17

Age-standardized (W) incidence rate per 100,000

Age-standardized (W) incidence rate per 100,000

18 CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

Age-standardized (W) rate per 100,000

VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2021 19

20 CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

Age-standardized (W) incidence rate per 100,000

VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2021 21

Age-standardized (W) incidence rate per 100,000

22 CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2021 23

24 CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

Age-standardized (W) rate per 100,000

VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2021 25

Age-standardized (W) incidence rate per 100,000

26 CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

Age-standardized (W) incidence rate per 100,000

VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2021 27

of changing guidelines needs to be determined, although Bladder cancer

28 CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians