Health -   

1
Eleanor Carment (left) has her thyroid gland checked out by student physician Sheila Harms at the Family Practice unit at McMaster University Medical Centre in Hamilton, Ont., in this April 12, 2002 photo. (CP PHOTO/Sheryl Nadler) doctor generic

Aging population pushing cancer rates higher: StatsCan

Viewer

CTV News Video

CTV Winnipeg: Cancer affecting more Canadians
Cancer prevalence rates for most types of cancer are on the rise in Canada, Statistics Canada reports. Jeff Keele has more on the increase.
CTV News Channel: List of cancers on the rise
Merella Fernandez lists the cancers on the rise and on the decline, and explains while certain types of cancers have increased over the past few years, it does not necessarily mean they are the most common.
CTV News Channel: What's causing some to rise?
Heather Bryant of the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer says the study is focusing on the prevalence of cancer, not new cases of the disease, and explains the ways in which the prevalence can go up.

A A |  Email ThisEmail  | PrintComments (18) Facebook   

Eleanor Carment (left) has her thyroid gland checked out by student physician Sheila Harms at the Family Practice unit at McMaster University Medical Centre in Hamilton, Ont., in this April 12, 2002 photo. (CP PHOTO/Sheryl Nadler) doctor generic

Photos

Eleanor Carment (left) has her thyroid gland checked out by student physician Sheila Harms at the Family Practice unit at McMaster University Medical Centre in Hamilton, Ont., in this April 12, 2002 photo. (CP PHOTO/Sheryl Nadler)

View Larger Image

Date: Wed. Jan. 18 2012 6:09 PM ET

Cancer prevalence rates for most types of cancer are on the rise in Canada, Statistics Canada reports, in part because the population is aging and survival rates are increasing.

In its first detailed report on cancer prevalence trends in Canada, the agency reports that the five-year prevalence rate for cancer rose 2.1 per cent a year between 1997 and 2008.

It should be noted that cancer "prevalence" is different from cancer "incidence," which refers to newly diagnosed cases. Prevalence includes all the people living after a diagnosis.

So changes in prevalence rates can reflect not just changes in the number of people being newly diagnosed, but also the number of people surviving.

"Several factors, the importance of which varies by cancer type, may account for changes in incidence and survival," the agency notes.

Aging population mostly to blame

The agency estimates that roughly half of the increase in five-year cancer prevalence seen during the study can be chalked up to the fact that Canada's population is aging, because the risk of most cancers increases with age.

An aging population is why, for example, the prevalence rates for prostate cancer rose substantially during the study,

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in Canada. The study found that the five-year prevalence rate for this cancer increased 3 per cent per year from 1997 to 2008.

But increases in the prevalence of breast cancer -- the most common cancer in women -- were more moderate. Between 1997 and 2008, the five-year prevalence rate rose by an average of 1.3 per cent per year.

Liver and thyroid prevalence up

The prevalence for both liver and thyroid cancer went up significantly during the study period. In fact, the average annual increases in five-year prevalence rates for both cancer types were more than double the increase for any other cancer.

And yet the reasons for the increases in the prevalence in these cancers are likely quite different.

The five-year liver cancer prevalence rate rose 8.3 per cent per year, with the increases higher in men. That rising rate most likely due to an increase in new diagnoses, since the five-year survival rate for liver cancer is low, says Heather Bryant, the vice-president for cancer control at Canadian Partnership Against Cancer.

"The survival is getting a bit better for liver cancer, but it's one of those cancers, like lung cancer and pancreatic cancer, where, unfortunately, the outlook isn't good," Bryant told CTV News Channel Wednesday.

With thyroid cancer, on the other hand, the prospects for treatment are quite good, so the increase in its five-year prevalence is likely due to survival, rather than an increase in incidence.

"The survival rate for thyroid cancer is really very good; it's about 98 per cent. And so anyone who gets diagnosed with it becomes part of the prevalence statistic," Bryant said.

Lung cancer gender differences

For lung cancer, the five-year prevalence rate increased 2.6 per cent per year since the beginning of 2005, up from a rate of less than 1 per cent a year before this period.

In men, the prevalence rate dropped slightly, 0.3 per cent per year. But in women, it increased 3.0 per cent per year.

"This discrepancy was the result of sharper decreases in smoking prevalence among men since the mid-1960s," the agency said.

The only cancer types that saw declines in prevalence during the study period were cervical cancer and cancer of the larynx.

Comments are now closed for this story

Article - Ottawa
said

I can remember reading a few years back on a lady who said she had "Alpha 1" which if I remember correctly is an enzyme missing in the liver and in turn attacks the lungs as if you have emphysema whether a person smokes or not which this lady never did. She was on some form of medication but there has not been enough at the time known about this disease. Hopefully the Cancer Society is able to find out more on this and get it out to the public so there is some form of awareness.


Darlene Buckingham
said

Stats Can and The Cancer Socity should coordinate information. Stats Can- cancers up, The Canadian Cancer Society - cancers down. Who do you believe? Is there anyone out there telling us the truth?


shawbrooke
said

Okay, half of the increase in cancer can be attributed to age, so age gets the headline. Seems misleading to me. What were the other causes of the increases. Would those causes be something that I could do something about? I'd like to know.


ME
said

Well, it certainly doesn't explain why my sister the nurse sees younger and younger people dying of agressive cancers (or at least diagnosed with them if them make it). I mean under 40. That's new. And also has zero to do with an aging population.


Bruce Conway
said

Now analyze the numbers from March 11, 2011 onwards and explain the jump.




Mr John.
said

Huh....Why is this a story ?????
I am not asking for an answer.
Most of it does not relate to the facts....seems like drama/panic for a very few....someone made their research grants very,very easily......


Will
said

hmmmm, live longer-increased possibility of cancer.....what we woudl refer to as a blinding glimpse of the obvious.


Intelligent Liberal
said

Susie-Q if I were you I might consider taking up drinking again, going to be a long 4 years to pass by before getting a flu shot. Plus you don't have to nuke beer, it's already sterilized.


Bszasz
said

I highly recommend: Slow Death By Rubber Duck:How the Toxic Chemistry of Everyday Life Affects Our Health authors: Rick Smith, Bruce Lourie , Sarah Dopp After I read it, I understood - it's not about early diagnosis for cancer - it's about diagnosing which of those chemicals in our bodies creates the cancer. You couldn't get more clear than 2 Toronto environmentalists intentionally exposing themselves to the toxins of everyday life.


Don
said

Another article on cancer..... we all know that people are dying younger but your article says it is reversed. Have anyone one of you checked out the obituaries in the paper, majority are dying in their 50's.... is this what you call an aging society??? The older folks before us live longer because they are not induced with the same amount of chemicals that this generation is. Wait till you see the stats for your children, they will not even probably live to see 40... it is a shame that the Government continues to let chemicals be processed into our foods and water contamination from Nuclear plants... but hey, I guess we have to go sometime in life.... enjoy today as tomorrow you may not see!!!


Susie-Q Mtl.
said

I gave up drinking June 2005. Smoking Aug. 2005. My lungs & liver are fine. I try to watch what I eat. I limit my use of soda pop. At MacDonalds I prefer to drink Friutopia. Healthier with my small salad. I use tap water. If i don't like it's looks i nuke it for 5 min. Then cool it & drink it. Plastic is now okay. they removed that chemical they were talking about. I wish i could get a Flu shot. I'm 61. I was told to come back at 65. Today i have the Flu. Took medicine.


Catherinanna
said

All disease has the potential to appear to be on the increase if the population is living longer. There is also the fact that screening, patient education and early diagnosis now come in to play. We will all die of something. We cannot stop death and we cannot cure all disease. All we can do is take care of our bodies and live the best life we can. Even then, some will still get cancer and others who seem to care nothing will escape it. Why do we not have a cure when so many, many millions of dollars have been put into research? Now that's where I get cynical about it all.


Ace in Edmonton
said

It only stands to reason that as the population ages, and more frequent and better screening is available, the incidents of cancer will increase. The sky is not falling.


Adam - GTA
said

For starters, don't consume Aspartame, sodium floride (in tap water) and stop getting vaccines. Flu vaccines don't do squat; I have not had the flu in over 15 years.


mining guy jim
said

HELLO two week's exposure on the beach at Cozumel, Sosua, Vindhoek, or Pateo.


Bottled water to blame?
said

One suggestion, do not buy water or soft drinks sold in plastic bottles. I can taste the difference between drinks contained in plastic containers vs metal ones. And for what its worth, dont buy water. Bottled water is not going to prolong your life and besides, the plastic in those bottles contain toxins. You dont think they are contaminating your drink? They certainly are but at a government acceptable rate.


Christina
said

should not be ignored that as the population ages en masse, and life expectancies rise, so will cancer rates: in earlier times people would generally die prior to getting to an age were cancer inevitably would finish them off. Of course this does not explain/account for all types of new cancers, but it should be noted as one aspect to cut through the alarmist hype that is unforgivingly promoted thru the media. Hype, you know, garners far more attention than mundane (albeit usually realistic) explanations....


mark
said

HELLO - fukushima etc etc


Share with your social Network:

Facebook DIGG Newsvine Delicious Twitter StumbeUpon Reddit Yahoo! Buzz

 

Advertisement

Contest

Subscribe!

MedNews Express newsletter

CTV MedNews Express

Sign up for our weekly medical newsletter, delivered for free to your inbox.

CTV.ca Blogs

Dr. Marla Shapiro

Health Blog

Check out what our guest medical experts and CTV health reporters are writing about.

Twitter

Avis Favaro Twitter

Follow us on Twitter

Follow CTV medical specialist Avis Favaro on Twitter.

Today's Health Stories

oxycontin

Saskatchewan joins push to stop funding OxyContin

More

Senior citizen

U.S. Alzheimer's strategy: Better treatment by 2025

More

CFIA generic

CFIA recalls cooked ham sold in Ontario and Quebec

More